natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Det er ikke i strid med traktatens artikel 48 og 51 eller ovennævnte forordning, at det i henhold til en national lovgivning som betingelse for udbetaling af en arbejdsløshedsunderstøttelse til personer, der er fyldt 52 år, kræves, at den berørte person i en periode på femten år har betalt bidrag til en alderspensionsordning i en eller flere medlemsstater.*
An allowance such as thai provided for by the Spanish General Law on Social Security for unemployed persons of more than 52 years of age constitutes an unemployment bene fa within the meaning of Article 4(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to
»1) Et arbejdsløshedstillæg som det, sagsøgerne har ansøgt om, og som i henhold til artikel 13, stk. 2, i lov nr. 31 af 2. august 1984 som affattet i kongelig dekret af 31. marts 1989 (nu artikel 215, stk. 3, i kongelig lovdekret nr. 1 af 20.6.1994) udbetales til personer, der er fyldt 52 år, skal betragtes som en ydelse ved arbejdsløshed som omhandlet i artikel 4, stk. 1, i forordning (EØF) nr. 1408/71.
self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community, as amended and updated by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2001/83 of 2 June 1983, as amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1248/92 of 30 April 1991
Når der består adgang til ydelser i henhold til de spanske sociale sikringsordninger, enten i henhold til national lovgivning eller i henhold til fællesskabsretten, er den kompetente institution forpligtet til at tage hensyn til en ret til alderspension, der er erhvervet i en anden medlemsstat, selv om arbejdstageren ikke har betalt bidrag i Spanien eller har betalt bidrag dér i mindre end et år.
It is for the national court to determine whether the condition laid down by Article 67(3) of the aforementioned regulation to the effect that a person who has completed periods of insurance in another Member State cannot rely on those periods in order to obtain unemployment benefit in the State concerned unless he last completed periods of insurance in accordance with the provisions of the legislation of that State, is fulfilled where the person concerned has never been in employment in that State but contributions have been paid on his behalf to the sickness insurance and family benefits schemes by the competent unemployment institution.
Kravet om, at vandrende arbejdstagere for at kunne oppebære arbejdsløshedstillægget til personer, der er fyldt 52 år, skal bevise, at de, forudsat pensionsalderen nås, er berettiget til en alderspension fra den spanske sociale sikringsordning, således at personer, der kun kan påvise sådanne rettigheder i en anden medlemsstat, ikke kan oppebære tillægget, er uforeneligt med artikel 48, stk. 2, og artikel 51 i traktaten om oprettelse af Det Europæiske Fællesskab, såfremt adgangen til sociale sikringsydelser allerede består for den pågældende gruppe personer, men alene på grundlag af den nationale lovgivning.« der Bilanzbuchhalter eV /
It is not contrary to Articles 48 and 51 of the EC Treaty, or to the aforementioned regulation, for national legislation to require the person concerned to have paid contributions for a fifteen-year period to a pension scheme in one or more Member States in order to qualify for the grant of an unemployment allowance for claimants of over 52 years of age. '
•Appel — annullationssøgsmål — formaliteten — Kommissionens afslag på at indlede en traktatbrudsprocedure — Kommissionens afslag på at indlede en procedure i henhold til EF-traktatens artikel 90, stk. 3« (Femte Afdeling)
With regard to an unemployment allowance for persons over 52 years of age, provided for by Article 215(3) of Royal Legislative Decree 1/1994 of 20 June 1994, which approves the consolidated version of the General Law on Social Security, the competent institution is required to take account of periods completed in another Member State, to the extent to which the right to a retirement pension is, subject to age requirements, obtained on the basis of those periods of contribution in that other Member State.'
Anbringendet vedrørende traktatens artikel 90, stk. 3
category of persons concerned to social security benefits was granted on the basis of national law alone.
Europæiske Fællesskabers Ret i Første Instans (Fjerde Afdeling) den 23. januar 1995, Bilanzbuchhalter mod Kommissionen (sag T84/94).
Case C-107/95 Ρ Bundesverband der Bilanzbuchhalter eV ν Commission of the European Communities Law governing the institutions
Under appelsagen har appellanten nedlagt påstand om, at Rettens kendelse ophæves, idet den er i strid med EF-traktatens bestemmelser, navnlig artikel 5, artikel 59, artikel 86, artikel 90, stk. 1 og 3, og idet der er anlagt en forkert fortolkning af traktatens artikel 155 og 169.
(Appeals A ction for annulment - Admissibility — Refusal by the Commission to proceedings against a Member State for failure to fulfil obligations — Refusal Commission to take measures under Article 90(3) of the EC Treaty) (Fifth Chamber) decision as a decision not to bring an action under Article 169 against the Federal Republic of Germany for failure to fulfil its obligations and interpreting it as a decision not to take measures under Article 90(3) of the Treaty.
Rettens kendelse anfægtes, både for så vidt Kommissionens beslutning herved er anset for en beslutning om ikke at indlede en traktatbrudssag mod Forbundsrepublikken Tyskland i medfør af traktatens artikel 169, og for så vidt beslutningen er blevet fortolket som en beslutning om ikke at træffe foranstaltninger i henhold til traktatens artikel 90, stk 3.
In this regard, it is sufficient to state that the Court of First Instance correctly applied the case-law of the Court of Justice according to which it is not open to individuals to bring an action against a refusal by the Commission to initiate proceedings under Article 169 against a Member State.
Endvidere kan en borger ikke ved et søgsmål til prøvelse af Kommissionens afslag på at træffe en beslutning i henhold til artikel 90, stk 1 og 3, over for en medlemsstat indirekte tvinge medlemsstaten til at vedtage en almengyldig retsakt.
By application lodged at the Court on 31 March 1995, the Bundesverband der Bilanzbuchhalter eV (hereinafter 'the appellant') brought an appeal against the order of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 23 January 1995 in Case T-84/94 Bilanzbuchhalter v Commission.
Anbringendet vedrørende traktatens artikel 169
The plea in law concerning Article 90(3) of the Treaty
Appellanten kunne derfor ikke anfægte Kommissionens afslag på at vedtage den retsakt, appellanten ønskede.
By its appeal the appellant requests this Court to set aside the order of the Court of First Instance for infringement of the EC Treaty, in particular Articles 5, 59, 86 and 90(1) and (3) thereof, and for misinterpretation of Articles 155 and 169 of that Treaty.
Det må på denne baggrund fastslås, at Retten med føje også afviste sagen, for så vidt den var rettet mod Kommissionens beslutning om ikke at træffe foranstaltninger i henhold til traktatens artikel 90, stk. 1 og 3.
The order of the Court of First Instance is contested for both treating the Commission's
I denne forbindelse er det tilstrækkeligt at bemærke, at Retten korrekt har anvendt Domstolens praksis, hvorefter borgerne ikke kan anfægte en afvisning fra Kommissionens side af at indlede en traktatbrudsprocedure mod en medlemsstat
In the present case, the appellant requested the Commission to address to the Federal Republic of Germany, pursuant to Article 90(1) and (3), a decision declaring that a piece of general legislation, the StBerG, was contrary to the Treaty and indicating the measures which that State had to adopt in order to comply with its obligations under Community law.
Generaladvokat A. La Pergola fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Femte Afdeling) den 11. juli 1996.
action against the Commission's refusal to take a decision against a Member State under Article 90(1) and (3), indirectly compel thai Member State to adopt legislation of general application.
9— ophæve den kendelse om afvisning, som De Europæiske Fællesskabers Ret i Første Instans afsagde den 23. januar 1995 i sag T-84/94,
In this regard, it is apparent from the wording of Article 90(3) and from the scheme of Article 90 as a whole that the Commission enjoys a wide discretion in the field covered by paragraphs 1 and 3, both in relation to the action which it considers necessary to be taken and in relation to the means appropriate for that purpose.
— forbeholde Retten afgørelsen om sagens omkostninger.«
The Court of First Instance was therefore right in also declaring the action to be inadmissible inasmuch as it was directed against the Commission's decision not to take any action under Article 90(1) and (3) of the Treaty.
Det bemærkes endvidere, at afgørelsen var
The Bundesverband der Bilanzbuchhalter eV is ordered to pay the costs.'
over for sin institution, at det måtte rejse tvivl om selve tillidsforholdet mellem institutionen og dens ansatte. Selv om det ikke udtrykkeligt fremgår af den omtvistede afgørelse, fremgår det dog tilstrækkeligt klart, at dette var begrundelsen for, at ansættelsesmyndigheden fraveg Disciplinærrådets udtalelse.
Court of First Instance found that they were stereotyped inasmuch as they gave no explanation of the particular reasons why, in the specific circumstances of the case, the appointing authority had chosen the disciplinary measure of removal from post rather than that of downgrading as the Disciplinary Board had suggested.
Det må herefter lægges til grund, at Rettens antagelse af, at den omtvistede afgørelse ikke indeholdt en tilstrækkelig klar begrundelse for, hvorfor ansættelsesmyndigheden havde vedtaget en sanktion, der var strengere end den, Disciplinærrådet havde foreslået, var udtryk for en forkert retsanvendelse.
Daffix ν Commission, in which the Court of First Instance annulled the Commission's decision of 18 March 1993 ('the contested decision') removing Mr Daffix from his post as a disciplinary measure, without reducing or withdrawing his entitlement to retirement pension, as provided for by the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities ('the Staff Regulations').
Det fremgår imidlertid af omstændighederne, at ansættelsesmyndigheden i modsætning til Disciplinærrådet var overbevist om, at Frédéric Daffix selv havde tilegnet sig det omtvistede beløb, at han havde forfalsket en ordreseddel, og at han havde benyttet den samt to andre ordresedler for at få pengene udbetalt, uden at hans overordnede havde givet instruks herom.
In its appeal, the Commission argues that the Court of First Instance infringed Community law by annulling the contested decision on the ground that the statement of reasons was inadequate.
•1) Den af Retten i Første Instans den 28. marts 1995 afsagte dom i sag T-12/94, Daffix mod Kommissionen, ophæves, for så vidt som Kommissionens afgørelse af 18. marts 1993 om, at Frédéric Daffix frentes fra tjenesten, annulleredes som følge af manglende begrundelse, og for så vidt som Kommissionen herved tilpligtedes at betale sagens omkostninger.
It appears from the facts that, the appointing authority, unlike the Disciplinary Board, was convinced that Mr Daffix had kept the sum in question himself and that he had forged an order form and used it and two more in order to obtain a payment without having received any instructions in that regard from his immediate superior.
Sagen hjemvises til Retten i Første Instans til påkendelse af de øvrige anbringender, som sagsøgeren har gjort gældende, og som fremgår af den anfægtede doms præmis 29.
In so far as it considered that the contested decision did not indicate sufficiently precisely the conduct with which Mr Daffix was charged and that hence Article 190 of the Treaty and Article 25 of the Staff Regulations had been infringed, the Court of First Instance committed an error of law.
Afgørelsen om sagens omkostninger udsættes.«
As regards the grounds for the disciplinary measure contained in the contested decision, the
Generaladvokat A La Pergola fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Femte Afdeling) den 19. september 1996.
In those circumstances, it must be held that the Court of First Instance committed an error in law in finding that the contested decision did not contain any ground specifying sufficiently the reasons why the appointing authority adopted a disciplinary measure more severe than that recommended by the Disciplinary Board.
Han foreslog følgende afgørelse:
The Court held:
Bestemmelserne i artikel 26 kan ifølge stk. 1 kun anvendes, hvis rejsebureauet eller rejsearrangøren handler i eget navn over for den rejsende og ikke som formidler.
Advocate General A La Pergola delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Fifth Chamber on 19 September 1996.
Ved kendelse af 18. juli 1995, indgået til Domstolen den 4. august 1995, har High Court of Justice (Queen's Bench Division) forelagt Domstolen et præjudicielt spørgsmål om fortolkningen af artikel 26 i Rådets sjette direktiv 77/388/EØF af 17. maj 1977 (herefter »sjette direktiv«).
He proposed that the Court should dismiss the appeal by the Commission and order it to pay the costs.
I en situation som den, der er beskrevet i forelæggelseskendelsen, er det det danske selskab DFDS, der som rejsearrangør er den virksomhed, bestemmelserne finder anvendelse på, og ikke det engelske datterselskab DFDS Ltd., som ikke handler i eget navn, men som formidler.
Case C-260/95 Commissioners of Customs & Excise ν DFDS A/S Taxation 20 February 1997
Den forelæggende ret ønsker oplyst, under hvilke omstændigheder de tjenesteydelser, som en rejsearrangør, hvis hovedsæde er beliggende i én medlemsstat, leverer til rejsende gennem en agent i en anden medlemsstat, er afgiftspligtige i sidstnævnte medlemsstat i henhold til sjette direktivs artikel 26.
Preliminary ruling (Sixth VA Τ Directive services) (Fifth Chamber) a company operating as an agent in another Member State are liable to VAT in the latter State under Article 26 of the Sixth Directive.
I denne bestemmelse anvendes de samme to begreber vedrørende hovedsæde for økonomisk virksomhed og fast kontor, som dem, der anvendes i sjette direktivs artikel 9, stk 1, til beskrivelse af de to vigtigste fiskale tilknytningsmomenter for tjenesteydelser i almindelighed (o.a.: I den danske version af artikel 9 anvendes dog henholdsvis hjemstedet for økonomisk virksomhed og fast forretningssted). Grundlaget er derfor de regler, der følger af denne beskrivelse.
By order of 18 July 1995, received at the Court on 4 August 1995, the High Court of Justice (Queen's Bench Division) of England and Wales referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling a question on the interpretation of Article 26 of the Sixth Council Directive (77/388/EEC) of 17 May 1977 ('the Sixth Directive').
Det tilkommer hver enkelt medlemsstats skatteog afgiftsmyndigheder inden for rammerne af de ved sjette direktiv indrømmede valgmuligheder at bestemme det tilknytningsmoment, der ud fra et
That question has been raised in proceedings between the Commissioners of Customs and Excise and the Danish company DFDS AS ('DFDS') concerning the letter's liability to value added tax ('VAT) in the United Kingdom in respect of package tours sold on its behalf by its English subsidiary, DFDS Ltd.
I sjette direktivs artikel 26 fastlægges en særordning med hensyn til moms for rejsebureauer og personer, der organiserer turistrejser.
Article 26 of the Sixth Directive contains special VAT rules for travel agents and tour operators.
De tjenesteydelser, disse virksomheder udfører, består af flere ydelser, navnlig med hensyn til transport og indkvartering, som udføres såvel i som uden for den medlemsstat, hvor virksomheden har sit hovedsæde eller et fast kontor.
The services provided by those undertakings consist of multiple services, concerning, in particular, transport and accommodation, rendered both within and outside the territory of the Member State in which the undertaking has established its business or has a fixed establishment.
Anvendelsen af de almindelige regler om beskatningssted, beskatningsgrundlag og fradrag af indgående afgift ville derfor for virksomhederne være forbundet med praktiske vanskeligheder, som
Application of the general rules on place of taxation, taxable amount and deduction of input tax would therefore entail practical difficulties for those undertakings of such a nature as to obstruct their operations.
fiskalt synspunkt er det mest hensigtsmæssige for en bestemt tjenesteydelse.
agent, or the tour operator, is to deal with customers in his own name and not as an intermediary.
inddrager det sted, hvor rejserne reelt sælges, hvilket de nationale myndigheder, uanset den rejsendes bestemmelsessted, med rimelighed kan betragte som det mest hensigtsmæssige tilknytningsmoment.
which, whatever the customer's destination, the national authorities have good reason to take into consideration as the most appropriate point of reference.
Det kan kun komme i betragtning at henføre en tjenesteydelse til et andet etableringssted end hjemstedet, såfremt dette etableringssted i kraft af en varig samvirken af menneskelige og tekniske ressourcer, som er nødvendige for at præstere bestemte tjenesteydelser, opfylder visse mindstekrav med hensyn til stabilitet.
In the situation described in the order for reference, it is the Danish company, DFDS, which, as tour operator, falls within the scope of that article, and not its English subsidiary DFDS Ltd, which acts not in its own name but as an intermediary.
I denne forbindelse bemærkes, at det er et grundlæggende kriterium ved anvendelsen af det fælles momssystem, at der tages hensyn til den økonomiske virkelighed.
Consideration of the actual economic situation is a fundamental criterion for the application of the common VAT system.
Den alternative løsning ved fastlæggelsen af beskatningsstedet for rejsebureauers tjenesteydelser, nemlig det faste kontor hvorfra tjenesteydelserne præsteres, har netop til formål at tage hensyn til en mulig spredning af bureauernes aktiviteter til forskellige steder i Fællesskabet.
The alternative approach for determining the place of taxation of the services of travel agents, based on the fixed establishment from which these services are supplied, is specifically intended to take account of the possible diversification of travel agents' activities in different places within the Community.
I den foreliggende sag indebærer den omstændighed, at hovedsædet for den økonomiske virksomhed fastlægges som tilknytningsmoment for alle de tjenesteydelser, en rejsearrangør leverer, herunder dem, der leveres i andre medlemsstater af en formidler, der handler i rejsearrangørens navn, klart den fordel, at der fastlægges ét beskatningssted for den del af rejsearrangørens virksomhed, der henhører under sjette direktivs artikel 26.
As regards the place of taxation, Article 26(2) provides that the services of a travel agent are to be taxable in the Member State in which the travel agent has established his business or has a fixed establishment from which the travel agent has provided the services.
Herefter må det antages, at en tjenesteydelse, der leveres til en rejsende, når den er præsteret af en rejsearrangør fra et fast kontor, som han har rådighed over i en anden medlemsstat end den, hvor han har etableret hovedsædet for sin økonomiske virksomhed, er afgiftspligtig i den medlemsstat, hvor det faste kontor befinder sig.
In those circumstances, it must be concluded that, where services have been provided by a tour operator from a fixed establishment which that operator has in a Member State other than that in which he has established his business, such supply of services to the customer is taxable in the State where that fixed establishment is located.
En sådan tilknytning fører imidlertid ikke til en rationel løsning ud fra et skatte- og afgiftsmæssigt synspunkt, for så vidt den ikke
That provision uses the same concepts of place where a supplier's business is established and fixed establishment as those used in Article 9(1) of the Sixth Directive to define the two main fiscal points of reference which may be applied to supplies of services in general.
•Artikel 26, stk 2, i Rådets sjette direktiv 77/388/EØF af 17. maj 1977 om harmonisering af medlemsstaternes lovgivning om omsætningsafgifter — Det fælles merværdiafgiftssystem: ensartet beregningsgrundlag, skal fortolkes således, at når en virksomhed, der organiserer turistrejser, og hvis hovedsæde er beliggende i en medlemsstat, leverer tjenesteydelser til rejsende gennem et selskab, der fungerer som agent i en anden medlemsstaty er disse tjenesteydelser momspligtige i sidstnævnte stat, når dette selskab, der alene handler som virksomhedens filial, disponerer over sådanne menneskelige og tekniske ressourcer, som er karakteristiske for et fast kontor.« «
Services cannot be deemed to be supplied at an establishment other than the place where the supplier has established his business unless that establishment is of a certain minimum size and both the human and technical resources necessary for the provision of the services are permanently present.
Generaladvokat A. La Pergola fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Femte Afdeling) den 16. januar 1997.
In this case, to treat, for tax purposes, all the services provided by a tour operator, including those supplied in other Member States through undertakings operating on his behalf, as being supplied from the place where the tour operator has established his business, would have the clear advantage of having a single place of taxation for all the business of that operator covered by Article 26 of the Sixth Directive.
Præjudiciel »Bruxelles-konventionen (Sjette Afdeling) anden part i kontraktforholdet ikke har reageret på en bekræftelsesskrivelse i handelsforhold, som medkontrahenten har fremsendt, eller gentagne gange og uden at gøre indsigelse har betalt fakturaer, når disse dokumenter indeholder en fortrykt angivelse af værnetinget, eller om der under alle omstændigheder skal foreligge en forudgående samstemmende vilje, således at der kun ses bort fra den skriftlige bekræftelse heraf.
'Article 26(2) of the Sixth Council Directive (77/388/EEC) of 17 May 1977, on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, is tobe interpreted as meaning that, where a tour operator established in one Member State provides services to travellers through the intermediary of a company operating as an agent in another Member State, VAT is payable on those services in the latter State if that company, which acts as a mere auxiliary organ of the tour operator, has the human and technical resources characteristic of a fixed establishment.'
Det bemærkes, at bestemmelserne i konventionens artikel 17 efter Domstolens praksis skal fortolkes strengt, for så vidt angår de deri opstillede betingelser, idet de både udelukker værnetinget ifølge det almindelige princip i konventionens artikel 2 om, at sag skal anlægges, hvor sagsøgte har bopæl, og de specielle værneting, som nævnes i artikel 5 og 6.
'Where a tour operator has its headquarters in Member State A but supplies services in the form of package tours through its agent in Member State B, the supply of those services by the tour operator is subject to VAT in Member State B, provided that the company acting as agent is not autonomous and independent from the tour operator but is a mere auxiliary thereof and is in a form, which includes both human and technical resources, such that it is able to provide the services in question.'
Andet spørgsmål
20 February 1997
Med det andet spørgsmål, som skal behandles først, da det angår en enekompetence, ønsker den nationale ret i det væsentlige oplyst, om en værnetingsaftale i forbindelse med en mundtlig aftale inden for den internationale handel kan antages at være indgået i overensstemmelse med formkravene i konventionens artikel 17, stk. 1, andet punktum, tredje tilfælde, alene fordi den
Preliminary ruling (Brussels Convention - Agreement on the place of performance of the obligation in question Agreement conferring jurisdiction) (Sixth Chamber)