natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Jurisdiction based on the forum necessitatis should, however, be exercised only if the dispute has a sufficient connection with the Member State of the court seised, for instance the nationality of one of the parties.
Pristojnost v okviru forum necessitatis pa se lahko izvršuje le, če je spor v zadostni meri povezan z državo članico, v kateri je sodišče, ki mu je bila zadeva predložena, kot je na primer povezan na podlagi državljanstva ene izmed strank.
An additional rule of jurisdiction should provide that, except under specific conditions, proceedings to modify an existing maintenance decision or to have a new decision given can be brought by the debtor only in the State in which the creditor was habitually resident at the time the decision was given and in which he remains habitually resident.
Z dodatnim pravilom o pristojnosti bi bilo treba določiti, da, razen v posebnih okoliščinah, zavezanec postopek za spremembo obstoječe sodne odločbe v preživninskih zadevah ali za izdajo nove odločbe, lahko sproži le v državi pogodbenici, v kateri je imel upravičenec običajno prebivališče, ko je bila izdana sodna odločba, in v kateri ima še naprej običajno prebivališče.
To ensure proper symmetry between the 2007 Hague Convention and this Regulation, this rule should also apply as regards decisions given in a third State which is party to the said Convention in so far as that Convention is in force between that State and the Community and covers the same maintenance obligations in that State and in the Community.
Da se zagotovi ustrezna povezava med Haaško konvencijo iz leta 2007 in to uredbo, bi bilo treba to pravilo uporabljati tudi za sodne odločbe izdane v tretji državi, ki je pogodbenica te konvencije, če ta konvencija velja med zadevno državo in Skupnostjo ter če zajema enake preživninske obveznosti v tej državi in v Skupnosti.
For the purposes of this Regulation, it should be provided that in Ireland the concept of ‘domicile’ replaces the concept of ‘nationality’ which is also the case in the United Kingdom, subject to this Regulation being applicable in the latter Member State in accordance with Article 4 of the Protocol on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community.
V tej uredbi bi bilo treba določiti, da se pojem „državljanstva“ na Irskem nadomesti s pojmom „domicil“; enako velja tudi za Združeno kraljestvo, če se v skladu s členom 4 Protokola o stališču Združenega kraljestva in Irske, ki je priložen k Pogodbi o Evropski uniji in Pogodbi o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti, ta uredba uporablja tudi v tej državi članici.
In order to increase legal certainty, predictability and the autonomy of the parties, this Regulation should enable the parties to choose the competent court by agreement on the basis of specific connecting factors.
Zaradi večje pravne varnosti, predvidljivosti in avtonomije strank bi morala ta uredba strankam omogočiti sklenitev sporazuma o pristojnosti sodišča na podlagi določenih naveznih okoliščin.
To protect the weaker party, such a choice of court should not be allowed in the case of maintenance obligations towards a child under the age of 18.
Da bi zagotovili varstvo šibkejše stranke, te pravice do izbire sodišča ne bi smeli dovoliti v primeru preživninskih obveznosti do otroka, mlajšega od osemnajst let.
It should be provided in this Regulation that, for Member States bound by the 2007 Hague Protocol, the rules on conflict of laws in respect of maintenance obligations will be those set out in that Protocol.
V tej uredbi bi bilo treba določiti, da se za države članice, ki jih zavezuje Haaški protokol iz leta 2007, uporabljajo določbe o kolizijskih pravilih, ki so predvidene v navedenem protokolu.
To that end, a provision referring to the said Protocol should be inserted.
V ta namen bi bilo treba v uredbo vključiti določbo, ki se sklicuje na navedeni protokol.
The 2007 Hague Protocol will be concluded by the Community in time to enable this Regulation to apply.
Skupnost bo Haaški protokol iz leta 2007 sklenila pravočasno, da se bo lahko uporabljala ta uredba.
To take account of a scenario in which the 2007 Hague Protocol does not apply to all the Member States a distinction for the purposes of recognition, enforceability and enforcement of decisions needs to be made in this Regulation between the Member States bound by the 2007 Hague Protocol and those not bound by it.
Da bi upoštevali primer, ko se Haaški protokol iz leta 2007 ne uporablja za vse države članice, bi bilo treba za namen priznanja, izvršljivosti in izvršitve sodnih odločb razlikovati med državami članicami, ki jih zavezuje Haaški protokol iz leta 2007, in državami članicami, ki nanj niso vezane.
It needs to be made clear in this Regulation that these rules on conflict of laws determine only the law applicable to maintenance obligations and do not determine the law applicable to the establishment of the family relationships on which the maintenance obligations are based.
V tej uredbi bi bilo treba jasno navesti, da kolizijska pravila določajo le pravo, ki se uporablja za preživninske obveznosti, in ne določajo prava, ki se uporablja za določitev družinskega razmerja, na katerem temeljijo preživninske obveznosti.
The establishment of family relationships continues to be covered by the national law of the Member States, including their rules of private international law.
Določitev družinskega razmerja še naprej ureja nacionalno pravo držav članic, vključno z njihovimi pravili o mednarodnem zasebnem pravu.
In order to ensure swift and efficient recovery of a maintenance obligation and to prevent delaying actions, decisions in matters relating to maintenance obligations given in a Member State should in principle be provisionally enforceable.
Da bi zagotovili hitro in učinkovito izterjavo preživninske terjatve in preprečili ravnanja, ki zavlačujejo postopek, bi sodne odločbe v preživninskih zadevah, izdane v državi članici, načeloma morale biti začasno izvršljive.
This Regulation should therefore provide that the court of origin should be able to declare the decision provisionally enforceable even if the national law does not provide for enforceability by operation of law and even if an appeal has been or could still be lodged against the decision under national law.
Zato bi bilo treba v tej uredbi določiti, da bi sodišče izvora lahko razglasilo začasno izvršljivost sodne odločbe, tudi če nacionalno pravo v zakonu ne predvideva izvršljivosti in čeprav je bilo v skladu z nacionalnim pravom proti odločbi vloženo pravno sredstvo oziroma bi lahko bilo še vloženo.
To limit the costs of proceedings subject to this Regulation, the greatest possible use of modern communications technologies, particularly for hearing parties, would be helpful.
Za zmanjšanje stroškov postopkov, ki jih ureja ta uredba, bi bilo koristno v mejah možnosti uporabiti sodobno komunikacijsko tehnologijo, še posebej pri zaslišanju strank.
The guarantees provided by the application of rules on conflict of laws should provide the justification for having decisions relating to maintenance obligations given in a Member State bound by the 2007 Hague Protocol recognised and regarded as enforceable in all the other Member States without any procedure being necessary and without any form of control on the substance in the Member State of enforcement.
Jamstva, ki jih omogoča uporaba kolizijskih pravil, bi morala zagotoviti, da se sodne odločbe v preživninskih zadevah, izdane v državi članici, ki jo zavezuje Haaški protokol iz leta 2007, priznajo in da veljajo za izvršljive v vseh drugih državah članicah, ne da bi bil za to potreben kakršen koli postopek, in brez preverjanja vsebine v državi članici izvršitve.
Recognition in a Member State of a decision relating to maintenance obligations has as its only object to allow the recovery of the maintenance claim determined in the decision.
Edini namen priznavanja sodne odločbe v preživninskih zadevah v drugi državi članici je omogočiti izterjavo preživninskega zahtevka, ki je določen v sodni odločbi.
It does not imply the recognition by that Member State of the family relationship, parentage, marriage or affinity underlying the maintenance obligations which gave rise to the decision.
Iz odločbe ne sledi, da ta država članica priznava družinsko razmerje, starševstvo, zakonsko zvezo ali svaštvo, na katerem temeljijo preživninske obveznosti in na podlagi katerih je bila sprejeta odločba.
For decisions on maintenance obligations given in a Member State not bound by the 2007 Hague Protocol, there should be provision in this Regulation for a procedure for recognition and declaration of enforceability.
Glede sodnih odločb, izdanih v državi članici, ki je Haaški protokol iz leta 2007 ne zavezuje, bi bilo treba v tej uredbi določiti postopek za priznavanje in za razglasitev izvršljivosti.
That procedure should be modelled on the procedure and the grounds for refusing recognition set out in Regulation (EC) No 44/2001.
Ta postopek bi moral temeljiti na postopku in razlogih za zavrnitev priznanja iz Uredbe (ES) št. 44/2001.
To accelerate proceedings and enable the creditor to recover his claim quickly, the court seised should be required to give its decision within a set time, unless there are exceptional circumstances.
Da bi pospešili postopek in upravičencu omogočili čimprejšnjo izterjavo zahtevka, bi bilo treba določiti, da mora sodišče, ki mu je bila zadeva predložena, odločbo izdati v predpisanem roku, razen če so podane izredne okoliščine.
It would also be appropriate to limit as far as possible the formal enforcement requirements likely to increase the costs to be borne by the maintenance creditor.
Prav tako bi bilo treba formalne zahteve glede izvršitve, ki povečujejo stroške preživninskega upravičenca, čim bolj omejiti.
To that end, this Regulation should provide that a maintenance creditor ought not to be required to have a postal address or an authorised representative in the Member State of enforcement, without this otherwise affecting the internal organisation of the Member States in matters relating to enforcement proceedings.
Zato ta uredba določa, da od preživninskega upravičenca ni treba zahtevati, da mora imeti v državi članici izvršitve poštni naslov ali pooblaščenca; ta določba ne vpliva na notranjo organizacijo držav članic na področju postopkov izvršbe.
In order to limit the costs of enforcement proceedings, no translation should be required unless enforcement is contested, and without prejudice to the rules applicable to service of documents.
Zaradi zmanjšanja stroškov postopka izvršbe bi bilo treba opuščati zahteve po prevodih, razen če se izvršba izpodbija; to ne posega v pravila o vročanju pisanj.
In order to guarantee compliance with the requirements of a fair trial, this Regulation should provide for the right of a defendant who did not enter an appearance in the court of origin of a Member State bound by the 2007 Hague Protocol to apply for a review of the decision given against him at the stage of enforcement.
Da bi zagotovili spoštovanje pravice do poštenega sojenja, bi bilo treba v tej uredbi toženi stranki, ki se ni zglasila pred sodiščem izvora, zagotoviti pravico, da zahteva ponovno preučitev sodne odločbe v fazi izvršbe.
However, the defendant must apply for this review within a set period which should start no later than the day on which, in the enforcement proceedings, his property was first made non-disposable in whole or in part.
Vendar pa bi morala tožena stranka ponovno preučitev zahtevati v določenem roku, ki bi moral začeti teči najpozneje z dnem, ko v postopku izvršbe njeno premoženje prvič v celoti ali delno postane nerazpoložljivo.
That right to apply for a review should be an extraordinary remedy granted to the defendant in default and not affecting the application of any extraordinary remedies laid down in the law of the Member State of origin provided that those remedies are not incompatible with the right to a review under this Regulation.
Pravica do ponovne preučitve bi morala biti izredno pravno sredstvo, ki se zagotovi toženi stranki, ki se ni spustila v postopek, in ne posega v uporabo drugih izrednih pravnih sredstev, ki so predvidena po pravu države članice izvora, če ta pravna sredstva niso nezdružljiva s pravico do ponovne preučitve v skladu s to uredbo.
In order to speed up the enforcement in another Member State of a decision given in a Member State bound by the 2007 Hague Protocol it is necessary to limit the grounds of refusal or of suspension of enforcement which may be invoked by the debtor on account of the cross-border nature of the maintenance claim.
Za hitrejšo izvršitev sodne odločbe, izdane v državi članici, ki jo zavezuje Haaški protokol iz leta 2007, v drugi državi članici, bi bilo treba omejiti razloge za zavrnitev ali odložitev izvršbe, ki bi jih zavezanec lahko uveljavil zaradi čezmejnega značaja preživninskega zahtevka.
This limitation should not affect the grounds of refusal or of suspension laid down in national law which are not incompatible with those listed in this Regulation, such as the debtor’s discharge of his debt at the time of enforcement or the unattachable nature of certain assets.
Omejitev ne bi smela vplivati na razloge za zavrnitev ali odložitev izvršbe, ki so predvideni po nacionalnem pravu in niso nezdružljivi z razlogi iz te uredbe, kot je na primer poravnava dolga s strani zavezanca med izvršbo ali zaščiteni del določenega premoženja.
To facilitate cross-border recovery of maintenance claims, provision should be made for a system of cooperation between Central Authorities designated by the Member States.
Da bi olajšali čezmejno izterjavo preživninskih zahtevkov, bi bilo treba vzpostaviti sistem sodelovanja med osrednjimi organi, ki jih imenujejo države članice.
These Authorities should assist maintenance creditors and debtors in asserting their rights in another Member State by submitting applications for recognition, enforceability and enforcement of existing decisions, for the modification of such decisions or for the establishment of a decision.
Ti organi bi preživninskim upravičencem in zavezancem morali pomagati, da bodo lahko v drugi državi članici uveljavili svoje pravice s predložitvijo zahtev za priznavanje, razglasitev izvršljivosti in izvršitev že obstoječih sodnih odločb, za njihovo spremembo ali za pridobitev odločbe.
They should also exchange information in order to locate debtors and creditors, and identify their income and assets, as necessary.
Poleg tega bi si morali izmenjavati informacije, na podlagi katerih bi lahko ugotavljali, kje se nahajajo zavezanci in upravičenci, po potrebi pa tudi, kakšni so njihovi prihodki in premoženje.
Lastly, they should cooperate with each other by exchanging general information and promoting cooperation amongst the competent authorities in their Member States.
Ne nazadnje bi morali sodelovati z medsebojno izmenjavo splošnih informacij in spodbujati sodelovanje med pristojnimi organi v svoji državi članici.
A Central Authority designated under this Regulation should bear its own costs, except in specifically determined cases, and should provide assistance for all applicants residing in its Member State.
Osrednji organ, imenovan v skladu s to uredbo, bi moral kriti lastne stroške, razen če je posebej določeno drugače, ter zagotavljati pomoč vlagateljem, ki imajo prebivališče v njegovi državi članici.
The criterion for determining a person’s right to request assistance from a Central Authority should be less strict than the connecting factor of ‘habitual residence’ used elsewhere in this Regulation.
Merilo za ugotavljanje, ali ima posameznik pravico zaprositi osrednji organ za pomoč, bi moralo biti manj strogo od navezne okoliščine „običajnega prebivališča“, ki se uporablja drugje v tej uredbi.
However, the ‘residence’ criterion should exclude mere presence.
Vendar pa bi moralo merilo „prebivališča“ izključevati zgolj prisotnost.
In order to provide full assistance to maintenance creditors and debtors and to facilitate as much as possible cross-border recovery of maintenance, the Central Authorities should be able to obtain a certain amount of personal information.
Da bi osrednji organi lahko v celoti zagotovili pomoč preživninskim upravičencem in zavezancem ter v kar največji meri olajšali čezmejno izterjevanje preživnin, bi morali imeti možnost, da pridobijo določene osebne podatke.
This Regulation should therefore oblige the Member States to ensure that their Central Authorities have access to such information through the public authorities or administrations which hold the information concerned in the course of their ordinary activities.
Ta uredba bi morala države članice torej obvezovati, da zagotovijo svojim osrednjim organom dostop do teh informacij pri javnih organih ali upravah, ki zadevne informacije hranijo v okviru svojih običajnih dejavnosti.
It should however be left to each Member State to decide on the arrangements for such access.
Vendar pa bi morale države članice same odločati o načinu dostopa do teh podatkov.
Accordingly, a Member State should be able to designate the public authorities or administrations which will be required to supply the information to the Central Authority in accordance with this Regulation, including, if appropriate, public authorities or administrations already designated in the context of other systems for access to information.
Države članice bi skladno s tem morale biti sposobne določiti javne organe ali uprave, ki bodo osrednjemu organu dolžni zagotavljati informacije v skladu s to uredbo; po potrebi bi bili to lahko tudi javni organi ali uprave, ki so bili določeni že v zvezi z drugimi sistemi dostopa do informacij.
Where a Member State designates public authorities or administrations, it should ensure that its Central Authority is able to access the requisite information held by those bodies as provided for in this Regulation.
Pri določanju javnih organov ali uprav morajo države članice paziti, da bo njihov osrednji organ imel dostop do informacij, ki jih ti hranijo in se zahtevajo v skladu s to uredbo.
A Member State should also be able to allow its Central Authority to access requisite information from any other legal person which holds it and controls its processing.
Države članice bi morale svojemu osrednjemu organu dostop do zahtevanih informacij omogočiti tudi pri vseh drugih pravnih osebah, ki jih hranijo in so odgovorne za njihovo obdelavo.
In the context of access to personal data and the use and transmission thereof, the requirements of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data [13], as transposed into the national law of the Member States, should be complied with.
Pri dostopu do osebnih podatkov, njihovi uporabi in posredovanju bi bilo treba spoštovati zahteve iz Direktive Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta 95/46/ES z dne 24. oktobra 1995 o varstvu posameznikov pri obdelavi osebnih podatkov in o prostem pretoku takih podatkov [13], kakor je bila prenesena v nacionalno zakonodajo držav članic:
For the purposes of the application of this Regulation it is however necessary to define the specific conditions of access to personal data and of the use and transmission of such data.
Za namene uporabe te uredbe bi bilo treba opredeliti posebne pogoje za dostop do osebnih podatkov ter za njihovo uporabo in prenos.
In this context, the opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor [14] has been taken into consideration.
V tem smislu je bilo upoštevano mnenje Evropskega nadzornika za varstvo podatkov [14].
Notification of the data subject should take place in accordance with national law.
Oseba, o kateri se zbirajo podatki, bi morala o tem biti obveščena v skladu z nacionalnim pravom.
It should however be possible to defer the notification to prevent the debtor from transferring his assets and thus jeopardising the recovery of the maintenance claim.
Vendar bi bilo treba določiti, da se navedeno obvestilo lahko odloži in s tem prepreči, da bi zavezanec svoje premoženje prerazporedil in tako ogrozil izterjavo preživninskega zahtevka.
On account of the costs of proceedings it is appropriate to provide for a very favourable legal aid scheme, that is, full coverage of the costs relating to proceedings concerning maintenance obligations in respect of children under the age of 21 initiated via the Central Authorities.
Zaradi stroškov postopka bi bilo treba predvideti zelo ugoden sistem pravne pomoči, tj. kritje vseh stroškov, povezanih s postopki, ki se nanašajo na preživninske obveznosti do otrok, mlajših od 21 let, in so bili sproženi s posredovanjem osrednjih organov.
Specific rules should therefore be added to the current rules on legal aid in the European Union which exist by virtue of Directive 2003/8/EC thus setting up a special legal aid scheme for maintenance obligations.
Obstoječa pravila glede pravne pomoči v okviru Evropske unije, določena v Direktivi 2003/8/ES, bi bilo treba zato dopolniti s posebnimi pravili in s tem vzpostaviti poseben sistem pravne pomoči za preživninske obveznosti.
In this context, the competent authority of the requested Member State should be able, exceptionally, to recover costs from an applicant having received free legal aid and lost the case, provided that the person’s financial situation so permits.
V tej zvezi bi pristojnemu organu zaprošene države članice izjemoma moralo biti omogočeno, da terja povračilo stroškov od stranke, ki prejme brezplačno pravno pomoč in z zahtevkom ne uspe, pod pogojem, da to dopušča njeno finančno stanje.
This would apply, in particular, where someone well-off had acted in bad faith.
Takšen primer bi bila premožna oseba, ki ni nastopala v dobri veri.
In addition, for maintenance obligations other than those referred to in the preceding recital, all parties should be guaranteed the same treatment in terms of legal aid at the time of enforcement of a decision in another Member State.
Poleg tega bi bilo treba v zvezi z drugimi preživninskimi obveznostmi, razen navedenih v predhodni uvodni izjavi, vsem strankam jamčiti enako obravnavanje kar zadeva pravno pomoč pri izvršitvi odločbe v drugi državi članici.
Accordingly, the provisions of this Regulation on continuity of legal aid should be understood as also granting such aid to a party who, while not having received legal aid in the proceedings to obtain or amend a decision in the Member State of origin, did then benefit from such aid in that State in the context of an application for enforcement of the decision.
Določbe o stalnosti pravne pomoči iz te uredbe bi bilo skladno s tem treba razlagati tako, da bi bila takšne pomoči lahko deležna tudi stranka, ki sicer ni prejela pravne pomoči v postopku za izdajo ali spremembo odločbe v državi članici izvora, vendar pa je nato prejela takšno pomoč od te države v zvezi z zahtevo za izvršitev odločbe.
Similarly, a party who benefited from free proceedings before an administrative authority listed in Annex X should, in the Member State of enforcement, benefit from the most favourable legal aid or the most extensive exemption from costs or expenses, provided that he shows that he would have so benefited in the Member State of origin.
Podobno bi morala biti stranka, ki ji je bil odobren brezplačen postopek pred enim od upravnih organov, naštetih v prilogi IX, v državi članici izvršitve upravičena do najbolj ugodne pravne pomoči ali do najobsežnejše oprostitve stroškov in izdatkov, pod pogojem, da izkaže, da bi bila uživala enako pomoč v državi članici izvora.
In order to minimise the costs of translating supporting documents the court seised should only require a translation of such documents when this is necessary, without prejudice to the rights of the defence and the rules applicable concerning service of documents.
Da bi znižali stroške prevajanja dokaznih listin, naj bi sodišče, ki mu je bila zadeva predložena, prevod teh listin zahtevalo le po potrebi in brez poseganja v pravice do obrambe in pravila, ki se uporabljajo glede vročanja pisanj.