natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
pozdravlja pozitivni odgovor Komisije na večkratne zahteve Parlamenta, navedene v odstavku 102 zgoraj navedene resolucije o razrešnici za leto 2001, v zvezi z javnim razkritjem prejetih zneskov in imen upravičencev iz proračuna EU, kakor je predlagano v Pobudi za preglednost v Evropi ( KOM(2006)0194 - SEK(2005)1300 ); vendar obžaluje, da so ustrezne informacije v zvezi z izterjavo sredstev Skupnosti izključene iz Pobude za preglednost v Evropi; poziva Komisijo, da proračunskemu organu inkončno tudi javnosti omogoči dostop do imen upravičencev in zneskov za izterjavo ali že vknjiženih v proračun EU, ter da pojasni dokončni namen teh zneskov;
Welcomes the Commission's positive reply to Parliament's repeated demands - namely those expressed in paragraph 102 of its above-mentioned resolution on the discharge for 2001 - for public disclosure of the amounts received by and the names of the beneficiaries under the EU budget, as proposed in the European Transparency Initiative ( COM(2006)0194 - SEC(2005)1300 ); regrets, however, that the equivalent information regarding recoveries of Community funds is excluded from the European Transparency Initiative; calls on the Commission to make available to the budgetary authority and ultimately to the public the names and amounts of recoveries due under or credited to the EU budget, as well as the final destination of these sums;
meni, da bi moral zakonski okvir predvideti izčrpno vodenje računov o vseh terjatvah, ki izhajajo iz nepravilnosti, zneskov izterjave, dejansko izplačanih obresti in denarnih kazni tretjim organom iz sredstev Skupnosti po načelih univerzalnosti in točnosti proračuna, navedenih v Pogodbi in finančni uredbi, ter poziva Komisijo, da to zagotovi;
Considers it essential that the regulatory framework should include the provision of full accounts regarding all sums owed arising from irregularities, the sums recovered and any interest or penalty payments actually paid to third party bodies from Community funds on the basis of the principles of budget universality and accuracy, as laid down in the Treaty and the Financial Regulation; calls on the Commission to take action to ensure this;
meni, da mora Komisija zagotoviti, da enaka načela neodvisnosti postopka plačilnega naloga, opravljanja revizije ter potrjevanja, ki se zahtevajo za izdatke Skupnosti v neposrednem upravljanju, veljajo za izdatke Skupnosti, ki so predmet deljene odgovornosti;
Considers that the Commission must ensure that the principle of independence regarding the activities of authorisation, auditing and certification required for directly managed Community expenditure is also followed for Community expenditure subject to shared responsibility;
ugotavlja, da morajo države članice, ne Komisija, zagotoviti v skladu z načelom deljenega upravljanja sredstev, da enaka načela neodvisnosti postopka plačilnega naloga, opravljanja revizije ter potrjevanja, ki se zahtevajo za izdatke Skupnosti v neposrednem upravljanju, veljajo za izdatke Skupnosti, ki so predmet deljene odgovornosti; nadalje ugotavlja, da to zlasti zadeva vzpostavitev akreditiranih plačilnih agencij z notranjo revizijsko službo ter vzpostavitev neodvisnih in certifikacijskih organov v smislu Uredbe (ES) št. 1663/95 UL L 158, 8.7.1995, str.
Notes that it is not the Commission but the Member States which ensure, in accordance with the shared management principle, that the same principles regarding the independence of authorisation, auditing and certification are applied to Community expenditure subject to shared responsibility as are applied to directly managed Community expenditure; notes further that this applies in particular to the establishment of accredited payment agencies with an internal audit service and the setting-up of independent certifying bodies for the purposes of Regulation (EC) No 1663/95 OJ L 158, 8.7.1995, p.
za področje Jamstvenega oddelka Evropskega kmetijskega usmerjevalnega in jamstvenega sklada (EKUJS-J) ter neodvisnih oseb in oddelkov v smislu člena 38(1)(f) Uredbe (ES) št. 1260/1999 UL L 161, 26.6.1999, str.
for the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, Guarantee Section (EAGGF-G) and of independent persons or departments within the meaning of Article 38(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p.
v povezavi s členom 15 Uredbe (ES) št. 438/2001 UL L 63, 3.3.2001, str.
in conjunction with Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 438/2001 OJ L 63, 3.3.2001, p.
meni, da naj postopek izterjave vodijo državni organi, v primeru, ko proračun EU lahko predvidi financiranje stroškov izterjave, pa naj izterjavo opravljajo neprofitne organizacije. v tem primeru se praviloma objavijo javni razpisi;
Considers that recovery should be carried out by public authorities, where the EU budget can finance the costs of recovery, or else by profit-making entities; considers that, in the latter case, there should of course be a call for tenders;
meni, da je v vsakem primeru pomembno, da revizija zakonskega okvira zagotavlja uporabo standardov preglednosti in odsotnosti navzkrižja interesov, kar zadeva vzrok, zneske ter namen zneskov, ki izhajajo iz denarnih kazni, obresti in izterjave sredstev Skupnosti;
Believes that, in all circumstances, the revision of the regulatory framework must ensure that rules of transparency apply and conflicts of interest are avoided with regard to the motivation, the sums concerned and the end use of the sums arising from penalty payments, interest payments or recovery of Community funds;
opozarja na zgoraj navedeno sobdo Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti v Zadevi C-87/01 P
Recalls the above mentioned judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-87/01 P
, v kateri je Sodišče presodilo, da naj bi zakonodaja države članice prevladala nad Komisijo od trenutka, ko je bil sedež zadevnega podjetja ustanovljen v tej državi članici, saj prevlada zakonodaje Skupnosti ne upravičuje pravnega tolmačenja, v skladu s katerim bi Komisija prevladala nad sodbo zadevne države članice;
, in which the Court found that, from the moment when the enterprise concerned established its headquarters in a Member State, that implied that the law of that Member State should prevail over the Commission, given that the supremacy of Community law does not justify a legal interpretation under which the Commission would prevail over the judge of the Member State concerned;
meni, da pomeni imenovanje evropskega javnega tožilca pomembno odločitev, ki bo omogočala neposreden dostop do javnega tožilstva posameznih držav članic, da bo to omogočalo uskladitev postopka in zmanjšanje večplastnosti povezav, ker naj bi iz tega izhajalo približevanje storitvam evropskega javnega tožilca: opozarja, da čeprav ima OLAF pristojnost posredovanja v okviru svojih preiskav, nima pravosodnih pooblastil;
Considers that the creation of the office of European Public Prosecutor will be a decision of major importance, since it will facilitate direct access to the national public prosecutor's offices, thus working in the interests of a more "joined-up" procedure; believes that this should help reduce complexity, since the result should be a converged use of the European Prosecutor's services; recalls that, while OLAF enjoys powers of intervention in the context of its inquiries, it does not enjoy judicial powers;
ugotavlja, da je treba projekt Evropskega javnega tožilca obravnavati kot dolgoročen projekt in da mora za doseganje kratkoročnega izboljšanja biti ključni del načrtovanja koordinacija javnih tožilstev držav članic, da se doseže dodana vrednost pri razbremenitvi dela OLAF in pri zaščiti finančnih interesov Skupnosti;
Notes that the project to establish a European Public Prosecutor must be regarded more as a long-term undertaking, and that, in order to achieve an improvement in the short term, coordination between Member States' public prosecutors must be central to plans to create added value, reducing OLAF's workload and protecting the financial interests of the Community;
naroči svojemu predsedniku, naj to resolucijo posreduje Svetu, Komisiji, Sodišču, Računskemu sodišču, nadzornemu odboru OLAF ter OLAF.
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice, the Court of Auditors, the OLAF Surveillance Committee and OLAF.
se pridružuje izjavi, podani na Evropskem svetu v času avstrijskega predsedstva 23. in 24. marca 2006, v kateri Evropski svet pozdravlja novico predsednika španske vlade, da je teroristična skupina ETA razglasila trajno premirje;
Endorses the statement by the European Council of 23 and 24 March 2006, under the Austrian Presidency, that "the European Council welcomed the reports of the President of the Spanish Government on the announcement of a permanent ceasefire made by the terrorist group ETA";
podpira sporočilo predsednika Evropskega parlamenta Josepa Borrella z dne 22. marca 2006, v katerem je povedal, da "je to dobra novica za špansko družbo in celotno Evropo, ki dokazuje, da je terorizem mogoče premagati z močjo demokracije; zdaj je čas, da ostanemo mirni in previdni, čas je, da se spomnimo na številne žrtve terorizma in zdaj je čas za upanje, za enotnost vseh demokratičnih politični sil";
Supports the statement on 22 March 2006 by the President of the European Parliament, Josep Borrell, to the effect that "this is good news for Spanish society and the whole of Europe, which shows that terrorism can be fought by the force of democracy; this is a time to show calmness and caution, a time to remember the many victims of terrorism, a time for hope, for all democratic political forces to join together";
poziva Svet in Komisijo, naj se ustrezno odzoveta;
Calls on the Council and the Commission to take appropriate action;
obsoja nasilje, ker je moralno nesprejemljivo in v popolnem nasprotju z demokracijo;
Condemns violence as being morally unacceptable and absolutely incompatible with democracy;
podpira boj proti terorizmu kot tudi mirovno pobudo, ki so jo španske demokratične institucije v okviru svojih izključnih pristojnosti podvzele v Baskiji;
Supports the fight against terrorism and the peace initiative in the Basque Country undertaken by the Spanish democratic institutions within the framework of their exclusive competences;
Zakonodajna resolucija Evropskega parlamenta o Skupnem stališču Sveta z namenom sprejetja Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o uvedbi postopka za evropski plačilni nalog (7535/3/2006 – C6-0227/2006 – 2004/0055(COD) )
European Parliament legislative resolution on the Council common position for adopting a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council creating a European order for payment procedure (7535/3/2006 – C6-0227/2006 – 2004/0055(COD) )
ob upoštevanju skupnega stališča Sveta (7535/3/2006 - C6-0227/2006 ),
having regard to the Council common position (7535/3/2006 – C6-0227/2006 ),
ob upoštevanju svojega stališča ob prvi obravnavi Sprejeta besedila
having regard to its position at first reading
predloga Komisije Parlamentu in Svetu ( KOM(2004)0173 ) Še ni objavljeno v Uradnem listu.
on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council ( COM(2004)0173 ) Not yet published in OJ.
ob upoštevanju člena 251(2) Pogodbe o ES,
having regard to Article 251(2) of the EC Treaty,
ob upoštevanju priporočila Odbora za pravne zadeve za drugo obravnavo ( A6-0316/2006 ),
having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A6-0316/2006 ),
naroči svojemu predsedniku, naj to stališče posreduje Svetu in Komisiji.
Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti in zlasti člena 61(c) Pogodbe,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 61(c) thereof,
30. junija 2006
30 June 2006
(še ni objavljeno v Uradnem listu)
(not yet published in the Official Journal)
Stališče Parlamenta z dne
Position of the European Parliament of
25. oktobra 2006
25 October 2006
Skupnost si je zastavila cilj ohranjanja in razvijanja območja svobode, varnosti in pravice, v katerem je zajamčen prosti pretok oseb.
The Community has set itself the objective of maintaining and developing an area of freedom, security and justice in which the free movement of persons is ensured.
Za postopno vzpostavitev takšnega območja bi morala Skupnost med drugim sprejeti ukrepe na področju pravosodnega sodelovanja v civilnih zadevah s čezmejnimi elementi, ki so potrebni za pravilno delovanje notranjega trga.
For the gradual establishment of such an area, the Community is to adopt, inter alia, measures in the field of judicial cooperation in civil matters having cross-border implications and needed for the proper functioning of the internal market.
V skladu s členom 65(c) Pogodbe bi morali ti ukrepi vključevati odpravo ovir za nemoten potek civilnih postopkov, po potrebi s spodbujanjem združljivosti pravil o civilnih postopkih, ki se uporabljajo v državah članicah.
According to Article 65(c) of the Treaty, these measures are to include measures eliminating obstacles to the good functioning of civil proceedings, if necessary by promoting the compatibility of the rules on civil procedure applicable in the Member States.
Evropski svet je na zasedanju v Tampereju 15. in 16. oktobra 1999 pozval Svet in Komisijo, naj pripravita novo zakonodajo o zadevah, ki so bistvenega pomena za dobro pravosodno sodelovanje in izboljšan dostop do pravnega varstva, ter je v zvezi s tem posebej izpostavil plačilne naloge.
The European Council meeting in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999 invited the Council and the Commission to prepare new legislation on issues that are instrumental to smooth judicial cooperation and to enhanced access to law and specifically made reference, in that context, to orders for money payment.
Svet je 30. novembra 2000 sprejel skupni program ukrepov Komisije in Sveta za izvajanje načela vzajemnega priznavanja odločb v civilnih in gospodarskih zadevah UL C 12, 15.1.2001, str.
On 30 November 2000, the Council adopted a joint Commission and Council programme of measures for implementation of the principle of mutual recognition of decisions in civil and commercial matters OJ C 12, 15.1.2001, p.
Program predvideva možnost, da se v Skupnosti določi poseben, enoten ali usklajen postopek za izdajanje sodnih odločb na določenih področjih, vključno s področjem nespornih zahtevkov.
The programme envisages the possibility of a specific, uniform or harmonised procedure laid down within the Community to obtain a judicial decision in specific areas including that of uncontested claims.
To je bilo upoštevano v Haaškem programu, ki ga je Evropski svet sprejel 5. novembra 2004, v katerem se poziva k aktivnemu nadaljevanju dela v zvezi z evropskim plačilnim nalogom.
This was taken forward by the Hague Programme, adopted by the European Council on 5 November 2004, which called for work to be actively pursued on the European order for payment.
Komisija je 20. decembra 2002 sprejela Zeleno knjigo o postopku za evropski plačilni nalog ter ukrepih za poenostavitev in pospešitev sodnih postopkov v sporih majhne vrednosti.
The Commission adopted a Green Paper on a European order for payment procedure and on measures to simplify and speed up small claims litigation on 20 December 2002.
Zelena knjiga je odprla posvetovanje o možnih ciljih in značilnostih enotnega ali usklajenega evropskega postopka za izterjavo nespornih zahtevkov.
The Green Paper launched consultations on the possible objectives and features of a uniform or harmonised European procedure for the recovery of uncontested claims.
Hitra in učinkovita izterjava neporavnanih, a nespornih dolgov, je bistvenega pomena za gospodarske subjekte v Evropski uniji, saj so zamude pri plačilih glavni razlog za plačilno nesposobnost, ki ogroža preživetje podjetij, zlasti malih in srednje velikih, ter povzroča izgubo številnih delovnih mest.
The swift and efficient recovery of outstanding debts over which no legal controversy exists is of paramount importance for economic operators in the European Union, as late payments constitute a major reason for insolvency threatening the survival of businesses, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, and resulting in numerous job losses.
Države članice poskušajo rešiti problem množičnosti izterjav nespornih zahtevkov, in sicer v večini držav z določitvijo poenostavljenega postopka za plačilni nalog, vendar se tako vsebina nacionalnih zakonodaj kot tudi učinkovitost domačih postopkov močno razlikujejo.
All Member States are trying to tackle the issue of mass recovery of uncontested claims, in the majority of States by means of a simplified order for payment procedure, but both the content of national legislation and the performance of domestic procedures vary substantially.
Poleg tega so trenutno obstoječi postopki v čezmejnih zadevah pogosto nedopustni ali so neizvedljivi.
Furthermore, the procedures currently in existence are frequently either inadmissible or impracticable in cross-border cases.
Zaradi ovir za dostop do učinkovitega pravnega varstva v čezmejnih zadevah, ki so posledica zgoraj navedenega, in izkrivljanja konkurence na notranjem trgu zaradi neenakega delovanja procesnih sredstev, ki so na voljo upnikom v različnih državah članicah, je potrebna zakonodaja Skupnosti, ki zagotavlja enake pogoje za dolžnike in upnike v vsej Evropski uniji.
The resulting impediments to access to efficient justice in cross-border cases and the distortion of competition within the internal market due to imbalances in the functioning of procedural means afforded to creditors in different Member States necessitate Community legislation guaranteeing a level playing field for creditors and debtors throughout the European Union.
Namen te uredbe je z uvedbo postopka za evropski plačilni nalog poenostaviti, pospešiti in zmanjšati stroške sodnih postopkov v čezmejnih zadevah v zvezi z nespornimi denarnimi zahtevki ter dopustiti prosti pretok evropskih plačilnih nalogov v vseh državah članicah z določitvijo minimalnih standardov, katerih upoštevanje povzroči nepotrebnost vseh vmesnih postopkov v državi članici izvršbe pred priznanjem in izvršbo.
The purpose of this Regulation is to simplify, speed up and reduce the costs of litigation in cross-border cases concerning uncontested pecuniary claims by creating a European order for payment procedure, and to permit the free circulation of European orders for payment throughout the Member States by laying down minimum standards, compliance with which renders unnecessary any intermediate proceedings in the Member State of enforcement prior to recognition and enforcement.
Postopek, uveden s to uredbo, bi moral biti za tožečo stranko dodatno in neobvezno sredstvo, ki ji dopušča, da uporabi postopek, ki ga predvideva nacionalno pravo.
The procedure established by this Regulation should serve as an additional and optional means for the claimant, who remains free to resort to a procedure provided for by national law.
Ta uredba ne nadomešča in ne usklajuje obstoječih mehanizmov za izterjavo nespornih zahtevkov v skladu z nacionalnim pravom.
Accordingly, this Regulation neither replaces nor harmonises the existing mechanisms for the recovery of uncontested claims under national law.
Zaradi olajšanja izvajanja postopka in uporabe avtomatske obdelave podatkov bi moral postopek v največji možni meri temeljiti na uporabi standardnih obrazcev za komunikacijo med sodiščem in strankami.
The procedure should be based, to the largest extent possible, on the use of standard forms in any communication between the court and the parties in order to facilitate its administration and enable the use of automatic data processing.
Pri odločanju, katera sodišča so pristojna za izdajo evropskega plačilnega naloga, bi morale države članice ustrezno upoštevati potrebo po zagotovitvi dostopa do pravnega varstva.
When deciding which courts are to have jurisdiction to issue a European order for payment, Member States should take due account of the need to ensure access to justice.
V zvezi s tem bi morala biti tožeča stranka obvezana, da priloži opis dokazov, ki podpirajo zahtevek.
In that context, it should be compulsory for the claimant to include a description of evidence supporting the claim.
V ta namen bi moral obrazec za vlogo vsebovati kar se da izčrpen seznam vrst dokazov, ki se običajno predložijo v podporo denarnim zahtevkom.
For that purpose the application form should include as exhaustive a list as possible of types of evidence that are usually produced in support of pecuniary claims.
Predložitev vloge za evropski plačilni nalog bi morala predpostavljati plačilo vseh veljavnih sodnih taks.
The lodging of an application for a European order for payment should entail the payment of any applicable court fees.
Sodišče bi moralo na podlagi v vlogi navedenih podatkov preučiti zahtevek, vključno z vprašanjem pristojnosti in opisom dokazov.
The court should examine the application, including the issue of jurisdiction and the description of evidence, on the basis of the information provided in the application form.
To naj bi sodišču omogočilo, da na prvi pogled preuči vsebino zahtevka in med drugim izključi očitno neutemeljene zahtevke ali nedopustne vloge.
This would allow the court to examine prima facie the merits of the claim and inter alia to exclude clearly unfounded claims or inadmissible applications.
Za preučitev naj ne bi bilo potrebno, da jo izvede sodnik.
The examination should not need to be carried out by a judge.
Zoper zavrnitev vloge naj ne bi bilo pravnega sredstva.
There is to be no right of appeal against the rejection of the application.
Vendar to ne izključuje možnosti ponovne preučitve odločbe o zavrnitvi zahtevka na isti stopnji.
This does not preclude, however, a possible review of the decision rejecting the application at the same level of jurisdiction in accordance with national law.
Evropski plačilni nalog bi moral toženo stranko poučiti o možnosti, da bodisi plača znesek, ki je bil dodeljen tožeči stranki, bodisi da v 30 dneh pošlje ugovor, če želi izpodbijati zahtevek.
The European order for payment should apprise the defendant of his options to pay the amount awarded to the claimant or to send a statement of opposition within a time limit of 30 days if he wishes to contest the claim.
Poleg vseh podatkov o zahtevku, ki jih predloži tožeča stranka, bi bilo treba toženo stranko poučiti o pravnih posledicah evropskega plačilnega naloga in zlasti o posledicah neizpodbijanja zahtevka.
In addition to being provided with full information concerning the claim as supplied by the claimant, the defendant should be advised of the legal significance of the European order for payment and in particular of the consequences of leaving the claim uncontested.
Zaradi razlik v civilnih postopkih med državami članicami in predvsem v pravilih, ki urejajo vročanje pisanj, bi bilo treba določiti posebno in podrobno opredelitev minimalnih standardov, ki naj se uporabljajo v postopku za evropski plačilni nalog.
Due to differences between Member States" rules of civil procedure and especially those governing the service of documents, it is necessary to lay down a specific and detailed definition of minimum standards that should apply in the context of the European order for payment procedure.
Zlasti se noben način, ki temelji na pravni domnevi o izpolnitvi teh standardov, ne bi smel šteti kot zadosten za vročitev evropskega plačilnega naloga.
In particular, as regards the fulfilment of those standards, any method based on legal fiction should not be considered sufficient for the service of the European order for payment.
Za vse načine vročanja, navedene v členih 13 in 14, je značilna bodisi popolna gotovost (člen 13) bodisi zelo visoka stopnja verjetnosti (člen 14), da je vročeno pisanje dejansko prišlo v naslovnikove roke.
All the methods of service listed in Articles 13 and 14 are characterised by either complete certainty (Article 13) or a very high degree of likelihood (Article 14) that the document served has reached its addressee.