natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Court stated that the retention of traffic data (and implicitly the directive) constitutes serious interference with the fundamental right to respect for private life enshrined in Article 7 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Sodišče je pojasnilo, da hramba podatkov o prometu (in s tem torej tudi direktiva) pomeni resno poseganje v temeljno pravico do zasebnega življenja, določeno v členu 7 Listine Evropske unije o temeljnih pravicah.
The Court stated that the right to accommodation is all the more justified in situations which persist over a long time and where passengers are particularly vulnerable.
Sodišče je navedlo, da je pravica do oskrbe še zlasti pomembna ob nastanku dlje trajajočih izrednih razmer in ko so potniki še posebej ranljivi.
The court stated that where the further use of the material was not a mere possibility but a certainty, without any further processing prior to reuse and as part of a continuing process of production, then the material would not be a waste.
Sodišče je navedlo, da kjer nadaljnja uporaba izdelka brez vsake dodatne obdelave pred ponovno uporabo in kot del trajnega postopka proizvodnje ni bila samo možna, temveč zanesljiva, potem material ne bi bil odpadek.
The Court stated that where the rocks were being stored prior to a possible future use or a future waste treatment obligation, they would be waste.
Sodišče je izjavilo, da bi bilo kamenje odpadek, kjer je skladiščeno pred možno nadaljnjo uporabo ali prihodnjo obveznostjo do obdelave odpadkov.
The Court stated that, as the decree applied Directive 2004/33 regarding requirements for blood and blood components,42 the Charter was applicable.
Sodišče je navedlo, da se v tem primeru Listina uporablja, saj se je v odloku uporabila Direktiva (ES) št. 33/2004 glede zahtev za kri in komponente krvi42.
The Court stated that, having regard to the importance which primary EU law attaches to the status of citizen of the Union, it is necessary for the national courts to take into account the consequences that the decision entails for the person concerned and for the members of his family with regard to the loss of the rights enjoyed by every citizen of the Union.
Sodišče je navedlo, da morajo nacionalna sodišča glede na pomen, ki ga primarno pravo EU daje statusu državljana Unije, upoštevati morebitne posledice, ki jih ima ta odločba za zadevno osebo in njene družinske člane v zvezi z izgubo pravic, ki jih ima vsak državljan Unije.
The Court stated that, since no information or evidence had been produced by the Commission to substantiate the allegations that Mr Kadi was involved in activities linked to international terrorism (allegations he strongly denied), those allegations did not justify the adoption, at EU level, of restrictive measures against him.
Kadija v dejavnosti, povezane z mednarodnim terorizmom (te trditve je strogo zanikal), zato zadevne trditve niso upravičevale omejevalnih ukrepov, ki so bili proti njemu sprejeti na ravni EU.
The Court stressed that Directive 64/221 provides that the Member State must take a decision on whether to grant a residence permit as soon as possible and in any event not later than six months from the date on which the application was submitted.
Sodišče je poudarilo, da Direktiva 64/221 določa, da mora država članica odločbo o izdaji dovoljenja za prebivanje sprejeti čim prej in nikakor ne pozneje kot v šestih mesecih od datuma vložitve prošnje.
The Court stressed that Member States are under the obligation to respect the Charter when they establish the responsibility for examining an asylum application.
Sodišče je poudarilo, da so države članice pri določitvi odgovornosti za obravnavanje prošnje za azil dolžne spoštovati Listino.
The Court stresses that every case in which the question arises as to whether a national procedural provision makes the application of European Union law impossible or excessively difficult must be analysed by reference to the role of that provision in the procedure, its progress and its special features, viewed as a whole, before the various national bodies.
Sodišče poudarja, da je treba vsak primer, v katerem se postavi vprašanje, ali neka nacionalna postopkovna določba onemogoča ali čezmerno otežuje uporabo prava Evropske unije, preizkusiti ob upoštevanju položaja te določbe v okviru celotnega postopka, njegovega poteka in njegovih posebnosti pred različnimi nacionalnimi sodišči.
The Court subsequently ruled against one Member State14.
Sodišče se je nato izreklo proti eni državi članici14.
The Court suggested that this would hardly be the case for pack sizes.
Sodišče je menilo, da bi v primeru velikosti predpakiranja težko obstajale take zahteve.
The Court suggested that this would hardly be the case for pack sizes.
Sodišče predlaga, da bi to le stežka bil primer v zvezi z velikostjo pakiranj.
The court that has jurisdiction is obviously the one that is responsible for dealing with the main case, from the time when the action/enforcement has already been effected.
Pristojno je seveda tisto sodišče, ki je pristojno za obravnavo glavnega zahtevka, od takrat, ko postopek/izvrševanje že poteka.
The court that has jurisdiction is obviously the one that is responsible for dealing with the main case, from the time when the action/enforcement has already been effected.
Pristojno sodišče je seveda tisto, ki je pristojno za obravnavo glavnega zahtevka, od takrat, ko postopek/izvrševanje že poteka.
The Court then held that the capacity to be the holder of rights guaranteed by the Treaty and by secondary law to move and reside freely cannot be made conditional upon the attainment by the person concerned of the age prescribed for the acquisition of legal capacity to exercise those rights personally.
Nato je Sodišče presodilo, da sposobnost biti imetnik pravic, zagotovljenih v Pogodbi in sekundarni zakonodaji, do prostega gibanja in prebivanja ne more biti pogojena z dopolnitvijo določene starosti zadevne osebe za pridobitev pravne sposobnosti za osebno izvrševanje teh pravic.
The Court therefore found that the Fund has met its underlying objective of demonstrating solidarity with Member States in times of disaster.
Sodišče je zato ugotovilo, da je Sklad izpolnil svoj osnovni cilj izkazovanja solidarnosti z državami članicami v času nesreč.
The Court thus advocates that checking of transposition measures must be done pragmatically on a case by case basis, in the light of the objectives of the directive and the sector concerned; and this may throw the Commission off course8.
Sodišče zato priporoča, naj se nadzor nad ukrepi prenosa izvaja pragmatično po posameznih primerih, v skladu s cilji direktive in glede na sektor, na katerega se direktiva nanaša, kar pa lahko zavede Komisijo8.
The Court thus concluded that, in adopting the contested decision, the Commission did not encroach on the jurisdiction of the ECJ or national courts and did not infringe Article 21(1) of the Merger Regulation, Article 220 of the Treaty and Article 226 of the Treaty, nor did it commit any misuse of procedure.
Sodišče je tako sklenilo, da Komisija pri sprejemanju izpodbijane odločbe ni posegla v pristojnost Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti ali nacionalnih sodišč ter ni kršila člena 21(1) uredbe o združitvah, člena 220 Pogodbe in člena 226 Pogodbe, niti ni na noben način zlorabila postopka.
The Court took the view that by requiring the retention of those data and by allowing the competent national authorities to access those data, the directive interferes in a particularly serious manner with the fundamental rights to respect for private life and to the protection of personal data.
Sodišče je presodilo, da direktiva s tem, ko določa hrambo teh podatkov in nacionalnim pristojnim organom dovoljuje dostop do njih, pomeni zelo resen poseg v temeljni pravici do spoštovanja zasebnega življenja in do varstva osebnih podatkov.
The Court took the view that where the Posting of Workers Directive applies it is unlawful for unions to organise industrial action for terms and conditions above the mandatory rules for minimum protection in the Directive.
Sodišče je zavzelo stališče, da je na področju uporabe direktive o napotitvi delavcev stavka, ki jo organizirajo sindikati zaradi pogojev, ki presegajo obvezne določbe te direktive o minimalni varnosti, nezakonita.
The Court was asked if a Member State could make the surrender of a person convicted in absentia conditional upon the conviction being open to review in the issuing Member State, in order to avoid any adverse effects on the right to a fair trial and the rights of the defence as guaranteed by the constitution of the Member State surrendering the person in question41.
Sodišče je bilo vprašano, ali lahko država članica predajo osebe, ki je bila obsojena v odsotnosti, pogojuje s tem, da je obsodba lahko predmet preizkusa v odreditveni državi članici, da bi se izognila zoževanju pravice do poštenega sojenja in pravice do obrambe, ki sta zagotovljeni z ustavo države članice, ki predaja zadevno osebo41.
The Court was asked to clarify whether cases of national law which meet objectives laid down in EU law also amount to situations where EU law is being ‘implemented’ within the meaning of Article 51 of the Charter.
Sodišče je bilo zaprošeno za pojasnilo, ali primeri nacionalnega prava, ki izpolnjujejo cilje, določene s pravom EU, veljajo tudi za situacije, v katerih se pravo EU „izvaja“ v smislu člena 51 Listine.
the court which has jurisdiction to entertain proceedings concerning parental responsibility, under the Regulation (EC) n° 2201/2003, if the matter relating to maintenance is ancillary to those proceedings.
sodišče, pristojno za vse postopke v zvezi s starševsko odgovornostjo v smislu Uredbe (ES) št. 2201/2003, kadar je zahtevek o preživninski obveznosti povezan s temi postopki.
the court which has jurisdiction to entertain proceedings concerning the status of a person if the matter relating to maintenance is ancillary to those proceedings, unless that jurisdiction is based solely on the nationality of one of the parties;
sodišče, pristojno za vse postopke v zvezi z osebnim stanjem oseb, kadar je zahtevek o preživninski obveznosti povezan s temi postopki, razen če temelji ta pristojnost izključno na državljanstvu ene od strank, ali
The court which would be required to decline jurisdiction may stay its proceedings if the jurisdiction of the other court is contested;
Sodišče, od katerega bi se zahtevala zavrnitev pristojnosti, lahkopostopek ustavi, če se pristojnost drugega sodišča izpodbija;
the court will deliver an enforceable decision unless it has received a statement of defence or a statement informing the court about the payment of the claim from the defendant within the time limit specified in paragraph 3.
da bo sodišče izdalo izvršljivo sodno odločbo, če ne bo v roku iz odstavka 3 od tožene stranke prejelo odgovora na tožbo ali potrdila, s katerim sodišče obvešča o plačilu zahtevka.
The Court will give its ruling on 16 July 2015.
Sodišče se bo izreklo 16. julija 2015.
The court with jurisdiction shall then be established in accordance with Article 5.
Pristojno sodišče se nato določi v skladu s členom 5.
the court with which an appeal against a decision not to issue an EAPO is to be lodged as referred to in Article 22;
sodišče, pri katerem se lahko vloži pritožba zoper odločitev o zavrnitvi izdaje ENZBR, kot je navedeno v členu 22;
The court with which an appeal is lodged under Article 43 or Article 44 shall refuse or revoke a declaration of enforceability only if enforcement of the instrument is manifestly contrary to public policy in the Member State addressed.
Sodišče, pri katerem je vloženo pravno sredstvo iz člena 43 ali 44, zavrne ali razveljavi razglasitev izvršljivosti samo v primeru, če bi bila izvršitev javne listine očitno v nasprotju z javnim redom v zaprošeni državi članici.
The court with which an appeal is lodged under Article 49 or Article 50 shall refuse or revoke a declaration of enforceability only if enforcement of the authentic instrument is manifestly contrary to public policy (ordre public) in the Member State of enforcement.
Sodišče, pri katerem je vloženo pravno sredstvo iz člena 49 ali člena 50, zavrne ali prekliče razglasitev izvršljivosti le, če je izvršitev javne listine očitno v nasprotju z javnim redom v državi članici izvršitve.
The court with which an appeal is lodged under Article [42 or 44] of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 may refuse or revoke a declaration of enforceability only if enforcement of the court settlement is manifestly contrary to public policy in the Member State addressed.
Sodišče, pri katerem je vloženo pravno sredstvo iz člena [42 ali 44] Uredbe (ES) št. 44/2001, zavrne ali razveljavi razglasitev izvršljivosti samo v primeru, da bi bila izvršitev sodne poravnave v očitnem nasprotju z javnim redom v državi članici izvršitve.
The court with which an appeal is lodged under Articles [43 and 44] of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 may refuse or revoke a declaration of enforceability only if enforcement of the instrument is manifestly contrary to public policy in the Member State addressed.
Sodišče, pri katerem je vloženo pravno sredstvo iz členov [43 in 44] Uredbe (ES) št. 44/2001, zavrne ali razveljavi razglasitev izvršljivosti samo v primeru, da bi bila izvršitev javne listine v očitnem nasprotju z javnim redom v državi članici izvršitve.
The court with which an appeal is lodged under Articles [43 and 44] of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 may refuse or revoke a declaration of enforceability only if enforcement of the instrument is manifestly contrary to public policy in the Member State addressed.
Sodišče, pri katerem je vloženo pravno sredstvo iz členov [43 in 44] Uredbe (ES) št. 44/2001, zavrne ali razveljavi razglasitev izvršljivosti samo v primeru, da bi bila izvršitev javne listine v očitnem nasprotju z javnim redom v državi članici izvršitve.
The court with which an appeal is lodged under Article 49 or Article 50 shall refuse or revoke a declaration of enforceability only if enforcement of the court settlement is manifestly contrary to public policy (ordre public) in the Member State of enforcement.
Sodišče, pri katerem je vloženo pravno sredstvo iz člena 49 ali člena 50, zavrne ali prekliče razglasitev izvršljivosti le, če je izvršitev sodne poravnave očitno v nasprotju z javnim redom v državi članici izvršitve.
The court with which an appeal is lodged under Article 49 or Article 50 shall, on the application of the party against whom enforcement is sought, stay the proceedings if the enforceability of the decision is suspended in the Member State of origin by reason of an appeal.
Sodišče, pri katerem je vloženo pravno sredstvo v skladu s členom 49 ali členom 50, na zahtevo stranke, zoper katero se zahteva izvršitev odločbe, prekine postopek, če je bila izvršljivost odločbe v državi članici izvora zaradi vložitve pravnega sredstva začasno zadržana.
The Court's "cellule marchés" made a number of further suggestions and notably that the Commission should register cases at the request of institutions which do not have a data base pursuant Article 95 FR because of the few contracts passed.
„Oddelek za oddajo naročil (cellule marchés)“ Sodišča je predlagal številne druge predloge, zlasti da bi morala Komisija na zahtevo institucij, ki zaradi majhnega števila pogodb nimajo svoje lastne baze podatkov v skladu s členom 95 FU, evidentirati določene primere.
The Court's case law is clear as regards the role of equal treatment and non-discrimination in the Community legal order.
Sodna praksa Sodišča je jasna glede vloge enakega obravnavanja in nediskriminacije v pravnem redu Skupnosti.
The Court's conclusion is that the supervisory and control systems are partly effective in ensuring the regularity of payments.
Sklep Računskega sodišča je, da so nadzorni in kontrolni sistemi delno učinkoviti pri zagotavljanju pravilnosti plačil.
The Court's decisions about on-call time and compensatory rest raise important questions for health and care services3.
Odločitev Sodišča o dežurstvu in nadomestnem počitku sproža pomembna vprašanja v zvezi s storitvami zdravstvenega varstva in nege3.
The Court's estimated level of error for Cohesion Policy has been high compared to other policy groups of the EU budget in these years, and has varied around 5%-10% of expenditure for the current programming period.
Stopnja napak, ki jo je Sodišče ocenilo za kohezijsko politiko, je višja v primerjavi z drugimi skupinami politik iz proračuna EU v navedenih letih ter je znašala med približno 5 in 10 % izdatkov za trenutno programsko obdobje.
The Court's ruling of 8 April 2014 confirms that respect for citizens' rights and freedoms is crucial for the European venture.
Sodba Sodišča Evropske unije z dne 8. aprila 2014 potrjuje pomen spoštovanja pravic in svoboščin državljanov za evropsko povezovanje.
The Court's sample of transactions in respect of its annual audit (DAS) work is typically small (for FY 2010, 12 payments were tested, covering Environment; Maritime Affairs and Fisheries; and Health and Consumer Protection).
Vzorec transakcij Računskega sodišča v okviru njegove letne revizije (DAS) je običajno majhen (za proračunsko leto 2010 je bilo preskušenih 12 plačil, ki so zajemala področja okolja, pomorskih zadev in ribištva ter zdravja in varstva potrošnikov).
The Court, confirming its previous caselaw (Case C-170/84 Bilka), considered that the exclusion of part-time workers from membership of an occupational scheme may constitute indirect discrimination against women prohibited by ex-Article 119 of the EC Treaty if there is no objective justification for such exclusion.
Sodišče je ob potrditvi prejšnje sodne prakse (zadeva C-170/84, Bilka) menilo, da izključevanje zaposlenih s skrajšanim delovnim časom iz poklicne sheme lahko pomeni posredno diskriminacijo žensk, ki je s prejšnjim členom 119 Pogodbe ES prepovedana, če ni objektivno upravičena.
The Court, following the conclusions of the Advocate-General, ruled that the concept of consideration paid directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, could not encompass benefits of statutory social security schemes without any element of agreement within the enterprise or the occupational branch concerned, and obligatorily applicable to general categories of workers.
Sodišče je v skladu s sklepi generalnega pravobranilca razsodilo, da pojem prejemka, izplačanega neposredno ali posredno, v denarju ali naravi, ne more vključevati prejemkov iz zakonsko predpisanih sistemov socialne varnosti, saj ti ne dopuščajo dogovorov znotraj podjetja ali zadevne poklicne panoge in so obvezni za splošne kategorije delavcev.
The Court, however, also indicated that such a measure must not go beyond what is necessary to attain the objective pursued (referring the assessment of the proportionality of this measure to the national court).
Sodišče je prav tako navedlo, da tak ukrep ne sme presegati tistega, kar je nujno za dosego zadanega cilja (oceno o sorazmernosti tega ukrepa je prepustilo nacionalnemu sodišču).
The Court, in its judgments of 6 October 1993 (Ten Oever), 14 December 1993 (Moroni), 22 December 1993 (Neath) and six judgments of 28 September 1994 confirmed the interpretation of the retroactive effect of the application of the principle of equal treatment between men and women in occupational schemes for paid workers34 in conformity with the additional Protocol to ex-Article 119.
Sodišče je v sodbah z dne 6. oktobra 1993 (Ten Oever), 14. decembra 1993 (Moroni), 22. decembra 1993 (Neath) in šestih sodbah z dne 28. septembra 1994 potrdilo, da je opredelitev retroaktivnega učinka uporabe načela enakega obravnavanja moških in žensk v poklicnih sistemih socialne varnosti za plačane delavce34 v skladu z dodatnim Protokolom k prejšnjemu členu 119.
The Court, which started its work in July 2005, is responsible for cases involving organised crime, serious economic crimes and crimes committed by certain categories of officials.
Sodišče, ki je začelo delovati julija 2005, je pristojno za zadeve s področja organiziranega kriminala in težkega gospodarskega kriminala ter kazniva dejanja, ki jih storijo nekatere kategorije uradnikov.
The Court5 described the requirement to have a subsidiary on the national territory as constituting "the very negation of the free provision of services".
Sodišče5 je zahtevo, da je na nacionalnem ozemlju na voljo podružnica, opredelilo kot „samo zanikanje svobode opravljanja storitev“.
the courts competent for the review in the Member State of origin pursuant to Article 45(3);
sodiščih, ki so po členu 45(3) pristojna za preizkus sodne odločbe v državi članici izvora;
the courts competent in the Member State of enforcement to which the application for a review may be submitted in accordance with Articles 34 (3) or 36;
pristojna sodišča v državi članici izvršbe, pri katerih se lahko v skladu s členom 34(3) ali členom 36 vloži zahteva za presojo;
The courts have had to take over administration of some small-medium manufacturers' businesses, which are currently being sold; others have even closed down their activities.
Nekateri srednje veliki in majhni proizvajalci so prišli pod prisilno upravo in so zdaj naprodaj, drugi pa so celo prenehali poslovati.
The courts in the Member State of the habitual residence of the heir or legatee shall also be competent to receive declarations concerning the acceptance or waiver of succession or legacy or designed to limit the liability of the heir or legatee where such declarations must be made before a court.
Sodišča države članice običajnega prebivališča dediča ali volilojemnika so pristojna tudi za sprejem izjav o sprejemu dediščine ali volila ali odpovedi dediščini ali volilu ali izjav za omejitev odgovornosti dediča ali volilojemnika, kadar je treba te izjave dati pred sodiščem.
The courts in these States apply, in the first place, the law of the common nationality of the spouses.
Sodišči v teh državah najprej uporabita pravo skupnega državljanstva zakoncev.
The courts of a Member State called upon to rule on an application for divorce, judicial separation or marriage annulment under Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003, shall also have jurisdiction, where the spouses so agree, to rule on matters of the matrimonial property regime arising in connection with the application.
Sodišče države članice, na katerem se v skladu z Uredbo (ES) št. 2201/2003 vloži zahtevek za razvezo, prenehanje življenjske skupnosti ali razveljavitev zakonske zveze, je prav tako pristojno za odločanje o vprašanjih premoženjskih razmerij med zakoncema v zvezi s tem zahtevkom, če se zakonca tako dogovorita.
The courts of a Member State seised by an application concerning the succession of a registered partner under Regulation (EC) ... [of the European Parliament and of the Council on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and authentic instruments in matters of succession and the creation of a European Certificate of Succession] shall also have jurisdiction to rule on matters of the property consequences of the partnership arising in connection with the application.
[Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o pristojnosti, pravu, ki se uporablja, priznavanju in izvrševanju sodnih odločb in javnih listin v zapuščinskih zadevah in uvedbi evropskega potrdila o dedovanju], je prav tako pristojno za odločanje o vprašanjih glede premoženjskopravnih posledic partnerskih skupnosti, ki izhajajo iz teh postopkov.
The courts of a Member State seised by an application concerning the succession of a spouse under Regulation (EC) ... [of the European Parliament and of the Council on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and authentic instruments in matters of succession and the creation of a European Certificate of Succession] shall also have jurisdiction to rule on matters of the matrimonial property regime arising in connection with the application.
[Parlamenta in Sveta o pristojnosti, pravu, ki se uporablja, priznavanju in izvrševanju sodnih odločb in javnih listin v zapuščinskih zadevah in uvedbi evropskega potrdila o dedovanju], je prav tako pristojno za odločanje o vprašanjih glede premoženjskih razmerij med zakoncema, ki izhajajo iz teh postopkov.