natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This question was referred in case the Court were to answer the first question in the affirmative.
Predložitveno sodi�če je postavilo to vpra�anje za primer, če bi bil odgovor na prvo vpra�anje pritrdilen.
By its third question, the referring court asks whether, pursuant to point 48(7)(a) of the annex to Directive 91/628, the duration of the sea transport between a geographical point of the Community and a geographical point in a third country does not have to be taken into account where, first, the vehicles used for the transport are loaded onto vessels without unloading the animals and, second, those animals are regularly fed and watered and, in such a case, whether a further period of 29 hours of transport by road may begin immediately after unloading those vehicles at the port of destination in the third country.
Predložitveno sodi�če v tretjem vpra�anju spra�uje, ali se ob uporabi točke 48, točka 7(a), priloge k Direktivi 91/628 trajanje prevoza po morju med geografsko točko v Skupnosti in geografsko točko v tretji državi ne sme upo�tevati, če so vozila za prevoz natovorjena na plovila, ne da bi bile živali raztovorjene oziroma so te redno napojene in nakrmljene, ter ali v tem primeru lahko takoj po izkrcanju navedenih vozil v pristani�ču tretje države namembnega kraja začne teči novo 29-urno obdobje cestnega prevoza.
It should be pointed out that, in the absence of specific provisions for transport by roll-on/roll-off ferry, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, and since point 48(7)(b) of the annex to Directive 91/628 does not apply to that means of transport, only point 48(7)(a), which lays down the general provisions applicable to transport by sea, determines the conditions in which the transportation of animals in such a roll-on/roll-off ferry must take place.
Poudariti je treba, da če ni določb, ki bi bile posebej določene za prevoze s trajekti ro-ro, kot so ti v postopku v glavni stvari, in če se točka 48, točka 7(b), priloge k Direktivi 91/628 ne uporabi za tak prevoz, potem le točka 7(a) točke 48, ki določa splo�ne predpise, ki se uporabijo za prevoz po morju, omogoča določiti pogoje, pod katerimi mora potekati prevoz živali na takem plovilu ro-ro.
As regards the duration of that transport, it is clear from the wording of point 48(7) (a) of the annex to Directive 91/628 that the journey time by sea may exceed eight hours if all the conditions laid down in point 48(3) and (4), apart from journey times and rest periods, are met.
Glede časa navedenega prevoza jasno izhaja iz točke 48, točka 7(a), priloge k Direktivi 91/628, da lahko potovanje po morju traja več kot osem ur, če so izpolnjeni vsi pogoji, določeni v točkah 3 in 4 te točke 48, razen pogojev glede časa potovanj in časa počitkov.
It should be noted that, among the conditions to be met are those concerning the intervals at which the animals have to be fed and watered.
Poudariti je treba, da so med pogoji, ki jih je treba spo�tovati, zlasti tisti v zvezi s presledki za napajanje in krmljenje živali.
Consequently, in the case of transport by roll-on/roll-off ferry on a link between a geographical point of the Community and a geographical point in a third country, the duration of the transport does not have to be taken into account if the animals are transported in accordance with the conditions laid down in point 48(3) and (4) of the annex to Directive 91/628, apart from journey times and rest periods.
Zato se trajanje prevoza pri prevozu s trajektom ro-ro med geografsko točko v Skupnosti in geografsko točko v tretji državi ne upo�teva, če se živali prevažajo v skladu s pogoji, določenimi v točki 48, točki 3 in 4, priloge k Direktivi 91/628, razen pogojev glede časa potovanj in časa počitkov.
As regards the question whether a further period of transport by road in accordance with the conditions laid down in point 48(4)(d) of the annex to Directive 91/628 may begin immediately after unloading the vehicle at the port of destination in the third country, it must be noted that point 48(7)(a) in no way states that a further period of transport by road should be preceded by a rest period for the animals after that vehicle has been unloaded from the vessel.
Glede vpra�anja, ali je mogoče začeti novo obdobje prevoza po cesti, pri čemer so pogoji, določeni v točki 48, točka 4(d), priloge k Direktivi 91/628, izpolnjeni takoj po izkrcanju vozila v pristani�ču namembnega kraja v tretji državi, je treba ugotoviti, da točka 7(a) točke 48 nikakor ne določa, da bi pred novim obdobjem prevoza po cesti živali morale počivati, potem ko je bilo to vozilo izkrcano s plovila.
Consequently, if the transport by roll-on/roll-off ferry is in conformity with the requirements laid down in point 48(7)(a) and all the conditions laid down in point 48(3) and (4), apart from journey times and rest periods, are met, a further period of transport by road may begin immediately after unloading those vehicles at the port of destination in the third country, in accordance with point 48(4)(d).
Če je torej prevoz s trajektom ro-ro v skladu z zahtevami, določenimi v navedeni točki 48, točka 7(a), in če so bili izpolnjeni vsi pogoji, določeni v točkah 3 in 4 točke 48, razen pogojev glede časa potovanj in časa počitkov, lahko v skladu s točko 4(d) točke 48 novo obdobje prevoza po cesti začne teči takoj po izkrcanju vozila v pristani�ču tretje države namembnega kraja.
In the light of the foregoing considerations, the answer to the third question must be that point 48(7)(a) of the annex to Directive 91/628 must be interpreted as meaning that, in the case of sea transport between a geographical point of the Community and a geographical point situated in a third country by means of vehicles loaded onto vessels without unloading the animals, the duration of the transport does not have to be taken into account if the animals are transported in accordance with the conditions laid down in point 48(3) and (4) of the annex to Directive 91/628, apart from journey times and rest periods.
Glede na zgornje ugotovitve je treba na tretje vpra�anje odgovoriti, da je treba točko 48, točka 7(a), priloge k Direktivi 91/628 razlagati tako, da se pri prevozu po morju med geografsko točko v Skupnosti in geografsko točko v tretji državi z vozili, ki so bila vkrcana na plovila, ne da bi bile živali iztovorjene, čas prevoza ne upo�teva, če se živali prevažajo v skladu s pogoji, določenimi v točkah 3 in 4 točke 48, razen pogojev glede časa potovanj in časa počitkov.
By its fourth question the referring court essentially asks whether the fact of stating prior to the ferry journey that the animals are fed and watered ‘in the evenings and mornings, at midday, and in the evenings and mornings’ satisfies the requirements of
Predložitveno sodi�če v četrtem vpra�anju v bistvu spra�uje, ali vnaprej�en vpis – navedba pred prevozom s plovilom –, da se živali krmijo in napajajo „zvečer, zjutraj, opoldne, zvečer, zjutraj“, izpolnjuje zahteve iz člena 5, A, točka 2(d)(ii), prva alinea,
2008 — CASE C-207/06 the first indent of Article 5A point 2(d)(ii) of Directive 91/628 and, if that question is to be answered in the negative, whether noncompliance with that provision may lead to the loss of the right to an export refund.
Direktive 91/628, in če je odgovor na to vpra�anje nikalen, ali kr�itev te določbe lahko povzroči izgubo pravice do izvoznega nadomestila.
In that regard, it should be pointed out that, in accordance with Article 5A point 2(d)(i) and (ii) of Directive 91/628, the Member States must make sure that the transporter ensures that the original copy of the route plan is duly drawn up and completed by the appropriate persons at the appropriate time and that the staff in charge of the transport state in the route plan the times and places at which the animals transported have been fed and watered during the journey.
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, da v skladu s členom 5, A, točka 2(d)(i) in (ii) Direktive 91/628 države članice zagotovijo, da prevoznik zagotavlja, da je izvirnik načrta poti ustrezno izdelan in so ga ob ustreznem času izpolnile ustrezne osebe, in da osebje, odgovorno za prevoz, navede v načrtu poti čas in kraje, kjer so bile živali, ki se prevažajo, med potjo nakrmljene in napojene.
It is clear from the wording of that provision that, irrespective of the time at which the route plan is drawn up, it must, in order to satisfy the requirements laid down in the first indent of Article 5A point 2(d)(ii) of Directive 91/628, contain statements from the staff in charge of the transport relating to the times and places at which the animals have been fed and watered during the journey.
Iz te določbe jasno izhaja, da ne glede na to, kdaj se izpolni načrt poti, mora ta načrt, zato da so izpolnjene zahteve iz člena 5, A, točka 2(d)(ii), prva alinea, Direktive 91/628, vsebovati navedbe osebja, odgovornega za prevoz, glede ure in kraja krmljenja oziroma napajanja živali med potovanjem.
As regards the consequences which noncompliance with those formalities could entail, the Court has held that, where the competent authority of a Member State considers that Directive 91/628 has not been complied with but that has not led to the death of the animals, the Community legislature grants a certain amount of discretion to that authority to determine whether it is appropriate, as a result of noncompliance with a provision of that directive, for the export refund to be forfeited, reduced or retained.
Sodi�če je glede posledic, ki jih lahko povzroči kr�itev navedenih formalnosti, razsodilo, da če pristojni organ države članice meni, da Direktiva 91/628 ni bila spo�tovana, vendar to nespo�tovanje ni povzročilo smrti živali, zakonodajalec Skupnosti pristojnemu organu podeli določeno diskrecijsko pravico glede odločitve, ali nespo�tovanje določbe navedene direktive povzroči izgubo, zmanj�anje ali ohranitev izvoznega nadomestila.
Such discretion is not unlimited, however, since it is circumscribed by Article 5 of Regulation No 615/98 (see Viamex Agrar Handel and ZVK, paragraphs 38 and 39).
Taka diskrecijska pravica pa ni neomejena, saj je njen okvir določen s členom 5 Uredbe �t. 615/98 (glej zgoraj navedeno sodbo Viamex Agrar Handel in ZVK, točki 38 in 39).
In addition, the Court has held that it is for the competent authority to assess whether a failure to comply with a provision of Directive 91/628 has had an impact on animal welfare, whether such a failure can, where appropriate, be remedied and whether it must result in the export refund being forfeited, reduced or retained (see Viamex Agrar Handel and ZVK, paragraph 44).
Poleg tega je Sodi�če razsodilo, da mora pristojni organ presoditi, ali je kr�itev določbe Direktive 91/628 vplivala na dobro počutje živali, ali je tako kr�itev mogoče odpraviti in ali mora povzročiti izgubo, zmanj�anje ali ohranitev izvoznega nadomestila (glej zgoraj navedeno sodbo Viamex Agrar Handel in ZVK, točka 44).
However, in order to adopt such a decision, the Court has held that the competent authority is required, pursuant to Article 5(3) of Regulation No 615/98, to base itself on objective and specific elements relating to the welfare of the animals which are capable of establishing that the documents attached by the exporter to its export refund application do not prove compliance with the provisions of Directive 91/628 during transportation, and it is for the exporter to show, where appropriate, that the elements relied on by the competent authority to substantiate its finding of noncompliance with that regulation and that directive are not relevant (see Case C-96/06 Viamex Agrar Handel [2008] ECR I-1413, paragraph 41).
V skladu s to razlago lahko torej pristojni organ odloči, da ne ugodi zahtevi za izvozno nadomestilo, če presodi, da vsi dokumenti, ki jih je predložil izvoznik, ne dokazujejo, da so bile spo�tovane določbe Direktive 91/628.
In any event, the competent authority is required to justify its decision by stating the reasons why it considers the evidence presented by the exporter does not enable it to be concluded that Directive 91/628 was complied with.
Vendar je Sodi�če razsodilo, da mora pristojni organ na podlagi člena 5(3) Uredbe �t. 615/98 pri sprejetju take odločitve izhajati iz objektivnih in konkretnih dejstev, ki se nana�ajo na dobro počutje živali, tako da dokaže, da dokumenti, ki jih je izvoznik priložil svoji zahtevi za izvozna nadomestila, ne dokazujejo spo�tovanja določb Direktive 91/628 med prevozom, naloga izvoznika pa je, če je to potrebno, da dokaže, zakaj niso upo�tevni dokazi, na katere se sklicuje pristojni organ pri ugotavljanju kr�itev določb te uredbe in te direktive (glej sodbo z dne 13. marca 2008 v zadevi Viamex Agrar Handel, C-96/06, ZOdl., str.
For that purpose, the authority is required, in particular, to make an objective assessment of the documents presented to it and to show the pertinence of the elements it has relied on in order to establish that the documentation attached to the export refund application was not sufficient to show compliance with the relevant provisions of that directive (Viamex Agrar Handel, paragraph 42).
I-1413, točka 41).
However, although it is true that a statement that the animals are fed and watered ‘in the evenings and mornings, at midday, and in the evenings and mornings’ during transportation by sea does not correspond exactly to the requirements of the first indent of Article 5A point 2(d)(ii) of Directive 91/628, none the less it cannot be inferred from such a statement that the animals have not been fed or watered.
Vendar čeprav je res, da navedba, da so živali nakrmljene in napojene „zvečer, zjutraj, opoldne, zvečer, zjutraj“ med prevozom po morju, ne ustreza točno predpisom člena 5, A, točka 28(d)(ii), prva alinea, Direktive 91/628, ostaja dejstvo, da to ne omogoča sklepa, da živali niso bile ne nakrmljene ne napojene.
A statement typed prior to the ferry journey, according to which the animals are fed and watered at sufficiently identifiable intervals, may satisfy the requirements of
Navedba, vpisana pred prevozom s plovilom, v skladu s katero so živali nakrmljene in napojene v času, ki ga je mogoče zadostno opredeliti, namreč lahko izpolnjuje zahteve Direktive 91/628, če se dokaže, da je bilo to dejansko opravljeno.
It is the task of the referring court to assess, in the main proceedings, whether, in the light of the documents submitted by the exporter as a whole, among which are the route plan and the affidavit referred to in paragraph 15 above, the animals were transported in accordance with the requirements of Directive 91/628.
Predložitveno sodi�če mora v postopku v glavni stvari preveriti, ali so se živali, v smislu vseh dokumentov, ki jih je predložil izvoznik, med katerimi sta tudi načrt poti in zaprisežena izjava, navedena v točki 15 te sodbe, prevažale v skladu z zahtevami Direktive 91/628.
In the light of the foregoing considerations, the answer to the fourth question must be that a route plan containing a pretyped statement indicating that during the ferry journey animals are fed and watered ‘in the evenings and mornings, at midday, and in the evenings and mornings’ may satisfy the requirements of Directive 91/628 provided that it is established that the animals were in fact fed and watered as stated.
Glede na zgornje ugotovitve je treba na četrto vpra�anje odgovoriti, da načrt poti, ki vsebuje navedbo, ki je bila vnaprej vpisana s pisalnim strojem in v skladu s katero so živali nakrmljene in napojene „zvečer, zjutraj, opoldne, zvečer, zjutraj“ med prevozom po morju, lahko izpolnjuje zahteve Direktive 91/628, če se dokaže, da je bilo to dejansko opravljeno.
If the competent authority considers, in the light of all the documents submitted by the exporter, that the requirements of that directive have not been complied with, it is for that authority to assess whether that noncompliance had an effect on the welfare of the animals, whether such noncompliance may, where appropriate, be remedied and whether it must result in the export refund being forfeited, reduced or retained.
Če pristojni organ presodi, glede na vse dokumente, ki jih je predložil izvoznik, da zahteve navedene direktive niso bile spo�tovane, mora presoditi, ali je ta kr�itev vplivala na dobro počutje živali, ali se taka kr�itev lahko popravi in ali ta kr�itev povzroči izgubo, zmanj�anje ali ohranitev izvoznega nadomestila.
Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 615/98 of 18 March 1998 laying down specific detailed rules of application for the export refund arrangements as regards the welfare of live bovine animals during transport cannot be interpreted as meaning that point 48(7)(b) of the annex to Council Directive 91/628/EEC of 19 November 1991 on the protection of animals during transport and amending Directives 90/425/EEC and 91/496/EEC, as amended by Council Directive 95/29/EC of 29 June 1995, must be applied to the case of transport by sea on a link between a geographical point of the European Community and a geographical point in a third country by means of vehicles loaded onto vessels without unloading of the animals.
Člen 1 Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 615/98 z dne 18. marca 1998 o podrobnih pravilih za uporabo sistema izvoznih nadomestil za dobro počutje živega goveda med prevozom se ne sme razlagati tako, da je treba točko 48, točka 7(b), priloge k Direktivi Sveta 91/628/EGS z dne 19. novembra 1991 o zaščiti živali med prevozom in o spremembi direktiv 90/425/EGS in 91/496/EGS, kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo Sveta 95/29/ES z dne 29. junija 1995, uporabiti pri prevozu po morju med geografsko točko v Evropski skupnosti in geografsko točko v tretji državi z vozili, ki so bila vkrcana na plovila, ne da bi bile živali iztovorjene.
Point 48(7)(a) of the annex to Directive 91/628, as amended by Directive 95/29, must be interpreted as meaning that, in the case of transport by sea between a geographical point of the European Community and a geographical point situated in a third country by means of vehicles loaded onto vessels without unloading the animals, the duration of the transport does not have to be taken into account if the animals are transported in accordance with the conditions laid down in point 48(3) and (4) of the annex to Directive 91/628, apart from journey times and rest periods.
Točko 48, točka 7(a), priloge k Direktivi 91/628, kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo 95/29, je treba razlagati tako, da se pri prevozu po morju med geografsko točko v Evropski skupnosti in geografsko točko v tretji državi z vozili, ki so bila vkrcana na plovila, ne da bi bile živali iztovorjene, trajanje prevoza ne upošteva, če se živali prevažajo v skladu s pogoji, določenimi v točkah 3 in 4 te točke 48, razen pogojev glede časa potovanja in časa počitkov.
If that is the case, a further period of transport by road may begin immediately after unloading the lorry at the port of destination in the third country, in accordance with point 48(4)(d).
Če je tako, lahko v skladu s točko 4(d) navedene točke 48 novo obdobje prevoza po cesti začne teči takoj po izkrcanju vozila v pristanišču tretje države namembnega kraja.
A route plan containing a pretyped statement indicating that during the ferry journey animals are fed and watered ‘in the evenings and mornings, at midday, and in the evenings and mornings’ may satisfy the requirements of Directive 91/628, as amended by Directive 95/29, provided that it is established that the animals were in fact fed and watered as stated.
Načrt poti, ki vsebuje navedbo, ki je bila vnaprej vpisana s pisalnim strojem in v skladu s katero so živali nakrmljene in napojene „zvečer, zjutraj, opoldne, zvečer, zjutraj“ med prevozom po morju, lahko izpolnjuje zahteve Direktive 91/628, kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo 95/29, če se dokaže, da je bilo to dejansko opravljeno.
If the competent authority considers, in the light of all the documents submitted by the
Če pristojni organ presodi, glede na vse dokumente, ki jih je predložil izvoznik, da niso bile spoštovane zahteve navedene direktive,
2008 — CASE C-207/06 exporter, that the requirements of that directive have not been complied with, it is for that authority to assess whether that noncompliance had an effect on the welfare of the animals, whether such noncompliance may, where appropriate, be remedied and whether it must result in the export refund being forfeited, reduced or retained.
2008 – ZADEVA C-207/06 mora presoditi, ali je ta kršitev vplivala na dobro počutje živali, ali se taka kršitev lahko popravi in ali ta kršitev povzroči izgubo, zmanjšanje ali ohranitev izvoznega nadomestila.
Case C-303/06
Zadeva C-303/06
(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Employment Tribunal, London South)
(Predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe, ki ga je vložilo Employment Tribunal, London South)
(Social policy — Directive 2000/78/EC — Equal treatment in employment and occupation — Articles 1, 2(1), (2)(a) and (3) and 3(1)(c) — Direct discrimination on grounds of disability — Harassment related to disability — Dismissal of an employee who is not himself disabled but whose child is disabled — Included — Burden of proof)
„Socialna politika – Direktiva 2000/78/ES – Enako obravnavanje pri zaposlovanju in delu – Členi 1, 2(1), (2)(a) in (3) ter 3(1)(c) – Neposredna diskriminacija na podlagi invalidnosti – Nadlegovanje, povezano z invalidnostjo – Odpoved delovnega razmerja zaposlenemu, ki ni invalid, vendar ima invalidnega otroka – Vključitev – Dokazno breme“
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber), 17 July 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . .
Poiaresa Madura, predstavljeni 31. januarja 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Social policy — Equal treatment in employment and occupation — Directive 2000/78 — Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of disability — Scope
Socialna politika – Enako obravnavanje pri zaposlovanju in delu – Direktiva 2000/78 – Prepoved diskriminacije na podlagi invalidnosti – Obseg
SUMMARY — CASE C-303/06
POVZETEK – ZADEVA C-303/06
Social policy — Equal treatment in employment and occupation — Directive 2000/78 — Prohibition of harassment — Scope
Socialna politika – Enako obravnavanje pri zaposlovanju in delu – Direktiva 2000/78 – Prepoved nadlegovanja – Obseg
Directive 2000/78 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, and, in particular, Articles 1 and 2(1) and (2)(a) thereof, must be interpreted as meaning that the prohibition of direct discrimination laid down by those provisions is not limited only to people who are themselves disabled.
Direktivo 2000/78 o splo�nih okvirih enakega obravnavanja pri zaposlovanju in delu ter zlasti njena člena 1 ter 2(1) in (2)(a) je treba razlagati tako, da prepoved neposredne diskriminacije, ki je z njimi določena, ni omejena le na invalidne osebe.
The principle of equal treatment enshrined in that directive in the area of employment and occupation applies not to a particular category of person but by reference to the grounds mentioned in Article 1.
Načelo enakega obravnavanja, določeno s to direktivo za področje zaposlovanja in dela, se namreč ne uporablja za skupino določenih oseb, ampak na podlagi razlogov iz njenega člena 1.
Directive 2000/78 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, and, in particular, Articles 1 and 2(1) and (3) thereof, must be interpreted as meaning that the prohibition of harassment laid down by those provisions is not limited only to people who are themselves dis -abled.
Direktivo 2000/78 o splo�nih okvirih enakega obravnavanja pri zaposlovanju in delu in zlasti njena člena 1 ter 2(1) in (3) je treba razlagati tako, da prepoved nadlegovanja, ki je z njimi določena, ni omejena le na invalidne osebe.
Under Article 2(3), harassment is deemed to be a form of discrimination within the meaning of Article 2(1) and the principle of equal treatment enshrined in that directive in the area of employment and occupation applies not to a particular category of person but by reference to the grounds mentioned in Article 1.
Na podlagi navedenega člena 2(3) se nadlegovanje �teje za obliko diskriminacije v smislu odstavka 1 tega člena in načelo enakega obravnavanja, določeno s to direktivo za področje zaposlovanja in dela, se ne uporablja za skupino določenih oseb, ampak na podlagi razlogov iz njenega člena 1.