natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Generaladvokat Giuseppe Tesauro fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (F.ierde Afdeling) den 11..juni 1992.
Mr Advocate General Tesauro delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Fourth Chamber of the Court on 11 June 1992.
Han foreslog følgende:
He proposed that the Court should reply as follows:
"Ydelse af den i Rådets forordning nr. 2114/71 fastsatte støtte til olieholdige frø er i henhold til de i Kommissionens forordning nr. 1204/72 indeholdte gennemførelsesbestemmelser betinget af, at ansøgningen om udstedelse af attestens ID-del indgives samme dag, som frøene undergives kontrol, og inden de forarbejdes."
"The grant of the subsidy for oil seeds, as provided for in Council Regulation No 2114/71, is subject, in accordance with the detailed rules of application laid down by Commission Regulation No 1204/72, to the condition that the request for the ID part of the certificate is lodged on the same day as that on which the seeds are placed under control and before they are processed."
"Automobil forsi kring - område hvor et køretøj er hjemmehørende" (Sjette Afdeling)
(Motor vehicle insurance - Territory in which the vehicle is normally based) (Sixth Chamber)
14 - køretøj er hjemmehørende" i artikel 1, stk. 4, i Rådets direktiv 72/166/EØF.
By judgment of 26 September 1988, which was received at the Court on 9 March 1989, the Tribunal de Grande Instance, Toulon (France), referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling a question on the interpretation of the phrase "territory in which the vehicle is normally based" in Article 1(4) of Council Directive 72/166/EEC.
Spørgsmålet var blevet rejst under en sag mellem, på den ene side, det franske forsi kringsbureau og, på den anden side, det nederlandske og det tyske forsi kringsbureau vedrørende spørgsmålet om, hvem der i sidste ende skal dække omkostningerne ved ydelse af erstatning til ofrene for et trafikuheld, der i Frankrig var blevet forårsaget af et privat motorkøretøj, der forskriftsmæssigt var blevet registreret i Tyskland og herefter stjålet og forsynet med falske nederlandske nummerplader, der var udleveret til et andet køretøj, som tilhørte en nederlandsk statsborger.
That question was raised in a dispute between the Bureau Central Français des Assurances, on the one hand, and on the other the Netherlands national bureau and the German national bureau, on the question of who was ultimately to bear the burden of compensating the victims of a road accident caused in France by a private motor vehicle, properly registered in Germany, subsequently stolen and equipped with a false Netherlands registration plate corresponding to another vehicle belonging to a Netherlands national.
"Artikel 1, stk. 4, i Rådets direktiv 72/166/EØF af 24. april 1972 om indbyrdes tilnærmelse af medlemsstaternes lovgivning om ansvarsforsikring for motorkøretøjer og kontrollen med forsikringspligtens overholdelse skal fortolkes således, at et køretøj, der på det tidspunkt, det passerer grænsen, er forsynet med nummerplader, der forskriftsmæssigt er udleveret af en medlemsstats myndigheder, men som er falske, da de i virkeligheden er udleveret til et andet køretøj, må anses for hjemmehørende på den stats område, som har udleveret de pågældende plader."
"Article 1(4) of Council Directive 72/166/EEC of 24 April 1972 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, and to the enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability, must be interpreted as meaning that a vehicle which, on crossing the frontier, bears a registration plate which has been properly issued by the authorities of a Member State but is false since it constitutes in fact the registration plate of another vehicle, is to be regarded as normally based in the territory of the State which issued the plate in question."
Generaladvokat F. G. Jacobs fremsatte forslag til afgørelse den 20. ma.i 1992
Mr Advocate General Jacobs delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Sixth Chamber of the Court on 20 May 1992.
Generaladvokaten foreslog følgende besvarelse af spørgsmålet:
He proposed that the Court should reply as follows:
"Når et køretøj, der er registreret i en medlemsstat, er blevet stjålet og forsynet med nummerplader, der giver indtryk af, at køretøjet er registreret i en anden medlemsstat, skal artikel 1, stk. 4, i Rådets direktiv 72/166, som ændret ved artikel 4 i Rådets direktiv 84/5, fortolkes således, at køretøjet er hjemmehørende på den anden medlemsstats område."
"Where a vehicle registered in one Member State is stolen and is unlawfully equipped with registration plates which create the impression that it is registered in another Member State, Article 1(4) of Council Directive 72/166, as amended by Article 4 of Council Directive 84/5, must be interpreted as meaning that the vehicle is normally based in the territory of the second Member State."
Forenede sager C-134/91 og C-135/91: Kerafina Keramische und Finanz Holding AG og Vioktimatiki AEVE mod Den Hellenske Republik
Joined Cases C-134/91 and C-135/91: Kerafina-Keramische und Finanz Holding AEG and Vioktimatiki AEBE ν Hellenic Republic - 12 November 1992
Ved domme af 31. januar 1991 indgået til Domstolen den 24. maj 1991 havde Efeteio Athen forelagt tre præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af Rådets andet direktiv 77/91/EØF og om fortolkningen af Kommissionens beslutning 88/167/EØF.
By judgments of 31 January 1991, which were received at the Court on 24 May 1991, the Efeteio (Court of Appeal), Athens, referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling three questions on the interpretation of the Second Council Directive 77/91/EEC and on the interpretation of Commission Decision 88/167/EEC.
De hidtidige aktionærer i Kerafina fandt, at den administrative beslutning om at forhøje selskabets kapitel var i strid med artikel 25 i andet direktiv.
Kerafina's former shareholders considered that the capital increases decided upon by an administrative act were contrary to Article 25 of the Second Directive.
En borger kan ved de nationale domstole over for en offentlig myndighed påberåbe sig artikel 25, stk. 1, i Rådets andet direktiv 77/91/EØF af 13. december 1976 om samordning af de garantier, der kræves i medlemsstaterne af de i artikel 58, stk. 2, i Traktaten nævnte selskaber til beskyttelse af såvel selskabsdeltagernes som tredjemands interesser, for så vidt angår stiftelsen af aktieselskabet samt bevarelse af og ændringer i dets kapital, med det formål at gøre disse garantier lige byrdefulde.
Article 25(1) of the Second Council Directive 77/91/EEC of 13 December 1976 on coordination of safeguards which, for the protection of the interests of members and others, are required by Member States of companies within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article the Treaty, in respect of the formation of public limited companies and the maintenance and alteration of their capital, view to making such safeguards equivalent, may be invoked
Bestemmelserne i andet direktivs artikel 25, sammenholdt med direktivets artikel 41, stk. 1, skal fortolkes således, at de er til hinder for nationale regler, der med henblik på at sikre den fortsatte beståen og drift af virksomheder, som økonomisk og socialt har særlig samfundsmæssig betydning, og som på grund af deres betydelige gældsættelse befinder sig i en kritisk situation, bestemmer, at der administrativt kan træffes beslutning om en fornøjelse af selskabskapitalen, hvorved hidtidige aktionærers fortegningsret til nyudstedte aktier dog bevares.
The combined provisions are Article 25 and Article 41(1) of the Second Directive must be interpreted as precluding national rules which, in order to ensure the survival and continued operation of companies of particular economic and social importance for society which, in view of their over-indebtedness, are in an exceptional situation, provide for the adoption by administrative act of a decision to increase the company capital, without prejudice to the pre-emptive right of the existing shareholders when the new shares are distributed.
Der er ikke ved Kommissionens beslutning 88/167/EØF af 7. oktober 1987 vedrørende lov nr. 1386/1983, på grundlag af hvilken den græske regering yder støtte til det græske erhvervsliv, givet Den Hellenske Republik tilladelse til at opretholde de bestemmelser i lov nr. 1386/1983, der er i strid med andet direktiv, indtil den 31. december 1987."
Commission Decision 88/167/EEC of 7 October 1987 concerning Law 1386/1983 by which the Greek Government grants aid to Greek industry did not authorize the Greek Government to maintain in force until 31 December 1987 that the latest the provisions of Law 1386/1983 which are contrary to the Second Directive."
Generaladvokat Giuseppe Tesauro fremsatte forslag til afgørelse for Domstolens Sjette Afdeling den 22. september 1992.
Mr Advocate General Tesauro delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Sixth Chamber of the Court on 22 September 1992.
Bestemmelserne i artikel 25 i Rådets andet direktiv 77/91/EØF af 13. december 1976, sammenholdt med direktivets artikel 41, stk. 1, skal fortolkes således, at de er til hinder for nationale regler, der med henblik på at sikre den fortsatte beståen og drift af virksomheder, som økonomisk og socialt har særlig betydning, og soni på grund af deres betydelige gældsættelse befinder sig i en kritisk
The combined provisions are Articles 25 and 41(1) in the second Council Directive 77/91/EEC of 13 December 1976 are to be interpreted as precluding national laws which, for the purpose of ensuring the survival and continued operation of undertakings that are of special economic and social importance to the community but find themselves in exceptional circumstances on account of excessive debts, provide for decisions in the form of administrative acts increasing their company capital without prejudice to existing shareholders' pre-emptive rights when the new shares are issued.
Der er ikke ved Kommissionens beslutning 88/167/EØF af 7. oktober 1987, hvorved Kommissionen udtalte, at den ikke havde nogen indvendinger mod gennemførelse af lov nr. 1386/1983, bl.a. forudsat at den græske regering senest den 31. december 1987 ændrede bestemmelserne i loven, således at de blev bragt i overensstemmelse med artikel 25 ff. og artikel 29 ff. i Rådets andet direktiv 77/91/EØF af 13. december 1976, indrømmet Den Hellenske Republik fritagelse for at gennemføre direktivet indtil den 31. december 1987."
Commission Decision 88/167/EEC of 7 October 1987, whereby the Commission stated that it had no objection to the implementation of Law 1386/1983, on condition (inter alia) that the Greek Government had amended, by 31 December 1987, the provisions of that Law so as to bring it into conformity with Articles 25 et seq. and 29 et seq. of the Second Council Directive of 13 December 1976, does not exonerate the Hellenic Republic from implementing the directive by that date (31 December 1987)."
Forenede sager C-132/91, C-138/91 og C-139/91: G. Katsikas m.fl. mod A. Konstantinidis m.fl.
Joined Cases C-132/91, C-138/91 and C-139/91: G. Katsikas and Others ν A. Konstantinidis and Others
Fortolkningen af artikel 1 og 7 i Rådets direktiv 77/187/EØF om tilnærmelse af medlemsstaternes lovgivning om varetagelse af arbejdstagernes rettigheder i forbindelse med overførsel af virksomheder, bedrifter eller dele af bedrifter - arbejdstagerens, adgang til at rejse indsigelse mod, at overdragerens rettigheder og pligter overgår til erhververen.
Interpretation of Articles 1 and 7 of Council Directive 77/187/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of businesses - Right of the worker to object to the transfer of rights and obligations to the purchaser.
Generaladvokat W. Van Gerven fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Domstolens plenum) den 10. november 1992.
Mr Advocate General Van Gerven delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Court on 10 November 1992.
"Rådets direktiv 77/187/EØF af 14. februar 1977 om tilnærmelse af medlemsstaternes lovgivning om varetagelse af arbejdstagernes rettigheder i forbindelse med overførsel af virksomheder, bedrifter eller dele af bedrifter, er ikke til hinder for, at en medlemsstat giver en arbejdstager ret til at erklære, at retsvirkningerne af en virksomhedsoverdragelse ikke indtræder for hans vedkommende, hvilket indebærer, at den med overdrageren indgåede arbejdsaftale opretholdes, for så vidt som det er sikret - ved en aftale mellem arbejdstageren og arbejdsgiveren eller i medfør af en administrativt eller ved lov fastsat bestemmelse efter betydningen i direktivets artikel 7 - at denne indsigelsesret ikke blot principielt, men også reelt er gunstigere for arbejdstageren.
"Council Directive 77/187/EEC of 14 February 1977, on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of businesses, does not preclude a Member State from granting to workers the right to state that the legal effects of the transfer of an undertaking are inapplicable to them, with the result that the contract of employment with the transferor is maintained, provided it is guaranteed - by an agreement between the workers and the employer or by virtue of a law, regulation or administrative provision within the meaning of Article 7 of the directive - that the right of objection is not only in principle but also in practice more favourable to the workers.
En fast retspraksis ved den højeste nationale retsinstans på det arbejdsretlige område, der giver en indsigelsesret som beskrevet ovenfor, kan anses for en bestemmelse efter betydningen i direktivets artikel 7,
The consistent case-law of the supreme national court having jurisdiction in labour disputes, which lays down a right of objection such as that defined above, may be regarded as a provision within the meaning of Article 7 of the directive where that case-law concerns the interpretation of a national law and was already established at the time of the transposai of the directive into national law, as is the case here."
Generaladvokat Carl Otto Lenz fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet den 10. november 1992
Mr Advocate General Lenz delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Court on 10 November 1992.
Kongeriget Belgien har tilsidesat sine forpligtelser efter Rådets direktiv 85/203/EØF af 7. marts 1985 om luftkvalitetsnormer for så vidt angår nitrogendioxid, og efter EØF-Traktatens artikel 189, idet det ikke har udstedt alle de love eller administrative bestemmelser, der er nødvendige til at gennemføre forpligtelserne i direktivets artikel 11 i national ret.
By failing to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to implement in its national law the obligations set out in Article 11 of Council Directive 85/203/EEC of 7 March 1985 on air quality standards for nitrogen dioxide, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under that article and under Article 189 of the EEC Treaty;
Sag C-217/91: Kongeriget Spanien mod Kommissionen
Case C-217/91: Kingdom of Spain ν Commission
Annullation af artikel 7a, stk. 3, andet afsnit, i Kommissionens forordning (EØF) nr. 1014/90 om gennemførelsesbestemmelser for definition af, betegnelse for og præsentation af spiritus, som ændret ved Kommissionens forordning (EØF) nr. 1781/91 - mærkning og præsentation af likører.
Annulment of the second sub-paragraph of Article 7a(3) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1014/90 laying down detailed rules of application for the definition, designation and presentation of alcoholic beverages, as amended by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1781/91 - Labelling and presentation of 1iqueurs.
Generaladvokat Claus Gul mann fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet den 10. november 1992.
Mr Advocate General Gulmann delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Court on 10 November 1992.
"Jeg skal af disse grunde foreslå Domstolen at frifinde Kommissionen og at pålægge Kongeriget Spanien sagens omkostninger, idet Kongeriget Danmark afholder sine egne omkostninger."
Interpretation of Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council - Right of residence for a Turkish worker - Worker "in regular employment" - Work permit granted for the period necessary for a decision on the right of residence.
En tyrkisk statsborger, som i Forbundsrepublikken Tyskland har fået opholdstilladelse med henblik på at indgå ægteskab med en tysk statsborger, kan ikke efter skilsmissen nægtes fornyelse af denne tilladelse, når han på tidspunktet for ansøgningen herom kan påvise at have haft en lovlig beskæftigelse som omhandlet i artikel 6, stk. 1, første led, i den nævnte afgørelse.
A Turkish national who has obtained a residence permit in the Federal Republic of Germany in order to marry a German national there cannot, following his divorce, be denied the right to have that permit renewed where, at the date on which he applys for renewal, he can claim to have been regularly employed for a year for the purposes of the first indent of Article 6(1) of the aforesaid decision.
En tyrkisk arbejdstager, der opfylder betingelserne i artikel 6, stk. 1, første eller tredje led, i den nævnte afgørelse kan gøre disse bestemmelser gældende for at få såvel arbejdstilladelsen som opholdstilladelsen forlænget."
A Turkish worker who satisfies the conditions laid down by the first or third indent of Article 6(1) of the aforesaid decision may rely directly on those provisions in order to obtain renewal of his residence permit as well as of his work permit."
Appel af dom afsagt den 13. december 1990 af Retten i Første Instans (Fjerde Afdeling) i sagen T-20/89, H. -J. Moritz mod Kommissionen -annullation af Kommissionens afgørelse om udnævnelse af en direktør i generaldirektoratet "Lån og investering"
Appeal against the judgment of 13 December 1990 of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) in Case T-20/89 H.-J. Moritz ν Commission - Annulment of the Commission's decision making an appointment to the post of director in the Directorate General for loans and investments.
Generaladvokat W. Van Gerven fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet den 10. november 1992.
Mr Advocate General Van Gerven delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Court on 10 November 1992.
Den af Retten i Første Instans den 13. december 1990 afsagte dom i sag T-20/89, H. -J. Moritz mod Kommissionen, annulleres på grund af mangelfuld begrundelse i det omfang, Retten i afgørelsen:
The judgment given by the Court of First Instance on 13 December 1990 in Case T-20/89 Moritz ν Commission is set aside on the ground that the reasons stated are defective, inasmuch as in that judgment the Court of First Instance: holds that the belated compilation of Mr Moritz's staff report for the period 1983 - 1985 does not constitute maladministration on the part of the Commission; rejects the submissions relied upon before it by Mr Moritz in which he seeks compensation for the material and non-material damage which he claims to have suffered as a result of the Commission's decision of 2 July 1986 appointing an official to an A2 post; orders each of the parties to bear their own costs.
Afgørelsen om sagens omkostninger udsættes."
The order as to costs is suspended."
Fortolkning af artikel 6, stk. 2, i sjette momsdirektiv 77/388/EØF -afgiftspålæggeise ved privat brug af firmabil
Interpretation of Article 6(2) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC on value added tax - Taxation of the private use of a company car.
Generaladvokat F. G. Jacobs fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet i Sjette Afdeling den 10. november 1990.
Mr Advocate General Jacobs delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Sixth Chamber of the Court on 10 November 1992.
Han foreslog Domstolen at besvare spørgsmålene således:
He considered that the Court should reply as follows:
(77/388/EØF) kan der opkræves afgift af tjenesteydelser til private formål, som tredjemænd har leveret til en afgiftspligtig med henblik på vedligeholdelse eller brug af et gode, der anvendes til private formål, uden at den afgiftspligtige har mulighed for at fratrække den indgående afgift.
Article 6(2) of the Sixth VAT Directive (77/388/EEC) prohibits taxation on the private use of services which a taxable person received without deduction of input VAT from third parties for the maintenance or use of goods put to private use.
En afgiftspligtig kan påberåbe sig dette forbud for nationale retter."
A taxable person may rely upon that prohibition before the courts of a Member State."
Forenede sager C-121/91 og C-122/91: CT Control (Rotterdam) BV og JCT Benelux BV mod Kommissionen
Joined Cases C-121/91 and C-122/91: CT Control (Rotterdam) BV and JCT Benelux BV ν Commission
Annullation af beslutningerne REM 1/90 og REM 8/90, rettet til Nederlandene - tilbagebetaling af importafgifter - honning fra Jamaica.
Annulment of Decisions REM 1/90 and REM 8/90 addressed to the Netherlands -Repayment of import duties - Jamaican honey.
Generaladvokat Claus Gul mann fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet i Femte Afdeling den 11. november }992.
Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Failure to implement Council Directives 88/407/EEC and 88/658/EEC - Trade in animal sperm and meatbased products.
Hans forslag lød således:
Case C-382/92: Commission ν United Kingdom
"Af disse grunde skal jeg føresiå Domstolen at frifinde Kommissionen og pålægge sagsøgerne at bære sagernes omkostninger, idet Kongeriget Nederlandene afholder egne omkostninger."
Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Incorrect implementation of Council Directive 77/187/EEC - Maintenance of workers' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of businesses.
Sag C-380/92: ENU mod Kommissionen
Case C-383/92: Commission ν United Kingdom
Ansvar uden for kontraktforhold - Euratom-Traktatens artikel 188, stk. 2 -manglende krav til Euratoms Forsyningsagentur om at overholde Euratom-Traktatens bestemmelser, der skal gøre det muligt at afsætte den sagsøgende virksomheds uranproduktion
Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Failure to transpose Council Directive 75/129/EEC correctly into national law - Collective dismissals.
Traktatbrud - manglende gennemførelse af Rådets direktiver 88/407/EØF og 88/658/EØF - handel med dyresæd og kødprodukter
Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Failure to implement Council Directives 88/661/EEC, 89/361/EEC, 90/118/EEC and 90/119/EEC within the prescribed periods - Sheep , goats and pigs.
Sag C-382/92: Kommissionen mod Det Forenede Kongerige
Case C-385/92: Greece ν Commission
Traktatbrud - ukorrekt gennemførelse af Rådets direktiv 77/187/EØF -varetagelse af arbejdstagernes rettigheder i forbindelse med overførsel af virksomheder, bedrifter eller dele af bedrifter
Annulment of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2294/92 - Discrimination against producers of oil seeds who sow after 15 May, in particular for a second crop.
Traktatbrud - ukorrekt gennemførelse i intern ret af Rådets direktiv 75/129/EØF - kollektive afskedigelser
Reference for a preliminary ruling - Tribunal de Commerce, Romans -Interpretation of Articles 30 to 36 and 85 of the EEC Treaty in relation to a Member State's policy designed to limit parallel imports of certain makes of vehicle from Asia.
Traktatbrud - manglende gennemførelse inden for de fastsatte frister af Rådets direktiver 88/661/EØF, 89/361/EØF, 90/118/EØF og 90/119/EØF - får, geder og svin
Reference for a preliminary ruling - Tribunal Superior de Justicia de la Comunidad Valenciana - Interpretation of Article 90 of the EEC Treaty in relation to national legislation which grants exemption from local taxes to official credit institutions.
Annullation af Kommissionens forordning (EØF) nr. 2294/92 -forskelsbehandling af producenter af oliefrø, når såningen finder sted efter 15. maj, navnlig af afgrøde nr. 2
Annulment of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2454/92 - Condition for non-resident carriers to operate national road passenger transport services within a Member State - Improper consultation of the European Parliament.
Sag C-388/92: Parlamentet mod Rådet
Case T-91/92: W.H.M. Daemen ν Commission Staff case.