natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Det fremgår af fjortende betragtning til direktivet, at Parlamentet og Rådet som udgangspunkt har valgt at hindre markedsforstyrrelser som følge af, at filialer af kreditinstitutter tilbyder højere dækning end kreditinstitutter, der har fået tilladelse i værtsmedlemsstaten.
beginning, any market disturbance resulting from the fact that the branches of some credit institutions offer higher cover than that offered by credit institutions authorized by the host Member Sute.
Da muligheden foren sådan forstyrrelse ikke fuldstændig kan udelukkes, har fællesskabslovgiver dermed i tilstrækkelig grad påvist, at han forfølger et berettiget formål.
Since the possibility of such a disturbance could not be wholly ruled out, it follows that the Community legislature has shown to the requisite legal standard that it was pursuing a legitimate objective.
I øvrigt er den begrænsning for de berørte kreditinstitutters aktiviteter, som udgøres af »udførselsforbuddet«, ikke åbenbart uforholdsmæssig.
Moreover, the restriction constituted by the prohibition on exportation for the activities of the credit institutions concerned is not manifestly disproportionate.
Af disse grunde skal anbringendet om, at artikel 4, stk. 1, andet afsnit er uforeneligt med målet om et højt forbrugerbeskyttelsesniveau, der er anført i traktatens artikel 3, litra s), og artikel 129 A, ligeledes forkastes.
On those grounds, the plea alleging the incompatibility of the second subparagraph of Article 4(1) with the objective set out in Article 3(s) and Article 129a of the Treaty of a high level of consumer protection must also be rejected.
Det følger heraf, at anbringendet om tilsidesættelse af proportionalitetsprincippet ligeledes må forkastes.
It follows that the plea alleging infringement of the principle of proportionality must also be rejected.
Anbringendet om overtrædelse proportionalitetsprincippet
The plea alleging infringement of the principle of proportionality
Af disse grunde kan påstanden om annullation af direktivets artikel 4, stk. 1, andet afsnit, ikke tages til følge.
On those grounds, the application for annulment of the second subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Directive must be rejected.
Vedrørende artikel 4, stk. 2
Article 4(2)
Anbringendet om tilsidesættelse af princippet om hjemlandstilsyn
The Court has held that in order to establish whether a provision of Community law complies with the principle of proportionality, it must be ascertained whether the means which it employs are suitable for the purpose of achieving the desired objective and whether they do not go beyond what is necessary to achieve it.
Indledningsvis bemærkes, at det ikke er blevet påvist, at fællesskabslovgiver har indført princippet om hjemlandstilsyn på bankrettens område med intention om systematisk at lade alle andre regler på området være betinget heraf.
The Court finds, first, that it has not been proved that the Community legislature works on the principle of home state supervision in the sphere of banking law with the intention of systematically subordinating all other rules in that sphere to that principle.
Dernæst, da der ikke er tale om et princip, der er knæsat i traktaten, kan fællesskabslovgiver fravige det, såfremt han ikke tilsidesætter de berørtes berettigede forventning.
Secondly, since it is not a principle laid down by the Treaty, the Community legislature could depart from it, provided that it did not infringe the legitimate expectations of the persons concerned.
Da der endnu ikke på fællesskabsniveau var lovgivet om indskudsgarantier, forelå der ikke en sådan berettiget forventning.
Since it had not yet acted in regard to the guarantee of deposits, no such legitimate expectations could exist.
Ved vurderingen af behovet for den pågældende foranstaltning skal det fremhæves, at den situation, som fællesskabslovgiver har tilstræbt en regulering af, økonomisk set er kompleks.
When assessing the need for the measure in question, it should be noted that the situation which the Community legislature was seeking to regulate is economically complex.
Før vedtagelsen af direktivet fandtes der ikke indskudsgarantiordninger i alle medlemsstater, ydermere omfattede hovedparten af dem ikke indskyderne i filialer, som godkendte kreditinstitutter havde oprettet i andre medlemsstater.
Before the adoption of the directive, deposit-guarantee schemes did not exist in all the Member States; moreover, most of them did not cover depositors with branches set up by credit institutions authorized in other Member States.
Fællesskabslovgiver skulle således vurdere fremtidige og usikre virkninger af tiltaget.
The Community legislature therefore needed to assess the future and uncertain effects of its action.
I denne forbindelse havde lovgiver et valg mellem en almindelig risikoforebyggelse og indførelsen af en punktuel beskyttelsesordning.
In so doing, it could choose between the general prevention of a risk and the establishment of a system of specific protection.
Af disse grunde må anbringendet om tilsidesættelse af princippet om hjemlandstilsyn forkastes.
On those grounds, the plea alleging infringement of the principle of home state supervision must be rejected.
Anbringendet om tilsidesættelse proportionalitetsprincippet
The plea alleging infringement of the principle of proportionality
I en sådan situation kan Domstolen ikke sætte sin vurdering i stedet for fællesskabslovgivers vurdering.
In such a situation the Court cannot substitute its assessment for that of the Community legislature.
Den kan kun forkaste lovgivers normative valg, såfremt dette er åbenbart forkert, eller såfremt de ulemper, der følger heraf for visse erhvervsdrivende, er helt uforholdsmæssige i forhold til de fordele, der i øvrigt er forbundet hermed.
It could, at most, find fault with its legislative decision only if it appeared manifestly incorrect or if the resultant disadvantages for certain economic operators was wholly disproportionate to the advantages otherwise offered.
Det bemærkes, at direktivet har til formål at afhjælpe de ulemper, der følger af, at der inden for samme territorium anvendes forskellige garantisatser, og at der skabes ulige konkurrencevilkår for henholdsvis nationale kreditinstitutter og filialer af kreditinstitutter
The Directive seeks to remedy the disadvantages resulting from disparities in compensation and different conditions of competition, within the same territory, between national institutions and branches of institutions from other Member States. Moreover, the Community legislature
Dernæst har fællesskabslovgiver anført, at der bør tages hensyn til omkostningerne ved finansieringen af ordningerne, og at det forekommer rimeligt at fastsætte den harmoniserede minimumsgaranti til 20 000 ECU.
stated that the cost of funding schemes should be taken into account and that it appeared reasonable to set the harmonized minimum guarantee level at ECU 20 000.
Ifølge direktivets artikel 7 kan indtil 31. december 1999 dette minimumsbeløb fraviges, idet dækningen indtil denne dato kan begrænses til 15 000 ECU.
Article 7 of the Directive provides for the possibility of derogating from that minimum amount until 31 December 1999, until that date the security does not have to exceed ECU 15 000.
Regeringen gør gældende, at proportionalitetsprincippet, der er knæsat i traktatens artikel 3 B, stk. 3, er blevet konkretiseret bl.a. i konklusionerne fra Det Europæiske Råd i Edinburgh vedrørende denne bestemmelse, idet det fastslås, at Fællesskabet bestræber sig på, når det træffer lovgivningsmæssige foranstaltninger, at tage hensyn til gængs national praksis, og at de af Fællesskabet trufne foranstaltninger skal give medlemsstaternevalget mellem forskelligemåder, hvorpå målene med foranstaltningerne kan nås.
The German Government claims that the principle of proportionality set out in the third subparagraph of Article 3b of the Treaty was specifically set out, in particular, in the Opinion of the European Council in Edinburgh relating to that provision, in which it is stated that the Community will, when adopting legislative measures, endeavour to take account of well established national practices and that the measures adopted by the Community must offer to the Member States alternative solutions to achieve the objectives pursued.
Indledningsvis bemærkes, uden at det er nødvendigt at fastslå præcist, hvilken retlig karakter konklusionerne fra Det Europæiske Råd i Edinburgh har, som den sagsøgende regering har påberåbt sig i denne sammenhæng, at når fællesskabslovgiver foretager en harmonisering, kan der ikke tages hensyn til »gængs national praksis«.
It follows from those recitals and those provisions that the Community legislature did not wish to impose an excessive burden on the home Member States which did not yet have deposit-guarantee schemes or which had only schemes providing for a lower guarantee.
Det følger af de nævnte betragtninger og bestemmelser, at fællesskabslovgiver ikke har villet belaste de hjemlande for meget, som endnu ikke havde et indskudsgarantiordning, eller hvis ordning indeholdt en lavere dækning.
In those circumstances, it could not require them to bear the risk linked to an additional cover resulting from a political decision of a particular host Member State.
Under disse omstændigheder kunne de ikke pålægges den risiko, der er forbundet med en højere dækning som følge af en bestemt værtsmedlemsstats politiske valg.
The alternative proposed by the German Government, compulsory supplementary cover by the schemes of the home Member State, would not therefore have resulted in the intended aim being achieved.
Det af den sagsøgende regering anførte alternativ med en tvungen supplerende dækning ved hjælp af hjemlandenes ordninger ville således ikke have kunnet føre til det tilsigtede mål.
Without it being necessary to determine the precise legal value of the Opinion of the European Council in Edinburgh, on which the German Government relies in this context, it should be pointed out, first of all, that when the Community legislature harmonizes legislation, not all Veil-established national practices' can be complied with.
For det andet er på dette område Forbundsrepublikken Tyskland åbenbart den eneste medlemsstat, der betegner en frivillig tilslutning til en indskudsgarantiordning som en garantiordning.
Second, it appears that in the present case the Federal Republic of Germany is the sole Member State to invoke the voluntary membership of a deposit guarantee scheme as such a practice.
Det skal tilføjes, at der til den pligt, værtsmedlemsstaten er pålagt, er knyttet flere betingelser, der skal lette dens opgave.
Moreover, the obligation imposed on the host State is subject to various conditions that are intended to ease its task.
Værtsmedlemsstaten kan således pålægge filialer, som ønsker at tilslutte sig en af dens garantiordninger, at betale et bidrag og kræve oplysninger om disse filialer af hjemlandet.
Thus, the host Member State may require branches wishing to join one of its guarantee schemes to pay a contribution and require the home State to provide information on those branches.
Dernæst er hensigten med direktivet at sikre, at de forpligtelser, der påhviler en sådan filial som medlem afindskudsgarantiordningen, overholdes.
Furthermore, the Directive aims to ensure compliance with the obligations incumbent on such a branch as a member of a deposit guarantee scheme.
Det følger af disse forskellige bestemmelser, at artikel 4, stk. 2, ikke medfører en overdreven belastning af værtsmedlemsstatens garantiordning.
It follows from these various provisions that the effect of Article 4(2) is not to cause an excessive burden on the guarantee schemes of host Member States.
Under hensyn til ovenstående må anbringendet om overtrædelse af proportionalitetsprincippet forkastes.
In view of all the foregoing considerations, the plea alleging infringement of the principle of proportionality must be rejected.
Hertil kommer, at den sagsøgende regering selv har oplyst, at der i oktober 1993 kun var fem ud af 300 kreditinstitutter, der ikke var tilsluttet en indskudsgarantiordning.
Third, it is common ground that the Community legislature considered it to be necessary to ensure a harmonized minimum level of deposit guarantee, wherever those deposits were located within the Community.
Følgerne af pligtmedlemskabet begrænser sig således til at pålægge disse få kreditinstitutter at blive medlem og kan derfor ikke anses for uforholdsmæssige.
Having regard to that requirement and to the fact that in some Member States there was no deposit guarantee scheme, the legislature cannot be criticized for having provided for an obligation to join a scheme, despite the proper functioning of a voluntary membership scheme in Germany.
Det følger heraf, at påstanden om annullation af direktivets artikel 4, stk. 2, ikke kan tages til følge.
It follows that the application for annulment of Article 4(2) of the Directive must also be rejected.
Artikel 3, stk. 1, første afsnit, andet punktum
The second sentence of the first subparagraph of Article 3(1)
Af de samme grunde kan der ikke gøres indsigelse mod, at fællesskabslovgiver ikke har givet mulighed for at vælge en alternativ løsning til pligtmedlemskabet, der bl.a. kunne bestå i en pligt for kreditinstitutterne til at underrette kunderne om en eventuel tilslutning.
Finally, the German Government itself accepts that in October 1993 only five credit institutions out of three hundred were not members of a deposit guarantee scheme.
Forbundsregeringen anfører, at pligtmedlemskabet efter direktivets artikel 3, stk. 1, første afsnit, andet punktum, er i strid med traktatens artikel 3 Β og det almindelige proportionalitetsprincip.
The German Government claims that the obligation to join a scheme, which follows from the second sentence of the first subparagraph of
at sikre et harmoniseret minimumsgarantiniveau for alle indskud, nås.
level of guarantee for all deposits.
Det følger heraf, at påstanden om annullation af direktivets artikel 3, stk. 1, første afsnit, andet punktum, kan ikke tages til følge.
alternative approach to compulsory membership, such as an obligation to inform customers of any membership of a scheme.
Forbundsrepublikken "tyskland betaler sagens omkostninger.
Ζ lhe Federal Republic of Germany is ordered to pay the costs;
Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber bærer sine egne omkostninger.·
The Commission of the European Communities is ordered to bear its own costs.'
Generaladvokat P. Léger fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Domstolens plenum) den 10. december 1996.
Advocate General P. Léger delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Full Court on 10 December 19%.
— at dømme Forbundsrepublikken Tyskland til at betale sagens omkostninger«
He proposed that the Court should dismiss the application and order the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.
Præjudiciel »EØF-traktatens artikel 52 — selskabers etableringsret — beskatning af indkomst i en filial — opdeling af indkomsten· (Domstolens plenum)
Preliminary ruling (Article 52 of the EEC Treaty — Freedom of establishment for companies — Taxation of a branch's income — Apportionment of income) (Full Court)
Spørgsmålet er rejst under en sag anlagt af Futura Participations SA Paris, og selskabets luxembourgske filial Singer (herefter »Singer«) mod Administration des contributions (de luxembourgske skattemyndigheder) vedrørende
By judgment of 12 July 1995, received at the Court on 19 July 1995, the Conseil d'État du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg (Council of State of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg) referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling a question on the interpretation of Article 52 of the EEC Treaty, now the EC Treaty.
Ved dom af 12. juli 1995 indgået til Domstolen den 19. juli 1995 har Luxembourgs Conseil d'État forelagt et præjudicielt spørgsmål om fortolkningen af EØF-traktatens, nu EF- traktatens, artikel 52.
The question was raised in proceedings between (i) Futura Participations SA, a company with its seat in Paris, and (ii) its Luxembourg branch, Singer (hereinafter 'Singer'), and the Luxembourg tax authorities concerning the determination of the basis for assessing Singer's liability to revenue tax for the year 1986.
Luxembourg, ikke beskattes dér i landet, omfatter deres skattepligtige indkomst således i det mindste overskud og underskud ved deres virksomhed i Luxembourg.
taxpayers, only profits and losses arising from their Luxembourg activities are taken into account in calculating the tax payable by them in that State.
Med hensyn til opgørelsen af ikkehjemmehørendes skattepligtige indkomst medregnes derimod alene overskud og underskud, der hidrører fra deres virksomhed i Luxembourg, ved beregningen af deres skat i denne stat.
Such a system, which is in conformity with the fiscal principle of territoriality, cannot be regarded as entailing any discrimination, overt or covert, prohibited by the Treaty.
Med sit spørgsmål ønsker den nationale ret i det væsentlige oplyst, om traktatens artikel 52 er til hinder for, at en medlemsstat opstiller som betingelse for at imødekomme en anmodning fra en skattepligtig, der har en filial i staten, men ikke har hjemsted dér, om overførsel af underskud fra tidligere regnskabsår, dels at underskuddet har økonomisk sammenhæng med den skattepligtiges indkomst i staten, dels at den skattepligtige i det regnskabsår, hvor underskuddet er opstået, har ført et regnskab for den udøvede virksomhed, der er i overensstemmelse med de nationale regler, og opbevaret det i den pågældende stat.
By its question the national court asks in substance whether Article 52 of the Treaty precludes a Member State from making the carrying forward of previous losses, requested by a taxpayer which has a branch in that State but is not resident there, subject to the condition that the losses must be economically related to the income earned by the taxpayer in that State and that, during the financial year in which the losses were incurred, the taxpayer must have kept and held in that State, in respect of activities he carried on there, accounts complying with the relevant national rules.
Med den anden betingelse kræves det, at den skattepligtige i det regnskabsår, hvor det underskud, der ønskes overført, er opstået i beskatningslandet, har ført et regnskab for sin virksomhed i den pågældende stat, der er i overensstemmelse med de i det pågældende regnskabsår gældende nationale regler.
The second condition is that, during the financial year in which the losses the taxpayer seeks to carry forward were incurred, he must have kept, in the Member State in which tax is to be charged, accounts complying with the relevant national rules applicable during that year, relating to his activities in that State.
Da overførsel af underskud således er undergivet to betingelser, hvoraf den ene vedrører den økonomiske sammenhæng, og den anden regnskabsføringen, skal de undersøges hver for sig.
The carrying forward of losses is thus subject to two conditions which will be examined in turn, one concerning the existence of an economic link and the other the keeping of accounts.
Det bemærkes, at til forskel fra den første betingelse, der vedrører de faktorer, der kan inddrages ved beregningen af skatten, vedrører den anden betingelse kun dokumentationen angående denne beregning.
Whereas the first condition concerns the items which can be brought into account in calculating the charge to tax, the second concerns only the evidence admissible when making that calculation.
Den første sammenhæng)
The first condition: existence of an economic link
En sådan betingelse kan udgøre en hindring for etableringsfriheden i henhold til traktatens artikel 52 for et selskab, som i medfør af traktatens artikel 58 er ligestillet med en fysisk person, der er statsborger i en medlemsstat, og som ønsker at oprette en filial i en anden medlemsstat end den, hvor selskabet har hjemsted.
Such a condition may constitute a restriction, within the meaning of Article 52 of the Treaty, on the freedom of establishment of a company or firm which, in terms of Article 58 of the Treaty, is to be treated in the same way as a natural person who is a national of a Member State, where that company or firm wishes to establish a branch in a Member State different from that in which it has its seat.
Med den første betingelse kræves det, at det overførte underskud har økonomisk sammenhæng med indkomst i beskatningslandet, således at der kun kan overføres underskud, der hidrører fra den ikkehjemmehørende skattepligtiges virksomhed i beskatningslandet.
The first condition is that losses carried forward must be economically linked to the income earned in the Member State in which tax is charged, so that only losses arising from the nonresident taxpayer's activities in that State can be carried forward.
Ifølge fast retspraksis skal medlemsstaterne, selv om bestemmelserne om direkte beskatning henhører under deres kompetence, dog overholde fællesskabsretten under udøvelsen af deres kompetence og således afstå fra enhver form for åbenlys eller skjult forskelsbehandling begrundet i nationalitet.
According to settled case-law, although direct taxation falls within the competence of the Member States, the latter must none the less exercise that competence consistently with Community law and therefore avoid any overt or covert discrimination on grounds of nationality.
Betingelsen indebærer, at et sådant selskab, hvis det ønsker at have mulighed for at overføre sin filials eventuelle underskud, er nødsaget til — foruden sit eget regnskab, der skal være i overensstemmelse med de gældende skatteregler i den medlemsstat, hvor selskabet har hjemsted — at føre et særskilt regnskab for filialens virksomhed efter de gældende skatteregler i den stat, hvor filialen er etableret.
It means in practice that if such a company or firm wishes to carry forward any losses incurred by its branch, it must keep, in addition to its own accounts which must comply with the tax accounting rules applicable in the Member State in which it has its seat, separate accounts for its branch's activities complying with the tax accounting rules applicable in the State in which its branch is established.
Dette regnskab skal endvidere opbevares på det sted, hvor filialen er etableret, og ikke på selskabets hjemsted.
Furthermore, those separate accounts must be held, not at the company's seat, but at the place of establishment of its branch.
I den foreliggende sag har den luxembourgske regering og Det Forenede Kongeriges regering gjort gældende, at en national foranstaltning som den anden betingelse er uomgængelig nødvendig for, at en medlemsstats skattemyndigheder kan
In the present case, the Luxembourg Government and the United Kingdom Government submit that a national measure such as the second condition is essential in order for the amount of income taxable in a Member State to be ascertainable by that Member State's tax authorities.
I den foreliggende sag bestemmes det i den luxembourgske lov med hensyn til hjemmehørende skattepligtige, at hele deres indkomst er skattepligtig, og den skattepligtige indkomst omfatter ikke kun deres virksomhed i Luxembourg.
Consequently, although there are exemptions under which a part or even, in certain cases, all of their income earned outside Luxembourg is not subject to tax in that country, the basis for assessment for resident taxpayers at any rate includes profits and losses arising from their Luxembourg activities.
Selv om der er undtagelser, hvorefter en del af eller i visse tilfælde hele den indkomst, der er oppebåret uden for
On the other hand, for the purpose of calculating the basis of assessment for nonresident
i Luxembourg, og at de luxembourgske myndigheder således som udgangspunkt har fraskrevet sig enhver mulighed for at foretage inspektion af deres regnskabsbilag.
It is only when a nonresident taxpayer asks to be allowed to carry forward losses which he has incurred in a previous year that he is obliged to show that during that period he kept — and held in Luxembourg — proper accounts relating to his activities in that State.