natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the White Paper of 12 September 2001 on European transport policy (COM(2001) 370 final), the Commission proposed that the European Union set itself the goal of halving the number of road deaths by 2010.
Komisija je glede tega v beli knjigi z dne 12. septembra 2001 o prometni politiki (KOM[2001] 370 konč.) predlagala, naj si Evropska unija zastavi za cilj zmanj�ati �tevilo mrtvih za polovico do leta 2010.
All the Member States are faced with the same road safety problems: excessive speed, alcohol consumption, failure to wear safety belts, inadequate impact protection, acci- dent black spots, failure to observe driving and rest times in the road transport industry, and poor visibility.
Vse države članice se soočajo z enakimi problemi varnosti cestnega prometa, namreč s prekoračitvami hitrosti vožnje, uživanjem alkohola, neuporabo varnostnega pasu, nezadostnim zaslonom za primer trka, nevarnimi odseki, neupo�tevanjem časa vožnje in časa počitka pri opravljanju dejavnosti cestnih prevozov in slabo vidljivostjo.
Article 71(1)(c) EC contains a specific legal basis for the adoption of traffic safety measures.
Člen 71(1)(c) ES vsebuje posebno pooblastilo, ki je podlaga za sprejetje ukrepov na področju varnosti cestnega prometa.
They are closely connected with the alignment of technical standards and thus with the harmonisation of competitive conditions.
Ti so tesno povezani s pravnim izenačevanjem tehničnih pravil in s tem z uskladitvijo pogojev konkurence.
The Community has adopted a considerable number of provisions in this field.
Skupnost je sprejela obilico tovrstnih predpisov.
They concern inter alia vehicle registration, typeapprovals for steering devices, brake systems, engine performance and conditions for vehicles transporting hazardous goods.
Med drugim se nana�ajo na registracijo motornih vozil, homologacijo krmilnih naprav, zavorne sisteme, izhodno moč ali kakovost motornih vozil za prevoz nevarnih snovi.
They also relate to emission values for polluting substances, calculations of fuel consumption and CO2 discharges, permissible noise levels, and dimensions and weights for certain vehicles.
Dalje gre za mejne vrednosti, ki se nana�ajo na �kodljive snovi, izračunavanje porabe goriva in emisije CO2, dopustno raven hrupa ali velikost in težo določenih vozil.
This is a focal point for legal harmonisation at Community level.
Na tem področju je poudarek pravnega izenačevanja na ravni Skupnosti.
In a broader sense the legal framework for a European driving licence falls under road safety.
V �ir�em smislu je s prometno varnostjo povezan pravni okvir za evropsko vozni�ko dovoljenje.
There are Community-wide rules governing the compulsory use of safety belts in certain vehicles and measures inspired by environmental policy, such as the compulsory sale of unleaded petrol.
Na ravni Skupnosti so dalje urejeni obvezna uporaba varnostnih pasov v določenih motornih vozilih in ukrepi, katerih podlaga so okoljevarstveni cilji, kot je obvezna prodaja neosvinčenega bencina.
The Europe-wide regulation of summer time was also introduced on grounds of transport policy (see Oppermann, T., Europarecht, 3rd edition, § 22, Section 21, p. 470).
Tudi ureditev poletnega časa po vsej Evropi je bila uvedena zaradi prometne politike (glede tega glej Oppermann, T., Europarecht, 3. izdaja, člen 22, točka 21, str. 470).
37 — Rutili (cited in footnote 27), paragraph 28; Bouchereau (cited in footnote 27), paragraph 35; Case C-54/99 Scientology [2000] ECR I-1335, paragraph 17; Case C-355/98 Commission v Belgium [2000] ECR I-1221, paragraph 28; Case C-348/96 Calfa [1999] ECR I-11, paragraphs 21 and 23; Orfanopoulos and Oliveri (cited in footnote 35), paragraph 66; Case C-503/03 Commission v Spain (cited in footnote 35), paragraph 46; Commission v Germany (cited in footnote 27), paragraph 35; and Case C-50/06 Commission v Netherlands (cited in footnote 27), paragraph 43.
39 – Prim. med drugim v opombi 14 navedeno sodbo Komisija proti Finski (točka 40) in sodbe z dne 5. oktobra 1994 v zadevi Van Schaik (C-55/93, Recueil, str. I-4837, točka 19); z dne 12. oktobra 2000 v zadevi Snellers (C-314/98, Recueil, str.
39 — See, inter alia, Commission v Finland (cited in footnote 14), paragraph 40; Case C-55/93 Van Schaik [1994] ECR I-4837, paragraph 19; Case C-314/98 Snellers [2000] ECR I-8633, paragraph 55; and Case C-451/99 Cura Anlagen [2002] ECR I-3193, paragraph 59.
I-8633, točka 55) in z dne 21. marca 2002 v zadevi Cura Anlagen (C-451/99, Recueil, str. I-3193, točka 59).
See the Opinion of Advocate General Léger of 5 October 2006 in Case C-110/05 Commission v Italy, currently pending before the Court, point 44.
Prim. sklepne predloge generalnega pravobranilca Légerja z dne 5. oktobra 2006 v zadevi Komisija proti Italiji, o kateri postopek �e poteka (C-110/05, točka 44).
Article 30 EC and Article 13 of the EEA Agreement also include protection of the health and life of humans.
zuma EGP, spada tudi varovanje zdravja in življenja ljudi.
The protection of those interests lies at the heart of the Community-wide prevention of road accidents.
Gre za pravni dobrini, varstvu katerih je namenjena osrednja pozornost v zvezi s preprečevanjem prometnih nesreč v vsej Skupnosti.
40Since the concept of road safety covers, amongst other things, the protection of both the health and the life of humans in connection with road traffic conditions, what follows will be based on the premiss of a special relationship between those interests with the result that the legal analysis to be undertaken must be based primarily on the justification of road safety.
40 Ker pojem varnost cestnega prometa med drugim zajema tako varovanje zdravja kot tudi življenja ljudi v povezavi z danostmi cestnega prometa, je v nadaljevanju treba izhajati iz posebnega razmerja med tema pravnima dobrinama, tako da je treba pravno presojo izvesti na podlagi utemeljitvenega razloga varnosti cestnega prometa.
On the one hand, it cannot be denied that, in the absence of harmonising rules, the Member States are free to decide, within the limits imposed by the Treaty, on their intended level of protection of the health and life of humans.
Na eni strani ni sporno, da so države članice glede na to, da ni uskladitvenih predpisov, pristojne, da znotraj omejitev, določenih s Pogodbo, presodijo, kak�no raven varovanja zdravja in življenja ljudi želijo zagotavljati.
42 It also cannot be denied that the effective protection of highly important legal interests, such as the right to health and the right to life or road safety, in particular, requires a wide range of preventive measures to be taken by the national authorities, with the result that the Member States have in principle complete discretion to determine how strict the checks to be carried out are to be. 43
42Niti ni sporno, da učinkovito varstvo pravnih in nadvse pomembnih dobrin, kot so pravkar navedene „zdravje“ in „življenje“ ali zlasti „varnost cestnega prometa“, predpostavlja raznovrstne preventivne varnostne ukrepe nacionalnih organov, tako da dejansko države članice po svoji presoji odločajo, kako strog naj bo nadzor, ki ga bo treba izvajati. 43
Nevertheless, my conclusion is that the contested prohibition in Article 2(1)
41 V tem pogledu je prepoved pritrjevanja barvnih folij na stekla motornih vozil zagotovo primerna za dosego cilja varnosti cestnega prometa.
On the other hand, this does not alter the fact that an exception to the principle
Na drugi strani ničesar ne spremeni dejstvo, da je mogoče izjemo od načela
40 — See also the Opinion of Advocate General Léger in Case C-110/05 Commission v Italy (cited in footnote 39), point 46.
40 – Glej tudi zgoraj navedene sklepne predloge generalnega pravobranilca Légerja z dne 5. oktobra 2006 v zadevi Komisija proti Italiji (C-110/05, točka 46).
42 — Case C-293/94 Brandsma [1996] ECR I-3159, paragraph 11; Case C-432/03 Commission v Portugal (cited in footnote 25), paragraph 44; and Case C-254/05 Commission v Belgium (cited in footnote 15), paragraph 35.
42 – Sodba z dne 27. junija 1996 v zadevi Brandsma (C-293/94, Recueil, str. I-3159, točka 11); v opombi 25 navedena sodba Komisija proti Portugalski (točka 44) in v opombi 15 navedena sodba Komisija proti Belgiji (točka 35).
41 — Compulsory use of safety belts is regulated throughout the Community by Council Directive 91/671/EEC of 16 December 1991 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to compulsory use of safety belts in vehicles of less than 3.5 tonnes (OJ 1991 L 373, p.
41 – Na ravni Skupnosti je obvezna uporaba varnostnih pasov urejena z Direktivo Sveta 91/671/EGS z dne 16. decembra 1991 o približevanju zakonodaje držav članic o obvezni uporabi varnostnih pasov v vozilih z manj kakor 3,5 tone (UL L 373, str.
26), as amended by Directive 2003/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 April 2003 (OJ 2003 L 115, p. 63).
26), spremenjena z Direktivo 2003/20/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 8. aprila 2003 (UL L 115, str. 63).
of the free movement of goods may be justified under Article 30 EC or for overriding reasons relating to the public interest only if the national authorities show that the exception is necessary in order to attain one or more objectives mentioned in that article and that it is in conformity with the principle of proportionality.
prostega pretoka blaga utemeljiti s členom 30 ES ali z nujnimi razlogi v javnem interesu le, če nacionalni organi izkažejo, da je navedena izjema nujna za dosego enega ali več tamkaj navedenih ciljev in da je v skladu z načelom sorazmernosti.
44I also believe that it is essential to point out in this connection that the reasons which may be invoked by a Member State by way of justification must be accompanied by appropriate evidence or by an analysis of the appropriateness and proportionality of the restrictive measure adopted by that State, and precise evidence enabling its arguments to be substantiated. 45
44Poleg tega menim, da je v zvezi s tem nujno opozoriti na to, da mora država članica poleg utemeljitvenih razlogov, ki jih lahko uveljavlja, predložiti primerne dokaze ali raziskavo o primernosti in sorazmernosti omejevalnega ukrepa, ki ga je sprejela, ter natančne podatke v utemeljitev svojih navedb. 45
The Portuguese Republic has failed to provide the Court with the appropriate
Portugalska republika Sodi�ču ni dala na voljo primernih podatkov – na primer �tudij, poročil ali statistik –, na podlagi katerih bi
The proof of such a threat to road safety would have been all the more necessary because the Portuguese Republic does not prohibit the use of tinted windows even though such windows, which are comparable to the contested tinted film, do not guarantee complete visibility.
Dokaz tovrstne nevarnosti za varnost cestnega prometa bi bil toliko bolj potreben, ker Portugalska republika uporabe obarvanih stekel ne prepoveduje, čeprav ta – sicer primerljiva s spornimi barvnimi folija - mi – ne zagotavljajo stoodstotne vidljivosti.
The different treatment of essentially identical situations requires a high level of justification for a restriction on the free movement of goods.
Različno obravnavanje v bistvu enakega dejanskega stanja zahteva zelo tehtno utemeljitev omejitve prostega pretoka blaga.
As a result, the Portuguese Republic has not complied with its duty to make out a case or to produce evidence either during the prelitigation procedure or during the proceedings before the Court of Justice.
Zato Portugalska republika niti med predhodnim postopkom niti med postopkom pred Sodi�čem ni izpolnila svoje dolžnosti predložiti dejstva in dokaze.
According to Kingreen, T., in Calliess and Ruffert (eds), Kommentar zu EUV/EGV, 3rd edition, 2007, Articles 28 EC to 30 EC, Section 199, in protecting the health and life of humans the Member States may not rely only on assumptions and assertions.
Po mnenju Kingreena, T., v Calliess/Ruffert (urednik), Kommentar zu EUV/EGV, 3. izdaja, 2007, členi od 28 do 30 ES, točka 199, se države članice pri varovanju človekovega zdravja in življenja ne smejo opreti samo na domneve in trditve.
The extent of the duty to substantiate will depend, in accordance with the principle of proportionality, in particular on the intensity of the threat in the individual case and the likelihood of that threat materialising.
Obseg dolžnosti utemeljitve kot izraz načela sorazmernosti bo odvisen zlasti od intenzivnosti nevarnosti, ki bo grozila v posameznem primeru, in verjetnosti, da se uresniči.
It is true that it is not necessary for damage already to have occurred, because effective protection requires preventive measures in many cases.
Sicer ni nujno potrebno, da že nastane �koda, ker učinkovito varstvo predpostavlja raznovrstne preventivne ukrepe.
However, the obligation arises as a rule, in cases where the necessity of a measure is at issue, to prove comprehensibly the need for action with reference to scientific knowledge or European and/or international standards.
Vendar obstaja obveznost, ki jo je treba redno preverjati glede na potrebo, da se nujnost omejitev prepričljivo dokaže na podlagi znanstvenih spoznanj ali evropskih/mednarodnih standardov.
That point apart, a total prohibition of the film in question would appear to be a disproportionate measure to guarantee road safety since, as the Commission rightly argues, the Member States may in any event require on the basis of Directive 2001/92 that the minimum light transmission of
Tudi če tega ne upo�tevamo, se absolutna prepoved spornih folij izkaže kot nesorazmeren ukrep za zagotavljanje varnosti cestnega prometa, kajti države članice smejo – kot je pravilno pojasnila Komisija – na podlagi Direktive 2001/92 v vsakem primeru zahtevati, da najnižja prepustnost svetlobe zasteklitve stebrička „B“ zna�a 70 % in za vetrobransko steklo najmanj 75 %. Pravilnik
Regulation No 43 is effective within the Community legal order and thus also in the legal orders of all the Member States.
43 namreč pravno učinkuje v pravnem redu Skupnosti in s tem tudi v pravnih redih držav članic.
First of all, Regulation No 43 was incorporated into Community law with effect from 24 March 1998 by Council Decision 97/836/EC of 27 November 1997 with a view to accession by the European Community to the Revised Economic Commission for Europe Agreement of 20 March 1958.
Na eni strani je bil pravilnik �t. 43 s Sklepom Sveta 97/836/ES z dne 27. novembra 1997 v pričakovanju pristopa [o pristopu] Evropske skupnosti k revidiranemu Sporazumu ECE z dne 20. marca 1958 46 z učinkom od 24. marca 1998 prevzet v pravo Skupnosti.
46Under Article 300(7) EC, the Agreement and Regulation No 43 are binding on the Community and on its Member States.
V skladu s členom 300(7) ES sta Sporazum in pravilnik �t. 43 zavezujoča tako za Skupnost kot za države članice.
Furthermore, Directive 2001/92 refers in its third recital and in Annex IIB to Regulation No 43, which lays down various technical specifications governing the properties and the fitting of glazing, including the abovementioned minimum light transmission values, with the result that those technical specifications must be taken into due consideration in the context of a typeapproval test under Directive 92/22.
Poleg tega Direktiva 2001/92 v tretji uvodni izjavi in Prilogi II B napotuje na pravilnik �t. 43, v katerem so določene različne tehnične specifikacije glede kakovosti in vgradnje stekel, med drugim tudi pravkar navedene najnižje vrednosti prepustnosti svetlobe, tako da je treba te tehnične specifikacije ustrezno upo�tevati v okviru homologacijskega preskusa na podlagi Direktive 92/22.
470 and § 18, Section 43, p. 388; and Langner, ‘Technische Vorschriften und Normen’, in Dauses (ed.), Handbuch des EU-Wirtschaftsrechts, C. VI., paragraphs 1, 4 and 118).
470, in člen 18, točka 43, str. 388; Langner, „Technische Vorschriften und Normen“, v: Dauses (ur.), Handbuch des EU-Wirtschaftsrechts, C.
46 — Council Decision 97/836/EC of 27 November 1997 with a view to accession by the European Community to the Agreement of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe concerning the adoption of uniform technical prescriptions for wheeled vehicles, equipment and parts which can be fitted to and/or be used on wheeled vehicles and the conditions for reciprocal recognition of approvals granted on the basis of these prescriptions (the ‘Revised 1958 Agreement’) (OJ 1997 L 346, p. 78).
46 – Sklep Sveta 97/836/ES z dne 27. novembra 1997 v pričakovanju pristopa [o pristopu] Evropske skupnosti k Sporazumu Gospodarske komisije Združenih narodov za Evropo o sprejetju enotnih tehničnih predpisov za cestna vozila, opremo in dele, ki se lahko vgradijo v cestna vozila in/ali uporabijo na njih, in o pogojih za vzajemno priznanje homologacij, dodeljenih na podlagi teh predpisov („Revidiran sporazum iz leta 1958“) (UL L 346, str. 78).
According to Sündermann, B., loc. cit. (footnote 5), pp. 51 and 54, under Article 300(7) EC in conjunction with Article 1(4) (in the case of new regulations) and Article 1(7) (in the case of existing regulations in the second amended version of the Revised 1958 Agreement), no additional legal act is required in order to incorporate such regulations or amendments to regulations into national law.
51 in 54, v skladu s členom 300(7) ES v povezavi s členom 1(4) (glede novih predpisov) in členom 1(7) (glede obstoječih predpisov Revizije 2 Sporazuma iz leta 1958) ni potreben dodaten pravni akt, s katerim bi se ti predpisi oziroma njihove spremembe prenesle v notranje pravo.
The Agreement and Regulation No 43 are therefore binding on both the Community and its Member States.
Tako sta Sporazum in ECE pravilnik �t. 43 zavezujoča tako za Skupnost kot za njene države članice.
It is clear that the Portuguese Government does not seriously deny this when it states in its rejoinder that other possible solutions are not inconceivable, possibly including measures that do not have binding legal effect.
Portugalska vlada tega resno ne zanika, ko v dupliki navaja, da bi bilo mogoče uvesti drugačne re�itve, eventualno take, ki ne bi bile pravne.
Nevertheless, it has failed to substantiate its argument that such alternative measures are not appropriate for maintaining traffic safety.
Prav tako ni dokazala svoje trditve, da alternativni ukrepi naj ne bi bili primerni za ohranitev varnosti cestnega prometa.
The national provision laid down in Article 2(1) of Decree-Law No 40/2003 cannot be justified on grounds connected with road safety because it infringes the principle of proportionality.
Nacionalne določbe iz člena 2(1) DL 40/2003 zaradi kr�itve načela sorazmernosti ni mogoče utemeljiti z razlogi, povezanimi z varnostjo cestnega prometa.
That provision must therefore be declared incompatible with Article 28 EC and Article 11 of the EEA Agreement.
To določbo je zato treba razglasiti za nezdružljivo s členom 28 ES in členom 11 Sporazuma EGP.
Under Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs.
V skladu s členom 69(2) Poslovnika se neuspeli stranki naloži plačilo stro�kov, če so bili ti prigla�eni.
Since the Portuguese Republic has failed in its submissions, it must be ordered to pay the costs.
Ker Portugalska republika s predlogi ni uspela, se ji naloži plačilo stro�kov.
In the light of the foregoing, I propose that the Court should:
Glede na zgornje ugotovitve Sodi�ču predlagam, naj
(1) declare that, by prohibiting pursuant to Article 2(1) of Decree-Law No 40/2003 of 11 March 2003 the affixing of tinted film to the windows of motor vehicles, the
1. ugotovi, da Portugalska Republika s tem, da je s členom 2(1) DL 40/2003 z dne 11. marca 2003 prepovedala pritrjevanje barvnih folij na stekla motornih vozil, ni
Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 28 EC and 30 EC and Articles 11 and 13 of the Agreement of 2 May 1992 on the European Economic Area, as that prohibition hinders the marketing in Portugal of tinted film lawfully manufactured and/or marketed in another Member State or in a State signatory to the EEA Agreement;
KOMISIJA PROTI PORTUGALSKI izpolnila obveznosti iz členov 28 ES in 30 ES ter členov 11 in 13 Sporazuma EGP, ker ta prepoved preprečuje, da bi se na Portugalskem prodajale barvne folije, ki so se v drugi državi članici ali državi podpisnici Sporazuma EGP proizvedle in/ali prodajale v skladu s predpisi;
JUDGMENT OF 10. 4.
SODBA Z DNE 10. 4.
2008 — CASE C-265/06
2008 – ZADEVA C-265/06
10 April 2008 *
SODBA SODIŠČA (tretji senat) z dne 10. aprila 2008 *
In Case C-265/06,
V zadevi C-265/06, zaradi tožbe zaradi neizpolnitve obveznosti na podlagi člena 226 ES, vložene 16. junija 2006,
ACTION under Article 226 EC for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 16 June 2006,
Komisija Evropskih skupnosti, ki jo zastopajo A. Caeiros, P. Guerra e Andrade in M.
Portuguese Republic, represented by L. Fernandes, acting as Agent, and by A. Duarte de Almeida, advogado, defendant,
Fernandes, zastopnik, skupaj z A. Duarte de Almeido, odvetnikom, tožena stranka,
Advocate General: V. Trstenjak, Registrar: M. Ferreira, Principal Administrator, having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 7 November 2007, after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 13 December 2007, gives the following
Ferreira, glavna administratorka, na podlagi pisnega postopka in obravnave z dne 7. novembra 2007, po predstavitvi sklepnih predlogov generalne pravobranilke na obravnavi 13. decembra 2007 izreka naslednjo
3) (‘the EEA Agreement’).
3, v nadaljevanju: Sporazum EGP).
The Community legislature has not adopted legislation on tinted film designed to be affixed to the windows of motor vehicles.
Zakonodajalec Skupnosti ni sprejel predpisov v zvezi z barvnimi folijami za pritrditev na stekla motornih vozil.
However, Community legislation exists in relation to typeapproval of safety glazing which is fitted from the outset to motor vehicles, in other words before those vehicles are put into circulation, in particular as regards the colouring of the glazing material.
Obstajajo pa predpisi Skupnosti v zvezi s homologacijo varnostnih stekel motornih vozil, ki so name�čena že od samega začetka oziroma, drugače povedano, preden so ta vozila dana v promet, ki se nana�ajo zlasti na barvo stekel.
That legislation includes Council Directive 92/22/EEC of 31 March 1992 on safety glazing and glazing materials on motor vehicles and their trailers (OJ 1992 L 129, p.
Med te predpise spada Direktiva Sveta 92/22/EGS z dne 31. marca 1992 o varnostnih steklih in materialih za zasteklitev na motornih vozilih in njihovih priklopnikih (UL L 129, str.
11), as amended by Commission Directive 2001/92/EC of 30 October 2001 (OJ 2001 L 291, p.
11), kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo Komisije 2001/92/ES z dne 30. oktobra 2001 (UL L 291, str.
24) (‘Directive 92/22’).
24, v nadaljevanju: Direktiva 92/22).
Article 4 of Regulation No 43 provides that, as regards windscreens, the regular light transmittance must not be less than 75%.
V členu 4 tega pravilnika je določeno, da prepustnost svetlobe pri vetrobranskih steklih ne sme zna�ati manj kot 75 %.
As regards safety glazing other than the windscreens located within the driver’s forward field of view, the light transmittance
Druga varnostna stekla, ki se nahajajo v prednjem vidnem polju voznika, morajo prepu�čati vsaj 70 % svetlobe. Prepustnost
COMMISSION v PORTUGAL must be at least 70%. With respect to safety glazing located within the driver’s rearward field of view, the light transmittance may be less than 70% if the vehicle is fitted with two exterior rear-view mirrors.
KOMISIJA PROTI PORTUGALSKI svetlobe pri varnostnih steklih, ki se nahajajo v vzvratnem vidnem polju voznika, sme zna�ati manj kot 70 %, če ima vozilo dve zunanji vzvratni ogledali.
Article 2(1) of Decree-Law No 40/2003 provides that ‘the affixing of tinted film to the windows of passenger or goods vehicles shall be prohibited with the exception of lawful stickers and dark, non-reflective film to the goods compartment of goods vehicles’.
V členu 2(1) uredbe-zakona �t. 40/2003 je določeno: