natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Furthermore, in the context of its IACS systems audits the Court has analysed the implemen­ tation at national level of the GAEC standards and the control systems put in place by the Member States, — in addition, in order to assess the basis for the Commission’s financial clearance decisions the Court reviewed 60 of the certification bodies’ certificates and reports related to 54 paying agencies (19). 
Sodišče je poleg tega v okviru svojih revizij sistemov IAKS analizi­ ralo izvajanje standardov za dobre kmetijske in okoljske pogoje na nacionalni ravni in kontrolne sisteme, ki so jih vzpostavile države članice, — Sodišče je pregledalo tudi 60 potrdil in poročil certifikacij­ skih organov, ki so se nanašala na 54 plačilnih agencij (19), da bi ocenilo osnovo za odločbo Komisije o finančni potrditvi.
On this basis the Court’s estimate of the most likely error for Agriculture and Natural Resources lies between 2 % and 5 %. _____________ (19) The number of paying agencies included in the DAS sample amounted to 56 for EAGF and seven for EAFRD. 
Na osnovi tega Sodišče ocenjuje, da je najverjetnejša stopnja napake za kmetijstvo in naravne vire med 2 % in 5 %. _____________ (19) V vzorcu DAS je bilo zajetih 56 plačilnih agencij za EKJS in sedem za EKSRP.
However, for three paying agencies (two for EAGF and one for EAFRD) no report and certificate were submitted in due time by the competent certification bodies, and thus no review was performed. 
Vendar za tri plačilne agencije (dve za EKJS in eno za EKSRP) pristojni certifikacijski organi niso pravočasno predložili nobenih poročil in potrdil, zato pregled ni bil izveden.
For the same reason the Commission disjoined the accounts of these three paying agencies. 
Iz istega razloga je Komisija izločila obračune teh treh plačilnih agencij.
T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S The Commission considers that an error rate which over the recent years oscillates around 2% confirms the overall positive assessment of previous years. 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E Komisija meni, da stopnja napak, ki se je v zadnjih letih gibala okoli 2 %, potrjuje splošno pozitivno oceno iz prejšnjih let.
Moreover the risk to the EU budget is adequately covered by the conformity clearance procedure. 3.18. 
Poleg tega je tveganje za proračun EU ustrezno zajeto v postopku potrditve skladnosti. 3.18
EN 9.11.2010 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 63 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S 3.19. In 2009, out of 241 transactions examined, 66 (27 %) (20) were affected by error. 
SL 9.11.2010 UradnilistEvropskeunije 63 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A 3.19 Leta 2009 so na 66 (27 %) (20) od 241 revidiranih transakcij vplivale napake.
42 (64 %) (21) of these trans­ actions were affected by quantifiable errors notably concerning eligibility and accuracy. 
Na 42 (64 %) (21) teh transakcij so vplivale količinsko opredeljive napake predvsem v zvezi z upravičenostjo in točnostjo.
Examples of the types of error are given below. 
V nadaljevanju so navedeni primeri napak.
Agriculture and rural development 3.20. IntheEAGF,outof148transactionssampled,35 (24 %) (22) were affected by errors. 
Kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja 3.20 V EKJS so napake vplivale na 35 (24 %) (22) od 148 transakcij v vzorcu.
24 (69 %) of these trans­ actions were affected by quantifiable errors. 
Na 24 (69 %) teh transakcij so vplivale količinsko opredeljive napake.
With regard to Rural Development expenditure, out of 80 transactions sampled, 25 (31%) were affected by errors. 
Pri odhodkih za razvoj pode­ želja so napake vplivale na 25 (31 %) od 80 transakcij v vzorcu.
16 (64%) of these transactions were affected by quantifiable errors. 
Na 16 (64 %) teh transakcij so vplivale količinsko opredeljive napake.
ExamplesofeligibilityerrorsfoundbytheCourtare the following: T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S _____________ (20) In 2008, the corresponding figure was 66 (32 %). 
3.21 Primeri napak v zvezi z upravičenostjo, ki jih je ugoto­ vilo Sodišče, so: O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E _____________ (20) V letu 2008 so napake vplivale na 66 transakcij (32 %).
(21) In 2008, the corresponding figure was 45 (68 %). 
(21) V letu 2008 so napake vplivale na 45 transakcij (68 %).
(22) One transaction sampled was the subject of a conformity clearance procedure under Article 11 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 885/2006 (OJ L 171, 23.6.2006, p. 
(22) Ena transakcija v vzorcu je bila obravnavana v postopku potrditve skladnosti v skladu s členom 11 Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 885/ 2006 (UL L 171, 23.6.2006, str.
90) and therefore no final assessment was possible at the time of the audit. 3.20. 
90), zato v času revizije končna ocena ni bila mogoča.
3.21. The Commission notes that most of the quantifiable errors are relatively small in financial terms and mainly concern small differences in the re-measurement of parcels carried out by the Court (see paragraph 3.22). 
3.20 3.21 Komisija ugotavlja, da je večina količinsko opredeljivih napak razmeroma majhnih v finančnem smislu in se predvsem nana­ šajo na majhna odstopanja pri ponovnem merjenju parcel, ki ga je opravilo Sodišče (glej odstavek 3.22).
Also, several errors were already identified by the Member State concerned prior to the Court’s audit. 
Prav tako je zadevna država članica nekatere napake ugotovila že pred revizijo Sodišča.
EN 64 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 9.11.2010 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S Examples EAGF A SAPS payment was made to a beneficiary without any proof of carrying out an agricultural activity: the beneficiary, a limited company owned by a municipality, made a SAPS claim for more than 530 hectares of meadows and pasture parcels. 
SL 64 UradnilistEvropskeunije 9.11.2010 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E Primeri za EKJS Plačilo SEPP je prejel upravičenec brez kakršnega koli dokaza o izvajanju kmetijske dejavnosti: ta upravičenec, družba z omejeno odgovornostjo v lasti občine, je vložil zahtevek za SEPP za več kot 530 hektarov travnikov in pašnikov.
No proof could be provided to the auditors that the company qualified for aid by carrying out an agricultural activity — i.e. production or growing of agricultural products, rearing or keeping animals for farming purposes, or maintaining land in good agricultural condition (GAC) — with the result that payment of the aid (30 000 euros) was not justified. 
Revizorjem niso mogli predložiti nobenih dokazov, da je družba upravičena do pomoči zaradi izvajanja kmetijske dejavnosti, tj. proizvodnje ali pridelo-vanja kmetijskih proizvodov, reje živali, reje živali za kmetijske namene ali ohranjanja zemljišč v stanju, ki je v skladu z dobrimi kmetijskimi in okoljskimi pogoji, zaradi česar je bilo plačilo pomoči (30 000 EUR) neupravičeno.
The Court considers that this case is a further example of the problem that the Court had already pointed out in its 2008 Annual Report (23). 
Sodišče meni, da je to še en primer problema, na katerega je opozorilo že v svojem letnem poročilu za leto 2008 (23).
An SPS payment was made to a beneficiary who incorrectly declared an area of rented poor pasture land. 
Plačilo SEP je prejel upravičenec, ki je napačno prijavil najete pašnike slabe kakovosti.
The land in question was public land for which another farmer (the lessor) declared having grazing rights granted by the municipality. 
Zadevno zemljišče je bilo javno zemljišče, za katerega je pašne pravice, ki mu jih je odobrila občina, prijavil že drug kmet (zakupodajalec).
The beneficiary, a retired farmer, who had disposed of his original holding but had retained part of his entitlements entered into two specific contracts with the lessor ostensibly to meet the requirements of the regulation: — a rental contract for 57 hectares of the above mentioned pasture land, — a ‘back to back’ contract ceding the grazing rights back to the lessor. 
Upravičenec, upokojen kmet, ki je prodal prvotno kmetijsko gospodarstvo, vendar obdržal del svojih pravic, je z zakupodajalcem sklenil dve posebni pogodbi, da bi navidezno izpolnil zahteve iz uredbe: — najemno pogodbo za 57 hektarov omenjenih pašnikov, — podizvajalsko pogodbo, s katero je pašne pravice odstopil nazaj zakupodajalcu.
The municipality, however, had not granted any grazing right to the lessor for the parcel in question. 
Vendar občina zakupodajalcu ni odobrila nobenih pašnih pravic na zadevni parceli.
In any case, any subletting (in whole or in part) of grazing rights is explicitly forbidden by municipality rules. Thus, the land was neither at the disposal of the lessor nor of the beneficiary. 
Poleg tega pa je v pravilniku občine izrecno prepovedano vsakršno (delno ali popolno) oddajanje pašnih pravic v podnajem. Tako niti zakupodajalec niti upravičenec nista imela pravice do uporabe tega zemljišča.
Consequently, the provisions of EU legislation (24) were not respected. 
Posledično določbe zakonodaje EU (24) niso bile upoštevane.
The latter caseis considered to be a clear breach of the provisions of article 29 of the governing regulation which stipulates that ‘no payment shall be made in favour of beneficiaries for whom it is established that they artificially created the conditions required for obtaining such payments’. 
Zadnji primer je po mnenju Sodišča jasna kršitev določb člena 29 uredbe, ki ureja to področje, v skladu s katerimi „se plačilo ne izplača upravičencem, za katere se ugotovi, da so umetno ustvarili pogoje, ki so potrebni za pridobitev takih plačil“.
Examples EAGF Natural or legal persons are entitled to receive SAPS payments if they carry out an agricultural activity or maintain the land in good agricultural condition (GAC)(1). 
Primeri za EKJS Fizične ali pravne osebe so upravičene do prejemanja plačil SEPP, če opravljajo kmetijsko dejavnost ali vzdržujejo zemljišče v dobrih kmetijskih pogojih (GAC) (1).
Thus, no specific agricultural activity is required. 
Posebna kmetijska dejavnost torej ni potrebna.
It is sufficient that the beneficiary respects good agricultural conditions (GAC). 
Zadostuje že, da upravičenec upošteva dobre kmetijske pogoje (GAC).
This case does not concern the regularity under the relevant EU rules, but rather the political choice made by the EU legislator during the Health Check by leaving it to the Member States to decide whether to grant direct payments to natural or legal persons whose principal business objects do not consist of exercising an agricultural activity or whose agricultural activities are insignificant. 
Ta primer se ne nanaša na pravilnost v skladu z ustreznimi predpisi EU, ampak na politično odločitev, ki jo je zakonodajalec EU sprejel med pregledom SKP, ko je državam članicam prepustil odločitev o tem, ali bodo odobrile neposredna plačila fizičnim ali pravnim osebam, katerih glavna dejavnost ni opravljanje kmetijske dejavnosti ali katerih kmetijske dejavnosti predstavljajo le majhen delež.
Further reflexion on this point is taking place in the context of the post-2013 reform of the Common Agricultural Policy. 
Nadaljnji premisleki o tej točki potekajo v okviru reforme skupne kmetijske politike po letu 2013.
Evidence from the payment file shows that in September 2008, the national authorities concerned checked the land claimed on the spot, including some of the parcels inspected by the Court, and determined the payment on the basis of the area which they found to be in good agricultural condition. 
Iz podatkov v spisu o plačilih je razvidno, da so septembra 2008 zadevni nacionalni organi na kraju samem preverili zemljišče iz zahtevka, vključno z nekaterimi parcelami, ki jih je pregledalo Sodišče, in na podlagi zemljišča, za katerega so ugotovili, da je v dobrih kmetijskih pogojih, določili plačilo.
An on-the-spot visit of the Commission in May 2010 confirmed that the corresponding area paid continues to be in good agricultural conditions. _____________ (23) In its 2008 Annual Report (paragraph 5.17) the Court reported on SAPS payments made to ineligible beneficiaries who failed to meet the farmer definition as they did not carry out any agricultural activity. 
Obisk Komisije na kraju samem v maju 2010 je potrdil, da je pripadajoče zemljišče, ki je predmet plačil, še vedno v dobrih kmetijskih pogojih. _____________ (23) Sodišče je v svojem letnem poročilu za leto 2008 (odstavek 5.17) poročalo, da so bila plačila SEPP izplačana upravičencem, ki dejansko niso upravičeni, saj niso ustrezali opredelitvi kmeta, ker niso izvajali nobene kmetijske dejavnosti.
It provided as an example the case of municipalities bene­ fiting from SAPS payments for common grassland used by local farmers for grazing their animals. 
Kot primer je navedlo občine, ki so prejele plačila SEPP za skupna travišča, ki so jih lokalni kmetje uporabljali za pašo svoje živine.
(24) Article 44(1) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003. _____________ (1) See the Commission's reply to point 5.17 of the Court's Annual Report 2008. 
(24) Člen 44(1) in (3) Uredbe (ES) št.
9.11.2010 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 65 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S 3.22. Mostofthequantifiableerrorswereaccuracyerrors (87 % in EAGF and 81 % for Rural Development) and furthermore, most of the accuracy errors were over-declarations of eligible land. 
SL 9.11.2010 UradnilistEvropskeunije 65 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A 3.22 Večina količinsko opredeljivih napak so napake v zvezi s točnostjo (87 % za EKJS in 81 % za razvoj podeželja), večina napak v zvezi s točnostjo pa so prijavljanje prevelikih upravičenih površin.
Other examples of accuracy errors found by the Court were the following: T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S 3.22. Examples EAGF In two out of 12 transactions audited in a Member State payments were calculated on the basis of incorrect entitlements recorded in the database leading to around 20 % overpayment in each case. 
Drugi primeri napak v zvezi s točnostjo, ki jih je ugotovilo Sodišče, so: O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E 3.22 Primera za EKJS V dveh od 12 revidiranih transakcij v eni od držav članic so bila plačila izračunana na osnovi nepravilnih pravic, evidentiranih v podatkovni bazi, zaradi česar je v vsakem od primerov prišlo do okoli 20-odstotnega preplačila.
In another Member State an SPS payment was calculated on the basis of the average value of entitlements held by the farmer and not on the basis of the average value of entitlements declared by the farmer in his application as provided by EU legislation, thereby resulting in an underpayment of around 20 %. 
V drugi državi članici je bilo plačilo SEP izračunano na osnovi povprečne vrednosti pravic, ki jih je kmet imel, in ne na osnovi povprečne vrednosti pravic, ki jih je kmet prijavil v svojem zahtevku, kot je določeno v zakonodaji EU, zato je bilo plačilo za 20 % prenizko.
Examples EAGF In both cases, the national authorities had already detected, prior to the Court, that payments were calculated on the basis of incorrect entitlements and that any overpayments would need to be recovered. 
Primeri za EKJS V obeh primerih so nacionalni organi že pred Sodiščem odkrili, da so bila plačila izračunana na osnovi nepravilnih pravic in da bo treba vsa preplačila vrniti.
The Commission regrets that, such underpayments, which do not result in any loss to the EU budget, are extrapolated to the whole of the expenditure in such a way as to increase the overall error rate, thus giving the incorrect impression that the error rate is an indication of the magnitude of the overpayment. 
Komisija obžaluje, da so takšna prenizka plačila, ki ne pomenijo nobene izgube za proračun EU, ekstrapolirana na celoto odhodkov tako, da se poveča splošna stopnja napak, kar ustvarja nepravilen vtis, da stopnja napak kaže na velikost preplačila.
3.23. Asfornon-quantifiableerrors,theCourtfoundfor example, in EAGF, that parcels were not clearly identified in the application , payments were made after the legal deadline and the date on which claimants have to have exclusive use of the parcel claimed was not specified. 
3.23 Pri količinsko neopredeljivih napakah je Sodišče ugotovilo na primer za EKJS, da parcele v zahtevku niso bile jasno opredeljene, da so bila plačila izvedena po zakon­ skem roku in da datum, ko morajo biti vlagatelji izključni uporabniki parcel, za katere je bil vložen zahtevek, ni bil določen.
In EAFRD, the Court noted a case where certain conditions applying to an aid paid for organic farming had not been fully complied with. 
Za EKSRP je Sodišče opazilo primer, pri katerem nekateri pogoji v zvezi s pomočjo, plačano za ekološko kmeto­ vanje, niso bili popolnoma izpolnjeni.
Environment, Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, and Health and Consumer Protection 3.24. As regards Environment, Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, and Health and Consumer Protection, out of 13 transactions sampled, 6 (46 %) were affected by errors. 
Okolje, pomorske zadeve in ribištvo ter zdravje in varstvo potrošnikov 3.24 Vzvezizokoljem,pomorskimizadevamiinribištvom ter zdravjem in varstvom potrošnikov, so napake vplivale na šest (46 %) od 13 transakcij v vzorcu.
(33 %) errors. of these transactions were affected by quantifiable 3.24. 
Na dve (33 %) od teh transakcij so vplivale količinsko opredeljive napake.
When deciding on its payments under shared management to the Member States the Commission was not aware of possible errors identified by the Court that had occurred at the level of the final recipient. 
3.24 Ko je Komisija odločala o svojih plačilih državam članicam v okviru deljenega upravljanja, se ni zavedala morebitnih napak, ki jih je ugotovilo Sodišče in so se pojavile na ravni končnega prejemnika.
However, the Commission has put in place a control environment to verify that the management and control systems of the Member States function effectively to prevent such errors. 
Vendar je Komisija vzpostavila obvladovalno okolje, da bi preverila, ali sistemi upravljanja in nadzora v državah članicah delujejo učin­ kovito, da se preprečijo takšne napake.
With regard to one transaction in the area of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, the Commission’s calculation of the interim payment was a correct application of the applicable rules for the calculation of such payments as laid down in Article 76 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006 which does not allow the Commission to use a different method of calculation at its discretion. 3.25. 
V zvezi z eno transakcijo na področju pomorskih zadev in ribištva je Komisija pri izračunu vmesnega plačila pravilno uporabila veljavna pravila za izračun takšnih plačil, kakor so opredeljena v členu 76 Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1198/2006, ki določa, da Komisija ne sme uporabiti drugačne metode za izračun po svoji presoji.
The Commission deducts detected ineligible amounts from subsequent expenditure claims (if any remain to be submitted) or at the latest before the closure of the programme. 
3.25 Komisija ugotovljene neupravičene zneske odšteje od prihod­ njih zahtevkov za odhodke (če bodo še predloženi) ali najpozneje pred zaključkom programa.
EN 66 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 9.11.2010 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S Example National authorities reimbursed expenditure incurred nine months after the deadline established for the construction of a fishing vessel. 
SL 66 UradnilistEvropskeunije 9.11.2010 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E Primer Nacionalni organi so povrnili odhodke, ki so nastali devet mesecev po roku za izgradnjo ribiškega plovila.
In light of the legislation this expenditure is ineligible since only in cases of ‘force majeure’ occurring within the project duration can such a deadline be set aside. 
V skladu z zakonodajo so taki odhodki neupravičeni, saj se ti roki lahko razveljavijo le v primeru višje sile, do katere pride v času trajanja projekta.
Example Within the framework of the closure exercise the Commission will take all the appropriate measures to deduct from the final statement of expenditure and final payment claim the ineligible amount. 3.26. 
Primer V okviru naloge zaključevanja programa bo Komisija sprejela vse ustrezne ukrepe, da od končnega poročila o odhodkih in končnega zahtevka za plačilo odšteje neupravičeni znesek.
TheCourtalsofoundnon-quantifiableerrors. 3.26. Examples FIFG: a final beneficiary declared, amongst others, expenses for own staff and machinery which have been estimated at selling prices rather than based on costs actually incurred for implementing the project. 
3.26 Primera FIUR: končni upravičenec je med drugim prijavil tudi stroške za lastne uslužbence in stroje, ki so bili ocenjeni po prodajni ceni, ne pa na podlagi stroškov, ki so dejansko nastali za izvajanje projekta.
As the actual costs incurred by the beneficiary could not be provided, this error has been classified as a non-quantifiable error. 
Ta napaka je bila razvrščena med količinsko neopredeljive napake, saj podatkov o dejanskih stroških, ki jih je imel upravičenec, ni bilo mogoče zagotoviti.
SANCO: in the case of a payment concerning the broadcasting of TV advertisements for an anti smoking campaign, the Court found that the Commission had not adequately verified that all the services paid for had actually been delivered. 
SANCO: Sodišče je pri plačilu za predvajanje televizijskih oglasov za protikadilsko kampanjo ugotovilo, da Komisija ni ustrezno preverila, ali so bile vse plačane storitve dejansko opravljene.
Examples FIFG: Within the framework of the closure exercise the Commission will take all the appropriate measures to deduct from the final statement of expenditure and final payment claim the ineligible amount. 
Primera FIUR: V okviru naloge zaključevanja programa bo Komisija sprejela vse ustrezne ukrepe, da od končnega poročila o odhodkih in končnega zahtevka za plačilo odšteje neupravičeni znesek.
SANCO: The Commission services carried out a certain number of checks which provided evidence that the TV advertisements were broadcast. 
SANCO: Službe Komisije so opravile določeno število pregledov, na podlagi katerih so dokazale, da so bili televizijski oglasi predvajani.
Additional controls will be carried out in the future. 
V prihodnje bodo opravljene dodatne kontrole.
3.28. IACSconsists,ineachMemberState,ofdatabasesof holdings, applications, agricultural parcels and where payments are still linked to the number of animals a database of animals, as well as a register of entitlements in those Member States implementing the SPS. 
3.28 IAKS v vsaki državi članici obsega podatkovne zbirke o kmetijskih gospodarstvih, zahtevkih, parcelah kmetijskih zemljišč in, kjer so plačila še vedno povezana s številom živali, podatkovno zbirko o živalih ter register pravic v državah članicah, ki izvajajo SEP.
The system provides for several eligi­ bility controls: an administrative check of all claims, cross-checks with databases to prevent the same land/animals from being claimed twice and a minimum rate of 5 % on-farm inspections to be carried out by the paying agencies. _____________ (25) Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 and Regulation (EC) No 796/2004. 
Sistem predvideva več kontrol v zvezi z upravičenostjo: administrativni pregled vseh zahtevkov, navzkrižna preverjanja v podatkovnih zbirkah za preprečevanje dvojnih zahtevkov za nekatera zemljišča/živali in minimalno 5-odstotno stopnjo za preglede, ki jih na kmetijskih gospodar­ stvih izvajajo plačilne agencije. _____________ (25) Uredba (ES) št. 73/2009 in Uredba (ES) št. 796/2004.
IACScoversSPS,SAPSandallarearelatedcoupled aid schemes as well as animal premia schemes. In the case of EAFRD, and especially for agri-environment and less favoured areas, verification of certain key elements such as surface and number of animals is made through IACS while other requirements are governed by specifically designed controls (26). 
Pri EKSRP, zlasti pri kmetijsko-okoljskih ukrepih in ukrepih za območja z omeje­ nimi možnostmi, se nekateri ključni elementi, kot sta površina in število živali, preverjajo z IAKS, za druge zahteve pa se uporabljajo posebej zanje zasnovane kontrole (26).
3.30. TheCourtassessedeightIACSsystemsunderthe EAGF and eight specific control systems under the EAFRD (see paragraph 3.17). 
3.30 Sodišče je ocenilo osem sistemov IAKS v okviru EKJS in osem posebnih kontrolnih sistemov v okviru EKSRP (glej odstavek 3.17).