natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
characteristics of goods lawfully manufactured and marketed in another Member State constitutes a measure having equivalent effect, even if the measure takes the form of a restriction on a particular selling arrangement.
nacionalnega predpisa v zvezi z lastnostmi proizvodov, zakonito proizvedenih in trženih v drugi državi članici, �teti za ukrep z enakim učinkom, čeprav gre le za omejevanje določenega načina prodaje.
The United Kingdom Government points out that the marketing restrictions laid down in Paragraph 12(3)(2) of the JuSchG, which include the prohibition of mail order sales in question, do not apply to image storage media in general but only to particular ones, that is to say, those that do not meet the requirements for authorisation and classification of their content by the competent German authority.
Ta vlada poudarja, da se omejitve za trgovino, določene s čle nom 12(3), točka 2, JuSchG, in med temi zadevna prepoved prodaje po po�ti, ne nana�ajo na nosilce slike na splo�no, ampak le na določene nosilce slike, ki ne izpolnjujejo zahtev za dovolitev in razvrstitev njihovih vsebin, ki ju opravi pristojni nem�ki organ.
Those restrictions, which apply only where the content of the image storage media has been judged unsuitable for young persons or has not been checked by that authority, therefore relate to the actual characteristics of the goods in question and not only to a selling arrangement.
Te omejitve, ki se uporabljajo samo, če je pristojni organ presodil, da vsebina nosilcev slike ni primerna za mladoletnike, ali če ta ni bila preverjena v postopku navedenega organa, naj bi se torej nana�ale na dejanske lastnosti proizvodov in ne le na določen način prodaje.
In any case, even if it were considered that the case in point related only to the regulation of a selling arrangement, the second of the conditions laid down in the Keck and Mithouard judgment will not be met, since according to the United Kingdom Government image storage media produced in Germany can meet the requirements of German law as to the suitability of the content for young persons more easily than those produced elsewhere.
Ta določ- ba – čeprav bi sprejeli stali�če, da gre samo za ureditev določenega načina prodaje – naj vsekakor ne bi izpolnjevala drugega izmed pogojev, opredeljenih v sodbi Keck in Mithouard, saj naj bi po mnenju vlade Združenega kraljestva nosilci slike, proizvedeni v Nemčiji, v primerjavi s tistimi, proizvedenimi drugje, lažje izpolnjevali zahteve nem�ke ureditve v zvezi s primernostjo za mladoletnike.
By contrast, Dynamic Medien, the German Government and Ireland maintain that the prohibition of mail order sales in question relates to a selling arrangement and meets the two conditions laid down in the Keck and Mithouard judgment, with
Družba Dynamic Medien in nem�ka ter irska vlada pa nasprotno trdijo, da se zadevna prepoved prodaje po po�ti nana�a na način
The German Government acknowledges that the prohibition of mail order sales at issue has to do with particular labelling, or rather with the absence thereof.
Nem�ka vlada priznava, da je zadevna prepoved prodaje po po�ti povezana z opremljenostjo oziroma neopremljenostjo z določeno nalepko.
It argues, however, that that is no reason to treat the prohibition as an obligation to label the product and to deny that it relates to a selling arrangement.
Vendar naj to ne bi bil razlog, ki bi utemeljeval sklep, da je prepoved izenačena z obveznostjo opremljanja proizvoda z nalepko in da se ne nana�a na način prodaje.
The marketing of image storage media that have not been examined by the competent German authority and hence are not labelled is not prohibited, nor as a general rule would their sale by mail order.
Sprostitev na trg nosilcev slike, ki jih ni preizkusil pristojni nem�ki organ in ki zato niso opremljeni z njegovo nalepko, naj ne bi bila prepovedana, kot naj ne bi bila na splo�no prepovedana niti njihova prodaja po po�ti.
Only ‘unprotected’ mail order sales are prohibited, that is to say, sales where there is no guarantee that the product is ordered and received only by adults.
Prepoved naj bi veljala le za „neza�čiteno“ prodajo po po�ti, to je za prodajo na tak način, ki ne zagotavlja, da bodo proizvod naročile in prejele izključno odrasle osebe.
Since other distribution channels for the sale of such products continue to be authorised, including sale by ‘protected’ mail order, the German
Glede na to, da obstajajo drugi dovoljeni načini za trženje teh proizvodov, med katere
German authority, and to be labelled accordingly. There is not even an absolute prohibition on the marketing of image storage media that have not been examined and classified by that authority, and hence not labelled accordingly.
DYNAMIC MEDIEN sodi „za�čitena“ prodaja po po�ti, naj bi bil po mnenju nem�ke vlade dostop uvoženih nosilcev slike na nem�ki trg zagotovljen in uvozniki naj ne bi bili prisiljeni spreminjati predstavitve svojih proizvodov za namene trženja v Nemčiji.
Such media may be sold, but only to adults, within commercial premises which the public enters in the normal way or by means of ‘protected’ mail order.
Šlo naj bi torej za ureditev določenega načina prodaje, ki se uporablja tako za uvožene kot za domače proizvode in iz katere ne izhaja niti pravno niti dejansko različno obravnavanje teh proizvodov.
Government maintains that imported image storage media are guaranteed access to the German market and importers are not forced to change the presentation of their products for sale in Germany.
Posledično tudi ni določena absolutna prepoved trženja nosilcev slike, ki niso bili predmet preizkusa in razvrstitve navedenega organa in ki torej niso opremljeni z njegovo oznako.
According to the German Government, the legislation lays down rules for a selling arrangement that apply to both imported and domestically produced merchandise and lead to no inequality of treatment between those products, either in law or in fact.
Tudi te nosilce je namreč mogoče prodajati, vendar samo odraslim in samo v trgovinah, v prostore katerih kupci običajno vstopajo, ali po „za�čiteni“ po�ti.
Ireland, for its part, points out that Paragraph 12 of the JuSchG does not relate to the characteristics of the products but to the means by which they may be offered and sold, and more specifically to the persons to whom they may be offered and sold.
Irska vlada poudarja, da se člen 12 JuSchG ne nana�a na lastnosti proizvodov, ampak na načine, na katere – ali, natančneje, na to, komu – so lahko ponujeni in prodani.
It notes that the rules apply in the same way to all traders concerned, irrespective of origin, and to all merchandise of the same type, whether produced in Germany or imported.
Ob tem ugotavlja, da se navedeni predpisi uporabljajo enako za vse zadevne gospodarske subjekte ne glede na njihov izvor in za vse proizvode iste vrste ne glede na to, ali so bili proizvedeni v Nemčiji ali uvoženi.
We are dealing rather with regulations that relate to commercial activity and impose restrictions on selling arrangements, on the one hand, in terms of ‘how’ and ‘where’ the products may be sold (Paragraph 12(3)(2) of the JuSchG) and, on the other, in terms of the personality of the purchaser, that is to say, ‘to whom’ the products may be sold (Paragraph 12(1) and (3)(1) of the JuSchG), thereby extending the list of categories set out in the formula used earlier by Advocate General Tesauro of ‘how, where, when and by whom the goods may be sold’. 23
Gre za ureditev, ki se nana�a na trgovsko dejavnost in uvaja omejitve v zvezi z načini prodaje, in sicer po eni strani z vidika „kako“ in „kje“ so lahko proizvodi prodajani (člen 12(3), točka 2, JuSchG), po drugi strani pa – z dopolnitvijo znanega pravila, ki ga je nekdaj uporabljal generalni pravobranilec Tesauro: „kdo, kako, kje, kdaj lahko prodaja proizvode“ 23 – z vidika kupca, to je „komu“ so lahko proizvodi prodani (člen 12(1) in (3), točka 1, JuSchG).
It is true that the restrictions in question do not apply to all image storage media but only to certain categories (media not submitted for national examination and classification, media classified as ‘Not suitable for young persons’).
Zadevne omejitve seveda ne veljajo za vse nosilce slike, ampak le za določeni skupini teh (za nosilce slike, ki niso bili predmet preizkusa in razvrstitve v nacionalnem postopku ali ki so bili označeni kot „mladoletnikom prepovedani“).
However, the fact that
Dejstvo, da sta ti
In my opinion, the prohibition on ‘unprotected’ mail order sales of image storage media not examined by the competent German authority, like the same prohibition on the making available of such products to young persons, is not a measure relating to the characteristics of the products.
Po mojem mnenju niti prepoved „neza�čitene“ prodaje po po�ti nosilcev slike, ki jih ni preizkusil pristojni nem�ki organ, niti prepoved omogočanja dostopa do teh proizvodov mladoletnikom, ne sodita med predpise, ki se nana�ajo na zahteve v zvezi z lastnostmi proizvodov.
As I have noted above, the JuSchG does not appear to impose an obligation for image storage media, whether imported or not, to be examined and classified by the competent
Kot sem poudaril zgoraj, ni videti, da bi bilo z JuSchG določeno, da mora nosilce slike, uvožene ali ne, obvezno preizkusiti in razvrstiti pristojni
The first condition is therefore met.
Prvi pogoj je torej izpolnjen.
those categories are identified in terms of certain product characteristics does not of itself mean that the rules regulate the characteristics of the products, at least to the extent that there is no formal obligation to adapt the products for sale on German territory.
skupini opredeljeni glede na lastnosti proizvodov, samo po sebi ne upravičuje sklepa, da gre za ureditev v zvezi z lastnostmi proizvodov, vsaj ker na formalni ravni ne nalaga nobene obveznosti prilagoditve proizvodov za namene njihovega trženja na nem�kem ozemlju.
24In that sense, the present case appears to be different from those that were the subject of the Mars 25and Familiapress 26judgments, which highlighted legislation that appeared to relate to selling arrangements but ultimately laid down requirements which products had to meet in order to be marketed in the Member State concerned.
24 Zdi se, da se obravnavani primer prav v tem smislu razlikuje od tistih, ki sta bila predmet sodb v zadevi Mars 25 in v zadevi Familiapress, 26v katerih so bili obravnavani upo�tevni predpisi, ki so – čeprav je bilo videti, da se nana�ajo na način proda- je – dejansko določali pogoje, ki so jih morali izpolnjevati proizvodi, da so bili lahko trženi v zadevni državi članici.
As regards the second condition, namely equal impact on the marketing of domestic products and of those from other Member States, the scope of that condition must be assessed in the light of the Court’s pronouncements in paragraph 17 of the Keck and Mithouard judgment, from which it can be deduced in essence that the application of provisions on the arrangements for selling products from another Member State meeting the requirements laid down by that State must not ‘prevent their access to the market or … impede access any more than it impedes the access of domestic products’. 27
Glede drugega pogoja, v skladu s katerim mora imeti predpis enake učinke na trženje domačih proizvodov in na trženje proizvodov iz drugih držav članic, pa menim, da je treba njegov obseg opredeliti ob upo�tevanju ugotovitev Sodi�ča iz točke 17 sodbe Keck in Mithouard, iz katerih v bistvu izhaja, da uporaba določb v zvezi z načini prodaje za proizvode iz druge države članice, ki so v skladu s predpisi te države, zadevnim proizvodom ne sme „preprečiti dostopa do trga ali […] ga omejevati bolj, kot ga omejuje domačim proizvodom“. 27
As regards the first of those conditions, namely application without distinction to all
V zvezi z obravnavano nem�ko zakonodajo lahko ugotovimo, da se nana�a na načine prodaje in da posledično ne sodi na področje uporabe člena 28 ES, če izpolnjuje pogoja, določena v sodbi Keck in Mithouard, ki sem ju navedel v točki 39 zgoraj.
In its decision making the reference, the Landgericht Koblenz expresses uncertainty as to whether the reasoning that led
Landgericht Koblenz se v predložitveni odločbi spra�uje o tem, ali je treba v
24 — In Case C-390/99 Canal Satélite Digital [2002] ECR I-607, paragraph 30, the Court observed that ‘the need in certain cases to adapt the products in question to the rules in force in the Member State in which they are marketed prevents the abovementioned requirements from being treated as selling arrangements within the meaning of … Keck and Mithouard …’.
24 – V sodbi z dne 22. januarja 2002 v zadevi Canal Satélite Digital (C-390/99, Recueil, str. I-607, točka 30) je Sodi�če navedlo, da „potreba po morebitni prilagoditvi zadevnih proizvodov zakonodaji, veljavni v državi članici trženja, izključuje možnost […], da bi lahko �lo za načine prodaje v smislu sodbe […] Keck in Mithouard“.
25 — Case C-470/93 [1995] ECR I-1923, relating to a prohibition on marketing products, the packaging of which bears certain advertising markings deemed to be misleading.
25 – Sodba z dne 6. julija 1995, (C-470/93, Recueil, str. I-1923) v zvezi s prepovedjo trženja proizvodov, na embalaži katerih so domnevno zavajajoče reklamne navedbe.
26 — Case C-368/95 [1997] ECR I-3689, relating to a prohibition on the sale of periodicals containing games for prizes.
26 – Sodba z dne 26. junija 1997 (C-368/95, Recueil, str. I-3689) v zvezi s prepovedjo prodaje periodičnega tiska, ki vsebuje nagradne igre.
DYNAMIC MEDIEN the Court to take the view, in Deutscher Apothekerverband, 28that a prohibition on as a result of the prohibition, pharmacies in Germany cannot use the extra or alternative method of gaining access to the German market consisting of end consumers of medicinal products, they are still able to sell the products in their dispensaries.
DYNAMIC MEDIEN sedežem zunaj Nemčije kot tistim, ki imajo sedež na nem�kem ozemlju. Čeprav bi težko oporekali ugotovitvi, da tudi tem ta ukrep preprečuje uporabiti dodatno ali alternativno sredstvo za dostop do nem�kega trga končnih potro�nikov zdravil, imajo te kljub temu �e naprej možnost, da zdravila prodajajo v svojih lekarnah.
However, for pharmacies not established in Germany, the internet provides a more significant way to gain direct access to the German market.
Za lekarne, ki nimajo sedeža na nem�kem ozemlju, pa bi bila internetna prodaja pomembnej�e sredstvo za neposredno doseganje tega trga.
A prohibition which has a greater impact on pharmacies established outside German territory could impede access to the market for products from other Member States more than it impedes access for domestic products.’ mail order sales of medicines via the internet such as that under consideration in that case did not meet the second of the conditions set in the Keck and Mithouard judgment is relevant in the present case.
obravnavanem primeru upo�tevati stali�ča, ki jih je Sodi�če sprejelo v sodbi Deutscher Apothekerverband, 28in sicer da prepoved internetne prodaje zdravil, kakr�na je bila obravnavana v zadevnem primeru, ne izpolnjuje drugega izmed pogojev iz sodbe Keck in Mithouard.
The Landgericht Koblenz points out that the difference between the present case and the situation in Deutscher Apothekerverband lies in the fact that Avides ‘first imports the goods from Great Britain into Germany and then sells them by mail order, whereas in [that] decision the importation took place by mail order, in other words, the undertaking concerned was established in another EU State’.
Predložitveno sodi�če poudarja, da je razlika med obravnavanim primerom in primerom iz zadeve Deutscher Apothekerverband ta, da družba Avides „blago najprej uvozi iz Združenega kraljestva v Nemčijo, nato pa ga prodaja po po�ti, medtem ko je bil v primeru [obravnavanem v navedeni sodbi] uvoz izpeljan ob prodaji na daljavo: povedano drugače, zadevno podjetje je imelo sedež v drugi državi članici Evropske unije“.
At a general level, such an approach could also be valid with regard to rules such as the prohibition on mail order sales under Paragraph 12(3)(2) of the JuSchG and could lead to the prohibition being classified as a measure having an effect equivalent to a quantitative restriction within the meaning of Article 28 EC.
Na splo�ni ravni bi bil lahko tak pristop upo�tevan tudi v zvezi z določbo iz čle na 12(3), točka 2, JuSchG, s katero je določena prepoved prodaje po po�ti, kar bi lahko pripeljalo do tega, da bi to prepoved kvalificirali za ukrep z enakim učinkom, kot ga imajo količinske omejitve v smislu člena 28 ES.
‘A prohibition such as that at issue in the main proceedings is more of an obstacle to pharmacies outside Germany than to those within it.
„[U]krep, podoben tistemu, ki je predmet spora o glavni stvari, bolj �kodi lekarnam s
28 — Paragraphs 73 to 75.29 — Ibid.
28 – Zgoraj navedena sodba, točke od 73 do 75.29 – Prav tam.
It is true that, as pointed out by the German Government, the prohibition in question is not absolute but relates only to ‘unprotected’ mail order sales.
Res je sicer, kot poudarja nem�ka vlada, da ta prepoved ni absolutna, ampak se nana�a le na „neza�čiteno“ prodajo po po�ti.
However, as that government explains, recourse to ‘protected’ mail order sales means that suppliers have to use systems for verifying the identity and majority of the person placing the order via the internet or by post and
Vendar, kot je pojasnila ista vlada, se morajo dobavitelji, če želijo uporabiti „za�čiteno“ prodajo po po�ti, opremiti s sistemi za preverjanje identitete in polnoletnosti osebe, ki naroči blago po internetu ali po po�ti, in uvesti postopke, ki zagotavljajo, da bo blago izro -čeno polnoletnemu kupcu. Nem�ka vlada
In its written reply to a question put by the Court, the German Government described the nature of such verification systems used in electronic trading 30and has mentioned, with regard to the delivery stage, registered delivery into the hands of the adult customer.
je v pisnem odgovoru na vpra�anje Sodi�ča opisala lastnosti navedenih sistemov preverjanja, uporabljenih v elektronski trgovini, 30 in glede dobave blaga navedla, da mora biti izvedena s priporočeno po�iljko in osebno vročitvijo polnoletnemu kupcu.
The German Government also indicated that, for mail order to be considered ‘protected’ where orders are placed via the internet, the supplier must use a verification system that the Kommission für Jugendmedienschutz (Commission for the Protection of Young Persons in the Media Sector) has previously deemed to be appropriate.
Nem�ka vlada je pojasnila �e, da sodi med pogoje „za�čitene“ prodaje po po�ti �e obveznost dobavitelja, da pri internetnem naročilu uporabi sistem preverjanja, ki ga je predhodno odobrila Kommission für Jugendmedienschutz (nem�ka komisija za varstvo mladoletnikov na področju medijev).
At the hearing, the German Government acknowledged that the use of such forms of ‘protected’ mail order by suppliers of image storage media entailed additional costs that would not be incurred in the case of ‘unprotected’ mail order sales.
Ta vlada je na obravnavi priznala, da imajo dobavitelji nosilcev slike zaradi takih oblik „za�čitene“ prodaje po po�ti dodatne stro�ke, ki jim ne bi nastali, če bi uporabljali „neza�čiteno“ prodajo po po�ti.
Nevertheless, although such considerations may lead one to conclude that the prohibition in question does not meet the second of the conditions laid down in the Keck and Mithouard judgment in that it is applicable to traders established in Member States other than Germany, 31it must be borne in mind that in the present case the trader involved, Avides, is established in Germany and that the mail order sales are not effected from another Member State to Germany but entirely within German territory, into which the goods have previously been imported.
Na podlagi teh ugotovitev bi torej lahko sklepali, da zadevna prepoved ne izpolnjuje drugega izmed pogojev iz sodbe Keck in Mithouard, če se uporablja za gospodarske subjekte s sedežem v drugih državah članicah in ne v Nemčiji, 31 vendar je treba ob tem upo�tevati �e, da ima v obravnavanem primeru gospodarski subjekt sedež v Nemčiji in da ne gre za prodajo po po�ti v drugi državi članici, ampak v celoti znotraj ozemlja Nemčije, kamor je blago uvoženo.
Hence it cannot be held, on the basis of the approach followed by the Court in Deutscher Apothekerverband referred to in point 55 above, that the prohibition in question impedes access to the German market for the products that Avides imports from the United Kingdom to a greater extent than for domestic products.
Zato na podlagi razlage, ki jo je podalo Sodi�če v sodbi Deutscher Apothekerverband in ki sem jo navedel v točki 55 zgoraj, ni mogoče trditi, da zadevna prepoved bolj ovira dostop do nem�kega trga proizvodom, ki jih družba Avides uvaža iz Združenega kraljestva, kot domačim proizvodom.
It is therefore clear that a ban on mail order sales such as that imposed by Paragraph 12(3)(2) of the JuSchG ultimately limits (to ‘protected’ mail order) and imposes additional costs on the permitted forms of a channel for distributing image storage media — namely mail order sales via the internet — which, as stated in point 55 above, is generally more important for
Iz tega torej izhaja, da prepoved prodaje po po�ti, kakr�na je tista, določena s čle -nom 12(3), točka 2, JuSchG, omejuje (dopu�čena je le „za�čitena“ prodaja po po�ti) in nalaga dodatne obveznosti v zvezi z uporabo ene izmed dovoljenih poti za distribucijo nosilcev slike, to je internetno prodajo, ki
31 — Albeit, of course, for the purpose of verifying that the prohibition on mail order sales under Paragraph 12(3)(2) of the JuSchG is compatible with Community law in that it is applicable to traders established in Member States other than Germany, regard must be had to Articles 28 EC and 30 EC, and not to the rules under Article 3 of Directive 2000/31, referred to in points 27 to 32 above.
30 – V bistvu gre za sisteme varstva zaključenih skupin uporabnikov, že uporabljene za onemogočanje neposrednega dostopa – na primer s prenosom z interneta na trdi disk – medijskih vsebin, namenjenih izključno odraslim.
30 — In essence, these are systems for protecting closed groups of users, which are already used for the direct enjoyment of media content reserved for adults, for example by means of remote downloading.
31 – Seveda pod pogojem, da je treba preizkus, ali je prepoved prodaje po po�ti iz člena 12(3), točka 2, JuSchG, če se uporablja za gospodarske subjekte s sedežem v drugih državah članicah in ne v Nemčiji, skladna s pravom Skupnosti, opraviti glede na člena 28 ES in 30 ES in ne glede na ureditev, določeno v členu 3 Direktive 2000/31 in navedeno v točkah od 27 do 32 teh sklepnih predlogov.
DYNAMIC MEDIEN tions could obstruct the purchase of image storage media by the very persons who represent the main and direct purchasers.
DYNAMIC MEDIEN nosilcev slike prav tistim, ki so njihovi glavni in neposredni kupci.
It is certainly possible to imagine other factors that would lead the Court to hold that, to the extent to which they also apply to traders established in Germany importing image storage media from other Member States, the German rules in question regarding selling arrangements constitute a measure having an equivalent effect since they do not meet the second condition laid down in Keck and Mithouard.
Seveda je mogoče domnevati, da obstajajo drugi dejavniki, ki bi utemeljevali sklepanje, da je zadevna nem�ka zakonodaja, ki se nana�a na načine prodaje, tudi ker se uporablja za gospodarske subjekte s sedežem v Nemčiji, ki uvažajo nosilce slike iz drugih držav članic, ukrep z enakim učinkom, ker ne izpolnjuje drugega pogoja iz sodbe Keck in Mithouard.