natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
35 It must be recalled that the purpose of Directive 2000/78, as stated in Article 1, is to lay down a general framework for combating discrimination, as regards employment and occupation, on any of the grounds referred to in that article, which include disability (see Chacón Navas, paragraph 41). In accordance with Article 3(1)(c) of the directive, it applies, within the limits of the areas of competence conferred on the European Union, to all persons, in relation inter alia to conditions of dismissal.
35 Prije svega valja istaknuti to da je, kako proizlazi iz njezinog članka 1., svrha Direktive 2000/78 utvrditi opći okvir za borbu protiv diskriminacije u području zapošljavanja i rada na temelju jednog od razloga iz tog članka, među kojima se nalazi i invaliditet (vidjeti presudu Chacón Navas , gore navedena, t. 41.). U skladu s člankom 3. stavkom 1. točkom (c) ta se direktiva, u granicama nadležnosti prenesenih na Europsku uniju, primjenjuje na sve osobe u odnosu na, između ostalog, uvjete otkaza.
36 The concept of ‘disability’ is not defined by Directive 2000/78 itself. The Court therefore held, in paragraph 43 of its judgment in Chacón Navas, that the concept must be understood as referring to a limitation which results in particular from physical, mental or psychological impairments and which hinders the participation of the person concerned in professional life.
36 Valja podsjetiti da pojam „invaliditeta” nije definiran samom Direktivom 2000/78. Sud je stoga u točki 43. presude Chacón Navas smatrao da taj pojam treba shvatiti u smislu da se odnosi na ograničenje koje je prije svega posljedica tjelesnog, mentalnog ili duševnog oštećenja i koje sprječava sudjelovanje dotične osobe u profesionalnoj karijeri.
37 The UN Convention, which was ratified by the European Union by decision of 26 November 2009, in other words after the judgment in Chacón Navas had been delivered, acknowledges in recital (e) that ‘disability is an evolving concept and that disability results from the interaction between persons with impairments and attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinders their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others’. Thus the second paragraph of Article 1 of the convention states that persons with disabilities include ‘those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others’.
37 U Konvenciji UN-a, koju je Unija ratificirala odlukom od 26. studenoga 2009., što je bilo nakon donošenja presude u predmetu Chacón Navas , u uvodnoj izjavi (e) prihvaća se da je „invaliditet koncept koji se još uvijek razvija te da invaliditet nastaje kao rezultat međudjelovanja osoba s oštećenjima i prepreka koje proizlaze iz stajališta njihove okoline te iz prepreka koje postoje u okolišu, a koje onemogućuju njihovo puno i djelotvorno sudjelovanje u društvu na izjednačenoj osnovi s drugim ljudima”. Članak 1. stavak 2. te konvencije navode da osobe s invaliditetom uključuju „osobe koje imaju dugotrajna tjelesna, mentalna, intelektualna ili osjetilna oštećenja, koja u međudjelovanju s različitim preprekama mogu sprječavati njihovo puno i učinkovito sudjelovanje u društvu na ravnopravnoj osnovi s drugima”.
38 Having regard to the considerations set out in paragraphs 28 to 32 above, the concept of ‘disability’ must be understood as referring to a limitation which results in particular from physical, mental or psychological impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder the full and effective participation of the person concerned in professional life on an equal basis with other workers.
38 Uzimajući u obzir razmatranja iz točaka od 28. do 32. pojam „invaliditeta” valja shvatiti u smislu da se odnosi na ograničenje koje je prije svega posljedica tjelesnog, mentalnog ili duševnog oštećenja i koje u međudjelovanju s različitim preprekama može sprječavati puno i učinkovito sudjelovanje dotičnih osoba u profesionalnoj karijeri na ravnopravnoj osnovi s drugim radnicima.
39 In addition, it follows from the second paragraph of Article 1 of the UN Convention that the physical, mental or psychological impairments must be ‘long-term’.
39 Osim toga, iz drugog stavka članka 1. Konvencije UN-a slijedi da tjelesno, mentalno ili duševno oštećenje treba biti „dugotrajno”.
40 It may be added that, as the Advocate General observes in point 32 of her Opinion, it does not appear that Directive 2000/78 is intended to cover only disabilities that are congenital or result from accidents, to the exclusion of those caused by illness. It would run counter to the very aim of the directive, which is to implement equal treatment, to define its scope by reference to the origin of the disability.
40 Valja dodati i, kako je nezavisna odvjetnica istaknula u točki 32. svojeg mišljenja, da Direktiva 2000/78 ne obuhvaća samo invaliditet koji je prirođen ili posljedica nezgoda, a da isključuje invaliditete uzrokovane bolešću. Bilo bi u suprotnosti sa samim ciljem direktive, koja želi uvesti jednako postupanje, njezino područje primjene definirati u odnosu na uzrok invaliditeta.
41 It must therefore be concluded that if a curable or incurable illness entails a limitation which results in particular from physical, mental or psychological impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder the full and effective participation of the person concerned in professional life on an equal basis with other workers, and the limitation is a long-term one, such an illness can be covered by the concept of ‘disability’ within the meaning of Directive 2000/78.
41 Iz tog razloga valja zaključiti da ako izlječiva ili neizlječiva bolest uzrokuje ograničenje koje je prije svega posljedica tjelesnog, mentalnog ili duševnog oštećenja koje u međudjelovanju s različitim preprekama može sprječavati puno i učinkovito sudjelovanje dotične osobe u profesionalnoj karijeri na ravnopravnoj osnovi s drugim radnicima, i ako je to ograničenje dugotrajno, takva se bolest može obuhvatiti pojmom „invaliditeta” u smislu Direktive 2000/78.
42 On the other hand, an illness not entailing such a limitation is not covered by the concept of ‘discrimination’ within the meaning of Directive 2000/78. Illness as such cannot be regarded as a ground in addition to those in relation to which Directive 2000/78 prohibits discrimination (see Chacón Navas, paragraph 57).
42 S druge strane, bolest koja ne uzrokuje takvo ograničenje nije obuhvaćena pojmom „invaliditeta” u smislu Direktive 2000/78. Bolest kao takva ne može se smatrati kao dodatan razlog uz one razloge temeljem kojih Direktiva 2000/78 zabranjuje svaku diskriminaciju (vidjeti Chacón Navas , t. 57.).
43 The circumstance that the person concerned can work only to a limited extent is not an obstacle to that person’s state of health being covered by the concept of ‘disability’. Contrary to the submissions of DAB and Pro Display, a disability does not necessarily imply complete exclusion from work or professional life.
43 Okolnost u kojoj dotična osoba može raditi samo u ograničenoj mjeri nije prepreka tomu da se njezino zdravstveno stanje obuhvati pojmom „invaliditeta”. Suprotno tvrdnjama DAB-a i Pro Display-a invaliditet ne podrazumijeva nužno puno isključivanje s posla ili profesionalne karijere.
44 The concept of ‘disability’ as defined in paragraph 38 above must be understood as referring to a hindrance to the exercise of a professional activity, not, as DAB and Pro Display submit, to the impossibility of exercising such an activity. The state of health of a person with a disability who is fit to work, albeit only part-time, is thus capable of being covered by the concept of ‘disability’. An interpretation such as that suggested by DAB and Pro Display would, moreover, be incompatible with the objective of Directive 2000/78, which aims in particular to enable a person with a disability to have access to or participate in employment.
44 Pojam „invaliditeta” prema definiciji iz točke 38. valja shvatiti kao prepreku obavljanju profesionalne djelatnosti, a ne, kao što tvrde DAB i Pro Display, kao nemogućnost obavljanja takve djelatnosti. Zdravstveno stanje osobe s invaliditetom koja je sposobna za rad, iako samo na nepuno radno vrijeme, može se stoga obuhvatiti pojmom „invaliditeta”. Tumačenje koje predlažu DAB i Pro Display bilo bi, osim toga, protivno cilju Direktive 2000/78 koja je posebno usmjerena na to da se osobama s invaliditetom omogući pristup zapošljavanju ili sudjelovanje na radu.
45 In addition, a finding that there is a disability does not depend on the nature of the accommodation measures such as the use of special equipment. It should be noted here that the definition of the concept of ‘disability’ within the meaning of Article 1 of Directive 2000/78 comes before the determination and assessment of the appropriate accommodation measures referred to in Article 5 of the directive.
45 Osim toga, utvrđivanje invaliditeta ne ovisi o prirodi mjera prilagodbe, kao što je uporaba posebne opreme. Valja primijetiti da definicija pojma „invaliditeta” u smislu članka 1. Direktive 2000/78 prethodi određivanju i procjenjivanju prikladnih mjera prilagodbe iz članka 5. te direktive.
46 According to recital 16 in the preamble to Directive 2000/78, such measures are intended to accommodate the needs of disabled persons. They are therefore the consequence, not the constituent element, of the concept of disability. Similarly, the measures or adaptations referred to in recital 20 in the preamble make it possible to comply with the obligation under Article 5 of the directive, but do not apply unless there is a disability.
46 Prema uvodnoj izjavi 16. Direktive 2000/78 tim se mjerama žele uzeti u obzir potrebe osoba s invaliditetom. One su stoga posljedica, a ne sastavni element, pojma invaliditeta. Slično tomu, mjere ili prilagodbe iz uvodne izjave 20. omogućavaju ispunjavanje obveze prema članku 5. te direktive i primjenjuju se isključivo u slučaju invaliditeta.
47 It follows from the above considerations that the answer to Questions 1 and 2 is that the concept of ‘disability’ in Directive 2000/78 must be interpreted as including a condition caused by an illness medically diagnosed as curable or incurable where that illness entails a limitation which results in particular from physical, mental or psychological impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder the full and effective participation of the person concerned in professional life on an equal basis with other workers, and the limitation is a long-term one. The nature of the measures to be taken by the employer is not decisive for considering that a person’s state of health is covered by that concept.
47 Iz gornjih razmatranja slijedi da na prvo i drugo pitanje valja odgovoriti da pojam „invaliditeta” iz Direktive 2000/78 treba tumačiti tako da uključuje stanje uzrokovano bolešću koja je dijagnosticirana kao izlječiva ili neizlječiva, ako ta bolest uzrokuje ograničenje koje je prije svega posljedica tjelesnog, mentalnog ili duševnog oštećenja koje u međudjelovanju s različitim preprekama može sprječavati puno i učinkovito sudjelovanje dotične osobe u profesionalnoj karijeri na ravnopravnoj osnovi s drugim radnicima i ako je to ograničenje dugotrajno. Sama priroda mjera koje treba poduzeti poslodavac nije presudna kod odluke da se zdravstveno stanje osobe obuhvati tim pojmom.
48 By its third question the referring court asks essentially whether Article 5 of Directive 2000/78 must be interpreted as meaning that a reduction in working hours may constitute one of the accommodation measures referred to in that article.
48 Trećim pitanjem sud koji je uputio zahtjev u biti pita treba li članak 5. Direktive 2000/78 tumačiti u smislu da skraćeno radno vrijeme može biti jedna od mjera prilagodbe iz tog članka.
49 As that article states, the employer is required to take appropriate measures in particular to enable a person with a disability to have access to, participate in, or advance in employment. Recital 20 in the preamble to the directive gives a non-exhaustive list of such measures, which may be physical, organisational and/or educational.
49 Kako navodi taj članak, poslodavac treba poduzeti odgovarajuće mjere kako bi se osobi s invaliditetom omogućio pristup zapošljavanju, sudjelovanje ili napredovanje u radu. Uvodna izjava 20. te direktive netaksativno nabraja takve mjere, koje mogu biti fizičke, organizacijske i/ili edukacijske.
50 Neither Article 5 of Directive 2000/78 nor recital 20 in its preamble mentions reduced working hours. However, the concept of ‘patterns of working time’ mentioned in that recital must be interpreted in order to determine whether an adaptation of working hours may be covered by that concept.
50 Skraćeno radno vrijeme ne spominje se ni u članku 5. Direktive 2000/78 ni u uvodnoj izjavi 20. Međutim, valja razjasniti pojam „raspored radnog vremena” iz te uvodne izjave kako bi se utvrdilo može li se prilagodba radnih sati obuhvatiti tim pojmom.
51 DAB and Pro Display submit that that concept refers to such matters as the organisation of the patterns and rhythms of work, for example in connection with a production process, and of breaks, so as to relieve as much as possible the burden on workers with disabilities.
51 DAB i Pro Display ističu da se taj pojam odnosi na elemente kao što je organizacija, u smislu rasporeda i ritma rada, na primjer u okviru proizvodnog postupka i stanke, kako bi se što više rasteretili radnici s invaliditetom.
52 However, it does not appear from recital 20 in the preamble or from any other provision of Directive 2000/78 that the European Union legislature intended to limit the concept of ‘patterns of working time’ to such elements and to exclude the adaptation of working hours, in particular the possibility for persons with a disability who are not capable, or no longer capable, of working full-time to work part-time.
52 Međutim, ni iz uvodne izjave 20. ni iz bilo koje druge odredbe Direktive 2000/78 ne proizlazi da je zakonodavac Unije namjeravao ograničiti pojam „rasporeda radnog vremena” na te elemente i isključiti prilagodbu radnih sati, a posebno mogućnost da osobe s invaliditetom koje nisu sposobne ili više nisu sposobne raditi puno radno vrijeme, rade skraćeno.
53 In accordance with the second paragraph of Article 2 of the UN Convention, ‘reasonable accommodation’ is ‘necessary and appropriate modification and adjustments not imposing a disproportionate or undue burden, where needed in a particular case, to ensure to persons with disabilities the enjoyment or exercise on an equal basis with others of all human rights and fundamental freedoms’. It follows that that provision prescribes a broad definition of the concept of ‘reasonable accommodation’.
53 Prema četvrtom stavku članka 2. Konvencije UN-a „razumna prilagodba” znači „potrebnu i prikladnu preinaku i podešavanja koja ne predstavljaju nerazmjerno ili neprimjereno opterećenje, da bi se takvo što u pojedinačnom slučaju, tamo gdje je to potrebno kako bi se osobama s invaliditetom osiguralo uživanje ili korištenje svih ljudskih prava i temeljnih sloboda na ravnopravnoj osnovi s drugima”. Iz tog slijedi da ta odredba propisuje široku definiciju pojma „razumna prilagodba”.
54 Thus, with respect to Directive 2000/78, that concept must be understood as referring to the elimination of the various barriers that hinder the full and effective participation of persons with disabilities in professional life on an equal basis with other workers.
54 Stoga u pogledu Direktive 2000/78 taj pojam treba shvatiti tako da se odnosi na uklanjanje različitih prepreka koje sprječavaju puno i učinkovito sudjelovanje osoba s invaliditetom u profesionalnoj karijeri na ravnopravnoj osnovi s drugim radnicima.
55 As recital 20 in the preamble to Directive 2000/78 and the second paragraph of Article 2 of the UN Convention envisage not only material but also organisational measures, and the term ‘pattern’ of working time must be understood as the rhythm or speed at which the work is done, it cannot be ruled out that a reduction in working hours may constitute one of the accommodation measures referred to in Article 5 of that directive.
55 Budući da uvodna izjava 20. Direktive 2000/78 i četvrti stavak članka 2. Konvencije UN-a predviđaju ne samo materijalne nego i organizacijske mjere, a pojam „raspored radnog vremena” treba shvatiti kao ritam ili brzinu rada, ne može se isključiti da skraćeno radno vrijeme može biti jedna od mjera prilagodbe iz članka 5. te direktive.
56 It should be observed, moreover, that the list of appropriate measures to adapt the workplace to the disability in recital 20 in the preamble to Directive 2000/78 is not exhaustive and, consequently, even if it were not covered by the concept of ‘pattern of working time’, a reduction in working hours could be regarded as an accommodation measure referred to in Article 5 of the directive, in a case in which reduced working hours make it possible for the worker to continue employment, in accordance with the objective of that article.
56 Valja primijetiti da popis prikladnih mjera za prilagodbu radnog mjesta invaliditetu iz uvodne izjave 20. Direktive 2000/78 nije konačan i da u skladu s ciljem tog članka, čak i da nije obuhvaćeno pojmom „raspored radnog vremena”, skraćeno radno vrijeme bi se moglo smatrati mjerom prilagodbe iz članka 5. te direktive u slučaju da smanjenje radnih sati omogućava radniku da nastavi obavljati svoj posao.
57 It must be recalled, however, that, as stated in recital 17 in the preamble, Directive 2000/78 does not require the recruitment, promotion or maintenance in employment of a person who is not competent, capable and available to perform the essential functions of the post concerned, without prejudice to the obligation to provide reasonable accommodation for people with disabilities, which includes a possible reduction in their hours of work.
57 Ipak treba podsjetiti da se, kako se navodi u uvodnoj izjavi 17., Direktivom 2000/78 ne zahtijeva zapošljavanje, unaprjeđivanje ili zadržavanje na radu osobe koja nije stručna, sposobna ni raspoloživa za obavljanje osnovnih zadataka odgovarajućeg radnog mjesta, ne dovodeći u pitanje obvezu razumne prilagodbe potrebama osoba s invaliditetom što uključuje moguće smanjenje njihove satnice.
58 Moreover, in accordance with Article 5 of that directive, the accommodation persons with disabilities are entitled to must be reasonable, in that it must not constitute a disproportionate burden on the employer.
58 Osim toga, u skladu s člankom 5. te direktive, prilagodbe na koje osobe s invaliditetom imaju pravo, moraju biti razumne u smislu da ne smiju biti nerazmjerno opterećenje za poslodavca.
59 In the disputes in the main proceedings, it is therefore for the national court to assess whether a reduction in working hours, as an accommodation measure, represents a disproportionate burden on the employers.
59 U glavnom postupku na nacionalnom je sudu da ocijeni može li smanjenje radnih sati kao mjera prilagodbe biti nerazmjerno opterećenje za poslodavca.
60 As follows from recital 21 in the preamble to Directive 2000/78, account must be taken in particular of the financial and other costs entailed by such a measure, the scale and financial resources of the undertaking, and the possibility of obtaining public funding or any other assistance.
60 Kako to proizlazi iz uvodne izjave 21. Direktive 2000/78, valja voditi računa osobito o povezanim financijskim i drugim troškovima, veličini i financijskim sredstvima poduzeća te o mogućnostima dobivanja javnih sredstava ili kakve druge pomoći.
61 It should be recalled that, in proceedings under Article 267 TFEU, which is based on a clear separation of functions between the national courts and the Court of Justice, any assessment of the facts in the case is a matter for the national court. However, in order to give the national court a useful answer, the Court may, in a spirit of cooperation with national courts, provide it with all the guidance that it deems necessary (Case C-433/05 Sandström [2010] ECR I-2885, paragraph 35 and the case-law cited).
61 Valja podsjetiti da je u okviru postupka iz članka 267. UFEU-a, koji se temelji na jasnom odvajanju funkcija između nacionalnih sudova i Suda, ocjena činjeničnog stanja u nadležnosti nacionalnog suda. Međutim, da bi nacionalnom sudu dao koristan odgovor, Sud mu može, u duhu suradnje s nacionalnim sudovima, dati sve upute koje smatra potrebnima (presuda od 15. travnja 2010., Sandström, C-433/05, Zb., str. I-2885., t. 35. i navedena sudska praksa).
62 It may be of relevance for the purposes of that assessment that, as noted by the referring court, immediately after the dismissal of Ms Ring, DAB advertised a position for an office worker to work part-time, 22 hours a week, in its regional office in Lyngby. There is nothing in the documents before the Court to show that Ms Ring was not capable of occupying that part-time post or to explain why it was not offered to her. Moreover, the referring court stated that soon after her dismissal Ms Ring started a new job as a receptionist with another company and her actual working time was 20 hours a week.
62 U svrhu te ocjene može biti relevantna činjenica koju je iznio sud koji je uputio zahtjev, da je neposredno nakon otkaza koji je dobila J. Ring, DAB objavio oglas za radno mjesto uredskog službenika na nepuno radno vrijeme, 22 sata tjedno, u regionalnom uredu u Lyngbyju. U spisima koji su dostavljeni Sudu nema nikakvih dokaza da J. Ring nije bila sposobna obavljati taj posao na nepuno radno vrijeme niti je objašnjeno zašto joj to mjesto nije bilo ponuđeno. Osim toga, sud koji je uputio zahtjev naveo je da je nedugo nakon otkaza J. Ring počela raditi na novom poslu kao recepcionarka u drugom poduzeću i njezino radno vrijeme je bilo 20 sati tjedno.
63 In addition, as the Danish Government pointed out at the hearing, Danish law makes it possible to grant public assistance to undertakings for accommodation measures whose purpose is to facilitate the access to the labour market of persons with disabilities, including initiatives aimed at encouraging employers to recruit and maintain in employment persons with disabilities.
63 Osim toga, kako je danska vlada istaknula na raspravi, dansko pravo predviđa mogućnost dodjele pomoći iz javnih sredstava za mjere prilagodbe čiji je cilj olakšati pristup tržištu rada za osobe s invaliditetom, uključujući inicijative kojima je cilj potaknuti poslodavce da zapošljavaju i zadržavaju na radu osobe s invaliditetom.
64 In the light of the foregoing, the answer to Question 3 is that Article 5 of Directive 2000/78 must be interpreted as meaning that a reduction in working hours may constitute one of the accommodation measures referred to in that article. It is for the national court to assess whether, in the circumstances of the main proceedings, a reduction in working hours, as an accommodation measure, represents a disproportionate burden on the employer.
64 S obzirom na gore navedeno, na treće pitanje valja odgovoriti da članak 5. Direktive 2000/78 treba tumačiti u smislu da smanjenje radnih sati može biti jedna od mjera prilagodbe iz tog članka. Na nacionalnom je sudu da ocijeni je li u okolnostima glavnog postupka smanjenje radnih sati kao mjera prilagodbe nerazmjerno opterećenje za poslodavca.
Question 4(b)
Četvrto pitanje, točka (b)