natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Denne obligatoriske anmeldelse af sygdommen, som den berżrte medlemsstat sender til Kommissionen og de żvrige medlemsstater, er fastsat i bestemmelserne (65). 
This compulsory notification of the disease by the Member State concerned to the Commission and the other Member States is, moreover, a requirement (65).
Men det fżrste udbrud skal fżrst anmeldes senest 24 timer efter, at sygdommen er bekržftet af en analyse af stikprżver udtaget af dyrene og udfżrt p et specifikt nationalt laboratorium. 
In the case of the first outbreak, however, it only has to be effected within 24 hours of the disease being confirmed on the basis of a test that is carried out by a specified national laboratory on samples taken from the animals.
Denne frist p 24 timer kan alts lžgges oven i den tid, det tager at udfżre analyserne, ogs selv om sygdommen er blevet bekržftet videnskabeligt. 
This interval of 24 hours can thus be added to the time needed for carrying out the tests, even though scientific confirmation has been obtained.
For at afbżde denne ulempe gav Rdet (66) Kommissionen mulighed for at indfżre en alarmordning, sledes at den medlemsstat, der var berżrt af epizootien, hurtigt kunne underrette Kommissionen og de andre medlemsstater om et udbrud af mund-og klovesyge. 
In order to offset this disadvantage the Council (66) gave the Commission the option of establishing a warning system, allowing any Member State affected by an epidemic to alert the Commission and the other Member States quickly to the occurrence of an outbreak of FMD.
Den 20. februar, fem timer efter, at det nationale referencelaboratorium officielt havde bekržftet sygdommen, anmeldte Det Forenede Kongerige i overensstemmelse med reglerne et primžrudbrud til Kommissionen, hvilket viser, at den fastsatte frist p 24 timer vil kunne reduceres takket vžre moderne kommunikationsmidler. 
On 20 February, five hours after the national reference laboratory had officially confirmed the disease, the United Kingdom, in accordance with the provisions of the Community regulations, notified the Commission of the existence of the first outbreak, thus demonstrating that the 24-hour period allowed by the regulations could be shortened, given modern methods of communication.
Kommissionen informerede s straks veterinžrtjenesterne i de andre medlemsstater og blokerede nžste dag for eksport fra Det Forenede Kongerige. 
The Commission then immediately informed the veterinary services in the other Member States and, on the following day, stopped exports from the United Kingdom.
I mellemtiden var ca. 287 svin blevet eksporteret fra Nordirland til Republikken Irland, inden eksportforbuddet trdte i kraft den 21. februar kl. 
In the intervening period around 287 pigs were still exported from Northern Ireland to the Irish Republic, before the export ban was actually implemented, at 17.00 hours on 21 February.
Medlemsstaterne konstaterede tilfžlde p deres omrde, hvor dette ikke var sket, og lagde sag an mod de pgžldende producenter. 
Member States found that in some cases these aspects had been disregarded in their territories and took action against the farmers concerned in the courts.
(64) Kilde: Origin of the U.K. Foot and Mouth Disease Epidemic in 2001, DEFRA, Det Forenede Kongerige, juni 2002. 
(64) Origin of the UK foot-and-mouth disease epidemic in 2001, DEFRA, United Kingdom, June 2002.
(65) I Rdets direktiv 82/894/EŻF (EFT L 378 af 31.12.1982, s. 
(65) Council Directive 82/894/EEC (OJ L 378, 31.12.1982, p.
58), artikel 3, stk. 1, hedder det, at medlemsstaterne anmelder inden 24 timer til Kommissionen og de żvrige medlemsstater primžrudbrud p deres omrde af en af de i bilag I anfżrte sygdomme. 
58), Article 3(1) requires Member States to notify the Commission and the Member States within 24 hours of an established primary outbreak on their territory of any of the diseases listed in Annex I to the Directive.
(66) Rdets direktiv 90/423/EŻF. 
(66) Council Directive 90/423/EEC.
3.3.2005 DA Den Europžiske Unions Tidende C 54/17 56. 
3.3.2005 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 54/17 56.
I Det Forenede Kongerige og i Frankrig blev de producenter, som ikke havde anmeldt sygdommen, eller som ikke havde overholdt restriktionerne med hensyn til flytning af dyr, indbragt for de relevante domstole og idżmt bżder. 
In the United Kingdom and France farmers who did not notify the disease or respect the animal movement restrictions were taken to court by the Member States concerned and were fined.
Da der ikke var nogen fžllesskabsbestemmelser, som gjorde godtgżrelsen betinget af, at de grundlžggende foranstaltninger i bekžmpelsesordningen var gennemfżrt, f.eks. at sygdommen var anmeldt eller restriktionerne med hensyn til flytning af dyr overholdt, havde disse producenter ret til at f det fulde belżb udbetalt (67). 
These farmers were entitled to full compensation because the Community provisions did not make the payment of compensation conditional on compliance with essential aspects of the control provisions, such as disease notification and observance of movement restrictions (67).
Medlemsstaterne har derfor kunnet forlange, at Kommissionen godtgjorde de belżb, de havde betalt til disse producenter (jf. punkt 77). 
The absence of such provisions made it possible for the Member States to claim back from the Commission the amounts that they had paid to those farmers (see paragraph 77).
For at have ret til tilskud fra EU skal medlemsstaterne i henhold til direktiv 85/511/EŻF sżrge for, at de smittede dyr straks aflives, s snart sygdommen officielt er bekržftet. 
In order to be entitled to Community reimbursement Member States must immediately slaughter infected animals, as required by Directive 85/511/EEC, as soon as the disease is officially confirmed.
For de sekundžre udbrud giver EF-reglerne, hvis epizootien breder sig, medlemsstaterne mulighed for, men plžgger dem ikke, at aflive dyrene, s snart en autoriseret dyrlžge har opdaget de kliniske tegn p sygdommen. 
In the case of secondary outbreaks, however, the Community regulations allow, but do not require, Member States to slaughter animals, if the epidemic spreads, as soon as clinical symptoms of the disease are detected by an official veterinarian.
De skal heller ikke aflive dyrene, fżr deres vžrdi er beregnet og konklusionerne fra de dermed forbundne administrative procedurer foreligger. 
Furthermore, they do not require animals to be culled before they have been valued and the relevant administrative procedures completed.
Som fżlge heraf blev nedslagningerne foretaget mere eller mindre hurtigt afhžngigt af praksis i de forskellige medlemsstater og antallet af disponible dyrlžger (jf. indrammet tekst nr. 3), og det żgede risikoen for, at epizootien skulle brede sig. 
In consequence culling was more or less rapid according to the practice of the Member State and the veterinary resources available (see Box 3), thereby increasing the risk of the epidemic spreading.
3 Nedslagningerne i medlemsstaterne I Det Forenede Kongerige ventede den kompetente myndighed i overensstemmelse med EF-lovgivningen p, at laboratoriet havde bekržftet sygdommen, fżr dyrene fra primžrudbruddet blev slet ned: I mellemtiden var der opstet tre nye udbrud. 
Box 3 Culling delays in Member States In the United Kingdom, as allowed by the Community regulations, the responsible authority waited for laboratory confirmation of infection before culling the animals from the first outbreak: in the meantime three other outbreaks had occurred.
For s vidt angr de fżrste hundrede udbrud, gik der, fra sygdommen var blevet bekržftet, og til dyrene var aflivet, i de fleste tilfžlde mere end 24 timer og helt op til syv dage. 
In the case of the first 100 outbreaks the interval between confirmation of contamination and slaughter was, in most instances, more than 24 hours and could be up to seven days.
I 78 % af disse tilfžlde bekržftede analysen senere dyrlžgernes diagnose (jf. rapporten fra NAO, tabel 38, s. 
In 78 % of such cases subsequent tests confirmed the vetsŐ diagnosis (see NAO report, Table 38, p.
(67) Kun i Nederlandene kunne erstatningerne nedsžttes med op til 100 %, hvis producenterne ikke havde overholdt veterinžr-og sundhedslovgivningen. 
(67) Only the Netherlands had made provision for up to 100 % of the compensation paid to farmers to be deducted if health or veterinary regulations had been infringed.
Bestemmelserne omfattede dog ikke brud p anmeldepligten og heller ikke manglende overholdelse af restriktionerne med hensyn til flytning af dyr, men kun manglende overholdelse af reglerne om identifikation af dyr (75 %) og hygiejnereglerne (18 %) samt obstruktion i forbindelse med nedslagning af vaccinerede dyr. 
The infringements in question were failure to comply with animal identification systems (75 %) and hygiene rules (18 %) and obstructing the killing of vaccinated animals, they did not concern notification and compliance with movement restrictions.
P grund af den vanskelige situation, producenterne str i, har de nederlandske myndigheder imidlertid efterfżlgende annulleret bżderne. 
However in view of the difficulties suffered by the persons concerned, the Dutch authorities cancelled the penalties ex post facto.
I de andre medlemsstater blev dyrene derimod aflivet, s snart der var mistanke om smitte, og fżr det endelige resultat af laboratorieana-lyserne forel. 
In the other Member States, on the other hand, slaughter took place as soon as an outbreak was suspected, before the final results of laboratory tests were received.
I Nederlandene, Frankrig og Irland blev der foretaget forebyggende nedslagninger, navnlig af fr importeret fra Det Forenede Kongerige. 
In the Netherlands, France and Ireland preventive culls were carried out, especially in the case of sheep imported from the United Kingdom.
I Det Forenede Kongerige blev dyrene fżrst aflivet efter vurderingen af deres vžrdi, og nr ejerne havde godkendt denne, og det sinkede nedslagningen af de smittede dyr. 
In the United Kingdom animals were killed after they had been valued and after the valuation had been accepted by the farmer, thus delaying slaughter of infected animals.
I Frankrig blev dyrenes vžrdi derimod beregnet efter, at de var aflivet, for ikke at forsinke udryddelsen af epizootien. 
In France, on the other hand, animals were valued after slaughter, so as not to delay eradication of the infection.
KOMMISSIONENS AKTION I FORBINDELSE MED GODTGŻRELSESORDNINGEN 59. 
COMMISSION ACTION CONCERNING THE REIMBURSEMENT SYSTEM 59.
Inden krisen havde Retten og dechargemyndigheden over for Kommissionen fremfżrt en ržkke anbefalinger, hvoraf nogle var de samme som dem, Levnedsmiddel-og Veterinžrkontoret havde fremsat, jf. punkt 46. 
Before the crisis the Court and the discharge authorities had already made recommendations to the Commission, some of them coinciding with the HVO findings mentioned in paragraph 46.
Kommissionen har ikke udnyttet de anbefalinger p det finansielle omrde, som Retten allerede fremsatte i 1996, og heller ikke de henstillinger, dechargemyndigheden fremsatte i forbindelse med svinepest og BSE, og tilpasset dem til mund-og klovesyge (jf. indrammet tekst nr. 4). 
In the financial area the Commission did not take advantage of the recommendations made by the Court in 1996, nor those made by the discharge authority in connection with classical swine fever and BSE - it did not adapt them to the FMD situation (see Box 4).
Indrammet tekst nr. 4 Kommissionens opfżlgning af Rettens og dechargemyndighedens tidligere anbefalinger og henstillinger Reglerne og procedurerne for, hvornr medlemsstaterne kan f refunderet deres udgifter og for de godtgżrelser, der udbetales til producenterne, bżr pržciseres (Sžrberetning nr. 
Box 4 Commission follow-up to previous recommendations by the Court and the discharge authority Clarify the rules and procedures relating to eligibility of Member StatesŐ expenditure and compensation payments to farmers (Special Report No 1/2000, paragraph 80): in reply to the follow-up to the CourtŐs 1995 Annual Report the Commission undertook to address directives to the Member States on compensation procedures and calculation of the amounts involved; this was not done.
Medfinansieringssatserne vedrżrende veterinžrforanstaltninger bżr matche satserne vedrżrende markedsstżtte (Sžrberetning nr. 1/2000, punkt 79): Kommissionen havde forpligtet sig til at sżrge herfor i forbindelse med svinepest; medfinansieringssatserne svinger imidlertid fortsat afhžngigt af, hvilken dyresygdom der er tale om. 
Align the cofinancing rates applicable to veterinary measures and market support measures (Special Report No 1/2000, paragraph 79); the Commission undertook to do this for classical swine fever; however, the cofinancing rates still vary according to the nature of the animal disease.
Kommissionen bżr forelžgge Rdet et forslag til žndring af bestemmelserne med henblik p at żge det bidrag, landbrugere med intensiv svineproduktion bżr yde til bekžmpelsesforanstaltningerne (Sžrberetning nr. 
Submit to the Council a proposal for reviewing the regulations so as to increase the contributions from owners of intensive pig units to measures to combat the disease (Special Report No 1/2000, paragraph 81): the Commission carried out a comparative study of other forms of financing but did nothing towards the introduction of systems in the Member States involving farmersŐ contributions for FMD.
C 54/18 DA Den Europžiske Unions Tidende 3.3.2005 Kommissionen har ikke stillet forslag til direktiver om procedurerne for og beregningen af medlemsstaternes godtgżrelse til producenterne 60. 
C 54/18 EN Official Journal of the European Union 3.3.2005 No Commission proposals for directives on procedures and calculation of compensation for farmers by Member States 60.
I henhold til bestemmelserne (68) er det Kommissionen, som skal tržffe de fornżdne gennemfżrelsesbestemmelser vedrżrende Fžllesskabets specifikke deltagelse i finansieringen af udryddelsen af mund-og klovesyge. 
The rules (68) give the Commission the task of adopting the necessary implementing measures as regards the special Community financial contribution for eradicating FMD.
Fžllesskabet refunderer medlemsstaternes udgifter bl.a. p betingelse af, at de har udbetalt en Čpassende godtgżrelseÇ til dyreejerne uden dog at pržcisere, hvad denne formulering betyder. 
It makes the Community reimbursement of expenditure to Member States conditional on Ôadequate compensation of the livestock farmersŐ, but without specifying the meaning of the expression.
I december 2000 plagde Rdet (69) Kommissionen at varetage hele den direkte forvaltning af disse udgifter. 
In December 2000 the Council (69) made the Commission alone responsible for direct management of this expenditure.
Selv om Kommissionen har forpligtet sig til at forelžgge direktiver om reglerne for udbetaling af godtgżrelse til producenterne i medlemsstaterne, s mener den paradoksalt nok, at den ikke er juridisk befżjet til at gżre det. 
Paradoxically, although the Commission undertook to present directives containing the arrangements for compensating farmers in the Member States, it considers that it is not legally competent to do so.
Da Kommissionen ikke har forelagt disse direktiver, er reglerne derfor fortsat ufuldstžndige. 
The regulations are incomplete as a consequence, in as far as the Commission has not presented the directives.
P grundlag af det nuvžrende retsgrundlag fastsžtter Kommissionen kun, hvornr medlemsstaterne har ret til at f refunderet deres udgifter, men den giver ingen regler for, hvordan de skal beregne de godtgżrelser, der skal udbetales til producenterne. 
On the basis of the current legal arrangements the Commission confines itself to determining whether Member StatesŐ expenditure is eligible for Community reimbursement, without providing the framework for their calculation of the compensation to be paid to their farmers.
Til gengžld har Kommissionen i forbindelse med obligatorisk nedslagning af kvžg ramt af spongiform encephalopati (70) fastsat stżrrelsen af den kompensation, medlemsstaterne skal udbetale til producenterne (71). 
On the other hand, in the context of compulsory slaughter of cattle affected by BSE (70), the Commission set limits on the amount of compensation to be paid to farmers by the Member States (71).
De m udbetale et belżb lig med den objektive markedsvžrdi af hvert af de pgžldende dyr, bestemt efter et system for objektiv og individuel vurdering, som (68) Rdets beslutning 90/424/EŻF, artikel 3 og artikel 11, stk. 
The latter are authorised to pay the objective current market value for each animal, established on the basis of a system of objective individual evaluation approved by them.
(69) Rdets beslutning 2001/12/EF af 19. december 2000 om žndring af beslutning 90/424/EŻF om visse udgifter p veterinžromrdet (EFT L 3 af 6.1.2001, s. 
(69) Council Decision 2001/12/EC of 19 December 2000 amending Decision 90/424/EEC on expenditure in the veterinary field (OJ L 3, 6.1.2001, p.
(70) Nr der er tale om bovin spongiform encephalopati, er det fortsat Generaldirektoratet for Landbrug, som forvalter de erstatninger, der skal udbetales til producenterne for obligatorisk nedslagning af deres dyr. 
(70) In the case of BSE the compensation payments to farmers for compulsory slaughter of cattle are still managed by the Directorate-General for Agriculture.
At kompetencen til at forvalte dyresygdomme er delt mellem Generaldirektoratet for Sundhed og Forbrugerbeskyttelse og Generaldirektoratet for Landbrug, skyldes historiske rsager. 
The division of responsibilities for animal disease management between the Directorate General for Health and Consumer Protection and the Directorate General for Agriculture is due to historical reasons.
164/97 af 30. januar 1997 (EFT L 29 af 8.1.1997, s. 
(71) Commission Regulation (EC) No 164/97 (OJ L 29, 8.1.1997, p.
Denne forordning er baseret p traktatens artikel 37 om den fžlles landbrugspolitik og p beslutning 90/424/EŻF om visse udgifter p veterinžromrdet. de har godkendt. 
This Regulation is based on Article 37 of the Treaty, concerning the common agricultural policy, and on Council Decision 90/424/EEC on expenditure in the veterinary field. the absence of any definition of compensation from Member States to farmers which prevails in the area of FMD.
Som der redegżres for i det fżlgende, har de manglende regler for godtgżrelserne sledes medfżrt inkonsekvenser og gjort det muligt at forskelsbehandle producenterne afhžngigt af deres geografiske placering og/eller den valgte aflivningsmetode. 
It was in fact the absence of any framework for compensation that made possible the inconsistencies and inequalities of treatment meted out to farmers according to their geographical location and/or the slaughter method chosen, as described below.
Kompensationen til producenterne for de direkte tab, det vil sige bruttovžrdien af de nedslagne dyr, var ikke blevet fastsat p forhnd (bortset fra i Nederlandene), og medlemsstaterne mtte derfor fastsžtte den under krisen, selv om en ržkke prisre-ferencer ikke var disponible, fordi markederne var blevet lukket. 
Variations in compensation systems and lack of uniformity in valuations 62. The compensation for direct losses by farmers, i.e. the gross value of slaughtered livestock, was not set in advance (except in the Netherlands).
De fleste medlemsstater udarbejdede prisoversigter som reference for de autoriserede vurderingsmžnd, som skulle vurdere dyrene, men det fremgik ikke, at der var tale om maksimumsbelżb. 
Most Member States drew up price grids for use as a reference by the official valuers responsible for valuing animals, but without instructing that the figures were upper limits.
For nogle kategorier af dyr var der ingen prisreferencer. 
Price references were unavailable for some categories of animals.
Tre medlemsstater (Det Forenede Kongerige, Irland og Nederlandene) udbetalte ikke kompensation for driftstab (72), og landbrugerne i disse lande stod derfor uden indtžgt i mindst tre uger efter nedslagningen af deres dyr og desinficeringen af hele deres bedrift. 
As regards indirect losses (72) there was no compensation in three Member States (Ireland, Netherlands, United Kingdom), leaving farmers without resources for at least three weeks after animals had been slaughtered, while the farm was being decontaminated.
I Frankrig godtgjorde myndighederne derimod producenternes driftstab, fordi de mente, at en Čpassende godtgżrelseÇ til dyreejerne burde džkke samtlige tab (dyr og indkomst). 
In France, on the other hand, the losses were reimbursed to farmers by the French authorities, who considered that the expression Ôadequate compensationŐ for farmers ought to cover all losses (animals and income).
Kommissionen har imidlertid ikke godkendt disse udgifter som berettigede til tilskud fra Fžllesskabet. 
However, the Commission did not accept them for reimbursement.
De kontrakter, medlemsstaterne indgik med vurderings-mžndene, og instrukserne til dem var forskellige og i nogle tilfžlde utilstržkkelige. 
The contracts concluded by Member States with valuers varied and the instructions for valuers were inadequate in some cases.
Kommissionen havde ikke givet medlemsstaterne instruks om, hvordan dyrene skulle vurderes, og (72) Nr dyrene er aflivet, og tre uger efter, at hele bedriften er desinficeret, m producenterne ikke genopbygge deres lagre. 
In the absence of instructions from the Commission to Member States about cattle valuations, the bovine identification (72) Farmers were not permitted to restock farms for three weeks after animals had been culled and premises decontaminated.
I denne periode er de uden indtžgt. 
During that period they had no income.
3.3.2005 DA Den Europžiske Unions Tidende C 54/19 vurderingsmžndene anvendte ikke systemet for identifikation og registrering af kvžg (73), som giver vigtige oplysninger vedrżrende dyrenes vžrdi (race, alder og kżn), til at bestemme dyrenes vžrdi, hvilket gav dem en stor skżnsmargin. 
3.3.2005 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 54/19 system (73), which contains important data relating to the value of animals (breed, age, sex), was not used by valuers to determine cattle values, leaving them a good deal of latitude.
Dyrenes identifikationsnumre var ikke anfżrt p vurderingsformularerne, og der var intet spor af, at overordnede vurderingsmžnd eller ministeriet havde gennemget dem. 
The identity of cattle was not included in the valuation forms and there was no trace of valuations having been reviewed by senior valuers or by the ministry.
De ordninger, medlemsstaterne vedtog, er beskrevet i indrammet tekst nr. 
The systems adopted by Member States are described in Box 5.
Indrammet tekst nr. 5 Medlemsstaternes godtgżrelsesordninger Det Forenede Kongerige, Irland og Nederlandene valgte en godtgżrelsesordning baseret p dyrenes vžrdi og medregnede ikke driftstab, hvorimod Frankrig indregnede driftstab, hvilket svarer til et tillžg p ca. 
Box 5 Compensation systems introduced by Member States The compensation system chosen by the United Kingdom, Ireland and the Netherlands was based on the value of the animals, excluding indirect losses, whereas France included the latter, thus supplementing the animal value by around 30 %.
I Det Forenede Kongerige anvendtes der nogle gange en ordning med en vurdering af dyrenes vžrdi udelukkende foretaget af vurderingsmžnd og nogle gange en blandet ordning, hvor landbrugerne enten kunne vžlge en vurdering baseret p en prisoversigt eller en vurdering foretaget af vurderingsmžnd. 
In the United Kingdom the system fluctuated between one where valuers alone assessed the value of the animals and a mixed system where farmers could opt for either a valuation based on a standard rate card or a value set by the valuers.
Denne standardoversigt omfattede ikke referencepriser for alle kategorier af dyr, og der var intet loft. 
The standard rate card did not include price references for all categories of animals and had no upper limits.
Efter en meget kraftig stigning i de vurderede belżb, gik man vžk fra at bruge standardoversigten. 
After a very strong rise in valuation figures use of the standard rate card was abandoned.