natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Artikel 4, stk. 2, i nævnte forordning nr. 1633/84 er derfor også ugyldig, for så vidt som den foreskriver, at der skal stilles sikkerhed for, at det i henhold til stk. 1 skyldige beløb opkræves.
Article 4(2) is invalid in so far as it requires a security to be lodged in order to cover the amount due pursuant to paragraph (1);
Erhvervsdrivende kan ikke støtte ret på den fastslåede ugyldighed af artikel 4, stk. 1 og 2, i nævnte forordning nr. 1633/84, for så vidt angår tiden inden afsigelsen af nærværende dom, medmindre der er tale om erhvervsdrivende - eller de, der afleder ret fra disse - som før denne dato har anlagt sag eller indgivet en efter national ret hermed ligestillet klage.
The declaration of invalidity of those provisions cannot be relied upon in respect of a date prior to that of this judgment, other than by persons who have instituted proceedings or lodged an equivalent complaint against measures adopted on the basis of the provisions declared invalid;
Det Forenede Kongerige er ifølge fællesskabsretten forpligtet til at kræve fremlæggelse af dokumenter vedrørende udførsel af får eller fårekød, som er undergivet en "clawback-afgift", og at iværksætte sanktioner over for erhvervsdrivende, som har afgivet urigtige erklæringer i sådanne dokumenter."
Under Community law the United Kingdom is not obliged to require the production of documentation relating to charges based on provisions declared invalid, or to institute criminal proceedings on that basis."
Generaladvokat Giuseppe Tesauro fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (S.iette Afdeling) den 13. december 1991.
Joined Cases C-78/90, C-79/90, C-80/90, C-81/90, C-82/90 and C-83/90 Société Compagnie Commerciale de l'Ouest and Others ν Receveur Principal des Douanes de la Pallice Port - 11 March 1992 (Parafiscal charges on petroleum products) (Full Court)
Han foreslog Domstolen at besvare de forelagte spørgsmål på følgende måde:
By judgments of 14 February 1990, received at the Court on 22 March 1990, the Cour d'Appel, Poitiers, referred several questions to the Court on the interpretation of Articles 3, 5, 6, 12, 13, 30, the first paragraph of Article 31, the first paragraph of Articles 32, Articles 37(2), 92 and 95 of the EEC Treaty.
Tilsvarende er artikel 4, stk. 2 ugyldig, for så vidt som den bestemmer, at der skal stilles sikkerhed til dækning af det beløb, der skyldes i henhold til stk. 1.
They concerned the legality of a parafiscal charge levied in France when certain petroleum products were put into circulation which was applicable to imported and domestic petroleum products alike.
Erhvervsdrivende kan alene støtte ret på de nævnte bestemmelsers ugyldighed, for så vidt angår tiden forud for dommens afsigelse, såfremt de allerede har anlagt sag eller indgivet en hermed ligestillet klage til prøvelse af retsakter, som er udstedt med hjemmel i de ugyldige bestemmelser.
"(1) A parafiscal charge applied under the same conditions as regards its collection to both national and imported products, the revenue from which goes to benefit solely national products so that the advantages accruing from it wholly compensate for the charge imposed on those products, constitutes a charge having an effect equivalent to customs duties prohibited by Article 12 of the EEC Treaty.
Det Forenede Kongerige er ikke efter fællesskabsretten forpligtet til at kræve fremlæggelse af dokumenter vedrørende forpligtelser som følge af de ugyldige bestemmelser eller at indlede retsforfølgning på dette grundlag."
(2) Such a parafiscal charge may, depending on the purpose to which the revenue it produces is put, constitute State aid incompatible with the Common Market if the conditions for the application of Article 92 of the Treaty are met; whether those conditions are satisfied must be determined by means of the procedure provided for for that purpose in Article 93 of the Treaty.
Forenede sager C-78-83/90: Compagnie Commerciale de l'Ouest m.fl. mod Receveur principal des douanes de La Pallice Port 11.3.92 "Skattelignende afgifter af mineralolieprodukter" (Domstolens plenum)
(3) Such a parafiscal charge is governed by Articles 12 et seq. or Article 95 of the Treaty, and is therefore not subject to the provisions in Article 30.
Ved domme af 14. februar 1990, indgået til Domstolen den 22. marts s.a., havde Cour d'appel de Poitiers forelagt en række præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af Traktatens artikel 3, 5, 6, 12, 13 og 30, artikel 31, stk. 1, artikel 32, stk. 1, artikel 37, stk. 2, samt artikel 92 og 95.
(4) Article 37 of the Treaty does not prohibit the introduction of a parafiscal charge which is created independently of the rules governing the importation and marketing of petroleum products in a Member State and which is independent of the exercise of exclusive rights provided for by those rules."
Domstolen besvarede de forelagte spørgsmål således:
He considered that the Court should reply as follows:
Hvis disse fordele derimod kun udligner en del af den byrde, der belaster de indenlandsk fremstillede varer, indebærer afgiften en forskelsbehandling, der er forbudt ifølge Traktatens artikel 95.
Articles 3, 5, 6, 30, 37 and 92 of the Treaty do not preclude the levying of a parafiscal charge such as that in issue in the present proceedings.
En sådan skattelignende afgift kan, uanset anvendelsen af dens provenu, anses for statsstøtte, der er uforenelig med fællesmarkedet, hvis betingelserne i Traktatens artikel 92 er opfyldt.
In order to assess the compatibility of a parafiscal charge, levied in the same way on national and imported products, with the rules concerning charges having effect equivalent to customs duties and discriminatory national taxation, the national court should take into account the destination of the product of the said charge.
Afgørelsen af, om disse betingelser er opfyldt, skal træffes på grundlag af den procedure, der med henblik herpå er fastsat i Traktatens artikel 93.
If it is intended to finance activities which specifically benefit taxed national products, so as to compensate fully for the amount charged on the products as a result of the levy, the latter must be described as a "charge having effect equivalent to a customs duty" within the meaning of Articles 9 and 12 of the Treaty.
En sådan skattelignende afgift, der er omfattet af Traktatens artikel 12 ff og artikel 95, er ikke omfattet af Traktatens artikel 30.
- 16 - products other than the taxed national products, so that the amount charged on national products as a result of the levy is compensated for only partially, the latter should be described as discriminatory internal taxation within the meaning of Article 95 of the Treaty."
Traktatens artikel 37 er ikke til hinder for indførelsen af en skattelignende afgift, som er uafhængig af den i en medlemsstat gældende ordning for import og salg af mineralolie, og som ikke er knyttet til udøvelsen af de i henhold til denne ordning fastsatte eksklusive rettigheder."
Case C-323/90 Commission ν Portuguese Republic - 11 March 1992 (Persons permitted to make a customs declaration - Declaration on behalf of another person) (Full Court)
Sag C-323/90: Kommissionen mod Republikken Portugal
Mr Advocate General Tesauro delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Full Court on 13 December 1991.
Ved stævning, indgået til Domstolen den 22. oktober 1990, havde Kommissionen anlagt sag med påstand om, at det fastslås, at Republikken Portugal har tilsidesat sine forpligtelser i henhold til EØF-Traktaten, idet den har opretholdt national lovgivning, der er i strid med Rådets forordning nr. 3632/85.
Declare that the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Regulation No 3632/85 inasmuch as Article 7(4) of Decree Law No 43 of 25 January 1983 prevents a category of traders, namely forwarding undertakings, from making customs declarations in the name and on behalf of another person as a regular part of their activity;
Generaladvokat Giuseppe Tesauro fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i Domstolens plenum den 13. december 1991.
Mr Advocate General Darmon delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Full Court on 5 November 1991.
Generaladvokaten foreslog følgende:
He proposed that the Court should:
Det fastslås, at Republikken Portugal har tilsidesat de forpligtelser, der påhviler den i medfør af forordning nr. 3632/85, idet artikel 7, stk. 4, i lovdekret nr. 43 af 25. januar 1983 er til hinder for, at en bestemt kategori af erhvervsdrivende i erhvervsmæssigt øjemed kan indgive toldangivelser i en andens navn og for en andens regning.
Take note of the Commission's withdrawal with regard to the pleas in law referred to at point II.1.a, point Il.l.b, except in respect of substances Nos. 102, 376, 878, 1332 and 1344, and at point II.1.d of the application;
Sag C-43/90: Kommissionen mod Forbundsrepublikken Tyskland
Declare the application inadmissible with regard to the plea in law referred to at point Il.l.b in relation to substances Nos. 376 and 878, and the plea in law referred to at point II.l.c, in so far as it is based on the absence of notification pursuant to Article 23 of Directive 79/831/EEC;
"Traktatbrud - etikettering af farlige stoffer" (Domstolens plenum)
Dismiss the remainder of the application;
Domstolen udtalte og bestemte:
Order the Commission to pay all the costs."
Generaladvokat Marco Darmon fremsatte forslag til afgørelse for Domstolens plenum den 5. november 1991.
In that connection it was not alleged that in its substantive content such a provision, adopted in the general interest of the Community, infringed a superior rule of law for the protection of the individual.
Kommissionen dømmes til at betale samtlige omkostninger."
The applicant is ordered to pay the costs."
Domstolen havde allerede konstateret, at artikel 13a i forordning nr. 1687/76 havde til formål at forhindre, at ordningen med returvarer blev anvendt til at begå svig til skade for Fællesskabets midler.
Case T-9/89 Hüls ν Commission - 10 March 1992 (Competition - Concepts of agreement and concerted practice - Collective responsibility) (First Chamber)
Det var i denne forbindelse ikke blevet hævdet, at en sådan bestemmelse ved sit materielle indhold, som var dikteret af Fællesskabets almene interesse, gjorde indgreb i en højere retsregel til beskyttelse af private.
By an application lodged in August 1986 the applicant brought an action for the annulment of the Commission's decision of 23 April 1986 imposing a fine on it for having infringed the provisions of Article 85(1) of the EEC Treaty or, in the alternative, reduction of the fine.
Domstolen udtalte og bestemte:
The applicant maintained, first, that the Commission did not comply with the audi alteram partem rule.
Sagsøgeren betaler sagens omkostninger."
Secondly the applicant claimed that the Commission had not substantiated its findings of fact concerning the alleged infringement to the required legal standard and, in law, had misapplied Article 85(1) of the EEC Treaty.
"At frifinde sagsøgte og at dømme sagsøgeren til at betale samtlige sagens omkostninger."
Thirdly the applicant claimed that the grounds for the decision were inadequate and contradictory.
Sag T-9/89: Hüls Aktiengesellschaft mod Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber
1) is annulled in so far as it states that Hüls participated in the infringement from some time between 1977 and 1979, and not from the end of 1978 or the beginning of 1979.
10.3.1992 "Konkurrence ­ begreberne aftale og samordnet praksis ­ kollektivt ansvar" (Første Afdeling)
The amount of the fine imposed on the applicant in Article 3 of that decision is set at ECU 2 337 500, that is to say DM 5 013 680.38;
For det andet gjorde sagsøgeren gældende, at Kommissionen ikke havde ført tilstrækkeligt bevis for sine konstateringer vedrørende fakta ved påvisning af overtrædelsen, og at Kommissionen havde anvendt EØF­Traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1, forkert.
The applicant is ordered to bear its own costs and half of the Commission's costs. The Commission is ordered to bear the other half of its own costs.
Kommissionen havde imidlertid ikke ført bevis for, at sagsøgeren havde medvirket til overtrædelsen før 1979.
Case T-10/89 Hoechst Aktiengesellschaft ν Commission - 10 March 1992 (Competition - Concepts of agreement and concerted practice - Collective responsibility) (First Chamber)
Med hensyn til anvendelsen af EØF­Traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1, bemærkede Retten, at da sagsøgeren havde deltaget i de nævnte møder, havde selskabet i nogle år deltaget i et samlet system, der udgjorde en enkelt overtrædelse, som Kommissionen med rette havde anset for en aftale og samordnet praksis, der kunne begrænse konkurrencen inden for fællesmarkedet og påvirke handelen mellem medlemsstaterne.
By an application lodged in August 1986 Hoechst brought an action for the annulment of the Commission's decision of 23 April 1986 imposing a fine on it for having infringed the provisions of Article 85(1) of the EEC Treaty.
- 21 - slutningen, idet den havde anført de faktiske og retlige omstændigheder, der lå til grund for foranstaltningen, og de betragtninger, som dannede udgangspunkt for beslutningen, dels at beslutningens begrundelse ikke var selvmodsigende, heller ikke i forhold til konklusionen vedrørende den retlige kvalificering af overtrædelsen.
By an application lodged in August 1986 the applicant brought an action for the annulment of the Commission's decision of 23 April 1986 imposing a fine on it for having infringed the provisions of Article 85(1) of the EEC Treaty.
For det fjerde bestred sagsøgeren de kriterier, som Kommissionen havde anvendt ved fastsættelsen af bødens størrelse samt den påståede overtrædelses varighed og grovhed.
The applicant inter alia alleged that the Commission did not properly assess the duration and gravity of the infringement it was found to have committed.
Retten bemærkede, at selv om Kommissionen havde foretaget en korrekt vurdering af overtrædelsens grovhed, var varigheden heraf, for så vidt angik sagsøgeren, kortere end fastslået i beslutningen, og den bøde, der var pålagt sagsøgeren, blev derfor nedsat.
In this connection the Court of First Instance found as a result of its assessments relating to proof of the infringement that the applicant had committed a breach of the Community competition rules of lesser duration than was specified in the decision and that therefore the amount of the fine imposed should be reduced.
Det hedder i domskonklusionen:
The Court of First Instance consequently
Artikel 1, syvende led, i Kommissionens beslutning af 23. april 1986 (IV/31.149 - Polypropylen, EFT L 230, s. 1) annulleres, for så vidt det heri fastslås, at Hüls har medvirket til overtrædelsen fra et tidspunkt mellem 1977 og 1979 og ikke fra slutningen af 1978 eller begyndelsen af 1979.
Annulled Article 1 of the Commission Decision of 23 April 1986 (IV/31.149 - Polypropylene, Official Journal L 230, p. 1) in so far as it held that Shell - took part in the infringement after September 1983, - took part in the beginning of the January-May 1981 price initiative;
Den bøde, der er pålagt sagsøgeren ved beslutningens artikel 3, fast sættes til 2 337 500 ECU, svarende til 5 013 680,38 DM.
Set the amount of the fine imposed on the applicant in Article 3 of that Decision at ECU 8 100 000, that is to say UKL 5 222 855.70;
I øvrigt frifindes sagsøgte.
For the rest, dismissed the application;
Sagsøgeren bærer sine egne omkostninger og halvdelen af Kommissionens. Kommissionen bærer den anden halvdel af sine omkostninger."
Ordered the applicant to bear its own costs and pay two thirds of the Commission's costs, and ordered the Commission to bear the remaining third of its own costs.
10.3.1992 "Konkurrence - begreberne aftale og samordnet praksis - kollektivt ansvar" (Første Afdeling)
Case T-12/89 Solvay et Compagnie S.A. ν Commission - 10 March 1992 (Competition - Concepts of agreement and concerted practice - Collective responsibility)
Sag Τ-11/89: Shell International Chemical Company Ltd mod Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber
By an application lodged in August 1986 Hoechst brought an action for the annulment of the Commission's decision of 23 April 1986 imposing a fine on it for having infringed the provisions of Article 85(1) of the EEC Treaty.
10.3.1992 "Konkurrence ­ begreberne aftale og samordnet praksis ­ kollektivt ansvar" (Første Afdeling)
Case T-13/89 Imperial Chemical Industries ν Commission - 10 March 1992 (Competition - Concepts of agreement and concerted practice - Collective responsibility) (First Chamber)
Ved stævning indgivet i august 1986 havde Shell anlagt sag med påstand om annullation af Kommissionens beslutning af 23. april 1986, hvorved Kommis­sionen havde pålagt selskabet en bøde for overtrædelse af bestemmelserne i EØF­Traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1.
By an application lodged in August 1986 the applicant brought an action for the annulment of the Commission's decision of 23 April 1986 imposing a fine on it for having infringed the provisions of Article 85(1) of the EEC Treaty.
Sagsøgeren gjorde bl.a. gældende, at Kommissionen ikke i tilstrækkelig grad havde vurderet varigheden og grovheden af den overtrædelse, der blev påberåbt over for selskabet.
The applicant inter alia alleged that the Commission did not properly assess the duration and gravity of the infringement it was found to have committed.
Retten bemærkede hertil, at det fremgik af dens vurdering af beviserne for overtrædelsen, at den hos sagsøgeren konstaterede overtrædelse var af kortere varighed end lagt til grund i beslutningen, og at bøden derfor burde nedsættes.
After evaluating the gravity of the infringement the Court of First Instance considered that the fine imposed should be reduced on account of the applicant's cooperation in the investigation.
Artikel 1 i Kommissionens beslutning af 23. april 1986 (IV/31.149 ­Polypropylen, EFT L 230, s. 1) annulleres, for så vidt det heri fast­slås, at Shell har medvirket ­ til overtrædelsen efter september 1983, og ­ da prisinitiativet blev taget i januar­maj 1981.
Set the amount of the fine imposed on the applicant in Article 3 of the Commission's decision of 23 April 1986 (IV/31.149Polypropylene, Official Journal L 230, p. 1) at ECU 9 000 000 or £5 803 173;
I øvrigt frifindes sagsøgte.
Dismissed the remainder of the application;
Sagsøgeren bærer sine egne omkostninger og to tredjedele af Kommis­sionens. Kommissionen bærer den sidste tredjedel af sine omkostninger."
Ordered the applicant to pay the costs, including the costs of the proceedings brought before the Court of Justice under Article 91 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice.
10.3.1992 "Konkurrence ­ begreberne aftale og samordnet praksis ­ kollektivt ansvar" (Første Afdeling)
Case T-14/89 Montedipe SpA ν Commission - 10 March 1992 (Competition - Concepts of agreement and concerted practice - Collective responsibility) (First Chamber)
Sagsøgeren betaler sagens omkostninger.'
The applicant is ordered to pay the costs, including the costs of the proceedings brought before the Court of Justice under Article 83 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice."
Sag T-13/89:
Case T-15/89 Chemie Linz AG ν Commission of the European Communities (Competition - Concepts of agreement and concerted practice - Collective responsibility) (First Chamber)
Ved stævning indgivet i august 1986 havde Imperial Chemical Industries anlagt sag med påstand om annullation af Kommissionens beslutning af 23. april 1986, hvorved Kommissionen havde pålagt selskabet en bøde for overtrædelse af bestemmelserne i EØF-Traktatens artikel 85, stk.l.
By an application lodged in August 1986 Chemie Linz AG brought an action for the annulment of the Commission's decision of 23 April 1986 imposing a fine on it for having infringed the provisions of Article 85(1) of the EEC Treaty.
I øvrigt frifindes sagsøgte.
The applicant is ordered to pay the costs."
Sagsøgeren betaler sagens omkostninger, herunder omkostningerne ved den i medfør af artikel 91 i Domstolens procesreglement indledte procedure for Domstolen."
Cases T-68/89, T-77/89 and T-78/89 Società Italiana Vetro SpA, Fabbrica Pisana SpA, Vernante Pennital i a ν Commission - 10 March 1992 (Competition - Concepts of agreement and concerted practice - Abuse of a collective dominant position - Evidence) (First Chamber)
Sag T-14/89: Montedipe SpA mod Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber
By an application lodged in March 1989 the applicants brought an action for the annulment of Commission Decision 89/93/EEC of 7 December 1988 imposing fines on them for having acted in infringement of Articles 85 and 86 of the EEC Treaty both in the "automotive market", in relation to the Italian undertakings Fiat and Piaggio, and in other markets.
Ved stævning indgivet i august 1986 havde Montedipe SpA anlagt sag med påstand om annullation af Kommissionens beslutning af 23. april 1986, hvorved Kommissionen havde pålagt selskabet en bøde for overtrædelse af bestemmelserne i EØF-Traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1.
The applicants claimed, first, that the decision did not contain any economic analysis of the Italian glass market and that absence of analysis vitiated the decision in its entirety.
Sagsøgeren betaler sagens omkostninger, herunder omkostningerne ved den i medfør af artikel 83 i Domstolens procesreglement indledte procedure for Domstolen."
In this connection the Court of First Instance found that the Commission had not carried out an adequate analysis of the way the Italian flat-glass market functioned.
Sag T-15/89: Chemie Linz AG mod Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber
In particular the Commission had inter alia failed to take into consideration imports on the Italian market from non-Member States.
10.3.1992 "Konkurrence - begreberne aftale og samordnet praksis - kollektivt ansvar' > " (Første Afdeling) Ved stævning indgivet i august 1986 havde Chemie Linz anlagt sag med påstand om annullation af Kommissionens beslutning af 23. april 1986, hvorved Kommissionen havde pålagt selskabet en bøde for overtrædelse af bestemmelserne i EØF-Traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1.
Secondly, the applicants alleged that the evidence relied upon by the Commission consisted for the most part of a very partial selection of citations which should have been read in the context of the document from which they were extracted and the realities of the market.
"Konkurrence - aftale og samordnet praksis - misbrug af kollektivt dominerende stilling - beviser" (Første Afdeling)
The Court of First Instance considered inter alia that the decision should be annulled rati one personae in so far as it applied to Vernante Pennital ia because the Commission had not sufficiently proved its participation in the alleged infringements.
Ved stævning indgivet i marts 1989 havde sagsøgerne anlagt sag med påstand om annullation af Kommissionens beslutning 89/93/EØF af 7. december 1988, hvorved sagsøgerne blev pålagt bøder for at have handlet i strid med EØF-Traktatens artikel 85 og 86, såvel inden for automobilsektoren i relation til de italienske virksomheder Fiat og Piaggio, som inden for andre sektorer.
With regard to the alleged infringement of Article 86 of the Treaty which the Commission believed had given rise to a collective dominant position on the Italian flat-glass market, the Court of First Instance held that the Commission had not adduced the necessary proof.
Som det første anbringende gjorde sagsøgerne gældende, at Kommissionens beslutning ikke indeholder en økonomisk analyse af det italienske marked for planglas, og at den omstændighed, at en sådan analyse ikke er foretaget, bevirker, at beslutningen i det hele er behæftet med en mangel.
The Court of First Instance considered that the Commission's analysis of the Italian market was inadequate and in addition the Commission had not substantiated its claim that the undertakings concerned presented themselves on the market as a single entity and not as individuals.