natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
A manufacturer wishing to benefit from a reduction of its average specific CO2 emissions for the purpose of meeting its specific emissions target by means of the CO2 savings from an eco-innovation shall apply to an approval authority within the meaning of Directive 2007/46/EC for an EC type-approval certificate of the vehicle fitted with the eco-innovation.
Proizvajalec, ki želi izkoristiti ugodnosti, ker je zmanjšal povprečne specifične emisije CO2, da bi izpolnil cilj v zvezi s specifičnimi emisijami s prihranki CO2 zaradi ekoloških inovacij, zaprosi pri homologacijskem organu v smislu Direktive 2007/46/ES za certifikat o ES-homologaciji za vozilo, v katerega je vgrajena ekološka inovacija.
The application for a certificate shall, in addition to the documents providing the necessary information specified in Article 6 of Directive 2007/46/EC, refer to the decision by the Commission to approve an eco-innovation in accordance with Article 10(2) of this Regulation.
Vloga za pridobitev certifikata poleg dokumentov, ki zagotavljajo potrebne informacije iz člena 6 Direktive 2007/46/ES, vsebuje sklic na sklep Komisije o odobritvi ekološke inovacije v skladu s členom 10(2) te uredbe.
The certified CO2 savings of the eco-innovation demonstrated in accordance with Article 8 of this Regulation shall be specified separately in both the type approval documentation and the certificate of conformity in accordance with Directive 2007/46/EC, on the basis of tests carried out by technical services in accordance with Article 11 of that Directive, using the approved testing methodology.
Certificirani prihranki CO2 zaradi ekološke inovacije, prikazani v skladu s členom 8 te uredbe, se navedejo ločeno v dokumentaciji o homologaciji in certifikatu o skladnosti v skladu z Direktivo 2007/46/ES na podlagi preskusov, ki jih izvedejo tehnične službe v skladu s členom 11 navedene direktive z uporabo odobrene metodologije preskušanja.
Where the CO2 savings of an eco-innovation for a specific type, variant or version are below the threshold specified in Article 9(1), the savings shall not be certified.
Če so prihranki CO2 zaradi ekološke inovacije za posamezen tip, varianto ali različico manjši od mejne vrednosti iz člena 9(1), se ne certificirajo.
Where the vehicle is fitted with more than one eco-innovation, the CO2 savings shall be demonstrated separately for each eco-innovation in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 8(1).
Če je v vozilo vgrajena več kot ena ekološka inovacija, se prihranki CO2 prikažejo ločeno za vsako ekološko inovacijo v skladu s postopkom iz člena 8(1).
The sum of the resulting savings determined in accordance with Article 8(2) for each eco-innovation shall provide the total CO2 savings for the purpose of the certification of that vehicle.
Vsota dobljenih prihrankov, določenih v skladu s členom 8(2) za vsako ekološko inovacijo, pomeni skupni prihranek CO2 za namen certificiranja zadevnega vozila.
Where interaction between several eco-innovations fitted to one vehicle cannot be ruled out because they are clearly of a different nature, the manufacturer shall indicate this in the application to the approval authority and shall provide a report from the independent and certified body on the impact of the interaction on the savings of the eco-innovations in the vehicle as referred to in Article 7(3).
Če medsebojnega vplivanja med več ekološkimi inovacijami, vgrajenimi v eno vozilo, ni mogoče izključiti zaradi njihove očitne različne narave, proizvajalec to navede v prošnji homologacijskemu organu ter predloži poročilo neodvisnega in priglašenega organa o medsebojnem vplivu na prihranke zaradi ekoloških inovacij v vozilu v skladu s členom 7(3).
Where, due to that interaction, the total savings are less than 1 g CO2/km times the number of eco-innovations only those eco-innovation savings that meet the threshold set out in Article 9(1) shall be taken into account for calculating the total savings in accordance with paragraph 3 of this Article.
Če je zaradi tega medsebojnega vpliva skupni prihranek manjši od 1 g CO2/km, pomnoženo s številom ekoloških inovacij, se za izračun skupnega prihranka v skladu z odstavkom 3 tega člena upoštevajo le prihranki zaradi ekološke inovacije, ki dosegajo mejno vrednost iz člena 9(1).
Review of certifications
Pregled certifikatov
The Commission shall ensure that the certifications and the CO2 savings attributed to individual vehicles are verified on an ad hoc-basis.
Komisija zagotovi, da se certifikati in prihranki CO2, opredeljeni za posamezna vozila, občasno preverjajo.
Where it finds that there is a difference between the certified CO2 savings and the savings it has verified using the relevant testing methodology or methodologies, the Commission shall notify the manufacturer of its findings.
Če Komisija ugotovi, da obstaja razlika med certificiranimi prihranki CO2 in prihranki, ki jih je preverila z ustrezno metodologijo ali metodologijami preskušanja, o svojih ugotovitvah obvesti proizvajalca.
The manufacturer may within 60 days of receipt of the notification provide the Commission with evidence demonstrating the accuracy of the certified CO2 savings.
Proizvajalec lahko v 60 dneh po prejemu obvestila Komisiji predloži dokazila, da so certificirani prihranki CO2 točni.
At the request of the Commission the report on the interaction of different eco-innovations referred to in Article 7(3) shall be provided.
Na zahtevo Komisije se predloži poročilo o medsebojnem vplivanju različnih ekoloških inovacij iz člena 7(3).
Where the evidence referred to in paragraph 1 is not provided within the indicated time period, or it finds that the evidence provided is not satisfactory, the Commission may decide not to take the certified CO2 savings into account for the calculation of the average specific emissions of that manufacturer for the following calendar year.
Komisija se lahko odloči, da certificiranih prihrankov CO2 ne upošteva pri izračunu povprečnih specifičnih emisij tega proizvajalca v naslednjem koledarskem letu, če dokazila iz odstavka 1 niso predložena v navedenem času ali če meni, da predložena dokazila niso zadovoljiva.
A manufacturer for which the certified CO2 savings are no longer taken into account may apply for a new certification of the vehicles concerned in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 11.
Proizvajalec, pri katerem se certificirani prihranki CO2 ne upoštevajo več, lahko zaprosi za novo certificiranje zadevnih vozil v skladu s postopkom iz člena 11.
Disclosure of information
Razkrivanje informacij
An applicant requesting that information submitted under this Regulation be treated as confidential shall justify why any of the exceptions referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 apply.
Vlagatelj, ki zahteva, da se informacije, predložene v skladu s to uredbo, obravnavajo kot zaupne, pojasni, zakaj se uporablja posamezna izjema iz člena 4 Uredbe (ES) št. 1049/2001.
This Regulation and the eco-innovations approved pursuant to this Regulation shall be reviewed by 31 December 2015 at the latest.
Ta uredba in ekološke inovacije, odobrene v skladu s to uredbo, se pregledajo najpozneje do 31. decembra 2015.
COM(2007) 19 final.
COM(2007) 19 konč.
COM(2007) 22 final.
COM(2007) 22 konč.
The testing methodology referred to in point (e) of Article 4(2) shall provide results that are verifiable, repeatable and comparable.
Z metodologijo preskušanja iz člena 4(2)(e) se zagotovijo rezultati, ki so preverljivi, ponovljivi in primerljivi.
It shall be capable of demonstrating in a realistic manner the CO2 emissions benefits of the innovative technology with strong statistical significance and, where relevant, take account of the interaction with other eco-innovations.
Z njo se morajo realno prikazati koristi inovativne tehnologije v zvezi z emisijami CO2 s pomembnimi statističnimi značilnostmi in, kadar je to pomembno, upošteva medsebojno vplivanje z drugimi ekološkimi inovacijami.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 726/2011
Izvedbena uredba Komisije (EU) št. 726/2011
amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 as regards the trigger levels for additional duties on apples
o spremembi Izvedbene uredbe Komisije (EU) št. 543/2011 glede sprožitvenih ravni za dodatne dajatve za jabolka
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (‘Single CMO’ Regulation) [1], and in particular Article 143(b) in conjunction with Article 4 thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1234/2007 z dne 22. oktobra 2007 o vzpostavitvi skupne ureditve kmetijskih trgov in o posebnih določbah za nekatere kmetijske proizvode („Uredba o enotni SUT“) [1] in zlasti člena 143(b) v povezavi s členom 4 Uredbe,
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors [2] provides for surveillance of imports of the products listed in Annex XVII thereto.
Izvedbena uredba Komisije (EU) št. 543/2011 z dne 7. junija 2011 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1234/2007 za sektorja sadja in zelenjave ter predelanega sadja in zelenjave [2] določa nadzor uvoza proizvodov, naštetih v njeni prilogi XVIII.
For the purposes of applying Article 5(4) of the Agreement on Agriculture [4] concluded as part of the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations and in the light of the latest data available for 2008, 2009 and 2010, the trigger levels for additional duties on apples should be adjusted.
Za namene uporabe člena 5(4) Sporazuma o kmetijstvu [4], sklenjenega v okviru urugvajskega kroga večstranskih trgovinskih pogajanj, in glede na najnovejše razpoložljive podatke za leta 2008, 2009 in 2010 je treba spremeniti sprožitvene ravni za jabolka.
Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 should therefore be amended accordingly.
Izvedbeno uredbo (EU) št. 543/2011 je zato treba ustrezno spremeniti.
Annex XVIII to Implementing Regulation (EC) No 543/2011 is replaced by the text set out in the Annex to this Regulation.
Priloga XVIII k Izvedbeni uredbi (EU) št. 543/2011 se nadomesti z besedilom iz Priloge k tej uredbi.
ADDITIONAL IMPORT DUTIES: TITLE IV, CHAPTER I, SECTION 2
DODATNE UVOZNE DAJATVE: NASLOV IV, POGLAVJE I, ODDELEK 2
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 727/2011
Izvedbena uredba Komisije (EU) št. 727/2011
This Regulation shall enter into force on 26 July 2011.
Ta uredba začne veljati 26. julija 2011.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 728/2011
Izvedbena uredba Komisije (EU) št. 728/2011
These prices and duties have been last amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 722/2011 [4].
Navedene cene in dolžnosti so bile nazadnje spremenjene z Izvedbeno uredbo Komisije (EU) št. 722/2011 [4].
OJ L 193, 23.7.2011, p. 24.
UL L 193, 23.7.2011, str. 24.
Amended representative prices and additional import duties applicable to white sugar, raw sugar and products covered by CN code 17029095 from 26 July 2011
Spremenjene reprezentativne cene in dodatne uvozne dajatve za beli in surovi sladkor ter proizvode z oznako KN 17029095, ki se uporabljajo od 26. julija 2011
Commission Regulation (EU) No 743/2011
Uredba Komisije (EU) št. 743/2011
of 26 July 2011
z dne 26. julija 2011
Council Regulation (EU) No 57/2011 of 18 January 2011 fixing for 2011 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in EU waters and, for EU vessels, in certain non-EU waters [2], lays down quotas for 2011.
Uredba Sveta (EU) št. 57/2011 z dne 18. januarja 2011 o določitvi ribolovnih možnosti za leto 2011 za nekatere staleže rib in skupine staležev rib, ki veljajo za vode EU in za plovila EU v nekaterih vodah zunaj EU, [2] določa kvote za leto 2011.
Done at Brussels, 26 July 2011.
V Bruslju, 26. julija 2011
VIIIc, IX and X; EU waters of CECAF 34.1.1
Cone VIIIc, IX in X; vode EU cone CECAF 34.1.1
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 744/2011
Izvedbena uredba Komisije (EU) št. 744/2011
Pursuant to Article 6(2) and in accordance with Article 17(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, the Czech Republic’s application of 20 October 2004 to register the name ‘Karlovarské oplatky’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union [2].
V skladu s členom 6(2) in členom 17(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 510/2006 je bila vloga Češke z dne 20. oktobra 2004 za registracijo imena „Karlovarské oplatky“ objavljena v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [2].
Austria and Germany submitted objections to the registration pursuant to Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006.
Avstrija in Nemčija sta v skladu s členom 7(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 510/2006 registraciji ugovarjali.
The objections were deemed admissible under points (a), (b), (c) and (d) of the first subparagraph of Article 7(3) of that Regulation.
Ugovori so se na podlagi točk (a), (b), (c) in (d) prvega pododstavka člena 7(3) navedene uredbe šteli za sprejemljive.
By letters dated 21 January 2008, the Commission asked the Member States concerned to seek agreement among themselves in accordance with their internal procedures.
Komisija je v dopisih z dne 21. januarja 2008 zadevne države članice pozvala, naj se sporazumejo v skladu s svojimi internimi postopki.
Given that no agreement was reached between Austria and the Czech Republic nor between Germany and the Czech Republic within the designated timeframe, the Commission should adopt a decision in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 15(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006.
Ker Avstrija in Češka ter Češka in Nemčija v predvidenem roku niso dosegle soglasja, mora Komisija sprejeti sklep po postopku iz člena 15(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 510/2006.
Concerning the alleged failure of compliance with Article 2 in respect of the delimitation of the geographical area and production within it, use of and characteristics of the thermal spring water, and the appearance of a graphic motif on the wafers, the national authorities responsible provided confirmation that these elements were correct and in addition no manifest error was identified.
V zvezi z domnevno neskladnostjo s členom 2 zaradi razmejitve geografskega območja in proizvodnje na tem območju, uporabe in značilnosti naravne mineralne vode ter pojavljanja grafičnega motiva na oblatih so pristojni nacionalni organi potrdili, da so bili ti elementi pravilni in da poleg tega ni bila ugotovljena nobena očitna napaka.
The national authorities further provided evidence to show the name ‘Karlovarské oplatky’ was used in the sense of Article 2(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 and was proposed by the identified producer group.
Nacionalni organi so predložili tudi dokaze, da se ime „Karlovarské oplatky“ uporablja v smislu člena 2(1)(b) Uredbe (ES) št. 510/2006 in da ga je predlagala prepoznana skupina proizvajalcev.
The terms ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’ and ‘Karlovarské oplatky’ were found to be mutual translations of each other in the German and Czech languages respectively.
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da sta imeni „Karlsbader Oblaten“ in „Karlovarské oplatky“ prevoda drug drugega v nemškem oziroma češkem jeziku.
The statements of objection from Germany showed that trade marks including the term ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’ had been registered prior to the application for registration of the term ‘Karlovarské oplatky’ as a protected geographical indication.
Nemčija je ugovarjala, da so bile blagovne znamke, vključno z imenom „Karlsbader Oblaten“ registrirane, preden je bila predložena vloga za registracijo imena „Karlovarské oplatky“ kot zaščitene geografske označbe.
Some evidence was provided to show that in a further instance, a name may have acquired the status of a trade mark established by use.
Predložen je bil možen dokaz, da je ime v drugem primeru pridobilo status blagovne znamke, uveljavljene z rabo.
Evidence was further provided to show that consumers in Germany associated the name ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’ with a certain type of wafer.
Prav tako je bil predložen dokaz, da potrošniki v Nemčiji ime „Karlsbader Oblaten“ povezujejo z določeno vrsto oblatov.
However no evidence was provided in the statements of objection that consumers strongly associated the wafers with all or any of the trade marks as distinct from the descriptive term ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’, nor that consumers would be liable to be misled as to the true identity of a product marketed under the name ‘Karlovarské oplatky’.
Vendar v izjavah o ugovoru ni bil predložen nikakršen dokaz, da potrošniki oblate tesno povezujejo z vsemi blagovnimi znamkami ali pa katero koli blagovno znamko, ki bi bila drugačna od opisnega izraza „Karlsbader Oblaten“; prav tako ni bil predložen dokaz, da bi potrošniki lahko imeli zmotne predstave o pravi identiteti proizvoda, trženega pod imenom „Karlovarské oplatky“.
Therefore, the Commission cannot conclude that the registration of the name ‘Karlovarské oplatky’ would be contrary to Article 3(4) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006.
Komisija zato ne more skleniti, da bi bila registracija imena „Karlovarské oplatky“ v nasprotju s členom 3(4) Uredbe (ES) št. 510/2006.
As a salient part of the names ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’ and ‘Karlovarské oplatky’ is identical, it is reasonable to conclude that the names are partly identical for the purposes of Article 7(3)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006.
Ker je poglavitni del imen „Karlsbader Oblaten“ in „Karlovarské oplatky“ identičen, je upravičeno sklepati, da sta imeni za namene člena 7(3)(c) Uredbe (ES) št. 510/2006 delno identični.
Furthermore, as mutual translations of each other, and given the phonetic and visual similarities between the products and their common origins, the application of the protection envisaged by Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, and in particular point (b) of paragraph (1) thereof, could have the result that ‘Karlovarské oplatky’, if registered, would be found by a competent court to be protected against the use of the name ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’ on the wafers concerned.
Ker sta imeni prevoda drug drugega in ker imata proizvoda skupno poreklo ter sta si fonetično in navzven podobna, bi lahko zaradi uporabe zaščite iz člena 13 Uredbe (ES) št. 510/2006 in zlasti njegovega odstavka 1(b) pristojno sodišče sklenilo, da bi bilo ime „Karlovarské oplatky“, če bi bilo registrirano, zaščiteno pred uporabo imena „Karlsbader Oblaten“ na zadevnih oblatih.
The evidence therefore shows that the continued existence of the name ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’ would be jeopardised by the registration of ‘Karlovarské oplatky’ within the meaning of point (c) of Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006.
Dokazi kažejo, da bi bil v smislu člena 7(3)(c) Uredbe (ES) št. 510/2006 obstoj imena „Karlsbader Oblaten“ ogrožen z registracijo imena „Karlovarské oplatky“.
The statements of objection were declared admissible on the ground, inter alia, that registration of the proposed name would jeopardise the existence of a partly identical name, namely ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’, in so far that this name is used for a product and not protected under trade mark legislation.
Izjave o ugovoru so bile sprejete v postopek, med drugim zato, ker bi registracija predlaganega imena ogrozila obstoj delno identičnega imena, in sicer imena „Karlsbader Oblaten“, v kolikor se to ime uporablja za proizvod in ni zaščiteno v okviru zakonodaje o blagovnih znamkah.
The evidence further shows that the name ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’ originated from producers in the town formerly known as Karlsbad and that production of the wafer so named has continued for a considerable period of time.
Dokazi obenem kažejo, da ime „Karlsbader Oblaten“ izvira od proizvajalcev iz mesta, ki je bilo nekoč znano kot Karlsbad, in da se zadevni oblati že dolgo časa proizvajajo pod tem imenom.
Moreover, the evidence shows that the uses of the name ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’ referred to an authentic and traditional product having a common origin with ‘Karlovarské oplatky’, but was generally not meant to exploit the reputation of the latter name.
Poleg tega je iz dokazov razvidno, da namen uporabe imena „Karlsbader Oblaten“, ki se nanaša na avtentičen in tradicionalen proizvod istega porekla kot proizvod „Karlovarské oplatky“, ni bil okoriščanje s slovesom imena tega drugega proizvoda.
Concerning trade marks containing the term ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’ that were protected through registration or acquired by use prior to the application for registration of ‘Karlovarské oplatky’, the conditions of Article 14(1) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 not being met, the said trade marks cannot be invalidated nor can their continued use be hindered by virtue of the registration of ‘Karlovarské oplatky’ as a protected geographical indication, provided the general requirements under trade mark legislation are otherwise met.
Zaradi neizpolnjevanja pogojev iz člena 14(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 510/2006 blagovnih znamk, ki vsebujejo ime „Karlsbader Oblaten“ in so bile zaščitene z registracijo ali privzete prek rabe pred predložitvijo vloge za registracijo imena „Karlovarské oplatky“, ni mogoče razveljaviti ali ovirati njihove nadaljnje uporabe na podlagi registracije imena „Karlovarské oplatky“ kot zaščitene geografske označbe pod pogojem, da so izpolnjene druge splošne zahteve zakonodaje o blagovnih znamkah.
Concerning generic status, the evidence provided in the statements of objection referred to the alleged general use of the term ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’ in Germany and Austria, and not to that of ‘Karlovarské oplatky’.
Kar zadeva generični status, so se dokazi, predloženi v okviru izjav o ugovoru, nanašali na domnevno občo rabo izraza „Karlsbader Oblaten“ v Nemčiji in Avstriji in ne na rabo izraza „Karlovarské oplatky“.
While the objections have provided evidence to show that a number of uses as general descriptive terms exist including the German mention ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’, no evidence has been provided that the name ‘Karlovarské oplatky’ is used to designate a category of products that do not originate in the region of Karlovy Vary.
Čeprav so bili v ugovorih predloženi dokazi, da obstajajo številni primeri uporabe v smislu splošnega opisnega izraza, vključno z nemškim izrazom „Karlsbader Oblaten“, pa ni bil predložen dokaz, da se ime „Karlovarské oplatky“ uporablja za označevanje vrste proizvodov, ki ne izvirajo iz območja mesta Karlovy Vary.
The name ‘Karlovarské oplatky’ was protected as a geographical indication in 1967 in the Czech Republic.
Ime „Karlovarské oplatky“ je bilo leta 1967 na Češkem zaščiteno kot geografska označba.
The objection does not take into consideration the situation in the Czech Republic.
Ugovor ne upošteva okoliščin na Češkem.
Therefore, on the basis of information provided the name ‘Karlovarské oplatky’ cannot be considered to be generic and there is no failure of compliance with Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006.
Na podlagi predloženih informacij zato ni mogoče skleniti, da je ime „Karlovarské oplatky“ generično, in ne gre za kršitev člena 3(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 510/2006.
In the light of the above, the name ‘Karlovarské oplatky’ should be entered in the Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications subject to a transitional period of 5 years during which time the term ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’ may continue to be used in circumstances that, without such a transitional period, could be contrary to the protection provided for by Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006.
Glede na navedeno je treba ime „Karlovarské oplatky“ vpisati v register zaščitenih označb porekla in zaščitenih geografskih označb pod pogojem, da se predvidi prehodno obdobje petih let, med katerim se lahko ime „Karlsbader Oblaten“ še naprej uporablja v okoliščinah, ki so brez takšnega prehodnega obdobja lahko v nasprotju z določbami o zaščiti iz člena 13(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 510/2006.
The term ‘Karlsbader Oblaten’ may be used to designate wafers not complying with the specification for ‘Karlovarské oplatky’ for a period of 5 years from the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Ime „Karlsbader Oblaten“ se lahko za obdobje petih let od začetka veljave te uredbe uporablja za poimenovanje oblatov, ki niso v skladu s specifikacijo oblatov „Karlovarské oplatky“.