natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Under Chapter VI of that directive, Member States may, where this is justified, refuse entry and residence on grounds of public policy, public security or public health.
V skladu s poglavjem VI navedene direktive lahko namreč države članice, kadar je to upravičeno zaradi javnega reda, javne varnosti ali javnega zdravja, zavrnejo vstop in prebivanje.
Such a refusal will be based on an individual examination of the particular case.
Vendar taka zavrnitev temelji na preučitvi posameznega obravnavanega primera.
Moreover, in accordance with Article 35 of Directive 2004/38, Member States may adopt the necessary measures to refuse, terminate or withdraw any right conferred by that directive in the case of abuse of rights or fraud, such as marriages of convenience, it being understood that any such measure must be proportionate and subject to the procedural safeguards provided for in the directive.
Poleg tega lahko države članice v skladu s členom 35 Direktive 2004/38 sprejmejo potrebne ukrepe za zavrnitev, prenehanje ali preklic katere koli pravice, dodeljene s to direktivo, v primeru zlorabe pravic ali prevare, kot so navidezne sklenitve zakonske zveze, pri čemer je treba upo�tevati, da mora biti vsak tak ukrep sorazmeren, pri čemer morajo biti spo�tovana postopkovna jamstva, določena z navedeno direktivo.
Those governments further submit that that interpretation of Directive 2004/38 would lead to unjustified reverse discrimination, in so far as nationals of the host Member State who have never exercised their right of freedom of movement would not derive rights of entry and residence from Community law for their family members who are nationals of nonmember countries.
Iste vlade trdijo tudi to, da bi navedena razlaga Direktive 2004/38 vodila do neupravičene obrnjene diskriminacije, tako da državljani države članice gostiteljice, ki niso nikoli izvr�evali svoje pravice do prostega gibanja, na podlagi prava Skupnosti ne bi pridobili pravice do vstopa in prebivanja za svoje družinske člane, državljane tretjih držav.
In that regard, it is settled caselaw that the Treaty rules governing freedom of movement for persons and the measures adopted to implement them cannot be applied to activities which have no factor linking them with any of the situations governed by Community law and which are confined in all relevant respects within a single Member State (Case C-212/06 Government of the French Community and Walloon Government [2008] ECR I-1683, paragraph 33).
Glede tega v skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso velja, da se pravila Pogodbe na področju prostega gibanja oseb in akti, sprejeti za izvr�evanje teh, ne morejo uporabiti za dejavnosti, v zvezi s katerimi niso podane navezne okoli�čine glede katerega koli položaja, ki ga predvideva pravo Skupnosti, in katerih vsa upo�tevna dejstva se ume�čajo znotraj ene same države članice (sodba z dne 1. aprila 2008 v zadevi Vlada francoske skupnosti in valonska vlada, C-212/06, ZOdl., str. I-1683, točka 33).
Any difference in treatment between those Union citizens and those who have exercised their right of freedom of movement, as regards the entry and residence of their family members, does not therefore fall within the scope of Community law.
Zato morebitna razlika v obravnavanju državljanov Unije in teh državljanov, ki izvr�ujejo svobodo gibanja, glede vstopa in prebivanja njihovih družinskih članov ne spada na področje uporabe prava Skupnosti.
Moreover, it should be recalled that all the Member States are parties to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed in Rome on 4 November 1950, which enshrines in Article 8 the right to respect for private and family life.
Poleg tega je treba opozoriti, da so vse države članice pogodbenice Evropske konvencije o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svobo�čin, podpisane v Rimu 4. novembra 1950, ki v členu 8 določa pravico do spo�tovanja zasebnega in družinskega življenja.
The answer to the first question must therefore be that Directive 2004/38 precludes legislation of a Member State which requires a national of a nonmember country who is the spouse of a Union citizen residing in that Member State but not possessing its nationality to have previously been lawfully resident in another Member State before arriving in the host Member State, in order to benefit from the provisions of that directive.
Na prvo vpra�anje je torej treba odgovoriti tako, da Direktiva 2004/38 nasprotuje ureditvi države članice, ki od državljana tretje države, zakonca državljana Unije, ki prebiva v tej državi članici, katere državljan ni, zato da bi bil upravičen do ugodnosti, ki izhajajo iz določb te direktive, zahteva, da je moral, preden se je preselil v državo gostiteljico, zakonito prebivati v drugi državi članici.
By its second question the referring court asks essentially whether the spouse of a Union citizen who has exercised his right of freedom of movement by becoming established in a Member State whose nationality he does not possess accompanies or joins that citizen within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive 2004/38, and consequently benefits from the provisions of that directive, irrespective of when and where the marriage took place and of the circumstances in which he entered the host Member State.
Predložitveno sodi�če z drugim vpra�anjem v bistvu spra�uje, ali za zakonca državljana Unije, ki je izvr�eval pravico do prostega gibanja s tem, da je začel prebivati v državi članici, katere državljan ni, ki tega državljana spremlja ali se mu pridruži v smislu člena 3(1) Direktive 2004/38, zato veljajo določbe te direktive ne glede na kraj in datum sklenitve zakonske zveze in ne glede na način, kako je vstopil v državo članico gostiteljico.
It should be noted at the outset that, as may be seen from recitals 1, 4 and 11 in the preamble, Directive 2004/38 aims to facilitate the exercise of the primary and individual right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States that is conferred directly on Union citizens by the Treaty.
Najprej je treba opozoriti, da je namen Direktive 2004/38, kot to izhaja iz njene prve, četrte in enajste uvodne izjave, olaj�anje uresničevanja temeljne in individualne pravice do prostega gibanja in prebivanja na ozemlju držav članic, ki je državljanom Unije podeljena neposredno s Pogodbo.
Moreover, as recital 5 in the preamble to Directive 2004/38 points out, the right of all Union citizens to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States should, if it is to be exercised under objective conditions of dignity, be also granted to their family members, irrespective of nationality.
Poleg tega, kot je to poudarjeno v peti uvodni izjavi Direktive 2004/38, bi morala biti pravica vseh državljanov Unije do prostega gibanja in prebivanja na ozemlju držav članic zagotovljena tudi njihovim družinskim članom, ne glede na državljanstvo, če naj bi se uresničevala v objektivnih razmerah svobode in dostojanstva.
Having regard to the context and objectives of Directive 2004/38, the provisions of that directive cannot be interpreted restrictively, and must not in any event be deprived of their effectiveness (see, to that effect, Eind, paragraph 43).
Ob upo�tevanju sobesedila in ciljev, ki jih zasleduje Direktiva 2004/38, določb te direktive ni mogoče razlagati restriktivno in se jim nikakor ne sme odvzeti njihovega učinka (glej v tem smislu zgoraj navedeno sodbo Eind, točka 43).
Article 3(1) of Directive 2004/38 provides that the directive is to apply to all Union citizens who move to or reside in a Member State other than that of which they are a national, and to their family members as defined in point 2 of Article 2 of the directive who accompany or join them.
Člen 3(1) Direktive 2004/38 določa, da se ta direktiva uporablja za vse državljane Unije, ki se preselijo ali prebivajo v državi članici, razen v tisti državi, katere državljani so, in za njihove družinske člane, kot so opredeljeni v členu 2(2) te direktive, ki jih spremljajo ali se jim pridružijo.
Articles 6 and 7 of Directive 2004/38, relating respectively to the right of residence for up to three months and the right of residence for more than three months, likewise require that the family members of a Union citizen who are not nationals of a Member State ‘accompany’ or ‘join’ him in the host Member State in order to enjoy a right of residence there.
Tudi s členoma 6 in 7 Direktive 2004/38, ki se nana�ata na pravico do prebivanja do treh mesecev in na pravico do prebivanja za več kot tri mesece, se zahteva, da družinski člani državljana Unije, ki niso državljani države članice, zato da bi v državi članici gostiteljici pridobili pravico do prebivanja, tega „spremljajo“ ali se mu „pridružijo“ v tej državi.
First, none of those provisions requires that the Union citizen must already have founded a family at the time when he moves to the host Member State in order for his family members who are nationals of nonmember countries to be able to enjoy the rights established by that directive.
Prvič, z nobeno od teh določb ni zahtevano, da bi moral državljan Unije pred selitvijo v državo članico gostiteljico že ustvariti družino, zato da bi lahko njegovi družinski člani, državljani tretjih držav, pridobili pravice, ki so zagotovljene z navedeno direktivo.
Where a Union citizen founds a family after becoming established in the host Member State, the refusal of that Member State to authorise his family members who are nationals of nonmember countries to join him there would be such as to discourage him from con -tinuing to reside there and encourage him to leave in order to be able to lead a family life in another Member State or in a nonmember country.
Kadar namreč državljan Unije ustvari družino po začetku prebivanja v državi članici gostiteljici, bi odločitev te države članice, da njegovim družinskim članom, državljanom tretjih držav, ne dovoli, da se mu v njej pridružijo, lahko tega državljana odvračala od nadaljnjega prebivanja v tej državi ter ga spodbujala k temu, da jo zapusti, zato da bi lahko zasnoval družinsko življenje v drugi državi članici ali v tretji državi.
It must therefore be held that nationals of nonmember countries who are family members of a Union citizen derive from Directive 2004/38 the right to join that Union citizen in the host Member State, whether he has become established there before or after founding a family.
Zato je treba ugotoviti, da imajo državljani tretjih držav, ki so družinski člani državljana Unije, v skladu z Direktivo 2004/38 pravico pridružiti se državljanu Unije v državi članici gostiteljici, ne glede na to, ali je državljan Unije tam začel prebivati, preden je ustvaril družino ali pozneje.
Second, it must be determined whether, where the national of a nonmember country has entered a Member State before becoming a family member of a Union citizen who resides in that Member State, he accompanies or joins that Union citizen within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive 2004/38.
Drugič, ugotoviti je treba, ali državljan tretje države ob vstopu v državo članico, preden je postal družinski član državljana Unije, ki prebiva v tej državi članici, tega državljana Unije spremlja ali se mu pridruži v smislu člena 3(1) Direktive 2004/38.
It makes no difference whether nationals of nonmember countries who are family members of a Union citizen have entered the host Member State before or after becoming family members of that Union citizen, since the refusal of the host Member State to grant them a right of residence is equally liable to discourage that Union citizen from continuing to reside in that Member State.
Ni pomembno, ali so državljani tretjih držav, družinski člani državljana Unije, v državo članico gostiteljico vstopili, preden so postali družinski člani tega državljana Unije ali pozneje, saj odločitev države članice gostiteljice, da jim ne odobri pravice do prebivanja, navedenega državljana Unije v obeh primerih odvrača od nadaljnjega prebivanja v tej državi članici.
Therefore, in the light of the necessity of not interpreting the provisions of Dir -ective 2004/38 restrictively and not depriving them of their effectiveness, the words ‘family members [of Union citizens] who accompany … them’ in Article 3(1) of that directive must be interpreted as referring both to the family members of a Union citizen who entered the host Member State with him and to those who reside with him in that Member State, without it being necessary, in the latter case, to distinguish according to whether the nationals of nonmember countries entered that
Zato je treba glede na zahtevo, da se določbe Direktive 2004/38 ne razlagajo restriktivno in da se jim ne odvzame njihov učinek, izraz „družinske člane, [državljana Unije], ki [tega] spremljajo“ iz člena 3(1) navedene direktive razlagati tako, da hkrati zajema družinske člane državljana Unije, ki so z njim vstopili v državo članico gostiteljico, in družinske člane, ki z njim prebivajo v tej državi članici, ne da bi bilo treba v drugem primeru razlikovati med tem, ali so državljani tretjih državi vstopili v nave-
Member State before or after the Union citizen or before or after becoming his family members.
METOCK IN DRUGI deno državo članico pred državljanom Unije ali za njim oziroma preden so postali njegovi družinski člani ali pozneje.
Application of Directive 2004/38 solely to the family members of a Union citizen who ‘accompany’ or ‘join’ him is thus equivalent to limiting the rights of entry and residence of family members of a Union citizen to the Member State in which that citizen resides.
Uporaba Direktive 2004/38 le za družinske člane državljana Unije, ki tega „spremljajo“ ali se mu „pridružijo“, tako pomeni omejitev pravic do vstopa in prebivanja družinskih članov državljana Unije na državo, v kateri ta prebiva.
From the time when the national of a nonmember country who is a family member of a Union citizen derives rights of entry and residence in the host Member State from Directive 2004/38, that State may restrict that right only in compliance with Articles 27 and 35 of that directive.
Od takrat, ko ima državljan tretje države, družinski član državljan Unije, na podlagi Direktive 2004/38 pravico do vstopa in do prebivanja v državi članici gostiteljici, lahko slednja to pravico omeji le ob upo�tevanju členov 27 in 35 te direktive.
Compliance with Article 27 is required in particular where the Member State wishes to penalise the national of a nonmember country for entering into and/or residing in its territory in breach of the national rules on immigration before becoming a family member of a Union citizen.
Spo�tovanje navedenega člena 27 se zahteva zlasti takrat, ko država članica želi kaznovati državljana tretje države zaradi vstopa in/ali prebivanja na njenem ozemlju s kr�itvijo nacionalnih pravil s področja priseljevanja, preden je postal družinski član državljana Unije.
However, even if the personal conduct of the person concerned does not justify the adoption of measures of public policy or public security within the meaning of Article 27 of Directive 2004/38, the Member State remains entitled to impose other penalties on him which do not interfere with freedom of movement and residence, such as a fine, provided that they are proportionate (see, to that effect, MRAX, paragraph 77 and the caselaw cited).
Vendar čeprav osebno vedenje zainteresirane stranke ne upravičuje sprejetja ukrepov zaradi javnega reda ali javne varnosti v smislu člena 27 Direktive 2004/38, država članica obdrži pravico, da zoper njega sprejme druge sankcije, ki ne posegajo v svobodo gibanja in prebivanja, kot je globa, če je sorazmerna (glej v tem smislu zgoraj navedeno sodbo MRAX, točka 77 in navedena sodna praksa).
The answer to the second question must therefore be that Article 3(1) of Dir -ective 2004/38 must be interpreted as meaning that a national of a nonmember country who is the spouse of a Union citizen residing in a Member State whose nationality he does not possess and who accompanies or joins that Union citizen benefits from the provisions of that directive, irrespective of when and where their marriage took place and of how the national of a nonmember country entered the host Member State.
Na drugo vpra�anje je torej treba odgovoriti, da je treba člen 3(1) Direktive 2004/38 razlagati tako, da za državljana tretje države, zakonca državljana Unije, ki prebiva v državi članici, katere državljan ni, ki tega državljana Unije spremlja ali se mu pridruži, veljajo določbe navedene direktive ne glede na kraj in datum sklenitve zakonske zveze in ne glede na način, kako je ta državljan vstopil v državo članico gostiteljico.
In view of the answer to the second question, there is no need to answer the third question.
Glede na odgovor na drugo vpra�anje za predhodno odločanje ni treba odgovoriti na tretje vpra�anje.
Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending
Direktiva Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta 2004/38/ES z dne 29. aprila 2004 o pravici državljanov Unije in njihovih družinskih članov do prostega gibanja in prebivanja na ozemlju držav članic, ki spreminja Uredbo (EGS)
Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC precludes legislation of a Member State which requires a national of a nonmember country who is the spouse of a Union citizen residing in that Member State but not possessing its nationality to have previously been lawfully resident in another Member State before arriving in the host Member State, in order to benefit from the provisions of that directive.
METOCK IN DRUGI št. 1612/68 in razveljavlja [d]irektive 64/221/EGS, 68/360/EGS, 72/194/EGS, 73/148/EGS, 75/34/EGS, 75/35/EGS, 90/364/EGS, 90/365/EGS in 93/96/EGS nasprotuje ureditvi države članice, ki od državljana tretje države, zakonca državljana Unije, ki prebiva v tej državi članici, katere državljan ni, zato da bi bil upravičen do ugodnosti, ki izhajajo iz določb te direktive, zahteva, da je moral, preden se je preselil v državo gostiteljico, zakonito prebivati v drugi državi članici.
Article 3(1) of Directive 2004/38 must be interpreted as meaning that a national of a nonmember country who is the spouse of a Union citizen residing in a Member State whose nationality he does not possess and who accompanies or joins that Union citizen benefits from the provisions of that directive, irrespective of when and where their marriage took place and of how the national of a nonmember country entered the host Member State.
Člen 3(1) Direktive 2004/38 je treba razlagati tako, da za državljana tretje države, zakonca državljana Unije, ki prebiva v državi članici, katere državljan ni, ki tega državljana Unije spremlja ali se mu pridruži, veljajo določbe navedene direktive, ne glede na kraj in datum sklenitve zakonske zveze ter ne glede na način, kako je ta državljan vstopil v državo članico gostiteljico.
Case C-152/08
Zadeva C-152/08
(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid)
(Predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe, ki ga je vložilo Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid)
(Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — EEC-Turkey Association Agreement — Article 37 of the Additional Protocol — Direct effect — Working conditions — Principle of nondiscrimination — Football — Limit on the number of professional players from nonmember States who may be fielded per team in national competitions)
„Člen 104(3) Poslovnika – Pridružitveni sporazum EGS-Turčija – Člen 37 Dodatnega protokola – Neposredni učinek – Pogoji za delo – Načelo prepovedi diskriminacije – Nogomet – Omejitev �tevila poklicnih igralcev, državljanov tretjih držav, ki jih mo�tvo lahko uvrsti na državno tekmovanje“
International agreements — Agreements concluded by the Community — Direct effect
Mednarodni sporazumi – Sporazumi Skupnosti – Neposredni učinek
(Additional Protocol to the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement, Art. 37; Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council, Art. 10(1))
(Dodatni protokol k Pridružitvenemu sporazumu EGS-Turčija, člen 37; Sklep Pridružitvenega sveta EGS-Turčija št. 1/80, člen 10(1))
SUMMARY — CASE C-152/08
POVZETEK – ZADEVA C-152/08
International agreements — EEC-Turkey Association Agreement — Workers — Equal treatment
Mednarodni sporazumi – Pridružitveni sporazum EGS-Turčija – Delavci – Enako obravnavanje
discriminating, on the basis of nationality, against Turkish migrant workers duly registered as belonging to their labour force as regards remuneration and other conditions of work.
tur�ke delavce migrante, ki so vključeni v zakoniti trg dela teh držav članic, in sicer glede plačila in drugih pogojev za delo.
(see paras 28, 29)
(Glej točki 28 in 29.)
The wording of Article 37 of the Additional Protocol, annexed to the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement, is essentially the same as that in the first indent of Article 38(1) of the Association Agreement with Slovakia and Article 23(1) of the Communities-Russia Partnership Agreement which lay down, in clear, precise and unconditional terms, a prohibition precluding any Member State from discriminating, on grounds of nationality, against the workers from the nonmember State concerned, vis-à-vis their own nationals, so far as their conditions of work, remuneration and dismissal are concerned.
Besedilo člena 37 Dodatnega protokola, ki je priložen k Pridružitvenemu sporazumu EGS-Turčija, se v ničemer bistveno ne razlikuje od besedila člena 38(1), prva alinea, Pridružitvenega sporazuma Skupnosti-Slova�ka in člena 23(1) Sporazuma o partnerstvu Skupnosti-Rusija, ki z jasnimi, nedvoumnimi in nepogojnimi izrazi vsaki državi članici prepovedujeta, da zaradi državljanstva delavce zadevne tretje države obravnavajo diskriminatorno v primerjavi z državljani omenjene države članice, in sicer glede pogojev za delo, plačila za opravljeno delo ali odpu�čanja.
Those provisions may therefore be relied on by individuals before the courts of the Member States.
Na te določbe se torej posamezniki lahko sklicujejo pred sodi�či držav članic.
Furthermore, Article 10(1) of Decision No 1/80, which repeats the rule laid down in Article 37 of the Additional Protocol, lays down in clear, precise and unconditional terms a prohibition precluding Member States from
Poleg tega člen 10(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80, ki povzema pravilo, določeno v členu 37 navedenega Dodatnega protokola, z jasnimi, nedvoumnimi in nepogojnimi izrazi državam članicam prepoveduje, da zaradi državljanstva diskriminirajo
The prohibition on all discrimination against Turkish workers duly registered as belonging to the labour force of the Member States with respect to remuneration and other conditions of work, as laid down in Article 37 of the Additional Protocol, annexed to the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement, and Article 10(1) of Decision No 1/80, adopted by the Association Council established by that agreement, on the development of the association, must be interpreted as precluding the application to a professional sportsman of
Prepoved vsakr�ne diskriminacije tur�kih delavcev, vključenih na zakoniti trg dela držav članic, glede plačila in drugih pogojev za delo, kot je določena v členu 37 Dodatnega protokola, ki je priložen k Sporazumu o pridružitvi EGS-Turčija, in v členu 10(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80 o razvoju pridružitve, ki ga je sprejel Pridružitveni svet, ustanovljen s tem sporazumom, je treba razlagati tako, da nasprotuje temu, da se za poklicnega �portnika s tur�kim državljanstvom, ki je zakonito zaposlen pri klubu s sedežem v državi članici,
Agreement on the European Economic Area.
Sporazuma o Evropskem gospodarskem prostoru.
(see para. 32, operative part)
(Glej točko 32 in izrek.) uporabi pravilo �portne zveze iz iste države članice, v skladu s katerim lahko klubi na tekmovanja na državni ravni uvrstijo samo omejeno �tevilo igralcev iz tretjih držav, ki niso pogodbenice
2008 — CASE C-152/08
2008 – ZADEVA C-152/08
ORDER OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber)
SKLEP SODIŠČA (peti senat) z dne 25. julija 2008 *