natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Member States point out that the only regulatory instrument of labour market policy remaining to them, with respect to Turkish students and their possible entry to the labour market made available by Article 6 of the decision, would be to regulate more closely, and possibly to reduce distinctly, the number of Turkish nationals allowed to enter for the purpose of studying.
Države članice v tem pogledu opozarjajo na to, da jim kot edini instrument uravnavanja politike trga dela glede tur�kih �tudentov in njihovega morebitnega vstopa na trg dela, omogočenega s členom 6 Sklepa, preostane zgolj, da strožje uravnavajo in eventualno občutno zmanj�ajo �tevilo tur�kih državljanov, ki jim je dovoljen vstop zaradi �tudija.
In connection with Directive 2004/114 the German and Netherlands Governments have, however, additionally pointed out that, if Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80 is applicable to students who carry on a secondary activity alongside their studies, the obligation on Member States under the directive to allow students to carry on a secondary activity would have the consequence that every Turkish student would have the opportunity to obtain the benefit of the rights under Article 6(1) of the decision.
V povezavi z Direktivo 2004/114 sta nem�ka in nizozemska vlada poleg tega opozorili na to, da bi pri uporabi člena 6(1) Sklepa �t.
A Member State’s decision to admit a Turkish national for the purpose of study would, via the provision in Article 17(1) of the directive, have the consequence that the student — if during the course of his studies, which will normally exceed the threshold in Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80, he makes use of his right to carry on a secondary activity — would directly obtain a permanent right of residence.
1/80 za �tudente, ki poleg �tudija opravljajo stransko zaposlitev, obveznost držav članic, ki izhaja iz direktive, da �tudentom dovolijo stransko zaposlitev, vodila do tega, da bi vsak tur�ki �tudent dobil možnost uživati pravice iz člena 6(1) Sklepa.
24 — See inter alia Nazli, cited in footnote 20, paragraph 29, Ertanir, cited in footnote 16, paragraph 23, and Kus, cited in footnote 14, paragraph 25.
Odločitev države članice, da tur�kim državljanom dovoli vstop zaradi �tudija, bi imela prek določbe člena 17(1) Direktive za posledico, da bi lahko �tudent – če bi med svojim �tudijem, ki bi bil praviloma dalj�i od roka iz člena 6(1) Sklepa �t.
23 — See recital 25 in the preamble to Directive 2004/114.
1/80, izkoristil svojo pravico do stranske zaposlitve – neposredno zahteval stalno pravico do prebivanja.
PAYIR AND OTHERS contracting parties agreed to be guided by Articles 48, 49 and 50 of the EC Treaty (now Article 39 et seq.
PAYIR IN DRUGI in 50 Pogodbe EGS (zdaj člen 39 in naslednji ES), da bi postopoma medsebojno vzpostavili prosto gibanje delavcev. 25
The Commission too, at the hearing, answered the question of the consequences following from the interaction of Decision No 1/80 and Directive 2004/114.
Tudi Komisija je na ustni obravnavi odgovorila na vpra�anje glede posledic, ki izhajajo iz součinkovanja Sklepa �t. 1/80 in Direktive 2004/114.
However, in so far as the Commission submitted that with an activity of 10 hours a week the status of worker might not be accepted, that argument cannot be followed, in the light of the considerations set out above in connection with the discussion of the concept of worker.
Vendar pa Komisijinemu stali�ču, da pri dejavnosti 10 ur na teden ni mogoče priznati statusa delavca, ki izhaja iz navedb, ki sledijo iz zgornje razprave o pojmu delavca, ni mogoče slediti.
Activity even of 10 hours a week constitutes an effective and genuine activity that is not on so small a scale as to be purely marginal and ancillary, as defined by the Court.
Tudi dejavnost 10 ur na teden pomeni dejansko in pristno dejavnost, ki v smislu opredelitve Sodi�ča nima tako majhnega obsega, da bi bila zgolj popolnoma postranska in pomožna.
In the context of Article 39 EC, the Court has ruled that it is the content of the work performed, not the motives for taking up work, that is decisive for Community law. 26
V okviru člena 39 ES je Sodi�če ugotovilo, da je za pravo Skupnosti odločilna vsebina opravljenega dela, in ne razlogi za začetek opravljanja dela. 26
The question whether the specific purpose of the entry of students and the fact that the activity has been permitted only on a secondary basis for the financing of studies are of relevance in interpreting the concept of worker in the context of Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80 is instead to be answered on the basis of an interpretation focused on the spirit and purpose of the decision.
Na vpra�anje, ali sta poseben namen vstopa �tudentov in dejstvo, da je zaposlitev dovoljena zgolj dodatno za financiranje �tudija, pomembna za razlago pojma delavca v okviru člena 6(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80, je treba nasprotno odgovoriti na podlagi razlage, ki se osredotoča na smisel in namen sklepa.
The Court has also held, however, that the principles recognised in the context of Article 39 EC are to be transferred to the rights conferred by Decision No 1/80 only so far as possible.
Sodi�če je seveda tudi ugotovilo, da je treba načela, priznana v okviru člena 39 ES, prenesti le toliko, kolikor mogoče, na pravice, ki so priznane v Sklepu �t. 1/80.
25 — The Court also mentions in this connection Article 36 of the Additional Protocol signed on 23 November 1970, annexed to the Association Agreement and concluded by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2760/72 of 19 December 1972 (OJ 1977 L 361, p. 60).
25 — Sodi�če omenja v tej povezavi tudi člen 36 Dodatnega protokola, ki je bil podpisan 23. novembra 1970, dodan kot priloga Sporazumu in sprejet z Uredbo Sveta (EGS) �t. 2760/72 z dne 19. decembra 1972 (UL L 293, str. 1).
26 — See Levin, cited in footnote 6, paragraph 21.
26 — Glej sodbo Levin (navedena v opombi 6, točka 21).
27 — See Kurz, cited in footnote 5, paragraph 30; Nazli, cited in footnote 20, paragraph 55; Bozkurt, cited in footnote 14, paragraph 20; and Case C-171/95 Tetik [1997] ECR I-329, paragraph 20.
27 — Glej sodbe Kurz (navedena v opombi 5, točka 30), Nazli (navedena v opombi 20, točka 55), Bozkurt (navedena v opombi 14, točka 20) in sodbo z dne 23. januarja 1997 v zadevi Tetik (C-171/95, Recueil, str. I-329, točka 20).
28 — For a clear differentiation between the purpose of the Association Agreement and Article 39 EC, see the Opinion of Advocate General Geelhoed of 12 September 2006 in Case C-16/05 Tum & Dari. 63.
28 — Generalni pravobranilec Geelhoed izrecno razločuje med namenom Pridružitvenega sporazuma in namenom člena 39 ES v sklepnih predlogih z dne 12. septembra 2006 v zadevi Tum & Dari (C-16/05, �e nere�ena zadeva pred Sodi�čem). 63.
The Court — as already stated above — in principle interprets the concept of worker within the meaning of Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80 in parallel to the principles recognised in the context of Articles 39 EC and 40 EC.
Sodi�če načelno razlaga – kot je bilo že zgoraj pojasnjeno – pojem delavca v smislu člena 6(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80 vzporedno z načeli, priznanimi v okviru členov 39 ES in 40 ES.
In so doing it relies on Article 12 of the Association Agreement, in which the
Pri tem se opira na člen 12 Pridružitvenega sporazuma, v katerem sta se pogodbenici sporazumeli, da bosta upo�tevali člene 48, 49
OPINION OF MRS KOKOTT — CASE C-294/06
KOKOTT – ZADEVA C-294/06 vstopa je namreč �tudij.
The Court has repeatedly held that the employment rights, and hence the residence rights, conferred by Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80 are intended to consolidate progressively the position of the persons concerned in the host Member State.
Sodi�če je večkrat odločilo, da je namen pravic na področju zaposlovanja in z njimi povezane pravice do prebivanja, ki jih podeljuje člen 6(1) Sklepa �t.
29 and need for protection. The purpose of his entering the country is to study.
1/80, da postopoma utrjujejo položaj zadevne osebe v državi članici gostiteljici. 29
In a teleological interpretation of Article 6 of Decision No 1/80, the spirit and purpose of the Association Agreement as a whole must also be taken into consideration.
V skladu s teleolo�ko razlago člena 6 Sklepa je treba poleg tega upo�tevati smisel in namen celotnega Pridružitvenega sporazuma.
An interpretation derived from the wording of Article 6 which runs counter to the aims of the Association Agreement cannot be valid.
Kajti razlaga na podlagi besedila člena 6, ki nasprotuje namenom Pridružitvenega sporazuma, ne more biti pravilna.
The intention of Article 6(1) is therefore to confer on a migrant worker who becomes increasingly integrated into the labour market of the host State rights of residence graduated accordingly.
Namen člena 6(1) je tudi, da sezonskemu delavcu, ki se v vedno večji meri vključuje v trg dela v državi članici gostiteljici, priznava postopoma večje pravice do prebivanja.
Those rights of employment and residence laid down in Article 6(1) thus protect the legitimate expectations of Turkish workers who enter the labour market of the Member States.
Te, v členu 6(1) določene pravice do zaposlitve in prebivanja, tako varujejo legitimna pričakovanja tur�kih delavcev, ki vstopijo na trg dela države članice.
The stronger their integration into the labour market, and the greater their need for certainty of planning and for protection of their confidence in the permanence of their situation, the further their rights under Article 6(1) extend.
Čim večje je njihovo vključevanje v trg dela, tem večja je njihova potreba po zanesljivem načrtovanju in po varstvu njihovega zaupanja v stalnost njihovega položaja, in toliko dlje sežejo pravice, ki jim jih podeljuje člen 6(1).
In accordance with Article 2(1) of the Association Agreement, the aim of the agreement is ‘to promote the continuous and balanced strengthening of trade and economic relations between the Parties, while taking full account of the need to ensure an accelerated development of the Turkish economy and to improve the level of employment and the living conditions of the Turkish people’.
V skladu s členom 2(1) Pridružitvenega sporazuma je namen sporazuma „spodbujati stalno in uravnoteženo krepitev trgovinskih in gospodarskih odnosov med pogodbenicami, ob polnem upo�tevanju potrebe po zagotovitvi pospe�enega razvoja gospodarstva Turčije in zvi�anja ravni zaposlenosti ter življenjskih razmer tur�kega naroda“.
A student who has entered a Member State in order to study and pursues an activity only on a secondary basis does not, however, present a comparable interest
Vendar �tudent, ki je pri�el v državo članico �tudirat in zgolj poleg �tudija opravlja neko zaposlitev, nima podobnega interesa in potrebe po varstvu. Namen njegovega
29 — See inter alia Case C-230/03 Sedef [2006] ECR I-157, paragraph 34, and Tetik, cited in footnote 27, paragraph 21.
29 — Glej zgolj sodbo z dne 10. januarja 2006 v zadevi Sedef (C-230/03, ZOdl., str. I-157, točka 34) in sodbo Tetik (navedena v opombi 27, točka 21).
It may be seen that it is detrimental in many ways to the achievement of those aims if students who carry on a secondary activity fall within the scope of Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80 with the conse-
Pokaže se, da se �koduje uresničitvi teh ciljev z več vidikov, če bi �tudenti, ki opravljajo stransko zaposlitev, spadali na področje uporabe člena 6(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80, s posledico, da bi imeli, če bi med �tudijem
PAYIR AND OTHERS quence that, if during their studies they have worked in compliance with the conditions in Article 6(1), under the third indent of Article 6(1) they have free access to any employment of their choice after four years’ legal employment.
PAYIR IN DRUGI ob upo�tevanju pogojev iz člena 6(1) delali, v skladu s členom 6(1), tretja alinea, po �tirih letih zakonite zaposlitve prost dostop do zaposlitve po svoji izbiri.
that way, make use of the opportunity of staying in the host State in order to work there.
ostanejo v državi gostiteljici, da bi tam dobili zaposlitev.
The Association Agreement’s aim of accelerating the development of the Turkish economy and improving the living conditions of the Turkish people would thereby be jeopardised.
Cilj Pridružitvenega sporazuma, da se pospe�i razvoj gospodarstva Turčije ter izbolj�ajo življenjske razmere tur�kega naroda, bi bil s tem ogrožen.
With respect to the admission of Turkish students to study in the Member States, the essential focus of the promotion of the ‘accelerated development of the Turkish economy’ and the improvement of ‘the level of employment and the living conditions of the Turkish people’ is the training of young Turkish academics who, after completing their studies, make use of the knowledge and skills they have acquired in economic life and in research and teaching in their home country, pass them on, and thus contribute them to Turkish society.
Z vidika sprejema tur�kih �tudentov na �tudij v državah članicah je bistveni poudarek zagotovitve „pospe�enega razvoja gospodarstva Turčije in zvi�anja ravni zaposlenosti ter življenjskih razmer tur�kega naroda“ izobraževanje mladih tur�kih akademikov, ki po koncu svojega �tudija pridobljeno vedenje in znanje v svoji domovini vložijo in posredujejo v gospodarstvo, raziskave in poučevanje, ter ga tako prinesejo v tur�ko družbo.
In relation to the interpretation of the concept of worker, a complete parallelism of the interpretation of the concept in Article 39 EC and Article 6 of Decision No 1/80 must therefore be ruled out.
V zvezi z razlago pojma delavca je treba izključiti popolno enakost z razlago pojma v členu 39 ES in členu 6 Sklepa �t. 1/80.
Turkish nationals who come to a Member State to study and are allowed to take up a secondary activity alongside their studies in order to finance them do not fall within the scope of Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80, even if, looking at their secondary activity in isolation, they possess all the qualities of a worker within the meaning of Article 39 EC.
Tur�ki državljani, ki pridejo v državo članico �tudirat in ki jim je dovoljeno poleg �tudija za njegovo financiranje imeti stransko zaposlitev, ne spadajo na področje uporabe člena 6(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80, in sicer tudi takrat ne, kadar imajo pri ločeni obravnavi njihove stranske zaposlitve vse lastnosti delavca v smislu člena 39 ES.
It would run counter to this aim pursued jointly by the parties to the Association Agreement if the interpretation of Article 6 of Decision No 1/80 were based on an understanding of the provision which, by including students financing their studies by secondary activities, ultimately gave them the possibility of obtaining an often attractive stay in the host State by overcoming minor obstacles.
Temu cilju, ki mu sledijo pogodbenice Pridružitvenega sporazuma, nasprotuje, če bi bila podlaga za razlago člena 6 Sklepa razumevanje določbe, ki bi z vključitvijo �tudentov, ki so si financirali �tudij s postranskim delom, tem nazadnje z majhnimi ovirami omogočila ostati v državi gostiteljici, kar bi bilo v veliko primerih privlačno.
Instead of returning to their country of origin and putting their acquired knowledge and skills into practice there, it would be to be feared that many Turkish students would, if the provision were understood in
Namesto da bi se vrnili v svojo matično državo in tam uporabili pridobljeno izobrazbo, bi se bilo treba bati, da bi z ustreznim razumevanjem določbe veliko tur�kih �tudentov izkoristilo možnost, da
That interpretation also leads to positive consequences from other points of view, both for the Turkish students concerned and with respect to the aims pursued by the Association Agreement as a whole.
Taka razlaga hkrati vodi do pozitivnih posledic tudi z drugih vidikov, tako za zadevne tur�ke �tudente kot tudi glede na vse cilje, ki jim sledi Pridružitveni sporazum.
Since a limitation of student numbers on the basis of labour market policy considerations is not necessary, the possibility of studying in a Member State is open to a greater number of Turkish
Ker z delovnopolitičnega vidika morebitna omejitev �tevila �tudentov ni potrebna, se velikemu �tevilu tur�kih �tudentov odpre možnost �tudija v državi članici.
The possibility of being allowed to work to a considerable extent alongside the studies, and hence the possibility of financing the studies in the host State oneself, furthermore ensure that not only students with a prosperous family background can come to the Member States to study.
Iz možnostjo, da si sami plačajo �tudij v državi gostiteljici, je torej zagotovljeno, da niso samo �tudenti iz bogatih družin tisti, ki lahko pridejo �tudirat v državo članico.
taking up paid employment 30 do not contradict the interpretation I have put forward. It is not possible to derive from the Court’s observations on these — different — factual situations any general principle that the purpose of the leave to enter and stay originally granted must without exception be disregarded.
ugotovitev Sodi�ča glede teh – drugačnih – okoli�čin primera ni mogoče izpeljati nobenega splo�nega načela, da se namena vstopnega dovoljenja in dovoljenja za prebivanje, ki sta bili prvotno izdani, brez izjeme ne sme upo�tevati.
On the contrary, by its decisions holding that the principles relating to Article 39 EC are to be transferred so far as possible in the interpretation of Decision No 1/80, the Court has in fact stated that, instead of a schematic generalisation, the specific situation must be taken into account in each case.
Poleg tega je Sodi�če s svojo sodno prakso, v skladu s katero je treba pri razlagi Sklepa načela v zvezi s členom 39 ES prenesti le toliko, kolikor mogoče, dejansko izrazilo, da je treba namesto shematske posplo�itve upo�tevati v vsakem primeru posebej poseben položaj.
The above conclusion is not contradicted by the Court’s caselaw according to which temporal limitations imposed by the Member States or statements made by the worker on entry that he will leave the country again after a certain time are immaterial in the context of Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80.
Tej razlagi ne nasprotuje sodna praksa Sodi�ča, v skladu s katero so časovne omejitve, ki jih naloži država članica, ali izjave delavca ob vstopu, da bo po določenem času zapustil državo, nepomembne v okviru člena 6(1) Sklepa �t. 1/80.
The Court was correct to state that the scope of Article 6 would be exposed to the arbitrariness of the Member States if those limitations or statements were allowed to affect the application of Article 6.
Sodi�ču je v tem treba pritrditi, da bi bilo področje uporabe čle na 6 prepu�čeno samovolji držav članic, če bi se dopustilo, da bi zgoraj omenjene časovne omejitve oziroma izjave vplivale na možnost uporabe člena 6.
The present situation is different, however, since, as the Netherlands Government rightly submits, the residence of students is by definition limited in time to the duration of the course of study, so that the limitation is not connected in any way with the periods specified in Article 6.
Ta položaj pa je drugačen, saj je, kot je pravilno navedla nizozemska vlada, prebivanje �tudentov per definitionem časovno omejeno na trajanje �tudija, torej časovna omejitev ni v nobeni povezavi z obdobji, določenimi v členu 6.
One of the decided cases, for example, concerned a Turkish worker who had been allowed to enter a Member State and take up employment there in order to obtain professional experience with his Turkish employer’s parent undertaking.
V enem od primerov, o katerem je na primer že bilo odločeno, je �lo za tur�kega delavca, ki mu je bil dovoljen vstop in začetek dela v državi članici, da tam pridobi delovne izku�nje pri matični družbi njegovega tur�kega delodajalca. 31 Drugače kot v okoli-
31 In contrast to the situation in the present case, in which entry was for the purpose of study, in that case a worker entered precisely for the purpose of taking up employment, so that the only issue to be decided was the significance to be attached to the motives for taking up the employment.
�činah tega primera, v katerih je bil namen vstopa �tudij, je v tistem primeru delavec vstopil prav zaradi poklicnega dela, tako da je bilo treba samo odločiti o vpra�anju, kak�en pomen je treba pripisati motivom za poklicno delo.
In so far as the Court held that the motivation for taking up the first employment was of no relevance, no conclusion may be drawn from that decision as to the present set of facts.
Iz mnenja Sodi�ča, da motivi za prvo zaposlitev niso upo�tevni, za to odločitev ni mogoče izpeljati nikakr�nega odgovora.
30 — See Günaydin, cited in footnote 18, paragraph 52; Kus, cited in footnote 14, paragraph 52; and Kurz, cited in footnote 5, paragraph 56.
30 — Glej sodbo z dne 30. septembra 1997 v zadevi Günaydin (navedena v opombi 18, točka 52) ter sodbi Kus (navedena v opombi 14, točka 52) in Kurz (navedena v opombi 5, točka 56).
The decisions of the Court in which it explained, with respect to certain factual situations, that the Member States may not refuse to extend the employment and residence right on the ground that entry and stay were permitted for reasons other than
Tudi odločitve Sodi�ča, v katerih je za določene okoli�čine primera pojasnilo, da države članice ne smejo zavrniti podalj�anja delovnega dovoljenja in dovoljenja za prebivanje z utemeljitvijo, da sta bila vstop in prebivanje dovoljena iz drugih razlogov
31 — Günaydin, cited in footnote 18.
31 — Sodba Günaydin (navedena v opombi 18).
PAYIR AND OTHERS vocational training to economic activity, as a result of which — in particular because of the extensive practical work and the organisation of the training relationship — vocational training ultimately appears as a stage in working life.
PAYIR IN DRUGI podobnost poklicnega izobraževanja poklicnemu delu, zaradi katerega se – zlasti zaradi obsežne prakse in organizacije izobraževalnega razmerja – poklicno izobraževanje na koncu zdi stadij poklicnega življenja.
Entry for the purpose of taking up a training course ultimately constitutes entry for the purpose of taking up employment.
Končno vstop zaradi izobraževanja pomeni vstop zaradi zaposlitve.
This factual situation too is therefore not comparable with entry for the purpose of study, from the point of view of classification in Article 6.
Torej tudi te okoli�čine primera niso primerljive z vstopom zaradi �tudija z vidika uvrstitve v člen 6.
In another case, a Turkish national had been allowed to enter the country for the purpose of marriage, and after being divorced he then applied for his right of employment and residence to be extended.
V nekem drugem primeru je bil tur�kemu državljanu vstop dovoljen za sklenitev zakonske zveze, nato pa je po razvezi zakonske zveze zaprosil za podalj�anje dovoljenja za prebivanje in delo.
32Again, in so far as the Court found, in relation to these facts, that the extension could not be refused on the ground that entry had been permitted for reasons other than the taking up of paid employment, no conclusion may be drawn from this decision as to the present set of facts.
32 Tudi iz mnenja Sodi�ča, da se podalj�anje ne sme zavrniti zaradi tega, ker je bil vstop dovoljen iz drugih razlogov kot zaradi opravljanja plačane zaposlitve, ni mogoče sklepati glede okoli�čin v tem primeru.
Entry for the purpose of marriage is not comparable to entry for the purpose of study, if only because entry for marriage by definition does not aim at a stay for a limited period of time, and residence is instead intended to be permanent, so that there is a corresponding legitimate expectation to be protected.
Vstop zaradi sklenitve zakonske zveze namreč ni primerljiv z vstopom zaradi �tudija že zaradi tega, ker vstop zaradi sklenitve zakonske zveze že per definitionem ne pomeni časovno omejenega prebivanja, ampak gre, nasprotno, za stalno prebivanje, tako da obstaja ustrezno legitimno pričakovanje, ki ga je treba varovati.
Entry for the purpose of marriage is not therefore comparable with entry for the purpose of taking up studies, and equal treatment with respect to Article 6 is not required.
Vstop zaradi sklenitve zakonske zveze torej ni primerljiv z vstopom zaradi �tudija in enaka obravnava glede na člen 6 torej v nobenem primeru ni potrebna.
Nor does a different conclusion follow from the Court’s judgment in Eroglu, 34 which
Drugačen zaključek ne sledi niti iz sodbe Sodi�ča v zadevi Eroglu 34, katere predmet