natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
However, to ensure that this rule is not detrimental to the creditors of the estate, a proviso should be added enabling the creditors to seek satisfaction of their claims out of all the assets of the estate, irrespective of their location.
Da bi zagotovili, da s tem pravilom ne bodo oškodovani upniki, ki imajo terjatve do zapuščine, bi bilo treba dodati določbo o tem, da lahko upniki, ki imajo terjatve do zapuščine, zahtevajo, da se te pobotajo s celotnim zapuščinskim premoženjem, ne glede na to, kje se nahaja.
The conflict-of-laws rules laid down in this Regulation may lead to the application of the law of a third State.
Uporaba kolizijskih pravil iz te uredbe lahko pomeni, da se bo uporabilo pravo tretje države.
In such cases regard should be had to the private international law rules of that State.
V takšnem primeru bi bilo treba upoštevati pravila mednarodnega zasebnega prava te države.
If those rules provide for renvoi either to the law of a Member State or to the law of a third State which would apply its own law to the succession, such renvoi should be accepted in order to ensure international consistency.
Če je v teh pravilih določena napotitev na pravo države članice ali pravo tretje države, ki bi za dedovanje uporabila svoje pravo, bi bilo treba zaradi mednarodne skladnosti takšno napotitev sprejeti.
Renvoi should, however, be excluded in situations where the deceased had made a choice of law in favour of the law of a third State.
Zavračanje pa bi moralo biti izključeno, če je zapustnik za dedovanje izbral pravo tretje države.
Considerations of public interest should allow courts and other competent authorities dealing with matters of succession in the Member States to disregard, in exceptional circumstances, certain provisions of a foreign law where, in a given case, applying such provisions would be manifestly incompatible with the public policy (ordre public) of the Member State concerned.
Zaradi javnega interesa bi morala imeti sodišča in drugi pristojni organi, ki obravnavajo dedne zadeve v državah članicah, v izjemnih okoliščinah možnost neupoštevanja nekaterih določb tujega prava, kadar bi bila njegova uporaba v določenem primeru očitno nezdružljiva z javnim redom zadevne države članice.
However, the courts or other competent authorities should not be able to apply the public-policy exception in order to set aside the law of another State or to refuse to recognise or, as the case may be, accept or enforce a decision, an authentic instrument or a court settlement from another Member State when doing so would be contrary to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and in particular Article 21 thereof, which prohibits all forms of discrimination.
Vendar sodišča ali drugi pristojni organi ne bi smeli imeti možnosti uporabe izjeme javnega reda, da bi zavrnili pravo druge države članice ali priznanje ali morda izvršitev odločbe, javne listine ali sodne poravnave, izdanih v drugi državi članici, kadar bi bilo to v nasprotju z Listino Evropske unije o temeljnih pravicah, zlasti s členom 21 Listine, ki prepoveduje vsakršno diskriminacijo.
In the light of its general objective, which is the mutual recognition of decisions given in the Member States in matters of succession, irrespective of whether such decisions were given in contentious or non-contentious proceedings, this Regulation should lay down rules relating to the recognition, enforceability and enforcement of decisions similar to those of other Union instruments in the area of judicial cooperation in civil matters.
Glede na splošni cilj te uredbe, ki je vzajemno priznavanje odločb, izdanih v državah članicah v dednih zadevah ne glede na to, ali so bile takšne odločbe izdane v pravdnem ali nepravdnem postopku, bi bilo treba v tej uredbi določiti pravila o priznavanju, izvršljivosti in izvrševanju odločb, podobna tistim iz drugih instrumentov Unije s področja pravosodnega sodelovanja v civilnih zadevah.
In order to take into account the different systems for dealing with matters of succession in the Member States, this Regulation should guarantee the acceptance and enforceability in all Member States of authentic instruments in matters of succession.
Da bi upoštevali različne sisteme za obravnavo dednih zadev v državah članicah, bi bilo treba s to uredbo zagotoviti sprejemljivost in izvršljivost javnih listin, izdanih v dednih zadevah, v vseh državah članicah.
Authentic instruments should have the same evidentiary effects in another Member State as they have in the Member State of origin, or the most comparable effects.
Javne listine bi morale imeti v drugi državi članici enako dokazno moč kot v državi članici izvora ali najbolj primerljive učinke.
When determining the evidentiary effects of a given authentic instrument in another Member State or the most comparable effects, reference should be made to the nature and the scope of the evidentiary effects of the authentic instrument in the Member State of origin.
Pri določanju dokazne moči dane javne listine v drugi državi članici ali njenih najbolj primerljivih učinkov bi bilo treba upoštevati vrsto in obseg dokazne moči javne listine v državi članici izvora.
The evidentiary effects which a given authentic instrument should have in another Member State will therefore depend on the law of the Member State of origin.
Zato bo dokazna moč javne listine v drugi državi članici odvisna od prava države članice izvora.
The ‘authenticity’ of an authentic instrument should be an autonomous concept covering elements such as the genuineness of the instrument, the formal prerequisites of the instrument, the powers of the authority drawing up the instrument and the procedure under which the instrument is drawn up.
Verodostojnost javne listine bi moral biti avtonomen pojem, ki naj zadeva vprašanja, kot so pristnost listine, zahteve glede obličnosti za listino, pooblastila organa, ki sestavi listino, in postopek, po katerem se listina sestavi.
It should also cover the factual elements recorded in the authentic instrument by the authority concerned, such as the fact that the parties indicated appeared before that authority on the date indicated and that they made the declarations indicated.
Vključevati bi moral tudi dejstva, ki jih v javno listino zapiše zadevni organ, kot je dejstvo, da sta se navedeni stranki določenega dne sestali v prisotnosti tega organa in dali navedene izjave.
A party wishing to challenge the authenticity of an authentic instrument should do so before the competent court in the Member State of origin of the authentic instrument under the law of that Member State.
Stranka, ki želi izpodbijati verodostojnost javne listine, bi morala to storiti na pristojnem sodišču države članice, iz katere izvira javna listina, po pravu te države članice.
The term ‘the legal acts or legal relationships recorded in an authentic instrument’ should be interpreted as referring to the contents as to substance recorded in the authentic instrument.
Pojme „pravni posli ali pravna razmerja, zapisana v javni listini“ bi bilo treba razlagati kot sklicevanje na materialno vsebino javne listine.
The legal acts recorded in an authentic instrument could be, for instance, the agreement between the parties on the sharing-out or the distribution of the estate, or a will or an agreement as to succession, or another declaration of intent.
Pravni posli, zapisani v javni listini, bi bili lahko na primer pogodba med strankama o delitvi zapuščine, oporoka ali dednopravna pogodba oziroma druga izjava volje.
The legal relationships could be, for instance, the determination of the heirs and other beneficiaries as established under the law applicable to the succession, their respective shares and the existence of a reserved share, or any other element established under the law applicable to the succession.
Pravna razmerja bi bila lahko na primer določitev dedičev in drugih upravičencev, določenih po pravu, ki se uporablja za dedovanje, ter določitev njihovih deležev, obstoj nujnega deleža ali drugi elementi po pravu, ki se uporablja za dedovanje.
A party wishing to challenge the legal acts or legal relationships recorded in an authentic instrument should do so before the courts having jurisdiction under this Regulation, which should decide on the challenge in accordance with the law applicable to the succession.
Stranka, ki želi izpodbijati pravne posle ali pravna razmerja, zapisana v javni listini, bi morala to storiti na sodiščih, pristojnih po tej uredbi, ki bi morala o tem odločati po pravu, ki se uporablja za dedovanje.
If a question relating to the legal acts or legal relationships recorded in an authentic instrument is raised as an incidental question in proceedings before a court of a Member State, that court should have jurisdiction over that question.
Če je vprašanje, ki zadeva pravne posle ali pravna razmerja, zapisane v javni listini, obravnavano kot predhodno vprašanje na sodišču države članice, bi moralo biti za odločanje o tem vprašanju pristojno to sodišče.
An authentic instrument which is being challenged should not produce any evidentiary effects in a Member State other than the Member State of origin as long as the challenge is pending.
Izpodbijana javna listina ne bi smela imeti nobene dokazne moči v državi članici, ki ni država članica izvora, dokler je postopek izpodbijanja v teku.
If the challenge concerns only a specific matter relating to the legal acts or legal relationships recorded in the authentic instrument, the authentic instrument in question should not produce any evidentiary effects in a Member State other than the Member State of origin with regard to the matter being challenged as long as the challenge is pending.
Če se izpodbija samo določena zadeva v zvezi s pravnimi posli ali pravnimi razmerji, zapisanimi v javni listini, izpodbijana javna listina v državi članici, ki ni država članica izvora, ne bi smela imeti nobene dokazne moči glede izpodbijane zadeve, dokler je postopek izpodbijanja v teku.
An authentic instrument which has been declared invalid as a result of a challenge should cease to produce any evidentiary effects.
Javna listina, ki je zaradi izpodbijanja razglašena za neveljavno, ne bi smela imeti nobene dokazne moči več.
Should an authority, in the application of this Regulation, be presented with two incompatible authentic instruments, it should assess the question as to which authentic instrument, if any, should be given priority, taking into account the circumstances of the particular case.
Organ, ki bi na podlagi uporabe te uredbe prejel neskladni javni listini, bi moral oceniti, katera od obeh, če sploh katera, naj ima prednost glede na okoliščine posamezne zadeve.
Where it is not clear from those circumstances which authentic instrument, if any, should be given priority, the question should be determined by the courts having jurisdiction under this Regulation, or, where the question is raised as an incidental question in the course of proceedings, by the court seised of those proceedings.
Če iz teh okoliščin ni razvidno, katera od obeh javnih listin, če sploh katera, bi morala imeti prednost, bi morala o tem odločiti sodišča, ki so pristojna v skladu s to uredbo, ali – če se to vprašanje postavi kot predhodno vprašanje v postopku, sodišče, pred katerim teče ta postopek.
In the event of incompatibility between an authentic instrument and a decision, regard should be had to the grounds of non-recognition of decisions under this Regulation.
Če sta neskladni javna listina in odločba, bi bilo treba upoštevati razloge za nepriznanje iz te uredbe.
In order for a succession with cross-border implications within the Union to be settled speedily, smoothly and efficiently, the heirs, legatees, executors of the will or administrators of the estate should be able to demonstrate easily their status and/or rights and powers in another Member State, for instance in a Member State in which succession property is located.
Za hitro, nemoteno in učinkovito urejanje dedovanja s čezmejnimi posledicami v Evropski uniji bi moral imeti dediči, volilojemniki, izvršitelji oporoke ali upravitelji zapuščine možnost, da zlahka dokažejo svoj status in/ali uveljavlja svoje pravice in pooblastila v drugi državi članici, na primer v državi članici, v kateri je zapuščina.
To enable them to do so, this Regulation should provide for the creation of a uniform certificate, the European Certificate of Succession (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Certificate’), to be issued for use in another Member State.
V ta namen bi morala ta uredba določati uvedbo enotnega potrdila, tj. evropskega potrdila o dedovanju (v nadaljnjem besedilu: potrdilo), ki se izda za uporabo v drugi državi članici.
In order to respect the principle of subsidiarity, the Certificate should not take the place of internal documents which may exist for similar purposes in the Member States.
To potrdilo zaradi upoštevanja načela subsidiarnosti ne bi smelo nadomestiti nacionalnih dokumentov, ki se lahko za enak namen izdajajo v državah članicah.
The authority which issues the Certificate should have regard to the formalities required for the registration of immovable property in the Member State in which the register is kept.
Organ izdajatelj potrdila bi moral upoštevati obličnosti, ki so potrebne za vpis v register nepremičnine v državi članici, kjer se nahaja register.
For that purpose, this Regulation should provide for an exchange of information on such formalities between the Member States.
Ta uredba bi morala za ta namen določiti izmenjavo informacij med državami članicami o teh obličnostih.
The use of the Certificate should not be mandatory.
Uporaba potrdila ne bi smela biti obvezna.
This means that persons entitled to apply for a Certificate should be under no obligation to do so but should be free to use the other instruments available under this Regulation (decisions, authentic instruments and court settlements).
To pomeni, da osebam, ki lahko zaprosijo za potrdilo, tega ni treba storiti, temveč lahko uporabijo druge instrumente, ki so na voljo v skladu s to uredbo (odločbe, javne listine ali sodne poravnave).
However, no authority or person presented with a Certificate issued in another Member State should be entitled to request that a decision, authentic instrument or court settlement be presented instead of the Certificate.
Vendar pa noben organ ali oseba, ki se mu/ji predloži potrdilo, izdano v drugi državi članici, ne bi smela zahtevati, da se mu/ji namesto potrdila predloži odločba, javna listina ali sodna poravnava.
The Certificate should be issued in the Member State whose courts have jurisdiction under this Regulation.
Potrdilo bi morala izdati država članica, katere sodišča so pristojna v skladu s to uredbo.
It should be for each Member State to determine in its internal legislation which authorities are to have competence to issue the Certificate, whether they be courts as defined for the purposes of this Regulation or other authorities with competence in matters of succession, such as, for instance, notaries.
Države članice bi morale v nacionalni zakonodaji določiti, kateri organi bodo pristojni za izdajo potrdila, tj. bodisi sodišča, kot so opredeljena v tej uredbi, bodisi drugi organi, ki so pristojni za dedne zadeve, kot so na primer notarji.
It should also be for each Member State to determine in its internal legislation whether the issuing authority may involve other competent bodies in the issuing process, for instance bodies competent to receive statutory declarations in lieu of an oath.
Države članice bi morale v nacionalni zakonodaji določiti tudi, ali lahko organ izdajatelj, pri izdaji sodeluje z drugimi pristojnimi organi, na primer organi, ki so pristojni za sprejemanje zapriseženih izjav.
The Member States should communicate to the Commission the relevant information concerning their issuing authorities in order for that information to be made publicly available.
Komisiji bi morale sporočiti ustrezne informacije o svojih organih izdajateljih, da bi se lahko objavile.
The Certificate should produce the same effects in all Member States.
Potrdilo bi moralo imeti enake učinke v vseh državah članicah.
It should not be an enforceable title in its own right but should have an evidentiary effect and should be presumed to demonstrate accurately elements which have been established under the law applicable to the succession or under any other law applicable to specific elements, such as the substantive validity of dispositions of property upon death.
Samo po sebi ne bi smelo biti izvršilni naslov, imeti pa bi moralo dokazno moč, poleg tega bi se moralo zanj predpostavljati, da točno odraža elemente, ki so bili ugotovljeni po pravu, ki se uporablja za dedovanje, ali po katerem koli drugem pravu, ki se uporablja za posamezne elemente, kot je materialna veljavnost razpolaganja za primer smrti.
The evidentiary effect of the Certificate should not extend to elements which are not governed by this Regulation, such as questions of affiliation or the question whether or not a particular asset belonged to the deceased.
Dokazni učinek potrdila ne bi smel vključevati elementov, ki niso urejena s to uredbo, kot je ugotavljanje očetovstva in materinstva ali vprašanje, ali je določeno premoženje pripadalo zapustniku ali ne.
Any person who makes payments or passes on succession property to a person indicated in the Certificate as being entitled to accept such payment or property as an heir or legatee should be afforded appropriate protection if he acted in good faith relying on the accuracy of the information certified in the Certificate.
Vsakomur, ki izroči plačilo ali preda zapuščino osebi, ki je v potrdilu navedena kot upravičena, da prejme takšno plačilo ali premoženje kot dedič ali volilojemnik, bi bilo treba zagotoviti ustrezno zaščito, če je ravnal v dobri veri in se pri tem zanašal na to, da so informacije, navedene v potrdilu, točne.
The same protection should be afforded to any person who, relying on the accuracy of the information certified in the Certificate, buys or receives succession property from a person indicated in the Certificate as being entitled to dispose of such property.
Enako zaščito bi bilo treba zagotoviti vsakomur, ki se zanaša na to, da so informacije, navedene v potrdilu, točne, in ki kupi ali prejme premoženje od osebe, ki je v potrdilu navedena kot upravičena, da razpolaga s tem premoženjem.
The protection should be ensured if certified copies which are still valid are presented.
Zaščito bi bilo treba zagotoviti, če se predložijo še vedno veljavne overjene kopije.
Whether or not such an acquisition of property by a third person is effective should not be determined by this Regulation.
Ta uredba ne bi smela urejati vprašanja, ali je takšna pridobitev premoženja s strani tretje osebe veljavna ali ne.
The competent authority should issue the Certificate upon request.
Pristojni organ bi moral izdati potrdilo na zahtevo.
The original of the Certificate should remain with the issuing authority, which should issue one or more certified copies of the Certificate to the applicant and to any other person demonstrating a legitimate interest.
Organ izdajatelj bi moral izvirnik potrdila obdržati, prosilcu zahtevka in vsem drugim osebam, ki izkažejo upravičeni interes, pa izdati eno ali več overjenih kopij.
This should not preclude a Member State, in accordance with its national rules on public access to documents, from allowing copies of the Certificate to be disclosed to members of the public.
To ne bi smelo preprečevati državam članicam, da v skladu z nacionalnimi pravili o dostopu javnosti do dokumentov dovolijo, da se kopije potrdila razkrijejo javnosti.
This Regulation should provide for redress against decisions of the issuing authority, including decisions to refuse the issue of a Certificate.
Ta uredba bi morala omogočati pritožbe zoper odločitve organa izdajatelja, vključno zoper odločitev o zavrnitvi izdaje potrdila.
Where the Certificate is rectified, modified or withdrawn, the issuing authority should inform the persons to whom certified copies have been issued so as to avoid wrongful use of such copies.
Če je bilo potrdilo popravljeno, spremenjeno ali preklicano, bi moral organ izdajatelj s tem seznaniti osebo, ki so ji bile izdane kopije, da bi se preprečila njihova nepravilna uporaba.
Respect for international commitments entered into by the Member States means that this Regulation should not affect the application of international conventions to which one or more Member States are party at the time when this Regulation is adopted.
Zaradi spoštovanja mednarodnih obveznosti, ki so jih sprejele države članice, ta uredba ne bi smela vplivati na uporabo mednarodnih konvencij, katerih pogodbenice so ena ali več držav članic v trenutku sprejetja te uredbe.
In particular, the Member States which are Contracting Parties to the Hague Convention of 5 October 1961 on the Conflicts of Laws Relating to the Form of Testamentary Dispositions should be able to continue to apply the provisions of that Convention instead of the provisions of this Regulation with regard to the formal validity of wills and joint wills.
Zlasti bi moralo biti omogočeno državam članicam, ki so pogodbenice Haaške konvencije z dne 5. oktobra 1961 o koliziji zakonov glede oblike oporočnih razpolaganj, da za formalno veljavnost oporok in skupnih oporok še naprej uporabljajo določbe te konvencije namesto določb te uredbe.
Consistency with the general objectives of this Regulation requires, however, that this Regulation take precedence, as between Member States, over conventions concluded exclusively between two or more Member States in so far as such conventions concern matters governed by this Regulation.
Zaradi skladnosti s splošnimi cilji te uredbe pa bi morala v razmerjih med državami članicami ta uredba prevladati nad konvencijami, sklenjenimi izključno med dvema ali več državami članicami, kolikor se te konvencije nanašajo na zadeve, ki jih ureja ta uredba.
This Regulation should not preclude Member States which are parties to the Convention of 19 November 1934 between Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden comprising private international law provisions on succession, wills and estate administration from continuing to apply certain provisions of that Convention, as revised by the intergovernmental agreement between the States parties thereto.
Ta uredba ne bi smela preprečevati, da države članice, ki so pogodbenice konvencije med Dansko, Finsko, Islandijo, Norveško in Švedsko z dne 19. novembra 1934, ki vsebuje določbe mednarodnega zasebnega prava o dedovanju, oporokah in upravljanju zapuščine, še naprej uporabljajo nekatere določbe iz te konvencije, kot je bila spremenjena z medvladnim sporazumom med državami pogodbenicami te konvencije.
In order to facilitate the application of this Regulation, provision should be made for an obligation requiring the Member States to communicate certain information regarding their legislation and procedures relating to succession within the framework of the European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters established by Council Decision 2001/470/EC [6].
Za lažjo uporabo te uredbe bi bilo treba določiti, da morajo države članice sporočiti nekatere podatke o svoji zakonodaji in postopkih v zvezi z dedovanjem v okviru Evropske pravosodne mreže v civilnih in gospodarskih zadevah, ustanovljene z Odločbo Sveta 2001/470/ES [6].
In order to allow for the timely publication in the Official Journal of the European Union of all information of relevance for the practical application of this Regulation, the Member States should also communicate such information to the Commission before this Regulation starts to apply.
Da bi lahko vse informacije, pomembne za uporabo te uredbe v praksi, pravočasno objavili v Uradnem listu Evropske unije, bi morale države članice takšne informacije Komisiji sporočiti pred začetkom uporabe te uredbe.