natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Komisija je leta 2006 ocenila, da nanodelce vsebuje okrog 5 % kozmetičnih izdelkov.
In 2006 the Commission estimated the amount of cosmetic products containing nanoparticles of about 5 %.
Za nanomateriale obstajajo številne opredelitve, ki se večinoma nanašajo na velikost snovi.
There is a wide range of definitions what is to be called a nanomaterial which mostly refer to the size of the substance.
Da bi preprečili pravno negotovost, je treba poskrbeti za opredelitev nanomateriala.
To avoid legal uncertainty it is important to make sure what is meant by nanomaterial.
Poročevalka zato v to uredbo uvaja opredelitev, temelječo na opredelitvi, ki jo je Znanstveni odbor za potrošniške proizvode (ZOPP) oblikoval decembra 2007.
Therefore, the rapporteur introduces a definition to this regulation which is based on a definition developed by the Scientific Committee on Consumer Products (SCCP) in December 2007.
Nanomateriali imajo zaradi svoje majhnosti posebne značilnosti.
Because of their small size nanomaterials contain special characteristics.
Te značilnosti so lahko zelo pozitivne, hkrati pa lahko prinašajo tudi nova tveganja.
These characteristics can be very positive but, at the same time there can be new risks, too.
ZOPP bi zato moral te izdelke oceniti na podlagi ocene varnosti, posebej namenjene nanomaterialom, preden se jih da na trg, da bi zagotovili varnost za potrošnike.
Therefore, these products should be evaluated by the SCCP on the basis of a nano-specific safety assessment prior to their placing on the market to ensure the safety for consumers.
Poročevalka predlaga uvedbo prehodnega obdobja za obstoječe izdelke, ki vsebujejo nanomateriale.
The rapporteur suggests the introduction of a transitional period for existing products, which contain nanomaterials.
Nanomateriali, ki se uporabljajo kot barvila, konzervansi in UV filtri, so že vključeni v prilogah IV, V in VI k tej uredbi in jih mora Komisija po posvetovanju z ZOPP uvrstiti na pozitivni seznam.
Nanomaterials that are used as colorants, preservatives, UV-filters are already covered in Annex IV, V and VI of this regulation and already have to be positively listed by the Commission after consultation with the SCCP.
Za varnost kozmetičnih izdelkov bi bilo treba zahtevati oceno ZOPP za vse proizvode, ki vsebujejo nanomateriale.
To ensure the safety of cosmetic products, an evaluation by the SCCP for all products containing nanomaterials should be required.
Poročevalka zato vlaga predloge sprememb, s katerimi se uvaja usklajen postopek za vse nanomateriale.
The rapporteur therefore tables amendments which introduce a congruent procedure for all nanomaterials.
Ker raziskave nanomaterialov še potekajo, mora Komisija to uredbo redno revidirati glede na nanomateriale.
As the research on nanomaterials is still progressing the Commission is requested to regularly review this regulation in the view of nanomaterials.
Uporaba snovi CMR v kozmetičnih izdelkih
The use of CMR-substances in cosmetic products
S sedmo spremembo direktive o kozmetičnih izdelkih je bila uvedena popolna prepoved snovi CMR 1 in 2 v kozmetičnih izdelkih.
The 7 th amendment of the Cosmetics Directive introduced a total ban of CMR 1 and 2 substances in cosmetic products.
Seveda se lahko še vedno zgodi, da je uporaba nekaterih izmed teh snovi potrebna za izdelavo kozmetičnega izdelka.
Still, there might be cases were the use of some of those substances is necessary to produce a cosmetic product.
V teh primerih so mogoče izjeme od popolne prepovedi, pod pogojem da ZOPP ugotovi, da je snov varna za uporabo v kozmetičnih izdelkih.
For those cases there may be exemptions from the total ban given that the SCCP finds the substance safe for the use in cosmetics.
Predlog Komisije že vsebuje stroge zahteve, ki morajo biti v celoti izpolnjene, da se dovoli uporaba snovi CMR 1 ali 2 v kozmetičnem proizvodu.
The Commission proposal already contains strict requirements that all have to be fulfilled in order to allow the use of a CMR 1 or 2 in a cosmetic product.
Poročevalka ta pristop krepi z uvedbo nadaljnjih zahtev.
The rapporteur strengthens this approach by introducing further requirements.
Poleg tega v uredbo uvaja koncept splošne izpostavljenosti.
Moreover, she introduces the concept of global exposure to this regulation.
ZOPP mora zato pri ocenjevanju varnosti snovi CMR, ki bo uporabljena v kozmetičnem izdelku, upoštevati splošno izpostavljenost za snovi CMR iz vseh smeri in virov (prehrambeni sektor, kozmetični izdelki, drugi potrošniški proizvodi).
Consequently, the global exposure for CMRs from all routes and sources (food sector, cosmetics, other consumer products) has to be taken into account by the SCCP when evaluating the safety of the CMR substance to be used in a cosmetic product.
Ker pa trenutno ni splošne metodologije za merjenje splošne izpostavljenosti snovi CMR in ker gre za vprašanje, ki ga je treba poleg uredbe o kozmetičnih izdelkih obravnavati tudi drugje, poročevalka poziva Komisijo, naj pripravi ocene za merjenje splošne izpostavljenosti in nato ustrezno revidira uredbo o kozmetičnih izdelkih.
However, as there is no general methodology for measuring the global exposure of CMRs at the moment and, as it is a matter that should not only be dealt with in the Cosmetics Regulation, the rapporteur asks the Commission to develop estimates for measuring global exposure and subsequently, to review the cosmetics regulation accordingly.
Uporaba izjav na izdelkih za kozmetične izdelke
The use of product claims for cosmetic products
Potrošnike za nakup kozmetičnega izdelka pogosto prepričajo njegove posebne značilnosti.
It is often the specific characteristics of a cosmetic product that convince the consumer to buy the product.
Izjave na izdelkih so občutljivo področje, saj potrošniki pogosto nimajo nobene možnosti, da bi ocenili, ali so pravilne, ampak morajo zgolj zaupati obljubam na izdelku.
Such product claims are a sensitive issue as the consumers mostly have no possibility to assess their correctness but just to trust what the product promises.
Za zaščito potrošnika je torej treba zagotoviti, da se pri oglaševanju in označevanju izdelka lahko uporabljajo le značilnosti, ki jih izdelek dejansko ima.
Therefore, to protect the consumer it must be ensured that only the characteristics that the product really has can be used for advertising and labelling that the product.
V členu 16 predloga Komisije je poudarjeno, da kozmetični izdelki ne smejo vsebovati zavajajočih ali celo neresničnih izjav na izdelkih in da morajo biti izjave dokazane v dokumentu z informacijami o izdelku.
The Commission proposal underlines in Article 16 that cosmetic products must not contain product claims that are misleading or even false and that the claims have to be proven in the product information file.
Predlog Komisije uvaja tudi sistem usklajenih standardov glede izjav na izdelkih.
Apart from that, the Commission proposal introduces a system of harmonised standards regarding product claims.
Te standarde bi moral pripraviti evropski organ za usklajevanje, npr.
These standards should be developed by a European Harmonisation body, such as the CEN.
Zasebnim organom, kot je CEN, ki jih obvladujejo zadevni industrijski sektorji, ni mogoče zaupati občutljivih zadev, kot so izjave na izdelkih, pri katerih bi bilo nujno potrebno neodvisno ocenjevanje.
Private bodies, such as the CEN, which are dominated by the industry sectors concerned, cannot be put in charge of a sensitive matter like product claims, where independent assessment would absolutely necessary.
Zato poročevalka poziva Komisijo, naj pripravi akcijski načrt glede izjav, ki se uporabljajo na kozmetičnih izdelkih, in določi prednostne naloge za določitev skupnih meril za uporabo izjave.
Therefore, the rapporteur asks the Commission to establish an action plan regarding claims used in cosmetic products and to fix priorities for determining common criteria for the use of a claim.
Nato naj Komisija sprejme seznam skupnih meril za izjave, ki se lahko uporabljajo na kozmetičnih izdelkih.
After that, the Commission should adopt a list of common criteria for claims which could be used in cosmetic products.
Odbor za okolje, javno zdravje
Committee on Environment, Public Health
in varnost hrane
and Food Safety
Zadeva: Predlog uredbe o kozmetičnih izdelkih Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta (prenovitev)
Subject : Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on cosmetics products (recast version)
Odbor za pravne zadeve, ki mu predsedujem, je proučil navedeni predlog v skladu s členom 80a o ponovnem sprejetju pravnih aktov, ki ga je Parlament vključil v svoj poslovnik s sklepom z dne 10. maja 2007.
The Committee on Legal Affairs, which I am honoured to chair, has examined the proposal referred to above, pursuant to Rule 80a on Recasting, as introduced into the Parliament's Rules of Procedure by its Decision of 10 May 2007.
Vendar lahko predloge sprememb za dele, ki ostajajo nespremenjeni, izjemoma sprejme posamično predsednik tega odbora, če meni, da to zahtevata nujna skladnost besed ila ali povezanost z drugimi do pustnimi predlogi sprememb.
However, amendments to the parts which have remained unchanged may be admitted by way of exception and on a case-by-case basis by the chairman of the above committee if he considers that this is necessary for pressing reasons relating to the internal logic of the text or because the amendments are inextricably linked to other admissible amendments.
Na podlagi mnenja pravne službe Evropskega parlamenta, katere predstavniki so se udeležili sestankov posvetovalne skupine za proučitev prenovljenega predloga, in v skladu s priporočili poročevalca Odbor za pravne zadeve meni, da zadevni predlog ne vključuje bistvenih sprememb, razen tistih, ki so v zadevnem predlogu ali v mnenju pravne službe opredeljene kot take, in da je predlog, kar zadeva kodifikacijo nespremenjenih določb prejšnjih aktov z omenjenimi spremembami, zgolj kodifikacija obstoječih besedil brez vsebinskih sprememb.
Following the opinion of the Legal Service of the European Parliament, whose representatives participated in the meetings of the Consultative Working Party examining the recast proposal, and in keeping with the recommendations of the draftsperson, the Committee on Legal Affairs considers that the proposal in question does not include any substantive changes other than those identified as such in the proposal or in the opinion of the Legal Service and that, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier acts with those changes, the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts, without any change in their substance.
Poleg tega je skladu s členom 80a(2) in členom 80(3) Odbor za pravne zadeve ugotovil, da so tehnične prilagoditve, ki jih je v svojem mnenju predlagala pravna služba, potrebne za zagotavljanje skladnosti predloga s pravili prenovitve.
Furthermore, pursuant to Rules 80a(2) and 80(3), the Committee on Legal Affairs considered that the technical adaptations suggested in the opinion of the Legal Service were necessary in order to ensure that the proposal complied with the recasting rules.
Potem ko je Odbor za pravne zadeve 17. novembra 2008 na seji proučil zadevo in o njej glasoval s 17 glasovi za
In conclusion, after examining the issue at its meeting of 17 November 2008, the Committee on Legal Affairs, by 17 votes in favour
Prisotni so bili naslednji poslanci: Giuseppe Gargani (predsednik), Carlo Casini, Othmar Karas, Klaus-Heiner Lehne, Hartmut Nassauer, Rainer Wieland, Jaroslav Zvěřina, Tadeusz Zwiefka, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Manuel Medina Ortega, Aloyzas Sakalas, Diana Wallis, Monica Frassoni, Jean-Paul Gauzès, Georgios Papastamkos, Jacques Toubon, Ieke van den Burg. in brez vzdržanih glasov, vašemu odboru kot pristojnemu odboru priporoča, naj predlog prouči ob upoštevanju njegovih predlogov in v skladu s členom 80a.
The following Members were present: Giuseppe Gargani (Chairman), Carlo Casini, Othmar Karas, Klaus-Heiner Lehne, Hartmut Nassauer, Rainer Wieland, Jaroslav Zvěřina, Tadeusz Zwiefka, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Manuel Medina Ortega, Aloyzas Sakalas, Diana Wallis, Monica Frassoni, Jean-Paul Gauzès, Georgios Papastamkos, Jacques Toubon, Ieke van den Burg and no abstentions, recommends that your Committee, as the committee responsible, proceed to examine the above proposal in keeping with its suggestions and in accordance with Rule 80a.
Priloga: Mnenje posvetovalne skupine
Encl.: Opinion of the Consultative Working Party
Predlog uredbe o kozmetičnih izdelkih Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta (prenovitev)
Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on cosmetic products (recast)
KOM(2008)0049 končno z dne 5.2.2008 – 2008/0035 (COD)
COM(2008) 49 final of 5.2.2008 - 2008/ 0035 (COD)
V skladu z Medinstitucionalnim sporazumom z dne 28. novembra 2001 o bolj sistematičnem ponovnem sprejemu pravnih aktov, zlasti z odstavkom 9, se je posvetovalna skupina, ki jo sestavljajo predstavniki pravnih služb Evropskega parlamenta, Sveta in Komisije srečala 13., 20. in 25. februarja 2008, 13. marca 2008 in 27. maja 2008, da bi proučila omenjeni predlog, ki ga je predložila Komisija.
Having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 28 November 2001 on a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts, and in particular to point 9 thereof, the Consultative Working Party consisting of the respective Legal Services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, met on 13, 20 and 25 February, on 13 March and on 27 May 2008 for the purpose of examining the aforementioned proposal submitted by the Commission.
Razprava se je od septembra 2008 nadaljevala na ravni generalnih direktorjev/pravnih svetovalcev in vodila do izmenjave pisem med generalnim direktorjem pravne službe Sveta (pismo, naslovljeno na Christiana Pennera in Claire-Françoise Durand, z dne 4. novembra 2008), pravnim svetovalcem Evropskega parlamenta (odgovor z dne 7. novembra 2008) in v.d. generalnega direktorja pravne službe Komisije (odgovor z dne 13. novembra 2008), v katerih je vsaka od strani izrazila svoje mnenje.
The discussions continued at the level of the Directors General/Jurisconsults from September 2008 and led to an exchange of letters between the Director General of the Legal Service of the Council (letter addressed to Mr. Pennera and Ms Durand on 4 November), the Jurisconsult of the European Parliament (reply dated 7 November 2008) and the Acting Director General of the Legal Service of the Commission (reply dated 13 November 2008), in which the respective views were made clear.
Ves čas razprave je bilo osrednje vprašanje, ali je direktivo v okviru postopka prenovitve mogoče spremeniti v uredbo.
In all those discussions, the central issue was the question of whether a directive can be converted into a regulation in the context of a recast exercise.
(a) Pravni službi Evropskega parlamenta in Komisije zastopata mnenje, da je obstoječe določbe direktive s prenovitvijo mogoče spremeniti v novo uredbo, če so obstoječe določbe akta za države članice dovolj natančne in podrobne (in je zato potreben samo formalen prenos), da jih je mogoče pretvoriti v določbe uredbe, ki se neposredno uporabljajo.
a) The Legal Services of the European Parliament and of the Commission are of the view that it is possible to have the existing provisions of a directive recast into a new regulation, as long as the provisions of the act addressed to Member States are sufficiently precise and detailed (and therefore only requiring a mere formal transposition) as to be capable of conversion into directly applicable provisions in a regulation.
Po njunem mnenju je v tem primeru tako, saj so obravnavane določbe tehnične narave in so bile že v celoti prenesene v nacionalno zakonodajo vseh držav članic.
They are of the view that this is the case here, in that the provisions at issue are of a technical nature and have already been fully transposed into national law by all Member States.
S tem mnenjem sta omenjeni pravni službi priznali tudi pomen dveh predhodnih mnenj, ki ju je podala posvetovalna skupina pravnih služb glede direktiv, ki se spremenijo v uredbo v okviru postopka prenovitve
In reaching this opinion, the two said Legal Services also accept the relevance of two preceding opinions delivered by the Consultative Working Party as regards directives converted into regulations in the context of a recast exercise
V svojem mnenju o Prilogi XVI k predlogu Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o registraciji, vrednotenju, dovoljevanju in omejevanju kemikalij (REACH), o ustanovitvi Evropske agencije za kemikalije in o spremembi Direktive 1999/45/ES in Uredbe (ES) o obstojnih organskih onesnaževalih ( KOM(2003)0644 konč. – 2003/0256 (COD)) je posvetovalna skupina zapisala, da Priloga XVI […] predstavlja prenovitev prilog I in II Direktive Sveta 76/769/EGS z dne 27, julija 1976 […] in da je posvetovalna skupina s proučitvijo ustreznega dela predloga lahko soglasno zaključila, da predlog v zvezi z omenjeno prilogo ne vključuje bistvenih sprememb, razen tistih, ki so v zadevnem mnenju opredeljene kot take.
In its opinion relating to Annex XVI to the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council “concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restrictions of Chemicals ( Reach ), establishing a European Chemicals Agency and amending Directive 1999/45/EC and Regulation (EC) on Persistent Organic Pollutants” (COM(2003) 644 final – 2003/0256 (COD)) the Consultative Working Party stated that " Annex XVI […] constitutes a recast version of Annexes I and II to Council Directive 76/769/EEC of 27 July 1976 […]" and that " examination of the relevant part of the proposal has enabled the Consultative Working Party to conclude, without dissent, that, as regards the aforementioned Annex, the proposal does not comprise any substantive amendments other than those identified as such therein or in the present opinion.
Posvetovalna skupina je v zvezi s kodifikacijo nespremenjenih določb iz prilog I in II k Direktivi Sveta 76/769/EGS s temi bistvenimi spremembami tudi sklenila, da predlog Komisije vsebuje jasno kodifikacijo obstoječih besedil brez vsebinskih sprememb.
The Working Party also concluded, as regards the codification of the unchanged parts of Annexes I and II to Council Directive 76/769/EEC with those substantive amendments, that the proposal contains a straightforward codification of existing texts, without any change in their substance ".
V mnenju glede predloga za uredbo Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o skupnih pravilih za dostop do trga mednarodnega cestnega prevoza blaga ( KOM(2007)0265 konč. z dne 23.5.2007 – 2007/0099 (COD)) je posvetovalna skupina zapisala, da je po preučitvi predloga uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o prenovitvi Uredbe Sveta (EGS) št. 881/92 z dne 26. marca 1992 o dostopu na trg znotraj Skupnosti pri cestnem prevozu blaga na ozemlje države članice ali z njega ali prek ozemlja ene ali več držav članic, Uredbe Sveta (EGS) št. 3118/93 z dne 25. oktobra 1993 o pogojih, pod katerimi lahko prevozniki nerezidenti opravljajo notranje cestne prevoze tovora v državi članici in Direktive 2006/94/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 12. decembra 2006 o določitvi skupnih pravil za določene vrste cestnega prevoza blaga […] lahko soglasno zaključila, da predlog ne vključuje bistvenih sprememb, razen tistih, ki so v tem mnenju opredeljene kot take.
In the opinion relating to a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for access to the international road haulage market (COM(2007) 265 final of 23.5.2007 - 2007/0099 (COD)) the Consultative Working Party stated that " an examination of the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council recasting Council Regulation (EEC) No 881/92 of 26 March 1992 on access to the market in the carriage of goods by road within the Community to or from the territory of a Member State or passing across the territory of one or more Member States, Council Regulation (EEC) No 3118/93 of 25 October 1993 laying down the conditions under which non-resident carriers may operate national road haulage services within a Member State, and Directive 2006/94/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the establishment of common rules for certain types of carriage of goods by road […] has enabled the Consultative Working Party to conclude, without dissent, that the proposal does not comprise any substantive amendments other than those identified as such therein or in the present opinion.
Posvetovalna skupina je v zvezi s kodifikacijo nespremenjenih določb iz predhodnega akta s temi bistvenimi spremembami tudi sklenila, da predlog Komisije vsebuje jasno kodifikacijo obstoječih besedil brez vsebinskih sprememb. .
The Working Party also concluded, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier acts with those substantive amendments, that the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts, without any change in their substance ". .
Vendar sta pravni službi tudi mnenja, da bi morali biti naslednji deli besedila prenovljenega predloga osenčeni s sivo barvo za označitev bistvenih sprememb:
This being said, they are also of the view that the following parts of the text of the recast proposal should have been identified by using the grey-shaded type used for marking substantive changes:
- naslov predloga;
- the title of the proposal;
- izraz „ ta uredba “ v uvodnih izjavah 8, 9, 26 in 46, končnem besedilu preambule, členu 1, členu 2(1), končnem besedilu člena 3, členu 6, členu 14(a), (b), (c) in (d), členu 15(1)(c), točki 681 Priloge II in Prilogi VIII;
8, 9, 26 and 46, in the final wording of the preamble, in Article 1, in Article 2(1), in the final wording of Article 3, in Article 6, in Article 14(a), (b), (c) and (d), in Article 15(1)(c), in point 681 of Annex II, and in Annex VIII;
- prvi stavek uvodne izjave 13;
- the first sentence of Recital 13;
- celotno besedilo uvodne izjave 14;
- the entire text of Recital 14;
- celotno besedilo uvodne izjave 16;
- the entire text of Recital 16;
- zadnji stavek uvodne izjave 17;
- the last sentence of Recital 17;
- celotno besedilo uvodne izjave 18;
- the entire text of Recital 18;
- celotno besedilo uvodne izjave 20;
- the entire text of Recital 20;
- celotno besedilo uvodne izjave 24;
- the entire text of Recital 24;
- celotno besedilo uvodne izjave 42;
- the entire text of Recital 42;
- v prvem pododstavku člena 7(1) besede „ v skladu s Prilogo I “.
- in Article 7(1), first subparagraph, the words " in accordance with Annex I ".
Zato sta pravni službi Evropskega parlamenta in Komisije mnenja, da predlog, ki ga je predložila Komisija, predstavlja prenovljeni predlog, pripravljen v skladu s pravili medinstitucionalnega sporazuma z dne 28. novembra 2001 o bolj sistematični rabi metode prenove za pravne akte.
In consequence, the Legal Services of the European Parliament and of the Commission are of the view that the proposal submitted by the Commission constitutes a recast proposal made in compliance with the rules of the Inter-institutional Agreement of 28 November 2001 on a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts.
Menita, da predlog ne vključuje bistvenih sprememb, razen tistih, ki so opredeljene kot take v samem predlogu ali v tem mnenju.
According to them, it does not comprise any substantive amendments other than those identified as such therein or in the present opinion.
Pravni službi sta v zvezi s kodifikacijo nespremenjenih določb iz predhodnega akta s temi bistvenimi spremembami tudi mnenja, da predlog vsebuje jasno kodifikacijo obstoječih besedil brez vsebinskih sprememb.
They also are of the opinion that, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier act with those substantive amendments, the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts, without any change in their substance.
(b) Pravna služba Sveta je mnenja, da je direktivo mogoče spremeniti v uredbo, vendar ne s prenovitvijo.
b) The Legal Service of the Council is of the view that it is possible to transform a directive into a regulation, but not by means of a recast proposal.