natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
» ... at en bestemmelse i en aftale indgået af Fællesskabet med et tredjeland må anses for umiddelbart anvendelig, når der af dens ordlyd samt aftalens formål og karakter kan udledes en klar og præcis forpligtelse, hvis opfyldelse og retsvirkninger ikke er betinget af, at der udstedes yderligere retsakter.«
The Court has confirmed this ruling in subsequent judgments, such as Pretore de Salò. In this judgment it held that a directive could not have the effect, by itself and independently of a national law adopted by a Member State in order to implement it, of determining or aggravating the criminal liability of persons acting in contravention of the directive's provisions.2In another judgment it ruled that a national authority could not set up the provisions of a directive against an individual if the directive had not yet been incorporated into national law as it was required to be.3
Domstolen anvendte denne definition på bestemmelserne i den med Tyrkiet indgåede associeringsaftale med tilhørende tillægsprotokol vedrørende arbejdskraftens frie bevægelighed og statuerede, at disse bestemmelser ikke var »fællesskabsretlige regler, som har umiddelbare retsvirkninger i medlemsstaternes nationale retsordener« (præmis 25 og konklusion).
The Court has also made it clear in various judgments that a Member State cannot regard the possible direct effect of the provisions of a directive or the existence of an administrative practice that already conforms to them as dispensing it from the duty to incorporate the directive into its national law in a manner matching up to the requirements of clarity and legal certainty the directive intended.4
Når EF-Domstolen skal tage stilling til, om en bestemmelse i en international aftale indgået af Fællesskabet har direkte virkning, undersøger den, om den pågældende aftale på grund af sit formål og sin karakter er af en sådan art, at den kan have direkte virkning.
(iv) International agreements to which the Community is party
Den har også undersøgt, hvilken virkning de har for den interne retsorden, når der er tale om tidligere aftaler, hvor Fællesskabet — på grund af udøvelsen af sin kompetence — er trådt i medlemsstaternes sted.
Article 13(2) requiring the abolition of charges having equivalent effect to import duties had already been declared by the Court to be directly effective after the end of the transitional period.
I International Fruit-dommen2), udtalte EF-Domstolen, at GATT-bestemmelserne ikke havde direkte virkning.
The Court did not stop at the fact that the Convention expressly referred to the directly effective Treaty provision.
(SAMI), forenede sager 267, 268 og 269/81, Sml. 1983, s. 801 ff.
Case 152/84 [1986] ECR 723, at p. 749 (paragraph 48).
Den nationale dommers pligt til at undlade at bringe en national bestemmelse i anvendelse, når denne er i strid med en fællesskabsbestemmelse, der har direkte virkning, er blevet understreget af EF-Domstolen i LwcA-dommen ').
The Court was also asked about the direct effect of international agreements in a case concerning the provisions of the EEC-Portugal Free Trade Agreement relating to measures having equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions on imports.
Denne løsning nåede Domstolen også frem til i Lorenz-dommen2) og i den nyere Simmenthal-dom3), hvori det hedder, at »de bestemmelser i Traktaten og retsakter fra institutionerne, som gælder umiddelbart for medlemsstaternes nationale ret... i medfør af deres ikrafttræden, bevirker, at enhver modstridende bestemmelse i den eksisterende nationale lovgivning uden videre bliver uanvendelig«4).
The case arose out of imports of Portuguese-made records into the United Kingdom. Could the copy right holder in the United Kingdom, Polydor, enforce the copyright to prevent the importation of records that had been made in Portugal from the copyrighted sound recordings?
Den beføjelse, som de nationale instanser har til at vælge den fremgangsmåde, der er bedst egnet til at sikre fællesskabs rettens direkte virkning, skal være forenelig med, at dennes bestemmelser er »en umiddelbar retskilde, der stifter rettigheder og pligter for alle dem, de vedrører«.
The English Court of Appeal referred two main questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling.
En løsning, hvorefter en ældre modstående5) national bestemmelse uden videre bliver uanvendelig, vil således være den mindst indgribende. Dommeren vil kunne gå et skridt videre og for eksempel erklære bestemmelsen for ugyldig, hvis han har hjemmel hertil ifølge national ret.
First, was the enforcement of UK copyrights to prevent import of the records a measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction on imports under Article 14(2) of the EEC-Portugal Agree ment?
Ifølge princippet om fællesskabsrettens forrang vil de umiddelbart anvendelige bestemmelsers »blokerende virkning« også gøre sig gældende over for yngre national ret.
As the Court replied in the negative to the first question, it did not see fit to answer the question about direct effect.2This was remarkable as the parties, the Commission and governments had all dealt with this question at length in their written and oral submissions.
Som nævnt kan der være tale om gennemførelsesbestemmelser til et direktiv6).
The Commission's representative had taken a very restrictive line.
I Simmenthal-dommen understregede EF-Domstolen udtrykkeligt, at fællesskabsretlige bestemmelser, som gælder umiddelbart, har til følge, »at nye nationale love ikke gyldigt kan udstedes i det omfang, de måtte være uforenelige med fællesskabsreglerne«7).
On the basis of considerations of legal policy, he had advanced the proposition that the notion of direct effect could not be transposed as such into the Community's international relations.
Da sådanne nationale love dermed er ugyldige, kan den nationale dommer ikke tillægge dem retsvirkning.
He put forward two arguments. ments.
3) Dom af 9.3.1978. jf. ovenfor, præmis 17. 4) Jf. allerede dom af 13.7.1972, sag 48/71, Kommissionen mod Den Italienske Republik,
While the Court did not commit itself on this thorny question in Polydor, it was faced with the problem of the direct effect of agreements in two later judgments.
Se også dom af 14.12.1971, sag 43/71.
Case 270/80 Polydor [1982] ECR 329.
Det tilkommer i virkeligheden de nationale domstole at sikre den retsbeskyttelse, som fællesskabsrettens direkte virkning indebærer for de retsundergivne2).
Article 95 of the EEC Treaty which prohibits discriminatory taxation of imports. ' It held that Article 53 forms part of a group of provisions the purpose of which was to prepare for the entry of Greece into the Community.
De nationale domstole skal anvende de nationale retsplejeregler.
Applying its customary criteria, the Court concluded that the obligation was directly applicable.
Vedrørende dette spørgsmål udtalte EF-Domstolen i Comei-dommen:
This judgment, on similar lines to that in Bresciani, did not resolve the general question raised by the Polydor case, i.e. whether the criteria the Court had established for the direct effect of provisions of the Community Treaties were applicable to any international agreement made by the Community.
»I mangel af fællesskabsbestemmelser på delte område tilkommer det derfor hver enkelt medlemsstat i sin interne retsorden at udpege de kompetente retter og fastsætte procesreglerne for sagsanlæg til sikring af beskyttelsen af de rettigheder, som fællesskabsrettens direkte virkning afføder for de retsundergivne, idet sådanne regler ikke kan være mindre gunstige end dem, der gælder for tilsvarende nationale søgsmål; ... det ville kun forholde sig anderledes, hvis disse procesregler og frister i praksis umuliggjorde indtaling af rettigheder, som de nationale retter har pligt til at beskytte«3).
Or, on the other hand, whether the doctrine of direct effect was so specific to the internal Community legal order that it could only be extended to international agreements when special circumstances were present, such as the special nature of the agreements (association agreements, for example) or a wording in precisely the same terms as in the Treaties.
I dette tilfælde var der tale om søgsmålsfrister, som EF-Domstolen anså for »rimelige«.
A later decision clarified the position in several important respects.
Ud fra princippet om retssikkerhed, der gælder inden for national ret såvel som inden for fællesskabs retten, anerkendes lovligheden af at fastsætte sådanne frister.
In the Kupferberg judgment the Court found that the first paragraph of Article 21 of the EEC-Portugal Free Trade Agreement, which prohibits discriminatory taxation of the products of one contracting party, was directly effective.2The governments that had made submis­sions to the Court had argued against the application of the criteria for Community-wide direct effect to the provision on the grounds of the allocation of responsibilities for the foreign relations of the Community, the principle of reciprocity governing the application of free trade agreements, the dispute settlement procedures set up under the agreements, and the safeguard clauses allowing the parties to depart from the agreements in special circumstances.
I det omfang, der ikke findes fællesskabsretlige procesregler, er det de nationale bestemmelser, der finder anvendelse.
The Court dismissed these arguments one by one and concluded that neither the nature nor the general scheme of the EEC-Portugal Agreement made direct effect in principle impossible.
Dersom der ikke finder en koordination sted af de nationale procesregler, vil en sådan situation nødvendigvis medføre, at der gælder forskellige frister, hvilket igen fører til visse forskelle i den effektive anvendelse af fællesskabsretten.
It therefore considered, in the light of both the object and purpose of the Agreement and of its context, whether the first paragraph of Article 21 imposed an uncon­ditional precise obligation.
Som understreget af EF-Domstolens præsident, Mertens de Wilmars i hans almindelige rapport til den niende kongres i International
After stressing the importance of a rule against tax discrimination in a free trade agreement, the Court found that the obligation imposed by the clause was unconditional and precise and hence directly effec­tive.
De finder kun anvendelse i det omfang, fællesskabsretten ikke har fastsat andet.
This judgment brought a substantial clarification of the position.
Ifølge Mertens de Wilmars må de nationale regler, der giver mulighed for at påberåbe sig en ret for de nationale domstole, eller som fastsætter vilkårene for gennemførelsen af en fællesskabsretlig forpligtelse, ikke være mindre gunstige end dem, der gælder for lignende søgsmål i forbindelse med national lovgivning. Princippet om ikkediskrimination finder således anvendelse.
There was no fundamental reason why provisions of certain interna tional agreements made by the Community should not be directly effective.
Endelig gælder det, at når fællesskabsbestemmelser, der har direkte virkning, skal påberåbes ved de nationale domstole, må denne direkte virkning ikke udhules derved, at udøvelsen af de ved fællesskabsretten tillagte rettigheder umuliggøres.
However, the institutions responsible for making the agree ments may contract with the other party what effects the agreement is to have in their respective internal laws.
Disse begrænsninger gælder både med hensyn til reglerne for anlæg af søgsmål, forældelsesfrister, sanktioner for overtrædelser og accessoriske spørgsmål, såsom anvendelsen af billighedsregler, betaling af renter, modregning, samt overvæltning af en ulovlig afgift på købere.
Only if this question is not settled by the agreement itself can the Court decide the matter in the same way as any other question of interpretation.
Sagen drejede sig om tilbage søgning af nationale afgifter, som en medlemsstat havde opkrævet i strid med Traktaten.
The direct effect of Article 3 of the EEC-Spain Agreement was recognized in a second Kupferberg judgment. '
Cali, dr. eur., 1981, s. 383 ff., navnlig s. 398 ff. 2) Jf. ovenfor, s. 135.
In a 1987 judgment it summed up the legal position thus:
137 der gør det praktisk umuligt eller uforholdsmæssigt vanskeligt at opnå tilbagebetaling af afgifter opkrævet i strid med fællesskabsretten«, selv om de pågældende bevisregler i henhold til loven også finder anven­delse på andre nationale afgifter eller skatter.
Applying this definition to the provisions of the association agreement with Turkey and of the additional protocol thereto governing the right of Turkish nationals to work in the EC, the Court decided that the provisions 'do not constitute rules of Community law that are directly applicable in the internal order of the Member States' (paragraph 25).
Domstolens indsats skal dog suppleres og underbygges via en harmonisering af de nationale regler og vedtagelse af fælles regler. Det skal i den forbin­delse bemærkes, at Rådet er gået i gang med at harmonisere procedu­rereglerne.
Thus, to answer a question about the direct effect of the provisions of an international agreement made by the Community, the Court first examines whether in the light of the agreement's nature and objectives it is capable of having direct effect.
Disse forordninger, der ganske vist markerer et fremskridt, regulerer ikke på udtømmende vis spørgsmålet om tilbagesøgning eller godtgørelse af beløb, der er erlagt i strid med fællesskabsretten.
Once this preliminary question has been resolved, it looks at the terms of the provisions, applying to them the same criteria as for articles of the EEC Treaty or Community legislation.3
Medlemsstaterne kan ikke passivt afvente den nødvendigvis langsom­melige lovgivningsproces på fællesskabsplan.
The Court has not only given rulings on the direct effect of agree ments made by the Community.
I henhold til EØF­Traktatens artikel 5, stk. 1,3), har medlemsstaterne pligt til at træffe alle de foranstaltninger, som er nødvendige for at fællesskabsretten kan få den tilsigtede virkning.
It has also had to consider the impact on domestic law of agreements antedating the Community under which because of the transfer of sovereignty to the Community the latter has assumed the Member States' obligations.
') Jf. P. Pescatore, L'application judiciaire des traités internationaux dans la Communauté européenne et dans ses États membres, Festskrift til P.H. Teilgen, op. cit.. s. 355 ff., navnlig s. 403-404.
3752 (paragraph 14).
139 tore i Milano — gældende, at loven om nationalisering af produktion og distribution af el-energi var i strid med EF-Traktaten.
For instance in the International Fruit judgment, ' the Court refused to recognize clauses of the GATT Agreement as directly effective.
Man kan forstå, at EF-Domstolen har villet tage stilling til dette problem.
(b) The fate of national provisions contrary to directly effective Community law
I begyndelsen af denne fremstilling er de præmisser citeret, hvori EF-Domstolen karakteriserede den retsorden, der følger af Traktat erne. Domstolen har heri understreget Fællesskabets ubegrænsede varighed, fællesskabsmyndighedernes autonomi såvel indadtil som udadtil og navnlig den begrænsning eller overførsel af medlemsstater nes beføjelser, som har indskrænket disses suverænitet og »således skabt et regelsæt, som finder anvendelse på deres statsborgere og på dem selv«.
Court in the Lück judgment.3The position was repeated in Lorenz and Simmenthal,4'5where the Court said that 'the relationship between provisions of the Treaty and directly applicable measures of the institutions on the one hand and the national law of the Mem­ber States on the other is such that those provisions and measures ... by their entry into force render automatically inapplicable any con­flicting provision of current national law'.6The right of national law to determine the best means of asserting the direct effect of Commun­ity law must be reconciled with the fact that directly effective Community rules ' are a direct source of rights and duties for all those affected thereby'.
Den nære sammenhæng mellem princippet om direkte anvendelighed og fællesskabsrettens forrang fremgår klart heraf.
Consequently, holding earlier national law contrary to Community law inapplicable is the least the court must do.7It may go further and hold the contrary provisions null and void, if it has the power to do so under national law.
Disse to grundpiller i Fællesskabets retsorden er nødvendige følger af den omlægning af beføjelserne, som oprettelsen af Fællesskaberne med fører.
By virtue of the supremacy of Community law, directly effective provisions of Community law have a blocking effect on later national
Fællesskabsretten må som følge af sin »selvstændige natur« tillægges forrang.
See also Case 48/71 Commission ν Italy [1972] ECR 527, at p.
Og det ville stemme dårligt med den koordination, som har fundet sted mellem disse systemer, og som navnlig kommer til udtryk ved ordningen med præjudicielle spørgsmål.
It is national courts that are responsible for enforcing the rights that directly effective Community law confers on individuals.4 But in doing so they must apply national procedure and remedies.
Dette fremgår endnu mere klart af Simmen thai-dommen af 9. marts 1978, hvor Domstolen konkluderede, at
The Court stated the position clearly in the Comet judgment :
»enhver 'national ret inden for sin kompetence har pligt til at anvende fællesskabsretten fuldt ud og til at beskytte de rettigheder, som fælles skabsretten tillægger private, idet den skal undlade al anvende enhver modstridende bestemmelse i national lov, hvad enten denne er vedtaget før eller efter fællesskabsreglen«.
' In the absence of any relevant Community rules, it is for the national legal order of each Member State to designate the competent courts and to lay down the procedural rules for proceedings designed to ensure the protection of the rights which individuals acquire through the direct effect of Community law, provided that such rules are not less favourable than those governing the same right of action on an internal matter. ...
Fællesskabsrettens forrang er således ikke en forpligtelse, som det påhviler den grundlovgivende forsamling eller lovgivningsmyndigheden at gennemføre.
The issue raised in the case was the legality of national limitation periods for bringing actions for the refund of overpayments of taxes where the taxes in question were contrary to directly effective provi­sions of Community law.
Det er en regel, der skal anvendes af domme ren.
The time-limits concerned were held by the
Den er også absolut i den forstand, at den finder anvendelse på en hvilken som helst intern retsregel uanset dens retlige trinfølge, selv en forfatningsbestemmelse.
See also Case 43/71 Politi [1971] ECR 1039, at p. 1049 (paragraph 9): 'The effect of a regulation, as provided for in Article 189, is therefore to prevent the implementation of any legislative measure, even if it is enacted subsequently, which is incompatible with its provisions.'
Forholdet lil national ret ratifikationsakten enten kun var en delvis accept af Traktaten eller et middel, hvorved Traktaten kunne tillægges forskellig retsvirkning alt efter medlemsstat, eller tages som anledning til at give visse borgere mulighed for at unddrage sig disse regler« ').
In the absence of procedural rules under Community law, it was national law that was applicable, and the lack of harmonization of national rules would inevitably lead to different time­limits being applied and consequently a degree of diversity in the application of Community law.
Domstolen understregede således, at enhver fordring fra en medlemsstats side om, at lade nationale forfatningsretlige kriterier gå forud for fællesskabsretten, ville være kimen til Fællesskabets opløsning og i strid med princippet om medlemskab »på gensidig basis«, der allerede er nævnt i Cos/a-dommen.
As the former President of the Court of Justice, Judge Mert­ens de Wilmars, pointed out in his general report to the Ninth Congress of the International Federation of European Law (FIDE),' the Court has endeavoured to determine the limits and the conditions of reference to national law.
Domstolen berørte her noget fundamentalt ved integrationsprocessen.
Such reference was only possible if the matter was not regulated by Community law.
Staterne kan kun gå med til en suverænitetsbegrænsning med den hertil svarende betydelige ændring i deres beføjelser, hvis de regler, som de underkaster sig, virkelig er fælles.
Also, the national remedies available in the courts to enforce a right under Community law or order the performance of an obligation under Community law must not be any less favourable than those available in similar national proceedings.
Dette er ikke tilfældet, hvis de underkastes kriterier og regler, som nødvendigvis varierer fra stat til stat.
In other words, the principle of non­discrimination applies.
»Derfor påvirkes en fællesskabsakts gyldighed eller virkning i en med lemsstat ikke af at det gøres gældende, at den krænker de fundamentale rettigheder, som de er udformet i statens forfatning, eller grundsætningerne i en national forfatningsstruktur«2).
The minimum requirements of national remedies relate to both the machinery through which remedies are available, limitation periods, penalties for infringements and ancillary matters such as equity, payment of interest, compensation and the fact that illegally levied charges may have been passed on to others, etc.
Dom af 8.2.1973. sag 30/72, Kommissionen mod Italien. Sml. 1973, s. 161, præmis 11.
Case 199/82 [1983] ECR 3595, at pp. 3612­3614.
De principper, som EF-Domstolen har udledt, afspejles i stadig højere grad i de nationale domstoles retspraksis.
In the case of export and import duties the Council has begun the work of standardizing the procedural rules.
I det følgende behandles dels problemet om forholdet mellem forfatningerne og fællesskabsret ten, dels spørgsmålet om dennes forrang for selv yngre lov.
It has issued two regulations, Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 on the repayment or remission of import or export duties and Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79 on the post-clearance recovery of such duties.1
Disse forfatninger indeholder alle på nuværende tidspunkt bestemmelser, der giver hjemmel til at tillægge Fællesskaberne kompetence.
The regulations only cover limitation periods for claims and do not cover all situations and rights arising in Community policies.
Nogle af disse bestemmelser eksisterede allerede forud for Fællesskabernes tilblivelse; andre blev — undertiden med betydelig forsinkelse - vedtaget med henblik på at »legalisere« statens medlemskab af disse.
Further legislation is therefore necessary and directives have been tabled or are in preparation.
Hvis aftalen, der forelægges til godkendelse, anses for uforenelig med bestemmelserne i forfatningen, og hvis udviklingen i den internationale retsorden måtte kræve det, skal aftalen godkendes med to tredjedeles flertal i parlamentets to kamre, jf. artikel 63.
The first paragraph of Article 5 of the Treaty obliges them to take all the necessary measures to give full effect to Community law.3As we will see in more detail below,4they must designate the authorities and courts to be responsible for applying and enforcing Community law, ensure that their activities are coordinated, provide appropriate administrative and judicial procedures for protecting individuals from loss due to infringements of Community law by the authorities or other individuals, lay down appropriate penalties, ensure that the remedies available for breaches of obligations under Community law are at least as favourable as those for similar breaches under national law, and abolish provisions that may cause distortions of competition or illegal discrimination.
Denne procedure er blevet fulgt ved godkendelsen af Rom-Traktaterne.
Pierre Pescatore once said that while the doctrine of direct effect was propagated by the Court of Justice as a means of increasing