natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission monitors those commitments, which need to be de-committed. _____________ (39) Outstanding budgetary commitments arise as a direct consequence of differentiated expenditure, where expenditure programmes take a number of years to be completed and commitments are made in earlier years before the corresponding payments. 
Komisija nadzoruje obveznosti, ki jih je treba razveljaviti. _____________ (39) Neporavnane proračunske obveznosti nastanejo kot neposredna posledica diferenciranih odhodkov, pri katerih programi odhodkov potekajo več let, obveznosti pa so sprejete v letih pred ustreznimi plačili.
As commitments are liquidated by payments, the long-term effect of commitments significantly exceeding payments results in an inevitable build up of outstanding commitments, with the situation being rolled forward each year. 
Ker se obveznosti likvidirajo s plačili in ker obveznosti močno presegajo plačila, je dolgoročni učinek ta, da se neizogibno naberejo neporavnane obveznosti, to stanje pa se vsako leto prenese v naslednje leto.
(40) The budget distinguishes between two types of appropriation: non-differentiated appropriations and differentiated appropriations. 
(40) Proračun razlikuje med dvema vrstama odobrenih proračunskih sredstev: nediferenciranimi sredstvi in diferenciranimi sredstvi.
Non-differentiated appropriations are used to finance operations of an annual nature, e.g. administrative expenditure. 
Nediferencirana sredstva se uporabljajo za financiranje dejavnosti letne narave, npr. upravnih odhodkov.
Differentiated appropriations were introduced to manage multiannual operations, the related payments can be made during the year of the commitment and during the following years. 
S tem povezana plačila je mogoče izvršiti v letu sprejetja obveznosti in v naslednjih letih.
Differentiated appro­ priations are used mainly for the structural funds and the Cohesion Fund. 
Diferencirana sredstva se uporabljajo predvsem za strukturne sklade in Kohezijski sklad.
In this field, outstanding commitments amounted to 128billion euro(41) (around 66 % of the total amount), representing 2,6 years worth of commitments or 3,4 years worth of payments in that area at the 2010 spending rate. 
Na tem področju so neporavnane obveznosti znašale 128 milijard EUR (41) (približno 66 % skup­ nega zneska), kar predstavlja obveznosti v vrednosti 2,6 leta ali plačila v vrednosti 3,4 leta na tem področju pri stopnji porabe za leto 2010.
The vast majority of these outstanding commitments (113,2 billion euro or 88 % of the total amount) refers to the current period 2007-2013. 
Velika večina teh neporavnanih obveznosti (113,2 milijarde EUR ali 88 % skupnega zneska) se nanaša na sedanje obdobje 2007–2013.
This shows the impact of the efforts to settle outstanding commitments by payments prior to the application of the automatic decommitment rule (n + 2 rule/n + 3 rule (42)). _____________ (41) For Cohesion see ‘Report on budgetary and financial management accompanying the Community accounts — Financial year 2010’, pp. 23, 36-41. 
To kaže učinek prizadevanj, da se plačila izvršijo, preden se za neporavnane proračunske obveznosti uporabi pravilo samodejnega prenehanja (pravilo n + 2/pravilo n + 3 (42)). _____________ (41) Za kohezijo glej „Poročilo o upravljanju proračuna in finančnem poslovodenju, ki spremlja računovodske izkaze Skupnosti, v prora­ čunskem letu 2010“, str.
(42) The n + 2/n + 3 deadline requires automatic decommitment of all funds not spent or not covered by a payment request by the end of the second/third year following the year of allocation. 
(42) Rok n + 2/n + 3 zahteva samodejno prenehanje prevzetih obvez­ nosti za vsa sredstva, ki niso porabljena ali zajeta v zahtevek za plačilo do konca drugega/tretjega leta po letu dodelitve.
As part of the ‘third simplification’ package, the n + 2/n + 3 rule was last amended for the 2007 commitments in Cohesion (see Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, amended by Regulation (EU) No 539/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 158, 24.6.2010, p. 
Pravilo n + 2/n + 3 je bilo kot del tretjega paketa poenostavitev nazadnje spremenjeno za obveznosti za leto 2007 na področju kohezije (glej Uredbo (ES) št.1083/2006, kakor je bila spremenjena z Uredbo (EU) št. 539/2010 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta (UL L 158, 24.6.2010, str.
However, this had no significant impact on the utilisation rate of payment appropriations. 
Vendar to ni bistveno vplivalo na stopnjo porabe odobritev plačil.
EN 10.11.2011 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 33 ANNEX 1.1 AUDIT APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY PART 1 — Audit approach and methodology for the reliability of accounts 1. 
SL 10.11.2011 UradnilistEvropskeunije 33 PRILOGA 1.1 REVIZIJSKI PRISTOP IN METODOLOGIJA DEL 1 – Revizijski pristop in metodologija za zanesljivost računovodskih izkazov 1.
2. Theauditconsistsofthefollowingbasicelements: (a) an update of the evaluation of the accounting control environment; (b) checking of the functioning of key accounting procedures and the year end closure process; (c) analytical checks (consistency and reasonableness) on the main accounting data; (d) analyses and reconciliations of accounts and/or balances; and (e) substantive tests of commitments, payments and specific balance sheet items based on representative samples. 
2. Revizijavsebujenaslednjeosnovneelemente: (a) posodobljeno oceno okolja računovodskega kontroliranja; (b) pregled delovanja ključnih računovodskih postopkov in procesa zaključevanja ob koncu leta; (c) analitične preglede (doslednost in razumnost) glavnih računovodskih podatkov; (d) analize in uskladitve računovodskih izkazov in/ali saldov ter (e) preizkušanje podatkov na podlagi reprezentativnih vzorcev za prevzete obveznosti, plačila in posamezne bilančne postavke.
The approach taken by the Court to audit the regularity of the transactions underlying the accounts comprises: — direct testing of transactions in each revenue or spending area (see Table 1.1) in order to ascertain how far they are regular, and — an assessment of the effectiveness of supervisory and control systems ensuring the regularity of transactions. 
Pristop Sodišča k revidiranju pravilnosti z računovodskimi izkazi povezanih transakcij vsebuje: — neposredno preizkušanje transakcij na vsakem področju prihodkov ali porabe (glej tabelo 1.1), da se ugotovi, v kolikšni meri so pravilne, in — ocenjevanje uspešnosti nadzornih in kontrolnih sistemov, ki zagotavljajo pravilnost transakcij.
This is supplemented by evidence provided by the work of other auditors (where relevant) and an analysis of Commission management representations. 
Todopolnjujejodokazi,pridobljeniprideludrugihrevizorjev(kjerjeustrezno),inanalizaposlovodskihpredstavitev Komisije.
The direct testing of transactions within each specific assessment (Chapters 2 to 7) is based on a representative sample of the receipts (in the case of revenue) and payments contained within the policy group concerned (2). 
Neposrednopreizkušanjetransakcijzavsakoposebnooceno(poglavja2do7)temeljinareprezentativnem vzorcu prejetih zneskov (v primeru prihodkov) in plačil za ustrezno skupino politik (2).
This testing provides a statistical estimation of the extent to which the transactions in the population concerned are irregular. 
S tem preizkušanjem se stati­ stično oceni, kolikšna je nepravilnost transakcij v posamezni populaciji.
(2) Additionally to this, a horizontal representative sample of commitments is drawn and tested for compliance with the relevant rules and regulations. 
(2) Poleg tega se sestavi horizontalni reprezentativni vzorec obveznosti, ki se preizkusi za skladnost z ustreznimi pravili in predpisi.
In order to determine the sample sizes necessary to produce a reliable result, the Court uses an audit assurance model. 
Sodišče za določitev velikosti vzorcev, potrebnih za zagotovitev zanesljivih rezultatov, uporablja model revizij­ skega zagotovila.
This involves an assessment of the risk of errors occurring in transactions (inherent risk) and the risk that the systems do not prevent or detect and correct such errors (control risk). 
Pri tem oceni, kakšno je tveganje, da se v transakcijah pojavijo napake (tveganje pri delovanju) in da sistemi teh napak ne preprečijo ali odkrijejo in popravijo (tveganje pri kontroliranju).
Transaction testing involves a detailed check of each transaction selected by the samples, including determination of whether or not the claim or payment was correctly calculated and in compliance with the relevant rules and regulations. 
Med preizkušanjem transakcij se podrobno pregledajo vse izbrane transakcije v vzorcu, kar vključuje ugotavljanje, ali je bil zahtevek ali plačilo izračunan pravilno in v skladu z ustreznimi pravili in predpisi.
The Court samples the transactions recorded in the budgetary accounts and traces the payment down to the level of the final recipient (e.g. farmer, organiser of training course, or development aid project promoter) and tests compliance at each level. 
Sodišče izbere vzorec transakcij, evidentiranih v proračunskih računovodskih izkazih, sledi plačilu do ravni končnega prejemnika (npr. kmeta, organizatorja tečaja usposabljanja ali nosilca projekta razvojne pomoči) in na vsaki ravni preizkusi skladnost.
When the transaction (at any level) is incorrectly calculated or does not meet a regulatory requirement or contractual provision, it is considered to contain an error. 
Če tran­ sakcija (na kateri koli ravni) ni pravilno izračunana ali če ne izpolnjuje katere od zakonskih zahtev ali pogodbenih določb, se šteje, da vsebuje napako.
Errors in individual transactions do not always affect the total amount paid. 
Napake v posameznih transakcijah ne vplivajo vedno na skupni izplačani znesek.
TheCourtclassifieserrorsasfollows: — whether they are quantifiable or non-quantifiable, depending on whether it is possible to measure how much of the amount paid or received from the EU budget was affected by error, and — in terms of their nature, in particular eligibility (payment does not meet the eligibility rules), occurrence (reimbursement of a cost which is not proven to have been incurred) or accuracy (payment incorrectly calculated). 
Sodiščenapakerazvrščagledena: — to, ali so količinsko opredeljive ali količinsko neopredeljive, kar je odvisno od tega, ali je mogoče izmeriti, na kolikšen del zneska, plačanega ali prejetega iz proračuna EU, je vplivala napaka, ter — njihovo naravo, zlasti upravičenost (plačilo ni v skladu s pravili za upravičenost), nastanek (povračilo stroška, za katerega ni dokazano, da je dejansko nastal) ali točnost (plačilo ni pravilno izračunano).
Public procurement is one area where the Court often finds errors. 
Oddaje javnih naročil so eno od področij, na katerem Sodišče pogosto odkrije napake.
EU public procurement law consists essentially of a series of procedural requirements. 
Zakonodaja EU o oddaji javnih naročil je pravzaprav niz postopkovnih zahtev.
To ensure the basic principle of competition foreseen in the Treaty the contracts have to be advertised; bids must be evaluated according to specified criteria; contracts may not be artificially split to get below thresholds, etc. 11. 
Za zagotovitev osnovnega načela konkurence, predvidenega v Pogodbi, je treba oddajo javnega naročila objaviti; ponudbe je treba oceniti po določenih merilih; pogodb se ne sme umetno razdeliti, da bi bile pod pragovi, itd. 11.
For its audit purposes the Court puts a value on failure to observe a procedural requirement. 
Sodišče za svoje revizijske namene ovrednoti neupoštevanje postopkovne zahteve.
The Court: (a) regards as ‘serious’ those errors which frustrate the objectives of the public procurement rules: fair competition and award of the contract to the best qualified bidder (3); (b) quantifies the impact of “serious” infringements of the public procurement rules as affecting the entire value of the payment related to the contract — a 100 % quantifiable error (4); (c) treats less serious errors which do not affect the outcome of the tendering procedure as non-quantifiable errors (5). 
Sodišče: (a) kot „resne“ napake oceni tiste, ki so v nasprotju s cilji pravil za oddajo javnega naročila: pošteno konkurenco in oddajo naročila najboljšemu ponudniku (3); (b) količinsko opredeli učinek „resnih“ kršitev pravil za oddajo javnega naročila, kot vplivajo na celotno vrednost plačila, povezanega s pogodbo – 100 % količinsko opredeljiva napaka (4); (c) obravnava manj resne napake, ki ne vplivajo na izid razpisnega postopka, kot količinsko neopredeljive napake (5).
The quantification by the Court may differ from that used by the Commission or Member States when deciding how to respond to misapplication of the public procurement rules. 
Količinska opredelitev Sodišča se lahko razlikuje od količinske opredelitve Komisije ali držav članic, ko se odločajo o odzivu na napačno rabo pravil za oddajo javnega naročila.
The Court expresses the frequency by which errors occur by presenting the proportion of the sample affected by quantifiable and non-quantifiable errors. 
Sodišče izrazi pogostost pojavljanja napak tako, da predstavi delež vzorca, na katerega vplivajo količinsko opredeljive in neopredeljive napake.
This indicates how widespread errors are likely to be within the policy group as a whole. 
To pokaže, kakšna je verjetna razširjenost napak v skupini politik kot celoti.
This information is given in Annexes x.1 to Chapters 2 to 7 when material error is present. 
Te informacije so navedene v prilogah x.1 k poglavjem 2 do 7, kadar obstaja pomembna stopnja napake.
On the basis of the errors which it has quantified, the Court, using standard statistical techniques, estimates the most likely rate of error (MLE) in each specific assessment and for spending from the budget as whole. 
Sodišče na podlagi napak, ki jih je količinsko opredelilo, s standardnimi statističnimi tehnikami oceni najverjet­ nejšo stopnjo napake (MLE) v vsaki posebni oceni in za proračunsko porabo kot celoto.
The MLE is the weighted average of the percentage error rates found in the sample (6). 
Najverjetnejša stopnja napake je ponderirano povprečje odstotkovnih stopenj napake, ugotovljenih v vzorcu (6).
The Court also estimates, again using standard statistical techniques, the range within which it is 95 % confident that the rate of error for the population lies in each specific assessment (and for spending as whole). 
S standardnimi statističnimi tehnikami oceni tudi razpon, za katerega je s 95-odstotno gotovostjo prepričano, da v njem leži stopnja napake v populaciji vsake posebne ocene (in porabe kot celote).
This is the range between the lower error limit (LEL) and the upper error limit (UEL) (7) (see illustration below). 
To je razpon med spodnjo mejo napake (LEL) in zgornjo mejo napake (UEL) (7) (glej spodnji prikaz).
(3) There are essentially two award systems: the lowest offer or the most advantageous offer. 
(3) V bistvu obstajata dva sistema za oddajo: najnižja ponudba ali najugodnejša ponudba.
(4) Examples of a quantifiable error: no or restricted competition (except where this is explicitly allowed by the legal framework) for the main or a supplementary contract; inappropriate assessment of bids with an impact on the outcome of the tender; substantial change of the contract scope; splitting of the contracts for different construction sites, which fulfil the same economical function. 
(4) Primeri količinsko opredeljivih napak: nobene konkurence ali omejena konkurenca za glavno ali dodatno pogodbo (razen kadar pravni okvir to izrecno dovoljuje); neustrezno ocenjevanje ponudb, ki vpliva na izid javnega razpisa; velike spremembe obsega pogodbe; delitev pogodb za različna gradbišča, ki izpolnjujejo enako gospodarsko funkcijo.
The Court applies in general a different approach to misapplication of the public purchasing directives by the EU institutions, on the grounds that the contracts concerned generally still remain valid. 
Sodišče na splošno uporablja drugačen pristop k napačni uporabi direktiv o javnem naročanju v institucijah EU, ker pogodbe običajno še vedno ostanejo veljavne.
Such errors are not quantified in the DAS. 
Takšne napake v DAS niso količinsko opredeljene.
(5) Examples of a non-quantifiable error: inappropriate assessment of bids without impact on the outcome of the tender, formal weak­ nesses of tender procedure or tender specification, formal aspects of the transparency requirements not respected. 
(5) Primeri količinsko neopredeljivih napak: neustrezno ocenjevanje ponudb, ki ne vpliva na izid javnega razpisa, formalne slabosti v razpisnem postopku ali razpisnih specifikacijah, nespoštovanje formalnih vidikov zahtev o preglednosti.
(6) MLE 1⁄4 1 × ΣiÊASIi× error amounti Ì, where ASI is the average sampling interval and i is the numbering of transactions in the ΣASI audited amounti sample. 
(6) MLE 1⁄4 1 × ΣiÊASIi× znesek napakei Ì, kjer je ASI povprečni vzorčni interval, i pa številčenje transakcij v vzorcu.
(7) LEL 1⁄4 MLE – tn;95 % × psffiffi and UEL 1⁄4 MLE þ tn;95 % × psffiffi, where t is the t-distribution factor, n is the sample size and s is the nn standard deviation of the percentage errors. EN 10.11.2011 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 35 14. 
ΣASI revidiran zneseki (7) LEL 1⁄4 MLE – tn;95 % × psffiffi in UEL 1⁄4 MLE þ tn;95 % × psffiffi, kjer je t faktor t-porazdelitve, n je velikost vzorca in s je standardni nn odklon stopenj napake v odstotkih.
The percentage of the shaded area below the curve indicates the probability that the true error rate of the population is between the LEL and the UEL. 
Delež osenčenega območja pod krivuljo prikazuje verjetnost, da je resnična stopnja napake v populaciji med spodnjo mejo napake (LEL) in zgornjo mejo napake (UEL).
In planning its audit work, the Court seeks to undertake procedures allowing it to compare the estimated rate of error in the population with a planning materiality of 2 %. 
Sodišče skuša pri načrtovanju svojega revizijskega dela izvesti postopke, ki mu omogočajo primerjavo ocenjene stopnje napake v populaciji s pri načrtovanju določeno pomembnostjo v višini 2 %.
In assessing audit results, the Court is guided by this level of materiality and takes account of the nature, amount and context of errors when forming its audit opinion. 
Ta stopnja pomembnosti ga vodi pri ocenjevanju revizijskih rezultatov, pri oblikovanju svojega revizijskega mnenja pa upošteva naravo, znesek in kontekst napak.
How the Court assesses systems and reports the results 16. 
Kako Sodišče ocenjuje sisteme in poroča o rezultatih 16.
Supervisory and control systems are established by the Commission and member and beneficiary states in the case of shared or decentralised management, to manage the risks to the budget, including the regularity of transactions. 
Komisija, pri deljenem ali decentraliziranem upravljanju pa tudi države članice in države upravičenke, vzpostavi nadzorne in kontrolne sisteme za obvladovanje tveganj za proračun, vključno s pravilnostjo transakcij.
Assessing the effectiveness of systems in ensuring regularity is therefore a key audit procedure, and particularly useful for identifying recommendations for improvement. 
Ocenjevanje uspešnosti sistemov pri zagotavljanju pravilnosti je zato ključni revizijski postopek, ki je zlasti koristen za pripravo priporočil za izboljšave.
Eachpolicygroupissubjecttoamultitudeofindividualsystems,likewiserevenue.TheCourtthereforenormally selects a sample of systems to assess each year. 
Zato Sodišče običajno vsako leto izbere vzorec sistemov, ki ga oceni.
The results of the systems assessments are presented in the form of a table called ‘Results of examination of systems’ given in Annexes x.2 to Chapters 2 to 7. 
Rezultati ocenjevanja sistemov so predstavljeni v obliki tabele z naslovom „Rezultati preverjanja sistemov“, ki je v prilogah x.2 k poglavjem 2 do 7.
Systems are classified as being effective in mitigating the risk of error in transactions, partially effective (when there are some weaknesses affecting oper­ ational effectiveness) or not effective (when weaknesses are pervasive and thereby completely undermine operating effec­ tiveness). 
Sistemi so razvrščeni kot uspešni pri blaženju tveganja napak v transakcijah, delno uspešni (kadar obstajajo nekatere slabosti, ki vplivajo na operativno uspeš­ nost) ali neuspešni, (kadar so slabosti zelo razširjene in zato v celoti ogrožajo operativno uspešnost).
In addition and when supported by evidence, the Court provides an overall assessment of systems for the policy group (also provided in Annexes x.2 to Chapters 2 to 7), which takes into account both the assessment of selected systems, as well as the results of transaction testing. 
Če so bili pridobljeni dokazi, Sodišče poleg tega poda skupno oceno sistemov za skupino politik (tudi ta je predstavljena v prilogah x.2 k poglavjem 2 do 7), v kateri so upoštevani ocena izbranih sistemov in rezultati preizkušanja transakcij.
How the Court assesses Commission management representations and reports the results 19. 
Kako Sodišče ocenjuje poslovodske predstavitve Komisije in poroča o rezultatih 19.
Asrequiredbyinternationalauditingstandards,theCourtobtainsaletterofrepresentationfromtheCommission, confirming that the Commission has fulfilled its responsibilities, and disclosed all information that could be relevant to the auditor. 
Sodišče v skladu z mednarodnimi standardi revidiranja od Komisije prejme pismo s poslovodskimi predstavitvami, ki potrjuje, da je Komisija izpolnila svoje odgovornosti in razkrila vse informacije, ki bi lahko bile pomembne za revizorja.
This includes confirmation that the Commission has disclosed all information in respect to the assessment of the risk of fraud, all information in respect to fraud or suspected fraud of which the Commission is aware, and all material instances of non-compliance with laws and regulation. 
To zajema potrditev, da je Komisija razkrila vse informacije o oceni tveganja goljufije, vse informacije, ki so ji na voljo o goljufijah ali sumih goljufij, in vse pomembne primere neskladnosti z zakoni in predpisi.
In addition, Chapters 2 to 7 consider the annual activity reports of relevant Directorates-General. 
Poleg tega so v poglavjih 2 do 7 preučena letna poročila o dejavnostih posameznih generalnih direktoratov.
These report on the achievement of policy objectives and the management and control systems in place to ensure the regularity of transactions and sound use of resources. 
V njih se poroča o doseganju ciljev politik in upravljavskih in kontrolnih sistemih, vzpostavljenih za zagotavljanje pravilnosti transakcij in dobre porabe sredstev.
Each annual activity report is accompanied by a declaration of the Director-General on inter alia the extent to which resources have been used for their intended purpose, and control procedures ensure the regularity of transactions (8). 
Vsakemu letnemu poročilu o dejavnostih je priložena izjava generalnega direktorja, ki se med drugim nanaša na obseg, v katerem so bila sredstva porabljena za navedeni namen in v katerem kontrolni postopki zagotavljajo pravilnost transakcij (8).
The Court assesses the annual activity reports and accompanying declarations in order to determine how far they provide a fair reflection of financial management in relation to regularity of transactions. 
Sodišče oceni letna poročila o dejavnostih in priložene izjave, da ugotovi, v kolikšni meri pošteno odražajo finančno poslovodenje glede pravilnosti transakcij.
The Court reports on the results of this assessment in the section ‘Reliability of Commission management representations’ in Chapters 2 to 7, and — in case of significant findings — by means of an observation following the conclusions on the regularity of transactions and effectiveness of systems. 
O rezultatih te ocene poroča v oddelku „Zanesljivost poslovodskih predstavitev Komisije“ v poglavjih 2 do 7, v primeru pomembnih ugotovitev pa tudi v opažanjih po zaključkih o pravilnosti transakcij in uspešnosti sistemov.
(8) Further information on these processes, as well as links to the most recent reports can be found at http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/synthesis/ index_en.htm 
(8) Dodatne informacije o teh procesih in povezave na najnovejša poročila so na voljo na spletni strani http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/ synthesis/index_en.htm.