natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Predlaga tudi spremembo besedila člena 8, nov odstavek 1a k členu 39 poslovnika ter spremembo člena 150(6) pododstavka 1 ter člena 2(1) priloge I poslovnika.
Other amendments are accounted for by a reworking of Rule 8, a new paragraph 1a to be inserted in Rule 39, and changes to the first subparagraph of Rule 150(6) and to Article 2, first paragraph, of Annex I.
Besedilo v veljavi
Present text
Kakršen koli dogovor o odstopu od mandata pred koncem ali ob zaključku mandatnega obdobja je ničen.
Any agreement concerning resignation from office before or at the end of a parliamentary term shall be null and void.
Če v statutu ni drugače določeno, pravila o izvajanju statuta poslancev v Evropskem parlamentu določi predsedstvo.
Except where the Statute provides otherwise, the rules implementing the Statute for Members of the European Parliament shall be laid down by the Bureau.
Parlament lahko z resolucijo, sprejeto na podlagi samoiniciativnega poročila pristojnega odbora, sestavljenega v skladu s členom 45, od Komisije zahteva, da mu predloži vsak ustrezen predlog v skladu s členom 192(2) Pogodbe ES.
Parliament may request the Commission to submit to it any appropriate proposal pursuant to Article 192, second paragraph, of the EC Treaty by adopting a resolution on the basis of an own-initiative report from the committee responsible initiated pursuant to Rule 45 .
Vsak poslanec lahko na podlagi pravice do pobude, ki je podeljena Parlamentu s členom 192 Pogodbe ES, vloži predlog za akt Skupnosti.
Any Member may table a proposal for a Community act on the basis of the right of initiative conferred on Parliament by Article 192 of the EC Treaty.
Predlog se vloži pri konferenci predsednikov, ki ga posreduje pristojnemu odboru v obravnavo.
The proposal shall be submitted to the Conference of Presidents, which shall refer it to the committee responsible for consideration.
Predlog se predhodno prevede v tiste uradne jezike, za katere predsednik meni, da so potrebni za potek skupne obravnave.
Prior to referral, the proposal shall be translated into those official languages which the chairman of that committee regards as necessary to make summary consideration possible.
Pristojni odbor sprejme sklep o nadaljnjem postopku v roku treh mesecev od posredovanja predloga in po zaslišanju pripravljavca predloga.
The committee responsible shall take a decision on further action within three months following the referral and after hearing the author of the proposal.
O svoji odločitvi obvesti konferenco predsednikov.
It shall inform the Conference of Presidents about its decision.
Pristojni odbor sklene:
The committee responsible shall decide to:
a) vložiti predlog resolucije na podlagi tega predloga.
(a) table a motion for a resolution on the basis of such a proposal.
Resolucijo sprejme večina poslancev; istočasno se lahko določi termin za predstavitev predloga; ali
The resolution shall be adopted by a majority of the component Members of Parliament and, at the same time, a deadline for submission of the proposal may be fixed; or
b) sprožiti postopek iz člena 45; ali
(b) initiate the procedure under Rule 45; or
c) zavrniti predlog.
(c) reject such a proposal.
V primeru zavrnitve predloga je treba vedno navesti razlog.
Where the proposal is rejected the reason must always be stated.
(b) se priprave predloga še niso začele ali neupravičeno zamujajo; ali
(b) the preparations of such a proposal have not started or are unduly delayed;
(c) Komisija ni pozitivno odgovorila na prejšnje zahteve, ki jih je podal pristojni odbor ali so vsebovane v resoluciji, ki jo je Parlament sprejel z večino oddanih glasov.
(c) the Commission has not responded positively to earlier requests either from the committee responsible or contained in resolutions adopted by Parliament with a majority of the votes cast.
Člen 150, odstavek 6, alinea 1
Rule 150, paragraph 6, subparagraph 1
Parlament ne more odločiti drugače, če temu nasprotuje najmanj 40 poslancev.
Parliament may not decide otherwise if at least forty Members object.
Razen v primeru iz člena 155(4) se Parlament izogiba sprejemanju odločitev, s katerimi bi lahko bili poslanci, ki uporabljajo določen jezik, oškodovani.
Without prejudice to Rule 155(4), Parliament shall avoid taking decisions which would lead to Members who use a given language being disadvantaged to an unacceptable degree.
Izvrševanje tega člena ne sme posegati v možnost izjemnega vlaganja sporazumnih predlogov sprememb v skladu s členom 155(4).
This rule should be applied without prejudice to the possibility of tabling of compromise amendments under exceptional circumstances, as stipulated in Article 155(4).
Priloga I, člen 2, odstavek 1, točka a a) (novo)
Annex I, Article 2, paragraph 1, point (a a) (new)
Primerno je uporabiti izraz "drug parlament" v skladu s statutom poslancev.
It seems to be appropriate to use the term ‘another parliament’ consistently with the wording of the Statute for Members.
Ta izraz bo natančno opredeljen v izvedbenih ukrepih statuta.
Exact interpretation of this term will be provided in the implementing measures of the Statute for Members.
Sprememba poslovnika glede na statut poslancev
Amendment of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure in the light of the Statute for Members
Okrepljeno sodelovanje – Datum razglasitve na zasedanju
Enhanced cooperation – date announced in plenary
Datum sklepa o pripravi poročila
Committee(s) asked for opinion(s) Date announced in plenary
Datum razglasitve dovoljenja na zasedanju
Not delivering opinion(s) Date of decision
Odbori, zaprošeni za mnenje Datum razglasitve na zasedanju
Enhanced cooperation Date announced in plenary
o predlogu Odločbe Sveta o odobritvi Republiki Sloveniji, da v interesu Evropske skupnosti ratificira Protokol z dne 12. februarja 2004 o spremembah Pariške konvencije z dne 29. julija 1960 o odgovornosti tretjim na področju jedrske energije
on the proposal for a Council decision authorising the Republic of Slovenia to ratify, in the interest of the European Community, the Protocol of 12 February 2004 amending the Paris Convention of 29 July 1960 on Third Party Liability in the Field of Nuclear Energy
– ob upoštevanju predloga Odločbe Sveta (09453/2007),
– having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (9453/2007),
– ob upoštevanju zahteve za privolitev, ki jo je Svet podal v skladu z drugo alinejo tretjega odstavka člena 300, v povezavi s točko c) člena 61, členom 67 in prvo alinejo drugega odstavka člena 300 pogodbe o ES ( C6-0180/2007 ),
– having regard to the request for assent submitted by the Council pursuant to Article 300, third paragraph, second subparagraph of the EC Treaty ( C6‑0180/2007 ),
– ob upoštevanju priporočila Odbora za pravne zadeve ( A6-0369/2007 ),
– having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A6‑0369/2007 ),
Z odločbo Sveta se Sloveniji, edini novi državi članici, ki je pogodbenica Pariške konvencije z dne 29. julija 1960 o odgovornosti tretjim na področju jedrske energije, dovoli ratifikacijo protokola o spremembi konvencije z dne 12. februarja 2004.
The proposal concerns a Council decision the aim of which is to authorise Slovenia, the only new Member State which is a contracting party to the 1960 Paris Convention on Third-Party Liability in the Field of Nuclear Energy (‘the Convention’) to ratify the 2004 Protocol amending that Convention (‘the Protocol’).
Ratifikacija protokola ali pristop k njemu sta hkrati v pristojnosti držav članic in Evropske skupnosti.
Ratification of, or accession to, the Protocol falls within the sphere of competence of both the Member States and the Community.
Skupnost ima izključno pristojnost v zvezi s spremembo člena 13 pariške konvencije, v primeru če ta zadeva določbe Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 44/2001 z dne 22. decembra 2000 o pristojnosti in priznavanju ter izvrševanju sodnih odločb v civilnih in gospodarskih zadevah.
The Community has sole competence with regard to the possibility of amending Article 13 of the Convention where such an amendment has an impact on the rules laid down in Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.
Države članice ohranijo pravno pristojnost na področjih, ki jih zajema protokol in ki niso zajete v pravu Skupnosti.
The Member States retain their competence in matters covered by the Protocol which do not affect Community law.
Svet je z dvema odločbama, in sicer odločbo 2003/882/ES z dne 27. novembra 2003 in odločbo 2004/294/ES z dne 8. marca 2004, pooblastil države članice, ki so pogodbenice pariške konvencije, k podpisu protokola v interesu Skupnosti in k njegovi ratifikaciji oziroma pristopu k njemu.
By two Decisions, 2003/882/EC of 27 November 2003 and 2004/294/EC of 8 March 2004, the Council authorised the Member States which are contracting parties to the Convention to sign and ratify the Protocol or to accede to it.
Avstrija, Irska in Luksemburg, ki niso pogodbenice pariške konvencije, protokola niso podpisale.
Austria, Ireland and Luxembourg are not parties to the Convention and will not sign the Protocol.
Slovenija je protokol h konvenciji podpisala 12. februarja 2004.
Slovenia signed the Protocol to the Convention on 12 February 2004.
Ker je bila odločba 2004/294/ES naslovljena le na nekatere države članice, Republika Slovenija ob svojem pristopu k Evropski uniji 1. maja 2004 v skladu s členom 53 akta o pristopu iz leta 2003 ni mogla biti obravnavana kot naslovnik.
Since Decision 2004/294/EC had been addressed only to certain Member States, when Slovenia acceded to the European Union on 1 May it could not be considered an addressee of the Decision, pursuant to Article 53 of the 2003 Act of Accession.
Bolgarija, Češka, Estonija, Madžarska, Latvija, Litva, Poljska, Romunija in Slovaška niso pogodbenice pariške konvencije, so pa pogodbenice dunajske konvencije o civilni odgovornosti za jedrsko škodo z dne 21. maja 1963.
Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Slovakia are not contracting parties to the Paris Convention but are parties to the Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage of 21 May 1963.
Ciper in Malta nista pogodbenici nobene mednarodne konvencije o civilni odgovornosti v jedrskem sektorju.
Cyprus and Malta are not parties to any international convention on third-party liability in the nuclear field.
Edini namen predloga odločbe je torej dati Sloveniji enak položaj, kot ga imajo države članice, na katere je naslovljena odločba 2004/294/ES.
In the light of the above, the sole purpose of this Decision is to place Slovenia on an equal footing with the Member States addressed by Decision 2004/294/EC.
Danska pri sprejetju odločbe ne sodeluje, ta je ne zavezuje in je ni dolžna uporabljati.
Denmark will not participate in the adoption of this proposal for a decision and will not be bound by it or subject to its application.
Združeno kraljestvo in Irsko zavezuje uredba Sveta (ES) št. 44/2001, zato bosta pri sprejetju odločbe sodelovali.
The United Kingdom and Ireland are bound by Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 and will therefore participate in the adoption of the proposal for a decision.
Ratifikacija protokola z dne 12. februarja 2004 o spremembi pariške konvencije z dne 29. julija 1960 o odgovornosti tretjim na področju jedrske energije s strani Republike Slovenije
Ratification by Slovenia of the Protocol of 12 February 2004 amending the Paris Convention of 29 July 1960 on Third-Party Liability in the Field of Nuclear Energy
o predlogu Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 1606/2002 o uporabi mednarodnih računovodskih standardov, kar zadeva Komisiji podeljena izvedbena pooblastila
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 on the application of international accounting standards as regards the implementing powers conferred on the Commission
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu ( KOM(2006)0918 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council ( COM(2006)0918 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve ( A6‑0370/2007 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A6‑0370/2007 ),
Navedena izjava vsebuje seznam aktov, ki bi jih bilo treba nujno prilagoditi, vključno z Uredbo (ES) št. 1606/2002.
That statement indicates a list of instruments which should be adjusted as a matter of urgency, including Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002.
(3) V skladu s skupno izjavo Evropskega parlamenta, Sveta in Komisije o Sklepu 2006/512/ES je treba že veljavne akte , sprejete v skladu s postopkom iz člena 251 Pogodbe, prilagoditi v skladu z veljavnimi postopki , da bi se lahko novi postopek uporabljal zanje .
(3) In accordance with the joint statement of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on Decision 2006/512/EC, for this new procedure to be applicable to instruments already in force adopted in accordance with the procedure under Article 251 of the Treaty, they must be adjusted in accordance with the applicable procedures.
(5) Lahko pride do primerov, v katerih EU v skladu z novim postopkom pred koncem koledarskega leta ne bo mogla sprejeti novo izdanih računovodskih standardov, sprememb k obstoječim računovodskim standardom ali razlag obstoječih računovodskih standardov.
(5) Situations may arise where newly issued accounting standards, amendments to existing accounting standards or interpretations of existing accounting standards cannot, under the new procedure, be adopted by the EU before the end of the calendar year .
To bi lahko imelo škodljive učinke na razumevanje vlagateljev ter s tem na njihovo zaupanje , ker morajo podjetja še naprej uporabljati prejšnje računovodske standarde in razlage, ki so medtem že zastareli.
This could have adverse effects on investor understanding and thus confidence because companies have to continue applying earlier accounting standards or interpretations which have since become out of date.
V zgoraj navedenih okoliščinah je treba zaradi nujnih razlogov Komisiji omogočiti, da sprejme ukrepe za izvajanje Uredbe 1606/2002 v skladu s postopkom iz člena 5a(6) Sklepa 1999/468/ES.
In the above circumstances, it is necessary, for reasons of urgency, to allow the Commission to take measures implementing Regulation 1606/2002 according to the procedure of Article 5a(6) of Decision 1999/468/EC .
(5) Lahko pride do primerov, v katerih je treba hitro ukrepati in zagotoviti pravočasno sprejetje novo izdanih računovodskih standardov, sprememb k obstoječim računovodskim standardom ali razlag obstoječih računovodskih standardov , da jih lahko podjetja izvajajo v določenem poslovnem letu in s tem ne omajajo razumevanja vlagateljev in njihovega zaupanja .
(5) Situations may arise where it is necessary to act speedily to ensure that newly issued accounting standards, amendments to existing accounting standards or interpretations of existing accounting standards are adopted in time for them to be applied by companies for the relevant financial year in order not to undermine investor understanding and thus confidence.
Odbor za ekonomske in monetarne zadeve je sprejemanje mednarodnih računovodskih standardov obravnaval že v preteklih letih.
ECON has in the past years dealt with endorsement of international accounting standards.
Sodelovanje med zadevnimi evropskimi institucijami v okviru postopka Lamfalussy uspešno poteka.
The cooperation between the involved European institutions has under the Lamfalussy-procedure worked well.
Kadar je treba hitro ukrepati, se to tudi zgodi.
In the situations where it has been necessary to move fast this has been done.
Odbor meni, da se bo dobro sodelovanje nadaljevalo in da ni potrebe po formalizaciji nujnega postopka.
ECON is certain that the good cooperation will continue and that there is no need for a formalised urgency procedure.
ČLEN 1, TOČKA 2, TOČKA (A) Člen 6, odstavek 2, pododstavek 2 (Uredba (ES) št. 1606/2002)
ARTICLE 1, POINT 2, POINT (A) Article 6, paragraph 2, subparagraph 2 (Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002)
„Izjemoma, in kadar je to ustrezno utemeljeno, lahko Komisija v nujnih primerih uporabi člen 5a(1), (2), (4) in (6) Sklepa 1999/468/ES.“
'The Commission may, in exceptional and duly justified cases and on imperative grounds of urgency, make use of Article 5a(1), (2), (4) and (6) of Decision 1999/468/EC.”
Odbor za pravne zadeve pozdravlja predlog Komisije za prilagoditev Uredbe (ES) 1606/2002 o uporabi mednarodnih računovodskih standardov glede na regulativni postopek s pregledom.
The Committee on Legal Affairs welcomes the Commission's proposal, which aims to adapt Regulation (EC) 1606/2002 on the application of international accounting standards, to the regulatory procedure with scrutiny.
Novi postopek je uveden s členom 5a Sklepa Sveta 1999/486/ES z dne 28. junija 1999 o določitvi postopkov za uresničevanje Komisiji podeljenih izvedbenih pooblastil (kot je bil spremenjen s Sklepom Sveta 2006/512/ES z dne 17. julija 2006).
This new procedure is introduced by Article 5a of the Council Decision 1999/486/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission (as amended by Council Decision 2006/512/EC of 17 July 2006).
Dejstvo, da Evropski parlament lahko izvaja večji nadzor nad izvedbenimi ukrepi, ki jih predlaga Komisija, je nadvse dobrodošlo, saj mora konec koncev evropsko zakonodajo v širšem smislu potrditi demokratično izvoljen organ.
The possibility for the European Parliament of exercising greater scrutiny over the implementing measures proposed by the Commission is most welcome, as European legislation sensu largo must be, in the end, approved by the body which is democratically elected.
Kar zadeva vsebino Uredbe (ES) 1606/2002, odbor podpira prilagoditev veljavnih določb o komitologiji glede na novi regulativni postopek s pregledom.
Taking under consideration the content of Regulation (EC) 1606/2002, the Committee supports the adaptation of the existing comitology provisions to the new regulatory procedure with scrutiny.
Namen predlaganih sprememb je izboljšati pravno jasnost besedila pa tudi črtati formalizacijo nujnega postopka.
The amendments proposed aim at improving the clarity of the text, but also at deleting the formalisation of the urgency procedure.
o zeleni knjigi o izboljšanju učinkovitosti izvrševanja sodnih odločb v Evropski uniji: zaplemba bančnih računov
on the Green Paper on improving the efficiency of the enforcement of judgments in the European Union: the attachment of bank accounts
MNENJE Odbora za državljanske svoboščine, pravosodje in notranje zadeve 8
OPINION of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs 8
IZID KONČNEGA GLASOVANJA V ODBORU...................................................................14
RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE.........................................................................14
– ob upoštevanju zelene knjige o izboljšanju učinkovitosti izvrševanja sodnih odločb v Evropski uniji: zaplemba bančnih računov ( KOM(2006)0618 ),
– having regard to the Green Paper on improving the efficiency of the enforcement of judgments in the European Union: the attachment of bank accounts ( COM(2006)0618 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve ter mnenja Odbora za državljanske svoboščine, pravosodje in notranje zadeve in Odbora za ekonomske in monetarne zadeve ( A6‑0371/2007 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs ( A6‑0371/2007 ),
A. ker je bil na področju brezgotovinskega plačevanja in čezmejnega plačilnega prometa dosežen velik napredek, ukrepi pa se bodo nadaljevali v okviru SEPA
A. whereas the cashless transfer system and cross-border payments have made significant headway and, in view of the SEPA
* Enotno evropsko plačilno območje. * ,
Single Euro Payments Area project, are destined to spread more widely,
B. ker imajo dejansko skoraj vse države članice predpise o izvajanju ukrepov v zvezi z izvrševanjem sodnih odločb, ki se lahko zaradi različnih pravnih sistemov in postopkovnih zahtev v celotno EU prenesejo le z zapletenim in dolgotrajnim postopkom ter ki omogočajo dolžniku, da svoj denar prenese na tuje račune,
B. whereas almost all Member States have arrangements for enforcing attachment measures, but the differing legal systems and procedural requirements mean that these are enforceable throughout the EU only by complicated, protracted procedures, enabling debtors to transfer their money to foreign accounts,
C. ker bi enotni evropski postopek za čezmejne primere koristil tistim, ki vodijo pravne spore v številnih državah, ter bančnim ustanovam, ki bodo prejemale odredbe iz različnih držav članic,
C. whereas a single European procedure for cross-border cases would benefit those who litigate in many countries and the banking institutions that will receive orders from several Member States,
D. ker mora upnik imeti možnost dolžniku preprečiti, da prenese denar v kratkem času in po potrebi večkrat na tuje račune,
D. whereas a creditor has to be able to counter the possibility that his debtor might rapidly and perhaps repeatedly transfer money to foreign accounts,
3. podpira uvedbo enotnega evropskega sistema, ki bo neodvisen od obstoječih nacionalnih pravil o izvršbi v državah članicah in katera bo dopolnjeval;
Believes that a standard European system should exist independently of, and in addition to, the Member States’ respective national enforcement rules;
7. meni, da je treba kot zakonodajno podlago za takšen postopek upoštevati člen 65(c) Pogodbe ES;
Is of the opinion that a legal basis for such a procedure might be found in Article 65(c) of the EC Treaty;
9. opozarja, da gre le za skrajšani postopek, pri katerem mora upnik sodišče prepričati, da ima zoper dolžnika upravičen zahtevek, ter dokazati nujnost in kršitev njegovih pravic;
Points out that what is involved is merely a summary procedure requiring the creditor to furnish persuasive evidence of his claim and demonstrate that his case is urgent and his rights are in jeopardy;
26. meni, da je treba oblikovati ustrezen pravni akt, po možnosti v obliki uredbe;
Considers that the instrument required for the above purposes might need to take the form of a regulation;
Poročevalec pozdravlja natančno obrazložitev vseh pomembnih vprašanj in težav v zeleni knjigi ter podpira cilj v zvezi z uvedbo hitrega in učinkovitega postopka za zaplembo bančnih računov v EU.
The rapporteur applauds the Green Paper for the detail in which all the relevant questions and difficulties are set out and endorses the aim of establishing a fast, effective procedure in the EU for the attachment of bank accounts.
Zaradi napredka v zvezi z integracijo plačilnega prometa v EUR je takšen sistem posebno potreben in smiseln.
Given the continuing progress of integration as regards euro-denominated payments, an arrangement of this kind seems a particularly necessary and sensible step to take.
Poročilo ne obravnava vseh vprašanj, kar je tudi razumljivo, saj je treba veliko zadev preučiti še natančneje in pravno primerljivo, tako da sedanje ugotovitve še niso zanesljive.
This report will not discuss every question and indeed cannot do so, because many points still need to be examined more closely – not least from a comparative law perspective – and it is too early to reach firm decisions at the present time.
S tem pridržkom je treba razumeti tudi ugotovitve.
The findings below should be considered to be subject to that proviso.
Skoraj vse države članice EU imajo sisteme, ki upniku omogočajo, da zaseže denarne zneske na bančnih računih.
Almost all of the Member States have systems enabling creditors to temporarily freeze sums held in bank accounts.
Zato načeloma obstaja možnost, da v drugi državi članici pride do odvzema prostosti, zaplembe ali česa podobnega.
In principle, therefore, distraint, attachment, or the like can be effected in a Member State other than a creditor’s country of origin.