natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Ved kendelser af 7. og 29. november 1989, indgået til Domstolen den 2. januar og den 7. juni 1990, havde Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Cataluña forelagt tre præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af EØF-Traktatens artikler 30 og 36.
they are conducted from beginning to end as a compulsory procedure in the sense that (i) they may be Imposed against the will of the directors of the undertaking, (ii) their effect is that the powers to administer the undertaking or handle its assets are withdrawn from the directors and entrusted to official receivers specially appointed by a public authority, and (iii) those receivers may approve the transfer without consulting the directors."
Til støtte for søgsmålet havde sagsøgerne ved den nationale retsinstans blandt andet gjort gældende, at lov nr. 20/85 er i strid med Traktatens artikel 30, for så vidt som de begrænsninger med hensyn til reklame, der er fastsat i
By orders of 7 and 29 November 1989, received at the Court on 2 January and 7 June 1990, the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Cataluña [High Court of Catalonia] referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling
- 17 - loven, begrænser mulighederne for afsætning af drikkevarer, der i det væsentlige kommer fra andre medlemsstater.
17 - three questions on the interpretation of Articles 30 and 36 of the EEC Treaty.
Domstolen bemærkede hertil, at den allerede har statueret, at en lovgivning, som begrænser eller forbyder visse former for reklame, kan, selv om den ikke direkte påvirker indførslerne, begrænse disses omfang, fordi den påvirker mulighederne for afsætning af indførte varer, og følgelig principielt må antages at være en foranstaltning med tilsvarende virkning i artikel 30's forstand.
The questions arose in the context of proceedings between (a) two companies, APESA and Publivia, which controlled advertisement hoardings, and (b) the DSSC, concerning the DSSC's decision to fine them for contravention of the provisions of Law 20/85 of the Parliament of the Autonomous Community of Catalonia prohibiting, in its territory, certain forms of advertising for alcoholic beverages of a strength exceeding 23 .
Det må fastslås, fortsatte Domstolen, at reklame udgør en tilskyndelse til forbrug, og at bestemmelser, som begrænser mulighederne for at reklamere for alkoholholdige varer og således er et led i bekæmpelsen af alkoholisme, derfor ikke er uden betydning for beskyttelsen af den offentlige sundhed.
In support of their actions to annul that decision the applicants argued inter alia that Law 20/85 was contrary to Article 30 of the EEC Treaty, inasmuch as the restrictions on advertising which the Law imposed affected the opportunities for marketing beverages coming mainly from other Member States.
De omtvistede nationale bestemmelser fandtes i øvrigt ikke at være åbenbart urimelige som led i bekæmpelsen af alkoholisme, dels fordi de kun vedrører drikkevarer med et alkoholindhold på 23% vol. og derover, dels fordi de kun forbyder reklame for sådanne drikkevarer på nøjagtigt angivne steder, hvoraf en del navnlig passeres af bilister og unge mennesker, dvs. to befolkningsgrupper, over for hvilke bekæmpelsen af alkoholisme er sårlig vigtig.
The Court noted that, as it had previously held, legislation which restricted or prohibited certain forms of advertising might, although it did not directly affect imports, be such as to restrict the volume of imports because it affected marketing opportunities for the imported product, and had accordingly to be regarded, in principle, as a measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction on imports, within the meaning of Article 30.
Domstolen bemærkede alslutningsvis, at de omtvistede nationale bestemmelser ikke udgør et middel til vilkårlig forskelsbehandling eller en skjult begrænsning af samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne.
However, the Court observed that advertising constituted a stimulus to consumption and that legislation which limited the opportunities for advertising alcoholic beverages and thereby endeavoured to combat alcoholism was a response to concerns over public health.
Bestemmelserne omfatter nemlig både produkter, der kommer fra den del af det nationale område, hvor de finder anvendelse, og produkter indført fra andre medlemsstater, og det forhold, at der inden for den pågældende del af det nationale område fremstilles flere drikkevarer med et alkoholindhold på under 23% vol. end over, kan ikke i sig selv ændre noget herved.
Moreover, the national measure at issue did not seem manifestly unreasonable in combatting alcoholism, since in the first place it covered only beverages having an alcoholic strength of more than 23 and in the second place it confined itself to prohibiting the advertising of such beverages in specific places, some of which were particularly frequented by motorists and young people - that is, by two classes of person with regard to whom the campaign against alcoholism was especially important.
Domstolen besvarede de forelagte spørgsmål således:
Lastly, the Court ruled that the national legislation in question did not constitute arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade within the Community.
"EØF-Traktatens artikel 30, sammenholdt med dens artikel 36, er ikke til hinder for bestemmelser som indeholdt i den i hovedsagen omtvistede lov, og hvorefter det i en del af en medlemsstats område er forbudt at reklamere for drikkevarer med et alkoholindhold på 23% vol. og derover i massemedier, på gader og veje bortset fra skiltning for produktions- eller salgssteder, i biografer og i offentlige transportmidler, idet de - selv om de er en foranstaltning med tilsvarende virkning i EØF-Traktatens artikel 30's forstand -kan være begrundede efter Traktatens artikel 36 ud fra hensynet til beskyttelse af den offentlige sundhed og end ikke - henset til deres indhold og de i Øvrigt i sagen oplyste omstændigheder - kan antages at vare et indirekte middel til beskyttelse af visse lokalt fremstillede produkter."
It affected products from that part of the national territory in which it applied, as well as products imported from other Member States, and the fact that that part of the national territory produced more beverages of an alcoholic strength lower than 23 than beverages of a higher strength was insufficient, in itself, to invalidate that finding.
Han foreslog følgende besvarelse:
He proposed that the Court should give the following ruling:
Bestemmelsen i artikel 30 skal fortolkes således, at den principielt er til hinder for bestemmelser, hvorefter det under visse omstændigheder, uanset at der ikke er tale om et absolut forbud, er forbudt at reklamere for drikkevarer med et alkolhol på 23% vol. og derover.
Article 30 must be interpreted as being in principle opposed to legislation which prohibits in certain circumstances - albeit not absolutely - the advertising of alcoholic beverages having a strength of more than 23 .
"Forbrugere ­ manglende overholdelse af et direktiv ­ mærkning af og reklame for levnedsmidler" (Domstolens plenum)
In the absence of Community legislation, Articles 30 and 36 do not preclude legislation such as that referred to in the answer to the first question, since that legislation is necessary to protect public health, and its restrictive effect on i ntra-Community trade is not disproportionate to that aim, and since it cannot be seen to constitute arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade between Member States."
Ved stævning, indgivet den 31. januar 1990, havde Kommissionen anlagt sag med påstand om, at det statueredes, at Den Italienske Republik ikke har overholdt de forpligtelser, der påhviler den i henhold til EØF­Traktatens artikler 5 og 189 samt artikel 3, stk. 1, nr. 4 og 7, i Rådets direktiv 79/112/EØF.
Case C-32/90: Commission of the European Communities ν Italian Republic - 25 July 1991 (Consumers - Failure to comply with a directive - Labelling and advertising of foodstuffs) (Full Court)
"at det statueres, at Den Italienske Republik ikke har overholdt de forpligtelser, der påhviler den i henhold til artikel 3, stk. 1, nr. 4 og 7, i Rådets direktiv 79/112/EØF, idet den kræver, at fabrikanter af visse pastaprodukter på etiketten angiver fremstillingstidspunktet samt det sted, hvor produktet har oprindelse eller kommer fra, og at Den Italienske Republik dømmes til at betale sagens omkostninger."
By requiring manufacturers of extruded pasta products to state on the label the date of manufacture and the place of origin or provenance of the product, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 3 (1) (4) and (7) of Council Directive 79/112/EEC of 18 December 1978 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs for sale to the ultimate consumer;
Sag C-58/90: Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber mod Den Italienske Republik 25.7.1991
The Italian Republic is ordered to pay the costs."
"Fri bevægelighed for personer - EØF-Traktatens artikler 48, 52 og 59 - anerkendelse af udenlandske eksamensbeviser forbeholdt italienske statsborgere -udøvelse af medicinske hjælpefunktioner" (Domstolens plenum)
Mr Advocate General Mischo delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the full Court on 9 July 1991.
Det hedder i domskonklusionen:
He proposed that the Court should:
Generaladvokat M. Darmon havde fremsat forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Domstolens plenum) den 2. juli 1991.
By application lodged on 8 March 1990 the Commission brought an action for a declaration that the Italian Republic had failed to fulfil Its obligations under Articles 48, 52 and 59 of the EEC Treaty.
Han foreslog:
The Court held as follows:
"At det statueres, at Den Italienske Republik har tilsidesat sine forpligtelser i henhold til EØF-Traktatens artikler 48, 52 og 59, idet det efter italiensk lovgivning alene er italienske statsborgere, der i Italien kan få anerkendt eksamensbeviser fra andre medlemsstater, som giver ret til at udøve visse medicinske hjælpefunktioner;
"By maintaining in force provisions restricting to Italian citizens the possibility of obtaining recognition in Italy of foreign qualifications which entitle holders to work in auxiliary occupations
- 20 - og at den sagsøgte stat dømmes til at betale sagens omkostninger.
20 - its in the field of health, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil obligations under Articles 48, 59 and 59 of the EEC Treaty."
Ved kendelse af 22. juni 1990, indgået til Domstolen den 12. juli s.a., havde High Court of Ireland forelagt et præjudicielt spørgsmål vedrørende forholdet mellem nationale søgsmålsfrister og den umiddelbare anvendelighed af artikel 4, stk. 1, i Rådets direktiv 79/7/EØF.
"declare that, by restricting to Italian citizens the possibility of obtaining recognition in Italy of qualifications obtained In other States of the Community, entitling holders to occupy certain auxiliary posts in health-care, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 48, 59 and 59 of the EEC Treaty; order the defendant State to bear the costs."
Dette spørgsmål var blevet rejst under en retssag mellem ovennævnte parter vedrørende et tillæg til sociale ydelser, som fru Emmott havde rejst krav om i henhold til direktivets artikel 4, stk. 1.
Case C-208/90: T. Emmott ν Minister for Social Welfare - 25 July 1991 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) (Social policy - Equal treatment in matters of social security - Disability benefit - Direct effect and time-limits for initiating proceedings before national courts)) (Full Court)
Domstolen fastslog, at medlemsstaterne skal sikre, at direktiver efterleves fuldt ud og med bestemthed og klarhed, således at de af direktiver omfattede personer i det omfang, der ved direktiverne tilsigtes at skabe rettigheder for private, sættes i stand til at få fuldt kendskab til deres rettigheder og i givet fald til at håndhæve disse rettigheder ved nationale domstole.
By order of 22 June 1990, which was received at the Court on 12 July 1990, the High Court of Ireland referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling a question on the interrelationship between time-limits for initiating proceedings before national courts and the direct effect of Article 4 (1) of Council Directive 79/7/EEC.
Denne mindstegaranti kan ikke berettige en medlemsstat til at undlade rettidigt at træffe egnede foranstaltninger med henblik på at gennemføre hvert direktivs mål.
That question was raised in proceedings between the parties mentioned above concerning additional social security benefits which Mrs Emmott claimed on the basis of Article 4 (1) of the Directive.
Så længe et direktiv ikke er blevet forskriftsmæssigt gennemført i national ret, er de retsundergivne ude af stand til at opnå fuldt kendskab til deres rettigheder.
In that regard the Court stressed that the Member States were required to ensure the full application of directives in a sufficiently clear and precise manner so that, where directives were intended to create rights for individuals, they could ascertain the full extent of those rights and, where necessary, rely on them before the national courts.
Denne usikkerhed for de retsundergivne består, selv efter at Domstolen ved dom har fastslået, at den pågældende medlemsstat ikke har opfyldt sine forpligtelser i henhold til direktivet, og endog selv om Domstolen har statueret, at en eller flere bestemmelser i direktivet er tilstrækkelig præcise og ubetingede til at kunne påberåbes for en national domstol.
The Court observed that it was only in specific circumstances, in particular where a Member State had failed to take the implementing measures required or had adopted measures which were not in conformity with
Alene en forskriftsmæssig gennemførelse af direktivet kan bringe denne usikkerhed til ophør, og det er først på tidspunktet for denne gennemførelse, at der skabes den nødvendige retssikkerhed, som må eksistere, hvis det kræves af retsundergivne, at de skal gøre deres rettigheder gældende.
That state of uncertainty for individuals subsisted even after the Court had delivered a judgment finding that the Member State in question had not fulfilled its obligations under the directive and even if the Court had held that a particular provision or provisions of the directive were sufficiently precise and unconditional to be relied upon before a national court.
Det følger heraf, at indtil tidspunktet for den forskriftsmæssige gennemførelse af direktivet, kan en medlemsstat, som ikke har efterkommet det, ikke påberåbe sig overskridelse af søgsmålsfrister under en sag, som er anlagt mod den af private med henblik på beskyttelse af rettigheder, som tilkommer dem i henhold til direktivets bestemmelser, samt at en national søgsmålsfrist først kan begynde at løbe fra dette tidspunkt.
It followed that, until such time as a directive had been properly transposed, a defaulting Member State could not rely on an individual's delay in initiating proceedings against it in order to protect rights conferred upon him by the provisions of the directive and that a period laid down by national law within which proceedings had to be Initiated could not begin to run before that time.
"Fællesskabsretten er til hinder for, at en medlemsstats myndigheder kan påberåbe sig nationale søgsmålsfrister under en sag, som er anlagt mod dem af private for de nationale domstole for at beskytte rettigheder, der direkte er tildelt vedkommende ved artikel 4, stk. 1, i Rådets direktiv 79/7/EØF af 19. december 1978 om gradvis gennemførelse af princippet om ligebehandling af mænd og kvinder med hensyn til social sikring, så længe medlemsstaten ikke for skriftsmæssigt har gennemført direktivets bestemmelser i sin nationale retsorden". orden".
"Community law precludes the competent authorities of a Member State from relying, in proceedings brought against them by an individual before the national courts in order to protect rights directly conferred upon him by Article 4 (1) of Directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security, on national procedural rules relating to time-limits for bringing proceedings so long as that Member State has not properly transposed that directive into its domestic legal system."
Generaladvokat J. Mischo fremsatte forslag til afgørelse den 23. april 1991.
Mr Advocate General Mischo delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the full Court on 23 April 1991.
Han foreslog følgende afgørelse:
He proposed that the Court should give the following answer:
"Under en retssag, som den i spørgsmålet beskrevne, tilsidesætter en medlemsstats myndigheder ikke fællesskabsretten ved at påberåbe sig nationale retsplejeregler, bl.a. vedrørende søgsmålsfrister, forudsat at de samme frister gælder for søgsmål med en tilsvarende rækkevidde, anlagt i medfør af national ret.
"In an action such as that described in the question, the competent authorities of a Member State do not Infringe Community law by relying on national procedural rules, in particular those relating to
Sag C-75/90: Anklagemyndigheden mod R. Guitard (Præjudiciel) 25.7.1991 "Landbrug - fælles markedsordning for vin - mindsteindhold af alkohol i vin -salg af alkoholfri vin" (Første Afdeling)
Case C-75/90: Ministère Public v R. Gui tard - 25 July 1991 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) (Agriculture - Common organization of the market in wine - Minimum alcoholic strength of wine - Marketing of an alcohol-free wine) (First Chamber)
Ved dom af 7. februar 1990, indgået til Domstolen den 21. marts s.a., havde Tribunal correctionnel de Carcassonne (Frankrig) forelagt et præjudicielt spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af en række bestemmelser i Rådets forordninger (EØF) nr. 337/79 og nr. 822/87.
By judgment of 7 February 1990, received at the Court on 21 March 1990, the Tribunal Correctionnel [Criminal Court], Carcassonne (France) referred for a preliminary ruling a question on the interpretation of certain provisions of Council Regulations No. 337/79 and No. 822/87.
Spørgsmålet var blevet rejst under en straffesag mod Roger Guitard i dennes egenskab af formand for andelsforeningen Union des caves coopératives de l'Ouest audois et du Razès. Han var tiltalt for vildledende angivelser om en vares art samt for vildledende reklame i forbindelse med markedsføring af en drikkevare fremstillet af ikke-alkoholholdig vin under betegnelsen "alkoholfri vin".
The question arose in the context of criminal proceedings against Mr Guitard In his capacity as President of the Union des Caves Co-opératives de l'Ouest Audois et du Razès [Union of Co-operative Wineries in western Aude and Razès], who was charged with fraud as to the nature of goods and with misleading advertising, arising from the marketing, under the name of "alcohol-free wine", of a beverage based on wine from which the alcohol had been removed.
Domstolen understregede først, at benævnelsen "vin" er forbeholdt produkter, der opfylder definitionen under punkt 8 i bilag II til forordning nr. 337/79, der er genoptaget som punkt 10 i bilag I til forordning nr. 822/87.
The Court pointed out that the appellation "wine" was confined to products meeting the definition contained In Point 8 of Annex II to Regulation No. 337/79, re-enacted in Point 10 of Annex I to Regulation No. 822/87.
Det fremgår klart af denne definition, at et produkt for lovligt at kunne betegnes som "vin" skal være fremstillet ved alkoholisk gæring, og at produktet herefter skal indeholde alkohol.
It was clear from that definition that, in order for a product legitimately to be described as "wine", an alcoholic fermentation-process was required and that the product thereafter had to contain alcohol.
Det forhold, at "alkoholfri vin" er fremstillet på grundlag af vin, er uden betydning for dette krav, der støttes på fællesskabsreglerne, hvorefter det endelige produkt med denne benævnelse skal indeholde alkohol for lovligt at kunne betegnes som vin.
Although that definition of wine did not expressly lay down any minimum alcoholic strength, and although no minimum strength was required for some types of wine, the Court ruled that it was the essential characteristic of any wine that it should contain a certain amount of alcohol.
Domstolen bemærkede imidlertid, at medlemsstaterne kan tillade anvendelsen af ordet "vin" sammen med et navn på en frugt til betegnelse af produkter, der er fremstillet ved gæring af denne frugt, samt andre sammensatte benævnelser, der indeholder ordet "vin".
The fact that the product from which the "alcohol-free wine" was prepared was itself wine was irrelevant to the requirement to be inferred from Community legislation, namely that the end-product described as such had to contain alcohol in order to be legitimately described as "wine".
"Punkt 8 i bilag II til Rådets forordning nr. 337/79 af 5. februar 1979, der er genoptaget som punkt 10 i bilag I til Rådets forordning nr. 822/87 af 16. marts 1987 om den fælles markedsordning for vin, skal fortolkes således, at vin, der udbydes til salg, skal have et mindsteindhold af alkohol."
"Point 8 of Annex II to Council Regulation No. 337/79 of 5 February 1979, re-enacted in Point 10 of Annex I to Council Regulation No. 822/87 of 16 March 1987 on the common organization of the market in wine requires that wine, when marketed, must possess a minimum alcoholic strength."
Generaladvokat Van Gerven fremsatte forslag til afgørelse den 15. januar 1991.
Mr Advocate General W. Van Gerven delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the First Chamber on 15 January 1991.
Generaladvokaten foreslog følgende besvarelse af det præjudicielle spørgsmål:
He proposed that the Court should give the following answer:
"Punkt 10 i bilag I til Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 822/87 af 16. marts 1987 om den fælles markedsordning for vin skal fortolkes således, at den deri definerede vin skal have et vist alkoholindhold.
"Point 10 of Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No. 822/87 of 16 March 1987 on the common organization of the market in wine must be interpreted as meaning that wine as defined therein must contain a certain amount of alcohol.
Selv om artikel 45, stk. 1, litra a), i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 355/79 af 5. februar 1979 om fastsættelse af almindelige regler for betegnelse og præsentation af vin og druemost, forbeholder benævnelsen "vin" for produkter, der opfylder definitionen under ovennævnte punkt 10, giver artiklens stk. 2 medlemsstaterne adgang til at tillade anvendelsen af den sammensatte benævnelse "alkoholfri vin" for produkter fremstillet af vin, der har gennemgået en fuldstændig afalkoholiseringsproces."
However, although Article 45 (1) (a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 355/79 of 5 February 1979 laying down general rules for the description and presentation of wines and grape musts restricts the appellation "wine" to products conforming to the definition in the aforesaid Point 10, Article 45 (2) allows Member States to accept the use of the composite name "alcohol-free wine" for describing wine-based products which have undergone a process for the complete removal of their alcohol."
Ved kendelse af 17. juli 1990, indgået til Domstolen den 1. oktober s.a., havde Bundesfinanzhof forelagt fire præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af artikel 3 i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1224/80.
Hepp & Co. KG - 25 July 1991 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) (Free movement of goods - Customs value - Buying commission) (Fourth Chamber) By order of 17 July 1990, received at the Court on 1 October 1990, the Bundesfinanzhof [Federal Finance Court] referred for a preliminary ruling four questions on the interpretation of Article 3 of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 1224/80.
Priserne i forbindelse med transaktionerne med den koreanske leverandør og provisionerne blev faktureret særskilt.
The questions arose in the context of a dispute between the abovementioned parties, concerning the value for customs purposes of goods which Hepp had imported from the Far East between 1983 and 1986.
I toldangivelserne angav Hepp Novimex i rubrikken "sælger", fremlagde fakturaerne fra Novimex, men henviste ikke til de aftale provisioner.
In importing the goods Hepp had called on the services of a company called Novimex, which had bought the goods from a Korean undertaking in its own name but on behalf of Hepp.