natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In accordance with Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 if a CCP or trading venue denies an access request it has to provide full reasons for that decision and this includes identifying how the relevant risks arising from granting access would in the particular situation be unmanageable and that there would be significant undue risk remaining.
V skladu z Uredbo (EU) št. 600/2014 mora CNS ali mesto trgovanja, ki zavrne zahtevo po dostopu, podati vse razloge za tako odločitev, kar vključuje navedbo, kako bi bila relevantna tveganja, nastala zaradi odobritve dostopa, v tem specifičnem primeru neobvladljiva in da bi bilo preostalo nepotrebno tveganje še vedno znatno.
An appropriate way of doing this is for the party denying access to clearly outline the changes in risk management that would arise from granting access, how it would have to manage the risk associated with changes in consequence of granting access, and to explain the impact on its activities.
Ustrezen način za to je, da stranka, ki zavrne dostop, jasno opiše spremembe pri obvladovanju tveganj, ki bi jih povzročila odobritev dostopa, in kako bi morala obvladovati tveganje, povezano s spremembami zaradi odobritve dostopa, ter pojasni učinke na njene dejavnosti.
Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 does not distinguish between risks incurred by CCPs and trading venues when granting access and includes the same general categories of conditions to be considered by trading venues and CCPs when assessing access requests.
Uredba (EU) št. 600/2014 ne razlikuje med tveganji, ki nastanejo pri CNS in mestih trgovanja pri odobritvi dostopa, ter vključuje iste splošne kategorije pogojev, ki jih morajo upoštevati mesta trgovanja in CNS pri ocenjevanju zahtev po dostopu.
However, due to the different nature of the activities of CCPs as compared to trading venues, risks stemming from granting access may in practice impact CCPs and trading venues differently, thus demanding an approach differentiating between CCPs and trading venues.
Vendar lahko zaradi različne narave dejavnosti CNS in mest trgovanja tveganja, ki izhajajo iz odobritve dostopa, v praksi različno vplivajo na CNS in mesta trgovanja, kar zahteva pristop, ki razlikuje med CNS in mesti trgovanja.
When a competent authority assesses whether access would threaten the smooth and orderly functioning of the markets or adversely affect systemic risk, it should consider whether the CCP or trading venue in question has adequate risk management procedures, including with respect to operational and legal risks, to avoid the access agreement creating significant undue risks to third parties that cannot be mitigated.
Pristojni organ bi moral pri ocenjevanju, ali bi dostop ogrozil nemoteno in pravilno delovanje trgov ali negativno vplival na sistemsko tveganje, upoštevati, ali imata zadevna CNS ali mesto trgovanja vzpostavljene zadostne postopke za obvladovanje tveganj, vključno za operativna in pravna tveganja, da sporazum o dostopu ne bi povzročil znatnih nepotrebnih tveganj za tretje osebe, ki jih ni mogoče omejiti.
The terms under which access must be permitted should be reasonable and non-discriminatory so as not to undermine the purpose of non-discriminatory access.
Pogoji, pod katerimi se lahko dovoli dostop, bi morali biti razumni in nediskriminatorni, da ne bi ogrozili namena nediskriminatornega dostopa.
Charging fees in a discriminatory way so as to deter access should not be permitted.
Zaračunavanje pristojbin na diskriminatoren način za odvračanje od dostopa ne bi smelo biti dovoljeno.
However, fees could differ for objectively justified reasons, such as where the costs to implement the access arrangements are higher.
Vendar bi se lahko pristojbine razlikovale na podlagi objektivno utemeljenih razlogov, na primer, ko so stroški za izvajanje ureditev dostopa višji.
When granting access CCPs and trading venues incur both one-off costs, such as assessing legal requirements, and ongoing costs.
CNS in mesta trgovanja imajo pri odobritvi dostopa tako enkratne stroške, kot na primer pri oceni zakonskih zahtev, kot redne stroške.
Since the scope of the access request and the associated costs for implementing the access agreement are likely to differ on a case-by-case basis, it is not appropriate to cover the specific allocation of costs between the CCP and the trading venue in this Regulation.
Ker se bodo okvir uporabe zahteve po dostopu in povezani stroški izvajanja ureditve dostopa verjetno razlikovali med posameznimi primeri, ni primerno, da ta uredba zajema konkretno razporeditev stroškov med CNS in mestom trgovanja.
However, the allocation of costs is an important element of an access agreement, therefore both parties should specify the coverage of costs in that agreement.
Vendar je razporeditev stroškov pomemben element sporazuma o dostopu, zato bi morali v sporazumu obe stranki določiti, katere stroške bosta krili.
Pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council [2], a CCP wishing to extend its business to additional services or activities not covered by the initial authorisation should submit a request for an extension of authorisation.
V skladu z Uredbo (EU) št. 648/2012 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [2] bi morala CNS, ki želi razširiti svoje poslovanje na dodatne storitve ali dejavnosti, ki niso zajete v prvotnem dovoljenju, zaprositi za razširitev dovoljenja.
An extension of authorisation is needed where a CCP intends to offer clearing services on financial instruments with a different risk profile or that have material differences from the CCP's existing product set.
Razširitev dovoljenja je potrebna, kadar namerava CNS ponujati storitve kliringa pri finančnih instrumentih z drugačnim profilom tveganja ali ki se pomembno razlikujejo od obstoječega nabora produktov CNS.
When a contract traded on a trading venue to which a CCP has granted access is in a class of financial instruments covered by the CCP's existing authorisation and has therefore similar risk characteristics to the contracts already cleared by the CCP, such a contract should be considered as economically equivalent.
Če spada pogodba, s katero se trguje na mestu trgovanja, ki mu je CNS odobrila dostop, v razred finančnih instrumentov, zajet z obstoječim dovoljenjem CNS, in ima zato podobne značilnosti kot pogodbe, za katere CNS že izvaja kliring, bi se morala taka pogodba šteti za gospodarsko enakovredno.
In order to ensure that a CCP does not apply discriminatory collateral and margining requirements to economically equivalent contracts traded on a trading venue that has been granted access to the CCP, any change to the margining methodology and operational requirements regarding margining and netting applied to economically equivalent contracts already cleared by the CCP should be subject to a review by the risk committee of the CCP and be considered as a significant change to the models and parameters for the purpose of the review procedure provided in Regulation (EU) No 648/2012.
Da bi se zagotovilo, da CNS ne uporablja diskriminatornih zahtev po zavarovanju s premoženjem in kritju za gospodarsko enakovredne pogodbe, s katerimi se trguje na mestu trgovanja, ki mu je bil odobren dostop do CNS, bi moral odbor za tveganja CNS pregledati vsako spremembo metodologije za določanje kritja in operativnih zahtev v zvezi z določanjem kritja in netiranjem, ki se uporabljajo za gospodarsko enakovredne pogodbe, za katere CNS že opravlja kliring, pri čemer bi se morala taka sprememba obravnavati kot pomembna sprememba modelov in parametrov za namene postopka pregleda iz Uredbe (EU) št. 648/2012.
Such a review should validate that the new models and parameters are non-discriminatory and based on relevant risk considerations.
S takim pregledom bi se moralo potrditi, da so novi modeli in parametri nediskriminatorni in da temeljijo na relevantnih tveganjih.
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 prevents competitive distortions by requiring non-discriminatory access to CCPs offering clearing of over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives to trading venues.
Uredba (EU) št. 648/2012 preprečuje izkrivljanje konkurence z zahtevo po nediskriminatornem dostopu do CNS, ki mestom trgovanja ponujajo storitve kliringa za izvedene finančne instrumente, s katerimi se trguje na prostem trgu (OTC).
In turn, Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 recognises the need to introduce similar requirements for regulated markets.
Uredba (EU) št. 600/2014 na drugi strani priznava potrebo po uvedbi podobnih zahtev za regulirane trge.
Given that a CCP may clear both OTC and exchange-traded derivatives, non-discriminatory treatment of economically equivalent contracts traded on a trading venue requesting access to a CCP should take into account all relevant contracts cleared by that CCP, irrespective of where the contracts are traded.
Glede na to, da lahko CNS opravlja kliring tako za izvedene finančne instrumente OTC kot izvedene finančne instrumente, s katerimi se trguje na borzi, bi se morale pri nediskriminatorni obravnavi gospodarsko enakovrednih pogodb, s katerimi se trguje na mestu trgovanja, ki zahteva dostop do CNS, upoštevati vse relevantne pogodbe, za katere opravlja kliring CNS, ne glede na to, kje se trguje s temi pogodbami.
A notification by a relevant competent authority to the CCP college and the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) about the approval of CCP transitional arrangements in accordance with Article 35 of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 should be made without undue delay in order to assist other relevant competent authorities to understand the impact this will have on the CCP and any trading venues that are connected by close links to that CCP.
Zadevni pristojni organ bi moral brez nepotrebnih zamud obvestiti kolegij pristojnih organov za CNS in Evropski organ za vrednostne papirje in trge (v nadaljnjem besedilu: ESMA) o odobritvi prehodnih ureditev CNS v skladu s členom 35 Uredbe (EU) št. 600/2014, da bodo drugi zadevni pristojni organi lažje razumeli učinek, ki ga bo to imelo na CNS in na vsa mesta trgovanja, ki so tesno povezana s to CNS.
The notification should contain all relevant information necessary to enable the CCP college and ESMA to understand the decision and to enhance transparency.
Obvestilo bi moralo vsebovati vse relevantne informacije, ki bodo kolegiju za CNS in ESMA omogočile razumeti odločitev in ki so potrebne za povečanje preglednosti.
Clear requirements about the information to be provided by CCPs and trading venues when notifying competent authorities and ESMA that they wish to benefit from transitional arrangements in accordance with Articles 35 and 36 of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 should contribute to a transparent and harmonised application of the notification procedure.
Jasne zahteve o informacijah, ki jih morajo CNS in mesta trgovanja zagotoviti pri obveščanju pristojnih organov in ESMA, da želijo koristiti prehodne ureditve v skladu s členoma 35 in 36 Uredbe (EU) št. 600/2014, bi morale prispevati k pregledni in usklajeni uporabi postopka obveščanja.
It is therefore necessary for the notification procedure to include uniform templates for the notifications so as to enable consistent and uniform supervisory practices.
Zato je potrebno, da postopek obveščanja vključuje enotne predloge za obveščanje, da se bodo omogočile dosledne in enotne nadzorne prakse.
It is important to avoid the risk of larger trading venues using calculation methods that minimise their annual notional amount with the aim of benefiting from the opt-out mechanism to the access provisions.
Pomembno je preprečiti nevarnost, da bodo večja mesta trgovanja uporabljala metode, ki v čim večji meri zmanjšujejo njihovi letni nominalni znesek trgovanja, s ciljem izkoristiti mehanizem izvzetja iz določb glede dostopa.
Where there are equally accepted alternative approaches to calculating notional amount, using the calculation which gives the higher value helps avoiding that risk.
Če obstajajo enakovredni pristopi za izračun nominalnega zneska trgovanja, uporaba izračuna, ki privede do višje vrednosti, prispeva k preprečevanju te nevarnosti.
The methods used for calculating notional amount for the purposes of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 should enable genuinely smaller trading venues that have not yet acquired the technological capability to engage on an equal footing with the majority of the post-trade infrastructure market to make use of the opt-out mechanism.
Metode, ki se uporabljajo za izračun nominalnega zneska trgovanja za namene Uredbe (EU) št. 600/2014, bi morale dejansko manjšim mestom trgovanja, ki še nimajo tehnoloških zmogljivosti za enakovredno konkuriranje večini trga potrgovalnih infrastruktur, omogočiti, da uporabijo mehanizem izvzetja.
It is also important for the methods prescribed to be straightforward and unambiguous in order to contribute to consistent and uniform supervisory practices.
Za predpisane metode je tudi pomembno, da so preproste in nedvoumne, da bodo prispevale k doslednim in enotnim nadzornim praksam.
It is important for trading venues to be consistent about calculating their notional amount for the purposes of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 so that the access provisions can be applied fairly by trading venues.
Za mesta trgovanja je pomembno, da so dosledna pri izračunu nominalnega zneska trgovanja za namene Uredbe (EU) št. 600/2014, tako da lahko mesta trgovanja določbe o dostopu uporabljajo na pošten način.
This is particularly relevant for certain types of exchange-traded derivatives, traded in units, such as barrels or tons.
To je posebej pomembno za nekatere vrste izvedenih finančnih instrumentov, s katerimi se na borzi trguje v enotah, kot so na primer sodčki ali tone.
However, to ensure that CCPs and trading venues may benefit from the transitional arrangements provided for in Article 35(5) and Article 36(5) of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014, certain provisions of this Regulation should apply from the date of its entry into force.
Vendar, da bi se zagotovilo, da lahko CNS in mesta trgovanja koristijo prehodne ureditve iz členov 35(5) in 36(5) Uredbe (EU) št. 600/2014, bi se morale nekatere določbe te uredbe uporabljati od datuma začetka njene veljavnosti.
The provisions in this Regulation are closely linked, since they deal with the denial and granting of access to CCPs and trading venues, including the procedure for CCPs and trading venues to opt out from the access requirements set out in this Regulation.
Določbe v tej uredbi so tesno povezane, saj obravnavajo zavrnitev in odobritev dostopa do CNS in mest trgovanja, vključno s postopkom izvzetja CNS in mest trgovanja iz zahtev glede dostopa, določenih v tej uredbi.
To ensure coherence between those provisions, most of which should apply at the same time, and to facilitate a comprehensive view and compact access to them by persons subject to those obligations, it is desirable to include the regulatory technical standards required by Article 35(6) and Article 36(6) of Regulation (EU) 600/2014 in a single Regulation.
Za zagotovitev skladnosti navedenih določb, od katerih bi morala večina začeti veljati hkrati, ter za omogočanje celovitega pregleda nad določbami in enotnega dostopa do njih za osebe, za katere veljajo navedene obveznosti, je zaželeno, da se regulativni tehnični standardi, ki se zahtevajo v členih 35(6) in 36(6) Uredbe (EU) št. 600/2014, vključijo v eno uredbo.
ESMA has conducted open public consultations on the draft regulatory technical standards on which this Regulation is based, analysed the potential related costs and benefits and requested the opinion of the Securities and Markets Stakeholder Group established by Article 37 of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council [3],
ESMA je o osnutku regulativnih tehničnih standardov, na katerem temelji ta uredba, opravila javna posvetovanja, analizirala morebitne povezane stroške in koristi ter zaprosila za mnenje interesno skupino za vrednostne papirje in trge, ustanovljeno v skladu s členom 37 Uredbe (EU) št. 1095/2010 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [3] –
NON-DISCRIMINATORY ACCESS TO CCPs AND TRADING VENUES
NEDISKRIMINATOREN DOSTOP DO CNS IN MEST TRGOVANJA
Non-discriminatory access to CCPs
Nediskriminatoren dostop do CNS
Conditions on the denial of access by a CCP
Pogoji, pod katerimi lahko CNS zavrne dostop
A CCP shall assess whether granting access would create any of the risks specified in Articles 2, 3 and 4 and may deny access only if, after making all reasonable efforts to manage its risks, the CCP concludes that there are significant undue risks that cannot be managed.
CNS oceni, ali bi odobritev dostopa povzročila katero koli tveganje iz členov 2, 3 in 4, in lahko dostop zavrne samo, če potem, ko je z vsemi razumnimi prizadevanji poskusila obvladati svoja tveganja, sklene, da še vedno obstajajo znatna nepotrebna tveganja, ki jih ni mogoče obvladovati.
If a CCP denies access, it shall identify which risks specified in Articles 2, 3 and 4 would result from granting access and explain why those risks cannot be managed.
Če CNS zavrne dostop, navede, katera tveganja iz členov 2, 3 in 4 bi nastala zaradi odobritve dostopa, in pojasni, zakaj teh tveganj ni mogoče obvladovati.
Denial of access by a CCP based on the anticipated volume of transactions
Zavrnitev dostopa s strani CNS na podlagi pričakovanega obsega poslov
A CCP may deny an access request on grounds of the anticipated volume of transactions arising from such access only where this would result in one of the following:
CNS lahko zavrne zahtevo po dostopu na podlagi pričakovanega obsega poslov, ki bi bil posledica takega dostopa, samo, če bi to privedlo do ene od naslednjih situacij:
the scalable design of the CCP being exceeded to such an extent that the CCP cannot adapt its systems so as to deal with the anticipated volume of transactions;
zasnova CNS, ki se sicer lahko prilagodi glede na velikost, bi se prekoračila v takem obsegu, da CNS ne bi mogla prilagoditi svojih sistemov tako, da bi lahko obvladovala pričakovani obseg poslov;
the planned capacity of the CCP being exceeded in a way that the CCP would not be able to acquire the required extra capacity to clear the anticipated volume of transactions.
načrtovana zmogljivost CNS bi se prekoračila tako, da CNS ne bi mogla pridobiti potrebnih dodatnih zmogljivosti za kliring pričakovanega obsega poslov.
Denial of access by a CCP based on operational risk and complexity
Zavrnitev dostopa s strani CNS na podlagi operativnega tveganja in zapletenosti
A CCP may deny an access request on grounds of operational risk and complexity.
CNS lahko zavrne zahtevo po dostopu na podlagi operativnega tveganja in zapletenosti.
Operational risks and complexity shall include any of the following:
Operativno tveganje in zapletenost vključujeta kar koli od naslednjega:
incompatibility of CCP and trading venue IT systems impeding the CCP to provide for connectivity between the systems;
nezdružljivost IT sistemov CNS in mest trgovanja, ki CNS ovira pri zagotavljanju povezljivosti med sistemoma;
lack of human resources with the necessary knowledge, skills and experience to perform the CCP's functions regarding the risk stemming from additional financial instruments where these differ from financial instruments already cleared by the CCP or inability to deploy such human resources.
pomanjkanje kadrov s potrebnim znanjem, spretnostmi in izkušnjami za izvajanje funkcij CNS v zvezi s tveganjem, ki izhaja iz dodatnih finančnih instrumentov, če se ti razlikujejo od finančnih instrumentov, za katere CNS že opravlja kliring, ali nezmožnost uporabe takih kadrov.
Denial of access by a CCP based on other factors creating significant undue risks
Zavrnitev dostopa s strani CNS na podlagi drugih dejavnikov, ki povzročajo znatna nepotrebna tveganja
A CCP may deny an access request on grounds of significant undue risks where any of the following conditions are met:
CNS lahko zavrne zahtevo po dostopu na podlagi znatnih nepotrebnih tveganj, če je izpolnjen kateri koli od naslednjih pogojev:
the CCP does not offer clearing services in respect of the financial instruments for which access is being requested and would not be able with reasonable efforts to launch a clearing service consistent with the requirements set out in Titles II, III and IV of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;
CNS ne ponuja storitev kliringa v zvezi s finančnimi instrumenti, za katere se zahteva dostop, in z razumnimi prizadevanji ne bi bila sposobna začeti izvajati storitve kliringa v skladu z zahtevami iz naslovov II, III in IV Uredbe (EU) št. 648/2012;
granting access would threaten the economic viability of the CCP or its ability to meet minimum capital requirements under Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;
bi odobritev dostopa ogrozila sposobnost uspešnega poslovanja CNS ali njeno sposobnost izpolnjevanja zahtev glede minimalnega kapitala v skladu s členom 16 Uredbe (EU) št. 648/2012;
there are legal risks;
obstajajo pravna tveganja;
there is an incompatibility of CCP rules and trading venue rules that the CCP cannot remedy in cooperation with the trading venue.
so pravila CNS in pravila mesta trgovanja nezdružljiva in CNS te težave ne more odpraviti v sodelovanju z mestom trgovanja.
A CCP may refuse an access request based on legal risk as referred to in point (c) of paragraph 1, where as a result of granting access, the CCP would not be able to enforce its rules relating to close out netting and default procedures or would not be able to manage the risks arising from the simultaneous use of different trade acceptance models.
CNS lahko zavrne zahtevo po dostopu na podlagi pravnega tveganja iz točke (c) odstavka 1, če zaradi odobritve dostopa CNS ne bi mogla uveljavljati svojih pravil glede postopkov predčasnega prenehanja s pobotom in postopkov v zvezi z neizpolnjevanjem finančnih obveznosti ali ne bi mogla obvladovati tveganj, ki izhajajo iz sočasne uporabe različnih modelov za sprejetje trgovanja.
Non-discriminatory access to trading venues
Nediskriminatoren dostop do mest trgovanja
Conditions on the denial of access by a trading venue
Pogoji, pod katerimi lahko mesto trgovanja zavrne dostop
A trading venue shall assess whether granting access would create any of the risks specified in Articles 6 and 7 and may deny access only if, after making all reasonable efforts to manage its risks, the trading venue concludes that there are significant undue risks that cannot be managed.
Mesto trgovanja oceni, ali bi odobritev dostopa povzročila katero koli tveganje iz členov 6 in 7, in lahko dostop zavrne samo, če potem, ko je z vsemi razumnimi prizadevanji poskusilo obvladati svoja tveganja, sklene, da še vedno obstajajo znatna nepotrebna tveganja, ki jih ni mogoče obvladovati.
If a trading venue denies access, it shall identify which risks specified in Articles 6 and 7 would result from granting access and why those risks cannot be managed.
Če mesto trgovanja zavrne dostop, navede, katera tveganja iz členov 6 in 7 bi nastala zaradi odobritve dostopa, in pojasni, zakaj teh tveganj ni mogoče obvladovati.
Denial of access by a trading venue based on operational risk and complexity
Zavrnitev dostopa s strani mesta trgovanja na podlagi operativnega tveganja in zapletenosti
A trading venue may deny an access request on grounds of operational risk and complexity arising from such access only if there is a risk of incompatibility of CCP IT systems and trading venue IT systems, impeding the trading venue to provide for connectivity between those systems.
Mesto trgovanja lahko zavrne zahtevo po dostopu na podlagi operativnega tveganja in zapletenosti, ki bi bila posledica takega dostopa, samo, če sta IT sistema CNS in mesta trgovanja nezdružljiva, kar ovira mesto trgovanja pri zagotavljanju povezljivosti med sistemoma.
Denial of access by a trading venue based on other factors creating significant undue risks
Zavrnitev dostopa s strani mesta trgovanja na podlagi drugih dejavnikov, ki povzročajo znatna nepotrebna tveganja
A trading venue may deny an access request on grounds of significant undue risks in any of the following cases:
Mesto trgovanja lahko zavrne zahtevo po dostopu na podlagi znatnih nepotrebnih tveganj v katerem koli od naslednjih primerov: