natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
If a Member State nevertheless has doubts whether the amend-ments made to its technical regulation since the initial noti«ca-tion are s i g n i « c a n t , i t c a n c o n s u l t t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s s e r v i c e s o n t h e need for a fresh noti«cation.
Toto poskytovanie informèció umo™ﾏuje, aby boli vþetky ｲlen-skï þtèty plne zainteresovanï v postupe monitoringu stanove-nom smernicou.
These are committees which cover sectoral directives, like the TCAM Committee, established by Directive 1999/5/ECfor the telecommunications sector or the `Recreational Craft Committee', established by Directive 94/25/EC for the recrea-tional craft sector.
Informècie, ktorï cirkulujÿ podﾋa postupu, oznamuje Komisia vþetk̅m ｲlensk̅m þtètom, najprv v jazyku informujÿceho ｲlen-skïho þtètu a potom formou prekladov do vþetk̅ch alebo niektor̅ch o«cièlnychjazykovànie.
It should be emphasised that noti«cationisnotnecessaryinthe case of a simple restatement of provisions which are al-ready applicable (for example, in the event of consolidation), and which are without added legal e.ectorofcourseinthecases provided for by Article 10 (e.g. integration in the text of remarks made by the Commission in a detailed opinion, see hereinafter).
Komisia zverejﾏuje oznèmenï nèvrhy a ich preklady aj na svoju internetovÿ strènku, ktorè ponÿka vþetk̅m podnikateﾋsk̅m subjektom na vnÿtornom trhu próle™itosﾝ vyjadriﾝ svoje stanovis-kè k nèvrhu nèrodnej legislatóvy (okrem própadu, keｵ informujÿci ｲlensk̅ þtèt v̅slovne po™iada, s odúvodnenóm, ™e informècie po-skytovanï Komisii by mali byﾝ v̅nimoｲne posudzovanï ako dú-vernï s ohﾋadom na podnikateﾋskï subjekty).
In practice, the Commission is responsible for administering the procedure for the provision of information in the «eldoftechnical regulations.
Smernica uvèdza ustanovenie, ktorï umo™ﾏuje Komisii predlo-™iﾝ, kvúli zóskaniu stanoviska, nèvrh Stèlemu v̅boru (pozri Kapi-tolu 4) alebo ¶v̅boru zodpovednïmu za predmetnÿ oblasﾝƒ.
The whole procedure, including the reac-tions to the noti«edprojects,isbasedonasystemofelectronicdata exchange, transmitted in accordance with a nomenclature set up by the Commission.
Ide o v̅bory, ktorï pokr̅vajÿ sektorovï smernice, ako sÿ V̅bor TCAM (V̅bor pre posudzovanie zhody a trhov̅ dohﾋad v tele-komunikècièch), ustanoven̅ smernicou 99/5/ES (53)pre sektor telekomunikèció alebo ¶V̅bor pre rekreaｲnï plavidlèƒ, ustano-ven̅ smernicou 94/25/ES (54) pre sektor rekreaｲn̅ch plavidiel.
When the Commission has been noti«edofanewdraftnation-al technical regulation, it must transmit all the information communicated by the notifying Member State to all the other Member States (the draft will simultaneously be sent to all the Commission departments which may be concerned by the no-ti«edregulationasaresultoftheirspeci«corhorizontalre-sponsibilities).
V̅sledky tohto hodnotenia sÿ podnetom na vznik dvoch typov reakció zo strany Komisie a ｲlensk̅ch þtètov (Komisia mè okrem toho þpeci«ckÿvoﾋbu:¶blokovanieƒnèvrhuakov̅sledokhar-monizaｲnej ｲinnosti, ktorè bude preskÿmanè ni™þie v pripo-mienkach k ｲlènku 9 smernice). Rúzne reakcie, ktor̅ch dosah je ÿmern̅ vè™nosti zistenó, sÿ nasledovnï:
This communication of information enables all the Member States to be fully involved in the monitoring procedure laid down by the Directive.
Cel̅ po-stup vrètane reakció na oznèmenï projekty je zalo™en̅ na systï-me v̅meny elektronick̅ch ÿdajov prenèþan̅ch v sÿlade s nomenklatÿrou stanovenou Komisiou.
The Commission also places the noti«eddraftsandtheirtrans-lations on its Website, which o.ersalltheeconomicoperatorsin
Generèlne riaditeﾋstvo pre podnikanie a priemysel (DG ENTR) (55)konè ako centrèlna jednotka pre prijatie vþetk̅ch od-
Directive 94/25/EC of the European Parliament and Council of 16 June 1994 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to recreational craft, OJ L 164, 30.6.1994, p.
'54) Smernica 94/25/ES Eurùpskeho parlamentu a Rady zo 16. jÿna 1994 o aproximècii zèkonov, nariadenó a administratóvnych ustanovenó ｲlensk̅ch þtètov t̅ka-jÿcich sa rekreaｲn̅ch remesiel, à. v. ES L 164, 30.6.1994, s.
See Annex 1 to this booklet.
) Pozri prólohu 1 k tejto próruｲke.
34/EC, if the regulation as «nallyadoptedshouldprovetobecontrary to the Treaty or to secondary legislation.
Na konci tohto obdobia mú™e in- se (pozri ｲlènok 10 (4): na prijatie t̅chto textov ｲlenskï þtèty nestanovili ™iadne obdobie).
in the form of translations into all or some of the o/ciallan-guages of the Union.
formujÿci ｲlensk̅ þtèt prijaﾝ nèvrh predpisu bez ｵalþej povin-nosti.
Second stage: possible reactions open to the Commission and the Member States
Podﾋa smernice nemè ｲlensk̅ þtèt ™iadnu formèlnu povinnosﾝ odpovedaﾝ na prijatï pripomienky.
During the three months following the noti«cationofadraft(this period corresponds to the standstill period referred to in Article 9(1)), the Commission and the Member States examine the n o t i « e d t e x t i n o r d e r t o a s c e r t a i n i t s c o m p a t i b i l i t y w i t h C o m mstu n i t y law, particularly with Articles 28 and 30, 43 and 49 of the Treaty, but also with the sectoral Directives involved, and to reach a decision, where necessary, on its consistency with the concerned provisions.
Toto prèvo vþak nevyluｲuje nèslednÿ intervenciu zo strany Ko-misie mimo postupu podﾋa smernice 98/34/ES, ak sa dokè™e, ™e koneｲn̅ prijat̅ predpis protireｲó Zmluve alebo sekundèrnej le-gislatóve.
Comments are sent when the noti«edtext,althoughinaccord-ance with Community law, raises issues of interpretation or calls for details of the arrangements for its implementation.
Smernica stanovuje ™e ｲlenskï þtèty musia ¶podﾋa mo™nostiƒ pripomienky zhodnotiﾝ (ｲlènok 8 (2)).
The various reac-tions, whose impact is proportional to the seriousness of the «ndings,areasfollows:
Vo vþeobecnosti vþak ｲlenskï þtèty berÿ pripomienky do ÿvahy.
The Commission and/or the Member States can decide that the draft technical regulation is not of a nature to form barriers to the free movement of goods and services and to the free-dom of establishment.
Komisia a ｲlenskï þtèty mú™u poslaﾝ pripomienky alebo podrobnï stanovisko ｲlenskïmu þtètu, ktor̅ oznèmil nèvrh technickïho predpisu.
Directive 98/34/EC provides, in Article 8 (1) (last subparagraph), that the comments and detailed opinions issued with regard to technical speci«cations,`otherrequirements'orrulesonservic-es linked to «scalor«nancialmeasures,canonlyrelatetoas-pects which may create barriers to the free movement of goods or, in respect of rules on services, the free movement of services or the freedom of establishment of service operators, and not to the « s c a l o r « n a n c i a l s i d e o ft h e mffe a s u r e . T h e Mffe mb e r S t a t e s ' « s c a l po w e r s a r e t h uffs n o tffu n d e r s c r uijt i n y i n t h i s r e s p e c t .
Podrobnï stanoviskè (uvedenï neskúr, spolu s ich dúsledkami, v ｲlènku 9 smernice) sÿ zaslanï Komisiou alebo ｲlensk̅m þtè-tom, ak usÿdia, ™e uva™ovan̅ nèvrh opatrenia by po prijató vy-tvoril prekè™ky voﾋnïmu pohybu tovaru, slobode poskytovaﾝ slu™by alebo slobode ustanoviﾝ podnikateﾋov v oblasti slu™ieb v rèmci vnÿtornïho trhu.
T h e d r a ft s concerned also bene«tfromspecialtreatmentwithre-gard to the standstill periods (see Article 10(4): no period is laid down for the adoption of these texts by Member States).
Tieto podrobnï stanoviskè si vy™adu-jÿ nèvrh zmeny opatrenia kvúli odstrèneniu ak̅chkoﾋvek v̅-sledn̅ch prekè™ok tak̅mto slobodèm u™ pri ich zrode.
Under the Directive, the notifying Member State has no formal obligation to reply to the comments received.
Pripomienky sÿ poslanï, keｵ oznèmen̅ text, hoci je v sÿlade so zèkonom Spoloｲenstva, vyvolèva otèzky o interpretècii, alebo vy™aduje uvedenie podrobnostó o postupoch jeho implemen-tècie.
In practice, how-ever, the Member State frequently does so on a voluntary basis and this increases the dialogue.
Pripomienky mú™u tie™ poskytnÿﾝ celkovï hodnotenie opatrenia so zohﾋadnenóm vþeobecn̅ch princópov zèkona Spo-loｲenstva a politók implementovan̅ch v tomto kontexte, alebo informovaﾝ ｲlensk̅ þtèt o jeho budÿcich povinnostiach s ohﾋa-dom na zèkony, ktorï budÿ prijatï na ÿrovni Spoloｲenstva.
In this case, neither the Commission nor the Member States re-act during the three-month period.
Medzi najｲastejþie poruþenia t̅chto ustanovenó patró absencia klauzuly o vzèjomnom uznèvanó ekvivalentn̅ch technick̅ch þpeci«kècióalebopravidielt̅kajÿcichsaslu™iebustanoven̅ch in̅m ｲlensk̅m þtètom v texte alebo skutoｲnosﾝ, ™e niektorï ustanovenia nèvrhu sÿ neprimeranï vzhﾋadom na sledovan̅ cieﾋ.
At the end of this period, the notifying Member State can adopt its draft regulation, without further obligation.
Okrem toho, podrobnï stanovisko sa mú™e t̅-kaﾝ poruþenia harmonizaｲnej smernice Spoloｲenstva, nariade-nia alebo rozhodnutia.
This right does not, however, exclude subsequent intervention by the Commission, outside the procedure under Directive 98/
Prósluþnï nèvrhy vyu™óvajÿ aj þpecièlne posudzovanie s ohﾋadom na obdobia preruþenia prèc na technickom predpi-
The Directive stipulates that the Member States must take com-ments into account `as far as possible' (Article 8(2)).
Podrobnï stanovisko nesmie byﾝ za ™iadnych okolnostó po-skytnutï k nèvrhu predpisov, ktorï si vy™adujÿ v̅robnï zèka-zy, ktorï vþak netvoria potencièlnu prekè™ku voﾋnïmu pohy-bu tovaru.
Although it is not sent to the notifying Member State, the decision not to follow up the n o t i « c a t i o n i s a f o r m a l d e c i s i o n b y t h e C o m m i s s i o n .
) Hoci nie je poslan̅ informujÿcemu ｲlenskïmu þtètu, rozhodnutie, ktorï nesleduje oznèmenie, je formèlnym rozhodnutóm Komisie.
States do, however, generally take account of the comments they receive.
Plenskï þtèty musia odpovedaﾝ na podrobnï stanovisko Komi-sie alebo inïho ｲlenskïho þtètu.
same case, a Member State has the right, in the event of adop-tion of the noti«eddraft,toinstitutetheinfringementproceed-ings provided for by Article 227 of the Treaty.
V rovnakom pró-pade mè ｲlensk̅ þtèt prèvo v própade prijatia oznèmenïho nè-vrhu zaｲaﾝ konanie o poruþenó uvèdzanï v ｲlènku 227 Zmluvy.
These detailed opinions seek to ob-tain an amendment to the proposed measure, in order to re-move at source any resulting barriers to such freedoms.
Povinnosﾝ dodr™aﾝ obdobia preruþenia prèc na technickom predpise
The obligation to observe the standstill periods
Prósluþn̅ ｲlensk̅ þtèt podè Komisii sprèvu o opatreniach, ktorï navrhuje prijaﾝ v sÿvislosti s tak̅mito podrobn̅mi stanoviskami.
Member States shall postpone the adoption of a draft technical regulation for three months from the date of receipt by the Com-mission of the communication referred to in Article 8 (1).
Plenskï þtèty odlo™ia prijatie nèvrhu technickïho predpisu o tri mesiace od dètumu prijatia oznèmenia uvedenïho v ｲlènku 8 (1) Komisiou.
These issues relate to the illegality of the draft in terms of Com-munity law, through a breach of Article 28, 43 or 49 of the Trea-ty.
Plènok 9 sa t̅ka naｲasovania uvedenïho v oznèmenó.
The most frequent breaches of these provisions are the ab-sence in the text of a clause of mutual recognition of equivalent technical speci«cationsorofrulesonservicesestablishedbyanother Member State, or the fact that some of the provisions of the draft are disproportionate to the pursued objective.
Dètum prijatia nèvrhu technickïho predpisu a vþetk̅ch po™adovan̅ch dokumentov oznèmen̅ch ｲlensk̅m þtètom Komisii je signè-lom na zaｲatie obdobia, poｲas ktorïho mè prósluþn̅ ｲlensk̅ þtèt prósnu povinnosﾝ neprijómaﾝ predmetn̅ nèvrh.
› for four months the adoption of a draft technical regulation in the form of a voluntary agreement within the meaning of the second indent of the second subparagraph of point 11 of Arti-cle 1,
› o þtyri mesiace prijatie nèvrhu technickïho predpisu vo for-me dobrovoﾋnej dohody v rèmci v̅znamu druhej odrè™ky druhïho pododseku bodu 11 ｲlènku 1,
A detailed opinion may not, under any circumstances, be is-sued against draft regulations which seek manufacturing pro-hibitions but which do not constitute a potential barrier to the free movement of goods.
Toto obdobie je be™ne oznaｲovanï ako obdobie preruþenia prèc na technickom predpise.
› without prejudice to paragraphs 3, 4 and 5, for six months the adoption of any other draft technical regulation (except for draft rules on services),
› bez zaujatosti voｲi odsekom 3, 4 a 5, o þesﾝ mesiacov prijatie akïhokoﾋvek inïho nèvrhu technickïho predpisu (okrem nè-vrhu pravidla t̅kajÿceho sa slu™ieb) od dètumu prijatia oznèmenia uvedenïho v ｲlènku 8 (1) Komisiou, ak Komisia
If the Commission considers that the reply to its detailed opin-ion is unsatisfactory, it can use, if the draft is actually adopted, the procedure referred to in Article 226 of the Treaty.
Trojmesaｲnï obdobie uvedenï v ｲlènku 9 (1) je poｲiatoｲn̅m obdobóm preruþenia prèc na technickom predpise. Znamenè
Member States to examine the noti«eddrafttextandtoreactto it if necessary.
obdobie, ktorï je pova™ovanï za potrebnï na preskÿmanie oznèmenïho nèvrhu textu zo strany Komisie a in̅ch ｲlensk̅ch þtètov a v própade potreby naﾏ reagovaﾝ (57).
by the Commission of the communication referred to in Article 8(1) if the Commission or another Member State delivers a de-tailed opinion, within three months of that date, to the e.ectthat the measure envisaged may create obstacles to the free movement of services or to the freedom of establishment of service operators within the internal market.
pripomienkuje opatrenia uva™ovanï zo strany ｲlenskïho þtètu ako reakciu na podrobnï stanovisko, aby ｲlensk̅ þtèt informo-vala o tom, ｲi sÿ tieto opatrenia vhodnï na eliminèciu prekè™ok voﾋnïmu pohybu tovaru, voﾋnïmu pohybu slu™ieb alebo slobo-de ustanovenia operètora slu™ieb, ktorï mohli vyplynÿﾝ z textu, alebo ｲi je prijateﾋnï zdúvodnenie pre zachovanie textu.
In addition to this period, the notifying Member State is subject to an additional standstill period, varying in length according to the nature of the text and the type of reaction it receives.
Okrem tohto obdobia podlieha informujÿci ｲlensk̅ þtèt ｵalþie-mu obdobiu preruþenia prèc na technickom predpise, ktorï sa lóþi dﾊ™kou podﾋa charakteru textu a typu prijatej reakcie.
Although comments sent to the Member State do not result in an extension of the initial three-month standstill period, the same does not apply to detailed opinions sent by the Commis-sion or the other Member States.
Hoci pripomienky zaslanï ｲlenskïmu þtètu nemajÿ za nèsledok pre-dﾊ™enie poｲiatoｲnïho trojmesaｲnïho obdobia preruþenia prèc na technickom predpise, to istï neplató pre podrobnï stanovis-kè poslanï Komisiou alebo in̅m ｲlensk̅m þtètom.
The Member State concerned shall report to the Commission on the action it proposes to take on such detailed opinions. The Com-mission shall comment on this reaction.
V própade podrobnïho stanoviska t̅kajÿceho sa dobrovoﾋnej dohody smernica uvèdza, ™e ｲlensk̅ þtèt musó reþpektovaﾝ ob-dobie preruþenia prèc na technickom predpise v trvanó þtyroch mesiacov (ｲlènok 9 (2)).
It adds only one month to the initial standstill period so that the Mem-ber States do not lose time in gaining the bene«tofmeasures,the e.ectivenessofwhichisasatisfactoryalternativetolegisla-tion.
Pridèva iba jeden mesiac k obdobiu preruþenia prèc na technickom predpise, aby ｲlenskï þtèty ne-strècali ｲas pri zóskavanó v̅hod z opatrenó, ktor̅ch ÿｲinnosﾝ je dostatoｲnou alternatóvou k legislatóve.
One should point out that the same `additional one-month rule' applies in the event of a detailed opinion concerning draft rules on Information Society services.
Je mo™nï poukèzaﾝ na to, ™e rovnakï ¶doplnkovï jednomesaｲ-nï pravidloƒ plató v própade podrobnïho stanoviska t̅kajÿceho sa nèvrhu slu™ieb t̅kajÿcich sa slu™ieb informaｲnej spoloｲnos-ti.
Article 9 relates to the timing involved in noti«cation.Thedateof receipt by the Commission of the draft national technical regulation communicated by a Member State and of all the re-quested documents is the signal for the beginning of a period during which the Member State concerned is strictly obliged not to adopt the draft in question.
Obdobie preruþenia prèc na technickom predpise je rozþórenï na þesﾝ mesiacov pre vþetky nèvrhy, ktorï sÿ predmetom podrobnïho stanoviska.
This period is commonly known as the standstill period.
Odseky (3), (4) a (5) ｲlènku 9 uvèdzajÿ oveﾋa dlhþie obdobia pre-ruþenia prèc ako v̅sledok blokècie uvalenej Komisiou › a len samotnou Komisiou › po preskÿmanó nèvrhu.
The three-month period referred to in Article 9(1) is the initial standstill period. It represents the period which is considered to be necessary in order to allow the Commission and the other
Plensk̅ þtèt, ktorïmu je takïto stanovisko adresovanï, musó informovaﾝ Komisiu o opatreniach, ktorï zam̅þﾋa prijaﾝ (odvo-lanie spochybnenïho textu, oprèvnenie na jeho zachovanie alebo zmena urｲit̅ch ustanovenó kvúli preukèzaniu ich kompa-tibility s pravidlami vnÿtornïho trhu) nezèvisle od toho, ｲi je autorom in̅ ｲlensk̅ þtèt a/alebo Komisia. Komisia postupne
A Member State to which such an opinion is addressed must inform the Commission of the actions it intends to take (revo-cation of the disputed text, justi«cationforretainingit,ortheamendment of certain provisions in order to render them com-patible with the rules of the internal market), irrespective of whether another Member State and/or the Commission was the author.
Tèto reakcia, najvè™nejþó dúsledok pre ｲlenskï þtèty ohﾋadom ｲasu, je zameranè na odvrètenie nepriaznivïho ÿｲinku oznè-menïho nèvrhu na legislatóvny harmonizaｲn̅ proces, ktor̅ za-ｲal na ÿrovni Spoloｲenstva.
With the exception of: a) urgent cases, b) laws, regulations or administrative provisions by Member States prohibiting manufacture, as long as these do not form barriers to the free movement of goods (see Article 10(2)), c) technical s p e c i « c a t i o n s o r o t h e r r e q u i r e mffe n t s l i n k e d w i t h « n a n c i a l o r « s c a l mffe a s u r e s ( s e e A r t i c l e 1 0 ( 4 ) ) .
'57) Okrem: a) urgentn̅ch própadov, b) zèkonov, nariadenó alebo administratóvnych ustanovenó ｲlensk̅ch þtètov zakazujÿcich v̅robu, pokiaﾋ netvoria prekè™ku voﾋnïmu pohybu tovaru (pozri ｲlènok 10 (2)), c) technickï þpeci«kèciealeboinïpo™iadavkyspojenïs«nanｲn̅mialebo«þkèlnymiopatreniami(pozriｲlènok
Paragraph (3) covers the « r s t c a s e : t h e C o m m i s s i o n a n n o u n c - e s its intention to propose or adopt a directive, regulation or decision (in other words any of the binding Community acts under Article 249 (former Article 189) of the Treaty on the same subject as the text of the draft technical regulation.
Odsek (3) sa t̅ka prvïho própadu: Komisia oznèmi svoj zè-mer navrhnÿﾝ alebo prijaﾝ smernicu, nariadenie alebo rozhod-nutie (in̅mi slovami akïkoﾋvek zèvêznï opatrenia Spoloｲen-stva podﾋa ｲlènku 249 (b̅val̅ ｲlènok 189) Zmluvy o rovnakom predmete, ako je text nèvrhu technickïho predpisu.
these measures are suited to eliminate the barriers to the free movement of goods, the free movement of services or the free-dom of establishment of service operators which may have re-sulted from the adoption of the text, or whether the justi«ca-tion given for retaining the text is acceptable.
Je potrebnï zdúrazniﾝ, ™e uvedenè ¶spoloｲnè pozóciaƒ repre-zentuje fèzu legislatóvneho procesu Spoloｲenstva podﾋa postu-
This paragraph does not specify what is meant by `the inten-tion' to propose, but it concerns an intention that has been ex-plicitly expressed, for example through inclusion in the Com-mission's annual legislative programme.
Tento odsek neþpeci«kuje,ｲoznamenènavrhnÿﾝ¶podﾋazème-ruƒ, ale t̅ka sa zèmeru, ktor̅ bol v̅slovne vyjadren̅, napróklad prostrednóctvom zaｲlenenia do roｲnïho legislatóvneho progra-mu Komisie.
Member States must then respect a standstill period of 12 months.
Plenskï þtèty musia teda reþpektovaﾝ obdobie preruþenia prèc na technickom predpise v trvanó 12 mesiacov.
In the « e l d o f I n f o r m a t i o n S o c i e t y s e r v i c e s , t h e C o m m i s s i o n c a n n o t require postponement of the adoption of a draft simply by stating its intention to propose or adopt a binding Commu-nity act relating to the subject of the text.
V oblasti slu™ieb informaｲnej spoloｲnosti nemú™e Komisia vy™a-dovaﾝ odklad prijatia nèvrhu jednoducho uvedenóm svojho zème-ru navrhnÿﾝ alebo prijaﾝ zèvêznï opatrenie Spoloｲenstva t̅kajÿce sa predmetu textu.
The fact that the Commission is in the process of drawing up a draft Community act is not su/cienttojustifya waitingperiodoftwelvemonthsfor the Member State concerned.
Skutoｲnosﾝ, ™e Komisia je v procese própravy zèkona Spoloｲenstva nie je dostatoｲnè na odúvodnenie ｲakacej lehoty dvanèstich mesiacov pre prósluþn̅ ｲlensk̅ þtèt.
If the Council adopts a common position during the standstill period referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4, that period shall, subject to paragraph 6, be extended to 18 months.
V druhom própade (odsek (4)) Komisia zistó, ™e oznèmen̅ nèvrh technickïho predpisu sa t̅ka zèle™itosti obsiahnutej v nèvrhu smernice, nariadenia alebo rozhodnutia prezentovanïho Rade.
Paragraphs (3), (4) and (5) of Article 9 stipulate much longer standstill periods as a result of the blockage imposed by the Commission - and by the Commission alone - following exami-nation of the draft.
Odsek (6) sa t̅ka vyprþania obdobó preruþenia prèc na technic-kom predpise uplatnen̅ch na ｲlenskï þtèty v própade blokova-nia nèvrhu technickïho predpisu zo strany Komisie.
In this case, as in the preceding case, the notifying Member State must respect a standstill period of 12 months.
V tomto própade, rovnako ako v predchèdzajÿcom, musó infor-mujÿci ｲlensk̅ þtèt reþpektovaﾝ obdobie preruþenia prèc na technickom predpise v trvanó 12 mesiacov.
Contrary to the preceding case, this e . e c t a p p l i e s a l s o i n t h e « e l d o f I n f o r - m a t i o n Society services.
V protiklade k pred-chèdzajÿcemu própadu, tento ÿｲinok plató tie™ v oblasti slu™ieb informaｲnej spoloｲnosti.
The blockage of a draft national regulation can be imposed by the Commission in three speci«ccases:
) Plènok 189b zaveden̅ do Zmluvy o ES Maastrichtskou zmluvou. (v sÿｲasnosti ｲlènok 251).
legislative work at a national level and to adopt the technical regulation.
Keｵ™e blokovanie odｵaﾋuje prijatie nèrodnej legislatóvy bez presn̅ch vedomostó o dﾊ™ke procesu, ktor̅ povedie k zèvereｲ-nïmu schvèleniu legislatóvy Spoloｲenstva, Komisia pou™óva tento nèstroj s opatrnosﾝou.
It should be emphasised that the `common position' referred to represents a stage of the Community legislative process under the procedures of co-operation and co-decision, the «rstin-volving the European Parliament in the Council's decision-mak-ing power and the second giving it the power to adopt, jointly with the Council, certain regulations, decisions and directives.
Je logickï, ™e v própade keｵ opatrenie Spoloｲenstva, o ktorom sa uva™uje, alebo je v procese, nevykazuje v̅sledok, povinnosti preruþenia prèc na technickom predpise uplatnenï na zèklade odsekov (3), (4) a (5) by mali zaniknÿﾝ, aby ｲlenskï þtèty mohli dokonｲiﾝ odlo™enÿ legislatóvnu prècu na nèrodnej ÿrovni a pri-jaﾝ technick̅ predpis.
These standstill obligations also lapse when the Council, to-gether with the Parliament in case of co-decision, or when the Commission adopts the announced binding Community act.
Tieto povinnosti preruþenia prèc na technickom predpise za-niknÿ aj v própade, keｵ Rada, spolu s Parlamentom v própade spolurozhodovania, alebo keｵ Komisia prijme oznèmenï zè-vêznï opatrenie Spoloｲenstva.
› when the Commission informs the Member States that it no long-er intends to propose or adopt a binding Community act,
Na klauzulu o naliehavosti sa mo™no odvolèvaﾝ aj vtedy, ak ide o pravidlè t̅kajÿce sa «nanｲn̅chslu™ieb,zosÿrnychdúvodovspúsoben̅ch vè™nymi okolnosﾝami t̅kajÿcimi sa ochrany bez-peｲnosti a integrity «nanｲnïhosystïmu,najmêochranydepo-nentov, investorov a poisten̅ch osúb.