What is the translation of " THE ANSWER TO THE SECOND QUESTION " in Slovenian?

• odgovor na drugo vprašanje
• na drugo vprašanje odgovoriti
• na drugo vpra�anje odgovoriti
• odgovor na drugo vpra�anje

Examples of using The answer to the second question in English and their translations into Slovenian

The answer to the second question is as follows:.
Odgovor na drugo vprašanje je sledeč:.

In a way, this is also the answer to the second question.
In to je na nek način tudi odgovor na naslednje vprašanje.

The answer to the second question is: probably not.
Odgovor na drugo vprašanje je: očitno ne.

In the light of all of the foregoing considerations, the answer to the second question is that:.
Glede na vse zgornje preudarke je treba na tretje vprašanje odgovoriti:.

The answer to the second question is 5 minutes.
Pravilen odgovor na drugo vprašanje je pet minut.

Only Article 8(3) of Directive 2001/29 is relevant as regards the answer to the second question.
Da je za odgovor na drugo vprašanje za predhodno odločanje upošteven le člen 8(3) Direktive 2001/29.

The answer to the second question is much more complicated.
Odgovor na drugo vprašanje je precej zapletenejši.

The answer to the first question is likely to be in the first paragraph and the answer to the second question in the second paragraph.
Verjetno si odgovor na prvo vprašanje našla v 1. stolpcu, odgovor na drugo vprašanje pa v 2.

The answer to the second question is also negative.
Prav tako pa je negativen tudi odgovor na drugo vprašanje.

Since the fourth question is referred on the hypothesis that the answer to the second question might be negative, and since the answer given was positive, there is no need to answer the fourth question..
Ker je četrto vprašanje postavljeno, če bi bil odgovor na drugo vprašanje nikalen, odgovor na to vprašanje pa je pritrdilen, na četrto vprašanje ni treba odgovoriti.

The answer to the second question, however, is a lot more complicated.
Odgovor na drugo vprašanje je precej zapletenejši.

With regard to the third question, the Czech Government refers to the arguments on the second question and considers that the answer to the third question is already contained in the answer to the second question.
Češka vlada v zvezi s tretjim vpra�anjem za predhodno odločanje opozarja na navedbe k drugemu vpra�anju in uveljavlja, da je odgovor na tretje vpra�anje vsebovan že v odgovoru na drugo vpra�anje.

The answer to the second question is more complex, but there are a number of options.
Odgovor na drugo vprašanje je nekoliko težji in ponuja več možnosti.

The national court itself presents the answer to the second question as subsidiary to and conditional upon the answer to the first.
Predložitveno sodišče samo pravi, da je odgovor na drugo vprašanje podreden in odvisen od odgovora na prvo vprašanje..

The answer to the second question is no: the problem must be tackled by the EU.
Odgovor na drugo vprašanja je"ne", saj mora to težavo obravnavati EU.

The national court must, on the basis of the criteria set out in the answer to the second question, determine whether the act of reproduction may be regarded as being‘transient' within the meaning of Article 5(1) of Directive 2001/29, if part of the reproduction which contains one or more extracts of 11 words is stored.
Nacionalno sodišče mora na podlagi meril, podanih v odgovoru na drugo vprašanje za predhodno odločanje, presoditi, ali se lahko dejanje reproduciranja šteje za prehodno v smislu člena 5(1) Direktive 2001/29, če se del reprodukcije, ki zajema enega ali več besednih odlomkov iz enajstih besed, shrani.

The answer to the second question is a tad easier than the first so I will deal with that first.
Odgovor na drugo vprašanje bo verjetno lažji, zato bom začel z njim.

In view of the answer to the second question, there is no need to answer the third question..
Glede na odgovor na drugo vpra�anje za predhodno odločanje ni treba odgovoriti na tretje vpra�anje.

The answer to the second question is positive, particularly with reference to the corrective arm.
Odgovor na drugo vprašanje je pritrdilen, predvsem glede korektivnega vidika.

In those circumstances, the answer to the second question must be that a privatelaw association, such as MPG, must observe the principle of nondiscrimination in.
Glede na to je treba na drugo vpra�anje odgovoriti, da mora zasebnopravno združenje, kot je MPG, v razmerju do delavcev v smislu člena 39 ES spo�tovati načelo.

The answer to the second question was sent down to the Prophet(salla Allahu alihi wa sallam) in the following verses concerning the great traveler Thul Karnain.
Odgovor na drugo vprašanje je bilo poslano do preroka(Salla Allahu alihi wa sallam) v naslednjih verzih zvezi velikega popotnika Thul Karnain.

In those circumstances, the answer to the second question must be that a private-law association, such as MPG, must observe the principle of non-discrimination in relation to workers within the meaning of Article 39 EC.
Glede na to je treba na drugo vprašanje odgovoriti, da mora zasebnopravno združenje, kot je MPG, v razmerju do delavcev v smislu člena 39 ES spoštovati načelo prepovedi diskriminacije.

If the answer to the second question is in the affirmative, what criteria should be used to determine the currency in which the passenger or his legal successor may demand payment, and what exchange rate should be applied?
Če je odgovor na drugo vprašanje pritrdilen, na podlagi katerih meril je treba določiti valuto, v kateri lahko potnik ali njegov pravni naslednik zahteva plačilo, in kateri menjalni tečaj je treba uporabiti?

Having regard to the foregoing, the answer to the second question must be that it is on the basis of its main purpose that a plant is to be classified as an‘incineration plant' or a‘co-incineration plant' within the meaning of Article 3(4) and(5) of Direct- ive 2000/76.
Glede na navedeno je treba na drugo vpra�anje odgovoriti tako, da se mora naprava glede na svoj glavni namen opredeliti kot„sežigalnica“ ali„naprava za sosežig“ v smislu člena 3, točki 4 in 5, Direktive 2000/76.

In the light of all the foregoing considerations, the answer to the second question is that Article 22(4) of Regulation No 44/2001 must be interpreted as not precluding, in circumstances such as those at issue in the main proceedings, the application of Article 31 of that regulation.
Glede na navedeno je treba na drugo vprašanje odgovoriti, da je treba člen 22, točka 4, Uredbe št. 44/2001 razlagati tako, da v okoliščinah, kot so te v postopku v glavni stvari, ne nasprotuje uporabi člena 31 te uredbe.

In the light of those factors, the answer to the second question must be that Article 32 of the Framework Decision must be interpreted as not precluding the application by an executing Member State of the 1996 Convention, even where that convention became applicable in that Member State only after 1 January 2004.
Ob upo�tevanju teh dejstev je treba na drugo vpra�anje odgovoriti, da je treba člen 32 Okvirnega sklepa razlagati tako, da v izvr�itveni državi članici ne nasprotuje uporabi Konvencije iz leta 1996, tudi če se je ta v tej državi članici začela uporabljati �ele po 1. januarju 2004.

In the light of the foregoing, the answer to the second question must be that Clause 4(1) of the framework agreement is unconditional and sufficiently precise for individuals to be able to rely upon it before a national court; that is not the case, however, as regards Clause 5(1) of the framework agreement.
Ob upo�tevanju navedenega je treba na drugo vpra�anje odgovoriti, da je določba 4, točka 1, okvirnega sporazuma brezpogojna in dovolj natančna, da se posameznik lahko sklicuje nanjo pred nacionalnim sodi�čem, in da nasprotno to ne velja za določbo 5, točka 1, navedenega okvirnega sporazuma.

In the light of the foregoing considerations, the answer to the second question must be that an entity such as Fernwärme Wien is to be regarded as a body governed by public law within the meaning of the second subparagraph of Article 2(1)(a) of Direct- ive 2004/17 and the second subparagraph of Article 1(9) of Directive 2004/18.
Glede na te ugotovitve je treba na drugo vpra�anje odgovoriti, da je treba naročnika, kot je družba Fernwärme Wien, opredeliti kot osebo javnega prava v smislu člena 2(1)(a), drugi pododstavek, Direktive 2004/17 in člena 1(9), drugi pododstavek, Direktive 2004/18.

Having regard to the foregoing, the answer to the second question is that the directive in question, in particular Article 47, must be interpreted as meaning that national legislation governing the grant of concessions in the field of betting and gambling, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, does not fall within its scope.
Glede na navedeno je treba na drugo vprašanje odgovoriti, da je treba navedeno direktivo in zlasti njen člen 47 razlagati tako, da nacionalna zakonodaja o ureditvi podeljevanja koncesij na področju iger na srečo, kakršna je ta iz zadeve v glavni stvari, ne spada v njuno področje uporabe.