natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Sag C-6/90 A. Francovich mod Den Italienske Republik (præjudiciel) Pretura di Vicenza Fortolkning af EØF-Traktatens artikel 189, stk. 3 - fortolkning af Rådets direktiv 80/987/EØF af 20. oktober 1980 om indbyrdes til nærmelse af medlemsstaternes lovgivning om beskyttelse af arbejdstagerne i tilfælde af arbejdsgiverens insolvens - manglende gennemførelse af direktivet i national ret - den forsømmelige medlemsstats ansvar over for arbejdstageren. Processprog: italiensk.
M.J.E. Bernini ν Minister van Onderwijs en Wetenschappen (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Commissie van Beroep Studiefinanciering Interpretation of Articles 48 and 49 of the EEC Treaty ­Interpretation of Articles 7 and 12 of Regulation (EEC) No. 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community ­ Concept of migrant worker ­ Person who has completed a period as a trainee in the framework of a training course and is pursuing studies in another Member State of which he or she is a national ­ Concept of social advantage ­ Student funding awarded directly to persons studying in another State ­ Requirement of residence in the host State Language of the case: Dutch
Sag C-7/90 Anklagemyndigheden mod P. Vandevenne m.fl. (præjudiciel) Politierechtbank, Hasselt
Application for authorization to serve a garnishee order on the Commission concerning sums owed by the latter to the Belgian State in respect of rent Language of the case: Dutch
Fortolkning af artikel 15 i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 3820/85 af 20. december 1985 om harmonisering af visse bestemmelser på det sociale område inden for vejtransport - bestemmelser om køre- og hviletider - fortolkning af begrebet "virksomhed" - objektivt strafansvar for virksomhedens ejer. Processprog: nederlandsk.
(Reference for a preliminary ruling) Bundesfinanzhof Interpretation of Article 10 (4) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No. 798/80 of 31 March 1980 laying down general rules on the advance payment of export refunds and positive monetary compensatory amounts in respect of agricultural products, as amended by Regulation (EEC) No. 3445/85 - Consequences of the failure to comply with rules governing the quality of goods for export -Validity of Commission Regulation (EEC) No. 1633/80 of 26 June 1980 fixing the export refunds on cereals and on wheat or rye flour, groats and meal - Principle of proportionality Language of the case: German
Sag C-8/90 Arbeidsauditeur ved Arbeidsrechtbank Turnhout mod W. Kennes m.fl. (præjudiciel) Hof van Cassatie Fortolkning af artikel 18, stk. 2, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 3820/85 af 20. december 1985 om harmonisering af visse bestemmelser på det sociale område inden for vejtransport - virkningerne af en henvisning til bestemmelser i en tidligere forordning, når denne henvisning findes i en national gennemførelsesbestemmelse. Processprog: nederlandsk.
A. Francovich ν Repubblica Italiana (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Pretura di Vicenza Interpretation of the third paragraph of Article 189 of the EEC Treaty - Interpretation of Council Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 October 1980 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer - Failure to implement the directive in national law - Responsibility of the Member State in default towards the worker Language of the case: Italian
B. For Retten i Første Instans
Openbaar Ministerie ν P. Vandevenne and Others
Sag T-3/90 Prodifarma mod Kommissionen Passivitetssøgsmål - undladelse af at efterkomme en begæring om at konstatere tilsidesættelse af EØF-Traktatens artikel 85 -"Omnipartijenakkoord" vedrørende distribution af lægemidler i Nederlandene. Processprog: nederlandsk.
Arbeidsauditeur bij de Arbeidsrechtbank ν W. Kennes and Others (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Hof van Cassatie Interpretation of Article 18 (2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 3820/85 of 20 December 1985 on the harmonization of certain social legislation relating to road transport - Effects of a reference to provisions of an earlier regulation where such reference is made in a national implementing provision Language of the case: Dutch
Sag T-4/90 Tjenestemandssag.
Case T-4/90
Sag T-5/90 Tjenestemandssag.
Case T-5/90
Sag T-6/90 Tjenestemandssag.
Case T-6/90
Sag T-7/90 Tjenestemandssag.
Case T-7/90
Udgivet af Informationstjenesten for De Europæiske Fællesskabers Domstol, L-2925 Luxembourg.
Published by the Information Service of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, L-2925 Luxembourg.
ARBEJDET VED DE EUROPÆISKE FÆLLESSKABERS DOMSTOL*) Ugen 12. - 16. februar 1990 nr. 4/90
Week of 12 to 16 February 1990
*) DENNE PUBLIKATION UDARBEJDES AF DOMSTOLENS INFORMATIONSTJENESTE MED HENBLIK PÃ EN HURTIG ORIENTERING OM ARBEJDET VED DOMSTOLEN.
* THIS BULLETIN IS PREPARED BY THE INFORMATION SERVICE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE IN ORDER TO SUPPLY READERS WITH RAPID INFORMATION ON THE WORK OF THE INSTITUTION.
DOMSTOLENS DOMME OG DE FOR DOMSTOLEN FREMSATTE FORSLAG TIL AFGØRELSE OFFENTLIGGØRES SENERE I "SAMLING AF DOMSTOLENS AFGØRELSER".
HOWEVER, ONLY THE COMPLETE TEXT OF THE JUDGMENTS AND OPINIONS PUBLISHED LATER IN THE REPORTS OF CASES BEFORE THE COURT IS AUTHENTIC.
DENNE UDGAVE ER DEN ENESTE GYLDIGE. GENGIVELSE KAN SKE MED KILDEANGIVELSE.
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS BULLETIN MAY BE REPRODUCED PROVIDED THAT THE SOURCE IS STATED.
Sag C-301/87: Den Franske Republik nod Komissionen for De Europeiske Fællesskaber
Case C-301/87: French Republic ν Commission of the European Communities - 14 February 1990
14.2.1990 "Statsstøtte - forudgående underretning - kapitalindskud, ydelse af rentelettede lån og nedskæring af socialsikringsbidrag" (Domstolens plenum)
(State aids - Prior notification - Capital contributions, provision of loans at reduced rates of interest and reductions in social security charges) (Full Court)
Den Franske Republik havde ved stævning indgivet den 4. oktober 1987 i medfør af Traktatens artikel 173, stk. 1, anlagt sag mod Kommissionen med påstand om annullation af Kommissionens beslutning af 15. juli 1987, hvori det konstateres, at de finansielle ydelser i form af kapitalindskud, rentelettede lån og nedskæring af socialsikringsbidragene, som den franske regering har ydet en producent af tekstilvarer, beklædning og papir, selskabet Boussac Saint Frères (CBSF), udgør en støtte, der er i strid med fællesmarkedet, jfr. Traktatens artikel 92, stk. 1, og at denne støtte er ulovlig, idet den udgør en overtrædelse af Traktatens artikel 93, stk. 3, og ikke kan anses for forenelig med fællesmarkedet efter Traktatens artikel 92, stk. 3, hvorfor det i beslutningen bestemmes, at støtten delvis skal kræves tilbagebetalt.
By an application made on 4 October 1987 under the first paragraph of Article 173 of the Treaty, the French Republic sought the annulment of Commission Decision 87/585 of 15 July 1987 by which the Commission decided that financial assistance in the form of capital contributions, provision of loans at reduced rates of interest and reductions in social security charges granted by the French Government to a manufacturer of textiles, clothing and paper-based products, Compagnie Boussac Saint Frères (CBSF), constituted aid which was incompatible with the common market within the meaning of Article 92 (1) of the Treaty. The Commission decision also stated that such aid was unlawful because it had been granted in contravention of Article 93 (3) of the Treaty and that it could not be considered to be compatible with the common market under Article 92 (3) of the Treaty, and it demanded partial repayment of the aid which had been granted.
Den franske regering støttede sin annullationspåstand på anbringender om overtrædelse af procedurereglerne i henhold til Traktatens artikel 93, mangelfuld begrundelse, fejlagtig anvendelse af Traktatens artikel 92 samt tilsidesættelse af proportionalitetsprincippet.
The arguments submitted by the French Government in support of its application were based on infringement of the procedural rules contained in Article 93 of the Treaty, the inadequate grounds on which the contested decision was based, the incorrect application of Article 92 of the Treaty and infringement of the general principle of proportionality.
A. Virkningerne af den manglende underretning
A. The effects of the failure to give reasons
Domstolen undersøgte først et spørgsmål, Kommissionen havde rejst. Kommissionen gjorde nemlig gældende, at den ikke på forhånd var blevet underrettet om den omhandlede støtte, dengang denne var blevet projekteret, og at Domstolen har fastslået, at bestemmelserne i artikel 93, stk. 3, sidste punktum, er umiddelbart anvendelige, og at en overtrædelse af disse bestemmelser således i sig selv medfører, at støtten er ulovlig.
The Court first had to consider a problem raised by the Commission, which took the view that, as it had not been notified in advance of the aid in question before it was implemented and as the Court had recognized the direct effect of the final sentence of Article 93 (3) of the Treaty, failure to comply with the provisions thereof was in itself sufficient to render the aid unlawful.
Der foreligger dermed en ulovlighed, der overflødiggør enhver behandling af realiteten og giver Kommissionen beføjelse til at påbyde tilbagesøgning af støtten.
Such illegality, the Commission went on to claim, rendered any detailed examination unnecessary and entitled it to order the repayment of the assistance paid.
Den franske regerings anbringender om en fejlagtig anvendelr.o af Traktatens artikel 92 3kulle derfor Ikke pikendes af Domstolen.
The objections put forward by the French Government in respect of the incorrect application of Article 92 of the
- 3 - at det kan være nødvendigt at træffe retssikrende foranstaltninger, når praksis vedrørende støtte i visse medlemsstater bevirker, at den ordning, der er indført ved Traktatens artikler 92 og 93, ikke kan virke efter hensigten.
Treaty could not, therefore, the Commission asserted, be taken into consideration by the Court.
Når Kommissionen derfor konstaterer, at en støtte er blevet indført eller ændret, uden at den har modtaget underretning herom, kan den pålægge vedkommende medlemsstat straks at suspendere udbetalingen af støtten og at give Kommissionen adgang til al den dokumentation og alle de oplysninger, der er nødvendige for at afgøre, om støtten er forenelig med fællesmarkedet.
The French Government claimed that a possible failure to comply with the procedural rules contained in Article 93 (3) of the Treaty could not render the financial contributions unlawful and justify per se recovery of the assistance already paid. The Commission, it was claimed, ought in any case to have carried out a detailed examination of the disputed contributions.
Når vedkommende medlemsstat fuldt ud efterkommer Kommissionens påbud, er Kommissionen forpligtet til at undersøge, om støtten er 1 overensstemmelse med fællesmarkedet og derved følge den i Traktatens artikel 93, stk. 2 og 3, fastlagte procedure.
It was necessary to point out in that connexion, as the Court had already ruled, that, for Articles 92 and 93 of the Treaty to be effective, it was necessary that measures could be adopted to counteract any infringement of the rules in Article 93 (3) and that such measures should be subject to appeal, in order that the legitimate interests of Member States could be protected.
I den foreliggende sag står det fast, at Kommissionen omend kun subsidiært havde gennemført en undersøgelse af støttens forenelighed med fællesmarkedet. Denne undersøgelse kunne derfor påkendes under sagen.
With regard to that system, there was an obvious need for interim protective measures to be introduced when the practices of certain Member States in the matter of aid had the effect of thwarting the system established by Articles 92 and 93 of the Treaty.
Den franske regering gjorde med dette anbringende først og fremmest gældende, at Kommissionen havde tilsidesat det almindelige retssikkerhedsprincip ved ikke at handle i rimelig god tid, når henses til de detaljerede oplysninger, der rettidigt var meddelt den af de franske myndigheder.
It was for that reason that the Commission, when it found that aid had been granted or altered without it having been informed thereof, had the power to order the Member State concerned to suspend immediately the payment of such aid and to provide the Commission with all the documents, information and facts necessary for it to decide whether such aid was compatible with the common market.
Den gjorde desuden gældende, at der i det foreliggende tilfælde havde været tale om en tilsidesættelse af retten til forsvar, idet Kommissionen ikke underrettede den om de bemærkninger, der var fremsat af andre interesserede parter, og som den havde modtaget i henhold til Traktatens artikel 93, stk. 2.
If the Member State fully complied with the injunction of the Commission, the latter was required to examine whether the aid was compatible with the common market, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 93 (2) and (3) of the Treaty.
Domstolen bemærkede vedrørende det første klagepunkt, at der ganske rigtigt gik temmelig lang tid mellem på den ene side den franske regerings første brev af 22. marts 1°84 og Kommissionens åbningsskrivelse af 3. december 1984, og på den anden side mellem åbningsskrivelsen og den anfægtede beslutning, der blev truffet den 15. juli 1987, men at Kommissionen imidlertid først fra og med den 21. maj 1987 rådede over alle de oplysninger, der var nødvendige for at tage stilling til stuttens forenelighed med fællesmarkedet.
In so far as the present case was concerned, it was not disputed that the Commission had examined the compatibility of the aid with the common market, if only in a cursory manner.
Domstolen måtte derfor fastslå, at Kommissionen ikke ved sin adfærd havde tilsidesat det almindelige retssikkerhedsprincip.
That examination was consequently able to form the subject of the present action.
Den franske regering gjorde gældende, at begrundelsen til den anfægtede beslutning var mangelfuld, dels fordi den ikke indeholdt nogen vurdering af den faktiske virkning for konkurrencen og samhandelen mellem medlemsstater af den allerede udbetalte støtte, dels fordi den måtte forekomme selvmodsigende, når henses til lukningen af produktionsanlæg.
With regard to the first part of the submission, while it was true that rather long periods had elapsed between the first letter from the French Government of 22 March 1984 and the formal letter of notice of 3 December 1984, and also between the latter and the contested decision of 15 July 1987, the fact remained that the Commission did not have available to it until 21 May 1987 all the material necessary for it to examine whether the aid was compatible with the common market.
For dersom Kommissionen i beslutningen var forpligtet til at godtgøre den faktiske virkning af allerede ydet støtte, ville det være ensbetydende med, at man begunstigede de med lemsstater, der yder støtte i strid med underretningspligten ifølge artikel 93, stk. 3, på de medlemsstaters bekostning, der giver underretning om en projekteret støtte.
Concerning the second part of the submission, the Court emphasized that according to its decided case-law, the Commission could not, in its decision against a Member State, take account of observations of that kind on which the State had not had an opportunity to comment.
Domstolen bemærkede vedrørende det andet anbringende, at beslutningen i betragtningerne indeholder en indgående analyse af kapacitetsnedskæringerne.
However, in order for such an infringement of the rights of the defence to result in annulment, it was necessary to demonstrate that those proceedings could have had a different outcome in the absence of that infringement.
Den franske regering kunne derfor ikke begrænse sig til at erklære, at beslutningen er selvmodsigende og samtidig undlade at fremføre andre argumenter end dem.
In that connexion, the Court held that the observations in question contained no additional information to that which the Commission already had at its disposal and of which the French Government was aware.
Kommissionen allerede har behandlet i betragtningerne til den anfægtede beslutning.
Given the circumstances, the fact that the French Government did not have the opportunity to comment on those observations was not likely to influence the outcome of the administrative proceedings.
Beslutningen var på dette punkt udtrykkelig og detaljeret nok til, at det var muligt for den franske regering at blive bekendt med og vurdere Kommissionens grunde og for Domstolen at efterprøve beslutningens lovlighed.
That part of the submission, therefore, also had to be rejected.
D. Anvendelsen af Traktatens artikel 92
C. The reasoning on which the decision was based
Den franske regering anførte principalt og i første række, at de omtvistede kapitalindskud, rentelettede lån og nedskæringen af socialsikringsbidrag ikke udgjorde støtte, idet de blev ydet CBSF inden for rammerne af en markedsøkonomi, og fordi de blev gennemført sideløbende med private kapitalindskud.
The French Government claimed that the reasoning on which the contested decision was based was inadequate both because it failed to consider the substantive effect on competition and trade between Member States of aid already paid and because it appeared to contradict itself on the subject of the closure of the production sites.
Disse offentlige tilskud udgør derfor statsstøtte i Traktatens artikel 92, stk. 1's forstand.
The Court rejected the first part of that submission.
Domstolen anlagde det samme synspunkt på de rentelettede lån og nedskæringen af socialsikringsbidragene, idet også disse havde gjort det muligt for CBSF at undgå omkostninger, der normalt skulle have været afholdt af virksomhedens egen kapital; disse lån og nedsættelser har altså været til hinder for, at kræfterne på markedet kom til at virke på sædvanlig måde.
If the Commission were required to demonstrate in its decision the substantive effect of aid already granted, that would have favoured Member States which made payments of aid in contravention of the duty to notify under Article
Den franske regering gjorde yderligere gældende, at de finansielle foranstaltninger ikke påvirkede samhandelen og ikke fordrejede eller truede med at fordreje konkurrencen mellem medlemsstater.
With regard to the second part of the submission, the Court ruled that the decision contained, in the recitals in its preamble, a detailed analysis of the reductions in capacity.
Domstolen bemærkede i den forbindelse, at Kommissionen i begrundelsen til beslutningen bl.a. havde fremhævet, at CBSF var den femtestørste tekstilvirksomhed i Fællesskabet, at selskabet deltog aktivt i samhandelen inden for Fællesskabet, idet det eksporterede 16% af sin tekstilproduktion til de Øvrige med lemsstater og 9% til tredjelande, og at selskabets eksport af tekstilvarer til de øvrige medlemsstater i det tidsrum, hvor støtten blev ydet, var steget med 32%.
The French Government could not, therefore, simply declare that the decision was contradictory without adducing further arguments in addition to those which the Commission had already examined in the recitals in the preamble to the contested decision.
Kommissionen havde desuden i beslutningen anført, at tilskuddet, der skulle genoprette CBSF's finansielle situation, nedbragte de omkostninger, selskabet normalt ville have haft i en sådan grad, at der blev tale om en fordel i konkurrencen, hvorfor selskabets konkurrenter måtte anses for berørt af støtten.
The decision was, on that point, sufficiently explicit and detailed to enable the French Government to identify and evaluate the reasoning of the Commission and to permit the Court to check whether that decision was justified.
Den franske regering anførte subsidiært, at de forskellige former for støtte var forenelige med fællesmarkedet i henhold til artikel 92, stk. 3, litra a) og litra c), og at de var i overensstemmelse med de forskellige retningslinier og meddelelser, Kommissionen havde udsendt i 1971, 1977 og 1984 vedrørende støtte til tekstil- og beklædningsindustrien.
The French Government took the view, first and foremost, that the capital contributions, the provision of loans at reduced rates of interest and reductions in social security charges in question did not constitute aid because they were accorded to the CBSF under market economy conditions and were on a par with private investments.
Domstolen kunne ikke anerkende sagsøgerens argumentation. For da de omhandlede former for støtte havde nedbragt CBSF's omkostninger og således havde svækket konkurrenceevnen for andre producenter i Fællesskabet, der derved havde kunnet vare nødt til at opgive at deltage på markedet, havde Kommissionen med rette kunnet nå til det resultat, at de omhandlede former for støtte ikke kunne omfattes af undtagelsesbestemmelsen i Traktatens artikel 93, stk. 3, litra c).
The Court took the view that it was relevant in that regard to apply the criterion proposed in the Commission's decision and not disputed by the French Government, which was based on the opportunities which the undertaking had of acquiring the sums in question on the capital market.
Domstolen bemærkede vedrørende argumentationen om anvendelse af artikel 92, stk. 3, litra a), at der måtte lægges vægt på, at de områder, hvori de af CBSF's produktionsanlæg ligger, som støtten er blevet ydet til, ikke er områder, hvor levestandarden er usædvanlig lav, eller hvor der hersker en alvorlig unde rbeskæft ige Ise.
The facts before the Court in the present case revealed that the financial condition of the undertaking in 1981 was not such as to make it likely that there would be an acceptable return on investments within a reasonable period of time and that CBSF, in view of the inadequate level of its self-financing, would not have been in a position to obtain the necessary funds on the capital market.
De kritiserede finansielle foranstaltninger havde derfor efter Domstolens opfattelse tilsigtet kunstigt at forlænge CBSF's virksomhed på et tidspunkt, hvor selskabet var helt insolvent.
For that reason, the public capital assistance constituted State aid within the meaning of Article 92 (1) of the Treaty.
Domstolen tilføjede, at de former for støtte, der er ydet til CBSF, ikke opfylder flere af de betingelser, der var opstillet for anvendelsen i 1984 af en fransk ordning om støtte til tekstil- og beklædningsindustrien i form af nedskæring af socialsikringsbidrag.
In addition, the aid granted to CBSF also infringed several conditions to which the application of a French system of aid to the textile and clothing industry in the form of reductions in social security charges had been made subject in 1984.
Vedrørende betingelsen om, at støtte kun kunne ydes til investeringsformål, og kun såfremt virksomheden var i stand til at finansiere mindst 50% af investeringernes beløb med egen kapital bemærkede Domstolen således, at det af sagens oplysninger, der ikke er blevet bestridt, fremgår, at den støtte, der blev ydet, indtil 1986 oversteg de investeringer, CBSF havde foretaget i tekstilsektoren.
With regard to the condition under which aid could only be granted for purposes of investment and only if the undertaking was in a position to finance at least 50% of the cost of the investment out of its own resources, the Court held that the uncontested facts before it showed that, up to 1986, the aid granted had exceeded the amount of investment made by CBSF in the textile sector.
E. Anbringendet om tilsidesættelse af proportionalitetsprincippet
E. The argument derived from breach of the general principle of proportionality