natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Producers have shown a clear interest in the scheme, as indicated by the significant number of product names registered (about 1 000) accounting for a market value of 14,5 billion euro in 2008. 
Proizvajalci so izrazili jasen interes za shemo, kar dokazuje veliko število registriranih imen proizvodov (okoli 1 000), ki so leta 2008 dosegla tržno vrednost 14,5 milijarde EUR.
The legislator has chosen to apply the Official Feed and Food Control (OFFC) Regulation (EC) No 882/20042, within the frame of the General Food Law (GFL), also to the control of compliance of products with the product specifications established for each specific protected designation of origin (PDO) or protected geographical indication (PGI). 
Zakonodajalec se je odločil, da bo Uredbo (ES) št. 882/2004 o uradnem nadzoru krme in živil (OFFC)2 v okviru splošne živilske zakonodaje uporabljal tudi za nadzor skladnosti proizvodov s specifikacijami proizvodov, določenimi za vsako posamezno zaščiteno označbo porekla (ZOP) ali zaščiteno geografsko označbo (ZGO).
The OFFC sets out a harmonised framework of general rules for all controls relating to feed and food control, obliging each Member State to apply it based on a risk assessment. 
OFFC določa usklajen okvir splošnih pravil za vse kontrole v zvezi s krmo in živili ter vsako državo članico zavezuje, da ga uporablja na podlagi ocene tveganja.
The legislator’s choice of applying an existing control system also to PDO and PGI — instead of creating a separate one — is both legitimate and justified from the point of view of better regulation. 
Odločitev zakonodajalca, da za ZOP in ZGO ne bo vzpostavil ločenega sistema nadzora, temveč bo uporabil že obstoječega, je z vidika boljše ureditve zakonita in upravičena.
Furthermore, it should be noted that for most other intellectual property schemes the enforcement effort (and cost) is left to the interested parties, whilst the OFFC system is based on administrative enforcement allowing for an ex officio protection. 
Poleg tega je treba opozoriti, da so v večini drugih shem intelektualne lastnine za izvrševanje (in stroške) odgovorne zainteresirane strani, medtem ko sistem OFFC temelji na upravnem izvrševanju, ki omogoča zaščito po uradni dolžnosti.
1 Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs. 
1 Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 510/2006 z dne 20. marca 2006 o zaščiti geografskih označb in označb porekla za kmetijske proizvode in živila.
2 Regulation (EC) No 822/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules. 
2 Uredba (ES) št. 822/2004 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 29. aprila 2004 o izvajanju uradnega nadzora, da se zagotovi preverjanje skladnosti z zakonodajo o krmi in živilih ter s pravili o zdravstvenem varstvu živali in zaščiti živali.
Audits under the OFFC, including the geographical indications (GI) scheme, are planned and executed by the Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) of the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Health and Consumer Policy in full cooperation with the Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development. 
Revizije v okviru OFFC, vključno s shemo geografskih označb (GO), načrtuje in izvaja Urad za prehrano in veterinarstvo Generalnega direktorata Evropske komisije za zdravje in varstvo potrošnikov (GD SANCO) ob polnem sodelovanju z Generalnim direktoratom za kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja (GD AGRI).
V. The Commission has put in place a coherent set of different initiatives aimed at raising awareness of the geographical indications scheme: — the Quality website3 attracts more than 50 000 page views by more than 10 000 unique visitors per month; — Member States make use of the option to include promotion measures (132 and 133) in their rural development programmes. 
V. Komisija je oblikovala usklajen sklop različnih pobud, namenjenih krepitvi ozaveščenosti o shemi geografskih označb: — spletna stran o kakovosti3 zabeleži več kot 50 000 obiskov več kot 10 000 enkratnih obiskovalcev na mesec; — države članice izkoriščajo možnost vključitve promocijskih ukrepov (132 in 133) v svoje programe za razvoj podeželja.
Individual Member States can decide to do so on the basis of their own analysis and strategy; — conferences with stakeholders, leading, among others, to define the most appropriate actions to increase awareness of the scheme; — specific promotion programmes under Regulation (EC) No 3/20084; 3 http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/quality/ 4 Council Regulation (EC) No 3/2008 of 17 December 2007 on information provision and promotion measures for agricultural products on the internal market and in third countries. 
Posamezne države članice lahko to storijo na podlagi svoje analize in strategije; — konference z zainteresiranimi stranmi, na katerih se med drugim opredelijo najprimernejši ukrepi za krepitev ozaveščenosti o shemi; — posebni promocijski programi v okviru Uredbe (ES) št. 3/20084; 3 http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/quality/ 4 Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 3/2008 z dne 17. decembra 2007 o ukrepih za informiranje o kmetijskih proizvodih in njihovo promocijo na notranjem trgu in v tretjih državah.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION — information measures under Regulation (EC) No 814/20005, where information about the quality of agricultural products is one of the priorities. 
ODGOVORI KOMISIJE — ukrepi za informiranje v okviru Uredbe (ES) št. 814/20005, kadar so informacije o kakovosti kmetijskih proizvodov ena od prednostnih nalog.
These also include participating in agricultural fairs, conferences, seminars and round tables. 
Ti ukrepi vključujejo tudi udeležbo na kmetijskih sejmih, konferencah, seminarjih in okroglih mizah.
The Commission is also to redefine its promotion policy starting with the launch of a broad consultation about the future of promotion actions for agricultural products where PDO and PGI will play a prominent role. 
Komisija namerava tudi ponovno opredeliti svojo promocijsko politiko, pri čemer bo začela s širokim posvetovanjem o prihodnosti ukrepov za promocijo kmetijskih proizvodov, v katerem bosta imeli ZOP in ZGO pomembno vlogo.
The study referred to by the Court was conducted at a time when the use of the logo and the identifications ‘protected designation of origin’ and ‘protected geographical indication’ were not compulsory, as instead is the case since 1 May 2009. 
Ko je bila izvedena študija, ki jo navaja Sodišče, uporaba logotipa ter opredelitev „zaščitena označba porekla“ in „zaščitena geografska označba“ ni bila obvezna, temveč je to postala 1. maja 2009.
VI. first indent The current regulatory system based on the OFFC Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 provides for the necessary level of detail as regards the requirements of the GI checks. 
VI., prva alinea Veljaven regulativni sistem, ki temelji na Uredbi (ES) št. 882/2004 OFFC, zagotavlja potrebno raven podrobnosti v zvezi z zahtevami pregledov GO.
Within the OFFC Regulation, the specific modalities regarding these controls are left to Member States pursuant to the principle of subsidiarity. 
Odločitve glede posebnih načinov v zvezi z navedenim nadzorom so v okviru Uredbe OFFC prepuščene državam članicam v skladu z načelom subsidiarnosti.
Considering the extreme diversity of concrete situations that may arise, further harmonisation is deemed inappropriate. 
Ob upoštevanju izjemne raznolikosti dejanskih situacij, ki bi lahko nastale, se nadaljnje usklajevanje obravnava kot neustrezno.
This is without prejudice to any clarification or precisions that might be further contemplated in the overall legislative framework. 
To ne posega v nobena pojasnila ali podrobnosti, ki se bodo morda nadalje preučila v splošnem zakonodajnem okviru.
5 Council Regulation (EC) No 814/2000 of 17 April 2000 on information measures relating to the common agricultural policy. 
5 Uredba Sveta (ES) št.
Special Report No 11/2011 – Do the design and management of the geographical indications scheme allow it to be effective? 36 VI. second indent OFFC rules set out clear principles for such checks, which should be established by Member States. 
11/2011 – Ali zasnova in upravljanje sheme geografskih označb omogočata njeno uspešnost? 36 VI., druga alinea Predpisi OFFC določajo za te preglede jasna načela, ki jih morajo vzpostaviti države članice.
Mutual assistance provisions are applicable in accordance with Title IV (Administrative assistance and cooperation in the areas of feed and food) Articles 34 to 40 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004. REPLY OF THE COMMISSION INTRODUCTION 10. 
Določbe o medsebojni pomoči se uporabljajo v skladu s členi 34–40 iz naslova IV (Upravna pomoč in sodelovanje na področju krme in živil) Uredbe (ES) št. 882/2004.
The primary aim of the scheme is to register names and through this create and protect intellectual property rights. 
Glavni cilj sheme je registracija imen ter s tem oblikovanje in zaščita pravic intelektualne lastnine.
See also reply to point II. 
Glej tudi odgovor k točki II.
The primary mechanism by which to ensure protection of the registered names is through the integrity of the registration process and the legal protection provided for each name registered. 
Glavni mehanizem za zagotovitev zaščite registriranih imen je neoporečnost postopka registracije in pravna zaščita vsakega registriranega imena.
Food law controls are carried out in a harmonised framework of general rules as laid down in the OFFC Regulation (EC) No 882/2004, including risk-based control analysis; structure of the competent authority; planning, nature and reporting about controls, etc. 
882/2004 OFFC, vključno s kontrolno analizo, ki temelji na tveganju, strukturo pristojnega organa, načrtovanjem in naravo nadzora ter poročanjem o njem itd. Člen 10(1) Uredbe (ES) št.
Article 10(1) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 stipulates that the competent authorities responsible for controls shall be designated by Member States ‘in conformity with’ Regulation (EC) No 882/2004. 
510/2006 določa, da države članice imenujejo pristojne organe, odgovorne za nadzor, „v skladu z“ Uredbo (ES) št. 882/2004.
The specific modalities regarding these controls should be left to Member States pursuant to the principle of subsidiarity. 
Odločitve glede posebnih načinov v zvezi s tem nadzorom je treba v skladu z načelom subsidiarnosti prepustiti državam članicam.
In line with the concept of better regulation, Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 covers all issues falling in the field of consumer protection, including food labelling and consumer information issues. 
V skladu s konceptom boljše ureditve Uredba (ES) št. 882/2004 zajema vsa vprašanja, ki spadajo na področje varstva potrošnikov, vključno z vprašanji glede označevanja živil in obveščanja potrošnikov.
Therefore, checks concerning product specifications are covered. 
Zato vključuje tudi preglede v zvezi s specifikacijami proizvodov.
The reference to Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 implies a reference to all the linked legal acts, and in particular to the two Commission Decisions 2006/677/EC7 and 2007/363/EC8, which provide more details on the framework of official controls. 
Sklic na Uredbo (ES) št. 882/2004 pomeni sklic na vse povezane pravne akte ter zlasti na odločbi Komisije 2006/677/ES7 in 2007/363/ES8, ki vsebujeta več podrobnosti o okviru uradnega nadzora.
The general structure and principles of food law control are duly harmonised. 
Splošna struktura in načela nadzora živilske zakonodaje so ustrezno usklajeni.
The OFFC Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires Member States to carry out official controls regularly on a risk basis and with appropriate frequency taking account, inter alia, of past history of compliance and the reliability of operators’ own controls. 
882/2004 OFFC od držav članic zahteva, da uradni nadzor opravljajo redno, na podlagi tveganja in z ustrezno pogostnostjo, pri čemer med drugim upoštevajo preteklo skladnost in zanesljivost lastnih kontrol gospodarskih subjektov.
The OFFC Regulation is a control instrument that is fitted to the particular circumstances of the food control, in line with the subsidiarity principle and better regulation. 
Uredba OFFC je nadzorni instrument, prilagojen posebnim okoliščinam nadzora živil, v skladu z načelom subsidiarnosti in boljšo ureditvijo.
See also the reply to point 19. 
Glej tudi odgovor k točki 19.
7 Commission Decision 2006/667/EC of 29 September 2006 setting out the guidelines laying down criteria for the conduct of audits under Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council on official controls to verify compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules (notified under document number C(2006) 4026). 
7 Odločba Komisije z dne 29. septembra 2006 o določitvi smernic, ki določajo merila za izvajanje presoj v skladu z Uredbo (ES) št. 882/2004 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o izvajanju uradnega nadzora za preverjanje skladnosti z zakonodajo o krmi in živilih ter s pravili o zdravstvenem varstvu živali in zaščiti živali (notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2006) 4026).
8 Commission Decision 2007/363/EC of 21 May 2007 on guidelines to assist Member States in preparing the single integrated multi-annual national control plan provided for in Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (notified under document number C(2007) 2099). 
8 Odločba Komisije z dne 21. maja 2007 o smernicah za podporo državam članicam pri pripravi enotnega večletnega nacionalnega načrta nadzora, določenega v Uredbi (ES) št.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION Differences in the approach are inherent in the decentralisation of controls under the OFFC, and the legislator’s choice. 
ODGOVORI KOMISIJE Razlike v pristopu so povezane z decentralizacijo nadzora v okviru OFFC in izbiro zakonodajalca.
Nevertheless, the Court’s observations can serve as a basis for an exchange of experiences and appropriate follow-up, without putting into question the Member States’ capacity to apply risk-based controls under their separate responsibility9. 
Kljub temu so lahko opažanja sodišča podlaga za izmenjavo izkušenj in ustrezno nadaljnje ukrepanje, ne da bi bila s tem ogrožena zmožnost držav članic, da uporabijo nadzor na podlagi tveganja v okviru njihove ločene pristojnosti9.
Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 requires Member States to put in place the check system which best fits their needs, based on a risk analysis. 
882/2004 od držav članic zahteva, da na podlagi analize tveganja vzpostavijo sistem pregledov, ki čim bolj ustreza njihovim potrebam.
Variations between Member States as regards the quantity and intensity of the checks on geographical indications are explained, among other things, by the different impact and uptake of the geographical indications schemes in each Member State. 
Razlike med državami članicami v zvezi s količino in intenzivnostjo pregledov geografskih označb pojasnjujeta med drugim različen vpliv in uporaba shem geografskih označb v posamezni državi članici.
The reference within recital 6 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 to fair competition and enhancement of credibility merely aims at justifying the creation of a harmonised legislative framework defining PDOs/PGIs, in order to put an end to divergent national practices, and is not meant to address any control issues, referred to in recital 16 thereof. 
Cilj sklicevanja v uvodni izjavi 6 Uredbe (ES) št. 510/2006 na enake konkurenčne pogoje in povečanje zaupanja je zgolj utemeljiti vzpostavitev usklajenega zakonodajnega okvira, ki opredeljuje ZOP/ZGO, da bi se odpravile različne nacionalne prakse, in ne obravnavanje kakršnih koli vprašanj nadzora iz uvodne izjave 16 navedene uredbe.
9 In this sense, the initiative Better Training for Safer Food (BTSF), which aims at organising an EU training strategy in the areas of food law, feed law, animal health and animal welfare rules, as well as plant health rules, included in its programme for 2011–12 several topics for discussion amongst Member States’ representatives: — verification of compliance with specifications; — verification of compliance vs. official controls: various similar techniques and methods of detecting fraudulent practices and differences between the official controls and verification of compliance conducted for designated quality products; — case studies based on practical examples of how verification of compliance with specifications should be conducted (traceability, geographical origin and boundaries, specific climatic and geographical characteristics, etc.); risk-based approach and issues of verification of compliance for protected designation schemes. Special Report No 11/2011 – Do the design and management of the geographical indications scheme allow it to be effective? 
9 V tem smislu je pobuda Boljše usposabljanje za varnejšo hrano, katere cilj je organiziranje strategije usposabljanja EU na področju živilske zakonodaje, zakonodaje o krmi, pravil o zdravstvenem varstvu živali in zaščiti živali ter pravil o zdravstvenem varstvu rastlin, v svoj program za obdobje 2011–2012 vključila več tem, o katerih bodo razpravljali predstavniki držav članic: — preverjanje skladnosti s specifikacijami; — preverjanje skladnosti nasproti uradnemu nadzoru: različne podobne tehnike in metode odkrivanja goljufivega ravnanja ter razlik med uradnim nadzorom in preverjanjem skladnosti, ki se izvajajo za določene kakovostne proizvode; — študije primerov, ki temeljijo na praktičnih primerih, kako je treba izvajati preverjanje skladnosti s specifikacijami (sledljivost, geografsko poreklo in omejitve, posebne podnebne in geografske značilnosti itd.); pristop na podlagi tveganja in vprašanja preverjanja skladnosti za sheme zaščitenih označb. Posebno poročilo št. 11/2011 – Ali zasnova in upravljanje sheme geografskih označb omogočata njeno uspešnost?
Controls in both geographical indications and organic farming are carried out in a harmonised framework of general rules as laid down in the OFFC Regulation (EC) No 882/2004. 
Nadzor geografskih označb in ekološkega kmetijstva poteka na podlagi usklajenega okvira splošnih pravil iz Uredbe (ES) št. 882/2004.
The two schemes have however a different purpose, reflected in their legal bases. 
Vendar imata ti dve shemi različen namen, ki se odraža v njunih pravnih podlagah.
Regulation (EC) No 834/200710 on organic products describes the requirements for processes and production methods compulsory for all organic producers in a very detailed and complete manner, while Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 describes mainly procedural steps and prescriptions. 
Uredba (ES) št. 510/2006 opisuje predvsem postopkovne ukrepe in predpise.
As checks are made on the basis of these specifications, the control system in the case of organic farming can be based on a single model, while this is not feasible in the case of geographical indications, where protected products show a wide variety of specifications. 
Ker se pregledi opravljajo na podlagi teh specifikacij, lahko sistem nadzora v primeru ekološkega kmetijstva temelji na enotnem modelu, medtem kot to v primeru geografskih označb ni izvedljivo, ker imajo zaščiteni proizvodi veliko različnih specifikacij.
The wine sector is traditionally a highly regulated sector, from the use of permitted oenological practices to the rules on use of vine varieties and planting conditions. 
Vinski sektor je tradicionalno sektor z visoko stopnjo zakonske urejenosti, ki zajema vse od uporabe dovoljenih enolo-ških praks do predpisov o uporabi sort vinske trte in pogojih sajenja.
Article 62 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 in fact excludes the common market organisation (CMO) obligations from the scope of OFFC controls. 
Člen 62 Uredbe (ES) št. 882/2004 dejansko izključuje obveznosti skupne ureditve trga iz področja uporabe nadzora OFFC.
This has made it more necessary to apply a specific dedicated system of controls. 
Zato je uporaba posebnega namenskega sistema nadzora še bolj nujna.
10 Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91. 
834/2007 z dne 28. junija 2007 o ekološki pridelavi in označevanju ekoloških proizvodov in razveljavitvi Uredbe (EGS) št. 2092/91.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION Box 1 The Commission notes that, in the cases referred to by the Court, no violation of Regulations (EC) No 510/2006 and (EC) No 882/2004 was found. 
ODGOVORI KOMISIJE Okvir 1 Komisija ugotavlja, da v primerih, ki jih navaja Sodišče, niso bile ugotovljene nobene kršitve uredb (ES) št. 510/2006 in št.
Besides, concerning traceability, Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 (the General Food Law), which lays down requirements for traceability of food and of food-producing animals and other ingredients expected or intended to be incorporated into food, is in any case applicable in respect of PDOs/ PGIs. 
Poleg tega se v zvezi s sledljivostjo za ZOP/ZGO v vseh primerih uporablja člen 18 Uredbe (ES) št. 178/2002 (splošna živilska zakonodaja), ki določa zahteve glede sledljivosti živil in živali za pridobivanje hrane ter drugih sestavin, za katere se pričakuje, da se bodo uporabile, ali ki so namenjene uporabi v živilih.
Under this provision, food business operators are required to have systems in place to identify the source and quantity of a food or food ingredient and the businesses to which they supply their products. 
V skladu s to določbo morajo nosilci živilske dejavnosti vzpostaviti sisteme za ugotavljanje vira in količine živila ali živilske sestavine ter podjetij, katerim dobavljajo svoje proizvode.
In addition, specific provisions regarding traceability/proof of origin are laid down in the respective specifications of the PDOs/PGIs, enshrined at EU level. 
Poleg tega so v ustreznih specifikacijah ZOP/ZGO na ravni EU določene posebne določbe glede sledljivosti/dokazila o poreklu.
The nature and scope of such provisions are bound to vary depending on the characteristics and specificities of each PDO/PGI. 
Narava in področje uporabe teh določb se razlikujeta glede na značilnosti in posebnosti posamezne ZOP/ZGO.
Joint reply to points 23–24 Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 provides already for a protection which is equivalent to the ex officio protection requested by the European Parliament. 
Skupni odgovor k točkama 23 in 24 Uredba (ES) št. 882/2004 že predvideva zaščito, ki je enaka zaščiti po uradni dolžnosti, ki jo zahteva Evropski parlament.
For the sake of clarity, in the Commission proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council (COM(2010) 733 of 10 December 2010) on agricultural product quality schemes some elements have been added in order to reinforce such controls. 
Zaradi jasnosti so bili predlogu Komisije za uredbo Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta (COM(2010) 733 z dne 10. decembra 2010) o shemah kakovosti kmetijskih proizvodov dodani nekateri elementi za okrepitev zadevnega nadzora.
In Article 13(3) of the Commission proposal Member States are required to take the appropriate administrative and judicial steps to prevent or stop the unlawful use of protected designations of origin or protected geographical indications. 
Člen 13(3) predloga Komisije določa, da morajo države članice sprejeti ustrezne upravne in sodne ukrepe za preprečitev ali odpravo nezakonite uporabe zaščitenih označb porekla ali zaščitenih geografskih označb.
Special Report No 11/2011 – Do the design and management of the geographical indications scheme allow it to be effective? 39 In line with the principle of subsidiarity, Member States are better placed to decide on the use of resources, based on risk assessment and on the specificities of the national market. 
11/2011 – Ali zasnova in upravljanje sheme geografskih označb omogočata njeno uspešnost? 39 V skladu z načelom subsidiarnosti so države članice primernejše za sprejemanje odločitev glede uporabe sredstev na podlagi ocene tveganja in posebnosti domačega trga.
Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 includes clear provisions on mutual assistance (Articles 35 and 42) which apply also to the GI checks. 
882/2004 vključuje jasne določbe o medsebojni pomoči (člena 35 in 42), ki se uporabljajo tudi za preglede GO.