natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Države članice lahko sprejmejo strožje ukrepe od tistih, ki se zahtevajo z uredbo št. 2320/2002, vendar morajo v tem primeru kriti s tem povezane stroške, da se izognejo izkrivljanju konkurence.
Member States may adopt security measures more stringent than required by Regulation 2320/2002, but if they do so, they must bear the cost involved, in order to avoid distorting competition.
Države članice imenujejo ali ustanovijo neodvisen organ kot svoj nacionalni neodvisni regulativni organ, da zagotovijo pravilno uporabo ukrepov, sprejetih za uskladitev s to direktivo, in prevzamejo naloge, dodeljene na podlagi členov 4 in 7.
Member States shall nominate or establish an independent body as their national independent regulatory authority in order to ensure the correct application of the measures taken to comply with this Directive and to assume the tasks assigned under Articles 4 and 7.
To telo je lahko isto kot tisto, kateremu država članica zaupa izvajanje dodatnih ureditvenih ukrepov iz člena 1(2), vključno z odobritvijo sistema obračunavanja pristojbin in/ali ravnijo pristojbin, pod pogojem, da izpolnjuje zahteve iz odstavka 2.
Such body may be the same as the entity entrusted by a Member State with the application of the additional regulatory measures referred to in Article 1(2), including with the approval of the charging system and/or the level of charges, provided that it meets the requirements of paragraph 2.
Države članice imenujejo ali ustanovijo neodvisen organ kot svoj nacionalni neodvisni regulativni organ, da zagotovijo pravilno uporabo ukrepov, sprejetih za uskladitev s to direktivo, in izvedbo nalog, dodeljenih na podlagi členov 4 in 7.
Member States shall nominate or establish an independent body as their national independent regulatory authority in order to ensure the correct application of the measures taken to comply with this Directive and to ensure that the tasks assigned under Articles 4 and 7 are carried out .
Za organizacijo neodvisnega regulativnega organa je odgovorna država članica, ki mora zagotoviti izvedbo nalog, dodeljenih na podlagi členov 4 in 7, pa tudi ukrepov za izvajanje te direktive.
The Member States are responsible for organising the independent regulatory authority, and must also ensure that the tasks stated at Articles 4 and 7 and the measures to implement this directive are carried out.
Neodvisni nacionalni regulativni organ lahko pod svojim nadzorom izvedbo določb ali delov določb te direktive dodeli regionalnim neodvisnim regulativnim organom pod pogojem, da bo izvedba potekala v skladu z njegovimi standardi.
The national independent regulatory authority may delegate, under its supervision, the implementation of the provisions, or parts of the provisions, of this directive to regional independent regulatory authorities, provided that the implementation takes place in accordance with the same standards.
Neodvisni nacionalni regulativni organ je še naprej odgovoren za zagotavljanje ustreznega izvajanja določb te direktive.
The national independent regulatory authority shall continue to bear responsibility for ensuring the correct application of the provisions of this Directive.
Določbe iz člena 10(2) te direktive veljajo tudi za regionalne neodvisne regulativne organe.
The provisions of Article 10(2) of this directive shall also apply to regional independent regulatory authorities .
Predlog spremembe upošteva dejstvo, da bo izvajanje člena 10 v različici Komisije privedlo do težav v nekaterih državah članicah.
This amendment seeks to reflect the fact that the application of Article 10 in the Commission’s version will lead to problems in some Member States.
Nadomešča predlog spremembe 17 iz osnutka poročila.
Replaces Amendment 17 in the draft report.
Če se hoče upravni organ letališča ali uporabnik letališča pritožiti glede katere koli zadeve, ki spada na področje uporabe te direktive, lahko pritožbo predloži neodvisnemu regulativnemu organu, ki deluje kot organ za poravnavo sporov; sklep izda v dveh mesecih po prejemu pritožbe.
Whenever an airport managing body or an airport user has a complaint with regard to a matter within the scope of this directive, it may refer the complaint to the independent regulatory authority which, acting as dispute settlement authority, shall issue a decision within two months after receipt of the complaint.
Neodvisni regulativni organ ima pravico, da od strank zahteva informacije, potrebne za sklep.
The independent regulatory authority shall have the right to request the necessary information from the parties for the decision .
Sklepi regulativnega organa so zavezujoči.
The decisions of the regulatory authority should have binding effect.
Pri izvajanju preiskave o utemeljenosti spremembe strukture ali ravni letaliških pristojbin, kot je določeno v členu 4, lahko neodvisni regulativni organ od zadevnih strank zahteva potrebne informacije in se je pri sprejetju odločitve dolžan posvetovati z zadevnimi strankami in vsemi drugimi prizadetimi strankami.
When carrying out an investigation into the justification for modifying the structure, level or airport charge, as provided for in Article 4, the independent regulatory authority shall be able to request necessary information from the parties concerned and shall be required to consult the parties concerned and any other affected parties in order to reach its decision.
Svojo odločitev sprejme v treh mesecih po prejemu pritožbe in to takoj, ko je mogoče, ter je dolžan objaviti svojo odločitev in utemeljitev zanjo.
It shall reach its decision as soon as practical within three months of the receipt of a complaint and shall be required to publish the decision and the reasons behind it.
Sklepi regulativnega organa so zavezujoči.
The decisions of the regulatory authority shall have binding effect.
Dva meseca nista dovolj, da bi neodvisni regulativni organ izpeljal celovito preiskavo o utemeljitvi ravni ali strukture pristojbin.
Two months is not sufficient time for the IRA to conduct a full investigation into the justification of the level of structure charges .
Komisija Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu predloži poročilo o izvajanju te direktive najpozneje štiri leta po začetku njene veljavnosti in po potrebi ustrezen predlog.
The Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the operation of this Directive no later then 4 years after its entry into force as well as, when appropriate, any suitable proposal.
Komisija Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu predloži poročilo o izvajanju te direktive, v katerem oceni napredek pri izpolnjevanju njenih ciljev , najpozneje štiri leta po začetku njene veljavnosti in, če je potrebno, oblikuje ustrezen predlog.
The Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the operation of this Directive , assessing progress made in attaining the objectives of this Directive, no later then 4 years after its entry into force as well as, when appropriate, any suitable proposal.
Neodvisna ocena izvajanja direktive bi morala biti povezana z napredkom pri izpolnjevanju opredeljenih ciljev.
An independent evaluation of the operation of the directive should be linked to the progresses made in relation to the set objectives.
Predlog Komisije o direktivi o letaliških pristojbinah poskuša preprečiti, da bi posamezna letališča zlorabljala prevladujoči položaj na trgu, in tako prispevati k uravnoteženemu razvoju v evropskem sektorju zračnega prometa.
This Commission proposal for a directive on airport charges aims to prevent any abuse of a dominant position in the market by individual airports, thus contributing to the balanced development of the European air transport sector.
Za vsa letališča in letalske prevoznike, na katere se nanašajo določbe te direktive, bodo veljala enotna pravila glede medsebojnega obveščanja, zahtev po preglednosti in načina obračunavanja letaliških pristojbin.
All airports and airlines subject to the provisions of this directive will be bound by common rules on provision of mutual information, transparency, and the way airport charges are calculated.
Načrtuje se vzpostavitev neodvisnih nacionalnih regulativnih organov, ki bodo zagotovili dosledno izvajanje direktive.
It is planned to introduce national independent regulatory authorities to ensure that the directive is applied in full.
Predpisi na evropski ravni so potrebni, ker nimajo vse države članice EU delujočega, nediskriminatornega in razumljivega postopka za obračunavanje pristojbin.
European-level rules are needed as not all EU Member States have a functioning, non-discriminatory and comprehensible procedure for calculating charges.
Predlagani ukrep torej skuša preprečiti izkrivljanje konkurence med letališči in med letalskimi prevozniki, za katere na posameznih letališčih veljajo različne pristojbine.
Thus the proposed measure should prevent distortions of competition both between airports and between individual airlines subject to different pricing levels at individual airports.
Institucionalizacija učinkovitega mehanizma za posvetovanje in določanje pristojbin bo pomagala tudi pri krepitvi sistemskega partnerstva v zračnem prometu.
Institutionalising an effective mechanism for consultation and determining charges will also help to reinforce partnerships in air transport systems.
Mnenje poročevalca o posameznih predlogih sprememb:
Your rapporteur's views on the amendments
Predlagano področje uporabe (letališča z več kot enim milijonom potnikov ali z več kot 25.000 tonami tovora na leto) pomeni, da bodo določbe direktive veljale za okoli 150 letališč v Skupnosti.
The proposed field of application (airports with over one million passengers or more than 25 000 tonnes of air freight per year) means that about 150 Community airports would be covered by the rules in the directive.
Čeprav je načeloma smiselno v evropska pravila vključiti čim več letališč, so bili izraženi precejšnji dvomi glede smiselnosti predlaganega področja uporabe.
Although in principle it makes sense to include as many airports as possible in a European set of rules, there are considerable doubts as to whether the proposed field of application is right.
Zlasti Britanci so izrazili mnogo pomislekov, kar gre pripisati predvsem nasprotnemu trendu v prid deregulacije v tem sektorju, ki ga je opaziti v Veliki Britaniji.
The British in particular have expressed considerable misgivings, which can be largely ascribed to the counter-trend towards deregulation in this sector that can be observed in Great Britain.
Ravno nasprotno so tu letalski prevozniki v položaju, ki jim omogoča prednost pri pogajanjih o letaliških pristojbinah.
On the contrary, airlines here often have a position that gives them an advantage in negotiations on airport charges.
Glede na kategorizacijo v "Smernicah Skupnosti o financiranju letališč in zagonski državni pomoči letalskim družbam z odhodi z regionalnih letališč" s septembra 2005 poročevalec predlaga zvišanje praga področja uporabe na 5 milijonov potnikov letno, se pravi na letališča kategorije B ("nacionalna letališča" s 5 do 10 milijoni potnikov letno) in kategorije A ("velika letališča Skupnosti" z več kot 10 milijoni potnikov letno) (predlog spremembe 1).
In line with the classification scheme in the ‘ Community guidelines on financing of airports and start-up aid to airlines departing from regional airports’ of September 2005, your rapporteur proposes raising the field of application to 5 million passengers per year, so that it would apply to airports of Category B (‘national airports’, with an annual passenger volume of between 5 and 10 million) and Category A (‘large Community airports', with more than 10 million passengers a year) ( Amendment 1 ).
V nekaterih državah članicah (Španija, Portugalska, Grčija, Švedska, Finska) se letališča upravljajo v okviru skupin letališč.
In some Member States (Spain, Portugal, Greece, Sweden and Finland), airports are operated in a system of airport groups.
Zato v teh državah obstajajo okoliščine, ki bi lahko bile nezdružljive z določbami direktive.
In these Member States, there are rules which may be incompatible with the provisions of this directive.
Da bi preprečili nejasnosti in morebitne pravne spore v prihodnosti, bi bilo treba izrecno opozoriti, da lahko te strukturne posebnosti tudi ob izvajanju določb direktive obstajajo še naprej (predloga sprememb 3 in 15).
To avoid future uncertainties and possible legal disputes, it should be expressly pointed out that these structural particularities may continue even when the provisions of this directive are applied ( Amendments 3 and 15 ).
Predlog Komisije predvideva ustanovitev neodvisnega nacionalnega regulativnega organa v vsaki državi članici, ki bi bil zadolžen za izvajanje določb.
The Commission proposal provides for a national independent regulatory authority to be set up in each EU Member State and given the task of implementing the provisions.
Zlasti v Nemčiji pa bi zahteva po vzpostavitvi enega samega osrednjega regulativnega organa zaradi njene federalne strukture povzročila nemajhne težave.
In Germany in particular, the requirement to set up a single, central regulatory authority will lead to considerable problems because of Germany's federal structure.
V tej luči je treba premisliti, ali je vzpostavitev določene institucionalne strukture sploh potrebna.
In view of this, consideration should be given to whether it is actually necessary to lay down a particular institutional structure.
Namesto tega bi moralo biti v ospredju učinkovito izvajanje načel direktive, ne glede na institucionalno strukturo (predloga sprememb 16 in 17).
Instead, effective implementation of the directive’s principles, regardless of the institutional structure, should be the main consideration ( Amendments 16 and 17 ).
Nekateri predlogi sprememb obravnavajo obveznost posvetovanja, saj obveznost posredovanja informacij, ki jo Komisija predvideva za letališča (deloma pa tudi letalske prevoznike), presega zahteve direktive (predlogi sprememb 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 in 13).
Some amendments are also proposed in connection with the requirement for consultation, as the obligation to provide information which the Commission proposes to impose on airports (and partly also on airlines) exceeds what is required for this directive ( Amendments 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 13 ).
Hkrati bi morali upravljavci letališč posredovati uporabnikom letališč zadostne informacije o poslovnem modelu, na katerem temeljijo pristojbine (predloga sprememb 2 in 6).
At the same time, airport operators should provide airport users with sufficient information on the business model on which charges are based ( Amendments 2 and 6 ).
Pravica uporabnikov letališč, da v primeru nestrinjanja glede odločitve o letaliških pristojbinah prosijo za posredovanje neodvisen regulativni organ, prinaša tudi nevarnost, da bi posamezni letalski prevozniki ovirali napredek pri spremembah sistema obračunavanja letaliških pristojbin.
The right of airport users to appeal to the independent regulatory authority in the event of disagreement with a decision on airport charges carries with it the danger that some airlines will impede progress in modifications to the airport charging system.
Poročevalec zato predlaga višji prag za izvajanje pravice do pritožbe.
Your rapporteur therefore proposes a higher threshold for the exercise of the right of appeal.
Nadalje bi bilo treba poskrbeti, da spori ne bi ovirali postopka odločanja (predlog spremembe 5).
Furthermore, care should be taken to ensure that any disputes do not block the decision-making process ( Amendment 5 ).
Razvoj nove letališke infrastrukture hitro postaja eden najpomembnejših izzivov za evropski sistem zračnega prometa.
The development of new airport infrastructures is increasingly becoming a major challenge to the European air transport system.
Poročevalec zato predlaga nov člen, ki pri obračunavanju pristojbin omogoča upoštevanje stroškov odobrenih infrastrukturnih projektov.
Your rapporteur therefore proposes the introduction of a new article to make it possible to include the costs of approved infrastructure projects in the calculation of charges.
Letališčem bo tako olajšano uresničevanje novih projektov, izognili pa bi se tudi nenadnim in prekomernim spremembam višine pristojbin.
This would make it easier for airports to carry out new projects and prevent sudden, excessive jumps in the level of charges.
Ker je gradnja nove infrastrukture praviloma dolgoročen projekt, ki uporabnikom letališč ne prinaša nobenih kratkoročnih koristi, bi moralo predfinanciranje preko pristojbin potekati le s soglasjem letalskih prevoznikov in po objavi podatkov o trajanju in obsegu.
As the construction of new infrastructures is usually a long-term project and does not bring any short-term benefits for airport users, pre-funding in the context of charges should only operate with the agreement of airlines and after they have been informed of its duration and scope.
Tako bi upoštevali načela ICAO za predfinanciranje infrastrukturnih projektov (glej pododstavek "Predfinanciranje projektov" v dokumentu "Politike ICAO o pristojbinah za uporabo letališč in storitev navigacijske službe, dok.
Thus account should be taken of the principles formulated by the ICAO for pre-funding of infrastructure projects (see subparagraph ‘ Pre-funding of projects’ in the ‘ ICAO’s policies on charges for airports and air navigation services, Doc.
9082/7") (predlog spremembe 12).
9082/7 ’ ( Amendment 12 ).
Osrednji cilj urejanja letaliških pristojbin bi moralo biti zagotavljanje, da komercialno usmerjena letališča z znatno tržno močjo ne bodo zlorabljala svojega prevladujočega položaja s pretiranim zaračunavanjem za zmogljivosti in storitve ter hkrati povračila gospodarsko učinkovitih naložb v razvoj teh letališč.
The primary objective in relation to the regulation of airport charges should be to ensure that commercially driven airports with significant market power do not abuse their dominant position by charging excessively for facilities and services while at the same time ensuring that economically efficient investment in the development of such airports can be remunerated.
Številne države članice so že vzpostavile mehanizme za neodvisno urejanje letaliških pristojbin.
Mechanisms for the independent regulation of airport charges have already been put in place in a number of Member States.
Model ureditve z gospodarsko "spodbudo", ki so ga sprejele številne države članice na splošno vključuje neodvisen regulativni organ, ki redno pregleduje oblikovanje cen storitev po natančnih merilih in določa pristojbine na osnovi stroškovne učinkovitosti storitve, tako da zagotavlja ustrezno donosnost gospodarsko pomembnih naložb.
The model of economic “incentive” regulation which has been adopted in a number of Member States generally involves an independent regulator reviewing utilities’ charges at set intervals against specified criteria and setting charges on the basis of an efficient cost structure for the utility and allowing a reasonable return on economically efficient investment.
Sistem ureditve običajno kot del postopka omogoča posvetovanje z uporabniki letalskih prevoznikov in širše posvetovanje.
This system of regulation normally allows for consultation with airline users and more general consultation as part of the process.
Pristojbine se običajno določajo za več let, tako da se zagotavlja pravno varnost in omogoča financiranje gospodarsko učinkovitih naložb ob najugodnejših pogojih.
It is also normal practice for charges to be set for a period of years so as to promote regulatory certainty and facilitate the financing of economically efficient investment on the most attractive terms possible.
Ni povsem jasno, če je predlog Komisije v skladu s tem modelom.
It is not all clear that the proposal put forward by the Commission is consistent with that model.
Čeprav je izraženi cilj direktive vzpostaviti vrste skupnih načel, državam članicam pa pustiti diskrecijsko pravico glede načina izvajanja načel, je pristop direktive docela preskriptiven.
While the stated objective of this Directive is to establish a set of common principles and leave discretion with Member States on how they give effect to these principles, the Directive is in fact quite prescriptive in its approach.
Skrb zbujajoče področje je predlagana uporaba direktive za vsa letališča z vsaj 1 milijonom potnikov pretoka.
One area of concern is the proposed application of the Directive to all airports with a passenger throughput of 1 million or more.
Resnično vprašanje je, če lahko letališče izvaja znatno tržno moč pri določanju pristojbin.
The real issue is whether an airport can exercise significant market power in setting charges.
Številna letališča s pretokom, večjim kot 1 milijon potnikov, dejansko nimajo take moči, zlasti letališča, katerih delovanje je odvisno od javnega financiranja za podporo njihovi dejavnosti.
In reality many airports with throughput well over 1 million passengers are not in a position to exercise such power, particularly airports reliant on public funding to support their operations.
Določbe o obveznem letnem posvetovanju o pristojbinah, ki so povezane z izmenjavo podrobnih informacij, skupaj z dejstvom, da je to posvetovanje namenjeno le obstoječim uporabnikom letalskih prevoznikov – kot je omenjeno v obstoječih sistemih ureditve s spodbudo, se pristojbine na splošno določajo za določeno obdobje, razen če ni stvarne osnove za njihovo revizijo.
The provisions for compulsory annual consultation on charges allied to the exchange of detailed information together with the fact that this consultation is confined to existing airline users only – as indicated above under existing systems of incentive regulation, charges are generally set for a period of time unless there are substantive grounds for revising the charges.
Namen te določbe v direktivi ni popolnoma jasen, če pa mora za pristojbine veljati letna revizija, bi akterji tvegali soočanje s kratkoročno perspektivo in praktičnimi težavami pri upravljanju letaliških dejavnosti.
While the intention behind this provision in the Directive is not entirely clear if it were to mean that charges would be open to review on an annual basis this could well give rise to a very short term perspective and practical difficulties in managing airport businesses.
Osredotočiti se je treba na načeli posvetovanja in preglednosti, kjer se podrobni mehanizmi zaupajo državam članicam.
The focus should be on the principles of consultation and transparency with detailed mechanisms left to Member States.
Ob dejstvu, da se katera koli zadeva, ki spada na področje direktive, lahko nanaša na organ za reševanje sporov ter da so odločitve organa zavezujoče, še posebej ob upoštevanju, da merila, ki se uporabljajo pri poravnavi teh sporov, niso izpostavljena in ni jasno, ali država članica lahko izvaja svojo diskrecijsko pravico pri določanju teh meril - v primeru na primer, ko spor izhaja iz konflikta med kratkoročnimi uporabniki letalskega prevoznika in dolgoročnimi razvojnimi potrebami letališča, katera merila uporabiti pri odločanju o sporu?
The fact that any matter within the scope of the Directive can be referred to a dispute resolution authority and that the decisions of the authority will be binding, particularly given that the criteria to be applied in arbitrating on such disputes are not stated nor is it made clear that a Member State could exercise its discretion in establishing such criteria – in the case, for example, where a dispute arises from a conflict between airline users’ short term perspective and the longer term development needs of an airport what criteria will apply in deciding the dispute?
V modelih ureditve s spodbudo morajo neodvisni regulativni organi zagotoviti ravnotežje med potrebami sedanjih uporabnikov in prihodnjim razvojem letališča ob upoštevanju gospodarske učinkovitosti.
Under the incentive regulation model, independent regulators are normally required to strike a balance between the needs of existing users and the future development of an airport in the interests of economic efficiency.