natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Efter i sagen at have fastsläet, at Kommissionen havde besluttet at godkendede af SIC pätalte foranstaltninger efter den indledende undersogelsesfase,undersogte Retten, offi de vurderinger, som Kommissionen lagde til grund,frembsd aivorlige vanskeligheder, der godtgjorde, at den formelle undersogelsesfase blev äbnet.
Thus, the Court upheld decisions of Boards of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market in which they had refused registration as a Community trade mark, on the basis of the lack of distinctive character -referred to in Article 7(1Xb) of Regulation No 40194 - in relation to theproducts and services concerned in each of the casessubmitted, of the words"Companyline" (udgment of 12 January 2000 in Case T-19199DKV v OHIM(" Companyline"); under appeal, Case C-104l00 P), "TRUSTEDLINK" (udgmentof 26 October 2000 in Case T-345199Harbinger v OHIM ("TRUSTEDLINK"),"Investorworld" (udgment of 26 October 2000 in Case T-360199Communiry Communiry
Rettenfastslogderfor, at Kommissionens vurdering, hvorefter der ikke var tale om statsststte, i hvert fald kunne frembyde alvorlige vanskeligheder, som indebar,at den formelle procedure, burde v & re indledt.
OPTIONS"),it held that the Office had correctly refused to register the word "OPTIONS" asa Community trade mark under Article 7(3) of Regulation No 40194, sincedistinctive character acquired through the use of the trade mark had not beendemonstrated in the substantial part of the Community where it was devoid of anysuch character under Article 7(1)(b), (c) and (d) of that regulation.
Selv om disse foranstaltninger var blevet beskrevet,som om, de havde tilformäl at kompensere for de merudgifter, der folger af de public service-forpligtelser, som RTP varetager,bemrerkede Retten, at denne omstnndigheder uden betydning for kvalificeringen af foranstaltningen som ststte.Kommissionen kan kun tage hensyn til denne omstrendighed med henblik pägodkendelse af ststte pä de i traktatens srrlige bestemmelser fastsatte betingelser.
On the other hand, the Court held that a Board of Appeal had erred in law inrelying, as an absolute ground for refusal, on the idea that the mark consistedexclusively of a shape which resulted from the nature of the goods themselves,as provided for in Article 7(1)(e)(i) of Regulation No 40194 (udgment of 16February 2000 in Case T-I22199 Procter & Gamble v OHIM ("soap bar shape"). The case-law was also developed by useful clarifications regarding the jurisdictionof Boards of Appeal of the Office.
Med hensyn til de andre pätalte foranstaltninger (afgiftsfritagelser, betalingslettelser, RTP's gradvisebetaling af skyldige bidrag til Segurangasocial og fritagelse for pälobne renter og morarenter) fastslog Retten, at
It was found in Procter & Gamble v OHIM(" soap bar shape") that an appeal to a Board of Appeal seeking to have theexaminer's refusal to register a Community trade mark on an absolute groundoverturned places the Board of Appeal, in the examination of the merits of theapplicationfor registration,in the position of the examiner. It follows that, under Article 62(I) of Regulation No 40194, the Board of Appeal is competent to reopen Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark(OJ1994 L11, p. 1).
Kommissionen ifolge sagensakter ogsä efter dens fsrste undersogelse reelthavde alvorlige vanskelighedermed bedsmmelsen.
the examination of the application in the light of all the absolute grounds forrefusal set out in Article 7 of the regulation, without being limited by theexaminer's reasoning.
Endvidere fandt Retten, at varigheden af en forste undersogelser pä 3 är klartoverskred den frist, der normalt er päkrevet for en fsrste undersogelse.Sammenholdt med de andre forhold, der var blevet konstatereti sagen, kunnevarigheden bekrrefte , tt der forelä alvorlige vanskeligheder, der nsdvendiggjorde ivrerksettelsen af den anden fase i undersogelsesprocedurenmed henblik pä at give interesserede tredjemend lejlighed til at fremkommemed deresbemrerkninger. bemrerkninger.
However, by raising of its own motion and a posterioria formal irregularity not raised by the examiner, the Board of Appeal exceededits powers: if the examinerhad initially dismissed the application for registrationas inadmissibleowing to a formal irregularity, the applicant would have had thechoice of either appealingto the Board of Appeal or immediately making a freshapplication for registration to the Office.
- I sin beslutning om Frankrigs pästäede stotte til SFMl-Chronopost, somblev vedtaget efter den formelle undersogelsesprocedure, havde Kommissionennavnlig konkluderet, at den logistiskeog forretningsmessigebistand, som La Poste som offentligretlig juridisk person ydede til sit datterselskab SFMI-Chronopost, ikke udgjorde statsstotte til fordel for sidstnrevnte.
In addition, the general Communitylaw principle of the protection of the rightsof the defence, enshrined in Article 73 of Regulation No 40194, requires the Board of Appeal to accord the person concerned an opportunity to express hisviews on absolute grounds for refusal of registration of a Community trade markwhich it applies of its own motion.
Sagsogerne,der var konkurrerende selskaber til FMl-Chronopost pä markedet forkurfrpost, havdepätalt denne bistand i en klage indgivet til Kommissionen.
The Court found that, by failing to accordthat opportunity to the applicant, the Board of Appeal had infringed theapplicant's rights of defence.
Idom af 14. december 2000, Ufex m.fl. mod Kommissionen (sag T-613197,endnu ikke trykt i Samling af Afgorelser), gav Retten sagsogerne medhold ogannullerede Kommissionens beslutning.
The Court was required to rule on the conditions governing public access todocuments 26 of the Commission (udgments of 13 September 2000 in Case T2 0 199 Denkavit Nederland v Commission and of 12 October 2000 in Case T12 31 99 JT's Corporation v Commission) and of the Council (udgment of 6April in Case T-188/98 Kuijer v Council; under appeal, Case C-239100 P).
Retten fastslog säledes, at Kommissionen skulle have undersogt, om de samlede omkostninger, som S FMl-Chronopost betalte til La Poste for den logistiskeog forretningsmrssigebistand, svarede til de faktorer, som en virksomhed under normalemarkedsbetingelser skulle have taget i betragtning ved fastsettelsen afvederlaget for ydelserne.
- In Kuijer v Council the Court found fault with the Council's refusal, foundedon the exception relating to protection of the public. interest (internationalrelations), to provide access to certain documents connectedwith the activities ofthe Centre for Information, Discussion and Exchange on Asylum. The Council'sdecision was annulled on two grounds.
Retten fastslog, at Kommissionen, uden at haveforetaget denne efterprovelse, havde ststtet sin beslutning pä en fejlagtigfortolkning af traktatens artikel 92.
First, the decision contained noexplanation enablingit to be verified whether the Council had examined whetherdisclosure of each of the documents at issue was in fact liable to damage the
Sagsogerens ovrige anbringender blev forkastet, navnlig anbringendet omtilsidesrttelse af retten til kontradiktion.
On 6 December 1993 the Council and the Commission approved a code of conductconcerning public access to Council and Commission documents (OJ 1993 L 340, p. 41).
Flere sager har givet Retten anledning til at prrecisere den retspraksis, ifolgehvilken de virksomheder, der modtageren ststte, i princippet kun kan have en berettiget forventning om stottenslovlighed, hvis denne er blevet ydet ioverensstemmelse med den i traktatens artikel 93 fastsatte procedure.
Second, the Court, relying expressly on the judgment in Case T-l4lg8 Hautala v Council II999l ECR II-2489 (under appeal, Case C-353199 P)," held that the Council should have examined the possibility of disclosingcertain passages in the documents to which access was sought.
Hvad angär sporgsmälet om, hvorvidt modtagerneaf en ulovlig stotte harmulighed for - med henblik pä at modsrette sig ststtenstilbagebetaling - atpäberäbe sig ekstraordinareomstrendigheder, som kunne have dannet grundlagfor deres forventning om, at denne ststte var lovlig, fastslog Retten, at selv omsagsogeren har päberäbtsig sädanne omstrendigheder med henblik pä modsettesig tilbagesogningen af stotten,tilkommer det den nationale ret, der eventuelt har fäet sagen forelagt, at bedsmme disse (dom af 13.6.2000,EPAC mod Kommissionen).
- It was also in direct relianceon Hautala v Council, and on grounds identicalto those in Kuijer v Council, that the Court found rn JT's Corporation v Commission that the Commission's decision had to be annulled in so far as itrefused access to certain documents (mission reports and Commissioncorrespondence with the Government of Bangladesh).The refusal had been basedon the exception relating to protection of the public interest(inspections andinvestigations) and on Article 19 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1468181,28which provides that information obtained in connection with customsinvestigations is confidential in nature.
Imidlertid vurderede Retten i de ovenfor nrevnte senere afsagte domme Alzetta m.fl. mod Kommissionen og CETM mod Kommissionen, dervedrsrte det samme sporgsmäl, at sädanne omstrndigheder ikke forelä, idetdet i CETM mod Kommissionen dog blev angivet, at denne vurdering var blevet foretaget uden hensyn til sporgsmälet om, hvorvidt modtagereaf enulovlig stotte er berettiget til at päberäbe sig sädanne omstrndigheder for Frellesskabets retsinstanser.
With regard to a further category ofdocuments, namely correspondence sent by the Government of Bangladeshto the Commission, the Court held that the Commission was entitled to rely on theauthorship rule to refuseaccess. access.
Rädet, dom af 29.9.2000, sag T-87198, InternationalPotash Company mod Rädet, endnu ikke trykt i Samling af Afgorelser).
Council Regulation (EEC) No 1468/81of 19 May 1981 on mutual assistance between theadministrative authorities of the Member States and cooperation between the latter and the
To af Rädets forordninger blev annulleret delvis (1f. dommene i sagerne Medici Grimm mod Rädet og Starway mod Rädet).
Commission to ensure the correct application of the law on customs or agricultural matters(OJ1981 L144, p1).
I sagen anlagt af selskabet Medici Grimm blev Retten anmodet om at vurderelovligheden af en rädsforordning, der blev vedtaget som afslutning pä enfornyet undersogelse af de antidumpingforanstaltninger,der rndrede enforordning om indfsrelse af en endelig antidumpingtold pä importen afhändtasker af lreder med oprindelse i FolkerepublikkenKina (herefter "denoprindelige forordning").
- In Denkavit Nederland v Commission, the Court upheld the Commission'srefusal, founded on the mandatory exceptions relating to protection of the publicinterest (inspectionsand investigations) and of conrmercialand industrial secrecy,to grant access to a Commission inspection report concerning the combating ofswine fever in the Netherlands.
Sagsogeren, som det i den anfagtede forordning blevkonstateret, ikke havde foretaget dumping i forbindelse med sine transaktionermed selskabet Lucci Creation med hjemsted i Hongkong i lsbet afundersogelsesperioden, der lä forud for datoen for vedtagelsen af denoprindelige forordning, gjorde greldende, at den anfregtede forordning varulovlig, for sä vidt som Rädet ikke havde titbagebetalt den antidumpingtold tilselskabet, som det havde betalt fsr forordningen blev vedtaget.
Since that document in fact related to aninspection and the Commission had not errsd in its assessment that its disclosure could undermine the protection of the public interest, the Court dismissed theaction for annulment, stating that that exception was sufficient in itself to justifyrefusal of access to the document.
Formälet med den af Kommissionen ivrrksatte fornyede undersogelse varsäledes at gore det muligt for de virksomheder, der ikke havde deltaget i denoprindelige procedure, at opnä en individuel behandling pä grundlag af dereseksportpriser.
By judgment of 18 January2000 in Case T-290197 Mehibas Dordtselaanv Commission, the Court dismissedan action contesting the legality of a Commission decision refusing a requestsubmitted by the Kingdom of the Netherlands for repayment to the applicant ofagricultural levies.
For at gsre dette muligt valgtes den safilmeundersogelsesperiode som i den oprindelige undersogelse.
That error in the declarations was caused by the submission offraudulent invoices by the importer of the goods.
Retten fastslog, atnär institutionerne havde fastsläet, at et af de forhold, som den endeligeantidumpingtold blev indfsrt pä grundlag af, ikke forelä, kunne det ikkelaengere antages,at de betingelser, der er fastsat i artikel 1 i forordning (EF)nr. 384196 23, var opfyldt pä tidspunktet for vedtagelsen af den oprindeligeforordning, og at de handelsmrssige beskyttelsesforanstaltninger derfor varnsdvendige.
Subsequently,the applicantapplied to the Netherlands authorities for repayment of the supplementary levies.The application was sent to the Commission, which found in an initial decisionthat the application was not justified.
Under disse omstendigheder var institutionerne forpligtet til atdrage alle de nodvendige konsekvenser, der falger af valget afundersogelsesperiode for den omhandlede fornyede undersogelse,og när dehavde fastsläet, at den interesserede part ikke har foretaget dumping under dennevnte periode, skulle de give denne konstatering tilbagevirkende gyldighed.Säfremt denne tilgangsvinkel ikke blev fulgt, ville det medfsre en uberettigetberigelse af Faellesskabet pä bekostningaf sagsogeren.
However, in the light of the Court's judgment in Case T-346194 France-Aviationv Commission [1995] ECR II-2841,the Commission revoked its initial decision. It was only after ascertainingthat that the application contained a "statementfor the file" made by the person concernedthat it then decided that the application for repayment was not justified.
Dommen i sagen Starway mod Rädet rejste bl.a. sporgsmälet om, hvorvidtfrellesskabsinstitutionerne inden for rammerne af en undersogelse om omgäelseaf antidumpingforanstaltningeraf hensyn, der er begrundet i snsket om eneffektiv administration, kan anmode importorerne om at fremleggeoprindelsescertifikater til bevis for rigtigheden af deres oplysninger i
In thatsecond decision, the Commission stated in particular that the fact that invoicesproved to be inaccuratewas a trade risk to be assumedby any person making acustoms declaration and could not itself be regarded as a specialcircumstance. circumstance.
Rädets forordning (EF) nr.384196 af 22.12.1995om beskyttelse mod dumpingimportfra lancle,der ikke er medlemmer af Det Europriske Fellesskab (EFT i996 L 56, s' 1).
Council Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79of 2 July 1979 on the repayment or remission ofimport or export duties (OJ 1979 L I75, p. 1).
toldangivelserne,med henblik pä at sikre, at formälet med artikel 13 iforordning384196nem,lig at imodegäomgäelsespraksisbl,iver opnäet. Svareter i princippet bekreftende.
In its judgment, the Court found that there were irregularities in the procedurewhereby the Commission had adopted the second decision.
Denne afuisning af andrebevismidler svarer reelt til at fratage den bersrte retten til at fremlreggedokumenter med henblik pä frifindelse.
30 However, it had not beenestablished that without the irregularities which occurredin the present case theprocedure might have resulted in a different decision.
Det folger heraf, at defellesskabsinstitutioner, der har aflroldt sig fra omhyggeligtog upartisk atundersoge de dokumenter, der var blevet meddelt institutionerne, ikke gyldigtkan afuise dokumenterne med den begrundelse, at de ikke kan tillegges nogen bevisvaegt.
The Court also held that the Commission had not manifestly erred in itsassessment of Article 13 of Regulation No 1430179by confirming that thesubmission of documents subsequently found to be falsified or inaccuratedid notin itself constitute a special situationjustiffing the remission or repayment ofimport duties, even where such documents had been presented in good faith.
Retten fastslog forst, at Kommissionen var berettiget til at fortolkebestemmelserne i forordning nr.384196 pä baggrund af antidumpingkodeksen
- Of the decisions in this field, mention will be made first of all of the actiontaken following the three judgments of the Court of Justice of 5 May 1998 (Case
Endvidere fastslog Retten, at Kommissionen ikke var berettiget til automatiskat udelukke forbrugerorganisationer fra kredsen af bersrte parter somomhandlet i artikel 5, stk. 10, artikel 6, stk. 7, og artikel 21 i forordning nr.384196 ved at anvende et generelt kriterium, som sondrermellem varer, deralmindeligvis srelges i detailsalgsleddet, og andre varer, uden at giveorganisationerne lejlighed til at godtgore, hvorved de kan v & re bersrt af de pägreldende varer.
Commission was correct in refusing to approve amendments to contracts for thepurchase of wheat concluded between a Russian State-owned company and theapplicants - contracts which the Commission had approved - on the ground thatthe condition of free competition had not been fulfilled. When the applicantsagreed new contractual terms with the Russian State-owned company, they had
Anvendelsen af Rädets afgorelse 9ll482lEAF om de overssiske landes ogterritoriers associering med Faellesskabet (OLT), midtvejsrevideret vedafgorelse 97180318F, udgjorde grundlaget for vigtige sager for Retten, derbäde vedrsrte gyldigheden af afgorelsen om midtvejsrevision og de af Kommissionen i henhold til artikel 109 i afgorelse 911482 vedtagnebeskyttelsesforanstaltninger inden for sektoren for indfsrsel af ris og sukker.
The applicable legislationprovides that, when the financial assistance is not used in accordance with theconditions set out in the decision of approval of the ESF, the Commission maysuspend, reduce or withdraw the assistance.It was decisions by the Commissionsuspending financial assistance granted by the ESF to a Portuguese company thatthe Court again had to deal with (udgment of 27 January 2000 in Joined Cases T-L 94 197 and T-83198Branco v Commission).
I en sag afsluttet i 2000 (ovennrevnte dom af 10.2.2000i sagen Nederlandse Antillen mod Kommissionen) gav Retten De NederlandskeAntiller medhold ien af disse anlagt sag med pästand om annullation af enkommissionsforordning om srerlige foranstaltninger for indforsel af ris medoprindelse i OlT-lande samt af en anden forordning, der havde hjemmel i denfsrste.
Thejudgment is noteworthy above all because the Court held in relation to a pleaalleging infringement of the principle of legal certainty that the Commission mustdecide, in the exercise of a power vested in itself alone, on claims for finalpayment of financial assistance by taking a decision within a reasonable time,either by ordering full payment or by suspending,reducing or withdrawing theaid.
Retten fandt säledes, at Kommissionen havde overträdt artikel 109 iafgorelse 911482, som fortolket af Domstolen i dens dom af 11. februar 1999,Antillean Rice M i U s m.ft. mod Kommissionen (sagC-390195 P, Sml.
However, the fact that there has been unreasonabledelay in adopting adecision suspending assistance cannot lead to its annulment.
I, s. 769)ved ikke at godtgore, at der var ärsagsforbindelse mellem anvendelsen afafgorelse 911482 og de indträdte forstyrrelser pä Frellesskabets marked.
If such decisionswere annulled on the sole ground that they were late, the Commission could dono more than adopt, pursuant to Article 176 of the Treaty (now Article 233 EC),fresh decisions to suspendassistance since it would still not have the informationit neededto calculate eligible expenditure.
Inden for omrädet for landbrugspolitik i vid forstand har anvendelsen afbestemmelserne om den falles markedsordning for bananer igen givetanledning til flere domme.
In those circumstances, an annullingjudgment would be wholly pointless.
I dommene af 28. marts 2000, T. Port mod Kommissionen (sag T-251197 , Sntl.II, s. 1775)og af 19. september 2000, Anton Dürbeck mod Kommissionen (sag T2 5 219 7, endnu ikke trykt i Samling af Afgorelser (appelsag:C-430/00 P))nedlagde de sagsogendefrugtimportfirmaer pästand om annullation af Kommissionens beslutninger, der i den fsrste sag afslog og i den anden sagkun delvist accepterede at udstede supplerende importlicenser til dem inden forrammerne af de overgangsforanstaltninger,der var fastsat i artikel 30 iforordning (EOF) m. 4041932a. Med denne forordning blev der indfsrt enfelles importordning for bananer, som erstattede de forskellige nationaleordninger.
- In ADT Projekt v Commission, cited above, the Court dismissed as unfoundedan action for annulment of a decision by the Commission not to award theapplicant a contract relating to a project under the TACIS progralnme.
Idet denne erstatning risikerede at medfsre forstyrrelser pä det indremarked, giver artikel 30 Kommissionen kompetence til at trreffe serlige
The Court found, in answer to a claim by the applicant,that the procedure which had led to the adoption of the decision by the Commission to carry out a second evaluation of the tenders was not unlawful inany way.
Rädets forordning (EgF) nr.404193 af 13.2.1994om den frelles markedsordning forbananer (EFT L 47, s. 1).
After pointing out that the contracting authority is not bound by theevaluation committee's proposal, it held that, in the circumstances of the case, the
overgangsforanstaltninger for at gsre det muligt at lsse de vanskeligheder, deropstär for de erhvervsdrivende efter indfsrelsenaf den frelles markedsordning,men som beror pä forholdenepä de nationale markeder, ffrr forordning nr.404193 trädte i kraft.
Commission had good grounds, in order to restore equal treatment and, thereby,equality of opportunity for all the tenderers,which it is bound to ensure at each stage of a tendering procedure, for cancelling the evaluation procedure andorganising a fresh one, open to the same tenderers as those who had competedin in the first evaluation procedure.
I sag T-25I197 fandt Kommissionen ikke, at de af T. Port päberäbteomstendigheder udgjorde et srerligt vanskeligt tilfrelde, der kunne godtgore ensrerlig tildeling af importlicenser,navnlig fordi de kontrakter, der vedrsrtelevering af bananer, ikke kunne tages i betragtning,da de var blevet indgäet,efter at forordning nr. 404193 var blevet offentliggfort i De EuropreiskeFellesskabers Tidende.
The question of the conditions to which financial assistance under the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) is subject was raised in a casebrought by the Council of European Municipalities and Regions against the Commission.
Retten bekraftede Kommissionens analyse og frifandtinstitutionen.
In its judgment of 3 February 2000 in Joined Cases T-46198and T1 51 198 CEMR v Commission, the Court held, first, that the contested decisioncontained in a debit note had to be annulled on the ground of inadequatereasoning in particular because it did not explain why the receipts which theapplicant had supplied to the Commission were not sufficient evidence of theexpenditure actually incurred.
I sag T-252197havde Kommissionen vedtaget en beslutning, der delvisimsdekom den af selskabet Anton Dürbeck indgivne ansogning om udstedelseaf supplerende importlicenser.Sagsogeren gjorde i denne sag, der blev anlagt med henblik pä at tä denne beslutning annulleret, grldende, at de af Kommissionen i henhold til artikel 30 i forordning nr. 404193 trufneovergangsforanstaltninger var utilstrekkelige til at gsre det muligt forsagsogerenat overvinde det"srrligtvanskeligetilfeelde"(dvs.sin serligtvanskelige situation).
The Court then recalled that grant of financialassistance is subject not only to compliance with the conditions laid down by the Commission in the decision granting assistance but also to compliance with theterms of the application for assistance in respect of which that decision has beengiven.