natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
I 1996 er Domstolens sammensætning ændret således:
In 1996, the composition of the Court of Justice changed as follows:
Som følge af Fernand Schockweilers bortgang den 1. juni 1996 tiltrådte dommer ved Retten i Første Instans Romain Schintgen den 12. juli 1996 som dommer ved Domstolen.
Following the death on 1 June L996 of Judge Fernand Schockweiler, JudgeRomain Schintgen of the Court of First Instance entered into office as judge atthe Court of Justice on 12 Julv 1996.
Der henvises, for så vidt angår yderligere detaljer, til afsnittet »Højtidelige retsmøder«, s. 91.
For further details, please seethe sectionunder"Formalsittings",p. 91.
Retten i Første Instans' virksomhed i 1996 ved Rettens præsident, A. Saggio
The proceedings of the Court of First Instance in 1996 by Antonio Saggio, President
Rettens virksomhed
Proceedings of the Court
I 1996 blev der indbragt 215 nye sager for Retten, dvs. et påfaldende ens antal i forhold til 1995 (212 sager), hvis man for begge referenceårene ser bort fra mælkekvotesagerne, hvis antal fortsat falder (5 sager i 1996 mod 32 i 1995).
In L996,215 new cases were brought before the Court of First Instance, a figure which is substantially similar to that of 1995(2I2 cases), notincluding, in either reference year, milk quota actions, whose number continuesto decrease(5casesin 1996 as against 32 in 1995).
Derimod er fordelingen af disse 215 sager temmelig anderledes end fordelingen i 1995.
The distribution by subject-matter of those215 case is, none the less, quitedifferent from that observedin respect of 1995.
Hvad angår konkurrencesageme var der tilsyneladende et stort fald i antallet (25 sager mod 65 i 1995), hvilket dog skyldes fraværet af et fænomen, der blev observeret i 1995 (og i 1994), nemlig serier af sager til prøvelse af kommissionsbeslutninger rettet til et stort antal virksomheder inden for en given branche.
So far as competition cases are concerned, it should be pointed out that therewas a marked decrease (25 cases as against 65 in 1995)which, nevertheless, must be attributed to the absence of a phenomenon observedin 1995 (as in
Ses der bort fra sådanne serier, steg antallet af konkurrencesager en smule i forhold til 1995 (23).
Outwith such series,the number of competition cases is slightly higher by comparison with lees(23). (23).
Den antalsmæssigt næsten fuldstændige opvejning af denne reduktion inden for konkurrenceområdet skyldes primært den udvikling, der fandt sted på områderne for personalesager (98 sager mod 79 i 1995), landbrug (ekskl. mælkekvotesager: 25 sager mod 16 i 1995) og statsstøtte (18 sager mod 12 i 1995).
The fact that the reduction in the field of competition has been, with regard tothe number of new cases, entirely made up for is essentially due to the continued growth in the number of staff cases(98 cases as agains t 79 in 1995) ,agriculture cases (other than milk quotas:25 actions as against 16 in 1995)and and
I 1996 blev der stadig ikke indbragt nogen sager på det immaterialretlige område (varemærker, mønstre og modeller samt sortsbeskyttelse).
State aid cases(18actions as against 12 in 1995).
Retten fortsatte sine bestræbelser for så vidt angår produktiviteten; heri deltog også de medlemmer, der kom til Retten for ganske nylig (kort inden begyndelsen af rapporteringsåret, nemlig i forbindelse med den regelmæssige, delvise nybesættelse, eller endog i selve 1996 for det ene af de nye medlemmers vedkommende).
No case has so far been brought in the field of the protection of intellectualproperty (trade marks and designsor plant variety rights). In that regard, itshould be pointed out that, during that period, the Boardsof Appeal of the Oftice for Harmonisation in the Internal Market, whose Rules of Procedureentered into force in February 1996 (Commission Regulation (EC) No 216196of 5 February L996)have not delivered any decisions.
Antallet af domme, som Retten afsagde i 1996 (107 i nettotal, dvs. efter forening af visse sager, mod 118 i bruttotal), er således sammenligneligt med antallet i 1995 (hvor disse tal androg henholdsvis 98 og 128). Der bør erindres om, at der
Together with the Members who took office but recently (a little before theyear in question as part of the regular partial renewalor, in the case of one of
i 1995 forelå en kraftig stigning i antallet af domme i forhold til det forudgående år (jf. Årsrapport 1995).
It should be borne in mind that, by comparison with theprevious year, there had been in L995 a steep increase in the number ofjudgments (see the Annual Report 1995).
Selv om antallet af afsluttede sager faldt i forhold til det forudgående år (186 sager mod 265, og i nettotal 176 sager mod 198), er dette dog i vidt omfang udtryk for et anseligt fald i antallet af sager afgjort ved kendelse (fra 137 sager i 1995 til 68 i 1996; i nettotal er tallene henholdsvis 100 og 67).
Althoughthe number of cases decidedhas, nonethe,less, been lower comparedwith thepreceding year (186 cases as against265 cases;174 cases as against198 cases in net figures), this is largely due to a significant reduction in thenumber of cases disposed of by way of orders (137 cases in 1995 to 68 in1996; in net terms, the figures are 100 and 67 respectively).
Navnlig er antallet af slettelser (igen) faldet, nemlig fra 94 sager i 1995 til 42 i 1996 (nettotallene var 63 sager mod 41).
In particular, thenumber of cases struck off the register has, once again, dropped, from 94 casesin 1995to 42 casesin 1996(innet figures:63 and 41 cases).
Under disse omstændigheder var antallet af verserende sager ved årets udgang (659 sager i bruttotal mod 476 i nettotal) højere end for det forudgående år (henholdsvis 616 sager og 427); dette gælder endog for personalesagerne (140 sager ved udgangen af 1996 mod 121 i 1995 — i nettotal 133 sager mod 118), hvor Retten hævede sin arbejdsrytme markant (66 domme i 1996 mod 34 i 1995, hvilket svarede til 68 sager mod 36 i nettotal).
(659 cases in gross figures , 416 net) is higher than the number of the precedingyear (616 and421 cases respectively), and the same obtains even in respect of staff cases(140 cases at the end of 1996 as againstl2I at the end of 1995 or133 as against 118 cases in net figures) in which the Court has greatlyincreased its rhythm (66 judgments in 1996 as against 34 in 1995, whichequates respectivelyto 68 and 36 cases decided in net terms).
Antallet af kendelser vedrørende begæringer om foreløbige forholdsregler steg fra 19 i 1995 til 23 i 1996, hvilket bekræfter den stigende tendens, der har kunnet konstateres siden oprettelsen af Retten.
The number of interlocutory orders increased from 19 in 1995 to 23 in 1996,an increase which confirms the trend observed since the creation of the Courtof First Instance.
Antallet af appeller, der blev iværksat i 1996, var betydeligt lavere end for det forudgående år (27 mod 47). Ca.
The number of appeals brought in 1996 is considerablyinferior to that of thepreceding year (27 as against47).
I 1995 var der tale om mere end 30% (jf. Årsrapport 1995).
In 1995 that tigure was of 30% (see Annual Report 1995).
På det organisatoriske plan besluttede Retten den 12. september 1996 en principiel afgrænsning af femmands-afdelingernes kompetence til at omfatte sager vedrørende reglerne om statsstøtte og om handelspolitiske beskyttelsesforanstaltninger.
So far as concerns organisation, the Court of First Instance, in ameeting of 12 September 1996, decided to limit, in principle, the competenceof the five-judge chambers to actions which concern the implementation of therules concerning State aid and the rules on trade protection measures.
Sager vedrørende fusionskontrol og konkurrenceområdet henvises fremover som hovedregel til tremands-afdelinger.
Actionsrelating to the control of concentrationsand mergers and in the field of
formaliteten for så vidt angår fysiske eller juridiske personers anlæg af sager til prøvelse af kommissionsbeslutninger, der ikke er rettet til dem.
competition are henceforthto be assigned,normally, to three-judge chambers.That readjustmentshould make it possible, in particular as regards the latterfield, to work more effectively still in terms of the assessment of the facts,while ensuring that particular attention will be paid to cases containing complexlegal problems.
I forbindelse med dom af 11. juli 1996 (forenede sager T-528/93, T-542/93, T543/93 og T-546/93, Métropole télévision SA m.fl. mod Kommissionen, Sml.
In the field of competition, two cases should first be noted (in theirchronological order) in which two Chambers of the Court of First Instancegave their views as to the admissibility of actions brought by natural andlegalpersons against decisions of the Commission not addressed to them.
II, s. 649) skulle Retten (Første Udvidede Afdeling) tage stilling til en beslutning truffet i medfør af EF-traktatens artikel 85, stk. 3, hvorved bestemmelserne i traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1, blev erklæret uanvendelige på visse regler fra European Broadcasting Union (herefter »EBU«), der er en sammenslutning af radio- og tv-selskaber.
In its judgment in Joined Cases T-528193, T-542193, T-543193 and T - 5 46 193 Mötropole Tö I ö v is i on and Others v Commission[L996) ECR II-649, the Court of First Instance(First Chamber, Extended Composition) was called upon tohear and determine a dispute concerning a decision adopted under Article 85(3)of the EC Treaty which declared the provisions of Article 85(1) of that Treatyinapplicable to certain rules of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), atrade association of radio and television organisations.
Til fordel for EBU's aktive medlemmer foreskrev de pågældende regler bl.a. eksklusiv adgang til de rettigheder til retransmission af sportsarrangementer, der blev erhvervet inden for rammerne af det såkaldte »Eurovision«-system(der gør det muligt for selskaberne at udveksle programmer), idet udenforstående aktørers mulighed for aftalebaseret adgang til disse rettigheder principielt er begrænset til forskudte transmissioner.
In particular, thoserules provided, for the benefit of the active members of the EBU, for theexclusivity of the rights to broadcast sporting events acquired under the"Eurovision" system (which enabled those organisations to exchangeprogrammes) while limiting the contractual access of other operatorsto thoserights, in principle, to deferred retransmissions.
Blandt de fire sagsøgere, der drev virksomhed med fjernsynstjenesteydelser, og som ikke var medlemmer af EBU, havde kun to fremsat bemærkninger i forbindelse med den administrative procedure ved Kommissionen.
Of the four applicants,television service operators and non-membersof the EBU, only two submittedobservations during the administrative procedure before the Commission, whileanother (RTI) simply attended the hearing.
Under disse omstændigheder havde Kommissionen nedlagt påstand om afvisning af de søgsmål, der var rejst af disse to sagsøgere, med den begrundelse, at de ikke var individuelt berørt af den anfægtede beslutning. Retten forkastede disse argumenter.
In those circumstances, the Commission claimed that the action brought by the last two applicants wasinadmissible on the ground that they were not individually concerned by thecontested decision.
Retten fremhævede, at de pågældende sagsøgere konkurrerede med EBU og dennes medlemmer, og at blandt medlemmerne fandtes de eneste aktive medlemmer af EBU på sagsøgernes respektive hjemmemarkeder.
It pointed out thatthose applicants were in competition with EBU and its members and that, inparticular, the latter included as direct competitorsof the applicants the onlyactive members of the EBU who operatedwithin their respective domesticmarkets.
Ifølge Retten gjorde den anfægtede beslutning det gennem de fritagne vedtægtsbestemmelser muligt at afskære sagsøgerne fra de konkurrencemæssige fordele ved et EBU-medlemskab.
According to the Court of First Instance,the'contested decision madeit possible, through the exemptedrules of the EBU's Statutes,to exclude theapplicants from the benefit of the competitive advantages arising out ofmembership of that organisation.
I kraft af denne påvirkning af deres konkurrencestilling var sagsøgerne interesserede tredjemænd, der skulle inddrages i den administrative procedure i medfør af forordning nr. 17.
Thus affected in respect of their competitiveposition, they had the status of interested third parties within the meaning of Regulation No 17 and were entitled to be associated with the administrative
Ifølge Retten er den proceduremæssige rettighed, der har hjemmel i forordning nr. 17, ikke undergivet nogen betingelser med hensyn til, hvorledes den udøves.
In the Court's view, the proceduralright provided for by Regulation No 17 is notsubject to any condition relating to the manner of its exercise.
I forbindelse med prøvelsen af sagens realitet annullerede Retten den anfægtede beslutning.
As regardssubstance, the Court annulled the contested decision.
For det første afviste Retten Kommissionens vurdering af de betingelser for optagelse i sammenslutningen, der fandtes i EBU's vedtægter vedrørende dækning af befolkningen, programudbud og produktion af udsendelser.
It criticised, first, theassessment by the Commission of the conditions laid down in the EBU Statutefor membership of that organisation relating to coverageof the population, toprogramming and to the production of the programmes broadcast.
Ifølge Retten havde Kommissionen ikke — sådan som den burde for korrekt at kunne vurdere, om den begrænsning af konkurrencen, som var en følge af de omhandlede regler, var nødvendig — på forhånd kontrolleret, hvorvidt reglerne var objektive og tilstrækkeligt præcise og kunne anvendes ens og uden forskelsbehandling i forhold til alle potentielle aktive medlemmer.
According to the Court, the Commission failed to ascertain properly beforehand, as it wasunder a duty to do in order to assess correctly the indispensable nature of therestrictions of competition resulting from those rules, whether they wereobjective and sufficiently determinate so as to enable them to be applieduniformly and in a non-discriminatory manner vis-ä-vis all potential active members.
Retten fastslog endvidere, at de omtvistede optagelsesbetingelser, der reelt relaterede sig til kvantitative kriterier uden talangivelser, ikke opfyldte disse krav.
Moreover, the Court found that since the disputed membershipconditions referred essentially to unquantified quantitative criteria they did not meet those requirements.
For det andet fandt Retten, at Kommissionen ikke uden nærmere forklaring kunne anse det for berettiget at tildele EBU en særlig status i forhold til konkurrencereglerne på grund af de aktive medlemmers særlige offentlige opgave.
Secondly, the Court found that the Commissioncould not, without further explanation, consider that a special Statute for the EBU with regard to the competition rules was justified by the constraintsarising out of the particular public mission of its active members.
Med henblik på at begrunde en fritagelse ud fra betragtninger knyttet til hensynet til den offentlige interesse burde Kommissionen — på grundlag af konkrete økonomiske oplysninger og mere generelt på grundlag af øvrige relevante forhold i sagen (såsom spørgsmålet, om der fandtes en ordning med økonomisk kompensation for de pågældendes byrder og forpligtelser) — have påvist, at sådanne betragtninger fordrede eksklusive rettigheder til retransmission af sportsarrangementer, og at denne eksklusivitet var nødvendig for, at de pågældende kunne opnå et rimeligt afkast.
In order tobe able to justify the granting of an exemption in view of the burdensarising arising as a result of the pursuit of the public interest,the Commission should haveproved, on the basis of specific economic data and, generally, of all therelevant aspects of the case, such as the possible existence of a system offinancial compensation for the burdens and obligations on those concerned, thatsuch considerations required broadcasting rights for sporting events to beexclusive and that such exclusivity was essentialin order to enable those concerned to obtain an equitablereturn.
Der er iværksat appel ved Domstolen til prøvelse af denne dom.
An appeal has been lodged againstthatjudgment before the Court of Justice.
Ved dom af 12. december 1996 (sag T-87/92, Kruidvat mod Kommissionen, Sml.
In its judgment in Case T-87192 Kruidvatv Commtssion [1996] ECR II-1931,the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber, Extended Composition)
Den omstændighed, at sagsøgeren var konkurrent til den pågældende producents autoriserede forhandlere, eller muligheden for, at sagsøgeren ikke kunne opnå leverancer fra de pågældende distributionsnet (såfremt selskabet ikke opfyldte udvælgelseskriterierne i henhold til standardkontrakten), var ifølge Retten ikke tilstrækkeligt til at individualisere sagsøgeren i traktatens forstand.
dismissed as inadmissible the action brought by an undertaking whichdistributes cosmetic products (including perfumery products) against a decisionof the Commission declaring the provisions of Article 85(1) of the EC Treatyinapplicable to standard-form authorised retailer contracts binding themanufacturer of luxury cosmetic products or its exclusive agents, to itsspecialised retailers.
Retten fastslog, at den anfægtede beslutning ikke i kraft af sin rækkevidde hindrede sagsøgeren i at foretage lovlige indkøb som hidtil uden for det pågældende net.
The Court found that the applicant was not individually.ön..rn.d by the contested decision.
Retten henviste endvidere til en retssag for en national domstol, hvorunder en af den omhandlede producents eneforhandlere i henhold til en national lov om illoyal konkurrence havde begæret et påbud til sagsøgeren om at ophøre med ethvert salg af de pågældende varer i et givet område, idet sagen tillige omfattede en tvist mellem parterne om, hvorvidt det omtvistede distributionsnet var lovligt.
Neither the applicant as such, it pointedout, nor the parent companies or even the group of which it formed part hadlodged a complaint with the Commission pursuant to Regulation No 17.
Under alle omstændigheder og hvad angik sagsøgerens interesse i en tilstrækkelig retsbeskyttelse bemærkede Retten, at den nationale ret, hvis den måtte finde det nødvendigt, kunne forelægge et præjudicielt spørgsmål for Domstolen vedrørende gyldigheden eller fortolkningen af den anfægtede beslutning.
Noneof them had participated in the administrative procedure provided for in thatregulation or applied to the manufacturer concerned to be admitted to itsselective distribution network.
Der er iværksat appel ved Domstolen til prøvelse af denne dom.
In the view of the Court, there was not asufficient link between,on the one hand, participation in that procedure by anorganisation to which one of the parent companies of the applicant belonged
Sagsøgeren i disse to sager er en indkøbssammenslutning, der i en af medlemsstaterne i Fællesskabet leverer til et net af detailsalgssteder, hvoraf hovedparten er varehuse eller supermarkeder.
The Court found that the scope of the contesteddecision did not prevent the appticantfrom legally obtaining supplies, as untilnow, outwith that network.
Over for Kommissionen havde sagsøgeren anført, at anvendelsen af de omhandlede standardkontrakter ville indebære, at visse af de nævnte salgssteder ville blive afskåret fra at forhandle de pågældende luksuskosmetikvarer, selv om de var indrettet til dette.
The Court also referred to the dispute pendingbefore the national court in which, first, an exclusive agent for themanufacturer concerned sought an order, pursuant to a national law in the fieldof unfair competition, requiring the applicant to discontinuethe sale of itsproducts within a given territory and which, secondly, involved a disputebetween the parties as to the lawfulness of the distribution network in issue.According to the Court, the applicant was not distinguished individually to adegree sufficient merely because the contested decision could be relevant to theoutcome of those proceedings, since any distributor of perfumes may inappropriate circumstances have an interest in questioningthe lawfulness of thatnetwork.
Søgsmålene til prøvelse af kommissionsbeslutningerne, hvorved EF-traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1, blev erklæret uanvendelig på de pågældende kontrakter (med den begrundelse, at de deri indeholdte udvælgelseskriterier ikke var omfattet af traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1, mens de øvrige forpligtelser og betingelser kunne omfattes af artikel
In any event, so far as concerns the interest of the applicant inbenefitting from adequatejudicial protection, the Court pointed out that thenational court rlay, if it considered it necessary to do so, refer a question onthe validity or interpretation of the contested decision to the Court of Justice.An appeal against that judgment has been lodged with the Court of Justice.
85, stk. 3), blev antaget til realitetsbehandling af Retten, der navnlig fandt, at sagsøgeren var individuelt berørt.
The applicant in bothcases was a purchasing association supplying a network of retail outlets, mostof which were hypermarketsor supermarketsin one of the Member States ofthe Community.
For det første måtte sagsøgeren ifølge Retten sammenlignes med en erhvervsdrivende, som havde fået afslag på en ansøgning om adgang til et netværk som autoriseret forhandler, og som var fremkommet med bemærkninger i henhold til artikel 19, stk. 3, i forordning nr. 17.
It had argued before the Commission that the use of thestandard-form contracts in question led to the exclusion of certain of the outletsfrom the distribution of the luxury cosmetic products, although they wereappropriately specialised.The actions against the Commission decisionsdeclaring Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty inapplicable to those contracts (on theground that the selection criteria laid down therein are not covered by thatprovision, whereas the other obligations and conditions could fall under Article85(3)) were held to be admissibleby the Court of First Instance which, inparticular, considered that they were of individual concern to the applicant.First, the applicant ought to be assimilated to an operatorwho has been refusedadmission to the network as an authorised distributor and which had submittedobservations pursuant to Article 19(3)of Regulation No 17.
Da sagsøgeren var et andelsselskab af detailhandlende, som havde til opgave at levere tjenesteydelser af betydning for sine medlemmers erhverv, havde selskabet forgæves anmodet de omhandlede producenter om, at i det mindste visse af selskabets medlemmer fik adgang til distributionsnettene som autoriserede forhandlere.
As a cooperativesociety of retailers with the duty to provide its services to its members relatingto their trade, the applicant had asked the manufacturers in question,unsuccessfully, that at leasta number of its members should be admitted to thenetwork as authorisedretailers.
Flere af medlemmerne havde selvstændigt tilkendegivet et ønske om at forhandle de pågældende producenters varer.
Several of its members had themselvesexpressed an interest in distributing that manufacturer's products.
Endelig havde sagsøgeren deltaget i den administrative procedure for Kommissionen og fremsat udførlige bemærkninger (jf. ovenfor).
Finally, theapplicant had participated in the administrative procedure before the Commission, submitting detailed observations to it (seeabove).
Retten henviste dernæst til sagsøgerens interesser, for så vidt som selskabet forhandlede leveringskontrakter, og til, at selskabet i henhold til sine vedtægter var bemyndiget til under den administrative procedure at gøre ikke blot sine egne synspunkter gældende, men også de medlemmers synspunkter, som ønskede at få adgang til de omtvistede distributionsnet.
The Courttook account of the interests of the applicant in its capacity as negotiator ofsupply contracts and because its statutes authorised it to put forward during theadministrative procedure not only its own point of view but also that of itsmembers wishing to belong to the network at issue.