natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Sag C­287/87: Komissionen for De Europeiske Fællesskaber «od Den Hellenske Republik
I - JUDGMENTS Case C-287/87: Commission of the European Communities ν Hellenic Republic -18 January 1990 (Transport - Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Failure to transpose into national law Directive 74/562/EEC - Admission to the occupation of road passenger transport operator) (Full Court)
Ved stævning indgivet den 28. september 1987 havde Kommissionen for De Euro­ gennemføre Rådets direktiv 74/562/EØF.
By application lodged on 28 September 1987, the Commission of the European Communities brought an action for a declaration that, by failing to enact and communicate to the Commission within the prescribed period the measures necessary in order to comply with Council Directive 74/562/EEC, the Hellenic Republic had failed to fulfil its obligations under the EEC Treaty.
Under skriftvekslingen benægtede den hellenske regering ikke, at direktivet InflrTJ-^¡^ aennemført ¡ dens retsorden inden for den fastsatte frist.
The Greek Government, during the written procedure, did not deny that the directive had not been transposed into its national legal system within the prescribed period.
Den anførte imidlertid, at forsinkelsen skyldtes den omstændighed, at tilpasningen af græsk ret viste sig at være meget vanskelig. ^pasningen
However, it stated that the delay in implementing the directive was due to the fact that it was proving very difficult to adapt Greek law.
Efter at skriftvekslingen var afsluttet, meddelte den græske regering Domsto­len, at præsidentens dekret om tilpasning af græsk lovgivning til bestemmel­ r k t
After the completion of the written procedure, the Greek Government informed the Court that the presidential decree adapting Greek legislation to the provisions of Directive 74/562/EEC had been published in the Official Journal of the Hellenic Republic of 14 December 1988.
1988 · måneder efter nï£n£î **? 'offentliggørelsen.
That decree entered into force two months after its publication.
Ï tldUgert praksis, hvorefter genstanden tor en sag, som Kommissionen har anlagt i henhold til artikel 169, er fastsat i Kommissionens begrundede udtalelse, og hvorefter der selv i tilfælde hvor mangelen fjernes efter den frist, der er fastsat i samme artikel stk
The Court pointed out in that regard that it had consistently held that the object of an action under Article 169 was established by the Commission's reasoned opinion, and even when the default had been remedied subsequently to the time limit prescribed by paragraph 2 of the same Article, there was still an interest in continuing the proceedings in order to establish the basis of a responsibility that a Member State could incur as a result of its default, as regards other Member States, the Community or individuals.
2 sîa­ difl er knyttet interesse til sagens forfølgning med henblik på fastsættelsen af grundlaget for det ansvar, som en medlemsstat som følge af sin pass v te?
Since the Commission continued with the action, the Court emphasized that, having regard to the arguments put forward by the Greek Government to justify the delay in transposing the directive in question, it was established case-law that a Member State could not plead provisions, practices or circumstances existing in its internal legal system in order
Den Hellenske Republik har ikke overholdt de forpligtelser, der påhviler den i henhold til EØF-Traktaten, idet den ikke inden for a t S e f r t
By failing to enact and communicate to the Commission within the prescribed period the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary in order to comply with Council Directive 74/562/EEC of 12 November 1974 on admission to the occupation of road passenger transport operator in national and international transport operations, as amended by Council Directive 80/1179/EEC of 4 December 1980, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty.
Generaladvokat Giuseppe Tesauro fremsatte følgende forslag til afgørelse den 7. december 1989:
He proposed that the Court should:
"- Det statueres, at Den Hellenske Republik ikke har overholdt de forpligtelser, der påhviler den i henhold til EØF-Traktaten, idet den ikke inden for den fastsatte frist har truffet og meddelt Kommissionen de administrativt eller ved lov fastsatte foranstaltninger, der er nødvendige for at gennemføre direktiv 74/562/EØF, som ændret ved direktiv 80/1179/EØF;
"(a) Declare that by failing to enact and communicate to the Commission within the prescribed period the laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary to comply with Directive 75/562/EEC, as amended by Directive 80/1179/EEC, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EEC Treaty;
- Den Hellenske Republik betaler sagens omkostninger."
(b) Order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs."
Sag C-295/88: SA Nicolas Corman et Fils mod den belgiske stat og Storhertugdømmet Luxembourg 18.1.1990 indført
Case C-295/88: Nicolas Corman et Fils S.A. ν Belgian State and Grand Duchy of Luxembourg - 18 January 1990 (preliminary ruling) (Agriculture - Export refunds and monetary compensatory amounts - Goods imported under an incorrect tariff heading) (First Chamber)
Ved rnellemdom, afsagt den 29. september 1988 og indgået til Domstolen den 11. oktober s.a., havde Cour d'appel de Bruxelles stillet fire præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af en række fællesskabsbestemmelser om ydelse af eksportrestitutioner og monetære udligningsbeløb.
By an interlocutory judgment of 29 September 1988, which reached the Court on 11 November 1988, the Court of Appeal, Brussels, referred four questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of several provisions of Community law relating to the grant of export refunds and monetary compensatory amounts.
- 4 - havde medført udtrækning et basisprodukt, der var omfattet af Traktatens bilag II, at dette produkt ikke kunne betragtes som et nyt produkt eller udgøre et vigtigt trin i fremstillingen som omhandlet i artikel 5 i forordning nr. 802/68 og derfor ikke kunne anerkendes som havende oprindelse i Fællesskabet, kunne føre til, at "nutrix" blev betragtet som et basisprodukt med henblik på en senere anvendelse af reglerne om ydelse af eksportrestitutioner og monetære udligningsbeløb i forbindelse med udførsel fra Fællesskabet af de produkter, som var udtrukket ved forarbejdningen af varen.
Those questions arose in a dispute between Corman and the Belgian State and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg concerning Corman's entitlement to refunds and monetary compensatory amounts for exporting from the Community a basic product, "butteroil", obtained by processing a substance called "nutrix" which was not covered by Annex II to the EEC Treaty and which was initially considered to be of French origin but which, after inquiries had been made, turned out to have originated in Austria, from where it had been imported into France under an incorrect tariff heading, which resulted in a lower levy being applied than would have been applied under the correct tariff heading.
Det andet spørgsmål vedrørte fortolkningen af artikel 9 i Rådets forordning nr. 2682/72 om fastsættelse af almindelige regler for ydelse af eksportrestitutioner og om fastlæggelse af kriterierne for fastsættelse af restitutionsbeløbet for visse landbrugsprodukter, der udføres i form af varer, som ikke omfattes af Traktatens bilag II.
802/68 and could not therefore be recognized as being of Community origin - could cause "nutrix" to be considered a basic product for the purposes of the subsequent application of the rules relating to the grant of export refunds and monetary compensatory amounts upon exportation from the Community of substances obtained by processing those goods.
Hertil fastslog Domstolen under hensyn til forordningens anvendelsesområde, at den nævnte artikel kun udelukkede ydelse af en restitution til udførsel af varer uden for bilag II, som tidligere som sådanne var blevet indført fra tredjelande og bragt i fri omsætning i Fællesskabet.
The Court emphasized in that regard that the foregoing circumstances did not in any way affect the designation of goods with regard to Annex II of the Treaty.
Artiklen kunne derfor ikke anvendes på udførsel af et basisprodukt som "butteroil", selv om dette var blevet udtrukket ved forarbejdning af en vare uden for bilag II, som var indført fra et tredjeland.
Regardless of the purpose of the designation, it depended exclusively on the tariff classification of the goods in question according to the Brussels Nomenclature to which Annex II of the Treaty made reference.
Det tredje spørnsmål vedrørte de fællesskabsretlige regler, som var grundlaget for de rocpektive beregninger af på den ene side restitutionerne ved udførsel fra Fællesskabet af et basisprodukt som "butteroil" og på den anden side de monetære udligningsbeløb, som eventuelt skulle ydes eksportøren.
The second question concerned the interpretation of Article 9 of Council Regulation No. 2682/72 laying down general rules for granting export refunds on certain agricultural products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex II to the Treaty, and the general criteria for fixing the amount of such refunds.
Udførsel fra Fællesskabet af dette produkt kunne derfor medføre ydelse af monetære udligningsbeløb.
It did not apply to the exportation of a basic product, such as butteroil, even if that product was obtained by processing goods not covered by Annex II imported from a non-member country.
Domstolen bemærkede hertil, at i en situation som den foreliggende, hvor et produkt var blevet genudført til et tredjeland efter udførsel fra en medlemsstat til en anden medlemsstat, begrænsede artikel 12 i den nævnte forordning nr. 1380/75 sig til at underkaste ydelsen af monetære udligningsbeløb den betingelse, at et sådant beløb var blevet beregnet ved indførslen i den genudfØrende medlemsstat, eller at der på denne stats vegne var blevet gjort brug af den mulighed, som er fastsat i artikel 2a i Rådets forordning nr. 974/71, som er grundlaget og den almindelige ramme for anvendelse af de monetære udligningsbeløb.
With regard to the first point, and having regard to the fact that the national court had ruled that the butteroil exported in the present case could not be considered to be of Community origin, the Court pointed out that the export of that product from the Community could qualify for refunds only on the basis of Article 7 of Regulation No. 876/68 which made entitlement to refund conditional on proof that the product to be exported and the product previously imported were the same and that the levy had been collected when the product was imported.
Når denne betingelse var opfyldt, indeholdt den nævnte bestemmelse derimod ingen begrænsning, for så vidt angår summen af de beløb, der kunne ydes som monetære udligningsbeløb.
However, the condition that the product must be the same could not be considered to have been met in a situation such as the one in the present case where the product exported was a basic product obtained by processing goods not covered by Annex II.
Artiklen omfatter derimod ikke udførsel af et basisprodukt, der er fremkommet ved forarbejdning af en tidligere indført vare uden for bilag II.
The fourth question concerned the limits applicable to any monetary compensatory amounts which may be payable upon exportation of a basic product such as butteroil.
- 6 - i Fællesskabet. Udførsel fra Fællesskabet af dette produkt kan imidlertid under de i Rådets forordning nr. 974/71 og i artikel 12, stk. 1, sidste afsnit, i Kommissionens forordning nr. 1380/75 fastsatte betingelser medføre ydelse af monetære udligningsbeløb.
6 - making application of a monetary compensatory amount conditional on a monetary compensatory amount having been applied upon entry into the reexporting Member State or on the exercise on behalf of that State of the option provided for in Article 2a of Council Regulation 974/71, which constitutes the basis and the general framework of the system of monetary compensatory amounts.
Artikel 6, stk. 1, i forordning (EØF) nr. 876/68 skal, uden at dette berører bestemmelserne i artikel 7, fortolkes således, at udførsel af produkter, der er nævnt i artikel 1 i forordning (EØF) nr. 804/68, men som ikke har oprindelse i Fællesskabet, ikke kan medføre ydelse af eksportrestitutioner.
Neither the incorrect classification of goods upon their importation into the Community, nor a bona fide mistake by the purchaser as to the origin of the goods, nor the nature of the product extracted from those goods by processing, nor, finally, the fact that that product cannot be regarded as being of Community origin because of the insubstantial character of the processing carried out can cause goods not falling under Annex II to the Treaty to be considered a basic product covered by the said Annex for the purposes of the subequent application of the rules relating to the grant of export refunds and extraCommunity compensatory amounts upon the exportation outside the Community of substances extracted in the processing of those goods.
Udførsel til tredjelande af et produkt, der er omfattet af forordning (EØF) nr. 804/68, kan under de betingelser, der følger af forordning (EØF) nr. 974/71 og artikel 12, stk. 1, tredje afsnit, i forordning (EØF) nr. 1380/75, medføre ydelse af monetære udligningsbeløb også for produkter, som ikke har oprindelse i Fællesskabet".
Article 9 of Regulation No. 2682/72 of the Council of 12 December 1972 must be interpreted as excluding export refunds only in respect of goods not covered by Annex II exported in their natural state or after processing which have been previously imported as such from non-member countries and put into free circulation in the Community.
Sag C-345/88: Forbundsrepublikken Tyskland mod Firma Butter-Absatz Osnabrück-Easland e.G. 18.1.1990 husdyr,
Article 9 does not, however, apply to the export of a basic product resulting from the processing of goods not covered by Annex II which have been previously imported.
Ved kendelse af 1. september 1988, indgået til Domstolen den 28. november 1988, havde Bundesverwaltungsgericht stillet nogle præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende gyldigheden og fortolkningen af en række bestemmelser i Kommissionens forordning nr. 2793/77.
Regulation No. 876/68 of the Council of 28 June 1968 laying down general rules for granting export refunds on milk and milk products and criteria for fixing the amount of such refunds excludes entitlement to a refund for exports outside the Community of a basic product extracted in the processing of goods not covered by Annex II which cannot be considered to be of Community origin.
- 7 - litra b), andet led, og i artikel 5, stk. 3, litra b), i forordning nr. 2793/77 ikke rettidigt havde fået indsendt besætningsopgørelser for fem brugere med specialiserede bedrifter.
compensatory amounts under the conditions laid down by Regulation No. 974/71 of the Council and the last subparagraph of Article 12 (1) of Regulation No. 1380/75 of the Commission.
Med det første spørgsmål Ønskedes fastslået, om Kommissionen havde kompetence til at udstede bestemmelsen i artikel 5, stk. 3, litra b), i forordning nr. 2793/77, idet bestemmelsen, for så vidt som det heri pålægges mejeriet at afgive en erklæring vedrørende de af brugerne påtagne forpligtelser, hævdedes at knytte en yderligere materiel betingelse til de i rådsforordningerne fastsatte betingelser for ydelse af særstøtten.
The monetary compensatory amounts which may be due upon the exportation of a basic product such as "butteroil" must not be limited according to the duties actually levied on importation into the Community or according to the duties which should have been levied in accordance with the correct tariff position".
Med det andet spørgsmål Ønskede den nationale ret fastslået, om den fastsatte sanktion, nemlig tilbagebetaling af den udbetalte støtte, ikke er uforholdsmæssig i forhold til en ubetydelig forsinkelse på nogle få dage med indsendelsen af de foreskrevne besætningsopgørelser.
Article 6 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No. 876/68 must be interpreted, without prejudice to Article 7, as meaning that the export of products which are mentioned in Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No. 804/68 but which are not of Community origin does not give rise to the application of export refunds.
Domstolen bemærkede først, at der ved Kommissionens forordning nr. 188/83 er indsat et nyt stykke i artikel 4 i forordning nr. 2793/77, hvorefter der, såfremt de opgørelser, som skal indgives til mejeriet over besætningens størrelse, indsendes for sent, men forsinkelsen ikke overstiger 10 dage, sker en nedsættelse af støtten for den pågældende periode med 10%.
Export to a non-member country of a product covered by Regulation (EEC) No. 804/68 can also give rise, under the conditions laid down 1n Regulation (EEC) No. 974/71 and the third subparagraph of Article 12 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No. 1380/75, to the application of monetary compensatory amounts for products which are not of Community origin".
På baggrund af denne retstilstand - bemærkede Domstolen - kunne det spørgsmål yderligere rejses, om det ikke er i strid med proportionalitetsprincippet, at retten til særstøtten bortfalder fuldt ud, såfremt den fastsatte frist overskrides med mere end 10 dage.
Case: C-345/88: Federal Republic of Germany ν Butter-Absatz Osnabrück-Emsland e.G. - 18 January 1990 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) (Agriculture - Aid for skimmed milk for use as feed for animals other than young calves - Time-limits for declarations)
Det var ved det tredje spørgsmål lagt til grund, at den pågældende medlemsstat ikke pr. 1. januar 1980 havde benyttet den valgret, der hjemles i Kommissionens forordning nr. 1438/79 om fjerde ændring af forordning nr. 2793/77; i henhold til bestemmelsen herom skal brugeren enten forpligte sig til at sende mejeriet en opgørelse over sin besætning inden begyndelsen af hvert kvartal -som efter den hidtidige ordning - eller forpligte sig til inden begyndelsen af hvert kalenderår at sende en erklæring vedrørende besætningens gennemsnitlige størrelse.
By order of 1 September 1988, which was received at the Court on 28 November 1988, the Bundesverwaltungsgericht [Federal Administrative Court] referred a number of questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling on the validity and interpretation of certain provisions of Commission Regulation No. 2793/77.
Den nationale ret ønskede således klarlagt, om brugerens forpligtelse til at tilsende mejeriet en besætningsopgørelse hvert kvartal i denne situation er faldet bort, eller om den består, indtil medlemsstaten har benyttet sin valgmulighed.
Those questions were raised in a dispute between Butter-Absatz, a dairy, and the Federal Office for Food and Forestry which had demanded
Det måtte tværtimod lægges til grund, at støtteordningen som reguleret i de forskellige fælles skabsforordninger kun kan virke effektivt på grundlag af brugerens forpligtelse til at meddele oplysninger om besætningens størrelse.
repayment of the special aid granted to the dairy on the ground that, contrary to the provisions of Article 4 (1) (b) second indent and Article 5 (3) (b) of Regulation No. 2793/77, the dairy had not received in due time the statements as to herd size from five specialized farmers.
Påstandene vedrørende afgørelsen af 31. marts 1987
He suggested that the questions should be answered as follows:
Fagforeningsrepræsentanterne skal således med dette formål for øje indrømmes tjenestefrihed efter nærmere regler, som ensidigt eller efter fælles overenskomst fastsættes af vedkommende myndighed i hver enkelt fællesskabsinstitution eller hvert enkelt fællesskabsorgan.
Article 5 (3) (b) of Commission Regulation No. 2793/77, in the version of the regulation in force before 30 January 1983, must be regarded as invalid on the ground that it infringed the principle of proportionality in so far as it provided that a dairy applying for special aid had to repay the whole of the special aid in respect of the farmer and calendar quarter in question if a farmer had failed to abide by the undertaking given pursuant to the second indent of Article 4 (1) (b) to supply before the beginning of each quarter a statement of the size of his herd, even 1f the farmer had only slightly exceeded the prescribed period for the statement (by ten days or less) and it had been established that the farmer had otherwise complied with the obligations of the special aid scheme.
I øvrigt frifindes sagsøgte for de af Henri Maurissen nedlagte påstande.
Consideration of the questions raised has not disclosed any other factor of such a kind as to affect the validity of Article 5 (3) (b) of Commission Regulation No. 2793/77.
Generaladvokat Marco Darmon fremsatte forslag til afgørelse den 5. december
Mr Maurissen's claims challenging the decision of 17 March 1987
"- Den af Revisionsrettens formand trufne afgørelse af 31. marts 1987, hvorved der blev givet afslag på at indrømme repræsentanter for Union Syndicale tjenestefrihed til deltagelse i møder med Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber om lønninger, kriseafgift og ændringer af tjenestemandsvedtægten, bør annulleres.
Such a decision would be open to criticism only if the right to the advantage which it denied could be based, as Mr Maurissen maintained, either on a general principle of labour law applicable in the Community's legal system, or on the Staff Regulations or the unilateral provisions or agreements adopted for their implementation, or else on the existence of a duty of care.
- I Øvrigt bør sagsøgte frifindes for de af Henri Maurissen nedlagte påstande.
The nature of the principle of trade union freedom could not be extended so as to impose an obligation on the Community institutions and bodies to place their messenger services at the disposal of trade union organizations.
- Revisionsretten bør tilpligtes at betale en tredjedel af Henri Maurissens omkostninger, og i øvrigt bør hver part, herunder intervenienten, tilpligtes at bære sine egne omkostninger".
Nor did Article 24a of the Staff Regulations contain any details concerning the grant of such facilities; finally, the duty of care could not be relied upon in order to resolve problems relating to collective agreements between the Community institutions and bodies, on the one hand, and the trade union or professional organizations, on the other.
16.1.1990 Traktatbrud - ufuldstændig gennemførelse af Rådets direktiv 79/409/EØF om beskyttelse af vilde fugle. Generaladvokat: W. van Gerven. Processprog: nederlandsk.
The Court pointed out, in the first place, that the Community institutions and bodies were under an obligation to allow those trade union activities which were necessary in order to ensure effective participation in the process of co-ordination provided for by the Council's decision of 23 June 1981.
Sag C-259/87: Grækenland mod Kommissionen
The Court held as follows:
Sag C-334/87: Grækenland mod Kommissionen
The decision of the President of the Court of Auditors of 31 March 1987 is annulled.
Sag C-335/87: Grækenland mod Kommissionen
For the rest, Mr Maurissen's claims are dismissed.
Sag C-132/88: Kommissionen mod Grækenland
Case C-10/88
17.1.1990 Traktatbrud - EØF-Traktatens artikel 95 - særlig forbrugsafgift og fast indregistreringsafgift på motorkøretøjer med et slagvolumen på over 1800 cm3, som importeres fra andre medlemsstater. stater.
Italy ν Commission - 16 January 1990 Annulment of Commission Decision 87/541/EEC of 21 October 1987 - Clearance of the EAGGF accounts for the 1984 and 1985 financial years - Calving premium Advocate General: W. Van Gerven Language of the case: Italian
Processprog: græsk.
Case C-259/87
Processprog: tysk.
Lenz Language of the case: Greek
B. For Retten i Første Instans
Case C-334/87
(Tjenestemandssag)
Lenz Language of the case: Greek
(Tjenestemandssag)
Before the Court of Justice
(Tjenestemandssag)
Case C-10/89
Processprog: tysk.
Case T-42/89
Sag C-375/89: Kommissionen mod Beligen
Marcopoulos ν Court of Justice - 17 January 1990 (Staff Case)
Processprog: tysk.
Case C-373/89