natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Notranji trg je temeljni kamen evropske gospodarske rasti, ki izhaja iz štirih svoboščin: prostega pretoka oseb, blaga, storitev in kapitala.
The Internal Market is the cornerstone of Europe's economic growth, which is built on the four freedoms: free movements of people, goods, services and capital.
Da bi notranji trg blaga deloval v celoti, je treba odpraviti tehnične ovire.
For a fully functioning internal market for goods, the elimination of technical obstacles is fundamental.
V zvezi z blagom se to lahko doseže z uskladitvijo tehničnih predpisov držav članic ali z vzajemnim priznavanjem teh predpisov.
In the field of goods this can be done through the harmonisation of technical rules of Member States or through mutual recognition of technical rules of Member States.
Usklajenega je 75 % notranjega trga blaga (približno 1,5 trilijona EUR), neusklajenega pa ostaja 25 % (okoli 500 milijard).
The harmonized area covers 75% of the Internal market (approximately €1,5 trillion) for goods and the non-harmonized (for which mutual recognition should apply) cover the remaining 25% (approximately 500 billion).
Stroški neuporabe vzajemnega priznavanja so ocenjeni na približno 150 milijard EUR.
The cost of the non-application of mutual recognition has been estimated at around €150 billion.
Namen tega predloga uredbe je odpraviti ovire za pravilno uporabo tega načela.
The present proposal for regulation aims at removing barriers to the proper application of mutual recognition.
Splošne informacije o načelu vzajemnega priznavanja
Background information on Mutual Recognition
To načelo izhaja iz sodne prakse Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti, zlasti iz znane zadeve Cassis de Dijon z dne 20. februarja 1979.
The Mutual Recognition Principle derives from the jurisprudence of the ECJ, in particular from the well-known case Cassis de Dijon of 20 February 1979.
Temelji na pravilu in izjemi:
The principle is based on a rule and an exception:
a) splošno pravilo : država članica na svojem ozemlju načeloma ne more prepovedati ali omejiti prodaje izdelkov, ki se zakonito tržijo v drugi državi članici, čeprav niso skladni s predpisi namembne države članice.
a) General rule: a Member State cannot, in principle, prohibit or restrict the sale on its territory of goods which are lawfully produced and marketed in another Member State, even if those goods do not fully comply with the rules of the Member State of destination.
b) izjema : če ni uskladitve, se lahko država članica odloči, da ne bo upoštevala načela vzajemnega priznavanja, in sprejme ukrepe, s katerimi takemu blagu prepove ali omeji dostop na nacionalni trg, vendar le, če so ti ukrepi potrebni, sorazmerni in utemeljeni z razlogi iz člena 30 Pogodbe o ES ali iz višjih razlogov v splošnem interesu.
b) Exception: in the absence of harmonisation, the Member State may depart from this principle and take measures prohibiting or restricting access by such goods to the national market, only if those measures are (i) necessary, (ii) proportionate and (iii) are justified on the grounds described in Article 30 EC Treaty or on the basis of overriding requirements in the general interest.
Načelo vzajemnega priznavanja velja za dve obsežni skupini izdelkov:
There are two broad categories of products to which mutual recognition applies:
(i) Izdelki, za katere ne obstaja usklajevalna zakonodaja na ravni EU.
(i) products for which there is no harmonisation of laws at EU level.
V to skupino na primer sodijo kolesa, lestve, zidarski odri, izdelki iz žlahtnih kovin, izdelki za nego otrok, cisterne in zabojniki.
This category includes for example bicycles, ladders, scaffolding, articles of precious metal, childcare articles, tanks and containers.
(ii) Izdelki, ki so delno usklajeni.
(ii) products which are partially harmonised.
Podnebni vidiki in učinkovitost alarmnih sistemov na primer niso usklajeni, vsi drugi vidiki pa so.
The functionality, for instance, of climatic and efficiency aspects of alarm systems are not harmonised but all other aspects are.
V to skupino med drugim sodijo tekstilni izdelki, obutev, informacijska tehnologija, posebne vrste motornih vozil, električni material in nekatere vrste krme.
This category also includes (among others) textiles, footwear, information technology, specific types of motor vehicles, electrical material and certain foodstuffs.
Za neustrezno uporabo vzajemnega priznavanja obstajajo trije glavni razlogi:
There are three main reasons for the weak functioning of mutual recognition:
(i) države članice ga ne uporabljajo pravilno oziroma ga sploh ne uporabljajo;
(i) Member states not applying the principle correctly or at all.
(ii) tako nosilci gospodarskih dejavnosti kot države članice to načelo premalo poznajo;
(ii) Lack of knowledge on the part of both the economic operators and Member States about the principle of mutual recognition.
(iii) ni pravne gotovosti, kako naj bi se to načelo v praksi uporabljalo.
(iii) Legal uncertainty on how the principle should be implemented in practice.
Glavne točke predloga Komisije
Main points of the Commission's proposal
Področje uporabe predloga (člena 2 in 3).
Scope of the proposal (Articles 2 and 3).
Uredba se nanaša na sklepe, ki neposredno ali posredno vplivajo na to, da izdelek, ki se zakonito trži v drugi državi članici, v enaki obliki ne more ostati na trgu druge države članice ali se ne sme dati na trg.
The regulation applies to decisions having the direct or indirect effect that the product lawfully marketed in another Member State cannot remain or cannot be put on the market of another Member State in its current form.
Za te izdelke veljajo tehnični predpisi, ki se na ravni Skupnosti ne usklajujejo.
Products concerned fall under technical rules which are not subject of harmonisation at Community level.
Postopek, kadar namerava država članica vpeljati svoje tehnične predpise (členi 4, 5 in 6).
Procedure in case a Member State intends to apply its own technical rules (Articles 4, 5 and 6).
Če pristojni organ sklene uveljaviti svoje tehnične predpise (npr. če se iz kakršnega koli razloga ne uporabi načelo vzajemnega priznavanja), mora to utemeljiti.
In case the authority decides to implement its own technical rule (i.e. when mutual recognition is not applied for any reason), the authority is required to justify the reasons for doing so.
Zadevni nosilec gospodarske dejavnosti ima 20 dni časa, da se na to utemeljitev odzove, preden pristojni organ sprejme dokončno odločitev, ali bo uporabil posebno tehnično pravilo ali ne.
The economic operator concerned is given 20 days to react on the justification of the authorities before the authorities can take the final decision on applying or not applying its own technical rules.
Naloge kontaktnih točk za izdelke (člena 7 in 8).
Tasks of the Product Contact Points (Articles 7 and 8).
Njihova glavna naloga je posredovanje informacij o tehničnih predpisih podjetjem in pristojnim organom drugih držav članic.
The main task involves providing information on technical rules to enterprises and to the competent authorities of other member States.
Telematska omrežja (člen 9).
Telematics network (Article 9).
V tem členu je v skladu s sklepom 2004/387/ES omogočeno vzpostavljanje telematskih omrežij, da bi se spodbujala uporaba načela vzajemnega priznavanja.
This article gives the possibility to establish a telematics network, in accordance with Decision 2004/387/EC to enhance the application of mutual recognition.
V tem členu je določen sistem poročanja (člen 10) o uporabi te uredbe.
A reporting scheme (Article 10) on the implementation of this regulation is laid down in this article.
Poročevalec v celoti odobrava cilj Komisije, da bi načelo vzajemnega priznavanja polno razvila ter nosilcem gospodarske dejavnosti in državam članicam zagotovila pravno jasnost v zvezi z njegovo uporabo.
The Rapporteur fully endorses the Commission's aim at making the principle of mutual recognition to work up to its full potential and to give legal clarity to economic operators as well as to Member States on how the principle should be implemented.
Vsebina in področje uporabe (poglavje 1)
Subject-matter and scope (Chapter 1)
Poročevalec meni, da bi moral biti v predlogu jasneje izražen njegov glavni cilj, to je zagotoviti prost pretok blaga na neusklajenem področju.
The Rapporteur considers that the Proposal should state more clearly its principal aim, namely to ensure the free movement of goods in the non-harmonised area.
Da bi zagotovili večjo pravno jasnost, so namesto industrijsko izdelanih proizvodov navedeni vsi izdelki.
In order to bring more legal clarity, industrially manufactured products have been changed to all products.
Izdelki za lastno uporabo so na primer še vedno izključeni, saj se ne tržijo v vseh državah članicah in ne ves čas.
Products produced for own use, for example, are still excluded as these products are not marketed in any Member State at any point of time.
Poročevalec meni, da je prepoved izdelka enakovredna zavrnitvi ali njegovemu umiku s trga.
The Rapporteur considers that to ban a product is equivalent to the refusal or withdrawal of the product from the market.
Opredelitev tehničnega predpisa je iz direktive 98/34/ES.
The definition of 'technical rule' has been taken from Directive 98/34/EC.
Zaradi večje jasnosti je poročevalec preskušanje in potrdila razvrstil v ločena pododstavka.
For enhanced clarity the Rapporteur groups testing and certificates as a separate sub-paragraph.
Čeprav obstoječi postopki za ugotavljanje skladnosti (ali postopki predhodne odobritve po razsodbah Sodišča) niso tehnični predpisi, preskušanje, metode preskušanja in potrdila v tem postopku vendarle so tehnični predpis in zato sodijo na področje uporabe te uredbe.
Whereas the existence of conformity assessment procedures (or prior authorisation procedures in line with ECJ rulings) do not constitute a technical rule, all testing and test methods and certificates are technical rules and thus within the scope of this regulation.
Pomembno je, da se s to uredbo prepreči nepotrebno preskušanje izdelkov v namembni državi članici.
It is essential to avoid unjustified additional testing of products in the Member State of destination with the means of this regulation.
Pri izjemah s področja uporabe te uredbe se zdi poročevalcu člen 54 uredbe (ES) št. 882/2004 nepotreben, saj je v uredbi (ES) št. 178/2002 že zagotovljeno, da se nevarna živila in krma umaknejo s trga.
In the exclusions from the scope of this regulation the Rapporteur sees Article 54 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 unnecessary as Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 already ensures that dangerous food or feed can be withdrawn from the market.
Vendar bi opustitev člena 54 uredbe (ES) št. 882/2004 državam članicam omogočila, da s trga umaknejo izdelke, ki niso skladni z nacionalno zakonodajo, ne da bi morale uporabiti načelo vzajemnega priznavanja.
However, exclusion of Article 54 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 would enable Member states to withdraw products which do not comply with their own national legislation from the market without needing to apply the principle of mutual recognition.
Poročevalec meni, da člen 4 te uredbe opisuje vrhunec rednih dejavnosti za nadzor nad trgom.
The Rapporteur sees that Article 4 of this regulation depicts a culmination of regular market surveillance activities.
Pred tem nosilec gospodarske dejavnosti in pristojni organ države članice na podlagi dialoga sodelujeta pri nadzoru nad trgom.
Normally before that point of culmination the economic operator and the competent authority of the Member State engage into a market surveillance dialogue.
Poročevalec ocenjuje, da je treba pojasniti, da mora nosilec gospodarske dejavnosti v tem dialogu priskrbeti informacije o predpisih, po katerih je izdelek tržil v drugi državi članici.
The Rapporteur deems necessary to clarify that during this dialogue the economic operator needs to provide information about the provisions under which the product has been marketed in another Member State.
Da bi nosilec gospodarske dejavnosti pri načrtovanju svojih dejavnosti imel več gotovosti, je poročevalec uvedel 20-dnevni rok, ki začne teči od trenutka, ko se izteče rok za prejem pripomb nosilca gospodarske dejavnosti.
In order to give stronger certainty to the economic operator in the planning of its activities, the Rapporteur has introduced a deadline of 20 days counting from the expiry of the deadline for receipt of comments from the economic operator.
Tako bo imel nosilec najmanj 20 dni časa, da se odzove na obvestilo.
Thus, the economic operator will have at least 20 days to react to the notice.
Po tem ima država članica na voljo še 20 delovnih dni, da sprejme dokončni sklep, pri čemer upošteva pripombe nosilca gospodarske dejavnosti.
After these, the Member State still holds a period of 20 working days to come up with its final decision taking into account the comments of the economic operator.
Ne glede na to, kakšen je sklep države članice, lahko nosilec gospodarske dejavnosti z večjo gotovostjo načrtuje svoje dejavnosti glede na čas, določen za sprejetje sklepa.
Whatever the final decision of the Member State, the economic operator can plan its activities with more certainty concerning the timing of this decision.
Če država članica ne izda dokončnega sklepa, se šteje, da je izdelek zakonito na njenem trgu.
If no final decision is issued by the Member State, the product is deemed to be legally on the market of that Member State.
Člen 4a (novo)
Article 4a (new)
Praviloma izdelek, obravnavan po postopkih iz te uredbe, ostane na trgu namembne države članice ves čas postopkov, dokler država ne sprejme dokončnega sklepa.
By default the product being observed within the procedures of this regulation remains on the market of the Member State of destination throughout the procedures until the final decision is issued by the Member State.
S tem členom je poročevalec želel pojasniti, komu je treba poslati obvestilo in sklep države članice.
In this article the Rapporteur has seeks to clarify to whom the notice and decision done by the Member State should be sent.
Za večjo skladnost s poglavjem 2 je poročevalec besedilo člena 6 vključil v odstavek 2 člena 4.
To give greater coherence to Chapter 2, the Rapporteur includes the text of Article 6 to the Paragraph 2 of Article 4.
Kontaktne točke za izdelke (poglavje 3)
Product Contact Points (Chapter 3)
Člena 7 in 8
Articles 7 and 8
Poročevalec je ta dva člena spremenil zaradi pojasnitve, da bi morale kontaktne točke za izdelke:
The Rapporteur amends these two articles to clarify that the Product contact points should:
- predvsem zagotoviti informacije o načelu vzajemnega priznavanja ter iz tega izhajajoče pravice nosilcev gospodarske dejavnosti in držav članic,
- provide first and foremost information on the principle of mutual recognition and the subsequent rights of the economic operators and of the Member States.
- delovati kot nekakšna podporna služba za praktično pomoč (ne pravno) o izvajanju tega načela,
- serve as helpdesks providing practical (but by no means legal) assistance on the implementation of the principal of mutual recognition.
- nuditi informacije tako nosilcem gospodarske dejavnosti kot pristojnim organom držav članic ter
- provide information both to the economic operators as well as to the competent authorities of the Member States.
- se povezati s kontaktnimi točkami v drugih državah v učinkovito informacijsko omrežje.
- liaise with one another across countries to form an efficient network of information.
Končne določbe (poglavje 4)
Final Provisions (Charter 4)
Tako bo Komisija redno obveščena o uporabi te uredbe v državah članicah.
This would further ensure, that the Commission is regularly informed about the application of this regulation in the Member States.
Komisija bo ta poročila preučila in ukrepala proti kršitvam.
The Commission shall also analyse these reports and act upon infringements.
Da bi povečali ozaveščenost o načelu vzajemnega priznavanja in nosilcem gospodarskih dejavnosti nudili nadaljnje vodenje na področjih, kjer se to načelo uporablja, poročevalec meni, da bi morala Komisija objaviti okvirni seznam izdelkov, ki sodijo na področje uporabe te uredbe.
In order to raise awareness on the principle of mutual recognition and to give further guidance to economic operators on the areas where the principle applies, the Rapporteur deems necessary for the Commission to publish an indicative list of products falling under the scope of this regulation.
Ta bi moral biti čim bolj izčrpen in bi s primeri služil samo kot vodilo.
The list would by no means even attempt to be exhaustive and would serve merely as an indication through examples.
Poročevalec meni, da je treba državam članicam po začetku veljavnosti uredbe dati šest mesecev časa, da vzpostavijo kontaktne točke za izdelke.
The Rapporteur considers that the Member States need to be given six months time to set up the Product Contact Points upon entry into force of the regulation.
Uredba bi seveda morala začeti veljati 20 dni po objavi.
The regulation itself, however should enter into force within 20 days of its publishing.
Tako bi imeli nosilci gospodarske dejavnosti možnost, da čim bolje izkoristijo vzajemno priznavanje od vsega začetka, četudi prvih šest mesecev brez pomoči kontaktnih točk za izdelke.
This would give the economic operator the possibility to use mutual recognition in a more efficient manner from the beginning on be it then even without the assistance of Product Contact Points in the first six months.
o predlogu Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o določitvi postopkov za uporabo nekaterih nacionalnih tehničnih predpisov pri izdelkih, ki se zakonito tržijo v drugi državi članici, in o razveljavitvi Odločbe 3052/95/ES
on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down procedures relating to the application of certain national technical rules to products lawfully marketed in another Member State and repealing Decision 3052/95/EC
Prosti pretok blaga je ena od štirih temeljnih svoboščin, na katerih temelji Evropska unija.
The free movement of goods is one of the four basic freedoms on which the European Union is founded.
Unija je te svoboščine dosegla zlasti z odpravo carinskih dajatev in drugimi ukrepi, kot je usklajevanje tehničnih zahtev za nekatere kategorije izdelkov.
The Union has succeeded in achieving this freedom by, in particular, abolishing customs duties and through other measures such as harmonising technical requirements on certain categories of products.
Tako je nastalo nemalo dragih upravnih ovir za trgovce, ki so se morali prebijati skozi dodatne upravne postopke in prilagajati svoje izdelke na neusklajenem področju, če so jih želeli izvoziti v druge države članice.
However, this practice has created significant and costly administrative obstacles for traders, who have had to go through additional administrative procedures and adapt their products in the non-harmonised field in order to export them to other Member States.
V mnogih primerih so se zato odločili, da jih v nekatere države ne bodo izvažali.
In a number of cases, this has led to traders deciding not to export their products to certain countries.
Leta 1979 je Sodišče evropskih skupnosti našlo rešitev, ko je v sodbi v zadevi „Cassis de Dijon“ na podlagi Pogodbe o ES uvedlo „načelo vzajemnega priznavanja“.
In 1979, a solution was found by the European Court of Justice, which, in its judgment on the ‘Cassis de Dijon’ case, established a ‘principle of mutual recognition’ on the basis of the EC Treaty.
Po tem načelu imajo lahko izdelki, izdelani ali dani na trg v eni državi članici, dostop do trga druge države članice, čeprav nacionalnih zahtev ne izpolnjujejo v celoti.
According to this principle, goods produced or placed on the market in one Member State may have access to the market of another Member State even if they do not entirely fulfil the relevant national requirements.
To je povsem razumljiv pristop, saj lahko predvidevamo, da se javni interes, na primer varstvo zdravja ali okolja, v različnih državah članicah varuje podobno.
This approach is perfectly understandable because it can be assumed that the public interest, e.g. protection of health or of the environment, is safeguarded in a similar way in the different Member States.
Država članica lahko omeji dostop do svojega trga samo, če lahko dokaže, da je ogrožen javni interes.
A Member State may restrict access to its market only when it can demonstrate that the public interest is threatened.
V pojasnilo je treba poudariti, da načelo vzajemnega priznavanja ne velja za nekakovostne izdelke, ki so za potrošnike neposredno nevarni ali škodljivi.
For clarification, it should be pointed out that the principle of mutual recognition does not apply to non-quality products that are immediately dangerous or harmful to consumers.
V skladu z direktivo 2001/95/ES o splošni varnosti proizvodov je mogoče take izdelke nemudoma odstraniti s trga, nacionalni organi pa morajo o njihovem pojavu obvestiti druge države članice prek sistema skupnosti za hitro izmenjavo informacij (RAPEX).
Pursuant to Directive 2001/95/EC on general product safety, such products may be withdrawn from the market immediately and information on their incidence communicated by the national authorities to other Member States through the Community Rapid Information System (RAPEX).
Vendar so po podatkih držav članic in Komisije razmere celo po 25 letih uporabe načela vzajemnega priznavanja v EU nezadovoljive.
However, according to information provided by the Member States and the Commission, the situation, even after 25 years of application of the principle of mutual recognition in the EU, is unsatisfactory.
Po uveljavljeni praksi nacionalni organi v državah članicah zahtevajo, da trgovci prilagodijo svoje izdelke lokalnim predpisom ter izvedejo drage in dolgotrajne postopke, kot so lokalni pregledi izdelkov, čeprav je to v večini primerov v nasprotju z evropsko zakonodajo.
It is common practice for national authorities in the Member States to request that traders adapt their products to local rules and undergo costly and time-consuming processes, such as subjecting products to local checks, although in the majority of cases this contravenes European law.
Zato je Komisija predlagala osnutek uredbe, ki določa jasna pravila o vzajemnem priznavanju, da bi povečala pravno varnost za trgovce, pa tudi za nacionalne organe.
That is why the Commission has come forward with a draft regulation intended to increase legal certainty for traders – and for national authorities themselves – by setting clear rules on mutual recognition.
Osnutek uredbe vsebuje več bistvenih vidikov:
The draft regulation contains several key aspects:
– obvezen postopek za nacionalne organe, če se odločijo, da ne bodo uporabljali načela vzajemnega priznavanja in bodo raje omejili pretok izdelka iz druge države članice na svoj trg;
- a compulsory procedure for national authorities in the event that they decide not to apply the principle of mutual recognition but instead to restrict the movement of a product from another Member State onto their market;
– dovolj časa za ukrepanje na osnovi pripomb trgovcev, preden nacionalni organ izda končni pisni sklep;
- sufficient time for observations to traders to be acted upon before a final written decision is issued by the national authority;
– v zvezi s podatki, ki jih posreduje trgovec, mora nacionalni organ svoj končni sklep pisno utemeljiti;
- concerning the information submitted by the trader, the national authority must justify its final decision in writing;
– nacionalni organ nosi tudi breme dokazovanja, zakaj je treba omejiti dostop izdelka iz druge države članice na trg in zakaj je treba uporabiti poseben nacionalni predpis;
- the national authority also bears the burden of proof as to why it deems it necessary to restrict access of a product from another Member State to its market and why a special national rule needs to be applied;
– trgovec se lahko zoper ta sklep pritoži na sodišču;
- the trader can also appeal against such a decision in court;