natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
For så vidt som Hoechst fortsat påstår ophævelse af den appellerede dom og til støtte herfor gør gældende, at beslutningen blev udstedt på ulovlig vis, og at Retten burde have foretaget de nødvendige undersøgelser for at bringe disse mangler på det rene, er det imidlertid berettiget, at DSM støtter disse påstande i forbindelse med interventionen med den begrundelse, at disse mangler burde have foranlediget Retten til at fastslå, at nævnte beslutning var en nullitet
In so far as ICI continues to seek the annulment of the contested judgment, claiming that the Polypropylene Decision was adopted in an irregular manner and that the Court of First Instance ought to have carried out the necessary investigation to establish the procedural defects involved, DSM is still entitled to make those submissions in its intervention, on the ground that those defects should have led the Court of First Instance to find that decision nonexistent.
Retten afgjorde begæringen om genåbning af den mundtlige forhandling, hvorpå den fandt, at det var ufornødent at genåbne den mundtlige forhandling og at foranstalte den af Hoechst ønskede bevisoptagelse.
The Court of First Instance is not obliged to accede to such a request unless the party concerned relies on facts which may have a decisive influence and which it could not put forward before the close of the oral procedure.
Artikel 37, stk. 4, i EF-statutten for Domstolen er ikke til hinder for, at en intervenient påberåber sig andre argumenter end dem, der er fremsat af den part, der støttes, forudsat at intervenienten støtter den pågældende parts påstand.
It is clear from settled case-law that the fourth paragraph of Article 37 of the EC Statute of the Court of Justice does not prevent an intervener from using arguments different from those used by the party it is supporting, provided the intervener seeks to support that party's submissions.
Ved kendelse afsagt af Domstolen den 30. september 1992 er det nederlandske selskab DSM NV (herefter »DSM«) blevet admitteret som intervenient til støtte for Hoechst's påstande.
In this case, the request for the oral procedure to be reopened and measures of inquiry ordered was based on the PVC judgment of the Court of First Instance and on statements made by the Commission's Agents at the hearing in the PVC
Appellen skal ikke afvises i det hele.
cases, or at a press conference which took place after that judgment was delivered.
Det skal undersøges fra tilfælde til tilfælde, om klagepunkterne og de af Hoechst fremsatte påstande kan realitetsbehandles under appel.
Acts of the Community institutions are in principle presumed to be lawful and accordingly produce legal effects, even if they are tainted by irregularities, until such time as they are annulled or withdrawn.
støtte for appellen: og tilsidesættelse af
The purpose of this exception is to maintain a balance between two fundamental, but sometimes conflicting, requirements with which a legal order must comply, namely stability of legal relations and respect for legality.
Anbringenderne til proceduremangler fællesskabsretten
From the gravity of the consequences attaching to a finding that an act of a Community institution is nonexistent it is self-evident that, for reasons of legal certainty, such a finding is reserved for quite extreme situations.
Til støtte for appellen har Hoechst påberåbt sig anbringender om proceduremangler og tilsidesættelse af fællesskabsretten, hvilke står i forbindelse med Rettens afslag på dels at fastslå mangler ved den procedure, der førte til polypropylenbeslutningen, dels at genåbne den mundtlige forhandling og at anordne foranstaltninger til sagens tilrettelæggelse og bevisoptagelse.
The irregularities alleged by ICI, which relate to the procedure for the adoption of the Polypropylene Decision, do not appear to be of such obvious gravity that the decision must be treated as legally nonexistent.
manglerne ved
The Court:
Undladelsen af at fastslå polypropylenbeslutningen
(4) Order the appellant to pay the remaining costs.'
Hvad angår de klagepunkter, Hoechst udleder af den angivelige manglende meddelelse af polypropylenbeslutningen, må det indledningsvis fastslås, at denne mangel ikke kan medføre, at beslutningen enten stemples som en nullitet eller annulleres.
By application lodged at the Registry of the Court of Justice on 18 May 1992, Hoechst AG brought an appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 10 March 1992 in Case T-10/89 Hoechst ν Commission ('the contested judgment').
På begæring af Kommissionen og med Hoechst's samtykke blev sagens behandling udsat ved beslutning af 28. juli 1992 fra Domstolens præsident og indtil den 15. september 1994 med henblik på at undersøge, hvilke konsekvenser der skal drages af dommen af 15. juli 1994 i sagen Kommissionen mod BASF m.fl. (herefter »Domstolens PVC-dom«), som blev afsagt i en appelsag indledt til prøvelse af Rettens PVC-dom.
appropriate conclusions to be drawn from the judgment of 15 June 1994 in Case C-137/92 Ρ Commission ν BASF and Others ('the PVC judgment of the Court of Justice'), which was delivered on the appeal against the PVC judgment of the Court of First Instance.
Spørgsmålet, om interventionen bør admitteres
Hoechst was fined ECU 9 000 000, or DEM 19 304 010 (Article 3 of the Polypropylene Decision).
Heraf følger, at fællesskabsretten i modsætning til det af Hoechst antagne ikke kender noget midtertilfælde mellem fastslåeisen af, at en retsakt er en nullitet, og en underkendelse af den i form af annullation.
On 2 August 1986, Hoechst lodged an action for annulment of that decision before the Court of Justice which, by order of 15 November 1989, referred the case to the Court of First Instance, pursuant to Council Decision 88/591/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 24 October 1988 establishing a Court of First Instance of the European Communities.
Domstolens PVC-dom vedrørte ikke polypropylen-beslutningens nullitet og fjernede derfor ikke DSM's interesse i at få fastslået, at nullitet forelå.
In dealing with the request to reopen the oral procedure, the Court of First Instance considered that it was not necessary to order the reopening of the oral procedure or to order measures of inquiry as requested by Hoechst.
Det er vel korrekt, at Hoechst i bemærkningerne til DSM's interventionsbegæring har frafaldet en
By order of the Court of Justice of 30 September 1992, DSM NV ('DSM') was given leave to intervene by the Court in support of the forms of order sought by Hoechst.
Det kan ikke mod denne konklusion indvendes, at beslutningerne i medfør af artikel 254, stk. 3, EF får virkning fra deres meddelelse, og at beslutningen, da den ikke er blevet meddelt, er ganske uden retsvirkning.
The fourth paragraph of Article 37 of the EC Statute of the Court of Justice does not prevent an intervener from using arguments different from those used by the party it is supporting, provided the intervener seeks to support that party's submissions.
Da der er tale om
The appeal is not inadmissible in its entirety.
Den af Hoechst påberåbte tilsidesættelse af fællesskabsretten angår de krænkelser, Retten skal have gjort sig skyldig i ved at afslå at genåbne proceduren og foranstalte bevisoptagelse, hvorfor det således falder sammen med anbringendet om proceduremangler.
The Court of First Instance did not therefore infringe Community law as regards the conditions capable of rendering an act nonexistent.
meddelelse af en retsakt — ligesom ethvert andet væsentligt formkrav — gælder det at manglen enten er så graverende og åbenbar, at den anfægtede retsakt må være en nullitet eller manglen udgør en krænkelse af væsentlige formforskrifter, der kan medføre dens annullation.
With regard to Hoechst's complaints alleging lack of notification of the Polypropylene Decision, it must be stated immediately that non notification could have no consequence other than a finding of the non-existence or annulment of the act in question.
Det må undersøges, om Retten ved at afslå at genåbne den mundtlige forhandling og foranstalte bevisoptagelse har gjort sig skyldig i retlige fejl.
The appeal relates only to the contested judgment and it is only if that judgment were annulled that the Court of Justice could, in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 54 of the EC Statute of the Court of Justice, deliver judgment itself in the case.
Heraf følger, at Retten ikke har gjort sig skyldig i en retlig fejl ved ikke at fastslå, at polypropylenbeslutningen var uden enhver retsvirkning.
It follows that, contrary to Hoechst's submissions, Community law does not accept an intermediate situation between a finding that an act is non existent and its annulment.
Med hensyn til foranstaltningerne til tilrettelæggelse af sagen kan Domstolen i medfør af artikel 21 i EF-statutten for Domstolen forlange, at parterne fremlægger ethvert dokument og meddeler enhver oplysning, som den finder ønskelig.
Failure to reopen the oral procedure and to order measures of organisation of procedure and inquiry
Vedrørende Rettens afslag på at fastslå mangler vedrørende vedtagelsen og meddelelsen af polypropylenbeslutningen, som måtte medføre dens annullation, bemærkes blot, at dette anbringende blev fremført for første gang i begæringen om genåbning af sagen og om foranstaltninger til sagens tilrettelæggelse og til bevisoptagelse.
In so far as the infringement of Community law alleged by Hoechst concerns the refusal by the Court of First Instance to reopen the oral procedure and order measures of organisation of procedure and inquiry, it overlaps with the plea alleging breach of procedure.
Rettens procesreglements foranstaltninger med henblik på sagens tilrettelæggelse har navnlig til formål at sikre, at skriftvekslingen og den mundtlige forhandling forløber bedst muligt, og at lette bevisoptagelsen, samt at afklare de punkter, på hvilke parterne bør uddybe deres argumentation, eller på hvilke der er behov for bevisoptagelse. Foranstaltningerne kan bestå i at anmode om fremlæggelse af dokumenter eller aktstykker vedrørende sagen, og hver part kan på et hvilket som helst trin i sagen foreslå disse foranstaltninger.
That conclusion is not open to the objection that, pursuant to Article 254(3) EC, decisions take effect upon notification and that, in the absence of notification, the decision is devoid of any effect.
Ligesom i PVC-sagerne må det antages, at de angivelige, af Hoechst påståede uregelmæssigheder ved udstedelsen af polypropylenbeslutningen ikke — uanset om de betragtes isoleret eller under ét — ses at være så klart grove, at beslutningen juridisk må anses for en nullitet.
It is appropriate, therefore, to examine, first, whether, in refusing to reopen the oral procedure and order measures of organisation of procedure and inquiry, the Court of First Instance committed errors of law.
Det fremgår på samme tid af formålet og genstanden for foranstaltningerne til tilrettelæggelse af sagen, at de indgår i forskellige faser i sagsbehandlingen for Retten, som de tager sigte på at lette.
It follows that the Court of First Instance did not commit an error of law when it failed to find that the Polypropylene Decision was devoid of any effect.
Hvad angår betingelserne for at fastslå en retsakt som en nulhtet findes Retten herefter ikke at have tilsidesat fællesskabsretten.
Turning to measures of organisation of procedure, the Court may require the parties to produce all documents and to supply all information which it considers desirable.
Appellen vedrører kun den appellerede dom, og det er alene i det tilfælde, hvor denne måtte blive ophævet at Domstolen i samklang med artikel 54, stk. 1, i EF-statutten for Domstolen, ville kunne afgøre sagen selv.
With regard to the refusal by the Court of First Instance to find defects relating to the adoption and notification of the Polypropylene Decision such as to lead to its annulment, it need merely be held that this plea was raised for the first time in the request that the procedure be reopened and measures of organisation of procedure and inquiry be taken.
Så længe den appellerede dom ikke er ophævet påhviler det ikke Domstolen at pådømme eventuelle mangler ved polypropylenbeslutningen.
Consequently, the question whether the Court of First Instance was obliged to examine it overlaps with the question whether that Court should have acceded to the request, which is the subjectmatter of the plea alleging breach of procedure.
Heraf følger, at en part efter afslutningen af den mundtlige forhandling kun kan begære foranstaltninger til tilrettelæggelse af sagen, såfremt Retten beslutter at genåbne den mundtlige forhandling.
Measures of organisation of procedure are, in particular, to have as their purpose to ensure efficient conduct of the written and oral procedure and to facilitate the taking of evidence and to determine the points on which the parties must present further argument or which call for measures of inquiry.
Følgelig havde Retten ikke pligt til at træffe afgørelse vedrørende en sådan begæring, medmindre den havde imødekommet begæringen om genåbning af den mundtlige forhandling, således at der ikke er anledning til særskilt at pådømme de af Hoechst i den forbindelse fremsatte klagepunkter.
Those measures may consist of asking for documents or any papers relating to the case to be produced and their adoption may be proposed by the parties at any stage of the procedure.
Undladelsen af at genåbne den mundtlige forhandling og af at anordne foranstaltninger til tilrettelæggelse af sagen og bevisoptagelse
It follows from both the purpose and subjectmatter of measures of organisation of procedure that they form part of the various stages of the procedure before the Court of First Instance, the conduct of which they are intended to facilitate.
Vedrørende begæringen om bevisoptagelse fremgår det af Domstolens praksis, at en parts begæring om bevisoptagelse efter afslutning af de mundtlige forhandlinger kun kan imødekommes,
As was the case in the PVC actions, whether considered in isolation or even together, the irregularities alleged by Hoechst, which relate to the procedure for the adoption of the Polypropylene Decision, do not appear to be of such obvious gravity that the decision must be treated as legally nonexistent.
hvis den angår forhold, som kan få afgørende betydning, og som den pågældende ikke kunne have gjort gældende før afslutningen af den mundtlige forhandling.
Accordingly, the Court of First Instance would only have to take a decision on such a request if it had upheld the request to reopen the oral procedure, so that there is no need to examine separately the complaints made by Hoechst in this regard.
Bemærkninger i almindelige vendinger vedrørende en formodet praksis hos Kommissionen, som fremgik af en dom afsagt i andre sager eller af erklæringer fremsat under andre sager, kunne ikke som sådanne betragtes som afgørende for løsningen af den tvist, Retten skulle pådømme.
As regards the request for measures of inquiry, the case-law of the Court makes it clear that, if made after the oral procedure is closed, such a request can be admitted only if it relates to facts which may have a decisive influence and which the party concerned could not put forward before the close of the oral procedure.
Retten råder på dette område vel over et frit skøn.
The Court of First Instance has discretion in this area.
Retten er ikke pligtig at imødekomme en sådan begæring, medmindre den pågældende part påberåber sig faktiske omstændigheder af afgørende betydning, som parten ikke havde kunnet gøre gældende før afslutningen af den mundtlige forhandling.
The Court of First Instance is not obliged to accede to such a request unless the party concerned relies on facts which may have a decisive influence and which it could not put forward before the close of the oral procedure.
Retten var ikke pligtig at anordne genåbning af den mundtlige forhandling på grund af en angivelig pligt til ex officio at fremkomme med argumenter vedrørende lovligheden af fremgangsmåden ved vedtagelsen af polypropylenbeslutningen. En sådan pligt til ex officio at rejse argumenter af ordre publickarakter kan potentielt kun eksistere ud fra de faktiske oplysninger, som er tilført sagens akter.
In this case, the request to the Court of First Instance for the oral procedure to be reopened and measures of inquiry ordered was based on the PVC judgment of the Court of First Instance and on statements made by the Commission's Agents at the hearing in the PVC cases, or at a press conference which took place after that judgment was delivered.
Konkret var begæringen om genåbning af den mundtlige forhandling og om anordningen af bevisoptagelse, der blev fremsat for Retten, begrundet med henvisning til Rettens PVC-dom samt til erklæringer afgivet af Kommissionens befuldmægtigede i retsmødet i PVC-sagerne eller under en pressekonference, som fandt sted efter dommens afsigelse.
Indications of a general nature relating to an alleged practice of the Commission concerning the language rules or subsequent alterations to a decision that emerged from a judgment delivered in other cases or from statements made on the occasion of other proceedings could not, as such, be regarded as decisive for the purposes of the determination of the case then before the Court of First Instance.
Retten har ikke gjort sig skyldig i nogen retlig fejl ved at afslå at genåbne den mundtlige forhandling og at foranstalte bevisoptagelse.
The Court of First Instance was not obliged to order that the oral procedure be reopened on the ground of an alleged duty to raise of its own motion issues concerning the regularity of the procedure by which the Polypropylene Decision was adopted.
Generaladvokat G. Cosmas fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Sjette Afdeling') den 15. juli 1997.
Advocate General G. Cosmas delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Sixth Chamber on 15 July 1997.
forhandling en beslutning af den mundtlige for vedtagelse af
Case C-234/92 Ρ Shell International Chemical Company Ltd ν Commission of the European Communities Competition
Retten afgjorde begæringen om genåbning af den mundtlige forhandling, hvorpå den fandt, at det var ufornødent at genåbne den mundtlige forhandling og at foranstalte den af Shell ønskede bevisoptagelse.
Shell was one of the big four producers of polypropylene which supplied the market in 1977, with a market share on the West European market of between 10.7 and 11.7%.
Ved appelskrift indleveret til Domstolens Justitskontor den 20. maj 1992 har Shell International Chemical Company Ltd (herefter »Shell«) appelleret den kendelse, som den 10. marts 1992 blev afsagt af Retten i Første Instans i sagen Shell mod Kommissionen (herefter »den appellerede kendelse«).
By application lodged at the Registry of the Court of Justice on 20 May 1992, Shell International Chemical Company Ltd ('Shell') brought an appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 10 March 1992 in Case T-11/89 Shell ν Commission ('the contested judgment').
Shell var blandt de nye producenter af polypropylen, der kom ind på markedet i 1977. Selskabets markedsandel i Vesteuropa lå på mellem 10,7% og 11,7%.
At the end of the procedure it had commenced, the Commission adopted the Polypropylene Decision, in which it found that Shell had
Ved kendelse afsagt af Domstolen den 30. september 1992 er det nederlandske selskab DSM NV (herefter »DSM«) blevet admitteret som intervenient til støtte for Shell's påstande.
Admissibility of the intervention infringed Article 81(1) EC by participating, with other undertakings, and in Shell's case from mid1977 until at least November 1983, in an agreement and concerted practice originating in mid-1977.
Den 5. august 1986 rejste Shell annullationssøgsmål til prøvelse af beslutningen for Domstolen, som ved kendelse af 15. november 1989 henviste sagen til Retten i medfør af Rådets afgørelse af 24. oktober 1988 om oprettelse af De Europæiske Fællesskabers Ret i Første Instans.
DSM's interest did not die on delivery of the judgment by which the Court of Justice annulled the PVC judgment of the Court of First Instance and held that the defects found by the latter were not such as to warrant treating the decision challenged in the PVC cases as nonexistent.
DSM's interesse bortfaldt ikke efter afsigelsen af den dom, ved hvilken Domstolen ophævede Rettens PVC-dom og fandt, at de mangler, Retten havde antaget, ikke var af en sådan karakter, at den i PVC-sagerne anfægtede beslutning måtte anses for at være en nullitet.
Pleas in law relied upon in support of the appeal: lack of competence, breach of procedure and infringement of Community law
Domstolens PVC-dom vedrørte nulliteten af polypropylenbeslutningen og fjernede derfor ikke DSM's interesse i at søge fastslået, at nullitet forelå.
On 5 August 1986, Shell lodged an action for annulment of that decision before the Court of Justice which, by order of 15 November 1989, referred the case to the Court of First Instance, pursuant to Council Decision 88/591/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 24 October 1988 establishing a Court of First Instance of the European Communities.
Shell har gjort gældende, at for så vidt som Retten for det første fastslog, at polypropylenbeslutningen ikke var en nullitet og ikke skulle annulleres, og for det andet afslog begæringen om genåbning af den mundtlige forhandling og om, at der skulle træffes de nødvendige
Shell argues that, inasmuch as it held, on the one hand, that the Polypropylene Decision was not nonexistent and should not be annulled and, on the other hand, rejected Shell's request that the oral procedure be reopened and the necessary measures of organisation and inquiry ordered, the Court of First Instance lacked competence to make the final orders of the judgment, committed a breach of procedure adversely affecting its interests and committed an infringement of Community law.
Ved skrivelse indgivet til Rettens Justitskontor den 6. marts 1992 fremsatte sagsøgeren begæring til Retten om, at denne genåbner den mundtlige forhandling og anordner bevisoptagelse på grund af de erklæringer, Kommissionen fremsatte under retsmødet i de forenede sager BASF m.fl. mod Kommissionen (dom af 27.2.1992, herefter »Rettens PVC-dom«) og under den pressekonference, som Kommissionen afholdt den 28. februar 1992, efter at der var blevet afsagt dom i sidstnævnte sag.
In dealing with the request to reopen the oral procedure, the Court of First Instance considered that it was not necessary to order the reopening of the oral procedure or to order measures of inquiry as requested by Shell.
under en pressekonference, som fandt sted efter dommens afsigelse.
The Court of First Instance did not therefore infringe Community law as regards the conditions capable of rendering an act nonexistent.
foranstaltninger til sagen tilrettelæggelse og bevisoptagelsen, havde den ikke kompetence til at fremlægge konklusionen til dommen, gjorde sig skyldig i en proceduremangel til skade for Shell's interesser og tilsidesatte fællesskabsretten.
For the rest, it dismissed the application and ordered Shell to bear its own costs and pay two thirds of the Commission's costs, ordering the Commission to bear the remaining third of its own costs.
Bemærkninger i almindelige vendinger vedrørende en formodet praksis hos Kommissionen, som fremgik af en dom afsagt i andre sager eller af erklæringer fremsat under andre sager, kunne ikke som sådanne betragtes som afgørende for løsningen af den tvist, Retten skulle pådømme.
In so far as they challenge the appraisal by the Court of First Instance of the evidence placed before it in connection with the request that the oral procedure be reopened, the applicant's complaints cannot be examined in an appeal.
Det må undersøges, for det første om Retten med sin fortolkning af betingelserne for at stemple en retsakt som nullitet har tilsidesat fællesskabsretten, og for det andet, om den ved at afslå at genåbne den mundtlige forhandling og foranstalte bevisoptagelse har gjort sig skyldig i proceduremangler.
By order of the Court of Justice of 30 September 1992, DSM NV ('DSM'), was given leave to intervene by the Court in support of the forms of order sought by Shell.