natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In doing so the Court acknowledged the importance of applying the Fund flexibly and in a way adapted to the specific circumstances of a given disaster as set out in Article 1 of the EUSF regulation. 
Pri tem je priznalo pomembnost tega, da se sklad uporablja fleksibilno in glede na specifične okoliščine nesreče, kakor je navedeno v členu 1 uredbe o SSEU.
The Court concluded that ‘the Fund is working efficiently. 
Sodišče je prišlo do zaključka, da „sklad posluje učinkovito.
As regards flexibility, the Court found no cases where the Fund showed a lack of flexibility in its treatment of applications for aid’. 10. 
V zvezi s fleksibilnostjo ni Sodišče našlo nobenih primerov, kjer bi sklad pri svojem obravnavanju vlog za pomoč pokazal pomanjkanje fleksibilnosti.“ 10.
The Commission interpretation relates to the reconstruction of infrastructure and plant referred to in the first and third indents only. 
Razlaga Komisije se nanaša samo na obnovo infrastrukture ter naprav iz prve in tretje alinee.
The provision of temporary accommodation and emergency services is considered fully eligible and has not been narrowed down in any way. 
Zagotovitev začasne nastanitve in nujnih storitev velja za v celoti upravičeno in v nobenem pogledu ni bila omejena.
The Commission welcomes the Court’s finding that all the operations were implemented according to the implementation agreement. 
Komisija pozdravlja ugotovitev Sodišča, da so bili vsi ukrepi izvedeni v skladu s sporazumom o izvajanju.
The Italian authorities thus met the conditions imposed on them for receiving the grant. 
Italijanski organi so tako izpolnili pogoje za prejem nepovratnih sredstev.
1 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&reference =P6-TA-2007-0362&language=EN 2 Special Report No 3/2008, ‘The European Union Solidarity Fund: how rapid, efficient and flexible is it?’ 
1 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP// TEXT+TA+P6-TA-2007-0362+0+DOC+XML+V0//SL 2 Posebno poročilo št. 3/2008 „Kako hiter, učinkovit in fleksibilen je Solidarnostni sklad Evropske unije?“ (UL C 153, 18.6.2008).
(OJ C 153, 18.6.2008) REPLY OF THE COMMISSION The Commission considers that the CASE project under the given circumstances fully corresponded to the conditions and objectives of the EUSF regulation as it responded to an urgent need of thousands of people made homeless by the earthquake by providing temporary accommodation for them until they could return to their own homes. 
ODGOVOR KOMISIJE Komisija meni, da je bil projekt C.A.S.E. v danih okoliščinah popolnoma skladen s pogoji in cilji uredbe o SSEU ter se je na nujne potrebe več tisoč ljudi, ki so zaradi potresa ostali brez doma, odzval tako, da jim je zagotovil začasno nastanitev, dokler se niso lahko vrnili na svoje domove.
In the Commission’s view the term ‘temporary’ used by the regulation has to be applied with due regard to the specific circumstances of a given disaster and take into consideration inter alia the expected time needed for reconstruction until the displaced population can return to their own homes. 
Stališče Komisije je, da je treba izraz „začasno“, ki se uporablja v uredbi, uporabljati glede na specifične okoliščine nesreče in pri tem med drugim upoštevati predvideni čas, ki je potreben za obnovo, dokler se lahko razseljeno prebivalstvo vrne na svoje domove.
In the case of L’Aquila, this time frame was estimated at 10 years or more. 
V primeru L‘Aquile je bil ta časovni okvir ocenjen na 10 ali več let.
Climatic and geological conditions — which are particularly difficult at L’Aquila — are other factors to be taken into account. 
Drugi dejavniki, ki jih je treba upoštevati, so podnebne in geološke razmere, ki so v L‘Aquili še zlasti zahtevne.
Moreover, it is the limited duration of the accommodation that should be decisive, not the nature of the structures in which the accommodation takes place. 
Poleg tega bi moralo biti pri tem odločilno omejeno trajanje nastanitve, ne pa vrsta objektov, v katerih se zagotavlja nastanitev.
The Commission wishes to stress that the total cost of the eligible operations amounted to EUR 1,785 billion, including the initial emergency assistance to the population for EUR 653 million. 
Komisija želi poudariti, da so celotni stroški upravičenih ukrepov znašali 1,785 milijarde EUR, kar vključuje začetno nujno pomoč prebivalstvu v višini 653 milijonov EUR.
These first emergency expenses alone were sufficient to justify the EUSF grant of EUR 494 million, therefore the inclusion of the CASE project had no impact on the EU budget. 
Že samo ti odhodki za prve nujne ukrepe so zadostovali, da so bila nepovratna sredstva iz SSEU v višini 494 milijonov EUR upravičena, zato vključitev projekta C.A.S.E. ni vplivala na proračun EU.
The implementation agreement describes the type of operations to be carried out. 
Sporazum o izvajanju opisuje vrsto ukrepov, ki jih je treba izvesti.
The specific details (number of apartments, etc.) are given indicatively. 
Konkretne podrobnosti (število stanovanj ipd.) so navedene okvirno.
The Commission considers that the construction of the CASE blocks was a major achievement and extremely rapid. 
Komisija meni, da je bila gradnja stanovanjskih blokov C.A.S.E. velik dosežek in izjemno hitra.
The regulation provides no definition of the term ‘temporary accommodation’. 
V uredbi o SSEU izraz „začasna nastanitev“ ni opredeljen.
Article 1 of the EUSF regulation however calls for a flexible manner in responding to major disasters. 
Vendar pa njen člen 1 zahteva fleksibilno odzivanje na večje nesreče.
Therefore the Commission takes the view that the adjective ‘temporary’ refers to the objective of the intervention, namely the accommodation of people, and not to the nature of the buildings. 
Zato Komisija meni, da se pridevnik „začasen“ nanaša na cilj intervencije, in sicer nastanitev ljudi, in ne na vrsto stavb.
Moreover, ‘temporary’ should be assessed in the specific context of a situation. 
Poleg tega bi bilo treba izraz „začasen“ presojati v specifičnem okviru razmer.
At L’Aquila the high number of people to be accommodated, the expected long duration of the reconstruction works and the bad experience of the Italian authorities with more provisional solutions following earlier disasters, led the Commission to consider that the CASE project fully met the intentions of the regulation. 
V primeru L‘Aquile je Komisija zaradi velikega števila ljudi, ki jim je bilo treba zagotoviti nastanitev, predvidene dolgotrajnosti obnovitvenih del in slabih izkušenj italijanskih organov z več začasnimi rešitvami po nesrečah v preteklosti menila, da projekt C.A.S.E. v celoti izpolnjuje namene uredbe.
The Commission takes the view that ‘immediately neces-sary’ should be interpreted in the light of the specific circumstances. 
Komisija meni, da bi se moral izraz „takoj potrebno“ razlagati z vidika specifičnih okoliščin.
The CASE project — of which the EUSF covered less than half of the cost (43 %) — responded to the urgent of need of providing shelter to some 15 000 people for an expected reconstruction period of many years. 
Projekt C.A.S.E., pri katerem se je iz sredstev SSEU pokrila manj kot polovica stroškov (43 %), se je na nujne potrebe odzval tako, da je v času obnove, ki naj bi predvidoma trajala več let, zagotovil nastanitev približno 15 000 ljudem.
The specificities of the project — for which the implementation agreement imposes no detailed conditions — correspond with the strategy chosen by the Italian authorities. 
Specifičnosti projekta, za katerega sporazum o izvajanju ne določa podrobnejših pogojev, ustrezajo strategiji, ki so jo izbrali italijanski organi.
Higher energy efficiency is an investment that would help reduce future energy bills. 
Naložba v večjo energetsko učinkovitost bi prispevala k zmanjšanju prihodnjih stroškov energije.
The Commission does not share the view that the absence of a specific provision for revenue generation in the EUSF regulation would suggest the non-eligibility of longer-term projects. 
Komisija se ne strinja z mnenjem, da neobstoj posebne določbe o ustvarjanju prihodkov v uredbi o SSEU kaže, da dolgoročnejši projekti niso upravičeni.
The Commission would however agree that revenue generation should be addressed by including a specific provision in the regulation at the time of its future revision. 
Kljub temu bi se Komisija strinjala, da naj se vprašanje ustvarjanja prihodkov obravnava tako, da se v uredbo ob njeni prihodnji reviziji vključi posebna določba.
The Commission agrees with the Court that the EUSF should not normally be used for longer-term reconstruction. 
Komisija se strinja s Sodiščem, da se SSEU navadno ne bi smel uporabljati za dolgoročnejšo obnovo.
The CASE project however does not fall in this category. 
Vendar pa projekt C.A.S.E. ne spada v to kategorijo.
The CASE buildings are not reconstruction nor are they intended to replace destroyed structures but serve the purpose of providing temporary accommodation for the population until they can return to their own homes. 
Stavbe C.A.S.E. niso obnova niti niso namenjene temu, da bi nadomestile uni-čene objekte, temveč je njihov namen zagotoviti prebivalcem začasno nastanitev do takrat, ko se bodo lahko vrnili na svoje domove.
The CASE project therefore complies with the regulation. 
Projekt C.A.S.E. je zato v skladu z uredbo.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION 21. 
ODGOVOR KOMISIJE 21.
The EUSF was created as an instrument enabling the EU to demonstrate (financial) solidarity with countries suffering from major disasters. 
SSEU je bil oblikovan kot instrument, ki omogoča EU izkazati (finančno) solidarnost z državami, ki so jih prizadele večje nesreče.
Unlike most financial EU instruments it has no other policy objectives and is not intended to interfere with the disaster-response policy, strategies and choices of a beneficiary country in responding to a disaster. 
V nasprotju z večino finančnih instrumentov EU nima drugih ciljev politike ter se pri odzivanju na nesrečo nima namena vmešavati v politiko, strategije in odločitve države upravičenke na področju ukrepanja ob nesrečah.
The EUSF regulation expressly leaves the implementation of the grant to the beneficiary state. 
Uredba o SSEU odločanje o uporabi nepovratnih sredstev izrecno prepušča državi upravičenki.
This is all the more true as the responsible authorities have to develop and implement their strategy to a specific disaster long before they actually know whether their application for EUSF aid is accepted and what the aid amount will be. 
To pa zlasti zato, ker morajo odgovorni organi svojo strategijo v zvezi s konkretno nesrečo oblikovati in uporabiti veliko prej, preden dejansko izvejo, ali je njihova vloga za pomoč iz SSEU sprejeta in kakšen bo znesek pomoči.
Moreover, while there is no co-financing obligation, the EUSF usually covers only a small part of the cost of disaster-response operations. 
Poleg tega, ker ni obveznosti sofinanciranja, SSEU običajno krije le majhen del stroškov ukrepov odzivanja na nesreče.
In the case of L’Aquila, the EUSF contributed only 27 % to the cost of the operations laid down in the agreement. 
V primeru L‘Aquile je SSEU k stroškom ukrepov, določenih v sporazumu, prispeval samo 27 %.
In the Commission’s view the EUSF must be applied in a rapid, efficient and flexible manner as called for in Article 1 of the EUSF regulation. 
Stališče Komisije je, da se mora SSEU uporabljati hitro, učinkovito in fleksibilno, kakor določa člen 1 uredbe o EUSF.
It considers that flexibility in this context means in particular that the operations supported by the Fund respond to the specific circumstances of a given disaster. 
Komisija meni, da fleksibilnost v tej zvezi pomeni zlasti to, da se ukrepi, ki jih podpira sklad, odzovejo na specifične okoliščine nesreče.
The CASE project did that particularly well albeit in an innovative way. 
Projekt C.A.S.E. je to opravil še zlasti dobro, čeprav na inovativen način.
According to the Commission, the strategy was appropriate and met the conditions and objectives of the regulation. 
Komisija ocenjuje, da je bila strategija primerna ter je izpolnjevala pogoje in cilje uredbe.
25.–26. Common reply The Commission shares the Court’s analysis that a high degree of preparedness is key to the success of disaster-response operations and should therefore be promoted. 
25. in 26., skupni odgovor Komisija se strinja z analizo Sodišča, da je visoka stopnja pripravljenosti odločilna za uspešnost ukrepov odzivanja na nesreče in bi jo bilo zato treba spodbujati.
The construction of the CASE blocks for so many people in such short time under the given circumstances was a major achievement and most were available by the end of the year. 
Izgradnja blokov C.A.S.E. za tolikšno število ljudi v tako kratkem času je bila v danih okoliščinah velik dosežek, večina blokov pa je bila na voljo že ob koncu leta.
The adoption of a new strategy by the Italian authorities results from the assessment of earlier strategies which in their view proved to be inadequate as they resulted in thousands of victims of earlier disasters having to dwell in unacceptable conditions for many years. 
Italijanski organi so novo strategijo sprejeli na podlagi ocene preteklih strategij, ki so se po njihovem mnenju izkazale za neprimerne, saj so povzročile, da je moralo na tisoče žrtev preteklih nesreč več let prebivati v nesprejemljivih razmerah.
The experience gained in implementing this new strategy has already been mainstreamed by the Department of Civil Protection, as shown in footnote 26. 
Izkušnje, pridobljene pri izvajanju te nove strategije, je Služba civilne zaščite že upoštevala, kot je predstavljeno v opombi 26.
Common reply The Commission considers that the comparison with average social housing standards should be adapted to the specific circumstances at L’Aquila: the great number of people to be catered for, the time pressure, the climatic and the geological conditions, the expected duration of reconstruction, etc. 
31. in 32., skupni odgovor Komisija meni, da bi bilo treba primerjavo s povprečnimi standardi za socialna stanovanja prilagoditi specifičnim okoliščinam v L‘Aquili: veliko število ljudi, za katere je bilo treba poskrbeti, časovni pritisk, podnebne in geološke razmere, predvideno trajanje obnove ipd.
These specific conditions necessarily had an influence on cost and made the construction more expensive. 
Navedene specifične razmere so neizogibno vplivale na stroške in podra-žile gradnjo.
See the Commission reply to paragraphs 31 and 32. 
Glej odgovora Komisije na odstavka 31 in 32.
The CASE project was necessarily prepared and procured under extremely tight time constraints and with complex technical requirements which had a justifiable impact on the cost. 
Projekt C.A.S.E. je bilo treba pripraviti in naročilo oddati v izredno kratkem roku ter ob upoštevanju zapletenih tehničnih zahtev, kar je upravičeno vplivalo na stroške.
The Italian authorities were confronted with a number of challenges: speedy implementation, meeting specific technical standards, minimising the environmental impact, etc. 
Italijanski organi so se znašli pred številnimi izzivi: hitro izvajanje, izpolnjevanje posebnih tehničnih standardov, zmanjšanje vpliva na okolje v največji možni meri ipd.
These factors cannot be seen in isolation and necessarily had an influence on price. 
Navedenih dejavnikov ni mogoče obravnavati ločeno in so neizogibno vplivali na ceno.
Had they given priority to keeping the costs low, the prime purpose of the operation would have failed. 
Če bi italijanski organi dali prednost nizkim stroškom, bi glavni namen ukrepa propadel.
The choices made by the Italian authorities in the procurement had no impact on the EU budget for the reasons explained in the Commission’s reply to paragraph 11. 
Odločitve, ki so jih italijanski organi sprejeli v postopku javnega naročanja, niso vplivale na proračun EU zaradi razlogov, pojasnjenih v odgovoru Komisije na odstavek 11.
The implementation of the grant is the responsibility of the beneficiary state in compliance with the regulation. 
Za izvrševanje nepovratnih sredstev je v skladu z uredbo odgovorna država upravičenka.
The responsibility of the Italian authorities was to comply with the applicable procurement rules. 
Italijanski organi so bili odgovorni za upoštevanje veljavnih predpisov o javnem naročanju.
See also the Commission reply to paragraph 37. 
Glej tudi odgovor Komisije na odstavek 37.
If the conditions set out in Article 31(1)(c) of Directive 2004/18/EC are met, the contracting authority (i.e. the Department of Civil Protection) is entitled to reduce the time available for submission of bids. 
Če so izpolnjeni pogoji iz člena 31(1)(c) Direktive 2004/18/ES, lahko naročnik (tj. služba civilne zaščite) skrajša rok za predložitev ponudb.
As explained by the Italian authorities, ‘the existence of inadmissible bids is not linked to the short time available for submission. 
Italijanski organi so pojasnili, da „obstoj nesprejemljivih ponudb ni povezan s kratkimi roki za predložitev ponudb.
The reasons for inadmissibility, as faithfully reported in the tender reports, should be analysed. 
Razloge za nesprejemljivost, kot so natančno predstavljeni v poročilih o razpisu, bi bilo treba analizirati.
The inadmissibility is more likely to be related to rigorous, meticulous compliance with all the conditions set by the tenders, which was the case despite the obvious urgency. 
Verjetneje je, da je nesprejemljivost ponudb povezana z doslednim, skrajno natančnim izpolnjevanjem vseh razpisnih pogojev kljub očitni nujnosti razmer.
Moreover, fulfilment of the conditions set by the tenders was necessary in order to ensure the success of the project in general, which was characterised by the highly unusual completion times.’3 41. 
Poleg tega je bilo izpolnjevanje razpisnih pogojev potrebno zato, da bi zagotovili splošen uspeh projekta, za katerega so bili značilni zelo neobičajni izvedbeni roki“3. 41.
The directive does not oblige the contracting authority to split contracts into lots. 
Direktiva 2004/18/ES ne določa, da mora naročnik naročila razdeliti v sklope.
The Member State replied to the Court’s comments that ‘the amount of concrete in the tender required the on-site presence of concrete plant with an extremely high capacity (264 000 m3 by the end of the works, equivalent to around 3 500 m3 per day). Only one bidder could do this. 
Država članica je na pripombe Sodišča odgovorila, da „je bilo treba zaradi količine betona, navedene v razpisni ponudbi, na kraju obratovanja postaviti betonarno z izredno visoko zmogljivostjo (264 000 m3 do zaključka del, kar je enako približno 3 500 m3 na dan)“.
The Member State also underlined that ’the temporal, logistical, production and economic implications were considered’.4 3 The Commission accepts the reply given by the Member States' authorities. 
Ta pogoj je lahko izpolnil samo en ponudnik. Država članica je prav tako poudarila, da „so bile upoštevane časovne, logistične, proizvodne in ekonomske posledice“4.
4 The Commission accepts the reply given by the Member States' authorities. Special Report No 24/2012 – The European Union Solidarity Fund’s response to the 2009 Abruzzi earthquake: the relevance and cost of operations 
4 Komisija sprejema odgovor organov države članice. Posebno poročilo št.24/2012 – Odziv Solidarnostnega sklada Evropske unije na potres v Abrucih leta 2009: ustreznost in stroški ukrepov
For the purpose of EUSF grants, the provisions of the EU directives on public procurement apply, except for contracts covered only by national legislation. 
Za nepovratna sredstva iz SSEU se uporabljajo določbe direktiv EU o javnem naročanju, razen pri naročilih, ki jih ureja samo nacionalna zakonodaja.
As set out in Article 53 of the quoted directive, ‘when the award is made to the tender most economically advantageous from the point of view of the contracting authority, various criteria linked to the subject-matter of the public contract in question, for example, quality, price, technical merit, aesthetic and functional characteristics, environmental characteristics, running costs, cost-effectiveness, after-sales service and technical assistance, delivery date and delivery period or period of completion’. 
V členu 53 navedene direktive je navedeno: „če je naročilo oddano na podlagi ekonomsko najugodnejše ponudbe s stališča naročnika, na podlagi različnih meril, ki so vezana na predmet javnega naročila, na primer kakovosti, cene, tehničnih prednosti, estetskih in funkcionalnih lastnosti, okoljskih značilnosti, tekočih stroškov, stroškovne učinkovitosti, poprodajnih storitev in tehnične pomoči, datuma dobave ter roka za dobavo ali dokončanje del.“ V okviru navedene določbe ni nobene obveznosti, da je treba ceni dati večjo utež v primerjavi s katerimi koli drugimi merili.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION 47. 
ODGOVOR KOMISIJE 47.
See also the Commission reply to paragraph 42. 
Glej tudi odgovor Komisije na odstavek 42.
The award criteria to be used in a given tender are the choice of the contracting authority, under the conditions set out in the directive. 
Merila za oddajo naročila, ki se bodo uporabljala v razpisu, določi naročnik v skladu s pogoji, navedenimi v Direktivi 2004/18/ES.
See the Commission replies to paragraph 37 and paragraph 45. 
Glej odgovora Komisije na odstavka 37 in 45.
See the Commission reply to paragraph 37. 
Glej odgovor Komisije na odstavek 37.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 50. 
ZAKLJUČKI IN PRIPOROČILA 50.
The Commission considers that the CASE project complied with the conditions and objectives of the regulation. 
Komisija meni, da je bil projekt C.A.S.E. v skladu s pogoji in cilji uredbe.
The CASE project responded in a flexible and very effective manner that was well adjusted to the specific situation to the urgent need to provide temporary accommodation for thousands of people. 
Projekt C.A.S.E. se je na nujno potrebo po zagotovitvi začasne nastanitve več tisoč ljudem odzval fleksibilno in zelo učinkovito ter pri tem dobro upošteval specifične razmere.
The Commission considers that the term ‘temporary’ used by the regulation must be applied in a way that reflects the specific circumstances of a given disaster. 
Komisija meni, da je treba izraz „začasno“, ki se uporablja v uredbi, uporabljati tako, da izraža specifične okoliščine nesreče.
Temporary thus means ‘for the time needed until the population concerned can return to their own homes’. 
Začasno torej pomeni „do takrat, ko se bo prizadeto prebivalstvo lahko vrnilo na svoje domove“.
The fact that in the case of L’Aquila this period will take many years is part of the characteristics of this dramatic disaster. 
Dejstvo, da bo v primeru L‘Aquile to obdobje trajalo več let, je ena od značilnosti te dramatične nesreče.
The Commission will use the opportunity of the forthcoming review of the regulation to clarify the formulation of ‘temporary accommodation’ and address the question of revenue generation. 
Komisija bo v okviru bližajočega se pregleda uredbe pojasnila zvezo „začasna nastanitev“ in obravnavala vprašanje ustvarjanja prihodkov.
Furthermore, the Commission notes that, given that the declared expenditure for the other emergency operations exceeded by far the amount of the aid, the Court’s findings would not have any impact on the EU budget. 
Poleg tega Komisija meni, da glede na to, da so prijavljeni odhodki za druge nujne ukrepe daleč presegli znesek pomoči, ugotovitve Sodišča ne bi vplivale na proračun EU. 44.
The Commission welcomes the Court’s finding that expenditure on initial aid and assistance and on MAP houses and MUSP buildings was compliant with the EUSF regulation. 
Komisija pozdravlja ugotovitev Sodišča, da so bili odhodki za začetno pomoč ter za nastanitvene enote M.A.P. in stavbe M.U.S.P. skladni z uredbo o SSEU.
The total cost of these operations alone exceeded by far the total amount of EUSF aid. 
Že samo celotni stroški teh ukrepov so daleč presegli skupni znesek pomoči iz SSEU.
Recommendation 1 The Commission partially agrees with this recommendation. 
Priporočilo 1 Komisija se delno strinja s tem priporočilom.