natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
30 In that regard, it should be recalled, first, that a ‘flight’ within the meaning of Regulation No 261/2004 consists in an air transport operation, performed by an air carrier which fixes its itinerary (Case C-173/07 Emirates Airlines [2008] ECR I-5237, paragraph 40). Thus, the itinerary is an essential element of the flight, as the flight is operated in accordance with the carrier’s pre-arranged planning. 
30 U vezi s tim, prvo valja podsjetiti da se „let” u smislu Uredbe br. 261/2004 sastoji od operacije zračnog prijevoza koju izvodi zračni prijevoznik, koji određuje svoj plan putovanja (presuda od 10. srpnja 2008., Emirates Airlines, C-173/07, Zb., str. I-5237., t. 40.). Stoga je plan putovanja bitan element leta budući da se let izvodi u skladu s unaprijed određenim planom prijevoznika.
31 It is clear furthermore from Article 6 of Regulation No 261/2004 that the Community legislature adopted a notion of ‘flight delay’ which is considered only by reference to the scheduled departure time and which implies as a consequence that, after the departure time, the other elements pertaining to the flight must remain unchanged. 
31 Osim toga, iz članka 6. Uredbe br. 261/2004 proizlazi da je zakonodavac Zajednice usvojio pojam „kašnjenje leta” koji je određen samo u odnosu na planirano vrijeme odlaska, čime se posljedično podrazumijeva da nakon vremena odlaska ostali elementi koji se odnose na let moraju ostati nepromijenjeni.
32 Thus, a flight is ‘delayed’ for the purposes of Article 6 of Regulation No 261/2004 if it is operated in accordance with the original planning and its actual departure time is later than the scheduled departure time. 
32 Stoga, za potrebe članka 6. Uredbe br. 261/2004 let „kasni” ako se izvodi u skladu s prvotnim planom, pri čemu je njegovo stvarno vrijeme odlaska kasnije od planiranog vremena odlaska.
33 Second, according to Article 2(l) of Regulation No 261/2004, flight cancellation, unlike delay, is the result of non-operation of a flight which was previously planned. It follows that, in that regard, cancelled flights and delayed flights are two quite distinct categories of flights. It cannot therefore be inferred from Regulation No 261/2004 that a flight which is delayed may be classified as a ‘cancelled flight’ merely on the ground that the delay is extended, even substantially. 
33 Drugo, valja istaknuti da je u skladu s člankom 2. točkom (l) Uredbe br. 261/2004, otkazivanje leta, za razliku od kašnjenja leta, rezultat neizvođenja leta koji je prethodno bio planiran. Iz navedenog proizlazi da su u tom smislu otkazani letovi i letovi koji kasne dvije posve različite kategorije letova. Stoga se iz Uredbe br. 261/2004 ne može zaključiti da se za let koji kasni može ocijeniti da je „otkazani let“ samo na temelju činjenice da je kašnjenje produljeno, čak i ako je to produljenje znatno.
34 Consequently, a flight which is delayed, irrespective of the duration of the delay, even if it is long, cannot be regarded as cancelled where there is a departure in accordance with the original planning. 
34 Stoga se let koji kasni, bez obzira na trajanje kašnjenja čak i kada je ono dugotrajno, ne može smatrati otkazanim ako je odlazak obavljen u skladu s prvotnim planom.
35 In those circumstances, where passengers are carried on a flight whose departure time is later than the departure time originally scheduled, the flight can be classified as ‘cancelled’ only if the air carrier arranges for the passengers to be carried on another flight whose original planning is different from that of the flight for which the booking was made. 
35 U tim okolnostima, ako se putnici prevezu letom čije je vrijeme odlaska kasnije od prvotno planiranog vremena odlaska, za let se može ocijeniti da je „otkazan” samo ako zračni prijevoznik organizira prijevoz putnika drugim letom čiji je prvotni plan različit od prvotnog plana leta za koji su putnici imali rezervaciju.
36 Thus, it is possible, as a rule, to conclude that there is a cancellation where the delayed flight for which the booking was made is ‘rolled over’ onto another flight, that is to say, where the planning for the original flight is abandoned and the passengers from that flight join passengers on a flight which was also planned – but independently of the flight for which the passengers so transferred had made their bookings. 
36 Stoga se u načelu može zaključiti da se o otkazivanju leta radi kada se let koji kasni i za koji putnici imaju rezervaciju „prebaci” na drugi let, to jest, kada se plan za prvotni let napusti te se putnici s tog leta pridruže putnicima nekog drugog leta koji je također bio planiran – ali neovisno o letu za koji su tako prevezeni putnici imali rezervaciju.
37 By contrast, it cannot, as a rule, be concluded that there is a flight delay or cancellation on the basis of a ‘delay’ or a ‘cancellation’ being shown on the airport departures board or announced by the air carrier’s staff. Similarly, the fact that passengers recover their luggage or obtain new boarding cards is not, as a rule, a deciding factor. Those circumstances are not connected with the objective characteristics of the flight as such. They can be attributable to inaccurate classifications or to factors obtaining in the airport concerned or, yet again, they may be unavoidable given the waiting time and the fact that it is necessary for the passengers concerned to spend the night in a hotel. 
37 Za razliku od toga, u načelu se ne može zaključiti da se radi o kašnjenju ili otkazivanju leta na temelju toga što je na ploči s informacijama o odlascima u zračnoj luci prikazana oznaka „kasni” ili „otkazano” ili na temelju toga što su to objavili zaposlenici zračnog prijevoznika. Slično tome, činjenica da je putnicima vraćena prtljaga ili da su dobili novu ukrcajnu kartu nije, u načelu, odlučujući čimbenik. Navedene okolnosti nisu povezane s objektivnim obilježjima leta. One se mogu pripisati pogrešnoj ocjeni ili prevladavajućim čimbenicima u dotičnoj zračnoj luci ili, također, mogu biti neizbježne s obzirom na vrijeme čekanja i činjenicu da dotični putnici moraju prenoćiti u hotelu.
38 Nor, as a rule, is it conclusive that the composition of the group of passengers who initially held reservations is essentially identical to that of the group subsequently transported. Indeed, as the delay grows longer by reference to the departure time originally scheduled, the number of passengers in the first of those groups may decrease because some passengers have been offered re-routing on another flight and others, for personal reasons, have decided not to take the delayed flight. Conversely, to the extent that seats have become available on the flight for which the booking was made, there is nothing to prevent the carrier accepting, before departure of the plane which is delayed, additional passengers. 
38 Također, u pravilu, nije odlučujuće ni to da sastav skupine putnika koji su imali prvotne rezervacije bude u osnovi jednak sastavu skupine koja se preveze kasnije. Uistinu, kako se kašnjenje produljuje u odnosu na prvotno planirano vrijeme odlaska, broj putnika iz prve od tih skupina može se smanjiti zbog toga što je nekim putnicima ponuđeno preusmjeravanje na drugi let, a neki drugi su iz osobnih razloga odlučili da ne putuju letom koji kasni. S druge strane, ukoliko su sjedala na letu za koji su putnici imali rezervaciju postala slobodna, nema razloga zbog kojih bi prijevoznik bio spriječen da prije odlaska leta koji kasni prihvati dodatne putnike.
39 In view of the foregoing, the answer to the first part of the questions referred is that Articles 2(l), 5 and 6 of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that a flight which is delayed, irrespective of the duration of the delay, even if it is long, cannot be regarded as cancelled where the flight is operated in accordance with the air carrier’s original planning. 
39 Slijedom navedenog, odgovor na prvi dio postavljenih pitanja valja odgovoriti da članak 2. točka (l), članak 5. i članak 6. Uredbe br. 261/2004 treba tumačiti tako da se let koji kasni, bez obzira na trajanje kašnjenja čak i kada je ono dugo, ne može smatrati otkazanim ako je izveden u skladu s prvotnim planom zračnog prijevoznika.
The second part of the questions referred, concerning the right to compensation in the event of delay 
Drugi dio prethodnih pitanja, koji se odnosi na pravo na odštetu u slučaju kašnjenja
40 Article 5(1) of Regulation No 261/2004 provides that in the event of cancellation of a flight, the passengers concerned are to have the right to compensation by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 7 of the regulation. 
40 Člankom 5. stavkom 1. predviđa se da u slučaju otkazivanja leta dotični putnici imaju pravo na odštetu od strane stvarnog zračnog prijevoznika u skladu s člankom 7. te Uredbe.
41 By contrast, it does not expressly follow from the wording of Regulation No 261/2004 that passengers whose flights are delayed have such a right. Nevertheless, as the Court has made clear in its case-law, it is necessary, in interpreting a provision of Community law, to consider not only its wording, but also the context in which it occurs and the objectives pursued by the rules of which it is part (see, inter alia, Case C-156/98 Germany v Commission [2000] ECR I-6857, paragraph 50, and Case C-306/05 SGAE [2006] ECR I-11519, paragraph 34). 
41 Za razliku od toga, iz teksta Uredbe br. 261/2004 ne proizlazi izričito da takvo pravo imaju putnici čiji letovi kasne. Ipak, kako je Sud pojasnio u svojoj sudskoj praksi, prilikom tumačenja odredbe prava Zajednice valja uzeti u obzir ne samo formulaciju te odredbe, nego i kontekst u kojemu se nalazi te ciljeve propisa kojeg je dio (vidjeti, između ostalog, presudu od 19. rujna 2000., Njemačka/Komisija, C-156/98, Zb., str. I-6857., t. 50. i presudu od 7. prosinca 2006., SGAE, C-306/05, Zb., str. I-11519., t. 34.).
42 In that regard, the operative part of a Community act is indissociably linked to the statement of reasons for it, so that, when it has to be interpreted, account must be taken of the reasons which led to its adoption (Case C-298/00 P Italy v Commission [2004] ECR I-4087, paragraph 97 and the case-law cited). 
42 U tom smislu izreka akta neodvojiva je od njegova obrazloženja, tako da se isti mora tumačiti, ako je to potrebno, vodeći računa o razlozima koji su doveli do njegova donošenja (presuda od 29. travnja 2004., Italija/Komisija, C-298/00 P, Zb., str. I-4087., t. 97. i navedena sudska praksa).
43 It must be stated that, even though the possibility of relying on ‘extraordinary circumstances’, allowing air carriers to be released from the obligation to pay compensation under Article 7 of Regulation No 261/2004, is provided for only in Article 5(3) thereof, which concerns flight cancellation, Recital 15 in the preamble to the regulation nevertheless states that that ground may also be relied on where an air traffic management decision in relation to a particular aircraft on a particular day gives rise to ‘a long delay [or] an overnight delay’. As the notion of long delay is mentioned in the context of extraordinary circumstances, it must be held that the legislature also linked that notion to the right to compensation. 
43 Valja napomenuti da iako je mogućnost pozivanja na „izvanredne okolnosti”, koje zračnom prijevozniku omogućuju oslobađanje od obveze plaćanja odštete u skladu s člankom 7. Uredbe br. 261/2004, predviđena samo u članku 5. stavku 3. te uredbe koji se odnosi na otkazivanje leta, u uvodnoj izjavi 15. navedene uredbe navodi se da se na tu osnovu također može pozvati kada odluka koja je donesena u okviru upravljanja zračnim prometom u vezi s određenim zrakoplovom određenog dana dovede do „dugog kašnjenja leta [ili], kašnjenja leta preko noći”. Kako je pojam dugog kašnjenja naveden u kontekstu izvanrednih okolnosti, mora se zaključiti da je zakonodavac također povezao taj pojam s pravom na odštetu.
44 That is implicitly borne out by the objective of Regulation No 261/2004, since it is apparent from Recitals 1 to 4 in the preamble, in particular from Recital 2, that the regulation seeks to ensure a high level of protection for air passengers regardless of whether they are denied boarding or whether their flight is cancelled or delayed, since they are all caused similar serious trouble and inconvenience connected with air transport. 
44 To je implicitno potkrijepljeno ciljem Uredbe br. 261/2004 budući da iz uvodnih izjava od 1. do 4., posebno iz uvodne izjave 2., proizlazi da se tom uredbom želi osigurati visoka razina zaštite putnika u zračnom prometu bez obzira na to uskraćuje li im se ukrcaj ili je njihov let otkazan ili kasni, budući da svi ti razlozi uzrokuju slične ozbiljne poteškoće i neugodnosti povezane sa zračnim prijevozom.
45 That is a fortiori the case since the provisions conferring rights on air passengers, including those conferring a right to compensation, must be interpreted broadly (see, to that effect, Case C-549/07 Wallentin-Hermann [2008] ECR I-0000, paragraph 17). 
45 Tome je a fortiori tako budući da se odredbe kojima se putnicima u zračnom prometu daju prava, uključujući one odredbe kojima se daje pravo na odštetu, moraju tumačiti široko (vidjeti u tom smislu presudu od 22. prosinca 2008., Wallentin-Hermann, C-549/07, Zb., str. I-11061., t. 17.)
46 In those circumstances it cannot automatically be presumed that passengers whose flights are delayed do not have a right to compensation and cannot, for the purposes of recognition of such a right, be treated as passengers whose flights are cancelled. 
46 U tim se okolnostima ne može odmah pretpostaviti da putnici čiji letovi kasne nemaju pravo na odštetu i da se za potrebe priznavanja takvog prava prema njima ne može postupati kao prema putnicima čiji su letovi otkazani.
47 Next, it must be stated that, according to a general principle of interpretation, a Community act must be interpreted, as far as possible, in such a way as not to affect its validity (see, to that effect, Case C-403/99 Italy v Commission [2001] ECR I-6883, paragraph 37). Likewise, where a provision of Community law is open to several interpretations, preference must be given to that interpretation which ensures that the provision retains its effectiveness (see, inter alia, Case 187/87 Land de Sarre and Others [1988] ECR 5013, paragraph 19, and Case C-434/97 Commission v France [2000] ECR I-1129, paragraph 21). 
47 Nadalje, valja napomenuti da se u skladu s općim načelom tumačenja akt Zajednice mora tumačiti u najvećoj mogućoj mjeri tako da se ne dovede u pitanje njegova valjanost (vidjeti u tom smislu presudu od 4. listopada 2001., Italija/Komisija, C-403/99, Zb., str. I-6883., t. 37.). Isto tako, u slučaju kada je moguće odredbu prava Zajednice tumačiti na više načina, treba dati prednost onom tumačenju koje može sačuvati njezin koristan učinak. (vidjeti osobito presude od 22. rujna 1988., Land de Sarre i dr., C-187/87, Zb., str. 5013., t. 19., i od 24. veljače 2000., Komisija/Francuska, C-434/97, Zb., str. I-1129., t. 21.).
48 In that regard, all Community acts must be interpreted in accordance with primary law as a whole, including the principle of equal treatment, which requires that comparable situations must not be treated differently and that different situations must not be treated in the same way unless such treatment is objectively justified (Case C-210/03 Swedish Match [2004] ECR I-11893, paragraph 70, and Case C-344/04 IATA and ELFAA [2006] ECR I-403, paragraph 95). 
48 U tom smislu sve akte Zajednice treba tumačiti u skladu s primarnim pravom u cjelini, uključujući načelo jednakog postupanja kojim se zahtijeva da se u usporedivim situacijama ne postupa na različit način i da se u različitim situacijama ne postupa na jednak način, osim ako je takvo postupanje objektivno opravdano (presude od 14. prosinca 2004, Swedish Match, C-210/03, Zb., str. I-11893., t. 70., i od 10. siječnja 2006., IATA i ELFAA, C-344/04, Zb., str. I-403., t. 95.).
49 In view of the objective of Regulation No 261/2004, which is to strengthen protection for air passengers by redressing damage suffered by them during air travel, situations covered by the regulation must be compared, in particular by reference to the type and extent of the various types of inconvenience and damage suffered by the passengers concerned (see, to that effect, IATA and ELFAA, paragraphs 82, 85, 97 and 98). 
49 S obzirom na cilj Uredbe br. 261/2004, tj. jačanje zaštite putnika u zračnom prometu naknadom štete koju su pretrpjeli tijekom putovanja zrakoplovom, situacije obuhvaćene ovom uredbom moraju biti usporedive posebno u odnosu na vrstu i raspon različitih vrsta neugodnosti i štete koje su pretrpjeli dotični putnici (vidjeti u tom smislu gore navedenu presudu IATA i ELFAA, točke 82., 85., 97. i 98.).
50 In this instance, the situation of passengers whose flights are delayed should be compared with that of passengers whose flights are cancelled. 
50 U ovom slučaju, situaciju putnika čiji letovi kasne valja usporediti sa situacijom putnika čiji su letovi otkazani.
51 In that connection, Regulation No 261/2004 seeks to redress damage in an immediate and standardised manner and to do so by various forms of intervention which are the subject of rules relating to denied boarding, cancellation and long flight delay (see, to that effect, IATA and ELFAA, paragraph 43). 
51 U vezi s tim valja napomenuti da se Uredbom br. 261/2004 šteta nastoji popraviti trenutačno i na standardiziran način, različitim oblicima intervencije koji podliježu pravilima u vezi s uskraćenim ukrcajem, otkazivanjem i dugotrajnim kašnjenjem leta (vidjeti u tom smislu gore navedenu presudu IATA i ELFAA, t. 43.).
52 Regulation No 261/2004 has, in those measures, the objective of repairing, inter alia, damage consisting, for the passengers concerned, in a loss of time which, given that it is irreversible, can be redressed only by compensation. 
52 Uredba br. 261/2004 ima u okviru tih mjera za cilj popraviti, između ostalog, štetu koja se za dotične putnike sastoji od gubitka vremena i koja se, s obzirom da je nepovratna, može nadoknaditi samo isplatom odštete.
53 In that regard, it must be stated that that damage is suffered both by passengers whose flights are cancelled and by passengers whose flights are delayed if, prior to reaching their destinations, the latter’s journey time is longer than the time which had originally been scheduled by the air carrier. 
53 U tom pogledu valja utvrditi da takva šteta nastaje i za putnike čiji su letovi otkazani i za putnike čiji letovi kasne ako je prije dolaska na njihova odredišta vrijeme putovanja putnika čiji letovi kasne dulje od vremena koje je zračni prijevoznik prvotno planirao.
54 Consequently, passengers whose flights have been cancelled and passengers affected by a flight delay suffer similar damage, consisting in a loss of time, and thus find themselves in comparable situations for the purposes of the application of the right to compensation laid down in Article 7 of Regulation No 261/2004. 
54 Stoga, za putnike čiji su letovi otkazani i za putnike čiji letovi kasne nastaje slična šteta koja se sastoji od gubitka vremena, pa se prema tome, za potrebe primjene prava na odštetu utvrđenog u članku 7. Uredbe br. 261/2004, oni nalaze u usporedivim situacijama.
55 More specifically, the situation of passengers whose flights are delayed is scarcely distinguishable from that of passengers whose flights are cancelled, who are re-routed in accordance with Article 5(1)(c)(iii) of Regulation No 261/2004 and who may be informed of the flight cancellation at the very last moment, when they actually arrive at the airport (see Case C-204/08 Rehder [2009] ECR I-0000, paragraph 19). 
55 Točnije, situacija putnika čiji letovi kasne jedva se može razlikovati od situacije putnika čiji su letovi otkazani, koji su preusmjereni u skladu s člankom 5. stavkom 1. točkom (c) podtočkom iii. Uredbe br. 261/2004 i koji su o otkazivanju leta možda obaviješteni u posljednjem trenutku, kada su već došli u zračnu luku (vidjeti presudu od 9. srpnja 2009., Rehder, C-204/08, Zb., str. I-06073., t. 19.).
56 First, both categories of passengers are informed, as a rule, at the same time of the incident which will make their journey by air more difficult. Second, even if they are transported to their final destination, they reach it after the time originally scheduled and, as a consequence, they suffer a similar loss of time. 
56 Prvo, obje se kategorije putnika u pravilu u istom trenutku obavješćuje o događaju koji će njihovo putovanje zrakoplovom otežati. Drugo, iako ih se preveze do njihovog konačnog odredišta, oni na njega stižu kasnije u odnosu na prvotno planirano vrijeme i, posljedično, pretrpe toliki gubitak vremena.
57 That said, passengers who are re-routed under Article 5(1)(c)(iii) of Regulation No 261/2004 are afforded the right to compensation laid down in Article 7 of the regulation where the carrier fails to re-route them on a flight which departs no more than one hour before the scheduled time of departure and reaches their final destination less than two hours after the scheduled time of arrival. Those passengers thus acquire a right to compensation when they suffer a loss of time equal to or in excess of three hours in relation to the duration originally planned by the air carrier. 
57 S obzirom na rečeno, putnici koji su u skladu s člankom 5. stavkom 1. točkom (c) podtočkom iii. Uredbe br. 261/12004 preusmjereni, imaju pravo na odštetu utvrđenu u članku 7. te uredbe ako ih zračni prijevoznik ne preusmjeri na let čiji odlazak nije više od jednog sata prije planiranog vremena odlaska i koji stiže na njihovo konačno odredište manje od dva sata kasnije od planiranog vremena dolaska. Ti putnici tako stječu pravo na odštetu, u slučaju kada pretrpe gubitak vremena od tri sata ili više u odnosu na trajanje koje je zračni prijevoznik prvotno planirao.
58 If, by contrast, passengers whose flights are delayed did not acquire any right to compensation, they would be treated less favourably even though, depending on the circumstances, they suffer a similar loss of time, of three hours or more, in the course of their journey. 
58 Kada, za razliku od toga, putnici čiji letovi kasne ne bi stekli nikakvo pravo na odštetu, prema njima bi se postupalo nepovoljnije čak i kada, ovisno o okolnostima, tijekom svojeg putovanja pretrpe sličan gubitak vremena, odnosno tri sata ili više.
59 There appears, however, to be no objective ground capable of justifying such a difference in treatment. 
59 Čini se, međutim, da nema objektivne osnove kojom bi se opravdala takva razlika u postupanju.
60 Given that the damage sustained by air passengers in cases of cancellation or long delay is comparable, passengers whose flights are delayed and passengers whose flights are cancelled cannot be treated differently without the principle of equal treatment being infringed. That is a fortiori the case in view of the aim sought by Regulation No 261/2004, which is to increase protection for all air passengers. 
60 Budući da je šteta koju pretrpe putnici u zračnom prometu u slučajevima otkazivanja ili dugog kašnjenja usporediva, prema putnicima čiji letovi kasne i putnicima čiji su letovi otkazani ne može se postupati različito, a da se time ne krši načelo jednakog postupanja. To je a fortiori slučaj s obzirom na cilj koji se želi postići Uredbom br. 261/2004, a to je povećanje zaštite za sve putnike.
61 In those circumstances, the Court finds that passengers whose flights are delayed may rely on the right to compensation laid down in Article 7 of Regulation No 261/2004 where they suffer, on account of such flights, a loss of time equal to or in excess of three hours, that is to say when they reach their final destination three hours or more after the arrival time originally scheduled by the air carrier. 
61 U tim okolnostima Sud smatra da se putnici čiji letovi kasne mogu pozvati na pravo na odštetu utvrđeno u članku 7. Uredbe br. 261/2004 ako radi takvih letova pretrpe gubitak vremena od tri sata ili više, to jest, ako na svoje konačno odredište stignu tri sata ili više nakon vremena dolaska koje je zračni prijevoznik prvotno planirao.