natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Dvesto deset prejetih odgovorov je bilo razdeljenih na različne teme, ki so podrobneje predstavljene spodaj.
The 210 answers received have been classified in different themes which are further developed below.
Kot prikazuje graf na strani 19, so sodniki zahtevali predvsem boljšo usposobljenost in boljši dostop do informacij o postopku (42 %).
As can be seen in the chart on p.19, judges mainly called for more training and better access to information on the procedure (42%).
Zelo veliko število anketirancev (24 %) je kritiziralo trajanje postopka.
A very large number of respondents (24%) criticised the length of the procedure.
Slog in obrazložitev sodb SES je kritiziralo 10 % anketirancev.
The style and reasoning of ECJ judgments was criticised by 10% of respondents.
Poleg tega je več sodnikov (6 %) predlagalo različne notranje reforme v zvezi s SES.
Furthermore, a number of judges (6%) suggested various internal reforms concerning the ECJ.
Enako število sodnikov je tudi predlagalo večjo vključenost predložitvenih sodnikov v postopek predhodnega odločanja.
Finally, an equal number of judges proposed to involve referring judges more closely in the preliminary reference procedure.
Najpogosteje priporočena izboljšava postopka predhodnega odločanja (42 %) se je nanašala na usposabljanje državnih sodnikov in boljši dostop do informacij o postopku.
The most frequently recommended improvement to the preliminary ruling procedure (42%) was related to the training of national judges and better access to information on the procedure.
Francoski sodnik je navedel, da je določeno strokovno znanje o predmetu in postopku bistven pogoj za to, da bi se lahko sploh pomislilo na vložitev predloga za sprejetje predhodne odločbe.
A French judge stated that a certain amount of expertise on the subject-matter and the procedure was an essential precondition to be able even to consider making a reference.
Namen prve vrste predlogov je torej premagati „strah pred neznanim“, kot je dejal nemški sodnik.
The first series of suggestions therefore sought to remedy the “fear of the unknown”, as expressed by one German judge.
To vključuje položaje, v katerih sodniki niso niti pomislili, da bi vložili predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe zaradi pomanjkanja strokovnega znanja, in tudi tiste, ko predlogi za sprejetje predhodnih odločb niso vloženi iz strahu, da jih bo SES razglasilo za nedopustne.
This would include situations in which judges were deterred from even considering making a reference because of a lack of expertise, but also where a reference is not made for fear of the ECJ declaring it inadmissible.
Nekateri anketiranci so prosili za osnovne posodobljene informacije ali redno elektronsko glasilo o tekočih in zaključenih predhodnih odločanjih.
Some respondents asked for basic up-to-date information or a regular e-newsletter on pending and completed preliminary rulings.
Mnogo jih je zahtevalo uradni obrazec, predlogo ali smernice za dobro prakso, ki bi jih lahko uporabili pri oblikovanju predloga za sprejetje predhodne odločbe.
Many called for an official form, template or good practice guidelines which they could use to make a reference.
Nemški sodnik na sodišču prve stopnje je predlagal pripravo priročnika za predloge za sprejetje predhodne odločbe v sodelovanju z nacionalnimi organi in po vzoru praktičnega vodnika, ki se je uporabil za direktivo o pridobivanju dokazov.
A first instance judge in Germany recommended the drafting of a guide on preliminary references, in cooperation with national authorities, along the lines of the practice guide used for the Directive on the Taking of Evidence.
Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 1206/2001 z dne 28. maja 2001 o sodelovanju med sodišči držav članic pri pridobivanju dokazov v civilnih ali gospodarskih zadevah; vodnik je na voljo na spletni strani:
Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters; the guide is available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/civiljustice/evidence/docs/evidence_ec_guide_en.pdf Eden od sodnikov je pripomnil, da bi postopek lažje uporabljal, če bi bilo jasno navedeno, kako je treba v predlogu povzeti dejstva.
http://ec.europa.eu/civiljustice/evidence/docs/evidence_ec_guide_en.pdf One judge commented that he or she would be more comfortable with the procedure if there were clearer indications as to how the facts should be summarised in the reference.
Francoski in poljski sodnik sta pripomnila, da sta popolnoma zadovoljna z uradnimi smernicami, ki sta jih leta 2005 pripravili njuni ministrstvi in so na voljo v spletu.
On the other hand, two judges, from France and Poland commented however that they were entirely satisfied with the official guidance provided in 2005 by their respective ministries and available online.
Druga zelo pogosta tema je bil strah pred ponovitvijo vprašanja, ki je bilo na SES že naslovljeno.
A second very common theme was the fear of duplicating a question referred previously to the ECJ.
V zvezi s tem je eden od sodnikov predlagal zbirko vprašanj, ki so že bila postavljena in ki bi bila organizirana po področjih po vzoru modela, razvitega na področju pravosodnega sodelovanja v civilnih zadevah.
In this respect, a judge suggested the idea of an atlas of questions already referred, organised by subject-area along the lines of the model developed in the area of judicial cooperation in civil matters.
Pravosodni atlas za civilne zadeve je na voljo na spletni strani:
The Judicial Atlas in Civil Matters is accessible at:
http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/judicialatlascivil/html/index_en.htm Drugi predlog je bil horizontalni mehanizem, ki bi vse sodnike EU sistematično seznanjal s predlogi za sprejetje predhodne odločbe na njihovih področjih.
http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/judicialatlascivil/html/index_en.htm Another idea was a horizontal mechanism to make all EU judges systematically aware of references made in their subject area.
Bolgarski sodnik je pripomnil, da se mora postopek za preverjanje, ali so bila predvidena vprašanja že vložena, v vsakem primeru poenostaviti.
A Bulgarian judge commented that the procedure for checking whether the intended questions had already been referred should in any event be simplified.
Nemški sodnik na področju patentnega prava je menil, da so informacije o posameznih predlogih za sprejetje predhodne odločbe, ki so objavljene v Uradnem listu Evropske unije, nepopolne in da se morajo dopolniti.
A German patent judge considered that the information on individual references published in the Official Journal of the European Union was insufficient and should be completed.
Tretja ponavljajoča se tema je bila želja, da bi bilo mogoče vse informacije o predlogih za sprejetje predhodnih odločb dobiti prek interneta.
A third recurring theme was the desire to be able to obtain all relevant information on preliminary references via the internet.
Eden od poljskih sodnikov je to nadgradil in je predlagal, da bi moralo biti mogoče predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe vložiti po elektronski poti.
One Polish respondent went further and suggested that it should be possible to make a reference electronically.
Sodniki iz 16 držav članic so v svojih pripombah zelo poudarili ugotovljeno predolgo trajanje postopka.
The perceived excessive length of the procedure featured very prominently in judges' comments from sixteen Member States.
Ocenjeno je bilo, da ta dolžina negativno vpliva na predloge za sprejetje predhodnih odločb.
The consequence of this length was considered to be a chilling effect on references.
Mnogi sodniki so trdili, da poznajo postopek, vendar ga ne uporabljajo zaradi zamude, ki jo povzroči.
Many judges claimed to know the procedure but refrain from using it because of the delay involved.
Avstrijski sodnik je na primer take zamude na področju socialnega prava ocenil kot popolnoma nesprejemljive.
For instance, an Austrian judge considered that such delays were totally unacceptable in the area of social law.
Nemški sodnik z višjega sodišča ni mogel razumeti razloga za zastoj med koncem ustne obravnave in izdajo predhodne odločbe, medtem ko bi podobne zamude v nacionalnem okviru verjetno pomenile zlorabo in nezakonitost.
One German judge from a higher court had particular difficulty in understanding the reason for the delay between the end of the oral procedure and the handing down of the preliminary ruling, and that similar delays in a purely domestic context would probably be considered abusive or illegal.
Več sodnikov je drugače razumelo utemeljitve in sklepalo, da bi obstoječi neizkoriščen potencial med državnimi sodniki za SES pomenil nevarnost, da se ga zasuje s predlogi za sprejetje predhodnih odločb, če bi se dolžina postopka skrajšala.
Several judges also reversed the reasoning to conclude that the existing untapped potential among national judges would mean that the ECJ risked being swamped with references should the duration of the procedure decrease.
Več sodnikov je zahtevalo izjemno pospešitev postopka v nekaterih nujnih primerih, na primer na področju azila.
Several judges called for the particular acceleration of the procedure in certain urgent cases, such as in the area of asylum.
Eden od sodnikov je menil, da bi morali imeti predlogi za sprejetje predhodne odločbe pri SES prednost pred drugimi vrstami primerov, medtem ko je drugi želel, da bi se obstoječi hitri postopek uporabljal pogosteje.
One judge considered that references for a preliminary ruling should be given priority over other types of cases before the ECJ, whilst another wanted to see the existing accelerated procedure used more frequently.
Hitri postopek je predviden v členu 104a Poslovnika SES, medtem ko na novo vstavljen člen 104b uvaja nujni postopek in določa pravila, ki veljajo zanj.
The accelerated procedure is provided for in Article 104a of the ECJ's Rules of Procedure whilst the newly inserted Article 104b introduce an urgent procedure and sets out the rules applicable thereto.
Nekaj sodnikov je dejansko predlagalo, kako dolgo mora povprečni postopek trajati.
Few judges actually made suggestions as to how long the average procedure should last.
Vendar je eden od finskih sodnikov predlagal od 3 do 4 mesece, švedski pa od 7 do 8 mesecev.
However, one Finnish judge proposed 3-4 months and a Swedish judge suggested 7-8 months.
Slog in vsebina sodb SES sta za mnoge sodnike predstavljala posebno skrb, zlasti, a ne izključno, za nemške sodnike.
The style and content of ECJ judgments was of particular concern to many judges, particularly but not exclusively from Germany.
Najpogostejša pripomba je bila povezana z jezikovno jasnostjo sodb.
The most frequent complaint related to the linguistic clarity of judgments.
Druga skupina odgovorov je bila povezana s predolgim trajanjem sodb.
Another series of answers related to the excessive length of judgments.
Eden od finskih sodnikov je na primer želel, da bi bile sodbe krajše in bolj podobne sodbam finskega vrhovnega upravnega sodišča.
One Finnish judge, for instance, wanted to see shorter judgments more akin to judgments of the Finnish supreme administrative court.
Več sodnikov je menilo, da je obrazložitev SES pogosto preveč splošna ali abstraktna, da bi jo bilo mogoče pravilno uporabiti pri dejstvih nacionalnih zadev.
Several judges considered that the reasoning of the ECJ was often too general or abstract to be able to be properly applied to the facts of national cases.
Nekaterim drugim sodnikom ni bil všeč način, na katerega SES obravnava precedens.
Some other judges were uncomfortable with the way in which the ECJ deals with precedent.
Eden od sodnikov si želi, da bi bile sodbe jasnejše v zvezi s tem, kako se povezujejo s predhodno sodno prakso, medtem ko je drugi dal prednost sistemu, ki temelji bolj na načelih kot na predhodnih primerih.
One judge would have liked judgments to be more explicit on how they relate to previous case-law whilst another preferred a system predominantly based on principles rather than precedent.
Eden od sodnikov je predlagal, naj SES pogosteje uporablja možnost obiter dicta .
Finally, one judge suggested that the ECJ make more use of obiter dicta .
Vendar niso bili vsi odgovori pod tem naslovom pritožbe.
However, not all responses under this heading were complaints.
Eni od sodnic se je zdel dialog SES z nacionalnimi sodišči „prijetno drugačen“ od načina, na katerega je predložitvene sodnike obravnavalo njeno domače ustavno sodišče.
One judge found the ECJ's dialogue with national courts "refreshingly different" from the way referring judges were treated by her domestic constitutional court.
Precej sodnikov je izrazilo željo po večji vključenosti predložitvenih sodnikov na vseh stopnjah postopka.
A substantial number of judges wanted to see closer involvement of the referring judge in all stages of the procedure.
Ena od nemških finančnih sodnic je navedla, da je bilo po širitvi tveganje, da sodniki, generalni pravobranilci ali vključeno osebje SES ne poznajo nacionalnega pravnega sistema, še večje kot prej.
One financial judge from Germany stated that following enlargement, the risk of judges, Advocates General or ECJ staff involved in any particular preliminary ruling being unfamiliar with any given domestic legal system was even greater than before.
Poudarila je dejstvo, da se je to pogosto pokazalo šele po izdaji mnenja generalnega pravobranilca, ko je bilo že prepozno, da bi lahko državni sodnik ukrepal.
She highlighted the fact that this often became clear only after the Advocate General’s Opinion, and it was then too late for the national judge to do anything.
Zato je predlagala uradno priložnost za pripombe predložitvenega sodnika, čeprav se zaveda, da to upočasnjuje pospeševanje postopka in da bi za to moral biti določen zelo kratek časovni okvir.
She therefore recommended a formal opportunity for comments from the referring judge even though she realised this went against the speeding up of the procedure and should therefore be kept within a very short time-frame.
Več anketirancev se je s tem na splošno strinjalo.
Several respondents concurred in more general terms.
Sodnik na delovnem sodišču je priporočil obvezno posvetovanje s predložitvenim sodnikom, preden bi lahko SES preoblikovalo kateri koli del predloga za sprejetje predhodne odločbe.
A labour court judge recommended a mandatory consultation of the referring judge before the ECJ could reformulate any part of the reference.
Drugi sodnik je pozval k „dialogu“, da se vprašanja primerno preoblikujejo.
Another judge called for a "dialogue" to reformulate the questions as appropriate.
Dva anketiranca sta predlagala, da se predložitvenega sodnika povabi k sodelovanju na ustno obravnavo za zagotovitev, da odločitev SES ostane ustrezna za tekočo nacionalno zadevo.
A further proposal made by two respondents consisted in inviting the referring judge to participate in the oral procedure, in order to ensure that the ECJ ruling remained relevant to the pending domestic case.
Eden od sodnikov, ki je specializiran za finančne zadeve, bi želel posebno mesto za predložitvene sodnike, ki si prizadevajo, da bi bili prisotni na obravnavi SES, ter možnost, da odgovarjajo na vprašanja različnih strani in pozdravijo sodnika poročevalca.
One judge specialising in financial matters would have liked to see a "special chair" for referring judges who make the effort to be present at the ECJ for the hearing, and the possibility for them to answer questions from all sides and to greet the juge rapporteur .
Anketiranci iz več različnih držav članic so predlagali strukturne spremembe SES.
Respondents from a wide range of Member States proposed structural changes to the ECJ.
Najpogosteje so predlagali spodbujanje specializacije sodnikov SES in ustanovitev specializiranih oddelkov za ta namen.
The most frequent proposal was to encourage the specialisation of ECJ judges and to create specialised chambers to that effect.
Tako naj bi bile sodbe SES sprejemljivejše za specializirane državne sodnike.
This was said to make ECJ judgments more acceptable to specialised national judges.
Danski sodnik je predlagal prenos pristojnosti za predhodno odločanje na Sodišče prve stopnje na področjih, na katerih je sodna praksa SES že dobro razvita.
A Danish judge suggested transferring competence to hand down preliminary rulings to the Court of First Instance in certain areas where the ECJ's case-law was already well-developed.
Nemški sodnik z regionalnega vrhovnega upravnega sodišča je predlagal večjo vključenost generalnih pravobranilcev v nacionalne postopke, ki so predmet predlogov za sprejetje predhodnih odločb.
A German judge from a regional supreme administrative court proposed involving the Advocates General more closely in the national proceedings forming the subject of the reference.
Avstrijski sodnik je to nadgradil in predlagal sodišča prve stopnje Skupnosti s sedeži v državah članicah.
One Austrian judge went further and proposed Community first instance courts based in all Member States.
Nemški sodnik je nadalje predlagal, da sodnike SES neposredno izvolijo državni sodniki, namesto da jih v medsebojnem soglasju imenujejo vlade držav članic, kot zdaj velja v skladu s členom 223(1) Pogodbe ES.
A further idea came from a German judge who wanted to see ECJ judges directly elected by national judges rather than appointed by common accord of the governments of the Member States, as is currently the case under Article 223(1) EC.
Vrhovna sodnika iz različnih držav članic sta menila, da bi moralo SES odločati le v zadevah, ki so pomembne za pravni red Skupnosti, tj. v obliki pristojnosti po izbiri.
Finally, two supreme court judges from different Member States were of the opinion that the ECJ should only consider ruling on the most relevant cases for the Community legal order, ie. a form of optional jurisdiction.
Malo nemških in danskih sodnikov, zlasti s sodišč druge stopnje, je predlagalo omejitve pravice sodišč prve stopnje do predložitve vprašanj SES.
A small number of German and Danish judges, mainly from second instance courts, proposed limitations to the right of first instance courts to refer questions to the ECJ.
Eden od sodnikov je menil, da bi se morala nižja sodišča posvetovati z ustreznimi višjimi sodišči, preden bi se jim dovolilo, da predložijo vprašanje SES.
One judge considered that lower courts should consult the relevant higher court before being allowed to refer a question to the ECJ.
Drugi sodnik je navedel, da sodniki s sodišč prve stopnje mehanizem predhodnega odločanja uporabljajo kot način, da se izognejo odločanju v zahtevnih zadevah.
Another stated that first instance judges relied on the preliminary reference mechanism as a way to avoid having to decide on difficult cases.
Eden od anketirancev je predlagal, da se strankam da dovoli, da blokirajo odločitev sodnika o vložitvi predloga za sprejetje predhodne odločbe.
One respondent proposed to grant to the parties the power to block a judge’s decision to make a reference.
(vii) Povečanje stvarne pristojnosti SES
(vii) Increasing the ECJ's material jurisdiction
Več nemških sodnikov je izrazilo željo, da se pristojnost SES razširi na področja iz naslova IV Pogodbe ES in naslova VI Pogodbe EU, zlasti na področje azila in priseljevanja.
Several judges from Germany were keen to see the ECJ's jurisdiction fully expanded to the areas covered by Titles IV EC and VI EU, in particular asylum and immigration.
Podobno sta poljska sodnika pozvala lastno državo, naj predloži izjavo v smislu člena 35(2) Pogodbe EU.
Similarly, two Polish judges called on their Member State to make a declaration within the meaning of Article 35(2) EU.
V številnih odgovorih, zlasti iz „novih“ držav članic, so pozvali k ustanovitvi ali okrepitvi nacionalnih organov ali služb za pomoč, namenjenih sodnikom, ki nameravajo vložiti predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe.
A number of answers, mainly from "new" Member States, called for the creation or reinforcement of national bodies or helpdesks designed to assist judges intending to make a reference.
Drugim je bila bolj všeč ideja specializiranih pomočnikov na vsakem sodišču ali višjih sodiščih.
Others preferred the idea of having specialised assistants within each court, or within higher courts.
Sodnik, ki dela na kasacijskem sodišču, je pozval k ustanovitvi službe znotraj Sodišča, s katero bi lahko državni sodniki neposredno kontaktirali za boljše usmerjanje svojega raziskovalnega prizadevanja.
Finally a magistrate working in a court of cassation called for the setting up of a service within the Court of Justice which national judges could contact directly to better direct their research efforts.
Več anketirancev je menilo, da bi bilo treba omiliti merila za uporabo doktrine acte clair glede na vse širšo in pogostejšo uporabo zakonodaje Skupnosti.
Several respondents considered that the criteria for applying acte clair should be loosened, given the ever wider and more frequent application of Community law.
Eden od vrhovnih sodnikov je pripomnil, da bi bilo SES zasuto z zahtevki višjih sodišč, če bi nacionalna sodišča člen 234(3) Pogodbe ES uporabljala strogo v skladu z merili, ki jih določa sodna praksa SES
One supreme court judge commented that if national courts applied Article 234(3) EC strictly in accordance with the criteria laid down in the ECJ's case-law
Glej na primer zadevo C-283/81 CILFIT , ECR [1982], str.
For instance, see case C-283/81 CILFIT , ECR [1982] p.
3415 odstavki 16–20. .
3415 at paragraphs 16-20. , the ECJ would be flooded with requests from higher courts.
Sodnik s sodišča prve stopnje je ugotovil, da je pojem „sodišča, zoper katerega odločitev ni pravnega sredstva po nacionalnem pravu,“ nejasen.
A first instance judge found that the concept of a court "against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law" was unclear.
Eden od sodnikov je bil zaskrbljen, da bo nemško procesno pravo omogočilo drugo potrditev dejstev, ko bo sodišče prve stopnje mogoče poslalo predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe.
One judge was concerned that German procedural law would allow the facts to be ascertained a second time, once a reference for a preliminary ruling had potentially been sent by the first instance court.
Na podlagi več kot tisoč odgovorov na to vprašanje (1 109) je precej jasno, da stranke pred državnimi sodišči redko navedejo zakonodajo Skupnosti (glej spodnji graf).
With more than a thousand answers to this question (1109) it appears quite clearly that Community law is rarely raised by the parties before national judges (see chart below).
Spodnji graf s tehtanim kazalnikom od leve proti desni in v naraščajočem vrstnem redu navaja države članice, v katerih vprašani sodniki ugotavljajo, da stranke najpogosteje navajajo zakonodajo Skupnosti.
Using a weighted indicator, the chart below indicates from left to right in ascending order the Member States in which the parties are perceived by responding judges to raise Community law the most frequently.
Nekatere države članice niso vključene v ta graf zaradi nepopolnih odgovorov.
Certain Member States could not be included in this chart for lack of sufficient responses.
Razen Belgije in Portugalske se zdi, da obstaja v „starih“ državah članicah sorazmerno očiten trend pogostejšega navajanja zakonodaje Skupnosti.
Except for Belgium and Portugal, it appears that there is a relatively clear trend, with Community law being raised more frequently in "old" Member States.
Tako se na primer v Bolgariji, na Poljskem in v Češki republiki ugotavlja, da zakonodaja Skupnosti pred večino sodnikov ni bila „nikoli“ navedena.
It is notable, for instance, in Bulgaria, Poland and the Czech Republic that Community law was "never" raised before a majority of judges.
Zdi se tudi, da je bila zakonodaja Skupnosti na podlagi istega tehtanega kazalnika največkrat navedena na sodiščih, specializiranih za finančne zadeve, intelektualno lastnino in upravne zadeve.
Using the same weighted indicator, it also appears that Community law was pleaded most in courts specialised in financial, intellectual property, and administrative matters.
Od anketirancev jih je 9 % ugotovilo, da je bila zakonodaja Skupnosti pred njimi navedena „pogosto“ ali „zelo pogosto“.
9% of all respondents noted that Community law was pleaded "often" or "very often" before them.