natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
We consider the matter of the decision-making process within the framework of implementation of one-stop-shop mechanism, i.e. the final decision of the supervisory authority, to be a fundamental issue which requires special attention, especially in the context of its binding application for all Member States. 
Pitanje procesa donošenja odluka u okviru provedbe one-stop-shop mehanizma tj. konačne odluke nadzornog tijela s glavnim sjedištem, osobito u kontekstu njihove obvezujuće primjene za sve DČ, smatramo osnovnim pitanjem kojem je potrebno posvetiti posebnu pozornost.
The working group should explore the methods for improving the proximity method between the individuals and the decision-making of supervisory authority by including local supervisory authorities in the decision-making process. 
Radna skupina trebala bi istražiti metode za poboljšanje proximity metode između pojedinaca i donošenja odluka nadzornog tijela putem uključivanja lokalnih nadzornih tijela u procesu donošenja odluka.
The one-stop-shop mechanism implies an advantage for the companies, and its objective is to ensure consistency with the Regulation and legal certainty for entrepreneurs. 
One-stop-shop mehanizam podrazumijeva prednost za tvrtke, a cilj mu je osigurati usklađenost s Uredbom i pravnu sigurnost za poduzetnike.
Further professional work on that matter should be continued according to the model in which one supervisory authority makes a decision, but exclusive competence of that authority shall be limited to certain powers. 
Daljini stručni rad na tome treba nastaviti po modelu u kojem jedno nadzorno tijelo donosi odluku, ali isključiva nadležnost tog tijela će biti ograničena na određene ovlasti.
The one-stop-shop mechanism does not affect the competences of the supervisory authority for monitoring the processing of the activities of controllers and processors who are limited to one Member State. 
One-stop-shop mehanizam ne utječe na nadležnosti nadzornog tijela za nadzor obrade nad aktivnostima controllera i processora koji su ograničeni na jednu državu članicu.
Corrective powers enable the supervisory authority to monitor cases for which it is competent in its territory or which have a significant impact on the data subject in its territory. 
Korektivnim ovlastima nadzorno tijelo ostvaruje nadzor u odnosu na slučajeve za koje je ovlašteno na svom teritoriju ili značajno utječu na data subject na svom teritoriju.
On the one hand, that will enable a data subject to resolve its complaint with the local supervisory authority, and on the other hand, it will enable the supervisory authority dealing with the complaint to act on-site. 
To će s jedne strane omogućiti da data subject može svoj ​​prigovor rješavati sa lokalnim nadzornim tijelom, a s druge strane omogućiti nadzornom tijelu koje se bavi prigovorom da djeluje na licu mjesta.
Agenda Item: 
Točka dnevnog reda:
In view of the current economic crisis and its consequences, an effective and independent judicial system in every Member State (MS) contributes to confidence in the system and its stability. 
Imajući u vidu postojeću ekonomsku krizu i posljedice koje ista nosi, učinkovit i neovisan pravosudni sustav u svakoj DČ doprinosi povjerenju u sustav i njegovu stabilnost.
The consequence of shortcomings in the functioning of judicial systems is the distrust of citizens and business entities in judicial institutions. 
Posljedica nedostataka u funkcioniranju pravosudnih sustava su nedostatan razvoj i nepovjerenje građana i poslovnih subjekata u pravosudne institucije.
In 2012 it was estimated that 6 MSs (BG, IT, LV, PL, SI, SK) have difficulties, especially regarding the duration of judicial proceedings and the organisation of the justice. 
U 2012. godini procijenjeno je da 6 DČ (BG, IT, LV, PL, SI, SK) ima poteškoća, posebice u pogledu duljine trajanja sudskih postupaka i organizacije pravosuđa.
Every time a national court applies European legislation, it acts as a European court and must provide effective judicial protection to all citizens and business entities whose rights have been violated. 
Svaki put kada nacionalni sud primjeni europski propis, on postupa u svojstvu europskog suda i mora svim građanima i poslovnim subjektima, čija su prava povrijeđena, osigurati učinkovitu sudsku zaštitu.
Also, effective judicial systems are important for strengthening mutual trust which is necessary for the development and implementation of European instruments based on mutual recognition and cooperation. 
Također, učinkoviti pravosudni sustavi bitni su za jačanje međusobnog povjerenja nužnog za razvoj i provedbu europskih instrumenata koji se temelje na međusobnom priznanju i suradnji.
Shortcomings of national judicial systems therefore do not cause only a problem for an individual MS, but they also have direct impact on the single market and the EU as a whole. 
Stoga, nedostaci nacionalnih pravosudnih sustava ne predstavljaju isključivo problem za pojedinu DČ, već imaju direktan utjecaj na jedinstveno tržište i na EU u cijelosti.
At the time of EU accession, each state must have ensured rule of law, respect democratic processes, as well as human rights and rights of minorities (part of the Copenhagen criteria). 
Svaka država u trenutku pristupanja EU mora imati osiguranu vladavinu prava, poštivati demokratske procese, kao i ljudska prava i prava manjina (dio kriterija iz Kopenhagena).
However, after the entry of the states into full membership, the EU has no mechanisms in place to ensure that the MS implements the said criteria. 
Međutim, nakon stupanja država u punopravno članstvo, EU ne raspolaže mehanizmima radi osiguranja provedbe ovih ciljeva u DČ.
The EU may penalise the MS which seriously and systematically disregards the EU values, however the EU has never used that right. 
Doduše, EU može kazniti DČ koje ozbiljno i sustavno ne poštuju vrijednosti EU, međutim nikada dosad nije iskoristila to svoje pravo.
Before taking any kind of measure against an individual MS, the national governments must unanimously agree that such a violation actually occurred. 
Prije poduzimanja bilo kakve mjere protiv pojedine DČ, nacionalne Vlade se moraju jednoglasno složiti da je do takve povrede doista došlo.
Although the EC has the authority to bring legal action against an individual MS at the Court of Justice of the European Union in the event of failure to implement EU legislation, the Commission emphasises that there is just an insignificant number of European legislation that covers the issues of rule of law, democracy and human rights. 
Iako EK ima ovlasti tužiti pojedinu DČ Sudu pravde EU u slučaju propusta provedbe prava EU, Komisija ističe kako postoji tek neznatan broj europskog zakonodavstva koji pokriva pitanja vladavine prava, demokracije i ljudskih prava.
Exactly due to the abovementioned, the EC believes that the ranking system of MS judicial systems is an excellent tool for promoting the importance of the rule of law. 
Upravo zbog navedenog, EK smatra da je sustav rangiranja pravosudnih sustava DČ izvrstan alat za promociju važnosti vladavine prava.
The EC therefore proposes an evaluation mechanism which would, without imposing sanctions to a single MS, make it possible to "name and shame" the MSs that fail to respect the EU values . 
Stoga EK predlaže mehanizam evaluacije koji bi, bez izricanja sankcija pojedinoj DČ omogućio prozivanje DČ koje ne poštuju vrijednosti EU („make it possible to name and shame them“).
In order to achieve the desired effects, the EC is prepared to submit an annual report to the EP about the status and level of the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary and other parameters in an MS. 
U cilju postizanja željenih učinaka, EK je spremna jednom godišnje predstaviti EP-u izvješće o stanju razine vladavine prava, neovisnosti pravosuđa i drugih parametara u DČ.
Improving the quality, independence, and effectiveness of judicial systems is also the priority of the European Semester. 
Unapređenje kvalitete, neovisnosti i učinkovitosti pravosudnih sustava prioritet je i Europskog semestra.
The key factors for the existence of an effective justice are: timeliness, independence, availability, and easy access to the justice. 
Za postojanje učinkovitog pravosuđa ključni čimbenici su: pravovremenost, neovisnost, dostupnost te jednostavan pristup pravosuđu.
Before Country Specific Recommendations can be issued for each MS in this field, the EC points out the importance of a comprehensive overview of the judicial systems of MSs, which takes into account the judicial systems of MSs and their judicial traditions. 
Prije nego što se mogu izdati Preporuke za svaku pojedinu DČ (Country Specific Recommendations) u ovom području, EK ističe važnost sveobuhvatnog pregleda pravosudnih sustava DČ, a koji uzima u obzir pravosudne sustave DČ i njihove pravne tradicije.
The Council adopted such Country Specific Recommendations in respect of 10 MSs in June 2013. 
U lipnju 2013. godine Vijeće je usvojilo takve posebne preporuke u odnosu na 10 DČ.
According to the EC, the objective of the Justice Scoreboard is to assist the MSs to achieve more effective judicial systems through access to objective, reliable, and comparable data on the functioning of the systems in each MS. 
Prema EK, cilj Justice Scoreboard-a je pomoći DČ da uspostave učinkovitije pravosudne sustave, kroz uvid u objektivne, pouzdane i usporedive podatke o funkcioniranju tih sustava u svakoj DČ.
The EC implemented the Justice Scoreboard in 2013. 
EK je provela Justice Scoreboard u 2013. godini.
The EC will take into account the problems identified in the 2013 Scoreboard when preparing future MS specific analyses within the framework of implementation of the 2013 European Semester. 
EK će probleme identificirane u Scoreboard-u za 2013. godinu uzeti u obzir prilikom izrade predstojećih specifičnih analiza za DČ u okviru provedbe Europskog semestra 2013.
Also, the results will represent guidance to the work in the context of the Economic Adjustment Programme. 
Također, rezultati će predstavljati smjernice za rad u okviru Ekonomskih programa prilagodbe.
Its objective is not an overall unique ranking of MS systems or a promotion of a certain judicial system. 
Njegov cilj nije sveobuhvatno jedinstveno rangiranje sustava DČ niti promicanje određenog pravosudnog sustava.
- overview of trends in the functioning of national judicial systems over time. 
- prikaz trenda funkcioniranja nacionalnih pravosudnih sustava kroz vrijeme
However, the existence of poor indicators shall require a deeper analysis of the reason, and, where necessary, initiation of respective reforms, bearing in mind that the comparability of data may be limited because of the differences in judicial proceedings and legal frameworks. 
Međutim, postojanje loših pokazatelja zahtijevat će dublju analizu razloga te, gdje je to potrebno, pokretanje odgovarajućih reformi, imajući na umu da usporedivost podataka može biti ograničena zbog različitosti sudskih postupaka i pravnih okvira.
- an evolving system, i.e. a system that will expand gradually into other areas of application (not just the economy), other indicators of shortcomings of national systems, and a different methodology, with a view to identifying the key parameters of an effective judicial system. 
- sustav koji se razvija, odnosno koji će se postepeno širiti i na ostala polja primjene (ne samo ekonomsku sferu), ostale pokazatelje slabosti nacionalnih sustava i drugačiju metodologiju, s ciljem utvrđivanja ključnih parametara djelotvornog pravosudnog sustava.
In dialogue with MSs, the system could progressively cover other areas of the judicial systems and additional stages of judicial proceedings. 
Kroz dijalog s DČ, sustav bi progresivno mogao pokrivati i druga područja pravosudnih sustava te dodatne faze postupka.
Namely, for now the Scoreboard focuses on the parameters important for the improvement of the business and investment climate, i.e. on civil and commercial procedures. 
Naime, Scoreboard se zasada fokusira na parametre važne za unapređenje poslovne i investicijske klime, odnosno na građanske i trgovačke sudske postupke
The EC concluded that statistical data indicate significant differences in the length of the proceeding: the duration of proceedings is at least twice as long in at least a third of MSs in comparison to most other MSs. 
EK zaključuje da statistički podaci ukazuju na značajne razlike u dužini trajanja postupaka: barem jedna trećina DČ ima barem dvostruko dulje trajanje postupaka u odnosu na većinu drugih DČ.
- ratio of resolved cases and incoming cases - is the court able to resolve new cases; otherwise, there will be a backlog. 
- omjer riješenih i zaprimljenih predmeta -uspijeva li sud rješavati nove predmete; u suprotnom dolazi do backlog-a
- monitoring and evaluation of courts' activities - with the aid of clear indicators such as incoming cases, closed cases, pending cases, backlogs, evaluating the performance of judges and court staff. 
- Nadzor i procjena aktivnosti sudova - putem jasnih pokazatelja poput pristiglih predmeta, zaključenih predmeta, predmeta u tijeku, zaostataka, ocjena rada sudaca i sudskih službenika.
Several MSs perform regular evaluations of courts' activities, but more than half of them do not have a defined set of quality standards. 
Nekoliko DČ provodi redovite procjene aktivnosti sudova, ali u više od pola njih nisu definirani standardi kvalitete.
There are large disparities between MSs in relation to the development of IT system with the aim of information exchange between courts and the parties. 
U DČ postoje velike razlike u odnosu na razvoj IT sustava u cilju razmjene informacija sudova i stranaka.
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) - the EC concluded that almost in all MSs there's a possibility of alternative dispute resolution, but evidence of their usage in commercial disputes is often unavailable. 
- Alternativno rješavanje sporova - EK zaključuje da u gotovo svim DČ postoji mogućnost alternativnog rješavanja sporova, ali dokazi o njihovoj upotrebi u trgovačkim sporovima često nisu dostupni.
In its annual Global Competitiveness Report, the World Economic Forum (WEF) provided a ‘perceived independence index' which is relevant for the economic growth of each state as it is based on the replies from small enterprises operating in the main economic areas. 
World Economic Forum (WEF) je u svom godišnjem Global Competitiveness Report -u izložio podatke o ‘perceived independence index', bitnom za ekonomski rast svake države, budući da se temelji na odgovorima malih poduzetnika u glavnim ekonomskim područjima.
Also, the World Justice Project (WJP) developed an indicator of the 'perceived independence of the civil justice' based on replies from the citizens. 
Također, World Justice Project (WJP) razvio je pokazatelj neovisnosti u području pravosuđa - 'perceived independence of the civil justice', a koji se temelji na odgovorima građana.
The EC concluded that, although several MSs are among the global top 10 by the perception index of judicial independence, business end-users in certain MSs have a relatively low perception of judicial independence. 
EK zaključuje da, iako je nekoliko DČ u svjetskih top 10 država po indeksu percepcije neovisnosti pravosuđa, u određenim DČ krajnji poslovni korisnici imaju relativno nisku percepciju neovisnosti pravosuđa.
It is therefore necessary to carry out a more detailed analysis of the lack of trust in the justice. 
Stoga je potrebno provesti detaljniju analizu uzroka nedostatka povjerenja u pravosuđe.
The Republic of Croatia supports the primary objective of the Justice Scoreboard - i.e. establishing more effective judicial systems in the EU Member States. 
Republika Hrvatska podržava osnovni cilj Justice Scoreboard-a, odnosno uspostavu učinkovitijih pravosudnih sustava u državama članicama Europske unije.
Primarily it is emphasized that the European Commission has not yet presented a working document on the implementation of the Justice Scoreboard, which would clearly define its objectives and methodology, as well as possible consequences the Scoreboard results may have for a Member State. 
Prvenstveno se ističe da Europska komisija još uvijek nije predstavila radni dokument o provedbi Justice Scoreboard-a, a kojim bi se jasno definirali njegovi ciljevi i metodologija te moguće posljedice koje rezultati istog mogu imati za državu članicu.
As contentious we point out that the Member States are not sufficiently involved in the work on this project, especially regarding the methodology of Justice Scoreboard implementation, result evaluation, and the Scoreboard's final scope and consequences. 
Kao sporno ističemo da države članice nisu u dovoljnoj mjeri uključene u rad na ovom projektu, posebice u pogledu metodologije provođenja Justice Scoreboard-a, procjene rezultata te njegovog konačnog opsega i posljedica.
Furthermore, the Republic of Croatia would like to highlight the shortcomings of comparative comparison of the judicial systems of Member States where there is a risk of giving a negative sign to the states whose judicial systems are apparently less effective than the systems of other states. 
Nadalje, Republika Hrvatska ističe nedostatke komparativnog uspoređivanja pravosudnih sustava država članica gdje postoji opasnost davanja negativnog predznaka državama čiji su pravosudni sustavi naočigled manje učinkoviti od sustava drugih država.
The principal risk of a comparative overview primarily lies in the fact that national data gathering methods which are different and uneven exist, as well as differences in judicial systems of the Member States. 
Opasnost usporednog prikaza prvenstveno leži u činjenici postojanja različitih i neujednačenih nacionalnih metodologija prikupljanja podataka i različitosti u pravosudnim sustavima država članica.
Namely, the lack of uniform criteria and the methodology of data collection calls into question the competence of comparative reviews of the judicial systems. 
Naime, upravo nepostojanje ujednačenih kriterija i metodologije prikupljanja podataka dovodi u pitanje mjerodavnost komparativnih prikaza pravosudnih sustava.
Relying exclusively on Scoreboard (or European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice [CEPEJ]) data could lead to erroneous conclusions on the (in)efficiency of judicial systems, without identifying the true cause and consequently the right solution for their improvement. 
Kruto oslanjanje na podatke Scoreboard-a (odnosno CEPEJ-a) moglo bi dovesti do pogrešnih zaključaka o (ne)učinkovitosti pravosudnih sustava, bez identificiranja pravog uzroka i posljedično pravog rješenja za njihovo unapređenje.
Alternatively, misdemeanour cases in the Republic of Croatia are tried at misdemeanour courts, while in certain Member States other bodies decide thereon (such as Austria, where traffic violations are handled by special tribunals outside of the judicial system; in Sweden, judges that rule on commercial or land disputes are not part of the judicial authority). 
Isto tako, u Republici Hrvatskoj prekršajne predmete rješavaju prekršajni sudovi, dok u pojedinim državama članicama o prekršajima odlučuju druga tijela (poput Austrije gdje o prometnim prekršajima odlučuju posebni tribunali izvan pravosudnog sustava ili Švedske gdje suci koji se bave trgovačkim i zemljišnim pitanjima ne potpadaju pod sudbenu vlast).
The non-compliance of national criteria for determining the duration of judicial proceedings is also observed . 
Također, primjetna je i neusklađenost nacionalnih kriterija za određivanje trajanja sudskih postupaka.
Namely, some states for the "time required to reach a decision at first instance" count the time from bringing an action before the court pending a first instance decision, while some states, on the other hand, count also the time elapsed before bringing an action (extrajudicial proceeding), as well as the duration of the enforcement of decisions issued at first instance. 
Naime, neke države pod „vrijeme potrebno za donošenje prvostupanjske odluke“ računaju vrijeme od podnošenja tužbe sudu do donošenja prvostupanjske odluke, dok neke države pak u navedeno računaju i vrijeme proteklo prije podnošenja tužbe (izvansudski postupak), kao i trajanje ovršnog postupka po prvostupanjskoj odluci.
Also, in some states, trying cases is the primary activity of all the courts, while in other states courts and judges also perform a series of other tasks, e.g. manage set of registers or enforce their decisions, and therefore the efficiency criteria cannot be equally applied to all states. 
Također, u nekim državama svi sudovi bave se suđenjem kao svojom glavnom aktivnošću, dok u drugim državama sudovi i suci uz to obavljaju i niz drugih zadaća, npr. vode niz registara, ili provode ovrhu svojih odluka, slijedom čega se kriteriji učinkovitosti ne mogu jednako primjenjivati na sve države.
In view of the preceding, the application of the comparative overview method could lead to substantial differences in the ratios of the number of judges and the number of inhabitants, or the number of pending cases at the courts, or the time required for a court to reach a decision, which creates a false image of the efficiency of judicial systems. 
Obzirom na navedeno, primjena metode komparativnih prikaza, mogla bi dovesti do značajnih razlika u omjeru broja sudaca prema broju stanovnika, odnosno broju neriješenih predmeta na sudovima, ili pak vremenu u kojem je sudu potrebno da donese odluku, čime se stvara pogrešna slika o učinkovitosti pravosudnih sustava.
We believe that the primary and basic role of the Justice Scoreboard should be the identification of weaknesses of each individual national judicial system and to aid states in improving their systems, defining better judicial policies, identifying issues that require special attention and, if necessary, introducing appropriate reforms. 
Mišljenja smo da bi glavna i osnovna uloga Justice Scoreboard-a trebala biti identifikacija slabosti svakog pojedinog nacionalnog pravosudnog sustava te pružanje pomoći državama u njegovom jačanju, definiranju boljih pravosudnih politika i identifikaciji pitanja koja zaslužuju posebnu pažnju te po potrebi, pokretanje odgovarajućih reformi.
In doing so it is important that the European Commission, when drawing up country specific analyses for each individual Member State, takes into consideration only the state that is the subject of the analysis and that it interprets the heterogeneity of data between the states as a result of the disparity of national systems. 
Pri tome je važno da Europska komisija, prilikom izrade specifičnih analiza za svaku pojedinu državu članicu, uzima u obzir isključivo tu pojedinu državu te da različitosti u podacima za pojedine države interpretira imajući na umu element različitosti sustava.
The Justice Scoreboard should not be a tool for "measuring" the efficiency of the justice, but the means that will only offer data on the European justices of individual EU Member States that can be relevant for a comprehensive performance rating of national judicial systems in the European Union and for the improvement of the said systems. 
Justice Scoreboard ne bi trebao biti alat za „mjerenje“ efikasnosti pravosuđa, već sredstvo koje će tek ponuditi podatke o europskim pravosuđima pojedinih država članica koji mogu biti relevantni za sveobuhvatnu ocjenu rada nacionalnih pravosudnih sustava u Europskoj uniji i njihovo unapređenje.
- duration of judicial proceeding - expressed in days required for the court to reach a decision at first instance. 
- duljina trajanja sudskog postupka - izražava se u danima potrebnim da sud donese odluku u prvom stupnju.
Basic substantive provisions of the EU Proposal: 
Osnovne sadržajne odredbe prijedloga EU:
The draft Proposal for Regulation which is currently being discussed, provides for the use of the word "insolvency practitioner" instead of the current word "liquidator" (which was used in the Regulation from 2000). 
Nacrt prijedloga Uredbe o kojem se trenutno raspravlja predviđa da se umjesto dosadašnje riječi „liquidator“ (koja se koristila u Uredbi iz 2000. godine), koristi riječ „insolvency practitioner“ („stečajni upravitelj“).