natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
— a Turkish national was granted leave to enter the United Kingdom under the Immigration Rules in order to follow a course of study in that country; …
— je bilo tur�kemu državljanu izdano dovoljenje za vstop v Združeno kraljestvo v skladu z [Immigration Rules] z namenom �tudija v tej državi; […]
— his leave to enter included permission to be employed in any occupation with a limit during term time of 20 hours work per week; …
— je njegovo dovoljenje za vstop vključevalo dovoljenje, da sprejme katerokoli zaposlitev, ki med �olskim letom ne sme preseči 20 ur na teden na delovno obdobje; […]
— he was continuously employed by the same employer for a period exceeding one year during his leave to enter;
— je bil nepretrgoma zaposlen pri istem delodajalcu za obdobje, dalj�e od enega leta, v času veljavnosti svojega dovoljenja za vstop;
— that employment was in accordance with national laws relating to employment and immigration; then, was the Turkish national concerned, during that employment:
— je bila ta zaposlitev v skladu z nacionalno zakonodajo v zvezi z zaposlovanjem in priseljevanjem, bil zadevni tur�ki državljan v času svoje zaposlitve:
— a worker within the meaning of Article 6 of Decision No 1/80 …?
— delavec v smislu člena 6 Sklepa �t. 1/80 […]?
— duly registered as belonging to the labour force of the United Kingdom within the meaning of that Article?’
— vključen v zakoniti trg dela Združenega kraljestva v smislu tega člena?“
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling
Vprašanji za predhodno odločanje
The same questions are asked in both cases and relate, respectively, to au pairs and to students.
Vpra�anji, postavljeni v obeh zadevah, sta enaki in se nana�ata na eni strani na osebe „aupair“ ter na drugi strani na �tudente.
By those questions, the national court is essentially asking whether the fact that a Turkish national was granted permission to enter the territory of a Member State as an au pair or as a student deprives that national of the status of ‘worker’ and prevents him from being regarded as ‘duly registered as belonging to the labour force’ of that Member State within the meaning of Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80, with the result that he cannot rely on that provision for the purposes of obtaining renewed permission to work and a corollary right of residence.
Iz teh vpra�anj izhaja, da predložitveno sodi�če v bistvu spra�uje, ali dejstvo, da je bilo tur�kemu državljanu dovoljeno vstopiti na ozemlje države članice kot osebi „aupair“ ali �tudentu, odvzame temu državljanu status „delavca“ in mu prepreči vključitev v zakoniti trg dela te države članice v smislu člena 6(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80, tako da se ne more sklicevati na to določbo, da bi se mu njegovo delovno dovoljenje podalj�alo in da bi pridobil z njim povezano pravico do prebivanja.
Observations submitted to the Court
Sodišču predložena stališča
PAYIR AND OTHERS within the meaning of Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80.
PAYIR IN DRUGI
Those Turkish nationals are duly registered as belonging to the labour force of the host Member State.
Ti tur�ki državljani naj bi bili vključeni v zakoniti trg dela države članice gostiteljice.
They entered the territory of that State lawfully and, equally lawfully, joined the labour force of that State.
Na ozemlje te države naj bi vstopili zakonito in se na isti način vključili v zakoniti trg dela navedene države.
In particular, they did not commit any form of fraud in order to obtain or take up work.
Zlasti naj ne bi storili nobene goljufije, da bi pridobili in izvr�evali njim zaupano delo.
Their situation as part of the labour force is therefore stable and secure.
Njihov položaj na trgu dela naj bi bil torej trden in gotov.
In so far as those Turkish nationals fulfil the conditions laid down in Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80, they can rely on that provision for the purposes of obtaining renewed permission to work and a corollary right of residence.
Če ti tur�ki državljani izpolnjujejo pogoje iz člena 6(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80, bi se lahko sklicevali na to določbo, da bi se jim njihovo delovno dovoljenje podalj�alo in da bi pridobili z njim povezano pravico do prebivanja.
It is neither necessary nor relevant to examine the reasons for which the United Kingdom granted them leave to enter and to remain, that is to say, leave for a limited period, as young persons with au pair or student status.
Ne bi bilo niti nujno niti smiselno preučevati razloge, zaradi katerih je Združeno kraljestvo podelilo njihova dovoljenja za vstop in prebivanje, to je, dovolilo vstop mladim samo kot osebam „aupair“ ali �tudentom, za določen čas.
The United Kingdom Government and the German, Italian and Netherlands Governments contend that, on the contrary, the reasons underlying the grant of leave to remain are important.
Vlada Združenega kraljestva ter nem�ka, italijanska in nizozemska vlada pa nasprotno menijo, da so razlogi za prebivanje pomembni.
Consequently, even if they have performed an activity that can be regarded as genuine and effective economic activity, it does not follow that those nationals are workers or that they are duly registered as belonging to the labour force of the host Member State, within the meaning of that provision.
Čeprav se lahko dejavnost, ki so jo opravljali ti državljani, opredeli kot resnična in dejanska gospodarska dejavnost, naj torej iz tega ne bi izhajalo, da naj bi imele zadevne osebe status delavcev niti da naj bi bile vključene v zakoniti trg dela države članice gostiteljice v smislu navedene določbe.
If it were to be held that Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80 may be relied upon by Turkish nationals who have been permitted to enter the territory of a Member State as au pairs or as students, there would be serious consequences.
Sklepanje, da se lahko tur�ki državljani, ki jim je bil dovoljen vstop na ozemlje države članice kot osebam „aupair“ ali �tudentom, sklicujejo na določbe člena 6(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80, naj bi imelo hude posledice.
First and foremost, the Member States would no longer be free to determine the conditions governing the entry of Turkish nationals into their territory.
Iz tega naj bi najprej izhajalo, da države članice ne bi mogle svobodno določati pogojev za vstop tur�kih državljanov na svoje ozemlje.
Second, it would encourage the circumvention of national legislation, since the persons concerned would have an interest in presenting themselves as students or as au pairs in order to integrate in the labour force of the Member State into whose territory they enter.
Spodbujalo naj bi tudi obid nacionalnih zakonodaj, saj naj bi zadevne osebe imele interes, da se predstavljajo kot �tudenti ali osebe „aupair“, da bi se vključile v trg dela države članice, na ozemlje katere so vstopile.
Lastly, it would lead the Member States to restrict their policy of admitting Turkish students and au pairs, to the detriment of those two groups.
Nazadnje naj bi to vodilo države članice k strožji politiki sprejemanja tur�kih �tudentov in oseb „aupair“ v �kodo teh dveh skupin oseb.
The German and Netherlands Governments add that assimilation of the situation of a student or au pair performing part-time work with the situation of an ordinary worker is inconsistent with the approach taken by the Community legislature in Council Directive 2004/114/EC of 13 December 2004 on the conditions of admission of thirdcountry nationals for the purposes of studies, pupil exchange, unremunerated training or voluntary service (OJ 2004 L 375, p. 12).
Nem�ka in nizozemska vlada dodajata, da je izenačevanje položaja �tudenta ali osebe „aupair“, ki opravljata delo s kraj�im delovnim časom, s položajem običajnega delavca v nasprotju s pristopom, ki ga je izbral normodajalec Skupnosti v Direktivi Sveta 2004/114/ES z dne 13. decembra 2004 o pogojih za sprejem državljanov tretjih držav za namene �tudija, izmenjav učencev, neplačanega usposabljanja ali prostovoljnega dela (UL L 375, str. 12).
According to those governments, that directive clearly distinguishes between student and worker.
Po njunem mnenju naj bi ta direktiva jasno razločevala med �tudentom in delavcem.
In order to reply to the questions referred — as reformulated in paragraph 20 of the present judgment — it is appropriate to note the three conditions laid down in Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80.
Pri odgovoru na postavljeni vpra�anji, kot sta bili preoblikovani v točki 20, je treba opozoriti na tri pogoje, določene v členu 6(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80.
The first of those conditions concerns the status of worker.
Prvi od teh pogojev se nana�a na pojem delavca.
It is settled caselaw that, in order to satisfy that condition, the Turkish national must perform activities which are real and genuine, to the exclusion of activities which are on such a small scale as to be regarded as purely marginal and ancillary.
Iz ustaljene sodne prakse izhaja, da mora tur�ki državljan za izpolnitev tega pogoja opravljati resnično in dejansko dejavnost, z izjemo dejavnosti, ki so tako majhne, da jih je mogoče �teti za postranske in pomožne.
The essential feature of an employment relationship is that, for a certain period of time, a person performs services for and under the direction of another person, in return for which he receives remuneration (see Birden, paragraph 25 and the caselaw cited).
Bistvena značilnost delovnega razmerja je okoli�čina, da oseba določen čas v korist druge osebe in pod vodstvom slednje opravlja dela, za katera v zameno prejme plačilo (glej zgoraj navedeno sodbo Birden, točka 25 in navedena sodna praksa).
The second condition concerns the concept of being duly registered as belonging to the labour force.
Drugi pogoj se nana�a na vključenost v zakoniti trg dela.
The Court has held that this concept embraces all workers who have met the conditions laid down by law or regulation in the host Member State and who are thus entitled to pursue an occupation in its territory (see Birden, paragraph 51).
Sodi�če je presodilo, da ta pojem označuje vse delavce, ki so upo�tevali zakone in druge predpise države članice gostiteljice in ki imajo torej pravico opravljati poklicno dejavnost na njenem ozemlju (glej zgoraj navedeno sodbo Birden, točka 51).
According to the case-file, they all worked under the direction of an employer and received remuneration in return for their services.
Iz spisa izhaja, da so delali pod vodstvom delodajalca in prejemali plačilo za svoje storitve. E.
2008 — CASE C-294/06
2008 – ZADEVA C-294/06 na teden.
The national court adds that the jobs held by Ms Payir, Mr Akyuz and Mr Ozturk were in conformity with requirements not only under the rules on immigration but also under employment law and, in particular, that those jobs were fully in line with the conditions attaching to the form of leave granted in those three cases to enter the national territory.
To sodi�če dodaja, da so se te osebe zaposlile v skladu ne samo s pravili s področja priseljevanja, ampak tudi z delovnim pravom, in zlasti, da so bile te zaposlitve v skladu s pogoji iz njihovega dovoljenja za vstop na nacionalno ozemlje.
It is common ground that Ms Payir, Mr Akyuz and Mr Ozturk enjoyed an undisputed right of residence.
Ugotovljeno naj bi bilo, da so imele nesporno pravico do prebivanja.
It follows that the characteristics of the jobs held by the three Turkish nationals concerned in the main proceedings, as presented by the national court, also satisfy the other two conditions laid down in Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80: being duly registered as belonging to the labour force, and being in legal employment.
Značilnosti zaposlitev, ki so jih sprejeli trije tur�ki državljani iz postopka v glavni stvari, kot jih je predstavilo predložitveno sodi�če, tako izpolnjujejo tudi druga dva pogoja iz člena 6(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80, ki sta vključenost v zakoniti trg dela in opravljanje zakonite zaposlitve.
The question nevertheless arises whether, in cases where Turkish nationals — whose activities otherwise satisfy the three conditions laid down in Article 6(1) — have au pair or student status, they are thereby precluded from the status of workers and from being duly registered as belonging to the labour force of a Member State, within the meaning of that provision.
Kljub temu se postavlja vpra�anje, ali status oseb „aupair“ ali �tudentov tur�kih držav -ljanov, katerih dejavnosti izpolnjujejo med drugim vse tri pogoje iz tega člena 6(1), odvzame tem državljanom status delavcev in jim prepreči, da bi se lahko vključili v zakoniti trg dela države članice v smislu te določbe.
In that regard, it should first be pointed out that a social objective pursued through granting leave to enter as students or as au pairs, together with the related right to work, does not, of itself, take away the lawful character of the activities performed
V zvezi s tem je najprej treba poudariti, da morebitni socialni namen dovoljenja za vstop, ki je izdan �tudentom ali osebam „aupair“, in pravice do dela, ki jim je
PAYIR AND OTHERS by the persons concerned and, consequently, does not prevent them from being regarded as ‘duly registered as belonging to the labour force’ of the host Member State.
PAYIR IN DRUGI odobrena, sam po sebi ne odvzame značilnosti zakonitosti dejavnostim, ki so jih zadevne osebe izvr�evale, in jim torej ne prepreči, da bi se vključile v zakoniti trg dela države članice gostiteljice.
The Court held in paragraph 51 of Birden that the concept of being duly registered as belonging to the labour force cannot be interpreted as applying to the labour market in general as opposed to a specific market with a social objective supported by the public authorities.
V točki 51 zgoraj navedene sodbe Birden je Sodi�če presodilo, da se pojem zakonitega trga dela ne more razlagati tako, da označuje splo�ni trg dela v nasprotju s posebnim trgom s socialnim namenom in podporo javnih organov.
Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80 thus covers Turkish nationals who have the status of workers in the host Member State without, however, requiring that they have entered the Community as workers.
Ta določba se tako nana�a na tur�ke državljane, ki imajo status delavcev v državi članici gostiteljici, ne da bi se zahtevalo, da so vstopili v Skupnost kot delavci.
They can have acquired that status after their entry into the Community.
Ta status lahko pridobijo po svojem vstopu v Skupnost.
Thus, in the case leading to the judgment in Birden, Mr Birden, who had been permitted to enter the territory of a Member State, found himself at the outset unemployed in that State and only later found paid employment there.
Tako je bil v zadevi, v kateri je bila izrečena zgoraj navedena sodba Birden, M. Birden, ki mu je bilo dovoljeno vstopiti na ozemlje države članice, najprej brezposeln v tej državi, preden je na�el zaposlitev.
In the case which led to the judgment in Kurz, the Turkish national concerned had been authorised to enter the Community at the age of 15, not as a worker but in order to train to be a plumber.
V zadevi, ki je vodila do zgoraj navedene sodbe Kurz, je bilo zadevnemu tur�kemu državljanu dovoljeno vstopiti v Skupnost, ko je bil star 15 let, in to ne kot delavcu, ampak da bi opravil poklicno izobraževanje za in�talaterja vodovodnih in plinskih cevi.
It is on the expiry of his first year of work that the Turkish national may, if he meets the conditions laid down in the first indent of Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80, claim renewal of permission to work for the same employer and a corollary right of residence.
Če tur�ki državljan izpolnjuje pogoje iz člena 6(1), prva alinea, Sklepa �t. 1/80, lahko po izteku prvega leta dela zahteva podalj�anje delovnega dovoljenja pri istem delodajalcu in uveljavlja z njim povezano pravico do prebivanja.
In order to determine whether Turkish nationals meet those conditions, no account is taken of the aim pursued in permitting the persons concerned to enter the Member State in question.
Da bi se preverilo, ali tur�ki državljani izpolnjujejo te pogoje, ni treba upo�tevati namena, s katerim je bil tem osebam dovoljen vstop na ozemlje zadevne države članice.
Accordingly, the Court has held that the intention expressed by a Turkish national to return to his country of origin after spending a number of years in the host Member State cannot prevent him from being able to rely on the rights conferred by Article 6(1).
Sodi�če je tako presodilo, da namen, ki ga je izrazil tur�ki državljan, da se vrne v svojo državo izvora po nekaj letih prebivanja v državi članici gostiteljici, temu ne more preprečiti uveljavljanja pravice, določene v navedenem členu 6(1).
It would only be otherwise if the person in question had set out to deceive the competent authorities by making a false declaration with the sole intention of inducing them to issue the requisite authorisation (see, to that effect, Günaydin, paragraphs 54 and 60).
Nasprotno bi veljalo le, če bi ta državljan sku�al prevarati pristojne organe s tem, da bi izrazil lažen namen izključno zato, da bi mu ti organi neupravičeno izdali potrebna dovoljenja (glej v tem smislu zgoraj navedeno sodbo Günaydin, točki 54 in 60).
As is clear from Günaydin, neither the fact that the Turkish national in question was permitted to enter the territory of the Member State in order to follow a course of study nor the fact that, initially, he was allowed to remain on condition that he did not take up remunerated activities prevents him from being able to rely on Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80, provided that he then lawfully obtains paid employment and works for the same employer for at least one year.
Kot izhaja iz zgoraj navedene sodbe Günaydin, okoli�čina, da je bil navedenemu tur�kemu državljanu dovoljen vstop na ozemlje države članice, da bi tam �tudiral, in da so njegova dovoljenja za prebivanje najprej vsebovala prepoved opravljanja plačane dejavnosti, temu državljanu ne preprečuje uveljavljanja določb člena 6(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80, če je pozneje zakonito pridobil zaposlitev in je delal vsaj eno leto pri istem delodajalcu.
Nor can the fact that the employment contract is of fixed duration preclude the application of Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80.
Morebitna časovna omejitev pogodbe o zaposlitvi prav tako ne more biti ovira za uporabo člena 6(1) Sklepa 1/80.
The Court has held that, if the temporary nature of the employment contract could suffice to call into question the legality of the employment of the person concerned, Member States would be able wrongly to deprive Turkish migrant workers whom they have permitted to enter their territory and who have lawfully pursued an economic activity there for an uninterrupted period of at least one year of rights on which they are entitled to rely directly under Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80 (see Birden, paragraph 64).
Sodi�če je namreč presodilo, da bi države članice lahko tur�kim delavcem migrantom, ki so jim dovolile vstop na svoje ozemlje in ki tam opravljajo zakonito gospodarsko dejavnost neprekinjeno vsaj eno leto, neupravičeno odvzele pravice, ki jih lahko uveljavljajo neposredno na podlagi navedenega člena 6(1), če bi se zaradi začasnosti delovnega razmerja lahko podvomilo o zakonitosti zaposlitve, ki jo ima zadevna oseba v skladu s predpisi (glej zgoraj navedeno sodbo Birden, točka 64).
Thus, in order to determine whether a Turkish national who has entered the territory of a Member State lawfully may, after working for a year in that territory, rely on the rights conferred by Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80, it must be determined whether he meets the objective conditions laid down in that provision, without it being necessary to take into account the reasons for which he was first granted the right to enter that territory or any temporal limitations attached to his right to work.
Da bi tako ugotovili, ali lahko tur�ki državljan, ki je zakonito vstopil na ozemlje države članice, po enem letu dela na tem ozemlju uveljavlja pravice iz člena 6(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80, je treba preveriti, ali ta državljan izpolnjuje objektivne pogoje, navedene v tej določbi, ne da bi bilo treba upo�tevati namene, za katere je bila pravica do vstopa na navedeno ozemlje prvotno podeljena, niti morebitne časovne omejitve njegove pravice do dela.
According to settled caselaw, it is not open to the national authorities to attach conditions to such rights or to restrict their application, as they would otherwise undermine the effect of Decision No 1/80 (see Günaydin, paragraphs 37 to 40, and 50; Birden, paragraph 19; Kurz, paragraph 26; Joined Cases C-317/01 and C-369/01 Abatay and Others [2003] ECR I-12301, paragraph 78; and Sedef, paragraph 34).
Na podlagi ustaljene sodne prakse nacionalni organi ne morejo pogojevati ali omejevati uveljavljanja takih pravic, saj bi v nasprotnem primeru onemogočali polni učinek navedenega sklepa (glej zgoraj navedene sodbe Günaydin, točke od 37 do 40 in 50; Birden, točka 19; Kurz, točka 26; sodbo z dne 21. oktobra 2003 v združenih zadevah Abatay in drugi, C-317/01 in C-369/01, Recueil, str. I-12301, točka 78, in zgoraj navedeno sodbo Sedef, točka 34).
Consequently, in cases such as those before the referring court, the reasons for which leave to enter was granted to the Turkish nationals concerned — to enable them to pursue studies or gain experience as an au pair — cannot in themselves prevent the persons concerned from being able to rely on Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80.
Tako v zadevah, kot so te iz postopkov v glavni stvari, nameni, za katere je bilo dovoljenje za vstop odobreno zadevnim tur�kim državljanom, to je za opravljanje dejavnosti kot „aupair“ ali �tudij, tem osebam ne morejo sami po sebi preprečiti uveljavljanja določb člena 6(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80.
Provided that the conditions referred to in paragraphs 27 to 30 of the present judgment are met and provided, in particular, that the genuineness of the work performed by the Turkish nationals in question is confirmed, the fact that they have entered as students in order to pursue a course of studies or as au pairs with the aim of mastering the language of the host Member State is immaterial.
Če so pogoji, na katere je bilo opozorjeno v točkah od 27 do 30 te sodbe, izpolnjeni in zlasti če je potrjena resničnost dela, ki so ga sporni tur�ki državljani opravljali, dejstvo, da so te osebe vstopile kot �tudenti z namenom �tudija ali kot oseba „aupair“ z namenom izbolj�anja znanja jezika države članice gostiteljice, ni pomembno.
If those Turkish nationals succeed, objectively, in fulfilling the conditions laid down in the three indents of Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80, they cannot be deprived of the rights which that provision progressively grants them on the basis of the duration of their paid employment (see, to that effect, Günaydin, paragraph 37).
Če ti tur�ki državljani izpolnijo pogoje, predvidene v treh alineah člena 6(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80, se jim ne morejo odvzeti pravice, ki jim jih ta določba postopoma podeljuje glede na trajanje njihove zaposlitve (glej v tem smislu zgoraj navedeno sodbo Günaydin, točka 37).
In those circumstances, the argument put forward by the Member States who submitted observations to the effect that a student or au pair could circumvent the legislation of the host Member State, in order progressively to obtain an unlimited right of access to the labour market of that State, cannot be accepted.
V teh okoli�činah ni mogoče sprejeti utemeljitve držav članic, ki so predstavile svoja stali�ča, v skladu s katero bi lahko �tudent ali oseba „aupair“ ob�la zakonodajo države članice gostiteljice, da bi postopoma pridobila neomejeno pravico dostopa do trga dela v tej državi.
There can be no question of that legislation being circumvented so long as the persons concerned are merely exercising a right expressly provided for in Decision No 1/80.
Do obida te zakonodaje namreč ne more priti, dokler zadevne osebe samo izvr�ujejo pravico, ki je izrecno predvidena s Sklepom �t. 1/80.
It would only be otherwise if they had fraudulently obtained a right of entry into the territory of a Member State by falsely claiming that they intended to study or act as an au pair.
Nasprotno bi veljalo le, če bi te osebe pridobile pravico do vstopa na ozemlje države članice na goljufiv način, tako da bi lažno zatrjevale namen �tudija ali opravljanja dejavnosti kot „au-pair“.