natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Den 30. januar 1975 indgik sagsøgeren en kontrakt med Republikken Iraks Ministry of Works and Housing (herefter 'det irakiske ministerium'), i henhold til hvilken selskabet forpligtede sig til at levere ydelser i forbindelse med planlægningen af og tilsynet med anlægget af Iraq Express Way No 1.
On 30 January 1975 the applicant concluded with the Ministry of Works and Housing of the Republic of Iraq (hereinafter 'the Iraqi Ministry') a contract for services relating to the organisation and supervision of works on the construction of Iraqi Expressway No 1.
Denne kontrakt, som blev indgået for et minimum af seks år, blev siden forlænget flere gange med henblik på gennemførelsen og tilsynet med de nævnte arbejder.
The contract, which was for a minimum period of six years, was subsequently renewed several times for the purposes of execution and supervision of the abovementioned works.
Den 8. august 1990 udstedte Rådet under henvisning til 'den alvorlige situation, der [var opstået] som følge af Iraks invasion af Kuwait', og til Sikkerhedsrådets resolution nr. 661 (1990), efter forslag fra Kommissionen, forordning ... nr. 2340/90.
Article 1 of Regulation No 2340/90 prohibits as from 7 August 1990 the introduction into the territory of the Community of all commodities or products originating in, or coming from, Iraq or Kuwait and the export to those countries of all commodities or products originating in, or coming from, the Community.
Artikel 1 i forordning nr. 2340/90 forbyder fra den 7. august 1990 indførsel til Fællesskabets område af enhver vare, der har oprindelse i eller hidrører fra Irak eller Kuwait, samt udførsel til nævnte lande af enhver vare, der har oprindelse i eller hidrører fra Fællesskabet.
Outstanding debts owed to the applicant by the Iraqi authorities at the beginning of 1990 for services rendered under the abovementioned contract were acknowledged in two letters, dated 5 and 6 February 1990, from the Iraqi Ministry to an Iraqi bank, Rafidian Bank, directing it to transfer the sums due to the applicant to the latter's bank account.
'Republikken Iraks øverste revolutionsråd' vedtog den 16. september 1990 under henvisning til Visse regeringers vilkårlige beslutninger' med
That Law froze all property and assets and income from them held at the material time by the governments, undertakings, companies and banks of those States which had adopted 'arbitrary decisions* against Iraq.
Udestående fordringer, som sagsøgeren fortsat havde på de irakiske myndigheder i starten af 1990 som følge af ydelser udført i henhold til kontrakten, blev anerkendt i to skrivelser af henholdsvis 5. og 6. februar 1990 fra den irakiske minister til den irakiske bank Rafidian Bank.
On 2 August 1990 the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution No 660 (1990) to the effect that there had been a breach of international peace and security resulting from Iraq's invasion of Kuwait and that Iraqi forces
Appellen tilbagevirkende gyldighed fra den 6. august 1990 lov nr. 57 om beskyttelse af irakisk ejendom, interesser og rettigheder inden for såvel som uden for Irak (herefter 'lov nr. 57').
The applicant, by letters of 4 August 1995, asked the Council and the Commission to compensate it for the damage suffered as a result of those debts having become irrecoverable through application of Law No 57, since that Law had been adopted in response to the adoption by the Community of Regulation No 2340/90.
Ved loven blev al ejendom og alle fordringer samt indtægter heraf, som på det pågældende tidspunkt tilkom regeringer, virksomheder, selskaber og banker i stater, som havde truffet disse Vilkårlige beslutninger', indefrosset.
The applicant claimed that the Community legislature was under an obligation to compensate operators affected by the embargo imposed on trade with Iraq and that the failure to do so rendered the Community liable under the second paragraph of Article 215 of the EC Treaty.
Spørgsmålet om der foreligger et faktisk og reelt tab (første, andet og tredje anbringende)
It added that, as a precaution, it had registered its claims against Iraq with the United Nations Iraq Claims Compensation Commission.
Spørgsmålet om der foreligger en direkte og forudsigelig årsagssammenhæng (fjerde, femte og sjette anbringende)
right to compensation for damage suffered as a result of a lawful act (17th plea);
Spørgsmålet om der foreligger et usædvanligt og særligt tab (syvende til sekstende anbringende)
By letter dated 20 September 1995 the Council refused to grant the applicant's request for compensation.
Retten til erstatning af tab, der er lidt som følge af en lovlig handling (syttende anbringende)
In those circumstances the applicant brought the present action.
Sagsøgeren gjorde gældende, at fællesskabslovgiver var forpligtet til at erstatte de tab, som erhvervsdrivende, der var berørt af indførelsen af embargoen mod Irak, havde lidt, og at den omstændighed, at man havde undladt at erstatte tabene, betød, at Fællesskabet ifaldt erstatningsansvar i medfør af EF-traktatens artikel 215, stk. 2.
right to compensation for damage suffered as a result of the failure of the Community legislature to exercise its discretion in regard to fixing the amount of the compensation, that plea being submitted in the alternative (18th plea).
Subsidiært: retten til erstatning af tab, der er lidt som følge af, at fællesskabslovgiver har undladt at udøve sit skøn med hensyn til at fastsætte erstatningens størrelse (attende anbringende).
In the contested judgment the Court of First Instance dismissed the application in its entirety.
Generaladvokat A La Pergola fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet ("Femte Afdeling) den 14. december 1999.
Advocate General A La Pergola delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Fifth Chamber on 14 December 1999.
»Appel — PHARE-program — beslutning om at annullere et udbud og offentliggøre et nyt udbud — erstatningssøgsmål — spørgsmålet om et tab er opretteligt — årsagsforbindelse — foranstaltninger med henblik på sagens tilrettelæggelse — bevisoptagelse« (Femte Afdeling) offentligt selskab, der driver rådgivende ingeniørvirksomhed i jernbanesektoren. Disse to virksomheder dannede et konsortium og afgav et bud.
(Appeal - PHARE programme - Decision to annul an invitation to tender and to issue a new invitation to tender—Action for damages — Categorisation of reparable damage — Causal link — Measures of organisation of procedure — Measures of inquiry) (Fifth Chamber)
Kommissionen underrettede de bydende om, at udbuddet var blevet annulleret, fordi der var blevet indført nye mål, og fordi udbudsbetingelserne var blevet ændret.
On 4 December 1995, the Commission issued, 'on behalf of the Government of Poland', a new restricted invitation to tender.
Den 4. december 1995 offentliggjorde Kommissionen »på vegne af den polske regering« et nyt udbud.
It stated that the submission of bids was, in the meantime, deferred.
Ved appelskrift indleveret til Domstolens Justitskontor den 18. januar 1999 har TEAM Sri iværksat appel til prøvelse af dom afsagt den 29. oktober 1998 af Retten i Første Instans i sag T­13/96 (TEAM mod Kommissionen), hvorved Retten frifandt Kommissionen i den erstatningssag, som selskabet havde anlagt efter dels Kommissionens afgørelse i en skrivelse af 16. november 1995 om annullation af udbuddet vedrørende en undersøgelse af gennemførligheden af en modernisering af et jernbaneknudepunkt i Warszawa, dels det begrænsede udbud af 4. december 1995 om en undersøgelse af gennemførligheden af moderniseringen af et jernbaneknudepunkt i Warszawa.
By application lodged at the Court Registry on 18 January 1999, TEAM Sri ('the appellant') brought an appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 29 October 1998 in Case T-13/96 TEAM ν Commission [1998], by which that Court dismissed the action for damages brought by the appellant following, first, the Commission's decision, contained in a letter of 16 November 1995, annulling the tendering procedure for a feasibility study for the modernisation of a railway junction in Warsaw, and, second, the restricted invitation to tender of 4 December 1995 for a feasibility study for the modernisation of a railway node in Warsaw.
Kommissionen meddelte, at den havde til hensigt at fastsætte mere præcise udbudsbetingelser samt en ny frist for afgivelse af bud.
The appellant and Kolprojekt brought an action before the Court of First Instance, in which they sought, first, annulment of the contested decision and of the contested invitation to tender and, second, compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by them as a result.
Den præciserede, at afgivelsen af bud i mellemtiden var sat i bero.
The Community's PHARE programme is based on Council Regulation (EEC) No 3906/89 of 18 December 1989.
Fællesskabsprogrammet PHARE blev indført på grundlag af Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 3906/89 af 18. december 1989.
It pointed out that the tendering procedure had been suspended for several months, that there were plans to modernise the junction, and that priority must be given to new activities on another line.
Appellanten og Kolprojekt anlagde sag ved Retten med påstand om dels annullation af den anfægtede afgørelse og det anfægtede udbud, dels om erstatning for det tab, som disse havde påført dem.
The appellant is an engineering consultancy company incorporated under Italian law specialising in the construction, management and maintenance of civil engineering, industrial and infrastructure projects.
Appellanten er et italiensk selskab, som driver rådgivende ingeniørvirksomhed i forbindelse med opførelse, administration og vedligeholdelse af bygge­ og anlægsarbejder.
On 13 June 1995, the Commission issued a restricted invitation to tender for a feasibility study for the modernisation of a railway junction in Warsaw.
Den 13. juni 1995 offentliggjorde Kommissionen et begrænset udbud vedrørende gennemførelse af en undersøgelse af gennemførligheden af moderniseringen af et jernbaneknudepunkt i Warszawa.
That invitation to tender was sent to, amongst others, the appellant and Centralne Biuro Projektowo-Badawcze Budownictwa Kolejowego (Kolprojekt), a Polish public-owned company providing railway engineering consultancy services.
Den polske regering anmodede Kommissionen om at tage undersøgelsen vedrørende jernbaneknudepunktet i Warszawa ud af PHARE­programmet og at erstatte den med andre presserende jernbaneprojekter.
The Commission raised a procedural issue and asked the Court of First Instance to rule that the application for annulment should not proceed to judgment, to declare the claim for damages inadmissible or, in the alternative, dismiss it as unfounded, and to order the appellant and Kolprojekt to pay the costs of the claim for damages.
Den polske regering gjorde gældende, at afgivelsen af bud havde været sat i bero i flere måneder, at man havde til hensigt at modernisere det pågældende knudepunkt, og at nye aktiviteter på en anden linje havde forrang.
The Court of First Instance ruled that there was no longer any need to give a decision on the application for annulment and reserved for the final judgment its decision on the application for
Kommissionen underrettede den polske regering om, at den havde besluttet at annullere hele proceduren.
The Commission, which received copies of those documents, argued pursuant to Article 48(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance that their production was inadmissible.
Den mundtlige forhandling for Retten fandt sted den 25. juni 1998.
By order of 8 May 1998, the President of the Fourth Chamber of the Court of First Instance ordered that Kolprojekt's name be removed from the register of the Court of First Instance, on the ground that it wished to withdraw its application.
Kommissionen fremsatte en formalitetsindsigelse og nedlagde påstand om, at Retten fastslog, at det var ufornødent at træffe afgørelse om annullationspåstanden, at påstanden om erstatning blev afvist, subsidiært, at Kommissionen blev frifundet, og at appellanten samt Kolprojekt blev dømt til at betale omkostningerne i forbindelse med påstanden om erstatning.
The Court of First Instance dismissed the action and ordered the appellant to pay all the costs relating to the application for damages.
Retten fastslog, at det var ufornødent at træffe afgørelse vedrørende annullationspåstanden, og henskød påstanden om afvisning af erstatningspåstanden til afgørelse i forbindelse med sagens realitet.
The Court of First Instance requested the Commission, pursuant to Article 64 of its Rules of Procedure, to produce the minutes, notes and memoranda relating to the contested decision and the contested invitation to tender, together with the correspondence exchanged between the Commission and the Polish authorities concerning the conduct of the two successive invitations to tender.
Ved skrivelse af 11. maj 1998 har Retten anmodet Kommissionen om at fremlægge de referater, notater og memoranda, der vedrører den anfægtede beslutning og det anfægtede udbud samt den skriftlige korrespondance, som den havde ført med de polske myndigheder om forløbet af de to successive udbud.
By letter of 4 June 1998, the Court of First Instance returned to the Commission the documents annexed to the letter of 20 May, requesting it to produce a non-confidential version of those documents and to send a copy of that version to the appellant. By letter of the same date, it informed the appellant of the Commission's letter and of its response to it.
Kommissionen oversendte dokumenterne, men anmodede dog om, at disse først blev vedlagt sagens akter og meddelt appellanten, efter at Retten havde truffet afgørelse om deres fortrolige karakter.
By its first plea, the appellant asserts that the Court of First Instance infringed, first, the rights of the defence and, second, the principle of equality of arms.
Appellanten har fremført tre anbringender til støtte for appellen.
The Court of Justice finds that the appellant clearly has no grounds for maintaining that the contested judgment disregarded the principle of equality of arms.
Ved skrivelse af 4. juni 1998 tilbagesendte Retten de dokumenter, der var vedlagt skrivelsen af 20. maj, til Kommissionen og anmodede den om at fremlægge en ikke-fortrolig version deraf og at tilsende appellanten en kopi.
By letter of 5 June 1998, the Commission sent the Court of First Instance a non-confidential version of the documents in question, stating that it was not free to dispose of the documents emanating from the Polish Government or its administrative bodies.
Ved skrivelse af samme dag meddelte den appellanten Kommissionens skrivelse og sin reaktion herpå.
The Court of First Instance sent a copy of that letter, together with the documents in question, to the appellant, which received them on 12 June 1998.
Det må nødvendigvis fastslås, at appellanten ikke med føje kan hævde, at den appellerede dom er afsagt under tilsidesættelse af princippet om parternes ligestilling.
The oral procedure before the Court of First Instance took place on 25 June 1998.
Det følger heraf, at det første anbringende må forkastes.
By its second plea, the appellant maintains that the Court of First Instance was wrong, and had no reason, to find in paragraph 79 of the contested judgment that the documents produced by the appellant at the hearing were irrelevant and to refuse to include them in the case-file.
Det fremgår klart af den appellerede dom, at Retten faktisk har undersøgt appellantens krav, i det omfang det var baseret på tab af chancer for at opnå kontrakten under udbuddet af 13. juni 1995.
which resulted from an autonomous decision by the Polish authorities.
Med sit andet anbringende har appellanten anført, at det er med urette og uden nogen begrundelse, at Retten i den appellerede doms præmis 79 har frakendt de dokumenter betydning, som appellanten fremlagde under retsmødet, og afslået at lade dem indgå i sagens akter.
general principles of law and the rules of procedure in relation to the burden of proof and the taking of evidence have been observed, it is for the Court of First Instance alone to assess the value to be attached to the evidence produced before it. That appraisal does not therefore constitute, save where the clear sense of that evidence has been distorted, a point of law which is subject, as such, to review by the Court of Justice.
Med det tredje anbringendes andet led har appellanten gjort gældende, at Retten har foretaget en fejlagtig analyse af årsagsforbindelsen ved at antage, at tabet ikke kunne tilskrives Kommissionens ulovlige handlinger og adfærd, men derimod de polske myndigheders selvstændige beslutning om at trække projektet om undersøgelsen af gennemførligheden tilbage.
However, the question whether the grounds of a judgment of the Court of First Instance are contradictory or inadequate is a question of law which is amenable, as such, to judicial review on appeal.
Det bemærkes, at Domstolen ikke har kompetence til at fastslå de faktiske omstændigheder og i princippet heller ikke til at bedømme de beviser, som Retten har lagt til grund ved fastlæggelsen af de faktiske omstændigheder.
Moreover, an appeal must indicate precisely the contested elements of the judgment which the appellant seeks to have set aside, and also the legal arguments specifically advanced in support of the appeal.
Når disse beviser er blevet forskriftsmæssigt tilvejebragt, og de almindelige retsgrundsætninger og de processuelle regler om bevisbyrde og bevisførelse er blevet overholdt, er det alene Retten, der har kompetence til at afgøre, hvilken bevisværdi der skal tillægges de oplysninger, den har fået forelagt. Denne vurdering udgør derfor ikke, medmindre disse oplysninger er gengivet forkert, et retsspørgsmål og er dermed ikke undergivet Domstolens prøvelsesret.
In the present case, it must be held, first, that, by referring to its earlier reasoning showing that the documents produced by the appellant at the hearing were irrelevant for the purposes of determining the dispute, the Court of First Instance gave sufficient reasons for its decision not to include them in the case-file.
Derimod er spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt begrundelsen for en dom afsagt af Retten er selvmodsigende eller utilstrækkelig, et retsspørgsmål, der kan rejses under en appelsag.
It must be held, first, that, inasmuch as the appellant claims that the damage suffered by it resulted from unlawful acts and conduct on the part of the Commission, it is contesting the assessment of the facts carried out by the Court of First Instance and that, seen in that light, the plea is inadmissible.
Det bemærkes, at det følger af traktatens artikel 168 A og artikel 61 i EF-statutten for Domstolen, at appel kun kan støttes på overtrædelse af visse retsregler, idet enhver bedømmelse af faktisk karakter er udelukket.
Second, there is nothing to indicate that, in so doing, the Court of First Instance clearly distorted the evidence adduced by the appellant.
I denne sag må det fastslås, dels at Retten ved at henvise til sin tidligere argumentation, hvoraf det fremgik, at de dokumenter, som appellanten havde fremlagt under retsmødet, ikke var relevante for tvistens afgørelse, retligt set har givet en tilstrækkelig begrundelse for sin afgørelse om ikke at lade dem indgå i sagens akter.
By the first part of its third plea, the appellant complains that the Court of First Instance wrongly categorised the damage for which it sought compensation. That damage resulted, it claims, not from its failure to win the contract but from its loss of opportunity.
Dels fremgår det ikke, at Retten herved har gengivet det af sagsøgeren fremlagte bevismiddel forkert.
It is clear from the contested judgment that the Court of First Instance did in fact consider the appellant's claim on the basis that it was founded on the loss of chance of award of the contract under the invitation to tender of 13 June 1995.
Det bemærkes dels, at i det omfang appellanten gør gældende, at det lidte tab er en følge af Kommissionens forskellige ulovlige handlinger og ulovlige adfærd, anfægter appellanten Rettens bedømmelse af faktiske omstændigheder, og forstået på denne måde må anbringendet afvises.
Second, in so far as the appellant's arguments are to be construed as an assertion that the Court of First Instance committed an error of law in finding that there was no sufficiently direct causal link between the damage alleged by it and the Commission's conduct of which it complains since this was merely one of the reasons which prompted the decision by the Polish Government to request withdrawal of the Warsaw rail junction study from the PHARE programme, it must be held that the appellant has not put forward any specific plea in law in support of those arguments and that it is not for the Court of Justice, in determining an appeal, to consider such a plea of its own motion.
Det følger heraf, at det andet anbringende må forkastes.
It follows that the second part of the third plea must likewise be rejected.
Med det tredje anbringendes første led gør appellanten gældende, at Retten har foretaget en fejlagtig subsumption af det tab, som appellanten har påstået erstattet.
The first part of the third plea must therefore be rejected.
Dette tab følger nemlig ikke af, at appellanten ikke fik tildelt kontrakten, men af et tab af chancer.
It results from all the foregoing that none of the pleas put forward by the appellant can be accepted and that the appeal must therefore be dismissed.
Dels bemærkes, at i det omfang appellantens argumentation skal forstås således, at den går ud på, at Retten har begået en retlig fejl ved at antage, at der ikke var en tilstrækkelig direkte årsagsforbindelse mellem det tab, som appellanten hævder at have lidt, og Kommissionens kritiserede adfærd, fordi denne kun var en af de grunde, der har fremkaldt den polske regerings beslutning om at anmode om, at undersøgelsen vedrørendejernbaneknudepunktet
By the second part of its third plea, the appellant claims that the analysis of the causal link undertaken by the Court of First Instance was incorrect, in that it took the view that the damage was attributable not to any illegal acts or conduct on the part of the Commission but to the withdrawal of the feasibility study project,
Sag C-302/98 Manfred Sehrer / Bundesknappschaft Fri bevægelighed for personer
Case C-302/98 Manfred Sehrer ν Bundesknappschaft Freedom of movement for persons
Præjudiciel »Arbejdskraftens frie bevægelighed — social sikring — sygesikringsbidrag som en medlemsstat opkræver af en supplerende alderspension, der udbetales i en anden medlemsstat på grundlag af en overenskomst — beregningsgrundlag for bidragene — hensyntagen til allerede fratrukne bidrag i den anden medlemsstat* (Sjette Afdeling)
Preliminary ruling (Freedom of movement for workers — Social security — Sickness insurance contributions levied by a Member State on supplementary retirement pensions payable under an agreement in another Member State — Basis for calculating contributions — Taking into account of contributions already deducted in that other Member State) (Sixth Chamber)
12, 39 og 40 EF), artikel 50 (nu artikel 41 EF) og artikel 51 (efter ændring nu artikel 42 EF) samt af artikel 3 i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1408/71 af 14. juni 1971.
That question has been raised in proceedings between Mr Sehrer and the Bundesknappschaft (Federal Insurance Fund for Miners).
Ved kendelse af 13. maj 1998 har Bundessozialgericht forelagt et præjudicielt spørgsmål om fortolkningen af EF-traktatens artikel 6 og 48 og 49 (efter ændring nu artikel
By order of 13 May 1998, the Bundessozialgericht (Federal Social Court) referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling a question on the interpretation of Articles 6, 48 and 49 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 12 EC, 39 EC and 40 EC), Article 50 of the EC Treaty (now Article 41 EC), Article 51 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 42 EC) and Article 3 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971.