natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Domstolen bekræftede også, at når virksomheder modtager en gratis offentlig ydelse, er dette statsstøtte til virksomhederne, hvis a) staten dækker omkostningerne ved ydelsen, b) virksomheder således ikke skal betale udgifter, de normalt ville skulle erholde som led i deres aktivitet, og c) ydelsen tilbydes udvalgte virksomheder.
The ECJ also confirmed that offering a public service for free to enterprises does result in state aid to these enterprises, if (a) the State bears the costs of that service, (b) the enterprises are thus relieved of costs they would normally have to bear as part of their activity and (c) the service is offered to selected enterprises.
Domstolen bekræftede samtidig sin tidligere retspraksis51, for så vidt angår Kommissionens skønsbeføjelser i forbindelse med traktatbrudsprocedurerne efter artikel 258 i TEUF.
In addition, the Court confirmed its earlier case law51 as regards the Commission's discretionary right in relation to the infringement procedures under Article 258 TFEU.
Domstolen bekræftede således, at ”direktivet (…) skal fortolkes således, at en vagttjeneste (»Bereitschaftsdienst«), som en læge udfører efter ordningen med fysisk tilstedeværelse på hospitalet, fuldt ud skal anses for at være arbejdstid i direktivets forstand, selv om lægen har lov til at hvile sig på arbejdsstedet i de perioder, hvor hans arbejdsydelser ikke er påkrævet, og direktivet er følgelig til hinder for en lovgivning i en medlemsstat, hvorefter arbejdstagerens arbejdsfrie perioder under en sådan vagttjeneste betragtes som hviletid”.
The Court therefore confirmed that "Directive 93/104 must be interpreted as meaning that a period of duty spent by a doctor on call (‘Bereitschaftsdienst’), where presence in the hospital is required, must be regarded as constituting in its entirety working time for the purposes of that Directive, even though the person concerned is permitted to rest at his place of work during the periods when his services are not required, with the result that that Directive precludes a Member State's legislation which classifies as a rest period an employee's periods of inactivity in the context of such on-call duty".
Domstolen bekræftede, at anvendelsesområdet for direktivet om racelighed ikke kan defineres restriktivt.
The Court confirmed that the scope of the Race Equality Directive cannot be defined restrictively.
Domstolen bekræftede, at de generelle nationale administrative procedurer er langt fra gennemsigtige, og at situationen i Luxembourg kan afskrække interesserede parter i at ansøge om adgangsret.
The ECJ confirmed that the national administrative procedures as a whole are far from transparent and that, therefore, the situation in Luxembourg is capable of discouraging interested parties from making applications for rights of way.
Domstolen bekræftede, at de multilaterale interbankgebyrer udgør en konkurrencebegrænsning og dermed en overtrædelse af EU's konkurrenceregler.
The Court confirmed that the MIFs constituted a restriction of competition, in breach of EU antitrust rules.
Domstolen bekræftede, at den omstændighed, at betingelserne for finansielle transaktioner mellem beslægtede selskaber, der er hjemmehørende i forskellige medlemsstater, afviger fra dem, der ville have været aftalt mellem ikke-beslægtede parter, udgør en objektiv omstændighed, som kan efterprøves selvstændigt for at afgøre, om den pågældende transaktion helt eller delvis er et rent kunstigt arrangement.
The ECJ confirmed that the fact that the terms and conditions of financial transactions between related companies resident in different MSs deviate from those that would have been agreed upon between unrelated parties constitutes an objective and independently verifiable element for the purpose of determining whether the transaction in question represents, in whole or in part, a purely artificial arrangement.
Domstolen bekræftede, at der gælder absolut nul tolerance i EU-lovgivningen for en sådan uautoriseret tilstedeværelse af gmo14.
In this case, where honey was unintentionally contaminated by pollen from GM maize, the Court confirmed that EU law applies absolute zero tolerance for such unauthorised GMO presence14.
Domstolen bekræftede, at der på grundlag af de beviser, Kommissionen havde fremlagt, ikke var tale om en samstemmende vilje, og Domstolen afklarede dermed begrebet aftale i henhold til artikel 81.
Confirming that, on the basis of the evidence adduced by the Commission, a concurrence of wills had not been established, the ECJ clarified the notion of agreement under Article 81 EC.
Domstolen bekræftede, at det forhold, at en medlemsstat ved hjælp af ensidige foranstaltninger forsøger at tilnærme konkurrencevilkårene i en særlig sektor til de vilkår, der gælder i andre medlemsstater, ikke medfører, at de pågældende foranstaltninger mister deres karakter af støtte187.
The Court of Justice confirmed that the fact that a Member State seeks to approximate, by unilateral measures, the conditions of competition in a particular sector of the economy to those prevailing in other Member States cannot deprive the measures in question of their character as aid.187
Domstolen bekræftede, at det fortsat står værtsmedlemsstaten frit for at konstatere, at en person, der er tildelt en social ydelse, ikke længere opfylder de betingelser, som gælder for opholdsretten.
The Court confirmed that it remains open to the host Member State to take the view that a person who has recourse to social assistance no longer fulfils the conditions of the right of residence.
Domstolen bekræftede, at en person har ret til at blive informeret om årsagen til en afgørelse om afslag på indrejse, da beskyttelsen af den nationale sikkerhed ikke må medføre, at den pågældende fratages sin ret til en retfærdig rettergang og derved retten til klage over afgørelsen (artikel 47).
The Court confirmed that a person has the right to be informed of the basis for a decision to refuse entry, as the protection of national security cannot deny the right to a fair hearing, rendering the right to redress ineffective (Article 47).
Domstolen bekræftede, at forordningen står i et rimeligt forhold til målet om at beskytte forbrugerne mod høje omkostninger og er berettiget ud fra nærhedsprincippet, da det er nødvendigt at sikre et velfungerende indre marked for roamingtjenester.
It confirmed that the Regulation is proportionate to the objective of protecting consumers against high charges, and is justified on the grounds of subsidiarity as it is necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the internal market in roaming services.
Domstolen bekræftede, at Kommissionen i forbindelse med undersøgelsesfasen af traktatbrudsproceduren, for så vidt angår aktindsigt, kan behandle hele indholdet af den administrative sagsakt som en enkelt kategori af dokumenter (også EU Pilot).
The Court confirmed that from the point of view of public access to documents, the Commission could treat the entire content of its administrative file as belonging to a single category of documents during the investigation phase of the infringement procedure (including EU Pilot).
Domstolen bekræftede, at Kommissionen ikke kan gå ud fra, at et moderselskab, der har overtaget en anden virksomheds datterselskab og udtrykkeligt påtager sig ansvaret for dette datterselskabs handlinger, har givet afkald på sin kontradiktionsret i forbindelse med datterselskabets handlinger før overtagelsen.
The ECJ confirmed that the Commission cannot presume that a parent company that has acquired a subsidiary of another party and expressly assumes liability for the acts of this subsidiary has waived its right to exercise its rights of defence in respect of the subsidiary’s earlier conduct, before the transfer of the latter’s business.
Domstolen bekræftede, at medlemsstaterne kan træffe foranstaltninger til beskyttelse og fremme af et eller flere officielle sprog som en del af deres kulturpolitik.
The Court confirmed that Member States may adopt measures to defend and promote one or several official languages as part of their cultural policy.
Domstolen bekræfter desuden, at medlemsstaterne er forpligtet til at udøve deres kompetence under iagttagelse af såvel de fundamentale rettigheder, som er sikret ved traktaten, som den effektive virkning af direktivbestemmelser, der indebærer foranstaltninger med henblik på indbyrdes at fjerne hindringerne for den frie bevægelighed for personer, for at borgerne i Den Europæiske Union og deres familiemedlemmer lettere kan udøve deres ret til ophold i enhver medlemsstat.
The Court also reaffirms that Member States must exercise their powers in full respect for the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Treaty and to give full effect to the provisions of the Directives abolishing barriers to free movement of persons between them so as to facilitate the exercise of the right of residence of Union citizens and their family members in the territory of any Member State.
Domstolen bekræfter i sin dom af 17. maj 1990 (C-262/88 Barber) og i de følgende domme (jf. nedenfor) sin tidligere retspraksis i sag C-170/84 Bilka, nemlig at ydelser til erhvervs­tilknyttede ordninger for arbejdstagere falder ind under begrebet løn i henhold til den tidligere artikel 119 i EF-traktaten.
In its judgment of 17 May 1990 (Case 262/88 Barber) and its subsequent judgements (see below) the Court confirms its earlier caselaw in 170/84 Bilka, i.e. that benefits under occupational schemes for paid workers fall within the concept of pay within the meaning of ex-Article 119 of the EC Treaty.
Domstolen bekræfter Kommissionens holdning, nemlig at den ordning, der er fastsat i direktiv 93/96 om opholdsret for studerende, adskiller sig fra ordningen i de to andre direktiver med hensyn til tilstrækkelige midler.
The Court of Justice upheld the Commission’s view that the system of Directive 93/96 on the right of residence for students differs from that of the two other Directives with regard to sufficient resources.
Domstolen bekræfter med sin dom i sagen Baumbast og R også det princip, den fastlagde i sin dom af 11. juli 2002 i sag C-60/00, Carpenter15, om, at fællesskabsrettens bestemmelser om fri bevægelighed for personer må fortolkes på baggrund af kravet om respekt for familielivet ifølge artikel 8 i den europæiske menneskerettighedskonvention (EMRK), idet denne respekt er en del af de grundlæggende rettigheder, som er anerkendt i fællesskabsretten.
In Baumbast and R the Court of Justice also confirmed the principle declared in Case C‑60/00 Carpenter,15 whereby the provisions of Community law concerning free movement of persons must be interpreted in the light of the requirement for respect for family life, provided for by Article 8 of the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), this respect being one of the basic rights recognised by Community law.
Domstolen bemærkede Kommissionens engagement i ikke at give tredjemand adgang til de omstridte dokumenter, før hovedsøgsmålet er afsluttet.
The ECJ noted the Commission’s commitment not to disclose the documents under dispute to third parties until the conclusion of the main proceedings.
Domstolen bemærkede, at den pågældende lov sigter mod at blive anvendt på en selektiv måde til fordel for store kriseramte industrivirksomheder, hvis gæld til visse kategorier af kreditorer, hovedsagelig offentlige kreditorer, er særlig stor.
The Court noted that the relevant law was intended to apply selectively to large industrial undertakings in difficulties which owed particularly large debts to certain, mainly public, classes of creditors.
Domstolen bemærkede, at med hensyn til finansieringen af disse ordninger bidrager arbejdstagere, arbejdsgivere og det offentlige i et omfang, som i mindre grad følger ansættelsesforholdet mellem arbejdstagere og arbejdsgivere, end det skyldes socialpolitiske overvejelser.
The Court noted that, for the funding of these schemes, workers, employers, and public authorities contribute to an extent determined less by the employment relationship between workers and employers than by considerations of social policy.
Domstolen bemærkede, at staten i disse tilfælde ikke optræder som en offentlig investor, hvis adfærd skal sammenlignes med en privat investor, der indskyder kapital for at sikre et afkast, men som en offentlig kreditor, der ligesom en privat kreditor forsøger at inddrive skyldige beløb.
It noted that in such cases the State did not act as a public investor whose conduct must be compared to that of a private investor laying out capital with a view to realising a profit but as a public creditor who, like a private creditor, seeks to recover sums due to it.
Domstolen benyttede denne anledning til at udelukke en meget udbredt opfattelse, som var, at en tekniske forskrift, som har til formål at liberalisere handelen, ikke skal notificeres.
The Court seized this opportunity to dismiss the widely held view that a technical rule whose purpose or effect was to liberalise trade did not need to be notified.
Domstolen benyttede denne lejlighed til at understrege, at kvalificering af en national foranstaltning som teknisk forskrift sker uanset den oprindelige begrundelse herfor.
The Court seized this opportunity to stress that the underlying purpose of a national measure has no bearing on whether or not that measure constitutes a technical regulation.
Domstolen benyttede et lignende ræsonnement i Wielockx-sagen og i andre sager27.
The Court has followed similar reasoning in Wielockx and other cases27.
Domstolen besluttede i denne sag, at bestemmelserne om fri bevægelighed for kapital ikke er til hinder for en regel om, at boet efter en statsborger fra en medlemsstat, som er flyttet til udlandet og mindre end ti år efter fraflytningen er afgået ved døden, beskattes, som om denne statsborger havde beholdt sin bopæl i medlemsstaten.
The Court decided in this case that the provisions on free movement of capital did not forbid a rule whereby the estate of a national of a Member State who dies within 10 years of ceasing to reside in that Member State is to be taxed as if that national had continued to reside in that Member State.
Domstolen bestemte dog også, at forordningens retsvirkninger skulle opretholdes, indtil der under anvendelse af de korrekte hjemmelsbestemmelser og inden for en rimelig frist kunne vedtages en ny forordning.
However the Court also ruled that the effects of the Regulation were maintained until the adoption, within a reasonable period, of a new Regulation founded on appropriate legal bases.
Domstolen bestemte også, at retsvirkningerne af annullationen suspenderes, indtil der inden for en rimelig frist vedtages en ny forordning.
The Court also ordered that the effects of the annulment be suspended until the adoption, within a reasonable time, of a new regulation.
Domstolen bestemte således, at indrømmelsen af de eksklusive rettigheder er berettiget i tilfælde af denne art, da det ellers ikke vil være muligt for disse pensionsfonde at udføre den særlige sociale opgave af almindelig økonomisk interesse, de har fået overdraget, på acceptable økonomiske vilkår.
The Court thus ruled that the grant of the exclusive rights is justified in such cases, because it would not otherwise be possible for these pension funds to carry out under economically acceptable conditions a particular social task of general economic interest which is assigned to them.
Domstolen blev anmodet om at afgøre, om artikel 81 fandt anvendelse på kollektive aftaler mellem arbejdstagere og arbejdsgivere, om artikel 81 og 82 fandt anvendelse på nederlandske tillægspensionsfonde, og om sådanne fondes eksklusive rettigheder var forenelige med artikel 82 og 86.
The ECJ was asked to give rulings on whether Article 81 applies to collective agreements between labour and management, whether Articles 81 and 82 apply to Dutch supplementary pension funds, and on the compatibility of the exclusive rights granted to such funds with Articles 82 and 86.
Domstolen blev anmodet om at præcisere, om de tilfælde, hvor national lovgivning opfylder mål, der er fastsat i EU-retten, også svarer til situationer, hvor EU-retten "gennemføres", jf chartres artikel 51.
The Court was asked to clarify whether cases of national law which meet objectives laid down in EU law also amount to situations where EU law is being ‘implemented’ within the meaning of Article 51 of the Charter.
Domstolen blev bedt om at tage stilling til fastsættelse af advokaters salærtakster i Italien og om et selvregulerende forbud mod advokatpartnerskaber i Nederlandene.
The Court had been asked to rule on lawyers’ price fixing in Italy and on a self-regulatory ban on lawyer-auditor partnerships in the Netherlands.
Domstolen blev spurgt, om en medlemsstat kunne gøre overgivelsen af en person, der var dømt in absentia, betinget af, at dommen kunne prøves på ny i den medlemsstat, hvor den var afsagt, for derved at undgå en krænkende fortolkning af retten til en upartisk domstol og retten til et forsvar, der er sikret i forfatningen i den medlemsstat, der overgiver den pågældende person41.
The Court was asked if a Member State could make the surrender of a person convicted in absentia conditional upon the conviction being open to review in the issuing Member State, in order to avoid any adverse effects on the right to a fair trial and the rights of the defence as guaranteed by the constitution of the Member State surrendering the person in question41.
Domstolen bør have kompetence til at afgøre tvister om krænkelse af EF-patenter og supplerende EF-beskyttelsescertifikater eller om disses gyldighed, tvister om udnyttelse af opfindelsen efter offentliggørelsen af EF-patentansøgningen, tvister om en ret på grundlag af tidligere udnyttelse af opfindelsen, foreløbige og bevissikrende forholdsregler inden for det tildelte sagsområde, erstatning eller godtgørelse i de nævnte situationer og ikendelse af tvangsbøder i tilfælde af manglende opfyldelse af en afgørelse eller kendelse, der består i en forpligtelse til at handle eller undlade at handle.
The Court of Justice should have jurisdiction in disputes relating to the infringement or the validity of a Community patent and a Community supplementary protection certificate, the use of the invention after the publication of the Community patent application, the right based on prior use of the invention, provisional and evidence-protection measures in the subject matter conferred, damages or compensation in the situations referred to above and orders of a penalty payment in case of non-compliance with a decision or order constituting an obligation to act or to abstain from an act.
Domstolen bør have mulighed for at udstede pålæg over for den erhvervsdrivende eller tredjemand med henblik på fremlæggelse af dokumenter eller på bevisoptagelse for at fremskaffe nye beviser.
The judge must be able to use powers of injunction with regard to the commercial operator involved or third party in order to secure the production of documents or he must be able to order measures of inquiry with a view to establishing new evidence.
Domstolen bør have mulighed for at udstede pålæg over for modparten eller tredjemand med henblik på fremlæggelse af dokumenter eller på bevisoptagelse for at fremskaffe nye beviser.
The judge must be able to use powers of injunction with regard to the opposing party or third party in order to secure the production of documents or he must be able to order measures of inquiry with a view to establishing new evidence.
Domstolen bør i henhold til artikel 261 i TEUF gives fuld prøvelsesret vedrørende afgørelser, hvorved Kommissionen pålægger bøder eller tvangsbøder.
The Court of Justice should, in accordance with Article 261 of the TFEU, be given unlimited jurisdiction in respect of decisions by which the Commission imposes fines or periodic penalty payments.
Domstolen bør sikre fuld overholdelse af de processuelle minimumsstandarder og udstede et standardiseret europæisk betalingspåbud.
The court should ensure full compliance with the minimum procedural standards and issue a standardised European order for payment.
Domstolen bør tillægges kompetence til at afgøre visse tvister om EF-patenter.
The Court of Justice should be vested with jurisdiction in certain disputes relating to Community patents.
Domstolen drog den konklusion, at eftersom den skattemæssige sammenhæng var sikret ved en bilateral konvention indgået med en anden medlemsstat, kunne det pågældende princip ikke benyttes til at begrunde afvisningen af et fradrag som det nævnte21.
The Court concluded that, since fiscal cohesion was secured by a bilateral convention concluded with another Member State, that principle could not be invoked to justify the refusal of a deduction such as that in issue21.
Domstolen drog i den pågældende sag den konklusion, at "et gældsbrev, der er eksigibelt efter lovgivningen i den stat, hvor det er udstedt, men hvis ægthed ikke er attesteret af en offentlig myndighed eller et andet organ, der af denne stat er bemyndiget hertil, ikke er et officielt bekræftet dokument i den forstand, hvori udtrykket anvendes i artikel 50 i Bruxelles-konventionen".
The Court holds on this basis that “An acknowledgement of indebtedness enforceable under the law of the State of origin whose authenticity has not been established by a public authority or other authority empowered for that purpose by that State does not constitute an authentic instrument within the meaning of Article 50 of the [Brussels] Convention”.
Domstolen dømte Den Franske Republik til at efterkomme direktivet og betale en tvangsbøde på 31 650 EUR pr. dags forsinkelse med iværksættelse af de nødvendige foranstaltninger for at sikre den fulde og hele opfyldelse af dom af 25. april 2002, beregnet fra afsigelsen af den nye dom.
The Court ordered the French Republic to comply with the Directive and pay a penalty of 31 650 euros for each day of delay in taking the necessary measures to ensure full compliance with the judgment of 25 April 2002, as from the date of the delivery of the new judgment.
Domstolen dømte ved dom af 20. marts 199718 Tyskland for ikke inden for den fastsatte frist at have vedtaget de bestemmelser, der var nødvendige for at gennemføre direktiverne 90/364 og 90/365 i den nationale lovgivning.
In a judgment of 20 March 1997,18 the Court of Justice ruled against Germany for failing to adopt the provisions needed to transpose Directives 90/364 and 90/365 within the specified deadline.
Domstolen er af den opfattelse, at bestemmelser, som medfører diskriminerende behandling af erhvervsdrivende fra andre medlemsstater, kun kan indføres på grundlag af de særlige hensyn, der er nævnt i EF-traktatens artikel 5627.
The Court considers that the imposition of rules involving discriminatory treatment of operators from other Member States can only be based on the grounds set out in Treaty Article 5627.
Domstolen er dog aldrig gået så langt som til at mene, at forpligtelsen til en præcis gengivelse i forbindelse med implementering af direktiver nødvendigvis indebærer en ubetinget kopi.
However, the Court has never gone as far as to rule that the obligation to transpose faithfully necessitates direct transcription.
Domstolen er en institution af afgørende betydning for Unionen; den skal værne om lov og ret ved fortolkningen og anvendelsen af traktaten (artikel 220 i EF-traktaten).
The Court of Justice is essential to the European Union: its duty is to ensure that the law is observed in the interpretation and application of the Treaty (Article 220).