natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
41 It follows from the foregoing that, during the legislative process, the Parliament, the Council and the Commission took into account the available scientific data, including that which emerged in the course of that procedure, in order to exercise their discretion properly. 
41 Iz gore navedenog proizlazi da su tijekom zakonodavnog postupka Parlament, Vijeće i Komisija radi pravilnog izvršavanja svoje diskrecijske ovlasti uzeli u obzir dostupne znanstvene podatke, uključujući i one koji su se pojavili u toku tog postupka.
42 In the light of the scientific documents which relate both to the effects of MMT on human health and the environment and its impact on vehicles, the Parliament and the Council did not make a manifest error of assessment in deciding to set a limit for the MMT content of fuel. Consequently, Article 1(8) of Directive 2009/30, in so far as it inserts an Article 8a(2) in Directive 98/70, is not invalid. 
42 S obzirom na znanstvenu dokumentaciju koja se odnosi i na učinke MMT-a na zdravlje ljudi i okoliš i na njegov utjecaj na vozila, Parlament i Vijeće nisu počinili očitu pogrešku u ocjeni kada su odlučili utvrditi graničnu vrijednost sadržaja MMT-a u gorivu. Slijedom navedenog, članak 1. stavak 8. Direktive 2009/30, u dijelu u kojem u Direktivu 98/70 umeće članak 8.a stavak 2., nije nevaljan.
The failure to comply with the principle of proportionality and the precautionary principle 
Nepoštovanje načela proporcionalnosti i načela opreznosti
43 Afton claims that the adoption of limits for the MMT content of fuel infringed the principle of proportionality on the ground that there is nothing to justify a limitation on the use of MMT which is so stringent that it amounts to a de facto ban on MMT in unleaded petrol from 2014 and in lead replacement petrol from 2011. 
43 Afton tvrdi da je usvajanjem graničnih vrijednosti sadržaja MMT-a u gorivu povrijeđeno načelo proporcionalnosti s obrazloženjem da ništa ne opravdava ograničenje uporabe MMT-a koje je toliko strogo da de facto predstavlja zabranu MMT-a u bezolovnom benzinu od 2014. i benzinskom gorivu koje zamjenjuje olovni benzin od 2011.
44 Further, Afton attempts to demonstrate that there is no evidence to justify the adoption of a piece of legislation which is intended to be based on the precautionary principle as regards MMT since no examination of the effects of MMT on health and no scientific risk assessment in relation to the negative impact of MMT on pollution abatement technologies and on the environment were carried out. In addition, it was an error to rely on the precautionary principle as justification. 
44 Nadalje, Afton pokušava pokazati da nema dokaza koji opravdavaju donošenje propisa čiji je cilj primjena načela opreznosti u pogledu MMT-a budući da nikakva ispitivanja učinaka MMT-a na zdravlje ni znanstvene procjene rizika u odnosu na negativan učinak MMT-a na tehnologije za smanjenje onečišćenja i na okoliš nisu provedeni. Osim toga bilo je pogrešno pozivati se na načelo opreznosti kao opravdanje.
"45 According to settled case-law, it must be recalled that the principle of proportionality, which is one of the general principles of Community law, requires that measures adopted by Community institutions do not exceed the limits of what is appropriate and necessary in order to attain the objectives legitimately pursued by the legislation in question; when there is a choice between several appropriate measures recourse must be had to the least onerous, and the disadvantages caused must not be disproportionate to the aims pursued (Case C-189/01 Jippes and Others [2001] ECR I-5689, paragraph 81; Case C-558/07 S.P.C.M. and Others [2009] ECR I-0000, paragraph 41; and Joined Cases C-379/08 and C-380/08 ERG and Others [2010] ECR I-0000, paragraph 86 and case-law there cited)." 
"45 Prema ustaljenoj sudskoj praksi, valja podsjetiti da načelo proporcionalnosti kao jedno od općih načela prava Zajednice zahtijeva da akti institucija Zajednice ne prelaze granice onoga što je prikladno i nužno za postizanje ciljeva kojima zakonodavstvo legitimno teži, s time da, ako postoji izbor između više prikladnih mjera, treba izabrati manje otegotnu, a uzrokovane nepovoljnosti ne smiju biti neproporcionalne u odnosu na ciljeve koje se želi postići (presude od 12. srpnja 2001., Jippes i dr., C-189/01, Zb., str. I-5689., t. 81.; od 7. srpnja 2009., S.P.C.M. i dr., C-558/07, Zb., str. I-5783., t. 41., kao i od 9. ožujka 2010., ERG i dr., C-379/08 i C-380/08, Zb., str. I-2007., t. 86. kao i u njima navedenu sudsku praksu)."
46 With regard to judicial review of the conditions referred to in the previous paragraph, the European Union legislature must be allowed a broad discretion in an area which entails political, economic and social choices on its part, and in which it is called upon to undertake complex assessments. The legality of a measure adopted in that sphere can be affected only if the measure is manifestly inappropriate having regard to the objective which the competent institutions are seeking to pursue (S.P.C.M. and Others, paragraph 42 and case-law there cited). 
46 U pogledu sudskog nadzora uvjeta iz prethodne točke, zakonodavcu Unije valja dati široku diskrecijsku ovlast u području koja uključuje njegovo sudjelovanje u odlukama političke, gospodarske i socijalne naravi, a u kojem se od njega traži da izvrši složene procjene. Na zakonitost mjere usvojene u tom području može utjecati samo očita neprikladnost mjere u odnosu na cilj koji nadležne institucije žele postići (gore navedena presuda S.P.C.M. i dr., t. 42. i navedena sudska praksa).
47 In the present case, it is necessary to consider whether the setting of limits for manganese content, as provided for by Article 8a(2) of Directive 98/70, constitutes a proportionate means of achieving the objectives of that directive. 
47 U ovom slučaju valja razmotriti je li postavljanje graničnih vrijednosti sadržaja mangana, kako je propisano člankom 8.a stavkom 2. Direktive 98/70, proporcionalno sredstvo za postizanje ciljeva te direktive.
48 According to recital 35 of Directive 2009/30, the objectives of setting limits for MMT are based on the fact that the use of that substance might entail risks for human health and might cause damage to vehicle engines and emission control equipment. It provides for the labelling of all fuels and accordingly states that there is a requirement to inform consumers. 
48 Prema uvodnoj izjavi 35. Direktive 2009/30, ciljevi postavljanja graničnih vrijednosti za MMT temelje se na činjenici da uporaba MMT-a može imati za posljedicu rizike za zdravlje ljudi i da može uzrokovati oštećenje motora u vozilima i opreme za regulaciju emisija. U njoj se predviđa označivanje svih goriva i navodi da postoji obveza informiranja potrošača.
49 The objectives of protection of health, environmental protection and consumer protection are referred to both in Article 95(3) EC, under which the legislature is to take as a base a high level of protection, taking account, in particular, of any new development based on scientific facts, and in Article 174(1) and (2) EC, which provides that the Community policy on the environment is to be based on, inter alia, the precautionary principle. 
49 Ciljevi zaštite zdravlja, zaštite okoliša i zaštite potrošača predviđeni su i u članku 95. stavku 3. UEZ-a, na temelju kojih zakonodavac kao osnovu treba uzeti visoku razinu zaštite, posebno uzimajući u obzir moguća nova dostignuća na temelju znanstvenih činjenica, i u članku 174. stavcima 1. i 2. UEZ-a, koji propisuju da se politika Zajednice u području okoliša treba zasnivati, između ostaloga, na načelu opreznosti.
50 The setting of a limit for the presence of MMT in fuel which makes it possible thereby to reduce the quantities of that substance which might potentially damage health is not manifestly inappropriate for attaining the objectives of protection of health and environmental protection pursued by the European Union legislature. It remains however to be verified that the legislature has not gone beyond what is necessary to attain those objectives. 
50 Postavljanje granične vrijednosti za prisutnost MMT-a u gorivu koja omogućuje odgovarajuće smanjenje količina te tvari koje mogu biti potencijalno štetne za zdravlje nije očito neprikladno za postizanje ciljeva zaštite zdravlja i zaštite okoliša koje zakonodavac Unije želi postići. Međutim preostaje provjeriti da taj zakonodavac ne prekoračuje ono što je potrebno za postizanje tih ciljeva.
51 In the present case, whilst the Commission’s proposal for a directive did not make any provision for either banning or limiting MMT in fuel, the Parliament’s Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety wanted MMT to be banned completely. In that regard, as regards Directive 2003/17, it is clear that, when Directive 2009/30 was adopted, the state of scientific knowledge meant that the development of test methodologies was difficult or impossible. 
51 U ovom slučaju valja jasno istaknuti da je, iako u prijedlogu direktive Komisija nije predvidjela ni zabranu ni ograničenje MMT-a u gorivu, Parlamentarni odbor za okoliš, javno zdravlje i sigurnost hrane htio da MMT bude zabranjen u potpunosti. U tom pogledu, što se tiče Direktive 2003/17, valja utvrditi da je u vrijeme donošenja Direktive 2009/30 stanje znanstvenih spoznaja bilo takvo da je razvoj metodologije ispitivanja bio otežan ili nemoguć.
52 Moreover, Article 8a(1) of Directive 98/70 provides for the development of test methodologies and the presentation of conclusions before the Parliament and the Council by 31 December 2012. 
52 Osim toga, članak 8.a stavak 1. Direktive 98/70 predviđa razvoj metodologije ispitivanja i predstavljanje zaključaka pred Parlamentom i Vijećem prije 31. prosinca 2012.
53 The limit for the MMT content of fuel was accordingly set pending the development of such test methodologies. It is therefore temporary and is capable of amendment according to the results of developments which may be observed. 
53 Tako je granična vrijednost sadržaja MMT-a u gorivu postavljena u očekivanju razvoja tih ispitnih metoda. Stoga je ona privremena i može se mijenjati u skladu s rezultatima razvoja koji se uoče.
54 The contested provision must, lastly, be seen in the wider framework of Directive 2009/30, which is intended to define minimum specifications for fuels in the interest of health protection and environmental protection in the context of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 
54 I konačno, spornu odredbu treba gledati u širem okviru Direktive 2009/30 kojom se žele definirati minimalne specifikacije za goriva radi zaštite zdravlja i zaštite okoliša u kontekstu smanjenja emisija stakleničkih plinova.
55 Consequently, having regard to the health risks and the risks of damage to vehicle engines and to the difficulties in developing test methodologies, a restrictive measure such as a limitation on the presence of MMT in fuels does not go beyond what is necessary to meet the objectives of Directive 2009/30. 
55 Slijedom navedenog, s obzirom na rizike za zdravlje i rizike od oštećenja motora u vozilima i na poteškoće u razvoju metodologija ispitivanja, ograničenje prisutnosti MMT-a u gorivima kao mjera ograničavanja ne prekoračuje ono što je potrebno za ispunjavanje ciljeva Direktive 2009/30.
56 Moreover, it is necessary to ascertain whether, in exercising its discretion, the European Union legislature attempted to achieve a degree of balance between, on the one hand, the protection of health, environmental protection and consumer protection and, on the other hand, the economic interests of traders, while pursuing the objective assigned to it by the Treaty to ensure a high level of protection of health and environmental protection. 
56 Osim toga, važno je utvrditi je li, u izvršavanju svoje diskrecijske ovlasti, zakonodavac Unije, nastojeći ispuniti cilj koji mu je dodijeljen Ugovorom, tj. osigurati visoku razinu zaštite i zaštitu okoliša, pokušao postići stupanj uravnoteženosti između, s jedne strane, zaštite zdravlja, zaštite okoliša i zaštite potrošača i, s druge strane, ekonomskih interesa gospodarskih subjekata.
57 First, it must be borne in mind that the Commission’s impact assessment was not binding on either the Parliament or the Council. 
57 Kao prvo, valja podsjetiti na to da procjena utjecaja koju je provela Komisija nije bila obvezujuća ni za Parlament ni za Vijeće.
58 In that regard, it is clear from the scientific documents and from the debate between the parties that, when Directive 2009/30 was adopted, no public body or independent entity had undertaken a scientific assessment of the effects of MMT on health. As regards the studies provided by professionals in the sector, it is clear that the widely disparate conclusions reached on that subject are dependent on whether the study relied on was carried out by the motor car industry or by the producers of MMT. 
58 U tom pogledu, iz znanstvenih dokumenata i rasprave vođene između stranaka proizlazi da u vrijeme donošenja Direktive 2009/30 nijedno javno tijelo ni neovisni subjekt nisu poduzeli znanstvenu procjenu utjecaja MMT-a na zdravlje. Kada se radi o studijama koje su isporučili stručnjaci u tom sektoru, valja utvrditi da se zaključci studija po tom pitanju međusobno jako razlikuju s obzirom na to je li studiju na koju se pozivaju izradila automobilska industrija ili su je izradili proizvođači MMT-a.
59 It follows that the European Union legislature was faced with serious doubts, in the absence of adequate and reliable scientific data, as to whether MMT was harmless for health and the environment. 
59 Iz toga slijedi da je u nedostatku prikladnih i pouzdanih znanstvenih podataka zakonodavac Unije bio suočen s ozbiljnim sumnjama u to da MMT nije štetan za zdravlje i za okoliš.
60 A correct application of the precautionary principle presupposes, first, identification of the potentially negative consequences for health of the proposed use of MMT, and, secondly, a comprehensive assessment of the risk to health based on the most reliable scientific data available and the most recent results of international research (see Case C-333/08 Commission v France [2010] ECR I-0000, paragraph 92 and case-law there cited). 
60 Pravilna primjena načela opreznosti pretpostavlja, kao prvo, identifikaciju potencijalno negativnih posljedica predložene uporabe MMT-a po zdravlje i, kao drugo, sveobuhvatnu procjenu rizika za zdravlje na temelju najpouzdanijih dostupnih znanstvenih podataka i najnovijih rezultata međunarodnih istraživanja (vidjeti presudu od 28. siječnja 2010., Komisija/Francuska, C-333/08, Zb., str. I-757., t. 92. i navedenu sudsku praksu).
61 Where it proves to be impossible to determine with certainty the existence or extent of the alleged risk because of the insufficiency, inconclusiveness or imprecision of the results of studies conducted, but the likelihood of real harm to public health persists should the risk materialise, the precautionary principle justifies the adoption of restrictive measures, provided they are non-discriminatory and objective (see Commission v France, paragraph 93 and case-law there cited). 
61 Kada se dokaže da zbog nedostatnosti, neuvjerljivosti ili nepreciznosti rezultata provedenih studija nije moguće sa sigurnošću utvrditi postojanje ili doseg navodnog rizika, pri čemu, ako bi se rizik ostvario, postoji vjerojatnost stvarnog štetnog djelovanja na javno zdravlje, načelo opreznosti opravdava usvajanje mjera ograničavanja pod uvjetom da su nediskriminirajuće i objektivne (vidjeti gore navedenu presudu, Komisija/Francuska, t. 93. i navedenu sudsku praksu).
62 In those circumstances, it must be acknowledged that the European Union legislature may, under the precautionary principle, take protective measures without having to wait for the reality and the seriousness of those risks to be fully demonstrated (see Commission v France, paragraph 91). 
62 U tim okolnostima valja potvrditi da zakonodavac Unije na temelju načela opreznosti može poduzeti zaštitne mjere, a da ne mora čekati da se u potpunosti dokaže stvarna narav i ozbiljnost tih rizika (vidjeti gore navedenu presudu, Komisija/Francuska, t. 91.).
63 In a case such as that in the main proceedings, the limit for the MMT content of fuel is not discriminatory, since it applies to the whole of the European Union and to all producers and importers of MMT. 
63 U slučaju kakav je onaj u glavnom postupku granična vrijednost sadržaja MMT-a u gorivu nije diskriminirajuća, budući da se primjenjuje na cijelu Uniju i na sve proizvođače i uvoznike MMT-a.
64 Moreover, the European Union legislature could justifiably take the view that the appropriate manner of reconciling the high level of health and environmental protection and the economic interests of producers of MMT was to limit the content of MMT in fuel on a declining scale while providing for the possibility, in Article 8a(3) of Directive 98/70, of revising those limits on the basis of the results of assessment. 
64 Osim toga, zakonodavac Unije mogao je opravdano zauzeti stajalište da je primjereno da se visoka razina zaštite zdravlja i okoliša uskladi s ekonomskim interesima proizvođača MMT-a tako da se sadržaj MMT-a u gorivu ograniči degresivno, ali da se istovremeno ostavi mogućnost, u članku 8.a stavku 3. Direktive 98/70, da se te granične vrijednosti revidiraju na temelju rezultata procjene.
65 Lastly, Afton challenges the level of the limits on the basis that there is no scientific basis for it, that it entails a number of disadvantages in relation to older vehicles and that the European Union legislature carried out no examination of those disadvantages. Afton adds that the limits amount to a de facto ban of MMT. 
65 I na kraju, Afton osporava razinu graničnih vrijednosti smatrajući da za nju nema znanstvene osnove, da ona dovodi do nedostataka u odnosu na starija vozila i da zakonodavac Unije o tim nedostacima nije proveo ispitivanje. Afton dodaje da granične vrijednosti dovode do zabrane MMT-a.
66 However, since the nature of the harm which might be caused by MMT is uncertain, there cannot be more precise information which makes it possible to define the level of the MMT fuel content limit which would be capable of ensuring that that harm was adequately prevented. 
66 Međutim, budući da je narav štetnosti MMT-a neizvjesna, nema preciznijih informacija koje bi omogućile da se definira razina granične vrijednosti sadržaja MMT-a u gorivu koja bi bila u stanju osigurati odgovarajuću prevenciju štetnosti.
67 Moreover, Afton marketed less than 0.5% of the total worldwide sales of MMT in 2008, to just a few countries in the European Union. At the same time, other Member States such as the Federal Republic of Germany have banned the presence of MMT in fuel. 
67 Osim toga, Afton je prodao manje od 0,5 % od ukupne svjetske prodaje MMT-a u 2008., u samo nekoliko zemalja Unije. Istovremeno, druge države članice, kao npr. Savezna Republika Njemačka, zabranile su prisutnost MMT-a u gorivu.
68 Further, having regard to the uncertainty in relation to both the damage caused by the use of MMT and the risks created for users of MMT, the setting of limits for the MMT content of fuel does not appear manifestly disproportionate in relation to the economic interests of producers of MMT, in order to ensure a high level of protection of health and the environment. 
68 Nadalje, uzimajući u obzir neizvjesnost u odnosu i na štetu uzrokovanu uporabom MMT-a i na rizike nastale za korisnike MMT-a, postavljanje graničnih vrijednosti sadržaja MMT-a u gorivu kako bi se osigurala visoka razina zaštite zdravlja ljudi i zaštite okoliša nije očito neproporcionalno u odnosu na ekonomske interese proizvođača MMT-a.
69 It follows from the foregoing that Article 1(8) of Directive 2009/30, in so far as it inserts an Article 8a(2) in Directive 98/70, is not invalid by reason of the infringement of the precautionary principle and the principle of proportionality. 
69 Iz gore navedenog proizlazi da članak 1. stavak 8. Direktive 2009/30, u dijelu u kojem u Direktivu 98/70 umeće članak 8.a stavak 2., nije nevaljan na temelju povrede načela opreznosti i načela proporcionalnosti.
Failure to comply with the principle of equal treatment 
Nepoštovanje načela jednakog postupanja
70 Afton claims that there is no justification for setting limits on MMT when no restrictions are imposed on the use of other metallic additives, including those containing manganese. 
70 Afton tvrdi da nema opravdanja za postavljanje graničnih vrijednosti MMT-a bez uvođenja ograničenja uporabe drugih metalnih aditiva, uključujući i aditive koji sadrže mangan.
71 According to Afton, MMT performs a function which is comparable to that of other metallic additives and does not entail any additional risks to health and the environment. Afton cites, as an example, cyclopentadienyl manganese tricarbonyl (CMT), the use of which is not subject to any limit under the legislation at issue. 
71 Prema Aftonu, MMT ima funkciju usporedivu s funkcijom drugih metalnih aditiva i nema za posljedicu dodatne rizike za zdravlje i okoliš. Afton kao primjer navodi ciklopentadienil manganov trikarbonil (CMT), čija uporaba ne podliježe graničnoj vrijednosti na temelju predmetnog propisa.
72 The institutions which have intervened before the Court contend, in essence, that other manganese-based additives are not used or imported in the European Union. 
72 Institucije koje su intervenirale pred Sudom smatraju da se u biti ti drugi aditivi na bazi mangana ne rabe u Uniji niti se u nju uvoze.
73 The Parliament states that MMT has long been the subject of studies and risk analyses and that its use as a metallic additive in fuel is of long standing, whereas no studies exist on other additives. 
73 Parlament navodi da je MMT već dugo predmet studija i analiza rizika te da se kao metalni aditiv u gorivu upotrebljava već duže vrijeme dok za druge aditive takvih studija nema.
74 According to settled case-law, the principle of equal treatment or non-discrimination requires that comparable situations must not be treated differently and that different situations must not be treated in the same way unless such treatment is objectively justified (see S.P.C.M. and Others, paragraph 74 and case-law there cited). 
74 Prema ustaljenoj sudskoj praksi, načelo jednakog postupanja ili nediskriminacije zahtijeva da se u usporedivim situacijama ne postupa na različite načine i da se u različitim situacijama ne postupa na isti način, osim ako bi takvo postupanje bilo objektivno opravdano (vidjeti gore navedenu presudu S.P.C.M. i dr., t. 74. i navedenu sudsku praksu).
75 In that regard, it is sufficient to find that Afton has not disproved the assertion that other metallic additives, such as CMT, have not been used or imported in the European Union. 
75 U tom pogledu je dovoljno utvrditi da Afton nije dokazao netočnost navoda da se drugi metalni aditivi, npr. CMT, ne rabe u Uniji niti se u nju uvoze.
76 It follows that MMT is not in a situation which is comparable to that of other manganese-based metallic additives and the European Union legislature was therefore not required to set limits for those other additives. 
76 Iz toga slijedi da se kod MMT-a ne radi o situaciji koja je usporediva s onom kod drugih metalnih aditiva na bazi mangana i da zakonodavac Unije stoga nije bio obvezan postaviti granične vrijednosti za te druge aditive.
77 Consequently, since the Court finds that the principle of equal treatment has not been infringed, Article 1(8) of Directive 2009/30, in so far as it inserts an Article 8a(2) in Directive 98/70, is not invalid by reason of the infringement of that principle. 
77 Stoga, budući da Sud smatra da načelo jednakog postupanja nije povrijeđeno, članak 1. stavak 8. Direktive 2009/30, u dijelu u kojem u Direktivu 98/70 umeće članak 8.a stavak 2., nije nevaljan na temelju povrede tog načela.
Failure to comply with the principle of legal certainty 
Nepoštovanje načela pravne sigurnosti
78 Afton claims that the new Article 8a(2) of Directive 98/70 is insufficiently precise as regards the link which should exist between the limit for the MMT content of fuel and development of a test methodology. 
78 Afton tvrdi da je novi članak 8.a stavak 2. Direktive 98/70 nedovoljno precizan što se tiče veze koja bi trebala postojati između granične vrijednosti sadržaja MMT-a u gorivu i razvoja metodologije ispitivanja.