natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The main objective of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 is the migration from national credit transfer and direct debit schemes to harmonised SEPA credit transfer (SCT) and SEPA direct debit (SDD) schemes, inter alia, by providing Union citizens with a unique international bank account number (IBAN) that can be used for all SCTs and SDDs denominated in euro.
Glavni cilj Uredbe (EU) št. 260/2012 je prehod z nacionalnih shem za kreditne prenose in direktne bremenitve na usklajeni shemi za kreditne prenose SEPA in direktne bremenitve SEPA, med drugim z zagotovitvijo edinstvene mednarodne številke bančnega računa (IBAN) državljanom Unije, ki se lahko uporablja za vse kreditne prenose SEPA in direktne bremenitve SEPA v eurih.
Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 has provided for the SEPA migration to take place by 1 February 2014 in order to allow payment service providers and payment service users sufficient time to adapt their processes to the technical requirements that the migration to SCT and SDD entail.
Uredba (EU) št. 260/2012 določa, da se mora prehod na SEPA izvesti do 1. februarja 2014, da bi se ponudnikom in uporabnikom plačilnih storitev zagotovilo dovolj časa, da svoje postopke prilagodijo tehničnim zahtevam, ki jih vključuje prehod na kreditne prenose SEPA in direktne bremenitve SEPA.
Since the adoption of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 the Commission and the European Central Bank have closely monitored the progress of SEPA migration.
Komisija in Evropska centralna banka sta od sprejetja Uredbe (EU) št. 260/2012 pozorno spremljali napredek pri prehodu na SEPA.
Several meetings with Member States, national public authorities and market participants have been held.
Organiziranih je bilo več srečanj z državami članicami, nacionalnimi javnimi organi in udeleženci na trgu.
The European Central Bank has regularly published progress reports on SEPA migration on the basis of payment data collected by national central banks.
Evropska centralna banka je redno objavljala poročila o napredku pri prehodu na SEPA na podlagi podatkov o plačilih, ki so jih zbrale nacionalne centralne banke.
Those reports indicate that a number of Member States in the euro area are well on track with migration rates for SCT currently close to 100 %.
Navedena poročila kažejo, da vrsta držav članic v euroobmočju dobro napreduje pri prehodu, in sicer s stopnjami prehoda za kreditne prenose SEPA blizu 100 %.
The large majority of payment service providers have reported that they are already SEPA-compliant.
Velika večina ponudnikov plačilnih storitev je sporočila, da že izpolnjujejo zahteve SEPA.
However, in several other Member States the migration rates are lagging behind expectations.
Vendar v več drugih državah članicah stopnje prehoda zaostajajo za pričakovanji.
This is particularly the case for SDD.
To še zlasti velja za direktne bremenitve SEPA.
On 14 May 2013, the ECOFIN Council in its conclusions again stressed the importance of SEPA migration.
Svet ECOFIN je 14. maja 2013 v svojih sklepih ponovno poudaril pomembnost prehoda na SEPA.
It was noted that the SEPA migration was far from complete and that immediate efforts would be required by all market participants to complete SEPA migration in time.
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da prehod na SEPA še zdaleč ni zaključen in da je potrebno takojšnje ukrepanje na strani vseh udeležencev na trgu, da bo prehod na SEPA pravočasno zaključen.
An action plan was adopted in which merchants, corporates, SMEs and public administrations were invited to immediately take the necessary concrete internal steps to adapt their processes and inform their clients of their IBAN details.
Sprejet je bil akcijski načrt, v okviru katerega so bili trgovci, podjetja, MSP in javne uprave pozvani, naj nemudoma sprejmejo potrebne konkretne interne ukrepe, da bodo prilagodili svoje postopke ter obvestili stranke o podrobnostih v zvezi z IBAN.
Despite the considerable efforts made by the European Central Bank, Member States, their national public authorities and market participants during recent months, the latest migration statistics show that the overall migration rate in the euro area to SCT has only increased from 40 % in June 2013 to around 64 % in November 2013, while the overall migration rate towards SDD has only reached 26 %.
Kljub znatnim prizadevanjem Evropske centralne banke, držav članic, njihovih nacionalnih javnih organov in udeležencev na trgu v preteklih mesecih najnovejši statistični podatki o prehodu kažejo, da se je v euroobmočju skupno prehod na kreditne prenose SEPA povečal s 40 % v juniju 2013 na samo okrog 64 % v novembru 2013, prehod na direktne bremenitve SEPA pa je skupno dosegel samo 26 %.
While the national figures show good progress in several Member States, a significant group of Member States is lagging considerably behind the expected migration rates.
Čeprav nacionalne številke kažejo dober napredek v več državah članicah, pomembna skupina držav članic še vedno precej zaostaja za pričakovanimi stopnjami prehoda.
It is therefore very unlikely that all market participants will be SEPA compliant by 1 February 2014.
Zato je zelo malo verjetno, da bodo vsi udeleženci na trgu zagotovili izpolnjevanje zahtev SEPA do 1. februarja 2014.
From 1 February 2014, banks and other payment service providers will have to refuse to process credit transfers or direct debits that are not SEPA-compliant because of their legal obligations, although, as is currently already the case, they technically could process those payments by continuing to use existing legacy payment schemes alongside SCT and SDD.
Banke in drugi ponudniki plačilnih storitev bodo morali od 1. februarja 2014 zaradi svojih pravnih obveznosti zavračati obdelavo kreditnih prenosov ali direktnih bremenitev, ki ne izpolnjujejo zahtev SEPA, čeprav bi lahko tehnično taka plačila obdelovali z nadaljnjo uporabo obstoječih plačilnih shem, vzporedno s shemami za kreditne prenose SEPA in direktne bremenitve SEPA, kar trenutno že poteka.
Failing full migration to SCT and SDD, delays in those payments cannot therefore be excluded.
V primeru nepopolnega prehoda na kreditne prenose SEPA in direktne bremenitve SEPA zamud pri plačilih torej ni mogoče izključiti.
All payment services users, and particularly SMEs and consumers, could be affected.
To bi lahko prizadelo vse uporabnike plačilnih storitev, zlasti MSP in potrošnike.
It is essential to avoid unnecessary disruption of payments resulting from the fact that SEPA migration is not fully completed by 1 February 2014.
Bistvenega pomena je, da se preprečijo nepotrebne motnje pri plačilih, ki bi bile posledica dejstva, da prehod na SEPA ne bo v celoti zaključen do 1. februarja 2014.
Payment service providers should therefore be allowed, for a limited period of time, to continue the processing of payment transactions through their legacy schemes alongside their SCT and SDD schemes, as they are doing now.
Ponudnikom plačilnih storitev bi se zato moralo za omejeno obdobje dovoliti, da nadaljujejo z obdelavo plačilnih transakcij prek obstoječih shem, vzporedno s shemami za kreditne prenose SEPA in direktne bremenitve SEPA, kar trenutno tudi počnejo.
A transitional period should therefore be introduced to allow for the continuation of such parallel processing of payments in different formats.
Zato bi bilo treba uvesti prehodno obdobje, ki omogoča nadaljevanje takega vzporednega obdelovanja plačil v različnih oblikah.
Considering the current migration figures and the expected pace of migration, a one-off additional transitional period of six months is appropriate.
Glede na trenutne podatke o prehodu in pričakovano hitrost prehoda je primerno enkratno dodatno prehodno obdobje 6 mesecev.
Such ‘grandfathering’ of non-SEPA compliant legacy systems should be considered to be an exceptional measure and should therefore be kept as short as possible, as rapid and comprehensive migration is necessary in order to achieve the full benefits of an integrated payments market.
Takšna uporaba obstoječih sistemov, ki ne izpolnjujejo zahtev SEPA, v prehodnem obdobju bi se morala obravnavati kot izreden ukrep in bi zato morala trajati čim manj časa, saj je hiter in celovit prehod potreben za to, da se zagotovijo vse koristi povezanega trga plačil.
It is also important to limit in time the costs to the payment service providers of the continued use of the legacy payment schemes in parallel with the SEPA system.
Pomembno je tudi, da se časovno omejijo stroški za ponudnike plačilnih storitev, ki bodo vzporedno s sistemom SEPA še naprej uporabljali obstoječe plačilne sheme.
Payment service providers that have already fully migrated to SEPA might consider providing payment service users that have not yet migrated with conversion services during the transitional period.
Ponudniki plačilnih storitev, ki so že v celoti izvedli prehod na SEPA, lahko razmislijo o nudenju storitev pretvorbe uporabnikom plačilnih storitev, ki prehoda še niso izvedli, v prehodnem obdobju.
During the transitional period, Member States should refrain from applying penalties to payment service providers that process non-compliant payments and to payment service users that have not yet migrated.
V prehodnem obdobju države članice ne bi smele nalagati kazni ponudnikom plačilnih storitev, ki obdelujejo neskladna plačila, in uporabnikom plačilnih storitev, ki še niso izvedli prehoda.
Several large users of direct debit instruments have already indicated that they plan to migrate close to the end-date.
Več večjih uporabnikov instrumentov direktne bremenitve je že napovedalo, da nameravajo izvesti prehod blizu končnega roka.
Any postponing of those migration projects could lead to temporary stress on incoming payments and cash flows, and hence on treasury levels of the companies concerned.
Kakršno koli odlaganje takih projektov prehoda bi lahko privedlo do začasne obremenitve vhodnih plačil in denarnih tokov ter s tem na finančna sredstva zadevnih podjetij.
Such late migration on a large scale could also create certain bottlenecks, in particular at the level of banks and software vendors which may be faced with certain capacity constraints.
Tak pozen prehod velikega obsega bi lahko ustvaril tudi ozka grla, zlasti na ravni bank in dobaviteljev programske opreme, ki se bodo morda soočili z omejitvami, kar zadeva zmogljivost.
The additional period for phasing in the new system would allow for a more gradual approach.
Navedeno dodatno obdobje za uvedbo novega sistema bi omogočilo bolj postopen pristop.
Market participants that have not yet started to implement the necessary adaptations for SEPA compliance are called upon to do so as soon as possible.
Udeležence na trgu, ki še niso začeli z izvajanjem potrebnih prilagoditev za izpolnjevanje zahtev SEPA, se poziva, naj to storijo čim prej.
Market participants that have already started to adapt their payment processes should nevertheless complete the migration as rapidly as possible.
Udeleženci na trgu, ki so že začeli prilagajati svoje plačilne postopke, bi kljub temu morali zaključiti prehod, kolikor hitro je mogoče.
In view of the overall objective to realise coordinated and integrated migration, it is appropriate that the transitional period apply to both SCT and SDD.
Glede na splošni cilj zagotoviti usklajen in povezan prehod je primerno, da se prehodno obdobje uporablja tako za kreditne prenose SEPA kot za direktne bremenitve SEPA.
Different transitional periods for SCT and SDD would cause confusion to consumers, payment service providers, SMEs and other payment service users.
Različni prehodni obdobji za kreditne prenose SEPA in za direktne bremenitve SEPA bi privedlo do zmede pri potrošnikih, ponudnikih plačilnih storitev, MSP in drugih uporabnikih plačilnih storitev.
For reasons of legal certainty and in order to avoid any discontinuity to the application of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012, it is necessary that this Regulation enter into force as a matter of urgency and that it apply, with retroactive effect, from 31 January 2014.
Zaradi pravne varnosti in da bi se preprečila kakršna koli prekinitev uporabe Uredbe (EU) št. 260/2012, je potrebno, da ta uredba začeti veljati čim prej in se uporablja z retroaktivnim učinkom od 31. januarja 2014.
In view of the urgency of the matter, an exception to the eight-week period referred to in Article 4 of Protocol No 1 on the role of national parliaments in the European Union, annexed to the Treaty on European Union, to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, should apply.
Glede na nujnost zadeve bi bilo treba uporabiti izjemo od roka osmih tednov iz člena 4 Protokola (št. 1) o vlogi nacionalnih parlamentov v Evropski uniji, ki je priložen Pogodbi o Evropski uniji, Pogodbi o delovanju Evropske unije in Pogodbi o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti za atomsko energijo.
Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 should therefore be amended accordingly,
Uredbo (EU) št. 260/2012 bi bilo zato treba ustrezno spremeniti –
In Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:
V členu 16 Uredbe (EU) št. 260/2012 se odstavek 1 nadomesti z naslednjim:
By way of derogation from Article 6(1) and (2), PSPs may continue, until 1 August 2014, to process payment transactions in euro in formats that are different from those required for credit transfers and direct debits pursuant to this Regulation.
Z odstopanjem od člena 6(1) in (2) lahko ponudniki plačilnih storitev še naprej, in sicer do 1. avgusta 2014, obdelujejo plačilne transakcije v eurih v oblikah, ki se razlikujejo od tistih, ki se v skladu s to uredbo zahtevajo za kreditne prenose in direktne bremenitve.
Member States shall apply the rules on the penalties applicable to infringements of Article 6(1) and (2), laid down in accordance with Article 11, from 2 August 2014.
Države članice uporabljajo predpise o kaznih, ki se uporabljajo za kršitve člena 6(1) in (2) in so določene v skladu s členom 11, od 2. avgusta 2014.
By way of derogation from Article 6(1) and (2), Member States may allow PSPs to provide PSUs, until 1 February 2016, with conversion services for national payment transactions enabling PSUs that are consumers to continue using BBAN instead of the payment account identifier specified in point (1)(a) of the Annex on condition that interoperability is ensured by converting the payer’s and the payee’s BBAN technically and securely into the respective payment account identifier specified in point (1)(a) of the Annex.
Z odstopanjem od člena 6(1) in (2) lahko države članice ponudnikom plačilnih storitev dovolijo, da do 1. februarja 2016 uporabnikom plačilnih storitev zagotavljajo storitve pretvorbe za nacionalne plačilne transakcije in s tem uporabnikom plačilnih storitev, ki so potrošniki, omogočijo nadaljnjo uporabo številke BBAN namesto identifikacije plačilnega računa iz točke 1(a) Priloge, pod pogojem, da je zagotovljena interoperabilnost s pretvorbo številke BBAN plačnika in prejemnika plačila na tehničen in varen način v ustrezno identifikacijo plačilnega računa iz točke 1(a) Priloge.
In such a case PSPs shall not levy any charges or other fees on the PSU directly or indirectly linked to those conversion services.’.
V tem primeru ponudniki plačilnih storitev uporabniku plačilnih storitev neposredno ali posredno ne zaračunajo nikakršnih stroškov ali drugih pristojbin, povezanih s storitvijo pretvorbe.“
It shall apply, with retroactive effect, from 31 January 2014.
Uporablja se z retroaktivnim učinkom od 31. januarja 2014.
Position of the European Parliament of 4 February 2014 (not yet published in the Official Journal) and decision of the Council of 18 February 2014.
Stališče Evropskega parlamenta z dne 4. februarja 2014 (še ni objavljeno v Uradnem listu) in odločitev Sveta z dne 18. februarja 2014.
Regulation (EC) No 924/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 on cross-border payments in the Community and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2560/2001 (OJ L 266, 9.10.2009, p. 11).
Uredba (EU) št. 260/2012 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 14. marca 2012 o uvajanju tehničnih in poslovnih zahtev za kreditne prenose in direktne bremenitve v eurih in o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 924/2009 (UL L 94, 30.3.2012, str. 22).
Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2012 establishing technical and business requirements for credit transfers and direct debits in euro and amending Regulation (EC) No 924/2009 (OJ L 94, 30.3.2012, p. 22).
Uredba (ES) št. 924/2009 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 16. septembra 2009 o čezmejnih plačilih v Skupnosti in razveljavitvi Uredbe (ES) št. 2560/2001 (UL L 266, 9.10.2009, str. 11).
Regulation (EU) No 249/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council
Uredba (EU) št. 249/2014 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta
repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 827/2004 prohibiting imports of Atlantic bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus) originating in Bolivia, Cambodia, Equatorial Guinea, Georgia and Sierra Leone and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1036/2001
o razveljavitvi Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 827/2004 o prepovedi uvoza atlantskega veleokega tuna (Thunnus obesus) s poreklom iz Bolivije, Kambodže, Ekvatorialne Gvineje, Gruzije in Sierre Leone in o razveljavitvi Uredbe (ES) št. 1036/2001
The Union has been a contracting party to the International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (the ICCAT Convention) since 14 November 1997, following the adoption of Council Decision 86/238/EEC [2].
Unija je pogodbenica Mednarodne konvencije za ohranitev tunov v Atlantiku (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Konvencija ICCAT) od 14. novembra 1997, po sprejetju Sklepa Sveta 86/238/EGS [2].
The ICCAT Convention provides a framework for regional cooperation in the conservation and management of tuna and tuna-like species in the Atlantic Ocean and its adjacent seas.
Konvencija ICCAT določa okvir za regionalno sodelovanje pri ohranjanju in upravljanju tuna ter tunu podobnih vrst v Atlantskem oceanu in sosednjih morjih.
The ICCAT Convention established an International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) which adopts conservation and management measures.
S Konvencijo ICCAT je bila ustanovljena Mednarodna komisija za ohranitev tunov v Atlantiku (ICCAT), ki sprejema ukrepe za ohranjanje in upravljanje.
Those measures become binding on the contracting parties.
Ti ukrepi postanejo zavezujoči za pogodbenice.
In 1998, ICCAT adopted resolution 98-18 concerning the unreported and unregulated catches of tuna by large-scale long line vessels in the Convention area.
Leta 1998 je ICCAT sprejela resolucijo 98-18 v zvezi z neprijavljenim in nereguliranim ulovom tuna z večjimi plovili za ribolov s parangali na območju Konvencije.
That resolution established procedures for identifying countries whose vessels had fished for tuna and tuna-like species in a manner which diminished the effectiveness of ICCAT conservation and management measures.
V navedeni resoluciji so bili določeni postopki za identifikacijo držav, katerih plovila so lovila tuna in tunu podobne vrste na način, ki zmanjšuje učinkovitost ukrepov ICCAT za ohranjanje in upravljanje.
It also specified measures to be taken, including if necessary non-discriminatory trade restrictive measures, in order to prevent those countries’ vessels from continuing such fishing practices.
V resoluciji so bili prav tako opredeljeni ukrepi, ki jih je treba izvajati, med katere se po potrebi vključijo tudi nediskriminatorni ukrepi omejevanja trgovine, da bi tako preprečili nadaljevanje take ribiške prakse na plovilih teh držav.
Following the adoption of resolution 98-18, ICCAT has identified Bolivia, Cambodia, Equatorial Guinea, Georgia and Sierra Leone as countries whose vessels fish Atlantic bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus) in a manner which diminishes the effectiveness of its conservation and management measures.
Po sprejetju resolucije 98-18 je ICCAT ugotovila, da so Bolivija, Kambodža, Ekvatorialna Gvineja, Gruzija in Sierra Leone države, katerih plovila lovijo atlantskega veleokega tuna (Thunnus obesus) na način, ki zmanjšuje učinkovitost njenih ukrepov za ohranjanje in upravljanje.
ICCAT has substantiated its findings with data concerning catches, trade and the activities of vessels.
ICCAT je svoje ugotovitve utemeljila s podatki o ulovu, trgovini in dejavnosti plovil teh držav.
As a consequence, ICCAT recommended that contracting parties take appropriate measures, consistent with the provisions of its resolution 98-18, to prohibit imports of Atlantic bigeye tuna and its products in any form from those countries.
ICCAT je zato priporočila, da pogodbenice sprejmejo ustrezne ukrepe, skladne z določbami resolucije 98-18, da se prepove uvoz atlantskega veleokega tuna in njegovih proizvodov v kateri koli obliki iz navedenih držav.
In 2004, imports of Atlantic bigeye tuna originating in Bolivia, Cambodia, Equatorial Guinea, Georgia and Sierra Leone into the Union were prohibited by Council Regulation (EC) No 827/2004 [3].
Leta 2004 je bil uvoz atlantskega veleokega tuna s poreklom iz Bolivije, Kambodže, Ekvatorialne Gvineje, Gruzije in Sierre Leone v Unijo prepovedan z Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 827/2004 [3].
At its 14th special meeting in 2004, ICCAT acknowledged the efforts made by Cambodia, Equatorial Guinea and Sierra Leone to address its concerns and adopted recommendations lifting trade-restrictive measures against those three countries in relation to Atlantic bigeye tuna and its products.
ICCAT je na 14. izrednem zasedanju leta 2004 potrdila, da si Kambodža, Ekvatorialna Gvineja in Sierra Leone prizadevajo odpraviti njene pomisleke, in sprejela priporočila za ukinitev ukrepov omejevanja trgovine za te tri države v zvezi z atlantskim veleokim tunom in njegovimi proizvodi.
As a consequence, Council Regulation (EC) No 919/2005 [4] amended Regulation (EC) No 827/2004 to lift the prohibition on imports of Atlantic bigeye tuna and its products from Cambodia, Equatorial Guinea and Sierra Leone into the Union.
Uredba (ES) št. 827/2004 je bila zato spremenjena z Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 919/2005 [4] tako, da je ukinila prepoved uvoza atlantskega veleokega tuna in njegovih proizvodov iz Kambodže, Ekvatorialne Gvineje in Sierre Leone v Unijo.
Following that amendment, Regulation (EC) No 827/2004 only prohibits such imports from Bolivia and Georgia.
Po tej spremembi Uredba (ES) št. 827/2004 prepoveduje tak uvoz le iz Bolivije in Gruzije.
At its 22nd regular annual meeting in 2011, ICCAT acknowledged the actions taken by Bolivia and Georgia and adopted recommendation 11-19 lifting the prohibition on imports of Atlantic bigeye tuna and its products that continued to apply to those two countries.
Leta 2011 je ICCAT na 22. rednem letnem zasedanju priznala prizadevanja Bolivije in Gruzije ter sprejela priporočilo 11-19 za ukinitev prepovedi uvoza atlantskega veleokega tuna in njegovih proizvodov, ki se je še naprej uporabljala za ti dve državi.
Regulation (EC) No 827/2004 should therefore be repealed,
Uredbo (ES) št. 827/2004 bi bilo zato treba razveljaviti –
Regulation (EC) No 827/2004 is repealed.
Uredba (ES) št. 827/2004 se razveljavi.
Position of the European Parliament of 5 February 2014 (not yet published in the Official Journal) and decision of the Council of 20 February 2014.
Stališče Evropskega parlamenta z dne 5. februarja 2014 (še ni objavljeno v Uradnem listu) in določitev Sveta z dne 20. februarja 2014.
Council Decision 86/238/EEC of 9 June 1986 on the accession of the Community to the International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, as amended by the Protocol annexed to the Final Act of the Conference of Plenipotentiaries of the States Parties to the Convention signed in Paris on 10 July 1984 (OJ L 162, 18.6.1986, p. 33).
Sklep Sveta 86/238/EGS z dne 9. junija 1986 o pristopu Skupnosti k Mednarodni konvenciji za ohranitev tunov v Atlantiku, kakor je bila spremenjena s Protokolom, priloženim k Sklepni listini Konference pooblaščencev držav pogodbenic konvencije, ki je bila podpisana 10. julija 1984 v Parizu (UL L 162, 18.6.1986, str. 33).