natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The investigation showed that ZAC was in the process of privatization supervised by the Ukrainian State.
Preiskava je pokazala, da je bil ZAC v postopku privatizacije, ki ga je nadzorovala država.
In the framework of the privatisation, ZAC's majority shareholder and private investor concluded a contract with a state organisation.
V okviru privatizacije je večinski delničar in zasebni vlagatelj ZAC sklenil pogodbo z državno organizacijo.
Until the end of the IP, ZAC had several obligations imposed by the contract, in particular concerning its workforce and activities.
Do konca OP je imel ZAC številne pogodbene obveznosti, zlasti glede svojih zaposlenih in dejavnosti.
The fulfilment of these obligations was subject to yearly State inspections and failure to fulfil these obligations was subject to sanctions.
Izpolnitev teh obveznosti je bila predmet letnih državnih pregledov in za neizpolnjevanje obveznosti so bile predvidene sankcije.
It was found that the conditions imposed in the contract go beyond what a private investor under normal market economy conditions would accept.
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da so v pogodbi navedeni pogoji presegali, kar bi zasebni vlagatelj sprejel pod pogoji običajnega tržnega gospodarstva.
Therefore, it is concluded that the company decisions of ZAC regarding labour, output and sales were not made in response to market signals reflecting supply and demand.
Zato je bilo sklenjeno, da odločitve družbe ZAC o delovni sili, proizvodnji in prodaji niso bile sklenjene kot odgovor na tržne signale, ki odražajo ponudbo in povpraševanje.
Rather the decisions were taken with significant State interference in this regard.
Predvsem so bile odločitve v zvezi s tem sprejete z znatnim vmešavanjem države.
Further it was also found that the accounts and the audit of the accounts were not reliable.
Nadalje je bilo ugotovljeno, da računovodski izkazi in revizija računovodskih izkazov niso bili zanesljivi.
Indeed, ZAC could modify key data in the accounting program (dates and values for a closed accounting period) and it has not been possible to track certain financial operations in the accounts of ZAC.
ZAC bi lahko spremenil ključne podatke v programu za računovodstvo (datume in vrednosti za zaprto obračunsko obdobje) in določenim finančnim transakcijam v računovodskih izkazih ZAC ni bilo mogoče slediti.
These serious drawbacks were not reported in the audit report.
Te resne slabosti niso bile navedene v revizijskem poročilu.
Therefore it is concluded, that ZAC does not have one clear set of basic accounting records which are independently audited in line with international accounting standards and which are applied for all purposes.
Zato je bilo sklenjeno, da ZAC nima ene same jasne osnovne računovodske dokumentacije, revidirane neodvisno v skladu z mednarodnimi računovodskimi standardi in uporabljene za vse namene.
Finally it was found, that by placing defence objects of military nature belonging to the State on the balance sheet and by depreciation of these objects, the patrimonial state, production costs and financial situation of ZAC are subject to significant distortions carried over from the former non-market economy system.
Nazadnje je bilo ugotovljeno, da so bili z umeščanjem obrambnih objektov vojaške narave, ki pripadajo državi, na bilanco stanja, in z depreciacijo teh objektov premoženjsko stanje, proizvodni stroški in finančno stanje ZAC podvrženi občutnim izkrivljanjem, prenesenim iz prejšnjega sistema netržnega gospodarstva.
Also, the production costs are distorted through the acceptance by ZAC of an interest free loan granted by an investor during the process of privatization.
Prav tako so izkrivljeni proizvodni stroški zaradi brezobrestnega posojila, ki ga je ZAC sprejel od vlagatelja med postopkom privatizacije.
On this basis it was concluded that not all criteria set out in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation were met and that market economy conditions do not prevail for the applicant.
Na podlagi tega je bilo ugotovljeno, da niso izpolnjeni vsi kriteriji iz člena 2(7)(c) osnovne uredbe in da pogoji tržnega gospodarstva za vlagatelja ne veljajo.
The Commission informed the applicant and the Community industry in detail of the abovementioned determinations and granted them the possibility to comment.
Komisija je podrobno obvestila vlagatelja in industrijo Skupnosti o zgoraj omenjenih ugotovitvah in jim zagotovila možnost, da podajo svoje pripombe.
The Community industry supported the Commission’s determinations.
Industrija Skupnosti je podprla ugotovitve Komisije.
The comments submitted by the applicant were not such as to warrant any change in the MES determination.
Pripombe, ki jih je predložil vlagatelj, niso bile takšne, da bi utemeljevale kakršno koli spremembo ugotovitev o STG.
Further to Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation, a country-wide duty is established for countries falling under Article 2(7), except in those cases where companies are able to demonstrate on the basis of properly substantiated claims, that all criteria laid down in Article 9(5) of the basic Regulation are met.
Na podlagi člena 2(7)(a) osnovne uredbe se za države, ki sodijo v okvir člena 2(7), dajatev določi na ravni države, razen v primerih, ko družbe lahko na podlagi primerno utemeljenih zahtevkov dokažejo, da so izpolnjeni vsi kriteriji, določeni v členu 9(5) osnovne uredbe.
The applicant also claimed IT leading to the establishment of a specific individual anti-dumping duty in the event it was not granted MES.
Vlagatelj je zahteval tudi IO, ki bi vodila k določitvi posebne individualne protidampinške dajatve v primeru, če se mu ne podeli STG.
However, the investigation did not point towards the existence of other producers of the product concerned in Ukraine but showed that the applicant is the only known producer of the product concerned in Ukraine.
Vendar preiskava ni izkazala obstoja drugih proizvajalcev zadevnega izdelka v Ukrajini, ampak je razkrila, da je vlagatelj edini znani proizvajalec zadevnega izdelka v Ukrajini.
In such a case it is considered that the question of IT does not arise because the specific individual dumping margin would be identical to the country-wide dumping margin.
V takšnem primeru se šteje, da IO ne pride v poštev, ker bi bila posebna individualna stopnja dampinga enaka stopnji dampinga na ravni države.
According to Article 2(7) of the basic Regulation, for non-market-economy countries and, to the extent that MES could not be granted, for countries in transition, normal value shall be determined on the basis of the price or constructed value in an analogue country.
Skladno s členom 2(7) osnovne uredbe se za države z netržnim gospodarstvom in, v kolikor STG ne more biti podeljen, za države v prehodu določi normalna vrednost na podlagi cene ali konstruirane vrednosti v primerljivi državi.
The applicant claimed that the analogue country used in the original investigation, Brazil, was not appropriate and that in the current interim review, Russia should be chosen as the most, if not the only appropriate analogue country for establishing normal value for Ukraine.
Vlagatelj je trdil, da primerljiva država Brazilija, uporabljena za prvotno preiskavo, ni bila primerna in da bi za vmesni pregled morala biti izbrana Rusija kot najbolj, če ne edina primerna primerljiva država za določitev normalne vrednosti za Ukrajino.
The arguments put forward by the applicant in favour of Russia were the facts that allegedly (i) Russia’s access to raw materials, energy resources and other major inputs, the technology used in production and the scale of production are comparable to Ukraine (ii) Russia's domestic sales are representative, as the total domestic sales volume exceed 5 % of the total export sales volume of Ukraine (iii) the competitive situation in Russia is comparable to Ukraine.
Argumenti, ki jih je predložil vlagatelj v prid Rusije, so bila dejstva, da domnevno (i) so dostop Rusije do surovin, energetskih virov in drugih pomembnejših produkcijskih sredstev, tehnologija, uporabljena v proizvodnji, in obseg proizvodnje primerljivi z Ukrajino (ii) je domača prodaja Rusije reprezentativna, ker je njen celotni obseg presegel 5 % celotnega obsega izvozne prodaje Ukrajine (iii) so konkurenčne razmere v Rusiji primerljive z razmerami v Ukrajini.
The Commission considered the proposal of the applicant.
Komisija je obravnavala predlog vlagatelja.
It was considered first of all that exports of the product concerned originating in Russia were found to be dumped in the original investigation.
Predvsem se je upoštevalo, da je bilo v prvotni preiskavi ugotovljeno, da je bil izvoz zadevnega izdelka s poreklom iz Rusije dampinški.
Such a situation alone implies already an anomaly in the relationship between normal value and export price and puts into question the suitability of Russia as an analogue country.
Že takšne razmere pomenijo nepravilnost v odnosu med normalno vrednostjo in izvozno ceno ter postavljajo pod vprašaj primernost Rusije kot primerljive države.
Notwithstanding this observation and following the explicit request of the applicant, the Commission services invited the Russian exporting producer to cooperate in this proceeding.
Ne glede na to ugotovitev in zaradi izrecne zahteve vlagatelja, so službe Komisije povabile ruskega proizvajalca – izvoznika, da sodeluje v tem postopku.
However, the Russian company has not cooperated.
Vendar ruska družba ni sodelovala.
For these reasons it was found that Russia could not be chosen as an appropriate analogue country for establishing normal value for Ukraine.
Zaradi tega je bilo ugotovljeno, da Rusija ne more biti izbrana kot primerna primerljiva država za določitev normalne vrednosti za Ukrajino.
Furthermore, no evidence was found suggesting that circumstances with regard to the analogue country in the original investigation had changed in favour of the applicant.
Poleg tega ni nobenega dokaza, ki bi izkazoval, da so se okoliščine v zvezi s primerljivo državo v prvotni preiskavi spremenile v prid vlagatelja.
According to Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation, the export price shall be the price actually paid or payable for the product when sold for export from the exporting country to the Community.
V skladu s členom 2(8) osnovne uredbe je izvozna cena dejansko plačana cena ali cena, ki se plača za izdelek, prodan za izvoz iz države izvoznice v Skupnost.
In cases where there is no export price, the export price may be constructed according to Article 2(9) of the basic Regulation on the basis of the price at which the imported products are first resold to an independent buyer, or, if the products are not resold to an independent buyer, or are not resold in the condition in which they were imported, on any reasonable basis.
V primerih, ko izvozne cene ni, je izvozna cena lahko konstruirana v skladu s členom 2(9) osnovne uredbe na podlagi cene, po kateri so uvoženi izdelki prvič ponovno prodani neodvisnemu kupcu ali na kakršni koli utemeljeni podlagi, če izdelki niso prodani neodvisnemu kupcu ali če niso ponovno prodani v stanju, v katerem so bili uvoženi.
The applicant claimed a change of circumstances with regard to its export prices and argued that in the absence of representative exports to the Community, export prices to a substitute non-EU market comparable to the Community should be used as a reasonable basis to establish a dumping margin.
Vlagatelj se je skliceval na spremembo okoliščin v zvezi s svojimi izvoznimi cenami in trdil, da bi se v odsotnosti reprezentativnega izvoza v Skupnost izvozne cene za nadomestni trg, ki ni trg EU in je primerljiv s Skupnostjo, morale uporabljati kot razumna podlaga za vzpostavitev stopnje dampinga.
To this end, the applicant proposed the USA or EU10 as a reference country.
V ta namen je vlagatelj kot referenčno državo predlagal ZDA ali EU 10.
The Commission considered the proposals of the applicant, as indeed, in very exceptional circumstances it could be envisaged to use export prices to third countries as a basis for comparison with normal value.
Komisija je obravnavala predloge vlagatelja, ker bi se dejansko v zelo izjemnih okoliščinah lahko predvidela uporaba izvoznih cen za tretje države kot osnova za primerjavo z normalno vrednostjo.
However, in this case it was found that the export quantities of the applicant to the USA during the IP were not even representative, so that the question whether it was appropriate to use the export prices to the USA did not arise.
Vendar je bilo v tem primeru ugotovljeno, da izvozne količine vlagatelja v ZDA med OP niso bile niti reprezentativne, tako da vprašanje, ali je bilo primerno uporabiti izvozne cene za ZDA, ni prišlo v poštev.
Hence the claim to base the dumping calculation on export prices to the USA was rejected.
Zato je bil zahtevek, da naj izračun dampinga temelji na izvoznih cenah za ZDA, zavrnjen.
Furthermore, no evidence was found suggesting that the isolated use of export prices to EU10 would be in favour of the applicant.
Poleg tega ni nobenega dokaza, da bi bila ločena uporaba izvoznih cen za EU 10 v prid vlagatelja.
Finally, it is confirmed that no representative sales were found to exist during the IP to the Community.
Nazadnje je bilo potrjeno, da ni bila odkrita nobena reprezentativna prodaja v Skupnost med OP.
Given the above, MES could not be granted to the applicant.
Z upoštevanjem navedenega se STG ni mogel podeliti vlagatelju.
The question of IT does not arise in this case.
IO v tem primeru ne pride v poštev.
In addition, all other examined claims regarding the choice of an analogue country and the export prices of the applicant put forward by the applicant were rejected.
Poleg tega so bili vsi drugi preučeni zahtevki glede izbire primerljive države in izvoznih cen vlagatelja, ki jih je le-ta predložil, zavrnjene.
On this basis, it is considered that the circumstances with regard to dumping have not changed significantly compared to the situation prevailing during the investigation period used in the investigation which led to the imposition of the measures.
Na tej podlagi se šteje, da se okoliščine v zvezi z dampingom niso znatno spremenile v primerjavi z razmerami, ki so prevladovale med obdobjem preiskave, uporabljenim v preiskavi, ki je vodila k uvedbi ukrepov.
Therefore, it is concluded that the partial interim review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports into the Community of silicon carbide originating in Ukraine should be terminated without amending or repealing the measures in force,
Zato je bilo sklenjeno, da se delni vmesni pregled protidampinških ukrepov, ki se uporabljajo za uvoz silicijevega karbida s poreklom iz Ukrajine v Skupnost, zaključi brez spreminjanja ali razveljavitve veljavnih ukrepov –
The partial interim review of the anti-dumping duty on imports of silicon carbide originating in Ukraine is hereby terminated.
Delni vmesni pregled protidampinške dajatve na uvoz silicijevega karbida s poreklom iz Ukrajine se zaključi.
The definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Regulation (EC) No 1100/2000 shall be maintained.
Dokončna protidampinška dajatev, uvedena z Uredbo (ES) št. 1100/2000, se ohrani.
OJ L 94, 13.4.1994, p. 21.
UL L 94, 13.4.1994, str. 21.
Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1786/97 (OJ L 254, 17.9.1997, p. 6).
Uredba, kakor je bila nazadnje spremenjena z Uredbo (ES) št. 1786/97 (UL L 254, 17.9.1997, str. 6).
OJ L 182, 19.5.2004, p. 18.
UL L 182, 19.5.2004, str. 18.
OJ L 344, 20.11.2004, p. 37.
UL L 344, 20.11.2004, str. 37.
OJ C 3, 7.1.2004, p. 4.
UL C 3, 7.1.2004, str. 4.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 780/2005
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 780/2005
of 24 May 2005
z dne 24. maja 2005
This Regulation shall enter into force on 25 May 2005.
Ta uredba začne veljati 25. maja 2005.
Done at Brussels, 24 May 2005.
V Bruslju, 24. maja 2005
to Commission Regulation of 24 May 2005 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
k Uredbi Komisije z dne 24. maja 2005 o določitvi pavšalnih uvoznih vrednosti za določanje vhodne cene nekaterega sadja in zelenjave
Commission Regulation (EC) No 781/2005
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 781/2005
amending Regulation (EC) No 622/2003 laying down measures for the implementation of the common basic standards on aviation security
o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 622/2003 o določitvi ukrepov za izvajanje skupnih osnovnih standardov za varnost letalstva
Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 2320/2002 of the European Parliament and the Council of 16 December 2002 establishing common rules in the field of civil aviation security [1] and in particular Article 4(2) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta (ES) št. 2320/2002 z dne 16. decembra 2002 o določitvi skupnih pravil na področju varnosti civilnega letalstva [1] in zlasti člena 4(2) Uredbe,
The Commission is required, by virtue of Regulation (EC) No 2320/2002, to adopt measures for the implementation of common basic standards for aviation security throughout the European Community.
Komisija mora v skladu z Uredbo (ES) št. 2320/2002 sprejeti ukrepe za izvajanje skupnih osnovnih standardov za varnost letalstva po vsej Evropski skupnosti.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 622/2003 of 4 April 2003 laying down measures for the implementation of the common basic standards on aviation security [2] was the first act containing such measures.
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 622/2003 z dne 4. aprila 2003 o določitvi ukrepov za izvajanje skupnih osnovnih standardov za varnost letalstva [2] je bila prvi zakon, ki je zajemal take ukrepe.
There is a need for measures giving precision to the common basic standards.
Obstaja potreba po ukrepih, ki bi podrobno določali skupne osnovne standarde.
In accordance with Regulation (EC) No 2320/2002 and in order to prevent unlawful acts, the measures laid down in the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 622/2003 should be secret and should not be published.
V skladu z Uredbo (ES) št. 2320/2002 in z namenom preprečevanja nezakonitih dejanj ukrepi iz Priloge k Uredbi (ES) št. 622/2003 ostanejo tajni in se ne objavijo.
The same rule necessarily applies to any amending act.
Isto pravilo se prav tako uporablja za vse spremembe zakona.
Regulation (EC) No 622/2003 should be amended accordingly.
Uredbo (ES) št. 622/2003 je treba ustrezno spremeniti.
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Civil Aviation Security,
Ukrepi, predvideni s to uredbo, so v skladu z mnenjem Odbora za varnost civilnega letalstva –
The Annex to Regulation (EC) No 622/2003 is amended as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.
Priloga k Uredbi (ES) št. 622/2003 se spremeni, kot je določeno v Prilogi k tej uredbi.
Article 3 of that Regulation shall apply as regards the confidential nature of this Annex.
Člen 3 navedene uredbe se uporablja glede zaupne narave te priloge.
Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 68/2004 (OJ L 10, 16.1.2004, p. 14).
Uredba, kakor je bila nazadnje spremenjena z Uredbo (ES) št. 68/2004 (UL L 10, 16.1.2004, str. 14.)
In accordance with Article 1 the Annex is secret and shall not be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
V skladu s členom 1 je Priloga tajna in se ne objavi v Uradnem listu Evropskih skupnosti.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 782/2005
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 782/2005
setting out the format for the transmission of results on waste statistics
o določitvi oblike za posredovanje rezultatov o statistiki odpadkov
Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 2150/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2002 on waste statistics [1] and in particular Article 6(e) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Evropskega Parlamenta in Sveta (ES) št. 2150/2002 z dne 25. novembra 2002 o statistiki odpadkov [1] in zlasti člena 6(e) Uredbe,
By virtue of Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 2150/2002, the Commission is required to adopt the measures necessary for implementing that Regulation.
V skladu s členom 6 Uredbe (ES) št. 2150/2002 mora Komisija sprejeti ukrepe, potrebne za izvajanje te uredbe.
In accordance with Article 6(e) of Regulation (EC) No 2150/2002, the Commission should set out the appropriate format for the transmission of results by Member States.
V skladu s členom 6(e) Uredbe (ES) št. 2150/2002 mora Komisija za države članice določiti primerno obliko za posredovanje rezultatov.
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Statistical Programme Committee established by Council Decision 89/382/EEC, Euratom [2],
Ukrepi, predvideni v tej uredbi, so v skladu z mnenjem Odbora za statistični program, ustanovljenim s Sklepom Sveta 89/382/EGS, Euratom [2] –
The appropriate format for the transmission of results on waste statistics to the Commission (Eurostat) shall be as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.
Primerna oblika za posredovanje rezultatov o statistiki odpadkov Komisiji (Eurostatu) se določi v Prilogi k tej uredbi.
Member States shall use this format for the data on the 2004 reference year and subsequent years.
Države članice uporabljajo to obliko za podatke o referenčnem letu 2004 in nadaljnjih letih.
Member States shall transmit to the Commission (Eurostat) the data and metadata required by Regulation (EC) No 2150/2002 in electronic form, in accordance with an interchange standard proposed by the Commission (Eurostat).
Države članice posredujejo Komisiji (Eurostatu) podatke in meta podatke, ki jih zahteva Uredba (ES) št. 2150/2002, v elektronski obliki v skladu s standardom izmenjave, ki ga predlaga Komisija (Eurostat).
FORMAT FOR THE TRANSMISSION OF RESULTS ON WASTE STATISTICS
OBLIKA ZA POSREDOVANJE REZULTATOV O STATISTIKI ODPADKOV
The data sets
Sklopi podatkov
The domain covered by Regulation (EC) No 2150/2002 on waste statistics consists in five sets of information:
Področje, ki ga pokriva Uredba (ES) št. 2150/2002 o statistiki odpadkov, je sestavljeno iz petih sklopov podatkov:
Generation of waste (GENER)
nastajanje odpadkov (GENER),
Incineration (INCIN)
sežig (INCIN),
Operations which may lead to recovery (RECOV)
postopki za predelavo (RECOV),
Disposal (DISPO)
odstranjevanje (DISPO),
Number and capacity of recovery and disposal facilities; coverage of waste collection scheme by NUTS 2 region (REGIO).
število in zmogljivost obratov za predelavo in odstranjevanje, pokritost s sistemom zbiranja odpadkov po regiji NUTS 2 (REGIO).
Domain
Področje
Value: WASTE
Vrednost: WASTE
Set
Sklop
Value: A2
Vrednost: A2
Country code
Koda države
Two letter country code (see list A)
Dvočrkovna koda države (glej seznam A)
Reference Year (first reference year 2004)
Referenčno leto (prvo referenčno leto 2004)
Value: 0000 (zero, zero, zero, zero) for annual data
Vrednost: 0000 (nič, nič, nič, nič) za letne podatke
The parts of the file name are separated by an underscore.
Deli imena datoteke so ločeni s podčrtajem.
A text based format will be used.
Uporablja se oblika, ki temelji na besedilu.
For example, the set on the generation of waste from Belgium in 2004 will have the name WASTE_GENER_A2_BE_2004_0000.
Sklop o nastajanju odpadkov iz Belgije za leto 2004 bo imel na primer ime WASTE_GENER_A2_BE_2004_0000.
Missing values
Manjkajoče vrednosti
There will be no missing values in the classifying variables (waste category, economic activity, NUTS 2 region, type of waste treatment facility).
V opredeljujočih spremenljivkah (kategorija odpadkov, gospodarska dejavnost, regija NUTS 2, vrsta obrata za obdelavo odpadkov) ne bo manjkajočih vrednosti.
Records should be provided for each combination of the classifying variables.
Za vsako kombinacijo opredeljujočih spremenljivk mora biti predložena evidenca.
All records where the combination does not occur should be sent with a value set to 0 (zero).
Vsa evidenca, v kateri se kombinacija ne pojavlja, mora biti poslana z vrednostjo, določeno kot 0 (nič).
Any records for which data are not available should nevertheless be provided with the value coded appropriately as missing (coded with the letter ‘M’).
Vsa evidenca, za katero podatki niso na voljo, mora biti kljub temu poslana s primerno označeno vrednostjo za manjkajoče podatke (označeno s črko „M“).
Missing values will have to be explained in the quality report; they might for instance be the result of the methods used.
Manjkajoče vrednosti bo treba pojasniti v poročilu o kakovosti; lahko so na primer posledica uporabljenih pristopov.