natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In so far as the contested decision is based on the contested joint action, the Commission, supported by the Parliament, is seeking to have the joint action, and in particular Title II thereof, declared illegal on the ground that it encroaches on Community competences.
Ker izpodbijani sklep temelji na spornem skupnem ukrepu, Komisija, ki jo podpira Parlament, predlaga, naj se sporni skupni ukrep in zlasti njegov naslov II ugotovi za nezakonitega, ker posega v pristojnosti Skupnosti.
While certain aspects of the fight against the proliferation of small arms and light weapons can fall within the CFSP, in particular police or military action to collect weapons or begin destruction programmes, that does not apply to the measures of financial and technical assistance provided for under Title II of the joint action, which fall within Community competences in the field of development cooperation and of economic, financial and technical cooperation with third countries.
Čeprav nekateri vidiki dejavnosti proti �irjenju lahkega orožja in orožja malega kalibra lahko spadajo na področje SZVP, zlasti policijski in voja�ki ukrepi za zbiranje navedenega orožja ali vzpostavitev programov za uničenje, pa to ne velja za ukrepe finančne in tehnične pomoči iz navedenega naslova II, ki naj bi spadali v pristojnost Skupnosti na področju razvojnega sodelovanja ter gospodarskega, finančnega in tehničnega sodelovanja s tretjimi državami.
The Council, supported by all the intervening governments of the Member States, considers that there is no basis to claim infringement of Article 47 EU since the campaign against the proliferation of small arms and light weapons does not fall within Community competences in the field of development cooperation policy or within any other Community competences.
Svet, ki ga podpirajo vse vlade držav članic intervenientk, meni, da se ni mogoče sklicevati na nobeno kr�itev člena 47 EU, ker boj proti raz�irjanju lahkega orožja in orožja malega kalibra ne spada med pristojnosti Skupnosti na področju politike razvojnega sodelovanja niti med katere koli druge pristojnosti Skupnosti.
With regard, first, to Article 47 EU, the Council submits that that provision aims to protect the balance of powers established by the Treaties and cannot be interpreted as aiming to protect the competences conferred upon the Community to the detriment of those enjoyed by the Union.
Najprej, Svet v zvezi z razlago člena 47 EU poudarja, da je namen te določbe ohraniti ravnotežje pristojnosti, vzpostavljeno s pogodbami, in ga ni mogoče razlagati tako, da je njegov cilj varstvo pristojnosti, dodeljenih Skupnosti, v �kodo pristojnosti, dodeljenih Uniji.
In contrast to the Commission, the Council is of the view that Article 47 EU does not establish a fixed boundary between Community and Union competences.
V nasprotju s trditvami Komisije naj člen 47 EU ne bi določal nespremenljive razmejitve med pristojnostmi Skupnosti in pristojnostmi Unije. Da bi
COMMISSION v COUNCIL affects Community competences, it is necessary to take into account the nature of the competences conferred on the Community in the sector concerned, in particular the complementary character of Community competence in the field of development cooperation.
KOMISIJA PROTI SVETU ugotovili, ali ravnanje Unije posega v pristojnosti Skupnosti, bi bilo treba upo�tevati značilnosti pristojnosti, ki jih ima Skupnost na zadevnem področju, zlasti komplementarnost pristojnosti Skupnosti na področju razvojnega sodelovanja.
According to the United Kingdom government, in order to regard a measure based on the EU Treaty as contrary to Article 47 EU, it is necessary, first, that the Community be competent to adopt a measure having the same purpose and the same content.
Vlada Združenega kraljestva meni, da bi morala biti Skupnost za ugotovitev, da je akt, ki temelji na Pogodbi EU, v nasprotju s členom 47 EU, prvič, pristojna za sprejetje akta, ki bi imel isti namen in isto vsebino.
Second, the measure based on the EU Treaty must encroach on a competence conferred upon the Community by preventing or limiting the exercise of that competence, thus creating a pre-emptive effect on Community competence.
Drugič, akt, ki temelji na Pogodbi EU, bi moral posegati v pristojnost, dodeljeno Skupnosti, s tem da bi preprečeval ali omejeval njeno izvr�evanje, kar bi pripeljalo do učinka izključitve pristojnosti Skupnosti.
Such an effect is however impossible in an area such as development cooperation, where the Community has concurrent competences.
Vendar naj tak učinek ne bi bil mogoč pri razvojnem sodelovanju, pri katerem ima Skupnost vzporedne pristojnosti.
The Council, supported by all the intervening governments of the Member States, then contends that the campaign against the destabilising accumulation and spread of small arms and light weapons does not fall within the competences conferred on the Community.
Svet, ki ga v zvezi s tem podpirajo države članice intervenientke, dalje zatrjuje, da boj proti destabilizirajočemu kopičenju in raz�irjanju orožja malega kalibra in lahkega strelnega orožja ne spada v pristojnosti, ki jih ima Skupnost.
Neither the combating of the proliferation of small arms and light weapons, nor the more general objectives of preserving peace and strengthening security, appear among the objectives of the Community contained in Articles 2 EC and 3 EC.
Niti dejavnost proti �irjenju navedenega orožja niti splo�nej�i cilji za ohranitev miru in krepitev varnosti ne spadajo med cilje Skupnosti, navedene v členih 2 ES in 3 ES.
Furthermore, according to Article 177(1) EC, the main aim of Community development cooperation policy is the reduction of poverty.
Poleg tega naj bi bil v skladu s členom 177(1) ES glavni cilj politike Skupnosti na področju razvojnega sodelovanja zmanj�anje rev�čine.
The objectives of preserving peace and strengthening international security fall exclusively within the EU Treaty, in particular the CFSP.
Cilji ohranitve miru in krepitve mednarodne varnosti naj bi namreč spadali izključno na področje uporabe Pogodbe EU, zlasti na področje SZVP.
The provisions of the EC Treaty cannot therefore be interpreted broadly without undermining the coexistence of the Union and the Community as integrated but distinct legal orders and also the constitutional architecture formed by the three ‘pillars’ as a whole.
Vendar naj se določbe Pogodbe ES ne bi razlagale �iroko, saj bi bil sicer omajan soobstoj Unije in Skupnosti kot integriranih, a različnih pravnih sistemov, kot tudi ustavna arhitektura celote, ki jo sestavljajo trije „stebri“.
The Council, supported by the French, Netherlands and United Kingdom Governments, considers that the fact that the proliferation of small arms and light weapons may incidentally affect the prospects for sustainable development does not mean that the whole of that area falls within Community competences.
Svet, ki ga pri tem podpirajo francoska in nizozemska vlada ter vlada Združenega kraljestva, meni, da dejstvo, da bi lahko �irjenje lahkega orožja in orožja malega kalibra morda vplivalo na vidike trajnostnega razvoja, ne pomeni, da to celotno področje spada med pristojnosti Skupnosti.
The Council and the United Kingdom Government contend, in addition, that, if the Commission’s argument were accepted, the CFSP would be of no practical effect at all.
Svet in vlada Združenega kraljestva poleg tega zatrjujeta, da SZVP, če bi bila sprejeta trditev Komisije, ne bi imela polnega učinka.
That government adds that, were an incidental effect on the objectives of a Community competence sufficient to bring the matter under that competence, there would no longer be any limits to the scope of Community competences, thus undermining the principle of conferred competences.
Ta vlada dodaja, da če bi neka dejavnost spadala v pristojnost Skupnosti samo zato, ker vpliva na cilje te pristojnosti, ne bi bilo več omejitve obsega pristojnosti Skupnosti, kar bi bilo v nasprotju z načelom dodelitve pristojnosti.
The Netherlands Government, for its part, does not consider it desirable to restrict the role of the CFSP in preserving peace and security in developing countries, since that policy enables the Council to act rapidly and decisively in those countries.
Nizozemska vlada meni, da ni dobro omejevati vloge SZVP glede ohranitve miru in varnosti v državah v razvoju, ker taka politika Svetu omogoča, da v teh državah ukrepa hitro in učinkovito.
The Council, supported by the Spanish, French, Swedish and United Kingdom Governments, submits that, given the ‘mixed’ character of the Cotonou Agreement, a Community competence to combat the destabilising accumulation and spread of small arms and light weapons cannot be derived from that agreement either.
Svet, ki ga pri tem podpirajo �panska, francoska, �vedska vlada in vlada Združenega kraljestva, poudarja, da glede na to, da je sporazum iz Cotonouja „me�an“ sporazum, iz njega ne more izhajati pristojnost Skupnosti na področju boja proti destabilizirajočemu kopičenju in raz�irjanju orožja malega kalibra in lahkega strelnega orožja.
Both the Council and all the intervening governments of the Member States consider furthermore that the contested decision was adopted in accordance with the provisions and the spirit of the EU Treaty.
Svet in vse druge vlade držav članic, intervenientke, poleg tega menijo, da je bil izpodbijani sklep sprejet v skladu z določbami in v duhu Pogodbe EU.
Since the principal objective of the contested decision is to combat the accumulation and spread of small arms and light weapons, it does not fall within Community competence but in fact within Union competences in the framework of the CFSP.
Ker naj bi bil namreč glavni cilj izpodbijanega sklepa boj proti destabilizirajočemu kopičenju in raz�irjanju orožja malega kalibra in lahkega strelnega orožja, naj ne bi spadal v pristojnosti Skupnosti, ampak v pristojnosti Unije v okviru SZVP.
First, the campaign against the proliferation of small arms and light weapons is part of the CFSP’s fundamental objective, which is the preservation of peace and the strengthening of international security, as stated in Article 11 EU.
Na eni strani naj bi namreč boj proti destabilizirajočemu kopičenju in raz�irjanju orožja malega kalibra in lahkega strelnega orožja spadal v temeljni cilj SZVP, ki je ohranitev miru in okrepitev mednarodne varnosti, kar izhaja iz člena 11 EU.
The Swedish government adds that, with regard to the fight against the spread of small arms and light weapons in West Africa, the United Nations Security Council has adopted a number of resolutions inviting the international community of donors to implement the ECOWAS moratorium on those weapons and to support its technical secretariat.
Švedska vlada dodaja, da je Varnostni svet Združenih narodov v boju proti destabilizirajočemu kopičenju in raz�irjanju orožja malega kalibra in lahkega strelnega orožja v Zahodni Afriki sprejel resolucije, v katerih je pozval mednarodno skupnost donatorjev, naj izvedejo moratorij ECOWAS-a na navedeno orožje in podprejo njegov tehnični sekretariat.
Second, the Council and the intervening governments of the Member States maintain that, in so far as a measure falls within the CFSP, Article 47 EU does not preclude the Union from using the same instruments as those employed by the Community in the sphere of development cooperation.
Na drugi strani Svet in vlade držav članic intervenientk menijo, da če ukrep ali dejavnost spadata v okvir SZVP, člen 47 EU ne nasprotuje temu, da Unija uporabi ista sredstva, kot jih uporablja Skupnost pri razvojnem sodelovanju.
In order to further the objectives assigned to it in the framework of the CFSP, the instruments at the disposal of the Union are not limited to diplomatic or military démarches, but also comprise operational activities, such as the financial or technical assistance required to achieve the desired objectives.
Za doseganje ciljev v okviru SZVP naj bi Unija namreč imela instrumente, ki niso omejeni na diplomatske ali voja�ke intervencije, ampak vključujejo operativne ukrepe, med katerimi sta tudi finančna ali tehnična pomoč, potrebni za uresničenje določenih ciljev.
The Council and the French Government point out moreover that the contested joint action was implemented by a series of decisions falling within the CFSP, the legality of which was not challenged by the Commission, that is: Council Decision 2002/842/CFSP of 21 October 2002 concerning the implementation of Joint Action 2002/589 with a view to a European Union contribution to combating the destabilising accumulation and spread of small arms and light weapons in South East Europe (OJ 2002 L 289, p.
Svet in francoska vlada poleg tega poudarjata, da je bil sporni skupni ukrep izvr�en s �tevilnimi sklepi s področja SZVP, katerih zakonitosti Komisija ni izpodbijala, in sicer s Sklepom Sveta 2002/842/SZVP z dne 21. oktobra 2002 o izvajanju Skupnega ukrepa 2002/589/SZVP z namenom, da bi Evropska unija prispevala k boju proti destabilizirajočemu kopičenju in �irjenju osebnega orožja in lahkega orožja v jugovzhodni Evropi (UL L 289, str.
1); Council Decision 2003/543/CFSP of 21 July 2003 concerning the implementation of Joint Action 2002/589 with a view to a European Union contribution to combating the destabilising accumulation and spread of small arms and light weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean (OJ 2003 L 185, p.
1); s Sklepom Sveta 2003/543/SZVP z dne 21. julija 2003 o izvajanju Skupnega ukrepa 2002/589 o prispevku Evropske unije k boju proti destabilizirajočemu kopičenju in raz�irjanju lahkega orožja in orožja malega kalibra v Latinski Ameriki in na Karibskem otočju (UL L 185, str.
59); Council Decision 2004/790/CFSP of 22 November 2004 extending and amending Decision 2003/276/CFSP implementing Joint Action 2002/589 with a view to a European Union contribution to the destruction of ammunition for small arms and light weapons in Albania (OJ 2004 L 348, p.
59); s Sklepom Sveta 2004/790/SZVP z dne 22. novembra 2004 o podalj�anju veljavnosti in spremembi Sklepa 2003/276/SZVP o izvajanju Skupnega ukrepa 2002/589 glede prispevka Evropske unije za uničenje streliva za osebno in lahko orožje v Albaniji (UL L 348, str.
45); Council Decision 2004/791/CFSP of 22 November 2004 extending and amending Decision 2002/842/CFSP implementing Joint Action 2002/589 with a view to a European Union contribution to combating
45); s Sklepom Sveta 2004/791/SZVP z dne 22. novembra 2004 o podalj�anju in spremembi Sklepa 2003/842/SZVP o izvajanju Skupnega ukrepa 2002/589 z namenom, da bi Evropska unija prispevala k boju proti destabilizirajočemu kopičenju in �irjenju osebnega orožja in lahkega orožja v jugovzhodni Evropi (UL L 348, str. 46); s Sklepom Sveta
2008 — CASE C-91/05 the destabilising accumulation and spread of small arms and light weapons in South East Europe (OJ 2004 L 348, p.
2008 – ZADEVA C-91/05
46); Council Decision 2004/792/CFSP of 22 November 2004 extending and amending Decision 1999/730/CFSP implementing Joint Action 1999/34 with a view to a European Union contribution to combating the destabilising accumulation and spread of small arms and light weapons in Cambodia (OJ 2004 L 348, p.
2004/792/SZVP z dne 22. novembra 2004 o podalj�anju veljavnosti in spremembi Sklepa 1999/730/SZVP o izvajanju Skupnega ukrepa 1999/341 o prispevku Evropske unije k boju proti destabilizirajočemu kopičenju in �irjenju orožja malega kalibra in lahkega orožja v Kambodži (UL L 348, str.
47), and Council Decision 2005/852/CFSP of 29 November 2005 for the destruction of small arms and light weapons (SALW) and their ammunition in Ukraine (OJ 2005 L 315, p. 27).
47) in Sklepom Sveta 2005/852/SZVP z dne 29. novembra 2005 za uničenje orožja malega kalibra in lahkega strelnega orožja (SALW) ter pripadajočega streliva v Ukrajini (UL L 315, str. 27).
Finally, the Council, supported in that regard by the Spanish and United Kingdom governments, argues that the Commission’s plea that the contested joint action is illegal is inadmissible, since a privileged applicant, such as the Commission, is barred from pleading the illegality of an act the annulment of which it could have sought directly by an action under Article 230 EC.
Nazadnje, Svet, ki ga v zvezi s tem podpirata vladi Španije in Združenega kraljestva, meni, da je ugovor nezakonitosti spornega skupnega ukrepa nedopusten, ker privilegirana tožeča stranka, kot je Komisija, ne sme več uveljavljati ugovora nezakonitosti akta, glede katerega bi lahko neposredno predlagala razglasitev ničnosti s tožbo na podlagi člena 230 ES.
While referring to the arguments concerning the contested decision, the Council and the Netherlands, Swedish and United Kingdom Governments submit that, in any event, the contested joint action was adopted in full compliance with Article 47 EU.
Svet, nizozemska in �vedska vlada ter vlada Združenega kraljestva s sklicevanjem na trditve glede izpodbijanega sklepa menijo, da je bil sporni skupni ukrep v vsakem primeru sprejet popolnoma v skladu s členom 47 EU.
Application of Article 47 EU
Uporaba člena 47 EU
As stated in paragraphs 31 to 33 of this judgment, under Article 47 EU, it is the task of the Court to ensure that the acts which, according to the Council, fall within the
Iz točk od 31 do 33 te sodbe izhaja, da mora Sodi�če na podlagi člena 47 EU paziti, da akti, za katere Svet trdi, da se zanje uporablja naslov V Pogodbe EU, in ki imajo
COMMISSION v COUNCIL scope of Title V of the EU Treaty and which are capable of having legal effects do not encroach upon the powers conferred by provisions of the EC Treaty on the Community.
KOMISIJA PROTI SVETU lahko pravne učinke, ne posegajo v pristojnosti, ki jih določbe Pogodbe ES priznavajo Skupnosti.
According to the Commission, the contested decision fails to respect the division of competences between the Community and the Union established by Article 47 EU as it could have been adopted on the basis of competences conferred on the Community in the area of development cooperation.
Komisija meni, da izpodbijani sklep ne upo�teva razdelitve pristojnosti med Skupnostjo in Unijo, določene v členu 47 EU, ker bi bil lahko sprejet v skladu s pristojnostmi, ki jih ima Skupnost na področju razvojnega sodelovanja.
The same applies to the provisions of Title II of the contested joint action, as implemented by the contested decision, which, it claims, fall either within Community competences concerning development cooperation or those concerning economic, financial and technical cooperation with third countries.
Isto velja za določbe iz naslova II spornega skupnega ukrepa, ki so uresničene z izpodbijanim sklepom in ki se nana�ajo bodisi na pristojnosti Skupnosti na področju razvojnega sodelovanja bodisi na pristojnosti v zvezi z gospodarskim, finančnim in tehničnim sodelovanjem s tretjimi državami.
It is therefore necessary to determine whether the provisions of the contested decision affect competences enjoyed by the Community under the EC Treaty, on the ground that, as the Commission argues, they could have been adopted on the basis of that treaty (see, to that effect, Case C-176/03 Commission v Council, paragraph 40, and Case C-440/05 Commission v Council, paragraph 54).
Preveriti je torej treba, ali določbe izpodbijanega sklepa vplivajo na pristojnost, ki jo ima Skupnost na podlagi Pogodbe ES, s tem da bi lahko bile, kot zatrjuje Komisija, sprejete na podlagi določb te pogodbe (glej v tem smislu zgoraj navedeni sodbi z dne 13. septembra 2005 Komisija proti Svetu, točka 40, in z dne 23. oktobra 2007 Komisija proti Svetu, točka 54).
In providing that nothing in the EU Treaty is to affect the Treaties establishing the European Communities or the subsequent Treaties and Acts modifying or supplementing them, Article 47 EU aims, in accordance with the fifth indent of Article 2 EU and the first paragraph of Article 3 EU, to maintain and build on the acquis communautaire.
S tem da je določeno, da nobena določba Pogodbe EU ne vpliva na pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropskih skupnosti ali na poznej�e pogodbe in akte, ki prve spreminjajo ali dopolnjujejo, se namreč člen 47 EU v skladu s členom 2, peta alinea, EU in členom 3, prvi odstavek, EU nana�a na ohranitev in razvijanje pravnega reda Skupnosti.
Contrary to what is submitted by the United Kingdom Government, a measure having legal effects adopted under Title V of the EU Treaty affects the provisions of the EC Treaty within the meaning of Article 47 EU whenever it could have been adopted on the basis of the EC Treaty, it being unnecessary to examine whether the
V nasprotju s trditvami vlade Združenega kraljestva akt, ki ima pravne učinke in je bil sprejet na podlagi naslova V Pogodbe EU, vpliva na določbe Pogodbe ES v smislu člena 47 EU, ker bi bil lahko sprejet na podlagi Pogodbe ES, ne da bi bilo treba preveriti, ali ta akt Skupnosti preprečuje ali omejuje izvr�evanje njenih pristojnosti. Iz
2008 — CASE C-91/05 measure prevents or limits the exercise by the Community of its competences. It is apparent from the caselaw of the Court that, if it is established that the provisions of a measure adopted under Titles V or VI of the EU Treaty, on account of both their aim and their content, have as their main purpose the implementation of a policy conferred by the EC Treaty on the Community, and if they could properly have been adopted on the basis of the EC Treaty, the Court must find that those provisions infringe Article 47 EU (see, to that effect, Case C-176/03 Commission v Council, paragraphs 51 and 53, and Case C-440/05 Commission v Council, paragraphs 69 to 74).
2008 – ZADEVA C-91/05 sodne prakse Sodi�ča namreč izhaja, da če je očitno, da je glavni cilj določb akta, sprejetega na podlagi naslova V in naslova VI Pogodbe EU, glede na njihov namen in vsebino, uresničitev politike, ki je na podlagi Pogodbe ES dodeljena Skupnosti, pri čemer bi bile te določbe lahko prav tako veljavno sprejete na podlagi zadnjenavedene pogodbe, Sodi�če meni da so bile te določbe sprejete v nasprotju s členom 47 EU (glej v tem smislu zgoraj navedeni sodbi z dne 13. septembra 2005 Komisija proti Svetu, točki 51 in 53, in z dne 23. oktobra 2007 Komisija proti Svetu, točke od 69 do 74).
Moreover, the question whether the provisions of such a measure adopted by the Union fall within the competence of the Community relates to the attribution and, thus, the very existence of that competence, and not its exclusive or shared nature (see, to that effect, Case C-459/03 Commission v Ireland [2006] ECR I-4635, paragraph 93).
Poleg tega se vpra�anje, ali so določbe takega akta, ki ga je sprejela Unija, v pristojnosti Skupnosti, nana�a na dodelitev in torej obstoj te pristojnosti, ne na njeno izključnost ali deljenost (glej v tem smislu sodbo z dne 30. maja 2006 v zadevi Komisija proti Irski, C-459/03, ZOdl., str. I-4635, točka 93).
It is therefore necessary to determine whether the contested decision infringes Article 47 EU inasmuch as it could have been adopted on the basis of the provisions of the EC Treaty.
Ugotoviti je torej treba, ali je izpodbijani sklep v nasprotju s členom 47 EU, ker bi bil lahko sprejet na podlagi določb Pogodbe ES.
Demarcation of the areas of Community development cooperation policy and the CFSP respectively
Razmejitev področij, ki se nana�ajo na politiko Skupnosti na področju razvojnega sodelovanja in SZVP
With regard to Community development cooperation policy, the Court has held that the objectives pursued by Article 130u of the EC Treaty (now Article 177 EC) are broad in the sense that it must be possible for the measures required for their pursuit to concern various specific matters (Case C-268/94 Portugal v Council [1996] ECR I-6177, paragraph 37).
Sodi�če je v zvezi s politiko Skupnosti na področju razvojnega sodelovanja razsodilo, da so cilji iz člena 130 U Pogodbe ES (postal člen 177 ES) �ir�i v tem smislu, da se morajo ukrepi, potrebni za dosego teh ciljev, nana�ati na različna posebna področja (sodba z dne 3. decembra 1996 v zadevi Portugalska proti Svetu, C-268/94, Recueil, str. I-6177, točka 37).