natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It is undisputed that, in Ireland, the absence of an environmental impact assessment required by Directive 85/337 as amended can be remedied by obtaining a retention permission which makes it possible, in particular, to leave projects which were not properly authorised undisturbed, provided that the application for such a permission is made before the commencement of enforcement proceedings.
Ni sporno, da se lahko na Irskem neobstoj presoje vplivov na okolje, zahtevane s spremenjeno Direktivo 85/337, odpravi z legalizacijo, ki omogoča zlasti nadaljnji obstoj projekta brez zakonitega soglasja za izvedbo, če je bila zahteva za legalizacijo vložena pred izvedbo postopka v zvezi s sankcijo.
The consequence of that possibility, as indeed Ireland recognises, may be that the competent authorities do not take action to suspend or put an end to a project that is within the scope of Directive 85/337 as amended and is being carried out or has already been carried out with no regard to the requirements relating to development consent and to an environmental impact assessment prior to issue of that development consent, and that they refrain from initiating the enforcement procedure provided for by the PDA, in relation to which Ireland points out that the powers are discretionary.
S to možnostjo je, kot sicer priznava Irska, pristojnim organom omogočeno, da ne ukrepajo, da bi zadržali ali prenehali izvajanje projekta, ki spada na področje uporabe spremenjene Direktive 85/337 in ki se izvaja ali je že izveden v nasprotju z zahtevami v zvezi s soglasjem in presojo vplivov na okolje pred izdajo navedenega soglasja, in da ne začnejo postopka prisilnih ukrepov, ki je predviden v PDA, pri čemer Irska poudarja, da je pristojnost na tem področju diskrecijska.
The inadequacy of the enforcement system set up by Ireland is accordingly demonstrated inasmuch as the existence of retention permission deprives it of any effectiveness, and that inadequacy is the direct consequence of the Member State’s failure to fulfil its obligations which was found in the course of consideration of the first two pleas in law.
Tako je ugotovljena pomanjkljivost sistema prisilnih ukrepov, ki ga je vzpostavila Irska, ker je z možnostjo legalizacije odvzeta vsa njegova učinkovitost, saj je navedena pomanjkljivost neposredna posledica neizpolnitve obveznosti, ugotovljene med presojo dveh predhodnih tožbenih razlogov.
That conclusion is not affected by the fact that, according to Ireland, the enforcement regime must take account of the various competing rights held by developers, landowners, the public and individuals directly affected by the development.
Na to ugotovitev ne vpliva dejstvo, da je treba po mnenju Irske v sistemu sankcij upo�tevati različne pravice, med katerimi so pravice nosilcev projektov, lastnikov zemlji�č, javnosti in posameznikov, ki jih sporni projekt neposredno zadeva.
The need to weigh those interests cannot in itself provide justification for the ineffectiveness of a system of control and enforcement.
Nujnost, uravnovesiti te interese, namreč ne more utemeljiti tega, da sistem nadzora in sankcij ni učinkovit.
Accordingly, it becomes superfluous to analyse the various examples put forward by the Commission to illustrate the deficiencies in application of the enforcement measures, since those deficiencies are the direct result of the inadequacies of the Irish legislation itself.
Zato je brezpredmetno preučiti različne primere, ki jih je navedla Komisija, da bi opisala pomanjkljivosti pri uporabi prisilnih ukrepov, ker take pomanjkljivosti izhajajo neposredno iz irske zakonodaje.
Consequently, the third plea in law is also well founded, and therefore the first complaint must be upheld on all of the pleas in law.
Tretji tožbeni razlog je zato prav tako utemeljen in je torej treba prvi očitek sprejeti zaradi vseh tožbenih razlogov.
Lastly, the decision that the first complaint is well founded holds good both with regard to Directive 85/337 as amended and with regard to Directive 85/337.
Nazadnje je treba navesti, da je prvi očitek utemeljen v zvezi s spremenjeno Direktivo 85/337 in v zvezi z Direktivo 85/337.
2008 — CASE C-215/06 both the original and the amended version of the directive, projects likely to have significant effects on the environment must be subject to an assessment of their effects before the grant of development consent, the definition of development consent moreover remaining unchanged.
2008 – ZADEVA C-215/06 s spremenjeno različico je treba namreč za projekte, ki bodo verjetno pomembno vplivali na okolje, izvesti presojo njihovih vplivov pred izdajo soglasja za izvedbo, katerega opredelitev med drugim ostaja nespremenjena.
In addition, the characteristics of the retention permission that are specified by the Irish legislation have remained the same.
Poleg tega so značilnosti legalizacije, določene z irsko zakonodajo, ostale iste.
It follows from the foregoing that, by failing to adopt all measures necessary to ensure that projects which are within the scope of Directive 85/337 either before or after amendment by Directive 97/11 are, before they are executed in whole or in part, first, considered with regard to the need for an environmental impact assessment and, secondly, where those projects are likely to have significant effects on the en -vironment by virtue of their nature, size or location, that they are made subject to an assessment with regard to their effects in accordance with Articles 5 to 10 of that directive, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 2, 4 and 5 to 10 of that directive.
Iz navedenega izhaja, da Irska, s tem da ni sprejela vseh potrebnih ukrepov za zagotovitev, da se, preden so v celoti ali deloma izvedeni, presodi, ali je za projekte, ki spadajo na področje uporabe Direktive 85/337 v različici pred spremembami, uvedenimi z Direktivo 97/11, in v različici po njih, treba izvesti presojo vplivov na okolje, in da se izvede presoja njihovih vplivov v skladu s členi od 5 do 10 Direktive 85/337, če bodo verjetno pomembno vplivali na okolje zaradi svoje narave, velikosti ali lokacije, ni izpolnila svojih obveznosti iz členov 2, 4 in od 5 do 10 navedene direktive.
This complaint relates to the circumstances obtaining for the construction of a wind farm at Derrybrien, County Galway, in relation to which it is useful first to note the various consents obtained.
Ta očitek se nana�a na pogoje gradnje polja vetrnih elektrarn v Derrybrienu v okrožju Galway, v zvezi s katero je treba najprej opozoriti na različna pridobljena soglasja.
As is clear from the documents before the Court, applications for consent relating to the first two phases of the development, each involving 23 wind turbines, were submitted on 4 and 18 December 1997.
Kot izhaja iz spisa, sta bili zahtevi za soglasje za izvedbo v zvezi s prvima fazama projekta, ki se nana�ata vsaka na 23 turbin na veter, vloženi 4. in 18. decembra 1997.
Fresh applications were lodged on 23 January 1998, since the earlier applications for consent were held to be invalid.
Novi zahtevi sta bili vloženi 23. januarja 1998, ker je bilo odločeno, da prej�nji zahtevi za soglasje za izvedbo nista bili veljavni. Dovoljenje je bilo izdano 12. marca 1998.
On 5 October 2000, an application was made for consent for a third phase of works relating, inter alia, to 25 turbines and service
Za tretjo fazo del, ki se nana�a na 25 turbin in na dovozne poti, je bila zahteva za soglasje za izvedbo vložena 5. oktobra 2000 in 15. novembra 2001 ji je bilo ugodeno.
COMMISSION v IRELAND roadways, which was approved on 15 November 2001.
KOMISIJA PROTI IRSKI kar je bilo odobreno 30. julija 2002.
In October 2003, when the consent granted for the first two phases of the works had expired, the developer applied for renewal of that consent, which was granted in November 2003.
Ker je soglasje za izvedbo, izdano za prvi dve fazi del, prenehalo veljati, je nosilec projekta oktobra leta 2003 zahteval podalj�anje navedenega soglasja, kar je bilo odobreno novembra leta 2003.
By this complaint, the Commission claims that Ireland did not take all the measures necessary to ensure that the development consents relating to the wind farm and associated works were preceded by an assessment of the environmental effects of the project, in accordance with Articles 5 to 10 of Directive 85/337 and of Direct- ive 85/337 as amended.
S tem očitkom Komisija trdi, da Irska ni sprejela vseh potrebnih ukrepov za zagotovitev, da se pred izdajo soglasij v zvezi s poljem vetrnih elektrarn in povezanimi deli ter pred izvedbo del opravi presoja vplivov projekta na okolje v skladu s členi od 5 do 10 Direktive 85/337 in spremenjene Direktive 85/337.
The Commission argues that, while, pursuant to the Irish legislation, environmental impact assessments were carried out for various constituent parts of the development, those assessments were deficient.
Komisija v zvezi s tem uveljavlja, da čeprav je bila na podlagi irske zakonodaje izvedena presoja vplivov na okolje za različne elemente spornega projekta, je bila navedena presoja pomanjkljiva.
In particular, the environmental impact assessment carried out in 1998 did not properly address the environmental risks attached to execution of the various constituent parts of the development.
V presoji vplivov na okolje iz leta 1998 naj se namreč ne bi pravilno obravnavala okoljska tveganja, povezana z izvedbo različnih elementov tega projekta.
The impact assessment carried out for the third phase of the development was vitiated by the same inadequacies.
Presoja vplivov, izvedena za tretjo fazo navedenega projekta, naj bi bila prav tako pomanjkljiva.
The Commission adds that the wind farm is the largest terrestrial wind-energy development ever planned in Ireland and one of the largest in Europe.
Poleg tega Komisija navaja, da je polje vetrnih elektrarn največji projekt kopenskega izkori�čanja energije vetra, ki je bil kadar koli predlagan na Irskem, in eden od najpomembnej�ih v Evropi.
The Commission claims also that the construction of the wind farm required the destruction of large areas of coniferous forest amounting to 263 hectares, a felling licence having been granted on 20 May 2003.
Komisija prav tako uveljavlja, da je bilo treba za gradnjo polja vetrnih elektrarn uničiti �iroka področja iglastega gozda s povr�ino 263 hektarov, pri čemer je bilo soglasje za posek dreves izdano 20. maja 2003.
However, no environmental impact assessment was carried out for that operation, contrary to the very requirements of the Irish legislation.
Vendar se v zvezi s tem ni izvedla presoja vplivov na okolje, kar je celo v nasprotju z zahtevami irske zakonodaje.
The Commission adds that, after the landslide which occurred on 16 October 2003 and the consequent ecological disaster, when the mass of peat which was dislodged from an area under development for the wind farm polluted the Owendalulleegh river, causing the death of about 50 000 fish and lasting damage to the fish spawning beds, Ireland carried out no fresh environmental impact assessment of this construction before the resumption of work on the site by the developer in 2004.
Komisija dodaja, da po zemeljskem plazu 16. oktobra 2003 in ekolo�ki katastrofi, ki jo je ta povzročil, ko je velikanska količina �ote, ki se je odtrgala od področja gradnje polja vetrnih elektrarn, onesnažila reko Owendalulleegh, kar je povzročilo pogin 50.000 rib in je trajno po�kodovalo njihova drsti�ča, Irska ni izvedla nove presoje vplivov te gradnje na okolje, preden je nosilec projekta leta 2004 nadaljeval dela na tem področju.
Ireland contends that, when consents were applied for, in 1997 and in 1998, for the first two phases of construction of the wind farm, neither Annex I nor Annex II to Directive 85/337 referred to that category of project as being among those within its scope.
Irska pojasnjuje, da v letih 1997 in 1998, ko so se zahtevala soglasja za izvedbo za prvi dve fazi gradnje polja vetrnih elektrarn, ta vrsta projektov ni bila navedena kot projekt, ki spada na področje uporabe Direktive 85/337, niti v prilogi I niti v prilogi II k navedeni direktivi.
Accordingly, it was not necessary that consent be preceded by an environmental impact assessment as governed by that directive.
Zato ni bilo treba pred izdajo soglasja za izvedbo izvesti take presoje vplivov na okolje, kot je urejena z navedeno direktivo.
Ireland adds that the applications submitted in 1998 were, however, accompanied, in accordance with the Irish legislation, by an environmental impact statement.
Irska dodaja, da je bila zahtevam, vloženim leta 1998, vendarle priložena izjava o vplivih na okolje v skladu z irsko zakonodajo.
Ireland considers, moreover, that it is artificial to attempt to suggest that ancillary aspects of the wind farm project, such as road construction, peat extraction, quarrying or electricity transmission, were of such importance that they made an en -vironmental impact assessment within the meaning of Directive 85/337 necessary.
Poleg tega meni, da je neustrezno posku�ati predlagati, da so dejavnosti, ki so povezane s stranskimi vidiki projekta gradnje polja vetrnih elektrarn, kot so gradnja ceste, pridobivanje �ote, izkori�čanje kamnoloma ali prenos elektrike, tako pomembne, da bi bilo treba za njih izvesti presojo vplivov na okolje v smislu Direktive 85/337.
Ireland considers, in addition, that an application to extend the duration of a planning permission does not constitute ‘development consent’ within the meaning of Directive 85/337 as amended.
Irska poleg tega meni, da zahteva za podalj�anje trajanja veljavnosti dovoljenja ni „soglasje za izvedbo“ v smislu spremenjene Direktive 85/337.
Ireland contends lastly that the landslide was caused by the construction methods used and that there was no question of difficulties which could have been anticipated by an environmental impact assessment, even one in conformity with the Community requirements.
Irska nazadnje uveljavlja, da je bil zemeljski plaz povzročen z uporabljenimi metodami gradnje in da ne gre za težave, ki bi jih bilo mogoče vnaprej odkriti s presojo vplivov na okolje, tudi če bi bila izvedena v skladu z zahtevami Skupnosti.
It also states that, in order to ensure the safe completion of the wind farm, construction work practices were changed, after construction work had been suspended and an investigation carried out.
Ta država članica poleg tega pojasnjuje, da so bile za zagotovitev varnega dokončanja polja vetrnih elektrarn metode gradnje spremenjene po tem, ko se je gradnja prekinila in se je izvedla preiskava.
First, as regards the circumstances in which the consents relating to the first two phases of construction of the wind farm project were granted on 12 March 1998 following applications submitted on 23 January 1998, it is necessary to begin by deciding whether Directive 85/337 is applicable.
Prvič, v zvezi s pogoji, v skladu s katerimi sta bili 12. marca 1998 izdani soglasji za izvedbo za prvi dve fazi gradnje polja vetrnih elektrarn, za kateri je bila vložena zahteva 23. januarja 1998, je treba najprej presoditi, ali se uporabi Direktiva 85/337.
It is clear from Article 3 of Directive 97/11 that if an application for development consent was submitted to a competent authority before 14 March 1999, the provisions of Directive 85/337 continued to apply.
V zvezi s tem iz člena 3 Direktive 97/11 izhaja, da se �e naprej uporabljajo določbe Direktive 85/337, če je bila zahteva za soglasje za izvedbo predložena pristojnemu organu pred 14. marcem 1999.
Moreover, while it is common ground that installations for the harnessing of wind power for energy production are not listed in either Annex I or Annex II to Directive 85/337, it is not disputed by Ireland that the first two phases of construction of the wind farm required a number of works, including the extraction of peat and of minerals other than metalliferous and energy-producing minerals, and also road construction, which are listed in Annex II to that directive, respectively in point 2(a) and (c) and in point 10(d).
Poleg tega, čeprav ni sporno, da naprave za izkori�čanje energije vetra za proizvodnjo elektrike niso navedene niti v prilogi I niti v prilogi II k Direktivi 85/337, Irska ne izpodbija dejstva, da je bilo za prvi dve fazi gradnje polja vetrnih elektrarn treba izvesti različna dela, med katerimi so pridobivanje �ote ter mineralnih snovi razen kovinskih mineralnih snovi in mineralnih energetskih surovin ter gradnja cest, ki so na�teta v navedeni prilogi II, točka 2(a) in (c) oziroma točka 10(d).
Consequently, Directive 85/337 was applicable to the first two phases of construction of the wind farm in so far as they involved specifically the carrying out of work on projects referred to in Annex II to that directive.
Direktiva 85/337 je torej veljala za prvi dve fazi gradnje polja vetrnih elektrarn, ker sta bili povezani zlasti z izvedbo projektov del, navedenih v prilogi II k tej direktivi.
However, Ireland states that the competent authorities took the view that Annex II to Directive 85/337 was not applicable, since the ancillary works of peat extraction and road construction were minor aspects of the project of wind farm construction itself.
Vendar Irska zatrjuje, da so pristojni organi menili, da zadeva ne spada v okvir priloge II k Direktivi 85/337, ker je pomen stranskih del pridobivanja �ote in gradnje cest majhen v primerjavi s projektom gradnje samega polja vetrnih elektrarn.
The competent authorities therefore considered that there was no need either to investigate whether the intended projects were likely to have significant effects on the environment or, accordingly, to conduct an environmental impact assessment meeting the requirements of Directive 85/337 prior to granting the consents.
Pristojni organi so zato menili, da ni treba ugotoviti, ali bodo predlagani projekti pomembno vplivali na okolje, niti pred izdajo soglasja za izvedbo opraviti presoje vplivov na okolje, ki bi ustrezala zahtevam iz Direktive 85/337.
However, the fact that the abovementioned projects falling under Annex II to that directive may have been of secondary importance vis-à-vis the wind farm construction project taken as a whole did not mean that, by virtue of that fact alone, those projects were not likely to have significant effects on the environment.
Vendar dejstvo, da so imeli zgoraj navedeni projekti, na katere se nana�a priloga II k navedeni direktivi, drugoten pomen v primerjavi s projektom gradnje polja vetrnih elektrarn kot celote, ne pomeni, da navedeni projekti zaradi tega ne bodo verjetno pomembno vplivali na okolje.
The intended projects of peat and mineral extraction and road construction were not insignificant in terms of scale by comparison with the overall area of the wind farm project which covered 200 hectares of peat bog and which was the largest project of its kind in Ireland, and they were moreover essential both to the installation of the turbines and to the progress of the construction works as a whole.
V zvezi s tem je treba poudariti, da predlagani projekti pridobivanja �ote ter mineralnih snovi in gradnje cest niso bili zanemarljivi v smislu velikosti glede na celotno povr�ino polja vetrnih elektrarn, ki pokriva 200 hektarjev �oti�č in ki je najpomembnej�i tak projekt na Irskem, in so bili poleg tega nujni za namestitev turbin ter potek vseh del gradnje.
In addition, those works were carried out on the slopes of Cashlaundrumlahan Mountain, where there are layers of peat up to 5.5 metres in depth, largely covered by plantation forestry.
Prav tako je treba poudariti, da so bila navedena dela izvedena na pobočju gore Cashlaundrumlahan, kjer so nahajali�ča �ote tudi do 5,5 metra globoko in �iroko pokrita z gozdom.
It follows from those factors, which are not disputed by Ireland, that the location and size of the projects of peat and mineral extraction and road construction, and the proximity of the site to a river, all constitute specific characteristics which demonstrate that those projects, which were inseparable from the installation of 46 wind turbines, had to be regarded as likely to have significant effects on the en -vironment and, accordingly, had to be subject to an assessment of their effects on the environment.
Iz teh navedb, ki jih Irska ne izpodbija, izhaja, da so lokacija in velikost projektov pridobivanja �ote ter mineralnih snovi in gradnje cest ter bližina reke konkretne značilnosti, iz katerih izhaja, da bi bilo treba navedene projekte, ki jih ni mogoče ločiti od postavitve 46 turbin na veter, obravnavati kot projekte, ki bodo verjetno pomembno vplivali na okolje in za katere bi bilo torej treba izvesti presojo njihovih vplivov na okolje.
The purpose of carrying out an environmental impact assessment in conformity with the requirements of Directive 85/337 is to identify, describe and assess in an appropriate manner the direct and indirect effects of a project on factors such as fauna and flora, soil and water and the interaction of those factors.
Namen izvedbe presoje vplivov na okolje v skladu z zahtevami Direktive 85/337 je namreč, da se primerno opredeli, opi�e in oceni neposredne in posredne vplive posameznega projekta na dejavnike, kot so živalstvo in rastlinstvo, tla in voda, ter medsebojni vpliv teh različnih dejavnikov.
In the present case, the environmental impact statements supplied by the developer had certain deficiencies and did not examine, in particular, the question of soil stability, although that is fundamental when excavation is intended.
V obravnavanem primeru se lahko v zvezi s tem opozori, da so bile izjave nosilca projekta o vplivih na okolje pomanjkljive in da v njih zlasti ni bilo obravnavano vpra�anje stabilnosti tal, kar je bistveno, ko so predlagana dela izkopavanja.
Consequently, by failing to take all measures necessary to ensure that the grant of development consents relating to the first two phases of construction of the wind farm was preceded by an environmental impact assessment in conformity with Articles 5 to 10 of Directive 85/337 and by merely attaching to the applications for consent environmental impact statements which did not satisfy those requirements, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive.
Zato Irska, s tem da ni sprejela vseh potrebnih ukrepov za zagotovitev, da se pred izdajo soglasij za izvedbo v zvezi s prvima dvema fazama gradnje polja vetrnih elektrarn opravi presoja vplivov na okolje v skladu s členi od 5 do 10 Direktive 85/337, in s tem da se je pri zahtevah za soglasje za izvedbo omejila na predložitev izjav o vplivih na okolje, ki ne ustrezajo tem zahtevam, ni izpolnila svojih obveznosti iz navedene direktive.
Secondly, as regards the application for consent relating to the third phase of construction of the wind farm, submitted on 5 October 2000, and the application for consent to alter the first two originally authorised phases of construction, lodged on 20 June 2002, the complaint must be considered in the light of Directive 85/337 as amended, since the applications for consent concerned were submitted after 14 March 1999.
Drugič, glede zahteve za soglasje za izvedbo v zvezi s tretjo fazo gradnje polja vetrnih elektrarn, ki je bila vložena 5. oktobra 2000, in glede zahteve za soglasje k spremembam prvih dveh prvotno dovoljenih faz gradnje, ki je bila vložena 20. junija 2002, je treba očitek preučiti ob upo�tevanju spremenjene Direktive 85/337, ker sta bili zahtevi za soglasje vloženi po 14. marcu 1999.
It is not disputed, first, that the competent authorities gave their approval to the change in the type of wind turbines originally planned without requiring an
Na eni strani ni sporno, da so pristojne oblasti sogla�ale s spremembo vrste turbin na veter, ki so bile prvotno predvidene, ne da bi zahtevale presojo vplivov na okolje
2008 — CASE C-215/06 environmental impact assessment in conformity with Directive 85/337 as amended and, secondly, that the consent given for the third phase of construction was also not accompanied by such an assessment.
2008 – ZADEVA C-215/06 v skladu s spremenjeno Direktivo 85/337, in na drugi strani, da niti soglasju za izvedbo, izdanemu za tretjo fazo gradnje, ni bila priložena taka presoja.