natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In addition, rules are applied to avoid allocation to Judges of the same nationality as the case and, for the appeals from the General Court; the case is not allocated to a Judge with the nationality of the original Reporting Judge. 
Lisaks vlditakse seda, et kohtunik ja hagi oleksid prit samast riigist, ning ldkohtust tulevate apellatsioonkaebuste puhul ei mrata menetlusega tegelema algse ettekandja-kohtunikuga samast riigist prit kohtunikku.
Ad hoc assignments take place when procedural decisions must be taken without delay and where expedited procedures are needed. 
Kohtunikke mratakse juhtumiphiselt juhul, kui menetluslikke otsuseid tuleb teha viivitamatult ja kui tuleb kasutada kiirendatud menetlust.
These provide for four separate rotas relating respectively to: (i) cases concerning application of the competition rules to undertakings, the rules on State aid and the rules on trade protection measures; (ii) cases concerning intellectual property rights; (iii) civil service cases (only since 2016) and (iv) cases other than those referred to above. 
Need phinevad jrgmisel neljal valdkonnal (rotal): i) ettevtete konkurentsiksimusi, riigiabi eeskirju ning kaubanduse kaitsemeetmeid puudutavad kohtuasjad; ii) intellektuaalomandiiguse alased kohtuasjad; iii) avalikku teenistust puudutavad kohtuasjad (alles aastast 2016); ja iv) eespool loetlemata valdkondi puudutavad kohtuasjad.
In conformity with the applicable rules, the President may derogate from those rotas on the ground that cases received are connected with others being processed or previously completed, or with a view to ensuring an even spread of the workload. The information provided by the General Court suggests that approximately 40 % of cases were assigned outside the rota system in 2014 and 2015. Following the assignment to a Chamber, the President of that Chamber proposes a Reporting Judge for each individual case; the President of the General Court then makes the final decision. 
Vastavalt kodukorrale vib president kohtuasjade mramise reeglitest krvale kalduda juhul, kui esitatud hagid on seotud juba menetluses olevate vi varem lpetatud kohtuasjadega, vi kui see on vajalik vrdse tkoormuse tagamiseks. ldkohtu esitatud teabest nhtub, et aastatel 2014 ja 2015 mrati umbes 40 % kohtuasjadest mramisreeglite vliselt. Peale kohtuasja kojale mramist teeb koja president ettepaneku ettekandja-kohtunike mramiseks; lpliku otsuse tegemine on ldkohtu presidendi pdevuses.
The process of handling of the cases by Chambers and Reporting Judges following their assignment 46. 
Kohtuasjade menetlemine kodades ja ettekandja-kohtunike poolt peale nende mramist 46.
The processing of cases following their assignment until their closure includes several steps and represents a very significant part of their whole duration: in particular the preparation of the preliminary reports took on average 3.2 months at the Court of Justice and 9.4 months at the General Court, and the closure of the cases took on average 4 months at the Court of Justice and 5.3 months at the General Court in the years 2014 and 2015. 
Kohtuasjad lbivad jagamisest kuni lpetamiseni mitu etappi, mis moodustavad olulise osa nende kestusest: aastatel 2014 ja 2015 vttis esialgse aruande koostamine Euroopa Kohtus keskmiselt 3,2 kuud ja ldkohtus 9,4 kuud; kohtuasjade lpetamine vttis Euroopa Kohtus keskmiselt 4 kuud ja ldkohtus 5,3 kuud.
The full analysis of the factors affecting the duration of the 60 cases is given in Annex II. 
Tielik anals 60 kohtuasja kestust mjutanud teguritest on esitatud II lisas.
Figure 7 Đ Most frequent factors affecting the duration of the handling of the 30 selected cases at the Court of Justice 31 63% 40% 40% 40% 37% 17% 17% 13% Judicial vacations Workload of the rfrendaire responsible for the file Case raising new and/or particularly complex legal issues Sickness, maternity / parental leave, or departure of a rfrendaire Workload of the Reporting Judge and/or the Advocate General Voluminous case Factually, economical or scientifically complicated case Complex case for other reasons Source: ECA analysis of CJEU questionnaires. 
Joonis 7. Euroopa Kohtus valitud 30 kohtuasja menetlemise kestust kige sagedamini mjutanud tegurid 29 63% 40% 40% 40% 37% 17% 17% 13% Kohtu puhkused Kohtuasjaga tegeleva nuniku tkoormus Kohtuasi, milles ksitletakse uusi ja/vi eriti keerukaid igusksimusi Nuniku haigus, emadus-/vanemapuhkus vi tlt lahkumine Ettekandja-kohtuniku ja/vi kohtujuristi tkoormus Mahukas kohtuasi Faktiliselt, majanduslikult vi teaduslikult keerukas kohtuasi Muudel phjustel keerukas kohtuasi Allikas: Euroopa Kontrollikoja anals Euroopa Liidu Kohtu ksimustike phjal.
For the Court of Justice, the most frequent factors indicated in the questionnaires affecting the duration of the handling of cases are represented by judicial vacations36, by the workload of the rfrendaires as well as their sickness, maternity/parental leave or departure, by the workload of the Reporting Judges and Advocates-General, by the complexity and by the voluminous contents of the cases. 
Euroopa Kohtu ksimustikes nimetati kige sagedamini menetluste kestust mjutavate teguritena kohtu puhkusi36, nunike tkoormust ja haigusi, emadus-ja vanemapuhkusi ja tlt lahkumist, ettekandja-kohtunike ja kohtujuristide tkoormust, kohtuasjade keerukust ning mahukust.
This was due to the significant workload experienced by this service as a result of the efforts to reduce the backlog of cases in the years 2014 and 2015. 
See tulenes allksuse suurest tkoormusest, mille phjuseks oli omakorda aastatel 2014 ja 2015 kuhjunud kohtuasjade hulga vhendamiseks tehtud jupingutused.
The other factors frequently indicated were the workload of the Reporting Judges and of their rfrendaires, the change of composition of the Chamber dealing with the case, the re-assignment of cases and the measures of organisation of procedure. 
Sagedaste teguritena mrgiti ka ettekandja-kohtunike ja nende nunike tkoormust, kohtuasja menetleva koja koosseisus tehtud muudatusi, kohtuasjade mberjagamist ning menetlust korraldavaid meetmeid.
Comparisons between the frequency of specific factors in the Court of Justice and the General Court are presented in Box 3. 
Euroopa Kohtu ja ldkohtu vastustes nimetatud tegurite sagedust vrreldakse 3. selgituses.
33 Box 3 Đ Comparisons between the frequency of specific factors in the Court of Justice and the General Court Complexity and voluminous case documentation The complexity of the issues raised by the cases is indicated by the Judges as one of the most frequent factors affecting the duration after the written procedure. 
Euroopa Kohtu ja ldkohtu vastustes nimetatud tegurite sageduse vrdlus Kohtuasjade keerukus ja dokumentatsiooni mahukus Kohtunikud mrkisid prast kirjalikku menetlust kohtuasjade kestust mjutava he kige sagedasema phjusena neis ksitletavate teemade keerukust.
Both Courts are similarly confronted by this issue (evoked for 40 % of the cases sampled at the Court of Justice and 33 % for the General Court). The responses also show that both Courts are affected equally by voluminous case documentation which was given as a factor in about 20 % of the sampled cases both at the Court of Justice and at the General Court. 
Nimetatud asjaolu on mlema kohtu jaoks sarnase thtsusega (seda mainiti Euroopa Kohtu valimis 40 % kohtuasjade puhul ja ldkohtus 33 % puhul). Vastused nitavad samuti, et mlema kohtu td mjutab mahukas dokumentatsioon, mida nimetati nii Euroopa Kohtus kui ldkohtus menetluste venimise phjusena valimi 20 % kohtuasjade puhul.
Workload The workload of the Reporting Judge/Advocate-General and of the rfrendaire in charge of the case is a frequent factor affecting the duration of the procedures indicated by the General Court (affecting 67 % and 53 % of sampled cases). 
Tkoormus ldkohtus nimetati he kohtuasjade kestust mjutava sagedase phjusena nendega tegeleva ettekandja-kohtuniku/kohtujuristi ja nuniku suurt tkoormust (see mjutas vastavalt 67 % ja 53 % valimi kohtuasjadest).
This reason is evoked with a significantly lower frequency by the Court of Justice (37 % and 40 % respectively). 
Euroopa Kohtus nimetati tkoormust mrksa harvemini (vastavalt 37 % ja 40 %).
End of the Reporting JudgesŐ mandate, the change of composition of the Chamber, the re-assignment of cases According to the responses of the CJEU, the end of the Reporting JudgesŐ mandate is a more frequent factor affecting the duration of the procedure at the General Court (37 %) than at the Court of Justice (less than 10 %). 
31 Ettekandja-kohtuniku mandaadi lppemine, koja koosseisu muutmine ja kohtuasjade mberjagamine Euroopa Liidu Kohtu vastuste kohaselt on ettekandja-kohtuniku mandaadi lppemine kohtumenetluste kestust mjutava tegurina olulisem ldkohtus (37 %); Euroopa Kohtus on sama nitaja viksem kui 10 %. ldkohtus nimetati menetluse kestust mjutavate teguritena sageli (ca 60 % vastustest) koja koosseisu muutmist ja kohtuasjade mberjagamist.
These factors are often linked to the end of the JudgeŐs mandate. 
Mlemad tegurid on tihti seotud kohtuniku mandaadi lppemisega.
Suspensions Six cases in our sample related to the General Court and no cases related to the Court of Justice were subject to formal suspensions in line with the Rules of Procedure37. 
Menetluse peatamised Kontrollikoja valimis sisaldunud kuue ldkohtu kohtuasja (Euroopa Kohtus mitte htegi) menetlemine oli vastavalt kohtu kodukorrale ametlikult peatatud37.
For example, this was done where the Court of Justice kept the case handling on hold in order to wait for the judgments on other similar cases to be delivered. 
Seda tehti niteks juhul, kui Euroopa Kohus tahtis menetluse peatada selleks, et oodata ra teised sarnastes kohtuasjades tehtud otsused.
Our interviews with Judges and Advocates-General indicated that they are conscious of the need to handle cases where possible within the indicative time-frames without compromising the quality of the work. 
Kontrollikoja vestlused kohtunike ja kohtujuristidega nitasid, et nad on teadlikud vajadusest menetleda kohtuasju soovituslike thtaegade jooksul, ilma seejuures t kvaliteedis jreleandmisi tegemata.
They also highlighted the impact that the unavailability of the rfrendaire assigned to a particular case may have on the efficiency of its processing, especially in the absence of an adequate back-up. 
Lisaks rhutasid nad kohtuasjaga tegeleva nuniku puudumise mju menetlemise thususele, seda eriti sobiva asendusttaja puudumise korral.
Monitoring 51. 
Seire 51.
Monitoring and following up the treatment of cases, including the development of online monitoring tools, has evolved positively over time. The Judges we interviewed acknowledged their effect on the efficiency of case processing. 
Kohtuasjade menetlemise seire ja selle phjal vetavad meetmed (sh veebiphised seirerakendused) on aja jooksul positiivselt arenenud. Intervjueeritud kohtunikud mrkisid nende positiivset mju kohtuasjade menetlemisele.
Court of Justice 53. 
Euroopa Kohus 53.
The monitoring process has been evolving over a number of years with progressively more detailed reports and analyses being now produced to aid the follow-up, supported by various reports and certain IT tools such as Suivi des Affaires. 
Seireprotsess on aastate jooksul arenenud Đ jrelmeetmete vtmise toetamiseks koostatakse ksikasjalikumaid aruandeid ja analse, millele lisanduvad mitmed aruanded ja IT-rakendused (nt Suivi des Affaires).
Also in 2016 the Court of Justice introduced a ŇPlan de rattrapageÓ to be produced for cases where the indicative time-frames were not respected. 
2016. aastal vttis Euroopa Kohus kasutusele nn jrelejudmiskava (plan de rattrapage), mis ttatakse vlja soovituslikust ajakavast maha jnud kohtuasjade jaoks.
The Court of Justice has progressively introduced a series of measures to bring down the time spent dealing with cases, and to identify and remedy prolongations in procedural steps. 
Euroopa Kohus on jrk-jrgult vtnud rea meetmeid, mille eesmrk on kohtuasjade menetlemiseks kuluva aja vhendamine ning menetluse eri etappide kestust pikendavate phjuste vljaselgitamine ja krvaldamine.
In particular, as from 2004, it has adopted an ŇchancierÓ as part of the Practical Guide39 to the treatment of cases brought before the Court. 
Eelkige veti alates 2004. aastast kasutusele kohtule esitatud hagide menetlemist ksitlevate praktiliste suuniste39 osaks olev nn ajatelg (echancier).
That is to say the deadline set does not take account of the typology, complexity or other characteristics of the individual cases, possibly being too short in the case of complex cases and over-generous for more simple ones. 
kohtuasja liiki, keerukust ja muid omadusi Đ keerukate juhtumite jaoks vib see olla liiga lhike ja lihtsate jaoks liiga pikk. ldkohus 56. ldkohtus kuuluvad menetluste seire ja selle phjal vetavad meetmed prast nende kohtunikele jagamist presidendi pdevusse.
There is a wider collective responsibility also involving the President, the President of Chamber and the Reporting Judge for each individual case. 
Laiem kollektiivne pdevus hlmab ka presidenti, koja presidenti ja iga konkreetse menetluse ettekandja-kohtunikku.
The need for closer monitoring and follow-up has, as at the Court of Justice, been recognised and tools to do so have evolved over time. 
Euroopa Kohus tunnistab vajadust parema seire ja selle phjal vetavate meetmete jrele, ning selleks kasutatavad tvahendid on aja jooksul arenenud.
57. The General Court has developed and used analyses of data and reports to encourage the respect of general time-frames set out for some of the key steps of case management40, and to reduce the average time spent on cases. 
57. ldkohus on vlja ttanud ja kasutanud andmeanalse ja aruandeid, mis motiveerivad ttajaid kinni pidama kohtumenetluste peamistele etappidele seatud ldistest thtaegadest40 ja lhendama kohtumenetluste keskmist kestust.
In addition to the IT tool Suivi des Affaires, the General Court introduced, in 2011, a ŇTableau de ProductivitÓ and a table of cumulative delays which is sent to each Judge on a three monthly basis. 
Lisaks IT-rakendusele Suivi des Affaires vttis ldkohus 2011. aastal kasutusele nn tootlikkuse tabeli (tableau de productivit) ja kumuleerunud viivituste tabeli, mis saadetakse iga kolme kuu tagant igale kohtunikule.
The details of this report are discussed on a quarterly basis between the President and the Presidents of the Chambers to identify in which steps of the procedure further efforts are needed. 
President ja kodade presidendid arutavad seda aruannet kord kvartalis eemrgiga leida, millistes menetluse etappides tuleks tiendavaid meetmeid vtta.
In addition to this report, there are tools which are used as a measure of performance again every three months. 
Lisaks aruandele on olemas vahendid, millega mdetakse t edenemist uuesti iga kolme kuu tagant.
These consist of a memorandum of cases showing analyses of prolongations, a list of cases having ŇsignificantÓ41 prolongations and specific email reminders sent to the individual Judges listing the cases with prolongation under their responsibility. 
Need sisaldavad kohtuasjade memorandumit koos ajakavast maha jmist ksitlevate analsidega, oluliselt41 ajakavast maha jnud menetluste nimekirja ning kohtunikele nende ajakavast maha jnud kohtuasjade kohta saadetavaid meeldetuletusi.
The detailed information at the level of individual Judges has increased transparency, raised awareness and promoted a more timely treatment of cases. 
Konkreetsete kohtunike menetluste kohta kogutav teave on suurendanud lbipaistvust, parandanud teadlikkust ja edendanud kohtuasjade ajakavakohast menetlemist.
It is clear that more active case management has been given a higher priority in recent years with overall positive results before the reform entered into force. 
On ilmne, et viimastel aastatel on olnud prioriteediks kohtuasjade aktiivsem menetlemine ning see judis enne reformi justumist ka tulemusi anda.
For example, the General CourtŐs own analysis shows that, for all open cases, the total number of days by which the time taken to develop preliminary reports exceeded the indicative time-frame has fallen from 130 000 days in 2010 to 15 000 days at the end of 2016, a reduction of nearly 90 %42. 
enda anals, et kigi pooleliolevate kohtuasjade esialgsete ettekannete koostamiseks kulunud pevade arv, mis letas selleks ette nhtud soovitusliku pevade arvu, vhenes peaaegu 90 % vrra Đ 2010. aasta 130 000 pevalt 2016. aasta lpuks 15 000 pevani42.
For both Courts, the continuing development of IT systems such as Business Intelligence reports (formerly Business Object) and the ARGOS system, due to be introduced in 2017, should provide more detailed information through a personalised dashboard showing all outstanding tasks and steps in the process for Judges, Advocates-General and rfrendaires. 
Uute IT-ssteemide (nt Business Intelligence reports) (endise nimega Business Object) ja plaanide kohaselt 2017. aastal kasutusele vetav ARGOS) pidev arendamine peaks mlemas kohtus andma rohkem teavet, mis sisaldab personaliseeritud tulemusnitajaid kohtunike, kohtujuristide ja nunike veel tegemata ja alustatud tde kohta.
The CJEU accounts for its performance with reference to judicial statistics: in particular the number of cases lodged, completed during the year and pending at the year-end, together with the average duration of proceedings closed during the year. 
Euroopa Liidu Kohus kasutab oma tulemuslikkuse aruandluseks kohtustatistikat: eelkige esitatud hagide arvu, aasta jooksul lpetatud ja pooleli jnud menetlusi ning aasta jooksul lpetatud menetluste keskmist kestust.
Internally, a more detailed breakdown of the number of cases together with more analytical averages of duration are used by the institution for information purposes. 
Organisatsiooni sees kasutatakse teabe-eesmrkidel kohtuasjade ksikasjalikumat jaotust ja menetluste kestust mtvaid analtilisemaid keskmisi nitajaid.
The CJEU does not monitor its proceedings against established standards based on the duration of cases tailored to their complexity and typology. 
Euroopa Liidu Kohus ei vrdle oma menetluste kestust nende keerukust ja liiki arvestavate kohandatud standarditega.
In the absence of information on the complexity of the cases concerned, an increase of the number of closed cases and/or a decrease in their average duration do not necessarily mean more efficiency. 37 
Kui puudub info menetluste keerukuse kohta, ei pruugi lpetatud kohtuasjade arvu suurenemine ja/vi nende keskmise kestuse vhenemine ilmtingimata thendada suuremat thusust.
In this respect, we have identified the work of the CEPEJ43 established by the Council of Europe as being particularly relevant. 
Nimetatud kontekstis on eriti asjakohane Euroopa Nukogu asutatud kohtute efektiivsust hindava komisjoni (CEPEJ)43 t.
According to the guide, time-frames are intended to be applied to categories of proceedings, and take into account the complexity of cases. 
Vastavalt suunistele peab erinevate kohtuasjade liikide kohta kasutama erinevaid sihtthtaegu, kusjuures arvesse tuleb vtta kohtuasjade keerukust.
For example, performance can be measured by setting time-frames, i.e. closing 90 or 95 % of cases within a time-frame from 12 to 36 months depending on the type and complexity of proceedings. 
Tulemuslikkust saab niteks mta thtaegade kokkuleppimise teel: eesmrgiks seatakse niteks 90 vi 95 % menetluste lpetamine 12Đ36 kuu jooksul (olenevalt menetluse liigist ja keerukusest).
We have also analysed the main CEPEJ guidelines on time management45 in order to identify best practices that could be applicable also to the CJEU procedures. 
Audiitorid analsisid ka CEPEJ peamisi ajakasutust puudutavaid suuniseid45, et leida parimaid tavasid, mida saaks kasutada ka Euroopa Liidu Kohtu menetlustes.
We found in particular that the CEPEJ ŇTime management check-listÓ could be a good tool for assessing the extent to which the CJEU has at its disposal appropriate information and analyses relevant aspects of the judicial proceedings. The check-list is organized around six time management indicators. 
Leiti, et eelkige CEPEJ ajakasutuse kontrollnimekiri (time management check-list) viks olla kasulik tvahend, mille abil saaks hinnata Euroopa Liidu Kohtu ksutuses olevat asjakohast teavet ning seda, mil mral hindab kohus kohtumenetluste asjakohaseid aspekte.
The specific points in the check-list relating to each of these indicators are presented in Annex III. 
Iga nitaja kohta kivad punktid on esitatud III lisas.
Our assessment of the extent to which the available information and subsequent analyses made by the CJEU are in line with the relevant CEPEJ guidelines relating to these indicators is presented in Figure 9. 
Joonisel 9 esitatakse kontrollikoja hinnang selle kohta, mil mral vastab Euroopa Liidu Kohtu ksutuses olev teave ja selle alusel tehtud anals neile nitajatele osutavatele CEPEJ asjaomastele suunistele.
examination of the CJEU systems for case management, and on the analysis of the sample of 60 closed cases (see paragraphs 36 to 60). 
Joonis phineb Euroopa Liidu Kohtu kohtuasjade menetlemise ssteemidel ja valimisse langenud 60 kohtuasja analsimisel (vt punktid 36Đ 60).
Although substantial progress has already been made in most of the areas covered by the six CEPEJ indicators on time management, the review found there remains scope to improve the measurement of judicial performance. 
Enamikus valdkondades, mida CEPEJ kuus ajakasutuse nitajat hlmavad, on kll juba olulisi edusamme tehtud, ent kontrollikoja t nitas, et kohtumenetluste tulemuslikkuse mtmist on vimalik veelgi parandada.
Assessment on the compatibility between the CJEU time management procedures and the CEPEJ guidelines set out in the indicators (1) Ability to assess the overall length of proceedings Yes There is data available about the length of proceedings for each case, both as regards the overall length as well as the duration of individual stages of proceedings (see paragraphs 28 to 30). 
Hinnang sellele, kas Euroopa Liidu Kohtu ajakasutuse protseduurid on koosklas CEPEJ nitajate kujul vljendatud suunistega 1) Vime hinnata menetluste kogukestust Jah Olemas on teave iga kohtumenetluse kestuse kohta Đ seda nii kogukestuse kui menetluse iga etapi kohta (vt punktid 28Đ30).
(2) Established standards for duration of proceedings Partially Although the CJEU has set standard indicative deadlines for case management for certain individual stages of proceedings, they are not tailored to the different types of cases (see paragraphs 55 and 57). 
2) Menetluste kestuse standardid Osaliselt Euroopa Liidu Kohtus on kll kokku lepitud menetluse teatud etappide soovituslikud kestused, kuid need ei vta arvesse kohtuasjade erinevate liikide eriprasid (vt punktid 55 ja 57).
However, this information is not used to categorize cases with regard to their complexity and average duration (see paragraph 62). 
Seda ei kasutata aga kohtuasjade liigitamiseks nende keerukuse ja keskmise kestuse alusel (vt punkt 62).
(4) Ability to monitor course of proceedings Partially While the timing of most important and typical steps of proceedings is recorded, actual time (resources) spent on each stage of the procedure and reasons affecting the duration of the procedures are not recorded (see paragraphs 34, 46 and 47). 
4) Vime jlgida kohtumenetluste edenemist Osaliselt Menetluste kige olulisemate ja tpilisemate etappide kestust puudutav teave kll salvestatakse, ent menetluste igale etapile kuluvat tegelikku aega (ressursse) ja menetluste kestust mjutavaid phjuseid ei fikseerita (vt punktid 34, 46 ja 47).