natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Hertil bemærkede Domstolen først, at Retten havde bemærket, at det fremgik af oplysningerne i sagen, at brugerne i mange tilfælde ikke havde mulighed for at anvende andre fastgørelsessystemer end SM-systemer.
The Court of Justice first pointed out that, in holding that it was apparent from the documents before it that in many cases it was impossible for users to use fastening systems other than PAF systems, the Court of First Instance
brugerne i mange situationer ikke havde mulighed for at anvende andre systemer end SM-systemer, men ikke havde angivet det nøjagtige antal af sådanne situationer.
Furthermore, the Court of First Instance did not invalidate its decision on the ground of defective reasoning merely by indicating, in paragraph 69 of the contested judgment, that users stated that it was impossible to use systems other than PAF systems in many cases, without specifying the exact number of those cases.
Hilti gjorde gældende, at det ikke på grundlag af den omstændighed alene, at der teknisk er forskelle mellem de forskellige fastgørelsessystemer, kunne antages, at de forskellige systemer ikke er substituerbare.
Hilti's third plea was that the mere existence of technical differences between the various fastening systems is not sufficient to establish that those systems are not substitutable.
Domstolen bemærkede hertil, at Retten havde fundet, at der kun var en forholdsvis beskeden grad af substituerbarhed med hensyn til efterspørgslen til SM-systemer og andre fastgørelsessystemer, idet Retten navnlig havde lagt til grund, at de tekniske forskelle mellem systemerne, således som de var beskrevet i den omtvistede beslutning, medførte åbenbart differentierede betingelser med hensyn til anvendelsen og dermed også til efterspørgslen efter systemerne, og at bestemte systemer gennem lang tid havde dækket en konstant del af den samlede efterspørgsel efter fastgørelsessystemer.
The Court of First Instance found that there was only a relatively low degree of substitutability between demand for PAF systems and that for other fastening systems, and based its finding essentially on the fact that the technical differences between the systems, as described in the decision at issue, gave rise to clearly differentiated conditions for the use of, and hence demand for, the systems, and on the fact that for long periods certain systems accounted for a stable share of total demand for fastening systems.
I modsætning til, hvad Hilti havde anført, havde Retten således ikke alene på grundlag af de tekniske forskelle mellem systemerne antaget, at det ikke var økonomisk substituerbare.
Contrary to Hilti's assertion, the Court of First Instance did not therefore merely cite technical differences between the systems in reaching its conclusion that they were not economically substitutable.
Hilti gjorde gældende, at den omstændighed, at de forskellige fastgørelsessystemer havde været på markedet samtidig gennem lang tid, ikke i sig selv var tilstrækkelig som bevis for, at der kun var en forholdsvis beskeden grad af substituerbarhed mellem de forskellige fastgørelsessystemer.
Hilti's fourth plea was that the mere co-existence of the different fastening systems over long periods is insufficient to show that there was only a relatively low degree of substitutability between the different fastening systems.
Hertil bemærkede Domstolen, at som det var fremgået af det ovenfor anførte, var Rettens konklusioner på det punkt kun en del af en større helhed af bemærkninger, på grundlag af hvilke den havde antaget, at fastgørelsessystemerne ikke var substituerbare.
As has already been indicated, the findings of the Court of First Instance in the second sentence of paragraph 71 of the contested judgment constitute only one of a number of considerations on which it based itself in reaching its conclusion that the fastening systems were not substitutable.
Hilti anførte, at Retten havde fordelt bevisbyrden forkert mellem sagens parter, idet den havde krævet, at Hilti skulle bevise, at det relevante marked var markedet for fastgørelsessystemer, der anvendes i byggeriet.
Hilti's fifth plea is that, by requiring Hilti to demonstrate that the relevant market was the market for construction fastening systems, the Court of First Instance took a wrong approach to the burden of proof.
Kommissionen havde således ikke, som hævdet af appellanten, fastlagt det relevante produktmarked alene ud fra formodninger.
The Commission based itself on precise factual evidence, set out at points 60 to 65 of the decision at issue, such as the factors likely to result in the
Hilti anførte, at Retten havde anlagt en fejlagtig vurdering af forskellige markedsundersøgelser.
Hilti's sixth plea was that the Court of First Instance wrongly appraised several market research studies.
Domstolen bemærkede hertil, at Rettens vurdering af de beviser, der er fremført for den, ikke - med mindre de er gengivet forkert - udgør et retsspørgsmål og dermed er undergivet Domstolens prøvelsesret.
The Court pointed out that the appraisal by the Court of First Instance of the evidence put before it does not constitute (save where the clear sense of that evidence has been distorted) a point of law which is subject, as such, to review by the Court of Justice.
Ifølge Hilti havde Retten ikke taget alle de beviser, Hilti havde fremlagt, i betragtning; de viste, at der var en høj grad af økonomisk substituerbarhed mellem SM-systemerne og de øvrige fastgørelsessystemer.
Hilti claims that the Court of First Instance failed to take into consideration all the evidence put before it by Hilti, evidence which showed there was a high degree of economic substitutability between PAF systems and the other fastening systems.
Domstolen bemærkede hertil, at i modsætning til det af Hilti anførte fremgik det ikke af sagen, at Retten ikke havde undersøgt nærmere angivne beviser, som Hilti havde fremført.
Contrary to Hilti 's claims, the documents before the Court do not suggest that the Court of First Instance failed to consider certain evidence put before it by Hilti.
Bauco's påstand om forhøjelse af den bøde, Hilti blev pålagt ved Kommissionens beslutning 88/138/EØF af 22. december 1987 om en procedure i henhold til EØF-traktatens artikel 86, afvises.
Dismisses Bauco's claim that the amount of the fine imposed on Hilti by Commission Decision 88/138/EEC of 22 December 1987 relating to a proceeding under Article 86 of the EEC Treaty be increased;
Generaladvokat F. G. Jacobs fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet for Domstolens plenum den 10. november 1993.
Mr Advocate General Jacobs delivered his Opinion at the sitting on 10 November 1993.
- 9 - fortolkningen af Rådets andet direktiv om indbyrdes tilnærmelse af medlemsstaternes lovgivning om ansvarsforsikring for motorkøretøjer, 84/5/EØF.
Order Hilti to pay the costs, including the costs incurred by Bauco."
Spørgsmålene var blevet rejst under en sag, som N. Vaneetveld har anlagt mod forsikringsselskabet Le Foyer, og hvori der er tvist om, hvorvidt sagsøgeren har krav på erstatning for den skade, hun led i forbindelse med en trafikulykke den 2. maj 1988.
Case C-316/93 Nicole Vaneetveld ν SA le Foyer SA Le Foyer ν Fédération des Mutualités Socialistes et Syndicales de la Province de Liège 3 March 1994 (Preliminary ruling) (Insurance - Directive - Time-limit for transposition - Direct effect) (Second Chamber)
Det fremgik af sagen, at ansvaret for ulykken måtte tilskrives Vaneetveld's fraseparerede, men ikke fraskilte, ægtefælle, Jean Dubois, og at denne er forsikret hos Le Foyer.
By judgment of 9 June 1993, which was received at the Court on 16 June 1993, the Tribunal de Commerce, Huy, referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling three questions on the interpretation of the Second Council Directive 84/5/EEC.
Ifølge Dubois' forsikringsaftale med Le Foyer var forsikringstagerens ægtefælle ikke erstatningsberettiget.
Those questions were raised in the course of proceedings brought by Mrs N. Vaneetveld against the insurance company Le Foyer SA for compensation for damage she suffered as a result of a traffic accident on 2 May 1988.
Efter at være blevet gjort bekendt med, at Vaneetveld ikke var skilt, men kun separeret, fra Dubois, nægtede Le Foyer at yde hende nogen erstatning som skadelidt.
It is apparent from the case-file that the person responsible for the accident, Mr Dubois, is the husband of Mrs Vaneetveld, from whom he is separated but not divorced, and that he is insured with Le Foyer.
Domstolen bemærkede, at borgerne ved de nationale domstole først kan påberåbe sig et direktiv efter udløbet af fristen for at gennemføre dette i national ret.
Having learnt that Mrs Vaneetveld was not divorced, but only separated from Mr Dubois, Le Foyer refused to make any payment to the accident victim.
Det fremgik herved at den utvetydige affattelse af artikel 5 i det andet direktiv, at selv om der bestod en forpligtelse for medlemsstaterne til at ændre deres nationale bestemmelser senest den 31. december 1987, var de hvad angår forsikringsmæssig dækning af skader alene forpligtet til at anvende disse på skader, der indtraf fra og med den 31. december 1988.
In its questions the national court asked this Court whether, and if so, from what date, the Second Directive, in prohibiting the exclusion from compulsory insurance of the insured person's spouse in the event of physical injury, creates rights for individuals which the national courts must protect.
"Rådets andet direktiv om indbyrdes tilnærmelse af medlemsstaternes lovgivning om ansvarsforsikring for motorkøretøjer, 84/5/EØF af 30. december 1983, skal fortolkes således, at bestemmelserne i direktivet ikke forud for den 31. december 1988, jf. direktivets artikel 5, stk. 2, kunne skabe rettigheder for borgerne, som de nationale domstole skulle beskytte."
The Court noted that a directive can be relied on by individuals before national courts only after the expiry of the time-limit laid down for its transposition into national law.
Generaladvokat F. G. Jacobs fremsatte forslag til afgørelse for Domstolens Anden Afdeling den 27. .januar 1994.
It followed from the clear wording of Article 5 of the Second Directive that, even though Member States were under an obligation to amend their national provisions by 31 December 1987 at the latest, they were obliged to apply them only in respect of insurance cover for accidents occurring on or after 31 December 1988.
Præjudiciel "Fælles markedsordning for ris - kontraktafgift - restitutioner" (Sjette Afdeling)
(Common organization of the market in rice - Contract duty - Refund) (Sixth Chamber)
Ved tre kendelser af 30. juli 1992, indgået til Domstolen den 4. og 5. august s.a., havde Conciliatura di Vercelli og Pretura circondariale di Vercelli forelagt to præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af EØF-traktatens artikel 40, stk. 3, og artikel 5, samt af bestemmelserne i artikel 17, stk. 2, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1418/76 "og af de grund læggende principper for forbrugsafgifter på varer inden for Fællesskabet".
By three orders of 30 July 1992, which were received at the Court on 4 and 5 August 1992, the Conciliatura for Vercelli and the Pretura Circondariale for Vercelli referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling two questions on the interpretation of Articles 40(3) and 5 of the EEC Treaty and also Article 17(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1418/76 and on "the basic principles of taxation on the consumption of goods within the Community".
Spørgsmålene var stillet under tre sager, som vedrørte den såkaldte "kontraktafgift", som i henhold til italiensk lovgivning opkræves af Ente Risi ved køb eller forarbejdning af italiensk produceret uafskallet ris.
Those questions were raised in the course of three actions concerning a pecuniary charge called "contract duty", levied by the Rice Authority in pursuance of Italian law, whenever paddy rice produced in Italy is purchased or processed into rice.
Ente Risi, der er en juridisk person og henhører under staten, er det italienske interventionsorgan for den fælles markedsordning for ris.
The Rice Authority, a legal person acting under the supervision of the State, is the Italian intervention agency in the context of the common organization of the market in rice.
Desuden udarbejder organet bl.a. statistisk materiale og foretager under søgelser af risproduktionen og -forbruget, bekæmper svigagtige handlinger inden for området og træffer foranstaltninger med henblik på at forøge risproduktionen og -forbruget.
Its activities also include processing data and research concerning the production or consumption of rice, combating fraud in that area and encouraging and implementing increases in the production and consumption of rice.
Denne del at Ente Risi's virksomhed finansieres af kontraktafgiften.
Those activities are financed by the "contract duty".
Med de forelagte spørgsmål ønskede de nationale retsinstanser i det væsentlige oplyst, om traktatens artikel 40, stk. 3, andet afsnit, og artikel 5, skal fortolkes således, at manglende tilbagebetaling af en intern afgift, som kun betales ved køb eller forarbejdning af indenlandske produkter, og hvis provenu indgår i en fond til fremme af den indenlandske produktion, indebærer forskelsbehandling af de afgiftspligtige erhvervsdrivende, såfremt de pågældende produkter eksporteres til en medlemsstat eller et tredjeland.
The national courts seek in essence to ascertain whether the second paragraph of Article 40(3) and Article 5 of the Treaty are to be interpreted as meaning that nonreimbursement of an internal tax imposed only on domestic products, when they are purchased or processed, and designed to build up a fund to promote national production creates, where the said products are exported to
Domstolen bemærkede, at afgiften, som optages som indtægt på Ente Ri si's budget, opkræves af købere af uafskallet ris med oprindelse i Italien ved indgåelsen af købekontrakten og af producenten selv, når han forarbejder sin ris.
The Court observed that the traders purchasing or processing Italian paddy rice benefit from the services provided by the Rice Authority of which "contract duty" forms the counterpart.
Afgiften er således pålagt italiensk ris, uanset om den eksporteres eller forbruges inden for landets grænser.
It followed that those traders did not suffer any discrimination in comparison with traders who, by obtaining their supplies on another market, are not subject to the said duty, but do not benefit from the services of the Rice Authority either.
Der er følgelig, fortsatte Domstolen, ingen sammenhæng mellem kontrakt afgiften og eksportrestitutionerne, idet afgiften også skal betales, såfremt risen ikke eksporteres.
The Court noted that the tax designed to build up the Rice Authority's budget affects purchasers of paddy rice produced in Italy on the completion of a sale contract and producers themselves when they undertake the processing of the rice.
Afgiften påvirker heller ikke restitutionernes størrelse og har ingen umiddelbar betydning for, hvordan de i forordning nr. 1418/76 fastsatte ordninger fungerer.
It has no connection with the amount of the refunds either and no direct bearing on the working of the mechanisms provided for by Regulation No 1418/76.
Endelig ønskede den nationale retsinstans oplyst, om de grundlæggende principper for forbrugsafgifter på varer inden for Fællesskabet er til hinder for, at en afgift som "kontraktafgiften" ikke tilbagebetales eksportøren, når det produkt, som pålægges afgiften, eksporteres til en anden medlemsstat.
Finally, the national court sought to ascertain whether the basic principles of taxation on the consumption of goods within the Community preclude nonreimbursement to exporters of a tax having the features of "contract duty", where the product subject to the said tax is exported to another Member State.
Domstolen bemærkede hertil, at uanset om der måtte gælde sådanne principper, er en afgift som "kontraktafgiften", som den er beskrevet ovenfor, ikke en forbrugsafgift, men, som Kommissionen med rette havde bemærket, en skattelignende afgift.
The Court pointed out in that connection that, regardless of whether such principles exist, a tax with the features of "contract duty", as described above, does not constitute a tax on consumption but rather, as the Commission rightly observes, a parafiscal charge.
Traktatens artikel 40, stk. 3, andet afsnit, skal fortolkes således, at manglende tilbagebetaling af en intern afgift, som kun betales ved køb eller forarbejdning af indenlandsk fremstillede produkter, og hvis provenu indgår i en fond til fremme af den indenlandske produktion, ikke indebærer forskelsbehandling af de afgiftspligtige erhvervsdrivende, såfremt de pågældende produkter eksporteres.
The second paragraph of Article 40(3) of the Treaty is to be interpreted as meaning that nonreimbursement of an internal tax imposed only on domestic products when they are purchased or processed and which is intended to build up a fund to promote national production does not, where those products are exported, create discrimination against the traders who bear the burden of the charge;
Bestemmelserne i artikel 17, stk. 2, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1418/76 af 21. juni 1976 om den fælles markedsordning for ris skal fortolkes således, at de ikke er til hinder for, at en afgift med de ovenfor nævnte kendetegn ikke tilbagebetales til eksportøren af det pågældende produkt, medmindre afgiften viser sig at være et middel til at formindske eksportrestitutionsbeløbet."
Artide 17(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1418/76 of 21 June 1976 on the common organization of the market in rice, which concerns export refunds, is to be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude nonreimbursement of a tax possessing the features mentioned above to the exporter of the product in question, unless that tax appears to be a means of reducing the amount of the export refunds."
Generaladvokat M. Darmon fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet for Domstolens Sjette Afdeling den 17. november 1993.
Mr Advocate General Damon delivered his Opinion at the sitting on 17 November 1993.
EØF-traktatens artikel 5 og artikel 40, stk. 3, er i princippet ikke til hinder for, at en intern afgift, som opkræves i forbindelse med kontrakter vedrørende køb af uafskallet ris produceret i en medlemsstat, og hvis provenu indgår i en fond til fremme af den indenlandske produktion, ikke tilbagebetales.
Articles 5 and 40(3) of the EEC Treaty do not preclude, in principle, the absence of refund of a national charge on contracts for the purchase of paddy rice produced in a Member State and intended for the credit of a fund of assistance for the domestic production.
Det tilkommer dog den nationale retsinstans at tage stilling til, hvorvidt og i givet fald i hvilket omfang en sådan afgift begrænser anvendelsen af de prisordninger, der er fastsat i den fælles markedsordning for ris.
It is however for the national court to determine whether, and if so to what extent, the effect of such a charge is to obstruct the functioning of the price mechanism provided for by the common organization of the market in rice.
En sådan afgift er kun i strid med bestemmelserne i artikel 17, stk. 2, i forordning (EØF) nr. 1418/76 af 21. juni 1976, såfremt den viser sig at være et middel til at formindske eksportrestitutionsbeløbet."
Such a charge would be contrary to Article 17(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1418/76 of 21 June 1976 only if it were to appear as a means to reduce the amount of export refunds."
3.3.1994 (Præjudiciel) "Moms - tjenesteydelser mod vederlag - begreb - musik på offentlig vej" (Sjette Afdeling)
(Preliminary ruling) (Value added tax - Supply of services for consideration - Definition - Musical performance on the public highway) (Sixth Chamber)
Ved kendelse af 8. januar 1993, indgået til Domstolens Justitskontor den 20. januar s.a., havde Gerechtshof te Leeuwarden forelagt to præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af artikel 2, nr. 1, i Rådets sjette direktiv 77/388/EØF.
By order of 8 January 1993, which was received at the Court on 20 January 1993, the Gerechtshof, Leeuwarden, referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling two questions on the interpretation of Article 2(1) of the Sixth Council Directive (77/388/EEC).
Det fremgår af dokumenterne i sagen, at Tolsma musicerer med et gadeorgel på offentlig vej i Nederlandene, og at han samtidig hermed beder de forbipasserende om penge ved at rasle med en bøsse.
It appeared from the case-file that Mr Tolsma plays a barrel organ on the public highway in the Netherlands.
Det forekommer også, at han henvender sig på privatboliger og i forretninger for at bede om penge, uden at han dog kan gøre krav på vederlag.
During his musical performance he offers passers-by a collecting tin for their donations; he also sometimes knocks on the door of houses and shops to ask for donations, but without being able to claim any remuneration by right.
For perioden 1. juli · 30. september 1991 fremsatte omsætningsafgifts- myndigheden oyer for Tolsma krav om efterbetaling af 1 805 HFL i moms og 180 HFL i skat for denne aktivitet.
In respect of the period from 1 July to 30 September 1991 Mr Tolsma received from the Inspecteur an assessment to tax on the aforesaid activity in the sum of HFL 1 805 by way of VAT and HFL 180 by way of a surcharge for late payment.
Domstolen besvarede de forelagte spørgsmål således:
In a case such as that which is the subject of the main proceedings, it was clear that those conditions are not fulfilled.
Lenz fremsatte forslag til afgørelse den 20. januar 1994.
Mr Advocate General Lenz delivered his Opinion at the sitting on 20 January 1994.
En aktivitet, som består i at frembringe musik på offentlig vej, for hvilken der ikke er aftalt et vederlag, men for hvilken gademusikanten dog modtager en vis betaling, kan ikke anses for en tjenesteydelse, som foretages mod vederlag, jf. artikel 2 i sjette direktiv om harmonisering af medlemsstaternes lovgivning om omsætningsafgifter.
A performance which consists of playing music on the public highway, for which no payment is required, but for which payment is none the less received, must not be regarded as the supply of services effected for consideration within the meaning of Article
Sag C-382/92: Kommissionen mod Det Forenede Kongerige
2 of the Sixth Directive on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes.
Generaladvokat W. Van Gerven fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i Domstolens plenum den 2. marts 1994.
It is immaterial in this regard whether a payment is solicited and whether, in view of customary usage, such payment can be expected, although its amount is not quantified and is not quantifiable."
Traktatbrud - urigtig gennemførelse af Rådets direktiv 75/129/EØF af 17. februar 1975 om tilnærmelse af medlemsstaternes lovgivninger vedrørende kollektive afskedigelser
Case T-82/92 Manuel Cortés Jiménez and Others and Others ν Commission 28 October 1993 (Officials - Action for annulment - Confirmatory act - Conditions for admission to a competition - University studies sanctioned by a diploma -Short term studies completed in Spain) (Fourth Chamber)
Generaladvokaten foreslog følgende afgørelse:
Case C-382/92 Commission ν United Kingdom
Da Det Forenede Kongerige i det hele taber sagen, skal jeg foreslå Domstolen, at den pålægger Det Forenede Kongerige at betale sagens omkostninger, jf. procesreglementets artikel 69, stk. 2."
Mr Advocate General Van Gerven delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the full Court on 2 March 1994.