natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
For those purposes, even where persons are exempt from all or part of the conditions for authorisation Member States should enter them in the register of payment institutions.
Glede na posebne značilnosti opravljenih storitev in tveganj v zvezi z opravljanjem storitev zagotavljanja informacij o računih je primerno zagotoviti poseben nadzorni režim za ponudnike storitev zagotavljanja informacij o računih.
However, it is essential to make the possibility of an exemption subject to strict requirements relating to the value of payment transactions.
Ponudnikom storitev zagotavljanja informacij o računih bi moralo biti dovoljeno čezmejno opravljanje storitev na podlagi pravil o „passportingu“.
Payment institutions benefiting from an exemption should not benefit from the right of establishment or freedom to provide services and should not indirectly exercise those rights while being a member of a payment system.
Za vse ponudnike plačilnih storitev je nujno, da imajo dostop do storitev tehnične infrastrukture plačilnih sistemov.
In view of the specific nature of the activity performed and the risks connected to the provision of account information services, it is appropriate to provide for a specific prudential regime for account information service providers.
Vendar bi moral biti takšen dostop pogojen z ustreznimi zahtevami, da bi zagotovili integriteto in stabilnost navedenih sistemov.
Account information service providers should be allowed to provide services on a cross-border basis, benefiting from the ‘passporting’ rules.
Vsak ponudnik plačilnih storitev, ki zaprosi za udeležbo v plačilnem sistemu, bi moral prevzeti tveganje lastne izbire sistema in plačilnemu sistemu predložiti dokaz, iz katerega je razvidno, da je njegova notranja ureditev dovolj stabilna za vse vrste tveganj.
It is essential for any payment service provider to be able to access the services of technical infrastructures of payment systems.
Takšni plačilni sistemi običajno vključujejo štiristranske kartične sheme, kot tudi večje sisteme, ki obdelujejo kreditna plačila in direktne obremenitve.
Such access should, however, be subject to appropriate requirements in order to ensure integrity and stability of those systems.
Da bi po vsej Uniji zagotovili enako obravnavo različnih kategorij ponudnikov plačilnih storitev z dovoljenjem v skladu s pogoji njihovega dovoljenja, je treba pojasniti pravila v zvezi z dostopom do plačilnih sistemov.
Each payment service provider applying for participation in a payment system should bear the risk of its own choice of system and provide proof to the payment system that its internal arrangements are sufficiently robust against all kinds of risk.
Določiti bi bilo treba pravila za nediskriminatorno obravnavo plačilnih institucij, ki so pridobile dovoljenje, in kreditnih institucij, tako da bi lahko vsi ponudniki plačilnih storitev, ki tekmujejo na notranjem trgu, uporabljali storitve tehnične infrastrukture teh plačilnih sistemov pod enakimi pogoji.
Those payment systems typically include the four-party card schemes as well as major systems processing credit transfers and direct debits.
Zaradi razlik v pravilih skrbnega in varnega poslovanja je primerno določiti, da se ponudniki plačilnih storitev, ki so pridobili dovoljenje, in tisti, ki so upravičeni do izjeme v skladu s to direktivo in izjeme v skladu s členom 3 Direktive 2009/110/ES, obravnavajo različno.
In order to ensure equality of treatment throughout the Union as between the different categories of authorised payment service providers, according to the terms of their licence, it is necessary to clarify the rules concerning access to payment systems.
V vsakem primeru bi morale biti razlike v cenovnih pogojih dovoljene le, če so utemeljene z razlikami v stroških, ki jih imajo ponudniki plačilnih storitev.
Provision should be made for the non-discriminatory treatment of authorised payment institutions and credit institutions so that any payment service provider competing in the internal market is able to use the services of the technical infrastructures of those payment systems under the same conditions.
To ne bi smelo posegati v pravico držav članic, da omejijo dostop do sistemsko pomembnih sistemov v skladu z Direktivo 98/26/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [15] ter v pristojnosti ECB in Evropskega sistema centralnih bank glede dostopa do plačilnih sistemov.
It is appropriate to provide for different treatment for authorised payment service providers and for those benefiting from an exemption under this Directive as well as from the exemption under the Article 3 of Directive 2009/110/EC, due to the differences in their respective prudential framework.
Ta direktiva ne posega v področje uporabe Direktive 98/26/ES.
In any case, differences in price conditions should be allowed only where that is motivated by differences in costs incurred by the payment service providers.
Da bi zagotovili pošteno konkurenco med ponudniki plačilnih storitev, bi moral udeleženec določenega plačilnega sistema, za katerega veljajo pogoji Direktive 98/26/ES, ki storitve v zvezi s takšnim sistemom zagotavlja ponudniku plačilnih storitev, ki ima dovoljenje za opravljanje plačilnih storitev ali je zanje registriran, na objektiven, sorazmeren in nediskriminatoren način omogočiti dostop do takšnih storitev tudi vsem ponudnikom plačilnih storitev, ki imajo dovoljenje za opravljanje plačilnih storitev ali so zanje registrirani, če to zahtevajo.
This should be without prejudice to Member States’ right to limit access to systemically important systems in accordance with Directive 98/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council [15] and without prejudice to the competence of the ECB and the European System of Central Banks concerning access to payment systems.
Vendar pa ponudniki plačilnih storitev, ki se jim odobri dostop, ne bi smeli veljati za udeležence, kot so opredeljeni v Direktivi 98/26/ES, in torej ne bi smeli biti upravičeni do zaščite, ki jim je priznana z navedeno direktivo.
This Directive is without prejudice to the scope of application of Directive 98/26/EC.
Določbe glede dostopa do plačilnih sistemov se ne bi smele uporabljati za sisteme, ki jih vzpostavi in upravlja en sam ponudnik plačilnih storitev.
However, in order to ensure fair competition between payment service providers, a participant in a designated payment system subject to the conditions of Directive 98/26/EC which provides services in relation to such a system to an authorised or registered payment service provider should also, when requested to do so, grant access to such services in an objective, proportionate and non-discriminatory manner to any other authorised or registered payment service provider.
Takšni plačilni sistemi lahko delujejo tako, da neposredno konkurirajo plačilnim sistemom, ali – kar je bolj običajno – v tržni niši, ki je plačilni sistemi ne pokrivajo v zadostni meri.
Payment service providers that are granted such access should not, however be considered to be participants as defined in Directive 98/26/EC, and hence should not benefit from the protection granted under that Directive.
Med takšnimi sistemi so tristranske sheme, kot so tristranske sheme kartic, če nikoli ne delujejo kot dejanske štiričlanske sheme kartic, na primer z vključevanjem pridobiteljev licenc, zastopnikov ali partnerjev, ki souporabljajo blagovno znamko.
The provisions relating to access to payment systems should not apply to systems set up and operated by a single payment service provider.
Poleg tega takšni sistemi običajno zajemajo plačilne storitve, ki jih opravljajo ponudniki telekomunikacij, kjer je upravljavec sheme ponudnik plačilnih storitev tako za plačnika kot za prejemnika plačila, ter interne sisteme bančnih skupin.
Such payment systems can operate either in direct competition to payment systems, or, more typically, in a market niche not adequately covered by payment systems.
Zaradi spodbujanja konkurence med takšnimi zaprtimi plačilnimi sistemi in uveljavljenimi glavnimi plačilnimi sistemi ne bi bilo primerno, da bi tretjim strankam dovolili dostop do teh zaprtih lastniških plačilnih sistemov.
Such systems include three-party schemes, such as three-party card schemes, to the extent that they never operate as de facto four-party card schemes, for example by relying upon licensees, agents or co-brand partners.
Za takšne zaprte sisteme bi morala vedno veljati pravila o konkurenci na ravni Unije in na nacionalni ravni, s katerimi bi lahko zahtevali možnost dostopa do shem zaradi zagotavljanja učinkovite konkurence na plačilnih trgih.
Such systems also typically include payment services offered by telecommunication providers where the scheme operator is the payment service provider both to the payer and to the payee, as well as internal systems of banking groups.
Ker potrošniki in podjetja niso v enakem položaju, ne potrebujejo enake stopnje zaščite.
In order to stimulate the competition that can be provided by such closed payment systems to established mainstream payment systems, it would not be appropriate to grant third parties access to those closed proprietary payment systems.
Čeprav je pomembno pravice potrošnikov zaščititi z določbami, od katerih s pogodbo ni mogoče odstopati, je primerno, da se podjetjem in organizacijam dovoli drugačen dogovor, kadar ne poslujejo s strankami.
However, such closed systems should always be subject to Union and national competition rules which may require that access be granted to the schemes in order to maintain effective competition in payments markets.
Vseeno bi morale imeti države članice možnost določiti, da se mikropodjetja, kot so opredeljena v Priporočilu Komisije 2003/361/ES [16], obravnavajo enako kot potrošniki.
As consumers and undertakings are not in the same position, they do not need the same level of protection.
V vsakem primeru bi morale nekatere temeljne določbe te direktive vedno veljati ne glede na status uporabnika.
While it is important to guarantee consumer rights by provisions from which it is not possible to derogate by contract, it is reasonable to let undertakings and organisations agree otherwise when they are not dealing with consumers.
V tej direktivi bi morale biti določene obveznosti ponudnikov plačilnih storitev glede zagotavljanja informacij uporabnikom plačilnih storitev, ki bi morali prejeti enako jasne informacije o plačilnih storitvah, da bi se lahko znotraj Unije ustrezno odločali in prosto izbirali.
However, Member States should be able to provide that microenterprises, as defined in Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC [16], be treated in the same way as consumers.
Zaradi zagotavljanja preglednosti so v tej direktivi določene usklajene zahteve za zagotavljanje potrebnih, zadostnih in razumljivih informacij uporabnikom plačilnih storitev tako glede pogodbe o plačilnih storitvah kot glede plačilnih transakcij.
In any case, certain core provisions of this Directive should always apply, irrespective of the status of the user.
Zaradi nemotenega delovanja enotnega trga plačilnih storitev bi morale države članice sprejeti samo določbe o zagotavljanju informacij, ki so določene v tej direktivi.
This Directive should specify the obligations on payment service providers as regards the provision of information to the payment service users who should receive the same high level of clear information about payment services in order to make well-informed choices and be able to choose freely within the Union.
Potrošnike bi bilo treba zaščititi pred nepoštenimi in zavajajočimi praksami v skladu z Direktivo 2005/29/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [17], kot tudi z direktivami 2000/31/ES [18], 2002/65/ES [19], 2008/48/ES, 2011/83/EU [20] in 2014/92/EU [21] Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta.
In the interest of transparency, this Directive lays down the harmonised requirements needed to ensure that necessary, sufficient and comprehensible information is given to the payment service users with regard to the payment service contract and the payment transactions.
Določbe iz navedenih direktiv še vedno veljajo.
In order to promote the smooth functioning of the single market in payment services, Member States should adopt only those information provisions laid down in this Directive.
Vendar bi bilo treba zlasti jasno opredeliti razmerje med zahtevami v zvezi z informacijami pred sklenitvijo pogodbe iz te direktive in Direktive 2002/65/ES.
Consumers should be protected against unfair and misleading practices in accordance with Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and the Council [17] as well as with Directives 2000/31/EC [18], 2002/65/EC [19], 2008/48/EC, 2011/83/EU [20] and 2014/92/EU [21] of the European Parliament and the Council.
Za povečanje učinkovitosti bi morale biti zahtevane informacije sorazmerne s potrebami uporabnikov in sporočene v dogovorjeni obliki.
The provisions of those Directives continue to apply.
Vendar bi se morale zahteve po informacijah pri enkratnih plačilnih transakcijah razlikovati od tistih pri okvirnih pogodbah, v katerih je določenih več plačilnih transakcij.
However, the relationship between the pre-contractual information requirements laid down in this Directive and Directive 2002/65/EC should, in particular, be clarified.
V praksi so okvirne pogodbe in plačilne transakcije, za katere veljajo, veliko pogostejše in gospodarsko pomembnejše kot enkratne plačilne transakcije.
In order to enhance efficiency the information required should be proportionate to the needs of users and should be communicated in a standard format.
Če obstaja plačilni račun ali določen plačilni instrument, se zahteva okvirna pogodba.
However, the information requirements for a single payment transaction should be different from those of a framework contract which provides for a series of payment transactions.
Zato bi morale biti zahteve po predhodnih informacijah v zvezi z okvirnimi pogodbami izčrpne, informacije pa vedno posredovane na papirju ali na drugem trajnem nosilcu, kot so izpisi iz bančnih tiskalnikov, CD-ROM-i, DVD-ji in trdi diski osebnih računalnikov, na katerih se lahko shranjuje elektronska pošta, ter na spletnih mestih, če jih je mogoče uporabljati tako dolgo, kot je potrebno za namene dostopanja do informacij, in če ta spletna mesta omogočajo reproduciranje tam shranjenih informacij v nespremenjeni obliki.
In practice, framework contracts and the payment transactions covered by them are far more common and economically significant than single payment transactions.
Vendar bi moralo biti ponudniku in uporabniku plačilnih storitev omogočeno, da se v okvirni pogodbi dogovorita o načinu nadaljnjih informacij o izvršenih plačilnih transakcijah, na primer, da so pri spletnem bančništvu vse informacije o plačilnem računu dostopne neposredno na spletu.
If there is a payment account or a specific payment instrument, a framework contract is required.
Pri enkratnih plačilnih transakcijah se na lastno pobudo ponudnika plačilnih storitev vedno zagotovijo le bistvene informacije.
Therefore, the requirements for prior information on framework contracts should be comprehensive and information should always be provided on paper or on another durable medium, such as printouts by account printers, CD-ROMs, DVDs, the hard drives of personal computers on which electronic mail can be stored, and internet sites, provided that such sites are accessible for future reference, for a sufficient period of time for the purposes of accessing the information and provided that these sites allow the reproduction of the information stored there in an unaltered form.
Ker je plačnik ob izdaji plačilnega naloga običajno navzoč, ne bi bilo treba zahtevati, da se informacije v vsakem primeru predložijo na papirju ali drugem trajnem nosilcu.
However, it should be possible for the payment service provider and the payment service user to agree in the framework contract on the manner in which subsequent information on executed payment transactions is to be given, for instance, that in internet banking, all information on the payment account be made available online.
Ponudnik plačilnih storitev bi lahko informacije podal ustno na okencu ali omogočil, da so zlahka dostopne, na primer tako, da pogoje objavi na oglasni deski v svojih prostorih.
In single payment transactions only the essential information should always be given on the payment service provider’s own initiative.
Potrebno bi bilo tudi navesti, kje so na voljo podrobnejše informacije, na primer naslov spletnega mesta.
As the payer is usually present when giving the payment order, it should not be necessary to require in every case that information be provided on paper or on another durable medium.
Vendar bi morale biti na zahtevo potrošnika bistvene informacije zagotovljene na papirju ali drugem trajnem nosilcu.
The payment service provider should be able to give information orally over the counter or make it otherwise easily accessible, for example by keeping the conditions on a notice board on the premises.
S to direktivo bi morala biti potrošniku zagotovljena pravica do ustreznih brezplačnih informacij, preden se zaveže s kakršno koli pogodbo o plačilnih storitvah.
Information should also be given on where to find other, more detailed, information, for example on the website.
Potrošnik bi prav tako moral imeti možnost, da brezplačno zahteva predhodne informacije in kadar koli med trajanjem pogodbenega razmerja okvirno pogodbo na papirju, da se mu omogoči primerjanje storitev in pogojev ponudnikov plačilnih storitev ter, v primeru spora, preverjanje njegovih pogodbenih pravic in obveznosti, s čimer bi ohranili visoko raven varstva potrošnikov.
However, if the consumer so requests, the essential information should also be given on paper or on another durable medium.
Te določbe bi morale biti združljive z Direktivo 2002/65/ES.
This Directive should provide for a right for consumers to receive relevant information free of charge before being bound by any payment service contract.
Izrecne določbe o brezplačnih informacijah iz te direktive ne bi smele biti razlog, da se lahko potrošnikom te informacije zaračunajo na podlagi drugih veljavnih direktiv.
Consumers should also be able to request prior information as well as the framework contract, on paper, free of charge at any time during the contractual relationship, so as to enable them both to compare the services and conditions offered by payment service providers and in the case of any dispute, to verify their contractual rights and obligations, thereby maintaining a high level of consumer protection.
Pri načinu zagotavljanja zahtevanih informacij uporabniku plačilnih storitev s strani ponudnika plačilnih storitev bi bilo treba upoštevati potrebe uporabnika plačilnih storitev kot tudi praktične tehnične vidike in stroškovno učinkovitost glede na dogovor v zadevni pogodbi o plačilnih storitvah.
Those provisions should be compatible with Directive 2002/65/EC.
Tako bi morala ta direktiva razlikovati dva načina, na katera lahko ponudnik plačilnih storitev zagotavlja informacije: informacije bi morale biti zagotovljene, to je ponudnik plačilnih storitev informacije zagotovi v skladu s to direktivo v ustreznem času sam, ne da bi bilo treba uporabniku plačilnih storitev to izrecno zahtevati, ali pa so informacije uporabniku plačilnih storitev dane na voljo na podlagi njegove zahteve po dodatnih informacijah.
The specific provisions on free information in this Directive should not have the effect of allowing charges to be imposed for the provision of information to consumers under other applicable directives.
Pri drugem načinu bi si moral uporabnik plačilnih storitev dejavno prizadevati za pridobitev informacij, na primer jih izrecno zahtevati od ponudnika plačilnih storitev, se prijaviti v poštni nabiralnik bančnega računa ali vstaviti bančno kartico v tiskalnik za bančne izpiske.
The way in which the required information is to be given by the payment service provider to the payment service user should take into account the needs of the latter as well as practical technical aspects and cost-efficiency depending on the situation with regard to the agreement in the respective payment service contract.
Ponudnik plačilnih storitev bi moral v ta namen zagotoviti, da ima uporabnik plačilnih storitev možnost dostopa do informacij in da so mu te na voljo.
This Directive should therefore distinguish between two ways in which information is to be given by the payment service provider: either the information should be provided, i.e. actively communicated by the payment service provider at the appropriate time as required by this Directive without any prompting by the payment service user, or the information should be made available to the payment service user on the basis of a request for further information.
Poleg tega bi moral potrošnik prejeti osnovne informacije o izvršenih plačilnih transakcijah brez plačila dodatnih nadomestil.
In the second situation, the payment service user should take active steps in order to obtain the information, such as requesting it explicitly from the payment service provider, logging into a bank account mail box or inserting a bank card into a printer for account statements.
Pri enkratnih plačilnih transakcijah ponudnik plačilnih storitev teh informacij ne bi smel zaračunavati ločeno.
For such purposes the payment service provider should ensure that access to the information is possible and that the information is available to the payment service user.
Podobno bi se morale poznejše informacije o plačilnih transakcijah na podlagi okvirne pogodbe brezplačno zagotavljati enkrat mesečno.
The consumer should receive basic information on executed payment transactions at no additional charge.
Glede na pomembnost preglednosti določanja cen in različne potrebe strank pa bi morale imeti pogodbene stranke možnost, da se dogovorijo o nadomestilih, zaračunanih za pogostejše ali dodatne informacije.
In the case of a single payment transaction the payment service provider should not charge separately for that information.
Zaradi upoštevanja različnih nacionalnih praks bi bilo treba državam članicam dovoliti, da določijo pravila, na podlagi katerih je treba mesečne izpiske plačilnih računov na papirju ali drugem trajnem nosilcu vedno zagotoviti brezplačno.
Similarly, subsequent information on payment transactions under a framework contract should also be provided on a monthly basis free of charge.
Zaradi večje mobilnosti strank bi morali imeti potrošniki na voljo možnost, da prekinejo okvirno pogodbo brez stroškov.
However, taking into account the importance of transparency in pricing and differing customer needs, the parties should be able to agree on charges for more frequent or additional information.
Vendar pa bi morali imeti ponudniki plačilnih storitev pri pogodbah, ki jih potrošniki prekinejo manj kot šest mesecev po začetku njihove veljavnosti, možnost, da zaračunajo nadomestila glede na stroške, ki jih povzroči potrošnikova prekinitev okvirne pogodbe.
In order to take into account different national practices, Member States should be able to require that monthly statements of payment accounts on paper or in another durable medium are always to be given free of charge.
Dogovorjeni odpovedni rok za potrošnike ne bi smel biti daljši od enega meseca, za ponudnike plačilnih storitev pa ne krajši od dveh mesecev.
In order to facilitate customer mobility, it should be possible for consumers to terminate a framework contract without incurring charges.
Ta direktiva ne bi smela posegati v obveznost ponudnika plačilnih storitev, da v izjemnih primerih prekine pogodbo o plačilnih storitvah v skladu z drugim zadevnim pravom Unije ali nacionalnim pravom, npr. s področja pranja denarja in financiranja terorizma, kakršnimi koli ukrepi za zamrznitev sredstev ali kakršnim koli posebnim ukrepom, povezanim s preprečevanjem in preiskovanjem kaznivih dejanj.