natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Det første spørgsmål åbenbart, at andet direktivs artikel 3, stk. 1, og artikel 4, punkt 1, der indeholder definitionerne af begreberne cigaretter og røgtobak, ikke var blevet korrekt gennemført i dansk ret, idet den minister, der ved lov var blevet bemyndiget til at fastsætte de fornødne regler, ikke havde udstedt nogen bestemmelser til gennemførelse af den pågældende lov.
(2) Directive 76/207 does not, however, require Member States to introduce into their national legal systems such measures as are necessary to enable employees to bring legal proceedings against former employers who have refused to provide references for them, where that refusal constitutes retaliation for legal proceedings brought by the employee against the employer with a view to enforcing compliance with the requirement of equal treatment for men and women.
Således har de danske myndigheder ufortøvet anvendt de relevante bestemmelser i andet direktiv, der indeholder præcise definitioner for så vidt angår tobaksprodukter. Den omstændighed, at definitionerne i andet direktiv ikke er gennemført ved ministerielt fastsatte bestemmelser, medfører derfor ikke i sig selv, at staten ifalder ansvar.
Preliminary ruling (Tax on the consumption of manufactured tobacco — Directive 79/32/EEC — Cigarettes -Smoking tobacco Concept Non-contractual liability of a Member State for breach of Community law) (Second Chamber) as a cigarette or as smoking tobacco, which would result in a lower rate.
Det må endvidere undersøges, om de danske myndigheder, når henses til den klare og præcise karakter af de relevante bestemmelser i andet direktiv, har overtrådt dem på en tilstrækkelig kvalificeret måde.
By an order of 4 September 1996, the Østre Landsret (Danish Eastern Regional Court) referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling a number of questions on the interpretation of Articles 3(1) and 4(1) of the Second Council Directive (79/32/EEC) of 18 December 1978 (hereinafter 'the Second Directive'), and of the principle of a State's liability for damage caused to individuals by a breach of Community law attributable to that State.
Med det andet, tredje og fjerde spørgsmål ønsker Østre Landsret nærmere bestemt oplyst, om en medlemsstat, hvis myndigheder ved fortolkningen af andet direktivs artikel 3, stk. 1, og artikel 4, punkt 1, fejlagtigt har kvalificeret et produkt som det i hovedsagen omhandlede som cigaretter og ikke har tillagt den trufne afgørelse opsættende virkning, i henhold til fællesskabsretten er forpligtet til at erstatte det tab, producenten har lidt som følge af den fejlagtige afgørelse.
First of all, the Second Directive, already contained a precise definition of cigarettes stating their three distinctive features to be as follows: (a) they are rolls of tobacco (b) which are capable of being smoked as they are and (c) which are not cigars or cigarillos.
Westpoint svarer i realiteten ikke nøjagtigt til nogen af de relevante definitioner i direktivet.
It is common ground that a product such as Westpoint exhibits the first and third characteristics.
Der er derimod tale om et produkt, som ikke fandtes, da andet direktiv blev udstedt, og som for forbrugerne skulle have en cigarets fordele og samtidig drage fordel af den lavere afgift på røgtobak.
It does not, however, exhibit the second because the roll of tobacco at issue cannot be smoked as it is but must first be inserted into a cigarette-paper tube or wrapped in normal cigarette paper.
Det hedder i domskonklusionen:
A product of the kind at issue in the main proceedings thus falls within the scope of Article
Generaladvokat F.G. Jacobs fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet ("Anden Afdeling) den 22. januar 1998.
The rolls of tobacco at issue here in fact consist of tobacco which has been cut and is capable of being smoked without further industrial processing.
Han foreslog Domstolen følgende besvarelse:
The second, third and fourth questions
»1) Et produkt, der består af en tobaksrulle indhyllet i porøs cellulose, der ikke kan ryges, som det er, men først må anbringes i et cigaretpapirhylster eller påføres et almindeligt cigaretpapir, skulle klassificeres som røgtobak som omhandlet i artikel 4, stk. 1, i Rådets direktiv 79/32/EØF i den affattelse, der var gældende den 14. maj 1990.
However, it must be emphasised that there is no direct causal link in this case between the breach of Community law and the damage allegedly suffered by Brinkmann.
En medlemsstat, hvis myndigheder ved anvendelsen af definitionerne i direktiv 79/32 fejlagtigt klassificerede et sådant produkt som en cigaret, jf. direktivets artikel 3, stk. 1, er ikke i henhold til fællesskabsretten erstatningsansvarlig for tab som følge af den fejlagtige klassificering, medmindre der under lignende omstændigheder ville opstå et sådant erstatningsansvar ved tilsidesættelse af en national lovbestemmelse.«
Indeed, the Danish authorities gave immediate effect to the relevant provisions of the Second Directive containing precise definitions of tobacco products. Accordingly, the fact that the definitions in the Second Directive were not implemented by ministerial decree does not in itself give rise to liability on the part of the State.
Sag C-413/96 Skatteministeriet / Sportgoods A/S Frie varebevægelser
It remains to be determined whether the Danish authorities committed a sufficiently serious breach of the relevant provisions of the Second Directive, having regard to the degree of clarity and precision of those provisions.
Præjudiciel »Told — toldskylds opståen — efteropkrævning af importafgifter — fritagelse for importafgifter« (Femte Afdeling)
By its second, third and fourth questions, the Østre Landsret is essentially asking whether a Member State whose authorities, in interpreting Articles 3(1) and 4(1) of the Second Directive, erroneously classified a product such as that at issue in these proceedings as a cigarette and did not suspend the operation of the decision adopted, is required under Community law to compensate the manufacturer for the damage sustained by the latter as a result of the erroneous decision.
Spørgsmålene er blevet rejst under en sag anlagt af Skatteministeriet mod Sportgoods A/S vedrørende efteropkrævning af importafgifter af fem partier fodboldstøvler hidrørende fra Thailand.
In this case, there is no disputing that Articles 3(1) and 4(1) of the Second Directive which contain the definitions of cigarettes and smoking tobacco were not properly transposed into national law, as the competent Minister authorised by the relevant law to lay down the necessary provisions has not adopted any rule of law in implementation thereof.
Første og andet spørgsmål
In this case, they did not.
Ved beslutning af 20. december 1996 har Højesteret forelagt tre præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af artikel 2, stk. 1, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1697/79 af 24. juli 1979 (herefter »den omtvistede forordning«), og vedrørende retsvirkningen af en beslutning truffet af Kommissionen efter forelæggelse for Toldkodeksudvalget.
Indeed, Westpoint does not correspond exactly to either of the definitions in the directive. Rather, the product is one which did not exist at the time when the Second Directive was adopted and which sought to give consumers the advantages of a cigarette while benefiting from the lower tax applicable to smoking tobacco.
Med første og andet spørgsmål ønsker den forelæggende ret nærmere bestemt oplyst, om
In those circumstances, the interpretation given by the Danish authorities to the relevant definitions was not manifestly contrary to the wording of the Second Directive or in particular to the aim pursued by it.
Om forpligtelsen til at foretage efteropkrævning af toldskyld
He was of the opinion that the questions referred by the Østre Landsret should be answered as follows:
Når toldmyndighederne efter at have omberegnet toldskylden på grundlag af de på tidspunktet for antagelsen af angivelsen om overgang til fri omsætning gældende satser konstaterer, at den pågældende indførsel ikke længere kan henføres under en toldsuspension, skal den omberegnede told forskriftsmæssigt opkræves.
(1) A product consisting of a roll of tobacco wrapped in porous cellulose which cannot be smoked as it is but must first be inserted into a cigarette-paper tube or wrapped in ordinary cigarette paper fell to be classified as smoking tobacco under Article 4(1) of Council Directive 79/32/EEC in the version in force on 14 May 1990.
Når toldmyndighederne under en kontrol opdager en fejl ved den tarifering af en vare, der er foretaget i angivelsen om overgang til fri omsætning, skal de som udgangspunkt træffe de nødvendige foranstaltninger til på grundlag af de nye oplysninger, der foreligger, at foretage en ny beregning af den told, der forskriftsmæssigt skulle have været opkrævet på tidspunktet for antagelsen af angivelsen.
(2) A Member State whose authorities, in applying the definitions in Directive 79/32, mistakenly classified such a product as a cigarette under Article 3(1) of the Directive does not incur liability by virtue of Community law to repair any loss or damage resulting from the mistaken classification, unless in similar circumstances such liability would arise in respect of a breach of national law.
Om anvendelsen af reglerne om generelle toldpræferencer
Case C-413/96 Skatteministeriet ν Sportgoods A/S Free movement of goods
Tredje spørgsmål
24 September 1998
Problemet bør imidlertid snarere betragtes i sammenhæng med opbygningen af den pågældende toldsuspensionsordning, der afhænger af, at de fastsatte lofter overholdes så nøjagtigt som muligt.
Preliminary ruling (Customs duty Constitution of a customs debt Remission of import duties) (Fifth Chamber)
Det skal blot bemærkes på den ene side, at som Kommissionen har påpeget, har den ikke i sin beslutning af 18. juli 1994 taget stilling til, om der er hjemmel i den omtvistede forordning til at foretage efteropkrævning af tolden.
By decision of 20 December 1996, the Højesteret (Danish Supreme Court) referred for a preliminary ruling three questions concerning the interpretation of Article 2(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79 of 24 July 1979 ('the regulation in issue') and on the legal effect of a decision delivered by the Commission following consultation with the Customs Code < om m i lice. Those questions have arisen in a dispute between Skatteministeriet (the Danish Ministry of Fiscal Affairs) and Sportgoods A/S, a company incorporated under Danish law, concerning the postclearance recovery of customs duties on imports of five consignments of football boots from Thailand.
Hvis man accepterede en efterfølgende overskridelse af lofterne ved omtarifering af varer som følge af, at det opdages, at importøren har tariferet en vare forkert, efter at loftet for den toldposition, hvori varen skulle have været
By its first and second questions, the Højesteret is asking in substance whether Article 2(1) of the regulation in issue, which was applicable at the time of the facts in the main proceedings, is to be construed as meaning that, where a postclearance inspection has revealed an error in the tariff classification of goods indicated in & declaration for release into free circulation, and where the levying of customs duties on products covered by the heading under which those goods ought to have been classified was suspended at the date on which that declaration was accepted but had been re-established when the error was detected, the factual and legal situation to be taken into account by the customs authorities in order to recalculate the amount of customs duty legally due is that prevailing when the declaration was accepted or when the error in tariff classification was discovered. The first and second questions
På den anden side fremgår det af den omtvistede forordning, at toldmyndighederne har en forpligtelse til at foretage efteropkrævning af manglende told.
In principle, when the customs authorities discover, in the course of an inspection, an error in the tariff classification of goods indicated in a declaration of release for free circulation, they must recalculate, in the light of the new information at their disposal, the amount of customs duties legally due at the date when that declaration was accepted.
»1) Artikel 2, stk 1, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1697/79 af 24. juli 1979 om opkrævning af import- og eksportafgifter, der ikke er opkrævet hos debitor for varer, der er angivet til en toldprocedure, som medfører en forpligtelse til at betale sådanne afgifter, skal fortolkes således, at når der ved efterfølgende kontrol er opdaget en fejl i den tarifering af en vare, der blev foretaget i angivelsen om overgang til fri omsætning, og når opkrævningen af told af varer henhørende under den toldposition, som varen skulle have været tariferet i, var suspenderet, da angivelsen blev antaget, men var genindført, da fejlen blev opdaget, skal toldmyndighederne ved beregningen af den told, der forskriftsmæssigt skulle have været opkrævet på det tidspunkt, hvor angivelsen blev antaget, ikke tage hensyn til suspensionen.
Where, after recalculating the amount of the customs debt on the basis of the rates applicable on the date when the declaration for release into free circulation was accepted, the customs authorities find that the imports in question can no longer benefit from tariff suspension, the customs duties thus recalculated are legally due.
Når Kommissionen efter forelæggelse for Toldkodeksudvalget har truffet en beslutning, rettet til en medlemsstat, om, at det i et givet tuf ælde ikke er berettiget at indrømme fritagelse for importafgifter i medfør af bestemmelserne i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1430/79 af'1 juli 1979 om godtgørelse af eller fritagelse f or import- eller eksportafgifter, men beslutningen ikke indeholder nogen retlige eller faktiske oplysninger om spørgsmålet om hjemmel til at foretage efteropkrævning af de pågældende importafgifter i medfør af forordning nr. 1697/79, kan en national domstol tage stilling til dette spørgsmål, i givet fald efter at have bragt proceduren i EF-traktatens artikel 177 i anvendelse«
To the extent that the person liable has not been required to pay those customs duties, the customs authorities must, in accordance with the provisions of the regulation in issue, take steps to recover any uncollected duties.
Generaladvokat S. Alber fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Femte Afdeling) den 16. december 1997.
However, the problem should be viewed rather in the context of the overall scheme of the system of tariff suspensions in question, which requires the strictest possible adherence to the ceilings established.
»1) I henhold til artikel 2, stk. 1, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1697/79 kan der kun foretages efteropkrævning, såfremt der er opstået et tab i form af et beløb, der skulle have været opkrævet, men ikke er blevet betalt.
According to Skatteministeriet, the Commission, in a decision of 18 July 1994, implicitly ruled that there was a legal basis for postclearance recovery of the customs duties in question; that decision, it claims, is binding on national courts, which cannot therefore hold that there is no such legal basis.
Ordene '(import- eller eksportafgift), der forskriftsmæssigt skulle have været opkrævet' i artikel 2, stk. 1, i forordning nr. 1697/79 skal fortolkes således, at det er de faktiske og retlige omstændigheder på det tidspunkt, hvor de kompetente myndigheder modtager toldangivelsen, der er afgørende for, om der er opstået en toldskyld.
If it were to be accepted that ceilings may be exceeded retroactively where goods are reclassified following the discovery of an error by the importer in the tariff classification of goods after the ceiling provided for the subheading under which the goods should have been classified has been reached and the levying of customs duties on imports of the goods in question has been re-established, that would have to be accepted irrespective of the quantity and value of the goods in question and irrespective of whether, at the time when the declaration was accepted, a tariff suspension applied to both of the subheadings concerned or only to one of them.
Beslutningen er ikke bindende for en ret og heller ikke til hinder for, at retten træffer afgørelse om, hvorvidt der overhovedet består et retsgrundlag. Noget andet gælder kun, såfremt det udtrykkeligt fremgår af beslutningen.
Second, the obligation on the customs authorities to take action to recover uncollected customs duties derives from the regulation in issue.
Ved stævning indleveret til Domstolens Justitskontor den 24. januar 1997 har Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber anlagt sag med påstand om, at det fastslås, at Den Franske Republik har tilsidesat sine forpligtelser i henhold til EF-traktatens artikel 48, stk. 2, og artikel 7 i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1612/68 ved at udelukke grænsearbejdere bosat i Belgien fra retten til tiUægspensionspoint, når deres beskæftigelse er blevet afbrudt førtidigt.
When the Commission, after consultation with the Customs Code Committee, has delivered a decision addressed to a Member State holding that there was, in a specific case, no justification for granting remission of import duties pursuant to the provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 of 2 July 1979 on the repayment or remission of import or export duties, and when that decision does not contain any legal or factual indication relating to the legal bashfor effecting postclearance recovery of the import duties concerned under Regulation No 1697/79, a national court may rule on the latter question, having recourse, if appropriate, to the procedure under Article 177 of the EC Treaty.'
Disse ordninger finansieres af arbejdsgiver- og lønmodtagerbidrag, som indbetales til den institution, der administrerer ordningen.
Case C-35/97 Commission of the European Communities ν French Republic Freedom of movement for persons
I afsnit IV i den almindelige overenskomst for social sikring af personale i de østlige og nordlige stålselskaber, som er berørt af omstruktureringerne af 24. juli 1979 (herefter »overenskomsten«), fastlægges en
(Failure to fulfil obligations Article 48 of the EC Treaty — Unemployment benefits —Award of supplementary retirement pension points Conditions of dismissal Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 Frontier workers) (Fifth Chamber)
hvorimod personer i samme situation, som er bosat i Belgien, ikke har en sådan ret.
persons in the same situation who reside in Belgium.
omstændigheder indvendes, at ordningen med tildeling af gratis point omfatter personer, hvis arbejdskontrakt er ophørt. Således består visse rettigheder, der beror på de vandrende arbejdstageres status som arbejdstagere, herunder dem, der er opregnet i artikel 7, stk 1, i forordning nr. 1612/68 vedrørende afskedigelsesvilkårene, selv om de pågældende ikke længere er i beskæftigelse.
By application lodged at the Court Registry on 24 January 1997 the Commission of the European Communities brought an action for a declaration that, by excluding frontier workers residing in Belgium from qualifying for supplementary retirement pension points after being placed in early retirement, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 48(2) of the EC Treaty and Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council.
Domstolen har allerede i dom af 16. januar 1992, Kommissionen mod Frankrig, fastslået, at ordningerne for tillægspension, som er vedtaget ved overenskomster indgået af de kompetente myndigheder med de faglige og tværfaglige organisationer, fagforeninger eller virksomheder, eller ved kollektive overenskomster indgået af arbejdsmarkedets parter og gjort tvungne ved artikel L 731-5 i codé de la sécurité sociale, ikke kan anses for lovgivning i henhold til artikel 1, litra j), første afsnit, i forordning nr. 1408/71.
The Court has held, in paragraphs 19 and 20 of its judgment of 16 January 1992 in Commission ν France, that the supplementary retirement pension schemes introduced under agreements concluded by the competent authorities with trade or inter-trade bodies, trade-union organisations or individual undertakings or under collective agreements concluded by both sides of industry, membership of which has been rendered compulsory by Article L 731-5 of the Social Security Code, do not constitute legislation within the meaning of the first subparagraph of Article l(j) of Regulation No 1408/71.
Det følger heraf, at disse ordninger — og det heraf omfattede system med tildeling af gratis point — ikke henhører under det materielle anvendelsesområde for forordning nr. 1408/71, hvorfor de ikke kan vurderes efter bestemmelserne i denne forordning.
In France, in addition to the general old-age insurance scheme, there are supplementary retirement pension schemes established pursuant to collective agreements concluded by both sides of industry.
For så vidt angår princippet om beskyttelse af den berettigede forventning, fjerner den omstændighed, at overenskomsten blev underskrevet for knap 20 år siden, at den franske myndigheder siden har antaget, at en anderledes behandling af grænsearbejdere bosat i Belgien var forenelig med fællesskabsretten, og at nærværende dom kunne få alvorlige økonomiske følger for Den Franske Republik, ikke den diskriminerende karakter af den ved overenskomsten fastsatte ordning med tildeling af gratis point.
Those schemes are financed by contributions paid by both employers and employees to the institution which manages the scheme In terms of Article L 731-5 of the Social Security Code, membership of one of the supplementary schemes is compulsory for employees.
Den franske regering har under retsmødet anmodet Domstolen om, under hensyn til den alvorlige retlige tvivl, som ifølge denne forelå på det pågældende tidspunkt, at begrænse de tidsmæssige konsekvenser af den foreliggende dom, såfremt Domstolen skulle nå frem til, at overenskomstens bestemmelser ikke er forenelige med fællesskabsretten.
It follows that those schemes - together with the system for the validation of concessionary points which forms part thereof — are not covered by Regulation No 1408/71, so that they cannot be assessed in the light of the provisions of that regulation.
I denne sag findes der ikke grundlag for at tilsidesætte princippet om fortolkningsdommes tilbagevirkende gyldighed.
Title IV of the General Agreement of 24 July 1979 for the welfare of employees of steel companies in eastern and northern France affected by reorganisation ('the Agreement') lays down, the welfare scheme applicable to 'employees aged 55 or over who are placed in early retirement'.
Imidlertid udgør dette pointsystem, som er en del af de fordele, som tilfalder arbejdstagere i den pågældende sektor, når deres beskæftigelse er blevet afbrudt førtidigt, et af de afskedigelsesvilkår, som er opregnet i artikel 7, stk. 1, i forordning nr. 1612/68, og som finder anvendelse på dem.
By contrast, the system of validation, which forms an integral part of the advantages granted to workers in the sector concerned upon their being placed in early retirement, constitutes one of the conditions applicable to their dismissal, within the meaning of Article 7(1) of Regulation No 1612/68.
Det følger herved af artikel 7, stk. 4, at enhver bestemmelse i kollektive eller individuelle overenskomster eller andre kollektive aftaler om afskedigelsesvilkår er retligt ugyldig, hvis den indeholder diskriminerende betingelser for arbejdstagere, der er statsborgere i andre medlemsstater.
In that regard, Article 7(4) of that regulation provides that any clause of a collective agreement concerning conditions of dismissal is null and void in so far as it lays down discriminatory conditions in respect of workers who are nationals of other Member States.