natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Forenede sager T-159/94 og T-160/94 Ajinomoto / Rådet Handelspolitik
Ajinomoto ν Council Commercial policy
Sag T-166/95 Karagiozopoulou / Kommissionen Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T­166/95 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 17 D ecember 1997 Karagiozopoulou ν Commission Staff Regulations of Officials
Sag T-168/96 Patronis / Rådet Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T­168/96 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 21 O ctober 1997 Patronis ν Council Staff Regulations of Officials
Sag T-170/94 Shanghai Bicycle / Rådet Handelspolitik
Case T­170/94 eptember 1997 Shanghai Bicycle ν Council Commercial policy
Sag T-172/96 Chevalier-Delanoue / Rådet Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T­172/96 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 23 September 1997 Chevalier­Delanoue ν Council Staff Regulations of Officials
Forenede sager T-176/96 og T-108/97 Volger / Parlamentet Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Joined Cases T­176/96 and T­108/97
Dom af 18. december 1997
Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 13 January 1998
Dom af 27. november 1997
Staff Regulations of Officials
Sag T-20/96 Pascali / Kommissionen Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T-178/94 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 18 December 1997 ATM ν Commission State aid
Sag T-208/96 Eiselt / Kommissionen Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T-20/96 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 27 November 1997 Pascali ν Commission Staff Regulations of Officials
Forenede sager T-213/95, T-18/96 og T-18/96 SCK og FNK / Kommissionen Regler for institutionerne
Joined Cases T-213/95, T-18/96 and T-18/96 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 22 October 1997
Sag T-217/95 Passera / Kommissionen Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T-217/95 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 17 December 1997 Passera ν Commission Staff Regulations of Officials
Sag T-220/95 Giménez / Regionsudvalget Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T-220/95 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 16 September 1997 Giménez ν Comité des régions Staff Regulations of Officials
Sag T-222/95 Angelini / Kommissionen Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T-222/95 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 18 December 1997 Angelini ν Commission Staff Regulations of Officials
Sag T-223/95 Ronchi / Kommissionen Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T-223/95 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 6 November 1997 Ronchi ν Commission Staff Regulations of Officials
Sag T-225/95 Chiou / Kommissionen Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T-225/95 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 17 December 1997 Chiou ν Commission Staff Regulations of Officials
Sag T-26/89 (125) de Compte / Parlamentet Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T-26/89 (125) Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 5 November 1997 de Compte ν Parliament Staff Regulations of Officials
Sag T-62/96 De Corte / Kommissionen Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T-62/96 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 29 January 1998 De Corte ν Commission Staff Regulations of Officials
Sag T-67/94 Ladbroke Racing / Kommissionen Statsstøtte
Case T-67/94 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 27 January 1998 Ladbroke Racing ν Commission State aid
Sag T-71/96 Berlingieri Vinzek / Kommissionen Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T-71/96 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 6 November 1997 Berlingieri Vinzek ν Commission Staff Regulations of Officials
Dom af 18. december 1997
Case T-90/95 Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 18 December 1997 Gill ν Commission Staff Regulations of Officials
Sag T-90/95 Gill / Kommissionen Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T-97/95
Dom af 29. januar 1998
Final judgments of the Court of First Instance of 29 January 1998
Sag T-97/95 Sinochem / Rådet Handelspolitik
Sinochem ν Council Commercial policy;
Sag T-98/96 Costacurta / Kommissionen Tjenestemandsvedtægten
Case T-98/96 Final judgments of the Court'of First Instance of 22 January 1998 Costacurta ν Commission Staff Regulations of Officials
Denne publikation udarbejdes af Domstolens Presse- og Informationsafdeling (L-2925 Luxembourg) med henblik på en hurtig orientering om arbejdet ved Domstolen og Retten i Første Instans.
This bulletin is issued by the Court's Press and Information Division (L-2925 Luxembourg) to provide rapid information on the work of the Court.
Originalsprog: fransk Redaktionen afsluttet den 21.9.1998 Katalognr.: DX-AC-98-0020-DA-C
Original version: French Completed on 7.10.1998 Catalogue No: DX-AC-98-0020-EN-C
Sag C-61/97
Case C-35/97 Commission of the European Communities v French Republic Freedom of movement for persons
Sag C-413/96 Skatteministeriet / Sportgoods A/S Frie varebevægelser
Case C-413/96 Skatteministeriet v Sportgoods A/S Free movement of goods
Engelsksprogede juridiske sprogeksperter (oversættere) (almindelig udvælgelsesprøve nr. CJ/LA/29)
Administrative assistants - Proof-readers of Finnish mother tongue (Open Competition No EUR/B143) THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES AND THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
Græsksprogede juridiske sprogeksperter (oversættere) (almindelig udvælgelsesprøve nr. CJ/LA/30)
Administrative assistants · Proof-readers of Swedish mothertongue Open Competition No EUR/B/144 The Court of Justice of the European Communities and the European Commission 32 Conference interpreters of German mothertongue (m/f) Open competition No CJ/LA/28the Court of Justice of the European Communities in Luxembourg 33 LAWYER-LINGUISTS (m/f) of English mothertongue (Open competition No CJ/LA/29) 33 LAWYER-LINGUISTS (m/f) of Greek mothertongue (Open competition No CJ/LA/30)
Sag C­347/97 Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber / Kongeriget Belgien
Case C-256/97 D.M. Transport S.A.
Sag C-61/97 Foreningen af danske V ideogramdistributører / Laserdisken Frie varebevægelser
Case C-61/97 Foreningen af danske Videogramdistributører ν Laserdisken Free movement of goods
22. september 1998 rettigheder udlejning af laserdiscs«
Preliminary ruling (Copyright and related rights - Videodisc (Full Court)
Præjudiciel »Ophavsret og beslægtede (Domstolens plenum) faktiske og retlige omstændigheder.
national court, it gives no explanation of the reasons for which it raised the question of the effect of those articles in connection with the matters of fact and law in the main proceedings.
Da der ikke er givet sådanne oplysninger, har den forelæggende ret ikke sat Domstolen i stand til at give retten en relevant fortolkning af de nævnte artikler.
In the absence of such information the national court has failed to put the Court in a position to give an interpretation of those articles which could be of use to it.
Ved kendelse af 7. februar 1997 har retten i Ålborg forelagt to præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af EF-traktatens artikel 30, 36, 85 og 86 og af Rådets direktiv 92/100/EØF af 19. november 1992 (herefter »direktivet«).
Those questions were raised in proceedings between Foreningen af danske Videogramdistributører (Association of Danish Video Distributors, 'the FDV), acting for Egmont Film A/S and Others, and the Danish undertaking Laserdisken, which specialises in marketing films on laser discs, concerning the offer of such products imported from the United Kingdom for rental in Denmark.
Under disse omstændigheder må de af den nationale ret forelagte spørgsmål afvises, i det omfang de vedrører fortolkningen af traktatens artikel 85 og 86.
In those circumstances, the questions referred by the national court must be regarded as inadmissible in so far as they concern the interpretation of Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty.
Der kan således kun tages stilling til spørgsmålene for så vidt angår fortolkningen af traktatens artikel 30 og 36 og direktivet.
As a result, those questions can be considered only with regard to the interpretation of Articles 30 and 36 of the Treaty and the Directive.
Med de to spørgsmål ønsker den forelæggende ret oplyst, om de anførte artikler i traktaten og direktivet er til hinder for, at indehaveren af en eneret til udlejning kan forbyde udlejning af eksemplarer af et filmværk i en medlemsstat, selv om der er givet tilladelse til udlejning af disse eksemplarer i en anden medlemsstat.
By its two questions, the national court is asking ihr Court of Justice whether it is contrary to the articles of the Treaty referred to or to the Directive for the holder of an exclusive rental right to prohibit copies of a film from being offered for rental in a Member State even where offering those copies for rental has been authorised within another Member State.
Det bemærkes, at som understreget af Domstolen i dommen af 28. april 1998 i sagen Metronome Musik, fremgår princippet om, at spredningsretten udtømmes, når værker, som er beskyttet af ophavsretten, udbydes til salg af rettighedshaveren eller med dennes tilladelse, af fast retspraksis, hvorefter EF-traktatens artikel 36 kun tillader, at princippet om frie varebevægelser fraviges af hensyn til de i medlemsstaternes lovgivninger anerkendte industrielle og kommercielle ejendomsrettigheder, i det omfang disse fravigelser er begrundet i hensynet til beskyttelse af de rettigheder, der udgør denne ejendomsrets særlige genstand. Den ved en medlemsstats lovgivning om industriel og kommerciel ejendomsret sikrede eneret har netop udtømt
As the Court pointed out in its judgment in Case C-2(J(V% Mrltonomr Musik ν Mum /'nini Hokamp [1998J ECR 1-1953, the principle of exhaustion of distribution rights where copyright works are offered for sale by the rightholder or with his consent is expressed in the settled caselaw according to which, whilst Article 36 of the EC Treaty allows derogations from the fundamental principle of the free movement of goods on grounds of the protection of industrial and commercial property, such derogations are allowed only to the extent to which they are justified by the fact that they safeguard the rights
Indledningsvis bemærkes, at selv om forelæggelseskendelsen nævner traktatens artikel 85 og 86 blandt de fællesskabsbestemmelser, som den nationale ret ønsker fortolket, indeholder den ingen nærmere oplysninger om, hvilke grunde retten har haft til at stille spørgsmål om disse artiklers betydning i forhold til hovedsagens
It should be noted at the outset that, while the order for reference includes Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty among the Community provisions interpretation of which is requested by the
Der sondres i direktivet mellem på den ene side den i artikel 1 omhandlede særlige udlejnings- og udlånsret og på den anden side spredningsretten efter artikel 9, som er defineret som en eneret til at gøre de omhandlede genstande tilgængelige for almenheden, navnlig ved salg.
The Directive draws a distinction between the specific rental and lending right, referred to in Article 1, and the distribution right, governed by Article 9 and defined as an exclusive right to make one of the objects in question available to the public, principally by way of sale.
Mens retten til udlejning ikke udtømmes ved salg eller anden form for distribution af genstanden, udtømmes spredningsretten ved det første salg i Fællesskabet af rettighedshaveren eller med dennes tilladelse.
Whereas lending right is not exhausted by the sale or any other act of distribution of the object, distribution right, by contrast, is exhausted upon the first sale in the Community by the rightholder or with his consent.
Imidlertid kan det forhold, at billed- og lydbærere er bragt i omsætning, per definition ikke lovliggøre andre former for udnyttelse af det beskyttede værk, såsom udlejning, som efter sin natur adskiller sig fra salg og fra enhver anden lovlig spredningshandling.
Thus the Directive expressly precludes the possibility that lending right, unlike distribution right, can be exhausted by any act of distribution of the object in question.
Direktivet udelukker således udtrykkeligt, at udlejningsretten, i modsætning til spredningsretten, kan udtømmes ved nogen form for distribution af den pågældende genstand.
Just like the right to present a work by means of public performance, rental right remains one of the prerogatives of the author and producer notwithstanding sale of the physical recording.
Samme ræsonnement må følges med hensyn til virkningerne af udlejningen.
The same reasoning must be followed as regards the effects produced by the offer for rental.
Eneretten til at udleje de enkelte eksemplarer af et værk, der er overført på et videogram, åbner efter sin karakter mulighed for en udnyttelse i form af gentagne og nærmest ubegrænsede handlinger, som hver for sig giver ret til vederlag.
The exclusive right to hire out various copies of the work contained in a video film can, by its very nature, be exploited by repeated and potentially unlimited transactions, each of which involves the right to remuneration.
Den særlige ret til at tillade eller forbyde udlejning ville miste sit indhold, hvis den allerede blev udtømt ved den
The specific right to authorise or prohibit rental would be rendered meaningless if it were held to be exhausted as
Det fremgår således både af en fortolkning af traktatens artikel 30 og 36 for så vidt angår beskyttelsen af ophavsrettigheder og af direktivet, at eneretten til at tillade eller forbyde udlejning af en film ikke udtømmes, når retten udøves for første gang i en af Fællesskabets medlemsstater.
Accordingly, it follows both from the interpretation of Articles 30 and 36 of the Treaty, as regards the protection of copyright, and from the interpretation of the Directive that the exclusive right to authorise or prohibit the rental of a film is not exhausted when it is first exercised in one of the Member States of the Community.
»EF-traktatens artikel 30 og 36 og Rådets direktiv 92/100/EØF af 19. november 1992 om udlejnings- og udJånsrettigheder samt om visse andre ophavsretsbeslægtede rettigheder i forbindelse med intellektuel ejendomsret er ikke til hinder for, at indehaveren af en eneret til udlejning kan forbyde udlejning af eksemplarer af et filmværk i en medlemsstat, selv om der er givet tilladelse til udlejning af disse eksemplarer i en anden medlemsstat.*
'It is not contrary to Articles 30 and 36 of the Treaty or to Council Directive 92/100/EEC of 19 November 1992 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property for the holder of an exclusive rental right to prohibit copies of a film from being offered for rental in a Member Stette even where the offering of those copies for rental has been authorised in the territory of another Member Slate.'
Generaladvokat A. La Pergola fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Domstolens plenum) den 26. maj 1998.
Advocate General A La Pergola delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Full Court on 26 May 1998.
Ved kendelse af 20. november 1996 har Employment Appeal Tribunal, London, forelagt to præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af Rådets direktiv 76/207/EØF af 9. februar 1976.
By order of 20 November 1996, the Employment Appeal Tribunal, London, referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling two questions on the interpretation of Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976.
Coote anlagde herefter en ny sag mod Granada under anbringende af, at hun var blevet udsat for urimelig behandling ved, at Granada havde nægtet at give en anbefaling til engageringsbureauet.
not to be interpreted as prohibiting net only retaliatory measures which take the form of detrimental conduct during the employment relationship but also those which are decided on or whose harmful effects are produced after the employment has ended.
Spørgsmålene er blevet rejst under en tvist mellem Belinda Jane Coote og dennes tidligere arbejdsgiver, firmaet Granada Hospitality Ltd (herefter »Granada«), angående Granada's beslutning om at nægte at give en anbefaling til potentielle arbejdsgivere for Coote.
Those questions were raised in proceedings between Ms Coote and her former private-sector employer, Granada Hospitality Ltd (hereinafter 'Granada'), concerning Granada's refusal to provide references to potential employers of Ms Cootc.
Coote var ansat hos Granada fra december 1992 til september 1993.1 1993 anlagde hun sag mod Granada i anledning af forskelsbehandling på grundlag af køn, idet hun gjorde gældende, at hun var blevet afskediget, fordi hun var blevet gravid.
Ms Cootc was employed by Granada from December 1992 to September 1993. In 1993 she brought a claim for sex discrimination against Granada, alleging that she had been dismissed because of pregnancy.
Denne sag blev forligt, og Coote's ansættelsesforhold hos Granada blev efter aftale mellem parterne bragt til ophør den 7. september 1993.
That claim was settled, and Ms Coote's employment with Granada ended by mutual agreement on 7 September 1993.
Det fremgår af fast retspraksis, at den pligt for medlemsstaterne, der følger af et direktiv, til at virkeliggøre dets mål, og pligten i medfør af EF-traktatens artikel 5 til at træffe alle almindelige eller særlige foranstaltninger til at sikre opfyldelsen af denne pligt, påhviler alle myndighederne i medlemsstaterne, herunder også domstolene inden for deres kompetence.
However, it has been consistently held that the Member States' obligation arising from a directive to achieve the result envisaged by thi. directive and their duty under Article 5 of the EC Treaty to take all appropriate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure the fulfilment of that obligation are binding on aii the authorities of Member States including, fot matters within their jurisdiction, the courts.
En national ret er ved anvendelsen af national ret -herunder bestemmelser i en lov, der, som i denne
In applying national law, in particular legislative provisions which, as in the present case, were specially introduced in order to implement the directive, the national court is required to interpret its national law, so far as possible, in the light of the wording and the purpose of the directive in order to achieve the result pursueo by the third paragraph of Article 189 of the Treaty.
I juli 1994 henvendte Coote, der søgte et nyt arbejde, sig til to engageringsbureauer.
In July 1994 Ms Coote, seeking new employment, had recourse to two employment agencies.
Coote er af den opfattelse, at hendes vanskeligheder ved at finde arbejde skyldtes, at Granada undlod at give
She considers th;il her difficulties in finding employment were due to Granada's failure to provide a reference to one of the employment agencies; Granada disputes this.
I medfør af direktivets artikel 6 har enhver person adgang til at indbringe et søgsmål for en kompetent ret med henblik på en effektiv prøvelse af dispositioner, som anses for stridende mod princippet om ligebehandling af mænd og kvinder som hjemlet ved direktivet.
Ms Cootc then brought a further claim against Granada claiming that she had been victimised by Granada's refusal to supply a reference to the employment agency.
Det kan imidlertid — når henses til målsætningen med direktivet, som er at nå frem til en reel lighed mellem mænd og kvinder for så vidt angår muligheder, og til den grundlæggende karakter af retten til beskyttelse i form af en effektiv domstolsprøvelse — for så vidt der ikke er klare holdepunkter for det modsatte resultat, ikke udledes af direktivet, at fællesskabslovgiver skulle have haft til hensigt at begrænse arbejdstagernes beskyttelse mod sanktionerende dispositioner fra arbejdsgiverens side til udelukkende at omfatte afskedigelser, der er en særligt alvorlig forholdsregel, men dog ikke den eneste form for indgreb, som rent faktisk vil kunne afholde en arbejdstager fra at gøre brug af sin ret til beskyttelse i form af en domstolsprøvelse.
In those circumstances, Ihr questions ¡mi by ihr national court must be understood as seeking to ascertain, for the purpose of interpreting national provisions transposing the Directive, whether the Directive requires Member Stales to introduce into their national legal systems such measures as are necessary to ensure judicial protection for workers whose employer, after the end of the employment relationship, refuses to provide references as a reaction to proceedings brought to enforce compliance with the principle of equal treatment within the meaning of the Directive.
Generaladvokat J. Mischo fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Domstolens plenum) den 2. april 1998.
judicial process, and would consequently be liable seriously to jeopardise implementation of the aim pursued by the Directive.
— om afslaget på anbefalinger reelt fandt sted i ansættelsesperioden eller efter dennes ophør;
Such deterrent measures include inter alia those which, as in the present case, are taken as a reaction to proceedings brought against an employer and are intended to obstruct the dismissed employee's attempts to find new employment.
— om arbejdsgiveren traf sin bestemmelse før eller efter udløbet af ansættelsesforholdet.
Fear of such measures, where no legal remedy is available against them, might deter workers who considered themselves the victims of discrimination from pursuing their claims by
Direktiv 76/207 forpligter imidlertid ikke medlemsstaterne til i deres nationale retsordener at indføre en ordning, der gør det muligt for en arbejdstager ved domstolene at gøre sin ret gældende over for vedkommendes tidligere arbejdsgiver, som afslog at give arbejdstageren en anbefaling, når afslaget viser sig at være en gengældelsesforanstaltning efter et søgsmål, som arbejdstageren havde anlagt mod arbejdsgiveren med henblik på at sikre overholdelse af ligebehandlingen af mandlige og kvindelige arbejdstagere.«
'Article 6 of Council Directive 761207¡EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions requires Member States to introduce into their national legal systems such measures as are necessary to ensure judicial protection for workers whose employer, after the employment relationship has ended, refuses to provide references as a reaction to legal proceedings brought to enforce compliance with the principle of equal treatment within the meaning of that directive.'
Præjudiciel »Forbrugsbeskatning af forarbejdet tobak — direktiv 79/32/EØF — cigaretter — røgtobak — begreb — en medlemsstats ansvar uden for kontraktforhold for overtrædelse af fællesskabsretten« (Anden Afdeling)
He proposed, finally, that the Court should phrase its answer to the questions on which the Employment Appeal Tribunal seeks a preliminary ruling as follows:
Ved beslutning af 4. september 1996 har Østre Landsret forelagt Domstolen en række præjudiciellespørgsmålvedrørende fortolkningen af artikel 3, stk 1, og artikel 4, punkt 1, i Rådets direktiv 79/32/EØF af 18. december 1978 (herefter »andet direktiv«) og vedrørende fortolkningen af princippet om statens ansvar for tab, der er forvoldt borgerne ved en overtrædelse af fællesskabsretten, som må tilregnes staten.
(1) The provision of references for employees by an employer is covered by the prohibition of any discrimination on grounds of sex laid down by Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions.
Spørgsmålene er blevet rejst under en sag mellem på den ene side Brinkmann Tabakfabriken GmbH, der har hjemsted i Bremen (Tyskland), og som fremstiller forarbejdet tobak, og på den anden side Skatteministeriet Sagen vedrører opkrævning af tobaksafgifter af et tobaksprodukt, som Brinkmann fremstillede og solgte under navnet »Westpoint«, og nærmere bestemt problemet om, hvorvidt Westpoint skulle beskattes som
In that connection, it is irrelevant whether the references were in fact refused during the period of employment or after its termination, or
cigaretter eller som røgtobak, hvilket indebar en lavere afgiftssats.
whether the employer decided on the refusal before or after the termination of the period of employment.