natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Investment firms executing orders should be able to include a single execution venue in their policy only where they are able to show that this allows them to obtain best execution for their clients on a consistent basis.
Razpoložljivost, primerljivost in konsolidacija podatkov o kakovosti izvršitve, ki se opravi na različnih mestih izvršitve, so ključne pri omogočanju investicijskim podjetjem in vlagateljem, da opredelijo tista mesta izvršitve, ki zagotavljajo najboljšo kakovost izvršitve za svoje stranke.
Investment firms should select a single execution venue only where they can reasonably expect that the selected execution venue will enable them to obtain results for clients that are at least as good as the results that they reasonably could expect from using alternative execution venues.
Da bi stranki zagotovila najboljšo izvršitev, bi investicijska podjetja morala primerjati in analizirati zadevne podatke, vključno s podatki, ki so jih v skladu s členom 27(3) Direktive 2014/65/EU dala na razpolago javnosti, ter s tem povezane izvedbene ukrepe.
This reasonable expectation must be supported by relevant data published in accordance with Article 27 of Directive 2014/65/EU or by other internal analyses conducts by the firms.
Investicijska podjetja, ki izvršujejo naročila, bi lahko v svojo politiko vključila eno samo mesto izvrševanja samo, kadar lahko dokažejo, da jim to ves čas omogoča najboljše izvrševanje za njihove stranke.
The reallocation of transactions should be considered as detrimental to a client if, as an effect of that reallocation, unfair precedence is given to the investment firm or to any particular client.
Investicijska podjetja bi morala izbrati eno samo mesto izvrševanja samo, kadar lahko razumno pričakujejo, da jim bo izbrano mesto izvrševanja omogočilo, da za stranke dosežejo rezultate, ki so vsaj tako dobri kot rezultati, ki jih lahko razumno pričakujejo na drugih mestih izvrševanja.
Without prejudice to Regulation (EU) No 596/2014, for the purposes of the provisions of this Regulation concerning client order handling, client orders should not be treated as otherwise comparable if they are received by different media and it would not be practicable for them to be treated sequentially.
Ta razumna pričakovanja morajo biti podprta z ustreznimi podatki, objavljenimi v skladu z določbami člena 27 Direktive 2014/65/EU, ali drugimi notranjimi analizami, ki jih opravijo podjetja.
Any use by an investment firm of information relating to a pending client order in order to deal on own account in the financial instruments to which the client order relates, or in related financial instruments, should be considered a misuse of that information.
Ponovna alokacija poslov bi se morala obravnavati kot škodljiva za stranko, če bi zaradi navedene ponovne alokacije investicijsko podjetje ali katera koli stranka dobila nepošteno prednost.
However, the mere fact that market makers or bodies authorised to act as counterparties confine themselves to pursuing their legitimate business of buying and selling financial instruments, or that persons authorised to execute orders on behalf of third parties confine themselves to carrying out an order dutifully, should not in itself be deemed to constitute a misuse of information.
Brez poseganja v Uredbo (EU) št. 596/2014 se naročil strank za namene določb te uredbe v zvezi z obravnavanjem naročil strank ne bi smelo obravnavati kot sicer primerljivih, če so prejeta prek različnih medijev in jih ne bi bilo mogoče obravnavati zaporedoma.
When assessing whether a market fulfils the requirement laid down in point (a) of Article 33(3) of Directive 2014/65/EU that at least 50 % of the issuers admitted to trading on that market are small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs), a flexible approach should be taken by competent authorities with regard to markets with no previous operating history, newly created SMEs whose financial instruments have been admitted to trading for less than three years and issuers exclusively of non-equity financial instruments.
Če investicijsko podjetje kakor koli uporabi informacije v zvezi s tekočim naročilom stranke za poslovanje za svoj račun s finančnimi instrumenti, na katere se nanaša naročilo stranke, ali s sorodnimi finančnimi instrumenti, se šteje, da so informacije zlorabljene.
Given the diversity in operating models of existing MTFs with a focus on SMEs in the Union, and to ensure the success of the new category of SME growth market, it is appropriate to grant SME growth markets an appropriate degree of flexibility in evaluating the appropriateness of issuers for admission on their venue.
Samo dejstvo, da se vzdrževalci trga ali organi, pooblaščeni, da nastopajo kot nasprotne stranke, omejijo na opravljanje svojih zakonitih dejavnosti kupovanja in prodaje finančnih instrumentov, ali da se osebe, pooblaščene za izvrševanje naročil v imenu tretjih oseb, omejijo na vestno izvajanje naročil, se samo po sebi ne bi smelo šteti kot zloraba informacij.
In any case, an SME growth market should not have rules that impose greater burdens on issuers than those applicable to issuers on regulated markets.
Pri presoji, ali trg izpolnjuje zahteve iz točke (a) člena 33(3) Direktive 2014/65/EU, da je vsaj 50 % izdajateljev, katerih finančni instrumenti so uvrščeni v trgovanje na tem trgu, malih in srednjih podjetij (MSP), bi morali pristojni organi uporabiti prožen pristop za trge brez predhodne zgodovine delovanja, novo ustanovljene MSP, katerih finančni instrumenti so uvrščeni v trgovanje manj kot tri leta, in izdajatelje izključno nelastniških finančnih instrumentov.
With regard to the content of the admission document which an issuer is required to produce upon initial admission to trading of its securities on an SME growth market, where the requirement to publish a prospectus pursuant to Directive 2003/71/EC does not apply, it is appropriate that competent authorities retain discretion to assess whether the rules set out by the operator of the SME growth market achieve the proper information of investors.
Glede na raznolikost operativnih modelov obstoječih MTF, ki so osredotočeni na MSP v Uniji, ter za zagotovitev uspešnosti nove kategorije zagonskega trga MSP je primerno zagonskim trgom MSP odobriti ustrezno stopnjo prožnosti pri ocenjevanju ustreznosti izdajateljev, ki jih bodo uvrstili na svoje mesto.
While full responsibility for the information featured in the admission document should lie with the issuer, it should be for the operator of an SME growth market to define how the admission document should be appropriately reviewed.
V vsakem primeru zagonski trg MSP ne bi smel imeti pravil, ki nalagajo večja bremena izdajateljem, kot jih pravila, ki veljajo za izdajatelje na reguliranih trgih.
This should not necessarily involve a formal approval by the competent authority or the operator.
V zvezi z vsebino dokumenta o uvrstitvi, ki ga mora izdajatelj predložiti ob začetni uvrstitvi njegovih vrednostnih papirjev v trgovanje na zagonskem trgu MSP, kadar zahteva po objavi prospekta v skladu z Direktivo 2003/71/ES ne velja, je primerno, da pristojni organi ohranijo diskrecijo za presojo, ali pravila, ki jih je določil upravljavec zagonskega trga MSP, zadevajo ustrezne informacije vlagateljev.
The publication by issuers of annual and half-yearly financial reports represents an appropriate minimum standard of transparency which is coherent with the prevailing best practice in existing markets focusing on SMEs.
Medtem ko bi za informacije, navedene v dokumentu o uvrstitvi, moral biti v celoti odgovoren izdajatelj, bi moral upravljavec zagonskega trga MSP opredeliti, kako ustrezno pregledati dokument o uvrstitvi.
As to the content of financial reports, the operator of an SME growth market should be free to prescribe the use of International Financial Reporting Standards or financial reporting standards permitted by local laws and regulations, or both, by issuers whose financial instruments are traded on its venue.
To ne bi smelo nujno zajemati uradne odobritve s strani pristojnega organa ali upravitelja.
Deadlines for publishing financial reports should be less onerous than those prescribed by Directive 2004/109/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council [13] as less stringent timeframes appear better suited to the needs and circumstances of SMEs.
Objava letnih in polletnih računovodskih poročil, ki jih objavijo izdajatelji, predstavlja ustrezen minimalni standard preglednosti, ki je skladen s prevladujočo najboljšo prakso na obstoječih trgih, osredotočenih na MSP.
Since the rules on dissemination of information about issuers on regulated markets under Directive 2004/109/EC would be too burdensome for issuers on SME growth markets, it is appropriate that the website of the operator of the SME growth market becomes the point of convergence for investors seeking information on the issuers traded on that venue.
Glede vsebine računovodskih poročil bi moral imeti upravljavec zagonskega trga MSP pravico, da predpiše, da morajo izdajatelji, s katerih finančnimi instrumenti se trguje na njegovem mestu, uporabljati mednarodne standarde računovodskega poročanja ali standarde računovodskega poročanja, ki jih dovoljujejo lokalni zakoni in predpisi, ali oboje.
A publication on the website of the operator of the SME growth market can also be effected by providing a direct link to the website of the issuer in case the information is published there, if the link goes directly to the relevant part of the website of the issuer where the regulatory information can be easily found by investors.
Roki za objavo finančnih poročil bi morali biti manj strogi, kot so roki, ki jih predpisuje Direktiva 2004/109/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [13], saj so manj strogi finančni okviri primernejši za potrebe in okoliščine MSP.
It is necessary to further specify when a suspension or a removal from trading of a financial instrument is likely to cause significant damages to the investor's interest or to the orderly functioning of the market.
Ker bi pravila o razširjanju informacij o izdajateljih na reguliranih trgih iz Direktive 2004/109/ES preveč obremenjevala izdajatelje na zagonskih trgih MSP, je primerno, da spletno mesto upravljavca zagonskega trga MSP postane stičišče za vlagatelje, ki iščejo informacije o izdajateljih, s katerih instrumenti se trguje na tem mestu.
Convergence in that field is necessary to ensure that market participants in a Member State where trading in financial instruments has been suspended or financial instruments have been removed are not disadvantaged in comparison to market participants in another Member State, where trading is still ongoing.
Objava na spletnem mestu upravljavca zagonskega trga MSP se lahko izvede z zagotovitvijo neposredne povezave do spletnega mesta izdajatelja, kadar so informacije objavljene tam, če povezava vodi neposredno na ustrezni del spletnega mesta izdajatelja, kjer lahko vlagatelji enostavno najdejo zakonsko predpisane informacije.
To ensure the necessary level of convergence, it is appropriate to specify a list of circumstances constituting significant damage to investors' interests and the orderly functioning of the market which could be the basis of a decision by a national competent authority, a market operator operating a regulated market or an investment firm or a market operator operating an MTF or an OTF not to demand the suspension or removal of a financial instrument from trading, or not to follow a notification thereto.
Potrebno je dodatno opredeliti, kdaj bi začasna ustavitev trgovanja s finančnim instrumentom ali njegov umik iz trgovanja verjetno precej škodovala interesu vlagatelja ali pravilnemu delovanju trga.
It is appropriate for such a list to be non-exhaustive as it will thus provide national competent authorities with a framework for the exercise of their judgement and will leave them a necessary degree of flexibility in the assessment of individual cases.
Konvergenca na tem področju je potrebna za zagotovitev, da udeleženci na trgu v državah članicah, kjer je bilo trgovanje s finančnimi instrumenti začasno ustavljeno ali so bili finančni instrumenti umaknjeni, niso v slabšem položaju v primerjavi z udeleženci na trgu v drugi državi članici, kjer trgovanje še vedno poteka.
Articles 31(2) and 54(2) of Directive 2014/65/EU respectively require investment firms and market operators operating an MTF or an OTF, and market operators of regulated markets to immediately inform their national competent authorities under certain circumstances.
Za zagotovitev potrebne ravni konvergence je primerno pripraviti seznam okoliščin, ki predstavljajo precejšnjo škodo za interes vlagatelja in za pravilno delovanje trga, ki bi lahko bile podlaga za odločitev nacionalnih pristojnih organov, upravljavca trga, ki upravlja reguliran trg, investicijskega podjetja ali upravljavca trga, ki upravlja MTF ali OTF, da ne zahtevajo začasne ustavitve trgovanja s finančnim instrumentom ali njegovega umika iz trgovanja oziroma da ne upoštevajo obvestila o tem.
This requirement is intended to ensure that national competent authorities can fulfil their regulatory tasks and are informed in a timely manner about relevant incidents which may have a negative impact on the functioning and integrity of the markets.
Primerno je, da takšen seznam ni izčrpen, saj bo tako nacionalnim pristojnim organom zagotovil okvir za uporabo lastne presoje ter jim bo puščal potrebno stopnjo prožnosti pri presoji posameznih primerov.
The information received from operators of trading venues should enable national competent authorities to identify and assess the risks for the markets and their participants as well as to react efficiently and to take action if necessary.
Člena 31(2) in 54(2) Direktive 2014/65/EU zahtevata, da investicijska podjetja in upravljavci trga, ki upravljajo MTF ali OTF, ter upravljavci reguliranih trgov v določenih okoliščinah nemudoma obvestijo svoje pristojne nacionalne organe.
It is appropriate to set up a non-exhaustive list of high-level circumstances where significant infringements of the rules of a trading venue, disorderly trading conditions or system disruptions in relation to a financial instrument may be assumed, thus triggering the obligation for the operators of trading venues to immediately inform their competent authorities as set out in Articles 31(2) and 54(2) of Directive 2014/65/EU.
Ta zahteva je namenjena za zagotovitev, da lahko nacionalni pristojni organi izpolnijo svoje regulativne naloge in so pravočasno obveščeni o zadevnih incidentih, ki bi lahko imeli negativen učinek na delovanje in celovitost trgov.
For that purpose, reference to the ‘rules of a trading venue’ should be understood in a broad sense and should comprise all rules, rulings, orders as well as general terms and conditions of contractual agreements between the trading venue and its participants which contain the conditions for trading and admission to the trading venue.
Informacije, prejete od upravljavcev mest trgovanja, bi nacionalnim pristojnim organom morale omogočiti, da prepoznajo in ocenijo tveganja za trge in njihove udeležence ter se ustrezno odzovejo in po potrebi ukrepajo.
With regard to conduct that may indicate abusive behaviour within the scope of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014, it is also appropriate to set up a non-exhaustive list of signals of insider dealing and market manipulation which should be taken into account by the operator of a trading venue when examining transactions or orders to trade in order to determine whether the obligation to inform the relevant national competent authority applies, as set out in Articles 31(2) and 54(2) of Directive 2014/65/EU.
Primerno je pripraviti neizčrpen seznam pomembnih okoliščin, v katerih je mogoče predpostavljati večje kršitve pravil mesta trgovanja, pogoje trgovanja, ki motijo delovanje trga, ali motnje v sistemu v zvezi s finančnim instrumentom, kar torej sproži obveznost za upravljavce mest trgovanja, da nemudoma obvestijo svoje pristojne organe, kot je določeno v členih 31(2) in 54(2) Direktive 2014/65/EU.
For that purpose, reference to ‘order to trade’ should encompass all types of orders, including initial orders, modifications, updates and cancellations of orders, irrespective of whether or not they have been executed and irrespective of the means used to access the trading venue.
V ta namen bi bilo treba sklic na „pravila mesta trgovanja“ razumeti v širšem smislu in bi moral zajemati vsa pravila, stališča in odredbe kot tudi splošne pogoje pogodbenih sporazumov med mestom trgovanja in njegovimi udeleženci, v katerih so navedeni pogoji za trgovanje in uvrstitev na mesto trgovanja.
The list of signals of insider dealing and market manipulation should be neither exhaustive nor determinative of market abuse or attempts of market abuse, as each of the signals may not necessarily constitute market abuse or attempts of market abuse per se.
V zvezi z ravnanjem, ki lahko kaže na nesprejemljivo ravnanje v okviru Uredbe (EU) št. 596/2014, je prav tako primerno pripraviti neizčrpen seznam znakov trgovanja z notranjimi informacijami in tržne manipulacije, ki bi jih upravljavec mesta trgovanja moral upoštevati pri preverjanju poslov ali naročil za trgovanje, da bi ugotovil, ali velja obveznost obveščanja zadevnega nacionalnega pristojnega organa, kot je določeno v členih 31(2) in 54(2) Direktive 2014/65/EU.
Transactions or orders to trade meeting one or more signals may be conducted for legitimate reasons or in compliance with the rules of the trading venue.
V ta namen bi moral sklic na „naročilo za trgovanje“ zajemati vse vrste naročil, vključno z začetnimi naročili, spremembami, posodobitvami in preklici naročil, ne glede na to, ali so bila izvršena, in ne glede na sredstva, ki so bila uporabljena za dostop do mesta trgovanja.
In order to provide transparency to market stakeholders whilst preventing market abuse and preserving confidentiality of the identities of position holders, the publication of aggregate weekly position reports on positions referred to in Article 58(1)(a) of Directive 2014/65/EU should only apply to contracts that are traded by a certain number of persons, above certain sizes as specified in this Regulation.
Seznam znakov trgovanja z notranjimi informacijami in tržne manipulacije ne bi smel biti niti izčrpen niti ne bi smel nujno kazati na zlorabo trga ali poskus zlorabe trga, saj ni nujno, da bi vsak od znakov sam po sebi pomenil zlorabo trga ali poskus zlorabe trga.
In order to ensure that market data is provided on a reasonable commercial basis in a uniform manner in the Union, this Regulation specifies the conditions that APAs and CTPs must fulfil.
Posle ali naročila za trgovanje, ki kažejo enega ali več znakov, se lahko izvaja iz upravičenih razlogov ali v skladu s pravili mesta trgovanja.
These conditions are based on the objective to ensure that the obligation to provide market data on a reasonable commercial basis is sufficiently clear to allow for an effective and uniform application whilst taking into account different operating models and costs structures of data providers.
Za zagotovitev preglednosti zainteresiranim stranem na trgu, pri čemer se hkrati preprečuje zloraba trga in ohranja zaupnost identitete imetnikov pozicij, bi zahteva po objavi tedenskega poročila s skupnimi pozicijami za pozicije iz člena 58(1)(a) Direktive 2014/65/EU morala veljati le za pogodbe, s katerimi trguje določeno število oseb, nad določenim obsegom, kot je določeno v tej uredbi.
To ensure that fees for market data are set at a reasonable level, the fulfilment of the obligation to provide market data on a reasonable commercial basis requires that prices be based on a reasonable relationship to the cost of producing and disseminating that data.
Za zagotovitev, da se podatki o trgu zagotovijo ob razumnih poslovnih pogojih in na enoten način po vsej Uniji, ta uredba določa pogoje, ki jih morajo izpolnjevati APA in CTP.
Therefore, without prejudice to the application of competition rules, data providers should determine their fees on the basis of their costs whilst being allowed to obtain a reasonable margin, based on factors such as the operating profit margin, the return on costs, the return on operating assets and the return on capital.
Ti pogoji temeljijo na cilju zagotoviti, da je obveznost zagotavljanja podatkov o trgu ob razumnih poslovnih pogojih dovolj jasna, da omogoči učinkovito in enotno uporabo, pri čemer se upoštevajo različni modeli poslovanja in strukture stroškov ponudnikov podatkov.
Where data providers incur joint costs for data provision and the provision of other services, costs of data provision may include an appropriate share of costs arising from any other relevant service provided.
Za zagotovitev, da so nadomestila za podatke o trgu določena na razumni ravni, je za izpolnitev obveznosti zagotovitve podatkov o trgu ob razumnih poslovnih pogojih potrebno, da so cene v razumnem obsegu sorazmerne s stroški priprave in razširjanja teh podatkov.
Since specifying the exact cost is very complex, cost allocation and cost apportionment methodologies should be specified instead, leaving the specification of those costs to the discretion of market data providers.
Zato bi ponudniki podatkov morali, brez poseganja v izvajanje pravil o konkurenci, določiti svoja nadomestila na podlagi svojih stroškov, pri čemer se jim omogoči, da prejmejo razumno maržo na podlagi dejavnikov, kot so stopnja dobička iz poslovanja, donos glede na stroške, donos iz poslovnih sredstev in donos iz kapitala.
Market data should be provided on a non-discriminatory basis, which requires that the same price and other terms and conditions should be offered to all customers who are in the same category according to published objective criteria.
Kadar imajo ponudniki podatkov skupne stroške za zagotavljanje podatkov in opravljanje drugih storitev, lahko stroški zagotavljanja podatkov vključujejo ustrezen delež stroškov, ki izhajajo iz drugih povezanih opravljenih storitev.
To allow data users to obtain market data without having to buy other services, market data should be offered unbundled from other services.
Ker je specifikacija točnih stroškov zelo kompleksna, bi bilo namesto tega potrebno opredeliti metodologije dodeljevanja in razporejanja stroškov ter pustiti, da o specifikaciji teh stroškov presodijo ponudniki podatkov o trgu.
To avoid that data users are charged more than once for the same market data when buying data from different market data distributors, market data should be offered on a per user basis unless doing so would be disproportionate to the cost of such way of offering that data in respect of the scale and the scope of the market data provided by the APA and the CTP.
Podatki o trgu bi morali biti zagotovljeni na nediskriminatorni podlagi, ki zahteva, da se vsem strankam, ki se uvrščajo v isto kategorijo glede na objavljena objektivna merila, ponudi tako enaka cena kot tudi enaki drugi pogoji.
In order to allow for data users and competent authorities to effectively assess whether market data is provided on a reasonable commercial basis, it is necessary that all the essential conditions for its provision are disclosed to the public.
Da bi se uporabnikom podatkov omogočilo, da pridobijo podatke o trgu, ne da bi morali kupiti druge storitve, bi bilo treba podatke o trgu ponuditi ločeno od drugih storitev.
Data providers should therefore disclose information about their fees and the content of the market data As well as the cost accounting methodologies used to determine their costs without having to disclose their actual costs.
Za preprečitev, da se uporabnikom podatkov več kot enkrat zaračuna za iste podatke o trgu, kadar kupujejo podatke pri različnih distributerjih podatkov o trgu, bi bilo treba podatke o trgu ponuditi za vsakega uporabnika posebej, razen če bi bilo to nesorazmerno s stroški takšne prakse z vidika razpona in obsega podatkov o trgu, ki jih zagotavljata APA in CTP.