natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Men den mente til gengæld, at dette argument måtte undersøges i i forhold til artikel 30, og med støtte i sin hidtidige retspraksis, hvorefter alene en ordning, der uden forskel gælder for indenlandske og indførte produkter, kan begrundes med de påberåbte omstændigheder, konstaterede den, at dette ikke var tilfældet i den foreliggende sag.
It did, however, hold that the sub­mission must be examined on the basis of Article 30 and, confirming its earlier deci­sions that only rules which applied equally to national and imported products could be justified on the grounds invoked, it found that this did not apply in the case in point.
Desuden tilbageviste Domstolen det af medlemsstaten fremførte argument om, at der kun skulle være tale om en tilsyneladende forskelsbehandling; det hedder i dommen.
The Court also rejected the submission by the Member State concerned that it was a case only of apparent discrimination, since the articles covered by the legislation in question constituted only a pictorial remin­der of the place visited, which does not of it­self imply that a souvenir must be manufac­tured in the country of origin.
2) Tiende Almindelige Beretning, nr. 580.
Case 1.32/80 United Foods and Van den Abeele ν patibility of an inspection levy for hygiene controls on imported goods with Articles 9, 12 and 13 of the EEC Treaty.
3) EF-Domstolen 17.6.1981 (Kommissionen/Irland, sag for sundhedskontrol ved indførsel er uforeneligt mee EØF-traktatens artikel 9. 12 og 13.
In the same case, the Court held that obligatory, sys­tematic hygiene controls on imported fish and the rules for such controls are contrary to Articles 30 to 36 of the Treaty in so far as they exceed the requirements of the con­trols.
I samme sag udtalte Domstolen, at sundhedskontrol af obligatorisk og systematisk karakter ved indførelsen af fisk og de nærmere regler for en sådan kontrol er i strid med traktatens artikel 30-36, for så vidt de går ud over, hvad der er nødvendigt af hensyn til kontrollen.
The Court held, in particular, that the requirement of giving notice in writing, at least 24 hours before importation, of the na­ture, quantity and origin of the consignment is incompatible with the rapidity of the transactions and transport operations in this sector, in view of the perishable nature of the goods in question.
Specielt mente Domstolen, at kravet om et skriftligt varsel mindst 24 timer før indførslen med angivelse af sendingens art, størrelse og oprindelse i betragtning af den pågældende vares let fordærvelige karakter forekommer at passe slet med den hur
It stated, moreover, that, since a hygiene inspection had been carried out on the fish in the exporting country in accordance with the standards laid down by the country of destination, in­spection of imports must in any event be li­mited to measures intended to counter trans­port risks or made necessary by any hand­ling of the goods following the controls at the time of departure.
113/80) endnu ikke offentliggjort.
1Case 113/80 Commission ported.
Domstolen blev endvidere spurgt, om den pågældende aftale kunne omfattes af undtagelsen i traktatens artikel 85, stk. 3, eller eventuelt af gruppeundtagelsen i Rådets forordning nr. 19/65 og Kommissionens forordning nr. 67/67.
The Court was also asked whether the agreement in question could be exempted under Article 85(3) of the Treaty or was eligible for the block exemption pro­vided for by Council Regulation No 19/65 and Commission Regulation No 67/67.
Domstolen har i to domme fortsat sin retspraksis, hvorefter det ifølge EØF-traktatens artikel 95 er medlemsstaterne forbudt i afgiftsmæssig henseende at forskelsbehandle inden landske og tilsvarende indførte produkter.
In two judgments the Court con­firmed its previous case law according to which Article 95 of the EEC Treaty pro­hibits Member States from treating different­ly for tax purposes domestic products and similar imported products.
Således har Domstolen i sagerne 142 og 143/802) kendt for ret, at et nationalt afgiftssystem, der er » udformet således, at afgiftsfritagelser eller -nedsættelser forbeholdes den indenlandske produktion, udgør en forskelsbehandling, som er for budt ved EØF-traktatens artikel 95«.
First of all, in Joined Cases 142 and 143/80,' the Court held that a system of national taxation 'or­ganized so as to limit exemptions or reduced rates of tax to national production alone constitutes discrimination prohibited by Arti­cle 95 of the EEC Treaty'.
Denne dom ligger på linje med retspraksis i » alkohol «sagerne af 27. februar 19803).
This judgment confirms the decision in the alcohol cases of 27 February 1980.2Similarly, in Case 153/80,' the Court, following Case 148/774 and Case 26/80,5held that tax advantages granted to domestic products must be ex­tended to products imported from other Member States which fulfil the criterion of similarity which forms the basis of Article 95.
På samme måde kendte Dolstolen i sagen 153/804) i overensstemmelse med sag 148/77 5) og sag 26/806) for ret, at afgiftsfordele, som indrømmes indenlandske varer, skal udstrækkes til at omfatte varer, der indføres fra andre medlemsstater, hvis de opfylder lighedskriteriet i artikel 95.
With regard to the first point, the Court, reaffirming its earlier judgments, stated that an exclusive distribution agreement concern­ing newspapers and periodicals, such as the agreement in question, is prohibited under Article 85 of the Treaty only where it may appreciably affect trade between Member States.
Arbejdskraftens frie bevægelighed og sociale bestemmelser
Free movement of workers and social provisions
I referenceperioden afsagde Domstolen tre domme7) om vandrende arbejdstageres socia le sikring. Skønt disse domme ikke har opstillet
During the period in question, the Court delivered three judgments6concerning social security for migrant workers.
') EF-Domstolen 16.6.1981 (Salonia/Poidaami og Oigedal, sag 126/80) endnu ikke offentliggjort. 2) EF-Domstolen 27.5.1981 (Amministrazione delle finanze dello Stato/A/S Essevi og firma Carlo Salengo. sagerne 142 og 143/80), endnu ikke offentliggjort.
In Case 99/80, the Court held that a person who is an employed person in a Member
3) EF-Domstolen 27.2.1980 (Kommissionen/Den franske Republik, sag 168/78); (Kommissionen/Den italienske Re publik, sag 169/78); (Kommissionen/Det forenede Kongerige, sag 170/78) og (Kommissionen/Kongeriget Danmark, sag 171/78) Sml. 1980. henholdsvis s. 347, s. 385, s. 417 og s. 447.
Salengo: not yet reported. :Cases 168/78 Commission ν French Republic; 169/78 Commission ν Italian Republic; 170/78 Com­mission ν United Kingdom and 171/78 Commission ν Kingdom of Denmark [1980] ECR 347, 385, 417 and
4) EF-Domstolen 7.5.1981 (Entreprise Rumhaus Hansen GmbH et Co./HZA Flensburg, sag 153/80) endnu ikke of fentliggjort.
Case 153/80 Rumhaus Hansen GmbH and Co ν HZA Flensburg: not yet reported. 4Case 148/77 Hansen ν HZA Flensburg [1978] ECR
Vedrørende det første spørgsmål udtalte Dom stolen, som herved fulgte sin hidtidige retspraksis, at aftalen om eneforhandling af aviser og tidsskrifter, som f.eks. den omtvistede aftale, kun udgør en overtrædelse af traktatens artikel 85, såfremt den mærkbart kan påvirke handelen mellem medlemsstater. Hvad angår klausulen om selektivt videresalg følger Domstolen ligeledes sin hidtidige praksis og statuerer, at en sådan klausul, hvorefter kun godkendte forhandlere, der har fået meddelt autorisation, kan få leveret de varer, der omfattes af overenskomsten, ikke udgør nogen overtrædelse af traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1, eller 86, stk. 1, såfremt udvælgelsen af godkendte forhandlere sker i henhold til objektive kriterier vedrørende forhandlerens faglige kvalifikationer, hans personales faglige dygtighed og hans salgslokalers beskaffenhed og ud fra en bedømmelse af, hvad forhandlingen af de pågældende varer kræver, og såfremt disse kriterier fastsættes ens for alle videreforhandlere og an vendes uden forskelsbehandling.
With regard to the selective distribution clause, the Court also reaffirmed its earlier judgments, ruling that a clause of this sort which restricts the supply of the products covered by the agreement to licence-holders alone is not in breach of Article 85(1) or of the first paragraph of Article 86 if it appears that the authorized vendors are selected on the basis of objective criteria relating to the capacity of the retailer, his employees and his facilities in connection with the require­ments for the distribution of the product and that those criteria are fixed uniformly in re­lation to all potential retailers and applied in a manner which does not lead to discrimina­tion.
Endelig mente Domstolen, at den omtvistede aftale ikke, uden anmeldelse lil Kommissionen, kunne være gen stand for en erklæring om uanvendelighed, som omhandlet i traktatens artikel 85, stk. 3, og at den pågældende aftale ikke er en aftale, hvori der
Finally, the Court held that the agree­ment in question could not, in the absence of notification to the Commission, be the subject of a declaration of inapplicability under Article 85(3) of the Treaty and that, since it is not an agreement to which only two undertakings are party, it does not come within the categories of agreements which can escape the application of Article 85(1) of the Treaty.
Domstolen noget nyt princip af fundamental betydning, har de ikke kun fulgt gældende retspraksis op, men har i visse henseender udvidet den.
State must be considered as a worker, for the purpose of Council Regulation No 1408/71, throughout the Community, even where he has been self-employed in another Member State during the earlier period in question.
I sagen 98/80 fortsatte og udvidede Domstolen sin retspraksis vedrørende rækkevidden af afgørelserne fra Den administrative Kommission for vandrende arbejdstageres sociale Sikring, idet den om en afgørelse om den vekselkurs, der skal benyttes ved beregningen af visse ydelser, under stregede, at den kan være et hjælpemiddel for de sociale sikringsinstitutioner, som skal anvende fællesskabsretten på dette område, men dog ikke kan forpligte institutionerne til at følge bestemte metoder eller anlægge bestemte fortolkninger, når de anvender fællesskabsreglerne.
In Case 98/80, the Court reaffirmed and ex­tended its earlier judgments on the scope of decisions of the Administrative Commission on Social Security for Migrant Workers, stating that, while a decision on the rate of conversion to be taken into consideration in the calculation of certain benefits may act as an aid for social security institutions charged with applying Community law in this field, it is not of such a nature as to require those institutions to follow certain methods or adopt certain interpretations when they come to apply Community rules.
Afgørelsen er derfor ikke bindende for de nationale domstole. le.
It does not, therefore, bind national courts.
Den fastslog, at beføjelsen til at træffe foranstaltnin ger inden for den fælles fiskeripolitik med hensyn til bevarelse af havets ressourcer — efter udløbet den 1. januar 1979 af den overgangsperiode, der er fastsat i tiltrædelsesaktens artikel 102 — fuldstændigt og endeligt tilkommer Fællesskabet.
It stated that, hav­ing regard to the expiration on 1 January 1979 of the transitional period laid down in Article 102 of the Act of Accession, power to adopt, as part of the common fisheries policy, measures relating to the conservation of the resources of the sea has belonged fully and definitively to the Community.
Medlemsstaterne er således ikke længere berettigede til at træffe egne foranstaltninger på dette område efter den 1. januar 1979.
Member States therefore ceased on 1 January 1979 to be entitled to take measures of their own in this field.
I den udstrækning, hvor Rådet ikke inden for de fast satte frister har truffet bevaringsforanstaltninger, har medlemsstaterne dog ret og endog pligt til at træffe sådanne midlertidige bevaringsforanstaltninger, som efter forholdene måtte være nødvendige, men udelukkende i samarbejde med Kom missionen og under skyldig hensyntagen til den generelle overvågningsrolle. som er pålagt denne institution ved artikel 155.
Nevertheless, in so far as the Council has not adopted conservation mea­sures within the required periods, Member States have the right, not to mention the duty, to bring into force any interim conser­vation measures which may be required by the situation, but only as part of a process of collaboration with the Commission and with due regard to the general task of super­vision which Article 155 gives to that in­stitution.
Dette betyder, at medlemsstaterne, inden de vedtager sådanne for anstaltninger, er forpligtede til at indhente Kom missionens godkendelse.
This means that, before adopting such measures, Member States must seek the Commission's approval.
Domstolens betragtninger kan have betydning for andre områder.
The Court's reasoning could be applicable in other fields.
Konventionen af 27. september 1968 om retter nes kompetence og om fuldbyrdelse af retsafgørelser i borgerlige sager, herunder handelssager
Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters
I sag nr. 150/80 3) blev Domstolen an modet om at fortolke artikel 17 (aftaler om ret ternes kompetence).
In Case 150/80,' the Court was re­quested to interpret Articles 17 (agreements
Sag 107/80') vedrørte fastsættelsen af anvendelsesområdet for direktiv 72/159 om modernisering af landbrugsbedrifter samt for for ordning 355/77 om forbedring af landbrugsvarer.
Case 107/80' concerned the deter­mination of the scope of Directive 72/159/EEC on the modernization of farms and of Regulation 355/77 on common mea­sures to improve the conditions under which agricultural products are processed and mar­keted.
Efter at have fastslået, at der er en forskel mel lem de to retsakters anvendelsesområde i materiel henseende, statuerer Domstolen, at et projekt vedrørende forbedring af forarbejdningen og af afsætningen af landbrugsvarer fra én og samme bedrift, hvor investeringerne skal foretages, aldeles ikke falder uden for forordningens anvendelsesområde, såfremt det godtgøres, at det effektivt kan bidrage til at rationalisere forarbejdningsog afsætningstrukturerne.
Having found a difference in scope in relation to the subject matter of the two acts, the Court held that a project to im­prove the processing and marketing of ag­ricultural products from the same farm where the investment programme is to be carried out is not excluded from the scope of Regulation No 355/77, where it is estab­lished that it may effectively contribute to the rationalization of the processing and marketing arrangements.
Men eftersom det på gældende projekt ikke havde til formål at øge afkastet af bedriften ved at forbedre produktionsvilkårene for basis-landbrugsvarerne, falder det ikke ind under anvendelsesområdet for di rektiv 72/159.
Since, however, the project was not intended to increase the farm's income by improving the conditions under which the basic agricultural products were produced, it does not fall within the scope of Directive 72/159.
Fiskeri forenede nen, sag 107/80) endnu ikke offentliggjort.
' Case 107/80 Cattaneo Adorno ν Commission: not yet reported.
2) EF-Domstolen 5.5.1981 (Kommissionen/Det Kongerige, sag 804/79) endnu ikke offentliggjort.
2Case 804/79 Commission ν United Kingdom: not yet reported.
3) EF-Domstolen 24.6.81 (Elefanten Schuh GmbH/Pierre Jacqmain. sag 158/80) endnu ikke offentliggjort.
1Case 150/80 Elefanten Schuh GmbH ν Pierre Jacqmain: not yet reported.
Domstolen har i referenceperioden truffet en meget vigtig afgørelse vedrørende havfis
During the period under considera­tion, the Court delivered a very important judgment concerning sea fisheries—conserva­tion measures.2The Court held that the Uni-
Domstolen vilretligt drages til ansvar som følge af gerningselementer i den lovovertrædelse, han er tiltalt for, eller et sådant ansvar senere til kunne gøres gældende imod ham.
Court of Justice fence for which he is being prosecuted is es tablished or may subsequently be alleged.
stolen fortolker artikel 17 således, at en kontraherende stats lovgivning ikke kan hindre, at en værnetingsaftale er gyldig, blot fordi det anvendte sprog ikke er det i denne lovgivning foreskrevne.
It in terpreted Article 17 as meaning that the law of a Contracting State cannot deny validity to an agreement conferring jurisdiction sole ly on the ground that the language used is not the one prescribed by that law.
Artikel 18 finder også anvendelse, når parter ne har indgået en aftale om kompetence i medfør af konventionens artikel 17, og artikel 18 skal fortolkes således, at kompetencereglen i denne bestemmelse ikke finder anvendelse, når sagsøgte ikke blot har rejst indsigelse om inkompetence, men desuden har nedlagt påstand om realiteten, såfremt indsigelsen om inkompetence, hvis den ikke fremsættes forud for enhver realitetsindsigelse, dog ikke sker efter tidspunktet for den stillingtagen, der efter national procesret an ses for det første forsvar, der fremføres for den ret, som sagen er indbragt for.
Article 18 applies even where the parties have de cided by agreement which court is to have jurisdiction within the meaning of Article 17 of the Convention, and must be interpreted as meaning that the rule on jurisdiction which that provision lays down does not apply where the defendant not only contests the court's jurisdiction but also makes submissions on the substance of the action, pro vided that the challenge to jurisdiction, if not preliminary to any defence as to the substance, does not occur after the making of the submissions which under national pro cedural law are considered to be the first de fence addressed to the court seised.
Artikel 22 finder kun anvendelse, når indbyrdes sammenhængen de sager er anlagt ved retterne i to eller flere kontraherende stater.
Article 22 applies only where related actions are brought before courts of two or more Con tracting States.
Dommen i sagen 166/802) vedrører fortolkningen af konventionens artikel 27, nr. 2.
The judgment in Case 166/802con cerns the interpretation of Article 27(2) of the Convention.
Denne bestemmelse opregner de tilfælde, i hvilke afgørelserne ikke anerkendes.
This provision lists the cases in which judgments are not recognized.
Dette gælder, »hvis det indledende processkrift... ikke er blevet lovligt forkyndt for eller meddelt en sagsøgt, der udebliver, i så god tid, at han kan varetage sine interesser«.
This is the case 'if the defendant was not duly served with the document which instituted the proceedings ... in sufficient time to en able him to arrange for his defence'.
Domstolen fortolkede begrebet »indledende processkrift« derhen, at det drejer sig om en retsakt som det i tysk ret eksisterende »Zahlungsbefehl« (betalingspålæg), hvis forkyndelse gør det muligt for sagsøgeren, i tilfælde af sagsøgtes udeblivelse, at opnå en retsafgørelse, der kan anerkendes og fuldbyrdes på grundlag af konventionens bestemmelser.
The Court interpreted the concept of 'the document which instituted the proceedings' as enbracing any document, such as the order for payment (Zahlungsbefehl) to be found in German law, service of which enables the plaintiff to obtain in default of appearance by the defendant a decision capable of being recognized and enforced under the provisions of the Convention.
Ved afgørelsen af, om sagsøgte har kunnet varetage sine interesser efter betydningen i artikel 27, nr. 2, skal den ret, hvortil der er fremsat begæring, udelukkende tage hensyn til den frist, sagsøgte har til at und gå, at der afsiges en udeblivelsesdom, som ifølge konventionen kan fuldbyrdes.
In order to determine whether the defendant has been given an opportunity to arrange for his defence as required by Article 27(2) the court con cerned must consider solely the time allowed the defendant to take measures ensuring that a decision which is enforceable under the Convention will not be given against him in default.
Selv når en dom stol i oprindelsesstaten har statueret, at forkyndelsen var lovlig, kræver artikel 27, nr. 2, at den ret, hvortil der er fremsat begæring, alligevel un dersøger, om denne forkyndelse eller meddelelse er foretaget i så god tid, at sagsøgte har kunnet varetage sine interesser.
Even if a court of the State in which the judgment was given has ruled that the service was duly effected, Article 27(2) re quires the court seised of the case to examine nevertheless whether the service was effected in time to enable the defendant to arrange his defence.
Det tilkommer denne ret at vurdere, om der i en konkret sag foreligger særlige omstændigheder af en sådan art, at for kyndelsen eller meddelelsen, skønt den var lov lig, dog ikke gav sagsøgte den fornødne tid til at varetage sine interesser.
The Court seised of the case must decide whether in the individual case there are exceptional circumstances such that, although service was duly ef fected, it was inadequate to cause the period to start to run.
') EF-Domstolen 25.5.81, (Strafverfahren/Siegfried Ewald Rinkau, sag 157/80) endnu ikke offentliggjort. 2) EF-Domstolen 16.6.1981 (Klomps/Michel, sag 166/80)
Case 157/80 Criminal proceedings against Siegfried
I sag nr. 157/80 ') drejer det sig om en fortolkning af artikel II i protokollen til konventionen, hvorefter personer, der har bopæl i en kontraherende stat, og mod hvem der indledes retsforfølgning for en uagtsom lovovertrædelse ved retter kompetente i straffesager i en anden kontraherende stat, hvor de pågældende ikke er statsborgere, til deres forsvar kan vælge personer, der er bemyndighet hertil, selv når de pågældende ikke personligt giver møde.
Case 157/80' concerned the in terpretation of Article II of the Protocol an nexed to the Convention, which provides that persons domiciled in a Contracting State who are being prosecuted in the criminal courts of another Contracting State of which they are not nationals for an offence which was not intentionally committed may be defended by persons qualified to do so, even if they do not appear in person.
Domstolen har i den anledning udtalt, at ved »uagtsom lovovertrædelse« må forstås enhver lovovertrædelse, som ifølge lovens definition hverken ud trykkeligt eller efter den pågældende overtrædelses art forudsætter, at tiltalte har haft forsæt til den strafbare handling eller undladelse, og at til talte har ret til at lade sig forsvare uden person ligt at give møde i enhver straffesag vedrørende en uagtsom lovovertrædelse, for så vidt han ci endnu ikke offentliggjort.
The Court stated that the expression 'an offence which was not intentionally committed' should be understood as including any of fence for which the statutory definition does not require either expressly or by the very nature of the offence defined, that the accused should have intended to commit the act or omission which is subject to criminal sanctions, and that the accused's right to be represented without appearing in person extends to all criminal proceedings concerning offences which were not intentionally com mitted in so far as the accused's civil liability as a result of the facts constituting the of
Opkrævning af told for indsmuglede og destruerede varer
Levying of customs duties on smuggled goods Article 177 of which have been destroyed EEC Treaty
Frie varebevægelser
Free movement of goods the
Sag 220/81 3) — Anklagemyndigheden / Robertson m.fl.
220/81 — Criminal proceedings Does a national law on metal alloy and the Article 177 of ν Robertson' form of hallmarks constitute a quantitative re­EEC Treaty striction?
Skattespørgsmål
Taxation the
Midlertidig ophævelse af restitutioner for smør og butteroil
217/81 — Interagra SA ν Com­Temporary suspension of refunds for butter Article 215 of mission6 and butteroil EEC Treaty
); 203 og 204/81'); 205/81 7
203 and 204/81;7
Tarifering af espadriller hidrørende fra Spanien
224/81 — Commission ν France' Tariff classification of espadrilles coming from Article 169 of Spain EEC Treaty