natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Til støtte for sin principale påstand gjorde Sandoz for det første gældende, at der ikke var indgået en aftale som forudsat i EØF-Traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1, mellem firmaet og dets kunder, men kun enkeltstående, selvstændige salgskontrakter.
In support of its main claim Sandoz alleged in the first place that there was no agreement within the meaning of Article 85 (1) of the EEC Treaty between it and its customers but solely separate contracts of sale.
Kundekredsen var ikke omfattet af firmaets distributionsnet, og firmaet havde heller ikke truffet nogen rammeaftale om forretningsforholdet til kunderne.
The customers were not part of Sandoz's distribution network and its commercial relations with its customers were not contained in a standard agreement.
De fakturaer, som var forsynet med påtegningen "må ikke eksporteres", var blot ensidige regnskabsdokumenter, og nævnte påtegning var under alle omstændigheder ugyldig efter italiensk ret.
The invoices containing the words "not to be exported" were simply accounting documents of a unilateral nature.
Endelig anførte Sandoz, at det var af forsømmelighed, at firmaet var begyndt at forsyne fakturaerne med påtegningen og havde forsat denne praksis.
In any event the words "not to be exported" were void under Italian law.
Standardfakturaen måtte derfor anses for mere end et simpelt regnskabsdokument til intern brug i firmaet.
Sandoz maintained further that it was an oversight that the words appeared and were retained on the invoices.
Vedrørende spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt klausulen "må ikke eksporteres" var uvirksom efter national ret, bemærkede Domstolen, at det efter Traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1, er tilstrækkeligt, at den pågældende klausul afspejlede parternes vilje, og at det ikke var nødvendigt, at den udgjorde en bindende og gyldig aftale efter national ret.
The Court recalled that it had consistently held that Council Regulation No. 17 authorized the Commission to impose fines on undertakings or associations of undertakings where, "intentionally or negligently", they had infringed the provisions of Article 85 (1) of the EEC Treaty.
For det andet gjorde Sandoz gældende, at den anfægtede beslutning var utilstrækkeligt begrundet, fordi den ikke omtalte de skadelige virkninger, som påtegningen "må ikke eksporteres" havde for samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne. terne.
With regard to the ineffectiveness of the words "not to be exported" under national law, the Court pointed out that for the application of Article 85 (1) of the EEC Treaty it sufficed that the stipulation in question should express the intention of the parties without there being any need for it to constitute a binding and valid contract under national law.
I Øvrigt havde Sandoz ikke truffet nogen foranstaltninger til at sikre, at firmaets kunder virkelig overholdt klausulen.
In the second place Sandoz alleged that there was an inadequate statement of reasons in the contested decision because it did not mention the adverse effect of the words "not to be exported" on trade between Member States.
Domstolen fandt det herom tilstrækkeligt at bemærke, at det efter Traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1, ikke er nødvendigt at tage hensyn til en aftales konkrete virkninger, når det fremgår, at den har til formål at hindre, begrænse eller fordreje konkurrencen inden for fællesmarkedet.
The Court pointed out that for the purposes of the application of Article 85 (1) of the EEC Treaty it was not necessary to take account of the specific effects of an agreement if it appeared that its objective was to prevent, restrict or distort competition within the Common Market.
Den omstændighed, at Sandoz ikke havde truffet nogen foranstaltninger til at sikre,'at firmaets kunder virkelig overholdt klausulen, indebar derfor ikke, at den på fakturaerne påsatte klausul "må ikke eksporteres" faldt uden for Traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1.
The fact that Sandoz had taken no steps to enforce observance of the clause by its customers was thus not sufficient to exempt the clause "not to be exported" on invoices from the prohibition in Article 85 (1) of the EEC Treaty.
Vedrørende den subsidiære påstand om bødens nedsættelse bemærkede Domstolen, at der skulle tages hensyn til samtlige de omstændigheder, der havde betydning fer vurderingen af overtrædelsens grovhed, herunder firmaets handlemåde under den administrative procedure.
With regard to the alternative claim for a reduction of the fine, the Court stated that it was necessary, in determining the amount of fines, to take account of all the factors likely to affect assessment of the
I den forbindelse fastslog Domstolen, at Sandoz fra begyndelsen af den administrative procedure og på foranledning af Kommissionens første henvendelse til firmaet fra november 1984, hvori Kommissionen udbad sig en række oplysninger, havde erklæret sig rede til at ændre den anfægtede standardfaktura og til at fjerne klausulen "må ikke eksporteres" på de fra januar 1985 anvendte fakturaer.
11 seriousness of the infringement and the conduct of the undertaking during the administrative procedure. The Court noted that since the administrative procedure stage and following the Commission's first request for information in November 1984 Sandoz had agreed to amend the standard invoice in issue and in fact removed the clause "not to be exported" on invoices dispatched since January 1985.
Den bøde, der blev pålagt sagsøgeren ved artikel 3 i Kommissionens beslutning af 13. juli 1987 vedrørende en procedure i henhold til EØF-Traktatens artikel 85, nedsættes til 500.000 ECU.
The amount of the fine imposed on the applicant in Article 3 of the Commission's decision of 13 July 1987 concerning a procedure initiated under Article 85 of the EEC Treaty is reduced to 500 000 ECU.
Sagsøgeren betaler sagens omkostninger."
The applicant is ordered to pay the costs."
Generaladvokat Walter Van Gerven fremsatte forslag til afgørelse den 10. oktober 1989.
Mr Advocate General Walter Van Gerven delivered his Opinion at the sitting on 10 October 1989.
"Jeg foreslår, at sagsøgte frifindes for samtlige påstande, og at sagsøgeren tilpligtes at betale sagens omkostninger".
He concluded: "I propose that the applicant's claim should be rejected in its entirety and it be ordered to pay the costs."
(præjudiciel) "Konvention om retternes kompetence og om fuldbyrdelse af retsafgørelser -Bruxelles-konventionen - sager om erstatning uden for kontrakt - fortolkning af artikel 5, nr. 3 - indirekte skadelidt - skade påført moderselskabet som følge af datterselskabets økonomiske tab" (Sjette Afdeling)
(Brussels Convention - Matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict -Interpretation of Article 5 (3) - Indirect victim - Injury to a parent company due to the financial losses sustained by its subsidiary) (Sixth Chamber)
Ved dom af 21. juni 1988, indgået til Domstolen den 4. august 1988, havde Frankrigs Cour de cassation forelagt et præjudicielt spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af artikel 5, nr. 3, i konventionen af 27. september 1968 om retternes kompetence og om fuldbyrdelse af retsafgørelser i borgerlige sager, herunder handelssager.
By judgment of 21 June 1988, received at the Court Registry on 4 August 1988, the Cour de Cassation [Court of Cassation], Paris, referred for a preliminary ruling a question on the interpretation of Article 5 (3) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters.
Spørgsmålet var blevet rejst under en sag om erstatning uden for kontrakt anlagt ved domstolene i Frankrig af de franske selskaber Dumez og Tracoba (herefter benævnt Dumez m.fl.) mod de ovenfor nævnte tyske banker. Sagsøgerne søgte herved at opnå erstatning for det tab, de påstod at have lidt som følge af, at deres datterselskaber i Forbundsrepublikken Tyskland var krakket, efter at et byggeri, der skulle udføres i Forbundsrepublikken Tyskland for en tysk bygherre, var blevet standset som følge af, at de tyske banker havde standset kreditgivningen til bygherren.
The question was raised in the context of proceedings concerning quasi-delictual liability, brought before the French courts by the French companies Dumez and Tracoba against the abovementioned German banks and seeking compensation for the damage which they claimed to have suffered on account of the insolvency of their subsidiaries established in the Federal Republic of Germany as a result of the halting of a building programme to be carried out in Germany on behalf of a German property-developer, the insolvency being due to the withdrawal by the German banks of the credits granted to that developer.
Domstolen fastslog først, at i et tilfælde som det, der er omhandlet i hovedsagen, er den påståede skade kun en indirekte følge af det tab, der oprindelig er påført andre juridiske personer, som direkte har lidt skade ved en skadetilføjelse, der er indtruffet et andet sted end det, hvor den indirekte skadelidte derefter har lidt et tab.
The Tribunal de Commerce [Commercial Court] and the Cour d'Appel [Court of Appeal], Paris, respectively upheld and confirmed the objection raised by the German banks alleging lack of jurisdiction, on the ground that the initial damage had been incurred in Germany by the subsidiaries of Dumez and Tracoba, and that it was only indirectly that the French parentcompanies had sustained financial loss.
Domstolen bemærkede dernæst, at konventionen i afsnit II, afd. 2, fastsætter en række specielle kompetenceregler, herunder reglen i artikel 5, nr. 3, men at disse kun er undtagelser fra hovedreglen om, at retterne på det sted, hvor sagsøgte har bopæl, har kompetencen. Som Domstolen allerede har fastslået i ovennævnte dom af 30. november 1976, bygger disse specielle kompetenceregler, som kan benyttes efter sagsøgers valg, på, at der findes en særlig snæver sammenhæng mellem tvisten og andre domstole end domstolene på det sted, hvor sagsøgte har bopæl, og at denne sammenhæng kan begrunde, at disse domstole tillægges kompetencen af retsplejehensyn og af hensyn til sagsbehandlingen.
Dumez and Tracoba thereupon lodged an appeal, in support of which they maintained that the case-law of the Court (namely the judgment of 30 November 1976 in Case 21/76, G.J. Bier BV ν Mines de Potasse d'Alsace S.A. [1976] ECR 1755), according to which the phrase "the place where the harmful event occurred" in Article 5 (3) of the Convention must be understood as intended to cover both the place where the damage occurred and the place of the event giving rise to it, with the result that the defendant could be sued, at the option of the plaintiff, before the courts of either place, applied equally in the event of indirect injury.
Domstolen udtalte, at det ud fra disse hensyn er nødvendigt at undgå, at antallet af værneting bliver for stort, idet dette øger risikoen for indbyrdes uforenelige afgørelser, som kan være en grund til at nægte anerkendelse eller fuldbyrdelsespåtegning i medfør af konventionens artikel 27, nr. 3.
The Cour de Cassation therefore wished to establish whether the rule on jurisdiction which allowed the plaintiff, under Article 5 (3) of the Convention, to choose between the court for place of the event giving rise to the damage and the court for the place where that damage occurred should be extended to cases in which the damage alleged was merely the consequence of the harm suffered by persons who were the immediate victims of damage occurring at a different place, thereby enabling the indirect victim to bring proceedings before the court of the State in which he was domiciled.
Domstolen udtalte videre, at de samme hensyn desuden er til hinder for enhver fortolkning af konventionen, som fører til, at der anerkendes en kompetence for retterne på sagsøgerens bopæl uden for disse udtrykkeligt fastsatte tilfælde, og som derfor gør det muligt for sagsøgeren at bestemme, hvilken ret, der skal være kompetent, gennem sit valg af bopæl.
In the first place, the Court found that, in circumstances such as those of the case before the national court, the damage alleged was merely the indirect consequence of the harm originally suffered by other legal persons, who had been the immediate victims of the damage which had occurred at a place different from the place at which the indirect victim had subsequently incurred the injury.
Heraf følger, at selv om udtrykket "det sted, hvor skadetilføjelsen er foregået" i konventionens artikel 5, nr. 3, efter Domstolens afgørelse kan sigte til det sted, hvor skaden er indtrådt, kan det kun forstås således, at det betegner det sted, hvor den skadegørende handling, som fører til, at der ifaldes erstatningsansvar uden for kontrakt, direkte har påført den umiddelbart skadelidte et tab.
The Court went on to find that it was only by way of exception to the general rule laid down by the Convention, under which jurisdiction was given to the courts of the defendant's domicile, that Section 2 of Title II provided for special jurisdiction in a number of cases, of which Article 5 (3) was one example.
Domstolen udtalte, at der i øvrigt sædvanligvis er en snæver forbindelse mellem det sted, hvor skadetilføjelsen oprindelig er sket, og de andre ansvarspådragende momenter, mens dette som oftest ikke er tilfældet, for så vidt angår den indirekte skadelidtes bopæl.
As the Court had previously ruled in its abovementioned judgment of 30 November 1976, special jurisdiction, where the choice was open to the plaintiff, was based on the existence of a particularly close connecting factor between the dispute and certain courts other than the courts of the defendant's domicile, which justified the conferring of jurisdiction on those courts in the interests of the proper administration of justice and the rational conduct of the proceedings.
"Værnetingsreglen i artikel 5, nr. 3, i konventionen af 27. september 1968 om retternes kompetence og om fuldbyrdelse af retsafgørelser i borgerlige sager, herunder handelssager, kan ikke fortolkes således, at en sagsøger, som gør gældende, at han har lidt et tab, som påstås at være en følge af den skade, de direkte skadelidte har lidt ved skadetilføjelsen, efter denne bestemmelse er berettiget til at sagsøge skadevolderen ved retten på det sted, hvor han selv har konstateret formuetabet."
In order to meet that objective it was essential to avoid the proliferation of courts having jurisdiction, which heightened the risk of irreconcilable judgments - the ground under Article 27 (3) of the
Generaladvokat Marco Darmon fremsatte forslag til afgørelse den 23. november vm:
Mr Advocate General Darmon delivered his Opinion at the sitting on 23 November 1989.
Han foreslog Domstolen at kende for ret:
He proposed that the Court should rule as follows:
Værnetingsreglen om, at sagsøgeren, for så vidt angår anvendelsen af artikel 5, nr. 3, i Bruxelles-konventionen om retternes kompetence og om fuldbyrdelse af retsafgørelser i borgerlige sager, herunder handelssager, kan vælge mellem retten på det sted, hvor den skadegørende handling er foretaget, og retten på sted, hvor skaden er indtrådt, gælder også for indirekte skadelidte. 2.
The rule on jurisdiction which allows the plaintiff, under Article 5 (3) of the Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, to choose between the court for the place of the event giving rise to damage and the court for the place where that damage occurs is applicable to indirect victims.
Det sted, hvor skaden er indtrådt, skal for disse skadelidtes vedkommende forstås som det sted, hvor den skade, der er påført den oprindelige skadelidte, er indtrådt".
The place where the damage to those victims occurred must be understood as meaning the place where the damage sustained by the initial victim occurred".
10.01.1990 Annullation af Kommissionens beslutning af 30. september 1988 om licitation nr. 8 i forbindelse med løbende licitation i henhold til Kommissionens forordning (EØF) nr. 570/88 af 16. februar 1988 om salg af smør til nedsat pris og ydelse af støtte for smør og koncentreret smør til fremstilling af konditorvarer, konsumis og andre levnedsmidler - nedsættelse af det maksimale støttebeløb for smør. Generaladvokat: CO. Lenz. Processprog: fransk.
Delacre and Others ν Commission - 10 January 1990 Application for the annulment of the Commission Decision of 30 September 1988 in connexion with Tender No. 8 pursuant to the standing invitation to tender procedure under Commission Regulation (EEC) No. 570/88 of 16 February 1988 on the sale of butter at reduced prices and the granting of aid for butter and concentrated butter for use in the manufacture of pastry products, ice-cream and other foodstuffs - Reduction in the maximum level of aid for butter Advocate General: C. 0.
Processprog: tysk.
Case C 372/88
B. For Retten i Første Instans
B. Before the Court of First Instance
09.01.1990 Anmodning om præjudiciel afgørelse fra Tribunal de Commerce de Quimper. Fortolkning af artikel 10 i direktiv 71/118/EØF om sundhedsmæssige problemer i forbindelse med handel med fersk fjerkrækød - en udtalelse fra en sagkyndig veterinær, udpeget i henhold til direktivets artikel 10, tillagt retsvirkning. Generaladvokat G. Tesauro. Processprog: fransk.
M. Ravida ν Office National des Pensions - 9 January 1990 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Tribunal du Travail, Nivelles Interpretation of Article 51 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No. 1408/71 - Overlapping of retirement and survivor's pensions - Effect of cost-of-living adjustment to the benefit made by one Member State on the amount of benefits granted in another Member State Advocate General: F. Jacobs Language of the case: French
Sag C-85/89:
Page 16
Sag C-348/88:
Case C 333/88
Sag
Case C 18/89
Sag C-333/88:
Case C 111/89
Sag
Case C 113/89
11.01.1990 Anmodning om præjudiciel afgørelse fra Nederlandenes Hoge Raad. Fortolkning af EØF-Traktatens artikel 12, 16 og 36 - opkrævning af afgifter for fytosanitar kontrol af planter bestemt til eksport - afgifterne beregnet på grundlag af vægten af de planter, der frembydes til eksport, eller af fakturanettobeløbet. Generaladvokat: F. Jacobs. Processprog: nederlandsk.
Interpretation of Articles 5, 58 to 66 of the EEC Treaty and of Article 2 of the Act of Accession of Portugal -Right of a Portuguese company to provide services on the territory of another Member State in order to carry out work there (in the building and public works sector) with its own staff, in its name and on its account - Is the exercise of that right subject to conditions, in particular relating to the engagement of staff in situ, the obtaining of work permits or the payment of fees to an official immigration body?
11.01.1990 Anmodning om præjudiciel afgørelse fra Tribunal Administratif de Versailles.
J.-M. Le Pen and Others ν Detlef Puhl and Others - 11 January 1990 (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Cour d'Appel, Colmar Court's jurisdiction over acts committed on the premises of the European Parliament in Strasbourg (defamation) Advocate General: F. Jacobs Language of the case: French
11.01.1990 Anmodning om præjudiciel afgørelse fra Cour d'Appel de Colmar. Domstolens kompetence til at påkende visse forhold begået i Europa-Parlamentets lokaler i Strasbourg (ærekrænkelse). Generaladvokat: F. Jacobs. Processprog: fransk.
R. Stanton Newton ν Chief Adjudication Office (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Social Security Commissioners Interpretation of Articles 4 (1) (b), Article 4 (4) and Article 10 of Regulation (EEC) No. 1408/71 - Concept of invalidity benefit - Exportation of entitlement to benefits - Residence clause Language of the case: English
Sag C-356/89:
Case C 358/89
Sag C-357/89:
Case C 359/89
Sag C-358/89:
Case C 360/89
Extramet Industrie mod Rådet Annullation af Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 2808/89 af 18. september 1989 om indførelse af en endelig antidumpingtold på importen af kalciummetal med oprindelse i Den Kinesiske Folkerepublik og Sovjetunionen og om endelig opkrævning af den midlertidige antidumpingtold på denne import. Processprog: fransk.
Commission ν Italy Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations -National legislation incompatible with the provisions of Article 59 of the EEC Treaty and Council Directive 71/305/EEC concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts Language of the case: Italian
Sag C-359/89:
Case C 361/89
Sag C-360/89:
Case C 362/89
Kommissionen mod Italien En stats traktatbrud - nationale bestemmelser uforenelige med EØF-Traktatens artikel 59 og Rådets direktiv 71/305/EØF af 26. juli 1971 om samordning om fremgangsmåderne med hensyn til indgåelse af offentlige bygge- og anlægskontrakter. Processprog: italiensk.
G. d'Urso and Others ν Marelli Eletromeccanica Generale and Others (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Pretura di Milano Interpretation of the first subparagraph of Article 1 (1) of Directive 77/187/EEC relating to the safeguarding of
Sag C-363/89:
D. Roux ν Belgian State
Sag C-364/89:
Case C 364/89
Sag C-365/89:
Case C 365/89
Sag C-368/89: A. Crispoltoni mod Fattoria Autonoma Tabacchi Anmodning om præjudiciel afgørelse fra Pretura Circondariale di Perugia.
A. Cri spol toni ν Fattoria Autonoma Tabacchi (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Pretura Circondariale di Perugia Validity of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 1114/88 of 25 April 1988 amending Regulation (EEC) No. 727/70 on the common organization of the market in raw tobacco -Validity of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2268/88 of 19 July 1988 fixing, for the 1988 harvest, the norm and intervention prices and premiums granted to purchasers of leaf tobacco, the derived intervention prices for baled tobacco, the reference qualities, the production areas and the guaranteed maximum quantities and amending Regulation (EEC) No. 1975/87 Language of the case: Italian
Sag C-369/89: P.I.A.G.E.M.E. m.fl. mod PVBA Peeters Anmodning om præjudiciel afgørelse fra Rechtsbank van
Pi ageme and Others ν PVBA Peeters (Reference for a preliminary ruling) Rechtbank van Koophandel te Leuven Interpretation of Article 30 of the EEC Treaty and of Article 14 of Council Directive 79/112/EEC of 18 December 1978 relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs for sale to the ultimate consumer Language of the case: Dutch
Sag C-370/89: Entreprises Electro-Mécaniques m.fl. mod Den Europæiske Investeringsbank Erstatningssøgsmål - godtgørelse af det tab.
Entreprises Electro-Méchaniques and Others ν European
Den Europæiske Investeringsbank har påført sagsøgeren ved at afskære denne fra at få tildelt kontrakten vedrørende højspændingsledningen Bamako Segou i Mali, selv om sagsøgerens tilbud var det laveste og det Økonomisk mest fordelagtige. Processprog: fransk.
Investment Bank Action to establish liability and for damages -Compensation for the damage caused by the EIB to the applicant by preventing its being the successful tenderer for the construction of the electricity line between Bamako and Ségou in Mali, although its bid was regarded as the lowest and economically the most advantageous
Sag C-371/89:
Language of the case: French
Processprog: tysk.
Case C 371/89
Udgivet af Informationskontoret ved De Europæiske Fællesskabers Domstol, L-2925 Luxembourg.
Published by the Information Service of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, L-2925 Luxembourg.
ARBEJDET VED DE EUROPÆISKE FÆLLESSKABERS DOMSTOL*)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES *
I - DOMME side
JUDGMENTS page
II - FORSLAG TIL AFGØRELSE
Joined Cases C-193/87 and 194/87
*) DENNE PUBLIKATION UDARBEJDES AF DOMSTOLENS INFORMATIONSTJENESTE HED HENBLIK PX EN HURTIG ORIENTERING OM ARBEJDET VED DOMSTOLEN.
* THIS BULLETIN IS PREPARED BY THE INFORMATION SERVICE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE IN ORDER TO SUPPLY READERS WITH RAPID INFORMATION ON THE WORK OF THE INSTITUTION.
DOMSTOLENS DOMME OG DE FOR DONSTOLEN FREMSATTE FORSLAG TIL AFGØRELSE OFFENTLIGGØRES SENERE I "SAMLING AF DOMSTOLENS AFGØRELSER", SOM ER DEN ENESTE GYLDIGE UDGAVE.
HOWEVER, ONLY THE COMPLETE TEXT OF THE JUDGMENTS AND OPINIONS PUBLISHED LATER IN THE REPORTS OF CASES BEFORE THE COURT IS AUTHENTIC.
GENGIVELSE KAN SKE NED KILDEANGIVELSE.
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS BULLETIN MAY BE REPRODUCED PROVIDED THAT THE SOURCE IS STATED.