natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Nødvendigheden af at sikre forsynin­gen med et lægemiddel kan indgå i de kriterier, der i henhold til artikel 25 i direktiv 77/62/EØF ) om offentlige indkøb kan lægges til grund. I sådanne til­fælde skal forsyningssikkerheden imidlertid klart anføres som et kriterium for tildelingen af kontrakten.
Lastly, the Court held that the need for reliable supplies of a medicine could also be a criterion for consideration under Ar­ticle 25 of Directive 77/62/EEC on public supply contracts,' but that it would have to be clearly specified as such for award purposes.
) Jf. endvidere kvartalsgennemgangen af retspraksis i Bulletin for Den Europæiske Union - Bull. 4-1995, punkt 1.8.30-1.8.37; Bull. 6-1995, punkt 1.8.58-1.8.65; Bull. 9-1995, punkt 1.8.43- 1.850; Bull. 12-1995. ) Sag C-324/93, Tbe Queen mod Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parle: Evans Medical Ltd and Macfarlan Smith Ltd, og Bull. 4-1995, punkt 1.8.33. 3) EFT C 11 af 15.1.1977.
See also the quarterly analysis of judgments in the Bulletin of lhe European Union — Bull.
Dommen vedrører et søgsmål med påstand om, at det fastslås, at de græske bestemmelser om, at mælk til spædbørn kun må sælges i apoteker, er i modstrid med EF-traktatens artikel 30.
The Commission had applied for a declaration to the effect that Greece, by requiring that modified milk for infants be sold only by pharma­cies, had failed to fulfil its obligations pursuant to Article 30 of the EC Treaty.
Spørgsmålet var, om en sådan for­anstaltning skal betragtes som et påbud om en bestemt form for salg (forbru­gerne skal indfinde sig et bestemt sted for at købe spædbørnsmælken) eller som en foranstaltning, der influerer på varernes adgang til det pågældende marked (producenterne skal nødvendigvis henvende sig til apotekere for at få distribueret deres varer).
The question was whether the Greek legislation constituted rules governing sales methods (consumers had to go to a particular place to buy baby milk) or a measure affecting the access of goods to the relevant market (producers had to rely on pharmacists for the distribution of their products).
Domstolen fandt, at den græske lovgivning tager sigte på kategorien »salgsformer«, idet den ikke vedrører selve produkternes karakteristika.
The Court held that the Greek legislation constituted rules governing sales methods since it was not concerned with the characteristics of the products themselves.
På bag­grund af retspraksis i sagerne Keck og Mithouard undersøgte Domstolen der­næst, om denne salgsform retligt eller faktisk var diskriminerende.
Following the line taken in Keck and Mithouard, the Court went on to consider whether these rules were discriminatory in law or in fact.
Den konklu­derede, at den pågældende foranstaltning tog sigte på alle produkter, uanset deres oprindelse, hvorfor den ikke er diskriminerende.
It concluded that since the legislation was applicable to all products irrespec­tive of their origin it was not discriminatory.
Diskriminationen skyldes ikke den omstændighed, at Den Hellenske Republik ikke selv fremstiller forar­bejdet mælk til spædbørn. Dette var ifølge Domstolen en faktisk og tilfældig omstændighed.
Discrimination could not arise from the mere circumstance (described by the Court as purely factual and incidental) that Greece did not itself produce any processed milk for infants.
Med en dom afsagt den 11. august ) tog Domstolen for første gang stilling til, om en afgift, der ikke opkrævedes af en stat, men som havde hjemmel i en aftale mellem private, var forenelig med EF-traktatens artikel 9 og 12.
On 11 August2the Court ruled for the first time on whether a pe­cuniary charge not levied by a Member State but arising from a contract between individuals was compatible with Articles 9 and 12 of the EC Treaty.
Tvi­sten vedrørte en »depotafgift«, som skulle dække en privat virksomheds omkost­ninger ved, at den påtager sig at bære de udgifter, der er forblindet med, at toldvæsenet og veterinærtjenesten — idet offentliges interesse — udfører deres opgaver, og hvor udgiften følger af en aftale, som den private virksomhed har indgået med sine kunder.
The charge at issue was intended to cover the expenses borne by a private firm, under a contract concluded with its customers, in respect of the tasks performed by the customs and veterinary authorities as providers of public services.
Domstolen fulgte et veletableret princip, hvorefter den omstændighed, at de erhvervsdrivende — i forbindelse med samhandelen inden for Fællesskabet - påtager sig at dække udgifterne i forbindelse med kontrol og administrative formaliteter, der udføres af toldmyndighederne, kan sidestilles med en afgift med tilsvarende virkning som told.
The Court first of all upheld the established principle that it would constitute a charge having equivalent effect if businesses engaged in intraCommunity trade were obliged to cover the costs of inspections and admin­istrative formalities carried out by customs offices.
Domstolen konkluderede, at karakteren af den aftale, hvorved en erhvervsdrivende pålægges at bære en del af de omkostninger, der er forbundet med, at toldvæsenet udfører sine opgaver, var uden betydning.
It held that the nature of the measure requiring traders to pay part of the operating costs of customs services was immaterial.
Uanset om den pengeydelse, som den erhvervsdrivende skal betale, følger af en ensidig beslutning fra myndighedernes side eller af en række privatretlige aftaler, således som det er tilfældet i den foreliggende sag, må for­holdet altid anses for direkte eller indirekte at være en følge af den pågældende
Whether the pecuniary charge was borne by the trader by virtue of a unilateral measure adopted by the authorities or, as in the present case, as a result of a series of private contracts, it still arose di­rectly or indirectly from the failure of the Member State concerned to fulfil its financial obligations under Articles 9 and 12.
FÆLLESSKABSRETTEN
COMMUNITY LAW stances.
Arbejdstagernes frie bevægelighed
In proceedings between a Belgian national, who lived with his fam­ily in Belgium but worked in Germany, and the German tax authorities, fundamental questions were raised as to the limits which the rules on the free movement of workers place on the application of national income tax.
Sidstnævnte beskattes kun af den del af deres indtægt, som de har optjent i det pågældende land, men de nægtes undertiden ret til visse fordele, f.eks. i forbindelse med deres familiemæssige situation.
The Court had consistently held that the rules on equal treatment prohibited not only overt discrimination but also any form of concealed discrimination which was based on different criteria but had the same effect.
Domstolen kon­staterede i sin dom af 14. februar ), at spørgsmålet om direkte beskatning ikke som sådant henhører under Fællesskabets kompetence, men at medlemsstaterne skal udøve deres beføjelser under overholdelse af fællesskabsretten, bl.a. bestem­melserne om arbejdstagernes frie bevægelighed, hvis grundlæggende princip er afskaffelse af enhver forskelsbehandling af arbejdstagere på grundlag af natio­nalitet.
In the case in question, the Court held that tax laws under which a distinction was drawn on the basis of residence (in that non­residents were denied certain benefits granted to residents) were liable to operate mainly to the detriment of nationals of other Member States: in the majority of cases non­residents are foreigners.
Ifølge Domstolens stadige retspraksis er reglerne om samme løn ikke blot til hinder for direkte forskelsbehandling, men også for alle former for skjult forskelsbehandling, som ved anvendelse af andre vurderingskriterier reelt med­fører samme resultat.
Tax benefits granted only to residents of a Member State could constitute indirect discrimination by reason of nationality, but only where different rules were applied to comparable situations or the same rule was applied to different situations.
Domstolen mener, at der er fare for, at en skattelovgivning, som foretager en sondring baseret på bopælskriteriet, således at ikke-hjemme­hørende nægtes vise fordele, der indrømmes hjemmehørende, hovedsagelig vil være til skade for statsborgere fra andre lande; således vil ikkehjemmehørende ofte være ikke-statsborgere. Domstolen finder således, at skattemæssige fordele, der er forbeholdt hjemmehørende i en medlemsstat, vil kunne medføre en indi­rekte forskelsbehandling på grund af nationalitet.
Where direct taxes are concerned, as the situations of residents and non­residents are not, as a rule, comparable, the Court found that the provisions on the free movement of workers did not in principle preclude the application of national rules under which a non­resident work­ing as an employed person in a Member State was taxed more heavily on his income than a resident in the same employment.
Der er dog kun tale om for­skelsbehandling, når der anvendes forskellige regler ved samme situationer eller samme regel ved forskellige situationer.
The position was dif­ferent, however, in cases where the non­resident received no significant in­come in the State of his residence and obtained the major part of his taxable income from an activity performed in the State of employment.
I forbindelse med direkte skatter er hjemmehørendes og ikke-hjemmehørendes situation normalt ikke sammenligne­lige, og som følge heraf er bestemmelserne om arbejdstagernes frie bevægelighed principielt ikke til hinder for, at en medlemsstat kan anvende regler, hvor man beskatter en ikke-hjemmehørende, der er lønmodtager i den pågældende med­lemsstat, hårdere af hans indtægt end en hjemmehørende, der har samme be­skæftigelse.
The Court held that in such cases there was no objective difference which could justify different treatment: in the case of a non­resident who received the major part of his income and almost all his family income in a Member State other than that of his residence, discrimination arose from the fact that his personal and family circumstances were not taken into account either in the State of residence or in the State of employment.
Det forholder sig imidlertid anderledes i det tilfælde, hvor den ikkehjemmehørende ikke oppebærer nogen særlig indtægt i den medlemsstat, hvor
Consequently, the provisions gov­erning the free movement of workers precluded the State of employment from withholding from non­residents the tax relief which it granted to resi­dents under the same circumstances.
Dommen af 15. december i sagen Bosman ) vedrørte anvendelsen i prak­sis af de regler, der er vedtaget af de private sammenslutninger, som arrangerer fodboldkampe på europæisk plan og på verdensplan.
On 15 December' the Court gave judgment on the practical application of the rules adopted by the private associations responsible for the organization of football at European and world levels.
Den belgiske fodboldspiller Bosman forsøgte ved udløbet af en toårig kontrakt, han havde indgået med en belgisk klub, at indgå en kontrakt med en fransk klub.
On the expiry of his twoyear contract with a Belgian club, Mr Bosman, a player of Belgian nationality, tried to conclude a contract with a French club.
I henhold til det belgiske fodboldforbunds reglement krævede den første klub imidlertid, at der skulle betales et omfattende afståelsesbeløb, og ingen klub var interesseret i at indgå en aftale på denne betingelse.
Under the rules of the Belgian Football Association, however, the player's former club asked his new club to pay a substantial transfer fee, which proved to be too high a price for any club to pay.
Domstolen mente, at artikel 48 i EF-traktaten finder anvendelse på kollektive bestemmelser, som er fastsat af private sportssammenslutninger, eftersom sports­udøvelse, i det omfang det er en økonomisk aktivitet, henhører under fælles­skabsretten.
The Court held that Article 48 of the EC Treaty applied to the collective rules adopted by private sports associations since the exercise of sport as an economic activity was covered by Community law.
Domstolen fandt endvidere, at de pågældende overførselsregler, ef­tersom de afskrækker en statsborger i en medlemsstat fra at forlade sit oprindel­sesland, er til hinder for arbejdstagernes frie bevægelighed.
It also held that by pre venting or deterring nationals of a Member State from leaving their country of origin the transfer rules constituted an obstacle to the free movement of workers and that the arguments put forward to justify such an obstacle were inadmissible.
Endelig mente retten, at de argumenter, der var fremført til forsvar for den nævnte hindring af den frie bevægelighed, ikke var acceptable.
Nor were the rules in question likely to provide en couragement and financing for clubs training young players, particularly the smaller clubs, since there was no guarantee that they would collect such fees and since the amount of the fees bore no relation to the costs actually in curred.
Bl.a. er reglerne vedrørende overførsel ikke egnede til at sikre en økonomisk og sportslig balance inden for fordboldverdenen, da de ikke kan forhindre, at de rigeste klubber sikrer sig de bedste spillere på markedet.
The Court's judgment did not apply, however, to players being transferred from one club to another within the Member State of which they were nationals or to relations between clubs in Member States of the Community and those in nonmember countries.
Desuden kan de nævnte to målsætninger opnås med andre midler, som ikke er til hinder for arbejdstagernes frie bevægelighed.
Lastly, it held that since the two sets of rules in question were incompatible with Article 48, there was no need for an interpretation of Articles 85 and 86.
Det skal bemærkes, at dommen ikke gælder i det tilfælde, hvor en spiller lader sig overføre til en klub inden for den medlemsstat, hvor han er statsborger, og at den heller ikke vedrø­rer forholdene mellem klubber i EU's medlemsstater og klubber i tredjelande.
Where transfer fees were concerned, the Court stated that its judgment would take effect only from the date on which it was given, in view of the uncertainty surrounding the compatibility of the said rules with Community law and the overriding need for legal certainty. Any fees for transfers already
') Sag C-415/93 og Bull. 12-1995.
Case C-415/93 Bosman: Bull. 12-1995.
Til gengæld er nationalitetsklausulen berettiget i forbindelse med kampe mellem de forskellige landes nationale hold.
COMMUNITY LAW completed or in progress could not be reimbursed unless judicial proceed­ings had been initiated before the date of the judgment.
Med sin dom af 10. maj ) fik Domstolen for første gang mulighed for at udtale sig om, hvorvidt en restriktion vedrørende den frie udveksling af tjeneste­ydelser, som er indført af den medlemsstat, hvor tjenesteyderen er etableret, er forenelig med EF-traktatens artikel 59.
On 10 May' the Court of Justice ruled for the first time on the compatibility with Article 59 of the EC Treaty of a restriction on the free­dom to provide services which had been imposed by the Member State where the provider was established.
Sagen vedrørte den nederlandske lovgiv­ning, som inden for den finansielle sektor forbyder den såkaldte »cold calling«, dvs. en fremgangsmåde, hvorved der optages telefonisk kontrakt med potentielle kunder uden deres skriftlige samtykke med henblik på at tilbyde dem finansielle tjenesteydelser. Domstolen skulle tage stilling til, om dette forbud, når det drejer sig om opkald til kunder i andre medlemsstater, var foreneligt med EF-traktatens artikel 59.
Dutch legislation prohibited 'cold call­ing' — the practice of approaching potential clients by telephone without their prior written consent to offer them financial services.
For første gang kunne Domstolen konstatere, at en sådan restriktion er omfattet af EF-traktatens artikel 59, men at den i det foreliggende tilfælde er berettiget af hensyn til den pågældende (finansielle) sektors gode omdømme.
The Court found that such a restriction was indeed covered by Article 59 but that in this particular case it was justified by the need to uphold the reputation of the financial sector.
Domstolen fastslog først, at den omstændighed, at restriktionen vedrører et til­bud om en tjenesteydelse og ikke selve tjenesteydelsen, ikke var til hinder for anvendelsen af EF-traktatens artikel 59.
The Court noted that, although the prohibition applied to the offer of services rather than the services themselves, this did not pre­clude the application of Article 59, which did not require that there be a specific recipient for the services in the first place.
Anvendelsen af denne bestemmelse kan ikke være betinget af, at tilbuddet rettes til en på forhånd bestemt modtager.
In the first place the Court held that the protection of consumers in other Member States was not in itself a matter for the Dutch authorities and could not therefore provide grounds for restricting the freedom to provide services.
Endvidere vil et sådant forbud være en hindring for den frie udveksling af tje­nesteydelser af grænseoverskridende karakter, da det fratager de berørte virk­somheder muligheden for kontrakt med potentielle kunder i andre medlemssta­ter.
On the other hand, the Court acknowledged that safeguarding the financial sec­tor's reputation might constitute an imperative reason for action in the pub­lic interest and might justify restrictions on the freedom to provide financial services.
Det interessante punkt i dommen er begrundelsen for en sådan foranstalt-
Moreover, the Member State from which the calls were made was in the best position to regulate cold calling.
Domstolen fastslog, at beskyttelsen af forbrugerne på andre medlemsstaters territorium ikke som sådan tilfalder de nederlandske myndigheder, og at den derfor ikke kan godtage en hindring for den frie udveksling af tjenesteydelser.
In Spain, the export of banknotes is subject to a prior declaration when the amount is in excess of PTA 1 million and subject to prior administrative authorization when the amount is in excess of PTA 5 million.
Til gengæld godtog Domstolen, at hensynet til den finansielle sektors omdømme er en tvingende almen grund, der kan berettige restriktioner i den frie udveksling af finansielle tjenesteydelser.
In criminal proceedings against persons who had transported large sums of money without prior authorization the question had been raised as to whether Spanish legislation was compatible with Community law.
Domstolen understregede, at forbrugeren, som sæd­vanligvis er ganske uforberedt, hverken kan få oplysninger om de indbyggede risici ved de transaktioner, der foreslås ham, eller er i stand til at sammenligne prisen på og kvaliteten af de tjenesteydelser, der udbydes, med konkurrenternes tilbud.
On 23 February1the Court held that, although Article 4 of Directive 88/361/EEC allowed Member States to take all requisite measures to prevent infringements of their laws and regulations, it precluded national legislation making the export of coins, banknotes or bearer cheques conditional on a prior authorization which would have a suspensory effect on such exports.
Endvidere er det den medlemsstat, hvorfra telefonopkaldet foretages, der er bedst i stand til at regulere området »cold calling«.
On the other hand, the Directive did permit Member States to make the exports in question subject to a prior declaration, which need not be a mere formality.
Domstolen fandt ligeledes, at forbuddet mod »cold calling« i den nederlandske lovgivning stod i et rimeligt forhold til det tilstræbte formål.
The Court stated that such a declaration could be required prior to the ex port transaction so that the national authorities could exercise effective supervision in order to prevent infringements of their laws and regulations, and that appropriate penalties could be imposed.
Ganske vist forbydes det tjenesteyderne at rette henvendelse til potentielle kunder uden disses forudgående skriftlige samtykke, men forbuddet vedrører ikke aktuelle kunder.
The Court also held that the relevant provisions of Directive 88/361/EEC had direct effect, since the requirement that Member States should abolish all restrictions on move ments of capital was precise and unconditional and did not require a specific implementing measure.
I Spanien kan udførsel af pengesedler kun ske på grundlag af en forud­gående anmeldelse, såfremt beløbet overstiger 1 mio. PTA, mens der kræves en forudgående tilladelse, såfremt beløbet overstiger 5 mio. PTA.
On 14 November2the Court clarified important aspects of the rules on the free movement of capital and loans within the Community.
I forbindelse med en række strafferetlige procedurer mod personer, som havde transporteret store pengesummer uden forudgående tilladelse, rejstes spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt denne lovgivning er forenelig med fællesskabslovgivningen.
The Svensson family, living in Luxembourg, had been refused housing aid by the Luxembourg authorities because, to build their home in Luxembourg, they had contracted a loan with a bank which was not established in the Grand Duchy.
I sin dom af 23. februar") erklærede Domstolen, at selv om artikel 4 i direktiv 88/361/EØF gør det muligt at træffe de foranstaltninger, der er tvingende nødvendige for at imø­degå overtrædelser af love og forskrifter, er den til hinder for, at udførslen af mønter, pengesedler eller ihændehavechecks undergives en forudgående tilla­delse, som vil få opsættende virkning på udførslen.
The Court found that the relevant provisions of the Luxembourg legislation constituted an obstacle to the free movement of capital in that they were likely to deter the parties concerned from approaching banks es tablished in another Member State.
Derimod kan Domstolen tillade, at medlemsstaterne kræver en forudgående anmeldelse, som ikke blot kan være en formel anmeldelse.
It also held that this legislation represented discrimination against banks established in other Member States and was prohibited by Article 59 of the EC Treaty.
Domstolen understreger således, at denne an­meldelse kan kræves inden udførslen, således at det bliver muligt for de nationale myndigheder at foretage en effektiv kontrol for at bekæmpe overtrædelser af deres lovgivning, og at en overtrædelse kan medføre strafferetlige sanktioner.
The Court rejected the Luxembourg Government's contention that the aid represented 1% of the total Luxembourg budget and that half of the aid was recovered through the taxes which financial bodies established in Luxembourg paid on their profits.
') Forenede sager C-358/93 og C-416/93, straffesager mod Bordessa m.fl., og Bull. 4-1995, punkt 1.8.31.
[oined Cases C-358/93 and C-416/93 Bordessa and Others: Bull.
Domstolen afviste den luxembourgske regerings argumenter, der var baseret på, at den på­gældende støtte repræsenterer 1% af Luxembourgs samlede budget og for halv­delens vedkommende indgår til staten igen via den udbytteskat, der betales af de finansieringsinstitutter, der er etableret i Luxembourg.
COMMUNITY LAW embourg rules be justified on the grounds of consistency in tax arrange­ments, an argument which the Court had accepted in earlier cases, for in this particular case there was no direct link between the granting of housing aid to borrowers, on the one hand, and the funding of the aid through the tax levied on banks' profits, on the other.
Den 17. oktober") udtalte Domstolen sig om foreneligheden mellem den ordning vedrørende ligebehandling af mænd og kvinder inden for den offentlige sektor, som er indført ved Land Bremens lov af 20. november 1990, og direktiv 76/207/EØF om gennemførelse af princippet om ligebehandling af mænd og kvinder.
On 17 October' the Court ruled on whether the arrangements which the Land Bremen had introduced on 20 November 1990 concerning equality of treatment in the public services were compatible with Direc­tive 76/207/EEC on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women.
Det fastslås i Bremens lovgivning, at »ved ansættelse og placering af en medarbejder i en højere lønklasse, skal kvinder, der har kvalifikationer sva­rende til deres mandlige modkandidater, gives en fortrinsstilling, når kvinder er underrepræsenteret.
Under the arrangements in question, when staff are recruited or assigned to a higher-paid post, women possessing qualifications equivalent to those of their male counterparts must be given priority treat­ment if they are under-represented in the area concerned.