natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Končno besedilo je mogoče obravnavati kot zelo zadovoljiv in dobro uravnotežen kompromis.
The final text can be regarded as a very satisfactory and well balanced compromise.
Glede na to, da je bilo sprejetih veliko predlogov sprememb Evropskega parlamenta iz druge obravnave, pri drugih spremembah pa so bili doseženi zadovoljivi kompromisi, je mogoče spravni postopek šteti za uspešen z vidika Evropskega parlamenta.
Given that many of the European Parliament second reading amendments have been accepted and satisfactory compromises were reached on the others, the outcome of the conciliation procedure can be regarded as successful for the European Parliament.
Delegacija Parlamenta v Spravnem odboru zato priporoča, da se v tretji obravnavi sprejme skupno besedilo.
The Parliament Delegation to the Conciliation Committee therefore recommends that the joint text be approved at third reading.
Skupno besedilo uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o pravu, ki se uporablja za nepogodbene obveznosti („Rim II“), ki ga je odobril Spravni odbor
Joint text approved by the Conciliation Committee for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (ROME II)
Predsednica delegacije: Podpredsednik/-ca
Delegation chairwoman: Vice-President
Pristojni odbor Predsednik
Committee responsible Chairman:
Predlog uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o pravu, ki se uporablja za nepogodbene obveznosti („Rim II“) – KOM(2003)0427 – C5-0338/2003
Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (ROME II) – COM(2003)0427 – C5-0338/2003
Datum 1. obravnave EP – številka P6
Date of Parliament’s first reading – P6 number
Spremenjeni predog Komisije
Amended Commission proposal
Datum 2. obravnave EP – številka P6
Date of Parliament’s second reading – P6 number
o predlogu Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o razveljavitvi Uredbe (EGS) št. 954/79 o ratifikaciji ali pristopu držav članic h Konvenciji Združenih narodov o kodeksu vedenja linijskih konferenc
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 954/79 concerning the ratification by Members States of, or their accession to, the United Nations Convention on a Code of Conduct for Liner Conferences
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu ( KOM(2006)0869 ),
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council ( COM(2006)0869 )
– ob upoštevanju člena 251(2) in člena 80(2) Pogodbe o ES, na podlagi katerih je Komisija Parlamentu podala predlog ( C6‑0059/2007 ),
– having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 80(2) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament ( C6‑0059/2007 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za ekonomske in monetarne zadeve ( A6‑0258/2007 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs ( A6‑0258/2007 ),
Namen predloga Komisije je razveljavitev Uredbe Sveta (EGS) št. 954/79 z dne 15. maja 1979.
The Commission proposal aims to repeal Council Regulation (EEC) No 954/79 of 15 May 1979.
Razveljavitev je potrebna zaradi sprejetja Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1419/2006 z dne 25. septembra 2006 o razveljavitvi Uredbe Sveta (EGS) št. 4056/86 o podrobnih pravilih za uporabo členov 85 in 86 Pogodbe v zvezi s pomorskim prometom in spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 1/2003 glede povečanja področja uporabe za vključitev kabotaže in mednarodnih prevoznih storitev v prosti plovbi.
The repeal has been made necessary by the adoption of Council Regulation (EC) No 1419/2006 of 25 September 2006 repealing Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 laying down detailed rules for the application of Articles 85 and 86 to maritime transport, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 as regards the extension of its scope to include cabotage and international tramp services.
Svet se je o razveljavitvi Uredbe (EGS) št. 4056/86 v skladu s členom 83 Pogodbe posvetoval s Parlamentom (zakonodajna resolucija z dne 4. julija 2006).
Parliament had been consulted by Council on the repeal of the above-mentioned Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 pursuant to Article 83 of the Treaty (legislative resolution of 4 July 2006).
Uredba (EGS) št. 954/79 obravnava ratifikacijo ali pristop držav članic h konvenciji o kodeksu vedenja linijskih konferenc, ki je bila pripravljena pod pokroviteljstvom Konference Združenih narodov o trgovini in razvoju (kodeks UNCTAD).
Regulation (EEC) No 954/79 deals with the accession to, or ratification by Member States of, the "Convention on a Code of Conduct for Liner Conferences", drafted under the auspices of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD Code).
Trinajst držav članic je pogodbenic kodeksa UNCTAD.
Thirteen Member States are party to the UNCTAD Code.
Namen kodeksa je bila vzpostavitev usklajenega mednarodnega okvira za konference v pomorskem prometu ter spodbujanje pravega ravnovesja pri dostopu do tovora v linijskem pomorskem prometu za gospodarske subjekte iz razvitih držav in držav v razvoju.
The aim of the Code was to set out a harmonised international framework for shipping conferences, thereby promoting fair access to freight in liner-shipping between operators from industrialised and developing countries.
S sprejetjem Uredbe (ES) št. 1419/2006 je bila razveljavljena skupinska izjema iz Uredbe (EGS) št. 4056/86.
With the adoption of Regulation (EC) No 1419/2006, the block exemption set out in Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 got repealed.
V skladu z zahtevo Parlamenta bodo 18. oktobra 2008 (po objavi smernic o konkurenci v pomorskem sektorju) linijske konference v pomorskem prometu postale nezakonite pri trgovanju v/iz pristanišč Skupnosti.
As requested by Parliament, on 18 October 2008, after the issuance of guidelines on competition in the maritime sector, shipping conferences will become illegal on trades to or from ports of the Community.
Države članice, ki so zdaj pogodbenice kodeksa UNCTAD, ne bodo mogle več izpolnjevati svojih obveznosti in bi morale odstopiti od konvencije.
Member States which are currently party to the UNCTAD Code will no longer be able to fulfil their obligations and should withdraw from the Convention.
Države članice morajo same urediti vprašanje odstopa, saj to ne sodi v okvir prava Skupnosti.
The Member States need to address their withdrawal from the convention themselves because it is not a matter of Community law.
Uredba (EGS) št. 954/79 bo zastarala in v skladu s pristopom o boljši zakonodaji, ki ga zagovarja Parlament, jo je treba razveljaviti 18. oktobra 2008, ob začetku veljavnosti Uredbe (ES) št. 1419/2006.
Regulation (EEC) No 954/79 will become obsolete and, in line with the approach on better regulation defended by Parliament, should be repealed at the time of the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 1419/2006 on 18 October 2008.
V svoji zakonodajni resoluciji z dne 4. julija 2006 je Parlament z veliko večino glasov podprl uporabo člena 81(1) Pogodbe za linijski morski promet in linijske konference v pomorskem prometu.
In its legislative resolution of 04/07/2006 Parliament backed by an overwhelming majority the application of Article 81(1) of the Treaty to liner shipping and shipping conferences.
Že od začetka je bilo jasno, da bo zaradi te odločitve treba razveljaviti Uredbo (EGS) št. 954/79 in dvostranske sporazume, ki na njej temeljijo.
It was clear from the outset that this decision would result in the necessity to repeal Regulation (EEC) No 954/79 and the bilateral agreements based thereon.
Parlament v svojem predlogu spremembe 4 k zakonodajni resoluciji pravzaprav izrecno priporoča, naj po razveljavitvi uredbe „države članice odstopijo od kodeksa“.
In fact, Parliament's amendment 4 of the legislative resolution explicitly recommends that "Member States should withdraw from the Code" once the Regulation is repealed.
Na podlagi jasnega stališča Parlamenta, da morajo za pomorski promet veljati skupna izvedbena pravila o konkurenci – pod pogojem, da Komisija objavi ustrezne smernice v zvezi s tem, kar naj bi se zgodilo letos – poročevalka meni, da bi bilo smiselno, če bi se Parlament podprl tudi predlog Komisije o razveljavitvi Uredbe (EGS) št. 954/79.
Given Parliament's clear stance on bringing maritime transport under the common competition enforcement rules - under the condition that the Commission publishes appropriate guidelines to this regard, which is due to happen this year - it would appear to be consistent in your Rapporteur's view, if Parliament also gave a positive reaction to the current Commission proposal of repealing Regulation (EEC) No 954/79.
Konvencija Združenih narodov o kodeksu vedenja linijskih konferenc (razveljavitev Uredbe Sveta (EGS) št. 954/79)
United Nations Convention on a Code of Conduct for Liner Conferences (repeal of Council Regulation (EEC) No 954/79)
o pravnih in institucionalnih vidikih uporabe instrumentov „mehkega prava“
on institutional and legal implications of the use of 'soft law' instruments
Pripravljavec mnenja(*): Philip Dimitrov, Odbor za ustavne zadeve
Draftsman(*): Philip Dimitrov, Committee on Constitutional Affairs
MNENJE Odbora za ustavne zadeve (*) .....................................................................9
OPINION of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (*) ............................9
MNENJE Odbora za notranji trg in zaščito potrošnikov ..........................12
OPINION of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection 12
MNENJE Odbora za kulturo in izobraževanje ..................................................16
OPINION of the Committee on Culture and Education ................................16
– ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o ES in zlasti členov 211, 230 in 249 Pogodbe,
– having regard to the EC Treaty, and in particular Articles 211, 230 and 249 thereof,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve ter mnenj Odbora za ustavne zadeve, Odbora za notranji trg in varstvo potrošnikov ter Odbora za kulturo in izobraževanje ( A6‑0259/2007 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and the Committee on Culture and Education ( A6‑0259/2007 ),
A. ker je pojem mehko pravo po običajni praksi dvoumen in škodljiv in ker se ga ne bi smelo uporabljati v dokumentih institucij Skupnosti,
A. whereas the notion of soft law, based on common practice, is ambiguous and pernicious and should not be used in any documents of the Community institutions,
B. ker se razlike med dura lex/mollis lex ne bi smelo sprejeti ali je priznati, saj je konceptualno zmotna,
B. whereas the distinction between dura lex / mollis lex , being conceptually aberrant , should not be accepted or recognised,
C. ker tako imenovani instrumenti mehkega prava, kot so priporočila, zelene in bele knjige ali sklepi Sveta, nimajo nobene pravne vrednosti in niso zavezujoči,
C. whereas so-called soft law instruments, such as recommendations, green and white papers or Council conclusions, do not have any legal value or binding force,
D. ker "mehko pravo" ne nudi popolnega sodnega varstva,
D. whereas 'soft law' does not provide full judicial protection,
E. ker bi obsežna uporaba instrumentov "mehkega prava" pomenila premik z edinstvenega modela Skupnosti na bolj tradicionalne modele mednarodnih organizacij,
E. whereas extensive recourse to 'soft law' instruments would signify a shift from the unique Community model to that of a traditional international organisation,
F. ker trenutno poteka razprava o tem, kako bi se lahko izboljšalo učinkovitost regulativne funkcije Evropske unije, tako kar zadeva "mehko pravo" kot tudi, kar zadeva "trdo pravo",
F. whereas there is currently a dispute as to how to make the regulatory function of the European Union more efficient with regard to both 'soft law' and 'hard law',
G. ker je Sodišče Evropskih skupnosti v zadevi Van Gend in Loos ugotovilo, da je Pogodba „ več kot mednarodni sporazum, ki vzpostavlja zgolj obojestranske obveznosti držav pogodbenic. ...
G. whereas in Van Gend en Loos the Court of Justice of the European Communities held that the Treaty "is more than an agreement which merely creates mutual obligations between the Contracting States. ...
Take pravice nastanejo ne samo z izrecno podelitvijo s Pogodbo, ampak tudi na podlagi obveznosti, ki jih Pogodba jasno opredeli in naloži posameznikom, državam članicam in institucijam Skupnosti“
These rights arise not only where they are expressly granted by the Treaty, but also by reason of obligations which the Treaty imposes in a clearly defined way upon individuals as well as upon the Member States and upon the institutions of the Community"
Zadeva 26/62, Van Gend in Loos [1963] ECR 1. ;
Case 26/62 Van Gend & Loos [1963] ECR 1. ,
I. ker to pomeni, da lahko institucije EU delujejo le v skladu z načelom zakonitosti, in sicer kadar jim je dodeljena pristojnost na pravni podlagi, in v okviru omejitev svojih pooblastil, za kar poskrbi Evropsko sodišče,
I. whereas this means that the EU institutions may only act in accordance with the principle of legality, that is to say, where a legal basis confers competence and within the limits of their powers, and whereas there is a European Court to ensure that they do so,
J. ker je pravilen način delovanja Skupnosti, kadar ima zakonodajno pristojnost, sprejemanje zakonodaje prek demokratičnih institucij Unije, Parlamenta in Sveta, v kolikor se zdi to nujno ob upoštevanju načel subsidiarnosti in sorazmernosti; ker lahko le sprejetje zakonodaje s primernimi institucionalnimi postopki iz Pogodbe zagotovi pravno varnost, pravno državo, pravičnost in spoštovanje prava, ter ker vključuje to tudi spoštovanje institucionalnega ravnovesja, ki ga zajema Pogodba, in omogoča odprtost pri sprejemanju odločitev,
J. whereas where the Community has legislative competence, the proper way to act is through the adoption of legislation by the democratic institutions of the Union, Parliament and the Council, in so far as this still appears necessary having due regard to the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; whereas it is only by means of the adoption of legislation through the institutional procedures laid down in the Treaty that legal certainty, the rule of law, justiciability and enforceability may be secured, and whereas this also entails respect for the institutional balance enshrined in the Treaty and allows for openness of decision-making,
K. ker to na splošno, kadar ima Skupnost zakonodajno pristojnost, preprečuje uporabo „mehkega prava“ ali „pravil ravnanja iz dokumentov, ki niso pravno zavezujoči,vendar imajo kljub temu nekatere neposredne pravne posledice, ter katerih cilj je dejanski učinek in ki ga lahko tudi dosežejo,“
K. whereas, in general, where the Community has competence to legislate, this precludes the use of "soft law" or "[r]ules of conduct that are laid down in instruments which have not been attributed legally binding force as such, but nevertheless may have certain – indirect – legal effects, and that are aimed at and may produce practical effects"
9, 1/01/2005. pri čemer so bila ta pravila ravnanja v preteklosti uporabljena za ublažitev pomanjkanja formalne zakonodajne pristojnosti in/ali sredstev za izvrševanje ter so kot taka značilna za mednarodno javno pravo,
9, 1.1.2005. , which have been used historically to alleviate a lack of formal law-making capacity and/or means of enforcement and as such are typical of public international law,
L. ker so instrumenti mehkega prava, kadar jih izrecno določa Pogodba, legitimni, če niso uporabljeni kot nadomestki za zakonodajo, kadar ima Skupnost zakonodajno oblast in ko se ureditev na ravni Skupnosti zdi primerna ob upoštevanju načel subsidiarnosti in sorazmernosti, saj bi to pomenilo tudi kršitev načela prenesenih posebnih pristojnosti, in ker to še toliko bolj velja za sporočila Komisije, katerih cilj je razlagati zakonodajo Skupnosti; ker predstavljajo pripravljalni dokumenti, kot sta zelena in bela knjiga, tudi legitimno uporabo mehkega prava skupaj z obvestili in smernicami, ki jih je objavila Komisija, da bi razložila, kako izvaja politiko konkurence in državne pomoči,
L. whereas, where the Treaty expressly provides for them, soft law instruments are legitimate, provided that they are not used as a surrogate for legislation where the Community has legislative power and where Community-wide regulation still appears necessary having due regard to the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, since this would also constitute a breach of the principle of conferred specific powers, and whereas this applies a fortiori to Commission communications purporting to interpret Community legislation; whereas preparatory instruments, such as green and white papers, also constitute a legitimate use of soft law, in common with notices and guidelines published by the Commission in order to explain how it applies competition and state-aid policy,
M. ker se takih instrumentov, ki jih je mogoče uporabiti kot razlagalna ali pripravljalna orodja za zavezujoče pravne akte, ne bi smelo obravnavati kot zakonodajo ali jim pripisovati učinkovitosti glede ustvarjanja norm,
M. whereas such instruments, which can be used as interpretative or preparatory tools for binding legislative acts, should neither be treated as legislation nor be given any norm-setting effectiveness,
N. ker bi takšen položaj ustvaril zmedo in negotovost na področju, na katerem bi morali prevladovati jasnost in pravna varnost, v interesu držav članic in državljanov,
N. whereas such a situation would bring confusion and insecurity to a field in which clarity and legal certainty should prevail, in the interests of the Member States and of the citizens ,
O. ker poleg tega, da spoštuje pravico Komisije do pobude, Parlament podpira tudi svojo pravico, da Komisijo pozove, naj poda zakonodajni predlog (člen 192 Pogodbe o ES),
O. whereas, as well as respecting the right of initiative of the Commission, Parliament also upholds its own right to invite the Commission to make a legislative proposal (Article 192 of the EC Treaty),
P. ker lahko odprta metoda usklajevanja pomaga pri spodbujanju dosežkov notranjega trga, vendar je sodelovanje Parlamenta in Sveta v zvezi s tem na žalost zelo slabo; ker se je zaradi tega demokratičnega primanjkljaja odprte metode posvetovanja ne bi smelo zlorabljati zato, da nadomesti pomanjkanje zakonodajne pristojnosti Skupnosti ter da se tako državam članicam naloži dejanske obveznosti, ki so enakovredne zakonodaji, vendar se ustvarjajo zunaj zakonodajnih postopkov, določenih v Pogodbi,
P. whereas the open method of coordination can be of service in promoting the achievement of the internal market but it is regrettable that the involvement of Parliament and the Court of Justice therein is very weak; whereas, because of this democratic deficit in the so-called open method of coordination, it should not be misused to replace the Community’s lack of legislative competence and in this way to impose de facto obligations on the Member States that are tantamount to legislation but arise outside the legislative procedures laid down in the Treaty,
Q. ker člen 211 Pogodbe o ES določa: „[d]a bi Komisija zagotovila ustrezno delovanje in razvoj skupnega trga ... oblikuje priporočila ... glede zadev, obravnavanih v tej pogodbi, če je to v njej izrecno predvideno ali po mnenju Komisije potrebno“, vendar v skladu s petim odstavkom člena 249 priporočila niso zavezujoča in so v skladu s Sodiščem „ukrepi, ki niso zavezujoči niti za osebe, katerim so namenjeni“
Q. whereas Article 211 of the EC Treaty provides that "[i]n order to ensure the proper functioning and development of the common market, the Commission shall formulate recommendations ... on matters dealt with in this Treaty, if it expressly so provides or if the Commission considers it necessary", but, according to Article 249, fifth paragraph, recommendations have no binding force and, according to the Court, are "measures which, even as regards persons to whom they are addressed, are not intended to produce binding effects"
Zadeva C-322/88 Grimaldi [1989] ECR 4407, odstavka 13 in 16. in ne določajo pravic, na katere bi se posameznik lahko skliceval pred državnim sodiščem
Case C-322/88 Grimaldi [1989] ECR 4407, paragraphs 13 and 16. and do not create rights upon which individuals may rely before a national court
Grimaldi , odst.16. , ter ker člen 230 Pogodbe o ES preprečuje razveljavitev priporočil, ker niso obvezujoča,
Grimaldi , paragraph 16. , and whereas Article 230 of the EC Treaty precludes the annulment of recommendations, since they are not binding,
R. ker Sodišče kljub temu meni, da se taka dejanja „ne smejo ... obravnavati, kot da nimajo pravnega učinka.
R. whereas, none the less, the Court has held that such acts "cannot ... be regarded as having no legal effect.
Nacionalna sodišča so zavezana k upoštevanju priporočil, da lahko presojajo o nerešenih sporih, zlasti kadar priporočila pojasnjujejo razlago nacionalnih ukrepov, ki so bili sprejeti z namenom njihovega izvajanja, ali kadar je njihov namen dopolnitev zavezujočih določb Skupnosti“,
The national courts are bound to take recommendations into consideration in order to decide disputes submitted to them, in particular where they cast light on the interpretation of national measures adopted in order to implement them or where they are designed to supplement binding Community provisions"
S. ker priporočila, če se jih ne uporablja dovolj pazljivo, imajo lahko za posledico dejstvo, da nekateri akti Komisije presežejo njena pooblastila,
S. whereas it is possible that the recommendations, if used without sufficient care, may result in certain acts of the Commission being ultra vires ,
T. ker vsebuje člen I-33 ustavne pogodbe podobno določbo kot člen 211 Pogodbe o ES, vendar dodaja, da „Evropski parlament in Svet pri obravnavi osnutkov zakonodajnih aktov ne sprejmeta nobenega akta, za katerega na zadevnem področju ni predviden ustrezen zakonodajni postopek“;
T. whereas Article I-33 of the Constitutional Treaty contains a similar provision to Article 211 of the EC Treaty, but adds that "When considering draft legislative acts, the European Parliament and the Council shall refrain from adopting acts not provided for by the relevant legislative procedure in the area in question",
U. ker je leta 2005 Komisija sprejela priporočilo o čezmejnem upravljanju avtorskih pravic za zakonite spletne glasbene storitve na podlagi člena 211 Pogodbe o ES, opredeljeno kot „instrument mehkega prava ... oblikovan za to, da trgu omogoči, da gre v pravo smer“ in navidezno oblikovan za izpostavitev Direktive o avtorskih pravicah v informacijski družbi
U. whereas in 2005 the Commission adopted a recommendation on the cross-border management of copyright for legitimate online music services on the basis of Article 211 of the EC Treaty, described as "a soft-law instrument ... designed to give the market a chance to move in the right direction" and ostensibly designed to flesh out the existing directives on copyright in the information society
Direktiva 2001/29/ES, (UL L 167, 22.6.2001, str.
Directive 2001/29/EC (OJ L 167, 22.6.2001, p.
10). ter Direktive o pravici dajanja v najem in pravici posojanja ter o določenih pravicah, sorodnih avtorski
10). and on rental right and lending right and on certain rights relating to copyright
Direktiva 92/100/EGS (UL L 346, 27.11.1992,str.
Directive 92/100/EEC (OJ L 346, 27.11.1992, p.
61), kakor je bila spremenjena. , ter ker uveljavlja Komisija možnosti posamezne politike s sredstvi mehkega prava, saj je njen glavni cilj spodbujati izdajo dovoljenj za več ozemelj ter priporočati, kako jo je treba urejati,
61), as amended. , and whereas, since its main aim is to encourage multi-territorial licensing and recommend how it should be regulated, the Commission is putting particular policy options into effect by soft-law means,