natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Organe drugih držav članic, na katerih ozemljih zavarovalnica opravlja svojo dejavnost, obvesti o vseh ukrepih, slednje pa na zahtevo prvega sprejmejo enake ukrepe.
It shall inform the authorities of other Member States in whose territories the undertaking is authorized of any measures and the latter shall, at the request of the former, take the same measures.
Pristojni organi lahko nadalje sprejmejo vse ukrepe, potrebne za varovanje interesov zavarovancev ...“
The competent supervising authorities may further take all measures necessary to safeguard the policy-holders' interests..."
Evropska komisija in zadeva družbe Equitable Life
The Commission and the Equitable Life case
Kot je razvidno iz dokazov, ki jih je pregledal in potrdil komisar EU Charlie McCREEVY (H8), je Komisija prvo korespondenco o zadevi družbe Equitable Life prejela februarja 2001
As documented by evidence sighted and confirmed by EU Commissioner Charlie McCREEVY (H8), the earliest correspondence received by the Commission on the Equitable Life case dates to February 2001
Pismo poslanca Evropskega parlamenta za komisarja Fritsa Bolkesteina z dne 27.2.2001, ki so mu sledili 5 pisem drugih poslancev, 2 vprašanji na pisni odgovor EP in 7 pritožb posameznih državljanov. , ko se je o zadevi že obširno razpravljalo v medijih Združenega kraljestva, in le malo po sodbi zgornjega doma britanskega parlamenta ter po prenehanju sklepanja novih poslov družbe Equitable Life.
letter from MEP to Commissioner Frits Bolkestein, 27.02.2001, followed by 5 letters from other MEPs, 2 EP written questions and 7 complaints from individual citizens. , i.e. when the case had already been widely debated in the UK press, well after the House of Lords rulings and after Equitable Life had closed to new business.
V prvih odgovorih je Komisija navedla, da bo „ pred določitvijo potrebnih ukrepov počakala na ugotovitve poročila lorda Penrosa “
In its first replies, the Commission stated it would " wait for the outcome of the Penrose report before determining what actions, if any, should be taken ."
Glej stran 4 WE-CONF11 in WE 73. .
see WE-CONF11 and WE 73, page 4.
Marca 2004 generalni sekretariat Komisije prejetih pritožb še ni registriral kot uradnih pritožb in navedel, da je cilj postopka Skupnosti za ugotavljanje kršitev „ izboljšati ali vzpostaviti skladnost nacionalne zakonodaje z zakonodajo Skupnosti in ne odločati o domnevni neusklajenosti nekdanjega regulativnega in nadzornega sistema “, pri čemer je dodal, da je treba „ vse zahtevke za povrnitev domnevne škode vložiti na nacionalna sodišča “.
In March 2004, the complaints received were still not registered as formal complaints by the Commission Secretariat General, which asserted that the objective of Community infringement proceedings is to " restore or establish the compatibility of national law with Community law and not to rule on the alleged incompatibility of a past regulatory or supervisory regime ", adding that " any claims for alleged damages must be pursued before national courts."
Vsebinsko je Komisija ob navajanju „pravnega nasveta, ki temelji na sodni praksi sodišča“
In substance, the Commission - citing " strong legal advice based on Court jurisprudence "
Glej ustne dokaze v H1 in H7. , stalno trdila, da ji ni treba sprejeti odločitve o nekdanji domnevni neskladnosti bonitetnega nadzora zakonodajalcev Združenega kraljestva nad družbo Equitable Life z zakonodajo ES, le da je bila ugotovljena sedanja usklajenost regulativnega sistema.
see oral evidence in H1 and H7. - persistently claimed that it did not need to take a decision on the alleged past incompatibility with EC law of UK regulators' prudential supervision over Equitable Life, as long as the current compatibility of the regulatory regime was ascertained.
V H8 je komisar McCREEVY potrdil, da je „ zagotavljanje ustreznega izvajanja zakonodaje Skupnosti ključna naloga Komisije “, pri čemer je dodal, „da je preverjanje izvajanja zakonodaje Skupnosti s strani držav članic težka naloga.
In H8 Commissioner Mr. McCREEVY confirmed that it is " the Commission's key job of making sure that Community legislation is properly implemented", adding that "checking Member States' implementation of Community legislation is a difficult exercise.
Države članice pogosto izvajajo naše direktive s spreminjanjem več delov veljavne zakonodaje in pogosto ne morejo zagotoviti tabel za prenos“.
Member States frequently implement our directives by amending multiple pieces of existing legislation and often fail to provide transposition tables".
Jasno je poudaril, „da Komisija ni odgovorna za nadzor posameznih zavarovalnic.
His clear message was that "the Commission is not responsible for the supervision of individual insurance undertakings.
To je naloga nacionalnih organov ...
That is the job of the national authorities.... the Commission is not and cannot be the supervisor of the supervisors."
Komisija ni in ne more biti nadzornica nadzornikov.“ Komisar McCREEVY je ob oceni zlasti zadeve družbe Equitable Life dejal, „da so se organi Združenega kraljestva po krizi družbe in prenehanju sklepanja novih poslov hitro odzvali ...
Assessing in particular the Equitable Life case, Commissioner McCREEVY concluded by saying that " the UK authorities reacted quickly following the Society's crisis and closure to new business ...
Odbor evropskih nadzornikov za zavarovanja in poklicne pokojnine ter sienski protokol
CEIOPS and the ' Siena Protocol'
Odbor evropskih nadzornikov za zavarovanja in poklicne pokojnine
The Committee of European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Supervisors (CEIOPS
Za dodatne informacije glej www.ceiops.org. , prej imenovan „Evropska konferenca nadzornikov za zavarovanja“ , je bil ustanovljen v skladu s Sklepom 2004/6/ES z dne 5. novembra 2003, delovati pa je začel 28. maja 2004.
for further information consult www.ceiops.org. ) - previously called 'European Conference of Insurance Supervisors' - was established pursuant to Decision 2004/6/EC of 5 November 2003 and began its operations on 28 May 2004.
Odbor evropskih nadzornikov za zavarovanja in poklicne pokojnine je sestavljen iz visokih predstavnikov nadzornih organov za zavarovanja in poklicne pokojnine držav članic EU
CEIOPS is composed of high-level representatives from the insurance and occupational pensions' supervisory authorities of the EU Member States
Organi držav članic Evropskega gospodarskega prostora (Norveška, Islandija in Lihtenštajn) in držav kandidatk EU ter Evropska komisija sodelujejo v odboru kot opazovalci. .
The authorities of the European Economic Area Member States (Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein) and EU candidate countries, as well as the European Commission, participate in CEIOPS as observers. .
Pri uporabi „postopka Lamfalussy“
In application of the "Lamfalussy Process"
„Postopek Lamfalussy“ je pristop k razvoju ureditve industrije finančnih storitev, ki ga je sprejela EU (imenovan je po predsedniku posvetovalnega odbora EU, ki ga je oblikoval), sestavljen pa je iz štirih stopenj:
The ' Lamfalussy process' is an approach to the development of financial services industry regulation adopted by the EU (named after the chair of the EU advisory committee that devised it), consisting of four levels:
Stopnja 1: Evropski parlament in Svet sprejmeta zakonodajo v postopku soodločanja, pri čemer določita okvirna načela in smernice o izvedbenih pooblastilih.
· Level 1: The EP and Council adopt legislation in co-decision, determining framework principles and guidelines on implementing powers.
Stopnja 2: tehnični izvedbeni ukrepi v obliki dodatnih direktiv in/ali uredb, sprejetih v skladu s pooblastili, prenesenimi na stopnji 1.
· Level 2: Technical implementing measures taking the form of further directives and/or regulations, adopted under powers delegated at level one.
Stopnja 3: mrežno povezovanje zakonodajalcev, ki omogoča pripravo skupnih razlagalnih priporočil, skladnih smernic in enotnih standardov, medsebojne preglede ter primerjave med regulativnimi sistemi, da se zagotovita skladno izvajanje in uporaba.
· Level 3: Networking between regulators with a view to producing joint interpretative recommendations, consistent guidelines and common standards, peer review, and comparisons between regulatory practice to ensure consistent implementation and application.
Stopnja 4: spremljanje skladnosti ravnanja države članice z zakonodajo EU s strani Komisije in izvršilni ukrepi, če je potrebno. v bančnem sektorju in sektorju kapitalskega trga je Odbor evropskih nadzornikov za zavarovanja in poklicne pokojnine opravljal funkcije „odbora na tretji stopnji“ v sektorju za zavarovanje, pozavarovanje in poklicne pokojnine.
· Level 4: Monitoring by the European Commission of MS compliance with EU legislation and enforcement action where necessary to the banking and capital markets sectors, CEIOPS has been performing the functions of 'Level 3 Committee' for the insurance, re-insurance and occupational pensions sectors.
Ta vloga vključuje svetovanje Komisiji o pripravi osnutkov izvedbenih ukrepov za okvirne direktive (na primer o projektu Solventnost II ter njegovih sedanjih osnovnih dejavnostih
This role involves providing advice to the Commission on the drafting of implementation measures for framework directives (for example on 'Solvency II', its core undertaking at present
Glej H7 Bjerra-Nielsena in naslednje poglavje 11. ) in o predpisih glede zavarovanj in poklicnih pokojnin ter uvedbo nadzornih standardov.
see H7, Mr. Bjerre-Nielsen, and the following chapter 11. ) and advising on insurance and occupational pensions' regulations as well as the establishing of supervisory standards.
Priporočila in smernice iz postopka so namenjeni izboljšanju zbliževanja in učinkovitejši uporabi predpisov, kar bi omogočilo lažje sodelovanje med nacionalnimi nadzorniki in posodobitev „sienskega protokola“ iz leta 1997.
Its recommendations and guidelines aim at enhancing the convergence and effective application of the regulations, thus facilitating cooperation between national supervisors and upgrading the 1997 ' Siena Protocol' .
Vendar je Odbor evropskih nadzornikov za zavarovanja in poklicne pokojnine ob upoštevanju njegovih posebnih izvedbenih pooblastil treba šteti kot „mediacijski mehanizem, kjer so nacionalni zakonodajalci predmet enakega pritiska in ne obvezujočega vsiljevanja“.
However, concerning its specific implementing powers, CEIOPS has to be seen as a 'mediation mechanism where national regulators are subject to peer pressure, not to cogent enforcement .'
Glej H7 Bjerra-Nielsena.
see H7, Mr. Bjerre-Nielsen.
„Sienski protokol“, ki je bil podpisan 30. oktobra 1997, zadeva sodelovanje nadzornih organov držav članic ES pri uporabi direktiv o življenjskem zavarovanju in neživljenjskem zavarovanju.
The ' Siena Protocol' , signed on 30 October 1997, relates to the collaboration of the supervisory authorities of the EU Member States in the application of the Directives on life and non-life insurance.
Ugotavlja, da „sprejetje okvirnih direktiv na področju življenjskega zavarovanja, ki so uvedle enotno dovoljenje in enoten nadzor, zlasti finančni, ki ga izvajajo le pristojni organi domače države članice, povečuje potrebo po poglobitvi njihovega sodelovanja iz protokolov, ki uporabljajo prvo in drugo direktivo“.
It considered that " the adoption of the 3LD insurance and life assurance framework Directives, which set up single authorisation and single supervision, particularly financial supervision exercised only by the competent authorities of the home Member State, makes necessary a deepening of their co-operation, which is already covered by protocols applying the First and Second Directives. "
Nadzorni organi so navedli, „ da analiza položaja zavarovalnic v njihovih zadevnih državah poziva k sprejetju različnih nadzornih metod in praks ter k zbiranju različnih računovodskih listin in statistike.
The supervisory authorities declared that " the analysis of the situation of undertakings in their respective countries calls for a variety of supervisory methods and practices and for a collection of different accounting documents and statistics.
Standardizacija nadzora bi se izboljšala s skupno analizo in usklajevanjem računovodskih listin ter statistike.
The standardisation of supervision would be improved by means of a common language of analysis and harmonisation of insurance accounting documentation and statistics.
Nadzorni organi navajajo, da potrebujejo standardni dokument, ki jim bo omogočal, da preverijo stanje minimalnega kapitala, česar pri pregledu računov zavarovalnic ni mogoče takoj ugotoviti“.
The supervisory authorities confirm that they must have a standard document allowing them to verify the state of the solvency margin, since this is not immediately apparent from an examination of an undertaking's accounts."
Glej WE55, del I, točko 1.3.
see WE55, part I, point 1.3.
Glede sodelovanja in varovanja poslovne skrivnosti so se nadzorni organi strinjali, da „si bodo izmenjali zaupne informacije, kadar bo mogoče, v okviru pravil iz tretje direktive o življenjskem zavarovanju ..., da se izboljša učinkovitost zavarovalnega nadzora v Evropski skupnosti“ , pri čemer so dodali, da „se lahko pravila o sodelovanju iz protokola v dejanskih zadevah izkažejo za neustrezna in se strinjajo, da se bodo pravila po potrebi razširila“.
Referring to cooperation and professional secrecy, the supervising authorities agreed to " exchange confidential information whenever possible, within the limits of the rules laid down in the Third Directives...) in order to improve the effectiveness of insurance supervision in the European Community" adding that "the rules for collaboration set out in the protocol may show themselves to be inadequate when faced with actual cases and agree that as a result they will be expanded as the need arises."
Glej WE55, del II, točke 1.4 do 1.6.
see WE55, part I, points 1.4-1.6.
Glede stalnega dela na glavnem regulativnem projektu za zavarovalne posle
Referring to the ongoing work on the main regulatory project for the insurance business
Komisija mora predlog novega okvira solventnosti v zavarovalniškem sektorju (Solventnost II) sprejeti do druge polovice leta 2007, z začetkom veljavnosti leta 2010. je komisar McCREEVY (H8) dejal, da je projekt Solventnost II „že ustvaril novo ozračje za nadzorno sodelovanje na ravni EU“ , pri čemer je potrdil, da je „glavna prednostna naloga Komisije na področju zavarovalnic“ ambiciozni cilj „temeljne revizije predpisov o zavarovanju in nadzora v EU.
The proposal for a new solvency framework for the insurance sector (Solvency II) should be adopted by the Commission in the second half of 2007, aiming at entry into force in 2010. , Commissioner McCREEVY (H8) stated that the Solvency II project "has already created a new climate of supervisory cooperation at EU level ", confirming that it was the Commission's " current top insurance priority " with the ambitious aim of bringing about " nothing less than a fundamental revision of insurance regulation and supervision in the EU.
Sedanji sistem solventnosti je zastarel.
The current solvency regime... is showing its age!
Zahteve o minimalnem kapitalu za zavarovalnice so bile na ravni EU prvič uvedene pred več kot 30 leti, metoda izračunavanja pa se od takrat ni bistveno spremenila.
Solvency margin requirements for insurers were first introduced at EU level over thirty years ago and the method of calculation has remained essentially unchanged since then.
Oblikovane so bile za zavarovalniško dejavnost in svet, ki ne obstaja več ...
They were designed for an insurance industry and a world that no longer exist...
Projekt Solventnost II so spopada z izzivom doseganja ravnovesja med pričakovanji potrošnikov, nadzornikov in zavarovalnic.
Solvency II has the challenging job of achieving a balance between the expectations of consumers, supervisors and insurers.
Ključno je, da industrija ne izgubi občutka za tveganje zaradi čezmernih nadzornih obveznosti.
It is crucial that the industry should not lose its appetite for risk because of excessive supervisory obligations.
Kljub temu je tudi pomembno, da se družbe v celoti zavedajo sprejetih tveganj in sprejmejo ustrezne posledice.
But it is also important that companies are fully aware of the risks they are taking on and accept the corresponding consequences.
V okviru projekta Solventnost II bodo zahteve o solventnosti temeljile na profilu tveganja družbe.
Within the Solvency II framework, solvency requirements will be based on the company’s risk-profile.
Na kratko: cilj projekta Solventnost II ni povečanje vseh stopenj zahtev o kapitalu, ampak zagotavljanje visokega standarda ocene tveganja in učinkovite razporeditve kapitala.
In brief: the aim of Solvency II is not to increase overall levels of capital requirements but rather to ensure a high standard of risk assessment and efficient capital allocation.
To bi prispevalo k večji preglednosti trga in pripomoglo k razvoju enakih konkurenčnih pogojev v Evropi, kar bi bil ključni korak pri izvajanju dejanskega enotnega trga za finančne storitve.
This would contribute to increased market transparency and help developing a level playing field across Europe, as a key step in the implementation of a true single market in financial services.
Ker se zdi kapital, ki se od zavarovalnic zahteva na podlagi projekta Solventnost I, neustrezno razporejen, so v več državah članicah predpisi postali ostrejši, kar je povzročilo razdrobljenost pravil o solventnosti.
In fact, as the capital currently required from insurance companies under Solvency I appears to be inadequately allocated, it led to the strengthening of regulations in a number of Member States, thus creating a patchwork of solvency rules.
Nov skupni okvir solventnosti mora tako temeljiti na jasnih gospodarskih načelih za izračun sredstev in obveznosti, tveganje pa je treba oceniti na podlagi skladnih načel in zahtev o kapitalu, ki temeljijo neposredno na tem izračunu.
The new common solvency framework should therefore be based on clear economic principles for the measurement of assets and liabilities, with risk measured on the basis of consistent principles and capital requirements based directly on these measurements.
Za več podrobnosti glej tudi „Vodnik o projektu Solventnost II“, Evropski zavarovalni odbor 2006 in WE-CONF18.
see also 'Solvency II Introductory Guide', CEA 2006 and WE-CONF18 for more specific details
Če se bo okvir projekta Solventnost II izvajal pravilno, bo pozitivno vplival na zavarovance in jim omogočil večjo zaščito z zagotavljanjem, da bodo družbe izboljšale prakse za obvladovanje tveganja in ohranjale ustrezno raven kapitala.
Thus, if implemented correctly, the Solvency II framework would have a positive impact on policyholders, giving them better protection by ensuring companies improve their risk management practices and hold appropriate levels of capital.
Hkrati bi to vodilo k učinkovitejši razporeditvi sredstev v industriji, nižjemu tveganju za napake družbe in zato tudi k večjemu zaupanju v zavarovalne posle ter njihovo finančno stabilnost.
At the same time, it would lead to a more efficient capital allocation across the industry, a lower risk of company failure and, consequently, greater confidence in the insurance business and its financial stability.
Odbor mora pri analizi določb zakonodaje ES iz tretje direktive o življenjskem zavarovanju v okviru tega dela mandata dobiti odgovore na naslednja vprašanja:
Analyzing the EC law provisions as defined by the Third Life Directive in the context of this part of the mandate, the committee had to find answers to the following questions:
Ali je bila ustanovitev nadzornih in regulativnih organov Združenega kraljestva učinkovita ter ali so imeli zadostno število osebja in zadostna sredstva za izpolnjevanje svojih dolžnosti iz člena 10(3) tretje direktive o življenjskem zavarovanju?
Were UK supervisory and regulatory bodies effectively created and adequately equipped with staff and resources to fulfil the duties detailed in Article10(3) of 3LD ?
Kaj in kdaj bi bilo od regulativnih organov Združenega kraljestva razumno pričakovati, da odkrijejo v zadevi Equitable Life, če bi pravilno izvajali svoje nadzorne in regulativne pristojnosti na področju bonitetne ureditve v skladu z določbami iz členov 10 in 13 tretje direktive o življenjskem zavarovanju?
What - and when - could the UK regulatory bodies have reasonably been expected to discover in the Equitable Life case, if they had correctly exercised their supervisory and regulatory powers on prudential regulation following provisions detailed in Articles 10 and 13 of 3LD ?
Ali so se zakonodajalci Združenega kraljestva ob novici o zadevi družbe Equitable Life odzvali pravočasno in ustrezno, kot je določeno v členu 13(3) tretje direktive o življenjskem zavarovanju, zlasti kar zadeva odkrivanje in poudarjanje tveganj pri zajamčenih rentah?
Did UK regulators react in a timely and correct manner once problems with Equitable Life became known to them, in particular on spotting and highlighting the risks inherent in GARs, as requested by Article 13(3) of 3LD ?
Ali so zakonodajalci Združenega kraljestva in drugih zadevnih držav članic pravilno nadzorovali uporabo pravil poslovanja na svojem ozemlju?
Did the UK regulators and regulators in other Member States concerned correctly supervise the application of conduct of business rules on their territory?
Ali so pomagali zavarovancem, ki so vložili pritožbe?
Did they assist policyholders addressing complaints to regulators?
Ali so bili izmenjava informacij in usklajeni ukrepi na njihovem ozemlju o dejavnosti družbe ELAS med zakonodajalci Združenega kraljestva in drugih držav članic ustrezni?
Was there an appropriate flow of information and concerted action between UK regulators and regulators of other Member States in relation to EL's activities on their territory?
Zavarovalnice Združenega kraljestva so bile pozvane, da predložijo natančna poročila o računovodenju in zavarovalno-tehničnih rezervacijah
UK insurance companies have been required to make detailed accounting and actuarial returns
Zakon o zavarovalnicah iz leta 1982 je od življenjskih zavarovalnic zahteval, da predložijo povzetek „poročila o vrednotenju imenovanega aktuarja“, „letno poročilo“ in „letno finančno poročilo“ družbe, kar zahteva zakon .
The Insurance Companies Act 1982 required life insurance companies to submit the abstract of the 'Appointed Actuary's valuation report', the 'Annual report' and the company's 'Annual Accounts' required under the Companies Acts .
Sekundarna zakonodaja je dodatno opredelila vsebino predpisanega regulativnega poročila, ki bi v poznih devetdesetih letih 20. stoletja lahko obsegal več sto strani.
Secondary legislation further specified the content of prescribed regulatory returns which - in the late 1990s - could run to several hundred pages. (compare.
(Prim. z odstavkom 44 WE32.) , s čimer bi omogočile spremljanje njihovega stanja solventnosti od sprejetja „Zakona o življenjskih zavarovalnicah“ iz leta 1870.
WE32, para.44) to enable the monitoring of their state of solvency since the adoption of the " Life Assurance Companies Act" of 1870.
Formalnejši sistem izdaje dovoljenja, ki vključuje regulativne pristojnosti, je bil uveden leta 1967 in leta 1974 okrepljen z uvedbo pojma „razumna pričakovanja zavarovancev“
A more formal authorisation regime backed by regulatory powers was consequently introduced in 1967 and later strengthened by the introduction of the concept of " policyholders' reasonable expectations" (PRE)
Iz odstavkov 30 in 31 iz WE32 je razvidno, da pojem „razumna pričakovanja zavarovancev“ ni bil nikoli natančno določen in ne izhaja iz zakonodaje ES, tj. zakonodaja ES ni nikoli ustvarila zakonske zahteve, ki bi bila podobna pojmu „razumna pričakovanja zavarovancev“.
As specified in WE32, para.30-31, the concept of 'policyholders' reasonable expectations' has never been specifically defined and did not have its origin in EC legislation, i.e. EC legislation never created an equivalent legal requirement to PRE.