natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This means, inter alia, that when contemplating the making of an application to the NCA the applicant should not destroy, falsify or conceal evidence of the alleged secret cartel.
Zato bi morali NOK pri presoji, ali uničenje dokazov postavlja pod vprašaj odkrito sodelovanje prijavitelja, upoštevati posebne okoliščine, v katerih so bili dokazi uničeni, in pomen takega uničenja.
When an undertaking is contemplating the making of an application, there is a risk that its directors, managers and other staff might destroy evidence in order to conceal their involvement in a cartel, but the destruction of evidence could also occur for other reasons.
Da bi prijavitelj izpolnil pogoj odkritega, popolnega, nenehnega in takojšnjega sodelovanja, pri načrtovanju vložitve prijave pri NOK ne bi smel razkriti dejstva, da namerava vložiti prijavo, ali vsebine načrtovane prijave, razen drugim NOK, Komisiji ali organom, pristojnim za konkurenco, iz tretjih držav.
Therefore, NCAs should take into account the specific circumstances under which evidence was destroyed and the significance of such destruction when considering whether the destruction of evidence calls into question the genuine cooperation of the applicant.
Prijavitelju to ne preprečuje, da bi o svojem ravnanju obvestil druge javne organe, kakor to zahteva ustrezna zakonodaja; s tem se preprečuje le to, da bi prijavitelj razkril dejstvo, da načrtuje vložitev prijave za prizanesljivost, in da bi navedenim organom predložil izjave za prizanesljivost.
In order to fulfil the condition of genuine, full, continuous and expeditious cooperation, when contemplating the making of an application to the NCA, the applicant should not have disclosed the fact or any of the content of its contemplated application, except to other NCAs, the Commission or competition authorities of third countries.
Ob tem je treba opozoriti, da bi moral prijavitelj pri izpolnjevanju svojih obveznosti na podlagi navedene ustrezne zakonodaje upoštevati, kako pomembno je, da ne ogrozi morebitne preiskave NOK.
This does not preclude an applicant from reporting its behaviour to other public authorities as required by relevant laws, but only prevents it from disclosing the fact that it is contemplating an application for leniency and from handing over leniency statements to those authorities.
Prijavitelji bi morali imeti možnost, da predložijo pisne izjave za prizanesljivost v zvezi s celovitimi ali skrajšanimi prijavami, NOK pa bi morali imeti vzpostavljen tudi sistem, ki bi jim omogočal, da sprejmejo take izjave ustno ali na kak drug način, ki bi prijaviteljem dopuščal, da takih predloženih izjav nimajo v posesti, hrambi ali pod nadzorom.
However, when fulfilling its obligations under those relevant laws, the applicant should also consider the importance of not adversely impacting the potential investigation by the NCA.
NOK bi morali imeti možnost, da sami izberejo, na kakšen način sprejemajo izjave za prizanesljivost.
Applicants should have the possibility of submitting leniency statements, in relation to full or summary applications, in writing, and NCAs should also have a system in place that enables them to accept such statements either in oral form or by other means that permit applicants not to take possession, custody, or control of such submitted statements.
Podjetja, ki želijo vložiti prijavo za odpustitev globe, bi morala imeti možnost, da NOK najprej zaprosijo za zaznamek, da si zagotovijo mesto v vrstnem redu za priznanje prizanesljivosti, preden uradno vložijo prijavo za odpustitev globe, da bi nato pridobila informacije in dokaze, potrebne za to, da bi dosegla ustrezni dokazni prag.
NCAs should be able to choose the means by which they accept leniency statements.
To državam članicam ne preprečuje, da bi tudi podjetjem, ki želijo vložiti prijavo za znižanje globe, ponudile možnost, da zaprosijo za zaznamek.
Undertakings that wish to make an application for immunity should be able to initially request NCAs for a marker for a place in the queue for leniency before they formally submit the application for immunity, in order to give the applicant time to gather the necessary information and evidence to meet the relevant evidential threshold.
Da bi poleg tega zmanjšali upravna in druga znatna časovna bremena, bi prijavitelji morali imeti možnost, da predložijo izjave za prizanesljivost v zvezi s celovitimi ali skrajšanimi prijavami ter v zvezi s prošnjami za zaznamke, in sicer v uradnem jeziku države članice zadevnega NOK ali, v primeru dvostranskega dogovora med NOK in prijaviteljem, v katerem od drugih uradnih jezikov Unije.
This is without prejudice to the ability of Member States to allow undertakings to apply for a marker in the case of applications for a reduction of fines.
Štelo bi se, da tak dogovor obstaja, kadar NOK običajno sprejmejo take vloge v navedenem jeziku.
Moreover, in order to reduce the administrative and other considerable burdens in terms of time, it should be possible for applicants to submit leniency statements in relation to full or summary applications, as well as in relation to requests for markers, either in an official language of the Member State of the NCA concerned, or, where bilaterally agreed between the NCA and the applicant, in another official language of the Union.
Glede na deljene pristojnosti med Komisijo in NOK za uveljavljanje členov 101 in 102 PDEU je ključno, da je vzpostavljen dobro delujoč sistem skrajšanih prijav.
Such agreement would be deemed to exist where the NCAs generally accept such submissions in that language.
Prijaviteljem, ki so pri Komisiji vložili prijavo za prizanesljivost v zvezi z domnevnim skrivnim kartelom, bi moralo biti omogočeno, da vložijo skrajšane prijave pri NOK v zvezi z istim kartelom, pod pogojem, da prijava, vložena pri Komisiji, zajema več kot tri države članice kot zadevna ozemlja.
In view of the shared competences between the Commission and the NCAs for the enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, it is key to have a smoothly functioning system of summary applications in place.
To ne posega v možnost Komisije, da bi obravnavala določene primere, če so tesno povezani z drugimi predpisi Unije, katerih uporaba je v izključni pristojnosti Komisije ali jih lahko ta uporabi bolj učinkovito, če je zaradi interesa Unije v primeru novega konkurenčnega problema treba sprejeti sklep Komisije za razvoj konkurenčne politike Unije ali ker je treba zagotoviti učinkovito uveljavljanje pravil konkurence.
Applicants which have applied for leniency to the Commission in relation to an alleged secret cartel should be able to submit summary applications to NCAs in relation to the same cartel, provided that the application to the Commission covers more than three Member States as affected territories.
Sistem skrajšanih prijav bi moral podjetjem omogočati, da pri NOK vložijo prijavo za prizanesljivost, ki vsebuje omejen nabor informacij, kadar je bila pri Komisiji vložena celovita prijava v zvezi s tem domnevnim kartelom.
This is without prejudice to the possibility for the Commission to deal with cases if they are closely linked to other Union provisions which may be exclusively or more effectively applied by the Commission, where the Union interest requires the adoption of a Commission decision to develop Union competition policy when a new competition issue arises, or to ensure effective enforcement.
NOK bi torej morali sprejeti skrajšane prijave, ki vsebujejo minimalni nabor informacij v zvezi z domnevnim kartelom za vsak element iz člena 22(2).
The summary application system should allow undertakings to submit a leniency application to NCAs containing a limited set of information where a full application has been submitted to the Commission in relation to such an alleged cartel.
To ne posega v možnost prijavitelja, da bi kasneje predložil podrobnejše informacije.
NCAs should therefore accept summary applications that contain a minimum set of information in relation to the alleged cartel for each of the items set out in Article 22(2).
NOK bi moral prijavitelju za prizanesljivost na njegovo zahtevo dati potrdilo o prejemu z navedbo datuma in časa prejema.
This is without prejudice to the possibility for the applicant to provide more detailed information at a later time.
Če NOK ni prejel take predhodne prijave za prizanesljivost od drugega prijavitelja za prizanesljivost, obenem pa meni, da skrajšana prijava izpolnjuje zahteve iz člena 22(2), bi moral o tem obvestiti prijavitelja.
At the request of the leniency applicant, NCAs should provide it with an acknowledgement of receipt stating the date and time of receipt.
Namen sistema skrajšanih prijav je zmanjšati upravno breme za prijavitelje, ki pri Komisiji vložijo prijavo za prizanesljivost v zvezi z domnevnim skrivnim kartelom in zajema več kot tri države članice kot zadevna ozemlja.
If an NCA has not yet received such a prior leniency application from another leniency applicant about the same alleged secret cartel, and considers that the summary application fulfils the requirements of Article 22(2), the NCA should inform the applicant accordingly.
Ker Komisija v takih primerih prejme celovito prijavo, bi morala biti v obdobju, ko še ni jasno, ali bo v celoti ali deloma obravnavala zadevo, glavna sogovornica prijavitelja za prizanesljivost, zlasti pri zagotavljanju navodil o tem, kako naj zadevni prijavitelj ravna pri morebitni nadaljnji interni preiskavi.
The aim of the system of summary applications is to reduce the administrative burden on applicants which submit a leniency application to the Commission in relation to an alleged secret cartel that covers more than three Member States as affected territories.
Komisija bi si morala prizadevati, da odločbo o tem sprejme v razumnem času, nato pa ustrezno obvesti NOK, brez poseganja v člen 11(6) Uredbe (ES) št. 1/2003.
Given that in such cases the Commission receives a full application, it should be the main interlocutor of the leniency applicant in the period before clarity has been gained as to whether the Commission will pursue the case in full or in part, in particular with respect to providing instructions on the conduct of any further internal investigation by the applicant.
V izrednih okoliščinah, kadar je to zaradi natančnosti opisa primera ali dodelitve primera nujno potrebno, bi NOK moral imeti možnost, da od prijavitelja zahteva, naj vloži celovito prijavo, preden se to razjasni.
The Commission is to endeavour to decide on this matter within a reasonable period of time and inform the NCAs accordingly, without prejudice to Article 11(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.
Ta možnost bi se morala uporabljati v zelo redkih primerih.
In exceptional circumstances, when strictly necessary for case delineation or case allocation, an NCA should be able to request the applicant to submit a full application before such clarity has been gained.
V drugih primerih bi se moralo od prijavitelja zahtevati le, da takrat, ko postane jasno, da Komisija v celoti ali deloma ne namerava obravnavati zadeve, pri NOK, ki je prejel skrajšano prijavo, vloži celovito prijavo.
This possibility should be used very rarely.
Prijaviteljem bi moralo biti omogočeno, da pri NOK, pri katerih so že vložili skrajšane prijave, vložijo celovite prijave za prizanesljivost.
In other cases, the applicant should only be asked to submit a full application to an NCA which has received a summary application once it is clear that the Commission does not intend to pursue the case in whole or in part.
Če prijavitelji vložijo take celovite prijave v roku, ki ga določi NOK, bi se moralo šteti, da so bile informacije iz navedenih prijav predložene, ko je bila vložena skrajšana prijava, če skrajšana prijava zajema enake zadevne proizvode ter ista zadevna ozemlja ter isto trajanje domnevnega kartela kot prijava za prizanesljivost, vložena pri Komisiji, ki je bila morda posodobljena.
Applicants should be given the opportunity to submit full leniency applications to the NCAs to which they have submitted summary applications.
Če pa se obseg prijave za prizanesljivost, vložene pri Komisiji, spremeni, bi morali biti prijavitelji odgovorni za obveščanje NOK, pri katerih so vložili skrajšane prijave, in za ustrezno posodobitev svojih skrajšanih prijav.
If the applicants submit such full applications within the period specified by the NCA, the information contained in those applications should be deemed to have been submitted at the time at which the summary application was submitted, provided that the summary application covers the same affected products and territories and the same duration of the alleged cartel as the leniency application filed with the Commission, which might have been updated.
NOK bi morali v sodelovanju z Evropsko mrežo za konkurenco imeti možnost preveriti, ali obseg skrajšane prijave ustreza obsegu prijave za prizanesljivost, vložene pri Komisiji.
The onus should be on applicants to inform the NCAs to which they have submitted summary applications if the scope of their leniency application with the Commission has changed and to update their summary applications accordingly.
Morebitne prijavitelje bi lahko pravna negotovost glede vprašanja, ali so trenutni in nekdanji vodilni delavci in drugi zaposleni prijaviteljev za odpustitev globe zaščiteni pred individualnimi sankcijami, kot so globe, prepoved opravljanja dejavnosti ali zaporna kazen, odvrnila od tega, da bi vložili prijavo za prizanesljivost.
NCAs should be able to check whether the scope of the summary application corresponds to the scope of the leniency application filed with the Commission, through cooperation within the European Competition Network.
Kadar so izpolnjeni pogoji iz te direktive, bi torej ti posamezniki zaradi svojega prispevka k odkritju in preiskavi skrivnih kartelov načeloma morali biti zaščiteni pred sankcijami, ki jih javni organi izrečejo v kazenskih, upravnih in nekazenskih sodnih postopkih v zvezi z njihovo vpletenostjo v skrivni kartel, ki je predmet prijave, in to v skladu z nacionalno zakonodajo, ki ima pretežno iste cilje, kot so določeni v členu 101 PDEU, kot je nacionalna zakonodaja o prikrojevanju razpisov za zbiranje ponudb.
Legal uncertainty as to whether current and former directors, managers and other members of staff of applicants for immunity are shielded from individual sanctions such as fines, disqualification or imprisonment, could prevent potential applicants from applying for leniency.
Eden od pogojev iz te direktive, ki jih je treba izpolnjevati, je, da bi morali prijavo za odpustitev glob vložiti, še preden so jih pristojni nacionalni organi obvestili o postopkih, ki bi lahko privedli do izreka sankcij.
In light of their contribution to the detection and investigation of secret cartels, those individuals should thus, in principle, be protected from sanctions in relation to their involvement in the secret cartel covered by the application imposed by public authorities in criminal, administrative and non-criminal judicial proceedings pursuant to national laws that predominantly pursue the same objectives to those pursued by Article 101 TFEU, such as national laws on bid-rigging, where the conditions set out in this Directive are fulfilled.
Trenutek, ko ti posamezniki postanejo osumljeni kršitve navedene nacionalne zakonodaje, je del takih postopkov.
One of these conditions is that the application for immunity should predate the time when those individuals were made aware by the competent national authorities of the proceedings that could lead to the imposition of sanctions.
Države članice lahko v okviru nacionalnega prava same določijo, kako bi navedeni posamezniki morali sodelovati z ustreznimi organi, da bodo učinkovito zaščiteni.
Such proceedings include the moment those individuals become suspected of violating such national laws.
Zaščita pred kazenskimi sankcijami vključuje primere, v katerih pristojni nacionalni organi pod določenimi pogoji ali ob upoštevanju navodil za prihodnje ravnanje zadevnega posameznika opustijo pregon.
Member States are free to provide under national law for modalities as to how those individuals should cooperate with the relevant authorities to ensure the effective functioning of this protection.
Države članice bi lahko z odstopanjem zaradi zagotovitve skladnosti zaščite pred sankcijami, ki se izrečejo posameznikom v kazenskih postopkih, z obstoječimi osnovnimi načeli njihovih pravnih sistemov pristojnim organom omogočile, da sami izberejo, ali bodo posamezniku ponudili zaščito pred sankcijami ali bodo take sankcije samo ublažili, odvisno od tega, ali pretehta interes za pregon in/ali sankcioniranje posameznika ali pa pomen njegovega prispevka k odkritju in preiskavi kartela.
Protection from criminal sanctions includes cases in which the competent national authorities refrain from prosecution under certain conditions or subject to instructions as to the future behaviour of the individual.
Pri ocenjevanju interesa za pregon in/ali sankcioniranje navedenih posameznikov se lahko med drugim upošteva, koliko so sami odgovorni za kršitev ali kako so sami pripomogli k njej.
By way of derogation, in order to ensure that the protection from sanctions to be imposed on individuals in criminal proceedings is in conformity with the existing basic principles of their legal system, Member States might provide that the competent authorities are able to choose between protecting the individual from sanctions or only mitigating those sanctions, depending on the outcome of weighing the interest in prosecuting and/or sanctioning the individual against the individual's contribution to the detection and investigation of the cartel.
Državam članicam nič ne preprečuje, da bi tudi trenutnim ali nekdanjim vodilnim delavcem in drugim zaposlenim prijaviteljev za znižanje globe ponudile zaščito pred sankcijami ali ublažitev takih sankcij.
When assessing the interest in prosecuting and/or sanctioning those individuals, their personal responsibility or contribution to the infringement, among other factors, may be taken into account.
Da bi bila lahko zaščita, kadar gre za več kot eno jurisdikcijo, učinkovita, bi morale države članice v primerih, ko organ, pristojen za sankcioniranje ali pregon, ni v isti jurisdikciji kot organ, pristojen za konkurenco, ki obravnava zadevo, določiti, da potrebno komunikacijo med temi organi zagotavlja NOK iz jurisdikcije organa, pristojnega za sankcioniranje ali pregon.
Member States are not precluded from also protecting the current or former directors, managers and other members of staff of the applicants for reduction of fines from sanctions, or from mitigating such sanctions.
V sistemu, v katerem imajo Komisija in NOK vzporedna pooblastila za uporabo členov 101 in 102 PDEU, je potrebno tesno sodelovanje med različnimi NOK ter med NOK in Komisijo.
In order to allow the protection to function in situations where more than one jurisdiction is involved, Member States should provide that in cases where the competent sanctioning or prosecuting authority is not in the same jurisdiction as the competition authority that is pursuing the case, the necessary contacts between those authorities should be ensured by the NCA of the jurisdiction of the competent sanctioning or prosecuting authority.
Zlasti kadar NOK izvaja pregled ali vodi razgovor na podlagi nacionalnega prava v imenu drugega NOK v skladu s členom 22(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 1/2003, bi bilo treba omogočiti prisotnost in pomoč uradnikov organa prosilca, da bi bili zaradi zagotovljenih dodatnih virov, znanja ter strokovnih izkušenj takšni pregledi in razgovori bolj učinkoviti.
In a system in which the Commission and NCAs have parallel powers to apply Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, close cooperation is required among NCAs and between NCAs and the Commission.
NOK bi morali biti tudi pooblaščeni, da za pomoč v postopku ugotavljanja, ali podjetja ali podjetniška združenja niso spoštovala preiskovalnih ukrepov in odločb, ki so jih sprejeli organi prosilci, zaprosijo druge NOK.
In particular when an NCA carries out an inspection or an interview under its national law on behalf of another NCA pursuant to Article 22(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, the presence and assistance of the officials from the applicant authority should be enabled to enhance the effectiveness of such inspections and interviews by providing additional resources, knowledge and technical expertise.
Vzpostaviti bi bilo treba ureditev, ki bi NOK omogočala, da zaprosijo za medsebojno pomoč pri čezmejni vročitvi dokumentov, povezanih z uporabo člena 101 ali 102 PDEU, strankam v postopku ali drugim podjetjem, podjetniškim združenjem ali fizičnim osebam, ki so lahko naslovniki takih vročitev.
NCAs should also be empowered to ask other NCAs to assist in establishing whether undertakings or associations of undertakings have failed to comply with investigative measures and decisions taken by the applicant NCAs.
Prav tako bi NOK morali imeti možnost, da organe iz drugih držav članic zaprosijo, da izvršijo odločbe o izreku glob ali periodičnih denarnih kazni, kadar se je organ prosilec v razumnih mejah skušal prepričati o tem, da podjetje, zoper katero je treba izvršiti globo ali periodično denarno kazen, nima zadostnih sredstev v državi članici organa prosilca.
Arrangements should be put in place to allow NCAs to request mutual assistance for the notification of documents related to the application of Article 101 or 102 TFEU on a cross-border basis to parties to the proceedings or other undertakings, associations of undertakings or natural persons which may be the addressees of such notifications.
Države članice bi morale določiti tudi, da lahko zaprošeni organ zlasti takrat, kadar podjetje, zoper katero je treba izvršiti globo ali periodično denarno kazen, nima sedeža v državi članici organa prosilca, na zaprosilo organa prosilca izvrši odločbe, ki jih je sprejel organ prosilec.
Similarly, NCAs should be able to request the enforcement of decisions imposing fines or periodic penalty payments by authorities in other Member States where the applicant authority has made reasonable efforts to ascertain that the undertaking against which the fine or periodic penalty payment is to be enforced does not have sufficient assets in the Member State of the applicant authority.
To bi zagotovilo učinkovito uveljavljanje členov 101 in 102 PDEU ter bi prispevalo k pravilnemu delovanju notranjega trga.
Member States should also provide, in particular, that where the undertaking against which the fine or periodic penalty payment is enforceable is not established in the Member State of the applicant authority, the requested authority may enforce decisions adopted by the applicant authority, at the request of the applicant authority.
Da se zagotovi, da NOK namenijo dovolj virov za zaprosila za medsebojno pomoč, in da bi spodbudili takšno pomoč, bi morali imeti zaprošeni organi možnost zahtevati povračilo stroškov, ki jih imajo z zagotavljanjem navedene pomoči.
This would ensure the effective enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU and would contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market.
Taka medsebojna pomoč ne posega v uporabo Okvirnega sklepa Sveta 2005/214/PNZ.
In order to ensure that NCAs devote sufficient resources to the requests for mutual assistance, and in order to incentivise such assistance, the requested authorities should be able to recover the costs they incur in providing that assistance.
Da se zagotovi učinkovito uveljavljanje členov 101 in 102 PDEU s strani NOK, je treba oblikovati izvedljiva pravila o zastaralnih rokih.
Such mutual assistance is without prejudice to the application of Council Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA.
Zlasti v sistemu vzporednih pooblastil bi bilo treba tek nacionalnih zastaralnih rokov prekiniti ali zastaranje pretrgati za čas trajanja postopka, ki ga vodijo NOK druge države članice ali Komisija.
To ensure the effective enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU by NCAs there is a need to provide for workable rules on limitation periods.
Taka prekinitev ali pretrganje državam članicam ne bi smela preprečevati, da ne bi ohranile ali uvedle absolutnih zastaralnih rokov, če to ne pomeni, da bi bilo zaradi trajanja takšnih absolutnih rokov učinkovito uveljavljanje členov 101 in 102 PDEU praktično nemogoče ali pretirano oteženo.