natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Moreover, to ensure that payments made by investors upon subscription have been received, the depositary should further ensure that another reconciliation is conducted between the subscription orders and the subscription proceeds.
Za zagotovitev, da so plačila vlagateljev po vpisu prejeta, bi moral depozitar nadalje zagotoviti, da je med naročili vpisa in dejanskim vpisom izvedena uskladitev.
The same reconciliation should be performed with regard to redemption orders.
Enako uskladitev bi bilo treba izvesti pri naročilih odkupa.
The depositary should also verify that the number of units or shares in the AIF’s accounts matches the number of outstanding units or shares in the AIF’s register.
Depozitar bi moral tudi preveriti, ali število enot ali deležev na računih AIS ustreza številu neporavnanih enot ali deležev v registru AIS.
The depositary should adapt its procedures accordingly, taking into account the frequency of subscriptions and redemptions.
Depozitar bi moral ustrezno prilagoditi svoje postopke, pri čemer bi moral upoštevati pogostost vpisov in odkupov.
The depositary should take all necessary steps to ensure that appropriate valuation policies and procedures for the assets of the AIF are effectively implemented, through the performance of sample checks or by comparing the consistency of the change in the NAV calculation over time with that of a benchmark.
Depozitar bi moral sprejeti vse potrebne ukrepe za zagotovitev, da se učinkovito izvajajo ustrezne politike in postopki vrednotenja sredstev AIS, in sicer z izvajanjem vzorčnih pregledov ali s primerjavo skladnosti spremembe izračuna čiste vrednosti sredstev v času z izračunom praga.
When setting up its procedures, the depositary should have a clear understanding of the valuation methodologies used by the AIFM or the external valuer to value the AIF’s assets.
Pri vzpostavitvi postopkov bi moral depozitar jasno razumeti metodologije vrednotenja, ki jih UAIS ali zunanji cenilec uporablja pri vrednotenju sredstev AIS.
The frequency of such checks should be consistent with the frequency of the AIF’s asset valuation.
Pogostost teh pregledov bi morala biti skladna s pogostostjo vrednotenja sredstev AIS.
By virtue of its obligation of oversight under Directive 2011/61/EU, the depositary should set up a procedure to verify on an ex-post basis the AIF’s compliance with applicable law and regulations and its rules and instruments of incorporation.
Depozitar bi na podlagi obveznosti nadzora iz Direktive 2011/61/EU moral vzpostaviti postopek naknadnega preverjanja skladnosti AIS z veljavno zakonodajo in predpisi ter lastnimi pravili upravljanja in akti o ustanovitvi.
This covers areas such as checking that the AIF’s investments are consistent with its investment strategies as described in the AIF’s rules and offering documents and ensuring that the AIF does not breach its investment restrictions, if any.
To zajema področja, kot je preverjanje, ali so naložbe AIS skladne z njegovimi naložbenimi strategijami, kot je opisano v pravilih in ponudbenih dokumentih AIS, ter zagotavljanje, da AIS ne krši svojih naložbenih omejitev, če obstajajo.
The depositary should monitor the AIF’s transactions and investigate any unusual transactions.
Depozitar bi moral spremljati transakcije AIS in preiskati vse nenavadne transakcije.
If the limits or restrictions set out in the applicable national law or regulations or the AIF rules and instruments of incorporation are breached, the depositary should, for example, obtain an instruction from the AIFM to reverse the transaction that was in breach at its own costs.
Če se kršijo omejitve iz veljavne nacionalne zakonodaje ali predpisov ali pravil upravljanja AIS in ustanovne listine, bi depozitar moral, na primer, od UAIS prejeti navodilo, da popravi transakcijo, ki je povzročila kršitev, na stroške UAIS.
This Regulation does not prevent the depositary from adopting an ex ante approach where it deems it appropriate and in agreement with the AIFM.
Ta uredba depozitarju ne preprečuje, da po potrebi in po dogovoru z UAIS izvaja predhodna preverjanja.
The depositary should ensure that the income is calculated accurately in accordance with Directive 2011/61/EU.
Depozitar bi moral zagotoviti, da je prihodek izračunan natančno v skladu z Direktivo 2011/61/EU.
In order to achieve this the depositary has to ensure that the income distribution is appropriate and, where it identifies an error, that the AIFM takes appropriate remedial action.
Za doseganje tega bi depozitar moral zagotoviti, da je porazdelitev dobička ustrezna, in kadar ugotovi napako, sprejme ustrezne ukrepe za odpravo le-te.
Once the depositary has ensured this, it should verify the completeness and accuracy of the income distribution and in particular of the dividend payments.
Ko depozitar to zagotovi, bi moral preveriti celovitost in točnost porazdelitve dobička ter zlasti izplačila dividend.
When delegating safe-keeping functions related to other assets according to Directive 2011/61/EU, delegation is likely to concern administrative functions in most cases.
Pri prenosu nalog hrambe, povezanih z drugimi sredstvi v skladu z Direktivo 2011/61/EU prenos verjetno v večini primerov zadeva administrativne naloge.
Where the depositary delegates record-keeping functions, it would therefore be required to implement and apply an appropriate and documented procedure to ensure that the delegate complies with the requirements of Article 21(11)(d) of Directive 2011/61/EU at all times.
Kadar depozitar prenese naloge vodenja evidenc, bi bilo treba zahtevati izvajanje in uporabo ustreznega ter dokumentiranega postopka za zagotovitev, da pooblaščenec izpolnjuje zahteve iz člena 21(11)(d) Direktive 2011/61/EU.
In order to ensure a sufficient level of protection of assets, it is necessary to set out certain principles that should be applied in relation to the delegation of safekeeping.
Da bi zagotovili zadostno raven zaščite sredstev, je treba določiti nekatera načela, ki jih je treba uporabljati v zvezi s prenosom hrambe.
For the delegation of custody duties it is important to set out some key principles which have to be effectively applied throughout the delegation process.
Pri prenosu dolžnosti hrambe je pomembno določiti nekatera ključna načela, ki jih je treba v postopku prenosa učinkovito uporabljati.
Those principles should not be taken to be exhaustive, either in terms of setting out all details of the depositary’s exercise of due skill care and diligence, or in terms of setting out all the steps that a depositary should take in relation to these principles themselves.
Navedena načela se ne bi smela šteti kot dokončna, in sicer glede določitve vseh podrobnosti strokovnega in skrbnega delovanja depozitarja ali vseh ukrepov, ki bi jih depozitar sam moral sprejeti v zvezi z navedenimi načeli.
The obligation to monitor on an ongoing basis the third party, to whom safekeeping functions have been delegated should consist of verifying that this third party correctly performs all the delegated functions and complies with the delegation contract.
Obveznost stalnega spremljanja tretje osebe, na katero so bile prenesene naloge hrambe, bi morala zajemati preverjanje tega, ali tretja oseba pravilno izvaja vse prenesene naloge in izpolnjuje pogoje iz pogodbe o prenosu.
The third party should act honestly, in good faith with a view to the best interests of the AIF and its investors, in compliance with regulatory and supervisory requirements, and should exercise care, diligence and skill that are normally expected from a highly prudent operator of that financial profession in comparable circumstances.
Tretja oseba bi morala delovati pošteno, v dobri veri in v najboljšem interesu AIS in njegovih vlagateljev, v skladu z regulativnimi in nadzornimi zahtevami, in skrbno ter strokovno, kar se običajno pričakuje od zelo preudarne osebe navedenega finančnega poklica v primerljivih okoliščinah.
The depositary should review, inter alia, elements assessed during the selection and appointment process and put these elements into perspective by comparing them with the development of the market.
Depozitar bi moral med drugim pregledati elemente, ki so bili ocenjeni med postopkom izbire in imenovanja, ter jih primerjati z dogajanjem na trgu.
The form of the regular review should reflect circumstances, so that the depositary is in a position to appropriately assess the risks related to the decision to entrust assets to the third party.
Oblika rednega pregleda bi morala odražati okoliščine, da bi depozitar lahko ustrezno ocenil tveganja, povezana z odločitvijo o prenosu hrambe sredstev na tretjo osebo.
The frequency of the review should be adapted so as to always remain consistent with market conditions and associated risks.
Pogostost pregleda bi bilo treba prilagoditi tako, da bi vedno ostala skladna s tržnimi pogoji in povezanimi tveganji.
For the depositary to effectively respond to a possible insolvency of the third party, it should undertake contingency planning, including the design of alternative strategies and the possible selection of alternative providers as may be relevant.
Depozitar bi moral, da bi se lahko učinkovito odzval na morebitno plačilno nesposobnost tretje osebe, sprejeti načrt ravnanja v nepredvidljivih razmerah, vključno z oblikovanjem alternativnih strategij in po potrebi morebitno izbiro alternativnih ponudnikov.
While such measures may reduce the custody risk faced by a depositary, they do not alter the obligation to return the financial instruments or pay the corresponding amount should they be lost, which depends on whether or not the requirements of Article 21(12) of Directive 2011/61/EU are fulfilled.
Medtem ko takšni ukrepi lahko zmanjšajo tveganje hrambe, s katerim se sooča depozitar, ne vplivajo na obveznost vrnitve finančnega instrumenta ali plačila ustreznega zneska, če se izgubijo, kar je odvisno od tega, ali so izpolnjene zahteve iz člena 21(12) Direktive 2011/61/EU.
When delegating safe-keeping functions, the depositary should ensure that the requirements of Article 21(11)(d)(iii) of Directive 2011/61/EU are fulfilled and that the assets of the AIF clients of the depositary are properly segregated.
Depozitar bi pri prenosu hrambe moral zagotoviti, da so izpolnjene zahteve iz člena 21(11)(d)(iii) Direktive 2011/61/EU in da so sredstva strank depozitarja AIS ustrezno ločena.
This obligation should particularly ensure that assets of the AIF are not lost due to insolvency of the third party to whom safekeeping functions are delegated.
Ta obveznost bi morala zlasti zagotoviti, da se sredstva AIS ne izgubijo zaradi plačilne nesposobnosti tretje osebe, na katere so prenesene naloge hrambe.
In order to minimise that risk in countries where the effects of segregation are not recognised by insolvency law, the depositary should take further steps.
Da bi čim bolj zmanjšali navedeno tveganje v državah, kjer učinki ločevanja niso priznani v zakonodaji o plačilni nesposobnosti, bi depozitar moral sprejeti nadaljnje ukrepe.
The depositary could make a disclosure to the AIF and the AIFM acting on behalf of the AIF so that such aspects of the custody risk are properly taken into account in the investment decision or take such measures as are possible in the local jurisdictions to make the assets as insolvency-proof as possible according to local law.
Depozitar bi to lahko razkril AIS in UAIS, ki deluje v imenu AIS, da bi se takšni vidiki tveganja hrambe ustrezno upoštevali pri naložbeni odločitvi, ali pa bi lahko sprejel takšne ukrepe, ki so mogoči v lokalnih jurisdikcijah, da postanejo sredstva kar se da neobčutljiva na plačilno nesposobnost v skladu z lokalno zakonodajo.
Furthermore, the depositary could prohibit temporary deficits in client assets, use buffers or put in place arrangements prohibiting the use of a debit balance for one client to offset a credit balance for another.
Poleg tega bi depozitar lahko prepovedoval začasne primanjkljaje v portfelju stranke, uporabil rezerve ali uvedel ureditve, ki prepovedujejo uporabo debetnega salda ene stranke za izravnavo kreditnega salda druge stranke.
While such measures may reduce the custody risk faced by a depositary when delegating custody functions, they do not alter the obligation to return the financial instruments or pay the corresponding amount where these are lost, which depends on whether or not the requirements of Directive 2011/61/EU are fulfilled.
Medtem ko takšni ukrepi lahko zmanjšajo tveganje hrambe, s katerim se depozitar sooča pri prenosu nalog hrambe, ne vplivajo na obveznost vrnitve finančnega instrumenta ali plačila ustreznega zneska, če se ti izgubijo, kar je odvisno od tega, ali so izpolnjene zahteve iz Direktive 2011/61/EU.
The depositary’s liability under Article 21(12) second subparagraph of Directive 2011/61/EU is triggered in the event of the loss of a financial instrument held in custody by the depositary itself or by a third party to whom the custody has been delegated, provided that the depositary does not demonstrate that the loss results from an external event beyond reasonable control, the consequences of which would have been unavoidable despite all reasonable efforts to the contrary.
Odgovornost depozitarja iz drugega pododstavka člena 21(12) Direktive 2011/61/EU začne veljati v primeru izgube finančnega instrumenta, ki ga hrani depozitar sam ali tretja oseba, na katero je bila prenesena hramba, če depozitar ne dokaže, da je izguba nastala kot posledica zunanjega dogodka, ki ga razumno ni mogel nadzorovati, posledice pa so bile ne glede na vsa razumna prizadevanja neizogibne.
That loss should be distinguished from an investment loss for investors resulting from a decrease in the value of assets as a consequence of an investment decision.
Navedeno izgubo bi bilo treba razlikovati od izgube vlagateljev pri naložbah, ki izhajajo iz zmanjšanja vrednosti sredstev kot posledice naložbene odločitve.
To be ascertained as such, it is important that the loss is definitive, and there is no prospect of recovering the financial asset.
Za potrditev tega je pomembno, da je izguba dokončna in ne obstaja možnost povrnitve finančnega sredstva.
Thus, situations where a financial instrument is only temporarily unavailable or frozen should not count as losses within the meaning of Article 21(12) of Directive 2011/61/EU.
Zato se primeri, ko finančni instrument samo začasno ni na voljo ali je zamrznjen, ne bi smeli šteti kot izgube v smislu člena 21(12) Direktive 2011/61/EU.
In contrast, three types of situations can be identified where the loss should be deemed to be definitive:
Obstajajo pa tri vrste razmer, kjer bi se izguba morala šteti kot dokončna:
where the financial instrument no longer exists or never did exist;
kadar finančni instrument ne obstaja več ali nikoli ni obstajal;
where the financial instrument exists but the AIF has definitively lost its right of ownership over it;
kadar finančni instrument obstaja, vendar je AIS dokončno izgubil pravico do njegovega lastništva;
and where the AIF has the ownership right but can no longer transfer title of or create limited property rights in the financial instrument on a permanent basis.
in kadar ima AIS lastninsko pravico, vendar je pri finančnem instrumentu ne more več trajno prenesti ali omejiti.
A financial instrument is deemed no longer to exist for instance when it has disappeared following an accounting error that cannot be corrected, or if it never existed, when the AIF’s ownership was registered on the basis of falsified documents.
Za finančni instrument se šteje, da ne obstaja več, ko se je izgubil po računovodski napaki, ki je ni mogoče popraviti, ali če nikoli ni obstajal, saj je bilo lastništvo AIS registrirano na podlagi ponarejenih dokumentov.
Situations where the loss of financial instruments is caused by fraudulent conduct should be deemed a loss.
Primeri, ko je izguba finančnih instrumentov posledica goljufivega ravnanja, bi se morali šteti kot izguba.
No loss can be ascertained when the financial instrument has been substituted by or converted into another financial instrument, for example in situations where shares are cancelled and replaced by the issue of new shares in a company reorganisation.
Izgube ni mogoče potrditi, če je bil finančni instrument nadomeščen ali pretvorjen v drug finančni instrument, na primer v primerih, ko se delnice razveljavijo in nadomestijo z izdajo novih delnic pri reorganizaciji družbe.
An AIF should not be considered as permanently deprived of its right of ownership over the financial instrument if the AIF or the AIFM acting on behalf of the AIF has legitimately transferred ownership to a third party.
Ne bi se smelo šteti, da je AIS dokončno izgubil pravico do lastništva finančnega instrumenta, če je AIS ali UAIS, ki deluje v imenu AIS, zakonito prenesel lastništvo na tretjo osebo.
Where there is a distinction between the legal ownership and the beneficial ownership of the assets, the definition of loss should refer to loss of the beneficial ownership right.
Če obstaja razlika med pravnim lastništvom in upravičenim lastništvom sredstev, bi opredelitev izgube morala zadevati izgubo pravice do upravičenega lastništva.
Only in the case of an external event beyond the reasonable control of the depositary, the consequences of which are unavoidable despite all reasonable efforts to the contrary, could the depositary avoid to be held liable under Article 21(12) of Directive 2011/61/EU.
Samo v primeru zunanjega dogodka, ki ga depozitar razumno ni mogel nadzorovati, posledice pa so bile ne glede na vsa razumna prizadevanja neizogibne, bi bil depozitar lahko oproščen odgovornosti v skladu s členom 21(12) Direktive 2011/61/EU.
The cumulative fulfilment of these conditions should be proven by the depositary in order for it to be discharged of liability.
Depozitar bi moral dokazati celotno izpolnjevanje teh pogojev, da bi bil oproščen odgovornosti.
It should first be determined whether the event which led to the loss was external.
Najprej bi bilo treba ugotoviti, ali je dogodek, ki je privedel do izgube, zunanji.
The depositary’s liability should not be affected by delegation and therefore an event should be deemed external if it does not occur as a result of any act or omission of the depositary or the third party to whom the custody of financial instruments held in custody has been delegated.
Prenos ne bi smel vplivati na depozitarjevo odgovornost in tako bi se dogodek štel kot zunanji, če do njega ne pride zaradi kakršnega koli dejanja ali opustitve depozitarja ali tretje osebe, na katero je bila prenesena hramba finančnih instrumentov.
Then, it should be assessed whether the event is beyond the reasonable control, by verifying that there was nothing a prudent depositary could reasonably have done to prevent the occurrence of the event.
Nato bi bilo treba oceniti, ali gre za dogodke, ki jih ni mogoče razumno nadzorovati, in sicer s preverjanjem, ali skrben depozitar ni mogel storiti ničesar, da bi dogodek preprečil.
Under these steps both natural events and acts of a public authority may be considered as external events beyond reasonable control.
V tem okviru bi se naravni dogodki in dejanja javnih organov lahko šteli kot zunanji dogodki, ki jih ni mogoče razumno nadzorovati.
Thus, in the context of the insolvency of a third party to whom custody was delegated, the law of the country where the instruments are held in custody, which does not recognise the effects of an appropriately implemented segregation, is deemed to be an external event beyond reasonable control.
Tako se v okviru plačilne nesposobnosti tretje osebe, na katero je bila prenesena hramba, zakonodaja države, kjer se instrumenti hranijo in ki ne priznava učinkov ustrezno izvedenega ločevanja, šteje kot zunanji dogodek, ki ga ni mogoče razumno nadzorovati.
In contrast, a loss caused by failure to apply the segregation requirements laid down in Article 21(11)(d) (iii) of Directive 2011/61/EU or the loss of assets because of disruption in the third party’s activity in relation to its insolvency cannot be seen as being external events beyond reasonable control.
Nasprotno pa se izguba, ki jo povzroči neizpolnjevanje zahteve glede ločevanja iz člena 21(11)(d)(iii) Direktive 2011/61/EU, ali izguba sredstev, ki nastane zaradi motenj v dejavnosti tretje osebe v zvezi s plačilno nesposobnostjo, ne more šteti kot zunanji dogodek, ki ga ni mogoče razumno nadzorovati.
Finally, the depositary should prove that the loss could not have been avoided despite all reasonable efforts to the contrary.
Depozitar pa bi moral tudi dokazati, da se ne glede na vsa razumna prizadevanja izgubi ni bilo mogoče izogniti.
In this context, the depositary should inform the AIFM and take appropriate action depending on the circumstances.
V tem okviru bi moral depozitar obvestiti AIS in glede na okoliščine ustrezno ukrepati.
For instance, in a situation where the depositary believes the only appropriate action is to dispose of the financial instruments, the depositary should duly inform the AIFM, which must in turn instruct the depositary in writing whether to continue holding the financial instruments or to dispose of them.
Na primer, kadar depozitar meni, da je edini ustrezen ukrep prodaja finančnih instrumentov, bi o tem moral obvestiti UAIS, ki mora depozitarju pisno naročiti, da finančne instrumente obdrži ali pa jih proda.
Any instruction to the depositary to continue holding the assets should be reported to the AIF’s investors without undue delay.
O kakršnih koli navodilih depozitarju o tem, da sredstva obdrži, bi bilo treba nemudoma obvestiti vlagatelje AIS.
The AIFM or the AIF should give due consideration to the depositary’s recommendations.
UAIS ali AIS bi moral upoštevati priporočila depozitarja.
Depending on the circumstances, if the depositary remains concerned that the standard of protection of the financial instrument is not sufficient, despite repeated warnings, it should consider further possible action, such as termination of the contract provided the AIF is given a period of time to find another depositary in accordance with national law.
Če je depozitar glede na okoliščine še vedno zaskrbljen glede tega, da običajna zaščita finančnega instrumenta kljub večkratnim opozorilom ni zadostna, bi moral sprejeti nadaljnje ukrepe, kot je prekinitev pogodbe, pri čemer mora AIS v skladu z nacionalno zakonodajo imeti dovolj časa, da poišče drugega depozitarja.
To ensure the same standard of investor protection, the same considerations should also apply to the delegate to whom a depositary has contractually transferred its liability.
Za zagotovitev enake ravni zaščite vlagateljev bi morali enaki pomisleki veljati tudi za pooblaščenca, na katerega je depozitar pogodbeno prenesel svojo odgovornost.
Therefore, in order to be discharged of liability under Article 21(12) of Directive 2011/61/EU the delegate should prove that it fulfils cumulatively the same conditions.
Pooblaščenec bi moral za razrešitev odgovornosti v skladu s členom 21(12) Direktive 2011/61/EU dokazati, da v celoti izpolnjuje enake pogoje.
A depositary is allowed under certain circumstances to discharge itself of liability for the loss of financial instruments held in custody by a third party to which custody was delegated.
Depozitar je lahko v določenih okoliščinah razrešen odgovornosti za izgubo finančnih instrumentov, ki jih hrani tretja oseba, na katero je bila prenesena hramba.
For such liability discharge to be permitted there must be an objective reason for contracting such discharge that is accepted by both the depositary and the AIF or the AIFM acting on behalf of the AIF.
Da se takšna razrešitev odgovornosti dovoli, mora obstajati objektiven razlog za sklenitev pogodbe o takšni razrešitvi, ki ga sprejemata tako depozitar kot tudi AIS ali UAIS, ki deluje v imenu AIS.
An objective reason should be established for each discharge of liability taking into account the concrete circumstances in which custody has been delegated.
Objektiven razlog bi moral biti določen za vsako razrešitev odgovornosti, ob upoštevanju dejanskih okoliščin, v katerih je bila hramba prenesena.