natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
To that end, it considered it appropriate to rely on the recommendations in the opinion on the welfare of animals during transport, issued on 11 March 2002 by the Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare, which is a Community committee, on the ground that that opinion takes account of scientific data more recent than those used as the basis for drafting Directive 91/628.
Pri tem je menila, da je primerno, da to stori na podlagi priporočil iz mnenja o dobrem počutju živali med prevozom, ki ga je 11. marca 2002 sprejel znanstveni odbor za zdravje in dobro počutje živali, ki je odbor Skupnosti, saj naj bi se v tem mnenju upo�tevali novej�i znanstveni podatki od teh, ki so se upo�tevali pri pripravi Direktive 91/628.
Those recommendations therefore constitute, in the view of the Danish Government, the best basis on which to lay down the standards of that directive and ensure protection of animals.
Navedena priporočila so po mnenju danske vlade najbolj�a podlaga za natančno določitev določb te direktive in za zagotovitev za�čite živali.
Rules such as those at issue in the main proceedings, comprising figures for the compartment height in order that transporters may refer to more exact standards than those given in Directive 91/628, fall, in principle, within the margin of discretion conferred on the Member States by Article 249 EC, on condition, however, that those rules, to the extent to which they are liable to impact adversely on the attainment of the directive’s objectives of eliminating technical barriers to trade in live animals and allowing market organisations to operate smoothly, remain objectively necessary and proportionate in order to ensure the attainment of the directive’s main objective of protecting animals during transport.
Treba je ugotoviti, da ureditev, kot je ta v postopku v glavni stvari, ki vsebuje �tevilčne podatke glede vi�ine ograd, zato da bi bile prevoznikom na voljo natančnej�e določbe od določb iz Direktive 91/628, načeloma spada pod diskrecijsko pravico, ki jo državam članicam daje člen 249 ES, toda pod pogojem, da je navedena ureditev objektivno nujna in sorazmerna za zagotovitev uresničitve glavnega cilja navedene direktive, to je za�čita živali med prevozom, saj je z njo mogoče preprečiti uresničitev ciljev odprave tehničnih ovir pri trgovanju z živimi živalmi in nemotenega delovanja tržnih ureditev, ki ju zasleduje ta direktiva.
In that regard, it is apparent from the observations of the Danish Government that, by the rules in issue in the main proceedings, the Kingdom of Denmark attached
V zvezi s tem iz stali�č danske vlade izhaja, da je Kraljevina Danska z ureditvijo v postopku v glavni stvari uresničitvi cilja za�čite živali med prevozom dala prednost
2008 — CASE C-491/06 priority to attaining the objective of protecting animals during transport over the other objectives of Directive 91/628.
2008 – ZADEVA C-491/06 pred drugimi cilji Direktive 91/628.
The Danish Government also points out that, since the welfare of animals is a priority issue, it chose to avoid unnecessary suffering for animals during their transport, while taking into account, so far as possible, the economic interests involved, in particular those of the transporters and their ability to adapt to the new requirements.
Sicer pa navedena vlada poudarja, da se je glede na to, da je vpra�anje dobrega počutja živali najpomembnej�e, odločila, da prepreči nepotrebno trpljenje živali med prevozom, pri čemer je hkrati kar najbolj upo�tevala s tem povezane gospodarske interese, zlasti interese prevoznikov in njihove zmožnosti prilagoditve novim zahtevam.
Furthermore, it is apparent from the information supplied by the national court that one of the objectives of those rules was to make it more difficult and onerous to meet the conditions for satisfying the requirements for animal transport and, thus, indirectly to reduce the number of animals transported for long periods to slaughterhouses.
Iz podatkov, ki jih je posredovalo predložitveno sodi�če, poleg tega izhaja, da je bil eden izmed ciljev navedene ureditve otežitev in podražitev pogojev za izpolnitev zahtev na področju prevoza živali, in s tem posredno zmanj�anje �tevila živali, katerih prevoz do klavnic traja dolgo.
The provisions at issue in the main proceedings would involve, inter alia, conversion of the vehicles normally used for the transport of animals, which, according to the Danish Government’s estimates, represents, for exporters, an additional cost of EUR 10 000 to EUR 20 000 per road train.
V skladu s predpisi v postopku v glavni stvari naj bi bilo zlasti treba prilagoditi vozila, ki se običajno uporabljajo za prevoz živali, kar naj bi v skladu z ocenami danske vlade za izvoznike pomenilo povečanje stro�kov od 10.000 do 20.000 EUR na povezano vozilo.
In such circumstances, it cannot be ruled out that the additional cost which compliance with rules such as those at issue in the main proceedings may represent and the technical difficulties to which they may give rise are liable to prevent attainment of the objectives of eliminating technical barriers to trade in live animals and allowing market organisations to operate smoothly, thereby restricting the free movement of goods in respect of both imports and exports.
V teh okoli�činah ni mogoče izključiti, da bi povečanje stro�kov, ki bi lahko bilo posledica spo�tovanja tak�ne ureditve, kot je ta v postopku v glavni stvari, in tehnične težave, do katerih lahko pride zaradi tak�ne ureditve, lahko preprečili uresničitev ciljev odprave tehničnih ovir pri trgovanju z živimi živalmi in nemotenega delovanja tržnih ureditev, s čimer bi bil tako pri uvozu kot pri izvozu omejen prosti pretok blaga.
In the absence, among the documents submitted to the Court, of data relating to the impact of the rules at issue in the main proceedings on the smooth operation of the common market, in particular with regard to pig producers from other Member States who transport animals on Danish territory, it is for the national court to determine whether those rules give rise to technical difficulties of such a kind to prevent attainment of the objectives of eliminating technical barriers to trade in live animals and allowing market organisations to operate smoothly pursued by Directive 91/628
Ker v spisu, ki je bil predložen Sodi�ču, ni podatkov glede vpliva ureditve v postopku v glavni stvari na dobro delovanje skupnega trga, zlasti z vidika rejcev pra�ičev iz drugih držav članic, ki prevažajo živali na danskem ozemlju, mora predložitveno sodi�če preveriti, ali lahko zaradi te ureditve pride do tehničnih težav, ki bi lahko preprečile uresničitev ciljev odprave tehničnih ovir pri trgovanju z živimi živalmi in
DANSKE SVINEPRODUCENTER and to assess, in the light of those various factors, whether, by adopting those rules, the Kingdom of Denmark exceeded the margin of discretion conferred on it by that directive.
DANSKE SVINEPRODUCENTER nemotenega delovanja tržnih ureditev, ki ju zasleduje Direktiva 91/628, in na podlagi teh različnih dejavnikov presoditi, ali je Kraljevina Danska s sprejetjem te ureditve prekoračila diskrecijsko pravico, ki naj bi jo imela na podlagi te direktive.
In particular, that court must be certain that those rules, to the extent to which they are liable to impact adversely on the attainment of those two objectives, remain objectively necessary and proportionate to ensure the attainment of the principal objective of protecting animals during transport pursued by Directive 91/628.
Glede na to, da je s to ureditvijo mogoče preprečiti uresničitev teh dveh ciljev, se bo moralo navedeno sodi�če zlasti prepričati, da je ta ureditev objektivno nujna in sorazmerna za zagotovitev uresničitve glavnega cilja navedene direktive, to je za�čita živali med prevozom.
To that end, it must ascertain, first of all, that the additional cost and technical difficulties resulting from the provisions at issue in the main proceedings are not liable to disadvantage pig producers in the Member State which adopted them.
V ta namen bo moralo predložitveno sodi�če najprej preveriti, da povečanje stro�kov in tehnične težave, ki so posledica predpisov v postopku v glavni stvari, ne postavljajo v slab�i položaj rejcev pra�ičev iz države članice, ki je te predpise sprejela.
Next, it must be satisfied that those provisions are not liable to penalise those producers who wish to export their products in comparison with exporters from other Member States, who would not have to bear the additional cost connected with the technical conversion of road trains.
Nato se bo moralo prepričati, da ti predpisi navedenih rejcev, ki želijo proizvode izvažati, ne postavljajo v slab�i položaj glede na izvoznike iz drugih držav članic, ki naj ne bi imeli večjih stro�kov v zvezi s tehničnimi spremembami povezanih vozil.
Finally, it must verify that those provisions do not disadvantage pig producers from other Member States which wish to transport animals to Denmark, or via that Member State, and who would also be required to convert road trains in order to comply with the Danish rules.
Na koncu bo moralo preveriti, da navedeni predpisi ne postavljajo v slab�i položaj rejcev pra�ičev iz drugih držav članic, ki bi želeli prevažati živali na Dansko ali preko te države in ki bi tako zaradi skladnosti z dansko ureditvijo morali prilagoditi povezana vozila.
Having regard to the foregoing, the answer to the first and second questions referred must be that rules such as those at issue in the main proceedings, comprising figures for the animal compartment height in order that transporters may refer to more precise standards than those set out in Directive 91/628, may fall within the margin of discretion conferred on the Member States by Article 249 EC, on condition that those rules, which comply with the objective pursued by that directive of protecting animals during transport, do not, contrary to the principle of proportionality, prevent attainment of the objectives, also pursued by Directive 91/628, of eliminating technical barriers to trade in live animals and allowing market organisations to operate smoothly.
Glede na vse, kar je bilo navedeno zgoraj, je treba na prvo in drugo postavljeno vpra�anje odgovoriti, da ureditev, kot je ta v postopku v glavni stvari, ki vsebuje �tevilčne podatke glede vi�ine ograd živali, da bi bile prevoznikom na voljo natančnej�e določbe od določb iz Direktive 91/628, spada pod diskrecijsko pravico, ki jo državam članicam daje člen 249 ES, pod pogojem, da ta ureditev, s katero se spo�tuje cilj za�čite živali med prevozom, ki ga zasleduje ta direktiva, ne preprečuje uresničitve ciljev odprave tehničnih ovir pri trgovanju z živimi živalmi in nemotenega delovanja tržnih ureditev, ki ju prav tako zasleduje navedena direktiva, s čimer bi bilo kr�eno načelo sorazmernosti.
By its third question, the national court asks essentially whether section D of point 47 in Chapter VI of the annex to Directive 91/628 is to be interpreted as meaning that a Member State is not entitled to introduce national rules under which, in the case of transport operations of over eight hours’ duration, the available area must be at least 0.50 m2 per 100 kg of pig.
S tretjim vpra�anjem predložitveno sodi�če v bistvu spra�uje, ali je treba poglavje VI, točka 47, naslov D, priloge k Direktivi 91/628 razlagati tako, da država članica ni upravičena do tega, da bi uvedla nacionalno ureditev, v skladu s katero mora v primeru prevoza, ki traja več kot osem ur, razpoložljiva povr�ina zna�ati vsaj 0,50 m2na 100 kg pra�ičev.
In that regard, it should be borne in mind, first, that, in accordance with Article 3(1) (aa) of Directive 91/628, Member States must ensure that space allowances (loading densities) for animals at least comply with the figures set out in Chapter VI of the annex to that directive, in respect of the animals and the means of transport referred to in that chapter.
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, prvič, da države članice v skladu s členom 3(1)(aa) Direktive 91/628 zagotovijo, da se zahtevan prostor (gostota nakladanja) za živali sklada najmanj s �tevilčnimi podatki, navedenimi v poglavju VI priloge k tej direktivi glede na vrsto živali in prevozna sredstva iz tega poglavja.
Second, section D of point 47 in that chapter provides that, in order to comply with the minimum requirements laid down by that provision, that is to say, that pigs must at least be able to lie down and stand up in their natural position, the loading density for pigs of around 100 kg should not exceed 235 kg/m2, which is equivalent to 0.42m2for a pig of 100 kg.
Drugič, točka 47, naslov D, navedenega poglavja določa, da zaradi skladnosti z minimalnimi zahtevami, ki jih določa ta določba sama, namreč, da je treba pra�ičem zagotoviti najmanj toliko prostora, da se lahko uležejo in stojijo v naravnem položaju, gostota nakladanja za pra�iče, težke približno 100 kg, ne sme biti večja od 235 kg/m2, kar je enako 0,42 m2 na 100 kg težkega pra�iča.
That provision also states that the breed, size and physical condition of the pigs may mean that the minimum required surface area has to be increased; a maximum increase of 20% may also be required depending on the meteorological conditions and the journey time.
Ta določba poleg tega določa, da se lahko zahtevana minimalna povr�ina poveča glede na pasmo, velikost in fizično kondicijo pra�ičev, pri čemer je lahko glede na vremenske pogoje in čas na poti potrebno povečanje za največ 20 %.
It is thus apparent from the wording of section D of point 47 in Chapter VI of the annex to Directive 91/628 that the Community legislature expressly laid down minimum standards for loading density for pigs of around 100 kg and, in particular, allowed the Member States to increase those standards by up to 20% depending on the meteorological conditions and the journey time.
Iz besedila poglavja VI, točka 47, naslov D, priloge k Direktivi 91/628 torej izhaja, da je zakonodajalec Skupnosti izrecno določil minimalne zahteve glede gostote nakladanja 100 kg težkih pra�ičev, pri čemer je državam članicam zlasti dovolil, da glede na vremenske pogoje in čas na poti te zahteve povečajo za največ 20 %.
100 kg complies with the minimum and maximum standards laid down by the
Treba je ugotoviti, da je nacionalni predpis, v skladu s katerim mora v primeru prevoza, ki traja več kot osem ur, razpoložljiva povr�ina zna�ati vsaj 0,50 m2 za 100 kg težke pra�iče, v skladu z minimalnimi in maksimalnimi zahtevami iz
DANSKE SVINEPRODUCENTER provisions of Directive 91/628 referred to in paragraph 48 of the present judgment.
Direktive 91/628, navedenimi v točki 48 te sodbe.
The increase in the minimum required space laid down by such a provision is justified by the journey time and falls within the 20% limit authorised by the Community legislature in those provisions.
Povečanje predpisanega minimalnega prostora, ki je predvideno s tak�nim predpisom, je utemeljeno s časom na poti in je tudi v skladu z omejitvijo povečanja za največ 20 %, ki jo je v tej direktivi določil zakonodajalec Skupnosti.
In those circumstances, the answer to the third question referred is that section D of point 47 of Chapter VI of the annex to Directive 91/628 must be interpreted as meaning that a Member State is entitled to introduce national rules under which, in the case of transport operations of over eight hours’ duration, the available space per animal must be at least 0.50 m2 per 100 kg of pig.
V teh okoli�činah je na tretje postavljeno vpra�anje treba odgovoriti, da je treba poglavje VI, točka 47, naslov D, priloge k Direktivi 91/628 razlagati tako, da je država članica upravičena do tega, da bi uvedla nacionalno ureditev, v skladu s katero mora v primeru prevoza, ki traja več kot osem ur, razpoložljiva povr�ina zna�ati vsaj 0,50 m2 na 100 kg težkega pra�iča.
Costs incurred in submitting observations to the Court, other than the costs of those parties, are not recoverable.
Stro�ki, prigla�eni za predložitev stali�č Sodi�ču, ki niso stro�ki navedenih strank, se ne povrnejo.
National rules such as those at issue in the main proceedings, comprising figures for the animal compartment height in order that transporters may refer to more precise standards than those set out in Council Direct - ive 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
Nacionalna ureditev, kot je ta v postopku v glavni stvari, ki vsebuje številčne podatke glede višine ograd za živali, zato da bi bile prevoznikom na voljo natančnejše določbe od določb iz Direktive Sveta 91/628/EGS z dne
2008 — CASE C-491/06 amended by Council Directive 95/29/EC of 29 June 1995, may fall with - in the margin of discretion conferred on the Member States by Article 249 EC, on condition that those rules, which comply with the objective pursued by that directive, as amended, of protecting animals during transport do not, contrary to the principle of proportionality, prevent attainment of the objectives, also pursued by that directive, as amended, of eliminating technical barriers to trade in live animals and allowing market organisations to operate smoothly.
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, spada pod diskrecijsko pravico, ki jo državam članicam daje člen 249 ES, pod pogojem, da ta ureditev, s katero se spoštuje cilj zaščite živali med prevozom, ki ga zasleduje ta direktiva, kot je bila spremenjena, ne preprečuje uresničitve ciljev odprave tehničnih ovir pri trgovanju z živimi živalmi in nemotenega delovanja tržnih ureditev, ki ju prav tako zasleduje navedena direktiva, kot je bila spremenjena, s čimer bi bilo kršeno načelo sorazmernosti.
It is for the national court to establish whether those rules comply with those principles.
Predložitveno sodišče mora preveriti, ali se s to ureditvijo spoštujejo ta načela.
Section D of point 47 in Chapter VI of the annex to Directive 91/628, as amended by Directive 95/29, must be interpreted as meaning that a Member State is entitled to introduce national rules under which, in the case of transport operations of over eight hours’ duration, the available space per animal must be at least 0.50 m2 per 100 kg of pig.
Poglavje VI, točka 47, naslov D, priloge k Direktivi 91/628, kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo Sveta 95/29, je treba razlagati tako, da je država članica upravičena do tega, da bi uvedla nacionalno ureditev, v skladu s katero mora v primeru prevoza, ki traja več kot osem ur, razpoložljiva površina znašati vsaj 0,50 m2 na 100 kg težkega prašiča.
Case C-14/07
Zadeva C-14/07
(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof)
(Predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe, ki ga je vložilo Bundesgerichtshof)
(Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000 — Service of judicial and extrajudicial documents — Annexes to the document not translated — Consequences)
„Pravosodno sodelovanje v civilnih zadevah – Uredba (ES) �t. 1348/2000 – Vročanje sodnih in zunajsodnih pisanj – Neprevedene priloge k pisanju – Posledice“
I - 3371Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber), 8 May 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . .
Trstenjak, predstavljeni 29. novembra 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Service of judicial and extrajudicial documents — Regulation No 1348/2000 — Document instituting proceedings — Definition
Pravosodno sodelovanje v civilnih zadevah – Vročanje sodnih in zunajsodnih pisanj – Uredba št. 1348/2000 – Tožba – Pojem
SUMMARY — CASE C-14/07
POVZETEK – ZADEVA C-14/07
Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Service of judicial and extrajudicial documents — Regulation No 1348/2000 — Service of a document written in a language other than the official language of the Member State addressed
Pravosodno sodelovanje v civilnih zadevah – Vročanje sodnih in zunajsodnih pisanj – Uredba št. 1348/2000 – Vročitev pisanja, napisanega v jeziku, ki ni uradni jezik zaprošene države članice
proceedings within the meaning of that regulation.
niso sestavni del tožbe v smislu te uredbe.
The term ‘document to be served’ in Article 8(1) of Regulation No 1348/2000 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil and commercial matters is to be interpreted, where such a document is a document instituting the proceedings, as meaning the document or documents which must be served on the defendant in due time in order to enable him to assert his rights in legal proceedings in the State of transmission.
Pijem „pisanje za vročitev“ iz člena 8(1) Uredbe �t. 1348/2000 o vročanju sodnih in zunajsodnih pisanj v civilnih ali gospodarskih zadevah v državah članicah se, če je to pisanje tožba, razlaga kot pisanje ali pisanja, katerih pravočasna vročitev toženi stranki omogoča uveljavljanje njenih pravic v okviru sodnega postopka v državi prosilki.
Such a document must make it possible to identify with a degree of certainty at the very least the subjectmatter of the claim and the cause of action as well as the summons to appear before the court or, depending on the nature of the pending proceedings, to be aware that it is possible to appeal.
Tako pisanje mora omogočati zanesljivo seznanitev vsaj s predmetom in podlago zahtevka, vsebovati pa mora tudi vabilo na sodi�če ali – odvisno od vrste postopka v teku – možnost vložitve pravnega sredstva pri sodi�ču.
Documents which have a purely evidential function and are not necessary for the purpose of understanding the subjectmatter of the claim and the cause of action do not form an integral part of the document instituting the
Listine, ki opravljajo zgolj dokazno funkcijo in niso nujne za razumevanje predmeta in podlage zahtevka,
Article 8(1) of Regulation No 1348/2000 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil and commercial matters is to be interpreted as meaning that the addressee of a document instituting proceedings which is to be served does not have the right to refuse to accept that document, provided that it enables the addressee to assert his rights in legal proceedings in the Member State
Člen 8(1) Uredbe �t. 1348/2000 o vročanju sodnih in zunajsodnih pisanj v civilnih ali gospodarskih zadevah v državah članicah je treba razlagati tako, da naslovnik tožbe za vročitev, ki lahko uveljavi svoje pravice v okviru sodnega postopka v državi članici prosilki, nima
WEISS UND PARTNER of transmission, where annexes are attached to that document consisting of documentary evidence which is not in the language of the Member State addressed or in a language of the Member State of transmission which the addressee understands, but which has a purely evidential function and is not necessary for understanding the subjectmatter of the claim and the cause of action.
WEISS UND PARTNER pravice zavrniti sprejema te tožbe, če so tožbi priložene priloge z dokazili, ki sicer niso napisane v jeziku zapro�ene države članice ali v jeziku države članice prosilke, ki ga naslovnik razume, vendar opravljajo zgolj dokazno funkcijo in niso nujne za razumevanje predmeta in podlage zahtevka. Nacionalno sodi�če mora preveriti, ali tožena stranka glede na vsebino tožbe lahko uveljavlja svoje pravice ali pa mora po�iljatelj zagotoviti prevod priloge, ki jo je treba nujno priložiti.
Secondly, it is apparent from an autonomous interpretation of the term ‘document instituting proceedings’ that such a document must consist of the document or documents, where they are intrinsically linked, enabling the defendant to understand the subjectmatter and grounds of the plaintiff’s application and to be aware of the existence of legal proceedings in which he may assert his rights.
Po drugi strani iz samostojne razlage pojma tožbe izhaja, da mora tako pisanje obsegati listino ali listine, če so te neločljivo povezane, na podlagi katerih se lahko tožena stranka seznani s predmetom in razlogi zahtevka tožeče stranke ter z obstojem sodnega postopka, v katerem lahko uveljavlja svoje pravice.