natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
a) predlagatelju v pisni obliki potrdi prejem zahtevka v roku 14 delovnih dni od prejema;
a) acknowledge receipt of the application in writing to the applicant within 14 working days of receiving it;
b) o zahtevku obvesti agencijo in jo prosi za mnenje.
b) notify the Authority of the application and request its opinion.
Komisija da zahtevek na voljo Evropskemu parlamentu, državam članicam in zainteresiranim stranem .
The application shall be made available by the Commission to the European Parliament, the Member States and to stakeholders .
Kadar Komisija začne postopek na lastno pobudo, o tem obvesti države članice in, če je primerno, prosi za mnenje Agencijo .
Where it initiates the procedure on its own initiative, the Commission shall inform the Member States and, where applicable, request the opinion of the Authority.
Kadar Komisija začne postopek na lastno pobudo, o tem obvesti države članice ter to objavi in, če je primerno, prosi za mnenje agencijo .
Where it initiates the procedure on its own initiative, the Commission shall inform the Member States and make public the fact and, where applicable, request the opinion of the Authority.
Agencija predloži mnenje v šestih mesecih po prejemu veljavnega zahtevka.
The Authority shall give its opinion within six months of receipt of a valid application.
Agencija predloži mnenje v devetih mesecih po prejemu veljavnega zahtevka.
The Authority shall give its opinion within nine months of receipt of a valid application.
Glede na sredstva, s katerimi razpolaga Evropska agencija za varnost hrane, in standarde kakovosti, ki jim mora njeno mnenje zadostiti, je rok, ki ga predlaga Komisija, prekratek.
Given the resources at the EFSA’s disposal and the quality standards required of the EFSA’s opinion, the Commission’s proposal for such a short period of time is not reasonable.
Agencija pošlje mnenje Komisiji, državam članicam in , če je primerno, predlagatelju.
The Authority shall forward its opinion to the Commission, the Member States and , where appropriate, the applicant.
Agencija pošlje mnenje Komisiji, državam članicam in predlagatelju.
The Authority shall forward its opinion to the Commission, the Member States and the applicant.
Mnenje se tudi objavi, ob upoštevanju določb iz člena 12.
The opinion shall also be made public, subject to the provisions of Article 12.
Predlagatelja je treba VEDNO obvestiti, mnenje Evropske agencije za varnost hrane pa mora biti objavljeno.
The applicant must ALWAYS be informed and the EFSA’s opinion must be made public.
V ustrezno utemeljenih primerih, v katerih Agencija od predlagateljev zahteva dodatne podatke, se lahko rok iz člena 5(1) podaljša.
In duly justified cases where the Authority requests additional information from applicants, the period referred to in Article 5(1) may be extended.
Po posvetovanju s predlagateljem Agencija določi rok, v katerem se ti podatki lahko zagotovijo, in obvesti Komisijo o potrebnem dodatnem roku.
After consulting the applicant, the Authority shall lay down a period within which this information can be provided and inform the Commission of the additional period needed.
Če Komisija ne ugovarja v osmih delovnih dneh od obvestila Agencije , se rok iz člena 5(1) samodejno podaljša za dodatno obdobje.
If the Commission does not object within eight working days of being informed by the Authority, the period referred to in Article 5(1) shall be automatically extended by the additional period.
Če agencija od predlagateljev zahteva dodatne podatke, se lahko rok iz člena 5(1) podaljša.
Where the Authority requests additional information from applicants, the period referred to in Article 5(1) may be extended.
Po posvetovanju s predlagateljem agencija določi rok, v katerem se ti podatki lahko zagotovijo, in obvesti Komisijo o potrebnem dodatnem roku.
After consulting the applicant, the Authority shall lay down a period within which this information can be provided and inform the Commission of the additional period needed.
Če Komisija ne ugovarja v osmih delovnih dneh od obvestila agencije , se rok iz člena 5(1) samodejno podaljša za dodatno obdobje.
If the Commission does not object within eight working days of being informed by the Authority, the period referred to in Article 5(1) shall be automatically extended by the additional period.
Če zahtevek ne vsebuje vseh podatkov, ki jih agencija potrebuje za oceno tveganja neke snovi, se razpoložljivo obdobje podaljša, zato da se omogoči ocena večjih tveganj.
If the application does not provide all data needed by the Authority to assess the risk of a given substance, the period available should be extended in order to allow a serious risk assessment.
Če predlagatelj predloži dodatne podatke na lastno pobudo, jih pošlje Agenciji in Komisiji.
Where applicants submit additional information on their own initiative, they shall send it to the Authority and to the Commission.
V takšnih primerih Agencija predloži mnenje v prvotnem roku.
In such cases, the Authority shall give its opinion within the original period.
Če predlagatelj predloži dodatne podatke na lastno pobudo, jih pošlje agenciji in Komisiji.
Where applicants submit additional information on their own initiative, they shall send it to the Authority and to the Commission.
V takšnih primerih agencija predloži mnenje v prvotnem roku, razen če za podaljšanje roka ne obstajajo posebni razlogi .
In such cases, the Authority shall give its opinion within the original period , unless there are special reasons for extending the period .
Po preteku roka se predlagateljev ne sme spodbujati k predložitvi dodatnih informacij.
There must be no incentives for the applicant to submit additional information once the deadline has expired.
Brez navedenega dopolnila besedila bi ta negativna spodbuda obstajala.
Without the above addendum, there would unfortunately be such a negative incentive.
V devetih mesecih po predložitvi mnenja Agencije Komisija Odboru iz člena 14(1) predloži osnutek uredbe o posodobitvi seznama Skupnosti, pri čemer upošteva mnenje Agencije , vse ustrezne določbe zakonodaje Skupnosti in vse druge zakonite dejavnike, ki so pomembni za obravnavano zadevo.
Within nine months of the Authority giving its opinion, the Commission shall submit to the Committee referred to in Article 14(1) a draft regulation updating the Community list, taking account of the opinion of the Authority, any relevant provisions of Community law and any other legitimate factors relevant to the matter under consideration.
V šestih mesecih po predložitvi mnenja agencije Komisija Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu predloži predlog uredbe o posodobitvi seznama Skupnosti, pri čemer upošteva mnenje agencije , vse ustrezne določbe zakonodaje Skupnosti in vse druge zakonite dejavnike, ki so pomembni za obravnavano zadevo.
Within six months of the Authority giving its opinion, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council a proposal for a regulation updating the Community list, taking account of the opinion of the Authority, any relevant provisions of Community law and any other legitimate factors relevant to the matter under consideration.
Komisija utemelji svoj predlog in pojasni izhodišča, na katerih temelji.
The Commission shall justify its proposal and explain the considerations on which it is based.
Če osnutek uredbe ni v skladu z mnenjem Agencije , Komisija pojasni odstopanja .
Where the draft regulation is not in accordance with the opinion of the Authority, the Commission shall explain the difference.
Uredba se sprejme v skladu s postopkom iz člena 14(2).
The regulation shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 14(2).
Če predlog uredbe ni v skladu z mnenjem agencije , Komisija pojasni razloge za svojo odločitev .
Where the proposal for a regulation is not in accordance with the opinion of the Authority, the Commission shall explain the reasons for its decision .
Če Komisija od predlagatelja zahteva dodatne podatke v zvezi z obvladovanjem tveganja, skupaj s predlagateljem določi rok, v katerem se ti podatki lahko zagotovijo.
Where the Commission requests additional information from applicants on matters concerning risk management, it shall determine, together with the applicant, a period within which this information can be provided.
V takšnih primerih se lahko rok iz člena 7 ustrezno podaljša .
In such cases, the period referred to in Article 7 may be extended accordingly .
V takšnih primerih lahko Komisija podaljša rok iz člena 7 in o podaljšanju obvesti države članice.
In such cases, the Commission may extend the period referred to in Article 7 and shall inform the Member States of the extension .
Komisija lahko roka iz člena 5(1) in člena 7 podaljša na lastno pobudo ali na zahtevo Agencije , če je primerno in če narava obravnavane zadeve to upravičuje, brez poseganja v člen 6(1) in člen 8(1).
The periods referred to in Article 5(1) and Article 7 may be extended by the Commission on its own initiative or, where applicable, at the Authority’s request, if the nature of the matter in question so justifies, without prejudice to Article 6(1) and Article 8(1).
V takšnih primerih Komisija , kjer je primerno, o podaljšanju in razlogih zanj obvesti predlagatelja.
In such cases , where appropriate, the Commission shall inform the applicant of the extension and the reasons for it.
Komisija lahko roka iz člena 5(1) in člena 7 podaljša na lastno pobudo ali na zahtevo agencije , če je primerno in če narava obravnavane zadeve to upravičuje, brez poseganja v člen 6(1) in člen 8(1).
The periods referred to in Article 5(1) and Article 7 may be extended by the Commission on its own initiative or, where applicable, at the Authority’s request, if the nature of the matter in question so justifies, without prejudice to Article 6(1) and Article 8(1).
V takšnih primerih Komisija o podaljšanju in razlogih zanj obvesti predlagatelja in države članice .
In such cases the Commission shall inform the applicant and the Member States of the extension and the reasons for it.
Predlagatelja je treba vedno obvestiti o morebitnem podaljšanju roka.
The applicant should always be informed of any extension of the time limits.
Prav tako je treba o tem obveščati države članice.
Member states should be informed as well.
Komisija zagotovi preglednost postopka odobritve z objavo vseh zahtevkov in zagotovitvijo dostopa javnosti do vse zadevne dokumentacije.
The Commission shall ensure the transparency of the authorisation procedure by making public all applications and by making all relevant material in the matter available to the public.
Preglednost je temeljnega pomena, če želimo doseči, da bi imeli potrošniki zaupanje v to, kako EU obravnava vprašanja v zvezi s hrano.
Transparency is a crucial factor if consumers are to have confidence in the EU’s way of handling food-related issues.
Med podatki , ki jih zagotovijo predlagatelji, se kot zaupni lahko obravnavajo podatki , katerih razkritje lahko znatno škoduje njihovemu konkurenčnemu položaju.
Among the information provided by applicants, confidential treatment may be given to information the disclosure of which might significantly harm their competitive position.
Podatki , ki jih zagotovijo predlagatelji, se kot zaupni obravnavajo le, če lahko njihovo razkritje znatno škoduje njihovemu konkurenčnemu položaju.
Information provided by applicants may be given confidential treatment only where the disclosure thereof might significantly harm their competitive position.
Člen 12, odstavek 1, pododstavek 2, uvodni del
Article 12, paragraph 1, subparagraph 2, introductory part
Kot zaupni se v nobenem primeru ne obravnavajo naslednji podatki:
Information relating to the following shall not , in any case, be considered confidential:
Kot zaupni se ne smejo v nobenem primeru obravnavati naslednji podatki:
Information relating to the following may never , in any case, be considered confidential:
Komisija določi, kateri podatki lahko ostanejo zaupni, in o tem obvesti predlagatelja.
The Commission shall decide which information can remain confidential and notify applicants accordingly.
Komisija določi, kateri podatki lahko ostanejo zaupni, in o tem obvesti predlagatelja ter države članice .
The Commission shall decide which information can remain confidential and notify applicants and the Member States accordingly.
Tudi države članice je treba obveščati.
Member states should also be informed.
Člen 12, odstavek 6 a (novo)
Article 12, paragraph 6 a (new)
Znanstveni podatki in druge informacije, ki jih posredujejo predlagatelji, se v obdobju petih let od datuma odobritve ne smejo uporabljati v korist poznejšega vlagatelja, razen če se ta s predhodnim vlagateljem dogovori za njihovo uporabo ter ustrezno razdelitev stroškov, če:
Scientific data and other information provided by applicants may not be used for the benefit of a subsequent applicant for a period of five years from the date of authorisation, unless the subsequent applicant has agreed with the prior applicant that such data and information may be used and costs are shared accordingly, where:
(a) predhodni predlagatelj znanstvene podatke in druge informacije ob vložitvi predhodnega zahtevka pravno zaščiti; in
(a) the scientific data and other information were designated as proprietary by the prior applicant at the time the prior application was made; and
(b) ima predhodni predlagatelj ob vložitvi predhodnega zahtevka izključne pravice do uporabe zaščitenih podatkov; in
(b) the prior applicant had exclusive rights of reference to the proprietary data at the time the prior application was made; and
(c) aditiva za živila ne bi bilo mogoče odobriti, če predhodni predlagatelj ne bi vložil zaščitenih podatkov.
(c) the food additive could not have been authorised without the submission of the proprietary data by the prior applicant.
Zato je razumljivo, da želijo odgovorni proizvajalci, ki takšne raziskave izvajajo in pri tem prevzamejo velike finančne obveznosti, vsaj nekaj časa izkoristiti prednosti, povezane z ustrezno odobritvijo.
It is understandable that responsible manufacturers who carry out these studies, making a large financial commitment in the process, are keen to benefit, at least for a certain amount of time, from the advantages associated with authorisation.
Pri sklicevanju na ta odstavek se uporabljata člen 5a(1) do (4) in člen 7 Sklepa 1999/468/ES ob ustreznem upoštevanju določb člena 8 tega sklepa.
Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5a (1) to (4) and Article 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply, having due regard to the provisions of Article 8 thereof.
Ta predlog spremembe je potreben zato, da se besedilo uskladi z določbami novega sklepa o komitologiji.
This amendment is needed in order to align the text to the provisions of the new comitology decision.
O okolju
Environmental considerations
Okoljski vidiki morajo biti v skladu s cardiffskim procesom vključeni v vso zakonodajo EU.
In accordance with the Cardiff process, environmental aspects must be integrated into all EU legislation.
To zlasti velja za obravnavano zakonodajo, ker tisto, kar človek pojé, ne ostane v človeškem telesu, ampak se širi po naravnem okolju in postane del naravnega ciklusa.
It is particularly relevant in this legislation since what a person eats does not stay in the human body but is dispersed into the natural environment and becomes part of the natural cycle.
Zato je treba pri odločanju o odobritvi upoštevati negativne vplive na okolje.
Negative environmental effects should therefore be taken into consideration when deciding to grant authorisation or not.
Tako bi moral biti podlaga za uredbo tudi člen 175 Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti.
Article 175 of the Treaty establishing the European Communities should therefore also form the basis for the regulation.
Preglednost je temeljnega pomena, če naj bi imeli potrošniki zaupanje v to, kako EU obravnava vprašanja v zvezi s hrano.
Transparency is a crucial factor if consumers are to feel confident in the EU's way of managing food-related issues.
Zato mora Komisija zagotoviti preglednost postopka odobritve z objavo vseh zahtevkov in zagotovitvijo dostopa javnosti do vse zadevne dokumentacije.
The Commission must, therefore, ensure the transparency of the authorisation procedure by making public all applications and making all relevant material in the matter available to the public.
Proizvajalci, ki zaprosijo za odobritev, morajo biti vedno neposredno obveščeni vsem, kar je povezano z njihovim zahtevkom.
Producers applying for authorisation must always be informed directly on matters concerning their application.
Komisija bi morala brez težav pojasniti izhodišča, na katerih temelji njena odločitev.
The Commission should be able, without difficulty, to explain the considerations on which its decision is based.
Takšna pregledna razlaga bi koristila potrošnikom, industriji in organom držav članic.
A transparent explanation of this nature would benefit consumers, industry and the Member States' authorities.
Zato bi morala Komisija predlagane odločitve vedno objaviti, predloge utemeljiti in pojasniti izhodišča, na katerih odločitve temeljijo.
The Commission should, therefore, always make public its proposals for decisions, justify its proposal and explain the considerations on which its decision is based.
Če se sprejeta uredba razlikuje od prvotnega predloga Komisije odboru za prehransko verigo in zdravstveno varstvo živali, potem Komisija svojo končno odločitev tudi pojasni.
Where the adopted regulation departs from the Commission's original proposal to the Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, the Commission shall also explain the background to the final decision.
Glede na sredstva, s katerimi razpolaga Evropska agencija za varnost hrane, in standarde kakovosti, ki jim mora njeno mnenje zadostiti, rok šest mesecev, ki ga predlaga Komisija, ni razumen rok, v katerem bi se lahko pripravilo mnenje o zahtevku.
Given the resources at the EFSA's disposal and the quality standards required of the EFSA's opinion, six months, as the Commission has proposed, is not a reasonable period within which to produce an opinion on an application.
Zato se za zagotovitev varnosti hrane predlaga, da bi rok, do katerega mora Evropska agencija za varnost hrane predložiti mnenje, podaljšali na devet mesecev.
Having regard to food safety, therefore, it is proposed that this time period be extended so that the EFSA has nine months in which to present an opinion.
Poleg tega je za nekatere skupine potrošnikov pomembno, da se snovi, ki se ne uporabljajo, in uporaba, ki ni več aktualna, črtajo s seznama.
It is also important for certain groups of consumers that substances and uses which are no longer current are removed from the list.
Zato je treba vse odobritve uporabe aditivov za živila, živilskih encimov in arom za živila redno pregledovati.
All authorisations for use of food additives, food enzymes and food flavourings must therefore be reviewed on a regular basis.
Novi postopek komitologije
The new comitology procedure
Nekaj sprememb predloga Komisije je predlaganih ob upoštevanju novega postopka komitologije.
In the light of the new comitology procedure, a number of amendments are proposed to the Commission's proposal.
v pismu z dne 28. februarja 2007 ste v skladu s členom 35(2) Poslovnika Odbor za pravne zadeve zaprosili za mnenje o točnosti in primernosti pravne podlage zgoraj omenjenega predloga Komisije.
By letter of 28 February 2007 you asked the Committee on Legal Affairs pursuant to Rule 35(2), to consider whether the legal basis of the above Commission proposal was valid and appropriate.
Zgoraj omenjeno vprašanje je odbor obravnaval na seji dne 20. marca 2007.
The committee considered the above question at its meeting of 20 March 2007.
Poročevalka pristojnega odbora Åsa Westlund predlaga, da se pravna podlaga predloga spremeni tako, da se namesto člena 95 uporabita člena 95 in 175 Pogodbe ES.
The lead committee's rapporteur, Ms Westlund, is proposing to change the legal basis of the proposal from Article 95 to Article 95 together with Article 175 of the EC Treaty.
Vsi akti Skupnosti morajo temeljiti na pravni podlagi, določeni v Pogodbi (oziroma drugem pravnem aktu, ki naj se z njimi izvaja).
All Community acts must be founded upon a legal basis laid down in the Treaty (or in another legal act which they are intended to implement).
Pravna podlaga določa pristojnost Skupnosti ratione materiae in način izvajanja te pristojnosti, in sicer kateri zakonodajni instrument (ali instrumenti) se lahko uporabi ter postopek sprejemanja odločitev.
The legal basis defines the Community's competence ratione materiae and specifies how that competence is to be exercised, namely the legislative instrument(s) which may be used and the decision-making procedure.
Glede na posledice, ki jih ima pravna podlaga, je njena izbira predvsem za Parlament bistvena, saj določa koliko vpliva, če sploh kaj, ima Parlament v zakonodajnem postopku.
In view of the consequences of the legal basis, its choice is of basic importance, particularly for Parliament, since it determines what say, if any, Parliament has in the legislative process.
Stališče Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti je, da izbira pravne podlage ne sme biti subjektivna, pač pa "mora temeljiti na objektivnih dejavnikih, ki jih je mogoče sodno preskusiti"
According to the Court of Justice the choice of legal basis is not a subjective one, but "must be based on objective factors which are amenable to judicial review"
Še več, odločilni dejavnik mora biti glavni cilj ukrepa
Furthermore, the decisive factor should be the main object of a measure.
Zadeva C-377/98, Nizozemska proti Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu , [2001] Poročila Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti I-7079, odstavka 27 in 28; Zadeva C-491/01, British American Tobacco (Investments) in Imperial Tobacco [2002] Poročila Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti I-11453, odstavka 93 in 94. .
Case C-377/98 Netherlands v. European Parliament and Council [2001] ECR I-7079, paras 27-28; Case C-491/01 British American Tobacco (Investments) and Imperial Tobacco [2002] ECR I-11453, paras 93-94. .
Če pa bi obveljalo stališče, da so cilji varovanja zdravja ljudi ter vzpostavitve in delovanja notranjega trga med seboj neločljivo povezani, pri čemer ni noben izmed njih podrejen ali posreden glede na ostale, lahko velja, da je treba uporabiti obe pravni podlagi, saj člen 95 in člen 175(1)
However, if the view were to be taken that the aims of protecting human health and the establishment and functioning of the internal market are indissolubly linked with each other without one being secondary and indirect in respect of the others, it might be considered that the two legal bases would have to be used, given that the same decision-making procedure (codecision) is provided for in both Articles 95 and 175(1)
Pristojni odbor predlaga, da se kot pravna podlaga predloga uredbe uporabi člen 175
The lead committee proposes that Article 175
Člen 175 (1)
Article 175(1)
Svet se v skladu s postopkom iz člena 251 ter po posvetovanju z Ekonomsko-socialnim odborom in Odborom regij odloči, katere ukrepe naj Skupnost sprejme za doseganje ciljev iz člena 174. skupaj s členom 95
The Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, shall decide what action is to be taken by the Community in order to achieve the objectives referred to in Article 174. together with Article 95
Če Komisija v tem roku ne sprejme nobene odločitve, se šteje, da so nacionalne določbe iz odstavkov 4 in 5 odobrene.
In the absence of a decision by the Commission within this period the national provisions referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5 shall be deemed to have been approved.
Člen 175(1) se sklicuje na cilje člena 174
Article 175(1) refers to the objectives of Article 174
Člen 174 (1)
Article 174(1)
— ohranjanju, varstvu in izboljšanju kakovosti okolja;
— preserving, protecting and improving the quality of the environment,
— varovanju človekovega zdravja;
— protecting human health,
— skrbni in preudarni rabi naravnih virov;
— prudent and rational utilisation of natural resources,