natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Kommissionen anførte i sine bemærkninger, at den havde behandlet H.'s sag korrekt, og at den opretholdt den analyse af sagen, der fremgår af ovennævnte skrivelser.
In its comments the Commission put forward that it had dealt appropriate ly with Mr H.'s case and it maintained its analysis of the case, set out in the letters quoted above.
Endvidere oplyste Kommissionen, at den fortsat undersøgte H.'s påstand om, at selv om de danske bestemmelser var i overensstemmelse med artikel 28 o i direktiv 94/5/EF, var de i modstrid med artikel 95.
Furthermore, it stated that it was still studying Mr H.'s allegation that the Danish rules, although in compliance with Article 28 (o) of Directive 94/5, were contrary to Article 95.
Kommissionen fandt, at dette argument vedrørende direktivets manglende overensstemmelse med EF-traktaten rejste en række spørgsmål, som nødvendiggjorde en detaljeret analyse.
The Commission stated that this argument concerning a Directive's incompatibility with the EC Treaty raised problems that it would have to analyse in detail.
Med skrivelse af 26. juni 1997 informerede Kommissionen Ombudsmanden om resultatet af denne analyse:
By letter of 26 June 1997 the Commission informed the Ombudsman about the results of its analysis. It stated:
For det første er Kommissionen af den opfattelse, at i de tilfælde, hvor de "særordninger", der henvises til i artikel 28 o i det sjette moms-direktiv, finder afvendelse (bla. i Danmark i medfør af den mulighed, landet indrømmes i den nævnte artikels stk. 2) som en undtagelse fra den normale ordning for beskatning af videresalg af brugte genstande, jf. direktiv 94/5/EF, stammer forskellene i skat tetrykket fra forskellene mellem den gældende momssats i Danmark (25%) og momssatserne i de øvrige medlemsstater.
First of all, we find that, in cases where the "special tax arrangements" referred to in Article 28 (o) of the Sixth VAT Directive apply (notably in Denmark pursuant to the option granted it by paragraph 2 of the said Article) by way of derogation from the normal system of taxing the resale of second-hand goods introduced by the Directive 94/5, the difference in the tax charge stems from the differences which exist between the rate of VAT in force in Denmark (25 %) and those in force in other Member States.
Det kan endog anføres, at i medfør af den fradragsordning, der er fast lagt eller endog pålagt i artikel 28 o, stk. 1, litra b, og litra c, tredje led, er forskellene i den afgift, der pålægges brugte biler, som videresælges i Danmark, og som varierer afhængigt af hvilken medlemsstat køretøjet stammer fra, en direkte konsekvens af for skellene i de momssatser, der finder anvendelse i de forskellige medlemsstater.
It can even be stated that pursuant to the deduction mechanism laid down, or even imposed by Article 28 (o) (1) (b) and the third indent of (c), the difference in the tax charged on second hand vehicles resold in Denmark and which varies on the basis of the vehicles' Member State of origin, is a direct consequence of the difference in the rates of VAT applied by the various Member States.
Det kan i denne forbindelse endog bemærkes, at de forskellige momssatser er et resultat af et bevidst valg fra fæl lesskabslovgivers side, som inden for en bredt harmoniseret beskatningsordning som momsordningen begrænsede sig til i det
It may even be noted in passing that this difference in VAT rates is the result of a deliberate choice by the Community legislator who, within in a broadly harmonized system of taxation such as the VAT system, confined himself to laying down, in Article 12 (2) (a) of the Sixth Directive, a minimum rate of 15 %, thus implicitly leaving the
• sjette direktivs artikel 12, stk. 2, litra a, at fastlægge en minimumssats på 15% og således underforstået overlade det til med lemsstaterne frit at fastsætte en højere momssats end denne.
Member States free to set VAT rates which a higher than the said "floor" rate.
Denne situation, som indebærer en forskelsbehandling af producenter eller forhandlere fra forskellige medlemsstater - en forskel, som udelukkende kan tilskrives forskellene i de nationale lovgivninger, som ikke er (fuldstændig) harmoniserede, blev for nylig behandlet i Domstolens dom af 1. februar 1996 i PerfHi-sagen,1 hvori den fastslår (præmis 17 i dommen):
It should also be noted that even at the present time the problem of a heavier tax charge in respect of second hand vehicles resold in Denmark and purchased in other Member States arises only in respect of vehicles coming from Member States which apply a rate of VAT which is lower than the Danish rate, whereas no difference in taxation could affect second hand vehicles purchased in a Member State which applies the same rate of VAT as Denmark (e.g. Sweden).
1 Dom af 1.2.1996 i sag C-177/94, Straffesag mod Gianfranco Perfili, Sml. 1996, s. 1-161.
Case C-177/94 Criminal proceedings ν Gianfranco Perfili[1996] ECR I 161.
På baggrund af ovenstående er Kommissionen af den opfattelse, at de forskelle i beskatningen, som i Danmark skyldes forskelle i de momssatser, dersomen "indgående" afgift skal fratrækkes den "udgående" afgift, vedkommende skal erlægge i medfør af artikel 28 o, stk. 1, i det sjette direktiv, med Domstolens ord "skyldes manglende overensstemmelse mellem de forskellige medlemsstaters lovgivninger".
In the light of the foregoing considerations, we are of the opinion that the difference in the tax charge which, in Denmark, stems from the different rates of VAT which the dealer has to deduct as 'input tax' from the Output tax' for which he is liable pursuant to Article 28 (o) (1) of the Sixth Directive, 'results'- to use the same words as the Court - 'from differences existing between the laws of the various Member States'.
Det fremgår endvidere, at "indgående" moms fratrækkes i henhold til et objektivt kriterium, nemlig den sats, der "gælder i den medlemsstat, i hvilken den afgiftspligtige videreforhandlers leve ringssted, som fastlagt i henhold til artikel 8, anses for at være
It would also appear that 'input VAT' is deducted in accordance with an objective criterion, namely, 'the rate applicable in the Member State within which the place of the supply to the taxable dealer, determined in accordance with Article 8, is deemed to be situated', a criterion which has no regard to the origin of the product and is applied without distinction to all dealers subject to Danish VAT legislation and to all used vehicles resold in Denmark.
Under disse omstændigheder konkluderer Kommissionen, at Danmark ikke overtræder traktatens artikel 95.
In these circumstances, we conclude that Denmark is not in infringement of Article 95 of the Treaty."
H. fastholdt i sine bemærkninger og bilagene hertil, at Kommissionen ikke havde behandlet hans sag.
In his observations Mr H. maintained that the Commission had not dealt with his case.
Endvidere anførte han, for så vidt angår hans klagepunkt vedrørende registreringsafgifter, at i visse tilfælde afveg de danske myndigheders fastlæggelse af det endelige afgiftsbeløb betragteligt fra det foreløbige afgiftsbeløb, og at det personale, der havde til opgave at foretage evalueringen af de importerede brugte biler, ikke var kompetent.
Furthermore, as for his grievance related to registration fees, he put forward that in some cases the Danish authorities' establishment of the final fee varied considerably from the provisional fee and that the staff in charge of the evaluation of imported second hand cars was not competent.
Han oplyste endvidere, at man inden importen af en brugt bil skulle forelægge bilens indregistreringspapirer for at opnå en foreløbig ansættelse af afgiften, hvilket i praksis betød, at man skulle købe bilen uden at kende de endelige afgiftsbeløb, af den simple årsag, at ingen bilforhandlere ville udlevere registreringspapirerne uden først at have solgt den pågældende bil.
He furthermore stated that before importing a second hand car, one was required to produce the registration papers of the car in order to know the provisional fee and that this requirement implied in practice that one had to buy the car without knowing the amount of the final fee, the reason being that no car dealer would hand out registration papers without first having sold the car in question.
Han påpegede endvidere, at de danske bestemmelser medførte problemer ved leasing af importerede brugte biler, og at importerede brugte taxaer ikke blev stillet på lige fod med brugte taxaer købt i Danmark.
He furthermore stated that the Danish rules entailed a problem in the leasing of imported second hand cars and that imported second hand taxis were not put on an equal footing with second hand taxis originating in Denmark.
Endvidere oplyste og påviste han, at en person med bopæl i Danmark, som arbejdede for en tysk virksomhed i Tyskland, ikke i Danmark fuldt ud kunne gøre brug af den firmabil, virksomheden stillede til hans rådighed.
Furthermore, he stated and evidenced that a person resident in Denmark who worked for a German company in Germany could not fully use the company car in Denmark that the company put at his disposal.
For så vidt angår begge klagepunkter, skal det påpeges, at Den Europæiske Ombudsmand ikke kan undersøge handlinger foretaget af nationale myndigheder.
As for both grievances, it has to be recalled that the European Ombudsman cannot inquire into the activities of national authorities.
Ombudsmanden kan derfor kun undersøge H.'s oprindelige påstand om, at Kommissionen ikke havde behandlet og vurderet den sag, han havde forelagde den, korrekt.
The Ombudsman can therefore only inquire into Mr H.'s original allegation that the Commission had not dealt with and properly assessed the case that he had brought forward.
For så vidt angår hans klagepunkt vedrørende registreringsafgifter, fremgik det, at Kommissionen havde behandlet det og vurderet det.
As for his grievance concerning registration fees, it appeared that the Commission had dealt with it and assessed it.
Tilbage stod så spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt Kommissionens vurdering var korrekt.
The outstanding question was thus whether the Commission's assessment was right.
Den ord ning, de danske myndigheder indførte efter ovennævnte dom fra Domstolen, havde til formål at sikre, at registreringsafgifterne fastsattes, således at den importerede brugte bils samlede pris inklusive registreringsafgiften ikke oversteg prisen på en brugt bil købt i Danmark, inklusive residualværdien af registreringsafgiften på den nye bil.
DECISIONS so that the total value of the imported second hand car, including registration fee, did not exceed that of a second hand car originating in Denmark, including residual registration fee paid when the car was new.
Kommissionen fandt, at denne ordning som sådan var i overensstemmelse med Domstolens dom.
The Commission found that this system as such complied with the Court's ruling.
H. blev af Kommissionen opfordret til at forelægge eventuelle beviser for, at ordningen var blevet anvendt på en måde, som var i modstrid med Domstolens dom.
If Mr H. had proof of the contrary, the Commission invited him to submit that proof.
Der forelå ingen elementer, som lod antage, at denne vurdering var fejlagtig.
There were no elements at hand which indicated that this assessment was wrong.
Dog skal det påpeges, at Domstolen er den højeste myndighed i spørgsmål vedrørende fælles skabsret.
However, it shall be recalled that the Court of Justice is the highest authority on questions of Community law.
For så vidt angår klagerens klagepunkt vedrørende merværdiafgift, fremgik det, at Kommissionen havde behandlet det og vurderet det.
As for the complainant's grievance concerning VAT, it appeared that the Commission had dealt with it and assessed it.
Det afgørende spørgsmål var således ligeledes, om Kommissionens vurdering var korrekt.
The crucial question was thus equally whether the Commission's assessment was right.
H. og Kommissionen syntes at lægge til grund, at de omhandlede bestemmelser i visse situationer kunne føre til en konkurrencemæssig forfordeling af danske forhandlere i forhold til tyske forhandlere.
It appeared to be established and uncontested between Mr H. and the Commission that the rules in question could lead to a competitive disadvantage in certain situations between Danish dealers and German dealers.
Ydermere syntes der at herske enighed mellem H. og Kommissionen om, at de danske bestemmelser var i overensstemmelse med direktiv 94/5/EF.
Furthermore, there appeared to be agreement between Mr H. and the Commission that the Danish rules were allowed under Directive 94/5.
Spørgsmålet var derfor, om den ordning, der var indført i medfør af direktiv 94/5/EF, var i modstrid med traktaten.
The question was thus whether the regime allowed under Directive 94/5 was contrary to the Treaty.
Kommissionen havde fundet, at den omhandlede forskel skyldtes de forskellige momssatser, som er tilladte i henhold til gældende fællesskabsret.
The Commission had found that the said disadvantages stemmed from the differences in the rate of VAT which are allowed under Community law as it stands.
Angiveligt ville forskellene rent faktisk forsvinde, hvis der fastsattes samme momssats i Tyskland og Danmark. Kommissionens vurdering forekom derfor korrekt.
It appeared that the disadvantages would in fact disappear if the same VAT rate was applicable in Germany and Denmark.
Det skal dog påpeges, at Domstolen er den højeste myndighed i spørgsmål vedrørende fællesskabsret.
However, it shall be recalled that the Court of Justice is the highest authority on questions of Community law.
Den Europæiske Ombudsmands undersøgelse af denne klage har ikke påvist tilfælde af fejl og forsømmelser fra Europa-Kommissionens side.
On the basis of the European Ombudsman's inquiries into this complaint, there appeared to have been no maladministration by the European Commission.
Ombudsmanden afsluttede derfor behandlingen af sagen.
The Ombudsman therefore decided to close the case.
UDBUD OM LEVERING AF TEKNISKE TJENESTEYDELSER TIL KOMMISSIONEN
TENDERING PROCEDURE FOR SUPPLY OF TECHNICAL SERVICES TO THE COMMISSION
Afgørelse om klage 817/19.8.96/OKA/NL-EN/IJH over Europa-Kommissionen
Decision on complaint 817/19.8.96/OKA/NL-EN/IJH against the European Commission
I august 1996 klagede OdK. til Ombudsmanden over et udbud, Kommissionen havde offentliggjort.
In August 1996, Dr. O.d.K. complained to the Ombudsman about a call for tenders organised by the Commission.
Hans konsulentvirksomhed indgav et bud vedrørende teknisk bistand til direktoratet for sundhed og' sikkerhed (GD V F).
His consultancy company submit ted a tender to supply technical assistance to the Directorate for Public Health and Health and Safety at Work (DGV F).
Kommissionen meddelte ham efterfølgende, at den havde annul leret udbuddet på grund af oversættelsesfejl i udbudsdokumenterne., og at den havde til hensigt at indlede en ny begrænset, fremskyndet procedure.
The Commission then informed him that it had cancelled the call for tenders because of translation errors in the tender documents and that it intended to proceed with a new limited accelerated procedure.
Klageren deltog i den nye procedure uden resultat.
He participated unsuccessfully in the new procedure.
Rådets direktiv 92/50/EØF af 18. juli 1992 om samordning af fremgangsmåderne ved indgåelse af offentlige tjenesteydelsesaftaler, EFT 1992 L 209, s. 1.
Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts, OJ 1992 L 209/1.
Klageren gjorde endvidere gældende, iv) at det ikke var oversættelsesfejl men andre ulovlige hensyn, der var årsag til, at udbuddet var blevet annulleret. Nærmere bestemt var kravene til personalets kvalifikationer i den første procedure stillet i bero i den anden procedure.
(iv) that the real reason for cancelling the first tender was not translation errors, but an illegitimate purpose.
Dette begunstigede firmaer med dårligere kvalificeret personale og i særdeleshed den nuværende kontrahent.
The consequence was to give an advantage to firms with lower quality personnel and in particular to the current contractor.
Klagen blev forelagt Kommissionen. For så vidt angik påstanden om procedurefejl, angav Kommissionen i det væsentligste følgende: i)
The complaint was forwarded to the Commission.
Kommissionen sendte alle udbudsdokumenter til alle de udvalgte bydende samtidig og pr. rekommanderet brev.
The Commission sent the tender documents to all the companies selected to tender at the same time and by registered post.
Fristen for modtagelsen af buddene var den 14. juni 1996.
The closing date for the receipt of tenders was 14 June 1996.
Kommissionen besvarede klagerens fax med anmodninger om yderligere oplysninger pr. telefon den 10. juni 1996, dvs. halv anden arbejdsdag, efter den havde modtaget faxen.
The Commission replied to the faxed queries from the complainant by telephone on 10 June 1996, one and a half working days following receipt of the fax.
Kommissionen erkendte, at den ikke svarede skriftligt.
The Commission acknowledged that it did not reply in writing.
Artikel 11, stk. 2, i direktivet om tjenesteydelser finder udelukkende anvendelse ved tildeling af kontrakter efter forhandling.
Article 11 § 2 of the Services Directive is relevant only where a contract is awarded using the negotiated procedure.
I dette tilfælde fandt den fremskyndede, begrænsede procedure anvendelse.
In this case, the accelerated restricted procedure was used.
Kommissionens svar på punkt iv) i klagen var i det væsentligste følgende: a)
The Commission's response to point (iv) of the complaint was, in summary, as follows:
Da buddene fra det første udbud blev åbnet, fremgik det, at der var store udsving i de bydendes fortolkning af udbudsbetingelserne, for så vidt angik de menneskelige ressourcer, fordi der som følge af en oversættelsesfejl i den franske udgave henvistes til "mand/måneder", mens der i den tyske og engelske udgave hen vistes til "timer/måned". Eftersom buddene ikke var sammenligne lige annullerede Kommissionen proceduren.
When the bids from the first call for tenders were opened it was discovered that there were differences in the tenderers' interpretation of the specifications for human resources because, as the result of a translation error, the French version of the specifications referred to "man/months" whereas the German and English versions referred to "hours/month".
Af tidsmæssige hensyn gennemførte Kommissionen et nyt udbud, hvor den anvendte den begrænsede, fremskyndede procedure.
In view of the urgency, the Commission organised a new call for tender using the restricted accelerated procedure.
Opfordringen til at afgive bud var blevet tilpasset den nye procedure og oversættelsesfejlen rettet, men derudover var de tekniske specifikationer enslydende i det første og det andet udbud.
Apart from adapting the invitation to tender to the new procedure and correcting the translation error, the technical specifications in the second invitation to tender were identical to those in the first.
I modsætning til den åbne procedure består den begrænsede procedure af to adskilte stadier, nemlig udvælgelsen af de deltagende virksomheder og dernæst tildelingen af kontrakten.
Unlike the open procedure, the restricted procedure comprises two distinct stages: selection of participating firms, followed by award of the contract.
Kravene til personalets kvalifikationer fandt anvendelse på udvælgelsessta- diet.
Requirements for quality of personnel were applied at the selection stage.
De forskellige entrepriser var blevet tildelt de virksomheder, der havde indgivet de laveste bud.
The various lots were awarded to the companies that put in the lowest bids.
I sine bemærkninger forelagde klageren en detaljeret kritik af Kommissionens udtalelse såvel som yderligere oplysninger vedrørende de fremsatte klagepunkter.
In his observations, the complainant made detailed criticism of the Commission's opinion, and gave further detail of his claims.
Bemærkningerne indeholdt i det væsentligste følgende nye punkter: i)
The observations included, in summary, the following additional points:
Anvendelsen af den i direktivet fastlagte procedure med forhandling ville have været passende, eftersom de bud, der var afgivet i forbindelse med den oprindelige procedure indebar visse uregelmæssigheder, herunder forskellige fortolkninger af, hvor meget oversættelsesarbejde, buddet skulle omfatte.
Use of the negotiated procedure under the Directive would have been appropriate given the irregularities in the bids made under the original procedure, including differences in interpretation of the amount of translation work to be tendered for.
Klageren betvivlede, at Kommissionen ved sammenligningen af de modtagne bud reelt havde anvendt de kriterier vedrørende per sonalets kvalifikationer, der var fastlagt i udbudsdokumenterne, og at Kommissionen kunne dokumentere, at det udvalgte bud opfyldte disse kriterier.
The complainant questioned whether the Commission had actual ly used the criteria for quality of personnel contained in the tender documents in comparing the bids received and whether the Commission could demonstrate that the successful tenderer actually met the criteria.
SUPPLERENDE UNDERSØGELSER
FURTHER INQUIRIES
Eftersom klagerens betragtninger indeholdt nye påstande, blev de forelagt Kommissionen til udtalelse.
In view of the fact that the complainant's observations made new claims, they were forwarded to the Commission with a request for a further opinion. ion.
Kommissionens svar omfattede i det væsentligste følgende punkter: i)
The Commission's reply included, in summary, the following points:
Klageren havde ingen begrundelse for at anmode om en procedure med forhandling, eftersom der ikke forelå uregelmæssigheder men højst en fejlagtig fortolkning af teksten.
The complainant had no reason to request a negotiated procedure because there were no irregularities, only at most an error of textual interpretation.
For så vidt angik udgifterne til oversættelse, havde Kommissionen foretaget en omhyggelig sammenligning af buddene på dette område for at undgå enhver forskelsbehandling af de bydende til trods for de for skelle, der kunne konstateres i de bud, Kommissionen havde mod taget.
As regards translation costs, the Commission carefully compared the tenders relating to this item in order not to discriminate against any tenderer in spite of the differences in the tenders received.
Som led i udvælgelsen under den begrænsede, fremskyndede procedure havde Kommissionen kontrolleret det foreslåede personales kvalifikationer på grundlag af de bydendes oplysninger.
At the selection stage of the restricted accelerated procedure, the Commission checked the quality and qualifications of the person nel proposed on the basis of the details provided by the various tenderers.
Kun de bydende, som opfyldte udvælgelseskriterierne, fik tilsendt de specifikationer, der var nødvendige for at afgive bud.
Only those tenderers who satisfied the selection criteria were sent the specifications to enable them to submit a tender.
I disse bemærkninger fremførte klageren en detaljeret kritik af Kommissionens svar og fastholdt påstanden om, at Kommissionen havde
The complainant's complementary observations
AFGØRELSER overtrådt udbudsbestemmelserne og gjort sig skyldig i fejl og forsømmelser. melser.
In his observations, the complainant made a detailed criticism of the Commission's reply and insisted that the Commission had violated the rules of public procurement and practised maladministration.
Klageren krævede, at Kommissionen beviste, at den reelt havde anvendt de fastlagte kriterier for personalets kvalifikationer ved at forelægge ham detaljerede oplysninger og dokumenter vedrørende den udvalgte bydendes bud og hans personales kvalifikationer.
He claimed that the Commission should prove that the criteria for quality of personnel were actually applied by providing him with detailed information and documents concerning the successful tenderer's bid and the quality of his personnel.
1 Krænkelse af procedurebestemmelserne i direktivet om tjeneste ydelser
1 The allegations of procedural violations of the Services Directive