natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Ladje, naštete v odstavkih II-3, II-4, II-5b, II-5c in II-8 dela b.I in dela b.II priloge I .
Ships identified in Annex I, Part B.I and Part B.II, paragraphs II-3, II-4, II-5b, II-5c and II-8
Ladje, naštete v Prilogi II , oddelku 3, točkah a) in b) .
Ships identified in Annex II 3A and 3B.
Uskladitev s spremenjeno prilogo II.
To ensure consistency with the amended version of Annex II.
Priloga VII, točka a, odstavek 1
ANNEX VII, Point A, paragraph 1
Te smernice se nanašajo samo na ladje, navedene v členu 3.1, 3.2 in 3.3 uredbe (ES) št. 725/2004, pod pogojem, da ne plujejo pod zastavo države pristanišča, v katerem se opravlja inšpekcijski pregled .
This guidance applies only to ships mentioned in articles 3(1), 3(2) and 3(3) of Regulation (EC) No. 725/2004, as long as they do not fly the flag of the port state of inspection.
Te smernice se nanašajo samo na ladje, navedene v členu 3.1 in 3.2 ter po potrebi v členu 3.3 uredbe (ES) št. 725/2004, pod pogojem, da ne plujejo pod zastavo države pristanišča, v katerem se opravlja inšpekcijski pregled.
This guidance applies only to ships mentioned in Articles 3(1) and 3(2) and , where appropriate, 3(3) of Regulation (EC) No. 725/2004, as long as they do not fly the flag of the port state of inspection.
Uskladitev s spremenjenim členom 9.2.
To be consistent with Article 9.2 as amended.
Priloga VIII, naslov
Annex VIII, title
Uskladitev z na novo predlaganim členom 8.
To ensure consistency with the proposed new Article 8.
po prejemu najave ladje, primerne za razširjeni pregled, pristojni organ ladjo takoj obvesti, ali bo inšpekcijski pregled izveden ali ne.
On reception of a pre-notification provided by a ship eligible for an expanded inspection, the competent authority shall inform the ship without delay whether or not an expanded inspection will be carried out.
Upravljavec ali poveljnik ladje zagotovi dovolj časa v upravljalnem urniku za izvedbo razširjenega pregleda.
The operator or master of the ship shall ensure that sufficient time is available in the operating schedule to allow the expanded inspection to be carried out.
Uskladitev z novim členom 8, odstavkom 3 .
To ensure consistency with the new Article 8(3).
Ladje za prevoz plinov in ladje za prevoz kemikalij, starejše od 12 let, računano od datuma gradnje, navedenega v spričevalih o varnosti ladje.
Gas and chemical tankers older than 12 years of age, as determined on the basis of the date of construction indicated in the ship's safety certificates.
Ladje za prevoz razsutega tovora, starejše od 12 let, šteto od datuma izgradnje, navedenega v spričevalih o varnosti ladje.
Bulk carriers older than 12 years of age, as determined on the basis of the date of construction indicated in the ship's safety certificates.
Tankerji z bruto tonažo nad 3 000 bt in starejši od 12 let, šteto od datuma izgradnje, navedenega v spričevalih o varnosti ladje.
Oil tankers with a gross tonnage of more than 3 000 gt and older than 12 years of age, as determined on the basis of the date of construction indicated in the ship's safety certificates.
Uskladitev s spremenjeno Prilogo II, delom 3 .
To ensure consistency with the new Annex II, part 3.
Priloga VIII, točka c, naslov
Annex VIII, paragraph C, title
Uskladitev s členom 8 in Prilogo II.
To ensure consistency with Article 8 and Annex II; this reference has become superfluous.
Priloga X, del 1, točka 13
Annex X, paragraph 1, point 13
Ime in naslov lastnika ali upravljavca ladje
Name and address of the ship's owner or the operator
Ime in naslov družbe ali upravljavca ladje
Name and address of the ship's company or the operator
Zdi se umestneje uporabiti besedo "družba" kot pa "lastnik".
It would be more appropriate to use the defined term ‘company’ than the term ‘owner’.
Priloga XIII
ANNEX XIII
Ta priloga je črtana.
Report from Pilot or Port Authority to Port State or Coastal State.
Uskladitev s spremembami v členu 17, kjer so navedene minimalne informacije, ki jih je treba vključiti v poročilo, in kjer je evropska komisija zaprošena, da preko postopka komitologije na osnovi pridobljenih izkušenj predlaga usklajen elektronski format teh poročil.
To ensure consistency with the changes made to Article 17, which lists the minimum information to be supplied in these reports and calls on the Commission, using the comitology procedure, to propose, in the light of experience, a harmonised electronic format for the reports.
Priloga XV
ANNEX XV
Ta priloga je črtana.
(as referred to in Article 20)
Uskladitev s spremenjenim členom 20: črni seznam družb bo oblikovan na osnovi profila tveganja upravljanih ladij iz Priloge II.1.
The black list of under-performing companies will be based on the risk profile of the ships operated, as indicated in Annex II.1.
Splošno ozadje: zakaj predelava direktive 95/21/ES?
General context: why is Directive 95/21/EC being recast?
Direktiva 95/21/ES obravnava ključni element varnosti na morju, ki je pomorska inšpekcija države pristanišča – torej pregled ladij, ki vstopajo v pristanišča evropske unije.
Directive 95/21/EC is concerned with an essential element of maritime safety: port State control, in other words the inspection of ships entering a European Union port.
Direktiva 95/21/ESje bila spremenjena po nesreči tankerja Erika decembra 1999.
Directive 92/21/EC was revised following the 'Erika' disaster in December 1999.
Decembra 2002, po nesreči tankerja Prestige, je svet pozval evropsko komisijo, naj v najkrajšem možnem času pripravi predlog za dopolnitev postopkov pomorske inšpekcije.
In December 2002, following the sinking of the 'Prestige', the Council asked the Commission to submit, as soon as possible, a proposal to strengthen port State control procedures.
V resoluciji je zahteval boljše in okrepljene inšpekcijske preglede ladij v pristaniščih evropske unije.
The recast directive proposed by the Commission was requested by both Parliament and Council.
Predelana direktiva, ki jo je predložila evropska komisija, je torej nastala na osnovi skupne zahteve evropskega parlamenta in sveta, poleg tega pa predstavlja odgovor na potrebo po konsolidirani pomorski inšpekciji, saj se je slednja že večkrat spreminjala in dopolnjevala tako na ravni skupnosti kot na mednarodni ravni, zlasti v okviru pariškega memoranduma.
It is also designed to consolidate the directive on port State control, a system which has undergone many changes both at Community and at international level, particularly in the context of the Paris Memorandum of Understanding (MoU Paris).
Povzetek predloga in ciljev evropske komisije
Summary of the proposal and Commission intentions
Po mnenju poročevalke komisija s predlagano prenovo direktive 95/21/ES sledi trem ciljem:
Your rapporteur considers that, by proposing to recast Directive 95/21/EC, the Commission has a triple objective in mind:
– zagotoviti učinkovitejšo pomorsko inšpekcijo s posebno pozornostjo, namenjeno podstandardnim ladjam, in izboljšati uporabo sistema nadzora v pristaniščih in sidriščih skupnosti;
- making port State control more effective by targeting sub-normal ships and improving the way the control regime is applied at Community ports and anchorages;
– poenostaviti, jasneje zapisati in prilagoditi direktivo, ki je zaradi kopičenja veljavnih obveznosti za pristaniške pomorske inšpekcije s časom postala zelo kompleksna in zapletena;
- simplifying, clarifying, and updating a directive which has gradually become more complex and cumbersome because of the increasing number of requirements imposed on mandatory inspections in ports;
– upoštevati nedavne spremembe predpisov evropske unije in tekočega dogajanja v okviru pariškega memoranduma.
- taking account of recent legislative developments in the European Union and the work in progress in connection with the Paris Memorandum of Understanding.
Pri doseganju zastavljenih ciljev evropska komisija predlaga nekatere večje spremembe:
To attain this triple objective, the Commission proposes a number of major changes:
Na podlagi natančno določenih parametrov se za vsako ladjo vzpostavi profil tveganja.
Individual risk profiles would be established for each ship by reference to a combination of precise parameters.
· Komisija uvaja tudi številne spremembe inšpekcijskega režima, ki bo vseboval tri tipe inšpekcije: začetni, podrobnejši in razširjeni inšpekcijski pregled .
· The Commission also introduces a number of changes to the inspection regime, which would include three types of inspection: initial, detailed and expanded.
· S preoblikovano direktivo so uvedeni inšpekcijski postopki, vzpostavljeni na ravni pariškega memoranduma v zvezi z zaščito na ladjah in v pristaniščih.
· The recast directive introduces inspection procedures laid down by the Paris Memorandum with regard to the safety of ships and port installations.
· Besedilo uvaja nove določbe v zvezi z zavrnitvijo dostopa do pristanišč skupnosti.
· The text introduces new provisions on refusal of access to Community ports.
· Komisija uvaja strožja merila za inšpektorje in opredeli zahteve glede njihovega strokovnega profila, torej njihovih kvalifikacij in pristojnosti.
· The Commission also tightens up the criteria for inspectors by specifying the requirements as regards inspectors’ professional profile, in other words their qualifications and competence.
· Z besedilom so postavljene strožje zahteve glede obveznosti obveščanja s strani pilotov, ki bo po novem veljala tudi za pilote na odprtem morju .
· The proposal also reinforces the notification obligations incumbent on pilots and extends to deep-sea pilots the obligation to report defects.
Predlagano je tudi, da bi se obveščalo tudi o napakah na ladji.
· Finally, the recast proposal provides for a blacklist of companies to be drawn up.
Mnenje poročevalke
Position of the rapporteur
Poročevalka je naklonjena predlogom evropske komisije in podpira poenostavitev in večjo učinkovitost sistema pomorske inšpekcije.
Your rapporteur welcomes the Commission’s plans and largely endorses its aim of simplifying and improving the effectiveness of port State control.
Vseeno želi izraziti začudenje nad obliko, ki jo je v ta namen izbrala komisija, to je preoblikovanje direktive.
However, your rapporteur was surprised at the method chosen by the Commission, namely recasting the directive.
Meni namreč, da ji izbira ne omogoča izpolnitve vseh zastavljenih ciljev, saj se preoblikovanje nanaša na preveč omejena področja.
This approach does not really seem to allow the Commission to achieve all its objectives, as the scope of the proposed recasting seems to be too limited.
Po soglasju z evropsko komisijo in predhodnim posvetovanjem s svetom je poročevalka podprla bolj daljnosežno preoblikovanje direktive 95/21/ES.
In agreement with the Commission, and after preliminary consultations with the Council, your rapporteur supports a more ambitious recasting of Directive 95/21/EC.
Zaradi tega je v primerjavi z začetnim predlogom pripravila precej preoblikovano besedilo, s katerim naj bi bilo omogočeno naslednje:
Consequently, your rapporteur proposes a text which departs considerably from the original proposal so as to make it possible to:
· Večja jasnost nekaterih členov, zlasti členov:
· clarify several articles of the text, and in particular the following articles:
– 5 (o inšpekcijskem režimu skupnosti),
- 5 (on the inspection regime),
– 5a (nov člen o skladnosti z inšpekcijskim režimom skupnosti),
- 5a (new, on Member States’ compliance with inspection objectives),
– 6a (nov člen o profilu tveganja ladje),
- 6a (new, on ship risk profiles),
– 6b (nov člen o pogostosti inšpekcijskih pregledov),
- 6b (new, on frequency of inspections),
– 6c (nov člen o izbiri ladij za inšpekcijski pregled),
- 7 (new, on the selection of ships for inspection),
– 8 (nov člen o vrstah inšpekcijskega pregleda),
- 8 (new, on the various types of inspection),
– 9 (nov člen o navodilih in postopkih v okviru predpisov skupnosti ter pariškega memoranduma),
- 9 (new, on compliance with general Community guidelines and the Paris Memorandum),
– 18a (nov člen o inšpekcijski bazi podatkov);
- 18a (new, on the inspection database);
· Natančna opredelitev prihodnje inšpekcijske baze podatkov, ki bo pomenila ključ do uspeha novega inšpekcijskega režima;
· describe more precisely the future inspection database, which is crucial for the success of the future inspection regime;
· Okrepljena in jasneje opredeljena povezava med inšpekcijskim režimom skupnosti in režimom iz pariškega memoranduma.
· strengthen and clarify the link between the Community inspection regime and the Paris Memorandum inspection regime.
Poročevalka ocenjuje, da zdaj besedilo ponuja mnogo boljšo osnovo za prvo obravnavo.
Your rapporteur considers that this text provides a much better basis for the first reading.
V nadaljevanju se sicer lahko izkaže, da bodo potrebne še nove spremembe za upoštevanje zaključkov pogovorov z evropsko komisijo in svetom, pa tudi na ravni pariškega memoranduma.
However, further amendments might prove necessary to take account of developments in the discussions with the Commission and the Council, and also in the context of the Paris Memorandum.
A ne glede na opravljeno delo v okviru pariškega memoranduma je po mnenju poročevalke nujno, da države članice sprejmejo tudi preoblikovano direktivo.
Your rapporteur considers, however, that regardless of the outcome of the Paris Memorandum proceedings, it is essential for this recast directive to be accepted and adopted by the Member States.
Kar nekaj vnesenih sprememb jasneje opredeljuje povezavo s pariškim memorandumom in omogoča zbližanje v številnih točkah.
The many changes made to the text clarify the link with the Paris Memorandum and make it possible to ensure a greater degree of convergence with the latter.
Prav zaradi tega je zelo pomembno, da svet sprejetje preoblikovane direktive obravnava kot prednostno nalogo.
It is essential, therefore, that the Council make the adoption of this recast directive a priority.
Predlagano besedilo je jasno in dobro utemeljeno, zato ni več razlogov, da bi s sprejetjem direktive čakali do dokončnega zaključka dela v okviru pariškega memoranduma.
With a clear and strong text such as the one proposed by your rapporteur, there are no longer any valid reasons for waiting for the definitive conclusion of the Paris Memorandum proceedings before adopting this directive.
Nekatere točke tehničnega značaja, kot je na primer uporaba inšpekcijskega režima v sidriščih, določila glede vlaganja pritožb in njihove obravnave, oblikovanje črnega seznama ladjarskih družb s slabo uspešnostjo ali vprašanja inšpekcijskih postopkov, bi bilo treba mogoče še dodelati.
It is possible that a certain number of technical points - relating to such matters as the application of the inspection regime at anchorages, rules on lodging and dealing with complaints, the drawing up of a blacklist of under-performing shipping companies and inspection procedures - will need to be clarified further.
Pomorska inšpekcija (preoblikovanje)
Port State control (recast version)
Datum predložitve ep
Date submitted to Parliament
datum razglasitve na zasedanju
Date announced in plenary
datum imenovanja
Date appointed
Obravnava v odboru
Discussed in
o osnutku sklepa Sveta o prilagoditvi določb iz naslova IV Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti v zvezi s pristojnostmi Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti
on the draft Council decision adapting the provisions concerning the Court of Justice in fields covered by Title IV of Part Three of the Treaty establishing the European Community
– ob upoštevanju osnutka sklepa Sveta, priloženega sporočilu Komisije ( KOM(2006)0346 - C6-0304/2006 ),
– having regard to the draft Council decision, annexed to the Commission communication ( COM(2006)0346 - C6‑0304/2006 ),
– ob upoštevanju druge alineje člena 67(2) Pogodbe o ES, v skladu s katero se je Svet posvetoval s Parlamentom,
– having regard to Article 67(2), second indent, of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve ( A6-0082/2007 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs( A6‑0082/2007 ),
Po mnenju Sodišča je postopek predhodnega odločanja bistven za to, „da pravo, ki ga uvaja pogodba, ohranja svoj značaj Skupnosti, in ima za cilj zagotavljati, da je v vseh okoliščinah to pravo enako v vseh državah Skupnosti“
According to the Court of Justice, the preliminary ruling procedure is "essential for the preservation of the Community character of the law established by the Treaty and has the object of ensuring that in all circumstances this law is the same in all States of the Community"
Člen 234 sicer Sodišču podeljuje pristojnost za predhodno odločanje o razlagi zakonodaje Skupnosti in o veljavnosti aktov institucij Skupnosti, vendar člen 68(1) omejuje možnost postavljanja vprašanj za predhodno odločanje v zvezi z ukrepi iz naslova IV Pogodbe o ES (vizumi, azil, priseljevanje in druge politike v zvezi s prostim gibanjem oseb) le na sodišča ali razsodišča „zoper odločitev katerih po nacionalnem pravu ni pravnega sredstva“.
Whereas Art. 234 empowers the Court of Justice to give preliminary rulings on the interpretation of Community law and on the validity of acts of the Community institutions, Art. 68(1) restricts the possibility to make references for preliminary rulings concerning measures based on Title IV of the EC Treaty (Visas, asylum, immigration and other policies related to free movement of persons) to courts and tribunals "against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law".
Na koncu pa člen 68(3) predvideva neke vrste postopek predhodnega odločanja o vprašanjih razlage naslova IV ali aktov institucij, ki na njem temeljijo, za katerega pa ne zaprosijo nacionalna sodišča, temveč Svet, Komisija ali država članica.
Lastly, Art. 68(3) provides for a species of preliminary ruling procedure to be brought, not by national courts, but by the Council, the Commission or a Member State on a question of interpretation of Title IV or acts of the institutions based thereon.
S stališča pristojnosti Odbora za pravne zadeve na področju pravosodnega sodelovanja v civilnih zadevah in zlasti mednarodnem zasebnem pravu velja opozoriti, da je z uredbama 44/2001 in 1347/2000 prenos konvencij o pristojnosti in priznavanju ter izvrševanju sodnih odločb v civilnih in gospodarskih zadevah ter v zakonskih sporih v zakonodajo Skupnosti predstavljal korak nazaj v primerjavi s prejšnjimi protokoli k tem konvencijam, ki so pristojnosti za začetek postopka predhodnega odločanja podeljevali tudi pritožbenim sodiščem in ne le sodiščem najvišje stopnje
From the point of view of the Legal Affairs Committee's competence for judicial cooperation in civil matters, and particularly private international law, it is noteworthy that the "communitarisation" of the conventions on jurisdiction and recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters and in matrimonial matters by Regulations Nos 44/2001 and 1347/2000 constituted a step backwards as compared with the former protocols to those conventions, which conferred jurisdiction to seek preliminary rulings also on appellate courts and not merely on courts of last instance
Med petletnim prehodnim obdobjem po začetku veljavnosti Amsterdamske pogodbe odloča Svet soglasno na predlog Komisije ali na pobudo države članice in po posvetovanju z Evropskim parlamentom.
During a transitional period of five years following the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam, the Council shall act unanimously on a proposal from the Commission or on the initiative of a Member State and after consulting the European Parliament.
Po tem petletnem obdobju:
After this period of five years:
- Svet odloča na podlagi predlogov Komisije; Komisija preuči vsako prošnjo države članice, naj pri Svetu vloži predlog;
- the Council shall act on proposals from the Commission; the Commission shall examine any request made by a Member State that it submit a proposal to the Council,
- Svet po posvetovanju z Evropskim parlamentom soglasno sprejme sklep, s katerim zagotovi, da vsa področja ali dele področij iz tega naslova ureja postopek iz člena 251, in prilagodi določbe o pristojnostih Sodišča. .... , s čemer bi člen 68 postal neveljaven.
- the Council, acting unanimously after consulting the European Parliament, shall take a decision with a view to providing for all or parts of the areas covered by this title to be governed by the procedure referred to in Article 251 and adapting the provisions relating to the powers of the Court of Justice. .... be utilised in order to render Art. 68 ineffective.
Predlaga tudi, da bi prenehal veljati člen 2(1) Protokola o vključitvi schengenskega pravnega reda.
It also proposes that Art. 2(1) of the Protocol integrating the Schengen acquis should cease to apply.
Posledica tega bi bila, da bi Sodišče lahko uporabljalo standardna pravila iz člena 234, ne da bi bili zahtevki za predhodno odločanje omejeni le na sodišča najvišje stopnje.
As a result, the Court could apply the standard rules of Art. 234 without any restriction to requests for preliminary rulings from courts of last instance only.
Ta predlog bi:
This proposal would:
· zagotovil enotno uporabo in razlago prava Skupnosti tudi na tem področju;
· ensure the uniform application and interpretation of Community law also in this area;
· omogočil krepitev sodnega varstva na področjih, kjer je varstvo temeljnih pravic še posebej občutljivo;
· make it possible to strengthen judicial protection in fields that are particularly sensitive in terms of fundamental rights;
· odpravil nazadovanje na področju sodnega varstva v civilnih zadevah iz člena 65 Pogodbe ES, ki je posledica amsterdamske pogodbe;
· remedy the retrograde step in judicial protection in civil matters covered by Art. 65 as a result of the Amsterdam Treaty;
· omogočil normalno delovanje pravnega sistema Skupnosti na tem področju.
· enable the Community judicial system to perform normally in this area.
Predlog bi predvsem vodil k enotni razlagi in uporabi prava ES – in s tem k enotnemu sistemu sodnega varstva – na področju, ki je zajeto v naslovu IV.
More specifically, the proposal would be conducive to the uniform interpretation and application of the EC law - and hence to a uniform system of judicial protection - in the area covered by Title IV.
Celovita uporaba postopka predhodnega odločanja pri naslovu IV bi torej okrepila sodno varstvo ljudi, ki jih to zadeva.
Again, the full application of the preliminary ruling procedure to Title IV would reinforce the judicial protection of people concerned.
Trenutno lahko osebe, ki menijo, da so bile z aktom Skupnosti, sprejetim pod tem naslovom, kršene njihove temeljne pravice, Sodišču predložijo vprašanje za predhodno odločanje le, če so izkoristile vsa nacionalna pravna sredstva v smislu, da morajo s svojim primerom stopiti pred sodišče najvišje stopnje.
At present, persons who consider that their fundamental rights have been violated by a Community act adopted under that Title can refer a question for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice only if they have exhausted all national remedies in the sense that they have to take their case to the court of final appeal.
Stroški teh postopkov utegnejo odvrniti tožnike in pravici ne bo zadoščeno.
The expense of doing so may deter litigants and justice may suffer.
Vprašljivo je, če je trenutni položaj v skladu z obveznostmi Unije po Evropski konvenciji o človekovih pravicah.
It is questionable whether the present position is compatible with the Union's obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Če bo predlog sprejet, bodo lahko vprašanja za predhodno odločanje predložila celo nacionalna sodišča prve stopnje.
If the proposal is accepted, even national courts of first instance will be able to refer a question for a preliminary ruling.