natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Odstavec 5 je tﾖetóm zvlèþtnóm pﾖópadem, kdy Rada dosèhne spoleｲnïho stanoviska bｸhem dvanèctimｸsóｲnóho blokovènó uvalenïho pﾖedchozómi dvｸma zvlèþtnómi pﾖópady.
Member States shall postpone the adoption of a draft technical regulation for 12 months from the date of receipt by the Commis-sion of the communication referred to in Article 8 (1) if, within the three months following that date, the Commission announces its «ndingthatthedrafttechnicalregulationconcernsamatterwhichis covered by a proposal for a directive, regulation or decision pre-sented to the Council in accordance with Article 189 of the Treaty.
) a spolurozhodovènó (
If the Council adopts a common position during the standstill period referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4, that period shall, subject to paragraph 6, be extended to 18 months.
spoluprèce zahrnuje Evropsk̅ parlament jako souｲèst rozho-dovacóch pravomocó Rady a spolurozhodovènó mu udｸluje pra-vomoc pﾖijmout spoleｲnｸ s Radou urｲitè naﾖózenó, rozhodnutó a smｸrnice.
Paragraphs (3), (4) and (5) of Article 9 stipulate much longer standstill periods as a result of the blockage imposed by the Commission - and by the Commission alone - following exami-nation of the draft.
Odstavce 1 a™ 5 se nepou™ijó, je-li
Contrary to the preceding case, this e . e c t a p p l i e s a l s o i n t h e « e l d o f I n f o r - m a t i o n Society services.
̌ ｲlensk̅ stèt z nalïhav̅ch dヮvodヮ zpヮsoben̅ch vè™n̅mi a ne-pﾖedvódateln̅mi okolnostmi, kterï souvisejó s ochranou veﾖejnïho
This reaction, the most serious consequence for the Member States in terms of time, is intended to prevent the noti«eddraftfrom adversely a.ectingalegislativeharmonisationprocesswhich has commenced at Community level.
58) Postup stanoven̅ Jednotn̅m evropsk̅m aktem v roce 1986 a potom uveden̅ jako ｲlènek 189c Smlouvy o ES Maastrichtskou dohodou (dnes ｲlènek 252).6/) Plènek 189b zaveden̅ do Smlouvy o ES Maastrichtskou dohodou (dnes ｲlènek 251).
The blockage of a draft national regulation can be imposed by the Commission in three speci«ccases:
pou™ót v oblasti «nanｲnóchslu™ebinformaｲnóspoleｲnostikvヮliurｲit̅m rizikヮm a po™adavkヮm, kterï jsou pro tuto oblast spe-ci«ckï.
legislative work at a national level and to adopt the technical regulation.
zdravó nebo bezpeｲnosti, s ochranou ™ivoｲichヮ nebo rostlin a v pﾖó-padｸ pﾖedpisヮ pro slu™by takï s veﾖejn̅m poﾖèdkem, zejmïna s ochranou mlède™e, nucen ve velmi krètkï lhヮtｸ pﾖipravit technic-kï pﾖedpisy tak, aby byly neprodlenｸ vydèny a provedeny, ani™ by byly mo™nï jakïkoli konzultace, nebo
It should be emphasised that the `common position' referred to represents a stage of the Community legislative process under the procedures of co-operation and co-decision, the «rstin-volving the European Parliament in the Council's decision-mak-ing power and the second giving it the power to adopt, jointly with the Council, certain regulations, decisions and directives.
Tyto mimoﾖèdnï a v̅jimeｲnï okolnosti nezbavujó ｲlenskï stèty povinnosti informovat Komisi o plènovan̅ch opatﾖenóch a o jasnïm zdヮvodnｸnó jejich nalïhavosti souｲasnｸ se sdｸlenóm pﾖósluþnïho textu.
These standstill obligations also lapse when the Council, to-gether with the Parliament in case of co-decision, or when the Commission adopts the announced binding Community act.
̌ ｲlensk̅ stèt z nalïhav̅ch dヮvodヮ zpヮsoben̅ch vè™n̅mi okol-nostmi, kterï souvisejó s ochranou bezpeｲnosti a integrity «nanｲ-nóho systïmu, zejmïna s ochranou vkladatelヮ, investorヮ a pojiþ-tｸncヮ, nucen neprodlenｸ vydat a provïst pﾖedpisy pro «nanｲnó slu™by.
These two procedures provide for a second reading of the text by the Parliament, which explains the need to extend the standstill period.
Ve sdｸlenó podle ｲlènku 8 odヮvodnó ｲlensk̅ stèt nalïhavost pﾖó-sluþn̅ch opatﾖenó.
› when the Commission informs the Member States that it no long-er intends to propose or adopt a binding Community act,
Jestli™e Komise uvè™ó, ™e nebyla tato dvｸ kritïria splnｸna, dヮvo-dy pro nouzov̅ postup neuznè, v opaｲnïm pﾖópadｸ Komise mヮ™e pou™itó tohoto postupu pﾖijmout. Komise i v tomto pﾖópa-dｸ provede rozbor vlastnóho pﾖedmｸtu opatﾖenó, a to hlavnｸ s ohledem na skuteｲnost, zda pﾖijómanï opatﾖenó nebude mót za nèsledek vytvoﾖenó jakïkoliv pﾖekè™ky obchodu.
› for urgent reasons, occasioned by serious and unforeseeable circumstances relating to the protection of public health or safety, the protection of animals or the preservation of plants and, for rules on services, also for public policy, notably the pro-tection of minors, a Member State is obliged to prepare techni-cal regulations in a very short space of time in order to enact and introduce them immediately without any consultations be-ing possible or
Tento odstavec stanovó, ™e obdobó pozastavenó pracó se neu-platnó tehdy, kdy™ musó ｲlensk̅ stèt pﾖipravit a zavïst technickï pﾖedpisy okam™itｸ a nemè pﾖedem ｲas na konzultace s Komisó a ostatnómi ｲlensk̅mi stèty.
› when the Commission informs the Member States of the with-drawal of its draft or proposal,
Takovï vè™nï a nepﾖedvódatelnï situace nastanou napﾖ. pﾖi pﾖórodnóch katastrofèch (ochrana obyvatelstva, atmosfïry, pヮdy nebo vody), epidemióch, epide-mióch zvóﾖat atd.
› when the Commission or the Council has adopted a binding Community act.
V pﾖópadｸ, kdy opatﾖenó, u nich™ nebyl uznèn nouzov̅ postup, byla pﾖijata a nebylo dodr™eno obdobó pozastavenó pracó, mヮ™e Komise podat ™èdost o zahèjenó soudnóho ﾖózenó o poruþenó prèva podle ｲlènku 226 Smlouvy proti ｲlenskïmu stètu, kter̅ se poruþenó povinnostó podle smｸrnice dopustil.
› for urgent reasons occasioned by serious circumstances relat-ing to the protection of the security and the integrity of the «-nancial system, notably the protection of depositors, investors and insured persons, a Member State is obliged to enact and implement rules on «nancialservicesimmediately.
V̅jimky z oznamovacó povinnosti nebo povinnosti dodr™o-vat obdobó pozastavenó pracó
Paragraph (6) concerns the expiry of the standstill periods im-posed on the Member States in the case of the Commission blocking a draft technical regulation.
Pokud se t̅kè pravidel pro slu™by, mヮ™e takï ｲlensk̅ stèt uplat-nit nouzov̅ postup v pﾖópadech, kdy nastala vè™nè a nepﾖedvó-datelnè situace nebo okolnost souvisejócó s veﾖejn̅m poﾖèd-kem, zejmïna s ochranou mlède™e.
In the communication referred to in Article 8, the Member State shall give reasons for the urgency of the measures taken.
Klauzuli nalïhavosti a spｸþnosti je mo™nï takï pou™ót v pﾖópa-dech, kterï se t̅kajó pravidel pro «nanｲnóslu™by,kdyjetﾖebaznalïhav̅ch dヮvodヮ zpヮsoben̅ch vè™n̅mi okolnostmi t̅kajócó-mi se ochrany bezpeｲnosti a integrity «nanｲnóhosystïmuchrè-nit zejmïna vkladatele, investory a pojiþtｸnce.
It is logical that, where Community action which is envisaged or in progress does not produce a result, the standstill obliga-tions imposed by paragraphs (3), (4) and (5) should lapse in or-der to allow the Member States to complete the postponed
Tuto zvlèþtnó a mïnｸ pﾖósnou formu nouzovïho postupu je mo™nï v̅hradnｸ
This paragraph provides that the standstill periods are not ap-plicable when a Member State, in order to respond to an urgent and unforeseeable situation such as, for example, a natural dis-aster (the need to protect people, the atmosphere, soil or wa-ter), an epidemic, an animal epidemic, etc., is obliged to pre-
Tento ｲlènek doplﾏuje ｲlènky 8 a 9 smｸrnice a stanovó zèkonnï v̅jimky z povinnosti oznamovat nèvrhy nèrodnóch technick̅ch pﾖedpisヮ.
Procedure established by the Single European Act in 1986 and then introduced as Article 189c of the EC Treaty by the Maastricht Treaty.
Plènek takï stanovó urｲitï v̅jimky z povinnosti dodr-™ovat obdobó pozastavenó pracó stanovenè v ｲlènku 9.
(Today Article 252).Article 189b, introduced into the EC Treaty by the Maastricht Treaty. (Today Article 251).
̌ plnó zèvaznï prèvnó pﾖedpisy Spoleｲenstvó, kterï vedou k pﾖijetó technick̅ch speci«kacó,
In the event of the adoption of measures whose urgency has been disputed, without observance of the standstill period, the Commission can launch the infringement procedure re-ferred to in Article 226 of the Treaty against the Member State concerned for breach of the obligations provided by the Di-rective.
Ve spoleｲnｸ projednèvan̅ch pﾖópadech Albers, Van den Berk-mortel a Nuchelmans (60) Soud rozhodl, ™e vydènóm zèkazu na
Exceptions to the obligation to notify or observe standstill periods
̌ plnó zèvazky vypl̅vajócó z mezinèrodnóch dohod, kterï vedou k pﾖijetó spoleｲn̅ch technick̅ch speci«kacó ve Spoleｲenstvó.
Concerning rules on services, Member States can invoke the urgency clause also for urgent reasons, occasioned by serious and unforeseeable circumstances relating to public policy, no-tably the protection of minors.
Hranice tïto v̅jimky je mo™nï nejlïpe ukèzat odkazem na zè-kladnó cól smｸrnice, kter̅m je vylouｲenó neopodstatnｸn̅ch pﾖekè™ek obchodu.
This new concept re‹ectsthespecial importance attached by the Community legislator to the protection of minors in the context of the new services.
Jestli™e ｲlenskï stèty pﾖijmou stejn̅ soubor pravidel po™adova-n̅ch smｸrnicó Spoleｲenstvó, dojde k odstranｸnó pﾖekè™ek ob-chodu a rozdólヮ mezi nèrodnómi pﾖedpisy zèroveﾏ a postup sta-noven̅ smｸrnicó 98/34/ES u™ nenó tﾖeba.
This Article supplements Articles 8 and 9 of the Directive, by stating the statutory exceptions to the obligation to notify a draft national technical regulation.
Stejnou ÿvahu lze pou™ót i pro mezinèrodnó dohody: jestli™e ta-kovè dohoda obsahuje pﾖesnｸ formulovanè ustanovenó a nenó v nich mósto pro odliþnost, potom pﾖijetó stejnïho souboru pra-videl vþemi pｸtadvaceti ｲlensk̅mi stèty nebude mót pravdｸpo-dobnｸ za nèsledek vznik pﾖekè™ek obchodu.
It also provides for certain exceptions to the obligation to comply with the standstill peri-ods stipulated in Article 9.
Podle Soudu je toto ustanovenó formulovèno tak obecnｸ, ™e ponechèvè prostor pro manïvrovènó, co™ vede k zèvｸru, ™e nè-rodnó pravidla pro oznaｲovènó t̅kajócó se pヮvodu olivovïho oleje nelze pova™ovat za nèrodnó ustanovenó, kterè se shodujó se zèvazn̅m prèvnóm pﾖedpisem Spoleｲenstvó ve smyslu prvnó odrè™ky v ｲlènku 10 odst. 1 smｸrnice o oznamovènó.
This special and less strict form of urgency clause is provided for exclusively in the « e l d o f I n f o r m a t i o n S o c i e t y « n a n c i a l s e r v i c e s o n a c c o u n t o f certain risks and requirements speci«ctothissector.
Situace se mｸnó, jestli™e prèvnó pﾖedpis Spoleｲenstvó nebo me-zinèrodnó dohoda jsou zavèdｸny prostﾖednictvóm opatﾖenó, kterè mohou b̅t v jednotliv̅ch ｲlensk̅ch stètech rヮznè, nebo jsou-li jednotnè ustanovenó, kterè majó b̅t transponovèna, do-plnｸna pravidly, kterè jsou ｲistｸ nèrodnó povahy.
› comply with binding Community acts which result in the adop-tion of technical speci«cationsorrulesonservices;
Omezujócó v̅klad prvnó odrè™ky ｲlènku 10 odst.
› ful«ltheobligationsarisingoutofinternationalagreementswhich result in the adoption of common technical speci«ca-tions or rules on services in the Community;
1 smｸrnice byl Soudem potvrzen v rozhodnutó pﾖópadu ¶Canal Satïlite Digitalƒ (62). V tomto rozhodnutó Soud znovu zdヮraznil, ™e ｲlènek 10
In practice, the Commission carries out a very thorough analy-sis of the reasons given, on the basis of the two criteria con-tained in this paragraph: the seriousness of the situation and (apart from «nancialservices)itsunforeseeablenature.
Tyto dヮvody, kterï nemajó ekonomickou povahu, se mohou vztahovat na veﾖejnou mravnost, veﾖejn̅ poﾖèdek nebo bez-peｲnost, ochranu zdravó a ™ivota lidó, zvóﾖat a rostlin, ochranu nèrodnóch kulturnóch statkヮ, kterï majó umｸleckou nebo arche-ologickou hodnotu, anebo ochranu prヮmyslovïho a obchod-nóho vlastnictvó.
A c c o r d i n g t o t h e C o u r t , t h i s p r o v i s i o n i s d r a ft e d i n g e n e r a l terms which leaves su/cientroomformanoeuvreforitto be concluded that national rules on labelling relating to the origin of olive oil cannot be regarded as national provisions conforming to a binding Community act within the meaning of the « r s t i n d e n t o f A r t i c l e 1 0 ( 1 ) o ft h e N o t i « c a t i o n D i r e c t i v e .
Avþak s ohledem na obsah smｸrnice 95/47/ES Soud zvè™il, ™e dotｲenou nèrodnó legislativu, i kdy™ ustavila systïm prvotnó administrativnó autorizace, kter̅ vlastnｸ smｸr-nice 95/47/ES nestanovó, nelze pova™ovat za legislativu splﾏujó-có zèvaznï opatﾖenó Spoleｲenstvó, na zèkladｸ kterïho by mohla technickï speci«kacepﾖijmout.
The situation is d i . e r e n t w h e n t h e C o m mstu n i t y a c t o r t h e i n t e r - n a t i o n a l agreement is implemented through measures which may d i . e r f r o m o n e Mffe mb e r S t a t e t o a n o t h e r , o r w h e n u n i f o r m p r o v i s i o n s , which have to be transposed, are supplemented by rules which are of purely national origin.
Plenskï stèty nemusó oznamovat nèvrhy nèrodnóch technic-k̅ch pﾖedpisヮ, kterï se vztahujó na pou™itó ｲlènku 12 odst. 1 smｸrnice o obecnï bezpeｲnosti v̅robkヮ.
Several judgments have clari«edthescopeoftheexceptionlaid down in the « r s t i n d e n t o f A r t i c l e 1 0 ( 1 ) o f D i r e c t i v e 9 8 / 3 4 / E C , whereby Member States are not obliged to notify texts by means of which they comply with binding Community acts which result in the adoption of technical speci«cationsorruleson Information Society services.
Do tïto v̅jimky spadajó opatﾖenó pﾖijatè tak, aby byla ve shodｸ se smlouvou, jejómi™ smluvnómi stranami jsou vþechny ｲlenskï stèty; jestli™e vþak jsou tato opatﾖenó pﾖija-ta tak, aby byla ve shodｸ s mezinèrodnó smlouvou, jejómi™ smluvnómi stranami nejsou vþechny ｲlenskï stèty, pak je tﾖeba je oznèmit.
In the joined Albers, Van den Berkmortel and Nuchelmans cases, the Court considered that in issuing the prohibition on administering Clenbuterol to fattening cattle, the Netherlands honoured its obligations under Directive 86/469/EEC concern-ing the examination of animals and fresh meat for the presence of residues, and was therefore exempt, under Article 10, from the duty of noti«cation.
Tento ｲlènek stanovó, ™e vþude tam, ¶pokud ｲlensk̅ stèt pﾖijme nebo se rozhodne pﾖijmout, doporuｲit nebo s v̅robci a distributo-ry na povinnïm nebo dobrovolnïm zèkladｸ dohodnout opatﾖenó nebo akce, kter̅mi na svïm ÿzemó z dヮvodu vè™nïho rizika zame-zó pﾖópadnïmu uvedenó v̅robku na trh nebo jeho pou™óvènó, ome-zó toto uvedenó nebo pou™óvènó nebo je podrobó zvlèþtnóm pod-mónkèm, neprodlenｸ je prostﾖednictvóm systïmu RAPEX oznèmó Komisi (63).
This restrictive interpretation of the « r s t i n d e n t o f A r t i c l e 1 0 ( 1 ) o f the Directive was c o n « r mffe d b y t h e C o u r t i n ` t h e C a n a l S a t ï l - i t e Digital' judgment. In this judgment, the Court reiterated that Article 10 of Directive 98/34/EC shows that Articles 8 and 9 do not apply to laws, regulations or administrative provisions of Member States, or to voluntary agreements entered into by them, whereby Member States comply with binding Commu-nity measures which result in the adoption of technical speci«-cations.
Rovnｸ™ neprodlenｸ uvｸdomó Komisi o zmｸnｸ nebo zru-þenó takovïho opatﾖenó nebo akce („)ƒ.
To the extent that the national legislation at issue in the main proceedings transposed Directive 95/47/EC on the use of standards for the transmission of television signals, and to that extent only, there would be no obligation to notify under the N o t i « c a t i o n D i r e c t i v e .
̌ vyu™óvajó ochrann̅ch dolo™ek obsa™en̅ch v zèvazn̅ch prèv-nóch pﾖedpisech Spoleｲenstvó,
H o w e v e r , h a v i n g r effg a r d t o t h e c o n t e n t o f D i r e c t i v e 95/47, the Court considered that the national legisla-tion in question, in so far as it established a system of prior ad-ministrative authorisation, - which in fact is not provided by Di-rective 95/47/EC - could not qualify as legislation whereby the Member State complies with a binding Community measure re-sulting in the adoption of technical speci«cations.
̌ se omezujó pouze na v̅kon rozsudku Soudnóho dvora Evrop-sk̅ch spoleｲenstvó,
Conversely, the Court s p e c i « e d , i n t h e U n i l e v e r ju d g mffe n t that Article 10 of the Directive may not be invoked when a provision of a directive allows the Member State su/cientroomforma-noeuvre. This was the case in point.
Tento ｲlènek v odstavci 10 stanovó, ™e ¶Harmonizaｲnó opatﾖenó („) zahrnujó v odヮvodnｸn̅ch pﾖópadech ochrannou do-lo™ku, kterè opravﾏuje ｲlenskï stèty pﾖijmout z jednoho nebo vóce
Italy had asserted that Council Directive 79/112/EEC on the labelling of foodstu.sim-posed the obligation to include in the labelling, particulars of the place of origin or provenance of the product in cases where
Plenskï stèty nemusó oznamovat ta nèrodnó opatﾖenó, jejich™ jedin̅m ÿｲelem je zavedenó rozsudku Soudnóho dvora, kterï se vztahuje na jin̅ aspekt, ne™ je oznèmenó technickïho pﾖedpisu.
The same reasoning applies to measures adopted to conform with an international agreement which contains speci«cprovi-sions for the implementation of which no possibility of diver-gence is laid down.
Rozhodnutó tohoto Soudu, kter̅ odpovódè za zajiþtｸnó shody s prèvem Spoleｲenstvó, musó b̅t vykonèno okam™itｸ.
Measures adopted to conform with an agreement to which all the Member States are party come
(63) RAPEX, jeho™ zèkonn̅m zèkladem je smｸrnice 2001/95/ES o obecnï bezpeｲnosti v̅robkヮ, slou™ó jako jednoduch̅, rychl̅ a v̅stra™n̅ systïm pro sledovènó nebezpeｲn̅ch spotﾖebitelsk̅ch v̅robkヮ.
Case C-425/97 `Albers', Case C-426/97 `Van den Berkmortel', Case C-427/97 `Nuchelmans' [1999] ECR I-2947.Case C-443/98 `Unilever' [2000] ECR I-7535.Case C-390/99 `Canal Satïlite Digital' [2002] ECR I-607.
Pokud se t̅kè nèvrhu pﾖedpisヮ t̅kajócóch se daﾏov̅ch nebo «-nanｲnóch opatﾖenó, nezbavuje neexistence povinnosti ｲlen-sk̅ch stètヮ dodr™et obdobó pozastavenó pracó Komisi nebo ｲlenskï stèty prèva reagovat na tyto nèvrhy prostﾖednictvóm pﾖipomónek nebo podrobn̅ch stanovisek (viz ｲlènek 8 odst. 1).
within this exception; if these are measures adopted to con-form with an international agreement to which not all the Member States are party, they must be noti«ed.
̌ se omezujó v souladu se ™èdostó Komise pouze na zmｸnu tech-nickïho pﾖedpisu ve smyslu ｲl.
› make use of safeguard clauses provided for in binding Commu-nity acts; tions to prevent, restrict or impose speci«cconditionsonthepossible marketing or use, within its own territory, of products by reason of a serious risk, it shall immediately notify the Commission thereof through RAPEX.
1 bodu 11 tïto smｸrnice se zèmｸ-rem odstranit pﾖekè™ky obchodu nebo v pﾖópadｸ pravidel pro slu™-by pﾖekè™ky volnïho pohybu slu™eb nebo svobody usazovènó poskytovatelヮ slu™eb,
It shall also inform the Commission without delay of modi«cationorwithdrawalofanysuchmeasureor action („)'.
Plenskï stèty nemajó povinnost oznamovat nèrodnó opatﾖenó zamｸﾖenè pouze na zmｸny technickïho pﾖedpisu, jimi™ odstra-nó pﾖekè™ky na ™èdost Komise (napﾖ. zaｲlenｸnó dolo™ky o vzè-jemnïm uznèvènó zalo™enï na ｲlènku 28 Smlouvy), napﾖ. pro-stﾖednictvóm podrobnïho stanoviska nebo pﾖipomónek, proto™e jsou tato opatﾖenó v dokonalïm souladu s cólem smｸrnice 98/34/ES.
The Member States do not have to notify the Commission of the draft provisional measures which they are authorised to take under the safeguard clause contained in Community Di-rectives, in accordance with Article 95 of the Treaty.
Na zèkladｸ znｸnó ｲlènku 8, 9 a 10 smｸrnice 98/34/ES je mo™nï uｲinit zèvｸr, ™e informaｲnó postup pou™iteln̅ pro technickï pﾖedpisy je pomｸrnｸ slo™it̅. Podrobnï vysvｸtlenó, jak postup funguje v praxi, je obsa™eno v pﾖóruｲce vypracovanï odbory Komise (64).
These non-economic reasons can relate to public morality, public order or public security; the protection of the health and life of humans, animals or plants, the protection of national treasures possessing artistic or archaeological value or the pro-tection of industrial and commercial property.
1 odst. 11 druhïm pododstavci tﾖetó odrè™ce.
› apply Article 8 (1) of Council Directive 92/59/EEC;
Ve smyslu odstavce 2 a 4 se obdobó pozastavenó pracó nevzta-huje na opatﾖenó, kterè zakazujó v̅robu do tï móry, kterè neo-mezó voln̅ pohyb zbo™ó uvnitﾖ Spoleｲenstvó, nebo na technickï speci«kace,jinïpo™adavkynebopravidlaproslu™byspojenïsdaﾏov̅mi nebo «nanｲnómiopatﾖenómi.
The Member States do not have to notify draft national techni-cal regulations relating to the application of Article 12 (1) of the Directive on general product safety.
Kromｸ toho ustanovenó smｸrnice o technick̅ch pﾖedpisech uklèdajó ｲlensk̅m stètヮm velmi pﾖósnï povinnosti (daleko pﾖós-nｸjþó ne™ povinnosti t̅kajócó se norem), kterï jsou vyvè™eny prè-vem reagovat na nèvrhy nèrodnóch pﾖedpisヮ pﾖipravovanï ostatnómi ｲlensk̅mi stèty, ÿsporou ｲasu a u™itóm mïnｸ slo™i-t̅ch postupヮ ve srovnènó s velmi slo™it̅mi postupy na ÿrovni Komise a na ÿrovni ｲlensk̅ch stètヮ, kterï vychèzejó z postupヮ ex post a pou™óvajó se v̅hradnｸ na odstraﾏovènó ji™ existujócóch uzèkonｸn̅ch pﾖekè™ek.
This Article provides that `where a Member State adopts or de-cides to adopt, recommend or agree with producers and distribu-tors, whether on a compulsory or voluntary basis, measures or ac-
V prvnóm pﾖópadｸ je zﾖejmï, ™e odlo™enó pﾖijetó opatﾖenó mè smysl pouze tehdy, jednè-li se o zèkaz v̅roby, kterè s sebou pﾖi-nèþó mo™nï riziko vytvoﾖenó technickï pﾖekè™ky na vnitﾖnóm trhu. V druhïm pﾖópadｸ bylo pova™ovèno za nevhodnï po™a-dovat odlo™enó pﾖijetó opatﾖenó spojen̅ch s daﾏov̅m systïmem ｲlensk̅ch stètヮ.
The Member States are not required to notify national meas-ures aimed solely at amending a technical regulation in order to remove obstacles in response to a request, for instance through a detailed opinion or comments, from the Commis-sion (for example, a request for the inclusion of a mutual recog-nition clause, based on Article 28 of the Treaty), since these measures are precisely in accordance with the objective of Di-rective 98/34/EC.
podﾖódit, ale kterï nebyly oznèmeny, na nich nelze vymèhat (66).
It may be concluded from the reading of Articles 8, 9 and 10 of Directive 98/34/EC that the information procedure applicable to technical regulations is quite complex.
Kromｸ toho rozhodnutó v pﾖópadu Unilever urｲilo, ™e dokonce i
The handbook pro-duced by the Commission departments explains in detail how the procedure operates in practice.
Jestli™e se ｲlensk̅ stèt nepodﾖódó, bude v̅sledkem soudnóho ﾖózenó rozhodnutó Soudnóho dvora o nesplnｸnó povinnostó (65).
In the second case, it was considered inopportune to require postponement of adoption of measures linked to the « s c a l s y s t e m o ft h e Mffe mb e r S t a t e s .
Soukromï osoby se mohou, pokud se jich t̅kè, spolehnout na skuteｲnost, ™e dodr™enó technick̅ch pﾖedpisヮ, kter̅m se musó dodr™enó opatﾖenó, kterï bylo oznèmeno, ale kterï bylo nèsled-nｸ pﾖijato v obdobó pozastavenó pracó stanovenïm ｲlènkem 9 smｸrnice 98/34/ES, nelze na jednotlivcóch vymèhat (67).
Where the Member States fail to meet their obligation to com-municate their draft technical regulations to the Commission, or do not observe the standstill periods laid down in the Direc-tive, the Commission can institute infringement proceedings, under Article 226 of the Treaty, as already mentioned.
(65) Odkaz na tato rozhodnutó je uveden v bodu V bibliogra«ckïhopﾖehledu.(66) Pﾖópad C-194/94 ¶CIA Securityƒ [1996] ECR I-2201 a Pﾖópad C-226/97 ¶Lemmensƒ [1998] ECR I-3711.
When the Member State concerned does not comply, the pro-cedure leads to a judgment of failure to fu l « l o b l i g a t i o n s b y t h e C o u r t of Justice.
Zﾖizuje se stèl̅ v̅bor slo™en̅ ze zèstupcヮ jmenovan̅ch ｲlensk̅mi stèty, kteﾖó si mohou pﾖizvat ke spoluprèci odbornóky nebo porad-ce; v̅boru pﾖedsedè zèstupce Komise.
A Standing Committee shall be set up consisting of representa-tives appointed by the Member States who may call on the assist-ance of experts or advisers; its chairman shall be a representative of the Commission.
c) pﾖi v̅bｸru konkrïtnóho systïmu v̅mｸny informacó podle tïto smｸrnice a pﾖi jakïkoli jeho zmｸnｸ;
b) when drawing up the rules for the consolidated presentation of information and the plan and criteria for the presentation of standards programmes (Article 2 (2));
Plènek 6 d) pﾖi ovｸﾖovènó fungovènó systïmu vytvoﾖenïho podle tïto smｸr-nice;
Article 6 c) when deciding on the actual system whereby the exchange of information provided for in this Directive is to be e.ectedandon any change to it;