natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Domstolen har i flere tilfælde bekræftet, at arbejdstagere bør være i stand til at trække deres bidrag til udenlandske arbejdsmarkedspensionsordninger fra på samme måde som ved bidrag til indenlandske ordninger.
The CJ has confirmed in several cases that workers should be able to deduct contributions to foreign occupational pension schemes in the same way as contributions to domestic schemes.
Domstolen har i mange tilfælde fastslået, at når en tekst, som Europa‑Parlamentet allerede er blevet hørt om, på en senere tidspunkt ændres  radikalt, bør Europa‑Parlamentet høres igen, medmindre ændringerne stemmer overens med udtalelser, Europa‑Parlamentet tidligere har afgivet.
In many cases, the Court of Justice has stated, in substance, that when a text, on which the European Parliament has already been consulted, is, at a later stage, radically amended, the European Parliament should be reconsulted, unless the amendments are consistent with the opinion previously delivered by the European Parliament.
Domstolen har i mellemtiden skabt klarhed over de typer af selskaber og brugere, der kan komme i betragtning til at anke de nationale tilsynsmyndigheders beslutninger, og antallet af parter, der kan komme i betragtning, forventes udvidet i visse medlemsstater (f.eks. Sverige), hvilket vil øge den retlige beskyttelse ved at forbedre konkurrenternes stilling.
In the meantime, the Court of Justice has provided clarification on the types of undertaking or users eligible to appeal decisions of NRAs, which is expected to broaden the number of eligible parties in certain Member States (e.g. Sweden) and will increase legal protection by improving the standing of competitors.
Domstolen har i praksis anerkendt, at egalisering af ydelser er dyrere.
The Court has in effect recognised that equalisation of benefit costs more.
Domstolen har i sagen Kommissionen mod Luxembourg10, der drejede sig om kravet om arbejdstilladelse for en udstationeret arbejdstager fra et tredjeland som led i leveringen af en tjenesteydelse, fastslået, at "forpligtelsen for en virksomhed, der leverer tjenesteydelser, til på forhånd at give de lokale myndigheder meddelelse om tilstedeværelsen af en eller flere udstationerede arbejdstagere, den påtænkte periode for denne tilstedeværelse og den eller de tjenesteydelser, der begrunder udstationeringen, imidlertid er en foranstaltning, der er lige så effektiv og mindre indgribende end det omhandlede krav.
In the case Commission v Luxembourg10, in which a posted worker who was a national of a third country was required to have a work permit in order to provide services, the Court declared that "a measure which would be just as effective whilst being less restrictive than the measures at issue here would be an obligation imposed on a service-providing undertaking to report beforehand to the local authorities on the presence of one or more deployed workers, the anticipated duration of their presence and the provision or provisions of services justifying the deployment.
Domstolen har i sin praksis yderligere præciseret visse nationale kontrolforanstaltningers forenelighed med EU-retten.
In its case law, the ECJ has further clarified the compatibility of certain national control measures with EU law.
Domstolen har i sin retspraksis (f.eks. i Spijkers-dommen)1 konsekvent henvist til begrebet økonomisk enhed, der bevarer sin identitet, og således defineret, hvilke faktiske omstændigheder, der skal være opfyldt, hvis direktivet af 1977 skal kunne finde anvendelse.
There are, in fact, consistent references in Court of Justice case law (e.g. the Spijkers case1) to the concept of an economic entity which retains its identity, and the Court has indicated the actual conditions which must be taken into consideration for the implementation of the 1977 Directive.
Domstolen har i sin retspraksis ganske vist præciseret grænsearbejdernes retlige status, bl.a. på det fiskale område26 og med hensyn til sociale fordele27 og social sikring28.
The Court’s case-law has certainly made it possible to clarify the legal status of frontier workers, particularly as regards taxation26, social benefits27 and social security28.
Domstolen har i sin retspraksis gentagne gange fastslået, at medlemsstaterne ikke kan anvende ikke-bindende retsakter til gennemførelse i national ret af EF-miljølovgivning, som indebærer rettigheder og forpligtelser for personer.
The Court of Justice has, in a consistent line of case law, stated that Member States may not have recourse to non-binding legal instruments in order to transpose into national law Community environmental legislation, which is likely to create rights and obligations for persons.
Domstolen har i sin retspraksis sat snævre grænser for, hvornår denne undtagelse kan bringes i anvendelse7:
The Case Law of the Court has interpreted the conditions of use of this derogation restrictively, stating that7 :
Domstolen har i sin retspraksis slået klart fast, at arbejdstageren har krav på ligebehandling for familiemedlemmerne16.
The Court’s decisions clearly affirmed that equal treatment for family members was one of the worker’s rights16.
Domstolen har i sine afgørelser insisteret på de "fire friheder" (fri bevægelighed for varer, personer [herunder etableringsretten], tjenesteydelser og kapital) i sager vedrørende direkte skatter i EU.
In its judgments the Court has insisted on the ‘four freedoms’ (free movement of goods, persons [including the right of establishment], services and capital) in EU direct tax matters.
Domstolen har i sine domme fastslået, at højere uddannelse må betragtes som erhvervsuddannelse.
in various rulings the Court of Justice has stipulated that higher education must be regarded as vocational training.
Domstolen har i to domme i 2001 understreget, at Kommissionen ikke kan udøve et skøn, når det afgøres, om der skal indledes en formel undersøgelsesprocedure således som omhandlet i artikel 88, stk. 2.
In two judgments, the Court emphasised that the Commission does not have any discretion in deciding whether or not to initiate the formal investigation procedure provided for in Article 88(2).
Domstolen har i øvrigt fået forelagt et præjudicielt spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af EF-traktatens artikel 87, stk. 1, i relation til destruktionsafgiften348.
A request for a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of Article 87(1) of the Treaty in relation to the rendering charge has also been referred to the Court of Justice of the European Communities348.
Domstolen har i øvrigt i forbindelse med EF-traktatens artikel 10 formelt i sin retspraksis stadsfæstet, at der er pligt til at samarbejde i tilfælde af problemer med gennemførelsen af fællesskabsretten, idet dette giver den pågældende medlemsstat mulighed for at lade Kommissionen vurdere problemerne16.
Moreover, the Court of Justice has formally confirmed in its case law on Article 10 of the EC Treaty the existence of an obligation of cooperation in the event of problems with the implementation of Community law, an obligation which for the Member State includes the possibility of submitting these problems for assessment by the Commission.16
Domstolen har igen og igen fastslået, at kriterierne i traktatens artikel 87, stk. 1, bør anvendes objektivt uden nogen form for skøn fra Kommissionens side.
The Court of Justice has repeatedly stated that the criteria laid down in Article (87)1 of the Treaty should be applied objectively without any discretion on the part of the Commission.
Domstolen har ikke accepteret nogen af de begrundelser, som medlemsstaterne har fremført, f.eks. de særlige forhold i tilknytning til ansættelse i den offentlige sektor, påskønnelse af loyalitet (på visse betingelser), forskelle i karrierestruktur, omvendt diskrimination, vanskeligheder med at foretage en sammenligning og princippet om homogenitet.
The Court has not yet accepted any of the justifications put forward by Member States, such as the specific characteristics of employment in the public sector; to reward loyalty (under certain conditions); differences in career structures; reverse discrimination; difficulties in making a comparison; principle of homogeneity.
Domstolen har ikke kompetence i sager, der allerede er anlagt ved en national ret på det tidspunkt, hvor denne afgørelse træder i kraft.
The Court of Justice shall not have jurisdiction over those disputes of which a national court is already seised on the date at which this Decision enters into force.
Domstolen har imidlertid fastslået, at dobbeltbeskatning forårsaget af to eller flere medlemsstaters parallelle udøvelse af beskatningsrettigheder ikke er i strid med traktaten18.
However, the Court has found that double taxation caused by the parallel exercise of taxing rights by two or more Member States is not in breach of the Treaty18.
Domstolen har imidlertid ligeledes fastslået, at det skal undersøges, om de oplysninger, der er indeholdt i de dokumenter, som kræves efter etableringsmedlemsstatens regler, samlet er tilstrækkelige til, at der kan foretages den nødvendige kontrol i værtsmedlemsstaten15.
However, the Court also said that it was necessary to check whether the information provided in the documents required under the legislation of the Member State of establishment were sufficient as a whole to enable the checks needed in the host Member State to be carried out15.
Domstolen har imidlertid også fastslået, at spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt den operation, materialet vil blive undergivet, er eller ikke er en affaldsbehandlingsoperation opført i bilag IIA eller IIB, ikke kan give det definitive svar på, om materialet er affald eller ej (Niselli).
The ECJ has, however, also held that whether the operation that will be applied to the material is or is not a waste treatment operation listed in Annex IIA or IIB cannot provide the definitive answer on whether the material is waste or not (Niselli).
Domstolen har imidlertid slået fast, at denne fravigelse skal begrænses til særlige sammenhænge som f.eks. naturkatastrofer eller teknologiske katastrofer, angreb eller alvorlige ulykker, og at disse arbejdstageres normale aktiviteter er omfattet af direktivet10.
However, the Court of Justice has held that this derogation must be limited to exceptional contexts, such as natural or technological disasters, attacks or serious accidents, and that the normal activities of such workers are covered by the Directive10.
Domstolen har især fastslået, at støtte ikke kan begrundes med, at andre medlemsstater har ydet ulovlig støtte.
Specifically, the Court has held that it is not possible to justify an aid measure on the ground that other Member States grant illegal aid.
Domstolen har klart fastslået, at medlemsstaterne ikke kan træffe foranstaltninger, som indebærer diskriminerende behandling af en erhvervsdrivende, som ifølge fælles tilladelse udøver erhvervsvirksomhed i henhold til enten etableringsordningen eller reglerne om fri udveksling af tjenesteydelser.
The Court's opinion is conclusive as to the manifest impossibility for a Member State to impose such measures when they imply discriminatory treatment of an economic agent operating within its territory under a single licence on the basis either of the freedom to provide services or the right of establishment.
Domstolen har knæsat dette princip i sin retspraksis (sag 222/84, Johnston mod Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, og sag 222/86, Unectef mod Heylens).
The Court of Justice enshrined this principle in its caselaw (Case 222/84- Johnston v Chief Constable of the RUC and Case 222/86 Unectef/v Heylens).
Domstolen har kompetence i henhold til de i traktaten fastsatte betingelser og i følgende tilfælde:
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction under the conditions laid down in the Treaty as well as in the following cases:
Domstolen har kompetence i sager anlagt mod IMI-fællesforetagendet, herunder vedrørende afgørelser truffet af dets bestyrelse, på de betingelser, der er fastsat i traktatens artikel 230 og 232.
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in actions brought against the IMI Joint Undertaking, including decisions of its Board, under the conditions provided for in Articles 230 and 232 of the Treaty.
Domstolen har kompetence til at afgøre enhver tvist, der har forbindelse med erstatning for sådanne skader.
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in any dispute relating to compensation for such damages.
Domstolen har kompetence til at afgøre præjudicielle spørgsmål
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction to give preliminary rulings concerning:
Domstolen har kompetence til at afgøre tvister vedrørende enhver sådan erstatning.
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in disputes relating to compensating for any such damage.
Domstolen har kompetence til at træffe afgørelse i enhver retstvist mellem medlem­mer i anliggender vedrørende denne forordning og de vedtægter, der er nævnt i denne forordnings artikel 5.
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in any dispute between the Members which relates to the subject matter of this Regulation and the Statutes referred to in Article 5 of this Regulation.
Domstolen har kompetence til at træffe afgørelse i henhold til enhver voldgiftsbestemmelse, som indgår i en af observatoriet indgået aftale.
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction pursuant to an arbitration clause contained in a contract concluded by the Centre.
Domstolen har kompetence til at træffe afgørelse i henhold til voldgiftsbestemmelser i de aftaler og kontrakter, IMI-fællesforetagendet indgår.
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction to give judgment pursuant to any arbitration clause contained in agreement and contract concluded by the IMI Joint Undertaking.
Domstolen har kompetence til at træffe afgørelse i retstvister om erstatning for sådanne skader.
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in disputes relating to compensation for any such damage.
Domstolen har kompetence til at træffe afgørelse i sager anlagt mod fællesforetagendet Clean Sky, herunder vedrørende afgørelser truffet af dets bestyrelse, på de betingelser, der er fastsat i traktatens artikel 230 og 232.
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in actions brought against the Clean Sky Joint Undertaking, including decisions of its Board, under the conditions provided for in Articles 230 and 232 of the Treaty.
Domstolen har kompetence til at træffe afgørelse i tvister vedrørende erstatning for skader, dets IMI-fællesforetagendets ansatte har forvoldt under udøvelsen af deres hverv.
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in disputes relating to compensation for damage caused by the staff of the IMI Joint Undertaking in the performance of their duties.
Domstolen har kompetence til at træffe afgørelse i tvister vedrørende erstatning for skader, fællesforetagendet Clean Skys ansatte har forvoldt under udøvelsen af deres hverv.
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in disputes relating to compensation for damage caused by the staff of the Clean Sky Joint Undertaking in the performance of their duties
Domstolen har kompetence til at træffe afgørelse i tvister vedrørende sådanne skadeerstatninger.
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in any dispute relating to compensation for such damage.
Domstolen har kompetence til at træffe afgørelse om enhver retstvist mellem medlemmer i anliggender vedrørende denne forordning og de vedtægter, der er nævnt i artikel 5.
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in any dispute between the Members which relates to the subject matter of this Regulation and the Statutes referred to in Article 5.
Domstolen har kompetence til at træffe afgørelse om følgende:
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction concerning:
Domstolen har kompetence til at træffe afgørelse om voldgiftsbestemmelser i de aftaler og kontrakter, fællesforetagendet Clean Sky indgår.
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction to give judgment pursuant to any arbitration clause contained in agreement and contract concluded by the Clean Sky Joint Undertaking.
Domstolen har kompetence til at træffe afgørelse om:
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction concerning:
Domstolen har kompetence til at udtale sig om klager, der indbringes mod agenturet, på de betingelser, der er fastlagt i traktatens artikel 230 eller 232.
The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in actions brought against the Agency under the conditions provided for in Article 230 or 232 of the Treaty.
Domstolen har konkluderet, at "det afgørende kriterium er, om bidraget anvendes specifikt til finansiering af en medlemsstats sociale sikringsordning" (sag C-34/98, præmis 40, og sag C-169/98, præmis 38).
The Court of Justice has concluded that “the decisive criterion is that of the specific allocation of a contribution to the funding of the social security scheme of a Member State” (Case C-34/98, paragraph 40, and Case C-168/98, paragraph 38).
Domstolen har konkluderet, at det økonomiske formål, der forfølges med traktatens artikel 141, (….) er underordnet i forhold til bestemmelsens sociale formål, som er udtryk for en grundlæggende menneskerettighed1.
The Court has concluded that the economic aim pursued by Article 141 EC is secondary to the social aim pursued by the same provision, which constitutes the expression of a fundamental right1.
Domstolen har konkluderet, at det økonomiske formål, der forfølges med traktatens artikel 141, er underordnet i forhold til bestemmelsens sociale formål, som er udtryk for en grundlæggende menneskerettighed.
The Court has concluded that the economic aim pursued by Article 141 of the Treaty is secondary to the social aim pursued by the same provision, which constitutes the expression of a fundamental right.
Domstolen har konsekvent defineret virksomheder som enheder, der udøver økonomisk aktivitet, uanset deres retlige form og finansieringsmåde10.
The Court of Justice has consistently defined undertakings as entities engaged in an economic activity, regardless of their legal status and the way in which they are financed10.
Domstolen har konsekvent fastslået, at afvigelser fra de grundlæggende frihedsrettigheder skal fortolkes strengt.
The Court of Justice has consistently held that derogations from fundamental freedoms must be interpreted strictly.
Domstolen har konsekvent fastslået, at denne undtagelse vedrører stillinger, der ved lov indebærer en direkte eller indirekte deltagelse i udøvelsen af offentlig myndighed og i funktioner, som skal sikre statens eller andre offentlige kollektive enheders almene interesser58.
The CJ has consistently held that this exception covers posts involving direct or indirect participation in the exercise of powers conferred by public law and duties designed to safeguard the general interests of the State or of other public authorities58.
Domstolen har konsekvent fastslået, at sondringen mellem etableringsretten og den frie udveksling af tjenesteydelser på midlertidig basis skal afgøres i hvert enkelt tilfælde, idet der tages hensyn til ikke blot varigheden, men også hyppigheden, den periodiske karakter eller kontinuiteten af leveringen af tjenesteydelser.
The Court of Justice has consistently held that the distinction between the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services on a temporary basis needs to be made on a case by case basis, taking into account not only the duration but also the regularity, periodicity and continuity of the provision of services.
Domstolen har konsekvent fortolket undtagelserne meget restriktivt111, og Kommissionen har aktivt søgt og søger stadig at fremme adgangen til den offentlige sektor.
However, the derogation has constantly been interpreted in a very restrictive way by the Court111 and the Commission has actively promoted increased access to the public sector, and continues to do so.
Domstolen har kun indskrænket princippet med hensyn til EU-konsumption af spredningsretten, når denne kolliderer med de frie varebevægelser, og med hensyn til konkurrencereglerne, når den er baseret på restriktive aftaler eller samordnet praksis eller misbrug af en dominerende stilling.
The Court has placed limitations on its exercise only in respect of the Community-wide exhaustion of the distribution right in circumstances where this conflicts with the free movement of goods and in respect of competition rules where it arises from restrictive agreements or concerted practices or an abuse of a dominant position.
Domstolen har kunnet klarlægge nogle af de pågældende spørgsmål ved at anvende princippet om fællesskabsrettens forrang for national ret.
The Court of Justice was able to clarify some of the issues involved by applying the principle of primacy of Community law over national law.
Domstolen har ligeledes anført, at direktivet også gælder for bestemmelser, som har tilknytning til det strafferetlige område; direktivets anvendelsesområde er ikke begrænset til produkter, der er beregnet til en anvendelse, som ikke henhører under statsmagtens beføjelser.
The Court also ruled that the Directive applies equally to regulations which fall within the scope of criminal law; its scope is not limited to products intended to be used otherwise than in connection with the exercise of public authority.
Domstolen har ligeledes fastslået, at den omstændighed, at lovgivningen i forsikringsmedlemsstaten ikke sikrer, at en patient, der er omfattet af denne lovgivning, kan få godtgjort sine udgifter med et beløb, der svarer til de udgifter, der ville være blevet godtgjort, hvis sundhedsydelserne var udført i forsikringsmedlemsstaten, er en begrænsning af den frie udveksling af tjenesteydelser i henhold til EF-traktatens artikel 4918.
As the Court has also held, the fact that the legislation of the Member State of affiliation does not guarantee a patient covered by that legislation a level of reimbursement equivalent to that to which he would have been entitled if he had received healthcare in the Member State of affiliation is a restriction of the freedom to provide services within the meaning of Article 49 EC18.
Domstolen har ligeledes fastslået, at den omstændighed, at lovgivningen i forsikringsmedlemsstaten ikke sikrer, at en patient, der er omfattet af denne lovgivning, kan få godtgjort sine udgifter med et beløb, der svarer til de udgifter, der ville være blevet godtgjort, hvis sundhedsydelserne var udført i forsikringsmedlemsstaten, er en begrænsning af den frie udveksling af tjenesteydelser i henhold til EF-traktatens artikel 4924.
As the Court has also held, the fact that the legislation of the Member State of affiliation does not guarantee a patient covered by that legislation a level of reimbursement equivalent to that to which he would have been entitled if he had received healthcare in the Member State of affiliation is a restriction of the freedom to provide services within the meaning of Article 49 EC24.
Domstolen har ligeledes fastslået, at en sådan foranstaltning ikke må gå videre end, hvad der er nødvendigt for at nå formålet hermed, og den overlader det til den nationale domstol at anvende denne afgørelse i den pågældende sag.
The Court also laid down that such a measure must not go beyond what is necessary to attain the objective pursued, and referred to the national court for application of this judgment in the case in question.
Domstolen har ligeledes fastslået, at visse supplerende betingelser, som en række medlemsstater pålægger tredjelandsarbejdstagere, ikke er i overensstemmelse med proportionalitetsprincippet.
The Court also held that a number of additional conditions which certain Member States imposed with regard to the posting of workers from third countries were excessive.
Domstolen har ligeledes fastslået, at visse særlige omstændigheder på visse betingelser kan berettige restriktioner for den frie bevægelighed, f.eks. for at beskytte folkesundheden eller forbrugerne.
The Court has also made clear that there are circumstances where, subject to certain conditions, it is possible to justify restrictions, for instance to protect public health or consumers.
Domstolen har ligeledes udtalt sig i den retning.
The Court of Justice itself has taken this same view.
Domstolen har ligeledes udtalt sig i den retning19.
The Court of Justice itself has taken this same view19.