natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Š ā panta 1. punkt ā paredz ē tajos priekšlikumos, kas attiecas uz vesel ī bas aizsardz ī bu, droš ī bu, vides aizsardz ī bu un pat ē r ē t ā ju ties ī bu aizsardz ī bu, Komisija par galveno uzskata augstu aizsardz ī bas l ī meni, ī pašu uzman ī bu piev ē ršot visiem atkl ā jumiem, kas pamatojas uz zin ā tnes faktiem.
The Commission, in its proposals envisaged in paragraph 1 concerning health, safety, environmental protection and consumer protection, will take as a base a high level of protection, taking account in particular of any new development based on scientific facts.
Saska ņā ar attiec ī g ā m pilnvar ā m ar ī Eiropas Parlaments un Padome tiecas sasniegt šo m ē r ķ i.
Within their respective powers, the European Parliament and the Council will also seek to achieve this objective.
Ja p ē c tam, kad Eiropas Parlaments un Padome, tikai Padome vai Komisija ir noteikusi saska ņ ošanas pas ā kumu, k ā da dal ī bvalsts uzskata par vajadz ī gu atst ā t sp ē k ā savus noteikumus 36. pant ā min ē to b ū tisko iemeslu d ēļ vai nol ū k ā aizsarg ā t vidi vai darba vidi, t ā dara Komisijai zin ā mus šos noteikumus, k ā ar ī pamatojumu to atst ā šanai sp ē k ā .
If, after the adoption of a harmonisation measure by the European Parliament and the Council, by the Council or by the Commission, a Member State deems it necessary to maintain national provisions on grounds of major needs referred to in Article 36, or relating to the protection of the environment or the working environment, it shall notify the Commission of these provisions as well as the grounds for maintaining them.
Komisija sešos m ē nešos p ē c 4. un 5. punkt ā min ē t ā s pazi ņ ošanas apstiprina vai noraida attiec ī gos valsts noteikumus, iepriekš p ā rbaudot, vai tie nav patva ļī gas diskrimin ā cijas l ī dzeklis vai sl ē pts ierobežojums tirdzniec ī b ā starp dal ī bvalst ī m un nerada š ķē rš ļ us iekš ē j ā tirgus darb ī bai.
The Commission shall, within six months of the notifications as referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5, approve or reject the national provisions involved after having verified whether or not they are a means of arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade between Member States and whether or not they shall constitute an obstacle to the functioning of the internal market.
Ja šaj ā laik ā Komisija l ē mumu nav pie ņē musi, 4. un 5. punkt ā min ē tos noteikumus uzskata par apstiprin ā tiem.
In the absence of a decision by the Commission within this period the national provisions referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5 shall be deemed to have been approved.
Komisija var inform ē t attiec ī go dal ī bvalsti, ka šaj ā punkt ā min ē to laiku var v ē l pagarin ā t uz laiku l ī dz sešiem m ē nešiem, ja to attaisno jaut ā juma sarež ģī t ī ba un cilv ē ku vesel ī ba netiek apdraud ē ta.
When justified by the complexity of the matter and in the absence of danger for human health, the Commission may notify the Member State concerned that the period referred to in this paragraph may be extended for a further period of up to six months.
Ja saska ņā ar 6. punktu dal ī bvalstij ļ auj atst ā t sp ē k ā vai ieviest savus noteikumus, atk ā pjoties no saska ņ ošanas pas ā kuma, Komisija t ū l ī t p ā rliecin ā s, vai ir j ā iesaka piel ā gošan ā s šim pas ā kumam.
When, pursuant to paragraph 6, a Member State is authorised to maintain or introduce national provisions derogating from a harmonisation measure, the Commission shall immediately examine whether to propose an adaptation to that measure.
Ja k ā da dal ī bvalsts nor ā da uz k ā du ī pašu vesel ī bas aizsardz ī bas probl ē mu jom ā , kur iepriekš noteikti saska ņ ošanas pas ā kumi, t ā v ē rš uz to Komisijas uzman ī bu, un Komisija t ū l ī t p ā rliecin ā s, vai ir j ā ierosina Padomei attiec ī gi pas ā kumi.
When a Member State raises a specific problem on public health in a field which has been the subject of prior harmonisation measures, it shall bring it to the attention of the Commission which shall immediately examine whether to propose appropriate measures to the Council.
Atk ā pjoties no 258. un 259. pant ā min ē t ā s proced ū ras, Komisija un jebkura dal ī bvalsts var tieši griezties Eiropas Savien ī bas Ties ā , ja uzskata, ka cita dal ī bvalsts nepareizi ī steno š ā panta pieš ķ irt ā s pilnvaras.
By way of derogation from the procedure laid down in Articles 258 and 259, the Commission and any Member State may bring the matter directly before the Court of Justice of the European Union if it considers that another Member State is making improper use of the powers provided for in this Article.
Iepriekš minētajos saskaņošanas pasākumos vajadzības gadījumā paredz drošības klauzulu, kas ļauj dalībvalstīm viena vai vairāku 36. pantā minētu un ar ekonomiku nesaistītu iemeslu dēļ veikt provizoriskus pasākumus, attiecībā uz kuriem kontroli īsteno Savienība.
The harmonisation measures referred to above shall, in appropriate cases, include a safeguard clause authorising the Member States to take, for one or more of the non-economic reasons referred to in Article 36, provisional measures subject to a Union control procedure. "
(bijušais EKL 175. pants)
(ex Article 175 TEC)
Eiropas Parlaments un Padome saska ņā ar parasto likumdošanas proced ū ru p ē c apspriešan ā s ar Ekonomikas un soci ā lo lietu komiteju un Re ģ ionu komiteju pie ņ em l ē mumu par to, k ā j ā r ī kojas Savien ī bai, lai sasniegtu 191. pant ā min ē tos m ē r ķ us.
The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, shall decide what action is to be taken by the Union in order to achieve the objectives referred to in Article 191
* Ir ietverti šādi mērķi: „(-) saglabāt, aizsargāt un uzlabot vides kvalitāti, (-) aizsargāt cilvēku veselību, (-) apdomīgi un racionāli izmantot dabas resursus, (-)sekmēt starptautiska mēroga pasākumus, risināt reģionālas un pasaules vides problēmas un jo īpaši cīnīties pret klimata pārmaiņām.” *
* Those objectives include: "(-) preserving, protecting and improving the quality of the environment, (-) protecting human health, (-) prudent and rational utilisation of natural resources, (-) promoting measures at international level to deal with regional or worldwide environmental problems, and in particular combating climate change" . * .
Atk ā pjoties no š ā panta 1. punkt ā paredz ē t ā s l ē mumu pie ņ emšanas proced ū ras un neskarot 114. pantu, Padome saska ņā ar ī pašu likumdošanas proced ū ru p ē c apspriešan ā s ar Eiropas Parlamentu, Ekonomikas un soci ā lo lietu komiteju un Re ģ ionu komiteju ar vienpr ā t ī gu l ē mumu:
By way of derogation from the decision-making procedure provided for in paragraph 1 and without prejudice to Article 114, the Council acting unanimously in accordance with a special legislative procedure and after consulting the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, shall adopt:
a) pie ņ em noteikumus, kam ir galvenok ā rt fisk ā la iedaba;
(a) provisions primarily of a fiscal nature;
b) paredz pas ā kumus attiec ī b ā uz:
(b) measures affecting:
— pils ē tu un lauku pl ā nojumu;
— town and country planning,
— ū dens resursu taup ī gu apsaimniekošanu vai pas ā kumus, kas tieši vai netieši ietekm ē š ā du resursu pieejam ī bu;
— quantitative management of water resources or affecting, directly or indirectly, the availability of those resources,
c) paredz pas ā kumus, kas b ū tiski ietekm ē dal ī bvalstu izv ē li saist ī b ā ar ener ģ ijas avotiem un energoapg ā des visp ā r ē jo strukt ū ru.
(c) measures significantly affecting a Member State ’s choice between different energy sources and the general structure of its energy supply.
Padome p ē c Komisijas priekšlikuma un p ē c apspriešan ā s ar Eiropas Parlamentu, Ekonomikas un soci ā lo lietu komiteju un Re ģ ionu komiteju ar vienpr ā t ī gu l ē mumu var attiecin ā t parasto likumdošanas proced ū ru uz pirmaj ā da ļā min ē taj ā m jom ā m.
The Council, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, may make the ordinary legislative procedure applicable to the matters referred to in the first subparagraph.
Saska ņā ar parasto likumdošanas proced ū ru un p ē c apspriešan ā s ar Ekonomikas un soci ā lo lietu komiteju un Re ģ ionu komiteju Eiropas Parlaments un Padome pie ņ em visp ā r ē jas r ī c ī bas programmas, izvirzot priorit ā rus m ē r ķ us.
General action programmes setting out priority objectives to be attained shall be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.
Pas ā kumus, kas vajadz ī gi, lai ī stenotu š ī s programmas, paredz saska ņā ar 1. vai 2. punkt ā izkl ā st ī tajiem nosac ī jumiem.
The measures necessary for the implementation of these programmes shall be adopted under the terms of paragraph 1 or 2, as the case may be.
Neskarot konkr ē tus Savien ī bas pie ņ emtus pas ā kumus, dal ī bvalstis finans ē un ī steno vides politiku.
Without prejudice to certain measures adopted by the Union, the Member States shall finance and implement the environment policy.
Neskarot principu, ka maks ā pies ā r ņ ot ā js, gad ī jumos, kad k ā ds ar 1. punktu pamatots pas ā kums paredz izmaksas, ko k ā das dal ī bvalsts iest ā des uzskata par nesam ē r ī g ā m, šaj ā pas ā kum ā paredz noteikumus par:
Without prejudice to the principle that the polluter should pay, if a measure based on the provisions of paragraph 1 involves costs deemed disproportionate for the public authorities of a Member State, such measure shall lay down appropriate provisions in the form of:
— pagaidu iz ņē muma statusa pieš ķ iršanu, un/vai
— temporary derogations, and/or
— finansi ā la atbalsta pieš ķ iršanu no Koh ē zijas fonda, kas izveidots saska ņā ar 177. pantu.” "
— financial support from the Cohesion Fund set up pursuant to Article 177. "
Komisijas izvēlētais juridiskais pamats
The Commission's choice of legal basis
Komisija ir izvēlējusies LESD 114. pantu.
The Commission opts for Article 114 TFEU.
Ar priekšlikumu groza Direktīvu 2001/18/EK, kas pieņemta, pamatojoties uz EKL 95. pantu (tagadējais LESD 114. pants), iekļaujot jaunu 26.b pantu, kas dalībvalstīm sniegs juridisko pamatu, lai pieņemtu tiesību aktus, ar ko ierobežo vai aizliedz visu vai atsevišķu ĢMO audzēšanu , kas jau ir atļauta saskaņā ar direktīvas C daļu vai ar Regulu (EK) Nr. 1829/2003, savas teritorijas daļā vai visā teritorijā, izpildot zināmus nosacījumus.
The proposal amends the Directive 2001/18/EC, adopted on the basis of Article 95 TEC (now 114 TFEU), by inserting a new Article 26b which would provide the Member States with a legal basis to adopt measures restricting or prohibiting the cultivation of all or particular GMOs which have already been authorised in accordance with Part C of the Directive or Regulation No 1829/2003 in all or parts of their territory, subject to compliance with certain conditions.
Dalībvalstis var pieņemt pasākumus, lai savas teritorijas daļā vai visā teritorijā ierobežotu vai aizliegtu visu vai konkrētu to ĢMO audzēšanu, par kuriem piešķirtas atļaujas saskaņā ar šīs direktīvas C daļu vai Regulu (EK) Nr. 1829/2003 un kas sastāv no ģenētiski modificētām šķirnēm, kuras laistas tirgū saskaņā ar attiecīgajiem ES tiesību aktiem par sēklu un augu pavairošanas materiāla tirdzniecību, ja
Member States may adopt measures restricting or prohibiting the cultivation of all or particular GMOs authorised in accordance with Part C of this Directive or Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, and consisting of genetically modified varieties placed on the market in accordance with relevant EU legislation on the marketing of seed and plant propagating material , in all or part of their territory, provided that:
a) šie pasākumi pamatojas uz apsvērumiem, kas nav saistīti ar novērtējumu par negatīvu ietekmi uz veselību un vidi, ko varētu radīt ĢMO apzināta izplatīšana vai laišana tirgū,
(a) those measures are based on grounds other than those related to the assessment of the adverse effect on health and environment which might arise from the deliberate release or the placing on the market of GMOs;
b) tie atbilst Līgumiem.
(b) that they are in conformity with the Treaties.
Atkāpjoties no Direktīvas 98/34/EK, dalībvalstis, kuras plāno pieņemt pamatotus pasākumus saskaņā ar šo pantu, informatīvos nolūkos dara tos zināmus pārējām dalībvalstīm un Komisijai vienu mēnesi pirms to pieņemšanas.”
By way of derogation to Directive 98/34/EC, Member States that intend to adopt reasoned measures under this Article shall communicate them to the other Member States and to the Commission, one month prior to their adoption for information purposes. "
Priekšlikuma 5. apsvērumā ir norādīts, ka „pieredze liecina, ka ĢMO audzēšanai dalībvalstis rūpīgāk pievēršas centrālā vai reģionālā un vietējā līmenī.
In recital 5 of the proposal it is stated that " Experience has shown that cultivation of GMOs is an issue which is more thoroughly addressed by Member States, either at central or at regional and local level.
Pretēji jautājumiem, kas saistīti ar ĢMO laišanu tirgū un importu, kas arī turpmāk jāregulē ES līmenī, lai aizsargātu iekšējo tirgu, ir atzīts, ka audzēšana ir saistīta ar spēcīgu vietējo/reģionālo aspektu.
Contrary to issues related to the placing on the market and the import of GMOs, which should remain regulated at EU level to preserve the internal market, cultivation has been acknowledged as an issue with a strong local/regional dimension.
Tādēļ saskaņā ar LESD 2. panta 2. punktu dalībvalstīm jādod iespēja pieņemt noteikumus par ĢMO efektīvu audzēšanu savā teritorijā pēc tam, kad ĢMO ir likumīgi piešķirta atļauja laišanai ES tirgū.”
In accordance with Article 2(2) TFEU Member States should therefore be entitled to have a possibility to adopt rules concerning the effective cultivation of GMOs in their territory after the GMO has been legally authorised to be placed on the EU market. "
Priekšlikuma 6. apsvērumā ir precizēts: „Tādēļ šķiet atbilstoši saskaņā ar subsidiaritātes principu piešķirt dalībvalstīm brīvu izvēli pieņemt lēmumu par to, vai tās savā teritorijā vēlas audzēt ĢMO kultūras, nemainot Savienības atļauju piešķiršanas sistēmu attiecībā uz ĢMO un neatkarīgi no pasākumiem, ko dalībvalstīm ir tiesības veikt, piemērojot Direktīvas 2001/18/EK 26.a pantu, lai izvairītos no netīšas ĢMO klātbūtnes citos produktos.”
Recital 6 of the proposal specifies as follows: " In this context, it appears appropriate to grant to Member States, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, more freedom to decide whether or not they wish to cultivate GMO crops on their territory without changing the system of Union authorisations of GMOs and independently of the measures that Member States are entitled to take by application of Article 26a of Directive 2001/18/EC to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in other products ".
Priekšlikuma 7. apsvērumā ir arī norādīts: „Tādēļ dalībvalstīm jāatļauj pieņemt pasākumus, lai ierobežotu vai aizliegtu audzēt visus vai konkrētus ĢMO visā vai daļā to teritorijas, un pēc saviem ieskatiem attiecīgi grozīt šos pasākumus jebkurā posmā, piešķirot atļauju, atjaunojot atļauju vai izņemot attiecīgo ĢMO no tirgus.
In recital 7 of the proposal it is also stated that: " Member States should therefore be authorised to adopt measures restricting or prohibiting the cultivation of all or particular GMOs in all or part of their territory, and respectively amend those measures as they deem appropriate, at all stages of the authorisation, re-authorisation or withdrawal from the market of the concerned GMOs.
Šie noteikumi jāpiemēro arī sēklu un augu pavairošanas materiāla ģenētiski modificētajām šķirnēm, kuras laiž tirgū saskaņā ar attiecīgajiem tiesību aktiem par sēklu un augu pavairošanas materiāla tirdzniecību un jo īpaši saskaņā ar Direktīvu 2002/53/EK un Direktīvu 2002/55/EK.
This should apply as well to genetically modified varieties of seed and plant propagating material which are placed on the market in accordance with relevant legislation on the marketing of seeds and plant propagating material and, in particular, in accordance with Directives 2002/53/EC and 2002/55/EC.
26.b pants attiektos gan uz ĢMO, kas atļauti saskaņā ar Direktīvu 2001/18/EK, gan Regulu (EK) Nr. 1829/2003.
Article 26b would apply to both GMOs authorised under Directive 2001/18/EC and under Regulation No 1829/2003.
Eiropas Savienības Tiesas pieeja: ierosināto tiesību aktu mērķis un saturs
Approach of the Court of Justice: aim and content of the proposed measures
Pirmkārt, ņemot vērā juridiskā pamata sekas gan no materiāltiesiskās kompetences, gan procesuālā viedokļa, pareizai juridiskā pamata izvēlei ir konstitucionāla nozīme.
First, in view of the consequences of the legal basis in terms of substantive competence and the procedure, the choice of the correct legal basis is of constitutional importance
Tiesību akta juridiskā pamata izvēle nenosaka attiecīgās iestādes pārliecību par sasniedzamo mērķi, bet tai ir jābalstās „uz objektīviem faktoriem, ko var pārbaudīt tiesā”
The choice of the legal basis for an act does not turn on the relevant institution's conviction as to the objective pursued but must be "based on objective factors which are amenable to judicial review"
LESD 114. pants: sākotnējais juridiskais pamats
Article 114 TFEU: the original legal basis
LESD 114. pantā ir noteikts, izmantojot parasto likumdošanas procedūru, paredzēt Komisijas pasākumus, „ kuri attiecas uz iekšējā tirgus izveidi un darbību ”.
Article 114 TFEU mandates via the ordinary legislative procedure Community measures " which have as their object the establishment and functioning of the internal market ".
Minētais pants jālasa kontekstā ar LESD 26. pantu, ar ko nosaka preču brīvu apriti kā pamatprincipu iekšējā tirgus izveidei.
This article should be read in the context of Article 26 TFEU, establishing free movement of goods as a fundamental principle in the establishment of the internal market.
Tiesību akta mērķis un saturs paredz sniegt dalībvalstīm brīvību izmantot citu pamatojumu, ne tikai veselības un vides riska zinātnisko novērtējumu, lai aizliegtu vai ierobežotu ĢMO audzēšanu savā teritorijā.
The aim and content of the measure is to grant freedom to Member States to invoke grounds other than scientific assessment of health and environmental risks in order to ban or restrict the cultivation of GMOs on their territory.
Šajā nolūkā ar 26.b pantu dalībvalstīm ļauj pieņemt tiesību aktus, lai ierobežotu vai aizliegtu tādu ĢMO audzēšanu, i) kas ir atļauti saskaņā ar Direktīvas 2001/18/EK C daļu vai Regulu (EK) Nr. 1829/2003 un kas sastāv no ģenētiski modificētajām šķirnēm, kuras laiž tirgū saskaņā ar attiecīgajiem ES tiesību aktiem par sēklu un augu pavairošanas materiāla tirdzniecību, ii) izpildot šādus nosacījumus: „a) šie pasākumi pamatojas uz apsvērumiem, kas nav saistīti ar novērtējumu par negatīvu ietekmi uz veselību un vidi, ko varētu radīt ĢMO apzināta izplatīšana vai laišana tirgū, un b) tie atbilst Līgumiem. ”
To this end, the new Article 26b allows Member States to adopt measures restricting or prohibiting the cultivation of GMOs (i) which have been authorised in accordance with Part C of Directive 2001/18/EC or Regulation No 1829/2003, and consist of genetically modified varieties placed on the market in accordance with relevant EU legislation on the marketing of seed and plant propagating material, (ii) under the following conditions: "(a) those measures are based on grounds other than those related to the assessment of the adverse effect on health and environment which might arise from the deliberate release or the placing on the market of GMOs; and, (b) that they are in conformity with the Treaties. "
Tādējādi ar priekšlikumu tiek mēģināts skaidrot pastāvošo tiesisko regulējumu — tajā skaidri noteikta dalībvalstu rīcības brīvība aizliegt vai ierobežot ĢMO audzēšanu visos gadījumos, kas nav saskaņoti, t. i., ja uz tiem neattiecas negatīvās ietekmes uz veselību un vidi novērtējums.
The proposal therefore attempts to clarify the existing legal framework in that it explicitly gives the Member States room for manoeuvre in prohibiting or restricting cultivation of GMOs in all such cases which are not harmonised, i.e. not related to the assessment of the adverse effect on health and environment.
Šķiet, ka faktiski priekšlikumam ir tikai viens mērķis: ieviest zināmu „elastīgumu” esošajā centralizētajā ĢMO atļauju piešķiršanas sistēmā.
It appears that the proposal does not in fact pursue any objective other than introducing a certain "flexibility" into the existing centralised system of authorisation of GMOs.
Šā iemesla dēļ Komisijas izvēlētais juridiskais pamats ir atbilstošs.
For this reason the legal basis chosen by the Commission is correct.
Šo secinājumu neietekmē fakts, ka Komisijas priekšlikuma pievienotā vērtība ir apšaubāma, jo redzams, ka 26.b panta praktiskā ietekme būs ierobežota.
This conclusion is not influenced by the fact that the added value of the Commission proposal seems questionable because the practical implication of Article 26b can only be seen as limited.
Šajā kontekstā atsauce b) punktā uz Līgumiem ir interesanta.
In this context the reference to the Treaties in point (b) of that article is of interest.
Neapskatot pašsaprotamo jautājumu par Savienības vai dalībvalstu pieņemto tiesību aktu atbilstību Līgumiem, šķiet, ka nosacījumā netieši ir atsauces uz LESD 114. panta 4. un 9. punktu un uz LESD 36. pantu.
Leaving aside the obvious question of conformity with the Treaties of measures adopted by the Union or Member States, the provision seems to refer implicitly to paragraphs (4) to (9) of Article 114 TFEU and Article 36 TFEU.
Parlamenta Juridiskais dienests savā atzinumā (13.–23. punkts) ir veicis detalizētu ĢMO audzēšanas ierobežošanas vai aizliegšanas pamatojuma analīzi.
Detailed analysis of grounds for restricting or prohibiting the cultivation of GMOs has been made by the Parliament Legal Service in its opinion (paras 13-23).
Ir tikai jākonstatē, ka iespējas dalībvalstīm pieņemt ierobežojošus tiesību aktus „ar citu pamatojumu” šajā gadījumā šķiet ierobežotas.
It suffices to say that the possibilities for Member States to take restrictive measures on "other grounds" seem in this case to be limited.
Lai gan šis nešķiet viennozīmīgs atsacīšanās no Savienības kompetences gadījums, LESD 114. pants joprojām ir piemērots juridiskais pamats — arī ja priekšlikums tiktu uzskatīts par „saskaņošanas mazināšanas” pasākumu.
Although this seems not to be a genuine case of abandonment of Union competence, Article 114 TFEU would still be an appropriate legal basis also in the event that the proposal were to be considered as a "de-harmonisation" measure
Kā to uzskata Padomes Juridiskais dienests savā atzinumā, ar kuru apstrīd LESD 114. pantu kā derīgu juridisko pamatu.
As considered by the Council Legal Service in its opinion contesting Article 114 TFEU as a valid legal basis.
Jo īpaši sarežģīti it pieņemt argumentu, ka „saskaņošanas mazināšana”, pamatojoties uz LESD 114. pantu, ir atļauta tikai tad, ja grozījuma ar mērķi „mazināt saskaņošanu” nolūks ir uzlabot iekšējā tirgus darbību.
In particular the argument that "de-harmonisation" on the basis of Article 114 TFEU is allowed only if the purpose of the amendment aiming at such "de-harmonisation" is to improve the functioning of the internal market is difficult to accept.
LESD 114. pants Savienības likumdevējam piešķir kompetenci noteikt saskaņošanas pasākumus, lai nodrošinātu iekšējā tirgus netraucētu darbību, un pēc tam mainīgajiem apstākļiem pielāgot jau veiktos pasākumus, vai nu palielinot vai pazeminot jau panākto saskaņošanas apmēru, vai pat atceļot saskaņošanas pasākumu.
Article 114 TFEU grants the Union legislator the competence to establish harmonising measures to ensure the smooth functioning of the internal market and consequently to adapt measures already taken to changing circumstances, either by increasing or lowering the degree of harmonisation already achieved, or even by repealing a harmonising measure.