natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
However, the terms of this guaranteed loan were renegotiated, and as of 13 December 2005 the interest rate was set at […]% until 15 January 2007, when it was to be changed to […] + […] basis points.
Vendar so o pogojih tega posojila s poroštvom potekala ponovna pogajanja in od 13. decembra 2005 je bila obrestna mera določena na […] % do 15. januarja 2007, ko naj bi se spremenila v […] + […] bazičnih točk.
On 14 January 2009 the interest rate was changed to […] + […] bps, and on 12 February 2011 it was again changed to […] + […] bps.
Dne 14. januarja 2009 je bila obrestna mera spremenjena na […] + […] bazičnih točk, 12. februarja 2011 pa je bila spet spremenjena na […] + […] bazičnih točk.
In Gibraltar v Commission (Joined cases T-195/01 and T-207/01 Government of Gibraltar v Commission, judgment of 30.4.2002, [2002] ECR II-2309, paragraphs 109-111), the CFI noted that, under Article 1(c) of Regulation (EC) No 659/99, ‘alterations of existing aid’ are to be regarded as new aid.
V svoji sodbi z dne 30. aprila 2002 v združenih zadevah Government of Gibraltar proti Komisiji Evropskih skupnosti (T-195/01 in T-207/01, ZOdl., str. II-02309, točke 109–111), Sodišče prve stopnje ugotavlja, da je v skladu s členom 1(c) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/99 „spremembo obstoječe pomoči“ treba obravnavati kot novo pomoč.
Consequently, it is only the alteration that is liable to be classified as new aid.
Zato je kot novo pomoč mogoče obravnavati le spremembo.
However, where the alteration affects the actual substance of the original scheme, because it is not severable from that scheme, then the latter is transformed into a new aid scheme (Joined cases T-254/00, T 270/00 and T 277/00 Hotel Cipriani v Commission, judgment of 28.11.2008, paragraphs 358-359).
Če pa sprememba vsebinsko vpliva na prvotno shemo, ker je ni mogoče ločiti od navedene sheme, se slednja spremeni v novo shemo pomoči (sodba Sodišča prve stopnje z dne 28. novembra 2008 v združenih zadevah Hotel Cipriani SpA in drugi proti Komisiji Evropskih skupnosti, T-254/00, T 270/00 in T 277/00, ZOdl., str. II-03269“ točki 358–359).
The law also covers some loans (the Commission’s note).
Zakon zajema tudi nekatera posojila (opomba Komisije).
The amendment of 3 March 1994 increased the budget from FIM 20 million to FIM 30 million, while the amendment of 16 February 1996 increased the budget from FIM 30 million to FIM 50 million.
Sprememba z dne 3. marca 1994 je povečala proračun z 20 milijonov na 30 milijonov FIM, sprememba z dne 16. februarja 1996 pa je proračun povečala s 30 milijonov na 50 milijonov FIM.
See case C-24/95 Land Rheinland-Pfalz v Alcan Deutschland GmbH, judgment of 20.3.1997, [1997] ECR I-1591, paragraph 49.
Glej sodbo Sodišča z dne 20. marca 1997 v zadevi Land Rheinland-Pfalz proti Alcan Deutschland GmbH, (C-24/95, Recueil, str. I-1591, točka 49).
Ibidem, point 17; see also joined cases C-465/09P Diputación Foral de Vizcaya v Commission and C-470/09P Territorio Histórico de Vizcaya et al. v Commission, judgment of 9.6.2011, paragraph 151, not yet published.
Ibid., točka 17; glej tudi sodbo Sodišča z dne 9. junija 2011 v združenih zadevah Territorio Histórico de Vizcaya - Diputación Foral de Vizcaya (C-465/09 P in C-468/09 P), Territorio Histórico de Álava - Diputación Foral de Álava (C-466/09 P in C-469/09 P) in Territorio Histórico de Guipúzcoa - Diputación Foral de Guipúzcoa (C-467/09 P in C-470/09 P) proti Evropski komisiji (združeni zadevi C-465/09 P do C-470/09 P, še ni objavljeno v ZOdl., točka 151).
Case C-5/89 Germany v Commission, judgment of 20.9.1990, [1990] ECR I-3437, paragraph 14.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 20. septembra 1990 v zadevi Komisija Evropskih skupnosti proti Zvezni republiki Nemčiji,(C-5/89, Recueil, str. I-3437, točka 14).
Joined cases T-427/04 and T-15/05 France and France Télécom v Commission, judgment of 30.11.2009, [2009] ECR II-4315, paragraph 261.
Sodba Sodišča prve stopnje z dne 30. novembra 2009 v združenih zadevah Francoska republika (T-427/04) in France Télécom SA (T-17/05) proti Komisiji Evropskih skupnosti (T-427/04 in T-15/05, ZOdl., str. II-4315, točka 261).
Case C-348/93 Commission v Italy, judgment of 4.4.1995, [1995] ECR I-673, paragraph 27.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 4. aprila 1995 v zadevi Komisija Evropskih skupnosti proti Italijanski republiki (C-348/93, Recueil, str. I-673, točka 27).
See recital 81 and footnote 25.
Glej uvodno izjavo 81 in opombo 25.
See recital 83 and footnote 26.
Glej uvodno izjavo 83 in opombo 26.
See recital 85 and footnote 27.
Glej uvodno izjavo 85 in opombo 27.
Total amount of aid received under the scheme [1]
Skupni znesek pomoči, prejet v okviru sheme [1]
Total amount of aid to be recovered [1](Principal)
Skupni znesek pomoči, ki ga je treba vrniti [1](glavnica)
Total amount already reimbursed [1]
Skupni znesek že vrnjenih pomoči [1]
Recovery interest
Obresti na terjatev
Million of national currency
V milijonih nacionalne valute.
By letters dated 25 October 2006 and 14 February 2007, the Commission requested information from Finland which was submitted by letters dated 11 January 2007 and 3 April 2007.
V dopisih z dne 25. oktobra 2006 in 14. februarja 2007 je Komisija od Finske zahtevala informacije, ki so bile predložene z dopisoma z dne 11. januarja 2007 in 3. aprila 2007.
The Finnish authorities submitted further information on 31 May 2007 and 12 July 2007.
Finski organi so dodatne informacije predložili 31. maja 2007 in 12. julija 2007.
The complainant submitted additional information in November 2006 and May 2007.
Pritožnik je novembra 2006 in maja 2007 predložil dodatne informacije.
Further to the opening decision, Finland submitted information which was registered with the Commission on 6 May 2008, 21 January 2010, 26 February 2010, 21 May 2010, 18 June 2010, 18 April 2011, 27 June 2011 and 28 June 2011.
Po odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka je Finska predložila informacije, ki so bile pri Komisiji evidentirane 6. maja 2008, 21. januarja 2010, 26. februarja 2010, 21. maja 2010, 18. junija 2010, 18. aprila 2011, 27. junija 2011 in 28. junija 2011.
A meeting between the Commission services, the Finnish authorities and representatives of ÅI took place on 4 June 2010.
Dne 4. junija 2010 so se sestali službe Komisije, finski organi in predstavniki podjetja ÅI.
Discussions between representatives of the local business community and the LG concerning the possibility of building a ‘technology park’ started back in 1999.
Razprave med predstavniki lokalne poslovne skupnosti in lokalne vlade o možnosti izgradnje „tehnološkega parka“ so se začele leta 1999.
Joint study trips were made to similar facilities in Sweden.
Organizirani so bili skupni študijski obiski podobnih objektov na Švedskem.
In 2000 the project was assigned to a working group, which presented a proposal to the LG and the City of Mariehamn in the spring of 2000.
Leta 2000 je bil projekt dodeljen delovni skupini, ki je spomladi leta 2000 predlog predstavila lokalni vladi in mestu Mariehamn.
The project and the LG’s plans to build and finance it were mentioned in the LG budget for 2000 [8] and confirmed in the 2001 budget, in which the LG also requested funds for possible capital increases for infrastructure projects, including for ÅI (a similar request was made in the 2000 budget) [9].
Projekt in načrti lokalne vlade, da ga zgradi in financira, so bili navedeni tudi v proračunu lokalne vlade za leto 2000 [8] in potrjeni v proračunu za leto 2001, v katerem je lokalna vlada zaprosila tudi za sredstva za možna povečanja kapitala za infrastrukturne projekte, vključno za podjetje ÅI (proračun za leto 2000 je vseboval podoben zahtevek) [9].
The preparatory land works were carried out in the spring of 2003 and the construction of phase 1 (the project was designed in two consecutive construction phases) started in the summer of 2003.
Pripravljalna zemeljska dela so bila izvedena spomladi leta 2003, prva faza gradnje (projekt je bil zasnovan v dveh zaporednih fazah gradnje) pa se je začela poleti leta 2003.
The first tenants moved into the completed ‘phase 1’ part of iTiden on 1 December 2004.
Prvi najemniki so se v dokončani del „prve faze“ zgradb iTiden vselili 1. decembra 2004.
The Commission’s formal investigation has covered several capital injections (‘capital increases’) and guarantees for bank loans (‘loan guarantees’) granted by the LG in favour of ÅI between 1997 and 2007.
Formalni postopek preiskave Komisije zajema več dokapitalizacij (v nadaljnjem besedilu: povečanje kapitala) in poroštev za bančna posojila (v nadaljnjem besedilu: poroštva za posojila), ki jih je lokalna vlada dodelila podjetju ÅI med letoma 1997 in 2007.
The measures are set out in the table below (capital injections are numbered C-I to C-XI and guarantees G-I to G-III).
Ukrepi so navedeni v spodnji preglednici (dokapitalizacije so oštevilčene C-I do C-XI, poroštva pa G-I to G-III).
ÅI’s long record of losses or negligible profits in the years in which the measures were granted.
V letih, ko so bili ukrepi odobreni, je podjetje ÅI že dolgo beležilo izgube ali neznatne dobičke.
Indeed, ÅI made losses in every year between 2001 and 2005.
Podjetje ÅI je med letoma 2001 in 2005 vsako leto imelo izgubo.
Another informal meeting between ÅI and the LG was held on 4 March 2003 in order to prepare ÅI’s general assembly on 5 March 2003.
Drugo neformalno srečanje podjetja ÅI in lokalne vlade je bilo 4. marca 2003, katerega namen je bil pripraviti skupščino podjetja ÅI 5. marca 2003.
The general assembly was to decide on launching the construction of phase 1 of iTiden, which had not been carried out in 2002.
Skupščina naj bi odločila o začetku gradnje prve faze projekta iTiden, ki ni bila izvedena v letu 2002.
An updated profitability calculation was provided.
Zagotovljen je bil posodobljen izračun donosnosti.
Although it is true that ÅI’s overall profits were modest or negative in the period 1998-2007, the fact is that it turned a modest profit in 2000 and the two preceding years and that losses started in 2001.
Čeprav je res, da je bil skupni dobiček podjetja ÅI v obdobju 1998–2007 skromen ali negativen, pa je dejstvo, da je v letu 2000 in v dveh predhodnih letih podjetje imelo skromen dobiček in da so se izgube začele leta 2001.
It has been shown in the investigation that the company was covering its costs and that the liquidity position was adequate.
Preiskava je pokazala, da je podjetje krilo svoje stroške in da je bil likvidnostni položaj ustrezen.
Capital increases C-VIII and C-IX were undertaken in 2004 and 2005, respectively.
Povečanje kapitala C-VIII je bilo izvedeno leta 2004, povečanje kapitala C-IX pa v letu 2005.
At that time, ÅI had been operating at a loss since 2001.
Takrat je podjetje ÅI od leta 2001 poslovalo z izgubo.
The interest rate on the loan was set at […]% until 15 January 2007 [26].
Za posojilo je bila določena […]-odstotna obrestna mera do 15. januarja 2007.
The premium for the guarantee was […]% of the loan amount p.a [27].
Premija za poroštvo je bila […] % zneska posojila na leto [27].
Finland acceded to the European Community on 1 January 1995.
Finska je pristopila k Evropski skupnosti 1. januarja 1995.
Moreover, according to paragraph 5 of Section 172 of the Treaty of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden ‘[…] state aids granted by new Member States during 1994 but which, in contravention of the EEA Agreement or arrangements made thereunder, either have not been notified to the ESA or have been notified but granted before the ESA took a decision, shall not as a consequence be considered as existing state aids under Article 93(1) of the EC Treaty […]’.
Poleg tega v skladu z odstavkom 5 člena 172 Pogodbe o pristopu Avstrije, Finske in Švedske „[…] se državne pomoči, ki so jih nove države članice dodelile leta 1994, te pa v nasprotju s Sporazumom EGP ali z dogovori, sklenjenimi na njegovi podlagi, bodisi niso bile sporočene Nadzornemu organu EFTA bodisi so bile sporočene, vendar so bile dodeljene, preden je Nadzorni organ EFTA sprejel odločbo, zaradi tega ne štejejo za državne pomoči, ki obstajajo v skladu s členom 93 (1) Pogodbe ES […]“.
In the course of the investigation, Finland has explained that the formal legal basis of the alleged scheme is the Act on the Autonomy of Åland (1144/1991), which was passed in 1991.
Med postopkom preiskave je Finska pojasnila, da je formalna pravna podlaga domnevne sheme Zakon o samostojnosti Ålandskih otokov (1144/1991), ki je bil sprejet leta 1991.
Under Section 18(22) the Åland local authorities have ‘general powers’ to adopt different sorts of measures focusing on the promotion of Åland’s economy.
V skladu s členom 18(22) imajo lokalni organi Ålandskih otokov „splošna pooblastila“ za sprejemanje različnih vrst ukrepov, ki se osredotočajo na spodbujanje gospodarstva Ålandskih otokov.
The Supreme Court came to the same conclusion regarding the 2006 loan guarantee.
Vrhovno sodišče je enako ugotovilo tudi glede poroštva za posojilo v letu 2006.
As the guarantee was never put into effect, it has not been assessed in this decision.
Ker to poroštvo ni bilo nikoli izvedeno, v tem sklepu ni ocenjeno.
This aid was put at the disposal of ÅI on 2 November 2004.
Ta pomoč je bila podjetju ÅI dana na voljo 2. novembra 2004.
From this amount shall be deducted the one-off guarantee premium of EUR 2900 [42].
Od tega zneska se odšteje enkratna poroštvena premija v višini 2900 EUR [42].
This aid was put at the disposal of ÅI on 13 December 2005.
Ta pomoč je bila podjetju ÅI dana na voljo 13. decembra 2005.
From this amount shall be deducted the one-off guarantee premium of EUR 6500 [43].
Od tega zneska se odšteje enkratna poroštvena premija v višini 6500 EUR [43].
This does not include the one-off premium of […]% of the loan, i.e. EUR 19500.
To ne vključuje enkratne premije v višini […] % posojila, t.j.
This will be addressed below, in Section 8.2 dealing with recovery of aid.
19500 EUR. To bo obravnavano v nadaljevanju, v delu o vračilu pomoči.
This does not include the one-off premium of […]% of the loan, i.e. EUR 2900.
To ne vključuje enkratne premije v višini […] % posojila, t.j.
This does not include the one-off premium of […]% of the loan, i.e. EUR 6500.
To ne vključuje enkratne premije v višini […] % posojila, t.j.
amending Annex II to Council Directive 2004/68/EC as regards the basic general criteria for a territory to be considered free from bluetongue
o spremembi Priloge II k Direktivi Sveta 2004/68/ES glede temeljnih splošnih meril, po katerih ozemlje velja za prosto bolezni modrikastega jezika
Having regard to Council Directive 2004/68/EC of 26 April 2004 laying down animal health rules for the importation into and transit through the Community of certain live ungulate animals, amending Directives 90/426/EEC and 92/65/EEC and repealing Directive 72/462/EEC [1], and in particular Article 13(2)(b) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Direktive Sveta 2004/68/ES z dne 26. aprila 2004 o določitvi predpisov v zvezi z zdravstvenim varstvom živali za uvoz v Skupnost in tranzit skozi Skupnost nekaterih živih parkljarjev, o spremembi direktiv 90/426/EGS in 92/65/EGS ter razveljavitvi Direktive 72/462/EGS [1] in zlasti člena 13(2)(b) Direktive,
Directive 2004/68/EC lays down the animal health requirements for the importation into and transit through the Union of live ungulates of the species listed in Annex I thereto.
Direktiva 2004/68/ES določa zahteve glede zdravstvenega varstva živali za uvoz v Unijo in tranzit skozi Unijo živih kopitarjev vrst, naštetih v Prilogi I k Direktivi.
Pursuant to that Directive, the importation of live ungulates into and transit through the Union is to be authorised only from third countries that appear on a list or lists to be drawn up or amended in accordance with the procedure referred to therein.
V skladu z navedeno direktivo se lahko uvoz živih kopitarjev v Unijo in tranzit skozi Unijo dovoli le iz tretjih držav s seznama ali seznamov, ki se sestavijo ali popravijo v skladu s postopkom iz navedene direktive.
Imports of live ungulates into the Union are to be allowed only if the authorised third country provides the guarantee that the animals come from a disease-free territory, in accordance with the basic general criteria listed in Annex II to Directive 2004/68/EC and into which the entry of animals vaccinated against the diseases listed in that Annex must be prohibited.
Uvoz živih kopitarjev v Unijo se dovoli le, če pooblaščena tretja država daje jamstvo, da živali prihajajo z ozemlja, prostega bolezni, ki je v skladu s temeljnimi splošnimi merili iz Priloge II k Direktivi 2004/68/ES in na katerega je prepovedan vstop živali, cepljenih proti boleznim, naštetim v navedeni prilogi.
Bluetongue is listed in Annex II to Directive 2004/68/EC.
Bolezen modrikastega jezika je navedena v Prilogi II k Direktivi 2004/68/ES.
Pursuant to that Annex, for all species of animals other than those of family Suidae, the conditions for a territory to be considered free from bluetongue are that no case of disease was registered and no vaccination was carried out during the last 12 months with appropriate control of the Culicoides population.
V skladu z navedeno prilogo določajo pogoji, ki se uporabljajo za vse vrste živali, razen živali iz družine Suidae, in po katerih ozemlje velja za prosto bolezni modrikastega jezika, da na njem v zadnjih dvanajstih mesecih ob ustreznem nadzoru populacije rodu Culicoides ni bilo nobenega primera bolezni in ni bilo izvedeno nobeno cepljenje.
In recent years, as a result of new technical developments, ‘inactivated vaccines’ against bluetongue have become available which do not pose the risk of undesired local circulation of the vaccine virus to unvaccinated cattle, sheep and goats.
V zadnjih letih so kot posledica novega tehničnega razvoja postala na voljo „inaktivirana cepiva“ proti bolezni modrikastega jezika, ki ne pomenijo tveganja nezaželenega lokalnega kroženja cepilnega virusa med necepljenim govedom, ovcami in kozami.
It is now widely accepted that vaccination with inactivated vaccines is the preferred tool for the control of bluetongue and for the prevention of clinical disease in such animals in the Union.
Splošno sprejeto je, da je cepljenje z inaktiviranimi cepivi najprimernejše orodje za nadzor bolezni modrikastega jezika in preprečevanje klinične bolezni pri tovrstnih živalih v Uniji.
Accordingly, Council Directive 2000/75/EC of 20 November 2000 laying down specific provisions for the control and eradication of bluetongue [2] was recently amended by Directive 2012/5/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council [3], to provide for the use of inactivated vaccines in all parts of the EU.
V skladu s tem je bila Direktiva Sveta 2000/75/ES z dne 20. novembra 2000 o določitvi posebnih določb za boj zoper in izkoreninjenje bolezni modrikastega jezika [2] pred nedavnim spremenjena z Direktivo 2012/5/EU Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [3], da bi se predvidela uporaba neaktiviranih cepiv po vsej EU.
As a result of the evolving epidemiological situation as regards bluetongue, and to align with the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) standards, Commission Regulation (EC) No 1266/2007 of 26 October 2007 on implementing rules for Council Directive 2000/75/EC as regards the control, monitoring, surveillance and restrictions on movements of certain animals of susceptible species in relation to bluetongue [4] was amended recently.
Zaradi spremembe epidemiološkega stanja v zvezi z boleznijo modrikastega jezika in prilagoditve standardom Mednarodne organizacije za zdravje živali (OIE) je bila pred kratkim spremenjena Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 1266/2007 z dne 26. oktobra 2007 o pravilih za izvajanje Direktive Sveta 2000/75/ES v zvezi z nadzorom, spremljanjem in omejitvami premikov nekaterih živali, ki so dovzetne za bolezen modrikastega jezika [4].
Consequently, EU standards require the absence of virus circulation for a minimum period of two years in order to consider a territory free from bluetongue.
Da bi ozemlje lahko veljalo za prosto bolezni modrikastega jezika, standardi EU zahtevajo odsotnost kroženja virusa v obdobju najmanj dveh let.
The period of 12 months referred to in Annex II to Directive 2004/68/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.
Obdobje dvanajstih mesecev iz Priloge II k Direktivi 2004/68/ES bi bilo zato treba ustrezno spremeniti.
Directive 2000/75/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1266/2007 apply to intra-Union movements of live ungulates of species susceptible to bluetongue.
Direktiva 2000/75/ES in Uredba (ES) št. 1266/2007 se uporabljata za premike živih kopitarjev vrst, dovzetnih za bolezen modrikastega jezika, znotraj Unije.
It is appropriate that the basic general criteria for a territory of a third country to be considered free from bluetongue, as set out in Annex II to Directive 2004/68/EC, be aligned with the requirements applicable within the Union.
Primerno je, da so temeljna splošna merila, po katerih ozemlje tretje države velja za prosto bolezni modrikastega jezika, kot je določeno v Prilogi II k Direktivi 2004/68/ES, v skladu z zahtevami, ki se uporabljajo v Uniji.
Annex II to Directive 2004/68/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.
Prilogo II k Direktivi 2004/68/ES bi bilo zato treba ustrezno spremeniti.
In Annex II to Directive 2004/68/EC, the entry for bluetongue is replaced by the following:
V Prilogi II k Direktivi 2004/68/ES se vnos za bolezen modrikastega jezika nadomesti z naslednjim:
‘Bluetongue
„Bolezen modrikastega jezika
no case of disease and no vaccination carried out during the last 24 months with appropriate control of the Culicoides population
da v zadnjih 24 mesecih ni bilo ob ustreznem nadzoru populacije rodu Culicoides nobenega primera bolezni in da ni bilo izvedeno nobeno cepljenje
All species other than those of the genera Bos, Bison, Bubalus, Ovis and Capra and of the family Suidae’
Vse vrste, razen živali iz rodov Bos, Bison, Bubalus, Ovis in Capra ter družine Suidae“
concerning the non-inclusion of dichlorvos for product type 18 in Annex I, IA or IB to Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of biocidal products on the market
o nevključitvi diklorvosa za proizvode 18. vrste v Prilogo I, IA ali IB k Direktivi 98/8/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o dajanju biocidnih pripravkov v promet
Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007, dichlorvos (CAS Nr 62-73-7; EC Nr 200-547-7) has been evaluated in accordance with Article 11(2) of Directive 98/8/EC for use in product-type 18, insecticides, acaricides and products to control other arthropods, as defined in Annex V to that Directive.
Na podlagi Uredbe (ES) št. 1451/2007 je bila v skladu s členom 11(2) Direktive 98/8/ES opravljena presoja diklorvosa (CAS št. 62 73 7; EC št. 200-547-7) glede uporabe v 18. vrsti izdelkov, insekticidih, akaricidih in pripravkih za nadzor drugih členonožcev, kot je opredeljena v Prilogi V k navedeni direktivi.
Italy was designated as rapporteur Member State and submitted the competent authority report, together with a recommendation, to the Commission on 20 November 2007 in accordance with Article 14(4) and (6) of Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007.
Italija, ki je bila imenovana za državo članico poročevalko, je 20. novembra 2007 v skladu s členom 14(4) in (6) Uredbe (ES) št. 1451/2007 Komisiji predložila poročilo pristojnega organa in priporočilo.
In accordance with Article 15(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007, the findings of the review were incorporated, within the Standing Committee on Biocidal Products on 9 December 2011, in an assessment report.
V skladu s členom 15(4) Uredbe (ES) št. 1451/2007 so bile ugotovitve pregleda z dne 9. decembra 2011 v Stalnem odboru za biocidne pripravke vključene v poročilo o oceni.
The assessment has demonstrated that biocidal products used as insecticides, acaricides and products to control other arthropods and containing dichlorvos cannot be expected to satisfy the requirements laid down in Article 5 of Directive 98/8/EC.
Presoja je pokazala, da za biocidne pripravke, ki se uporabljajo kot insekticidi, akaricidi in pripravki za nadzor drugih členonožcev ter vsebujejo diklorvos, ni mogoče pričakovati, da izpolnjujejo zahteve iz člena 5 Direktive 98/8/ES.