natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Kommissionen oplyste, at den havde bekræftet modtagelsen af skrivelsen af 6. september 1995 og senere fremsendt endnu en bekræftelse for de to øvrige skrivelser.
2.2 The Commission observed that a first acknowledgment receipt had been sent for the letter dated 6 September 1995 and a second acknowledgment receipt for the two other letters.
Kommissionen oplyste end videre, at UCLAF efter at have modtaget klagerens påstande, øje blikkeligt påbegyndte verificeringen af klagerens oplysninger.
It also indicated that, upon receipt of the allegations, the UCLAF Directorate immediately started to investigate the information received from the complainant.
Kommissionen konkluderede dog, at UCLAF's arbejdsomrade ikke tillod offentliggørelse af oplysninger vedrørende de foranstalt ninger, den havde truffet.
But the Commission concluded that the mission and the tasks of the UCLAF Directorate did not permit a disclosure of information concerning the actions it had undertaken.
Ombudsmanden bemærkede, at oplysninger, som Kommissionen får kendskab til i forbindelse med undersøgelser af svig i forbindelse med strukturfondsfinansierede foranstaltninger er omfattet af bestemmelserne om fortrolighed.
2.3 The Ombudsman noted that the information which the Commission obtained in the context of investigations into fraud with regard to operations financed by the Structural Funds is covered by professional confidentiality.
I særdeleshed kan der hen vises til artikel 10 i UCLAF-forordningen,1 som vedrører udveksling af oplysninger mellem medlemsstaterne og Kommissionen.
Reference can be made, in particular, to Article 10 of the UCLAF Regulation,1which deals with the exchange of information between the Member States and the Commission.
Det fastslås i den nævnte artikel 10, at medlemsstaterne og Kommissionen skal træffe de nødvendige forholdsregler for at sikre, at de oplysninger, de udveksler, forbliver fortrolige.
This provision foresees that Member States and the Commission shall take all necessary precautions to ensure that the information which they exchange remains confidential.
AFGØRELSER soner end dem, der i medlemsstaterne eller i EF-institutionerne i kraft af deres stilling er bemyndiget til at kende dem.
Article 10(2) stipulates that this information may not be sent to per sons other than those in the Member States or within the Community institutions whose duties require that they have access to it.
Det fremgik af ovennævnte bestemmelser, at UCLAF-direktoratet ikke havde beføjelse til at meddele klageren resultaterne af sine undersøgelser, som følge af de krav, der var forbundet med dens arbejdsopgaver.
It appeared from the above provision that the UCLAF Directorate was entitled not to disclose the results of its investigations to the complainant, because of the requirements of its mission and tasks.
Ombudsmanden fastslog, at udlevering af oplysninger til tredjeparter om igangværende kommissionsundersøgelser af påståede tilfælde af svig i en medlemsstat såvel som af undersøgelsesresultaterne kunne skade UCLAF's igangværende undersøgelser.
It appeared to the Ombudsman that providing information to third parties about ongoing Commission investigations into alleged fraud in a Member State and the results thereof might jeopardize ongoing investigations of the UCLAF Directorate.
Derfor kunne det faktum, at UCLAF-direktoratet i sit svar til kla geren kun informerede denne i generelle termer om de påbegyndte undersøgelser og ikke forelagde detaljerede oplysninger om enhedens undersøgelser af de påståede uregelmæssigheder, ikke anses for at være en fejl eller en forsømmelse.
For those reasons, the fact that the UCLAF Directorate, in its response to the complainant, informed only in general terms about the ongoing investigations and gave no details concerning its inquiries into the alleged mismanagement of the funds did not con stitute an instance of maladministration.
3 Påstanden om, at UCLAF ikke reagerede på klagerens påstande
The alleged failure of UCLAF to act on the complainant's allegations tions
Kommissionen oplyste i sin første udtalelse, at UCLAF efter mod tagelsen af klagen over ukorrekt forvaltning af EFS-midler i klage rens første skrivelse øjeblikkeligt indledte en undersøgelse af de pågældende påstande.
It appeared from the information presented in the Commission's opinion that, upon receipt of the allegations of mismanagement of ESF funds contained in the complainant's first letter, UCLAF immediately started to examine those allegations.
Det fremgik endvidere, at UCLAF under søgte spørgsmålene og foretog en undersøgelse på stedet samt en række andre kontrolforanstaltninger.
It also appeared that UCLAF investigated the matter and carried out an on the spot investigation and a series of other controls.
I sine bemærkninger til Kommissionens udtalelse gjorde klageren gældende, at UCLAF-direktoratets kontrol havde været ufuldstændig og ikke omfattet samtlige klagerens påstande.
In observations on the Commission's opinion, the complainant claimed that the audit car ried out by the UCLAF Directorate had been incomplete and had failed to examine all the allegations.
3.2 Ombudsmandens tjenestegrene kontaktede UCLAF-direktoratet og fik oplyst, at klageren havde fremsendt nye påstande om ukor rekt forvaltning, som han ønskede undersøgt, og at sagen var under behandling i UCLAF.
3.2 The Ombudsman's services contacted the UCLAF Directorate and were informed that the complainant had sent new allegations of mismanagement to be investigated, which were currently being dealt with by UCLAF.
I denne forbindelse forelagde Ombudsmanden UCLAF-direktoratet en kopi af det memorandum, klageren havde vedføjet sine bemærkninger.
In this context, the Ombudsman also sent to the UCLAF Directorate a copy of the memorandum which the complainant had attached to his observations.
På baggrund af ovennævnte oplysninger syntes der ikke at foreligge bevis for fejl eller forsømmelser i forbindelse med UCLAF's behandling af kla gerens påstande..
On the basis of the above information, there appeared to be no evidence of an instance of maladministration in the way that UCLAF had dealt with the complainant's allegations.
3.3 Ombudsmanden påpegede dog over for klageren, at den finansielle kontrol med foranstaltninger, der finansieres via strukturfondene, henhører under Revisionsretten.
3.3 The Ombudsman however wished to draw the attention of the complainant to the fact that the final financial control of the operations financed by the Structural Funds would fall within the com petence of the Court of Auditors.
I henhold til EF-traktatens artikel 188 C, stk. 2, efterprøver Revisionsretten lovligheden og den formelle rigtighed af indtægterne og udgifterne og sikrer sig, at den økonomiske forvaltning har været forsvarlig.
According to Article 188c (2) of the EC Treaty, the Court of Auditors examines whether all revenue has been received and all expenditure of the Community has been incurred in a lawful and regular manner and whether the financial management has been sound.
Afgørelse om klage 1040/21.11.96/HYDROPLAN/DA/K over Europa-Kommissionen
Decision on complaint 1040/21.11.96/HYDROPLAN/D/VK against the European Commission
Den 18. november 1996 klagede F til Den Europæiske Ombudsmand ved rørende Kommissionens udbud om tjenesteydelser (94/C173/17), som F havde anmodet om deltagelse i. Udbuddet omfattede undersøgelser, vurderinger og faglige bistandsydelser, som hovedsagelig skulle udføres i tredjelande.
On 18 November 1996, Mr F made a complaint to the European Ombudsman concerning a call for tender for service contracts of the Commission (94/C173/17) in which Mr F had applied for participation.
Den 29. marts 1995 modtog F en opfordring til at deltage i et begrænset udbud.
On 29 March 1995, Mr F. received an invitation to participate in a restrict ed tender.
Han fremsendte et bud til Kommissionen, og modtog den 15. maj 1995 en bekræftelse på, at Kommissionen havde modtaget dette.
He sent an offer to the Commission, for which he received an acknowledgement on 15 May 1995.
F oplyste, at udarbejdelsen af buddet havde forårsaget betydelige udgifter og krævet et omfattende samarbejde med ikke mindre end 13 virksomheder i 8 medlemsstater.
Mr F stated that the elaboration of his offer had involved considerable costs as well as extensive cooperation with no less than 13 companies in 8 Member States.
Med skrivelse af 15. februar 1996 modtog F meddelelse om, at hans bud ikke var blevet godkendt, men den pågældende standardskrivelse inde holdt ingen begrundelse herfor.
By letter of 15 February 1996, Mr F. was informed that the selection procedure had been unfruitful, but the standard letter did not give any reasons for this.
Den 26. august 1996 bad F Kommissionens GD I om begrundelserne for procedurens afslutning.
On 26 August 1996, Mr F. asked DG I of the Commission for the reasons for the closure of the procedure.
I Kommissionens svar af 28. oktober 1996 oplyste den, at proceduren var afsluttet, fordi ingen af buddene opfyldte udbudskravene. kravene.
In its reply of 28 October 1996, the Commission stated that the procedure was closed because none of the bids complied with the tender requirements.
F klagede til Ombudsmanden over i) den utilstrækkelige begrundelse, han omsider modtog, ii)
(i) the reasons which he was eventually given were insufficient;
Kommissionens manglende godtgørelse af hans udgifter.
(ii) his expenses should be reimbursed by the Commission.
Angående de nævnte punkter udtalte Kommissionen følgende:
In relation to the relevant points, the Commission stated the following:
Klageren modtog den 15. februar 1996 en meddelelse om, at udvælgelseskomiteen havde undersøgt alle modtagne bud, og havde ved taget at afslutte proceduren, fordi den ikke havde ført til det ønskede resultat.
The complainant was informed on 15 February 1996 that the selection board had examined all offers received and that it had decided to close the procedure because it was unsuccessful.
Ifølge bilag II, artikel 8, i beskrivelsen af tjenesterne er Kommissionen i henhold til bestemmelser om begrænsede udbud ikke forpligtet til at tildele en kontrakt ved udbudsprocedurens afslutning.
Annex II Article 8 of the description of the services provides that accord ing to the provisions for tenders in non public procedures the Commission is not obliged to offer a contract at the end of the tender procedure.
AFGØRELSER
DECISIONS ful participants in the procedure when it decides not to offer any con tracts. (Annexe III, N° 7).
Klageren fremsatte i det væsentligste følgende bemærkninger:
In summary, the complainant made the following main points:
Der var 157 bydende på 1570 entrepriser og der var inddraget 16.560 eksperter.
There were 157 bidders of 1,570 enterprises and 16,560 experts involved.
Afbrydelsen efter vurderingen af buddene havde forårsaget unødvendige økonomiske tab.
The interruption after the assessment of the bids appeared to cause avoidable economic damage.
Udvælgelseskomiteens beslutning var især uforståelig, fordi Kommissionen senere havde vedtaget at tildele kontrakter efter en direkte forhandlingsprocedure.
The action of the selection board became even less understandable as the Commission had afterwards decided to offer contracts in a direct negotiation procedure. dure.
Den 15. februar 1996 modtog alle bydende meddelelse om, at udvælgelsesproceduren havde været resultatløs og følgelig ville blive afsluttet.
On 15 February 1996, all tenderers were informed that the selection procedure had been unfruitful and therefore would be closed.
F kontaktede herefter den relevante tjenestegren i Kommissionen telefonisk for at modtage yderligere oplysninger om sagen.
Mr F. then con tacted the relevant Commission services by telephone in order to receive further information on the matter.
Han gjorde gældende, at Kommissionen ikke havde givet et tilfredsstillende svar.
He stated that the Commission had failed to provide him with an appropriate reply.
I skrivelse af 26. august 1996 udbad F. sig en mere fyldestgørende begrundelse for procedurens afslutning.
In his letter of 26 August 1996, Mr F. requested to be fully informed about the reasons for the closure.
Kommissionen svarede den 28. oktober 1996, at proceduren var blevet afsluttet og erklæret resultatløs, fordi ingen af buddene havde opfyldt udbudskravene.
The Commission replied on 28 October 1996 that the procedure was closed and declared fruitless because none of the bids complied with the tender require ments.
I skrivelsen under stregedes det endvidere, at alle bydende havde modtaget en skriftlig meddelelse herom.
The letter also emphasised that a written notification had been sent to all bidders.
Det fremgik således, at Kommissionen havde besvaret F's skriftlige anmodning tilfredsstillende.
It appeared therefore, that the Commission had appropriately replied to Mr F.'s written request.
Af de oplysninger, Ombudsmanden modtog, fremgik, at Kommissionen havde handlet i overensstemmelse med god forvaltningsskik ved at underrette de bydende og efter en skriftlig anmodning at forelægge begrundelsen for sin beslutning.
From the information given to the Ombudsman, it seemed that the Commission had complied with the principles of good administrative behaviour by notifying the tenderers and by explaining the reasons to those who requested it in writing.
2 Af de oplysninger, Ombudsmanden modtog, fremgik, at Kommissionen ikke var forpligtet til at tildele kontrakter eller udbetale godtgørelser til deltagere, hvis bud ikke blev godkendt.
From the information given to the Ombudsman, it appeared that the Commission was neither obliged to offer contracts nor did it have to reimburse the unsuccessful participants.
Den Europæiske Ombudsmands undersøgelse af denne klage viste ingen tilfælde af fejl eller forsømmelser fra Europa-Kommissionens side, og Ombudsmanden besluttede derfor at afslutte behandlingen af sagen.
On the basis of the European Ombudsman's inquiries into this complaint, there appeared to have been no maladministration by the European Commission. The Ombudsman therefore decided to close the case.
ØKONOMISK STØTTE TIL SPANSKE TOLDKLARERERE OG SPEDITØRER EFTER DET INDRE MARKEDS IKRAFTTRÆDEN
FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO SPANISH CUSTOM AGENTS AFTER ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE INTERNAL MARKET
Afgørelse om klage 1048/21.11.96/FPR/ES/JMA over Europa-Kommissionen
Decision on complaint 1048/21.11,96/FPR/ES/JMA against the European Commission
I november 1996 klagede P. til Ombudsmanden over Kommissionens gennemførelse af forordning 3904/921om tilpasning af erhvervet som toldklarerer og speditør til det indre marked.
In November 1996, Mr P. complained to the Ombudsman concerning the implementation by the Commission of Regulation 3904/921 on measures to adapt the profession of customs agent to the Internal Market.
Ps speditørvirksomhed havde lidt store tab som følge af det indre markeds ikrafttræden den 1. januar 1993 og ophævelsen af grænsekontrollen.
Mr P.'s firm of customs agents suffered large losses as a result of the entry into force of the Internal Market on 1 January 1993 and the consequent removal of border controls.
Han havde derfor indgivet en anmodning til de spanske myndigheder med ansvar for vurdering og udvælgelse af projekter til finansiering under for ordning 3904/92.
He therefore submitted an application to the Spanish authorities responsible for the vetting and selection of projects to be funded in the framework of Regulation 3904/92.
I løbet af sagsbehandlingen havde P. flere brevvekslinger med medlemmer af det spanske parlament og med det daværende spanske kommissions medlems kabinet.
In the course of the proceedings, Mr P. had some correspondence with members of the Spanish Parliament and with the cabinet of the then Spanish Commissioner, Mr Matutes.
Ifølge en skrivelse af 24. februar 1994 fra en medarbejder i hr. Matutes' kabinet til et spansk parlamentsmedlem var det sandsynligt, at Rs projekt kunne opnå en støtte på 100.000 ecu.
A letter from a member of Mr Matutes' Cabinet to a Spanish parliamentarian, dated 24 February 1994, indicated that Mr P.'s project was likely to obtain a grant of 100,000 ECUs.
I øvrigt gjorde klageren gældende, at de oplysninger, han modtog fra Kommissionen, generelt var uklare og utilstrækkelige.
Otherwise, in the complainant's view, the information being forwarded to him by the Commission was generally unclear and insufficient.
Han gjorde gældende, at Kommissionens gennemførelse af forordning 3904/92 havde været mangelfuld, hvilket udgjorde et tilfælde af fejl eller for sømmelse.
He alleged that application of Regulation 3904/92 by the Commission had been deficient and that this constituted an instance of maladministration.
Klagen blev fremsendt til Kommissionen, som i det væsentligste anførte følgende: gende: i)
The complaint was forwarded to the Commission. In summary, the Commission's opinion made the following points:
Kommissionen erkendte, at det indre markeds gennemførelse havde haft negative følger for toldklarerere og speditører, eftersom mere end 25% havde mistet deres job efter 1993, men var af den opfattelse, at omstruktureringen af denne sektor henhørte under medlemsstaterne i overensstemmelse med subsidiaritetsprincippet.
Whilst recognizing the negative consequences of the completion of the Internal Market for customs and commission agents, of whom more than 25% had lost their jobs after 1993, the Commission considered that the restructuring of this sector was a responsibility of the Member States, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity.
På grund af problemets omfang havde Kommissionen dog besluttet at støtte medlemsstaternes indsats gennem ledsageforanstaltninger: anstaltninger: a) finansieret via
Because of the importance of the problem, how ever, the Commission decided to support the efforts of Member States through accompanying measures:'
Europæiske foranstaltninger Socialfond, b) aktioner under Den Europæiske Regionaludviklingsfond, særlig INTERREG,
(b) actions from the Regional Development Funds, in particular INTERREG;
AFGØRELSER c) andre initiativer under forordning 3904/92 med et budget på 30 mio ecu, hvoraf 3.516.991 ecu tildeltes Spanien.
(c) other initiatives contained in Regulation 3904/92, with a budget of 30 MECU, of which 3,516,991 ECUs was allocated to Spain.
Ansøgninger om støtte til spanske virksomheder og tjenestegrene, som var blevet ramt af det indre markeds gennemførelse, skulle indgives af det spanske kontor med ansvar for gennemførelsen af forordning 3904/92, nemlig den spanske told- og skattestyrelse ("Agenda Tributaria').
Proposals to assist Spanish enterprises and services affected by the entry into force of the Internal Market had to be submitted by the Spanish agency responsible for the implementation of Regulation 3904/92, namely the Internal Revenue Service ("Agenda Tributaria").
Efter den tekniske evaluering af 82 spanske forslag, som blev foretaget af et udvalg under Agenda Tributaria, godkendtes 20 projekter.
Following the technical evaluation of 82 Spanish proposals by a committee of the Agenda Tributaria, 20 projects were accepted.
Evalueringen blev gennemført i fuldstændig uafhængighed på grundlag af de objektive kriterier, der var fastlagt i forordningen såvel som de relevante budgetbestemmelser.
The evaluation was carried out in full independence by the evaluators, and was based on the objective criteria laid down in the Regulation and in the relevant budgetary provisions.
Med fax af 16. december 1994 anmodede Agenda Tributaria kla geren om yderligere oplysninger vedrørende projektet.
By fax of 16 December 1994, the Agenda Tributaria requested further information from the complainant regarding his project.
Styrelsen modtog ingen yderligere oplysninger, og projektet blev ikke udvalgt, fordi definitionen var vag og upræcis og udgifterne mod svarede hele den spanske tildeling under forordning 3904/92.
No further information was received and the project was not selected because its definition was vague and imprecise and its cost amounted to the whole Spanish allocation of funds under Regulation 3904/92.
For så vidt angik korrespondancen med hr. Matutes' kabinet, kunne der i skrivelse af 24. februar 1994 være sket en forveksling af to virksomheder med samme navn ("O"), beliggende i hhv. Spanien ôg Frankrig.
As for the correspondence with the cabinet of Commissioner Matutes, there could have been a misunderstanding in the letter of 24 February 1994 between two firms with identical names ("C"), one located in Spain and the other in France.
Sidstnævnte havde modtaget en vis fælles skabsstøtte.
The latter had obtained some Community funding.
Forvekslingen skyldtes, at formand for bestyrelsen og administrerende direktør for den franske virksomhed "C." også havde forretningsmæssig forbindelse med klageren.
The misunderstanding was created by the fact that the President and Director General of the French company "C." was also a business partner of the com plainant.
Kommissionen havde undskyldt misforståelsen i en skrivelse til P.
The Commission had written to Mr P. apologizing for the confusion.
Kommissionen afviste påstanden om mangler i forbindelse med gennemførelsen af forordning 3904/92, som havde været under lagt kontrol fra Kommissionens egne finansielle tjenestegrene såvel som Revisionsretten.
(vi) The Commission denied that there had been deficiencies in the application of Regulation 3904/92, which had been monitored by both its own Financial services and the Court of Auditors.
P. fremsatte i det væsentligste følgende bemærkninger: i)
In summary, Mr P. made the following observations:
For så vidt angik den manglende besvarelse af anmodningen om yderligere oplysninger fra december 1994, oplyste klageren, at han ikke forstod formålet med denne anmodning, eftersom en beslutning var blevet truffet i februar 1994, og hans projekt alle rede var blevet udelukket.
Although Regulation 3904/92 was published on 31 December 1992, the Commission communicated with him for the first time only 22 days before the deadline of 31 March 1993 for the presentation of proposals.
For så vidt det støttebeløb, han havde anmodet om, var han på ansøgningstidspunktet ikke i besiddelse af oplysninger om det
As regards the failure to reply to the request for further information of December 1994, the complainant indicated that he did not understand the aim of such a request since a decision had been taken in February 1994 and his project had already been excluded. ed.
Kommissionen burde have offentliggjort navnene på de speditører, hvis projekter var blevet godkendt.
(iv) The Commission should have disclosed the name of the customs agents whose projects had been selected.
AFGØRELSEN 1 Kommissionens mangelfulde foranstaltninger
THE DECISION 1 Allegedly deficient measures adopted by the Commission
Kommissionens mangelfulde reaktion på toldklarerernes og spe­ditørernes problemer efter det indre markeds gennemførelse har allerede været genstand for flere klager til Den Europæiske Ombudsmand.1
The allegedly deficient response by the Community to the situation of customs and commission agents following the entry into force of the Internal Market, had already been the subjectmatter of several complaints addressed to the European Ombudsman.1
Endvidere blev der i forordning 3904/92 fastlagt specifikke støtteforanstaltninger.
Specific measures of assistance were also contained in Regulation 3904/92.
Ombudsmanden har ikke beføjelse til at tage stilling til Fællesskabets retsakter eller forslag til retsakter.
It is not the task of the Ombudsman to examine the merits of legislative acts or legislative proposals of the Communities.
En sådan kvali­tativ bedømmelse overstiger det rent konkrete spørgsmål om fejl eller forsømmelser og antager en politisk karakter.
This type of judgement goes beyond the boundaries of maladministration, and instead concerns considerations of a political nature.
I denne forbin­delse skal det bemærkes, at Europa­Parlamentet har vedtaget flere meget kritiske beslutninger om dette spørgsmål, herunder beslutningerne af 17. september og 20. november 1992 og Jackson­betænkningen af 4. november 1992.
In this context, it should be recalled that the European Parliament has adopted several very critical resolutions on this matter, such as those of 17 September and 20 November 1992 as well as the
2 Projektudvælgelse
2 Project selection