natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
of the Public Procurement Act, this body decided each party is to cover their own costs, as it was decided in item 3 of this Decision. 
Zakona o javnoj nabavi odlučilo da svaka strana podmiti svoje troškove, kako je odlučeno u točki 3. izreke ovog Rješenja.
Against this decision an appeal cannot be submitted, but an administrative proceedings can be initiated by filing a complaint to the competent Administrative Court within 30 days from receiving the Decision. 
Protiv ovog Rješenja ne može se izjaviti žalba, ali se protiv njega može pokrenuti upravni spor podnošenjem tužbe nadležnom upravnom sudu u roku od 30 dana od dana primitka Rješenja.
INSTRUCTIONS ON LEGAL REMEDY: 
UPUT A O PRAVNOM LIJEKU:
The appeal is admissible, timely and filed by the authorised person. 
Žalba je dopuštena, pravovremena i izjavljena od ovlaštene osobe.
A request by the appellant Telefon d.o.o, Knin, for having their costs of initiating an appeal reimbursed by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Rural Development, Zagreb, is thus dismissed as ungrounded. 
Odbija se zahtjev žalitelja Telefon d.o.o., Knin, da mu naručitelj Ministarstvo poljoprivrede, ribarstva i ruralnog razvoja, Zagreb, nadoknadi troškove pokretanja žalbenog postupka kao neosnovan.
The appeal by the appellant is admissible, timely and filed by the authorised person. 
Žalba žalitelja je dopuštena, pravovremena i izjavljena od ovlaštenih osoba.
The Client failed to act in accordance with the provision of the Public Procurement Act and the Regulation on the methodology for drawing up and handling tender documents and tenders (Official Gazette, no. 13/08 and 4/09) in relation to the bid review and evaluation, the reasons for bid rejection and selection and to this body's decision, and was, therefore, decided as in item 1 of this Decision. 
Naručitelj nije postupio sukladno odredbama Zakona o javnoj nabavi i Uredbe o načinu izrade i postupanju s dokumentacijom za nadmetanje i ponudama (Narodne Novine, broj 13/08 i 4109) koji se tiču pregleda i ocjene ponuda te razloga isključenja ponuda i odabira ponuda i rješenja ovog tijela te je stoga odlučeno kao u točki I. izreke ovog Rješenja.
The Client is instructed to reimburse the costs of appeal procedure to the appellant in the amount of HRK 7,500.00, within 8 days from the day of receiving this Decision, while the rest of the appeal is dismissed. 
Nalaže se naručitelju da u roku 8 dana od primitka ovog Rješenja nadoknadi žalitelju troškove žalbenog postupka u iznosu od 7.500,00 kuna dok se u preostalom dijelu zahtjev odbija.
Bidders who participate in the procurement procedure by submitting their bids, are not ignorant parties, because the composition of bids requires specific knowledge and bidders must be familiar with the way the public procurement procedure functions, which is why it cannot be said of the entity who is capable of submitting a bid in the public procurement procedure to be an average party who would not be able to manage without the aid of an attorney in composing an appeal. 
Gospodarski subjekti koji sudjeluju u postupku nabave podnoseći svoje ponude, nisu neuke stranke, jer za sastavljanje ponude treba imati određeno specifično znanje, ali i biti upućen u način funkcioniranja samog postupka javne nabave, zbog čega se za pravnu osobu koja je sposobna podnijeti ponudu u postupku javne nabave ne može reći kako je prosječna stranka koja bi se II postupku teško snašla bez pravne pomoći za sastav žalbe.
In addition, all parameters related to the Client's server access were described in the technical specification of the tendering documentation and to all interested bidders an authorised representative of the company GISDATA d.o.o. was made available, however, in the open deadline for bids delivery, not one bidder contacted the mentioned representative or the Client. 
Također, svi parametri pristupa serveru naručitelja bili su opisani u tehničkoj specifikaciji dokumentacije za nadmetanje i svim zainteresiranim gospodarskim subjektima na raspolaganju je bio prethodno ovlašteni predstavnik tvrtke GISDATA d.o.o., međutim nitko od gospodarskih subjekata nije se obratio u otvorenom roku za dostavu ponuda niti ovlaštenom predstavniku spomenute tvrtke kao niti naručitelju.
354-01 /10-13 on 28 July 2010 
354-0 l / I 0-13 od 28. srpnja 20 I O.
N-02-V-120510-150409, for the purpose of procurement and installation of a device for the fishing vessel monitoring system via satellite (VMS), pursuant to Articles 134, 151 and 158 of 
N-02-V-120510-1 50409, radi nabave i instalacije uređaja za satelitski sustav nadzora ribarskih plovila (VMS), sukladno člancima 134., 151. i 158.
The Client the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Rural Development, Zagreb, announced the open public procurement procedure number N-02-V-120510-150409 in the Electronic Public Procurement Classifieds, for the purpose of procurement and installation of a device for the fishing vessel monitoring system via satellite (VMS). 
Naručitelj Ministarstvo poljoprivrede, ribarstva i ruralnog razvoja, Zagreb, objavio je otvoreni postupak javne nabave broj N-02-V-12051O-1S0409 u Elektroničkom oglasniku javne nabave dana, radi nabave i instalacije uređaja za satelitski sustav nadzora ribarskih plovila (VMS).
The appeal is accepted as partly grounded. 
Žalba je djelomično osnovana.
Propositions for ordering a temporary security injunction are admissible, timely and filed by the authorised person. 
Prijedlozi za određivanje privremene mjere osiguranja su dopušteni, pravovremeni i izjavljeni od ovlaštene osobe.
To the mentioned Selection Decision, an appeal was voiced by the appellant Telefon d.o.o., Knin, to the State Commission for Supervision of Public Procurement Procedure and submitted to the Client, in which the appellant states that the Client failed to mention the estimated procurement value in the tender, that the delivery deadline was too short, that the procedure of public opening of bids was not done in accordance with the positive regulations and that the selected bid is not in accordance with the tendering documentation, and, therefore, requests the Selection Decision be annulled. In the appeal, the appellant Telefon d.o.o., Knin, requests their costs of initiating an appeal be reimbursed by the Client. 
Na navedenu Odluku o odabiru žalbu je Državnoj komisiji za kontrolu postupaka također izjavio, a naručitelju predao, žalitelj Telefon d.o.o., Knin, II kojoj u bitnome navodi da naručitelj nigdje nije naveo procijenjenu vrijednost nabave, da je rok za dostavu ponuda prekratak, da postupak javnog otvaranja ponuda nije proveden sukladno pozitivnim propisima te da odabrana ponuda nije sukladna dokwnentaciji za nadmetanje, pa traži da se poništi Odluka o odabiru. žalitelj Telefon d.o.o., Knin, u svojoj žalbi zahtijeva da mu naručitelj nadoknadi troškove pokretanja žalbenog postupka.
Propositions for ordering temporary security injunction are admissible, timely and filed by the authorised person. 
Prijedlozi za određivanje privremene mjere osiguranja su dopušteni, pravovremeni i izjavljeni od ovlaštene osobe.
of the Public Procurement Act, in addition to the appeal, the appellant can also submit a proposition for ordering temporary security injunction. 
Zakona o javnoj nabavi žalitelj može uz žalbu podnijeti i prijedlog za određivanje privremene mjere osiguranja.
Under the Public Procurement Act, an appeal has a suspensive character, that is, it postpones the execution of the decision. 
Prema Zakonu o javnoj nabavi žalba je suspenzivnog karaktera, odnosno odgađa se izvršenje tješenja.
The Decision on the selection of the most favourable offer, as of 4 June 2009, by the Client the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Rural Development, Zagreb, for the procurement and installation of a device for the fishing vessel monitoring system via satellite (VMS), is thus annulled. 
Poništava se Odluka o odabiru najpovoljnije ponude, od 4. lipnja 2009., naručitelja Ministarstvo poljoprivrede, ribarstva i ruralnog razvoja, Zagreb, za nabavu i instalacije uređaja za satelitski sustav nadzora ribarskih plovila (VMS).
Selection criterion is the lowest price. 
Kriterij odabira je najniža cijena.
On 4 June 2009, the Client reached a Selection Decision, choosing the bid by the bidder Erna d.o.o. as the most favourable. 
Naručitelj je 4. lipnja 2009. donio Odluku o odabiru kojom je kao najpovoljniju odabrao ponudu ponuditelja Erna d.o.o.
the Public Procurement Act and requests the Selection Decision and the respective procedure be annulled. 
Zakona o javnoj nabavi te traži da se poništi Odluka o odabiru i predmetni postupak.
STATE COMMISSION FOR SUPERVISION OF PUBLIC PROCUREMENT PROCEDURE 
DRŽAVNA KOMISIJA ZA KONTROLU POSTUPAKA JAVNE NABAVE
HAKOM) to import and/or put on the Croatian market the radio and telecommunications terminal equipment (hereinafter: 
HAKOM) za uvoz i/ili stavljanje na tržište Republike Hrvatske radijske opreme i telekomunikacijske terminalne opreme (dalje II tekstu:
R&TTE equipment). 
RiTT oprema).
of the Ordinance, for the import and/or putting of the R&TTE equipment in question on the Croatian market, which satisfies important demands from Article 4 
Pravilnika, za uvoz i/ili stavljanje na tržište Republike Hrvatske predmetne RiTT opreme, a koja udovoljava bitnim zahtjevima iz članka 4.
of the Act, the Client is obligated to request from the bidder, as evidence of the bidder's legal and business capacity, the following: 
Zakona javni naručitelj mora od gospodarskog subjekta, kao dokaz postojanja odgovarajuće pravne i poslovne sposobnosti, zahtijevati:
1. a document verifying the registration with a business, court (commercial), professional, craft or other appropriate register or appropriate certificate, not older than six months on the announcement day, 2. authorisation, approval etc. if the bidder needs such in the country where the bidder is established, for the performance of activities connected to the procurement subject, and 3. a document on the membership in certain professional organizations if the bidder needs such in the country where the bidder is established, for the performance of activities connected to the procurement subject. 
1. ispravu o upisu u poslovni, sudski (trgovački), strukovni, obrtni ili drugi odgovarajući registar ili odgovarajuću potvrdu, koji ne smiju biti stariji od šest mjeseci do dana slanja objave, 2. ovlaštenje, suglasnost i slično ako su gospodarskom subjektu potrebni u zemlji sjedišta za obavljanje djelatnosti povezane s predmetom nabave, te 3. ispravu o članstvu u određenoj strukovnoj organizaciji ako je gospodarskom subjektu potrebna u zemlji sjedišta za obavljanje djelatnosti povezane s predmetom nabave.
of the General Administrative Procedure Act (Official Gazette no. 53/91 i 103/96), from HAKOM and the Ministry of Sea, Transport and Tourism, by requesting an opinion whether the entities selling the procurement subject are obligated to obtain the mentioned approval, since the provision of Article 9, paragraph I 
Zakona o općem upravnom postupku (Narodne novine broj 53/91 i 103/96), od strane HAKOM-a te Ministarstva mora, prometa i turizma, na način da je zatraženo mišljenje jesu li subjekti koji se bave prodajom predmeta nabave dužni nabaviti navedeno odobrenje, budući da je odredbom članka 9. stavak l.
376-1O/MS-09-2, HAKOM replied as follows: 
376-1O/MS-09-2 odgovorio slijedeće:
"... in our expert opinion, a legal entity or natural person responsible for the import and/or putting of the fishing vessel monitoring system on the market is obligated, prior to the first instance of importing and putting on the market, to request our approval. 
" ... po našem stručnom mišljenju pravna ili fizička osoba odgovorna za uvoz i/ili stavljanje na tržište sustava za praćenje i nadzor ribarskih brodova dužna je prije prvoga uvoza i s4tvljanja na tržište ishoditi naše odobrenje.
530- 10-09-2 SR, the Ministry replied as follows: 
530~ l 0-09-2 SR odgovorilo slijedeće:
Article 2, Paragraph 4, Item c) of the Ordinance dictates that provisions of the Ordinance do not apply to the R&TTE equipment intended for marine and aircraft radio communication, which meets special demands determined in accordance with special regulations. 
Članak 2. stavak 4. točka c) Pravilnika odreduje da se odredbe Pravilnika ne primjenjuju na RiTT opremu namijenjenu pomorskim i zrakoplovnim radijskim komunikacijama, koja udovoljava posebnim uvjetima što se utvrđuju II skladu s posebnim propisima.
In this public procurement case, given the technical specifications of the system, we are of the opinion that the mentioned system cannot be regarded as R&TTE equipment intended for marine radio communication, and is, therefore, subject to the provisions of the Ordinance. 
U predmetnom slučaju javne nabave, uzimajući u obzir tehničke specifikacije sustava, mišljenja smo kako se navedeni sustav ne može smatrati RiTT opremom namijenjenom pomorskim radijskim komunikacijama te da se na istu stoga primjenjuju odredbe Pravilnika.
"... in our expert opinion, a legal entity or a natural person responsible for the import and/or putting of the fishing vessel monitoring system on the market is obligated, prior to the first instance of importing and putting on the market, to request our approval. 
" ... po našem stručnom mišljenju pravna ili fizička osoba odgovorna za uvoz i/ili stavljanje na tržište sustava za praćenje i nadzor ribarskih brodova dužna je prije prvoga uvoza i s4tvljanja na tržište ishoditi naše odobrenje.
Given the fact that the documentation was not prepared in accordance with positive regulations and that it is impossible to carry out a lawful public procurement procedure based on the documentation in question, this body reached a decision as in items 2 and 3 of the dispositive part of this Decision, as this is the case of serious violation under Article 140, Paragraph 1 and Paragraph 2, Item 2 
Kako se radi o dokumentaciji koja nije sastavljena sukladno pozitivnim propisima i temeljem koje je nemoguće provesti zakonit postupak javne nabave, ovo je tijelo odlučilo kao u točkama 2: i 3. dispozitiva ovog Rješenja, budući da se radi o bitnoj povredi iz članka 140. stavak 1. i stavak 2. točka 2.
of the Public Procurement Act, and evaluated as irrelevant the explanations of separate citations mentioned in the appeal by the appellant. 
Zakona o javnoj nabavi te nije ocijenilo relevantnim obrazlaganje pojedinih žalbenih navoda žalitelja.
Against this decision an appeal cannot be submitted, but administrative proceedings can be initiated by filing a complaint to the Administrative Court of the Republic of Croatia within 30 days from receiving the Decision. 
Protiv ovog Rješenja ne može se izjaviti žalba, ali se može pokrenuti upravni spor podnošenjem tužbe Upravnom sudu Republike Hrvatske u roku od 30 dana od dana primitka Rješenja.
Against this decision an appeal cannot be submitted, but administrative proceedings can be initiated by filing a complaint to the Administrative Court of the Republic of Croatia within 30 days from the day of receiving the Decision. 
Protiv ovog Rješenja ne može se izjaviti žalba, ali se može pokrenuti upravni spor podnošenjem tužbe Upravnom sudu Republike Hrvatske u roku od 30 dana od dana primitka Rješenja.
In the mentioned procedure, the Client reached a Selection Decision on 31 April 2010 and, as the most favourable bid, chose the bid by the bidder Ema d.o.o. 
U navedenom postupku naručitelj je donio Odluku o odabiru od 31. travnja 20 I O. kojom je kao najpovoljnija odabrana ponuda ponuditelja Ema d.o.o.
To the mentioned Selection Decision, as of 31 April 2010, appeals to this body were filed and submitted to the Client, by appellants Končar-elektrotehnika i informatika d.d. 
Na navedenu Odluku o odabiru od 31. travnja 2010. žalbu su ovom tijelu izjavi li, a naručitelju predali ponuditelji Končar-elektrotehnika i informatika d.d.
To the mentioned Selection Decision, as of 31 April 2010, appeals to this body were filed and submitted to the Client by appellants Končar-elektrotehnika i informatika d.d. 
Na navedenu Odluku o odabiru od 31. travnja 2010. žalbu su ovom tijelu izjavi li, a naručitelju predali ponuditelji Končar-elektrotehnika i informatika d.d.
To the mentioned Selection Decision as of 31 April 2010, appeals to this body were filed and submitted to the Client by appellants Končar-elektrotehnika i informatika d.d. 
Na navedenu Odluku o odabiru od 31. travnja 2010. žalbu su ovom tijelu izjavi li, a naručitelju predali ponuditelji Končar-elektrotehnika i informatika d.d.
By the mentioned Decision, the Selection Decision as of 31 April 2010, is annulled and the case file was returned to the Client to evaluate and review the case file again and to reach a new decision based on the new results. 
Navedenim rješenjem poništena je Odluka o odabiru od 31. travnja 2010. i vraćen predmet naručitelju da izvrši ponovni pregled i ocjenu te na temelju novih rezultata donese odluku.
By the mentioned Decision, the Selection Decision as of 31 April 2010, is annulled and the case file was returned to the Client to evaluate and review it again and to reach a new decision based on the new results. 
Navedenim rješenjem poništena je Odluka o odabiru od 31. travnja 2010. i vraćen predmet naručitelju da izvrši ponovni pregled i ocjenu te na temelju novih rezultata donese odluku.
The Client created a new record of bid review and evaluation process and reached a new Selection Decision on 31 August 2010, choosing the bid by the bidder Ema d.o.o. 
Naručitelj je sastavio novi zapisnik o pregledu i ocjeni ponuda te donio novu Odluku o odabiru dana 31. kolovoza 2010. kojom je odabrao ponudu Ema d.o.o.
To the Selection Decision as of 31 August 2010, an appeal was filed to this body and submitted to the Client by the appellant Telefon d.o.o., 
Na Odluku o odabiru od 31. kolovoza 20 10. ponuditelj Telefon d.o.o.
Knin, in which the appellant claims there were no grounds to exclude them from the tendering procedure due to failing to respond to the invitation to perform signal transmission via the testing device although that was not stipulated in the tendering documentation. 
Knin izjavio je ovom tijelu, a naručitelju predao žalbu u kojoj u bitnome navodi kako je neosnovano isključen iz postupka nadmetanja zbog neodazivanja pozivu da sam ostvari slanje signala preko testnog uređaja iako isto nije niti bilo predviđeno dokumentacijom za nadmetanje.
The Bidder's obligation to prove the functionality of the device is prescribed on page 18. 
Obveza da ponuditelj dokaže funkcionalnost uređaja propisana je na strani 18.
Pursuant to Article 149, paragraph 1 
Prema članku 149. stavak 1.
Acting in their official capacity pursuant to the Article 141, paragraph 1 
Postupajući po službenoj dužnosti temeljem članka 141. stavak 1.
Pursuant to the provision of the Article 49, paragraph 1 
Prema odredbi članka 49. stavak 1.
Therefore, in order to established the facts, this body requested legal aid, under Article 41, paragraph 1 
Stoga, radi utvrđivanja činjeničnog stanja ovo je tijelo zatražilo pravnu pomoć, temeljem članka 41. stavak 1.
of the Ordinance, legal entity or natural person from Article 7, paragraph 3 
Pravilnika, pravna ili fizička osoba iz članka 7. stavka 3.
Article 2, paragraph 4, item c) of the Ordinance dictates that provisions of the Ordinance do not apply to the R&TTE equipment intended for marine and aircraft radio communication, which meets special demands determined in accordance with special regulations. 
Članak 2. stavak 4. točka c) Pravilnika odreduje da se odredbe Pravilnika ne primjenjuju na RiTT opremu namijenjenu pomorskim i zrakoplovnim radijskim komunikacijama, koja udovoljava posebnim uvjetima što se utvrđuju II skladu s posebnim propisima.
Given the fact that the documentation was not prepared in accordance with positive regulations and that it is impossible to carry out a lawful public procurement procedure based on the documentation in question, this body reached a decision as in items 2 and 3 of the dispositive part of this Decision, as this is the case of serious violation under Article 140, paragraph 1 and paragraph 2, Item 2 
Kako se radi o dokumentaciji koja nije sastavljena sukladno pozitivnim propisima i temeljem koje je nemoguće provesti zakonit postupak javne nabave, ovo je tijelo odlučilo kao u točkama 2: i 3. dispozitiva ovog Rješenja, budući da se radi o bitnoj povredi iz članka 140. stavak 1. i stavak 2. točka 2.
In their appeal, the appellant FER, Zagreb, requested their costs of initiating an appeal be reimbursed in the total amount of HRK 7,570.00, which is in accordance with Article 158, paragraph 3 
Žalitelj FER, Zagreb, je II svojoj žalbi postavio zahtjev za naknadom troškova postupka u ukupnom iznosu od 7.570,00 kuna, što je u skladu sa člankom 158. stavak 3.
Furthermore, pursuant to Article 138, paragraph 1 of the same Act, the Client must not enter into the public procurement contract or act towards its realisation within 12 days, that is, within five days in the procedures of small procurement value, counting from the day set out in Article 147, paragraph 2, item 3, of that Act. 
Nadalje, prema članku 138., stavak 1., istog Zakona, naručitelj ne smije potpisati ugovor o javnoj nabavi ili pristupiti njegovu izvršenju u roku 12 dana, odnosno u roku od pet dana u postupcima nabave male vrijednosti, računajući od dana propisanog u članku 147. stavka 2. točke 3. toga Zakona.
of the Ordinance on the Radio and Telecommunications Terminal Equipment (Official Gazette no. 112/08, hereinafter Ordinance) determines that to import and/or put on the Croatian market the R&TTE equipment from Article 2, paragraph 1 and 2 
Pravilnika o radijskoj opremi i telekomunikacijskoj terminalnoj opremi (Narodne novine broj 112/08, dalje u tekstu Pravilnik) određeno da za uvoz i/ili stavljanje na tržište Republike Hrvatske RiTT opreme iz članka 2. stavka 1. i 2.
As the appeal of the appellant is accepted as grounded, so is the appellant's request for the reimbursement of costs, and the decision was reached as in item 4 of this Decision. 
Kako je žalitelj evo traženje osnovano, tako je i njegov zahtjev za naknadom troškova osnovan te je odlučeno kao u točki 4. izreke ovog Rješenja.
of the Public Procurement Act, a request for the reimbursement of costs must be completely determined, specified and delivered before the decision is reached, however, as the appellant failed to completely determine and specify the request, it was decided as in item 5 of the dispositive part of this Decision. 
Zakona o javnoj nabavi zahtjev za naknadu troškova postupka mora biti posve određen, specificiran i dostavljen prije donošenja .tješenja, a kako istog žalitelj nije posve odredio niti specificirao odlučeno je kao u točki 5. dispozitiva ovog Rješenja.
Paragraph 2 of the Article 138 determines that the appeal filed against the selection decision, announcement of the public procurement procedure in the case of negotiation procedure without prior announcement, exemption of the public procurement from this Act and the procurement of public services from the Annex II B, prevents the singing of the public procurement contract for all groups of parts of the procurement subject. 
Stavak 2. članka 138. određuje da žalba izjavljena protiv odluke o odabiru, obavijesti o početku postupka javne nabave u slučajevima pregovaračkog postupka javne nabave bez prethodne objave, izuzeća javne nabave od primjene ovog Zakona te nabave javnih usluga iz Dodatka II B sprječava potpisivanje ugovora o javnoj nabavi za sve grupe ili dijelove predmeta nabave.
To the mentioned Selection Decision, an appeal was voiced by the appellant FER, Zagreb, to the State Commission for Supervision of Public Procurement Procedure and submitted to the Client, in which the appellant states that the Client failed to describe the procurement subject in accordance with the Public Procurement Act, that the delivery deadline was too short and that the competency conditions were not in accordance with Article 31, paragraph 2 of 
Na navedenu Odluku o odabiru žalbu je Državnoj komisiji za kontrolu postupaka izjavio, a naručitelju predao, žalitelj FER, Zagreb, u kojoj II bitnome navodi kako naručitelj nije opisao predmet nabave sukladno Zakonu o javnoj nabavi, da je rok za dostavu ponuda prekratak te da uvjeti o sposobnosti nisu sukladni članku 31. stavak 2.