natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Den omstændighed, at en person under sin kørsel til en anden medlemsstat fra et bestemt tidspunkt har benyttet en ny bil, er følgelig irrelevant for fastlæggelsen af den pågældendes sædvanlige opholdssted.
The fact that a person who went to another Member State did so as from a given date in a new car was irrelevant as far as defining his normal place of residence was concerned.
Det sædvanlige opholdssted, jfr. artikel 7, stk. 1, i Rådets direktiv 83/182/EØF af 28. marts 1983 om afgiftsfritagelse inden for Fællesskabet ved midlertidig indførsel af visse transportmidler, er det varige midtpunkt for en persons interesser, og dette sted skal bestemmes ved hjælp af alle de kriterier, der er indeholdt i denne bestemmelse, og under hensyn til samtlige relevante faktiske omstændigheder.
Normal residence, within the meaning of Article 7 (1) of Council Directive 83/182/EEC of 28 March 1983 on tax exemptions within the Community for certain means of transport temporaril y imported into one Member State from another, corresponds to the permanent centre of interests of the person concerned, which must be determined with the aid of all the criteria set out in that provision and all the relevant facts.
En statsborger i medlemsstat B, der er flyttet til medlemsstat A, hvor han har fundet arbejde og bolig, men som fra et bestemt tidspunkt og gennem mere end et år har tilbragt næsten alle nætter og weekends hos en veninde i medlemsstat B, dog under bibeholdelse af sit arbejde og sin bolig i medlemsstat A, kan således ikke alene på dette grundlag anses for at have overflyttet sit sædvanlige opholdssted til medlemsstat B.
In that regard, the mere fact that a national of one Member State (B) moved to another Member State (A), in which he found a job and a dwelling, but as from a certain date and for more than one year spent practically every night and every weekend with a womanfriend in Member State B, whilst retaining his job and his dwelling in Member State A, is insufficient to support the conclusion that he transferred his normal residence to Member State B.
Artikel 10, stk. 2, i direktiv 83/182 forpligter ikke medlemsstaterne til at træffe forudgående aftale i hver enkelt sag, hvor gennemførelsen af direktivet giver anledning til vanskeligheder.
Article 10 (2) of Directive 83/182 does not require the Member States to co-operate in each individual case in which the application to that directive raises difficulties.
Artikel 10, stk. 2, i direktiv 83/182 kan ikke påberåbes af private ved de nationale domstole."
Article 10 (2) of Directive 83/182 cannot be relied individuals before a national court.
­ 4 ­ ieneräLadvokat Giuseppe Tesauro fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Slette Afdeling) den ¿T. november 1990.
Mr Advocate General Giuseppe Tesauro delivered his Opinion at the sitting on 27 November 1990.
Hans forslag lød således:
He proposed that the Court rule as follows:
De fællesskabsretlige bestemmelser om merværdiafgift er til hinder for, at en medlemsstat Β kræver, at der skal ske indregistrering og afgifts­oerigtigelse af en bil, der indføres af en statsborger i denne stat, der nar taget bopæl i medlemsstat A, hvor han arbejder og har en bolig, og det er herved uden betydning, at personen i mere end et år næsten hver nat og i mange weekender har besøgt sin veninde i stat B.
The applicable Community legislation on VAT precludes a Member State Β from requiring registration and the payment taxes in respect thereof where a car is imported into the said Member State Β by one of its nationals who has established his residence in Member State A where he works or has accommodation, even if, for more than a year, the said national of Member State Β has spent nearly every night and a large number of weekends at the residence of a woman friend in State B.
Forpligtelsen i henhold til artikel 10, stk. 2, i direktiv 83/182 er ikke en forpligtelse til at samarbejde i hvert enkelt tilfælde, hvor den praktiske gennemførelse af direktivet giver anledning til vanskelighe­der.
The obligation referred to in Article 10 (2) of Directive 83/182 does not imply that consultation is compulsory in every specific case of difficulty in applying that directive.
Sidstnævnte bestemmelse har ikke direkte virkning."
The provision in question has no direct effect."
"Fri bevægelighed for personer ­ fri udveksling af tjenesteydelser ­ udøvelse af offentlig myndighed ­ konkurrence ­ rådgivning vedrørende ansættelse af vi rksomhedsledere" (Sjette Afdeling)
(Free movement of persons - Freedom to provide services - Exercise of official authority - Competition - Personnel consultants for business executives) (Sixth Chamber)
Ved kendelse af 31. januar 1990, indgået til Domstolen den 14. februar s.a., havde Oberlandesgericht München stillet en række præjudicielle spørgsmål ved­rørende fortolkningen af EØF­Traktatens artikler 7, 55, 56, 59, 60, 66, 86 og 90.
By Order of 31 January 1990, which was received at the Court on 14 February 1990, the Oberlandesgericht München [Higher Regional Court, Munich] requested a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of Articles 7, 55, 56, 59, 60, 66, 86 and 90 of the EEC Treaty
I Tyskland udøves den virksomhed, der består i at bringe arbejdssøgende i kon­takt med arbejdsgivere, af Bundesanstalt für Arbeit i kraft af den eneret, som Arbeitsförderungsgesetz giver denne.
In Germany, persons seeking work are put in contact with employers by the Bundesanstalt für Arbeit (Federal Employment Office - "the BA"), which has been given the exclusive right to undertake that activity by the Arbeitsförderungsgesetz (Law on the Promotion of Employment - "the AFG").
Trods denne eneret har der imidlertid udviklet sig en særlig virksomhed inden for ansættelse og formidling af virksomhedsledere.
Notwithstanding that exclusive right, a specific recruitment and placement business has developed for business executives.
Denne virksomhed udøves af ansættelsesrådgivningsfirmaer, som i et vist omfang tolereres af Bundesanstalt für Arbeit.
It is carried on by recruitment consultants which are to some extent tolerated by the BA.
Det står dog fast, at enhver retshandel, som er i strid med et lovbestemt forbud, er ugyldig i henhold til § 134 i Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, og at dette forbud ifølge tysk retspraksis gælder for arbejdsanvisningsvirk­somhed, der udøves i strid med Arbeitsförderungsgesetz's regler.
The fact nevertheless remains that any legal measure which contravenes a legal prohibition is void by virtue of Article 134 of the German Civil Code and that, according to decisions of the German courts, that prohibition applies to recruitment activities carried on in breach of the AFG.
- 5 - til ansættelsesrådgivningsfirmaet.
The dispute in the main proceedings was between Messrs Höfner and El ser, who were recruitment consultants, and Macrotron GmbH.
Dette anlagde derfor sag mod Macrotron ved Landgericht München I med påstand om betaling af det aftalte honorar.
The latter then commenced proceedings against Macrotron before the Landgericht München (Local Court, Munich) I to recover the agreed fees.
Efter at Landgericht havde frifundet sagsøgte, ankede sagsøgerne til Oberlandesgericht München. Denne fandt, at den omtvistede aftale var ugyldig i henhold til § 134 i Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, fordi den var i strid med Arbeitsförderungsgesetz's § 13.
The Landgericht rejected their application and the plaintiffs appealed to the Oberlandesgericht München.
Efter rettens opfattelse måtte indstævnte derfor frifindes, for så vidt appellanternes krav var baseret på national ret.
In its view, the application ought to be dismissed in so far as it was based on national law.
Det samme gjaldt dog ikke nødvendigvis med hensyn til fællesskabsretten.
However, the same would not necessarily apply with respect to Community law.
På denne baggrund udsatte Oberlandesgericht sagen og spurgte Domstolen, om Traktatens bestemmelser om fri udveksling af tjenesteydelser var til hinder for et lovbestemt forbud mod, at private ansættelsesrådgivningsfirmaer formidlede ansættelse af virksomhedsledere, og om et monopol på formidling af virksomhedsledere forbeholdt et offentligt arbejdsanvisningskontor er misbrug af en dominerende stilling på markedet.
Accordingly, the Oberlandesgericht stayed the proceedings and asked the Court whether the provisions of the Treaty on the freedom to provide services precluded a legal provision prohibiting private recruitment consultants from finding placements for business executives and whether the monopoly on the placement of executives vested in a public employment office constituted an abuse of a dominant position.
Domstolen bemærkede hertil først, at begrebet virksomhed inden for konkurrenceretten omfatter enhver enhed, der udøver økonomisk virksomhed, uanset denne enheds retlige status og finansieringsmåde, og at arbejdsformidlingsvirksomhed er Økonomisk virksomhed, hvis art ikke påvirkes af den omstændighed, at den normalt overdrages offentlige myndigheder.
The Court first stated that, in the context of competition law, the concept of undertaking included any entity which exercised an economic activity regardless of its legal status and basis of financing and also that placement of staff was an economic activity, the nature of which was not affected by the fact that it was entrusted normally to public offices.
Heraf følger, at en enhed som et offentligt arbejdsformidlingskontor kan betegnes som virksomhed med henblik på anvendelsen af Fællesskabets konkurrence regler, og at den forbliver omfattet af disse regler, for så vidt det ikke godtgøres, at deres anvendelse er uforenelig med udøvelsen af dens opgave.
It followed that a body such as a public employment office engaging in placement activities, could be classified as an undertaking for the purpose of applying Community competition rules and that it remained subject to those rules until such time as it was shown that their application was incompatible with the discharge of its duties.
Følgelig er enhver foranstaltning truffet af en medlemsstat, som opretholder en lovbestemmelse, der skaber en situation, hvor et offentligt arbejdsformidlingskontor nødvendigvis foranlediges til at overtræde artikel 86, uforenelig med Traktatens bestemmelser.
Consequently, any measure adopted by a Member State that maintained in force a legal provision which created a situation in which a public employment office was compelled to infringe the terms of Article 86 was incompatible with the provisions of the Treaty.
En medlemsstat skaber en sådan situation, når den virksomhed, som den har overdraget en eneret, der omfatter formidling af virksomhedsledere, åbenbart ikke er i stand til at efterkomme efterspørgslen på markedet for denne type virksomhed, når den faktiske udøvelse af arbejdsformidlingsvirksomhed, som udøves af private ansættelsesrådgivningsfirmaer, umuliggøres af, at der opretholdes en lovbestemmelse, som forbyder denne form for virksomhed og bestemmer, at aftaler herom er ugyldige, og når den pågældende arbejdsformidlingsvirksomhed kan udstrækkes til andre medlemsstaters statsborgere eller områder.
A Member State created such a situation where the undertaking to which it entrusted an exclusive right extending to the activity of placing business executives was manifestly not in a position to satisfy the demand existing on the market for activities of that kind, where the effective exercise of those activities by private companies was rendered impossible by the keeping in force of a legal provision which prohibited such activities on pain of the contracts in respect thereof being rendered void and where those activities might extend to the nationals or territories of other Member States.
Oomstolen besvarede de forelagte spørgsmål således:
The Court ruled as follows:
Ft offentligt arbejdsformidlingskontor er omfattet af forbudet i Traktatens artikel 86, for så vidt anvendelsen af denne bestemmelse ikke for hindrer udøvelsen af den særlige opgave, som er tillagt det.
A public employment office engaged in the activity of finding work for persons seeking employment is subject to the prohibition in Article 86 of the Treaty, provided the application of that provision does not defeat the specific task entrusted toit.
Den med lemsstat, som har overdraget det en eneret til arbejdsformidling, tilsidesætter Traktatens artikel 90, stk. 1, når den skaber en situation, hvor det offentlige arbejdsformidlingskontor nødvendigvis foranlediges til at overtræde Traktatens artikel 86.
A Member State which has conferred an exclusive right to carry on that activity upon the public employment office is in breach of Article 90 (1) of the Treaty where it creates a situation in which that office is obliged to infringe the terms of Article 86 of the Treaty.
Dette er navnlig tilfældet, når følgende betingelser er opfyldt: - eneretten omfatter formidling af virksomhedsledere; - det offentlige arbejdsformidlingskontor er åbenbart ikke i stand til at efterkomme efterpørgslen på markedet for denne type virksomhed; - den faktiske udøvelse af arbejdsformidlingsvirksomhed, som udøves af private ansættelsesrådgivningsfirmaer, umuliggøres af, at der opretholdes en lovbestemmelse, som forbyder denne form for virksomhed og bestemmer, at aftaler herom er ugyldige; - den pågældende arbejdsformidlingsvirksomhed kan udstrækkes til andre medlemsstaters statsborgere eller områder.
That is the case, in particular, where the following conditions are met : employment the exclusive for business right extends to finding executives; for the public employment office is manifesti y incapable of satisfying demand on the market such activity; the actual pursuit of that activity by private personnel consultants is rendered impossible by the mai ntenance in force of a statutory provi si on prohibiting it, with the annulment of the corresponding contracts as a penalty for contravention; or the activity in question may extend to nationals to the territory of other Member States.
Et ansættelsesrådgivningsfirma i en medlemsstat kan ikke påberåbe sig Traktatens artikler 7 og 59 med hensyn til anvisning af arbejde til statsborgere i denne medlemsstat hos virksomheder i samme stat."
A personnel consultant in a Member State cannot rely on Articles 7 and 59 of the Treaty with regard to the activity finding employment for nationals of that Member State with undertakings from the same State.
Generaladvokat F.G. Jacobs fremsatte forslag til afgørelse den 15. januar 1991.
Mr Advocate General Jacobs delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Sixth Chamber on 15 January 1991.
Han foreslog følgende afgørelse:
He proposed that the Court rule as follows:
Den aktivitet, der udøves af en virksomhed, som bringer beskæftigelsessøgende i kontakt med potentielle arbejdsgivere, er tjenesteydelser som omhandlet i EØF-Traktatens artikel 60, stk. 1.
The activities of an undertaking which introduces persons seeking employment to prospective employers constitute services within the meaning of the first paragraph of Article 60 of the EEC Treaty.
En person, som har ret til at udføre tjenesteydelser af denne art under henvisning til Traktatens artikler 59 ff., kan ikke hindres deri med den begrundelse, at den pågældende aktivitet er forbundet med udøvelse af offentlig myndighed, som omhandlet i Traktatens artikel 55.
A person entitled to invoke Article 59 et seq. of the Treaty in order to provide such services cannot be prevented from doing so on the ground that the activities in question are connected with the
86, for så vidt som den kan påvirke samhandelen mellem medlemsstater.
Where the law of a Member State establishes a State monopoly in the field of employment procurement and prohibits private undertakings from pursuing such activities, an undertaking established in that Member State cannot invoke Articles 7 and 59 of the Treaty in order to claim freedom to place in employment, with an undertaking established in that Member State, persons who have the nationality of that Member State and are resident therein.
Under disse omstændigheder er Traktatens artikel 90, stk. 1, til hinder for anvendelse af bestemmelser i national ret, som bevirker, at det forbydes andre personer at udføre sådanne tjenesteydelser, og at de forhindres i at få deres kontrakter opfyldt."
In such circumstances, Article 90(1) of the Treaty precludes the application of provisions of national law which would have the effect of prohibiting other persons from providing such services and of rendering their contracts unenforceable.
(Præjudiciel) "Frie varebevægelser - foranstaltninger med tilsvarende virkning - fri udveksling af tjenesteydelser - brugte luksusautomobiler - salg ved offentlig auktion" (Femte Afdeling)
30 April 1991 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) (Free movement of goods - Measures having equivalent effect - Freedom to provide services - Luxury and second-hand motor-cars - Sale by public auction) (Fifth Chamber)
Ved dom, afsagt den 3. juli 1990, indgået til Domstolen den 31. juli s.a., havde Frankrigs Cour de cassation stillet flere præjudicielle spørgsmål ved rørende fortolkningen af EØF-Traktatens artikler 59, 30 og 36.
By judgment of 3 July 1990, which was received at the Court on 31 July 1990, the French Cour de Cassation (Court of Cassation) submitted several questions for a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of Articles 59, 30 and 36 of the EEC Treaty.
Spørgsmålene var blevet rejst under en retssag mellem auktionsfirmaet SCP Boscher, Studer og Fromentin, Paris, og SA British Motors Wright m.fl., som sælger brugte luksusautomobiler, vedrørende et forbud mod afholdelse af en offentlig auktion.
The questions were raised in proceedings between SCP Boscher, Studer and Fromentin, an association of auctioneers operating in Paris, and SA British Motors Wright and Others, which market second-hand luxury cars, concerning the prohibition of sales by public auction.
SCP Boscher var af det tyske firma Nado, Hamburg, blevet anmodet om at afholde auktion over brugte automobiler.
SCP Boscher had been instructed by Nado, a company governed by German law, to sell second-hand vehicles by public auction.
Firmaet British Motors Wright anlagde en sag om foreløbige forholdsregler ved tribunal de grande instance de Paris, der af sagde en kendelse, som forbød auktionsfirmaet at afholde auktionen, så længe det ikke var godtgjort, at ejeren eller indehaveren af automobilerne var optaget i handels- og næringsbrevregisteret i henhold til artikel 1 i lov af 25. juni 1841 om regler vedrørende salg ved offentlig auktion.
In proceedings brought before him by British Motors Wright, the judge of the Tribunal de Grande Instance (Regional Court), Paris, hearing applications for interim relief made an order in which he directed that the auctioneers should not proceed
Domstolen bemærkede derefter for det første, at den fremgangsmåde med offentlige auktionssalg, som er beskrevet i sagen, oftest henvender sig til specielt underrettede købere og indebærer tilstrækkelig sikkerhed for forbrugeren.
The Court stated that national legislation requiring a seller to be registered in the Register of Trade of the place of the auction was liable to impede the free movement of goods since it amounted to requiring the owner of the goods either to use a trader carrying on business at the place of the sale or to abandon the idea of selling by public auction.
For det andet kan det formål at undgå salg af stjålne automobiler nås ved hjælp af passende kontrolforanstaltninger, såsom kontrol af chassisnumrene.
First, the procedure of selling by public auction, as described in the documents before the Court, was in most cases used for purchasers who had been given specific notice of the sale and adequate consumer safeguards applied to such sales.
En medlemsstats lovgivning, der regulerer salg, som en erhvervsdrivende, etableret i en anden medlemsstat, foretager af ham tilhørende varer, om fattes ikke af EØF-Traktatens artikel 59.
Legislation of a Member State laying down conditions governing the sale by a trader established in another Member State of goods belonging to him does not fall within the scope of Article 59 of the EEC Treaty.
Det er i strid med EØF-Traktatens artikler 30 og 36, såfremt en national lovgivning gør salg ved offentlig auktion af brugte varer fra en anden medlemsstat betinget af, at den virksomhed, som ejer de varer, der ønskes bortsolgt, er optaget i salgstedets handelsregister."
National legislation which makes the sale by public auction of second-hand goods coming from another Member State conditional on the prior registration of the undertaking to which the goods offered for sale belong in the regi ster of trade for the pi ace of the sale is incompatible with Articles 30 and 36 of the EEC Treaty".
Generaladvokat Giuseppe Tesauro fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet den 5. marts 1991.
Mr Advocate General Tesauro delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Fifth Chamber of 5 March 1991
Han foreslog følgende besvarelse:
He proposed that the Court rule as follows:
EØF-Traktatens artikel 59 skal fortolkes således, at den ikke finder anvendelse på en national lovgivning om betingelserne for afholdelse af salg ved offentlig auktion af varer, der tilhører en handlende, som er etableret i en anden medlemsstat.
Article 59 of the EEC Treaty must be interpreted as not applying to national rules governing the sale by public auction of products belonging to a trader established in another Member State;
Fortolkning af Domstolens dom af 24. marts 1987 i sag 286/85, McDermott og Cotter, vedrørende artikel 4, stk. 1, i Rådets direktiv 79/7/EØF ­ betydningen af nationale procedureforskrif­ter, navnlig vedrørende frister for at fremføre indsigelser i en sag anlagt ved en national domstol. Generaladvokat: J. Mischo.
Artide 30 of the EEC Treaty must be interpreted as precluding the application of a national law which makes the sale by public auction of second-hand products from another Member State conditional upon prior registration of the undertaking which owns the goods in the register of trade for the place where the sale takes place;
Generaladvokaten udtalte, at det under hensyn til udvidelsen af Parlamentets opgaver og behovet for at oplyse om dets aktiviteter samt holde kontakt med vælgerne er logisk, at Parlamentet benytter kommunikationsstrukturer for at sikre en høj grad af gennemskuelighed i lovgivningsproceduren samt oplysninger til borgerne.
Interpretation of the judgment of the Court of 24 March 1987 in Case 286/85, McDermott and Cotter ν Minister for Social Welfare and Attorney General, concerning Article 4 (1) of Council Directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978 Effect of national procedural rules, in particular rules relating to time-limits, on claims in defence against proceedings brought before a national court Advocate General: Mr Mischo
Der var ikke grundlag for at anfægte Parlamentets opfattelse, hvorefter det er nødvendigt at styrke pressekontoret i Bruxelles for at løse dets opgaver; ej heller at foranstaltningen er begrundet derved, at for det første udføres en væsentlig del af det parlamentariske arbejde i Bruxelles, dvs. arbejdet i udvalgene og de politiske grupper - dette arbejde beslaglægger tre af fire mødeuger - og for det andet er flertallet af de journalister, der er interesseret i europæiske politik, akkrediteret der.
24 April 1991 Failure of a State to fulfil its obligations - Articles 48 to 51 of the EEC Treaty and Article 10 of Regulation No. 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community -Entitlement to supplementary benefit from the Fonds National de Solidarité - Conditions relating to reciprocity and residence Advocate General : Mr Van Gerven
En henlæggelse til dette kontor af en eller anden opgave, som lige så godt kunne løses et andet sted, som en slags accessorisk kompetence kunne ikke føre til, at et centralt pressekontors funktion i Bruxelles betragtes som ulovligt.
(Reference for a preliminary ruling) Gerechtshof Arnhem Interpretation of Articles 4, 13B(d), (5) and 17 of the Sixth VAT Directive - Concept of taxable person -Activities of a holding company Advocate General : Mr Van Gerven
Den er omfattet af Parlamentets skønsmæssige kompetence.
Joined Cases C-213/88 and C-39/89 Luxembourg ν Parliament