natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Having regard to the direct applicability of Regulation No 259/68 in the legal systems of the Member States, the national court has an obligation to apply it in order to ensure compliance with the principle of non-discrimination.
Ob upo�tevanju neposredne uporabljivosti Uredbe �t. 259/68 v pravnem redu držav članic jo je nacionalno sodi�če dolžno uporabiti, da se tako zagotovi spo�tovanje načela prepovedi diskriminacije.
It is for the national court therefore to ensure equal treatment between persons whose child gives rise to entitlement to family allowances under the Staff Regulations and persons whose child gives rise to entitlement to family allowances under national law or an international social security convention in force in the Member State concerned.
Prav tako mora zagotoviti enako obravnavanje oseb, ki zaradi otrok pridobijo pravico do družinskih dodatkov v skladu s Kadrovskimi predpisi, in oseb, ki zaradi otrok pridobijo pravico do teh dodatkov v skladu z notranjim pravom ali mednarodno konvencijo o socialni varnosti, ki velja v zadevni državi članici.
In the light of the foregoing, the answer to the question referred must be, first, that the Staff Regulations have general application, are binding in their entirety and are directly applicable in all Member States and, second, that, in view of the direct applicability of Regulation No 259/68 in the legal systems of the Member States, a child giving rise to entitlement to family allowances under the Staff Regulations must be treated in the same way as a child giving rise to entitlement to family allowances under national law or an international social security convention in force in the Member State concerned.
Glede na navedeno je treba na zastavljeno vpra�anje odgovoriti, prvič, da se Kadrovski predpisi splo�no uporabljajo, so v celoti zavezujoči in se neposredno uporabljajo v vseh državah članicah in, drugič, da je treba glede na neposredno uporabljivost Uredbe �t. 259/68 v pravnem redu držav članic otroka, zaradi katerega nastane pravica do družinskih dodatkov na podlagi Kadrovskih predpisov, enačiti z otrokom, zaradi katerega nastane do teh dodatkov na podlagi notranjega prava ali mednarodne konvencije o socialni varnosti, ki velja v zadevni državi članici.
Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 of the Council of 29 February 1968 laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Communities and instituting special measures temporarily applicable to officials of the Commission, as amended by Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 2074/83 of 21 July 1983, has general application, is binding in its entirety and is directly applicable in all Member States.
Uredba Sveta (EGS, Euratom, ESPJ) št. 259/68 z dne 29. februarja 1968 o določitvi Kadrovskih predpisov za uradnike in Pogojev za zaposlitev drugih uslužbencev Evropskih skupnosti, ter uvedbi posebnih ukrepov, začasno veljavnih za uradnike Komisije, kot je bila spremenjena z Uredbo Sveta (EGS, Euratom, ESPJ) št. 2074/83 z dne 21. julija 1983, se splošno uporablja, je v celoti zavezujoča in se neposredno uporablja v vseh državah članicah.
In view of the direct applicability of that regulation in the legal systems of the Member States, a child giving rise to entitlement to family allowances under the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities must be treated in the same way as a child giving rise to entitlement to family allowances under national law or an international social security convention in force in the Member State concerned.
Glede na neposredno uporabljivost navedene uredbe v pravnem redu držav članic je treba otroka, zaradi katerega nastane pravica do družinskih dodatkov na podlagi Kadrovskih predpisov za uradnike Evropskih skupnosti, enačiti z otrokom, zaradi katerega nastane pravica do teh dodatkov na podlagi notranjega prava ali mednarodne konvencije o socialni varnosti, ki velja v zadevni državi članici.
Case C-450/06
Zadeva C-450/06
(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (Belgium))
(Predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe, ki ga je vložilo Conseil d’État (Belgija))
(Public procurement — Review — Directive 89/665/EEC — Effective review — Meaning — Balance between the adversarial principle and the right to observance of business secrets — Protection, by the body responsible for the review, of the confidentiality of information provided by economic operators)
„Javna naročila – Tožba – Direktiva 89/665/EGS – Učinkovita revizija – Pojem – Ravnovesje med načelom kontradiktornosti in pravico do varstva poslovne skrivnosti – Varstvo zaupnosti podatkov gospodarskih subjektov, ki ga zagotavljajo pristojni revizijski organi“
Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston delivered on 25 October 2007 . . .
Sharpston, predstavljeni 25. oktobra 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I - 583
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber), 14 February 2008 . . . . . . .
Sodba Sodi�ča (tretji senat) z dne 14. februarja 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . I - 601
Approximation of laws — Review procedures in respect of the award of public supply and public works contracts — Directive 89/665 — Audi alteram partem rule — Reconciliation with the protection of business secrets — Bodies responsible for review procedures
Približevanje zakonodaj – Revizijski postopki na področju oddaje javnih naročil za preskrbo in gradnje – Direktiva 89/665 – Načelo kontradiktornosti – Uskladitev z varstvom poslovnih skrivnosti – Pristojni organi za revizijske postopke
SUMMARY — CASE C-450/06 access to all of the information relating to the award procedure concerned which has been filed with the body responsible for the review.
POVZETEK – ZADEVA C-450/06 podatkov o zadevnem postopku oddaje naročila, predloženih pristojnemu revizijskemu organu.
On the contrary, that right of access must be balanced against the right of other economic operators to the protection of their confidential information and their business secrets.
Nasprotno, pravico dostopa je treba pretehtati glede na pravico drugih gospodarskih subjektov do varstva njihovih zaupnih podatkov in poslovnih skrivnosti.
It is for the body responsible for the review to decide to what extent and by what process it is appropriate to safeguard the confidentiality and secrecy of that information, having regard to the requirements of effective legal protection and the rights of defence of the parties to the dispute and, in the case of judicial review or a review by another body which is a court or tribunal within the meaning of Article 234 EC, so as to ensure that the proceedings as a whole accord with the right to a fair trial.
Pristojni organ odloča o tem, koliko in kako je treba zagotoviti zaupnost in varstvo podatkov glede na zahteve učinkovitega pravnega varstva in varstva pravic obrambe, ki jih imajo stranke v postopku, v primeru pravnega sredstva oziroma sredstva, o katerem odloča organ, ki je sodi�če v smislu člena 234 ES, in pa glede na to, da je treba v celotnem postopku zagotoviti pravično sojenje.
Article 1(1) of Directive 89/665 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts, as amended by Directive 92/50 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts, read in conjunction with Article 15(2) of Directive 93/36 coordinating procedures for the award of public supply contracts, as amended by Direct ive 97/52, must be interpreted as meaning that the body responsible for the reviews provided for in Article 1(1) must ensure that confidentiality and business secrecy are safeguarded in respect of information contained in files communicated to that body by the parties to an action, particularly by the contracting authority, although it may apprise itself of such information and take it into consideration.
Člen 1(1) Direktive 89/665 o usklajevanju zakonov in drugih predpisov o uporabi revizijskih postopkov oddaje javnih naročil za preskrbo in javnih naročil za gradnje, v različici iz Direktive 92/50 o usklajevanju postopkov za oddajo javnih naročil storitev, v povezavi s členom 15(2) Direktive 93/36 o usklajevanju postopkov oddaje javnih naročil blaga, kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo 97/52, je treba razlagati tako, da mora pristojni revizijski organ v smislu člena 1(1) zagotavljati zaupnost in pravico do varstva poslovnih skrivnosti za podatke v spisih, ki mu jih predložijo stranke postopka, vključno z naročnikom, pri čemer se lahko sam seznani s tovrstnimi podatki in jih upo�teva.
In the context of a review of a decision taken by a contracting authority in relation to a contract award procedure, the adversarial principle does not mean that the parties are entitled to unlimited and absolute
V okviru revizije odločitve, ki jo sprejme naročnik v postopku oddaje javnega naročila, načelo kontradiktornosti namreč strankam ne omogoča neomejenega in absolutnega dostopa do celote
(see paras 51, 55, operative part)
(Glej točki 51, 55 in izrek.)
The Belgian Conseil d’État (Council of State) asks whether a body hearing an appeal concerning the award of a public contract must protect the confidentiality of business secrets while remaining entitled to take account of evidence containing them.
Belgijsko Conseil d’État (vrhovno upravno sodi�če) spra�uje, ali mora organ, ki obravnava pritožbo glede oddaje javnega naročila, varovati zaupnost poslovnih skrivnosti in ima pri tem pravico upo�tevati dokaze, ki jih vsebujejo.
decisions taken by contracting authorities can be reviewed effectively and as rapidly as possible in accordance with the conditions set out in the remainder of the directive, if it is alleged that Community public procurement law or national implementing rules have been infringed.
odločitve, ki jih sprejmejo naročniki v zvezi s postopki, ki sodijo na področje direktiv o usklajevanju postopkov oddaje javnih naročil gradenj, blaga in storitev, 3 možno učinkovito in kolikor mogoče hitro pravno sredstvo v skladu s pogoji, določenimi v preostalem delu direktive, če se domneva, da je bilo kr�eno pravo Skupnosti na področju javnih naročil ali nacionalni izvedbeni predpisi.
The issue highlights the conflict between the right of one party to require production of and access to relevant evidence and that of another to maintain the confidentiality of certain evidence vis-à-vis a business competitor.
Vpra�anje zadeva razhajanje med pravico stranke, da zahteva predložitev upo�tevnih dokazov in dostop do njih ter pravico druge stranke, da ohrani zaupnost določenih dokazov nasproti konkurentu.
Community legislation
Ureditev Skupnosti
The directive then sets out conditions to be observed in such review procedures, with a view to ensuring a speedy and efficient
Direktiva dalje določa pogoje, ki jih je treba upo�tevati v takih revizijskih postopkih,
Article 1(1) of Directive 89/665 2 requires Member States to ensure that, as regards procedures falling within the scope of the
Na podlagi člena 1(1) Direktive 89/665 2morajo države članice zagotoviti, da je zoper
3 — The provision refers to Council Directive 71/305/EEC of 26 July 1971 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts (OJ, English Special Edition 1971 (II), p.
3 – Določba se nana�a na Direktivo Sveta 71/305/EGS z dne 26. julija 1971 o usklajevanju postopkov oddaje javnih naročil gradenj (UL, English Special Edition 1971 (II), str.
682), Council Directive 77/62/EEC of 21 December 1976 coordinating procedures for the award of public supply contracts (OJ 1977 L 13, p.
682), Direktivo Sveta 77/62/EGS z dne 21. decembra 1976 o usklajevanju postopkov oddaje javnih naročil blaga (UL 1977, L 13, str. 1), in Direktivo Sveta 92/50, navedena v opombi 2.
Directive 71/305 was however repealed and replaced by Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts (OJ 1993 L 199, p.
Direktivo 71/305 je razveljavila in nadomestila Direktiva Sveta 93/37/EGS z dne 14. junija 1993 o usklajevanju postopkov za oddajo javnih naročil za gradnje (UL 1993, L 199, str.
54), and Directive 77/62 was repealed and replaced by Council Directive 93/36/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating procedures for the award of public supply contracts (OJ 1993 L 199, p. 1).
54), in Direktivo 77/62 je razveljavila in nadomestila Direktiva Sveta 93/36/EGS z dne 14. junija 1993 o usklajevanju postopkov oddaje javnih naročil blaga (UL 1993, L 199, str. 1).
Since the time of the award in the main proceedings, all the directives concerned have been repealed and replaced by Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts (OJ 2004 L 134, p. 114).
Od trenutka oddaje javnega naročila v postopku v glavni stvari je vse zadevne direktive razveljavila in nadomestila Direktiva 2004/18/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 31. marca 2004 o usklajevanju postopkov za oddajo javnih naročil gradenj, blaga in storitev (UL 2004, L 134, str. 114).
2 — Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts (OJ 1989 L 395, p.
2 – Direktiva Sveta 89/665/EGS z dne 21. decembra 1989 o usklajevanju zakonov in drugih predpisov o uporabi revizijskih postopkov oddaje javnih naročil za preskrbo in javnih naročil za gradnje (UL 1989 L 395, str.
33), as amended by Article 41 of Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts (OJ 1992 L 209, p. 1).
33), spremenjena s členom 41 Direktive Sveta 92/50/EGS z dne 18. junija 1992 o usklajevanju postopkov za oddajo javnih naročil storitev (UL 1992 L 209, str. 1).
However, it is silent in respect of the treatment of confidential information contained in documents submitted or requested as evidence.
Ničesar pa ne določa glede ravnanja z zaupnimi podatki, ki jih vsebujejo predloženi dokumenti oziroma dokumenti, ki so se zahtevali kot dokaz.
Under Article 2(8), the review body must follow a ‘procedure in which both sides are heard’.
V skladu s členom 2(8) mora revizijski organ delovati na podlagi „kontradiktornega postopka“.
‘Without prejudice to the provisions of this Directive, in particular those concerning the obligations relating to the advertising of awarded contracts and to the information to candidates and tenderers …, and in accordance with the national law to which the contracting authority is subject, the contracting authority shall not disclose information forwarded to it by economic operators which they have designated as confidential; such information includes, in particular, technical or trade secrets and the confidential aspects of tenders.’
„Brez poseganja v določbe te direktive, zlasti v tiste, ki zadevajo obveznosti glede objavljanja oddanih naročil in obve�čanja kandidatov in ponudnikov […], in v skladu z nacionalnim pravom, ki velja za naročnika, slednji ne razkrije informacij, ki jih je dobil od gospodarskih subjektov in ki so jih ti označili za zaupne; to so predvsem tehnične ali poslovne skrivnosti in tajni vidiki ponudb.“
Belgian legislation
Belgijska zakonodaja
Confidentiality of tender documents
Zaupnost razpisne dokumentacije
Article 32 of the Belgian Constitution 6guarantees public access to administrative
Na podlagi člena 32 belgijske Ustave 6je kot splo�no pravilo zagotovljen dostop
4 — Cited in footnote 3, as amended in particular by European Parliament and Council Directive 97/52/EC of 13 October 1997 (OJ 1997 L 328, p. 1).
4 – Navedena v opombi 3, kot je bila spremenjena zlasti z Direktivo Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta 97/52/ES z dne 13. oktobra 1997 (UL 1997, L 328, str. 1).
VAREC enacted to transpose Directive 2004/18.
VAREC gradenj, blaga in storitev za prenos Direktive 2004/18.
The first two paragraphs of Article 11 read: documents as a general rule.
Prva odstavka člena 11 določata: javnosti do upravnih dokumentov.
Among exceptions to that rule is Article 6(1) of the Law of 11 April 1994 on administrative publicity, 7 which allows an authority to refuse access if the interest in granting it is outweighed by the interest in protecting, inter alia, business or manufacturing information of a confidential nature.
Med izjemami od tega pravila je člen 6(1) zakona z dne 11. aprila 1994 o objavljanju upravnih aktov, 7 ki organu dopu�ča, da zavrne dostop, če ugotovi, da interes javnosti ne prevlada nad interesom varstva, med drugim, zaupnih poslovnih ali proizvodnih podatkov, posredovanih organu.
‘Neither the contracting authority nor any person who, by reason of the duties or functions with which he is entrusted, has knowledge of confidential information relating to a contract or to the award or performance of the contract, communicated by candidates, tenderers, suppliers or service providers, shall divulge any such information.
„Niti naročnik niti katera koli druga oseba, ki je zaradi dolžnosti ali nalog, ki so ji zaupane, seznanjena z zaupnimi podatki glede naročila, oddaje ali izvedbe naročila, ki jih dobi od kandidatov, ponudnikov, dobaviteljev ali ponudnikov storitev, ne sme razkriti teh podatkov.
The information concerned shall include in particular technical or commercial secrets and confidential aspects of tenders.
Zadevni podatki se nana�ajo zlasti na tehnične ali poslovne skrivnosti in zaupne vidike ponudb.
The requirement for a public contracting authority to respect the confidentiality of business secrets contained in documents submitted to it is embodied in various provisions of the Belgian legislation covering award procedures — in particular, at the time of the award in issue in the main proceedings, Articles 25(4), 51(4) and 80(4) of the Royal Decree of 8 January 1996 on public works, supply and service contracts and on public works concessions.
Obveznost javnega naročnika, da spo�tuje zaupnost poslovnih skrivnosti, ki jih vsebujejo predloženi dokumenti, je vključena v različne določbe belgijske zakonodaje, ki urejajo postopke oddaje javnih naročil – v času oddaje zadevnega javnega naročila v postopku v glavni stvari zlasti členi 25(4), 51(4) in 80(4) kraljeve zakonske uredbe z dne 8. januarja 1996 o javnih naročilih gradenj, blaga in storitev ter o gradbenih koncesijah.
In the event of a review procedure, the review body and the contracting authority shall take care to ensure the confidential nature of the information referred to in the preceding paragraph.’
V primeru revizijskega postopka revizijski organ in naročnik skrbita, da se spo�tuje zaupnost podatkov iz prej�njega odstavka.“
Since then, the Law of 15 June 2006 on public procurement and certain works, supply and service contracts has been
Odtlej je bil sprejet zakon z dne 15. junija 2006 o javnih naročilih in določenih naročilih
However, like most of the other provisions of that law, Article 11 has not yet entered into force. 8
Vendar tako kot večina drugih določb tega zakona člen 11 �e ni začel veljati. 8.
7 — The search page on http://www.juridat.be/cgi_loi/legislation.pl may be used to consult this and all subsequent Belgian legislation referred to.
7 – Več o tem na spletni strani http://www.juridat.be/cgi_loi/legislation.pl in v zadevni belgijski zakonodaji. Od leta 2003 se Moniteur Belge / Belgisch Staatsblad / Belgisches Staatsblatt ne objavlja več v papirni obliki.
Proceedings before the Conseil d’État latter provision applies also when only part of the file has not been lodged.
Conseil d’État navaja, da se ta zadnja določba uporablja tudi, če le del spisa ni bil predložen.
Appeals against decisions in award procedures may be brought before the Conseil d’État.
Pritožbe zoper odločitve v postopkih oddaje javnih naročil je mogoče vložiti pred Conseil d’État.
In matters of judicial review, procedure before that court is governed in particular by a Decree of the Regent of 23 August 1948 and by the Coordinated Laws of 12 January 1973.
Za postopek, ki poteka pred tem sodi�čem, velja v zadevah sodnega nadzora zlasti odlok regenta z dne 23. avgusta 1948 in usklajeni zakoni z dne 12. januar -ja 1973.
It appears from the order for reference that the Conseil d’État has consistently held that neither the Law of 11 April 1994 nor the Royal Decree of 8 January 1996 9 can be relied upon to prevent a court reviewing the validity of an administrative decision from examining documents which are essential for it to be able to assess whether an alleged ground for annulment is well founded. 10
Iz predložitvene odločbe izhaja, da je Conseil d’État vztrajno zatrjevalo, da se ni mogoče sklicevati niti na zakon z dne 11. aprila 1994 niti na kraljevo zakonsko uredbo z dne 8. januarja 1996 9, da bi preprečili sodni nadzor veljavnosti upravne odločbe na podlagi pregledovanja dokumentov, ki so bistveni za presojo utemljenosti zatrjevanega razloga za razglasitev ničnosti. 10
Article 6 of the Decree of the Regent requires the defendant authority to lodge the administrative file with the registry within 60 days from service of the application.
Na podlagi člena 6 odloka regenta mora toženi organ upravni spis predložiti sodnemu tajni�tvu v 60 dneh od vročitve vloge. Če ta organ nima spisa, dalje velja, da ga je treba zahtevati od organa, ki ga ima.
It appears also that no provision governing procedure before the Conseil d’État explicitly allows anything in the documents lodged to be treated as confidential vis-à-vis a party to the proceedings.
Prav tako se zdi, da nobena določba, ki ureja postopek pred Conseil d’État, izrecno ne dopu�ča, da bi se podatki v predloženih dokumentih obravnavali kot zaupni nasproti stranki v postopku.
Article 87 of the Decree of the Regent provides that parties and their lawyers may inspect the file at the registry, a right which is also affirmed in Article 19 of the Coordinated Laws.
Člen 87 odloka regenta določa, da lahko stranke in njihovi odvetniki spisovno gradivo pregledajo v sodnem tajni�tvu, pri čemer gre za pravico, ki je določena tudi v členu 19 usklajenih zakonov.
The main proceedings arise out of an invitation to tender for the supply of tank
Predmet postopka v glavni stvari je javni razpis za dobavo členov gosenične verige za
9 — Cited above in points 7 and 8 respectively.
9 – Navedeno v točkah 7 in 8 zgoraj.
10 — Judgments of 14 December 1999 in Case 84.102, 23 December 1999 in Case 83.593, 21 March 2000 in Case 86.150 and 6 May 2003 in Case 119.018.
10 – Sodbe z dne 14. decembra 1999 v zadevi 84.102, z dne 23. decembra 1999 v zadevi 83.593, z dne 21. marca 2000 in v zadevi 86.150 ter z dne 6. maja 2003 v zadevi 119.018.
Article 21 of the Coordinated Laws allows the applicant to request an order that the defendant authority lodge the administrative file.
Na podlagi člena 21 usklajenih zakonov lahko tožeča stranka zahteva, naj toženi organ predloži upravni spis.
It further provides that, if the file is not lodged within the timelimit set, the facts alleged by the applicant are to be deemed proven unless they are manifestly inaccurate. The Conseil d’État states that the
Dalje določa, da se zatrjevana dejstva tožeče stranke, če spis ni
VAREC auditeur 11considers that if the contracting authority does not lodge a complete file, thereby failing in its duty to assist in ensuring proper administration of justice and fair proceedings, there is no alternative but to annul the contested award.
VAREC dostopa. Auditeur (poročevalec) 11meni, da je edina primerna sankcija, če naročnik ne predloži celotnega spisa, pri čemer kr�i dolžnost sodelovanja pri zagotavljanju pravičnega sojenja in postopka, razglasitev ničnosti izpodbijane odločbe o oddaji naročila.
track links, issued by the Belgian Defence Ministry.
tanke, ki ga je objavilo belgijsko ministrstvo za obrambo.