natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
46 Nevertheless, the national court considers that an interpretation of Clause 8(3) would be helpful to it in assessing the validity of the lawfulness of Paragraph 14(3) of the TzBfG, in its original version, in so far as, if that latter provision should not be in keeping with Community law, the result would be that its amendment by the Law of 2002 would be invalid. 
46 Međutim, nacionalni sud smatra da bi mu za donošenje odluke o zakonitosti članka 14. stavka 3. TzBfG-a, u njegovoj prvotnoj verziji, koristilo tumačenje članka 8. točke 3. jer, ako ta odredba nije u skladu s pravom Zajednice, njezine izmjene Zakonom iz 2002. ne bi bile važeće.
47 In any case, it is to be declared that the German legislature had already, when Directive 1999/70 was transposed into domestic law, lowered from 60 to 58 the age at which fixed-term contracts of employment might be concluded. 
47 U svakom slučaju valja istaknuti da je njemačko zakonodavstvo već tijekom prenošenja Direktive 1999/70 u nacionalno pravo dob u kojoj se dopušta sklapanje ugovora o radu na određeno vrijeme smanjilo sa 60 na 58 godina.
48 According to Mr Mangold, that reduction of protection, like that under the Law of 2002, is contrary to Clause 8(3) of the Framework Agreement. 
48 Prema mišljenju W. Mangolda to smanjenje zaštite je, poput onog na temelju Zakona iz 2002., protivno članku 8. točki 3. Okvirnog sporazuma.
49 In contrast, the German Government takes the view that that lowering of the relevant age was offset by giving workers bound by a fixed-term contract new social guarantees, such as the laying down of a general prohibition of discrimination and the extending to small businesses, and to short-term employment relationships, of the restrictions provided for in respect of recourse to that kind of contract. 
49 Suprotno tome, njemačka vlada smatra da je smanjenje relevantne dobi nadomješteno na način da su radnici zaposleni na temelju ugovora o radu na određeno vrijeme dobili nova socijalna jamstva, kao na primjer utvrđivanje opće zabrane diskriminacije te proširenje ograničenja predviđenih za sklapanje takve vrste ugovora na mala poduzeća i kratkoročne radne odnose.
50 In this connection, it appears from the very wording of Clause 8(3) of the Framework Agreement that implementation of the agreement cannot provide the Member States with valid grounds for reducing the general level of protection for workers previously guaranteed in the domestic legal order in the sphere covered by that agreement. 
50 U tom pogledu, iz teksta članka 8. točke 3. Okvirnog sporazuma proizlazi da provedba sporazuma ne predstavlja valjanu osnovu državama članicama za smanjenje opće razine zaštite radnika prethodno zajamčene nacionalnim pravnim poretkom u području u kojemu se sporazum primjenjuje.
51 The term `implementation', used without any further precision in Clause 8(3) of the Framework Agreement, does not refer only to the original transposition of Directive 1999/70 and especially of the Annex thereto containing the Framework Agreement, but must also cover all domestic measures intended to ensure that the objective pursued by the directive may be attained, including those which, after transposition in the strict sense, add to or amend domestic rules previously adopted. 
51 Pojam „provedba" koji je bez dodatnih objašnjenja upotrijebljen u članku 8. točki 3. Okvirnog sporazuma ne odnosi se samo na prvotno prenošenje Direktive 1999/70, a posebno njezinog priloga koji sadržava Okvirni sporazum, već također mora obuhvatiti sve nacionalne mjere kojima se osigurava postizanje njezinog cilja, uključujući one koje nakon prenošenja u užem smislu dopunjuju ili izmjenjuju već donesena nacionalna pravila.
52 In contrast, reduction of the protection which workers are guaranteed in the sphere of fixed-term contracts is not prohibited as such by the Framework Agreement where it is in no way connected to the implementation of that agreement. 
52 Suprotno tome, smanjenje zaštite (reformacija) zajamčene radnicima ugovorom o radu na određeno vrijeme nije kao takvo zabranjeno Okvirnim sporazumom, ako ni na koji način nije povezano s provedbom tog sporazuma.
53 Now, it is clear from both the order for reference and the observations submitted by the German Government at the hearing that, as the Advocate General has noted in paragraphs 75 to 77 of his Opinion, the successive reductions of the age above which the conclusion of a fixed-term contract is permissible without restrictions are justified, not by the need to put the Framework Agreement into effect but by the need to encourage the employment of older persons in Germany. 
53 Iz zahtjeva za prethodnu odluku i očitovanja njemačke vlade na raspravi proizlazi, kako je istaknuo nezavisni odvjetnik u točkama 75. do 77. mišljenja, da su uzastopna smanjenja dobi iznad koje nije dopušteno sklapanje ugovora o radu na određeno vrijeme opravdana, ali ne zbog provedbe Okvirnog sporazuma već zbog potrebe da se potakne zapošljavanje starijih osoba u Njemačkoj.
54 In those circumstances, the reply to be given to Question 1(a) is that on a proper construction of Clause 8(3) of the Framework Agreement, domestic legislation such as that at issue in the main proceedings which, for reasons connected with the need to encourage employment and irrespective of the implementation of that agreement, has lowered the age above which fixed-term contracts of employment may be concluded without restrictions, is not contrary to that provision. 
54 U tim okolnostima, na pitanje 1. (a) valja odgovoriti da članak 8. točku 3. Okvirnog sporazuma treba tumačiti na način da nije protivan nacionalnoj odredbi poput one u glavnom postupku kojom je zbog potrebe da se potakne zapošljavanje starijih osoba u Njemačkoj, a nevezano uz provedbu tog Sporazuma, smanjena dob iznad koje se ugovor o radu na određeno vrijeme može sklopiti bez ograničenja.
On the second and third questions 
Drugo i treće pitanje
55 By its second and third questions, which may appropriately be considered together, the national court seeks in essence to ascertain whether Article 6(1) of Directive 2000/78 must be interpreted as precluding a provision of domestic law such as that at issue in the main proceedings which authorises, without restriction, unless there is a close connection with an earlier contract of employment of indefinite duration concluded with the same employer, the conclusion of fixed-term contracts of employment once the worker has reached the age of 52. 
55 Drugim i trećim pitanjem, koja valja razmotriti zajedno, sud koji je uputio zahtjev zapravo pita treba li se članak 6. stavak 1. Direktive 2000/78 o uspostavi općeg okvira za jednako postupanje pri zapošljavanju i obavljanju zanimanja tumačiti na način da mu je protivna odredba nacionalnog prava poput one u glavnom postupku koja dopušta, bez ograničenja, osim kada postoji uska povezanost s prethodnim ugovorom o radu na neodređeno vrijeme koji je sklopljen s istim poslodavcem, sklapanje ugovora o radu na određeno vrijeme ako je radnik napunio 52 godine starosti.
If so, the national court asks what conclusions it must draw from that interpretation. 
Ako je odgovor potvrdan, sud koji je uputio zahtjev pita koje zaključke mora izvesti iz takvog tumačenja.
56 In this regard, it is to be noted that, in accordance with Article 1, the purpose of Directive 2000/78 is to lay down a general framework for combating discrimination on any of the grounds referred to in that article, which include age, as regards employment and occupation. 
56 U tom pogledu treba podsjetiti da je sukladno članku 1. svrha Direktive 2000/78 uspostaviti opći okvir za borbu protiv svih vrsta diskriminacije pri zapošljavanju i obavljanju zanimanja na temelju razloga navedenih u tom članku, što uključuje i dob.
57 Paragraph 14(3) of the TzBfG, however, by permitting employers to conclude without restriction fixed-term contracts of employment with workers over the age of 52, introduces a difference of treatment on the grounds directly of age. 
57 Međutim, dopuštajući poslodavcu da bez ograničenja sklapa ugovore o radu na određeno vrijeme s radnicima starijima od 52 godine, članak 14. stavak 3. TzBfG-a, uvodi različito postupanje neposredno na temelju dobi.
58 Specifically with regard to differences of treatment on grounds of age, Article 6(1) of Directive 2000/78 provides that the Member States may provide that such differences of treatment `shall not constitute discrimination, if, within the context of national law, they are objectively and reasonably justified by a legitimate aim, including legitimate employment policy, labour market and vocational training objectives, and if the means of achieving that aim are appropriate and necessary'. 
58 U pogledu različitog postupanja na temelju dobi, članak 6. stavak 1. Direktive 2000/78 predviđa da države članice mogu predvidjeti da se različito postupanje na temelju dobi „neće smatrati diskriminacijom ako su, u kontekstu nacionalnog prava, te razlike objektivno i razumno opravdane legitimnim ciljem, uključujući legitimne ciljeve politike zapošljavanja, tržišta rada i strukovnog obrazovanja, te ako su načini ostvarivanja tog cilja primjereni i nužni".
According to subparagraph (a) of the second paragraph of Article 6(1), those differences may include inter alia `the setting of special conditions on access to employment and vocational training, employment and occupation ... for young people, older workers and persons with caring responsibilities in order to promote their vocational integration or ensure their protection' and, under subparagraphs (b) and (c), the fixing of conditions of age in certain special circumstances. 
Sukladno istom stavku, drugom podstavku, točki (a), različito postupanje može, inter alia, biti „postavljanje posebnih uvjeta za pristup zapošljavanju i strukovnom osposobljavanju, za zapošljavanje i obavljanje zanimanja [...] za mlade osobe, starije radnike i osobe koje su dužne skrbiti o drugima, radi poticanja njihove strukovne integracije ili osiguranja njihove zaštite", kao i točkama (b) i (c), određivanje uvjeta u pogledu dobi u određenim posebnim okolnostima.
59 As is clear from the documents sent to the Court by the national court, the purpose of that legislation is plainly to promote the vocational integration of unemployed older workers, in so far as they encounter considerable difficulties in finding work. 
59 Kao što proizlazi iz dokumenata koje je sud koji je uputio zahtjev poslao Sudu, svrha tog propisa je poticanje strukovnog uključivanja nezaposlenih starijih radnika budući da oni imaju znatne poteškoće prilikom pronalaska posla.
60 The legitimacy of such a public-interest objective cannot reasonably be thrown in doubt, as indeed the Commission itself has admitted. 
60 Zakonitost takvog cilja koji je u javnom interesu nije upitna, što je potvrdila i sama Komisija.
61 An objective of that kind must as a rule, therefore, be regarded as justifying, `objectively and reasonably', as provided for by the first subparagraph of Article 6(1) of Directive 2000/78, a difference of treatment on grounds of age laid down by Member States. 
61 Stoga se taj cilj u načelu treba smatrati takvim da, „objektivno i razumno", sukladno članku 6. stavku 1. prvom podstavku Direktive 2000/78, opravdava različito postupanje na temelju dobi koje su propisale države članice.
62 It still remains to be established whether, according to the actual wording of that provision, the means used to achieve that legitimate objective are `appropriate and necessary'. 
62 Potrebno je još utvrditi jesu li, prema tekstu navedene odredbe, načini ostvarivanja tog cilja „primjereni i nužni".
63 In this respect the Member States unarguably enjoy broad discretion in their choice of the measures capable of attaining their objectives in the field of social and employment policy. 
63 U tom pogledu države članice neosporno raspolažu velikim diskrecijskim ovlastima kada biraju mjere za provedbu postizanja ciljeva u području socijalne politike i politike zapošljavanja.
64 However, as the national court has pointed out, application of national legislation such as that at issue in the main proceedings leads to a situation in which all workers who have reached the age of 52, without distinction, whether or not they were unemployed before the contract was concluded and whatever the duration of any period of unemployment, may lawfully, until the age at which they may claim their entitlement to a retirement pension, be offered fixed-term contracts of employment which may be renewed an indefinite number of times. 
64 Međutim, kako je naglasio sud koji je uputio zahtjev, primjena nacionalnog propisa poput onog u glavnom postupku dovodi do situacije u kojoj se svim radnicima koji su navršili 52 godine, bez obzira jesu li prije sklapanja ugovora o radu bili nezaposleni i bez obzira na trajanje razdoblja nezaposlenosti, može zakonito ponuditi, do dobi u kojoj imaju pravo na mirovinu, sklapanje ugovora o radu na određeno vrijeme koji se mogu produljiti neodređeni broj puta.
This significant body of workers, determined solely on the basis of age, is thus in danger, during a substantial part of its members' working life, of being excluded from the benefit of stable employment which, however, as the Framework Agreement makes clear, constitutes a major element in the protection of workers. 
Stoga je ta velika skupina radnika, određena isključivo na temelju dobi, u opasnosti da tijekom znatnog dijela svog radnog vijeka bude lišena pogodnosti stalnog zaposlenja što, međutim, kao što je jasno istaknuto u Okvirnom sporazumu, predstavlja glavni element zaštite radnika.
65 In so far as such legislation takes the age of the worker concerned as the only criterion for the application of a fixed-term contract of employment, when it has not been shown that fixing an age threshold, as such, regardless of any other consideration linked to the structure of the labour market in question or the personal situation of the person concerned, is objectively necessary to the attainment of the objective which is the vocational integration of unemployed older workers, it must be considered to go beyond what is appropriate and necessary in order to attain the objective pursued. 
65 Takav propis u kojem je dob dotičnog radnika jedini kriterij za primjenu ugovora o radu na određeno vrijeme, a da nije dokazano da je utvrđivanje starosnog praga kao takvog neovisno o drugim okolnostima povezanim sa strukturom dotičnog tržišta rada ili osobnom situacijom dotične osobe objektivno je neophodan za postizanje cilja strukovne integracije nezaposlenih starijih radnika, nadilazi ono što je primjereno i nužno za postizanje određenog cilja.
Observance of the principle of proportionality requires every derogation from an individual right to reconcile, so far as is possible, the requirements of the principle of equal treatment with those of the aim pursued (see, to that effect, Case C-476/99 Lommers [2002] ECR I-2891, paragraph 39). 
Poštovanje načela proporcionalnosti znači da se prilikom odstupanja od individualnog prava, u mjeri u kojoj je to moguće, usklade zahtjevi načela jednakog postupanja s postavljenim ciljem (vidjeti, u tom smislu, presudu od 19. ožujka 2002., Lommers, C-476/99, Zb., str. I-2891., t. 39.)
Such national legislation cannot, therefore, be justified under Article 6(1) of Directive 2000/78. 
Takav se nacionalni propis stoga ne može opravdati sukladno članku 6. stavku 1. Direktive 2000/78.
66 The fact that, when the contract was concluded, the period prescribed for the transposition into domestic law of Directive 2000/78 had not yet expired cannot call that finding into question. 
66 Ovaj zaključak ne može pobiti činjenica da u vrijeme sklapanja ugovora još nije isteklo razdoblje propisano za prenošenje Direktive 2000/78.
67 First, the Court has already held that, during the period prescribed for transposition of a directive, the Member States must refrain from taking any measures liable seriously to compromise the attainment of the result prescribed by that directive (Inter-Environnement Wallonie, paragraph 45). 
67 Prvo, Sud je već presudio da se tijekom roka propisanoga za prenošenje Direktive države članice moraju suzdržati od poduzimanja svih mjera koje bi mogle ozbiljnije ugroziti postizanje rezultata predviđenog tom Direktivom (vidjeti gore navedenu presudu Inter-Environnement Wallonie, t. 45.).
68 In this connection it is immaterial whether or not the rule of domestic law in question, adopted after the directive entered into force, is concerned with the transposition of the directive (see, to that effect, Case C-14/02 ATRAL [2003] ECR I-4431, paragraphs 58 and 59). 
68 U tom pogledu nije od značaja odnosi li se dotično pravilo nacionalnog prava, doneseno nakon što je dotična direktiva stupila na snagu, na njezino prenošenje (vidjeti, u tom smislu, presudu od 8. svibnja 2003., ATRAL, C-14/02, Zb., str. I-4431., t. 58. i 59.).
69 In the case in the main proceedings the lowering, pursuant to Paragraph 14(3) of the TzBfG, of the age above which it is permissible to conclude fixed-term contracts from 58 to 52 took place in December 2002 and that measure was to apply until 31 December 2006. 
69 U predmetu u glavnom postupku dob iznad koje je dopušteno sklapati ugovore o radu na određeno vrijeme, sukladno članku 14. stavku 3. „TzBfG-a", smanjena je s 58 na 52 godine u prosincu 2002. i tu mjeru treba primjenjivati do 31. prosinca 2006.
70 The mere fact that, in the circumstances of the case, that provision is to expire on 31 December 2006, just a few weeks after the date by which the Member State must have transposed the directive, is not in itself decisive. 
70 Sama činjenica da ta odredba ističe 31. prosinca 2006., samo nekoliko tjedana nakon datuma do kojeg države članice moraju prenijeti direktivu, nije sama po sebi odlučujuća.
71 On the one hand, it is apparent from the very wording of the second subparagraph of Article 18 of Directive 2000/78 that where a Member State, like the Federal Republic of Germany in this case, chooses to have recourse to an additional period of three years from 2 December 2003 in order to transpose the directive, that Member State `shall report annually to the Commission on the steps it is taking to tackle age ... discrimination and on the progress it is making towards implementation'. 
71 S jedne strane, iz teksta drugog podstavka članka 18. Direktive 2000/78 proizlazi da kada država članica, kao što je Savezna Republika Njemačka u ovom predmetu, odluči da će od 2. prosinca 2003. koristiti dodatno razdoblje od tri godine za prenošenje te direktive, ta država članica „mora godišnje izvještavati Komisiju o mjerama koje poduzima za rješavanje problema diskriminacije na temelju dobi [...] kao i o napretku u provedbi."
72 That provision implies, therefore, that the Member State, which thus exceptionally enjoys an extended period for transposition, is progressively to take concrete measures for the purpose of there and then approximating its legislation to the result prescribed by that directive. 
72 Stoga ta odredba podrazumijeva da država članica, koja iznimno koristi produljeno razdoblje za prenošenje, mora postupno poduzeti konkretne mjere u svrhu usklađivanja nacionalnih propisa s rezultatom propisanim u toj direktivi.
Now, that obligation would be rendered redundant if the Member State were to be permitted, during the period allowed for implementation of the directive, to adopt measures incompatible with the objectives pursued by that act. 
Ta bi obveza bila lišena korisnog učinka da je državama članicama dopušteno da tijekom razdoblja dozvoljenog za provedbu te direktive donose mjere koje nisu sukladne njezinim cijevima.
73 On the other hand, as the Advocate General has observed in point 96 of his Opinion, on 31 December 2006 a significant proportion of the workers covered by the legislation at issue in the main proceedings, including Mr Mangold, will already have reached the age of 58 and will therefore still fall within the specific rules laid down by Paragraph 14(3) of the TzBfG, with the result that that class of persons becomes definitively liable to be excluded from the safeguard of stable employment by the use of a fixed-term contract of employment, regardless of the fact that the age condition fixed at 52 will cease to apply at the end of 2006. 
73 S druge strane, nezavisni odvjetnik je naglasio u točki 96. svojeg mišljenja, da će veliki broj radnika na koje se odnosi dotični propis iz glavnog postupka, uključujući W. Mangolda, 31. prosinca 2006. već napuniti 58 godina te će se stoga na njih odnositi posebna pravila predviđena člankom 14. stavkom 3. TzBfG-a, tako da za tu skupina ljudi postoji opasnosti da izgubi jamstvo stalnog zaposlenja definitivno stečeno ugovorom o radu na određeno vrijeme, bez obzira na činjenicu da će se uvjet kojim je određena dob od 52 godine prestati primjenjivati krajem 2006. godine.
74 In the second place and above all, Directive 2000/78 does not itself lay down the principle of equal treatment in the field of employment and occupation. 
74 Drugo i prije svega, Direktiva 2000/78 sama ne propisuje načelo jednakog postupanja u području zapošljavanja i obavljanja zanimanja.
Indeed, in accordance with Article 1 thereof, the sole purpose of the directive is `to lay down a general framework for combating discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation', the source of the actual principle underlying the prohibition of those forms of discrimination being found, as is clear from the third and fourth recitals in the preamble to the directive, in various international instruments and in the constitutional traditions common to the Member States. 
Sukladno članku 1. jedina je svrha ove Direktive „utvrditi opći okvir za borbu protiv diskriminacije na temelju vjere ili uvjerenja, invaliditeta, dobi ili spolnog opredjeljenja", a izvor načela na temelju kojeg se zabranjuju ovi oblici diskriminacije čine, što je jasno iz treće i četvrte uvodne izjave direktive, različiti međunarodni instrumenti te ustavne tradicije zajedničke državama članicama.
75 The principle of non-discrimination on grounds of age must thus be regarded as a general principle of Community law. 
75 Načelo nediskriminacije na temelju dobi mora se stoga smatrati općim načelom prava Zajednice.
Where national rules fall within the scope of Community law, which is the case with Paragraph 14(3) of the TzBfG, as amended by the Law of 2002, as being a measure implementing Directive 1999/70 (see also, in this respect, paragraphs 51 and 64 above), and reference is made to the Court for a preliminary ruling, the Court must provide all the criteria of interpretation needed by the national court to determine whether those rules are compatible with such a principle (Case C-442/00 Rodríguez Caballero [2002] ECR I-11915, paragraphs 30 to 32). 
Kada nacionalni propis ulazi u područje primjene prava Zajednice, što je slučaj s člankom 14. stavkom 3. TzBfG-a, kako je izmijenjen zakonom iz 2002., kao provedbena mjera Direktive 1999/70 (vidjeti također, u tom smislu, točke 51. i 64. ove presude), Sud mora, kada mu se uputi zahtjev za prethodnu odluku, dati sve elemente tumačenja koji su potrebni nacionalnom sudu da ocijeni sukladnost tog propisa s tim načelom (vidjeti, u tom smislu, presudu od 12. prosinca 2002., Rodríguez Caballero, C-442/00, Zb., str. I-11915., t. 30. do 32.).