natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
EU legislation exempted Malta from the requirement that the claimant has to maintain at least 50 % of the historical animal raising activity in order to receive payment for a special entitlement. 
V zakonodaji EU je Malta izvzeta iz zahteve, da mora vlagatelj ohraniti vsaj 50 % pretekle živinorejske dejavnosti, če hoče prejeti plačilo za posebne pravice.
Malta decided not to set any minimum livestock requirements at national level for activation of special entitlements. 
Malta se je odločila, da za aktiviranje posebnih pravic ne bo postavila spodnje meje za zahteve v zvezi z živino na nacionalni ravni.
Hence, farmers who significantly reduced their herd after the introduction of SPS remain eligible and are paid in full for their special entitlements. 
Tako kmetje, ki so po uvedbi SEP močno zmanjšali svoje črede, ostajajo upravičeni in prejemajo polna plačila za svoje posebne pravice.
Cyprus exceeded the ceiling for EU SAPS aid by 1,44 %. 
Ciper je prekoračil zgornjo mejo za pomoč EU iz SEPP za 1,44 %.
The Cypriot authorities failed to apply a proportional reduction. 
Ciprski organi niso uporabili sorazmernega zmanjšanja.
As a result all individual payments were affected by a 1,44% overpayment although this was financed by national rather than the EU budget. Examples Malta has a significant intensive animal production without land. 
To je posledično vplivalo na vsa posamezna plačila, saj je pri vseh prišlo do 1,44-odstotnega preplačila, kar je bilo sicer financirano iz nacionalnega proračuna in ne proračuna EU.
The Council decided to make a derogation for Malta as concerns the obligation of maintaining at least 50 % of the agricultural activity exercised before the transition to the SPS. 
Svet je odločil, da Malto izvzame iz zahteve, da mora vlagatelj ohraniti vsaj 50 % kmetijske dejavnosti, ki jo je opravljal pred prehodom na SEP.
Cyprus is pursuing this issue as part of the review of the 2008 claims with a view to recovering the amounts concerned. 
Ciper to vprašanje rešuje v okviru pregleda zahtevkov za leto 2008, da bi se izterjali zadevni zneski.
3.41. With regard to the correctness of payments, the Court found substantial deficiencies in one Member State leading to cases of forest claimed as permanent pasture (Greece). 
3.41 V zvezi s pravilnostjo plačil je Sodišče v eni državi članici odkrilo precejšnje pomanjkljivosti, zaradi katerih so bili v nekaterih primerih za gozdne površine vloženi zahtevki za trajne pašnike (Grčija).
Moreover, Greece continues to allow the claimed area to exceed the eligible area of the reference parcel as recorded in the LPIS by applying a tolerance margin of 5 % not foreseen in the regulation. 
Poleg tega Grčija še vedno dopušča, da površine, za katere so bili vloženi zahtevki, presegajo upra­ vičene površine referenčne parcele, kot so evidentirane v LPIS, z uporabo 5-odstotnega dovoljenega odstopanja, ki v uredbi ni predvideno.
This observation was already reported by the Court in 2005. 
O tem opažanju je Sodišče poročalo že leta 2005.
Furthermore, the Court found cases of payments to beneficiaries being made without known anomalies having been resolved (Italy) and without cross-checking the area claimed against the eligible area recorded in LPIS (Spain). 
Poleg tega je Sodišče odkrilo primere plačil upravičencem, ki so bila izvedena brez odprave znanih odstopanj (Italija) in brez navzkrižnih preverjanj površine, za katero je bil vložen zahtevek, in upravičene površine, ki je evidentirana v LPIS (Španija).
In addition, examples were found of systematic incorrect calculation of aid and inadequate application of area and late claim penalties. 
Odkriti pa so bili tudi primeri sistematično nepravil­ nega izračunavanja pomoči in neustrezne uporabe kazni za napačno prijavljene površine in za prepozno vložene zahtevke.
The Italian authorities confirm that prior to making the payments, the regional authorities carry out all administrative controls to verify the eligibility, to resolve anomalies, and to make the results available to the farmers. 
Italijanski organi zatrjujejo, da pred izvedbo plačila regio­ nalni organi opravijo vse administrativne kontrole, v okviru katerih preverijo upravičenost, razrešijo nepravilnosti in rezultate dajo na voljo kmetom.
However, in cases where systems weaknesses which create a risk of undue payments are observed by the Commission, they are followed-up in the clearance of accounts procedure. 
Primeri, v katerih je Komisija ugotovila slabosti sistema, ki ustvarjajo tveganje za neupravičena plačila, pa so obravnavani tudi v postopku za potrditev obračunov.
The Spanish authorities confirm that in claim year 2008, the LPIS-GIS was indeed only used for a part of the cross-checks, but that they have remedied this situation as from claim year 2009. 
3.41 Španski organi potrjujejo, da se je v letu oddaje zahtevkov 2008 LPIS-GIS resnično uporabljal samo za določen del navzkrižnih preverjanj, vendar pa so ta položaj od leta oddaje zahtevkov 2009 izboljšali.
EN 72 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 In Greece, areas recorded as forest in the LPIS were claimed as permanent pasture and benefited from SPS, although the ortho-photos clearly show a significant density of trees and rocks. 
SL 72 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 Primera V Grčiji so bili za površine, ki so v LPIS evidentirane kot gozd, vloženi zahtevki za trajne pašnike, zato so te prejele plačilo iz SEP, čeprav je na orto-foto posnetkih jasno vidna precejšnja gostota dreves in skal.
Furthermore, Greece was found to systematically calculate SPS incorrectly in cases where the area determined is insufficient for payment of all entitlements claimed by the farmer and where these entitlements are of different unit values. 
Poleg tega je bilo ugotovljeno, da je Grčija sistematično nepravilno izračunavala SEP, kadar je bilo ugotovljeno, da je površina premajhna za plačilo vseh pravic, za katere je kmet vložil zahtevek, in kadar imajo te pravice različne vrednosti na enoto.
A similar problem was observed in Malta where in one case the incorrect calculation method led to an overpayment of 69 %. 
Podoben problem je bil opažen na Malti, kjer je nepravilna metoda izračuna v enem primeru povzročila preplačilo v višini 69 %.
In Cyprus overdeclaration penalties provided for in EU legislation were not applied in 2007 and in 2008 they were applied incorrectly. 
Na Cipru se kazni za previsoke prijave, ki so predvidene v zakonodaji EU, leta 2007 niso uporabljale, leta 2008 pa se niso uporabljale pravilno.
Examples The Commission accepts that there were problems with the Greek IACS in the past, however with the new LPIS-GIS in operation the risk has been reduced from claim year 2009. 
Primera Komisija se strinja, da so se v preteklosti pojavile težave z grškim IAKS, vendar se z vzpostavitvijo novega LPIS-GIS to tveganje od leta oddaje zahtevkov 2009 zmanjšuje.
The financial risk for the past is covered by the conformity clearance procedure by which, until now, some 866 million euro has been or is being excluded from EU financing. The Commission shares the observations of the Court. 
Finančno tveganje za preteklost je zajeto v postopku potrditve skladnosti, v katerem je bilo do zdaj iz financiranja EU izvzetih ali je v postopku izvzema približno 866 milijonov EUR. Komisija se strinja z ugotovitvami Sodišča.
The Greek authorities have stated they will remedy the problem. 
Grški organi so zatrdili, da bodo težavo odpravili.
This is however, an issue with limited impact. 
Vendar je učinek tega omejen.
The same can be said with regard to the Maltese case, which affects a total of 519 farmers or an area of 203 hectares. 
Enako lahko trdimo za malteški primer, ki je vplival na skupno 519 kmetov oziroma na območje 203 hektarov.
The Commission is aware of the situation for 2007 and Cyprus has assessed its financial impact during the review of the 2007 claims. 
Komisija se zaveda položaja, ki je nastal v letu 2007, Ciper pa je ocenil njegov finančni učinek med pregledom zahtevkov za leto 2007.
With regard to 2008 claim year, the Cypriot authorities confirmed that the procedure was amended. 
V zvezi z letom oddaje zahtevkov 2008 so ciprski organi potrdili, da je bil postopek spremenjen.
E A FR D 3.42. Administrativechecksconcernthecorrectnessofthe declarations made by the claimant and the fulfilment of the eligibility requirements for the granting of the aid (28). 
E K S RP 3.42 Administrativni pregledi se nanašajo na pravilnost zahtevkov vlagateljev in izpolnjevanje zahtev za upravičenost do odobritve pomoči (28).
Such controls include cross-checks with data already available to the administration, for example in the IACS databases. 3.43. 
Te kontrole obsegajo navzkrižna preverjanja s podatki, ki so organom že na voljo, na primer v podatkovnih zbirkah IAKS.
Theauditfounderrorsinthedeterminationofthe exchange rate used to convert to euro amounts of aid paid in national currencies (United-Kingdom, Czech Republic), and weaknesses in the calculation of aid reductions following on-the-spot checks (Germany (Bavaria)). 
3.43 Pri reviziji so bile odkrite napake pri določanju menjalnega tečaja, ki je bil uporabljen za pretvorbo zneskov plačane pomoči iz EUR v nacionalne valute (Združeno kralje­ stvo, Češka), in slabosti pri izračunu znižanja pomoči po pregledih na kraju samem (Nemčija (Bavarska)).
3.43. The Court’s observation regarding Germany (Bavaria) does not affect the EU budget because the reduction of the part of the aid paid from the EU budget was correctly calculated. 
3.43 Ugotovitve Sodišča glede Nemčije (Bavarska) ne vplivajo na proračun EU, saj je bilo zmanjšanje dela pomoči, izplačanega iz proračuna EU, pravilno izračunano.
The financial impact of these errors was already corrected in subsequent declarations of expenditure (Czech Republic, United Kingdom) or is being followed under conformity clearance procedures. 
Finančni učinek teh napak je bil že popravljen v poznejših izjavah o odhodkih (Češka, Združeno kraljestvo) ali pa se spremlja v okviru postopkov potrditve skladnosti.
Moreover, these amounts in relation to the payments executed can be assessed as negligible (far below 1 %). 
Poleg tega lahko ocenimo, da so ti zneski glede na izvršena plačila zanemarljivi (precej pod 1 %).
EN 9.11.2010 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 73 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S (II) Control systems based on on-the-spot checks 3.44. The Member States must, each year, carry out on-the-spot checks covering for most aid schemes at least 5 % of all beneficiaries (29). 
SL 9.11.2010 UradnilistEvropskeunije 73 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A II) Kontrolni sistemi, ki temeljijo na pregledih na kraju samem 3.44 Države članice morajo vsako leto opraviti preglede na kraju samem, ki morajo za večino shem pomoči zajeti vsaj 5 % vseh upravičencev (29).
The Court’s audit focussed on the adequacy of risk analysis procedures to select beneficiaries for such checks, the quality of the checks and the adequacy of the corrections made. 
Revizija, ki jo je izvedlo Sodišče, je bila usmerjena na ustreznost postopkov za analizo tveganja pri izbiri upravičencev za takšne preglede, kakovost pregledov in primernost izvedenih popravkov.
The Court’s audit revealed specific weaknesses in the on-the-spot checks. 
Revizija, ki jo je opravilo Sodišče, je pokazala nekatere slabosti pri pregledih na kraju samem.
3.45. InEAGF,theCourtidentifiedcasesofincorrectappli­ cation of measurement tolerances (Malta, Italy), inadequate quality and insufficient coverage of on-the-spot inspections (Greece). 
3.45 Pri EKJS je Sodišče ugotovilo primere nepravilne uporabe tolerance pri meritvah (Malta, Italija) ter neustrezne kakovosti in nezadostnega obsega inšpekcijskih pregledov na kraju samem (Grčija).
T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S 3.46. InEAFRD,theCourtfoundweaknessesconcerning precision and completeness of control reports (Germany (Bavaria), Romania), the global evaluation of the results of the controls (Bulgaria) and the respect of deadlines for reporting to the Commission on the controls carried out (Germany (Bavaria), France). 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E 3.46 Pri EKSRP je Sodišče odkrilo slabosti v zvezi z nata­ nčnostjo in popolnostjo poročil o kontroli (Nemčija (Bavarska), Romunija), skupnim ovrednotenjem rezultatov kontrol (Bolga­ rija) in spoštovanjem rokov za poročanje Komisiji o izvedenih kontrolah (Nemčija (Bavarska), Francija).
CrosscompliancerequirementsconsistofStatutory management requirements (SMRs) and GAEC standards (see paragraph 3.7). Whilst SMRs are specified in various EU Directives and regulations, GAEC standards are to be defined at national level. _____________ (29) Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 1975/2006 and Article 26 of 3.46. 
Predpisane zahteve ravnanja so določene v različnih direktivah in uredbah EU, standarde za dobre kmetijske in okoljske pogoje pa je treba opredeliti na nacionalni ravni. _____________(29) Člen 12 Uredbe (ES) št.
The weaknesses referred to by the Court concern an ancillary control rather than a key control. 
3.46 Slabosti, ki jih navaja Sodišče, se nanašajo bolj na pomožno kot na ključno kontrolo.
As regards reporting deadlines, the information was transmitted to the Commission sufficiently in time to be taken into account in Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development’s Annual Activity Report for 2009. Regulation (EC) No 796/2004. 
V zvezi z roki za poročanje lahko rečemo, da so bile informacije Komisiji posredovane dovolj zgodaj, tako da jih je Generalni direktorat za kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja lahko upošteval v svojem letnem poročilu o delu za leto 2009.
According to the Maltese authorities corrective measures have been taken for 2008 and applied for 2009 as well. 
3.45 Po navedbah malteških organov so bili za leto 2008 sprejeti popravni ukrepi, ki so se uporabili tudi v letu 2009.
The Italian authorities confirmed that they applied the correct procedures for application of tolerances in claim year 2009. 3.45. 
Italijanski organi so zagotovili, da so uporabili pravilne postopke za uporabo toleranc v letu oddaje zahtevkov 2009.
Example In Greece, the audit found that on-the-spot inspections did not always meet the legal requirement to measure at least 50 % of parcels and grassland was generally not or only visually inspected. 
Primer V Grčiji je bilo pri reviziji ugotovljeno, da inšpekcijski pregledi na kraju samem niso vedno izpolnili zakonske zahteve, v skladu s katero bi bilo treba izmeriti vsaj 50 % parcel, travišč pa običajno niso preverjali ali pa so jih preverili samo vizualno.
In several cases examined by the Court, claimed parcels which according to the ortho-photos consisted of forest or bushland were not included in the sample of parcels inspected on the spot. 
V več primerih, ki jih je pregledalo Sodišče, parcele, za katere so bili vloženi zahtevki, ki so bile glede na orto-foto posnetke poraščene z gozdovi ali grmovjem, niso bile vključene v vzorec parcel, za katerega so se izvedli inšpekcijski pregledi na kraju samem.
In addition, in several inspection reports analysed by the Court the geographical coordinates reported for the parcel measured on the spot did not match with the locations of the digitised parcel in the LPIS-GIS (different locations, different uses, different shape and perimeter). 
Poleg tega so bile v več poročilih o inšpekcijskih pregledih, ki jih je analiziralo Sodišče, za parcele, ki so bile izmerjene na kraju samem, navedene geografske koordinate, ki se niso ujemale z lokacijami digitaliziranih parcel v LPIS-GIS (različne lokacije, različna uporaba, različna oblika in obseg).
Example The Commission accepts that there were problems with the Greek IACS in the past, however with the new LPIS-GIS in operation the risk has been reduced from claim year 2009. 
Primer Komisija se strinja, da so se v preteklosti pojavile težave z grškim IAKS, vendar se z vzpostavitvijo novega LPIS-GIS to tveganje od leta oddaje zahtevkov 2009 zmanjšuje.
The financial risk for the past is covered under the conformity clearance procedure by which, until now, some 866 million euro has been or is being excluded from EU financing. 
Finančno tveganje za preteklost je zajeto v postopku potrditve skladnosti, v katerem je bilo do zdaj iz financiranja EU izvzetih ali je v postopku izvzema približno 866 milijonov EUR.
3.49. Duringitson-the-spotvisitstheCourtobserved,on the basis of the limited audit (see paragraph 3.17, third indent) cross compliance infringements in around 5% of the payments subject to cross compliance obligations. 
3.49 Sodišče je med obiskom na kraju samem na podlagi omejene revizije (glej tretjo alineo odstavka 3.17) opazilo kršitve navzkrižne skladnosti pri približno 5 % plačil, za katera veljajo obveznosti v zvezi z navzkrižno skladnostjo.
The infringements observed related to both SMRs (groundwater pollution, registration of animals, animal welfare, improper use of plant protection products), and GAEC (encroachment of unwanted vegetation). 
Opažene kršitve so se nanašale na predpisane zahteve ravnanja (onesna­ ževanje podzemne vode, registracijo živali, dobro počutje živali, nepravilno uporabo fitofarmacevtskih sredstev) in dobre kmetijske in okoljske pogoje (širitev nezaželene vege­ tacije).
Systems related to recoveries and financial corrections Recovery of old debts 3.50. 50%ofanyunduepaymentwhichtheMemberStates have not recovered from the beneficiaries within four years, or within 8 years in the case of legal proceedings, will be auto­ matically charged to their national budget (30) (so called 50/50 rule) (31). 
Sistemi v zvezi z izterjavami in finančnimi popravki Izterjava starih dolgov 3.50 50% vsakega neupravičenega plačila, ki ga države članice od upravičencev ne izterjajo v štirih letih, ali v osmih letih v primeru sodnih postopkov, samodejno bremeni nacio­ nalni proračun te države članice (30) (tako imenovano pravilo pol-pol) (31).
Member States are obliged to continue their recovery procedures. 
Države članice pa morajo nadaljevati svoje postopke izterjatve.
In 2009, the 50/50 rule was applied (32), hence amounts not recovered dating from 2000 or 2004 were cleared (eight and four years old respectively): 31,4 million euro was charged to the Member States while 20,1 million euro was borne by the EU budget. _____________ (30) Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005. 
Leta 2009 se je uporabljalo pravilo pol-pol (32), zato so bili potrjeni obračuni neizterjanih zneskov iz obdobja 2000–2004 (stari osem let oz. štiri leta): 31,4 mili­ jona EUR je bilo zaračunanih državam članicam, 20,1 milijona EUR pa proračunu EU.
(31) Undue payments which result from administrative errors committed by national Authorities are excluded from EU financing. 
(31) Neupravičena plačila, ki so posledica administrativnih napak nacio­ nalnih organov, so izvzeta iz financiranja EU.
(32) Commission Decision 2009/367/EC (OJ L 111, 5.5.2009, p. 
(32) Odločba Komisije 2009/367/ES (UL L 111, 5.5.2009, str.
The Commission points out that the amount of 20,1 million euro was borne by the EU budget for reasons of insolvency of the debtor and, thus irrecoverable before the 4-8 year deadline had elapsed. 
3.50 Komisija poudarja, da je znesek 20,1 milijona EUR nosil proračun EU zaradi plačilne nesposobnosti dolžnika, zato znesek ni izterljiv pred rokom 4–8 let.
EN 9.11.2010 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 75 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S 3.51. In its Annual Activity Report 2009 (33), DG AGRI reports having achieved by the end of financial year 2009 an overall recovery rate of 42 % of the 1 266 million euro outstanding at the end of financial year 2006. 
SL 9.11.2010 UradnilistEvropskeunije 75 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A 3.51 GD AGRI v svojem letnem poročilu o dejavnostih za leto 2009 (33) poroča, da je do konca proračunskega leta 2009 dosegel splošno stopnjo izterjave v višini 42 % od neporav­ nanih 1266 milijonov EUR na koncu proračunskega leta 2006.
According to the Commission, in the period 2007-2009 Member States recovered 121 million euro directly from beneficiaries and an additional 411 million euro was recovered from the Member States by the Commission applying the 50/50 rule. 
Po podatkih Komisije so države članice v obdobju 2007–2009 neposredno od upravičencev izterjale 121 mili­ jonov EUR, dodatnih 411 milijonov EUR pa je Komisija z uporabo pravila pol-pol izterjala od držav članic.
The Court observes that the 121 million euro recovered from the beneficiaries corresponded to less than 10 % of the total recoveries. 
Sodišče ugotavlja, da 121 milijonov EUR, ki so bili izterjani od upra­ vičencev, ustreza manj kot 10 % skupnih izterjav.
The Commission’s clearance of accounts procedures 3.52. Asthemanagementofexpenditureonagricultureis, in the main, shared between Member States and the Commission, aid is paid by the Member States, which are then reimbursed by the Commission (34). 
Postopki Komisije za potrditev obračunov 3.52 Glede na to, da se za upravljanje odhodkov za kmetij­ stvo v glavnem uporablja deljeno upravljanje med državami članicami in Komisijo, pomoč izplačajo države članice, Komi­ sija pa jim nato povrne sredstva (34).
The final recognition of expenditure is determined through a two-stage procedure called the clearance of accounts. 
Odhodki so dokončno sprejeti v dvostopenjskem postopku, ki se imenuje potrditev obračunov.
The two stages consist of an annual financial decision and multi-annual conformity decisions taken by the Commission. 
Ti stopnji sta sprejetje sklepa o letni finančni potrditvi in sprejetje večletnih odločb o skladnosti, ki jih sprejme Komisija.
On 30 April 2010 the Commission took three financial clearance decisions for the expenditure made under EAGF, EAFRD and TRDI and cleared all paying agencies accounts, except those shown in Annex 3.5. 
F i n a n č n a p o t r d i t e v o b r a č u n o v z a pr o r a č u n s k o let o 2 0 0 9 3.53 Komisija je 30. aprila 2010 sprejela tri sklepe o finan­ čni potrditvi obračunov za odhodke iz EKJS, EKSRP in ZIRP ter potrdila obračune vseh plačilnih agencij, razen tistih iz Priloge 3.5.
These decisions are mainly based on certificates provided by independent auditors (certification bodies). 
Ti sklepi temeljijo na potrdilih, ki so jih zagotovili neod­ visni revizorji (certifikacijski organi).
The Court’s audit did not detect expenditure incorrectly cleared in the financial clearance decisions. 3.54. 
Sodišče med revizijo ni odkrilo nepravilno potrjenih odhodkov v sklepih o finančni potrditvi.
TheCourtnotedshortcomingsinthelastthreeyears regarding the reliability of the debtors’ accounts. For financial year 2009 the Commission has initiated financial corrections in respect of 13 paying agencies in 10 Member States for 14,8 million euro, representing some 1,43 % of the 1 037 million euro that were to be recovered at the end of financial year 2009. _____________ (33) DG AGRI Annual Activity Report 2009, p. 
Komisija je za proračunsko leto 2009 v desetih državah članicah pri 13 plačilnih agencijah uvedla finančne popravke v višini 14,8 milijona EUR, kar je približno 1,43 % zneska 1 037 milijonov EUR, ki ga je bilo treba izterjati na koncu proračunskega leta 2009. _____________ (33) Letno poročilo o dejavnostih GD AGRI za leto 2009, str.
(34) On a monthly basis for EAGF and a quarterly basis for EAFRD. 
(34) Mesečno za EKJS in vsako četrtletje za EKSRP.
T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S 3.51. Recovery procedures are often delayed by lengthy proceedings in the national courts which, according to the principle of shared management, as defined in Article 53b(2)(c) of the Financial Regu­ lation and Article 9(1)(a)(iii) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005, are the sole responsibility of Member States. 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E 3.51 Postopki izterjave so pogosto dolgotrajni zaradi dolgih postopkov pred nacionalnimi sodišči, ki so v skladu z načelom delje­ nega upravljanja v izključni pristojnosti držav članic, kot je oprede­ ljeno v členu 53b(2)(c) finančne uredbe in členu 9(1)(a)(iii) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št.