natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Den spanske regering gjorde dernæst gældende, at anvendelsen af underhåndsaftaler med hensyn til offentlige indkøb af farmaceutiske produkter og medicinske specialiteter er begrundet ud fra bestemmelserne i artikel 6, stk. 1, litra b) og d), i direktiv 77/62, som bestemmer, at de ordregivende myndigheder kan indgå indkøbsaftaler uden at anvende de fremgangsmåder om offentligt udbud og begrænset udbud, der er fastsat i artikel 4, stk. 1 og
The Spanish Government also contended that recourse to the single-tender procedure for the award of public contracts for the supply of pharmaceutical products and specialities is justified by Article 6(1)(b) and (d) of Directive 77/62, which provide that the contracting authorities may award their supply contracts without applying the open or restricted procedures referred to in Article 4(1) and (2) and thus without publishing a notice of the contract in the Official Journal of the European Communities, 'when ... for reasons connected with protection of exclusive rights, the goods supplied may be manufactured or delivered only by a particular supplier' , and 'in so far as is strictly necessary when, for reasons of extreme urgency brought about by events unforeseeable by the contracting authorities, the time limit laid down in the procedures covered by Article 4(1) and (2) cannot be kept' .
Domstolen bemærkede hertil, at bestemmelserne i artikel 6 i direktiv 77/62, der tillader fravigelser fra de regler, som skal sikre, at de traktatfæstede rettigheder i sektoren for offentlige indkøbsaftaler bliver virksomme, må fortolkes indskrænkende.
In that regard, Article 6 of Directive 77/62, which authorizes derogations from rules intended to ensure the effectiveness of rights conferred by the Treaty in the public supply contracts sector, must be interpreted strictly.
Endvidere påhviler bevisbyrden for, at de særlige omstændigheder, som berettiger undtagelsen, faktisk foreligger, den, der vil påberåbe sig dem.
Furthermore, the burden of proving the actual existence of exceptional circumstances justifying a derogation lies on the person seeking to rely on those circumstances.
For at bestemmelsen i artikel 6, stk. 1, litra b), kan finder anvendelse, fortsatte Domstolen, er det ikke tilstrækkeligt, at de pågældende farmaceutiske produkter og medicinske specialiteter er beskyttet af enerettigheder; det er også en betingelse, at de kun kan fremstilles eller leveres af én bestemt leverandør.
If Article 6(1)(b) is to apply, it is not sufficient for the pharmaceutical products and specialities in question to be protected by exclusive rights; they must also be capable of being manufactured or delivered only by a particular supplier.
Da denne betingelse kun er opfyldt for de produkter og specialiteter, hvor der ikke er konkurrence på markedet, kan bestemmelsen i artikel 6, stk. 1, litra b), derfor under ingen omstændigheder begrunde, at der generelt og konsekvent anvendes underhåndsaftaler for så vidt angår indkøb af alle farmaceutiske produkter og medicinske specialiteter. ter.
Since that requirement is satisfied only with respect to those products and specialities for which there is no competition in the market, Article 6(1)(b) cannot in any way justify general and indiscriminate recourse to the single-tender procedure for all supplies of all pharmaceutical products and specialities.
Domstolen bemærkede afslutningsvis, at de samme synspunkter gør sig gældende med hensyn til bestemmelsen i artikel 6, stk. 1, litra d).
The position is the same with regard to Article 6(1)(d).
På baggrund af den ret til frit at ordinere lægemidler, som den spanske regering havde henvist til, kan det ganske vist ikke udelukkes, at der på et hospitalsapotek kan opstå et akut behov for en bestemt farmaceutisk specialitet; den nævnte ret til frit at ordinere lægemidler kan imidlertid ikke uden videre begrunde, at der konsekvent anvendes underhåndsaftaler med hensyn til alle indkøb af farmaceutiske produkter og medicinske specialiteter til hospitaler.
Admittedly, having regard to the freedom of doctors to prescribe pharmaceutical products, to which the Spanish Government referred, an urgent need for a particular pharmaceutical speciality may well arise in a hospital pharmacy; however, that freedom to prescribe pharmaceutical products cannot justify a priori systematic recourse to the single-tender procedure for all supplies of pharmaceutical products and specialities to hospitals.
Uanset om betingelsen om uopsættelighed måtte anses for at være opfyldt i et konkret tilfælde, finder bestemmelsen i artikel 6, stk. 1, litra d), ikke nødvendigvis anvendelse.
Moreover, even if the requirement of urgency were considered to have been satisfied in a particular case, Article 6(1)(d) would not necessarily apply.
En forudsætning for at anvende nævnte undtagelsesbestemmelse er ifølge Domstolens faste praksis, at alle de i bestemmelsen fastsatte betingelser er opfyldt samtidig.
The Court has consistently held that, in order to rely on the derogation provided by that provision, all the conditions it lays down must be satisfied cumulatively.
Kongeriget Spanien har tilsidesat sine forpligtelser i henhold til Rådets direktiv 77/62/EØF af 21. december 1976 om samordning af fremgangsmåderne ved offentlige indkøb, idet myndighederne i henhold til basi si ovgi vningen om social sikring skal indgå underhånd saf taler med hensyn til det of f enti i ges indkøb af farmaceutiske produkter og medi cinske specialiteter til institutioner under Seguridad Social, og næsten alle de nævnte indkøb sker ved underhåndsaftale, uden at der
Declares that, by requiring in the basic legislation concerning social security that the administrative authority award public contracts for the supply of pharmaceutical products and specialities to social security institutions by way of a single-tender procedure, and by awarding directly nearly all of those supply contracts without publishing a contract notice In the Official Journal of the European Communities, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Council Directive 77/62/EEC of 21 December 1986 coordinating procedures for the award of public supply contracts;
offentliggøres en bekendtgørelse om udbud i De Europæiske Fælles skabers Tidende.
Communities, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 77/62/EEC.
Kongeriget Spanien betaler sagens omkostninger."
The Kingdom of Spain is ordered to pay the costs.
Lenz fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Domstolens plenum) den 8. marts 1994.
Case C-47/93 Commission of the European Communities ν Kingdom of Belgium 3 May 1994
- myndighederne i henhold til basislovgivningen om social sikring skal indgå underhåndsaftaler med hensyn til det offentliges indkøb af farmaceutiske produkter og medicinske specialiteter til institutioner under Seguridad Social og
Article 27 of the 1971 Law, as amended by Article 85 of the Law of 5 January 1976 {Moniteur Belge of 6 January 1976), provides that the ordinary operating expenses of the university institutions are to be covered by reference to the number of students who are regularly charged to the national education budgets as regards, in particular, students of Belgian or Luxembourg nationality.
- næsten alle de nævnte indkøb sker ved underhåndsaftale, uden at der offentliggøres en bekendtgørelse om udbud i De Europæiske Fællesskabers Tidende.
Certain foreign students may also be taken into account for the financing of university institutions, in particular those whose parents are resident in Belgium and carry on or have carried on an occupation there and students residing themselves in Belgium whose parents are Community nationals who work or have worked in Belgium.
Kongeriget Spanien betaler sagens omkostninger."
The number of other foreign students cannot exceed 2% of the total number of Belgian students.
Sag C-47/93 Kommissionen mod Kongeriget Belgien Fællesskabsret!ige grundsætninger
Foreign students who are not charged to the national education budgets contribute to the ordinary operating expenses of the university institution at which they are enrolled.
- adgang til faglig uddannelse"
In particular, they must pay a supplementary enrolment fee, generally called the •minerval' .
Med hensyn til universitetsundervisning bestemte artikel 25 i den belgiske lov af 27. juli 1971, at den belgiske stat ved årlige tilskud bidrog til finansieringen af udgifterne ved universitetsinstitutionernes drift på
The Law of 21 June 1985 adds to the category of foreign students who may be charged to the Belgian State students who are nationals of a Member State of the Community who are duly established in Belgium and pursue or have pursued an occupation there and also students whose spouses meet those conditions.lt provides that rectors of university institutions may refuse to register
Antallet af øvrige udenlandske studerende kunne ikke overskride 2% af det samlede antal belgiske studerende.
students who may not be taken into account for the purposes of the financing of university institutions.
Ved lov af 21. juni 1985 blev der til den kategori udenlandske studerende, for hvem den belgiske stat afholdt udgifterne, tilføjet studerende, der er statsborgere i et af Fællesskabets medlemslande, og som er lovligt bosat på belgisk område, hvor de udøver eller har udøvet erhvervsvirksomhed, samt studerende, hvis ægtefælle opfylder samme betingelser.
Royal Decree No 543 of 31 March 1987 provided that the ordinary operating expenses of the university institutions would also be covered by the Belgian State by reference to the number of students who are nationals of a Member State of the Community and are studying in Belgium for one academic year provided that they establish that they are admitted to an identical course of study in the country of which they are nationals and that they have paid the corresponding enrolment fee there.So far as non-university teaching is concerned, the 1985 Law provides that a special enrolment fee is to be charged for foreign students whose parents or legal guardian are not of Belgian nationality and do not reside in Belgium.
I samme lov bestemtes, at universitetsinstitutionernes rektorer kunne nægte at indskrive studerende, som ikke kom i betragtning ved finansieringen af universitetsinstitutionerne. institutionerne.
The implementing Decree provides, however, that certain categories of foreign students are exempt from payment of the special enrolment fee.
Ved kongelig anordning nr. 543 af 31. marts 1987 bestemtes det, at driftsudgifterne ligeledes afholdtes af den belgiske stat på grundlag af antallet af studerende, der var statsborgere i en af Fællesskabets medlemsstater, og som tilbragte et studieår i Belgien, på betingelse af, at de godtgjorde, at de havde fået adgang til at følge identiske studier i det land, hvor de var statsborgere, og at de havde betalt indskrivningsgebyret dér.
The 1985 Law provides that the minerval or supplementary enrolment fees paid by pupils and students who are nationals of a Member State of the Community and have taken vocational training courses will be refunded on the basis of judicial decisions made in proceedings for repayment brought before the Belgian courts before 13 February 1985.
Med hensyn til undervisning uden for universitetsområdet bestemtes det i loven af 1985, at der opkrævedes et særligt indskrivningsgebyr for uden landske studerende, hvis forældre eller værge ikke havde belgisk statsborgerskab og ikke var bosat i Belgien. Gennemførelsesbekendtgørelsen bestemte dog, at visse kategorier udenlandske studerende var fritaget.
Declares that, by failing, in the Law of 21 June 1985 on teaching, to exempt from the 'minerval étudiants étrangers' nationals of other Member States who come to Belgium for the sole purpose of following courses in Belgian university institutions, by giving the rectors of university institutions the right to refuse to register such students, by restricting in an ad hoc manner the possibility of obtaining reimbursement of minervals unduly paid under Community law only to Community nationals who commenced legal proceedings before 13 February 1985, and by bringing into force the exemptions granted to workers and their spouses who are nationals of other Member States on 1 October 1983, as provided for by Articles 63 and 69 of that Law, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 5 and 7 of the EEC Treaty;
Domstolen udtalte og bestemte:
Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs."
Kongeriget Belgien har tilsidesat de forpligtelser, som påhviler det i henhold til EØF-traktatens artikel 5 og 7, ved i loven af 21. juni 1985 om undervisning ikke at fritage statsborgere fra andre medlemsstater, der er kommet til Belgien alene med det formål dér at følge kurser på belgiske universitetsinstitutioner, fra studi e af gi f t en for uden!andske studerende, ved at give universitetsinstitutionernes rektorer ret til at nægte at indskrive sådanne studerende, ved ad hoc at begrænse mulighederne for at opnå tilbagebetaling af studieafgifter, der i henhold til fællesskabsretten er betalt med urette, til EF-borgere, som har ani agt sag før den 13. februar 1985, og ved at lade de fritagelser, der er fastsat for arbejdstagere og deres ægtefæller, som er statsborgere i andre medlemsstater, træde i kraft den 1. okto-
"...that the Court uphold the Commission's claim that the Kingdom of Belgium has, as described in the form of order sought by the Commission, as amended, failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 5 and 7 of the EEC Treaty and that the Kingdom of Belgium should be ordered to pay the costs.
Generaladvokat C. Gulmann fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Domstolens plenum) den 2. februar 1994.
Advocate General Tesauro delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Court on 23 February 1994.
"Kommissionen gives medhold i, at Kongeriget Belgien som beskrevet i over ensstemmelse med Kommissionens berigtigede påstand har krænket sine for pligtelser i henhold til EØF-traktatens artikel 5 og 7, og at Kongeriget Belgien tilpligtes at betale sagens omkostninger."
"...that the Court should allow the application and order the defendant State to pay the costs."
"Traktatbrud - manglende gennemførelse (Domstolens plenum)
(Additional levy on milk - Calculation of the special reference quantity -Abatements and reductions) (Fifth Chamber)
Ved stævning indleveret den 27. april 1993 havde Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber anlagt sag med påstand om, at det fastslås, at Kongeriget Belgien har tilsidesat sine forpligtelser i henhold til artikel 16 i Rådets direktiv 86/278/EØF samt EØF-traktatens artikel 5 og 189 ved ikke inden for den fastsatte frist at have sat de til gennemførelse af det nævnte direktiv nødvendige ved lov eller administrativt fastsatte bestemmelser i kraft og/eller ved ikke at have givet Kommissionen underretning herom.
By order of 8 January 1992, received at the Court on 28 January 1992, the Finanzgericht (Finance Court) Düsseldorf referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling four questions on the interpretation and validity of Article 3a(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 857/84.
Kongeriget Belgien har tilsidesat sine forpligtelser i henhold til EØF-traktaten, idet det ikke inden for den fastsatte frist på for bund s pi an og i regionen Uallonien har udstedt de ved lov eller administrativt fastsatte bestemmelser, der er nødvendige for at gennem føre Rådets direktiv 86/278/EØF af 12. juni 1986 om beskyttelse af miljøet, navnlig jorden, i forbindelse med anvendelse i landbruget af slam fra rensningsanlæg.
Those questions were raised in the course of proceedings between Mr and Mrs Kamp, milk producers, and Hauptzollamt (Principal Customs Office) Wuppertal concerning their special reference quantity, set at 85% of the quantity of milk on the basis of which a non-marketing premium had been granted to them.
Generaladvokat G. Tesauro fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Domstolens plenum) den 23. februar 1994.
In return for their undertaking they received a non-marketing premium corresponding to 118 201 kg of milk.
"at Domstolen giver Kommissionen medhold i sagen og dømmer sagsøgte til at betale sagens omkostninger."
After their non-marketing undertaking had expired, they were unable to obtain a reference quantity under the additional milk levy scheme which had been
Ved kendelse af 8. januar 1992, indgået til Domstolen den 28. januar s.a., havde Finanzgericht Düsseldorf forelagt fire spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen og gyldigheden af artikel 3a, stk. 2, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 857/84.
Article 3a(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 857/84 of 31 March 1984 adopting general rules for the application of the levy referred to in Article 5c of Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 in the milk and milk products sector, as amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1639/91 of 13 June 1991, must be interpreted as meaning that the basic reduction is to be added to the percentage representative of all the abatements applied to the reference quantities established In accordance with Article 2;
I 1981 havde ægteparret Kamp for perioden 1981 til udgangen af 1985 påtaget sig en forpligtelse til at undlade at markedsføre mælk.
Consideration of the other questions raised has disclosed no factor of such a kind as to affect the validity of Article 3a(2) of Regulation No 857/84, as amended by Regulation No 1639/91."
Som modydelse for deres forpligtelse havde de modtaget en ikke-markedsføringspræmie, svarende til en mælkemængde på 118 201 kg.
Advocate General Jacobs delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Fifth Chamber on 30 June 1993.
Ægteparret Kamp havde ved Finanzgericht Düsseldorf anlagt sag med påstand om, at deres specifikke referencemængde skulle forhøjes til 100% af den mængde, der var grundlaget for udbetalingen af præmien.
"(1) Article 3a(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 857/84, as amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1639/91, must be interpreted as meaning that the 4.5% basic reduction is not part of, and should be applied in addition to, the percentage representative of all the abatements applied to the reference quantities established in accordance with Article 2 of Regulation No 857/84.
Domstolen besvarede de forelagte spørgsmål således:
Those abatements do not include the basic reduction of 4.5%.
Artikel 3a, stk. 2, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 857/84 af 31. marts 1984 om almindelige regler for anvende!sen af den i artikel 5c i for ordning (EØF) nr. 804/68 omhandlede afgift på mælk og mejeriprodukter, som ændret ved forordning (EØF) nr. 1639/91 af 13. juni 1991, skal fortolkes således, at basi snedsættelsen lægges til den repræsentative procentdel for de samlede nedsætte!ser, som er anvendt på de referencemængder, der er fastsat i overensstemmelse med artikel 2.
Article 3a(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 857/84, as amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1639/91, must be interpreted as allowing Member States to vary the reference quantities to be allocated to returning producers on the basis of the level of deliveries of certain categories of those producers.
Gennemgangen af de øvrige spørgsmål har intet frembragt, der kan rejse tvivl om gyldigheden af artikel 3a, stk. 2, i forordning nr. 857/84, som ændret ved forordning nr. 1639/91."
Consideration of the matters examined has disclosed no factor of such kind as to affect the validity of Article 3a(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 857/84, as amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1639/91."
Generaladvokat F. G. Jacobs fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Femte Afdeling) den 30. .juni 1993.
Those questions were raised in the course of proceedings brought by Mrs Habermann-Beltermann against the Arbeiterwohlfahrt Bezirksverband Ndb./Opf. eV (Regional Federation of the employees' social security organization, hereinafter referred to as 'the Arbeiterwohlfahrt').
Han foreslog Domstolen at besvare de forelagte spørgsmål således:
Mrs Habermann-Beltermann, a nurse qualified in the care of the elderly, applied for a post as a night attendant in a home for the elderly.
Disse nedsættelser omfatter ikke basisnedsættelsen på 4,5%.
A medical certificate dated 29 May 1992 stated that she was pregnant.
Artikel 3a, stk. 2, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 857/84, som ændret ved Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1639/91, skal fortolkes således, at den hjemler medlemsstaterne mulighed for at variere de referencemængder, der skal tildeles producenter, som genoptager produktionen, på grundlag af omfanget af leverancer, som er foretaget af visse kategorier af disse producenter.
The Arbeiterwohlfahrt relied on Paragraph 8(1) of the Mutterschutzgesetz (Law on the protection of mothers) in order to terminate the employment contract.That paragraph provides that it is prohibited to assign to women who are pregnant or breastfeeding overtime or nighttime work between 8 p.m. and 6 a.m. or work on Sundays or public holidays.In Germany, according to prevailing case-law and legal theory, contravention of a prohibition on night time work as a rule renders the contract void.
Gennemgangen af de behandlede spørgsmål har intet frembragt, der kan rejse tvivl om gyldigheden af artikel 3a, stk. 2, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 857/84, som ændret ved Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1639/91."
Again according to prevailing opinion, a contract entered into in the circumstances described above may likewise be avoided by the employer on account of a mistake on his part concerning an essential characteristic of the other party to the contract.
Præjudiciel "Direktiv 76/207/EØF - gravide kvinders (Sjette Afdeling)
The questions submitted related to an employment contract without a fixed term, for work to be performed at night, concluded between an employer and a pregnant employee, both of whom were unaware of the pregnancy.
Ved kendelse af 24. november 1992, indgået til Domstolens Justitskontor den 18. december s.a., havde Arbeitsgericht Regensburg, Landshut, forelagt to præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af Rådets direktiv 76/207/EØF.
In its questions, the national court sought essentially to ascertain whether the directive is to be interpreted as precluding such a contract, first, from being held to be void on account of the prohibition on nighttime work which applies, by virtue of national law, during pregnancy and breastfeeding and, secondly, from being avoided by the employer on account of a mistake on his part as to the essential personal characteristics of the other party at the time when the contract was concluded.
Under henvisning til § 8, stk. 1, i Mutterschutzgesetz (lov om beskyttelse af mødre) opsagde Arbeiterwohlfahrt ansættelseskontrakten.
Unequal treatment in a case such as this is not based directly on the woman's pregnancy but is the result of the statutory prohibition on nighttime work during pregnancy.
Den herskende opfattelse i tysk retspraksis og litteratur har været, at overtrædelse af et forbud mod beskæftigelse principielt medfører, at kontrakten er ugyldig.
The question, therefore, is whether the directive precludes compliance with the prohibition from rendering an employment contract invalid or allowing it to be avoided.
Det har også været den herskende opfattelse, at en arbejdsgiver kan anfægte en kontrakt, der er indgået under omstændigheder som de nævnte, på grund af sin vildfarelse med hensyn til væsentlige forudsætninger vedrørende medkontrahenten. trahenten.
The directive leaves Member States with a discretion as to the social measures which must be adopted in order to guarantee the protection of women and to offset the disadvantages which women suffer, by comparison with men.
Den nationale retsinstans rejste imidlertid det spørgsmål, om princippet om ligebehandling i direktivet ikke er til hinder for en sådan anvendelse af de nationale regler.
To acknowledge that the contract may be held to be invalid or be avoided because of the temporary inability of the pregnant employee to perform the nighttime work for which she was engaged would be contrary to the objective of protectiion of the directive, and would deprive the directive of its effectiveness.