natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
I denne sag er det ubestridt, at Kommissionens ulovlige afslag på at gennemgå Marie-Claude Girardots ansøgninger har berøvet hende muligheden for dels, at en eller flere af dem blev efterkommet, dels for senere at udtrykke sin interesse for en anden stilling, hvis hun stadig havde været berettiget hertil.
In this case, it is no longer disputed that the Commission’s unlawful refusal to examine Ms Girardot’s applications deprived her of the opportunity, first, of having one or more of the applications accepted and, second, of usefully expressing an interest in any other post subsequently, if she had been entitled to do so.
følger af den af Retten anvendte metode, understreget, at Kommissionen med denne kritik overhovedet ikke tager hensyn til den anden del af Rettens begrundelse, hvorved denne netop fastsætter den faktor, der skal anvendes på fastslået indkomsttab i det tilfælde, hvor muligheden realiseres, og som svarer til sandsynligheden for, at muligheden konkretiseres.
Instance’s line of reasoning, the very purpose of which, she submits, is to determine the factor which must be applied to the loss of earnings that would have resulted if the opportunity had been realised and which represents the probability of the opportunity materialising.
Marie-Claude Girardot har endvidere anført, at det forekommer rimeligt, i det tilfælde hvor en fastansættelse forekommer sandsynlig, at den ansøger, som har lidt et betydeligt indkomsttab, opnår en højere godtgørelse end den ansøger, som har lidt et mindre betydeligt løntab.
Furthermore, it would seem fair that, where there is an equal probability of being recruited, a candidate who has suffered a greater loss of income should be awarded higher compensation than a candidate who has suffered a smaller loss of earnings.
Disse ansøgere befinder sig ikke i en sammenlignelig situation, hvorfor der ikke kan foreligge nogen tilsidesættelse af princippet om ligebehandling.
Since such candidates are not in a comparable situation, there can be no infringement of the principle of equal treatment.
Hvad for det andet angår den såkaldte fordrejning af begrebet »fortabt mulighed« til et begreb om »fortabt sikkerhed« har Marie-Claude Girardot anført, at den metode, der er anvendt i den appellerede dom, nemlig en fastsættelse af de fordele, hun havde kunnet opnå, hvis hun var blevet ansat, og dernæst fastsættelse af en procentsats for sandsynligheden, hun havde for at blive ansat, er en klassisk metode, som Retten allerede har anvendt i dom af 5. oktober 2004, Eagle m.fl. mod Kommissionen 23, og som også anvendes af den belgiske doktrin.
With regard, secondly, to the alleged misinterpretation of the notion of loss of an opportunity as loss of a guarantee, Ms Girardot notes that the approach used in the judgment under appeal, consisting in listing the advantages which she would have enjoyed if she had been recruited and of subsequently determining the percentage chance which she had of being recruited, is a traditional approach which has already been used by the Court of First Instance in its judgment of 5 October 2004 in Eagle and Others v Commission 23 and which is referred to in Belgian legal literature.
Denne metode fordrejer ikke begrebet »fortabt mulighed«, men er tilpasset godtgørelse for skade som følge af fortabt mulighed, der pr. definition ikke med sikkerhed vil blive opfyldt.
That method does not misinterpret the notion of loss of chance, but is suited to the reparation of damage resulting from the loss of an opportunity which is not, by definition, certain to materialise.
Ifølge Domstolens praksis er en tvist mellem en tjenestemand eller en midlertidigt ansat og hans nuværende eller tidligere institution, der drejer sig om skadeserstatning og hidrører fra det ansættelsesforhold, som knytter den pågældende til institutionen, omfattet af artikel 236 EF og vedtægten,
According to the case-law, a dispute between an official or a temporary servant and the institution to which he is or was answerable concerning compensation for damage is pursued, where it originates in the relationship of employment between the person concerned and the institution, under Article 236 EC and the Staff Regulations and
FORSLAG TIL AFGØRELSE FRA GENERALADVOKAT MENGOZZI — SAG C-348/06 P hvorfor den ikke falder ind under artikel 235 EF og 288 EF 24.
OPINION OF MR MENGOZZI — CASE C-348/06 P lies outside the sphere of application of Articles 235 EC and 288 EC.
appellerede dom, og som delvis er blevet bestridt af Kommissionen i nærværende sag, er for hovedpartens vedkommende identiske med dem, der regulerer Fællesskabets ansvar uden for kontraktforhold i henhold til artikel 288 EF.
24 ment and in the judgment under appeal, although this is challenged in part by the Commission in this case — are therefore, in essence, analogous to those which govern the Community’s noncontractual liability, pursuant to Article 288 EC.
Jeg skal hertil bemærke, at hverken artikel 236 EF eller vedtægten modsat artikel 288, stk. 2, EF henviser til den regel, hvorefter Fællesskabet skal erstatte skade forvoldt af deres institutioner »i overensstemmelse med de retsgrundsætninger, der er fælles for medlemsstaternes retssystemer«.
In that regard, it is to be noted that neither Article 236 EC nor the Staff Regulations, unlike the second paragraph of Article 288 EC, make reference to the rule that the Community must make good any damage caused by its institutions, ‘in accordance with the general principles common to the laws of the Member States’.
Det fremgår også af retspraksis vedrørende erstatningssøgsmål på området for Fællesskabets offentlige tjeneste, at Fællesskabets ifaldelse af ansvar uden for kontrakt forudsætter tre kumulative betingelser, nemlig at handlinger, institutionen kritiseres for at have begået, skal være ulovlige, at der er lidt et tab, og at der er årsagsforbindelse mellem handlingen og tabet 25.
It also follows from the caselaw concerning proceedings for compensation in the context of the Community public service that for the Community to incur noncontractual liability three cumulative conditions must be satisfied, namely the illegality of the allegedly wrongful act committed by the institutions, the existence of damage and the existence of a causal link between the act and the damage alleged to have been suffered.
Domstolen har i denne sammenhæng fastslået, at Retten ikke har fraveget denne retspraksis ved at fastslå, at tjenestemænd for at kunne gøre krav på erstatning skulle godtgøre, at institutionen har begået en tjenstlig fejl, og at der faktisk er opstået en bestemt og mulig skade, samt at der foreligger årsagssammenhæng mellem den tjenstlige fejl og den påberåbte skade 26.
25In that context, the Court ruled that the Court of First Instance did not depart from that case-law, pointing out that in order to claim compensatory interest, officials had to demonstrate fault on the part of the institution, the existence of certain and quantifiable damage and a causal link between the fault and the alleged damage. 26
Disse betingelser, hvis opfyldelse er blevet fastslået i mellemdommen og i den
Those conditions — which were found to have been satisfied in the interim judg-
24 — Jf. dom af 22.10.1975, sag 9/75, Meyer-Burckhardt mod Kommissionen, Sml. s. 1171, præmis 7, af 17.2.1977, sag 48/76, Reinarz mod Rådet og Kommissionen, Sml. s. 291, præmis 10, af 4.7.1985, sag 176/83, Allo m.fl. mod Kommissionen, Sml. s. 2155, præmis 18, og af 7.10.1987, sag 401/85, Schina mod Kommissionen, Sml. s. 3911, præmis 9.
24 — See Case 9/75 Meyer-Burckhardt [1975] ECR 1171, paragraph 7; Case 48/76 Reinarz v Council and Commission [1977] ECR 291, paragraph 10; Case 176/83 Allo v Commission [1985] ECR 2155, paragraph 18; and Case 401/85 Schina v Commission [1987] ECR 3911, paragraph 9.
Jf. også Rettens dom af 12.12.1996, sag T-99/95, Stott mod Kommissionen, Sml. II, s. 2227, præmis 72.
See, also, Case T-99/95 Stott v Commission [1996] ECR II-2227, paragraph 72.
Da Fællesskabets ansvar uden for kontraktforhold er reguleret såvel i artikel 288 EF som i artikel 236 EF og i vedtægten af de samme uskrevne principper, er der efter min mening intet til hinder for, at der kan foretages en gennemgang af medlemsstaternes retsordener, således at det kan afgøres, om der består fælles generelle principper i medlemsstaternes ret, eller om visse af disse retsordener indeholder retlige midler, som Fællesskabets retsinstanser kan inspireres af.
However, since the noncontractual liability of the Community is governed both in the case of Article 288 EC and in that of Article 236 EC and the Staff Regulations by similar unwritten principles, I take the view that there is nothing to preclude the carrying out of an examination of the legal systems of the Member States in order to ascertain, if not whether there exist any general principles common to the laws of the Member States, at least whether some of them recognise any legal constructions from which the Community judicature may draw inspiration.
I øvrigt mener jeg, at en kort gennemgang af de nationale retsordener kan være interessant i sagen for så vidt angår, hvorledes en fortabt mulighed deri defineres, og hvilken erstatning der ydes i et sådant tilfælde, samt med hensyn til den metode, som anvendes af visse af disse retsordener for at vurdere omfanget af tabet som følge af en sådan fortabt mulighed.
Moreover, a brief survey of national laws may be of interest in the present case from the point of view of how they define the loss of an opportunity, whether or not they classify such a loss as capable of compensation and the method which some of those laws use to evaluate the extent of the damage resulting from that type of loss.
En sådan undersøgelse gør det også lettere at forstå den holdning,
This survey also allows
Derimod er begrebet »fortabt mulighed«, som kan indebære erstatning som sådan, navnlig i arbejdsretlige eller funktionærretlige tvister anerkendt i belgisk, græsk, spansk, fransk, irsk, italiensk, luxembourgsk, nederlandsk ret og i Det Forenede Kongerige.
By contrast, the notion of loss of opportunity and the possibility of compensating for it as such, in particular in disputes in the field of employment law and/or the national public service, are recognised in Belgian, Spanish, French, Greek, Irish, Italian, Luxembourg, Netherlands and United Kingdom laws.
En gennemgang af medlemsstaternes retsordener på det tidspunkt, hvor sagen blev anlagt ved Retten, altså i 2003, gør det ikke muligt at udlede en almindelig retsgrundsætning i disse retsordener, hvorefter fortabt mulighed for ansættelse udgør et tab, som kan erstattes, og heller ikke nogen fælles eller tilsvarende regler om, hvorledes tabet skal godtgøres.
It is not possible from an examination of the laws of the Members States at the time of the application initiating proceedings before the Court of First Instance, that is to say in 2003, to identify a common general principle underlying such rights under which the loss of an opportunity to be recruited constitutes damage capable of compensation, which, moreover is made good in accordance with common or comparable rules.
I disse retsordener defineres begrebet fortabt mulighed hovedsageligt som en bristet forhåbning om at opnå en fordel og/eller undgå, at der opstår en risiko.
Essentially, according to those laws, the notion of loss of opportunity is defined as the unrealised expectation of obtaining an advantage and/or of avoiding the occurrence of a risk.
For så vidt i hvert fald angår fortabt mulighed for at opnå en forventet fordel, som udgør genstanden i nærværende sag (fortabelse af mulighed for ansættelse), gælder i alle de nationale retter, som anerkender et sådant tab, at dette sker under omstændigheder, hvor der indtræffer en hændelse, som gør, at det forventede resultat aldrig kan kendes.
With regard at least to the loss of an opportunity to obtain an anticipated advantage — which is the situation in this case (the loss of an opportunity to be recruited) — a feature common to the national laws which recognise it is that it applies where an uncertain event occurs and thereby renders the expected result forever unknown.
Endvidere kræves i henhold til disse retsordener normalt, at den fortabte mulighed skal være betydelig i den forstand, at der skal foreligge en overvejende sandsynlighed for, at den konkretiseres.
Moreover, in general, those laws require that the lost opportunity should be genuine inasmuch as the probability that it will materialise must be high.
Den betydelige karakter af den fortabte mulighed udgør altså et middel til at vurdere, hvor sikkert det lidte tab er.
The genuine nature of a lost opportunity therefore constitutes an instrument for measuring the certainty of the damage suffered.
Flere nationale retsordener (nemlig den danske, tyske, østrigske, portugisiske, finske og svenske) indeholder principielt ingen bestemmelser om, hvorvidt en fortabt mulighed for ansættelse kan erstattes, mens visse af dem (bl.a. den danske, portugisiske og finske retsorden) fastsætter forskellige former for godtgørelse, som eventuelt kan være gunstigere for en ansøger, som ulovligt er blevet udelukket 27.
Indeed, several national laws (the German, Austrian, Finnish, Danish, Portuguese and Swedish laws) do not, in principle, allow compensation to be awarded for the loss of an opportunity to be recruited, even though some of them (in particular, the Finnish, Danish and Portuguese laws) provide for different forms of compensation which may, where appropriate, be more favourable to an unlawfully rejected candidate. 27
For så vidt angår vurderingen af tabet på grund af fortabt mulighed, uanset om der er tale om økonomisk eller ikkeøkonomisk tab 28, foretager de nationale retsinstanser en vurdering ud fra billighedshensyn. I Belgien vurderes den økonomiske
As regards evaluating the damage caused by the loss of an opportunity, regardless of whether the damage is regarded as nonmaterial or material, 28the national courts carry out an assessment on equitable principles.
27 — I portugisisk ret sker i henhold til administrativ retspraksis og den nye retsplejelov for forvaltningsretterne godtgørelsen af en tjenestemands tab af karriere ved en genoprettelse med tilbagevirkende kraft af nævnte karriere, således som den ville have forløbet uden den annullerede retsakt.
27 — Thus, under Portuguese law, according to the administrative caselaw and the new Code of Administrative Court Procedure, reparation of damage to the career of an official takes the form of a retroactive reconstruction of that career as it ought to have progressed in the absence of the act which has been declared void.
I dansk ret, som intet angiver om begrebet »fortabt mulighed«, kan offentlige myndigheders afgørelse, som er behæftet med en formmangel eller indholdsmangel, begrunde en erstatningspåstand, når der foreligger en vis sandsynlighed for, at den pågældende person ville være blevet ansat, hvis afgørelsen ikke havde været behæftet med nævnte mangel.
Under Danish law, which does not contain the notion of loss of opportunity, the decisions of public authorities which are unlawful on account of procedural or substantive errors may form the basis of an application for damages, in the context of which demonstration of a causal link between the unlawful act and the damage is established where there exists a certain probability that the person in question would have been employed if the decision had not been unlawful on account of that error.
FORSLAG TIL AFGØRELSE FRA GENERALADVOKAT MENGOZZI — SAG C-348/06 P ofret erkender sig sin rettighed (f.eks. reintegration eller omplacering), en vurdering af tab på grundlag af forskellen mellem den løn, som tjenestemanden ville have opnået, hvis han var forblevet i tjenesten, og den løn, som han reelt opnåede 33.
OPINION OF MR MENGOZZI — CASE C-348/06 P sation for the damage 32or, in the specific case in which the victim’s right is restored (for example, reinstatement or reclassification), an assessment of the damage on the basis of the difference between the salary that the official would have received if he had remained in active employment and his actual earnings.
I Italien har Corte supreme di cassazione (højeste kassationsret) godkendt en metode, hvorefter der tages hensyn til forskellen i den løn, som arbejdstageren ville have oppebåret ved konkretiseringen af muligheden for at blive forfremmet, og den, han reelt oppebærer, og har fastslået, at det var muligt at tildele en arbejdstager en procentdel af det tilsvarende beløb, som svarede til mulighederne for at opnå en forfremmelse 34.
33 In Italy, the Corte suprema di cassazione (Supreme Court of Cassation) approved a method which took into account the difference between the salary which a worker would have received if the opportunity to be promoted had materialised and that which he actually received and ruled that it was permissible to award a worker a percentage of that amount equal to the possibility of obtaining the promotion.
I Det Forenede Kongerige er fastsættelsen inden for arbejdsretten af fortabt mulighed for at opnå en stilling foretaget således, at der foretages en vurdering af procentsatsen for at opnå denne stilling, hvilken procentsats anvendes på et teoretisk tabt lønbeløb 35.
34In the United Kingdom, in the context of employment law, quantification of the loss of an opportunity to fill a post was carried out by evaluating the percentage chance of filling the post and multiplying that percentage by the amount of wages hypothetically lost. 35
værdi af den tabte mulighed ud fra ret og billighed i den forstand, at dommeren efter at have fastslået, at der ikke foreligger nogen præcise elementer til vurdering af tabet, reelt tager hensyn til alle elementer, der kan påvirke hans beregning 29.
The the lost opportunity is the subjectmatter of an assessment ex aequo et bono, in that a court, having found that there is no specific evidence for the purposes of evaluating the damage, takes into account, according to conscience, all the evidence capable of having an influence on its calculation.
I visse afgørelser vurderes tabet ved anvendelse af en procentsats svarende til den fortabte mulighed på værdien af den tabte fordel.
29 Some decisions evaluate the damage by multiplying the value of the lost benefit by a percentage corresponding to the lost opportunity.
Inden for den offentlige tjeneste er et tab, som er lidt af en person, der har fortabt en betydelig mulighed for forfremmelse, blevet vurderet til 50% af forskellen mellem den løn, som tjenestemanden ville have opnået efter forfremmelsen, og den, som tilkommer ham uden forfremmelse 30.
For example, in matters relating to the public service, the damage suffered by a person who has lost a genuine chance of promotion has been evaluated at 50% of the difference between the salary that the official would have obtained following that promotion and that which he received in the absence of that promotion.
Når betingelserne for godtgørelse foreligger, navnlig betingelsen om tab af en betydelig mulighed, som alene udgør et sikkert tab, foretager den administrative domstol i Frankrig fastsættelse af erstatningen i forhold til det kriterium, hvorefter erstatning for tabet skal vurderes i forhold til en del af den fortabte mulighed, hvilket tab ikke kan svare til den fordel, som ville være skabt, såfremt muligheden var blevet konkretiseret 31.
30In France, where the conditions for compensation have been satisfied, in particular the condition as to the loss of a genuine opportunity, which is the only type of loss which constitutes certain damage, the administrative court determines the amount of compensation having regard to the criterion that compensation for the damage must be measured at the value of the lost opportunity and cannot be equal to the advantage that that opportunity would have provided if it had materialised.
For så vidt angår fastsættelsen af tabet til ofret kan den administrative domstol ved erstatningsudmålingen foretage en samlet vurdering af tabet under overholdelse af princippet om fuldstændig godtgørelse heraf 32eller i særlige tilfælde, hvor
31 With regard to setting the amount of compensation awarded to the victim, the administrative court may make, in the context of an action for damages, an overall assessment of the amount of damage, whilst observing the principle of full compen-
32 — Jf. i denne retning Conseil d’État, 8.2.1984, Gueninchault, nr. 44690/044777, og 8.11.2002, Guisset, nr. 227147 (offentliggjort på hjemmesiden www.legifrance.gouv.fr).
35 — Court of Appeal, 22 July 1998, Doyle v Wallace [1998] PIQR Q 146.
KOMMISSIONEN MOD GIRARDOT har i sin appel anført, at Rettens praksis frembyder en vis inkonsekvens dels for så vidt angår anerkendelsen af fortabt mulighed som et tab, der kan erstattes i sin helhed, dels med hensyn til beregningsgrundlaget for den erstatning, som følger af en fortabt mulighed i forskellige sager.
Commission suggests in the main appeal that the caselaw of the Court of First Instance shows some inconsistency, first, as regards recognition of the loss of an opportunity as damage capable of compensation in its own right and, second, as regards the method of calculating the damage resulting from the loss of an opportunity in different cases.
tildelt vedkommende 37. En tilsvarende opfattelse, men mindre kategorisk, blev indtaget i dommen i sagen Farrugia mod Kommissionen 38, hvor Retten af tilsvarende grunde forkastede sagsøgerens påstand, hvorefter denne havde lidt et betydeligt tab, fordi han havde fortabt muligheden for at studere og forske på grund af et retsstridigt afslag på en ansøgning om et forskningsstipendium, der ifølge gældende fællesskabslovgivning burde være tildelt ham af Kommissionen.
on similar grounds, the applicant’s claim that he suffered substantial damage as a result of having lost a unique opportunity to pursue his studies and research on account of the unlawful rejection of his application for a research training fellowship which, under the applicable Community legislation, was to be awarded by the Commission.
Retten har imidlertid i personalesager ikke udvist så megen strenghed, idet den i hovedparten af sin praksis har anerkendt, at fortabt mulighed for ansættelse eller forfrem-
However, in disputes concerning the Staff Regulations, it seems that the Court of First Instance has not demonstrated the same rigour in finding, on an issue characterised to say the least by predominant judicial opinion, that the loss of an opportunity of being recruited or promoted is capable of
Retten har i andre tvister end personalesager fastslået, at erstatning som følge af en fortabt mulighed, som hverken var reel eller sikker, ikke kunne erstattes.
It is certainly true that in disputes other than those concerning the Community public service, the Court of First Instance has taken the view that it is not possible to compensate for damage resulting from the loss of an opportunity, since it is neither actual nor certain.
Retten har således i sager vedrørende offentlige kontrakter fastslået, at det tab, som følger af en manglende profit på grund af Kommissionens tilsidesættelse af fællesskabsretten under en udbudsprocedure, forudsætter, at sagsøgeren havde ret til tildeling af kontrakten 36.
Thus, in disputes concerning public contracts, the Court of First Instance tends to take the view that the damage which results from a loss of profit due to an infringement of Community law by the Commission in the conduct of a tendering procedure, presupposes that the applicant is entitled to be awarded the contract.
Retten har i en sådan situation fastslået, at tabet som følge af den manglende profit, som var påberåbt af den udelukkede tilbudsgiver hverken var reelt eller sikkert for så vidt som det ikke kan fastslås, at kontrakten sikkert ville være blevet
36 In such a situation, the Court of First Instance has ruled that the damage resulting from the loss of profit alleged by the rejected tenderer was neither actual nor certain insofar as it is not possible to infer that the contract would have