natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 22.6.2006, case C-182/03 and C-217/03, Forum 187 ASBL [2006] ECR I-5479, paragraph 147; see also judgment of the Court of Justice of 26.11.2005, case C- 506/03, Germany v Commission, unpublished, paragraph 58 and judgement of the Court of Justice of 11.3.1987, case C-265/85, Van den Bergh en Jurgens BV v. Commission [1987] ECR 1155, paragraph 44.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 22. junija 2006 v združenih zadevah C-182/03 in C-217/03, Forum 187, ZOdl, str. I-5479, točka 147. Glej tudi sodbo Sodišča z dne 26. novembra 2005 v zadevi C-506/03, Nemčija proti Komisiji, še neobjavljena, točka 58, in sodbo z dne 11. marca 1987 v zadevi C-265/85, Van den Bergh en Jurgens proti Komisiji, Recueil, str. 1155, točka 44.
See also paragraph 21 herein above.
Glej tudi uvodno izjavo 21.
Rhodes was privatised in April 1999 and at that time it stopped applying the reduced price of admission tickets.
Igralnica na Rodosu je bila privatizirana aprila 1999 in takrat je prenehala uporabljati znižano ceno za vstopnice.
Aid received by Rhodes before 21 October 2009 is covered by the limitation.
Pomoč, ki jo je igralnica na Rodosu prejela pred 21. oktobrom 2009, je zajeta v omejitvi
Exact date of 2000 when ETA started paying the 80 % tax of the reduced price of EUR 6 to be confirmed by Greek authorities.
Natančen datum v letu 2000, s katerim je ETA začela plačevati 80-odstotni davek na znižano ceno 6 EUR, morajo potrditi grški organi.
On the understanding that Corfu casino has stopped being a beneficiary upon its privatisation of August 2010, when it passed to EUR 15.
Ob razumevanju, da igralnica na Krfu po svoji privatizaciji avgusta 2010, ko je začela zaračunavati 15 EUR, ni bila več upravičenka.
The Commission currently only has partial information covering the period 22 October 1999 – 22 October 2009, and particularly, no information concerning the potential continuation of the measure after 22 October 2009.
Komisija ima trenutno le delne informacije za obdobje od 22. oktobra 1999 do 22. oktobra 2009 in nima informacij v zvezi z morebitnim nadaljevanjem ukrepa po 22. oktobru 2009.
By letter dated 17 November 2009 Greece requested further time to respond, which was granted by the Commission by e-mail message of 18 November 2009.
Z dopisom z dne 17. novembra 2009 je Grčija zaprosila za več časa za odgovor in Komisija je njeno prošnjo odobrila z e-poštnim sporočilom z dne 18. novembra 2009.
On 27 November 2009 Greece replied to the Commission.
Grčija je Komisiji poslala odgovor 27. novembra 2009.
By letter of 9 August 2010 Greece requested an extension of the deadline to respond, which was granted by the Commission by letter of 18 August 2010.
Grčija je z dopisom z dne 9. avgusta 2010 zaprosila za podaljšanje roka za odgovor, ki ga je Komisija odobrila z dopisom z dne 18. avgusta 2010.
By letter of 6 October 2010 the Commission received comments from Greece on the Opening Decision.
Komisija je pripombe Grčije na odločitev o začetku postopka prejela 6. oktobra 2010.
In the case of Rhodes casino, the license under Law 2206/1994 was issued in 1996 by virtue of ministerial decision Τ/633/29.5.1996.
V primeru igralnice na Rodosu je bilo dovoljenje, predvideno z zakonom 2206/1994, izdano leta 1996 z ministrskim odlokom Τ/633 z dne 29. maja 1996.
However the casino continued to apply the reduced price of admission tickets until 1999, passing to EUR 15 only after the privatisation which took place in April 1999 (as until its privatisation it operated under the control of EOT – and thus applied the EOT decision of 1992 [30] which set the price of admission tickets to the Rhodes Casinos at 1500 drachmas).
Vendar pa je igralnica še naprej zaračunavala znižano vstopnino in jo spremenila na 15 EUR šele po svoji privatizaciji aprila 1999: do svoje privatizacije je delovala pod nadzorom EOT, nato pa je uporabljala sklep EOT iz leta 1992, ki je določal vstopnino za igralnico na Rodosu v višini 1500 GRD [30].
The Commission observes that the requirement to remit 80 % of the price of admission tickets did not apply to the casinos of Mont Parnès and Corfu until 2003.
Komisija poudarja, da zahteva po plačilu 80 % vstopnine do leta 2003 ni veljala za igralnico Mont Parnès in igralnico na Krfu.
As noted above, as concerns the casinos of Thessaloniki and Rhodes, this requirement became applicable upon issuance of their license under the Law 2206/1994, namely since 1995 in the case of Thessaloniki, and since 1996 in the case of Rhodes.
Kot je bilo ugotovljeno, je zahteva začela veljati za igralnici v Solunu in na Rodosu, ko jima je bilo izdano dovoljenje na podlagi zakona 2206/1994, in sicer igralnici v Solunu leta 1995 in igralnici na Rodosu leta 1996.
As concerns the price of admission tickets, it has remained at EUR 6 in the case of Mont Parnès and Thessaloniki until present, for Corfu until its privatisation in August 2010, and for Rhodes until its privatisation in 1999.
Vstopnina je v igralnici Mont Parnès in igralnici v Solunu ostala 6 EUR vse do danes, v igralnici na Krfu do njene privatizacije avgusta 2010, v igralnici na Rodosu pa do privatizacije leta 1999.
However, both the requirement to remit 80 % and the price of admission tickets of EUR 15 applied to other casinos as of 1995 and have been in practice applied as such.
Vendar sta bili zahteva po plačilu 80 % in zahteva po vstopnini v višini 15 EUR za druge igralnice zavezujoči od leta 1995 in sta se tako tudi uporabljali.
As concerns the argument proposed by the authorities and Mont Parnès that even if the view were taken that the reduced price of admission tickets of EUR 6 might have influenced or may influence the decision of a foreign company to invest in a casino business in Greece, the foreign company could always avail itself of Law 2687/1953, the Commission observes that the application of the Law of 1953 is not automatic and would in fact allow the further granting of the more advantageous treatment granted to the beneficiary casinos (i.e. the lower price of admission tickets of EUR 6) to other undertakings.
Organi in Mont Parnès so trdili, da tudi če se sprejme, da bi znižana vstopnina v višini 6 EUR lahko vplivala ali je vplivala na odločitev tujega podjetja o naložbi v igralnico v Grčiji, bi tuje podjetje vedno imelo možnost, da uporabi zakonodajni odlok 2687/1953; Komisija ugotavlja, da uporaba tega odloka ni samodejna in bi dejansko dovoljevala ugodnejšo obravnavo, ki so je deležne upravičene igralnice (tj. nižjo vstopnino v višini 6 EUR), tudi drugih podjetij.
This measure would thus be liable to further propagate the fiscal discrimination under assessment.
Ta ukrep lahko tako še naprej širi davčno diskriminacijo, ki je predmet ocene.
In the case of Rhodes, the Commission understands that the casino is no longer a beneficiary (as it stopped practicing the lower price of admission tickets upon its privatisation in April 1999).
Komisija se strinja, da igralnica na Rodosu ni več upravičenka, saj je po svoji privatizaciji aprila 1999 prenehala zaračunavati nižjo vstopnino.
The Commission considers that neither the Greek authorities nor Mont Parnès have advanced any argumentation which would be sufficiently articulated to alter this conclusion.
Komisija meni, da niti grški organi niti Mont Parnès niso predložili nobenih argumentov, ki bi zadostovali za spremembo tega sklepa.
The Commission recognises, as noted above, the right of Member States to regulate gambling on their territory subject to EU law, and that such regulation in order to control and discourage gambling is a legitimate objective of public policy.
Kot je bilo pojasnjeno, Komisija priznava pravico držav članic do ureditve igralništva na njihovem ozemlju v skladu s pravom EU in se strinja, da je taka ureditev, namenjena nadzoru in odvračanju od igralništva, legitimen cilj javne politike.
However the Commission does not believe that this brings the aid, even if this is its objective, within the remit of Article 106(2) of the TFEU.
Vendar, tudi če bi bil to dejansko namen pomoči, Komisija meni, da pomoč kljub temu ne bi spadala v področje uporabe člena 106(2) PDEU.
The fiscal discrimination was introduced in 1995 illegally– that is, from the perspective of EU State aid law – by the choice made by the Greek authorities to allow in favour of certain casinos derogations from the general rule deriving from the Law 2206/1994 and the Ministerial Decision of 1995.
Davčna diskriminacija je bila nezakonito uvedena – to je za namene zakonodaje EU o državni pomoči – leta 1995, ko so grški organi odločili, da nekaterim igralnicam dovolijo uporabo izjeme od splošnega pravila, ki izhaja iz zakona 2206/1994 in ministrskega odloka iz leta 1995.
In particular, the Greek authorities allowed the public casinos of Mont Parnès, Corfu and Rhodes to continue to apply a lower price of admission tickets of EUR 6 instead of the standard price of EUR 15, and furthermore, also specifically granted this more advantageous treatment to the casino of Thessaloniki in 1995, based on the Law of 1953 (concerning foreign capital).
Zlasti so grški organi javni igralnici Mont Parnès in javnima igralnicama na Krfu in Rodosu dovolili, da še naprej uporabljajo nižjo vstopnino v višini 6 EUR namesto standardne cene 15 EUR, ter leta 1995 izrecno odobrili to ugodnejšo obravnavo igralnici v Solunu na podlagi zakonodajnega odloka o tujem kapitalu iz leta 1953.
Meanwhile, this standard level of EUR 15 was imposed and effectively respected by the 5 other private casinos which were established and licensed (under the Law 2206/1994) since 1995.
Standardna cena 15 EUR je bila uvedena in učinkovito upoštevana s strani petih drugih zasebnih igralnic, ki so bile od leta 1995 ustanovljene in pridobile dovoljenje v skladu z zakonom 2206/1994.
Furthermore, by virtue of the Law 3139/2003 the lower price of EUR 6 for admission tickets was specifically maintained for the casinos of Mont Parnès and Corfu, with the effect of illegally prolonging and confirming the fiscal discrimination.
Poleg tega je bila na podlagi zakona 3139/2003 nižja vstopnina v višini 6 EUR izrecno ohranjena za igralnico Mont Parnès in igralnico na Krfu, s čimer se je davčna diskriminacija nezakonito podaljšala in potrdila.
In the current case, the Commission did not take action, nor did Greece act at the request of the Commission, before 2009.
V zadevnem primeru Komisija ni ukrepala do leta 2009, prav tako pa na zahtevo Komisije ni ukrepala Grčija.
The Commission took such an action on 21 October 2009 when it communicated the complaint to Greece and requested information in this regard.
Komisija je ukrepala 21. oktobra 2009, ko je posredovala pritožbo Grčije in zaprosila Grčijo, naj pojasni vprašanja, ki jih je zastavila.
The Thessaloniki casino was licensed in 1995 under Law 2206/1994 [79].
Igralnica v Solunu je prejela dovoljenje na podlagi zakona 2206/1994 leta 1995 [79].
The requirement to remit to the State 80 % of the price of admission tickets was applicable to the casino of Thessaloniki since the issuance of its license in 1995.
Zahteva po nakazilu 80 % cene vstopnic državi je za igralnico v Solunu veljala vse od izdaje dovoljenja leta 1995.
Until the present date, it has been applying the reduced EUR 6 price of admission tickets applied by the casinos in Mont Parnès and Corfu.
Igralnica v Solunu je zaračunavala znižano vstopnino v višini 6 EUR, ki sta jo zaračunavali igralnica Mont Parnès in igralnica na Krfu.
Rhodes Casino was licensed under the Law 2206/1994 in 1996.
Igralnica na Rodosu je prejela dovoljenje na podlagi zakona 2206/1994 leta 1996.
At that time it began applying the EUR 6 price of admission tickets, however, it passed at EUR 15 upon its privatisation in April 1999. Further to observations submitted during the formal investigation procedure, the Commission understands that the casino of Rhodes ceased to be a beneficiary on its privatisation in April 1999, and therefore the recovery from this casino is covered by the limitation period pursuant to Article 15 of the Procedural Regulation.
Takrat je začela za vstopnice zaračunavati 6 EUR, vendar je to ceno aprila 1999, ko je bila privatizirana, zvišala na 15 EUR. Na podlagi opažanj, predloženih med formalnim postopkom preiskave, Komisija ugotavlja, da igralnica na Rodosu od svoje privatizacije aprila 1999 ni več upravičenka, zato vračilo s strani te igralnice onemogoča zastaralni rok, določen v členu 15 postopkovne uredbe.
The Commission notes that the limitation period of 10 years, provided for in Article 15 of the abovementioned Procedural Regulation applies to any aid awarded before 21 October 1999.
Komisija ugotavlja, da desetletni zastaralni rok, določen v členu 15 postopkovne uredbe, onemogoča vračilo kakršne koli pomoči, dodeljene pred 21. oktobrom 1999.
The Hellenic Republic shall cancel all outstanding fiscal advantage provided under the measure subject to the present Decision, with effect from the date of adoption of this Decision.
Grčija mora ukiniti vse preostale davčne koristi, zagotovljene na podlagi ukrepa, ki je predmet tega sklepa, z začetkom veljavnosti od datuma sprejetja tega sklepa –
T-214/95, Rec. 1998, p. II-717, paragraphs 48-50.
II-717, točke 48–50.
This information is available on the site http://www.clubhotelloutraki.gr/.The multinational company Queenco Leisure International (QLI) has the sole management of Casino Rodos but is also involved as shareholder and managerially in the following casinos: Club Hotel Casino Loutraki – Loutraki, Greece (Shareholder and joint management). Casino Palace – Bucharest, Romania (Major Shareholder and sole management).
Te informacije s ona voljo na spletni strani http://www.clubhotelloutraki.gr/.Multinacionalna družba Queenco Leisure International je edini upravljavec igralnice na Rodosu, kot delničar in upraviteljsko pa je vključena tudi v naslednje igralnice: Club Hotel Casino Loutraki, Lutraki, Grčija (delničar in skupni upravljavec); Casino Palace, Bukarešta, Romunija (glavni delničar in edini upravljavec); in Sasazu, Praga, Češka republika (edini delničar in edini upravljavec).
thereby placing the latter at a competitive disadvantage. (10) The measure under assessment concerns public casinos and one private casino (Thessaloniki), which was exceptionally allowed to benefit from the treatment of public casinos, as further described herein below.
s čimer postavljajo igralnice v zasebni lasti v podrejen konkurenčni položaj [5].(10) Upravičenci ukrepa so javne igralnice in ena zasebna igralnica, tj. igralnica v Solunu, ki ji je z uporabo izjeme omogočena enaka obravnava kot javnim igralnicam, kot je podrobneje pojasnjeno v nadaljevanju.
As a further example, in August 2010, the Corfu Casino passed to EUR 15 upon its privatisation.
Še en primer je igralnica na Krfu, ki je začela zaračunavati 15 EUR za vstopnino po svoji privatizaciji avgusta 2010.
However, the Greek authorities have not satisfactorily explained why at that time the abovementioned special circumstances no longer applied and thus why the lower price of admission tickets was no longer necessary in consideration thereof.
Grški organi niso zadovoljivo pojasnili, zakaj zgoraj navedene posebne okoliščine zdaj ne veljajo več in zakaj nižja cena vstopnic posledično ni bila več potrebna.
Greece also contended that because casinos keep 20 % of the unequal admission price, the advantage is for casinos with a higher price that cash in a net revenue of EUR 3, compared to the EUR 1,2 for the public casinos. This contention is however in fact misleading, since it ignores two key facts to understand in full the true anti-competitive effects of the measure.
Grčija tudi trdi, da ker igralnice ohranijo 20 % neenotne vstopnine, je prednost zagotovljena igralnicam, ki zaračunavajo višjo ceno, ki zagotavlja čisti prihodek v višini 3 EUR, medtem ko javne igralnice prejmejo 1,20 EUR. Ta trditev je zavajajoča, saj ne upošteva dveh dejstev, ki sta bistvenega pomena za pravilno razumevanje resničnih protikonkurenčnih učinkov ukrepa.
As already mentioned in the Opening Decision, the Commission does not accept this argument. In line with its previous practice [56], the Commission considers that the fact that a tax reduction in respect of certain tax payers can generate as a result an increase in the overall level of revenues collected under the relevant tax does not necessarily mean that the measure is not financed from State resources.
Kot je navedeno v odločitvi o začetku postopka, Komisija ne sprejme tega argumenta in v skladu s svojo predhodno prakso meni, da dejstvo, da lahko znižanje davka pri nekaterih davkoplačevalcih povzroči povečanje splošne stopnje prihodka, ustvarjenega s tem davkom, ne pomeni nujno, da ukrep ni financiran iz državnih sredstev [56].
In particular, the Commission notes that the advantage granted under the contested measure is not related to investment, job creation or specific projects. It simply relieves the undertakings concerned of charges normally borne by similar undertakings and must therefore be considered as operating aid.
Korist, zagotovljena s spornim ukrepom, ni povezana z naložbami, ustvarjanjem delovnih mest ali posebnimi projekti, temveč zadevna podjetja preprosto razbremenjuje dajatev, ki jih običajno plačujejo podobna podjetja, zato jo je treba šteti za pomoč za tekoče poslovanje.
Judgement of the Court in case Philip Morris/Commission, of 17 September 1980, aff. 730/79, Rec. 1980, p. 2671, paragraphs 11 and 12, and judgement of the General Court in case Het Vlaamse Gewest/Commission, of 30 April 1998, aff.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 17. septembra 1980 v zadevi 730/79, Philip Morris proti Komisiji, Recueil, str. 2671, točki 11 in 12, in sodba Sodišča prve stopnje z dne 30. aprila 1998 v zadevi T-214/95, Het Vlaamse Gewest proti Komisiji, Recueil, stra.
amending Decision 98/536/EC establishing the list of national reference laboratories for the detection of residues
o spremembi Odločbe 98/536/ES o določitvi seznama nacionalnih referenčnih laboratorijev za odkrivanje ostankov
Having regard to Council Directive 96/23/EC of 29 April 1996 on measures to monitor certain substances and residues thereof in live animals and animal products and repealing Directives 85/358/EEC and 86/469/EEC and Decisions 89/187/EEC and 91/664/EEC [1], and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 14(1) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Direktive Sveta 96/23/ES z dne 29. aprila 1996 o ukrepih za spremljanje nekaterih snovi in njihovih ostankov v živih živalih in v živalskih proizvodih ter razveljavitvi direktiv 85/358/EGS in 86/469/EGS in odločb 89/187/EGS in 91/664/EGS [1] ter zlasti tretjega pododstavka člena 14(1) Direktive,
Directive 96/23/EC lays down measures to monitor the substances and groups of residues listed in Annex I thereto.
Direktiva 96/23/ES določa ukrepe za spremljanje snovi in skupin ostankov snovi iz Priloge I k Direktivi.
It provides that each Member State is to designate at least one national reference laboratory, which is to be responsible for certain tasks laid down in that Directive.
Predpisuje, da mora vsaka država članica določiti vsaj en nacionalni referenčni laboratorij, ki je pristojen za nekatere naloge iz navedene Direktive.
Directive 96/23/EC also provides that a list of such designated laboratories is to be drawn up by the Commission.
Direktiva 96/23/ES določa tudi, da mora Komisija sestaviti seznam takih imenovanih laboratorijev.
The list of national reference laboratories for the detection of residues is currently set out in the Annex to Commission Decision 98/536/EC [2].
Seznam nacionalnih referenčnih laboratorijev za odkrivanje ostankov je trenutno določen v Prilogi k Odločbi Komisije 98/536/ES [2].
Certain Member States have designated additional national reference laboratories or have replaced the designated laboratories with other laboratories.
Nekatere države članice so imenovale dodatne nacionalne referenčne laboratorije ali nadomestile imenovane laboratorije z drugimi laboratoriji.
In addition, the contact coordinates and the groups of residues monitored by certain laboratories currently listed in the Annex to Decision 98/536/EC have changed.
Poleg tega so se spremenili kontaktni podatki in skupine ostankov, ki jih spremljajo nekateri laboratoriji, trenutno navedeni v Prilogi k Odločbi 98/536/ES.
In the interest of clarity and consistency of Union law, it is therefore appropriate to update the list of national reference laboratories set out in the Annex to that Decision.
Zaradi jasnosti in doslednosti zakonodaje Unije je zato primerno posodobiti seznam nacionalnih referenčnih laboratorijev iz Priloge k navedeni odločbi.
Decision 98/536/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.
Odločbo 98/536/ES je zato treba ustrezno spremeniti.
The Annex to Decision 98/536/EC is replaced by the text in the Annex to this Decision.
Priloga k Odločbi 98/536/ES se nadomesti z besedilom iz Priloge k temu sklepu.
Done at Brussels, 27 October 2011.
V Bruslju, 27. oktobra 2011
for animal products except feed
za živalske proizvode, razen za krmo
B1, B2 (except B2d), B3d, B3e
B1, B2 (razen B2d), B3d, B3e
All groups
vse skupine
A1, A3, A4, A6 (nitromidazoles only), B2b (nitromidazoles only), B2e, B2f (corticosteroids), B3d
A1, A3, A4, A6 (samo nitroimidazoli), B2b (samo nitroimidazoli), B2e, B2f (kortikosteroidi), B3d
A2, A5, A6 (except nitrofurans, nitromidazoles), B1, B2d, B2f (carbadox only), B3c
A2, A5, A6 (razen nitrofuranov, nitroimidazolov), B1, B2d, B2f (samo karbadoks), B3c
A6 (nitrofurans), B2a (anthelmintics except emamectin), B2b (anticoccidials), B2c
A6 (nitrofurani), B2a (antelmintiki, razen emamektina), B2b (kokcidiostatiki), B2c
B3a (organochlorine pesticides and 7 PCBs), B3b, B3f
B3a (organoklorirani pesticidi in 7 PCB-jev), B3b, B3f
A1, A3, A4, A6 (dapsone), B2f (carbadox, olaquindox, corticosteroids), B3a
A1, A3, A4, A6 (dapson), B2f (karbadoks, olakvindoks, kortikosteroidi), B3a
A2, A5, A6 (chlorpromazine, nitromidazoles), B1, B2d, B3b, B3c, B3e
A2, A5, A6 (klorpromazin, nitroimidazoli), B1, B2d, B3b, B3c, B3e
A6 (chloramphenicol and nitrofurans), B2c
A6 (kloramfenikol in nitrofurani), B2c
B1 in honey
B1 v medu
A1, A3, A4, A5, A6 (chloramphenicol, nitrofurans), B1, B2f (corticosteroids, carbadox, olaquindox), B3a, B3b, B3d, B3e, B3f
A1, A3, A4, A5, A6 (kloramfenikol, nitrofurani), B1, B2f (kortikosteroidi, karbadoks, olakvindoks), B3a, B3b, B3d, B3e, B3f
A2, A6 (nitromidazoles), B2a, B2b, B2c, B2d, B2e, B2f (except corticosteroids), B3f
A2, A6 (nitroimidazoli), B2a, B2b, B2c, B2d, B2e, B2f (razen kortikosteroidov), B3f
A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, B2f (glucocorticoids), B3a (PCBs and dioxins), B3f
A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, B2f (glukokortikoidi), B3a (PCB-ji in dioksini), B3f
A6, B1, B2a, B2b, B2d, B2e, B2f (except glucocorticoids), B3e
A6, B1, B2a, B2b, B2d, B2e, B2f (razen glukokortikoidov), B3e
B2c, B3a (except PCBs and dioxins), B3b, B3c, B3d
B2c, B3a (razen PCB-jev in dioksinov), B3b, B3c, B3d
A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, B1, B2, B3a (excluding dioxins and PCBs), B3b, B3c, B3d, B3e, B2f
A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, B1, B2, B3a (razen dioksinov in PCB-jev), B3b, B3c, B3d, B3e, B2f
B3a (PCBs, dioxins and DL-PCBs)
B3a (PCB-ji, dioksini in dioksinom podobni PCB-ji)
All groups (excluding B3d aquaculture)
vse skupine (razen ribogojstva iz B3d)
A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, B1, B2a, B2b, B2d, B2e, B2f (corticoids)
A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, B1, B2a, B2b, B2d, B2e, B2f (kortikoidi)
B2c, B2f (amitraz), B3a (excluding dioxins and PCBs), B3b, B3f (neonicotinoids)
B2c, B2f (amitraz), B3a (razen dioksinov in PCB-jev), B3b, B3f (neonikotinoidi)
B3a (dioxins and PCBs)
B3a (dioksini in PCB-ji)
All groups (excluding B3a dioxins and dl-PCBs and B3c aquaculture)
vse skupine (razen dioksinov iz B3a, dioksinom podobnih PCB-jev in ribogojstva iz B3c)
B3c (aquaculture)
B3c (ribogojstvo)
B3a (dioxins and dl-PCBs)
B3a (dioksini in dioksinom podobni PCB-ji)
A1, A4, A6 (nitromidazoles, nitrofurans), B1 (antibiotics), B2a, B2b, B2c, B2e, B2f, B3a (organochlorinated pesticides and ndl-PCB), B3b, B3c, B3d, B3e
A1, A4, A6 (nitroimidazoli, nitrofurani), B1 (antibiotiki), B2a, B2b, B2c, B2e, B2f, B3a (organoklorirani pesticidi in dioksinom nepodobni PCB-ji), B3b, B3c, B3d, B3e