natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In my Opinion delivered on 22 November 2007 in Case C-446/05, Doulamis, which is still pending before the Court, I argued that the protection of public health could justify a prohibition on advertising, other than in a purely informative manner, by health care professionals such as providers of dental care.
V sklepnih, ki sem jih predstavil 22. novembra 2007 v zadevi Doulamis (C-446/05) – postopek, ki �e teče pred Sodi�čem –, sem trdil, da varovanje javnega zdravja lahko utemelji prepoved osebam, ki opravljajo zdravstvene poklice, kot so ponudniki zobozdravstvenih storitev, da ogla�ujejo drugače kot informativno.
40 — See, to that effect, Gourmet International Products (paragraph 39) and Case C-262/02 Commission v France [2004] ECR I-6569, paragraph 26.
39 – Glej v tem smislu zgoraj navedeno sodbo v zadevi Gourmet International Products (točka 39) in sodbo z dne 13. julija 2004 v zadevi Komisija proti Franciji (C-262/02, ZOdl., str. I-6569, točka 26).
The measures in question must, however, be appropriate for the purpose of achieving the objective sought and must not go beyond what is necessary for that purpose.
Ukrepi, ki so v ta namen sprejeti, morajo biti primerni za dosego cilja, ki ga zasledujejo, in ne smejo preseči tega, kar je nujno potrebno za to.
43 affect the physical integrity and psychological equilibrium of the recipient.
42 na njegovo psihično ravnovesje.
I also referred to the fact that the field of health-care is one in which the difference in the level of knowledge between the person providing the service and the recipient is of the highest, so that the latter is not in a position to make a genuine assessment of the quality of the service he is purchasing.
Skliceval sem se tudi na dejstvo, da področje zdravstva pomeni enega izmed tistih področij, na katerih je razlika v ravni znanja med ponudnikom in prejemnikom storitve najvi�ja, tako da uporabnik dejansko ni sposoben presoditi kakovosti storitve, ki jo je kupil.
The effect of a prohibition on broadcasting advertisements on national television networks for medical and surgical treatments of a cosmetic nature is indeed to limit the advertising of such services to the public and, consequently, to protect public health.
Učinek prepovedi ogla�evanja zdravljenja in kirur�kih posegov na področju lepotnih posegov na postajah nacionalne televizije je omejevanje ogla�evanja takih storitev pri javnosti in zato varstvo zdravja.
However, where such advertising is permitted, under certain conditions, on local television networks, the proportionality of the prohibition of all advertising on national television networks is difficult to defend.
Vendar če je tako ogla�evanje dovoljeno pod določenimi pogoji na postajah lokalne televizije, je prepoved vsakr�nega ogla�evanja na nacionalnih televizijskih postajah težko obravnavati kot sorazmerno.
I think that those considerations can be extended to cosmetic treatments, since such treatments are not limited to services which promote well-being, such as relaxing massages or waxing, but can take the form of actual surgical operations, such as the re-modelling of part of the face or the body.
Zdi se mi, da bi se to razmi�ljanje lahko preneslo na področje lepotnih posegov, ker ti niso omejeni na storitve za dobro počutje (wellness), kot so sprostitvene masaže ali epilacija, ampak imajo obliko pravih kirur�kih posegov, kot je preoblikovanje dela obraza ali telesa.
If the Italian legislature considered that the conditions imposed on such advertising on local television networks were appropriate to protect public health, I do not see why such conditions should not also apply to national television networks.
Če je namreč italijanski zakonodajalec ocenil, da pogoji, ki omejujejo ogla�evanje na postajah lokalne televizije, lahko varujejo javno zdravje, ne razumem, zakaj taki pogoji ne bi mogli veljati tudi za postaje nacionalne televizije.
There is no reason to believe that viewers should be less protected when they watch local television stations.
Domneve, da mora biti varstvo gledalcev manj�e, če gledajo postaje lokalne televizije, ni mogoče dovoliti.
43 — See, to that effect, Joined Cases C-1/90 and C-176/90 Aragonesa de Publicidad Exterior and Publivía [1991] ECR I-4151, paragraph 16.
42 – Glej v tem smislu sodbo z dne 25. julija 1991 v združenih zadevah Aragonesa de Publicidad Exterior in Publivía (C-1/90 in C-176/90, Recueil, str. I-4151, točka 16).
Even though such surgical operations may be carried out at the request of the patient, without there being any real therapeutic need, I am of opinion that, because of the risks inherent in that type of medical procedure and its possible psychological repercussions, a Member State may legitimately impose restrictions on the advertising of such procedures to the public.
Čeprav se lahko taki kirur�ki posegi opravijo na zahtevo pacienta brez prave terapevtske potrebe, menim, da lahko država članica zaradi tveganj, ki so značilna za to vrsto zdravstvenih dejavnosti in njihovih morebitnih posledic na psihični ravni, legitimno predpi�e omejitve v zvezi z ogla�evanjem, ki se lahko predvaja javnosti.
I consider therefore that a Member State is perfectly justified in prohibiting or restricting advertising intended to persuade people to alter their face or their anatomy.
Tako se mi zdi, da je popolnoma upravičeno, da država članica prepove ali omeji reklamne akcije, katerih namen je spodbuditi ljudi, da si dajo spremeniti svoj obraz ali svojo postavo.
As the Commission pointed out, the 1992 Law is thus vitiated by a definite inconsistency inasmuch as, if the intention of the Italian legislature had really been to protect viewers’ health by prohibiting television advertising for medical and surgical treatments of a cosmetic nature, it should have extended the prohibition to local television networks.
Kot je poudarila Komisija, je zakon iz leta 1992 na ta način v določeni meri nekoherenten, saj bi moral italijanski zakonodajalec, če je bil njegov namen dejansko varovati zdravje gledalcev, tako da je prepovedal televizijsko ogla�evanje zdravljenja in kirur�kih posegov na področju lepotnih posegov, raz�iriti to prepoved na postaje lokalne televizije.
printing pay slips to undertakings with more than 250 employees, who did not appear to require less protection in that regard than those who worked for undertakings with smaller work forces.
listov podjetjem z več kot 250 zaposlenimi, pri čemer ti zaposleni ne bi smeli uživati v zvezi s tem manj�ega varstva kot tisti, ki delajo za podjetja z manj zaposlenimi.
It concluded that, since the tasks in question could not be any less complex when the number of salaried staff concerned increased, the disputed provision went, in any event, beyond what was necessary to attain its objective of protection. 44
Iz tega je izpeljalo, da ker zadevne naloge ne morejo biti manj zapletene, kadar �tevilo zadevnih zaposlenih nara�ča, sporna določba v vsakem primeru presega to, kar je nujno potrebno za doseganje njenega cilja varstva. 43
In that regard, the 1992 Law contains the same contradiction as the Italian legislation at issue in Payroll and Others.
Zakon iz leta 1992 glede tega predstavlja enako protislovje kot zadevna italijanska zakonodaja v zgoraj navedeni sodbi Payroll in drugi.
The prohibition of all broadcasting of advertisements for medical and surgical treatments of a cosmetic nature on national television networks thus appears to go beyond what is necessary to protect public health.
Zdi se, da prepoved vsakr�nega ogla�evanja zdravljenja in kirur�kih posegov na področju lepotnih posegov na postajah nacionalne televizije presega to, kar je nujno potrebno za varstvo javnega zdravja.
That analysis is further confirmed by the fact that, as the Italian Government explained at the hearing, the prohibition applies only to private medical establishments.
To analizo potrjuje tudi to, da v skladu s pojasnili italijanske vlade na obravnavi ta prepoved zadeva le zasebne zdravstvene ustanove.
That legislation required undertakings with fewer than 250 employees which wished to entrust the preparation and printing of their pay slips to outside data-processing centres to have recourse only to centres established and staffed exclusively by persons registered with certain professional associations in Italy.
Ta zakonodaja je podjetjem z manj kot 250 zaposlenimi, ki so hotela zaupati obračunavanje in tisk plačilnih listov zunanjim centrom za obdelavo podatkov, nalagala, da uporabijo le centre, ki so jih ustanovile in jih sestavljajo osebe, ki so člani zbornice določenih poklicev v Italiji.
That legislation was found to be a restriction on the freedom of establishment of companies having their registered office in another Member State which intended to establish themselves in Italy in order to provide computer services for the preparation and printing of pay slips there.
Navedena zakonodaja se je obravnavala kot omejitev svobode ustanavljanja družb, ki imajo sedež v drugi državi članici in ki želijo ustanoviti družbe v Italiji, da bi tam opravljale informacijske storitve obračunavanja in tiska plačilnih listov.
Consequently, the legislation of a Member State which prohibits the broadcasting of advertisements for medical and surgical treatments of a cosmetic nature carried out in private health care establishments on national television networks, while permitting such advertisements, under certain conditions, on local television networks, is incompatible with Articles 43 EC and 49 EC, read in conjunction with Art -icles 48 EC and 55 EC.
Zato je zakonodaja države članice, ki prepoveduje ogla�evanje estetskih zdravstvenih in kirur�kih storitev, ki jih opravljajo v zasebnih zdravstvenih ustanovah, na postajah nacionalne televizije, dopu�ča pa pod določenimi pogoji tako ogla�evanje na postajah lokalne televizije, v nasprotju s členoma 43 ES in 49 ES v povezavi s členoma 48 ES in 55 ES.
The Italian Government contended that the restriction was justified by the need to protect of workers’ rights.
Italijanska vlada je trdila, da je bila ta omejitev utemeljena z varstvom pravic delavcev.
The Court pointed out that under the Italian legislation in question, the data-processing centres which were not established and staffed only by employment consultants or persons of equivalent status could offer services of calculating and
Sodi�če je v zvezi s tem poudarilo, da na podlagi zadevne italijanske zakonodaje centri za obdelavo podatkov, ki jih niso ustanovili in jih ne sestavljajo le svetovalci za delo in zaposlitev ali enake osebe, lahko ponudijo storitve obračunavanja in tiska plačilnih
44 — Payroll and Others, paragraph 37.
43 – Zgoraj navedena sodba v zadevi Payroll in drugi (točka 37).
Having regard to the foregoing considerations, I propose that the Court should answer the questions referred to it by the Giudice di Pace di Genova as follows:
Na podlagi zgornjih navedb predlagam, naj se na vpra�anja za predhodno odločanje, ki jih je predložilo Giudice di pace di Genova, odgovori tako:
The legislation of a Member State which prohibits the broadcasting of advertisements for medical and surgical treatments of a cosmetic nature carried out in private health care establishments on national television networks, while permitting such advertisements, under certain conditions, on local television networks, must be regarded as incompatible with Articles 43 EC and 49 EC, read in conjunction with Articles 48 EC and 55 EC.
Člena 43 ES in 49 ES v povezavi s členoma 48 ES in 55 ES je treba razlagati tako, da nasprotujeta zakonodaji države članice, ki prepoveduje ogla�evanje estetskih zdrav -stvenih in kirur�kih storitev, ki jih opravljajo v zasebnih zdravstvenih ustanovah, na postajah nacionalne televizije, dopu�ča pa pod določenimi pogoji tako ogla�evanje na postajah lokalne televizije.
REFERENCE for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Giudice di Pace di Genova (Italy), made by decision of 23 October 2006, received at the Court on 8 December 2006, in the proceedings
V zadevi C-500/06, katere predmet je predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe na podlagi člena 234 ES, ki ga je vložilo Giudice di pace di Genova (Italija) z odločbo z dne 23. oktobra 2006, ki je prispela na Sodi�če 8. decembra 2006, v postopku
2008 — CASE C-500/06
2008 – ZADEVA C-500/06
Advocate General: Y. Bot, Registrar: C. Strömholm, Administrator, having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 21 November 2007, after considering the observations submitted on behalf of:
Strömholm, administratorka, na podlagi pisnega postopka in obravnave z dne 21. novembra 2007, ob upo�tevanju stali�č, ki so jih predložili:
This reference for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Articles 3(1)(g) EC, 4 EC, 10 EC, 43 EC, 49 EC, 81 EC, 86 EC and 98 EC.
Predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe se nana�a na razlago členov 3(1)(g) ES, 4 ES, 10 ES, 43 ES, 49 ES, 81 ES, 86 ES in 98 ES.
The reference was made in proceedings between Corporación Dermoestética SA (‘Dermoestética’), an undertaking constituted under Spanish law operating in the cosmetic surgery and treatment sector, and the advertising agency To Me Group Advertising Media (‘To Me Group’) concerning the latter’s failure to perform a contract for the organisation of an advertising campaign on behalf of Dermoestética.
Ta predlog je bil vložen v okviru spora med Corporación Dermoestética SA (v nadaljevanju: Dermoestética), družbo �panskega prava, ki svojo dejavnost izvaja v sektorju storitev zdravljenja in estetske medicine, in ogla�evalsko agencijo To Me Group Advertising Media (v nadaljevanju: To Me Group), ker naj slednja ne bi izpolnila pogodbe o organizaciji ogla�evalske kampanje za družbo Dermoestética.
Article 3(1) of Council Directive 89/552/EEC of 3 October 1989 on the coordin -ation of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in the Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities (OJ 1989 L 298, p.
Člen 3(1) Direktive Sveta 89/522/EGS z dne 3. oktobra 1989 o usklajevanju nekaterih zakonov in drugih predpisov držav članic o opravljanju dejavnosti raz�irjanja televizijskih programov (UL L 298, str.
60) (‘Directive 89/552’), provides as follows:
60, v nadaljevanju: Direktiva 89/552), določa:
‘Member States shall remain free to require television broadcasters under their jurisdiction to comply with more detailed or stricter rules in the areas covered by this Directive.’
„Države članice smejo od izdajateljev televizijskih programov pod svojo jurisdikcijo zahtevati, da za področja, ki jih zadeva ta direktiva, določijo natančnej�a in strožja pravila.“
Article 14(1) of Directive 89/552 states as follows:
Člen 14(1) Direktive 89/552 določa:
‘Television advertising for medicinal products and medical treatment available only on prescription in the Member State within whose jurisdiction the broadcaster falls shall be prohibited.’
„Televizijsko ogla�evanje zdravil in zdravljenja, ki jih je mogoče dobiti le na recept v tisti državi članici, pod katere jurisdikcijo je izdajatelj televizijskega programa, je prepovedano.“
Article 1(1) of Law No 175 of 5 February 1992 containing provisions on advertising in the health care sector and for the prevention of the improper exercise of the medical professions (Legge n. 175, norme in materia di pubblicità sanitaria e di repressione
Člen 1(1) zakona �t. 175 o ogla�evanju zdravstvenih storitev in preprečevanju zlorab pri opravljanju zdravstvenih poklicev (legge n. 175, norme in materia di pubblicità sanitaria e di repressione dell’esercizio abusivo delle professioni sanitarie) z dne
‘Advertising relating to the exercise of the medical professions and ancillary medical professions provided for and regulated by the legislation in force shall be permitted only by means of notices affixed to the building in which the professional activity is carried out, advertisements placed in telephone directories, in general professional directories, in periodicals intended exclusively for medical practitioners, in daily newspapers and in journals in the relevant fields and on local radio and television networks.
„Ogla�evanje, ki se nana�a na opravljanje zdravstvenih poklicev in pomožnih zdravstvenih poklicev, predvidenih in urejenih z veljavno zakonodajo, je dovoljeno samo v obliki tabel, pritrjenih na zgradbi, v kateri se opravlja poklicna dejavnost, ter z oglasi, objavljenimi v telefonskih imenikih, v splo�nih poslovnih telefonskih imenikih, v strokovnih revijah, ki so namenjene izključno osebam, ki opravljajo zdravstveni poklic, v dnevnih časopisih in informativnih revijah ter na lokalnih radijskih in televizijskih postajah.
Article 4(1) of Law No 175/1992 is worded as follows:
Člen 4(1) zakona �t. 175/1992 določa:
‘Advertising relating to private health care establishments and to surgeries and outpatient facilities specialising in one or more areas of health care which are subject to statutory authorisation shall be permitted only by means of notices or signs affixed to the building in which the professional activity is carried out, advertisements placed in telephone directories, in general professional directories, in periodicals intended exclusively for medical practitioners, in daily newspapers and in journals in the relevant fields and on local radio and television networks and shall be authorised to indicate the specific medical and surgical procedures and the diagnostic and therapeutic services actually provided, on condition that those details are accompanied by the first name, surname and professional qualifications of those responsible for each specialisation.’
„Ogla�evanje, ki se nana�a na zasebne klinike ter na ordinacije in ambulante, eno- ali multidisciplinarne, je dovoljeno v obliki tabel ali znakov na zgradbi, v kateri se opravlja poklicna dejavnost, ter v obliki objave v telefonskih imenikih, splo�nih poslovnih telefonskih imenikih in v strokovnih revijah, ki so namenjene izključno pripadnikom zdravni�kih poklicev, v dnevnih časopisih in informativnih revijah ter na lokalnih radijskih in televizijskih postajah, z možnostjo natančnej�e navedbe posebnih zdravni�kih in kirur�kih dejavnosti ter diagnostičnih in terapevtskih postopkov, ki se dejansko izvajajo, pod pogojem, da te podatke spremljajo ime, priimek in poklicni nazivi odgovornih za vsako specializirano področje.“
Article 5 of Law No 175/1992 is worded as follows:
Člen 5 tega zakona določa:
The advertising referred to in Article 4 shall be authorised by the Region, after seeking the opinion of the regional federations of the professional associations or organisations, where so established, which must ensure that the practitioners in question possess valid scientific and other academic qualifications and that the notice, sign or advertisement complies with the aesthetic format laid down in Article 2(3).
Ogla�evanje iz člena 4 se dovoli za pokrajino na podlagi mnenja pokrajinskih zvez zbornic ali poklicnih združenj – če obstajajo –, ki morajo zagotavljati imetni�tvo in veljavnost akademskih in znanstvenih nazivov ter skladnost estetskih značilnosti table, znaka ali oglasa z značilnostmi, določenimi z uredbo iz člena 2(3).
The proprietors and health care directors responsible for the establishments referred to in Article 4 who place advertisements in the form permitted, but without regional authorisation, shall be subject to the disciplinary penalties of a reprimand or suspension from medical practice in accordance with Article 40 of the regulation approved by Presidential Decree No 221 of 5 April 1950.
Imetnikom nazivov in odgovornemu zdravstvenemu vodstvu ustanov iz člena 4, ki bi ogla�evali v priznanih oblikah brez pokrajinskega dovoljenja, se lahko naloži disciplinsko sankcijo ukora ali prepoved opravljanja zdravstvenega poklica na podlagi člena 40 uredbe, odobrene z dekretom predsednika republike �t. 221 z dne 5. aprila 1950.
Article 9a of Law No 175/1992 provides as follows:
Člen 9a zakona �t. 175/1992 določa:
‘Those engaged in the medical professions referred to in Article 1 and the health care establishments referred to in Article 4 may engage in the forms of advertising permitted under this law incurring expenditure thereon only to an extent equivalent to 5% of declared income for the preceding year.’
„Osebe, ki opravljajo zdravstvene poklice iz člena 1, ter zdravstvene ustanove iz člena 4 lahko ogla�ujejo v obliki, ki je dovoljena s tem zakonom in v mejah izdatkov, enakim 5 % dohodkov, izkazanih v prej�njem letu.“
18) (‘Decree No 657/1994’) governs the aesthetic format of signs, notices and advertisements advertising medical services.
657/1994) določa estetske značilnosti tabel, znakov in oglasov na področju ogla�evanja zdravstvenih storitev.
However, that provision does not contain any specific measure on television advertising.
Vendar ta predpis ne vsebuje nobene posebne določbe glede televizijskega ogla�evanja.
Article 2(1) and (2) of Law No 248/2006, in Title I thereof, entitled ‘[u]rgent measures for the development, growth and promotion of competition and competitiveness, consumer protection and the liberalisation of the productive sectors’, is worded as follows:
Člen 2(1) in (2) zakona �t. 248/2006, ki se nahaja pod naslovom I tega zakona z naslovom „Nujni ukrepi za razvoj, dvig in pospe�evanje konkurence in konkurenčnosti, za varstvo potro�nikov in za liberalizacijo proizvodnih sektorjev“, določa:
In accordance with the Community principles of free competition, freedom of movement of persons and freedom to provide services and in order to guarantee
V skladu s skupnostnim načelom svobodne konkurence ter načelom prostega pretoka oseb in storitev in z namenom uporabnikom zagotoviti možnost dejanske
2008 — CASE C-500/06 consumers a proper choice in exercising their rights and the ability to compare ser -vices offered on the market, upon the date of entry into force of this decree shall be abolished the laws and regulations which impose, with regard to the professions and those engaged in intellectual work:
2008 – ZADEVA C-500/06 izbire pri izvr�evanju njihovih pravic in možnost primerjave storitev, ponujenih na trgu, so od datuma začetka veljavnosti te uredbe razveljavljeni zakoni in drugi predpisi, ki v zvezi s samostojnimi poklici in intelektualnimi dejavnostmi določajo:
(b) a prohibition, even a partial one, on placing advertisements providing information relating to professional qualifications and specialisations, the features of the services provided as well as the price and overall cost of the services, in accordance with the principles of transparency and accuracy in advertising, the observance of which shall be guaranteed by the relevant professional association;
[…] b) prepoved, tudi delno, predvajanja informativnega oglasa o diplomah in poklicnih specializacijah, o značilnostih ponujene storitve ter cenah in splo�nih stro�kih storitev v skladu z načeli preglednosti in resničnosti sporočila, spo�tovanje katerih zagotavlja združenje;
The provisions relating to practitioners operating within the national public health service or by virtue of a contractual relationship with that service and any maximum charges fixed in advance as a general rule in the interests of consumer protection shall not be affected by this provision …’
To ne vpliva na določbe v zvezi z opravljanjem poklicev v okviru nacionalne službe za javno zdravje ali v okviru pogodbenega razmerja s to službo ter na določbe v zvezi z morebitnimi najvi�jimi tarifami, ki so bile na splo�no predhodno uvedene zaradi varstva uporabnikov […]“
The dispute in the main proceedings and the questions referred for a pre -liminary ruling
Spor o glavni stvari in vprašanja za predhodno odločanje
On 10 October 2005, Dermoestética entered into a contract with To Me Group, entrusting it with carrying out an advertising campaign for cosmetic medical treatment services to be broadcast on the national Italian television channel Canale 5.
Družba Dermoestética je 10. oktobra 2005 družbi To Me Group zaupala izvedbo ogla�evalske kampanje, ki naj bi potekala na postaji italijanske nacionalne televizije Canale 5, glede storitev estetske medicine.
The contract was concluded at the premises of Cliniche Futura Srl, the Italian subsidiary of Dermoestética.
Ta pogodba je bila sklenjena v poslovnih prostorih Cliniche Futura Srl, italijanske hčerinske družbe družbe Dermoestética.