natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Den relevante tidsramme for fastlæggelse af en sådan trussel kan udgøre en periode på flere måneder eller endnu længere for at tage hensyn til sager, hvor skyldneren står over for ikkeøkonomiske vanskeligheder, der truer vedkommendes virksomheds status som en going concern og, på mellemlang sigt, vedkommendes likviditet.
The time frame relevant for the determination of such threat may extend to a period of several months or even longer in order to account for cases in which the debtor is faced with non-financial difficulties threatening the status of its business as a going concern and, in the medium term, its liquidity.
Dette kan f.eks. være tilfældet, hvis en skyldner har mistet en kontrakt, der er af afgørende betydning for vedkommende.
This may be the case, for example, where the debtor has lost a contract which is of key importance to it.
Denne forordning bør ikke berøre reglerne for tilbagesøgning af statsstøtte fra insolvente selskaber som fortolket i Den Europæiske Unions Domstols retspraksis.
This Regulation should be without prejudice to the rules on the recovery of State aid from insolvent companies as interpreted by the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Insolvensbehandling af forsikringsselskaber, kreditinstitutter, investeringsselskaber og andre selskaber og institutter, for så vidt disse er omfattet af Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2001/24/EF [5], samt institutter for kollektiv investering bør ikke være omfattet af denne forordning, da de alle er underlagt særlige ordninger, og da de nationale tilsynsmyndigheder har vidtgående indgrebsbeføjelser.
Insolvency proceedings concerning insurance undertakings, credit institutions, investment firms and other firms, institutions or undertakings covered by Directive 2001/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council [5] and collective investment undertakings should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation, as they are all subject to special arrangements and the national supervisory authorities have wide-ranging powers of intervention.
Insolvensbehandling indebærer ikke nødvendigvis en retslig myndigheds medvirken.
Insolvency proceedings do not necessarily involve the intervention of a judicial authority.
Udtrykket »ret« bør derfor i visse bestemmelser i denne forordning fortolkes bredt og omfatte en person eller instans, som i henhold til national lovgivning har kompetence til at indlede insolvensbehandlinger.
Therefore, the term ‘court’ in this Regulation should, in certain provisions, be given a broad meaning and include a person or body empowered by national law to open insolvency proceedings.
For at være omfattet af forordningen bør insolvensbehandlinger (herunder lovbestemte retshandlinger og formaliteter) ikke blot være i overensstemmelse med bestemmelserne i denne forordning, de bør også være officielt anerkendt og have retskraft i den medlemsstat, hvor insolvensbehandlingen indledes.
In order for this Regulation to apply, proceedings (comprising acts and formalities set down in law) should not only have to comply with the provisions of this Regulation, but they should also be officially recognised and legally effective in the Member State in which the insolvency proceedings are opened.
Insolvensbehandlere er defineret i denne forordning og opført i bilag B. Insolvensbehandlere, som er udpeget uden inddragelse af en retsinstans, bør i henhold til national lovgivning være underlagt passende regulering og være bemyndiget til at handle i forbindelse med insolvensbehandling.
Insolvency practitioners are defined in this Regulation and listed in Annex B. Insolvency practitioners who are appointed without the involvement of a judicial body should, under national law, be appropriately regulated and authorised to act in insolvency proceedings.
De nationale lovgivningsmæssige rammer bør fastsætte passende ordninger til håndtering af potentielle interessekonflikter.
The national regulatory framework should provide for proper arrangements to deal with potential conflicts of interest.
Denne forordning accepterer, at det som følge af store forskelle i den materielle ret ikke er hensigtsmæssigt at indføre en fælles procedure for insolvensbehandling med generel gyldighed i hele Unionen.
This Regulation acknowledges the fact that as a result of widely differing substantive laws it is not practical to introduce insolvency proceedings with universal scope throughout the Union.
At lovgivningen i den medlemsstat, hvor insolvensbehandlingen indledes, skulle anvendes uden undtagelse ville på denne baggrund ofte give anledning til problemer.
The application without exception of the law of the State of the opening of proceedings would, against this background, frequently lead to difficulties.
Dette gælder eksempelvis for de meget forskelligt udformede nationale retsregler om sikringsrettigheder, som findes i medlemsstaterne.
This applies, for example, to the widely differing national laws on security interests to be found in the Member States.
Derudover er de fortrinsrettigheder, nogle kreditorer har under insolvensbehandlingen, i visse tilfælde udformet yderst forskelligt.
Furthermore, the preferential rights enjoyed by some creditors in insolvency proceedings are, in some cases, completely different.
I forbindelse med den næste revision af denne forordning vil det være nødvendigt at identificere yderligere foranstaltninger med henblik på at forbedre arbejdstagernes fortrinsrettigheder på EU-plan.
At the next review of this Regulation, it will be necessary to identify further measures in order to improve the preferential rights of employees at European level.
Denne forordning bør tage hensyn til sådanne forskellige nationale retsregler på to måder.
This Regulation should take account of such differing national laws in two different ways.
Dels bør der fastlægges særlige regler om den lovgivning, der finder anvendelse i forbindelse med særligt betydningsfulde rettigheder og retsforhold (f.eks. tinglige rettigheder og arbejdsaftaler).
On the one hand, provision should be made for special rules on the applicable law in the case of particularly significant rights and legal relationships (e.g. rights in rem and contracts of employment).
Dels bør der parallelt med en hovedinsolvensbehandling med universel gyldighed åbnes mulighed for også at indlede territorial insolvensbehandling, som kun vedrører de aktiver, der befinder sig i den medlemsstat, hvor denne insolvensbehandling indledes.
On the other hand, national proceedings covering only assets situated in the State of the opening of proceedings should also be allowed alongside main insolvency proceedings with universal scope.
Ved denne forordning bliver det muligt at indlede hovedinsolvensbehandlingen i den medlemsstat, hvor centret for skyldnerens hovedinteresser befinder sig.
This Regulation enables the main insolvency proceedings to be opened in the Member State where the debtor has the centre of its main interests.
En sådan hovedinsolvensbehandling har universel gyldighed og sigter mod at omfatte alle skyldnerens aktiver.
Those proceedings have universal scope and are aimed at encompassing all the debtor's assets.
For at beskytte de mange forskellige interesser gør denne forordning det muligt at indlede en sekundær insolvensbehandling, som afvikles parallelt med hovedinsolvensbehandlingen.
To protect the diversity of interests, this Regulation permits secondary insolvency proceedings to be opened to run in parallel with the main insolvency proceedings.
Den sekundære insolvensbehandling kan indledes i den medlemsstat, hvor skyldneren har et forretningssted.
Secondary insolvency proceedings may be opened in the Member State where the debtor has an establishment.
Den sekundære insolvensbehandling har kun virkning for de aktiver, som befinder sig på den pågældende medlemsstats område.
The effects of secondary insolvency proceedings are limited to the assets located in that State.
Ufravigelige regler om samordning med hovedinsolvensbehandlingen sikrer den nødvendige ensartethed i Unionen.
Mandatory rules of coordination with the main insolvency proceedings satisfy the need for unity in the Union.
Når der er indledt en hovedinsolvensbehandling vedrørende en juridisk person eller et selskab i en anden medlemsstat end den, hvor den juridiske person eller selskabet har sit registrerede hjemsted, bør det være muligt at indlede en sekundær insolvensbehandling i det registrerede hjemsteds medlemsstat, forudsat at skyldneren udøver en økonomisk aktivitet under anvendelse af menneskelige midler og reelle produktionsfaktorer i denne stat i overensstemmelse med Den Europæiske Unions Domstols retspraksis.
Where main insolvency proceedings concerning a legal person or company have been opened in a Member State other than that of its registered office, it should be possible to open secondary insolvency proceedings in the Member State of the registered office, provided that the debtor is carrying out an economic activity with human means and assets in that State, in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Denne forordning finder kun anvendelse på procedurer vedrørende en skyldner, hvis centret for skyldnerens hovedinteresser befinder sig i Unionen.
This Regulation applies only to proceedings in respect of a debtor whose centre of main interests is located in the Union.
Denne forordnings kompetenceregler fastsætter kun den internationale kompetence, dvs. de udpeger den medlemsstat, hvis retter kan indlede insolvensbehandling.
The rules of jurisdiction set out in this Regulation establish only international jurisdiction, that is to say, they designate the Member State the courts of which may open insolvency proceedings.
Den stedlige kompetence inden for den pågældende medlemsstat bør afgøres efter denne medlemsstats nationale lovgivning.
Territorial jurisdiction within that Member State should be established by the national law of the Member State concerned.
Før indledning af insolvensbehandling bør den kompetente ret på eget initiativ undersøge, om centret for skyldnerens hovedinteresser eller skyldnerens forretningssted rent faktisk befinder sig inden for dens jurisdiktion.
Before opening insolvency proceedings, the competent court should examine of its own motion whether the centre of the debtor's main interests or the debtor's establishment is actually located within its jurisdiction.
Når det fastlægges, hvorvidt centret for skyldnerens hovedinteresser er identificerbart for tredjemand, bør der tages særligt hensyn til kreditorerne og deres opfattelse af, hvor en skyldner forvalter sine interesser.
When determining whether the centre of the debtor's main interests is ascertainable by third parties, special consideration should be given to the creditors and to their perception as to where a debtor conducts the administration of its interests.
Dette kan kræve, at kreditorer i tilfælde af ændring af centret for hovedinteresserne i god tid informeres om den nye beliggenhed, som skyldneren udøver sine aktiviteter fra, f.eks. ved at henlede opmærksomheden på adresseændringen i handelskorrespondance eller ved at offentliggøre den nye beliggenhed via andre passende midler.
This may require, in the event of a shift of centre of main interests, informing creditors of the new location from which the debtor is carrying out its activities in due course, for example by drawing attention to the change of address in commercial correspondence, or by making the new location public through other appropriate means.
Denne forordning bør indeholde en række beskyttelsesforanstaltninger, der sigter mod at forebygge svig eller misbrug i form af forumshopping.
This Regulation should contain a number of safeguards aimed at preventing fraudulent or abusive forum shopping.
Formodninger om, at det registrerede hjemsted, hovedforretningsstedet eller det sædvanlige opholdssted er centret for hovedinteresserne, bør derfor kunne afkræftes, og den relevante ret i en medlemsstat bør omhyggeligt vurdere, om centret for skyldnerens hovedinteresser reelt er beliggende i den pågældende medlemsstat.
Accordingly, the presumptions that the registered office, the principal place of business and the habitual residence are the centre of main interests should be rebuttable, and the relevant court of a Member State should carefully assess whether the centre of the debtor's main interests is genuinely located in that Member State.
I tilfælde, der vedrører et selskab, bør det være muligt at afkræfte denne formodning, hvis selskabets hovedsæde ligger i en anden medlemsstat end dens registrerede hjemsted, og det ud fra en udtømmende vurdering af alle relevante faktorer fremgår på en måde, så det er identificerbart for tredjemand, at det faktiske center for selskabets ledelse og tilsyn og for forvaltningen af dens interesser er beliggende i den anden medlemsstat.
In the case of a company, it should be possible to rebut this presumption where the company's central administration is located in a Member State other than that of its registered office, and where a comprehensive assessment of all the relevant factors establishes, in a manner that is ascertainable by third parties, that the company's actual centre of management and supervision and of the management of its interests is located in that other Member State.
I tilfælde, der vedrører en fysisk personperson, som ikke er selvstændigt erhvervsdrivende, bør det være muligt at afkræfte denne formodning, hvis størstedelen af skyldnerens aktiver befinder sig uden for den medlemsstat, hvor skyldneren har sit sædvanlige opholdssted, eller hvis det kan fastslås, at den primære årsag til at flytte var at indgive begæring om insolvensbehandling i den nye retskreds, og hvis en sådan indgivelse væsentligt ville skade interesserne hos de kreditorer, hvis forretninger med skyldneren fandt sted forud for flytningen.
In the case of an individual not exercising an independent business or professional activity, it should be possible to rebut this presumption, for example where the major part of the debtor's assets is located outside the Member State of the debtor's habitual residence, or where it can be established that the principal reason for moving was to file for insolvency proceedings in the new jurisdiction and where such filing would materially impair the interests of creditors whose dealings with the debtor took place prior to the relocation.
Ligeledes med det formål at forebygge svig eller misbrug i form af forumshopping bør formodningen om, at centret for hovedinteresserne er det registrerede hjemsted, den fysiske persons hovedforretningssted eller den fysiske persons sædvanlige opholdssted, ikke finde anvendelse — henholdsvis i forbindelse med et selskab, en juridisk person eller en selvstændigt erhvervsdrivende fysisk person — når skyldneren har flyttet sit registrerede hjemsted eller hovedforretningssted til en anden medlemsstat inden for en periode på tre måneder forud for begæringen om indledning af insolvensbehandling, eller — i forbindelse med fysiske personer, der ikke er selvstændigt erhvervsdrivende — når skyldneren har flyttet sit sædvanlige opholdssted til en anden medlemsstat inden for en periode på seks måneder forud for begæringen om indledning af insolvensbehandling.
With the same objective of preventing fraudulent or abusive forum shopping, the presumption that the centre of main interests is at the place of the registered office, at the individual's principal place of business or at the individual's habitual residence should not apply where, respectively, in the case of a company, legal person or individual exercising an independent business or professional activity, the debtor has relocated its registered office or principal place of business to another Member State within the 3-month period prior to the request for opening insolvency proceedings, or, in the case of an individual not exercising an independent business or professional activity, the debtor has relocated his habitual residence to another Member State within the 6-month period prior to the request for opening insolvency proceedings.
Hvis sagens omstændigheder giver anledning til tvivl om rettens kompetence, bør retten i alle tilfælde kræve, at skyldneren forelægger yderligere dokumentation til støtte for sine påstande og, hvis den lov, der finder anvendelse på insolvensbehandlingen, giver hjemmel hertil, give skyldnerens kreditorer lejlighed til at fremsætte bemærkninger til kompetencespørgsmålet.
In all cases, where the circumstances of the matter give rise to doubts about the court's jurisdiction, the court should require the debtor to submit additional evidence to support its assertions and, where the law applicable to the insolvency proceedings so allows, give the debtor's creditors the opportunity to present their views on the question of jurisdiction.
I tilfælde hvor den ret, der har modtaget begæringen om indledning af insolvensbehandling, finder, at centret for hovedinteresserne ikke befinder sig på dens område, bør den ikke indlede en hovedinsolvensbehandling.
In the event that the court seised of the request to open insolvency proceedings finds that the centre of main interests is not located on its territory, it should not open main insolvency proceedings.
Enhver af skyldnerens kreditorer bør desuden have effektiv adgang til at anfægte afgørelsen om indledning af insolvensbehandling.
In addition, any creditor of the debtor should have an effective remedy against the decision to open insolvency proceedings.
Konsekvenserne af en anfægtelse af afgørelsen om indledning af insolvensbehandling bør reguleres af national lovgivning.
The consequences of any challenge to the decision to open insolvency proceedings should be governed by national law.
Retterne i den medlemsstat, på hvis område insolvensbehandlingen er indledt, bør også have kompetence til behandling af sager, der er en direkte følge af insolvensbehandlingen eller har tæt forbindelse hermed.
The courts of the Member State within the territory of which insolvency proceedings have been opened should also have jurisdiction for actions which derive directly from the insolvency proceedings and are closely linked with them.
Sådanne sager bør omfatte anfægtelsessøgsmål, der er anlagt mod sagsøgte i andre medlemsstater, og sager vedrørende forpligtelser, der opstår i løbet af insolvensbehandlingen, såsom forudbetaling til dækning af sagsomkostningerne.
Such actions should include avoidance actions against defendants in other Member States and actions concerning obligations that arise in the course of the insolvency proceedings, such as advance payment for costs of the proceedings.
Sager om opfyldelse af forpligtelserne i henhold til en kontrakt, der er indgået af skyldneren forud for indledningen af insolvensbehandlingen, er derimod ikke en direkte følge af insolvensbehandlingen.
In contrast, actions for the performance of the obligations under a contract concluded by the debtor prior to the opening of proceedings do not derive directly from the proceedings.
Hvor en sådan sag er forbundet med en anden sag anlagt på grundlag af almindelig civilret, bør insolvensbehandleren kunne kræve begge sager behandlet ved sagsøgtes værneting, hvis han finder det mere effektivt at få sagen behandlet dér.
Where such an action is related to another action based on general civil and commercial law, the insolvency practitioner should be able to bring both actions in the courts of the defendant's domicile if he considers it more efficient to bring the action in that forum.
Det kan f.eks. være tilfældet, hvis insolvensbehandleren ønsker at kombinere en sag angående direktions- eller bestyrelsesmedlemmers konkursretlige ansvar med en sag om selskabsretlige eller almindelige erstatningsretlige spørgsmål.
This could, for example, be the case where the insolvency practitioner wishes to combine an action for director's liability on the basis of insolvency law with an action based on company law or general tort law.
Den ret, som har kompetence til at indlede hovedinsolvensbehandlingen, bør kunne træffe afgørelse om anvendelse af foreløbige og sikrende retsmidler fra det øjeblik, hvor der anmodes om indledning af insolvensbehandling.
The court having jurisdiction to open the main insolvency proceedings should be able to order provisional and protective measures as from the time of the request to open proceedings.
For at sikre insolvensbehandlingens effektivitet er det vigtigt, at der kan anvendes sikrende retsmidler både forud for og efter indledningen af insolvensbehandlingen.
Preservation measures both prior to and after the commencement of the insolvency proceedings are important to guarantee the effectiveness of the insolvency proceedings.
I den henseende bør denne forordning give forskellige muligheder.
In that connection, this Regulation should provide for various possibilities.
På den ene side bør den ret, som har kompetence til at indlede hovedinsolvensbehandlingen, også kunne træffe afgørelse om anvendelse af foreløbige og sikrende retsmidler over for aktiver, som befinder sig på andre medlemsstaters område.
On the one hand, the court competent for the main insolvency proceedings should also be able to order provisional and protective measures covering assets situated in the territory of other Member States.
På den anden side bør en midlertidig insolvensbehandler, som er udpeget inden indledningen af hovedinsolvensbehandlingen, kunne anmode om, at der i de medlemsstater, hvor skyldneren har et forretningssted, anvendes de sikrende retsmidler, som de pågældende medlemsstaters lovgivning åbner mulighed for.
On the other hand, an insolvency practitioner temporarily appointed prior to the opening of the main insolvency proceedings should be able, in the Member States in which an establishment belonging to the debtor is to be found, to apply for the preservation measures which are possible under the law of those Member States.
Forud for indledningen af hovedinsolvensbehandlingen bør retten til at indgive begæring om indledning af insolvensbehandling i den medlemsstat, hvor skyldneren har et forretningssted, begrænses til lokale kreditorer og offentlige myndigheder eller til tilfælde, hvor der ikke kan indledes hovedinsolvensbehandling i henhold til lovgivningen i den medlemsstat, hvor centret for skyldnerens hovedinteresser befinder sig.
Prior to the opening of the main insolvency proceedings, the right to request the opening of insolvency proceedings in the Member State where the debtor has an establishment should be limited to local creditors and public authorities, or to cases in which main insolvency proceedings cannot be opened under the law of the Member State where the debtor has the centre of its main interests.
Grunden til denne begrænsning er, at det kun i strengt nødvendige tilfælde skal være muligt at indgive begæring om indledning af territoriale insolvensbehandlinger, inden hovedinsolvensbehandlingen er indledt.
The reason for this restriction is that cases in which territorial insolvency proceedings are requested before the main insolvency proceedings are intended to be limited to what is absolutely necessary.
Når først hovedinsolvensbehandlingen er indledt, begrænser denne forordning ikke retten til at indgive begæring om indledning af insolvensbehandling i den medlemsstat, hvor skyldneren har et forretningssted.
Following the opening of the main insolvency proceedings, this Regulation does not restrict the right to request the opening of insolvency proceedings in a Member State where the debtor has an establishment.
Insolvensbehandleren for hovedinsolvensbehandlingen eller enhver anden, som har kompetence hertil efter lovgivningen i den pågældende medlemsstat, kan indgive begæring om indledning af en sekundær insolvensbehandling.
The insolvency practitioner in the main insolvency proceedings or any other person empowered under the national law of that Member State may request the opening of secondary insolvency proceedings.