natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Ensuring access to simple, efficient, fast and low-cost ways of resolving domestic and cross-border disputes which arise from sales or service contracts should benefit consumers and therefore boost their confidence in the market.
Zagotavljanje dostopa do enostavnih, učinkovitih, hitrih in cenovno ugodnih načinov za reševanje domačih in čezmejnih sporov, ki izhajajo iz pogodb o prodaji ali pogodb o storitvah, bi moralo koristiti potrošnikom ter s tem okrepiti njihovo zaupanje v trg.
That access should apply to online as well as to offline transactions, and is particularly important when consumers shop across borders.
Ta dostop bi moral veljati tako za spletne kot za nespletne transakcije in je še zlasti pomemben pri čezmejnih nakupih potrošnikov.
Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) offers a simple, fast and low-cost out-of-court solution to disputes between consumers and traders.
Alternativno reševanje sporov (ARS) nudi preprosto, hitro in cenovno ugodno izvensodno reševanje sporov med potrošniki in trgovci.
However, ADR is not yet sufficiently and consistently developed across the Union.
Vendar pa ARS v Uniji še ni dovolj in dosledno razvito.
It is regrettable that, despite Commission Recommendations 98/257/EC of 30 March 1998 on the principles applicable to the bodies responsible for out-of-court settlement of consumer disputes [3] and 2001/310/EC of 4 April 2001 on the principles for out-of-court bodies involved in the consensual resolution of consumer disputes [4], ADR has not been correctly established and is not running satisfactorily in all geographical areas or business sectors in the Union.
Žal kljub priporočilom Komisije 98/257/ES z dne 30. marca 1998 o načelih, ki veljajo za odgovorne organe v izvensodnih poravnavah potrošniških sporov [3], in 2001/310/ES z dne 4. aprila 2001 o načelih, ki veljajo za izvensodne organe, odgovorne za sporazumno reševanje potrošniških sporov [4], ARS na vseh geografskih območjih ali v vseh poslovnih sektorjih v Uniji ni pravilno vzpostavljeno in ne deluje zadovoljivo.
Consumers and traders are still not aware of the existing out-of-court redress mechanisms, with only a small percentage of citizens knowing how to file a complaint with an ADR entity.
Potrošniki in trgovci še vedno ne poznajo obstoječih mehanizmov pravnih sredstev za izvensodno reševanje sporov in le malo državljanov ve, kako vložiti pritožbo pri organu ARS.
Where ADR procedures are available, their quality levels vary considerably in the Member States and cross-border disputes are often not handled effectively by ADR entities.
Kakovost postopkov ARS, ki pa so na voljo, se med državami članicami zelo razlikuje, organi ARS pa pogosto niso uspešni pri reševanju čezmejnih sporov.
The disparities in ADR coverage, quality and awareness in Member States constitute a barrier to the internal market and are among the reasons why many consumers abstain from shopping across borders and why they lack confidence that potential disputes with traders can be resolved in an easy, fast and inexpensive way.
Razlike med državami članicami glede dostopnosti, kakovosti in poznavanja ARS ovirajo notranji trg in so eden od razlogov, da se številni potrošniki izogibajo čezmejnim nakupom in niso prepričani, da bi morebitne spore s trgovci lahko rešili na preprost, hiter in cenovno ugoden način.
For the same reasons, traders might abstain from selling to consumers in other Member States where there is no sufficient access to high-quality ADR procedures.
Iz istega razloga se trgovci morda izogibajo prodaji potrošnikom v drugih državah članicah, v katerih ni zadovoljivega dostopa do visoko kakovostnih postopkov ARS.
Furthermore, traders established in a Member State where high-quality ADR procedures are not sufficiently available are put at a competitive disadvantage with regard to traders that have access to such procedures and can thus resolve consumer disputes faster and more cheaply.
Poleg tega so trgovci s sedežem v državi članici, v kateri kakovostni postopki ARS v zadovoljivi meri niso na voljo, v slabšem konkurenčnem položaju v primerjavi s trgovci, ki imajo dostop do takšnih postopkov in lahko tako spore s potrošniki rešijo hitreje in ceneje.
In order for consumers to exploit fully the potential of the internal market, ADR should be available for all types of domestic and cross-border disputes covered by this Directive, ADR procedures should comply with consistent quality requirements that apply throughout the Union, and consumers and traders should be aware of the existence of such procedures.
Da bi lahko potrošniki v celoti izkoristili potencial notranjega trga, bi moralo biti alternativno reševanje sporov na voljo pri vseh vrstah domačih in čezmejnih potrošniških sporov, ki jih zajema ta direktiva, postopki ARS bi morali izpolnjevati dosledne zahteve kakovosti, ki se uporabljajo po vsej Uniji, potrošniki in trgovci pa bi morali take postopke poznati.
Due to increased cross-border trade and movement of persons, it is also important that ADR entities handle cross-border disputes effectively.
Zaradi vedno pogostejšega čezmejnega trgovanja in gibanja oseb je pomembno tudi, da organi ARS učinkovito obravnavajo čezmejne spore.
As advocated by the European Parliament in its resolutions of 25 October 2011 on alternative dispute resolution in civil, commercial and family matters and of 20 May 2010 on delivering a single market to consumers and citizens, any holistic approach to the single market which delivers results for its citizens should as a priority develop simple, affordable, expedient and accessible system of redress.
Kot je Evropski parlament zapisal v svoji resoluciji z dne 25. oktobra 2011 o alternativnem reševanju sporov v civilnih, gospodarskih in družinskih zadevah in resoluciji z dne 20. maja 2010 o uresničitvi enotnega trga za potrošnike in državljane, bi bilo treba pri vsakem celostnem pristopu k enotnemu trgu, namenjenem državljanom, najprej razviti preprost, poceni, hiter in dostopen sistem pravnih sredstev.
In its Communication of 13 April 2011 entitled ‘Single Market Act — Twelve levers to boost growth and strengthen confidence — “Working together to create new growth” ’, the Commission identified legislation on ADR which includes an electronic commerce (e-commerce) dimension, as one of the twelve levers to boost growth, strengthen confidence and make progress towards completing the Single Market.
Komisija je v Sporočilu z dne 13. aprila 2011 z naslovom „Akt za enotni trg – Dvanajst pobud za okrepitev rasti in zaupanja – ‚Skupaj za novo rast‘ “ opredelila zakonodajo o ARS, ki vključuje sklop, namenjen elektronskemu trgovanju (v nadaljnjem besedilu: e-trgovanje), kot eno od dvanajstih pobud za okrepitev rasti in zaupanja ter približevanje dokončni vzpostavitvi enotnega trga.
In its conclusions of 24-25 March and 23 October 2011, the European Council invited the European Parliament and the Council to adopt, by the end of 2012, a first set of priority measures to bring a new impetus to the Single Market.
Evropski svet je v svojih zaključkih z dne 24.-25. marca in 23. oktobra 2011 pozval Evropski parlament in Svet, naj do konca leta 2012 sprejmeta prvi sveženj prednostnih ukrepov za ponovni zagon enotnega trga.
Moreover, in its Conclusions of 30 May 2011 on the Priorities for relaunching the Single Market, the Council of the European Union highlighted the importance of e-commerce and agreed that consumer ADR schemes can offer low-cost, simple and quick redress for both consumers and traders.
Poleg tega je Svet Evropske unije v svojih zaključkih z dne 30. maja 2011 o prednostnih nalogah za ponovno vzpostavitev enotnega trga poudaril pomen e-trgovanja in strinjanje, da lahko sistemi ARS za potrošnike nudijo cenovno ugodna, enostavna in hitra pravna sredstva tako za potrošnike kot trgovce.
The successful implementation of those schemes requires sustained political commitment and support from all actors, without compromising the affordability, transparency, flexibility, speed and quality of decision-making by the ADR entities falling within the scope of this Directive.
Za uspešno izvajanje teh sistemov je potrebna trajna politična zavezanost in podpora vseh akterjev, ne da bi bile pri tem ogrožene cenovna dostopnost, preglednost, prožnost, hitrost in kakovost odločanja organov ARS, ki spadajo na področje uporabe te direktive.
Given the increasing importance of online commerce and in particular cross-border trade as a pillar of Union economic activity, a properly functioning ADR infrastructure for consumer disputes and a properly integrated online dispute resolution (ODR) framework for consumer disputes arising from online transactions are necessary in order to achieve the Single Market Act’s aim of boosting citizens’ confidence in the internal market.
Spletno poslovanje in zlasti čezmejno trgovanje postajata vse pomembnejši steber gospodarske dejavnosti Unije, zato sta potrebna ustrezno delujoča infrastruktura ARS za potrošniške spore ter ustrezno integriran okvir za spletno reševanje potrošniških sporov (v nadaljnjem besedilu: SRS), ki izhajajo iz spletnih transakcij, da bi tako okrepili zaupanje državljanov v notranji trg, kar je cilj Akta za enotni trg.
This Directive and Regulation (EU) No 524/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes [5] are two interlinked and complementary legislative instruments.
Ta direktiva in Uredba (EU) št. 524/2013 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 21. maja 2013 o spletnem reševanju potrošniških sporov [5] sta zakonodajna instrumenta, ki sta medsebojno povezana in se dopolnjujeta.
Regulation (EU) No 524/2013 provides for the establishment of an ODR platform which offers consumers and traders a single point of entry for the out-of-court resolution of online disputes, through ADR entities which are linked to the platform and offer ADR through quality ADR procedures.
Uredba (EU) št. 524/2013 določa vzpostavitev platforme za SRS, ki potrošnikom in trgovcem zagotavlja enotno vstopno točko za izvensodno reševanje spletnih sporov prek organov ARS, ki so povezani s platformo in zagotavljajo ARS s kakovostnimi postopki ARS.
The availability of quality ADR entities across the Union is thus a precondition for the proper functioning of the ODR platform.
Razpoložljivost kakovostnih organov ARS po vsej Uniji je zato predpogoj za ustrezno delovanje platforme za SRS.
This Directive should not apply to non-economic services of general interest.
Ta direktiva se ne bi smela uporabljati za negospodarske storitve splošnega pomena.
Non-economic services are services which are not performed for economic consideration.
Negospodarske storitve so storitve, ki se ne opravljajo iz gospodarskih razlogov.
As a result, non-economic services of general interest performed by the State or on behalf of the State, without remuneration, should not be covered by this Directive irrespective of the legal form through which those services are provided.
Ta direktiva zato ne bi smela zajemati negospodarskih storitev splošnega pomena, ki jih brez plačila opravlja država ali se opravljajo v imenu države ne glede na pravno obliko, s katero se te storitve zagotavljajo.
This Directive should not apply to health care services as defined in point (a) of Article 3 of Directive 2011/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2011 on the application of patients’ rights in cross-border healthcare [6].
Ta direktiva se ne bi smela uporabljati za storitve zdravstvenega varstva, kot so opredeljene v členu 3(a) Direktive 2011/24/EU Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 9. marca 2011 o uveljavljanju pravic pacientov pri čezmejnem zdravstvenem varstvu [6].
The development within the Union of properly functioning ADR is necessary to strengthen consumers’ confidence in the internal market, including in the area of online commerce, and to fulfil the potential for and opportunities of cross-border and online trade.
Razvoj dobro delujočega ARS v Uniji je nujen za okrepitev zaupanja potrošnikov v notranji trg, tudi na področju e-trgovanja, in za uresničitev potenciala ter priložnosti čezmejnega in spletnega trgovanja.
Such development should build on existing ADR procedures in the Member States and respect their legal traditions.
Takšen razvoj bi moral temeljiti na obstoječih postopkih ARS v državah članicah in spoštovati njihove pravne tradicije.
Both existing and newly established properly functioning dispute resolution entities that comply with the quality requirements set out in this Directive should be considered as ‘ADR entities’ within the meaning of this Directive.
Tako obstoječi kot na novo ustanovljeni ustrezno delujoči organi za reševanje sporov, ki izpolnjujejo zahteve glede kakovosti, določene v tej direktivi, bi se morali šteti za „organe ARS“ po tej direktivi.
The dissemination of ADR can also prove to be important in those Member States in which there is a substantial backlog of cases pending before the courts, preventing Union citizens from exercising their right to a fair trial within a reasonable time.
Razširjenost ARS se lahko izkaže za pomembno tudi v tistih državah članicah, kjer je veliko sodnih zaostankov, kar državljanom Unije onemogoča uveljavljanje pravice do poštenega sojenja v razumnem času.
This Directive should apply to disputes between consumers and traders concerning contractual obligations stemming from sales or services contracts, both online and offline, in all economic sectors, other than the exempted sectors.
Ta direktiva bi se morala uporabljati za spore med potrošniki in trgovci v zvezi s pogodbenimi obligacijskimi razmerji, ki izhajajo iz spletnih in nespletnih pogodb o prodaji ali pogodb o storitvah v vseh gospodarskih sektorjih, razen v izvzetih sektorjih.
This should include disputes arising from the sale or provision of digital content for remuneration.
To bi moralo vključevati spore v zvezi s prodajo ali zagotavljanjem digitalnih vsebin za plačilo.
This Directive should apply to complaints submitted by consumers against traders.
Ta direktiva bi se morala uporabljati za pritožbe, ki jih potrošniki vložijo proti trgovcem.
It should not apply to complaints submitted by traders against consumers or to disputes between traders.
Ne bi se smela uporabljati za pritožbe, ki jih trgovci vložijo proti potrošnikom, ali za spore med trgovci.
However, it should not prevent Member States from adopting or maintaining in force provisions on procedures for the out-of-court resolution of such disputes.
Državam članicam pa ne bi smela preprečevati, da sprejmejo nove ali ohranijo veljavne določbe o postopkih za izvensodno reševanje takih sporov.
Member States should be permitted to maintain or introduce national provisions with regard to procedures not covered by this Directive, such as internal complaint handling procedures operated by the trader.
Države članice bi morale imeti možnost, da ohranijo ali uvedejo nacionalne določbe v zvezi s postopki, ki niso zajeti v tej direktivi, kot so notranji postopki za obravnavo pritožb, ki jih vodijo trgovci.
Such internal complaint handling procedures can constitute an effective means for resolving consumer disputes at an early stage.
Takšni notranji postopki za obravnavo pritožb so lahko učinkovit način za reševanje potrošniških sporov v začetni fazi.
The definition of ‘consumer’ should cover natural persons who are acting outside their trade, business, craft or profession.
Opredelitev pojma „potrošnik“ bi morala zajemati fizične osebe, ki delujejo zunaj svoje trgovske, poslovne, obrtne ali poklicne dejavnosti.
However, if the contract is concluded for purposes partly within and partly outside the person’s trade (dual purpose contracts) and the trade purpose is so limited as not to be predominant in the overall context of the supply, that person should also be considered as a consumer.
Kadar pa je pogodba sklenjena deloma za namene trgovske dejavnosti osebe in deloma zunaj okvira te njene dejavnosti (pogodba z dvojnim namenom), pri čemer je namen trgovske dejavnosti tako omejen, da ne prevladuje v celotnem kontekstu ponudbe, bi morala ta oseba prav tako šteti za potrošnika.
Some existing Union legal acts already contain provisions concerning ADR.
Del veljavnih pravnih aktov Unije že vključuje določbe o ARS.
In order to ensure legal certainty, it should be provided that, in the event of conflict, this Directive is to prevail, except where it explicitly provides otherwise.
Da se zagotovi pravna varnost, bi bilo treba določiti, da v primeru spora prevlada ta direktiva, razen če je izrecno določeno drugače.
In particular, this Directive should be without prejudice to Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters [7], which already sets out a framework for systems of mediation at Union level for cross-border disputes, without preventing the application of that Directive to internal mediation systems.
Ta direktiva zlasti ne bi smela vplivati na Direktivo 2008/52/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 21. maja 2008 o nekaterih vidikih mediacije v civilnih in gospodarskih zadevah [7], ki že določa okvir za sisteme mediacije na ravni Unije za čezmejne spore, pri tem pa ne preprečuje, da bi se Direktiva 2008/52/ES uporabljala za notranje sisteme mediacije.
This Directive is intended to apply horizontally to all types of ADR procedures, including to ADR procedures covered by Directive 2008/52/EC.
Ta direktiva naj bi se horizontalno uporabljala za vse vrste postopkov ARS, vključno s postopki ARS, ki jih zajema Direktiva 2008/52/ES.
ADR entities are highly diverse across the Union but also within the Member States.
Postopki ARS se zelo razlikujejo po Uniji, pa tudi v posameznih državah članicah.
This Directive should cover any entity that is established on a durable basis, offers the resolution of a dispute between a consumer and a trader through an ADR procedure and is listed in accordance with this Directive.
Ta direktiva bi morala zajemati vsak trajno ustanovljen organ, namenjen reševanju spora med potrošnikom in trgovcem s postopkom ARS, ki je vključen na seznam v skladu s to direktivo.
This Directive may also cover, if Member States so decide, dispute resolution entities which impose solutions which are binding on the parties.
Ta direktiva lahko po odločitvi držav članic zajema tudi organe za reševanje sporov, ki strankam naložijo zavezujoče rešitve.
However, an out-of-court procedure which is created on an ad hoc basis for a single dispute between a consumer and a trader should not be considered as an ADR procedure.
Vendar se izvensodni postopek, vzpostavljen priložnostno za posamezni spor med potrošnikom in trgovcem, ne bi smel šteti za postopek ARS.
Also ADR procedures are highly diverse across the Union and within Member States.
Postopki ARS se poleg tega zelo razlikujejo po Uniji, pa tudi v posameznih državah članicah.
They can take the form of procedures where the ADR entity brings the parties together with the aim of facilitating an amicable solution, or procedures where the ADR entity proposes a solution or procedures where the ADR entity imposes a solution.
Lahko so v obliki postopkov, v katerih organ ARS poveže stranki s ciljem iskanja sporazumne rešitve, postopkov, v katerih organ ARS predlaga rešitev, ali postopkov, v katerih organ ARS naloži rešitev.
They can also take the form of a combination of two or more such procedures.
Lahko tudi združujejo dva ali več takšnih postopkov.
This Directive should be without prejudice to the form which ADR procedures take in the Member States.
Ta direktiva ne bi smela posegati v obliko postopkov ARS v državah članicah.
Procedures before dispute resolution entities where the natural persons in charge of dispute resolution are employed or receive any form of remuneration exclusively from the trader are likely to be exposed to a conflict of interest.
Postopki pred organi za reševanje sporov, kadar so fizične osebe, odgovorne za reševanje sporov, zaposlene ali prejemajo kakršno koli obliko plačila samo pri trgovcu, so verjetno izpostavljeni navzkrižju interesov.
Therefore, those procedures should, in principle, be excluded from the scope of this Directive, unless a Member State decides that such procedures can be recognised as ADR procedures under this Directive and provided that those entities are in complete conformity with the specific requirements on independence and impartiality laid down in this Directive.
Zaradi tega bi bilo treba navedene postopke načeloma izključiti iz področja uporabe te direktive, razen če država članica odloči, da se lahko ti postopki priznajo kot postopki ARS na podlagi te direktive, in pod pogojem, da ti subjekti v celoti izpolnjujejo posebne zahteve glede neodvisnosti in nepristranskosti iz te direktive.
ADR entities offering dispute resolution through such procedures should be subject to regular evaluation of their compliance with the quality requirements set out in this Directive, including the specific additional requirements ensuring their independence.
Pri organih ARS, ki nudijo reševanje sporov s pomočjo takšnih postopkov, bi bilo treba redno ocenjevati, kako izpolnjujejo zahteve glede kakovosti iz te direktive, vključno s posebnimi dodatnimi zahtevami za zagotavljanje njihove neodvisnosti.
This Directive should not apply to procedures before consumer-complaint handling systems operated by the trader, nor to direct negotiations between the parties.
Ta direktiva se ne bi smela uporabljati za postopke pred sistemi obravnave pritožb potrošnikov, ki jih upravljajo trgovci, niti za neposredna pogajanja med strankama.
Furthermore, it should not apply to attempts made by a judge to settle a dispute in the course of a judicial proceeding concerning that dispute.
Prav tako se ne bi smela uporabljati v primerih, ko poskuša sodnik rešiti spor v okviru sodnega postopka, ki poteka v zvezi s tem sporom.
Member States should ensure that disputes covered by this Directive can be submitted to an ADR entity which complies with the requirements set out in this Directive and is listed in accordance with it.
Države članice bi morale zagotoviti, da se lahko spori, ki jih zajema ta direktiva, predložijo organu ARS, ki izpolnjuje zahteve iz te direktive in je vključen na seznam v skladu s to direktivo.
Member States should have the possibility of fulfilling this obligation by building on existing properly functioning ADR entities and adjusting their scope of application, if needed, or by providing for the creation of new ADR entities.
Države članice bi morale imeti možnost, da to obveznost izpolnijo tako, da uporabijo obstoječe ustrezno delujoče organe ARS in po potrebi prilagodijo njihovo področje pristojnosti ali pa poskrbijo za ustanovitev novih organov ARS.
This Directive should not preclude the functioning of existing dispute resolution entities operating within the framework of national consumer protection authorities of Member States where State officials are in charge of dispute resolution.
Ta direktiva ne bi smela preprečevati delovanja obstoječih organov za reševanje sporov, ki delujejo v okviru nacionalnih organov za varstvo potrošnikov v državah članicah, v katerih so za reševanje sporov odgovorni državni uradniki.
State officials should be regarded as representatives of both consumers’ and traders’ interests.
Državni uradniki bi morali veljati za zastopnike tako interesov potrošnikov kot interesov trgovcev.
This Directive should not oblige Member States to create a specific ADR entity in each retail sector.
Ta direktiva od držav članic ne bi smela zahtevati ustanovitve posebnega organa ARS za vsak maloprodajni sektor.
When necessary, in order to ensure full sectoral and geographical coverage by and access to ADR, Member States should have the possibility to provide for the creation of a residual ADR entity that deals with disputes for the resolution of which no specific ADR entity is competent.
Po potrebi, in da bi se zagotovila polna sektorska in geografska pokritost ter dostop do ARS, bi morale države članice imeti možnost, da poskrbijo za ustanovitev dopolnilnega organa ARS, ki bi obravnaval spore, za reševanje katerih ni pristojen noben poseben organ ARS.