natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Domstolen stemt farvestof kan medføre, tage hensyn til resultaterne af den internationale forskning på området og navnlig resultaterne af Fællesskabets videnskabelige Komité for Levnedsmidler.
In their appraisal of the general health risk which the colouring mat­ter actually used might represent, the national authorities had to take into account the results of international scien­tific research, and in particular the work of the Community's Scientific Committee for Food.
Etableringsret til den offentlige sædelighed inden for sit område i overensstemmelse med sine egne værdinormer og i den af staten valgte form, men fandt, at et forbud mod import af disse varer ikke kan begrundes i de EØF-traktatens artikel 36 anførte hensyn, såfremt den pågældende medlemsstat for samme slags varer fremstillet eller forhandlet på dens eget område vedtager strafferetlige foranstaltninger eller andre alvorlige og effektive sanktioner, der tager sigte på at forhindre udbredelsen af de pågældende varer på dets område.
ance with its own scale of values and in the form selected by it the requirements of public morality in its territory, the Court considered that a prohibition on imports of such goods cannot be justified under Article 36 of the EEC Treaty where the Member State does not adopt, with respect to the same goods manufactured or marketed within its own territory, penal measures or other serious and effective measures intended to prevent the distribution of such goods in its territory.
Domstolen har i sag 270/83 2) afsagt kendelse om, at Frankrig har tilsidesat de for pligtelser, der påhviler det i medfør af EØF-traktatens artikel 52, idet denne medlemsstat ikke yder filialer og agenturer i Frankrig af forsikringsselskaber med hjemsted i en anden medlemsstat skattegodtgørelse af de udbytter fra franske selskaber, som de nævnte filialer og agenturer modtager, på samme vilkår som for sikringsselskaber med hjemsted i Frankrig.
In Case 270/83 Commission ν France the Court held that by failing to grant to the branches and agencies in France of insurance companies based in another Member State on the same terms as those enjoyed by insurance companies based in France the benefit of shareholders' tax cre­dits in respect of dividends paid to such branches or agencies by French companies, France had failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 52 of the EEC Treaty.
Denne vigtige dom præciserer rækkevidden af EØF-traktatens artikel 52 og tilskynder Kom missionen til at fortsætte sine bestræbelser for at sikre mulighed for reel udøvelse af etableringsretten. retten.
This important judgment clarifies the scope of Article 52, and provides an incentive for the Commission to continue its work for the effective exercise of the freedom of establishment.
Denne sag er nok specielt interessant på grund af besvarelsen af et subsidiært spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af EØF-traktatens artikel 234, i henhold til hvilken de rettigheder og forpligtelser, der følger af konventioner, som før EØF-traktatens ikrafttræden er indgået mel lem medlemsstater og tredjelande, ikke berøres af bestemmelserne i traktaten.
This case is perhaps more important for the answer given to a subsidiary question relating to the interpretation of Article 234 of the Treaty, which provides that the rights and obligations arising from agreements concluded before the entry into force of the Treaty between Member States and other countries are not to be affected by the Treaty.
Visse internationale multilaterale konventioner forpligter medlemsslandene til at begrænse den internationale handel med utugtige og usømmelige varer.
There are multilateral international conventions which require Member States to restrict international traffic in indecent or obscene articles.
Domstolen fandt, at EØF-traktatens artikel 234 tager sigte på at sikre rettigheder og forpligtelser over for tredjelande, og at den derfor ikke kan gøres gældende for så vidt angår forbindelserne mellem medlemsstater som begrundelse for begrænsninger af samhandelen inden for Fællesskabet.
The Court held that Article 234 is intended to preserve rights and obligations vis-à-vis non­member countries and may not therefore be relied upon in relations between Member States in order to justify restrictions on trade within the Community.
I sag 247/84 ') var der rejst spørgsmål om, hvorvidt en national lovgivning, i dette tilfælde belgisk, om en national godkendelsesprocedure ved import af fødevarer indeholdende et bestemt farvestof fra andre medlemsstat er, når disse fødevarer forhandles lovligt i den medlemsstat, hvorfra de indføres, er forenelig med EØF-traktatens artikel 30-36.
In Criminal proceedings against Motte ' the question was asked whether national provisions (Belgian in this case) which required authorization for the import of foodstuffs to which a colourant had been added, even where such foodstuffs were imported from another Member State in which they were lawfully marketed, were compatible with Articles 30 tö 36 of the EEC Treaty.
I henhold til denne ordning har en arbejdstager for sine familiemedlemmer, der er bosat i en anden medlemsstat end frankrig, ret til familieydelser efter lovgivningen i den stat, hvor disse familiemedlemmer er bosat.
to a request for a preliminary ruling submit­ted by the French Cour de Cassation, declared invalid Article 73(2) of Regulation No 1408/71 on social security for migrant workers,3which makes special arrange­ments for family benefits for workers sub­ject to French legislation.
Til gengæld har en arbejdstager, der er beskæftiget i en anden meldemsstat end Frankrig, for de af sine fami-
Where a worker subject to French legis­lation has members of his family living in another Member State, he is entitled to the
4) EFTL 149 af 5.7.1971.
F.C 2­1986, point
Domstolen besvarede spørgsmålet bekræftende, idet den fandt, at fællesskabsretten på sit nuværende stade ikke er til hinder for anvendelsen af en sådan procedure for importerede varer.
The Court replied that such rules were com­patible; in the present state of Community law, the provisions of the EEC Treaty did not preclude the application of such a pro­cedure to imported goods.
Medlemsstaterne skal imidlertid tillade anvendelsen af et bestemt farvestof, såfremt det i henhold til kostvanerne i importmedlemsstaten opfylder et reelt behov; dette behov kan afhængig af hvilken form for tilsætningsstof, der er tale om, være af teknologisk, økonomisk, organoleptisk eller psykologisk art. Desuden skal de nationale myndigheder som grundlag for deres vurdering af den sundhedsrisiko, som et be
However, the national authorities were under an obli­gation to authorize the colouring of the foodstuff if, having regard to the eating habits prevailing in the importing Member State, it corresponded to a real need (which
• Der er en grundlæggende forskel mellem retten til socialsikring og retten til beskæftigelse, idet Domstolen fastholdt, at det forhold, at medlemsstaterne har mulighed for at fastsætte forskellig pensionsalder for mænd og kvinder, ikke kan påberåbes af en arbejdsgiver som grundlag for at afskedige en kvinde, som har overskredet den normale pensionsalder for kvinder, men endnu ikke har nået den alder, der er fastsat for pensioneringen af mænd
(i) confirmed the fundamental distinction between social security law and labour law by holding that while for purposes of pen­sion entitlements the Member States could set retirement ages differing according to sex, this did not provide grounds for an employer to dismiss a woman who had reached the normal retirement age for women but who had not yet reached the age laid down for men;
• Domstolen udtalte sig for første gang om, hvorvidt en privat person over for en national retsinstans kan påberåbe sig et fællesskabsdirektiv over for en anden privatperson (direktivernes direkte horisontale virkning).
(ii) ruled for the first time on the question whether an individual may invoke a Com­munity directive against another individual before a national court (the 'horizontal effect' of a directive); the Court's answer is a clear no; family benefits provided in the Member State in which they live.
Domstolen besvarede dette spørgsmål klart benægtende liemedlemmer, der er bosat i et andet land end beskæftigelseslandet, ret til familieydelser efter lovgivningen i førstnævnte stat, som om de pågældende var bosat på dennes område (artikel 73, stk. 1, i forordning 1408/71 ').
Where a worker's country of employment is a Member State other then France, he is entitled to the fam­ily benefits provided in the Member State in which he himself works in respect of members of his family living outside that country, as though they were living there (Article 73(1) of Regulation No 1408/71).
Domstolen anfægtede denne dobbeltordning, fordi den skaber yderligere forskelle ud over dem, der i forvejen følger af den manglende harmonisering af de nationale lovgivninger.
The Court objected to this dual system because of the additional disparities it added to those already arising from the lack of harmonization of national legislation.
I dommen anfægtes desuden et andet forhold: Den ordning, der er indført i henhold til artikel 73, stk. 2, åbner vejen for skjult forskelsbehandling på grundlag af nationalitet (»problemet omkring familiemedlemmers bopæl uden for Frankrig vedrører først og fremmest de vandrende arbejdstagere«).
The system laid down in Article 73(2) also left the way open to disguised discrimi­nation on grounds of nationality: it was mainly migrant workers who were con­cerned by the problem of family members living outside France.
Kriteriet vedrørende familiemedlemmernes bo pæl strider efter Domstolens opfattelse imod det i artikel 48 i EØF-traktaten indeholdte krav om ligebehandling og kan ikke anvendes i for bindelse med den i EØF-traktatens artikel 51 foreskrevne samordning af de nationale lovgivninger. ninger.
The place of residence of members of the family was not a test which would ensure the equality of treat­ment jrequired by Article 48 of the EEC Treaty, and could not be used in the coordi­nation of national legislation provided for by Article 51 of the' Treaty.
• Domstolen fastslog dog for første gang, at artikel 5, stk. 1, i direktivet af 9. februar 1976 (76/207)2) kan påberåbes af en privatperson over for en stat eller en statslig myndighed, som det var tilfældet her (i henhold til denne bestemmelser er medlemsstaterne forpligtet til at for byde enhver form for forskelsbehandling på grundlag af køn for så vidt angår arbejdsvilkår, herunder også afskedigelse).
(iii) nevertheless held, for the first time, that Article 5(1) of Directive 76/207/EEC could be invoked by an individual against the State or, as in this case, an organ of the State (Article 5(1) requires Member States to prohibit any discrimination on grounds of sex with regard to working conditions, including the conditions governing dis­missal).
Kendelsen om den pågældende retsakts ugyldighed har dog først retsvirkning efter den 15. januar 1986.
But the effects of this declaration of inval­idity were confined to the period after 15 January 1986.
Domstolen fandt, at tvingende retssikerhedsmæssige hensyn var til hinder for, at tidligere truffende afgørelser om udbetaling af familieydelser kunne anfægtes.
There were imperative con­siderations of certainty as to the law which prevented any review of the sums received by way of family benefits in the past.
Domstolen har i dommen i sag 263/846), Beets-Proper, besvaret et spørgsmål fra Nederlandenes »Hoge Raad« om, hvorvidt artikel 5, stk. 1, i direktivet af 9. februar 1976 (76/207)2) giver medlemsstaterne mulighed for
In three judgments delivered on the same day concerning the interpretation of Directive 76/207/EEC,lthe Court replied to questions regarding the existence in cer­tain Member States of retirement ages diff­ering according to sex.
Domstolen har i en serie på tre dom me, der blev afsagt den 26. februar vedrørende fortolkningen af direktivet af 9. februar 1976 (76/207)2), besvaret en række spørgsmål vedrørende det forhold, at der i visse medlemsstater er forskelle med hensyn til pensionsalderen for mænd og kvinder.
In Beets-Proper ν F. van Lanschot Bankiers5the Court replied to a question put by the Hoge Raad of the Netherlands, asking whether Article 5(1) of Directive 76/ 207/EEC allowed the Member States the freedom to exclude from equal treatment an express or implied condition concerning the termination of the contract of employ­ment on the ground of the age attained by the employee, where that condition related to the age at which the employee became entitled to a pension.
Dette spørgsmål blev besvaret benægtende; i øvrigt ligger dommen på linje med den dom, der blev afsagt samme dag i sag 152/84, Marshall (punkt 2.4.28).
The Court said it did not; the judgment thus ran parallel to that delivered on the same day in Marshall (-+ point 2.4.28).
4) Dette betyder, at Domstolen ikke har ændret sin tidligere retspraksis på de dertil knyttede punkter; jf. dom af 16.2.1982 i sag 19/81, Burton/British Railway Board, Sml. 1982, s. 555. ;) Dom af 26.2.1986 i sag 152/84, Marshall/Southampton and
3For a similar ruling in a related case sec the Court's judgment in Case 19/81 Burton ν British Railways Board
6) Dom af 26.2.1986 i sag 262/84, Beets-Proper / van Lanschot forhold:
Case 262/84.
Domstolen forhold, at de belgiske myndigheder på grund af virksomhedens økonomiske situation ikke kun ne tilbagesøge den udbetalte sum, antoges ikke at medføre umulighed til ophør. Dette formål kunne som af den belgiske regering erkendt opnås ved en selskabslikvidation, som de belgiske myndigheder kunne fremkalde i deres egen skab af enten aktionærer eller kreditorer.
It may be pointed out that by contrast with the position in the United Kingdom, which was considered in Roberts (—► point 2.4.27) and Marshall (-» point 2.4.28), men's and women's retirement ages for pension pur­poses are identical under the Dutch national social security schemes.
Man skal være opmærksom på, at Nederlandene til forskel fra Det forenede Kongerige (sag 151/84, Roberts (punkt 2.4.27), og sag 152/84, Marhall (punkt 2.4.28), i de lovfæstede social sikringsordninger operere med samme pensionsberettigende alder for mænd og kvinder. Det er kun inden for visse faglige overenskomster, dvs. private, der gælder forskellige aldersgrænser for mænd og kvinder.
recover the sum paid did not mean that it was impossible to implement the Decision; the Commission's objective was to abolish the aid, and that objective, as the Belgian Government admitted, could be attained through the liquidation of the company, which the Belgian authorities could bring about in their capacity as shareholders or creditors.
Domstolen bemærkede for det første, at spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt franchise-aftaler vedrørende distribution, er forenelig med EØF-traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1, må bero på de bestemmelser, aftalerne indeholder, samt på den økonomiske kontekst, hvori de indgår.
The Court held first of all that the compati­bility with Article 85(1) of franchise agree­ments for the distribution of goods depended on the provisions contained there­in and on their economic context.
I sag 52/84 ') gav Domstolen Kommissionen medhold i, at kongeriget Belgien ved ikke inden for den fastsatte frist at have efter kommet Kommissionens beslutning af 16. fe bruar 1983 (83/130)2) om den belgiske regerings støtte til en virksomhed inden for sektoren for sanitetsartikler af keramik har undladt at opfylde en forpligtelse, der påhviler det i hen hold til traktaten.
In Case 52/84 Commission ν Belgium the Court held that by not comply­ing within the prescribed period with Com­mission Decision 83/130/EEC ' on aid granted by the Belgian Government to a firm manufacturing ceramic sanitary ware Belgium had failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty.
Domstolen fandt, at aftalebestemmelser, der er uomgængelige for at hindre, at den know-how og den bistand, franchisetagerne får ved sådan ne aftaler, udnyttes af konkurrerende virksomheder, og aftalebestemmelser, der sikrer be skyttelse af identitet og omdømme af det distributionssystem, der er kendetegnet ved bomærket, ikke er konkurrencebegrænsninger som omhandlet i EØF-traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1.
Provisions which were strictly necessary in order to ensure that the know-how and assistance provided by the franchisor did not benefit competitors did not constitute restrictions of competition for the purpose of Article 85(1); nor did provisions which established the control strictly necessary for maintaining the identity and reputation of the network identified by the common name or symbol.
Kommissionen fastslog ved den anfægtede be slutning, at en deltagelse på 475 mio BFR gennen et offentligt holdingselskab udgjorde en støtte, der i henhold til EØF-traktatens artikel 92 var uforenelig med fællessmarkedet og derfor skulle bringes til ophør.
In the Decision the Commission had held that a shareholding of BFR 475 million acquired by a public holding company in the firm constituted State aid incompatible with the common market within the mean­ing of Article 92 of the EEC Treaty and consequently had to be abolished.
Da Belgien havde undladt at træffe de nødvendige foranstaltnin ger til at efterkomme beslutningen inden for den fastsatte tidsfrist, havde Kommissionen anlagt sag ved Domstolen i medfør af EØF-traktatens artikel 93, stk. 2, andet afsnit.
As Belgium had taken no measures to comply with the Decision within the time allowed, the Commission had referred the matter to the Court pursuant to the second subpara­graph of Article 93(2) of the Treaty.
Under sagens behandling gjorde den belgiske regering gældende, at det var absolut umuligt at gennemføre beslutningen for det første, fordi den ikke var tilstrækkelig præcis, og for det andet fordi det ville have medført lukning af virksomheden.
There was such market sharing where the franchisee was prohibited from opening a second shop while the franchisor undertook to ensure that the franchisee had the exclusive use of his business name or symbol in a given territory.
Derimod fandt Domstolen, at visse aftalebestemmelser, der indebærer en opdeling af mar keder mellem franchise-tager eller mellem fran-chise-tagerne, udgør konkurrencebegrænsninger, der kan påvirke handelen mellem medlemsstaterne.
In the course of the proceedings the Belgian Government pleaded the absolute impossi­bility of implementing the Decision, firstly because it was insufficiently precise, and secondly because to execute it would involve the liquidation of the company.
Beslutningen indeholder kun krav om, at støtten skal ophøre, ikke om at virksomheden skal lukkes.
The Decision required the abolition of the aid, not the abolition of the firm.
I dommen bekræftede Domstolen først og frem mest den retspraksis, at en beslutnings gyldighed ikke kan anfægtes efter udløbet af den i EØF-traktatens artikel 173, stk. 3, fastsatte tidsfrist.
In its judgment the Court confirmed its previous rulings to the effect that the val­idity of a decision could not be challenged after the period prescribed in the third para­graph of Article 173 of the Treaty had expired.
Den eneste grund, som den belgiske regering derefter kunne gøre gældende, var, at det var absolut umuligt at gennemføre beslutningen.
The only defence still open was that of absolute impossibility.
1983 '), hvori det konstateres, at en række klausuler i licensaftaler indgået mellem Windsurfing International og dette firmas licenstagere i Europa er ulovlige; der blev ved beslutningen pålagt firmaet en bøde.
Taxation concluded between Windsurfing Inter­national and its licensees in Europe were unlawful, and imposed a fine on the com­pany.
Sagen har givet Domstolen anledning til at præsicere anvendelsen af EØF-traktatens artikel 85 på licensaftaler. ler.
The case gave the Court occasion to clarify the application of Article 85 of the EEC Treaty to patent licensing agreements.
Domstolen har i dommene i sag 106/842) og 243/843) bekræftet sin tidligere retspraksis med hensyn til beskatning af alkoholholdige drikkevarer, idet den kendte for ret, at Danmark ved at pålægge druevin en højere beskatning end frugtvin, har tilsidesat de for pligtelser, der påhviler det i henhold til bestemmelser i EØF-traktatens artikel 95.
In Commission ν Denmark ' and John Walker v Ministeriet for Skatter og Afgifter2the Court confirmed its previous findings on the taxation of alcoholic drink by holding that by taxing wine made from grapes at a higher rate than wine made from other fruit Denmark had failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 95 of the EEC Treaty.
Som konkurrencebegrænsninger, der strider imod EØF-traktatens artikel 85, betragter Domstolen bestemmelser, der forpligter licenstageren til følgende:
(i) an obligation to use the licensed inven­tion (here a rig for a sailboard) only for the manufacture of certain product models (sailboards) approved by the licensor in each case;
• kun at benytte det af licensen omfattede patent (riggen til et sejlbræt til fremstilling af en bestemt type sejlbrætter, som skal være god kendt af licensgiveren
(ii) an obligation to offer for sale the prod­ucts covered by the licence (rigs) only to­gether with the approved modela (of board);
• kun at sælge det produkt, der var omfattet af licensen (riggen) med de godkendte typer brætter ter
(iii) an obligation to affix a notice refer­ring to the licence on that part of the prod­uct marketed which was not covered by the patent (the board);
Med hensyn til de præjdicielle spørgsmål, Dom stolen havde fået forelagt, vedrørende konkurrenceforholdet mellem produkter som skotsk whisky og frugtvine af hedvinstypen, fandt Domstolen, at disse to kategorier af spiritus ikke kan betragtes som »lignende varer«.
Answering questions put to it concerning the competitive relationship between prod­ucts such as Scotch whisky and fruit wines of the liqueur type, the Court held that the two categories could not be regarded as similar products.
Dom stolen tilføjede, at EØF-traktatens artikel 95, stk. 2, ikke er til hinder for, at der opretholdes en differentieret afgitfsordning for visse drikkevarer efter objektive kriterier.
The second paragraph of Article 95 of the EEC Treaty did not pre­clude the application of a system of differen­tial taxation in respect of certain beverages on the basis of objective criteria.
• at mærke den del af produktet, der ikke var omfattet af patentet (brættet) med påtegningen »fremstillet på licens...«
(iv) an obligation to recognize as valid trade marks certain marks which the licensor claimed for himself or others;
• udelukkende at fremstille det produkt, der er omfattet af licensen, på det område, der er beskyttet af patentet (og især afholde sig fra at fremstille produktet i de lande inden for Fælles skabet hvor patentet ikke er beskyttet)
(v) an obligation to manufacture the licensed product only in the area in which patent protection was available (and in par­ticular not to manufacture it in common market countries where the patent was not protected);
Det forhold, at licensafgifterne på riggene be regnes på grundlag af nettosalgsprisen for et komplet sejlbræt, udgør ikke en konkurrence begrænsning, såfremt afgiften ikke er højere, end hvis den var beregnet på grundlag af· salgsprisen for riggen alene.
The fact that royalties on the rig were calcu­lated on the net selling price of the complete sailboard did not constitute a restriction of competition if the royalty was no higher than that which would have been calculated on the selling price of the rig.
Derimod ville en afgift beregnet på grundlag af prisen på brættet alene (som ikke er patentbeskyttet) udgøre en konkurrencebegrænsning. kurrencebegrænsning.
But a royalty calculated on the price of the separate board (which was not protected) did restrict com­petition.
Domstolen bekræftede i sag 250/84 5), at kvoteringsordningen udgør en væsentlig del af den fælles markedsordning for sukker.
In Eridania v Cassa Conguaglio Zucchero* the Court reaffirmed the val­idity of the quota system in the common organization of the market in sugar.
Visse italienske virksomheder fandt ordningen diskriminatorisk og derfor stridende imod forbudet imod forskelsbehandling i EØF-traktatens artikel 40, stk. 3.
Certain Italian undertakings considered that the sys­tem was discriminatory, and thus contrary to Article 40(3) of the Treaty. Italian inter­