natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Prva izmenjava mnenj o obeh predlogih je potekala 21. aprila 2009 v Odboru za pravne zadeve z nekdanjim poročevalcem Manuelom Medino Ortego.
A first exchange of views on both proposals took place in the Committee on Legal Affairs with the former rapporteur, Manuel Medina Ortega, on 21 April 2009.
Vaša poročevalka Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg namerava ob upoštevanju:
In principle, your rapporteur, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, bearing in mind:
· pomena celovitosti pravnega reda na območju svobode, varnosti in pravice, in še zlasti pomena tega, da bi se dva ključna instrumenta evropskega civilnega postopka uporabljala po vsej Uniji,
· the importance of the integrity of the acquis in the area of freedom, security and justice, and in particular the desirability of two crucial instruments of European civil procedure applying throughout the Union,
· pomena tega, da mora biti Danska podvržena ravni nadzora, ki velja za druge države članice, kadar želi sklepati mednarodne sporazume, ki vplivajo na uredbo Bruselj I in uredbo o vročanju pisanj,
· the importance of ensuring that Denmark is subject to the same level of scrutiny as any other Member State when it seeks to enter into international agreements affecting the Brussels I and Service of Documents Regulations,
· omejenega obsega, ki ga dopušča postopek posvetovanja,
· the limited latitude afforded by the consultation procedure,
načeloma podpreti predloga v odboru in mu priporočiti, da glasuje zanju.
is minded to commend the two proposals to the Committee and recommend that it vote in favour of them.
Ima pa poročevalka določene zadržke, o katerih bi rada v odboru razpravljala s Komisijo, preden se o poročilu glasuje.
However, she has certain reservations which she would like to discuss in committee with the Commission before the vote on this report goes ahead.
Dodatne opombe
Additional remark
Pri obravnavi predlogov je treba prav tako upoštevati, da bo položaj Danske na področju pravosodnega sodelovanja v civilnih zadevah spremenjen, če bo ratificirana Lizbonska pogodba.
The two proposals should also be seen in the context of the modification of Denmark's situation with regard to judicial cooperation in civil matters following the possible ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon.
Protokol o stališču Danske na področju svobode, varnosti in pravice bo namreč spremenjen tako, da bo namesto sedanje klavzule „opt-out” vključeval premostitveno klavzulo o sistemu „opt-in” po modelu, ki sedaj velja za Veliko Britanijo in Irsko
Indeed, the protocol on the position of Denmark in the area of freedom, security and justice would be amended to include a passerelle to an "opt-in" system along the lines of the one currently applying to the UK and Ireland, rather than the current blanket "opt-out"
Glej člen 8 priloge k protokolu št. 22 o stališče Danske, ki je priložen Pogodbi o Evropski uniji in Pogodbi o delovanju Unije. .
See Article 8 and the Annex of Protocol 22 on the position of Denmark annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the Union. .
S tem bi lahko odpravili potrebo po prej obravnavanih mehanizmih, če bi se Danska odločila za sprejem določenega ukrepa, na primer uredbe Bruselj I ali uredba o vročanju pisanj.
This would potentially remove the need for the mechanisms discussed above, should Denmark choose to opt into any particular measure, for example the Brussels I Regulation or the Regulation on the service of documents.
o predlogu Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o določitvi splošnih pravil za dodelitev finančne pomoči Skupnosti na področju vseevropskih omrežij (kodificirana različica)
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of trans-European networks (codified version)
o predlogu Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o določitvi splošnih pravil za dodelitev finančne pomoči Skupnosti na področju vseevropskih omrežij (kodificirana različica)
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on laying down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of trans-European networks (codified version)
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu ( KOM(2009)0113 ),
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council ( COM(2009)0113 ),
– ob upoštevanju členov 251(2) in 156 Pogodbe ES, na podlagi katerih je Komisija Parlamentu podala predlog ( C7-0039/2009 ),
– having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 156 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament ( C7‑0039/2009 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve ( A7–0057/2009 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A7‑0057/2009 ),
V Bruslju, 22 oktober 2009
Brussels, 22 October 2009
Predlog Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o določitvi splošnih pravil za dodelitev finančne pomoči Skupnosti na področju vseevropskih omrežij (kodificirana različica)
Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on laying down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of trans-European networks (codified version)
KOM(2009)0113 z dne 28.4.2009 – 2009/0037(COD)
COM(2009) 0 113 of 28.4.2009 - 2009/0037 (COD)
V skladu z Medinstitucionalnim sporazumom z dne 20. decembra 1994 o pospešenem delovnem postopku za uradno kodifikacijo zakonodajnih besedil, še zlasti s točko 4, se je posvetovalna skupina, ki jo sestavljajo pravne službe Evropskega parlamenta, Sveta in Komisije, srečala 8. maja 2009, da bi preučila omenjeni predlog, ki ga je predložila Komisija.
Having regard to the Inter-institutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 on an accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts, and in particular to point 4 thereof, the Consultative Working Party, consisting of the respective legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, met on 8 May 2009 for the purpose of examining, among others, the aforementioned proposal submitted by the Commission.
Posvetovalna skupina je po proučitvi
At that meeting
Posvetovalna skupina je imela na voljo vse jezikovne različice predloga in je delala na podlagi angleške različice, ki je izvirna različica obravnavanega besedila. predloga uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta, ki kodificira Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 2236/95 z dne 18. septembra 1995 o določitvi splošnih pravil za dodelitev finančne pomoči Skupnosti na področju vseevropskih omrežij, soglasno ugotovila naslednje:
The Consultative Working Party had at its disposal 22 language versions of the proposal and worked on the basis of the English version, being the master-copy language version of the text under discussion. , an examination of the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council codifying Council Regulation (EC) No 2236/95 of 18 September 1995 laying down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of trans-European networks resulted in the Consultative Working Party’s establishing, by common accord, as follows.
1) V uvodni izjavi 2 bi bilo treba spremeniti besedilo „in da lahko nudi podporo državam članicam pri financiranju vzpostavitve vseevropskih omrežij“, da bi se glasilo „in da lahko nudi podporo projektom skupnega interesa, ki jih podpirajo države članice, na področju vseevropskih omrežij“.
1) In Recital 2, the wording " and that it may support the financial efforts of the Member States to establish trans-European networks " should be adapted so as to read " and that it may support projects of common interest supported by Member States in the sphere of trans-European networks ".
2) V uvodni izjavi 5 in v členu 11(7) bi bilo treba ponovno vključiti besede „subvencije obrestnih mer“, ki se pojavljajo v uvodni izjavi 9 in členu 11(7) Uredbe (ES) št. 2236/95, in sicer namesto spremenjenih besed „obrestne subvencije“, ki se pojavljajo v predlogu kodifikacije.
2) In Recital 5 and in Article 11(7), the expression " interest rate subsidies ", appearing in the ninth recital and in Article 11(7) of Regulation (EC) No 2236/95, should be re-introduced in the place of the adapted wording " interest subsidies " appearing in the codification proposal.
4) V prvem odstavku člena 2 in v drugem pododstavku točke 1 priloge I bi bilo treba prilagoditi sklicevanje „iz člena 155(1), tretja alinea Pogodbe“, da bi se glasilo „iz člena 155(1), prvi pododstavek, prva alinea, Pogodbe“.
4) In the first paragraph of Article 2 and in the second subparagraph of point 1 of Annex I, the reference made to " Article 155 (1), first indent, of the Treaty " should be adapted so as to read as a reference made to " Article 155 (1), first subparagraph, first indent, of the Treaty ".
5) V uvodni izjavi 19 bi bilo treba številko „4 600 milijonov EUR“ spremeniti v „4 874,88 milijonov EUR“.
5) In Recital 19, the figure " EUR 4 600 million " should be adapted so as to read " EUR 4 874,88 million ".
6) Prilagoditi bi bilo treba besedilo člena 1, da bi se glasilo: „Ta uredba določa pogoje in postopke za dodelitev pomoči Skupnosti, v skladu s členom 155(1), prvi pododstavek, tretja alinea Pogodbe, za projekte skupnega interesa na področju vseevropskih omrežij za telekomunikacijsko infrastrukturo in za projekte skupnega interesa na področju vseevropskih omrežij za prometno in energetsko infrastrukturo iz člena 20, tretji odstavek Uredbe (ES) št. 680/2007“.
6) The wording of Article 1 should be adapted so as to read as follows: " This Regulation defines the conditions and procedures for granting Community aid under Article 155(1), first subparagraph, third indent, of the Treaty to projects of common interest in the field of trans-European networks for telecommunications infrastructures and to the projects of common interest in the field of trans-European networks for transport and energy infrastructures which are referred to in Article 20, third paragraph, of Regulation (EC) No 680/2007 ".
7) V drugem pododstavku odstavka (4) in v prvem pododstavku odstavka (5) člena 5 bi bilo treba besedo „projektov“ nadomestiti z besedami „projektov ali skupin projektov“, ki se pojavljajo v drugem pododstavku odstavka (4) in v prvem pododstavku odstavka (5) člena 5a Uredbe (ES) št. 2236/95.
7) In the second subparagraph of paragraph (4) and in the first subparagraph of paragraph (5) of Article 5, the word " projects " should be replaced by the words " projects or groups of projects " contained in the second subparagraph of paragraph (4) and in the first subparagraph of paragraph (5) of Article 5a of Regulation (EC) No 2236/95.
Pravnik Pravnik Generalni direktor
Jurisconsult Jurisconsult Director General
Dodelitev finančne pomoči Skupnosti na področju vseevropskih omrežij (kodificirana različica)
The granting of Community financial aid in the field of trans-European networks (codified version)
o predlogu Sklepa Sveta o spremembi Sklepa 2006/326/ES, da se zagotovi postopek za izvajanje člena 5(2) Sporazuma med Evropsko skupnostjo in Kraljevino Dansko o vročanju sodnih in zunajsodnih pisanj v civilnih ali gospodarskih zadevah
on the proposal for a Council decision amending Decision 2006/326/EC to provide for a procedure for the implementation of Article 5(2) of the Agreement between the European Community and the Kingdom of Denmark on the service of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Svetu ( KOM(2009)0100 ),
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council ( COM(2009)0100 ),
– ob upoštevanju prvega pododstavka člena 300(3) Pogodbe ES, v skladu s katerim se je Svet posvetoval s Parlamentom ( C6-0108/2009 ),
– having regard to Article 300(3), first subparagraph, of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament ( C6‑0108/2009 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve ( A7‑0058/2009 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A7‑0058/2009 ),
Parlament je bil zaprošen za mnenje o postopku, po katerem lahko Skupnost Danski dovoli sklenitev nekaterih mednarodnih sporazumov na področju evropskih postopkov civilnega prava.
Parliament is consulted on the procedure by which the Community can authorise Denmark to enter into certain international agreements in the area of European civil procedure.
Zato instrumenti, sprejeti na področju pravosodnega sodelovanja v civilnih zadevah, za Dansko niso zavezujoči in se zanjo ne uporabljajo, Danska pa se za te namene obravnava kot tretja država.
As a consequence, instruments adopted in the field of judicial cooperation in civil matters are not binding upon or applicable to Denmark which is considered for these purposes as a third country.
Skupnost je doslej z Dansko sklenila dva mednarodna sporazuma, ki na to državo razširjata uporabo dveh bistvenih instrumentov na področju civilnega prava, in sicer:
The Community has so far concluded two international agreements with Denmark, extending to it the application of two crucial instruments in the civil law field, namely
· uredbe o vročanju pisanj
· the Regulation on the service of documents
Uredba Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta (ES) št. 1393/2007 o vročanju sodnih in izvensodnih pisanj v civilnih ali gospodarskih zadevah v državah članicah (UL L 324, 10.12.07, str.
European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters, OJ L 324, 10.12.2007, p.
Člen 5(2) obeh mednarodnih sporazumov:
Article 5(2) of both international agreements:
„Danska se vzdrži sklepanja mednarodnih sporazumov, ki bi lahko vplivali na področje uporabe Uredbe Bruselj I, kot je priložena temu sporazumu, ali ga spremenili, razen v primeru soglasja Skupnosti in sprejetja zadovoljivih ukrepov v zvezi z odnosom med tem sporazumom in zadevnim mednarodnim sporazumom.“
"Denmark will abstain from entering into international agreements which may affect or alter the scope of the Brussels I Regulation as annexed to this Agreement unless it is done in agreement with the Community and satisfactory arrangements have been made with regard to the relationship between this Agreement and the international agreement in question."
Za analogijo glej sodbo v zadevi C-22/70 Komisija proti Svetu (Sporazum o evropskem cestnem prometu - ERTA),
See by analogy the judgment in Case C-22/70 Commission v. Council (European Road Transport Agreement - ERTA),
Vendar pa nikjer ni določen postopek, kako naj Skupnost sprejme odločitev o tem soglasju.
However, nowhere is any procedure laid down for the giving of such consent.
Komisija meni, da je „treba nujno najti rešitev“ za to odsotnost postopka sprejemanja soglasja
The Commission considers that this lack of a procedure for the giving of consent "urgently requires a solution"
KOM(2009)100 končno, Obrazložitveni memorandum, str.
COM(2009) 100 final, explanatory memorandum, p.3. .
Oba predloga imata isto pravno podlago kot izvirna sklepa Sveta, torej člene 61(c), 300(2)(i) in 300(3)(i).
Both proposals are based on the same legal basis as the original Council Decisions, i.e. Articles 61(c), 300(2)(i) and 300(3)(i).
Vsebina dveh predlogov
Content of the twin proposals
V skladu s prvim postopkom je predvideno, da bi bila samo Komisija pooblaščena dati Danski soglasje v imenu Evropske skupnosti.
The first procedure provides that the Commission alone would have the power to give the Community's consent to Denmark.
Ta postopke bi se uporabljal, če bi bile države članice že prej pooblaščene, da v interesu Skupnosti sklenejo mednarodni sporazum, katerega pogodbenica želi postati Danska, ali v primerih, ko bi Skupnost že sama sklenila tak sporazum.
This procedure would apply where the Member States had already been authorised to conclude, in the interest of the Community, the international agreement which Denmark requests becoming a party to, or where the Community had already concluded it itself.
V zvezi s tem velja opozoriti, da je bil nedavno dosežen dogovor o mehanizmu za pogajanja in sklenitev dvostranskih sporazumov med državami članicami (razen Danske) in tretjimi državami
It should be recalled in this respect that a mechanism has recently been agreed for the negotiation and conclusion of bilateral agreements between Member States (except for Denmark) and third countries
Uredba (ES) št. 662/2009 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 13. julija 2009 o uvedbi postopka za pogajanja in sklenitev sporazumov med državami članicami in tretjimi državami o določenih zadevah v zvezi s pravom, ki se uporablja za pogodbena in nepogodbena obligacijska razmerja (UL L 200, 31.7.2009, str.
Regulation No 662/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 establishing a procedure for the negotiation and conclusion of agreements between Member States and third countries on particular matters concerning the law applicable to contractual and non- contractual obligations, OJ L 200, 31.7.2009, p.
Ta mehanizem pa se trenutno ne uporablja za Uredbo Bruselj I
However, that mechanism does not currently apply to the Brussels I Regulation
Glej uvodno izjavo 21 o prihodnjem poročilu Komisije o uporabi uredbe, ki posredno navaja (prek sklicevanja na uvodno izjavo 5) možnost razširitve uporabe mehanizma na Uredbo Bruselj I.
See recital 21 on the future Commission report on the application of the Regulation which refers indirectly (by reference to recital 5) to a possible extension of the mechanism to the Brussels I Regulation.
Glej tudi izjavo v zapisniku Sveta: „Svet poziva Komisijo, naj bo pri pripravi poročila iz člena 10 pozorna na to, ali bi bilo treba uredbo ob prenehanju veljavnosti glede na izkušnje, pridobljene z njeno uporabo, nadomestiti z novo, ki bi urejala iste zadeve oziroma bi zajemala tudi druga vprašanja, ki jih urejajo drugi instrumenti Skupnosti.
See also the statement in the Council minutes: "The Council invites the Commission to consider carefully, when preparing its report under Article 10, whether, in the light of the experience gathered on the application of the Regulation, the Regulation on its expiry should be replaced by a new one covering the same subject matters or including also other matters covered by other Community instruments.
V zvezi s poročilom o uporabi uredbe o pravu, ki se uporablja, bi se morala Komisija posvetiti zlasti vprašanju, ali naj morebitna nova uredba ureja tudi priznavanje in izvrševanje po uredbi (ES) št. 44/2001[.]“; in odziv Komisije: „Komisija sprejema ta poziv v vednost in ga bo v svojem poročilu o izvajanju uredbe brez poseganja v lastne pristojnosti skrbno upoštevala.“ in zato ni mogoče spregledati dejstva, da ima – po mnenju Sodišča – Skupnost izključno pristojnost za sklepanje mednarodnih sporazumov na področju pristojnosti in priznavanja ter izvrševanja sodnih odločb v civilnih in gospodarskih zadevah
In the context of the report on the application of the Regulation on applicable law, the Commission should consider, in particular, whether a possible new Regulation should cover recognition and enforcement under Regulation (EC) No 44/2001.", and the Commission's response: "The Commission takes note of this invitation and will examine it carefully in its report on the application of the Regulation, without prejudice to its own competences." , and therefore there is no machinery to mitigate the fact that, according to the Court of Justice, the Community has exclusive competence to conclude international agreements in the area of jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters
Mnenje 1/03 z dne 7. februarja 2006 (Pristojnost Skupnosti za sklenitev nove Luganske konvencije o pristojnosti in priznavanju ter izvrševanju sodnih odločb v civilnih in gospodarskih zadevah) [2006] ZOdl., str.
Opinion 1/03 of 7 February 2006 (Competence of the Community to conclude the new Lugano Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters) [2006] ECR I-1145. .
Ta postopek bi se uporabil v primerih, ko se ne bi uporabil prvi.
This procedure would apply where the first one does not.
Utemeljitev za to podvajanje postopkov je, da bo v primerih prve vrste že opravljena ocena, ali mednarodni sporazum vpliva na ukrepe Skupnosti.
The rationale for this duality of procedures is that in the first category of cases, the assessment of whether the Community measures are affected by the international agreement will already have been undertaken.
Pristop poročevalke
Approach of the rapporteur
Prva izmenjava mnenj o obeh predlogih z bivšim poročevalcem Manuelom Medino Ortego je bila v Odboru za pravne zadeve 21. aprila 2009.
A first exchange of views on both proposals took place in the Committee on Legal Affairs with the former rapporteur, Manuel Medina Ortega, on 21 April 2009.
Poročevalka Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, ob upoštevanju
In principle, your rapporteur, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, bearing in mind:
· pomena celovitosti pravnega reda Skupnosti v območju svobode, varnosti in pravice ter še posebej koristnosti tega, da bi se dva bistvena instrumenta evropskih civilnih postopkov uporabljala po vsej Uniji,
· the importance of the integrity of the acquis in the area of freedom, security and justice, and in particular the desirability of two crucial instruments of European civil procedure applying throughout the Union,
· pomena zagotavljanja, da za Dansko velja enaka raven preverjanja kot za vse druge države članice, ko želi pristopiti k mednarodnim sporazumom, ki vplivajo na Uredbo Bruselj I in Uredbo o vročanju pisanj,
· the importance of ensuring that Denmark is subject to the same level of scrutiny as any other Member State when it seeks to enter into international agreements affecting the Brussels I and Service of Documents Regulations,
· omejenega manevrskega prostora, ki ga dopušča postopek posvetovanja,
· the limited latitude afforded by the consultation procedure,
načeloma meni, da velja pred odborom pohvaliti predloga in mu priporočiti, naj glasuje za njuno odobritev.
is minded to commend the two proposals to the Committee and recommend that it vote in favour of them.
Ima pa določene zadržke, o katerih bi želela s Komisijo razpravljati v odboru pred glasovanjem o tem poročilu.
However, she has certain reservations which she would like to discuss in committee with the Commission before the vote on this report goes ahead.
Predloga bi bilo treba razumeti tudi v povezavi s spremembo položaja Danske glede na pravosodno sodelovanje v civilnih zadevah po morebitni ratifikaciji Lizbonske pogodbe.
The two proposals should also be seen in the context of the modification of Denmark's situation with regard to judicial cooperation in civil matters following the possible ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon.
Protokol o stališču Danske, kar zadeva območje svobode, varnosti in pravice, bi se namreč spremenil in bi vključeval prehod s sedanjega sistema splošne izjeme (opt-out) na sistem z možnostjo vključitve (opt-in) podoben tistemu, ki trenutno velja za Združeno kraljestvo in Irsko
Indeed, the protocol on the position of Denmark in the area of freedom, security and justice would be amended to include a passerelle to an "opt-in" system along the lines of the one currently applying to the UK and Ireland, rather than the current blanket "opt-out"
Glej člen 8 in prilogo protokola 22 o stališču Danske, ki je priložen Pogodbi o Evropski uniji in Pogodbi o delovanju Evropske unije. .
See Article 8 and the Annex of Protocol 22 on the position of Denmark annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the Union. .
Tako bi utegnila izginiti potreba po mehanizmih, o katerih je bilo govora zgoraj – če bi se Danska odločila za sodelovanje pri kakšnem določenem ukrepu, na primer pri Uredbi Bruselj I ali Uredbi o vročanju pisanj.
This would potentially remove the need for the mechanisms discussed above, should Denmark choose to opt into any particular measure, for example the Brussels I Regulation or the Regulation on the service of documents.
o predlogu Sklepa Sveta o zagotavljanju makrofinančne pomoči Armeniji
on the proposal for a Council decision providing macro-financial assistance to Armenia
Poročevalec: Vital Moreira
Rapporteur: Vital Moreira