natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Regulation No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaeda network and the Taliban, inasmuch as it imposes restrictive measures of an economic and financial nature, plainly falls within the ambit ratione materiae of Articles 60 EC and 301 EC.
Uredba �t. 881/2002 o posebnih omejevalnih ukrepih za nekatere osebe in subjekte, povezane z Osamo bin Ladnom, mrežo Al Kaida in talibani, v delu, v katerem določa restriktivne gospodarske in finančne ukrepe, očitno izhaja iz področja uporabe ratione materiae členov 60 ES in 301 ES.
Since those articles do not, however, provide for any express or implied powers of action to impose such measures on addressees in no way linked to the governing regime of a third country such as those to whom that regulation applies, that lack of power, attributable to the limited ambit ratione personae of those provisions, may be made good by having recourse to Article 308 EC as a legal basis for that regulation in addition to the first two provisions providing a foundation for that measure from the point of view of its material scope, provided, however, that the other conditions to which the applicability of Article 308 EC is subject have been satisfied.
Vendar ker ta člena ne predvidevata posebne ali implicitne pristojnosti ukrepanja, da se naloži tak�ne ukrepe naslovnikom, ki nimajo nobene zveze z vodstvenim režimom tretje države, kot so določeni v tej uredbi, je bilo zaradi omejitev področja uporabe ratione personae navedenih določb ta neobstoj pristojnosti mogoče nadomestiti s sklicevanjem na člen 308 ES kot na pravno podlago navedene uredbe poleg teh prvih dveh členov, ki akt utemeljujeta z vidika njegovega stvarnega obsega, vendar le če so izpolnjeni drugi pogoji, s katerimi je določena uporaba člena 308 ES.
The objective pursued by the contested regulation being to prevent persons
Cilj te uredbe je preprečiti osebam, povezanim z Osamo bin Ladnom, mrežo Al
(see paras 197-204)
(Glej točke od 197 do 204.)
associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaeda network or the Taliban from having at their disposal any financial or economic resources, in order to impede the financing of terrorist activities, it may be made to refer to one of the objectives of the Community for the purpose of Article 308 EC.
Kaida in talibani, razpolaganje z vsemi finančnimi in gospodarskimi viri, da se prepreči financiranje terorističnih dejavnosti, in ga je mogoče povezati z enim izmed ciljev Skupnosti v smislu člena 308 ES.
Inasmuch as they provide for Community powers to impose restrictive measures of an economic nature in order to implement actions decided on under the common foreign and security policy, Articles 60 EC and 301 EC are the expression of an implicit underlying objective, namely, that of making it possible to adopt such measures through the efficient use of a Community instrument.
Člena 60 ES in 301 ES, kolikor določata pristojnost Skupnosti, da naloži omejevalne gospodarske ukrepe za izvajanje ukrepov, dogovorjenih v okviru skupne zunanje in varnostne politike, izražata namreč implicitni in osnovni cilj, in sicer omogočiti sprejetje tak�nih ukrepov z učinkovito rabo instrumenta Skupnosti.
That objective may be regarded as constituting an objective of the Community for the purpose of Article 308 EC.
Za ta cilj je mogoče �teti, da je cilj Skupnosti v smislu člena 308 ES.
Implementing such measures through the use of a Community instrument does not go beyond the general framework created by the provisions of the EC Treaty as a whole, because by their very nature they offer a link to the operation of the common market, that link constituting another condition for the application of Article 308 EC.
Evropska skupnost je skupnost, ki temelji na pravu, saj se ne države članice ne institucije ne morejo izogniti nadzoru skladnosti svojih aktov s temeljno ustavno listino, Pogodbo, pri čemer je ta oblikovala celosten sistem pravnih sredstev in postopkov, ki Sodi�ču omogočajo nadzor nad zakonitostjo aktov institucij.
If economic and financial measures such as those imposed by the regulation were imposed unilaterally by every Member State, the multiplication of those national measures might well affect the operation of the common market.
Mednarodni sporazum ne more ogrožati ureditve pristojnosti, kot so jo določile pogodbe, in s tem neodvisnosti pravnega sistema Skupnosti, katerega spo�tovanje zagotavlja Sodi�če na podlagi izključne pristojnosti, dodeljene s členom 220 ES, pristojnosti, ki izhaja iz temeljev Skupnosti.
With regard to a Community act which, like Regulation No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaeda network and the Taliban, is intended to give effect to a resolution adopted by the Security Council under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, it is not for the Community judicature, under the exclusive jurisdiction provided for by Article 220 EC, to review the lawfulness of such a resolution adopted by an international body, even if that review were to be limited to examination of the compatibility of that resolution with jus cogens, but rather to review the lawfulness of the implementing Community measure.
Izvajanje teh gospodarskih omejevalnih ukrepov z uporabo instrumenta Skupnosti ne presega splo�nega okvira, ki izhaja iz vseh določb Pogodbe, ker ti ukrepi s svojimi lastnostmi pomenijo vez z delovanjem skupnega trga, pri čemer je ta vez nadaljnji pogoj za uporabo člena 308 ES. Če bi vsaka država članica naložila gospodarske in finančne ukrepe, kakr�ni so ukrepi, naloženi s to uredbo, bi lahko namreč množitev teh nacionalnih ukrepov vplivala na delovanje skupnega trga.
(see paras 211, 213, 216, 222, 225-227, 229, 230)
(Glej točke 211, 213, 216, 222, od 225 do 227, 229 in 230.)
Any judgment given by the Community judicature deciding that a Community measure intended to give effect to such a resolution is contrary to a higher rule of law in the Community legal order would not entail any challenge to the primacy of that resolution in international law.
Sodba sodi�ča Skupnosti, s katero bi bilo ugotovljeno, da je akt Skupnosti, katerega namen je izvajanje tak�ne resolucije, v nasprotju z vi�jo določbo, ki izhaja iz prava Skupnosti, ne bi omajala prednosti te resolucije na ravni mednarodnega prava.
The obligations imposed by an international agreement cannot have the effect of prejudicing the constitutional principles of the EC Treaty, which include the principle that all Community acts must respect fundamental rights, that respect constituting a condition of their lawfulness which it is for the Court to review in the framework of the complete system of legal remedies established by the Treaty.
V tej zvezi obveznosti, ki jih nalaga mednarodni sporazum, ne morejo ogroziti ustavnih načel Pogodbe ES, med katerimi se pojavlja načelo, v skladu s katerim morajo vsi akti Skupnosti spo�tovati temeljne pravice, kar je pogoj za njihovo zakonitost, ki jo mora nadzirati Sodi�če v okviru popolnega sistema pravnih sredstev, ki ga vzpostavlja ta Pogodba.
(see paras 281, 282, 286-288)
(Glej točke 281, 282 in od 286 do 288.)
It is not a consequence of the principles governing the international legal order under the United Nations that any judicial review of the internal lawfulness of the Regulation No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaeda network and the Taliban in the light of fundamental freedoms is excluded by virtue of the fact that that measure is intended to give effect to a resolution of the Security Council adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations.
Načela, ki urejajo mednarodni pravni red Združenih narodov, ne implicirajo, da je sodni nadzor notranje zakonitosti Uredbe �t. 881/2002 o posebnih omejevalnih ukrepih za nekatere osebe in subjekte, povezane z Osamo bin Ladnom, mrežo Al Kaida in talibani, glede na temeljne pravice izključen, na podlagi tega, da je namen tega akta izvajanje resolucije Varnostnega sveta, sprejete na podlagi VII. poglavja Ustanovne listine Združenih narodov.
Such immunity from jurisdiction for a Community measure, as a corollary of the principle of the primacy at the level of international law of obligations under the Charter of the United Nations, especially those relating to the implementation of resolutions of the Security Council adopted under Chapter VII of that Charter, cannot find a basis in the EC Treaty.
Tak�na sodna imuniteta akta Skupnosti, kot posledica načela primarnosti obveznosti na ravni mednarodnega prava, zlasti tistih v zvezi z izvajanjem resolucij Varnostnega sveta Združenih narodov, sprejetih na podlagi VII. poglavja te listine, sicer nima nobene podlage v Pogodbi ES.
Article 307 EC may in no circumstances permit any challenge to the principles that form part of the very foundations of the Community legal order, which include the principles of liberty, democracy and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms enshrined in Article 6(1) EU as a foundation of the Union.
Člen 307 ES namreč v nobenem primeru ne more omajati tam določenih načel, ki izhajajo iz temeljev pravnega reda Skupnosti, med katerimi so varstvo temeljnih pravic ter načela svobode, demokracije ter spo�tovanja človekovih pravic in temeljnih svobo�čin, določenih v členu 6(1) Pogodbe EU, kot temelja Unije.
If Article 300(7) EC,
Na podlagi člena 300(7) ES so namreč
Fundamental rights form an integral part of the general principles of law whose observance the Court ensures.
Temeljne pravice so del splo�nih pravnih načel, katerih spo�tovanje zagotavlja Sodi�če.
For that purpose, the Court draws inspiration from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States and from the guidelines supplied by international instruments for the protection of human rights on which the Member States have collaborated or to which they are signatories.
V ta namen se Sodi�če zgleduje po ustavnih tradicijah, ki so skupne državam članicam, in po podatkih iz mednarodnih pogodb o varstvu človekovih pravic, pri katerih so države članice sodelovale ali h katerim so pristopile.
In that regard, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms has special significance.
Evropska konvencija o človekovih pravicah ima pri tem poseben pomen.
Respect for human rights is therefore a condition of the lawfulness of Community acts, and measures incompatible with respect for human rights are not acceptable in the Community.
Spo�tovanje človekovih pravic je tako pogoj za zakonitost aktov Skupnosti in v Skupnosti niso dopustni ukrepi, ki niso združljivi s spo�tovanjem človekovih pravic.
SUMMARY — JOINED CASES C-402/05 P AND C-415/05 P and a measure adopted by virtue of those powers must be interpreted, and its scope limited, in the light of the relevant rules of international law.
POVZETEK – ZDRUŽENI ZADEVI C-402/05 P IN C-415/05 P akt, sprejet na podlagi teh pristojnosti, in njegovo omejeno področje uporabe pa je treba razlagati v okviru upo�tevnih pravil mednarodnega prava.
providing that agreements concluded under the conditions set out therein are to be binding on the institutions of the Community and on Member States, were applicable to the Charter of the United Nations, it would confer on the latter primacy over acts of secondary Community law.
sporazumi, sklenjeni v skladu s pogoji iz tega člena, za institucije in države članice zavezujoči, zato bi na podlagi te določbe, če bi se uporabila za Ustanovno listino Združenih narodov, slednja imela prednost pred akti sekundarne zakonodaje.
That primacy at the level of Community law would not, however, extend to primary law, in particular to the general principles of which fundamental rights form part.
Vendar se ta prednost na ravni prava Skupnosti ne bi raztezala na primarno pravo, zlasti na splo�na načela, katerih del so temeljne pravice.
The Community judicature must, therefore, in accordance with the powers conferred on it by the EC Treaty, ensure the review, in principle the full review, of the lawfulness of all Community acts in the light of the fundamental rights forming an integral part of the general principles of Community law, including review of Community measures which, like the regulation at issue, are designed to give effect to the resolutions adopted by the Security Council under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations.
Sodi�ča Skupnosti morajo torej v skladu s svojimi pristojnostmi na podlagi Pogodbe ES zagotoviti načeloma popoln nadzor zakonitosti vseh aktov Skupnosti glede na temeljne pravice, vključno z akti Skupnosti, katerih namen je, tako kot v primeru zadevne uredbe, izvajanje resolucij Varnostnega sveta, sprejetih na podlagi VII. poglavja Ustanovne listine Združenih narodov.
In the exercise of its power to adopt Community measures taken on the basis of Articles 60 EC and 301 EC, in order to give effect to resolutions adopted by the Security Council under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, the Community must attach special importance to the fact that, in accordance with Article 24 of the Charter of the United Nations, the adoption by the Security Council of resolutions under Chapter VII of the Charter constitutes the exercise of the primary responsibility with which that international body is invested for the maintenance of peace and security at the global level, a responsibility which, under Chapter VII, includes the power to determine what and who poses a threat to international peace and security and to take the measures necessary to maintain or restore them.
Ppri izvajanju svoje pristojnosti sprejemanja aktov, sprejetih na podlagi členov 60 ES in 301 ES za izvajanje resolucij Varnostnega sveta, sprejetih na podlagi VII. poglavja Ustanovne listine Združenih narodov, mora Skupnost pripisati poseben pomen temu, da sprejetje resolucij – s strani Varnostnega sveta na podlagi VII. poglavja te listine – v skladu s členom 24 Ustanovne listine Združenih narodov pomeni izvr�evanje poglavitne pristojnosti, ki jo ima ta mednarodni organ za ohranjanje miru in varnosti v svetovnem merilu, to je odgovornost, ki v okviru tega VII. poglavja vključuje to, da določi, ali obstaja kak�no ogrožanje miru in mednarodne varnosti, ter da sprejme potrebne ukrepe za njuno ohranitev in ponovno vzpostavitev.
(see paras 283-285, 299, 303, 304, 306-308, 326)
(Glej točke od 283 do 285, 299, 303, 304, od 306 do 308 in 326.)
The Community must respect international law in the exercise of its powers
Pristojnosti Skupnosti je treba izvr�evati ob spo�tovanju mednarodnega prava,
The Charter of the United Nations does not, however, impose the choice of a predetermined model for the implementation of resolutions adopted by the Security Council under Chapter VII, since they are to be given effect in accordance with the procedure applicable in
Vendar Ustanovna listina Združenih narodov ne daje na izbiro vnaprej določenega modela za izvajanje resolucij Varnostnega sveta, sprejetih na podlagi njenega VII. poglavja, ker mora to izvajanje nastopiti v skladu z načini, ki se v tem okviru uporabijo v nacionalnem
KADI AND AL BARAKAAT INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION v COUNCIL AND COMMISSION that respect in the domestic legal order of each Member of the United Nations.
KADI IN AL BARAKAAT INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION PROTI SVETU IN KOMISIJI nasprotujejo temu, da so zainteresirani obve�čeni o določenih okoli�činah in da so zasli�ani glede teh elementov.
before their names were included for the first time in the list set out in Annex I to that regulation.
pravnem redu vsake države članice OZN.
In addition, with regard to a Community measure intended to give effect to a resolution adopted by the Security Council in connection with the fight against terrorism, overriding considerations to do with safety or the conduct of the international relations of the Community and of its Member States may militate against the communication of certain matters to the persons concerned and, therefore, against their being heard on those matters.
Ustanovna listina Združenih narodov članicam OZN namreč pu�ča prosto izbiro med različnimi mogočimi modeli prenosa tak�nih resolucij v njihov nacionalni pravni red.
(see paras 291, 293, 294, 298)
(Glej točke 291, 293, 294 in 298.)
So far as concerns the rights of the defence, in particular the right to be heard, with regard to restrictive measures such as those imposed by Regulation No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaeda network and the Taliban, the Community authorities cannot be required to communicate, before the name of a person or entity is included for the first time in the list of persons or entities concerned by those measures, the grounds on which that inclusion is based.
Glede pravic obrambe in zlasti pravice do izjave se od organov Skupnosti glede omejevalnih ukrepov, kakr�ni so tisti, ki jih določa Uredba �t. 881/2002 o posebnih omejevalnih ukrepih za nekatere osebe in subjekte, povezane z Osamo bin Ladnom, mrežo Al Kaida in talibani, ne zahteva, da sporočijo razloge pred prvo vključitvijo posameznika ali subjekta na ta seznam.
Such prior communication would be liable to jeopardise the effectiveness of the freezing of funds and resources imposed by that regulation.
Tak�no predhodno obvestilo bi lahko ogrozilo učinkovitost ukrepov zamrznitve sredstev in finančnih virov, ki jih nalaga ta uredba.
Nor, for reasons also connected to the objective pursued by that regulation and to the effectiveness of the measures provided by the latter, were the Community authorities bound to hear the appellants
Iz enakih razlogov, ki prav tako izhajajo iz cilja, ki mu sledi ta uredba, in učinkovitosti ukrepov, ki jih določa, organi Skupnosti tudi niso bili zavezani, da pritožnika zasli�ijo pred prvo vključitvijo njunih imen na seznam v prilogi I k tej uredbi.
Nevertheless, the rights of the defence, in particular the right to be heard, were patently not respected, for neither the regulation at issue nor Common Position 2002/402 concerning restrictive measures against Usama bin Laden, members of the Al-Qaeda organisation and the Taliban and other individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with them, to which that regulation refers, provides for a procedure for communicating the evidence justifying the inclusion of the names of the persons concerned in Annex I to that regulation and for hearing those persons, either at the same time as that inclusion or later and, furthermore, the Council neither communicated to the appellants the evidence used against them to justify the restrictive measures imposed on them nor afforded them the right to
Vendar pravice obrambe, zlasti pravica do izjave, očitno ni bile spo�tovane, ker niti zadevna uredba niti Skupno stali�če 2002/402 o omejevalnih ukrepih proti Osami bin Ladnu, članom organizacije Al Kaida in talibanom ter drugim osebam, skupinam, podjetjem in subjektom v zvezi z njimi, na katero se ta sklicuje, ne predvidevata postopka za obve�čanje o okoli�činah, ki utemeljujejo vključitev imen zainteresiranih subjektov v prilogo I k tej uredbi, in za njihovo zasli�anje, ki bi potekalo sočasno ali po tej vključitvi, in ker Svet pritožnikov ni obvestil o obremenilnih dokazih, s katerimi je utemeljil omejevalne ukrepe, uvedene zoper njiju, in jima ni dodelil pravice, da
SUMMARY — JOINED CASES C-402/05 P AND C-415/05 P be informed of that evidence within a reasonable period after those measures were enacted.
POVZETEK – ZDRUŽENI ZADEVI C-402/05 P IN C-415/05 P bi se z njimi seznanila v razumnem roku po uvedbi teh ukrepov.
knowledge of the relevant facts, whether there is any point in their applying to the Community judicature and also to put the latter fully in a position in which it may carry out the review of the lawfulness of the Community measure in question which is its duty under the EC Treaty.
ali je smiselno, da se obrnejo na sodi�če Skupnosti, ter da se sodi�ču Skupnosti popolnoma omogoči nadzor nad zakonitostjo zadevnega akta Skupnosti, kot je za to pristojno na podlagi Pogodbe.
(see paras 334, 338, 339, 341, 342, 345, 348)
(Glej točke 334, 338, 339, 341, 342, 345 in 348.)
The principle of effective judicial protection is a general principle of Community law stemming from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, which has been enshrined in Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights, this principle having furthermore been reaffirmed by Article 47 of the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union.
Ker te osebe ali subjekti niso obve�čeni o obremenilnih okoli�činah – in ob upo�tevanju razmerij, ki obstajajo med pravicami obrambe in pravico do učinkovitega pravnega sredstva –, s tega vidika pred sodi�čem Skupnosti ne morejo braniti svojih pravic v zadovoljivih pogojih, ker to ne more opraviti nadzora zakonitosti te uredbe v delu, v katerem se nana�a na osebe in subjekte, tako da je treba ugotoviti tudi obstoj kr�itev pravice do učinkovitega pravnega sredstva.
Given that those persons or entities were not informed of the evidence adduced against them and having regard to the relationship between the rights of the defence and the right to an effective legal remedy, they have also been unable to defend their rights with regard to that evidence in satisfactory conditions before the Community judicature and the latter is not able to undertake the review of the lawfulness of that regulation in so far as it concerns those persons or entities, with the result that it must be held that their right to an effective legal remedy has also been infringed.
Načelo učinkovitega sodnega varstva je splo�no načelo prava Skupnosti, ki izhaja iz skupnih ustavnih tradicij držav članic ter je potrjeno v členih 6 in 13 Evropske konvencije o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svobo�čin, pa tudi v členu 47 Listine Evropske unije o temeljnih pravicah.
(see paras 335-337, 349, 351)
(Glej točke od 335 do 337, 349 in 351.)
Observance of the obligation to communicate the grounds on which the name of a person or entity is included in the list forming Annex I to Regulation No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaeda network and the Taliban is necessary both to enable the persons to whom restrictive measures are addressed to defend their rights in the best possible conditions and to decide, with full
Spo�tovanje obveznosti, da se sporoči razloge, na katerih temelji vključitev imena posameznika na seznam priloge I k Uredbi �t. 881/2002 o posebnih omejevalnih ukrepih za nekatere osebe in subjekte, povezane z Osamo bin Ladnom, mrežo Al Kaida in talibani, je nujno, zato da se naslovnikom omejevalnih ukrepov omogoči obramba njihovih pravic v kar najbolj�ih okoli�činah in da se ob popolnem poznavanju razlogov odločijo,
The importance of the aims pursued by a Community act is such as to justify negative consequences, even of a substantial
S pomenom ciljev, ki jim sledi akt Skupnosti, se utemeljijo negativne, celo bistvene, posledice za določene subjekte,
KADI AND AL BARAKAAT INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION v COUNCIL AND COMMISSION putting his or its case to the competent authorities, as required by Article 1 of Protocol No 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights.
KADI IN AL BARAKAAT INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION PROTI SVETU IN KOMISIJI njegove zadeve pristojnim organom, kot zahteva člen 1 Protokola �t. 1 h Konvenciji o človekovih pravicah.
nature, for some operators, including those who are in no way responsible for the situation which led to the adoption of the measures in question, but who find themselves affected, particularly as regards their property rights.
vključno s tistimi, ki nikakor niso odgovorni za okoli�čino, ki je privedla do sprejetja zadevnih ukrepov, vendar se zlasti vpliva na njihovo lastninsko pravico.