natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Sag C-32/95 Ρ 32 Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber / Lisrestal - Organização e Gestão de Restaurantes Colectivos, Ld.a m.fl.
Case T­391/94 Jean Baiwir ν Commission of the European Communities Staff case
Sag T-391/94 Jean Baiwir / Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber Personalesag
Bayer AG ν Commission of the European Communities Competition
Sag C-101/94 Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber / Den Italienske Republik Fri bevægelighed for personer
Case C-101/94 Commission of the European Communities ν Italian Republic Freedom of movement for persons
»Børsmæglervirksomhed* (Domstolens plenum) om værdipapirmarkedets organisation hedder det:
(Dealing in transferable (Full Court)
»(Børs)selskabet skal være stiftet som et aktieselskab eller et kommanditaktieselskab; dets navn skal indeholde ordene 'Società di intermediazione mobiliare', og selskabet skal have hjemsted i Italien (...)«.
«The [dealer in securities] must be constituted in the form of a limited company (società per azioni), must include in its company name the words "società di intermediazione mobiliare* and have its registered office on Italian territory ...».
Klagepunktet om tilsidesættelse af traktatens artikel 52
The alleged infringement of Article 52 of the Treaty
Børsmæglererhvervet i Italien kan i forhold til offentligheden foruden af bankerne kun udøves af børsmæglerselskaber (»società di intermediazione mobiliare«, herefter »SIM«), som har fået tilladelse hertil af den nationale selskabs- og børskommission (»Commissione nazionale per le società e la borsa«, herefter »Consob«).
By application lodged at the Court Registry on 22 March 1994, the Commission of the European Communities brought an action under Article 169 of the EC Treaty for a declaration that, by restricting the activity of dealing in transferable securities (apart from by banks) to companies or firms whose registered office is in Italy, the Italian Republic had failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 52 and 59 of the EC Treaty.
Traktatens artikel 52, som er en af Fællesskabets grundlæggende bestemmelser, har med hensyn til etablering navnlig til formål at sikre, at statsborgere fra en medlemsstat, som, selv sekundært, vil etablere sig i en anden medlemsstat med henblik på at udøve selvstændig erhvervsvirksomhed dér, behandles efter samme regler som landets egne statsborgere.
Article 52 of the Treaty, which embodies one of the fundamental principles of the Community, is intended inter alia to ensure, with respect to establishment, that all nationals of Member States who wish to establish themselves in another Member State, even if that establishment is only secondary, for the purpose of pursuing activities there as self­employed persons receive the same treatment as nationals of that State.
For at få tilladelse til at udøve børsmæglervirksomhed skal SIM'erne opfylde visse betingelser, navnlig vedrørende deres retlige organisationsform, størrelsen af deres stiftelseskapital og deres lederes og aktionærers hæderlighed.
The profession of dealing in transferable securities may be carried on in Italy with respect to the public (apart from by banks) only by securities firms (società di intermediazione mobiliare, hereinafter «SIM») which have been authorized to do so by the Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (National Commission for Companies and the Stock Exchange, hereinafter «Consob»).
I artikel 3, stk. 2, litra a), i lov nr. 1 af 2. februar 1991 om regulering af børsmæglervirksomhed og
To obtain such authorization, the SIM must satisfy certain conditions relating inter alia to their legal form, the amount of their initial capital, and the probity of their managers and shareholders.
Artiklen forbyder al forskelsbehandling af statsborgere fra andre medlemsstater i henhold til nationale love, administrativt fastsatte bestemmelser eller forvaltningspraksis.
That article prohibits any discrimination against nationals of other Member States resulting from national legislation, regulations or practices.
Den forbyder navnlig enhver national bestemmelse, der kan stille statsborgere i andre medlemsstater
It prohibits in particular all national rules which are liable to place nationals of other Member States in a legal or factual situation which is less favourable than the situation, in the same circumstances, of a national of the Member State of establishment.
i en retlig eller faktisk situation, som er ufordelagtig i forhold til den situation, der under de samme omstændigheder gælder for en statsborger i etableringsmedlemsstaten.
States from using certain forms of secondary establishment or that it causes them to incur additional costs which Italian dealers do not have to bear. It simply argues that that difference in treatment is objectively justified.
Den italienske regering bestrider ikke, at dens lovgivning forhindrer børsmæglere fra de andre medlemsstater i at benytte visse former for sekundær etablering, og at den pålægger dem yderligere udgifter, som de italienske børsmæglere ikke skal bære.
The Italian Government considers that it is not possible to compare the conditions laid down by the Italian legislation with those laid down by the other Member States, as the Commission suggests.
Den gør blot gældende, at denne forskelsbehandling er objektivt begrundet.
It submits that that is the case in particular with guarantees regarding companies' own funds, which are determined by a method different from that used in the other Member States.
Selv om forpligtelsen til at have hjemsted i Italien letter tilsynet og kontrollen med de erhvervsdrivende på markedet, står det dog fast, at en sådan forpligtelse ikke er den eneste måde, hvorpå man dels kan sikre, at de erhvervsdrivende overholder de regler for udøvelsen af børsmæglervirksomhed, som er fastsat af den italienske lovgiver, dels effektivt kan iværksætte sanktioner over for de erhvervsdrivende, som overtræder disse regler.
As the Commission observes, it is possible to require dealers who wish to operate in Italy to agree to be subject to checks or to supply the Italian authorities with the necessary documents and information to ensure that they satisfy the conditions imposed by Italian law. In particular, they could be required to supply information and documents relating specifically to the activities of their secondary establishments in Italy.
Regeringen gør gældende, at dette navnlig er tilfældet, for så vidt angår garantierne med hensyn til egenkapital, som fastsættes efter en anden metode end den, der anvendes i de andre medlemsstater.
With respect to the solvency of operators, activity in Italy can be made subject to the provision of financial guarantees on Italian territory to cover the operations carried out on that territory.
Man kan navnlig forestille sig et krav om, at selskaberne giver oplysninger og stiller dokumenter til rådighed, som specifikt vedrører den virksomhed, der udøves af deres sekundære etableringer i Italien.
Furthermore, the Italian authorities might conclude cooperation agreements regarding supervision of markets and agents, as is the case with nonmember countries.
Som Kommissionen har anført, åbner den italienske lovgivning imidlertid mulighed for at foretage en sammenligning af de indenlandske og de udenlandske regler.
However, as the Commission observes, the Italian legislation itself admits the possibility of comparing the national and foreign rules.
Specielt er Consob bemyndiget til at indgå aftaler med tilsynsmyndighederne i de andre lande om gensidig anerkendelse af de regulerede værdipapirmarkeder, og Consob skal sikre, at en række kriterier, herunder reglerne om tilsyn med markederne og børsmæglerne, har »tilsvarende virkning som de gældende italienske regler«.
In particular, under Article 20(8) of the Law, Consob is empowered to conclude with the supervisory authorities of other countries agreements for the mutual recognition of regulated securities markets, and it is for Consob to satisfy itself that certain standards, including the rules for supervision of markets and dealers, have an effect «equivalent to that of the Italian rules in force».
Med hensyn til de erhvervsdrivendes solvens kan deres udøvelse af virksomhed i Italien gøres betinget af, at der stilles finansielle garantier i Italien til dækning af de forretninger, der udføres i landet.
The Italian Government cannot rely on Article 56 of the EC Treaty, either, to argue that its legislation is consistent with Community law.
Endvidere kan man også forestille sig, at de italienske myndigheder indgår samarbejdsaftaler med hensyn til tilsyn med markederne og med mæglerne, som det er tilfældet med tredjelande.
Moreover, according to the Commission, which was not contradicted on this point, the different methods used by Member States to determine own funds requirements ensure equivalent protection overall, even if one method may prove more protective, case by case, than another.
Endvidere giver de forskellige metoder, medlemsstaterne anvender med henblik på at fastsætte kravene til egenkapitalen, set under ét en tilsvarende sikkerhed, selv om én metode i konkrete tilfælde kan vise sig at yde større beskyttelse end andre.
Even if the aims pursued by the Italian legislation may be regarded as aims of «public policy» within the meaning of those provisions, it follows a fortiori from what has been said above that the obligations at issue are not indispensable for achieving those aims and thus cannot be regarded as justified from the point of view of those provisions.
Den italienske regering er ligeledes af den opfattelse, at der ikke effektivt kan føres tilsyn med og iværksættes sanktioner over for børsmæglerne, hvis de ikke primært er etableret i Italien.
The Italian Government also considers that dealers cannot be supervised and effectively sanctioned unless they have their principal establishment in Italy.
Regeringen finder nemlig, at det kun er muligt at få adgang til alle de oplysninger, der er nødvendige for tilsynet, og som sikrer, at sanktionerne bliver effektive, hvis hovedvirksomheden, og især selskabets hjemsted, er beliggende på italiensk område.
It considers that only if the principal establishment, and in particular the registered office, is located on the national territory is it possible to have all the information available which is necessary for supervision and all the factors which ensure that sanctions are effective.
retten til fri udveksling af tjenesteydelser og er ikke en tvingende nødvendig betingelse for at nå det tilstræbte mål.
The obligation for operators from other Member States to set up their principal establishment in Italy is the very negation of the freedom to provide services and, as can be seen from paragraphs 20 to 24 above, does not constitute a condition which is indispensable for attaining the aim pursued.
Den er derfor i strid med traktatens artikel 59.
It therefore infringes Article 59 of the Treaty.
Den italienske regering kan heller ikke støtte sig på bestemmelserne i EF-traktatens artikel 66.
Nor can the Italian Government rely on the provisions of Article 66 of the EC Treaty, for the same reasons as those stated at paragraph 26 above.
Den kan heller ikke påberåbe sig traktatbrud begået af andre medlemsstater som begrundelse for sit eget traktatbrud.
It also cannot rely on failures by other
Lenz fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet fDomstolens plenum1) den 19. marts 1996.
Lenz delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Full Court on 19 March 1996.
Den Italienske Republik har endvidere tilsidesat sine forpligtelser i henhold til EF-traktatens artikel 59, idet den har bestemt, at børsmæglervirksomhed — ud over af banker — kun kan udøves af selskaber med hjemsted i Italien.
By order of 27 October 1993, received at the Court on 3 May 1994, the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling under Article 177 of the EC Treaty several questions on the interpretation of Article 3a(l) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 857/84 of 31 March 1984 adopting general rules for the application of the levy referred to in Article 5c of Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 in the
Præjudiciel »Ordning om mælkeproduktionskvoter — tildeling medlemsstaternes kompetence og/eller pligter· (Femte Afdeling)
As to the second condition, which made the producer's eligibility for a special reference quantity subject to the requirement that he had not obtained a reference quantity under the conditions laid down, inter alia, by Article 2 of Regulation No 857/84, it should be noted that Ecroyd Limited had already obtained primary quota under that provision in respect of the five farms on which it had continued milk production.
Ved kendelse af 27. oktober 1993, indgået til Domstolen den 3. maj 1994, har High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, forelagt en række præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af artikel 3a, stk. 1, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 857/84 om almindelige regler for anvendelsen af den i artikel 5c i forordning (EØF) nr. 804/68 omhandlede afgift på mælk og mejeriprodukter, som ændret ved Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 764/89 og ved Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1639/91.
Ecroyd Limited did not, therefore, satisfy that second condition laid down by the rules then in force.
navnlig i medfør af forordningens artikel 3a, stk. 1, havde pligt til at tildele midlertidige specifikke referencemængder til producenter, der befandt sig i den beskrevne situation som angivet, eller om den havde kompetence hertil.
The national court's first question seeks to ascertain whether the competent national authority had a duty pursuant to Regulation No 857/84, as amended by Regulation No 764/89, and in particular under Article 3a(l) thereof, to award a provisional special reference quantity to producers finding themselves in the circumstances described under points (a) to (e) of that question, or whether it had the power to do so.
Den forelæggende ret har desuden spurgt, om den nationale myndighed efter afsigelsen af dom af 3. december 1992 i Wehrssagen (herefter »Wehrsdommen«) havde pligt til at tildele midlertidige specifikke referencemængder til producenter, der befandt sig i den ovennævnte situation, eller om den havde kompetence hertil.
In its judgment in Wehrs the Court held that the second indent of Article 3a(l) of Regulation No 857/84, as amended by Regulation No 764/89, was invalid in so far as persons taking over a premium granted pursuant to Regulation No 1078/77 were barred from allocation of a special reference quantity if they had received a reference quantity under Article 2 of Regulation No 857/84.
Første del af det første spørgsmål
The first part of (Question 1
Spørgsmålene er rejst i forbindelse med seks separate sager, som er anlagt ved den forelæggende ret til prøvelse af afslag fra Ministeriet for Landbrug, Fiskeri og Ernæring (herefter »ministeriet«) på at tildele sagsøgerne mælkekvoter.
In its observations Ecroyd Limited claimed essentially that, since its situation was comparable to that of Mr Wehrs, the Ministry should, following the judgment in Wehrs, have recognized its right ex tunc to a special reference quantity without waiting for the Council to adopt new rules, as it did in Regulation No 2055/93, because in the present case the illegality left in place a valid and applicable system.
Efter en kendelse fra den forelæggende ret om frafald af de spørgsmål, som var forelagt i forbindelse med fire af sagerne, foreligger for Domstolen kun de spørgsmål, som er blevet indbragt i forbindelse med to af hovedsagerne, nemlig de sager, som er anlagt af henholdsvis H. & R. Ecroyd Holdings Ltd (herefter »Ecroyd Limited«) og John Rupert Ecroyd (herefter »Rupert Ecroyd«). Det skal indledningsvis præciseres, at en producent for at kunne kræve en midlertidig specifik referencemængde i henhold til de regler, som er relevante for den foreliggende sag, ikke kun — direkte eller som efterfølger til en landbrugsbedrift — skal have deltaget i en ikkemarkedsføringsordning som indført ved Rådets forordning nr. 1078/77, hvorved der bl.a. indførtes en præmieordning for ikkemarkedsføring af mælk og mejeriprodukter, men desuden heller ikke må have opnået nogen referencemængde på de betingelser, der navnlig er fastsat i artikel 2 i forordning nr. 857/84.
To claim entitlement to a provisional special reference quantity under the relevant rules in this case, a producer must not only have participated, either in that capacity or as successor to an agricultural holding, in a nonmarketing scheme such as that established by Regulation No 1078/77, but must also not have obtained a reference quantity under the conditions laid down, inter alia, by Article 2 of Regulation No 857/84.
Spørgsmålene i Ecroyd Limited-sagen
That argument cannot be accepted.
Den nationale ret ønsker oplyst, om den nationale myndighed i medfør af forordning nr. 857/84, som ændret ved forordning nr. 764/89, og
The conclusions which may be drawn in the national legal systems from such a ruling of invalidity depend, on any view, directly on Community law as it stands in the light of that ruling.
Hvad angår den første betingelse er det uomtvistet, at Ecroyd Limited efter opløsningen af Credenhill Farming overtog dettes aktiver, videreførte dets aktiviteter og blev enebestyrer af bedriften, idet Ecroyd Limited herved overholdt den ikke-markedsføringsforpligtelse, som
As to the first condition, it is not disputed that, following the dissolution of Credenhill Fanning, Ecroyd Limited took over its assets and business and became the sole operator of the holding, while still observing the nonmarketing undertaking previously given by Credenhill Farming, although not having formally undertaken to do so.
Det kan ikke tiltrædes, at manglende opfyldelse af en simpel formalitet, som indgåelsen af en forpligtelse om at sikre gennemførelsen af de af forgængeren indgåede forpligtelser, medfører, at efterfølgeren til en landbrugsbedrift udelukkes fra ikke-markedsføringsordningen, på samme på måde, som hvis denne ikke reelt havde overholdt ikke-markedsføringsforpligtelsen.
Following the ruling in Wehrs that the antiaccumulation rule was invalid but before adoption of Regulation No 2055/93 and in the presence of a complex system such as that of milk quotas, the state of the law relevant to the present case did not of itself, that is to say without readjustment of that system, permit the allocation of a special reference quantity to a producer in the situation of Ecroyd Limited.
Hvad angår et komplekst system som det, der gælder for mælkekvoter, bemærkes, at de retsregler, der er relevante for nærværende sag, som disse fremstod efter, at antikumulationsreglen blev kendt ugyldig i Wehrs-dommen og forud for vedtagelsen af Rådets forordning nr. 2055/93 om tildeling af en specifik referencemængde til visse producenter af mælk og mejeriprodukter, ikke i sig selv, dvs. uden en tilpasning af systemet, gjorde det muligt at tildele en specifik referencemængde til en producent, som befandt sig i Ecroyd Limited's situation.
to one-quarter of the trust fund in 1983, which included, inter alia, Lyvers Ocle; second, that Lyvers Ocle was transferred to him by the trustees so that he could continue to operate the holding; and, finally, that the arrangement which enabled him to start operating Lyvers Ocle in 1987, whether characterized as a sub-tenancy or merely a family arrangement, was an integral part of the inheritance scheme.
Det andet spørgsmål
(Question 2
Ecroyd Limited opfyldte derfor ikke den anden betingelse, som var foreskrevet i de da gældende regler.
The second question asks essentially whether Article 3a(l) of Regulation No 857/84, as amended by Regulation No 764/89, is invalid in so far as it excludes producers finding themselves in the circumstances described.
Det ønskes i det væsentlige oplyst, om artikel 3a, stk. 1, i forordning nr. 857/84, som ændret ved forordning nr. 764/89, er ugyldig, i det omfang den udelukker producenter, der befinder sig i den beskrevne situation.
It follows from paragraphs 45 to 52 of this judgment that Ecroyd Limited's situation can be compared to that of a transferee of a premium granted under Regulation No 1078/77 who has obtained a reference quantity under Article 2 of Regulation No 857/84.
Andel del af det første spørgsmål
The questions concerning the Rupert Ecroyd case
Som det fremgår af nærværende dom, kan Ecroyd Limited's situation sammenlignes med situationen for en erhverver af en præmie, tildelt i medfør af forordning nr. 1078/77, som har opnået en referencemængde i henhold artikel 2 i forordning nr. 857/84.
None of those who might have been originators, in a situation such as that in point in this case, was entitled to a special reference quantity under Article 3a, in particular under the second indent of the last subparagraph of Article 3a(l), of Regulation No 857/84 as amended by Regulation No 764/89 and Regulation No 1639/91.
Spørgsmålene i Rupert Ecroyd-sagen
In support of his contention Rupert Ecroyd maintains, first, that under the terms of the trust he became entitled
Den nationale myndighed havde ikke efter dommen af 3. december 1982, sag C-264/90, Wehrs, pligt til at tildele midlertidige specifikke referencemængder lu producenter, der befandt sig i den ovennævnte situation, og havde heller ikke kompetence hertiL
The competent national authority had no duty, following the judgment of 3 December 1992 in Case C264/90 Wehrs ν Hauptzollamt Lüneburg, to award a provisional special reference quantity to producers finding themselves in the abovementioned circumstances, nor did it have me power to do so.
Artikel 3a, stk 1, i forordning nr. 857/84, som ændret ved forordning nr. 764/89, er ugyldig i det omfang, den udelukker producenter, der befinder sig i den ovennævnte situation, fra at få tildelt en specifik referencemængde.
Article 3a(l) of Regulation No 857/84, as amended by Regulation No 764/89, is invalid in so far as it excludes producers finding themselves in the abovementioned circumstances from, the award of a special reference quantity.
Inden udstedelsen af yderligere fællesskabsregler, beregnet til at afhjælpe den fastslåede ugyldighed, havde den nationale myndighed ikke pligt til at tildele specifikke referencemængder til producenter, der befandt sig i den ovennævnte situation, og havde heller ikke kompetence hertiL
Before the adoption of further Community legislation intended to cure the invalidity found, the competent national authority has no duty to award a special reference quantity to producers finding themselves in the abovementioned circumstances, nor does it have the power to do so.
Den nationale myndighed havde ikke i medfør af forordning nr. 857/84, som ændret ved forordning nr. 764/89 og Rådets forordning nr. 1639/91 af 13. juni 1991, og navnlig i medfør af forordningens artikel 3a, stk 1, sidste afsnit, andet led, pligt til at tildele specifikke referencemængder til producenter, der befandt sigi en situation som angivet under det første præjudicielle spørgsmåls punkt a) til k), og havde heller ikke kompetence hertiL
The competent national authority had no duty under Regulation No 857/84, as amended by Regulation No 764/89 and by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1639/91 of 13 June 1991, and in particular by the second indent of the last subparagraph of Article 3a(l) thereof, to award a special reference quantity to producers finding themselves in the circumstances described under points (a) to (k) of Question 1, nor did it have the power to do so.
Den nationale myndighed havde ikke efter afsigelsen af ovennævnte dom i Wehrssagen pligt til at tildele specifikke referencemængder til producenter, der befandt sig den ovennævnte situation, og havde heller ikke kompetence hertiL
The competent national authority could not on its own draw the appropriate conclusions from the judgment in Wehrs, before the adoption of fresh Community legislation designed to cure the invalidity found to exist;
Generaladvokat P. Léger fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Femte Afdeling) den 11. januar 1996.
In view of the answer to the third question, it is not necessary to answer the fourth and fifth questions.»
Han foreslog at svare således:
In the case of John Ecroyd