natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Dette var dog ikke uden videre ensbetydende med, at det havde været det eneste eller det afgørende formål med de vedtagne bestemmelser.
The applicants in the main proceedings, who are manufacturers, producers or distributors of veterinary medicinal products, associations in the field of animal health, carrying on their activities throughout Europe and the United States, and a veterinarian and a farmer, are challenging in the national court the validity of the national regulations which partly implement the directive at issue, on the ground that the directive is invalid.
Følgelig kunne en begrænsning af landbrugets overskudsproduktion ikke antages at falde uden for formålene med den fælles landbrugspolitik.
Its contents, including the date by which it was to be implemented, are identical to the contents of Council Directive 85/649/EEC of 31 December 1985 prohibiting the use in livestock farming of certain substances having a hormonal action, which was annulled by the Court in its judgment of 23 February 1988 in Case 68/86 (United Kingdom ν Council [1988] ECR 855) on the ground that by failing to comply with the procedure laid down in Article 6 (1) of its Rules of Procedure the Council had infringed an essential procedural requirement.
Anbringendet om tilsidesættelse af væsentlige foreforskrifter
The alleged infringement of the principle of legal certainty
Det til kommer institutionerne selv at vurdere, om en retsakt på grund af ændrede omstændigheder kræver en fornyet stillingtagen fra deres side.
The claim based on the existence of scientific evidence demonstrating the safety of the five hormones in question could not be upheld.
Herom bemærkede Domstolen, at bestemmelsen i direktivets artikel 10 ikke kunne fortolkes således, at den pålægger medlemsstaterne en forpligtelse til at træffe foranstaltninger i strid med fællesskabsretten, herunder forbudet mod at give straffebestemmelser tilbagevirkende gyldighed. Domstolen tilføjede, at
In fact, it was sufficient to state that, faced with divergent appraisals by the national authorities of the Member States, reflected in the differences between existing national legislation, the Council remained within the limits of its discretionary power in deciding to adopt the solution of prohibiting the hormones in question, and respond in that way to the
- 8 - artikel 10 heller ikke kunne give hjemmel til iværksættelse af strafferetlig forfølgning på grundlag af bestemmelser i national ret, som måtte være udstedt til gennemførelse af det annullerede direktiv, og som udelukkende beroede på direktivet.
- 8 concerns expressed by the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and by several consumer organizations.
Vedrørende det anfægtede direktivs tilbagevirkende gyldighed uden for det strafferetlige område konstaterede Domstolen, at en EF-retlig forskrift helt undtagelsesvis kan have virkning fra et tidspunkt, der ligger forud for dens offentliggørelse, når dens formål tilsiger det, og når der tages behørigt hensyn til beskyttelsen af de berørtes berettigede forventning.
Nor did the directive at issue frustrate the legitimate expectations of traders affected by the prohibition of the use of the hormones in question. Although Council Directive 81/602/EEC referred to the fact that the harmless or harmful effects of the substances in questions had yet to be examined in detail, and required the Commission to take account of scientific developments, it did not preempt the conclusions which might be drawn therefrom by the Council in the exercise of its discretion.
I denne forbindelse bemærkede Domstolen, at direktivet var blevet vedtaget for at undgå, at der i en periode ikke fandtes en EF-retlig hjemmel for de nationale retsforskrifter, medlemsstaterne havde udstedt til gennemførelse af det annullerede direktiv.
The prohibition at issue could not be regarded as a manifestly inappropriate measure. Even if the presence of natural hormones in all meat prevented detection of the presence of prohibited hormones by tests on animals or on meat, other control methods could be used and indeed were imposed on the Member States by other directives.
Under hensyn til, dels at der forlob meget kort tid mellem annullationen af det første direktiv og meddelelsen af det her omhandlede direktiv, henholdsvis dettes offentliggørelse i EF-Tidende, dels at det tidligere direktiv var blevet annulleret på grund af en procedurefejl, kunne de berørte ikke have nogen berettiget forventning om, at Rådet ændrede sin holdning med hensyn til, hvilke regler der skulle gælde.
It was also necessary to point out that it was not obvious that the authorization of only those hormones described as "natural" would be likely to prevent the emergence of a black market for dangerous but less expensive substances. Moreover, any system of partial authorization would require costly control measures whose effectiveness would not be guaranteed.
"Gennemgangen af de forelagte spørgsmål har intet frembragt, der kan rejse tvivl om gyldigheden af Rådets direktiv 88/146/EØF af 7. marts 1988 om forbud mod anvendelse af visse stoffer med hormonal virkning inden for husdyravl".
Finally, it had to be stated that the importance of the objectives pursued was such as to justify even substantial negative financial consequences for certain traders.
Generaladvokat Jean Mischo fremsatte forslag til afgørelse den 8. marts 1990.
The alleged infringement of the principle of equal treatment
Han foreslog Domstolen at afsige følgende dom: "Gennemgangen af de forelagte spørgsmål har intet frembragt, der kan rejse tvivl om gyldigheden af Rådets direktiv 88/146/EØF af 7. marts 1988 om forbud mod anvendelse af visse stoffer med hormonal virkning inden for husdyravl, idet bestemmelsen i direktivets artikel 10 må fortolkes således, at den ikke indebærer nogen forpligtelse for medlemsstaterne til at pålægge private sanktioner for forhold, som ligger forud for det tidspunkt, fra hvilket den nationale retsforskrift, der er udstedt til gennemførelse af direktivet, har kunnet gøres gældende imod dem".
In that connexion it was sufficient to state that a harmonization measure intended to standardize previously disparate rules of the Member States inevitably produced different effects depending on the prior state of the various national laws. Where Community rules applied equally to all
(Præjudiciel) "Fiskeri - forskelsbehandling - national foranstaltning til bevarelse af fiskeressourcerne" (Femte Afdeling)
In that connexion it was sufficient to state, on the one hand, that although the possibility of a reduction in surpluses was taken into consideration during the process leading to the adoption of the directive, it did not follow that such a reduction was in fact the exclusive or main purpose of the rules adopted.
Ved kendelse, afsagt den 22. november 1988 og indgået til Domstolen den 21. december 1988, havde High Court of Justiciary stillet flere præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af EØF-Traktatens artikel 7 og artikel 40, stk. 3 om gyldigheden og fortolkningen af artikel 19 i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 171/83 om fastlæggelse af tekniske foranstaltninger til bevarelse af fiskeressourcerne.
Furthermore, it was also appropriate to state that, as the Court has already held, agricultural policy objectives had to be conceived in such a manner as to enable the Community institutions to carry out their duties in the light of developments in agriculture and in the economy as a whole.
Spørgsmålene var blevet rejst under en straffesag mod Marshall, en britisk fisker, bosiddende i Skotland, som \/ar anlagt, fordi han på sit fiskerfartøj ulovligt havde medfdrt et monofilgarn, hvilket er forbudt ifølge en bekendtgørelse fra Secretary of State for Scotland.
Accordingly, the reduction of agricultural production surpluses could not be said to be foreign to the objectives of the common agricultural policy.
Marshall havde for den nationale ret gjort gældende, at bekendtgørelsen var retsstridig.
The alleged infringement of essential procedural requirements
Endelig havde Marshall gjort gældende, at bekendtgørelsen var retsstridig for det første, fordi den nationalt var udtryk for et myndighedsmisbrug, og for det andet, fordi den blev vedtaget i henhold til artikel 19 i forordning nr. 171/83, som ligeledes er retsstridig, fordi den giver medlemsstaterne hjemmel til at vedtage foranstaltninger, som kan være i strid med grundlæggende principper i Traktaten.
In that connexion, the directive which preceded the directive at issue was annulled on account of a procedural defect and did not affect the preparatory acts of the other institutions; a change in the composition of an institution did not affect the continuity of the institution itself, and its final or preparatory acts in principle retained their full effect; it was for the institutions themselves to assess whether or not changes in the circumstances, of whatever nature they might be, required them to take a fresh view; and finally, a fresh consultation of the European Parliament was not necessary since the Commission's proposal was modified essentially in the manner indicated in the opinion of the Parliament.
Domstolen besvarede de forelagte spørgsmål således:
The alleged infringement of the principle that legislation should not be retroactive
(Præjudiciel) "Fri bevægelighed for personer - vandrende arbejdstageres sociale sikring - børnetiIskud" (Sjette Afdeling)
"Examination of the questions raised has disclosed no factor of such a nature as to affect the validity of Council Directive 88/146/EEC of 7 March 1988 prohibiting the use in livestock farming of certain substances having a hormonal action."
Ved kendelse af 13. marts 1989, indgået til Domstolen den 24. marts s.a., havde Sozialgericht Frankfurt am Main forelagt et præjudicielt spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af artikel 73, stk. 1, og artikel 99 i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1408/71.
Mr Advocate General Jean Mischo delivered his Opinion at the sitting on 8 March 1990.
Spørgsmålet var stillet under en sag mellem F. Yañez-Campoy, som er spansk statsborger, og som har beskæftigelse og bopæl i Forbundsrepublikken Tyskland, men hvis to børn bor i Spanien, og Bundesanstalt für Arbeit; sagen var anlagt til prøvelse af den af Bundesanstalt für Arbeit trufne afgørelse om at yde F. Yañez-Campoy børnetilskud i henhold til artikel 40 i den tysk-spanske overenskomst om social sikring af 4. december 1973 og ikke i henhold til artikel 10 i den tyske lov om familieydelser, hvorefter børnetilskuddene er væsentlig højere.
He proposed that the Court should give the following reply: "Consideration of the questions raised has disclosed no factor of such a kind as to affect the validity of Directive 88/146/EEC of 7 March 1988 prohibiting the use in livestock farming of certain substances having a hormonal action, it being understood that Article 10 thereof must be interpreted as meaning that it does not require Member States to impose penalties on individuals in respect of facts which occurred prior to the date when the provision of domestic law implementing the directive became applicable to them".
F. Yañez-Campoy anførte, at i henhold til artikel 60 i Akten vedrørende Vilkårene for Kongeriget Spaniens og Republikken Portugals Tiltrædelse og som følge af Domstolens dom af 15. januar 1986 i Pinna-sagen, måtte artikel 73, stk. 1, i forordning nr. 1408/71 finde anvendelse på spanske arbejdstagere med virkning fra januar 1986.
Case 370/88 The Procurator Fiscal ν Andrew Marshall - 13.11.1990 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) (Fisheries - Discrimination - National measure for the conservation of fishery resources) (Fifth Chamber)
"Den ensartede løsning for samtlige medlemsstater, der er omhandlet i artikel 99 i Rådets forordning nr. 1408/71 af 14. juni 1971 - om anvendelse af de sociale sikringsordninger på arbejdstagere, selvstændige erhvervsdrivende og deres familiemedlemmer, der flytter inden for Fællesskabet - som affattet ved Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 2001/83 af 2. juni 1983, trådte i kraft den 15. januar 1986, og artikel 73, stk. 1, i forordning nr. 1408/71 finder i henhold til artikel 60 i Akten vedrørende Vilkårene for Kongeriget Spaniens og Republikken Portugals Til trædelse følgelig anvendelse fra nævnte dato på spanske arbejdstagere, som har beskæftigelse i en anden medlemsstat end Spanien, men hvis familiemedlemmer bor i Spanien."
Those questions were raised in criminal proceedings brought against Mr Marshall, a British fisherman resident in Scotland, for unlawfully carrying in his fishing boat a monofilament gill net contrary to an order made by the Secretary of State for Scotland, pursuant to Article 19 (2) of Regulation No. 171/83, which applies only to British fishermen and prohibits them from carrying monofilament gill nets when they are sailing in waters adjacent to the coast of Scotland within a limit of six miles.
Generaladvokat Carl Otto Lenz havde fremsat forslag til afgørelse den 6. juni vm:
In that context the order also constituted an interference with the right to the free exercise of a professional activity.
Han foreslog følgende besvarelse: "Spanske arbejdstagere, der udøver beskæftigelse i Forbundsrepublikken Tyskland, har med virkning fra den 15. januar 1986 for deres i Spanien bosatte børn ret til børnetilskud efter tysk lovgivning (Bundeskindergeldgesetz)".
Finally, the order was alleged to be unlawful, on the one hand, because it was vitiated by a misuse of powers at national level and, on the other hand, because it was adopted pursuant to Article 19 of Regulation No. 171/83 which itself was said to be invalid in so far as it authorized Member States to take measures conflicting with the fundamental principles of the Treaty.
(Præjudiciel) ' "Fri bevægelighed for personer - ligebehandling - barn af en EF-arbejdstager -uddannelsesstøtte" (Sjette Afdeling)
Consideration of the question referred has disclosed no factor of such a kind as to affect the validity of Article 19 of Council Regulation No. 171/83.
Domstolen bemærkede hertil, at artikel 12 i forordning nr. 1612/68 indeholder en generel regel, hvorefter enhver medlemsstat på undervisningsområdet er for digtet til at sikre ligebehandling af egne statsborgere og børn af arbejdstagere, som er statsborgere i en anden medlemsstat og bosiddende på første stats område.
A national measure such as the order in question comes within the scope of Article 19 (2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 171/83.
Når en medlemsstat giver egne statsborgere mulighed for at modtage uddannelsesstøtte ved studier i udlandet, skal et barn af en EF-arbejdstager derfor have samme mulighed, såfremt barnet beslutter at studere uden for etab leringslandet.
Neither Article 7 or Article 40 (3) of the Treaty nor the fundamental principles of Community law prevent a Member State from prohibiting the carriage of a particular type of net on all vessels registered in that State while they are in waters adjacent to its coast.
Denne fortolkning påvirkes ikke af det forhold, at den uddannelsessøgende beslutter at studere i den medlemsstat, hvor den pågældende er statsborger.
Mr Advocate General Giuseppe Tesauro delivered his Opinion at the sitting on 6 June 1990.
Domstolen besvarede spørgsmålet således:
He proposed that the Court should give the following reply:
Generaladvokat Marco Darmon fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet den 3. oktober 1990.
Consideration of the question raised has disclosed no factor of such a kind as to cast doubt on the validity of Article 19 of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 171/83;
Han foreslog følgende besvarelse: "Artikel 12 i Rådets forordning nr. 1612/68 skal fortolkes således, at støtte, ydet af en medlemsstat til studier i udlandet, skal anses for sociale fordele, som børn af EF-arbejdstagere har ret til på samme betingelser som statsborgere i etableringslandet, hvorved der ikke er grund til at undtage det tilfælde, hvor et barn studerer i den medlemsstat, hvor det er statsborger."
Community law, in particular Article 7 and Article 40 (3) of the EEC Treaty, does not prevent a Member State from adopting, with the prior valid approval of the Commission, a measure prohibiting the carriage on a fishing vessel registered in that Member State, while that vessel is within an area of the inshore waters of that Member State adjacent to a part of the coast thereof, of a fishing net of a specified type and construction, the use of which is otherwise not prohibited under Community legislation, provided that, as it appears in this case in the light of the facts available to the Court, that measure appears appropriate for the attainment of the objective sought and does not exceed what is necessary in order to attain that objective;
(Præjudiciel) "Fri bevægelighed for personer - social sikring - forordning nr. 1408/71 -person med tidligere statsborgerskab i en stat, som ikke var en af de oprindelige EF-medlemsstater - udbetaling af alderspension i et tredjeland" (Femte Afdeling)
By an order of 13 March 1989, which was received at the Court on 24 March 1989, the Sozialgericht [Social Court], Frankfurt am Main, referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling a question on the interpretation of Article 73 (1) and 99 of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 1408/71.
Ved dom af 23. marts 1989, indgået til Domstolen den 3. april s.a., havde Tribunal du Travail de Bruxelles forelagt tre præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af visse bestemmelser i EØF-Traktaten samt i Rådets for ordninger (EØF) nr. 1408/71 og nr. 574/72.
That question arose in proceedings between Mr Yanez-Campoy, a Spanish national employed and resident in the Federal Republic of Germany, whose two children live in Spain, and the Bundesanstalt für Arbeit [Federal Labour Office] (BAA) concerning the decision of BAA to grant Mr Yanez-Campoy family allowances under Article 40 of the Social Security Convention between Germany and Spain of 4 December 1973 and not under Article 10 of the Federal German law on family allowances, which provides for considerably higher allowances.
Spørgsmålene var blevet rejst under en mellem Buhari og INASTI verserende sag. Sagen drejede sig nærmere om den faktiske udbetaling af den alderspension, som Buhari - der havde britisk statsborgerskab indtil 1960, hvorefter han blev nigeriansk statsborger - havde fremsat krav om på grundlag af sin virksomhed som selvstændig erhvervsdrivende i det tidligere Belgisk Kongo, som den 1. juli 1960 blev til Zaire, hvor Buhari fortsat bor.
Mr Yanez-Campoy considered that, in accordance with Article 60 of the Act of Accession of the Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese Republic, and following the judgment of the Court of 15 January 1986 (Case 41/84, Pinna ν Caisse d'Allocation de la Savoie [1986] ECR 1), Article 73 (1) of Regulation No. 1408/71 must be applied in favour of Spanish employed persons with effect from January 1986.
Generaladvokat Jean Mischo fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet den 2. oktober l"99tT '
Case C-308/89 Carmina Di Leo ν Land Berlin - 13.11.1990 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) (Free movement of persons - Non-discrimination - Child of a Community worker - Educational or training grants) (Sixth Chamber)
14.11.1990 (Præjudiciel) Tribunal Administratif de Dijon Gyldigheden af Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 989/84 af 31.marts 1984 og af Kommissionens forordninger (EØF) nr. 1925/84 af 5. juli 1984, nr. 2222/85 af 31. juli 1985, nr. 2077/86 af 30. juni 1986 og nr. 2160/87 af 22. juli 1987 - fællesskabsstøtte til fremstilling af produkter forarbejdet af tomater - nedsættelse af støtten. Generaladvokat : CO. Lenz. Processprog : fransk.
The provisions of Community law do not preclude national legislation under which a self-employed person's retirement pension is payable abroad only to beneficiaries residing on the territory of a non-Member Country in which a self-employed person's pension could be paid to them on the basis of a reciprocity agreement, in so far as it has effect only within the Community."
13.11.1990 (Præjudiciel) Bundesfinanzhof Fortolkning af Den Fælles Toldtarif ­ pos. 20.09 i den kombine­rede nomenklatur ­ Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 2658/87 af 23. juli 1987 om told­ og statistiknomenklaturen og Den Fælles Told­tarif ­ appelsinsaft tilsat sukker. Generaladvokat : M. Darmon.
Deltakabel ν Staatssecretaris van Financier - 13 November 1990 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Hoge Raad der Nederlanden Interpretation of Article 4 (2) (b) of Directive 69/335/EEC - Indirect taxes on the raising of capital -Levying of capital duty in respect of the writing off by a parent company of a current account claim against a subsidiary.
13.11.1990 (Præjudiciel) Schleswig­Holsteinisches Verwaltungsgericht Fortolkning af Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 2772/75 af 29. oktober 1972 om handelsnormer for æg, som ændret ved Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1831/84 af 19. juni 1984 ­ angivelse af læggedatoen umiddelbart eller via en henvisning på emballagens yder­ eller inderside.
Trave Schiffahrts-Gesellschaft v Finanzamt Kiel-Nord - 13 November 1990 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Bundesfinanzhof Interpretation of Article 4 (2) (b) and Article 13 of Council Directive 69/335/EEC of 17 July 1969 on indirect taxes on the raising of capital - National measure imposing capital duty on an interest-free loan granted to a capital company by one of its members.
13.11.1990 (Præjudiciel) Cour d'Appel de Paris Fortolkning af EØF­Traktatens artikler 30, 36 og 86 ­ opkrævning af en afgift ved offentlig fremførelse af værker ved hjælp af lydbærere ­ supplerende ret til mekanisk gengivelse. Generaladvokat : CO. Lenz. Processprog : fransk.
Powell Duffryn v Wolfgang Petereit - 13 November 1990 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Oberlandesgericht Koblenz Interpretation of Article 17 of the Brussels Convention -Provision contained in the statutes of a company on the basis of which the shareholder, by subscribing for or purchasing shares, submits to the jurisdiction of the courts competent for disputes concerning the company -Clause conferring jurisdiction.
14.11.1990 (Præjudiciel) Cour d'Appel de Paris Fortolkning af Rådets direktiv 85/577/EØF af 20. december 1985 om forbrugerbeskyttelse i forbindelse med aftaler indgået uden for fast forretningssted ­ anvendelse når en erhvervsdrivende ønsker at sælge sin forretning. Generaladvokat : J. Mischo. Processprog : fransk.
Ministère public ν J.-C. Bel lon - 14 November 1990 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Tribunal de Grande Instance, Marseilles Interpretation of Articles 30 and 36 of the EEC Treaty and of Directives 65/54/EEC, 67/427/EEC, 71/160/EEC and 74/42/EEC - Restrictions on imports of foodstuffs lawfully produced and marketed in a Member State on the ground that the item of food contains sorbic acid, a preservative which is permitted under Directive 64/54/EEC of the Council of 5 November 1963.
14.11.1990 (Præjudiciel) Bundesfinanzhof Fortolkning af Den Fælles Toldtarif ­ pos. 20.05 C og 20.06 Β ­frugtmos fremstillet ved kogning. Generaladvokat : M. Darmon.
Alsthom Atlantique and Others v Sulzer and Others - 14 November 1990 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Tribunal de Commerce, Paris Interpretation of Articles 2, 3 (f), 34 and 85 (1) of the EEC Treaty in the light of a Member State's caselaw whereby the manufacturer or commercial vendor is subject to an irrebuttable presumption that he was aware of the defects in the item sold which can only be negated in the context of contractual relations with a purchaser in the same particular branch of business.
14.11.1990 (Præjudiciel) Bundessozialgericht Fortolkning af EØF­Traktatens artikler 7 og 48­51 og artikel 3 i forordning (EØF) nr. 1408/71 ­ national antikumulationsregel med forskellig virkning alt efter, om den pensionsydelse, der skal tages i betragtning, har indenlandsk eller udenlandsk oprindelse. Generaladvokat : M. Darmon.
Société SITPA v Oniflhor - 14 November 1990 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Tribunal Administratif, Dijon Validity of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 989/84 of 31 March 1984 and Commission Regulations (EEC) Nos. 1925/84 of 5 July 1984, 2222/85 of 31 July 1985, 2077/86 of 30 June 1986 and 2160/87 of 22 July 1987 - Community aid for products processed from tomatoes - Reduction of the aid.
Processprog : tysk.
Lenz Language of the case: French