natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
44 That is also true of the basic amount to which the multiplier coefficients are applied, which must be set at EUR 600.
44 Isto vrijedi i za osnovni iznos na koji se primjenjuju koeficijenti množenja, a koji treba biti utvrđen na 600 eura.
45 In the light of all of the above, the multiplication of a basic amount of EUR 600 by coefficients, set at 8 for the seriousness of the infringement, at 1.5 for the duration of that infringement, and at 4.38 for the capacity of the Member State concerned to pay, amounts, in the present case, to a total of EUR 31 536 per day of delay. That amount must be regarded as adequate in the light of the purposes served by the periodic penalty payment as referred to in paragraph 28 above.
45 S obzirom na sve prethodno navedeno, množenje osnovnog iznosa od 600 eura koeficijentima utvrđenima na 8 na temelju težine povrede, na 1,5 na temelju njezinog trajanja i na 4,38 na temelju sposobnosti plaćanja dotične države članice, dovodi u ovom slučaju do iznosa od 31 536 eura za svaki dan kašnjenja. Taj iznos treba smatrati primjerenim s obzirom na namjene novčane kazne kako su navedene u točki 28. ove presude.
46 In the light of all of the foregoing considerations, the Hellenic Republic must be ordered to pay to the Commission, into the account ‘European Community own resources’, a penalty payment of EUR 31 536 for each day of delay in implementing the measures necessary for compliance with the judgment in Case C-65/05 Commission v Greece, from the delivery of judgment in the present case until the day on which the judgment in Case C-65/05 is complied with.
46 Uzevši u obzir sva prethodna razmatranja, Helenskoj Republici valja naložiti da plati Komisiji na račun „Vlastita sredstva Europske zajednice” novčanu kaznu u iznosu od 31 536 eura za svaki dan kašnjenja u provedbi mjera potrebnih kako bi postupila u skladu s presudom Komisija/Grčka, računajući od objave te presude do izvršenja navedene presude Komisija/Grčka.
The lump sum payment
Paušalni iznos
47 The Commission proposes that the Court order the Hellenic Republic to make a lump sum payment of EUR 9 636 for each day of delay in complying with the judgment in Case C-65/05 Commission v Greece, from the day on which the judgment in that case was delivered until the day on which it has been fully complied with or until judgment is delivered in the present case, if the judgment in Case C-65/05 Commission v Greece has not been fully complied with by that date.
47 Komisija predlaže Sudu da Helenskoj Republici naloži plaćanje paušalnog iznosa od 9 636 eura za svaki dan kašnjenja u izvršenju presude Komisija/Grčka, od dana donošenja te presude do dana njezinog potpunog izvršenja ili do dana donošenja presude u tom predmetu, pod pretpostavkom da navedena presuda Komisija/Grčka do toga dana nije u potpunosti izvršena.
48 That daily amount is arrived at by multiplying a basic amount of EUR 200 by the coefficient for seriousness of the infringement, set in this case at 11 on a scale of 1 to 20, and by the coefficient reflecting the Hellenic Republic’s capacity to pay, set at 4.38.
48 Taj dnevni iznos proizlazi iz množenja osnovnog iznosa od 200 eura koeficijentom za težinu povrede, procijenjenim u ovom slučaju na 11 na ljestvici od 1 do 20, te koeficijentom koji odražava sposobnost plaćanja Helenske Republike, procijenjenim na 4,38.
49 The total lump sum payment requested amounts to EUR 3 420 780, which is arrived at by multiplying the daily amount of EUR 9 636 by 355, that it to say, by the number of days between 26 October 2006, the date on which the judgment in Case C-65/05 Commission v Greece was delivered, and 17 October 2007, the date on which the Commission decided to bring the present action.
49 Ukupan zahtijevani paušalni iznos je 3 420 780 eura, a dobiven je množenjem dnevnog iznosa od 9 636 eura s 355, tj. s brojem dana proteklih od 26. listopada 2006., datuma donošenja navedene presude Komisija/Grčka, do 17. listopada 2007., datuma odluke Komisije o podnošenju ove tužbe.
50 The Hellenic Republic contends that it should not be ordered to pay a lump sum, inasmuch as that financial penalty relates to its past conduct. Furthermore, in its view, the amount of the lump sum proposed by the Commission is disproportionate in relation to the seriousness and duration of the infringement and is excessive, particularly in view of the problematical nature of the rules on gaming in Greece.
50 Helenska Republika tvrdi da joj nije trebalo biti naloženo plaćanje paušalnog iznosa budući da se novčana kazna odnosi na proteklo ponašanje dotične države članice. Osim toga, prema njezinom mišljenju, iznos paušalnog iznosa koji je predložila Komisija je neproporcionalan s obzirom na težinu i trajanje povrede i previsok osobito ako se uzme u obzir problematika propisa o igrama u Grčkoj.
51 The decision whether to impose a lump sum payment must, in each individual case, depend on all the relevant factors pertaining to both the particular nature of the infringement established and the individual conduct of the Member State involved in the procedure instigated pursuant to Article 228 EC (Case C-121/07 Commission v France, paragraph 62).
51 Odluka o nalaganju paušalnog iznosa mora se u svakom pojedinom slučaju temeljiti na ukupnosti svih bitnih elementa koji se odnose kako na karakteristike utvrđene povrede tako i na stav dotične države članice u postupku pokrenutom na temelju članka 228. UEZ-a (presuda od 9. prosinca 2008., Komisija/Francuska, t. 62.).
52 If the Court decides to impose a periodic penalty payment or lump sum payment, it must do so, in exercising its discretion, in a manner that is appropriate to the circumstances and proportionate both to the breach that has been established and to the capacity of the Member State concerned to pay. More specifically as regards the imposition of a lump sum payment, the relevant factors to be taken into account include, in particular, factors such as how long the breach of obligations has persisted since the judgment which initially established it was delivered and the public and private interests involved (see Case C-121/07 Commission v France, paragraph 64 and the case-law cited).
52 Ako Sud odluči nametnuti plaćanje novčane kazne ili paušalnog iznosa, na njemu je da prilikom izvršavanja svojih ovlasti procjene utvrdi tako da je, s jedne strane, prilagođena okolnostima i, s druge strane, proporcionalna utvrđenoj povredi kao i sposobnosti plaćanja dotične države članice. Što se tiče osobito nalaganja plaćanja paušalnog iznosa, relevantni čimbenici koje treba uzeti u obzir u tom pogledu su trajanje povrede obveze od donošenja presude kojom se ona utvrđuje te relevantni javni i privatni interesi (vidjeti presudu od 9. prosinca 2008., Komisija/Francuska, t. 64., i navedenu sudsku praksu).
53 In a situation such as that which is the subject of the present action, in light of the fact that the breach of obligations has persisted for a long period since the judgment which initially established it, of the public and private interests at issue, of the lack of a decision to suspend application of the legislation in question in order to prevent criminal prosecutions, and of the lack of any tangible move to undertake compliance with that judgment, payment of a lump sum must be imposed.
53 U situaciji koja je predmet ove tužbe, s obzirom na trajanje povrede tijekom duljeg razdoblja od donošenja presude kojom je ona prvotno utvrđena, dotične javne i privatne interese, nedostatak odluke o obustavi primjene dotičnog zakonodavstva kako bi se spriječila provedba kaznenih progona i nedostatak opipljivog početka izvršenja te presude, nalaže se plaćanje paušalnog iznosa.
54 In the light of the foregoing considerations, the circumstances of the case are fairly assessed by setting the amount of the lump sum which the Hellenic Republic will have to pay at EUR 3 million.
54 S obzirom na prethodno navedeno, utvrđivanjem paušalnog iznosa od tri milijuna eura koji Helenska Republika, radi se o pravednoj ocjeni okolnosti slučaja.
55 The Hellenic Republic must therefore be ordered to pay to the Commission, into the ‘European Community own resources’ account, a lump sum of EUR 3 million.
55 Stoga Helenskoj Republici valja naložiti da na račun „Vlastita sredstva Europske zajednice” Komisiji plati paušalni iznos od tri milijuna eura.
56 Under Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs if they have been applied for in the successful party’s pleadings. Since the Commission has asked for costs and the Hellenic Republic has failed in its submissions, the Hellenic Republic must be ordered to pay the costs.
56 U skladu s člankom 69. stavkom 2. Poslovnika, na zahtjev protivne stranke, svakoj stranci koja izgubi spor nalaže se snošenje troškova. Budući da je Komisija postavila zahtjev da se Helenskoj Republici naloži snošenje troškova i da ona nije uspjela u postupku, Helenskoj Republici nalaže se snošenje troškova.
"1. Declares that, by not amending Articles 2(1) and 3 of Law No 3037/2002, laying down a prohibition, subject to the criminal and administrative penalties set out in Articles 4 and 5 of that law, on the installation and operation on all public or private premises, apart from casinos, of all electrical, electromechanical and electronic games, including all computer games, in accordance with Articles 28 EC, 43 EC and 49 EC and Article 8 of Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules on Information Society services, as amended by Directive 98/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 July 1998, the Hellenic Republic has not taken all the measures necessary to comply with the judgment of the Court of 26 October 2006 in Case C-65/05 Commission v Greece and has thus failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 228 EC;"
1. Ne izmijenivši članak 2. stavak 1. i članak 3. zakona br. 3037/2002 o zabrani, pod prijetnjom kaznenih ili administrativnih sankcija predviđenih člancima 4. i 5. istog zakona, instaliranja i korištenja svih električnih, elektromehaničkih i elektroničkih igara, uključujući sve igre na računalima, u svim javnim ili privatnim prostorijama, osim casinoa, u skladu s člancima 28. UEZ-a, 43. UEZ-a i 49. UEZ-a, kao i člankom 8. Direktive 98/34/EZ Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 22. lipnja 1998. o utvrđivanju postupka osiguravanja informacija u području tehničkih normi i propisa te o pravilima za usluge informacijskog društva, kako je izmijenjena Direktivom 98/48/EZ Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 20. srpnja 1998., Helenska Republika nije poduzela sve mjere potrebne za izvršenje presude od 26. listopada 2006., Komisija/Grčka (C-65/05) i time nije ispunila obveze koje ima na temelju članka 228. UEZ-a.
"2. Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay to the Commission of the European Communities, into the ‘European Community own resources’ account, a penalty payment of EUR 31 536 for each day of delay in implementing the measures necessary to comply with the judgment in Case C-65/05 Commission v Greece, from delivery of the present judgment until the judgment in Case C-65/05 Commission v Greece has been complied with;"
2. Helenskoj Republici nalaže se da na račun „Vlastita sredstva Europske zajednice” Komisiji plati novčanu kaznu u iznosu od 31 536 eura za svaki dan kašnjenja u provedbi mjera potrebnih kako bi postupila u skladu s presudom Komisija/Grčka, računajući od objave te presude do izvršenja navedene presude Komisija/Grčka.
"3. Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay to the Commission of the European Communities, into the ‘European Community own resources’ account, a lump sum of EUR 3 million;"
3. Helenskoj Republici nalaže se da na račun „Vlastita sredstva Europske zajednice” Komisiji plati paušalni iznos od tri milijuna eura.
4. Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.
4. Helenskoj Republici nalaže se snošenje troškova.
* Language of the case: Greek.
* Jezik postupka: grčki.
25 July 2008 (*)
25. srpnja 2008. (*)
(Directive 2004/38/EC – Right of Union citizens and their family members to move and reside freely in the territory of a Member State – Family members who are nationals of non-member countries – Nationals of non-member countries who entered the host Member State before becoming spouses of Union citizens)
„Direktiva 2004/38/EZ – Pravo građana Unije i članova njihovih obitelji slobodno se kretati i boraviti na državnom području država članica – Članovi obitelji koji su državljani trećih zemalja – Državljani trećih zemalja koji su ušli u državu članicu domaćina prije nego što su postali bračni drugovi građana Unije“
In Case C-127/08,
U predmetu C-127/08,
REFERENCE for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the High Court (Ireland), made by decision of 14 March 2008, received at the Court on 25 March 2008, in the proceedings
povodom zahtjeva za prethodnu odluku na temelju članka 234. UEZ-a, koji je uputio High Court (Irska), odlukom od 14. ožujka 2008., koju je Sud zaprimio 25. ožujka 2008., u postupku
Blaise Baheten Metock,
Blaise Baheten Metock,
Hanette Eugenie Ngo Ikeng,
Hanette Eugenie Ngo Ikeng,
Christian Joel Baheten,
Christian Joel Baheten,
Samuel Zion Ikeng Baheten,
Samuel Zion Ikeng Baheten,
Hencheal Ikogho,
Hencheal Ikogho,
Donna Ikogho,
Donna Ikogho,
Roland Chinedu,
Roland Chinedu,
Marlene Babucke Chinedu,
Marlene Babucke Chinedu,
Henry Igboanusi,
Henry Igboanusi,
Roksana Batkowska
Roksana Batkowska
v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform,
protiv Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform,
composed of V. Skouris, President, P. Jann, C.W.A. Timmermans, A. Rosas and K. Lenaerts, Presidents of Chambers, A. Tizzano, U. Lõhmus, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, M. Ilešič (Rapporteur), J. Malenovský, J. Klučka, C. Toader and J.-J. Kasel, Judges,
u sastavu V. Skouris, predsjednik, P. Jann, C. W. A. Timmermans, A. Rosas i K. Lenaerts, predsjednici vijeća, A. Tizzano, U. Lõhmus, J. N. Cunha Rodrigues, M. Ilešič (izvjestitelj), J. Malenovský, J. Klučka, C. Toader i J.-J. Kasel, suci,
having regard to the decision of the President of the Court of 17 April 2008 to apply an accelerated procedure in accordance with Article 23a of the Statute of the Court of Justice and the first paragraph of Article 104a of the Rules of Procedure,
uzimajući u obzir odluku predsjednika Suda od 17. travnja 2008. da se o predmetu odluči u ubrzanom postupku, u skladu s člankom 23.a Statuta Suda i prvim podstavkom članka 104.a Poslovnika,
having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 3 June 2008,
uzimajući u obzir pisani postupak i nakon rasprave održane 3. lipnja 2008.,
– B. Baheten Metock, H.E. Ngo Ikeng, C.J. Baheten and S.Z. Ikeng Baheten, by M. de Blacam, SC, and J. Stanley, BL, instructed by V. Crowley, S. Burke and D. Langan, Solicitors,
– za B. Baheten Metock, H.E. Ngo Ikeng, C.J. Baheten i S.Z. Ikeng Baheten, M. de Blacam, SC, i J. Stanley, BL, koje su opunomoćili V. Crowley, S. Burke i D. Langan, solicitors,
– H. Ikogho and D. Ikogho, by R. Boyle, SC, G. O’Halloran, BL, and A. Lowry, BL, instructed by S. Mulvihill, Solicitor,
– za H. Ikogho i D. Ikogho, R. Boyle, SC, G. O’Halloran, BL, i A. Lowry, BL, koje je opunomoćio S. Mulvihill, solicitor,
– R. Chinedu and M. Babucke Chinedu, by A. Collins, SC, M. Lynn, BL, and P. O’Shea, BL, instructed by B. Burns, Solicitor,
– za R. Chinedu i M. Babucke Chinedu, A. Collins, SC, M. Lynn, BL, i P. O’Shea, BL, koje je opunomoćio B. Burns, solicitor,
– H. Igboanusi and R. Batkowska, by M. Forde, SC, and O. Ladenegan, BL, instructed by K. Tunney and W. Mudah, Solicitors,
– za H. Igboanusi i R. Batkowska, M. Forde, SC, i O. Ladenegan, BL, koje su opunomoćili K. Tunney i W. Mudah, solicitors,
– the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, by D. O’Hagan, acting as Agent, and B. O’Moore, SC, S. Moorhead, SC, and D. Conlan Smyth, BL,
– za Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, D. O’Hagan, u svojstvu agenta, i B. O’Moore, SC, S. Moorhead, SC, i D. Conlan Smyth, BL,
– the Greek Government, by T. Papadopoulou and M. Michelogiannaki, acting as Agents,
– za grčku vladu, T. Papadopoulou i M. Michelogiannaki, u svojstvu agenata,
– the Cypriot Government, by D. Lisandrou, acting as Agent,
– za ciparsku vladu, D. Lisandrou, u svojstvu agenta,
– the Austrian Government, by E. Riedl and T. Fülöp, acting as Agents,
– za austrijsku vladu, E. Riedl i T. Fülöp, u svojstvu agenata,
– the United Kingdom Government, by I. Rao, acting as Agent, and T. Ward, Barrister,
– za vladu Ujedinjene Kraljevine, I. Rao, u svojstvu agenta, i T. Ward, barrister,
– the Commission of the European Communities, by D. Maidani and M. Wilderspin, acting as Agents,
– za Komisiju Europskih zajednica, D. Maidani i M. Wilderspin, u svojstvu agenata,
1 This reference for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (OJ 2004 L 158, p. 77, and corrigenda (OJ 2004 L 229, p. 35, OJ 2005 L 30, p. 27, OJ 2005 L 197, p. 34, and OJ 2007 L 204, p. 28)).
1 Zahtjev za prethodnu odluku odnosi se na tumačenje Direktive 2004/38/EZ Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 29. travnja 2004. o pravu građana Unije i članova njihovih obitelji slobodno se kretati i boraviti na državnom području država članica, o izmjeni Uredbe (EEZ) br. 1612/68 i stavljanju izvan snage direktiva 64/221/EEZ, 68/360/EEZ, 72/194/EEZ, 73/148/EEZ, 75/34/EEZ, 75/35/EEZ, 90/364/EEZ, 90/365/EEZ i 93/96/EEZ (SL L 158, str. 77., i ispravci (SL L 229, str. 35., SL L 30, str. 27., SL L 197, str. 34. i SL L 204, str. 28.) (SL, posebno izdanje na hrvatskom jeziku, poglavlje 5., svezak 2., str. 42. i ispravak SL 2016, L 87, str. 36.).
2 The reference was made in the course of four applications for judicial review before the High Court, each seeking inter alia an order of certiorari quashing the decision of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (‘the Minister for Justice’) refusing to grant a residence card to a national of a non-member country married to a Union citizen residing in Ireland.
2 Zahtjev je upućen u okviru četiri postupka za sudski nadzor („judicial review”) pred High Courtom, a cilj svakog je dobiti, među ostalim, nalog certiorari kojim se ukida odluka Ministera for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (u daljnjem tekstu: Minister for Justice) o odbijanju izdavanja dozvole boravka državljaninu treće zemlje koji je u braku s građankom Unije koja boravi u Irskoj.
3 Directive 2004/38 was adopted on the basis of Articles 12 EC, 18 EC, 40 EC, 44 EC and 52 EC.
3 Direktiva 2004/38 donesena je na temelju članaka 12. UEZ-a, 18. UEZ-a, 40. UEZ-a, 44. UEZ-a i 52. UEZ-a.
4 Recitals 1 to 5, 11, 14 and 31 in the preamble to that directive read as follows:
4 Uvodne izjave od 1. do 5., 11., 14. i 31. te direktive glase kako slijedi:
‘(1) Citizenship of the Union confers on every citizen of the Union a primary and individual right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, subject to the limitations and conditions laid down in the Treaty and to the measures adopted to give it effect.
„(1) Građanstvo Unije daje svakom građaninu Unije temeljno i osobno pravo slobodno se kretati i boraviti na državnom području država članica, koje je podložno ograničenjima i uvjetima utvrđenim u Ugovoru i mjerama donesenima za njegovu provedbu.
(2) The free movement of persons constitutes one of the fundamental freedoms of the internal market, which comprises an area without internal frontiers, in which freedom is ensured in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty.
(2) Slobodno kretanje osoba predstavlja jednu od temeljnih sloboda unutarnjeg tržišta, koje obuhvaća područje bez unutarnjih granica na kojima je sloboda osigurana u skladu s odredbama Ugovora.
(3) Union citizenship should be the fundamental status of nationals of the Member States when they exercise their right of free movement and residence. It is therefore necessary to codify and review the existing Community instruments dealing separately with workers, self-employed persons, as well as students and other inactive persons in order to simplify and strengthen the right of free movement and residence of all Union citizens.
(3) Građanstvo Unije predstavlja temeljni status državljana država članica kada ostvaruju pravo na slobodo kretanje i boravak. Stoga je potrebno kodificirati i preispitati postojeće instrumente Zajednice koji se zasebno bave radnicima, samozaposlenim osobama, kao i studentima te drugim osobama koje nisu zaposlene, kako bi se pojednostavnilo i ojačalo pravo na slobodno kretanje i boravak svih građana Unije.
(4) With a view to remedying this sector-by-sector, piecemeal approach to the right of free movement and residence and facilitating the exercise of this right, there needs to be a single legislative act …
(4) Kako bi se prevladao takav sektorski i pojedinačni pristup pravu na slobodno kretanje i boravak te olakšalo ostvarivanje ovog prava, potreban je jedinstveni zakonodavni akt […].
(5) The right of all Union citizens to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States should, if it is to be exercised under objective conditions of freedom and dignity, be also granted to their family members, irrespective of nationality …
(5) Pravo svih građana Unije slobodno se kretati i boraviti na državnom području država članica trebalo bi, kako bi se moglo ostvariti pod objektivnim uvjetima slobode i dostojanstva dodijeliti i članovima njihovih obitelji, bez obzira na njihovo državljanstvo […].
(11) The fundamental and personal right of residence in another Member State is conferred directly on Union citizens by the Treaty and is not dependent upon their having fulfilled administrative procedures.
(11) Temeljno i osobno pravo na boravak u drugoj državi članici za građane Unije proizlazi neposredno iz Ugovora i ne ovisi o ispunjavanju administrativnih postupaka.
(14) The supporting documents required by the competent authorities for the issuing of a registration certificate or of a residence card should be comprehensively specified in order to avoid divergent administrative practices or interpretations constituting an undue obstacle to the exercise of the right of residence by Union citizens and their family members.
(14) Kako bi se izbjegle različite upravne prakse ili tumačenja koja predstavljaju neprimjerenu prepreku za ostvarivanje prava na boravak građana Unije i članova njihovih obitelji, trebalo bi sveobuhvatno utvrditi koje su isprave potrebne nadležnim tijelima za izdavanje potvrde o prijavi ili boravišne iskaznice.
(31) This Directive respects the fundamental rights and freedoms and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In accordance with the prohibition of discrimination contained in the Charter, Member States should implement this Directive without discrimination between the beneficiaries of this Directive on grounds such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic characteristics, language, religion or beliefs, political or other opinion, membership of an ethnic minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation’.
(31) Ova je Direktiva u skladu s temeljnim pravima i slobodama, te načelima koja su priznata osobito u Povelji Europske unije o temeljnim pravima. U skladu sa zabranom diskriminacije sadržanoj u Povelji, države članice trebale bi provoditi ovu Direktivu bez diskriminacije među nositeljima prava iz ove Direktive na osnovama kao što su spol, rasa, boje kože, etničko ili socijalno podrijetlo, genetske karakteristike, jezik, vjeroispovijest ili uvjerenja, političko ili drugo mišljenje, pripadnost etničkoj manjini, imovina, rođenje, invaliditet, starost ili spolna orijentacija.”