natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Domstolen foretog desuden en bred fortolkning af rækkevidden af den beskyttelse, der ydes i ovennævnte forordnings artikel 12, idet den udtalte, at denne bestemmelse ikke blot omhandler erhvervsuddannelse, men også almen uddannelse, og at den ligebehandling, der kræves i denne artikel, også gælder støtte til dækning af en studerendes udgifter til undervis­ning og underhold.
The Court, having been asked by the French Court of Cassation for a preliminary ruling, held that until such time as the Council adopted new rules in the matter the French authorities could not continue to apply a system of family allowances which was invalid and contrary to Community law.
I en dom af 2. marts ') udtalte Dom­stolen, at Frankrig i forbindelse med familie­ydelser skal anvende den generelle ordning, der for øjeblikket gælder i henhold til EF­reglerne, herunder princippet om, at en arbejdstager for de af sine familiemedlemmer, der er bosat på en anden medlemsstats område, har ret til fami­lieydelser efter lovgivningen i det land, hvori han er beskæftiget, så længe Rådet ikke har vedtaget nye regler på området.
In Case 94/87 Commission ν Ger­many,ιthe Court examined the argument put forward by the German authorities that the principle of legitimate expectation justi­fied the non-recovery of aid which the Com­mission had considered to be incompatible with the Treaty. The Court recalled that, according to its case-law,2the only possible defence was the absolute impossibility of implementing the decision correctly and that in the case in point the relevant pro­visions of national law would have to be applied so as not to make the recovery required by Community law impossible.
Midlertidig indførsel af containere — Annulationssogsmål — Hjemmel — Den fælles handelspolitik — Den Fælles Toldtarif
Declaration of invalidity on a preliminary reference — Effects — Family allowances
Domstolen, der havde fået forelagt et præjudi­cielt spørgsmål herom af Cour de cassation, udtalte, at så længe Rådet ikke havde fastlagt nye regler, kunne de franske myndigheder ikke fortsat anvende en ordning for udbetaling af familieydelser, der var i strid med EF­retten og erklæret ugyldig.
The Court also gave a broad interpretation of the scope of the protection provided by Community law under Article 12 of the abovementioned Regulation in ruling that this provision covers general education as well as vocational training and that the equal treatment provided for in the article also extends to the aid granted to cover the student's maintenance and education.
Uden at tage stilling til forholdet mellem disse to artiklers anvendelsesområde udtalte Domsto­len, at Rådet ikke med rette kunne støtte sig på
In Pinna v Caisse d'allocations familiales de la Savoie,4the Court had ruled that the provision of Council Regulation No 1408/ 71,5which made France an exception to the general rule, was invalid and introduced the principle of payment according to the legislation of the country of residence.
1984, s. 1. ■·) Dom af 15.3.1989 (Echtemach og Moritz/det nederlandske Undervisningsministerium, sag 389 og 390/87), EFT C 99 af 20.4.1989.
Joined Cases 389 and 390/87: OJ C 99, 20.4.1989. OJ L 257, 19.10.1968 (corrigendum: OJ L 295, 7.12.1968).
Domstolen udtalte i overensstemmelse med sin hidtidige retspraksis, at de rettigheder, et familiemedlem til en arbejdstager fra en medlemsstat nyder i henhold til fællesskabsretten, ikke kan gøres
Following that judgment, the French Government took the view that a legal vac­uum had been created, and that it could maintain the previous system until new
Denne dom er ikke uden betyd­ artikel 234.
Court of Justice
ning, idet det er første gang, at Domstolen har anvendt disse principper inden for den fælles fiskeripolitik.
Common commercial policy such time as the Council adopted measures to comply with its judgment.
Den fælles landbrugs- og fiskeripolitik indbragte sager
Common agricultural policy and fisheries
Havfiskeri — Overskridelse af 1983­kvoterne — Finansiering af udgifterne til eksportrestitutioner gennem EUGFL
Sea fishing — Exceeding of quotas for 1983 — Financing by the EAGGF of expenditure relating to export refunds
Domstolens dom af 2. februar ') falder helt i tråd med dens tidligere afgørelser i spørgsmål vedrørende Kommissionens ansvar
In Case 262/87 Netherlands ν Commission,3the Court confirmed its case-law on the Commission's extensive responsibilities in account clearance for the EAGGF.4The judgment is important in that it is the first time that the Court has applied this case-law to the common fish­eries policy.
Hvor må et koretoj anses for at være hjemmehø­rende, jf. artikel 1, stk. 4. i Rådets direktiv 72/166/EØF, som ændret ved direktiv 84/5/EØF, når det successivt er blevet registreret i flere forskellige lande, hvad enten der er tale om for­skriftsmæssig registrering foretaget af de kompe­tente myndigheder, eller at koretojet blot er blevet forsynet med falske nummerplader?
The Court considered that the provisions on their use in internal traffic before re-expor­tation was an essential component of the arrangements, which necessarily included rules which authorize or prohibit the use of containers within the customs territory of the Community. The Court ruled that this aspect was 'inseparable' from the aim of the Regulation at issue which was covered by Article 28 or Article 113, or both.
Såfremt det forste sporgsmål besvares bekræf­tende, skal artikel 5. stk. 2. i forordning (EØF) nr. 1697/79 da fortolkes således, at objektive krite­rier skal lægges til grund ved afgørelsen af. om debitor burde have opdaget fejlen, og dette derfor må antages at være tilfældet, såfremt han på
Van Werven and Others' the subject of successive registrations in more than one Member State, whether duly granted by the competent authorities or indicated by the affixing thereto of false registration plates, normally based within the meaning of Article
Sagens art grundlag af de gældende — offentliggjorte — og hverken uklare eller upræcise bestemmelser ville have kunnet opdage fejlen eller må det antages, at fejlen ikke med rimelighed kunne forventes opda­get, når toldmyndigheden to gange — ganske vist ikke retligt bindende — har meddelt debitor den for toldbehandlingen tilgrundliggende fejlagtige opfattelse?
Basis which the error which resulted in the noncollection of the duty was committed holds that the conditions set out in Article 5(2) of Council Regulation No 1697/79 are not ful­filled?
Såfremt det første spørgsmål besvares bekræf­tende, skal den nævnte forordning da erklæres ugyldig af de af Powerex-Europe påberåbte grunde?
If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative, must that Regulation be declared invalid for the reasons put forward by Powerex-Europe?
Såfremt det andet spørgsmål besvares bekræf­tende, har annullationsdommen da virkning for import foretaget inden domsafsigelsen?
If Question 2 is answered in the affirmative, does the decision annulling the Regulation affect imports made before the judgment was given?
Skal artikel 3, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nri 1224/80, som bestemmelsen var affattet i 1982, fortolkes således, at transaktionsværdien af ind­førte databærere, hvorpå der var indlagret soft­ware, og hvis pris leverandøren havde indregnet i den samlede pris, som han fakturerede klarereren, udgjorde den nævnte fulde fakturapris, eller såle­des, at transaktionsværdien kun udgjorde den del af fakturaprisen, der vedrørte databærerne?
Was Article 3 of Council Regulation No Article 177 EEC 1224/80 to be interpreted in 1982 as meaning that the transaction value of imported carrier media with software recorded on them in respect of which the supplier provided the per­son making the customs declaration with an invoice containing only a total price was the entire invoice price or was the transaction value only that part of the invoice price which corre­sponded to the carrier medium?
Havde det herved betydning, om klarereren angav pri­serne på databærere og software seperat på tids­punktet for toldværdiansættelsen eller først senere?
Did it make any difference if the person making the customs declaration distinguished between the price of the carrier medium and the price of the software of the carrier medium and the price of the software at the material time or later?
Kan omkostninger vedrørende monteringsarbejder kun anses for separat angivet i henhold til artikel 3, stk. 4, i forordning (EØF) nr. 1224/80, såfremt specifikationen allerede foreligger for told­myndigheden på det relevante tidspunkt?
Are charges for assembly to be regarded as having been distinguished within the meaning of Article 3(4) of Regulation No 1224/80 only when the distinction has been brought to the customs authorities' attention at the material time?
Såfremt Kommissionens ovennævnte beslut­ning er gyldig: Hvorledes skal artikel 5, stk. 1, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1697/79 fortolkes:
If the Commission's decision is valid, how is Article 5(1) of Council Regulation No 1697/ 79 to be interpreted:
• er også almindelige administrative instrukser fra ministerier, der ikke direkte varetager opkrævnin­gen af afgifter, at anse for oplysninger fra de kompetente myndigheder?
(a) Do general administrative directives issued by departments not directly concerned with the collection of duties constitute information given by the competent authorities?
• såfremt ovennævnte spørgsmål besvares bekræf­tende: er administrative instrukser vedrørende toldsatserne bindende for de myndigheder, der varetager toldopkrævningen, i det omfang, disse myndigheder ved afgiftsopkrævningen har anvendt toldsatserne?
(b) If so: are administrative directives regarding the level of rates of customs duty binding on the authorities concerned with the collection of duties in so far as those authorities based the duties charged on the set rates?
Skal en vare, der er indfort fra et tredjeland til en medlemsstat, anses for at befinde sig i »fri omsætning«, når den indføres til en anden med­lemsstat, også selv om der ikke er erlagt importaf­gift i den førstnævnte medlemsstat?
May goods which are imported from a non­member country into a Member State be regarded as being 'in free circulation' if they are imported into another Member State, even if the import tax in the first Member State was not paid?
Såfremt det antages, at der ikke kan være tale om »fri omsætning«, medmindre formaliteterne ved indførsel er opfyldt forskriftsmæssigt, og der endvidere er erlagt told, er formodningen da for, at disse forpligtelser er opfyldt, når varerne fore­findes i en medlemsstat, eller er formodningen for, at disse forpligtelser ikke er opfyldt, medmindre varernes indehaver fører bevis for det modsatte?
If it is assumed that goods cannot be 'in free circulation' unless the import formalities were duly completed and in addition the cus­toms duties paid, is it then to be presumed that those obligations have been fulfilled when the goods are found in a Member State, or must it be presumed that those obligations are not fulfilled unless the person possessing the goods adduces proof to the contrary?
Mere generelt: Skal importøren af varer med oprindelse i et tredjeland — når han importerer disse varer fra en medlemsstat til en anden med­lemsstat — bevise, at han har betalt told i den første medlemsstat, for at det kan antages, at varerne er i fri omsætning inden for EØF?
More generally, must an importer of goods originating in a non­member country prove, when importing those goods from a Member State into another Member State, that he paid customs duties in the first Member State so as to establish the presumption that the goods are in free circu­lation in the EEC?
Er det foreneligt med bestemmelserne i Traktaten, især dens artikel 52 ff. om den frie etableringsret. at en fransk statsborger, der har et fransk statsligt eksamensbevis som fysioterapeut og er indehaver af et eksamensbevis som osteopat, udstedt den 1. oktober 1979 af Den Europæiske Osteopatiskole i Maidstone (Det Forenede Kongerige), for­bydes at praktisere som osteopat i Frankrig med den begrundelse, at han ikke, som det kræves i ministeriel bekendtgørelse af 6. januar 1962, er indehaver af et eksamensbevis som læge?
6 and Others v Bouchoucha holding a State Diploma as masseur­kinesither­ apist and a diploma in osteopathy issued on 1 October 1979 by the European School of Osteopathy, Maidstone, is not allowed to practice osteopathy in France on the ground that he does not hold the qualification of Doc­tor of Medicine laid down as a requirement for
Kommissionens beslutning af 7. december 1988 om en procedure i henhold til Traktatens arti­kel 85 og 86 (sag nr. IV/31.906 -- italiensk planglas).
98/89 PPG Vernante Pennitalia ν Annulment of Commission Decision 89/93/ Article 173 EEC Commission EEC relating to a proceeding under Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty (IV/31.906—Flat glass)
Annullering af Kommissionens beslutning af 21. december 1988 (sag nr. IV/31.865 — PVC) om en procedure i henhold til Traktatens artikel 85.
Annulment of Commission Decision 89/190/ Article 173 EEC EEC relating to a proceeding under Article 85 of the EEC Treaty (IV/31.865 —PVC)
Annuleringen af Kommissionens beslutning af 21. december 1988 (sag nr. IV/31.866 — LDPE) om en procedure i henhold til Traktatens arti­kel 85.
Annulment of Commission Decision 89/191/ Article 173 EEC EEC relating to a proceeding under Article 85 of the Treaty (IV/31.866—1 Dw­density poly­ethylene)
Når en medlemsstats lovgivning indeholder et kumulationsloft for alders- og efterladtepensioncr (i denne sag artikel 52 i kgl. anordning af 21.12.1967), og når dette kumulationsloft er blevet fastsat på det tidspunkt, hvor pensionen trådte i kraft, og under hensyntagen til den ydelse, som var tilkendt for en anden medlemsstats regning, er den forste medlemsstats kompetente institution da berettiget til at tage hensyn til de tilpasninger af
Did the uniform solution for all the Member Article 177 EEC States referred to in Article 99 of Council Regu­lation No 1408/71 enter into force in January 1986, and is Article 73(1) of Regulation No 1408/71 consequently applicable from January 1986 to the children resident in Spain of Spanish workers employed in the Federal Republic of Germany?
Tilsidesættes artikel 3, stk. 3, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 857/84 og artikel 3 i Kommissionens forordning (EØF) nr. 1371/84, såfremt artikel 4, stk. 2, andet led, i den tyske forordning af 25. maj 1984 om garanterede mælkemængder, som omfat­tet ved første ændringsbekendtgørelse af 27. sep­tember 1984, med henblik på beregningen af den yderligere reduktion på grund af forøgelse af leverancerne fortolkes således, at det, når mælke­produktionen i kalenderåret 1981 blev påvirket af en usædvanlig begivenhed (epizooti) i de nævnte EF-forordningers forstand, ikke er den mængde mælk, der faktisk blev produceret i 1981, der skal lægges til grund, men den anslåede mængde, som mælkeproducenten ville have produceret i 1981, hvis begivenheden ikke var indtruffet?
Is it compatible with Article 3(3) of Council Article 177 EEC Regulation No 857/84 in conjunction with Article 3 of Commission Regulation No 1371/ 84 to interpret the second sentence of the Ger­man Regulation of 25 May 1984, as amended by the first amending Regulation of 27 Sep­tember 1984, to mean that if milk production in the 1981 calendar year was affected by an exceptional event (an epizootic) within the meaning of the abovementioned provisions of EEC law, the quantity of milk which it is estimated that the milk producer would have produced in 1981 had the event not occurred, rather than the quantity actually produced in 1981, is taken as the basis for calculating the negative weighting?
Er Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1914/87 ugyl­dig, da den særlige absorptionsafgift er en finan­sieringsafgift, der kun kunne gennemføres med hjemmel i EØF­Traktatens artikel 201?
Is Council Regulation No 1914/87 invalid Article 177 EEC because the special elimination levy constitutes a financing levy which could be introduced only on the basis of Article 201 of the Treaty?
Er den ved Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1914/87 indførte særlige absorptionsafgift for produktionsåret 1986/1987 forenelig med begræns­ningen af egenfinansieringen i medfør af artikel 28 i forordning nr. 1985/81 samt med forbuddet mod indgreb i Fællesskabets lovgivningsprocedure?
Is the introduction of the special elimination levy for the 1986/87 marketing year by Council Regulation No 1914/87 compatible with the limitation on self­financing which is laid down in Article 28 of Regulation No 1785/81 and with the principle of non­interference with the legislative system of the Community?
Retten betvivler gyldigheden af nævnte for­ordning på grund af dens økonomiske følger for sukkerfabrikanter.
The national court questions the validity of the abovementioned Regulation because of its economic effects on sugar manufacturers
Sagens genstand
Transport
Sagens art forbød private at udføre majs og samtidig tillod KYDEP (en central myndighed, der forvalter nationale produkter) at udføre majs.
Annulment of Council Regulation No 15/89 Article 173 EEC introducing a redressive duty on containerized cargo to be transported in liner service between the Community and Australia by Hyundai Merchant Marine of Seoul, Republic of Korea
Sag 119/89 5Spanien
110/89 Commission ν Greece11
Det konstateres, at Spanien har overtrådt EØF-Traktatens artikel 95, idet det ikke har truffet de nødvendige foranstaltninger med henblik på at lade personer, som ikke er momspligtige, fradrage den resterende del af merværdiafgiften ved ind­førsel.
Seeking a declaration that, by restricting and prohibiting exports of maize by private persons during the autumn of 1985 while permitting the Kidep (Central Department for the Adminis­tration of National Products) to export maize, Greece has failed to fulfil its obligations under Council Regulation No 2727/75 on the common organization of the market in cereals—of which Article 34 of the Treaty forms an integral part—and the corresponding implementing measures
Italien har overtrådt sine forpligtelser i henhold til EØF-Traktatens artikel 19 ff, idet det pålægger importørerne af levende dyr fra andre medlemssta­ter omkostningerne til de telegrammer, der i hen­hold til national lovgivning skal sendes af grænse­dyrlægerne til de interne, kompetente veterinærog sundhedsmyndigheder
Seeking a declaration that, by charging Article 169 EEC importers of live animals from other Member States the cost of the telegrams which, pursuant to national legislation, veterinary surgeons at frontier crossing posts send to the competent national veterinary and health departments, Italy has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 12 et seq. of the Treaty
Det Forenede Kongerige har tilsidesat sine for­pligtelser i henhold til Traktaten ved - - med henblik på gennemførelse af den ordning, der er fastsat for Det Forenede Kongeriges kystfarvande i bilag I, sammenholdt med artikel 6, stk. 2, i Rådets førordning (EØF) nr. 170/83 — i visse områder at anvende nye basislinjer, som er trukket længere ude fra kysten end de basislinjer, der var gældende den 25. januar 1983.
146/89 Commission Kingdom13 ν United Seeking a declaration that by applying in cer­tain areas for the purposes of the fisheries arrangements established for the coastal waters of the United Kingdom in Annex 1, together with Article 6(2) of Council Regulation No 170/83, new baselines which are shifted further out to sea than those in force on 25 January 1983, the United Kingdom has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty
Italien har tilsidesat sine forpligtelser i henhold til artikel 30 ved at forbyde, at øl, som er lovligt fremstillet og bragt i omsætning i de andre med­lemsstater, men som ikke opfylder de italienske produktionsførskrifter, bringes i omsætning i Ita­lien.
Seeking a declaration that, by prohibiting the Article 169 EEC marketing in Italy of beers lawfully manufac­tured and marketed in other Member States, although in a manner not in conformity with the Italian production rules, Italy has failed to fulfil its obligations pursuant to Article 30 of the Treaty
Luxembourg har overtrådt sine forpligtelser, idet det ved udførsel og indførsel har henholdsvis refunderet og kompenseret for afgiften på øl ved at operere med en tabssats mellem most og det endelige produkt, der er højere end den sats, der i gennemsnit gælder for den luxembourgske brygge­riindustri og under alle omstændigheder for visse bryggerier i Luxembourg.
Seeking a declaration that by using, for the Article 169 EEC purposes of excise duty refunds on the expor­tation of beer and compensatory duty on its importation, a rate for wastage incurred between the wort and the finished product which exceeds the average rate found in the Belgian brewing industry and in any event exceeds that of certain Belgian breweries, Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty
I april måned har Domstolen afsagt dom i følgende sager:
In April, the following judgments were delivered by the Court:
Bilaterale eller multilaterale aftaler om priser for befordring med rutefly er ugyldige i medfør af Traktatens artikel 85. stk. 2:
Bilateral or multilateral agreements regard­Line Reisebüro ν Zentrale zur Bekämpfung unlauteren ing airline tariffs applicable to scheduled flights Wettbewerbs1 are automatically void under Article 85(2) of the Treaty:
• for så vidt angår billetpriser for flyvninger mel­lem lufthavne i én medlemsstat eller mellem en
(ii) in the case of tariffs applicable to internatio­nal flights between airports in the Community: where no application for exemption of the agree­ment from the prohibition set out in Article 85(1) has been submitted to the Commission under Article 5 of Regulation No 3975/87; or where such an application has been made but received a negative response on the part of the Commission within 90 days of the publication of the applica­tion in the Official Journal of the European Communities; or again where the 90­day time­limit expired without any response on the part of the Commission but the period of validity of
Domme sådan lufthavn og en lufthavn i et tredjeland: når enten myndighederne i den medlemsstat, hvor et af de berørte luftfartsselskaber har hjemsted, eller Kommissionen i medfør af hhv. Traktatens arti­kel 88 og 89 har fastslået, at aftalen er uforenelig med EØF-Traktatens artikel 85;
Held the exemption of six years laid down in the aforesaid Article 5 has expired or the Commis­sion withdrew the exemption during that period
Anvendelsen af priser, som følger af bilaterale eller multilaterale aftaler, for befordring med rutefly kan under visse omstændigheder udgøre misbrug af en dominerende stilling på det pågældende marked, især når det er lykkedes en virksomhed, som indta­ger en dominerende stilling, at tvinge andre trans­portvirksomheder til at anvende overdrevent høje eller lave priser eller også udelukkende at anvende én billetpris på en rute.
The application of tariffs for scheduled flights on the basis of bilateral or multilateral agreements may, in certain circumstances, consti­tute an abuse of a dominant position on the market in question, in particular where an under­taking in a dominant position has succeeded in imposing on other carriers the application of excessively high or excessively low tariffs or the exclusive application of only one tariff on a given route
Traktatens artikel 5 og 90 skal fortolkes såle­des:
Articles 5 and 90 of the Treaty must be interpreted as:
• at de forbyder nationale myndigheder at fremme indgåelse af prisaftaler, som er i strid med Trakta­tens artikel 85, stk. 1, eller eventuelt artikel 86,
(i) prohibiting the national authorities from encouraging the conclusion of agreements on tariffs contrary to Article 85(1) or Article 86 of the Treaty, as the case may be