natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Organizacija mora vedno imeti na razpolago vodstveno in tehnično podporo ter raziskovalno osebje, ki je sorazmerno z velikostjo klasificiranega ladjevja, sestavo organizacije in njenim sodelovanjem pri gradnji in predelavi ladij.
The organisation must be established at all times with significant managerial, technical, support and research staff commensurate with the size of the fleet in its class, its composition and the organization’s involvement in the construction and conversion of ships.
Priloga I, del B, odstavek 4 a (novo)
Annex I, part B, paragraph 4 a (new)
Organizacija, njeni inšpektorji in tehnično osebje pri svojem delu ne posegajo v pravice intelektualne lastnine ladjedelnic, dobaviteljev opreme in lastnikov ladij, kar vključuje spričevala, licence, znanje in izkušnje ter vse druge oblike znanja, uporaba katerega je na ravni Skupnosti ali na nacionalni ravni pravno zaščitena; organizacija, inšpektorji ali tehnično osebje, ki ga organizacija zaposluje, pod nobenim pogojem in ne glede na člen 17 ne posredujejo ali širijo komercialno pomembnih informacij, ki so jih pridobili med opravljanjem inšpekcij, pregledov in nadzora na ladjah v gradnji ali popravilu.
The organisation, its inspectors, and its technical staff shall carry out their work without in any way harming the intellectual property rights of shipyards, equipment suppliers, and shipowners, including patents, licences, know-how, or any other kind of knowledge whose use is legally protected at Community or national level; under no circumstances, and notwithstanding Article 17, may either the organisation or the inspectors and technical staff whom it employs pass on or divulge commercially relevant data obtained in the course of their work of inspecting, checking, and monitoring ships under construction or repair.
Tako kot se priznane organizacije upravičeno obotavljajo pri priznavanju organov, ki so tehnološko gledano na nižji stopnji razvoja, morajo drugi operaterji zaščititi svoje pravice intelektualne lastnine.
In view of the justified misgivings of recognised organisations, reflected in their unwillingness to recognise bodies not as technologically advanced as themselves, other operators need to safeguard their intellectual property rights.
Priloga I, del B, odstavek 6, točka g
Annex I, part B, paragraph 6, point (g)
(g) imajo poklicni inšpektorji obširno znanje o določeni vrsti ladje, na kateri izvajajo svoje delo , kolikor je pomembno za izvedbo določenega nadzora, in o zadevnih predpisih, ki se pri tem uporabljajo;
(g) surveyors have an extensive knowledge of the particular type of ship on which they carry out their work as relevant to the particular survey to be carried out and of the relevant applicable requirements;
Priloga I, del B, točka 7
Annex I, part B, paragraph 7
Organizacija razvije, izvaja in vzdržuje učinkovite notranje sisteme nadzora kakovosti, ki temeljijo na ustreznih mednarodno priznanih standardih kakovosti, ter so v skladu z EN ISO/IEC 17020:2004 (inšpekcijski organi) in z EN ISO 9001:2000, kot jih razlaga in potrjuje skupno telo iz člena 21(1).
The organisation has developed, implemented and maintains an effective internal quality system based on appropriate parts of internationally recognised quality standards and in compliance with EN ISO/IEC 17020:2004 (inspection bodies) and with EN ISO 9001:2000, as interpreted and certified by the joint body referred to in Article 21(1).
Organizacija razvije, izvaja in vzdržuje učinkovite notranje sisteme nadzora kakovosti, ki temeljijo na ustreznih mednarodno priznanih standardih kakovosti, ter so v skladu z EN ISO/IEC 17020:2004 (inšpekcijski organi) in z EN ISO 9001:2000, kot jih razlaga in potrjuje ocenjevalni odbor iz člena 21(1).
The organisation has developed, implemented and maintains an effective internal quality system based on appropriate parts of internationally recognised quality standards and in compliance with EN ISO/IEC 17020:2004 (inspection bodies) and with EN ISO 9001:2000, as interpreted and certified by the Assessment Committee referred to in Article 21(1).
Ker ocenjevalni odbor deluje neodvisno, mora imeti dostop do vseh sredstev, ki jih potrebuje za ustrezno delovanje ter temeljito in dosledno delo.
The Assessment Committee shall act independently and shall accordingly have access to all the resources needed to be able to operate properly and carry out thorough and consistent work.
Imeti mora visoko strokovno in obsežno tehnično znanje ter kodeks ravnanja, ki zagotavlja neodvisnost dejavnosti revizorjev.
It shall possess highly specialised and extensive technical skills and a code of conduct that will safeguard the independence of the auditors’ activities.
Skladno poimenovanje odbora v vseh predlogih sprememb.
To be consistent with the body’s name in the amendments.
Treba je opisati značilnosti skupnega odbora, ki mora biti avtonomen in razpolagati s sredstvi, ki mu omogočajo izpolnjevanje zadanih nalog.
There is a need to describe the features of the joint body, which must be autonomous and have the abilities to fulfil its tasks.
Ozadje in namen predloga
Background and purpose of the proposal
Namen te četrte revizije direktive je okrepiti in pojasniti vlogo klasifikacijskih zavodov, ki jih Evropska unija priznava in se sedaj imenujejo „priznane organizacije”, saj so bile pri postopkih pregleda in potrjevanja varnosti svetovne flote ugotovljene precejšnje pomanjkljivosti.
The purpose of this fourth revision is none other than to strengthen and clarify the role of classification societies recognised by the EU, now known as ‘recognised organisations’, having found that there are significant failings in the process of inspecting and certifying the safety of the world’s shipping.
Že prejšnje direktive, zlasti direktiva 2001/105/ES (ena izmed treh iz zakonodajnega paketa Erika I), so opozorile na nujno potrebo po preoblikovanju sedanjega sistema odobritev klasifikacijskih zavodov s strani Skupnosti, vzpostavljenega z direktivo 94/57/ES.
Previous directives, particularly Directive 2001/105/EC, one of three proposals in the Erika 1 legislative package, have already raised the serious need to reform the present system for Community recognition of classification societies, set up by Directive 94/57/EC; the substantial progress that they made was then reinforced by the Council’s conclusions of 13 December 2002 and Parliament’s resolutions on strengthening safety at sea ( 2003/2235(INI) and the resolution adopted after the wreck of the Prestige ( 2003/2066(INI) ).
Bistveni napredek teh direktiv sta podkrepila tudi Svet in Evropski parlament, prvi v zaključkih s srečanja 13. decembra 2002 in drugi v resoluciji o izboljšanju varnosti na morju ( 2003/2235(INI) in resoluciji, sprejeti po nesreči tankerja Prestige ( 2003/2066(INI) ).
The reason for returning to this question is the need for further tightening up of the activity of these organisations which, as has been said by the various operators making up the sea transport sector, if they did not exist would need inventing as they fulfil a vital task in maintaining safety at sea.
K vprašanju se je treba vrniti zato, ker je pomembno, da se še dodatno okrepijo dejavnosti teh organizacij, ki bi jih morali po izjavah različnih upravljavcev v pomorskem sektorju izumiti, če še ne bi obstajale, tako zelo pomembno vlogo igrajo pri ohranjanju varnosti na morju.
However, as mentioned there are still serious deficiencies today in the process of inspecting and certifying recognised organisations, and this poses a serious and unacceptable threat to safety and the environment.
A kot že rečeno, obstajajo pri postopku pregleda in potrjevanja priznanih organizacij precejšnje pomanjkljivosti, ki predstavljajo hudo in nesprejemljivo grožnjo za varnost in okolje.
Recognised organisations are a major concentration of power in the sea transport safety network and must be closely supervised by the appropriate authorities.
Priznane organizacije imajo precejšen vpliv na mrežo varnosti v pomorskem prometu, ta vpliv pa mora biti predmet temeljitega nadzora pristojnih služb, ki morajo zagotavljati odločno in povsem neodvisno delovanje organizacij, pristojnih za nadzor nad tem, ali ladje, ki plujejo po naših vodah, ustrezajo mednarodnim standardom s področja varnosti in preprečevanja onesnaževanja.
These should guarantee that the organisations that are required to ensure that the vessels on our seas comply with the relevant international safety and anti-pollution standards act with independence and rigour.
Reforme, ki jih uvaja direktiva Komisije
Reforms proposed by the Commission directive
Komisija je v okviru „tretjega zakonodajnega paketa s področja varnosti na morju” pripravila predlog za prenovo sedanjih pravil in predpisov, ki veljajo za priznane organizacije pri klasifikaciji in inšpekcijskih pregledih ladij, s čimer je spremenila direktivo 94/57/ES.
In its ‘Third package of legislative measures on maritime safety’ the Commission has put forward a proposal with the aim of reforming the current rules and regulations for recognised organisations classifying and inspecting ships, thus amending Directive 94/57/EC.
Direktiva je bila že večkrat bistveno spremenjena, ta četrta dopolnitev pa jo predvsem prenavlja.
Since this directive has already been substantially amended on previous occasions, in this fourth update it has been decided to make use of the technique of recasting the text.
Predlog se nanaša na pet tipov prenove:
The proposal contains five sections of reform:
Krepitev sistemov spremljanja priznanih organizacij:
Improving the systems for the monitoring of recognised organisations
Uskladitev sistema običajne in omejene odobritve
Harmonising the system of ordinary and limited recognition
Po veljavnem sistemu je odobritev pogojena z velikostjo organizacije.
The present system limits recognition according to the size of the organisation.
Komisija predlaga opustitev tega sistema in uvedbo odobritev Skupnosti na podlagi kakovosti in varnosti delovanja organizacije.
The Commission proposes to abandon this system and to tie in Community recognition based on the organisation’s performance in terms of quality and safety.
Poleg tega Komisija uvaja mehanizem zaščite, s katerim bo lahko preprečila, da bi priznane organizacije ne glede na svojo velikost delovale v imenu držav članic na posebnih področjih, za katere niso ustrezno usposobljene.
At the same time the Commission is introducing a safeguard mechanism enabling it to prevent a recognised organisation, whatever its size, from acting on behalf of Member States in specialised areas for which it does not have the necessary capability.
Komisija bo proučila tudi primere omejene odobritve, dodeljene v skladu z veljavno direktivo, in se po postopku komitologije odločila, ali je treba te omejitve nadomestiti ali umakniti.
The Commission will also examine cases of limited recognition granted under the current directive and decide through the comitology procedure whether the limitations should be replaced or scrapped.
Reforma meril za odobritev:
Reform of the recognition criteria
Predlog si prizadeva za poenostavitev meril za odobritev, saj so bila pripravljena dokaj ohlapno.
The aim is to simplify the criteria for granting recognition, since they have been developed in a somewhat disorderly manner.
Predlagane spremembe zadevajo predvsem število inšpektorjev (njihovo število naj bi bilo sorazmerno s klasificirano floto), nepooblaščene inšpektorje in upoštevanje pravne strukture priznanih organizacij.
The proposed changes are centred on the number of inspectors in proportion to the fleet being classified, the use of non-exclusive inspectors and consideration of the legal structure of recognised organisations.
Reforma sistema sankcij:
Reform of the system of penalties
Komisija si nazadnje prizadeva za prožnejši sistem sankcij.
The Commission wants ultimately to make the penalty system more flexible.
Razjasnitev področja uporabe sedanje direktive in poenostavitev uporabe nekaterih njenih določb:
Clarifying the scope and facilitating the application of certain provisions in the present directive
Točka se nanaša na posebnosti, ki veljajo za Skupnost pri opredelitvi njenih pristojnosti za inšpekcijski pregled.
This point refers to the specific arrangements to define the Community’s inspection powers.
Pogoji, ki veljajo za dostopanje inšpektorjev revizorjev do dokumentacije plovil, so postali bolj jasni.
It clarifies the access of inspector-auditors to the ships’ documentation.
Pravna struktura priznanih organizacij predstavlja drugi bistveni vidik, zato Komisija predlaga širok koncept organizacije, ki zagotavlja, da odobritev velja za najvišjo raven, ki ustreza konceptu.
Another fundamental aspect is the legal structure of recognised organisations: to this end the Commission proposes to introduce a broad organisational concept, so as to ensure that recognition applies at the highest level which that concept entertains.
Glede področja uporabe lahko rečemo, da se besedilo sklicuje na konvencijo SOLAS, a ne vključuje področja varnosti.
On the question of scope, the text refers to the SOLAS Convention, though excluding a section on protection.
Posvetovanje z zainteresiranimi stranmi
Consultation of interested parties
Poročevalec je menil, da se je smotrno še drugič srečati s predstavniki sektorja in ponovno proučiti njihova merila.
The rapporteur thought fit to meet the industry a second time to re-acquaint himself with its criteria.
Srečal se je tudi z lastniki ladij, ladjedelničarji in predstavniki evropske industrije za ribolovno opremo.
There were also meetings with shipbuilders, shipowners and representatives of the European marine equipment industry.
Poročevalec je poleg naštetega priredil javno predstavitev v Evropskem parlamentu, ki je bila odprta za Odbor za promet in naj bi izpolnila željo IACS, da se predstavita obseg dela in pomen priznanih organizacij.
Furthermore, the rapporteur held a public hearing at the European Parliament that was open to the full Committee on Transport, with the aim of meeting the wish of the IACS to explain the scope and significance of recognised organisations.
Pripombe in predlogi poročevalca:
The rapporteur’s considerations and proposals
Poročevalec izreka podporo predlogu direktive, ki predstavlja korak naprej pri zagotavljanju varnosti na morju in boju proti onesnaževanju.
The rapporteur takes a positive view of the proposed directive, which is a step forward in providing for safety at sea and controlling pollution.
Vseeno je v poročilo vključil nekaj predlogov sprememb, ki naj bi po njegovem mnenju izboljšali predlog Komisije.
However, the report does put forward a number of amendments which in our view improve the proposal.
(a) Krepitev sistemov spremljanja priznanih organizacij:
(a) Improving the systems for monitoring recognised organisations
Zamisel o ustanovitvi skupne strukture za ocenjevanje in potrjevanje kakovosti je dobra.
The creation of a joint body for assessing and certifying quality is a welcome development.
Kar se tiče njegovih nalog, odbor ne bo deloval le v imenu priznanih organizacij, ampak skupaj z državami članicami, in se bo posvetoval z IMO.
With regard to its establishment, this will not be a matter solely for the recognised organisations but will take place in conjunction with the Member States and in consultation with the IMO.
(b) Poenotenje dvojnega sistema običajne in omejene odobritve
(b) Merging the present twofold system of ordinary and limited recognition
Komisija predlaga odpravo sedanjega dvojnega sistema odobritev, namesto njega pa predlaga odobritev Skupnosti, ki bo namesto na kvantitativnih merilih, ki izhajajo iz velikosti organizacij, temeljila na merilih kakovosti.
The Commission proposes to end the present twofold system and calls for a Community recognition scheme based on qualitative criteria, rather than quantitative criteria dependent on size.
Poročevalec meni, da je takšna reforma pozitivna, vseeno pa se mu zdi vprašljiva zamisel o vzajemnem priznavanju .
The rapporteur sees this as a positive reform but points out that mutual recognition is a controversial matter.
Poročevalec je predlagal nekaj sprememb za večjo jasnost teh primerov in izpostavil zahtevo, da se pri uskladitvi pravil po potrebi upoštevajo najzahtevnejši in najstrožji standardi.
The rapporteur has put forward a number of amendments here to further clarify such cases, and ensure that when the rules are harmonised this should be done by reference to the most demanding and rigorous standards.
(c) Reforma sistema sankcij:
(c) Reform of the system of penalties
Poročevalec ocenjuje, da je sistem, ki ga zagovarja Komisija, pravičnejši od prejšnjega.
In the rapporteur’s judgement the system that the Commission advocates comes closer to equity than its predecessor.
Sistem sankcij, ki upošteva težo prekrška in gospodarsko zmogljivost organizacije, je pravičnejši in učinkovitejši.
A system of graduated penalties proportionate both to the severity of the infringement and the organisation’s economic capacity is fairer and more effective.
Kljub temu je poročevalec vložil nekaj predlogov sprememb, da bi bolje opredelil vrste prekrškov, za katere se predpiše kazen.
However, the rapporteur has proposed some amendments to define more clearly the type of infringement that is likely to be penalised.
Države članice pri procesu sodelujejo in morajo biti obveščene o popravljalnih in preventivnih ukrepih, ki jih bo Komisija zahtevala od priznane organizacije, ki ne bo izpolnjevala meril iz priloge I ali obveznosti, ki jih organizaciji nalaga direktiva, če deluje v imenu neke države članice.
The Member States are also brought in, as they must be notified of any corrective or preventive measures that the Commission may require of a recognised organisation that fails to comply with the criteria laid down in Annex I, or with the requirements of the directive when the organisation is acting on behalf of a Member State.
Predvidena je tudi možnost, da države članice svoje domneve posredujejo odboru COSS (odboru za varnost na morju in preprečevanje onesnaževanja z ladij) in se tako prepreči njihova nemoč braniti se.
Moreover, we have added the option enabling Member States to put their allegations to the Committee on Safe Seas and the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (COSS), to avoid a situation in which they are unable to defend themselves.
Znižan je tudi delež skupnega referenčnega zneska za denarne globe, in sicer na 5 odstotkov, ker se zdi delež 10 odstotkov pretiran.
Finally, the total reference figure for penalty fines is reduced to 5 %, as 10 % appears excessive.
(d) Omejena in neomejena odgovornost:
(d) Limited or unlimited liability
Vprašanje, ali naj bo odgovornost priznanih organizacij omejena ali ne, je sporno in vsaka stran je zagovarjala svoje stališče.
Whether or not recognised organisations should have limited liability is a matter of controversy, and both sides put forward good reasons to support their views.
Leta 2001 je bilo s členom 8(5) direktive predvideno, da Komisija Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu predloži poročilo z oceno ekonomskih posledic sistema odgovornosti, predvidenega v direktivi 94/57/ES.
Back in 2001, there was provision in Article 8(5) of the directive for the Commission to submit to Parliament and the Council an assessment report on the economic impact of the civil liability regime laid down in Directive 94/57/EC.
Komisija se je tedaj obvezala, da bo poročilo predložila najkasneje do 22. julija 2006.
The Commission undertook to submit such a report by 22 July 2006.
Poročilo prinaša naslednje ugotovitve:
The report’s conclusions are as follows.
Direktiva navaja, da mora biti odgovornost v primeru hude malomarnosti neomejena, kar je nesporno.
The directive states that in cases of gross negligence there must be provision for unlimited liability, and this principle is not disputed.
Za primere navadne malomarnosti direktiva ne zahteva neomejene odgovornosti, pač pa strankam prepušča pogajanja in dogovor o plačljivem znesku.
As to the liability arrangements applicable in the event of simple negligence, the directive does not require unlimited liability but leaves it to the parties concerned to negotiate and agree on the sums to be applied.
Zdaj veljavni okvir za primere navadne malomarnosti je takšen: sedemnajst držav članic in Norveška se je odločilo, da bo za primere navadne malomarnosti uporabljajo omejeno odgovornost.
The current situation with cases of simple negligence is this: 17 Member States and Norway have established limited liability for cases of simple negligence.
Zneski kazni več ali manj ustrezajo tistim, ki jih navaja direktiva, s tem da so najnižji zneski postali najvišji možni.
The amounts to a large extent reflect those in the directive, which were thresholds and are now ceilings.
Poročevalec torej ocenjuje, da je predlog Komisije uravnotežen in ustreza merilom, ki so v Evropski uniji najbolj razširjena.
As a result the rapporteur concludes that the Commission proposal is a balanced one and meets the majority’s criteria in the European Union.
Inšpekcijski pregled in nadzor ladij (prenovljena različica)
Ship inspection and survey organisations (recast version)
o zahtevi za zaščito imunitete in privilegijev Giuseppeja Garganija
on the request for defence of the immunity and privileges of Giuseppe Gargani
– ob upoštevanju zahteve Giuseppeja Garganija za zaščito njegove imunitete v zvezi s civilnim postopkom pred italijanskim sodiščem, ki jo je poslanec vložil 30. novembra 2006, na plenarnem zasedanju pa je bila razglašena 11. decembra 2006,
– having regard to the request by Giuseppe Gargani for defence of his immunity in connection with civil proceedings pending before an Italian court, of 30 November 2006, announced in plenary sitting on 11 December 2006,
– po zaslišanju Giuseppeja Garganija v skladu s členom 7(3) Poslovnika,
– having heard Giuseppe Gargani in accordance with Rule 7(3) of its Rules of Procedure,
Zadeva 101/63 Wagner proti Fohrmannu in Krieru [1964] Poročila sodišča Evropskih skupnosti (ECR) 195 in zadeva 149/85 Wybot proti Faureju in drugim [1986] ECR 2391. ,
Case 101/63 Wagner v Fohrmann and Krier [1964] ECR 195 and Case 149/85 Wybot v Faure and others [1986] ECR 2391. of the Court of Justice of the European Communities,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve ( A6-0071/2007 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A6‑0071/2007 ),
Na zasedanju 11. decembra 2006 je predsednik Parlamenta razglasil, da je prejel pismo s 30. novembra 2006 z zahtevo za zaščito imunitete poslanca Giuseppeja Garganija, ki je bilo takoj posredovano Odboru za pravne zadeve.
At the sitting of 11 December 2006, the President of Parliament announced that he had received a request for the defence of the Parliamentary immunity of Giuseppe Gargani MEP by letter of 30 November 2006, which was duly forwarded to the Committee for Legal Affairs.
Naslov članka Giuseppeja Garganija je bil "Nedosledna pravica (...)
Mr Gargani's article was entitled "Illogical justice (....)
Obravnavanje svobode govora kot zločina.
Treating freedom of speech as a crime.
Nov način, kako spremeniti pravosodni sistem v karikaturo pravičnosti?
Another means of turning the justice system into a travesty of justice?
Vprašanje je neizogibno, potem ko je nova sodna zadeva spet zbudila dvom in osuplost".
The question inevitably arises after yet another court case causes doubt and dismay".
Članek je govoril o zadevi Lina Jannuzzija, italijanskega senatorja in novinarja, ki je bil obsojen na več kot dve leti zapora "ker je Nadzorno sodišče v Neaplju na podlagi nenavadne interpretacije prava zavrnilo predloge za odložitev izvršitve kazni, ki je bila izrečena Jannuzziju zaradi obrekovanja, storjenega v času njegove novinarske dejavnosti v preteklih letih".
The article discussed the case of Lino Jannuzzi, an Italian senator and journalist, who was sentenced to a term of over 2 years' imprisonment "because the Tribunale di Sorveglianza of Naples, on the basis of an extraordinary interpretation of the law, has rejected applications to suspend the sentence passed on Jannuzzi for defamation in the course of his activities as a journalist in previous years".