natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Četverna struktura ne vpliva na strukturo prihodnjih zakonodajnih predlogov in izbiro pravnih instrumentov.
This four fold structure does not prejudice the structure of future legislative proposals and the choice of legal instruments.
Odraža zgolj vzorec, na podlagi katerega je poročevalec razvil predloge.
It only reflects the pattern according to which the proposals by the rapporteur have been developed.
Kar zadeva področje uporabe priporočil, se poročevalec v poročilu omejuje na področje uporabe uredbe o insolventnosti, kot je opredeljeno v njenem členu 1.
As regards the scope of the recommendations, the rapporteur confines his report to the scope of the Insolvency Regulation as defined in its Article 1.
Priporočila naj služijo kot smernice za Komisijo.
The recommendations shall serve as guidelines for the Commission.
Ker prihaja poročevalec iz nemškega pravnega sistema, so mnogi predlogi na videz najbrž podobni nemškemu pravu na področju insolventnosti.
Since the rapporteur has a background in the German legal system, most of the proposals may appear to be similar to German insolvency law.
Poročevalec meni, da so priporočila izhodišče za poglobljeno raziskavo, ki naj jo Komisija izvede v okviru priprave zakonodajnih predlogov.
The rapporteur considers the recommendations as a starting point for further in-depth research by the Commission being carried out in preparation of legislative proposals.
Poročevalec se zaveda, da bodo priporočila iz tega poročila povzročila sporne razprave.
The rapporteur is aware of the fact that the recommendations in this report will provoke controversial discussions.
Zaveda se, da se insolvenčno pravo med različnimi državami članicami zelo razlikuje.
He knows that insolvency law is very different from one Member State to the other.
Zato želi izpustiti vprašanja, ki bi zelo verjetno privedla do razprav, ki bi se lahko v tej zgodnji stopnji razprave po nepotrebnem zavlekle.
Therefore, he would like to leave out those issues that seem likely to lead to debates that might become at this early stage of discussion unnecessarily long.
Vsi vidiki, ki v poročilu niso izrecno omenjeni, so izpuščeni namenoma, na primer vidiki obravnavanja pogodb (med drugim pogodb o zaposlitvi, glej člen 10 uredbe o insolventnosti) ali pridržek lastninske pravice (glej člen 7 uredbe o insolventnosti).
All aspects that have not been mentioned explicitly in this report are left out on purpose, like for example aspects of the treatment of contracts (inter alia employment contracts, see Article 10 of the Insolvency Regulation) or the retention of title (see Article 7 of the Insolvency Regulation).
a) Roki na splošno
a) Deadlines in general
Roki morajo odsevati ravnotežje med interesom podjetnika za rešitev podjetja in interesom upnikov za zavarovanje njihovih terjatev.
Deadlines shall reflect a balance between the interest of the entrepreneur to look for rescue for the company and the interest of the creditors to safeguard their claims.
Verjetno je težko priporočiti fiksne roke.
It might be difficult to recommend fixed deadlines.
Zato poročevalec raje predlaga časovne okvire, v okviru katerih lahko države članice najdejo ustrezne roke za njihov namen.
Therefore, the rapporteur prefers to propose corridors within which the Member States can find the adequate deadlines for their purpose.
b) Uvedba postopkov zaradi insolventnosti
b) Opening of insolvency proceedings
Uredba o insolventnosti določa, da država, v kateri so bili uvedeni postopki, določi pogoje, še zlasti zoper katere dolžnike je mogoče uvesti postopke zaradi insolventnosti (člen 4(2)(a)) ter premoženje, ki je sestavni del mase, in obravnavanje premoženja (člen 4(2)(b)).
The Insolvency Regulation stipulates that the State of the opening of proceedings shall determine the conditions, in particular determine against which debtors insolvency proceedings may be brought on account of their capacity (Article 4(2) (a)), what assets form part of the estate and the treatment of assets (Article 4(2)(b)) .
Nova direktiva bi morala uskladiti te vidike, da bi zagotovili več pravne varnosti neposredno na samem začetku postopka.
A new directive should harmonise these aspects so that there is more legal certainty directly from the very beginning of the proceedings.
c) Prijava terjatev
c) Filing of claims
Poglavje IV uredbe o insolventnosti določa osnovne zahteve za prijavo terjatev.
Chapter IV of the Insolvency Regulation provides for basic requirements for the lodgement of claims.
Skladno z uredbo o insolventnosti pravila o prijavi, preverjanju in priznanju terjatev določa zakonodaja države, v kateri so bili uvedeni postopki (člen 4(2)(h)); enako velja za terjatve, ki jih je treba prijaviti zoper dolžnikovo premoženje (člen 4(2)(g)).
According to the Insolvency Regulation, the lodging, verification and admission of claims shall be determined by the law of the State of the opening of proceedings (Article 4(2)(h)); the same shall apply to claims which are to be lodged against the debtor’s estate (Article 4(2)(g)).
Uskladitev glede prijave terjatev ipd. bi okrepila pravno varnost za upnike.
Harmonisation with respect to the lodging etc of claims would add to the legal certainty for the creditors.
Časovni okvir mora odsevati ravnotežje med interesi posameznih upnikov za zaščito svojih terjatev, skupine upnikov, da uvedejo postopek, upravitelja, da na podlagi jasnih pravil upravlja poplačilo terjatev, ter dolžnika, da v čim večji meri poravna terjatve upnikov.
The deadline-corridor should reflect a balance between the interests of the single creditor to safeguard his/her particular claim, of the community of creditors to start a proceeding, of the liquidator to manage the satisfaction of claims on a clear basis and of the debtor to satisfy the creditors to the largest extent possible.
d) Izpodbijanje dolžnikovih dejanj
d) Avoidance actions
Uredba o insolventnosti v členu 4(2)(m) določa, da pravila v zvezi z ničnostjo, izpodbojnostjo ali neizvršljivostjo pravnih dejanj, ki so v škodo vseh upnikov, določijo države članice.
The Insolvency Regulation stipulates in Article 4(2)(m) that Member States shall determine the rules relating to the voidness, voidability or unenforceability of legal acts detrimental to all the creditors.
Poleg tega člen 13 uredbe omogoča izjemo.
In addition, Article 13 of the Insolvency Regulation provides for an exemption.
Omenjeni člen 4(2)(m) se ne uporablja, kjer oseba, ki je imela korist od dejanja, ki je v škodo vsem upnikom, dokaže, „da je za navedeno dejanje odločilno pravo države članice, ki ni država, v kateri so bili uvedeni postopki, in v ustreznem primeru pravo ne dopušča nobenega sredstva za izpodbijanje navedenega dejanja“.
The said Article 4(2)(m) shall not apply where the person who benefitted from an act detrimental to all the creditors provides proof that “the said act is subject to the law of a Member State other than that of the State of the opening of the proceedings and that that law does not allow any means of challenging that act in the relevant case”.
Uskladitev bi v tem primeru omejila obseg uporabe člena 13 uredbe o insolventnosti in s tem prispevala k enaki obravnavi upnikov znotraj notranjega trga ter zmanjšala pravno negotovost upraviteljev.
Harmonisation in this respect would reduce the scope of Article 13 of the Insolvency Regulation and may, thus, contribute to the equal treatment of creditors within the Internal Market and diminish legal uncertainty among liquidators.
Kar zadeva uskladitev rokov in obdobij, je treba poiskati ravnotežje med osnovnim načelom, da se podjetjem zagotovi druga možnost in pomaga preživeti, interesi zakonitih upnikov v postopkih zaradi insolventnosti ter zaupanjem „novega“ upnika zunaj postopka.
As regards to harmonisation of deadlines and periods, there must be a balance between the underlying principle of giving companies a second chance and helping them survive, the interests of the legitimate creditors in the insolvency proceeding and the trust of the “new” creditor outside of the proceeding.
Priporočilo poročevalca je tako kot drugod tudi v tem primeru treba obravnava kot izhodišče za razpravo.
The recommendation of the rapporteur is here as elsewhere understood as a starting point for discussion.
Uredba o insolventnosti ponuja v členu 2(b) opredelitev upravitelja, ki se uporablja tudi v tem poročilu.
The Insolvency Regulation offers in Article 2(b) a definition of the liquidator that shall be used also in this report.
Skladno s členom 4(2)(c) država, v kateri so bili uvedeni postopki, določa ustrezna pooblastila upravitelja, člena 18 in 19 pa vsebujeta osnovne določbe o upravitelju.
According to Article 4(2)(c), the State of the opening of proceedings shall determine the powers of the liquidator, and Articles 18 and 19 contain basic provisions for the liquidator.
Čeprav poročevalec na tej stopnji ne želi usklajevati pooblastil in nalog upraviteljev, vseeno predlaga nekaj skupnih zahtev.
While the rapporteur would not endeavour to harmonise the powers and duties of liquidators at that stage, he would still like to propose some common requirements.
Določena uskladitev na tem področju bi podprla idejo o tesnejšem sodelovanju med upravitelji in okrepila primerljivost v tem poklicu.
Some harmonisation in this area would support the idea of closer cooperation between the liquidators and enhance the comparability in the profession.
f) Načrt prestrukturiranja
f) Restructuring Plan
Skladno s politično voljo, da se podjetjem, ki so na robu insolventnosti ali že insolventna, omogoči druga priložnost, želi poročevalec prevzeti idejo o načrtu prestrukturiranja, ki je v zakonodaji nekaterih držav članic že razvita.
According to the political will to give companies a second chance when they risk to become insolvent or became insolvent, the rapporteur would like to take up the idea of restructuring plans which has been developed in the laws of some Member States.
2) Spremembe uredbe o insolventnosti :
2) Amendments to the Insolvency Regulation :
Priporočila v tem razdelku se omejujejo na vidike, za katere je po mnenju poročevalca zlasti pomembno, da jih Komisija upošteva v svoji reviziji uredbe o insolventnosti.
The recommendations made in this section are limited to those aspects that the rapporteur finds particularly relevant for the Commission to take into account in its revision of the Insolvency Regulation.
Poročevalec meni, da je treba področje uporabe uredbe razširiti, da bi vključevalo postopke, v katerih uprava še naprej vodi podjetje, saj bi tako imel dolžnik s premoženjem na voljo več mehanizmov za prestrukturiranje podjetja.
The rapporteur considers that the scope should be widened in order to include those procedures in which the management remains in control of the company as this would afford the debtor in possession a number of mechanisms to restructure its business.
Središče dolžnikovih glavnih interesov je najpomembnejši pojem, saj je od njegove opredelitve odvisno glavno pravilo o jurisdikciji iz uredbe o insolventnosti: katero sodišče je pristojno za vodenje glavnega postopka in katero pravo se pri tem uporablja.
The COMI is a most important concept, since of its definition depends the Insolvency Regulation's principal jurisdictional rule: which court is competent to open the main proceedings and which will be the applicable law.
Vendar pa ta pojem ni natančno opredeljen, kar povzroča negotovost.
The concept is however not defined and this creates uncertainty.
Opredelitev poslovalnice bi morala vključevati tudi storitve, ne le ljudi in premoženje.
The definition of establishment should include services, not just human means and goods.
Dolžnost posredovanja informacij in sodelovanja, ki je določena v členu 31, bi morala veljati ne le za upravitelje, ampak tudi za sodišča.
The duty of communication and cooperation provided for in Article 32 should not only affect liquidators, but also courts.
Uredba o insolventnosti velja le za posamična podjetja, na ravni EU pa ni zakonodaje s področja insolventnosti povezanih družb, čeprav so skupine v gospodarskem svetu zelo razširjena oblika poslovnega modela.
The Insolvency Regulation only applies to single companies and there is no legislation at EU level on the insolvency of groups of companies, despite the fact that groups are a very common form of business model of the economic life.
Ta izpust ima pomembne negativne posledice.
This omission has important negative consequences.
Poročevalec se zaveda, da obstaja zelo velik nabor različnih struktur skupin in odnosov med družbami, ki so članice iste skupine, in s tem dejstva, da za vse vrste skupin ni mogoče uporabiti iste rešitve, vsaj v okviru sedanjega stanja na področju prava o insolventnosti v Uniji ne.
The rapporteur is aware of the great variety of different group structures and relationships between companies member of the same group and therefore of the fact that the same solution cannot be applied to all kinds of groups, at least in the current state of insolvency laws in the Union.
V idealnem primeru bi insolventnost povezanih družb moralo voditi eno sodišče, ki bi uporabljalo insolvenčno pravo svoje države.
Ideally, the insolvency of groups of companies should be managed by a single court applying its own insolvency law.
Takšna rešitev bi olajšala usklajevanje, posredovanje informacij, prihranila stroške, povečala vrednost premoženja in olajšala reševanje podjetij.
This solution facilitates coordination, the transmission of information, saves costs, maximizes assets value and facilitates rescue.
Sodišča v nekaterih državah članicah to rešitev še uspešno uporabljajo.
It has already been successfully applied by courts from different Member States.
To je mogoče v skupinah, ki imajo centralno vodenje.
This is possible in centrally controlled groups.
Za horizontalne skupine poročevalec predlaga, da se oblikuje nabor pravil o sodelovanju med sodišči in stečajnimi upravitelji na podlagi zakonodajnega vodiča o insolvenčnem pravu UNCITRAL (tretji del).
For horizontal groups the rapporteur suggests to design a set of cooperation rules between the courts and insolvency representatives based on the UNCITRAL Legislative Guide on Insolvency Law (part three).
Oblikovanje registra EU je nujno, da se upnikom in sodiščem olajša ugotavljanje, ali so bili v drugih državah članicah postopki zaradi insolventnosti že uvedeni ter kakšni so roki in podrobnosti za prijavo terjatev.
The creation of an EU Registry is needed in order for creditors and courts to be able to determine whether insolvency proceedings have been opened in another Member State and the deadlines and details to present the claims.
o postopkih v primeru insolventnosti v okviru prava družb EU
with recommendations to the Commission on insolvency proceedings in the context of EU company law
4. v zvezi s tem meni, da bi obrnjeno testiranje izjemnih situacij lahko bilo koristno orodje za urejeni razdor čezmejnih konglomeratov v okviru „oporok za časa življenja“;
To that end, considers that reverse stress-testing could be a useful tool in order to facilitate an orderly resolution of cross-border conglomerates within the framework of ‘living wills’;
9. meni, da bi morali cilji vključevati oblikovanje načrta za popolno uskladitev čezmejnega postopka zaradi insolventnosti v vsej EU ter aktivna prizadevanja za mednarodno soglasje, vsaj v primeru velikih konglomeratov; meni, da bi se moral ta usklajeni okvir med drugim osredotočiti na:
Is of the opinion that objectives should include building a roadmap for the achievement of fully harmonised cross-border insolvency across the EU and actively pursuing an international consensus, at least in the case of large conglomerates; considers that this harmonised framework should focus inter alia on:
– vzpostavitev upravnega postopka za likvidacijo finančnih ustanov in konglomeratov, ki bi omogočil hitrejšo in pravilnejšo likvidacijo kot pa standardni sodni postopek;
– setting up an administrative liquidation procedure for financial institutions and conglomerates in order to facilitate a more speedy and orderly liquidation than under the standard court-based procedure;
– oblikovanje prednostne razvrstitve in predpisov o vračilu prejetih sredstev;
– setting up priority rankings and rules on claw-back actions;
– usklajevanje in uspešno upravljanje postopkov zaradi insolventnosti v primeru mednarodnih finančnih skupin;
– the coordination and efficient administration of international financial group insolvencies;
Udo Bullmann, Pascal Canfin, Nikolaos Huntis (Nikolaos Huntis (Nikolaos Chountis)), Rachida Dati, Leonardo Domenici, Derk Jan Eppink, Diogo Feio, Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz, Jean-Paul Gauzès, Sven Giegold, Liem Hoang Ngoc, Gunnar Hökmark, Wolf Klinz, Jürgen Klute, Philippe Lamberts, Astrid Lulling, Hans-Peter Martin, Alfredo Pallone, Ani Podimata (Ani Podimata (Anni Podimata)), Antolín Sánchez Presedo, Edward Scicluna, Kay Swinburne, Marianne Thyssen, Ramon Tremosa i Balcells
Udo Bullmann, Pascal Canfin, Nikolaos Chountis, Rachida Dati, Leonardo Domenici, Derk Jan Eppink, Diogo Feio, Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz, Jean-Paul Gauzès, Sven Giegold, Liem Hoang Ngoc, Gunnar Hökmark, Wolf Klinz, Jürgen Klute, Philippe Lamberts, Astrid Lulling, Hans-Peter Martin, Alfredo Pallone, Anni Podimata, Antolín Sánchez Presedo, Edward Scicluna, Kay Swinburne, Marianne Thyssen, Ramon Tremosa i Balcells
Thijs Berman, Herbert Dorfmann, Sari Essayah, Ashley Fox, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Danuta Jazłowiecka, Krišjānis Kariņš, Olle Ludvigsson, Teodoros Skilakakis (Teodoros Skilakakis (Theodoros Skylakakis)), Gianluca Susta, Pablo Zalba Bidegain
Thijs Berman, Herbert Dorfmann, Sari Essayah, Ashley Fox, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Danuta Jazłowiecka, Krišjānis Kariņš, Olle Ludvigsson, Theodoros Skylakakis, Gianluca Susta, Pablo Zalba Bidegain
6. z zaskrbljenostjo ugotavlja, da je čedalje več delavcev prizadetih zaradi postopkov zaradi insolventnosti, ki jih lahko pripišemo resnim gospodarskim in družbenim posledicam finančne in gospodarske krize; ugotavlja, da je zaradi njihove narave vloga sistemsko pomembnih čezmejnih finančnih ustanov povečana;
Notes with concern the increasing number of workers affected by insolvency proceedings, which can be attributed to the serious economic and social impact that the financial and economic crisis is having; notes that the nature of systemically-relevant cross-border financial institutions magnifies their role in this area;
9. priznava, da trenutno razvrščanje upnikov ni usklajeno, kar zmanjšuje predvidljivost izidov sodnih postopkov; vseeno meni, da je treba pri obravnavi dati več prednosti zahtevkom delavcev v primerjavi z drugimi upniki;
Recognises the current lack of harmonisation with regard to the ranking of creditors, which reduces predictability of outcomes of judicial proceedings; however, considers it necessary to increase the priority of employees' claims relative to other creditors' claims;
(a) načelo enakosti in prepoved diskriminacije;
(a) be in accordance with the principle of equality and non-discrimination;
(b) izključitev bonusov;
(b) exclude bonuses;
(c) vključevanje socialnih prispevkov;
(c) include social security contributions;
(d) vključevanje storitev;
(d) include benefits in kind;
(e) zagotavljanje hitrih in učinkovitih postopkov za primere sporov, ki vključujejo jamstveno ustanovo;
(e) be associated with provision for swift effective procedures in the event of disputes involving the guarantee institution;
poleg tega je treba prav tako uskladiti pojem neporavnanih terjatev, ki mora zajemati odpravnine, ki jih dolžnik ni mogel poravnati, pri čimer najvišji znesek nadomestila ne sme biti nižji od zneska, izračunanega po zgornjem izračunu, uskladiti pa je treba tudi trajanje postopka (največ eno leto) in posege jamstvenih skladov, ki omogočajo plačilo odškodnine (leto dni pred in po začetku postopka, če zahtevek pokriva to obdobje);
considers further that the concept of ‘outstanding claims’ will have to include redundancy payments which the debtor was unable to meet, that the ceiling for such payments must not be less than an amount calculated in accordance with the criteria set out above, and that it is also necessary to harmonise the timeframe for the relevant proceedings (maximum one year) and intervention by the guarantee funds to enable the payments to be made, as well as the period in which the sums in question are payable (a year prior to and a year following the opening of the proceedings, if the claim covers that period);
18. meni, da je treba opredeliti pojem „zlorabe“ v skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča, zlasti s sodbo z dne 11. septembra 2003 v zadevi C-201/01 Walcher
Considers that the concept of ‘abuse’ needs to be defined in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice, in particular its judgment of 11 September 3003 in Case C-201/01 Walcher
– da v svojo prilogo k predlogu resolucije vključi naslednje pobude:
– to incorporate the following recommendations in the annex to its motion for a resolution:
22. poziva Komisija, naj pri prihodnji reviziji Uredbe (ES) št. 1346/2000 vstavi naslednjo uvodno izjavo:
Asks the Commission to introduce the following recital in Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 on the occasion of the next revision thereof:
„ob upoštevanju Direktive 2008/94/ES o varstvu delavcev v primeru plačilne nesposobnosti delodajalca,“.
‘Having regard to Directive 2008/94/EC on the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer,’.
o osnutku sklepa Sveta o pristopu Evropske unije k Protokolu iz leta 2002 k Atenski konvenciji o prevozu potnikov in njihove prtljage po morju iz leta 1974, razen k členom 10 in 11 Konvencije
on the draft Council decision concerning the accession of the European Union to the Protocol of 2002 to the Athens Convention relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea, 1974, with the exception of Articles 10 and 11 thereof
o osnutku sklepa Sveta o pristopu Evropske unije k Protokolu iz leta 2002 k Atenski konvenciji o prevozu potnikov in njihove prtljage po morju iz leta 1974, razen k členom 10 in 11 Konvencije
on the draft Council decision concerning the accession of the European Union to the Protocol of 2002 to the Athens Convention Relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea, 1974, with the exception of Articles 10 and 11 thereof
– ob upoštevanju Protokola iz leta 2002 k Atenski konvenciji o prevozu potnikov in njihove prtljage po morju iz leta 1974 (08663/2011),
– having regard to the Protocol of 2002 to the Athens Convention Relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea, 1974 (08663/2011),
– ob upoštevanju zahteve za odobritev, ki jo je Svet predložil v skladu s členom 100(2), točko (a) drugega pododstavka člena 218(6) in prvim pododstavkom člena 218(8) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije ( C7–0142/2011 ),
– having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 100(2), Article 218(6) second subparagraph, point (a), and Article 218(8) first subparagraph, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ( C7‑0142/2011 ),
– ob upoštevanju priporočila Odbora za promet in turizem ter mnenja Odbora za pravne zadeve ( A7-0356/2011 ),
– having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Transport and Tourism and the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A7-0356/2011 ),
Pristop k Atenski konvenciji o prevozu potnikov in njihove prtljage po morju je dolgoletno vprašanje, s katerim sta se ukvarjala Evropska unija in zlasti Parlament.
The accession to the Athens Convention Relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea is a longstanding issue followed up by the EU and by the Parliament, in particular.
Konvencija je iz leta 1974, njeno bistvo pa sta varnost potniških ladij in pravice potnikov.
The Convention itself dates back to 1974 with the safety of passenger ships and passenger rights lying at its heart.
Vendar konvencija načeloma ni ustrezno urejala številnih pomembnih vprašanj, med drugim tudi narave in obsega odgovornosti prevoznika in minimalnih zahtev o zavarovanju.
It was, however, considered that the Convention regulated insufficiently a number of substantive issues including the nature and extent of the carriers' liability and minimum requirements on insurance.