natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
A — Ocial visits and events at the Court of Justice, the Court of First Instance and the Civil Service Tribunal .................................................................................................231
A – Uradni obiski in prireditve na Sodišču, Sodišču prve stopnje in Sodišču za uslužbence ....................................................................................................................................225
B — Study visits (2007) ......................................................................................................................235
D – Obiski ali udeležba na uradnih prireditvah .......................................................................235
Abridged organisational chart ............................................................................................................245
Podatki Sodišča ........................................................................................................................................ 243
In 2007, the European Community completed the 50th year of its existence.
Leto 2007 je zaznamovala petdesetletnica obstoja Evropske skupnosti.
To mark this, a series of events was organised by the Community institutions throughout the course of the year.
Ob tej priložnosti so institucije Skupnosti vse leto organizirale vrsto prireditev.
The Court of Justice celebrated Europe’s 50th anniversary by organising a symposium for the presidents of the supreme courts of the 27 Member States and its own current and former members.
Sodišče je petdesetletnico Evrope proslavilo z organiziranjem simpozija, na katerem so se zbrali predsedniki vrhovnih sodišč 27 držav članic ter sedanji in nekdanji člani Sodišča.
At this symposium, which testies to the close working ties fostered by the Court of Justice with the national courts, the presidents of the supreme courts of the Member States were the principal speakers.
Na tem simpoziju, ki je dokaz tesnega sodelovanja med Sodiščem in nacionalnimi sodišči, so bili glavni govorniki predsedniki vrhovnih sodišč držav članic.
The year 2007 will doubtless also remain engraved on the memory as the year in which the Treaty of Lisbon was signed, an instrument which is designed to endow the European Union with more eective legislative and administrative structures enhancing its ability to meet the challenges of the beginning of the 21st century.
Leto 2007 bo nedvomno ostalo zapisano v spomin kot leto podpisa Lizbonske pogodbe, katere namen je zagotoviti, da bo imela Evropska unija učinkovitejšo zakonodajno in upravno strukturo ter da se bo lažje spoprijela z izzivi začetka 21. stoletja.
So far as concerns the Court of Justice, the provisions relating to its jurisdiction in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, currently scattered because they are divided between Title IV of the EC Treaty and Title VI of the Treaty on European Union, are brought together in one title of the future Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Glede Sodišča naj omenim, da so določbe o njegovi pristojnosti v okviru območja svobode, varnosti in pravice, ki so zdaj uvrščene delno pod naslov IV Pogodbe ES in delno pod naslov VI Pogodbe o Evropski uniji, združene pod istim naslovom prihodnje pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije.
Most of the current restrictions on its jurisdiction in this eld will disappear.
Večina obstoječih omejitev njegove pristojnosti na zadevnem področju bo prenehala veljati.
Cases falling within the scope of the area of freedom, security and justice constitute without any doubt a major challenge for the Court of Justice, both because of their sensitivity and because they must be dealt with particularly expeditiously.
Zadeve, za katere se uporabljajo določbe o območju svobode, varnosti in pravice, so nedvomno velik izziv za Sodišče tako zaradi njihove občutljivosti kot zaradi zahteve po posebej hitri obravnavi.
The adoption by the Council in 2007 of amendments to the Statute and to the Rules of Procedure in order to introduce an urgent preliminary ruling procedure for dealing with this type of case constitutes a decisive step enabling the Court to meet this challenge.
Zato je to, da je Svet leta 2007 sprejel spremembe Statuta in Poslovnika, ki zadevajo uvedbo nujnega postopka predhodnega odločanja in so namenjene obravnavanju takih zadev, odločilen korak, ki Sodišču omogoča, da se spoprime s tem izzivom.
Also, 2007 has been marked by the partial renewal of the membership of the Court of First Instance and the departure of four of its members.
Leto 2007 je zaznamovala tudi delna zamenjava članov Sodišča prve stopnje in odhod štirih njegovih članov.
The institution cannot but welcome the fact that, as in the case of the partial renewal of the membership of the Court of Justice in 2006, the governments of the Member States were concerned when appointing the judges to safeguard the stability of the institution, thereby enabling the Court of First Instance to continue smoothly in the performance of its task.
Po zgledu delne zamenjave članov Sodišča leta 2006 so vlade držav članic pri imenovanju sodnikov upoštevale skrb za ohranitev stabilnosti institucije in Sodišču prve stopnje tako omogočile, da je še naprej neovirano izpolnjevalo svojo nalogo.
Finally, it is to be noted that in the past year 1 259 cases were brought before the three courts comprising the Court of Justice — the highest gure in the institution’s history and demonstrating the increase in the amount of Community litigation.
Na koncu naj navedem, da je bilo v preteklem letu pri treh sodiščih, ki sestavljajo Sodišče, vloženih 1259 zadev, kar je največ v zgodovini institucije in dokazuje, da se je število sporov v Skupnosti povečalo.
Annual Report 2007
Sodišče Evropskih skupnosti
A — The Court of Justice in 2007: changes and proceedings
A – Razvoj in dejavnost Sodišča leta 2007
This part of the Annual Report gives an overview of the activity of the Court of Justice of the European Communities in 2007.
V tem delu letnega poročila so strnjeno opisane dejavnosti Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti leta 2007.
It describes, first, how the institution evolved during that year, with the emphasis on the institutional changes that have aected the Court and developments relating to its internal organisation and working methods (Section 1).
V kratkem pregledu razvoja institucije v tem letu je poudarek na institucionalnih spremembah, ki so vplivale na Sodišče, in na spremembah njegove notranje organizacije in metod dela (oddelek 1).
It includes, second, an analysis of the statistics in relation to developments in the Court’s workload and the average duration of proceedings (Section 2).
Sledi analiza statistik, ki se nanašajo na razvoj obsega dela institucije in na povprečno trajanje postopkov (oddelek 2).
It presents, third, as each year, the main developments in the case-law, arranged by subject matter (Section 3).
Nato je tako kot vsako leto opisan poglaviten razvoj sodne prakse, razvrščene po področjih (oddelek 3).
The main development in 2007 for the Court as an institution was the completion of the legislative process for the establishment of an urgent preliminary ruling procedure enabling questions relating to the area of freedom, security and justice that are referred for a preliminary ruling to be dealt with expeditiously and appropriately.
Institucionalni razvoj Sodišča leta 2007 je najbolj zaznamoval konec zakonodajnega postopka za uvedbo nujnega postopka predhodnega odločanja, ki omogoča hitro in ustrezno obravnavanje predlogov za sprejetje predhodne odločbe v zvezi z območjem svobode, varnosti in pravice.
Specically, by decision of 20 December 2007, the Council adopted the amendments to the Statute and to the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice designed to establish an urgent preliminary ruling procedure.
Svet je s sklepom z dne 20. decembra 2007 sprejel spremembe Statuta in Poslovnika Sodišča, ki se nanašajo na uvedbo nujnega postopka predhodnega odločanja.
This is a new type of preliminary ruling procedure, created to deal with cases that are currently covered by Title IV of the EC Treaty (visas, asylum, immigration and other policies related to free movement of persons) and Title VI of the Treaty on European Union (provisions on police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters).
Gre za novo vrsto postopka predhodnega odločanja, ki je bil uveden za obravnavanje zadev, ki zdaj spadajo pod naslov IV Pogodbe ES (Vizumi, azil, priseljevanje in druge politike v zvezi s prostim gibanjem oseb) in naslov VI Pogodbe o Evropski uniji (Določbe o policijskem in pravosodnem sodelovanju v kazenskih zadevah).
After establishing that existing procedures, including the accelerated procedure under Article 104a of the Rules of Procedure, were not capable of ensuring that this category of cases would be dealt with suciently expeditiously, the Court proposed the creation of this new procedure in order to be able to decide such cases within a particularly short time and without delaying the handling of other cases pending before the Court.
Sodišče je na podlagi ugotovitve, da obstoječi postopki, vključno s hitrim postopkom iz člena 104a Poslovnika, ne morejo zagotoviti dovolj hitrega obravnavanja te skupine zadev, predlagalo uvedbo tega novega postopka, da bi navedene zadeve lahko obravnavalo v posebej kratkih rokih, ne da bi upočasnilo obravnavanje drugih nerešenih zadev pred Sodiščem.
The amendments to the Statute and the Rules of Procedure will enter into force in the first quarter of 2008.
Spremembe Statuta in Poslovnika bodo začele veljati v prvem trimesečju leta 2008.
The principal features of the urgent preliminary ruling procedure are apparent from the dierences between it and the ordinary and accelerated preliminary ruling procedures.
Nujen postopek predhodnega odločanja se od običajnega postopka predhodnega odločanja in hitrega postopka predhodnega odločanja razlikuje v glavnih značilnostih.
First, the written procedure is limited to the parties to the main proceedings, the Member State from which the reference is made, the European Commission and the other institutions if a measure of theirs is at issue.
Prvič, udeležba v postopku je omejena na stranke v sporu pred nacionalnim sodiščem, na državo članico, iz katere je to sodišče, ter na Evropsko komisijo in druge institucije, kadar je sporen njihov akt.
The parties and all the interested persons referred to in Article 23 of the Statute will be able to participate in an oral procedure, when they can express a view on the written observations that have been lodged.
Stranke in vsi drugi udeleženci iz člena 23 Statuta lahko sodelujejo pri ustnem postopku in se ob tej priložnosti opredelijo glede vloženih pisnih izjav.
Second, cases subject to the urgent preliminary ruling procedure will, as soon as they arrive at the Court, be assigned to a chamber of ve judges that is specially designated for this purpose.
Drugič, zadeve, vložene po nujnem postopku predhodnega odločanja, se takoj ko prispejo na Sodišče, dodelijo senatu petih sodnikov, ki je za to posebej določen.
Finally, the procedure in these cases will for the most part be conducted electronically, since the new provisions of the Rules of Procedure allow procedural documents to be lodged and served by fax or e-mail.
In tretjič, postopek v teh zadevah poteka skoraj v celoti po elektronskih sredstvih sporočanja, saj je po novih določbah Poslovnika procesne akte mogoče vložiti in vročiti po telefaksu ali elektronski pošti.
The statistics concerning the Court’s judicial activity in 2007 reveal a distinct improvement compared with the preceding year.
Sodišče je leta 2007 končalo 551 zadev, leta 2006 pa 503 (neto številka, upoštevajoč združitve).
In particular, the reduction, for the fourth year in a row, of the duration of proceedings before the Court should be noted, as should the increase of approximately 10 % in the number of cases completed compared with 2006.
V 379 med njimi je odločilo s sodbo, v 172 pa s sklepom. Število razglašenih sodb in sklepov se je v primerjavi z letom 2006 (351 sodb in 151 sklepov) precej povečalo.
The Court completed 551 cases in 2007 compared with 503 in 2006 (net gures, that is to say, taking account of the joinder of cases). Of those cases, 379 were dealt with by judgments and 172 gave rise to orders.
Na Sodišče je prispelo 580 novih zadev, kar je največ v zgodovini Sodišča1 in pomeni 8-odstotno povečanje v primerjavi s številom zadev, vloženih leta 2006, ter 22,3-odstotno povečanje v primerjavi z letom 2005.
The number of cases pending at the end of 2007 (741 cases, gross gure) did not, however, increase signicantly beyond the number at the end of 2006 (731 cases, gross gure).
Število nerešenih zadev ob koncu leta 2007 pa se ni močno povečalo (741 zadev, bruto številka) v primerjavi z zaostankom ob koncu leta 2006 (731 zadev, bruto številka).
The statistics concerning judicial activity in 2007 also reect the constant reduction in the duration of proceedings since 2004.
Iz sodnih statistik za leto 2007 je tudi razvidno, da se trajanje postopkov od leta 2004 stalno zmanjšuje.
So far as concerns references for a preliminary ruling, the average duration of proceedings was 19.3 months, as against 19.8 months in 2006 and 20.4 months in 2005.
Povprečno trajanje postopkov predhodnega odločanja je bilo 19,3 meseca, leta 2006 19,8 meseca in leta 2005 20,4 meseca.
A comparative analysis shows that in 2007 (as was the case in 2006) the average time taken to deal with references for a preliminary ruling reached its shortest since 1995.
Enako kot leta 2006 je iz primerjalne analize razvidno, da je bilo od leta 1995 povprečno obravnavanje predlogov za sprejetje predhodne odločbe najkrajše leta 2007.
The average time taken to deal with direct actions and appeals was 18.2 months and 17.8 months respectively (20 months and 17.8 months in 2006).
Obravnavanje neposrednih tožb oziroma pritožb je povprečno trajalo 18,2 oziroma 17,8 meseca (20 mesecev oziroma 17,8 meseca leta 2006).
In the past year, the Court has made use to diering degrees of the various instruments at its disposal to expedite the handling of certain cases (priority treatment, the accelerated or expedited procedure, the simplied procedure, and the possibility of giving judgment without an opinion of the Advocate General).
V preteklem letu je Sodišče uporabilo različne instrumente za pospešitev postopka v določenih zadevah (prednostno obravnavanje zadeve, hitri postopek, skrajšani postopek in možnost odločanja brez sklepnih predlogov generalnega pravobranilca).
Eight requests were made to the Court for use of the expedited or accelerated procedure, but the cases did not display the exceptional circumstances (of urgency) required by the Rules of Procedure. Following a practice established in 2004, requests for the use of the expedited or accelerated procedure are granted or refused by reasoned order of the President of the Court.
Predlog za obravnavanje po hitrem postopku je bil vložen v osmih zadevah, v katerih pa niso bili izpolnjeni pogoji izredne nujnosti, ki so zahtevani v Poslovniku.V skladu s prakso, uvedeno leta 2004, predsednik Sodišča z obrazloženim sklepom ugodi ali zavrne predloge za odločanje po hitrem postopku.
On the other hand, priority treatment was granted in ve cases.
Prednostno je bilo obravnavanih pet zadev.
Also, the Court continued to use the simplied procedure laid down in Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure to answer certain questions referred to it for a preliminary ruling.
Poleg tega je Sodišče še naprej odločalo po skrajšanem postopku iz člena 104(3) Poslovnika, da bi odgovorilo na določena vprašanja, ki jih je prejelo v postopkih predhodnega odločanja.
A total of 18 cases were brought to a close by orders made on the basis of that provision.
Na podlagi te določbe je bilo namreč s sklepi končanih 18 zadev.
Finally, the Court made signicantly more frequent use of the possibility oered by Article 20 of the Statute of determining cases without an opinion of the Advocate General where they do not raise any new point of law.
Sodišče je precej pogosteje uporabilo tudi možnost, ki jo ima na podlagi člena 20 Statuta, da odloči brez sklepnih predlogov generalnega pravobranilca, če zadeva ne odpira novega pravnega vprašanja.
About 43 % of the judgments delivered in 2007 were delivered without an opinion (compared with 33 % in 2006).
Leta 2007 je bilo tako brez sklepnih predlogov razglašenih okoli 43 % sodb (v primerjavi s 33 % leta 2006).
As regards the distribution of cases between the various formations of the Court, it may be noted that the Grand Chamber dealt with approximately 11 %, chambers of ve judges with roughly 55 %, and chambers of three judges with about 33 % of the cases brought to a close in 2007.
V zvezi s porazdelitvijo zadev različnim sestavam Sodišča naj navedemo, da je veliki senat odločil v okoli 11 % zadev, senati petih sodnikov v skoraj 55 % zadev in senati treh sodnikov v okoli 33 % zadev, končanih leta 2007.
The number of cases dealt with by the Grand Chamber was roughly the same as in the previous year, the number of cases dealt with by ve-judge chambers declined slightly (63 % in 2006) and the number of cases dealt with by three-judge
Ugotavljamo, da je število zadev, ki jih je obravnaval veliki senat, približno enako kot v preteklem letu, število zadev, ki so jih obravnavali senati petih sodnikov (63 % leta 2006), se je malo zmanjšalo, število zadev, ki so jih obravnavali senati treh sodnikov, pa se je povečalo (24 % leta 2006).
With the exception of the 1 324 cases brought in 1979. However, that exceptionally high gure can be explained by the huge ood of actions for annulment with the same subject matter that were brought.
Razen 1324 zadev, vloženih leta 1979.Ta številka je nenavadno visoka zato, ker je bilo takrat vloženih izjemno veliko ničnostnih tožb z istim predmetom.
Court of Justice chambers increased (24 % in 2006). The distribution of cases between the various formations of the Court was in fact almost identical to that in 2005.
Sodišče konkurenci; obdavčitev; približevanje zakonodaj in enotnost zakonodaj; znamke; ekonomska in monetarna politika; socialna politika; okolje; pravosodno sodelovanje v civilnih zadevah; policijsko in pravosodno sodelovanje v kazenskih zadevah; boj proti terorizmu, pri čemer pripominjamo, da sodba, ki se glede na glavno obravnavano problematiko uvršča na določeno področje, zelo pogosto odpira vprašanja, ki so pomembna na drugem področju.
Quite frequently, however, a judgment which, on the basis of the main issue addressed by it, comes under a given topic also broaches questions of great interest concerning another topic.
V sporih pred Sodiščem se še vedno postavlja vprašanje določitve ustrezne pravne podlage za sprejemanje predpisov Skupnosti, čeprav je bilo v prejšnji sodni praksi to vprašanje že temeljito obravnavano.
Given the vast range of matters that fall within this topic, it is not surprising that the issues ruled upon in the judgments mentioned are very diverse.
Tako je Komisija v zadevi Komisija proti Svetu, v kateri je bila izdana sodba z dne 23. oktobra 2007 (C-440/05) – ker je menila, da je okvirni sklep Sveta o okrepitvi kazenskopravnega okvira za izvrševanje zakonodaje proti onesnaževanju morja z ladij2, ki je bil sprejet v okviru policijskega in pravosodnega sodelovanja v kazenskih zadevah, temeljil na neustrezni pravni podlagi – ob intervenciji Evropskega parlamenta vložila ničnostno tožbo, v kateri je zatrjevala, da cilj in vsebina tega okvirnega sklepa izhajata iz pristojnosti Evropske skupnosti na področju skupne prometne politike.
Although dealt with in much previous case-law, determination of the appropriate legal basis for the adoption of Community legislation continues to be the subject of cases brought before the Court.
Sodišče je najprej opozorilo na to, da Pogodba o Evropski uniji določa, da se, kadar je mogoče uporabiti Pogodbo ES in Pogodbo o Evropski uniji, uporabi prva in da Sodišče skrbi, da akti, za katere Svet trdi, da se zanje uporabljajo določbe o policijskem in pravosodnem sodelovanju v kazenskih zadevah, ne posegajo v pristojnosti Skupnosti, nato pa je ugotovilo, da je cilj okvirnega sklepa izboljšanje varnosti na morju in sočasno izboljšanje varstva morskega okolja pred onesnaževanjem morja z ladij.
In Case C-440/05 Commission v Council (judgment of 23 October 2007), the Commission took the view that the Council framework decision to strengthen the criminal-law framework for the enforcement of the law against ship-source pollution (2), which had been adopted within the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, was founded on an inappropriate legal basis.
Zato bi bile določbe tega okvirnega sklepa, ki od držav članic zahtevajo uporabo kazenskih sankcij za določene vrste ravnanj, lahko veljavno sprejete na podlagi Pogodbe ES.
Supported by the European Parliament, it brought an action for annulment in which it submitted that the aim and the content of the framework decision were covered by the powers of the European Community regarding the common transport policy.
Čeprav načeloma ne kazensko pravo ne pravila kazenskega postopka ne spadajo v pristojnost Skupnosti, lahko zakonodajalec Skupnosti, če pristojni nacionalni organi kot bistveni ukrep v boju proti hudim okoljskim kršitvam uporabljajo učinkovite, sorazmerne in odvračilne kazenske sankcije, zahteva, naj države članice uvedejo take sankcije, ki bodo zagotavljale poln učinek pravil, ki jih določa na področju varstva okolja.
The Court pointed out, first, that, in a situation where the EC Treaty and the Treaty on European Union are both capable of applying, the latter provides that the EC Treaty prevails and, second, that it is the task of the Court to ensure that acts which, according to the Council, fall within the provisions relating to police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters do not encroach upon the powers of the Community.
Nasprotno pa Skupnost ni pristojna za določbe tega okvirnega sklepa, ki se nanašajo na vrsto in višino kazenskih sankcij, ki jih je treba uporabiti.
The Court then established that the purpose of the framework agreement was to enhance maritime safety and to improve protection of the marine environment against ship-source pollution.
Ker pa so te določbe nedeljivo povezane z določbami o kaznivih dejanjih, na katere se nanašajo, je Sodišče ugotovilo, da
Council Framework Decision 2005/667/JHA of 12 July 2005 to strengthen the criminal-law framework for the enforcement of the law against ship-source pollution (OJ 2005 L 255, p. 164).
Okvirni sklep Sveta 2005/667/PNZ z dne 12. julija 2005 o okrepitvi kazenskopravnega okvira za izvrševanje zakonodaje proti onesnaževanju morja z ladij (UL L 255, str. 164).
It supplements Directive 2005/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on ship-source pollution and on the introduction of penalties for infringements (OJ 2005 L 255, p. 11).
Ta sklep dopolnjuje Direktivo Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta 2005/35/ES z dne 7. septembra 2005 o onesnaževanju morja z ladij in uvedbi kazni za kršitve (UL L 255, str. 11).
Accordingly, the provisions of the framework agreement requiring Member States to apply criminal penalties to certain forms of conduct could have been validly adopted on the basis of the EC Treaty.
Razvoj in dejavnost je Svet s tem okvirnim sklepom posegel v pristojnosti Skupnosti na področju pomorskega prometa in kršil Pogodbo o Evropski uniji, ki daje prednost takim pristojnostim.
The framework decision, being indivisible, was therefore annulled in its entirety.
Okvirni sklep je bil torej zaradi nedeljivosti v celoti razglašen za ničnega.
It is worth noting several cases that deal with the extent of the Court’s jurisdiction to give preliminary rulings interpreting measures or determining their validity.
Glede obsega pristojnosti Sodišča na področju sprejemanja predhodnih odločb v zvezi z razlago ali presojo veljavnosti je treba omeniti več zadev.