natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
As regards collective investment undertakings covered by Council Directive 85/611/EEC of 20 December 1985 on the coordination of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to undertakings for collective investment in transferable securities (UCITS), it is not the purpose of this Directive to regulate the content of the simplified prospectus as defined by Article 28 of Directive 85/611/EEC.
Kar zadeva kolektivne naložbene podjeme iz Direktive Sveta 85/611/EGS z dne 20. decembra 1985 o usklajevanju zakonov in drugih predpisov o kolektivnih naložbenih podjemih za vlaganja v prenosljive vrednostne papirje (KNPVP), ni namen te direktive urejati vsebino poenostavljenega prospekta, kakor je opredeljen v členu 28 Direktive 85/611/EGS.
No information should be added to the simplified prospectus as a result of the implementation of this Directive.
Zaradi izvajanja te direktive se poenostavljenemu prospektu ne bi smele dodati nove informacije.
The simplified prospectus provides, notably, sufficient information in relation to the costs and associated charges in respect to the UCITS itself.
Poenostavljeni prospekt zlasti zagotavlja dovolj informacij v zvezi s stroški in povezanimi izdatki za sam KNPVP.
However, investment firms distributing units in UCITS should additionally inform their clients about all the other costs and associated charges related to their provision of investment services in relation to units in UCITS.
Investicijske družbe, ki distribuirajo enote v KNPVP, bi morale dodatno obvestiti svoje stranke o vseh drugih stroških in povezanih izdatkih v zvezi z opravljanjem investicijskih storitev, povezanih s KNPVP.
It is necessary to make different provision for the application of the suitability test in Article 19(4) of Directive 2004/39/EC and the appropriateness test in Article 19(5) of that Directive.
Treba je določiti različne določbe za uporabo preskusa primernosti iz člena 19(4) Direktive 2004/39/ES in ustreznosti iz člena 19(5) navedene direktive.
These tests have different scope with regards to the investment services to which they relate, and have different functions and characteristics.
Ti preskusi imajo različen obseg uporabe, kar zadeva investicijske storitve, na katere se nanašajo, ter različne funkcije in značilnosti.
For the purposes of Article 19(4) of Directive 2004/39/EC, a transaction may be unsuitable for the client or potential client because of the risks of the financial instruments involved, the type of transaction, the characteristics of the order or the frequency of the trading.
Za namene člena 19(4) Direktive 2004/39/ES je transakcija lahko neprimerna za stranko ali potencialno stranko zaradi tveganj finančnih instrumentov, ki jih zadeva, vrste transakcije, značilnosti naročila ali pogostosti trgovanja.
A series of transactions that are each suitable when viewed in isolation may be unsuitable if the recommendation or the decisions to trade are made with a frequency that is not in the best interests of the client.
Številne transakcije, ki so primerne, kadar se obravnavajo posamezno, so lahko neprimerne, če se priporočila ali odločitve za trgovanje izvajajo tako, da njihova pogostost ni v najboljšem interesu stranke.
In the case of portfolio management, a transaction might also be unsuitable if it would result in an unsuitable portfolio.
V primeru upravljanja portfelja je lahko transakcija neprimerna tudi, če bi zaradi nje portfelj postal neprimeren.
In accordance with Article 19(4) of Directive 2004/39/EC, a firm is required to assess the suitability of investment services and financial instruments to a client only when it is providing investment advice or portfolio management to that client.
V skladu s členom 19(4) Direktive 2004/39/ES mora družba oceniti primernost investicijskih storitev in finančnih instrumentov za stranko samo, če za navedeno stranko nudi investicijsko svetovanje ali upravljanje portfelja.
In the case of other investment services, the firm is required by Article 19(5) of that Directive to assess the appropriateness of an investment service or product for a client, and then only if the product is not offered on an execution-only basis under Article 19(6) of that Directive (which applies to non-complex products).
V primeru drugih investicijskih storitev mora družba na podlagi člena 19(5) navedene direktive oceniti, ali sta investicijska storitev ali produkt ustrezna za stranko, če produkt ni na voljo samo za izvajanje na podlagi člena 19(6) navedene direktive (kar velja za nekompleksne produkte).
For the purposes of the provisions of this Directive requiring investment firms to assess the appropriateness of investment services or products offered or demanded, a client who has engaged in a course of dealings involving a specific type of product or service beginning before the date of application of Directive 2004/39/EC should be presumed to have the necessary experience and knowledge in order to understand the risks involved in relation to that product or investment service.
Za namene določb iz te direktive, ki zahtevajo, da investicijske družbe ocenijo ustreznost investicijskih storitev ali produktov, ki se ponujajo ali po katerih se povprašuje, se šteje, da ima stranka, ki se ukvarja s posli v zvezi z določeno vrsto produkta ali storitve, ki se začenjajo pred datumom začetka uporabe Direktive 2004/39/ES, potrebne izkušnje in znanje, da razume tveganja, povezana z navedenim produktom ali investicijsko storitvijo.
Where a client engages in a course of dealings of that kind through the services of an investment firm, beginning after the date of application of that Directive, the firm is not required to make a new assessment on the occasion of each separate transaction.
Če se stranka ukvarja s posli navedene vrste preko storitev investicijske družbe, ki se začenjajo po datumu začetka uporabe navedene direktive, družbi ni treba pripraviti nove ocene za vsako posamezno transakcijo.
It complies with its duty under Article 19(5) of that Directive provided that it makes the necessary assessment of appropriateness before beginning that service.
Svojo dolžnost iz člena 19(5) navedene direktive izpolni, če pred začetkom opravljanja storitve pripravi potrebno oceno ustreznosti.
A recommendation or request made, or advice given, by a portfolio manager to a client to the effect that the client should give or alter a mandate to the portfolio manager that defines the limits of the portfolio manager's discretion should be considered a recommendation within the meaning of Article 19(4) of Directive 2004/39/EC.
Priporočilo ali zahtevek, ki ga izda upravitelj portfelja, ali nasvet, ki ga da stranki, da bi stranka dala ali spremenila pooblastilo upravitelju portfelja, ki določa omejitve diskrecijske pravice upravitelja portfelja, naj se šteje kot priporočilo v smislu člena 19(4) Direktive 2004/39/ES.
For the purposes of determining whether a unit in a collective investment undertaking which does not comply with the requirements of Directive 85/611/EC, that has been authorised for marketing to the public, should be considered as non-complex, the circumstances in which valuation systems will be independent of the issuer should include where they are overseen by a depositary that is regulated as a provider of depositary services in a Member State.
Da se ugotovi, ali naj se šteje, da je enota v kolektivnem naložbenem podjemu, ki ne izpolnjuje zahtev iz Direktive 85/611/EGS, ki je dobila dovoljenje za trženje javnosti, nekompleksna, naj okoliščine, v katerih bodo sistemi vrednotenja neodvisni od izdajatelja, vključujejo nadzor s strani skrbnika, ki se ureja kot ponudnik skrbniških storitev v državi članici.
Nothing in this Directive requires competent authorities to approve the content of the basic agreement between an investment firm and its retail clients.
Nobena določba v tej direktivi ne zahteva, da pristojni organi odobrijo vsebino osnovnega sporazuma med investicijsko družbo in majhnimi vlagatelji.
However, neither does it prevent them from doing so, insofar as any such approval is based only on the firm's compliance with its obligations under Directive 2004/39/EC to act honestly, fairly and professionally in accordance with the best interests of its clients, and to establish a record that sets out the rights and obligations of investment firms and their clients, and the other terms on which firms will provide services to their clients.
Hkrati pa jim tega tudi ne preprečuje, če vsaka taka odobritev temelji samo na dejstvu, ali družba izpolnjuje obveznosti iz Direktive 2004/39/ES, da bo poslovala pošteno, pravično in strokovno v skladu z najboljšimi interesi strank, ter da bo pripravila seznam, na katerem so naštete pravice in obveznosti investicijskih družb in njihovih strank, ter drugi pogoji, po katerih bodo družbe opravljale storitve za stranke.
The records an investment firm is required to keep should be adapted to the type of business and the range of investment services and activities performed, provided that the record-keeping obligations set out in Directive 2004/39/EC and this Directive are fulfilled.
Evidence, ki jih mora voditi investicijska družba, se prilagodijo vrsti poslovanja in obsegu investicijskih storitev in dejavnosti, ki se opravljajo, pod pogojem, da so izpolnjene obveznosti v zvezi z vodenjem evidenc, določene v Direktivi 2004/39/ES in v tej direktivi.
For the purposes of the reporting obligations in respect of portfolio management, a contingent liability transaction is one that involves any actual or potential liability for the client that exceeds the cost of acquiring the instrument.
Za namene obveznosti poročanja v zvezi z upravljanjem portfelja je transakcija pogojne obveznosti transakcija, ki vsebuje kakršno koli dejansko ali potencialno obveznost za stranko, ki presega stroške nakupa instrumenta.
For the purposes of the provisions on reporting to clients, a reference to the type of the order should be understood as referring to its status as a limit order, market order, or other specific type of order.
Za namene določb o poročanju strankam se sklic na vrsto naročila razume kot sklic na njegov status kot naročilo z omejitvijo, tržno naročilo ali druga posebna vrsta naročila.
For the purposes of the provisions on reporting to clients, a reference to the nature of the order should be understood as referring to orders to subscribe for securities, or to exercise an option, or similar client order.
Za namene določb o poročanju strankam se sklic na vrsto naročila razume kot sklic na naročilo za vpis vrednostnih papirjev, ali za uveljavljanje pravic iz opcije ali podobno naročilo stranke.
When establishing its execution policy in accordance with Article 21(2) of Directive 2004/39/EC, an investment firm should determine the relative importance of the factors mentioned in Article 21(1) of that Directive, or at least establish the process by which it determines the relative importance of these factors, so that it can deliver the best possible result to its clients.
Pri določanju politike izvajanja naročil v skladu s členom 21(2) Direktive 2004/39/ES naj investicijska družba določi relativen pomen dejavnikov iz člena 21(1) navedene direktive ali vsaj vzpostavi proces, po katerem določa relativen pomen teh dejavnikov, tako da lahko svojim strankam zagotovi najboljše rezultate.
In order to give effect to that policy, an investment firm should select the execution venues that enable it to obtain on a consistent basis the best possible result for the execution of client orders.
Da bi uveljavila navedeno politiko, naj investicijska družba izbere mesta izvajanja, ki ji omogočajo dosledno doseganje najboljšega možnega rezultata za izvajanje naročil strank.
An investment firm should apply its execution policy to each client order that it executes with a view to obtaining the best possible result for the client in accordance with that policy.
Investicijska družba bi morala uporabljati politiko izvajanja naročil za vsako naročilo stranke, ki ga izvede, z namenom doseganja najboljših možnih rezultatov za stranko v skladu z navedeno politiko.
The obligation under Directive 2004/39/EC to take all reasonable steps to obtain the best possible result for the client should not be treated as requiring an investment firm to include in its execution policy all available execution venues.
Obveznost iz Direktive 2004/39/ES sprejeti vse razumne ukrepe za doseganje najboljših možnih rezultatov za stranko naj se ne razume, kot da od investicijske družbe zahteva, da v svojo politiko izvajanja naročil vključi vsa razpoložljiva mesta izvajanja.
For the purposes of ensuring that an investment firm obtains the best possible result for the client when executing a retail client order in the absence of specific client instructions, the firm should take into consideration all factors that will allow it to deliver the best possible result in terms of the total consideration, representing the price of the financial instrument and the costs related to execution.
Da se zagotovi, da investicijska družba za stranko doseže najboljši možni rezultat pri izvedbi naročila majhnega vlagatelja v odsotnosti posebnih navodil stranke, bi morala družba upoštevati tudi vse dejavnike, ki ji bodo omogočali doseči najboljši možni rezultat z vidika skupne vrednosti, ki je sestavljena iz cene finančnega instrumenta in stroškov, povezanih z izvedbo.
Speed, likelihood of execution and settlement, the size and nature of the order, market impact and any other implicit transaction costs may be given precedence over the immediate price and cost consideration only insofar as they are instrumental in delivering the best possible result in terms of the total consideration to the retail client.
Hitrost, verjetnost izvedbe in poravnave, velikost in narava naročila, tržni vpliv in vsi drugi implicitni stroški transakcije lahko imajo prednost pred neposredno obravnavo cene in stroškov samo, če so nujni za doseganje najboljšega možnega rezultata za majhnega vlagatelja z vidika skupne vrednosti.
When an investment firm executes an order following specific instructions from the client, it should be treated as having satisfied its best execution obligations only in respect of the part or aspect of the order to which the client instructions relate.
Če investicijska družba izvede naročilo po specifičnih navodilih stranke, bi se moralo šteti, da je izpolnila svoje obveznosti po najboljši izvedbi samo za tisti del ali vidik naročila, na katerega se nanašajo navodila stranke.
The fact that the client has given specific instructions which cover one part or aspect of the order should not be treated as releasing the investment firm from its best execution obligations in respect of any other parts or aspects of the client order that are not covered by such instructions.
Če je stranka dala specifična navodila, ki zajemajo samo en del ali vidik naročila, se ne bi smelo šteti, da je investicijska družba zaradi tega oproščena obveznosti po najboljši izvedbi za kateri koli drugi del ali vidik naročila stranke, ki ni zajet v taka navodila.
An investment firm should not induce a client to instruct it to execute an order in a particular way, by expressly indicating or implicitly suggesting the content of the instruction to the client, when the firm ought reasonably to know that an instruction to that effect is likely to prevent it from obtaining the best possible result for that client.
Investicijska družba ne bi smela navesti stranke, da ji da navodilo, naj izvrši naročilo na določen način, tako da stranki izrecno navede ali implicitno predlaga vsebino navodila, če bi morala družba razumno vedeti, da ji tako navodilo verjetno ne bo omogočilo doseči najboljših možnih rezultatov za navedeno stranko.
However, this should not prevent a firm inviting a client to choose between two or more specified trading venues, provided that those venues are consistent with the execution policy of the firm.
Vendar pa to družbi ne bi smelo preprečiti, da stranko povabi, naj izbere med dvema ali več navedenimi mesti trgovanja, če so navedena mesta skladna s politiko družbe za izvajanje naročil.
Dealing on own account with clients by an investment firm should be considered as the execution of client orders, and therefore subject to the requirements under Directive 2004/39/EC and this Directive and, in particular, those obligations in relation to best execution.
Poslovanje investicijske družbe s strankami za lasten račun bi se moralo šteti kot izvajanje naročil strank, zato je njeno poslovanje predmet zahtev iz Direktive 2004/39/ES in te direktive, zlasti pa obveznosti v zvezi z najboljšo izvedbo.
However, if an investment firm provides a quote to a client and that quote would meet the investment firm's obligations under Article 21(1) of Directive 2004/39/EC if the firm executed that quote at the time the quote was provided, then the firm will meet those same obligations if it executes its quote after the client accepts it, provided that, taking into account the changing market conditions and the time elapsed between the offer and acceptance of the quote, the quote is not manifestly out of date.
Če pa investicijska družba zagotovi stranki kotacijo, navedena kotacija pa izpolnjuje obveznosti investicijske družbe na podlagi člena 21(1) Direktive 2004/39/ES, če jo družba izvede takrat, ko je kotacija dana, potem družba izpolni navedene obveznosti, če svojo kotacijo izvede potem, ko jo stranka sprejme, pod pogojem, da ob upoštevanju spremenljivih pogojev na trgu in časa, ki je potekel od ponudbe do sprejetja kotacija, kotacija ni izrazito zastarela.
The obligation to deliver the best possible result when executing client orders applies in relation to all types of financial instruments.
Obveznost doseganja najboljših možnih rezultatov pri izvajanju naročil strank se uporablja za vse vrste finančnih instrumentov.
However, given the differences in market structures or the structure of financial instruments, it may be difficult to identify and apply a uniform standard of and procedure for best execution that would be valid and effective for all classes of instrument.
Glede na razlike v strukturah trga ali strukturi finančnih instrumentov pa bi lahko bilo težko odkriti in uporabiti enoten standard in postopek za najboljšo izvedbo, ki bi bil veljaven in učinkovit za vse razrede instrumentov.
Best execution obligations should therefore be applied in a manner that takes into account the different circumstances associated with the execution of orders related to particular types of financial instruments.
Obveznosti najboljše izvedbe bi se torej morale uporabljati na način, ki upošteva različne okoliščine, povezane z izvajanjem naročil za posebne vrste finančnih instrumentov.
For example, transactions involving a customised OTC financial instrument that involve a unique contractual relationship tailored to the circumstances of the client and the investment firm may not be comparable for best execution purposes with transactions involving shares traded on centralised execution venues.
Na primer, transakcije v zvezi s prilagojenimi finančnimi instrumenti na prostem trgu, ki se opravljajo na podlagi enkratnega pogodbenega razmerja, prilagojenega razmeram stranke in investicijske družbe, za namene najboljše izvedbe morda niso primerljive s transakcijami, povezanimi z delnicami, s katerimi se trguje na centraliziranih izvedbenih mestih.
For the purposes of determining best execution when executing retail client orders, the costs related to execution should include an investment firm's own commissions or fees charged to the client for limited purposes, in cases where more than one venue listed in the firm's execution policy is capable of executing a particular order.
Za določitev najboljše izvedbe pri izvajanju naročil majhnih vlagateljev bi morali stroški, povezani z izvršitvijo, vključevati provizije ali pristojbine investicijske družbe, ki se zaračunajo stranki za omejene namene, v primerih, ko je izvedbo določenega naročila mogoče izvesti na več kakor enem mestu, naštetem v politiki družbe za izvajanje naročil.
In such cases, the firm's own commissions and costs for executing the order on each of the eligible execution venues should be taken into account in order to assess and compare the results for the client that would be achieved by executing the order on each such venue.
V takih primerih bi morale biti pri ocenjevanju rezultatov, ki bi bili za stranko doseženi z izvršitvijo naročila na vsakem takem mestu, za vsako primerno izvedbeno mesto upoštevane provizije družbe in stroški za izvršitev naročila.
However, it is not intended to require a firm to compare the results that would be achieved for its client on the basis of its own execution policy and its own commissions and fees, with results that might be achieved for the same client by any other investment firm on the basis of a different execution policy or a different structure of commissions or fees.
Vendar pa se s tem od družbe ne zahteva, naj primerja rezultate, ki bi bili doseženi za stranko na podlagi njene politike izvajanja naročil ter njenih provizij in pristojbin, z rezultati, ki bi jih lahko za isto stranko dosegla katera koli druga investicijska družba na podlagi drugačne politike izvajanja naročil ali drugače strukture provizij ali pristojbin.
Nor is it intended to require a firm to compare the differences in its own commissions which are attributable to differences in the nature of the services that the firm provides to clients.
Niti ni namen tega zahtevati od družbe, naj primerja razlike v svojih provizijah, ki so posledica razlik v naravi storitev, ki jih opravlja družba za stranke.
The provisions of this Directive that provide that costs of execution should include an investment firm's own commissions or fees charged to the client for the provision of an investment service should not apply for the purpose of determining what execution venues must be included in the firm's execution policy for the purposes of Article 21(3) of Directive 2004/39/EC.
Določbe te direktive, ki določajo, da naj stroški izvajanja vključujejo provizije in pristojbine investicijske družbe, ki se zaračunajo stranki za opravljanje investicijske storitve, se ne bi smele uporabljati za določanje, katera izvedbena mesta morajo biti vključena v politiko družbe za izvajanje naročil za namene člena 21(3) Direktive 2004/39/ES.
It should be considered that an investment firm structures or charges its commissions in a way which discriminates unfairly between execution venues if it charges a different commission or spread to clients for execution on different execution venues and that difference does not reflect actual differences in the cost to the firm of executing on those venues.
Treba je upoštevati, da investicijska družba sestavi ali zaračuna svoje provizije na način, ki nepošteno razlikuje med mesti izvedbe, če zaračunava različno provizijo ali razpon strankam za izvedbo na različnih mestih izvedbe, in da razlika ne prikaže dejanskih razlik stroškov, ki jih ima družba za izvedbo na navedenih mestih.
The provisions of this Directive as to execution policy are without prejudice to the general obligation of an investment firm under Article 21(4) of Directive 2004/39/EC to monitor the effectiveness of its order execution arrangements and policy and assess the venues in its execution policy on a regular basis.
Določbe te direktive v zvezi s politiko izvajanja naročil ne posegajo v splošno obveznost investicijske družbe na podlagi člena 21(4) Direktive 2004/39/ES, ki narekuje spremljanje učinkovitosti ureditve izvajanja naročil in politike in redno ocenjevanje izvedbenih mest v okviru politike izvajanja naročil.
This Directive is not intended to require a duplication of effort as to best execution between an investment firm which provides the service of reception and transmission of order or portfolio management and any investment firm to which that investment firm transmits its orders for execution.
Namen te direktive ni zahtevati podvajanja prizadevanj glede najboljše izvedbe med investicijsko družbo, ki opravlja storitev sprejetja in prenosa naročila ali upravljanja portfelja, in katero koli investicijsko družbo, kateri navedena investicijska družba prenese svoje naloge za izvedbo.