natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In accordance with Article 81 TFEU, this Regulation should apply in the context of the property consequences of registered partnerships having cross-border implications.
V skladu s členom 81 PDEU bi se morala ta uredba uporabljati za premoženjskopravne posledice registriranih partnerskih skupnosti s čezmejnimi posledicami.
To provide unmarried couples with legal certainty as to their property and offer them a degree of predictability, all the rules applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships should be covered in a single instrument.
Da bi se neporočenim parom zagotovila pravna varnost glede njihovega premoženja in omogočila neka raven predvidljivosti, bi bilo treba vsa pravila, ki se uporabljajo za premoženjskopravne posledice registriranih partnerskih skupnosti, združiti v enem samem instrumentu.
The way in which forms of union other than marriage are provided for in the Member States' legislation differs from one State to another, and a distinction should be drawn between couples whose union is institutionally sanctioned by the registration of their partnership with a public authority and couples in de facto cohabitation.
Zakonodaje držav članic različno urejajo zunajzakonske skupnosti in treba bi bilo razlikovati med pari, ki so svojo zvezo registrirali pri javnem organu, in tistimi, ki je niso.
While some Member States do make provision for such de facto unions, they should be considered separately from registered partnerships, which have an official character that makes it possible to take account of their specific features and lay down rules on the subject in Union legislation.
Čeprav v nekaterih državah članicah tudi za neregistrirane pare obstaja zakonska ureditev, bi jih bilo treba razlikovati od registriranih partnerskih skupnosti, ki imajo formalen značaj, zaradi česar je mogoče upoštevati njihove posebnosti in zanje določiti pravila v instrumentu Unije.
To ensure the smooth functioning of the internal market, barriers to the free movement of people who have entered into a registered partnership need to be eliminated, particularly those creating difficulties for such couples in the administration and division of their property.
Za zagotovitev dobrega delovanja notranjega trga je treba odpraviti ovire za prosto gibanje oseb, ki živijo v registriranih partnerskih skupnostih, zlasti tiste, ki parom povzročajo težave pri upravljanju in delitvi njihovega premoženja.
The Regulation should cover matters arising from the property consequences of registered partnerships.
Ta uredba bi morala urejati vprašanja, povezana s premoženjskopravnimi posledicami registriranih partnerskih skupnosti.
‘Registered partnership’ should be defined here solely for the purpose of this Regulation.
Pojem „registrirana partnerska skupnost“ bi bilo treba opredeliti le za namene te uredbe.
The actual substance of the concept should remain defined in the national laws of the Member States.
Dejansko vsebino pojma bi moralo še naprej opredeljevati nacionalno pravo držav članic.
Nothing in this Regulation should oblige a Member State whose law does not have the institution of registered partnership to provide for it in its national law.
Država članica, katere pravo ne pozna instituta registrirane partnerske skupnosti, v tej uredbi z ničimer ne bi smela biti obvezana, da ga vključi v svoje nacionalno pravo.
The scope of this Regulation should include all civil-law aspects of the property consequences of registered partnerships, both the daily management of the partner's property and its liquidation, in particular as a result of the couple's separation or the death of one of the partners.
Področje uporabe te uredbe bi moralo vključevati vsa civilnopravna vprašanja premoženjskopravnih posledic registriranih partnerskih skupnosti, tako glede vsakodnevnega upravljanja premoženja partnerjev kot glede likvidacije njihovih premoženjskih razmerij, zlasti ob razhodu para ali smrti enega od partnerjev.
This Regulation should not apply to areas of civil law other than the property consequences of registered partnerships.
Ta uredba bi se morala uporabljati samo za premoženjskopravne posledice registriranih partnerskih skupnosti, ne pa tudi za druga področja civilnega prava.
For reasons of clarity, a number of questions which could be seen as having a link with the property consequences of registered partnerships should be explicitly excluded from the scope of this Regulation.
Zaradi jasnosti bi morala biti nekatera vprašanja, ki bi jih bilo mogoče povezati s premoženjskopravnimi posledicami registriranih partnerskih skupnosti, izrecno izključena iz področja uporabe te uredbe.
Accordingly, this Regulation should not apply to questions of general legal capacity of the partners; however, this exclusion should not cover the specific powers and rights of either or both partners with regard to property, either as between themselves or as regards third parties, as these powers and rights should fall under the scope of this Regulation.
Ta uredba se tako ne bi smela uporabljati za vprašanja splošne pravne in poslovne sposobnosti partnerjev; vendar pa to izvzetje ne bi smelo zajemati posebnih pooblastil in pravic enega ali obeh partnerjev v zvezi s premoženjem, bodisi med njima bodisi v razmerju do tretjih oseb, saj bi morala ta pooblastila in pravice spadati v področje uporabe te uredbe.
This Regulation should not apply to other preliminary questions such as the existence, validity or recognition of a registered partnership, which is covered by the national law of the Member States, including their rules of private international law.
Ta uredba se ne bi smela uporabljati za druga predhodna vprašanja, kot so obstoj, veljavnost ali priznanje registrirane partnerske skupnosti, kar urejajo nacionalno pravo držav članic in njihova pravila mednarodnega zasebnega prava.
As maintenance obligations between spouses are governed by Council Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 [6], they should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation, as should issues relating to the succession to the estate of a deceased partner, since they are covered by Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council [7].
Ker preživninske obveznosti med partnerjema ureja Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 4/2009 [6], bi jih bilo treba izvzeti iz področja uporabe te uredbe, enako pa velja za vprašanja, povezana z dedovanjem zapuščine po pokojnem partnerju, saj jih ureja Uredba (EU) št. 650/2012 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [7].
Issues of entitlements to transfer or adjustment between partners of rights to retirement or disability pension, whatever their nature, accrued during the registered partnership and which have not generated pension income during the registered partnership are matters that should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation, taking into account the specific systems existing in the Member States.
Vprašanja, ali se lahko pravice do starostne ali invalidske pokojnine – ne glede na njihov značaj –, ki so bile pridobljene v času trajanja registrirane partnerske skupnosti in na podlagi katerih v času trajanja registrirane partnerske skupnosti ni prišlo do izplačila pokojnine, med partnerjema prenesejo ali prilagodijo, bi morala ostati izključena iz področja uporabe te uredbe, upoštevajoč specifične sisteme v državah članicah.
Hence, this Regulation should govern in particular the issue of classification of pension assets, the amounts that have already been paid to one partner during the registered partnership, and the possible compensation that would be granted in case of pension subscribed with common assets.
Zato bi morala ta uredba urejati zlasti vprašanje razvrstitve pokojninskih sredstev, zneske, ki so bili že plačani partnerju med trajanjem registrirane partnerske skupnosti, in morebitno nadomestilo, ki bi bilo odobreno v primeru skupnega plačevanja pokojninskih prispevkov.
This Regulation should allow for the creation or the transfer resulting from the property consequences of registered partnerships of a right in immovable or movable property as provided for in the law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships.
Ta uredba bi morala omogočati ustanovitev ali prenos pravice na nepremičnini ali premičnini, ki izvira iz premoženjskopravnih posledic registriranih partnerskih skupnosti, kot je določeno v pravu, ki se uporablja za premoženjskopravne posledice registrirane partnerske skupnosti.
However, in order to allow the partners to enjoy in another Member State the rights which have been created or transferred to them as a result of the property consequences of a registered partnership, this Regulation should provide for the adaptation of an unknown right in rem to the closest equivalent right under the law of that other Member State.
Da pa bi lahko partnerji v drugi državi članici uživali pravice, ki so bile ustanovljene ali so nanje prešle zaradi premoženjskopravnih posledic registrirane partnerske skupnosti, bi bilo treba v tej uredbi določiti, da se neznana stvarna pravica prilagodi najbolj enakovredni pravici po pravu te druge države članice.
For the purposes of determining the closest equivalent national right, the authorities or competent persons of the State whose law is applied to the property consequences of a registered partnership may be contacted for further information on the nature and the effects of the right.
Organi ali pristojne osebe v državi, katere pravo se je uporabilo za premoženjskopravne posledice registrirane partnerske skupnosti, se lahko zaprosijo za dodatne informacije o naravi in učinkih stvarne pravice, če je to potrebno za določitev najbolj enakovredne nacionalne pravice.
It should therefore be the law of the Member State in which the register is kept (for immoveable property, the lex rei sitae) which determines under what legal conditions, and how, the recording must be carried out and which authorities, such as land registers or notaries, are in charge of checking that all requirements are met and that the documentation presented or established is sufficient or contains the necessary information.
Zato bi moralo zakonske pogoje in način vpisa pravice ter organe, kot so zemljiške knjige ali notarji, ki so pristojni, da preverijo, ali so izpolnjene vse zahteve in ali je predložena ali veljavna dokumentacija zadostna oziroma vsebuje vse potrebne informacije, določati pravo države članice, v kateri se vodi register (za nepremičnine lex rei sitae).
In particular, the authorities may check that the right of a partner to a property mentioned in the document presented for registration is a right which is recorded as such in the register or which is otherwise demonstrated in accordance with the law of the Member State in which the register is kept.
Organi lahko zlasti preverijo, ali je pravica partnerja na premoženju, ki je navedena v listini, predloženi za vpis, vpisana v register ali kako drugače izkazana v skladu s pravom države članice, v kateri se vodi register.
This Regulation should respect the different systems for dealing with matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships applied in the Member States.
Ta uredba bi morala upoštevati različne sisteme za urejanje premoženjskopravnih posledic registriranih partnerskih skupnosti, ki se uporabljajo v državah članicah.
For the purposes of this Regulation, the term ‘court’ should therefore be given a broad meaning so as to cover not only courts in the strict sense of the word, exercising judicial functions, but also for example notaries in some Member States who, in certain matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships, exercise judicial functions like courts, and the notaries and legal professionals who, in some Member States, exercise judicial functions in dealing with the property consequences of a registered partnership by delegation of power by a court.
Zato bi moral imeti izraz „sodišče“ v tej uredbi širok pomen, tako da se ne bi nanašal le na sodišča v pravem pomenu besede, ki izvajajo sodne funkcije, temveč na primer tudi na notarje v nekaterih državah članicah, ki v nekaterih zadevah, povezanih s premoženjskopravnimi posledicami registriranih partnerskih skupnosti, tako kot sodišča izvajajo sodne funkcije, ter v nekaterih državah članicah na notarje in pravne strokovnjake, ki pri urejanju premoženjskopravnih posledic registriranih partnerskih skupnosti izvajajo sodne funkcije na podlagi prenosa pooblastil s strani sodišča.
Conversely, the term ‘court’ should not cover non-judicial authorities of a Member State empowered under national law to deal with matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships, such as the notaries in most Member States where, as is usually the case, they are not exercising judicial functions.
Nasprotno pa izraz „sodišče“ ne bi smel vključevati izvensodnih organov držav članic, ki so po nacionalnem pravu pooblaščeni za obravnavanje premoženjskopravnih posledic registriranih partnerskih skupnosti, kot so notarji v večini držav članic, če navadno ne izvajajo sodnih funkcij.
This Regulation should allow all notaries who are competent in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships in the Member States to exercise such competence.
Ta uredba bi morala vsem notarjem, ki so pristojni za obravnavanje premoženjskopravnih posledic registriranih partnerskih skupnosti v državah članicah, omogočiti izvajanje te pristojnosti.
Whether or not the notaries in a given Member State are bound by the rules of jurisdiction set out in this Regulation should depend on whether or not they are covered by the term ‘court’ for the purposes of this Regulation.
Veljavnost pravil o pristojnosti iz te uredbe za notarje v določeni državi članici bi morala biti odvisna od tega, ali spadajo v opredelitev sodišča iz te uredbe.
Acts issued by notaries in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships in the Member States should circulate in accordance with this Regulation.
Listine, ki jih notarji izdajo v zvezi s premoženjskopravnimi posledicami registriranih partnerskih skupnosti v državah članicah, bi morale biti v obtoku v skladu s to uredbo.
To reflect the increasing mobility of couples and facilitate the proper administration of justice, the rules on jurisdiction set out in in this Regulation should enable citizens to have their various related procedures handled by the courts of the same Member State.
Zaradi vse večje mobilnosti parov in olajšanja pravilnega delovanja pravosodja bi morala pravila o pristojnosti iz te uredbe omogočati državljanom, da njihove med seboj povezane postopke obravnavajo sodišča iste države članice.
To that end, this Regulation should seek to concentrate the jurisdiction on the property consequences of registered partnerships in the Member State whose courts are called upon to handle the succession of a partner in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 or the dissolution or annulment of the registered partnership.
Zato bi morala ta uredba težiti h koncentraciji pristojnosti za premoženjskopravne posledice registriranih partnerskih skupnosti v državi članici, katere sodišča obravnavajo dedovanje po partnerju v skladu z Uredbo (EU) št. 650/2012 ali prenehanje ali razveljavitev registrirane partnerske skupnosti.
This Regulation should provide that, where proceedings on the succession of a partner are pending before the court of a Member State seised under Regulation (EU) No 650/2012, the courts of that State should have jurisdiction to rule on matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships arising in connection with that succession case.
Če teče postopek v zvezi z dedovanjem po partnerju pred sodiščem države članice, ki je začelo postopek v skladu z Uredbo (EU) št. 650/2012, bi morala ta uredba določati, da imajo sodišča te države pristojnost za odločanje o premoženjskopravnih posledicah registrirane partnerske skupnosti, povezanih s to dedno zadevo.
Similarly, matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships arising in connection with proceedings pending before the court of a Member State seised with an application for dissolution or annulment of a registered partnership should be dealt with by the courts of that Member State, if the partners so agree.
Podobno bi morala vprašanja premoženjskopravnih posledic registriranih partnerskih skupnosti, povezana s postopkom, ki teče pred sodiščem države članice, ki obravnava vlogo za prenehanje ali razveljavitev registrirane partnerske skupnosti, obravnavati sodišča te države članice, če se partnerja s tem strinjata.
Where matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships are not linked to proceedings pending before the court of a Member State on the succession of a partner or on dissolution or annulment of the registered partnership, this Regulation should provide for a scale of connecting factors for the purposes of determining jurisdiction starting with the habitual residence of the partners at the time the court is seised.
Če vprašanja premoženjskopravnih posledic registriranih partnerskih skupnosti niso povezana s postopkom dedovanja po partnerju ali postopkom za prenehanje ali razveljavitev registrirane partnerske skupnosti, ki teče pred sodiščem države članice, bi morala ta uredba določati lestvico naveznih okoliščin, po kateri se določi pristojnost, začenši z običajnim prebivališčem partnerjev ob začetku postopka pred sodiščem.
The last step of the scale of jurisdiction factors should point to the Member State under whose law the mandatory registration of the partnership was made in order to establish it.
Zadnja na lestvici naveznih okoliščin za določitev pristojnosti bi morala napotovati na državo članico, po katere pravu je bila opravljena obvezna registracija partnerske skupnosti, s katero je bila ta partnerska skupnost ustanovljena.
These connecting factors are set in view of the increasing mobility of citizens and to ensure that a genuine connecting factor exists between the partners and the Member State in which jurisdiction is exercised.
Razlog za določitev teh naveznih okoliščin je vse večja mobilnost državljanov in zagotovitev obstoja resnične navezne okoliščine med partnerjema in državo članico, v kateri se izvaja pristojnost.
Given that the institution of registered partnership is not provided for in all Member States, the courts of a Member State whose law does not provide for the institution of registered partnership may exceptionally need to decline jurisdiction under this Regulation.
Ker instituta registrirane partnerske skupnosti ne poznajo vse države članice, morajo sodišča države članice, katere pravo ne pozna instituta registrirane partnerske skupnosti, izjemoma imeti možnost zavrniti pristojnost v skladu s to uredbo.
In such case, the courts shall act swiftly and the party concerned should have the possibility to submit the case in any other Member State that has a connecting factor granting jurisdiction, irrespective of the order of these jurisdiction grounds, while at the same time respecting the parties' autonomy.
Sodišča v takšnem primeru ukrepajo hitro in zadevna stranka bi morala imeti možnost zadevo predložiti v kateri koli drugi državi članici z navezno okoliščino, ki omogoča pristojnost, in sicer ne glede na vrstni red teh razlogov za pristojnost, pri čemer se spoštuje avtonomija strank.
Any court seised after a declining of jurisdiction, other than the courts of the Member State under whose law the registered partnership was created, which has jurisdiction on the basis of a choice of court agreement or the appearance of the defendant, may also exceptionally need to decline jurisdiction under the same conditions.
Katero koli sodišče, pred katerim se začne postopek po zavrnitvi pristojnosti – ki ni sodišče države članice, po katere pravu je bila registrirana partnerska skupnost ustanovljena, in ki ima pristojnost na podlagi dogovora o izbiri prava ali spustitve v postopek –, mora pod enakimi pogoji prav tako izjemoma imeti možnost zavrniti pristojnost.
Finally, if no court has jurisdiction to deal with the situation in light of the other provisions of this Regulation, an alternative jurisdictional rule should be included in this Regulation to avoid any risk of denial of justice.
Če na podlagi drugih določb te uredbe nobeno sodišče ni pristojno za določen primer, bi moralo biti v to uredbo vključeno dodatno pravilo glede pristojnosti, ki preprečuje vsa tveganja odrekanja sodnega varstva.
In order to increase legal certainty, predictability and the autonomy of the parties, this Regulation should, under certain circumstances, enable the parties to conclude a choice of court agreement in favour of the courts of the Member State of the applicable law or of the courts of the Member State under whose law the registered partnership was created.
Zaradi večje pravne varnosti, predvidljivosti in avtonomije strank bi morala ta uredba strankam v nekaterih okoliščinah omogočati, da sklenejo dogovor o izbiri prava v korist sodišč države članice, katere pravo se uporablja, ali sodišč države članice, po katere pravu je bila registrirana partnerska skupnost ustanovljena.
This Regulation should not prevent the parties from settling the case amicably out of court, for instance before a notary, in a Member State of their choice where this is possible under the law of that Member State.
Ta uredba ne bi smela preprečevati strankama, da zadevo sporazumno uredita zunaj sodišča (na primer pri notarju) v državi članici, ki sta jo izbrali, če je to mogoče po pravu te države članice.
This should be the case even if the law applicable to the property consequences of a registered partnership is not the law of that Member State.
To bi moralo veljati, tudi če pravo, ki se uporablja za premoženjskopravne posledice registrirane partnerske skupnosti, ni pravo te države članice.
In order to ensure that the courts of all Member States may, on the same grounds, exercise jurisdiction in relation to the property consequences of registered partnerships, this Regulation should provide in an exhaustive way the ground on which such subsidiary jurisdiction may be exercised.
Da se zagotovi, da lahko sodišča vseh držav članic na podlagi istih razlogov izvajajo pristojnost za premoženjskopravne posledice registriranih partnerskih skupnosti, bi morala ta uredba taksativno opredeliti razloge, na podlagi katerih je mogoče izvajati takšno subsidiarno pristojnost.
In order to remedy, in particular, situations of denial of justice, this Regulation should provide for a forum necessitatis allowing a court of a Member State, on an exceptional basis, to rule on the property consequences of a registered partnership which is closely connected with a third State.
Da bi odpravili zlasti primere odrekanja sodnega varstva, bi bilo treba v tej uredbi določiti tudi forum necessitatis, tako da bi lahko sodišče države članice izjemoma odločalo o premoženjskopravnih posledicah registrirane partnerske skupnosti, ki je tesno povezana s tretjo državo.
Such an exceptional basis may be deemed to exist when proceedings prove impossible in the third State in question, for example because of civil war, or when a partner cannot reasonably be expected to initiate or conduct proceedings in that State.
Do takšnega izjemnega primera bi lahko prišlo, če postopek v tretji državi ne bi bil mogoč, na primer zaradi državljanske vojne, ali če ni mogoče upravičeno pričakovati, da bo eden od partnerjev lahko začel ali izvedel postopek v tej državi.
One such procedural rule is a lis pendens rule, which will come into play if same case on the property consequences of registered partnerships is brought before different courts in different Member States.
Eno od takšnih postopkovnih pravil je pravilo o litispendenci, ki se bo uporabilo, če bo ista zadeva v zvezi s premoženjskopravnimi posledicami registrirane partnerske skupnosti predložena različnim sodiščem v različnih državah članicah.
That rule will then determine which court should proceed to deal with the case.
Na podlagi tega pravila se bo nato določilo, katero sodišče bo nadaljevalo obravnavo zadeve.