natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
I, s. 13031), at en national lovgivning, der – under trussel om straf – indeholder et forbud mod udøvelse af virksomhed, der består i indsamling, modtagelse, registrering og videresendelse af tilbud om væddemål, navnlig vedrørende sportsbegivenheder, uden en koncession eller en polititilladelse, der er udstedt af den pågældende medlemsstat, udgør en restriktion for etableringsfriheden og for den frie udveksling af tjenesteydelser, men at denne restriktion kan begrundes, hvis den – i det omfang den begrænser antallet af erhvervsdrivende, der er aktive i væddemålssektoren – reelt varetager formålet om at forhindre, at disse aktiviteter anvendes til kriminelle eller bedrageriske formål, hvilket det
On the other hand, schools which are not essentially nanced by private funds, in particular schools forming part of a system of public education, are excluded from the denition of services, given that, by establishing and maintaining a system of public education, nanced as a general rule by the public budget and not by pupils or their parents, the
Endelig udgør en lovgivning, som fastsætter en straf for personer, som har udøvet en organiseret væddemålsvirksomhed uden at være indehaver af en koncession eller en polititilladelse som krævet i den nationale lovgivning, ifølge Domstolen også en restriktion for disse friheder, når disse personer ikke har kunnet opnå sådanne koncessioner eller polititilladelser på grund af denne medlemsstats nægtelse, i strid med fællesskabsretten, af at bevillige dem.
The Court stated, second, that where schools established outside Germany that are essentially nanced by private funds wish to oer education to the children of German residents, the exclusion of those schools’ fees from the benet of the tax relief hinders their freedom to provide services and that, even though the freedom to provide services does not apply to schools established outside Germany which are not essentially nanced from private funds, the tax relief nonetheless may not be refused in respect of those schools’ fees.
Selv om straelovgivningen principielt henhører under medlemsstaternes kompetence, opstiller fællesskabsretten dog grænser for udøvelsen af denne kompetence, idet en sådan lovgivning nemlig ikke må begrænse de grundlæggende friheder, som er sikret ved fællesskabsretten.
As has already been noted above, it is the freedom of movement of citizens of the Union which prevents such an exclusion.
Dernæst bør, hvad angår skolepenge og udgifter til hospitalsbehandling betalt til en skole eller et behandlingssted beliggende i en anden medlemsstat, nævnes sagerne Schwarz og Gootjes-Schwarz, Kommissionen mod Tyskland samt Stamatelaki (dom af 19.4.2007, sag C-444/05).
Accordingly, the Court held that Community law precludes the tax relief from being generally refused in respect of school fees paid to schools in other Member States.
I sagerne Schwarz og Gootjes-Schwarz samt Kommissionen mod Tyskland vedrørte tvisterne et skattefradrag indrømmet til tyske skattepligtige for skolepenge for deres børns skolegang ved en privat skole, som opfyldte visse betingelser, i Tyskland. Dette skattefradrag fandt imidlertid ikke anvendelse på skolepenge betalt til skoler beliggende i andre medlemsstater.
Finally, such legislation also impedes the freedom of establishment of employees and self-employed persons who have transferred their normal place of residence to, or who work in, Germany and whose children continue to attend a fee-paying school situated in another Member State.
Inden den tog stilling til denne lovgivnings forenelighed med artikel 49 EF, udvidede Domstolen i første omgang tjenesteydelsesbegrebet til at omfatte skoler, som hovedsageligt er nansieret med private midler.
In Stamatelaki, the Court held that the freedom to provide services is impeded by national legislation which excludes all reimbursement by a national social security institution of the costs occasioned by treatment of persons insured with it in private hospitals in another Member State, except those relating to treatment provided to children under 14 years of age.
Eftersom disse institutioner har til formål at udføre en ydelse mod betaling, kan de påberåbe sig den frie udveksling af tjenesteydelser.
Such a measure, whose absolute nature (except for the case of children under 14 years of age) is not appropriate to the objective pursued, cannot be justied by the risk of seriously undermining the financial balance of a social security system since measures which are less restrictive and more in keeping with the freedom to provide services could be adopted, such as a prior authorisation scheme which complies with the requirements imposed by Community law and, if appropriate, the determination of scales for reimbursement of the costs of treatment.
Det er imidlertid ikke nødvendigt, at nansieringen af institutionerne hidrører fra eleverne eller deres forældre, idet artikel 50 EF ikke kræver, at tjenesteydelsen betales af den, der modtager ydelsen.
Finally, Case C-341/05 Laval un Partneri (judgment of 18 December 2007) and Case C-438/05 The International Transport Workers’ Federation and The Finnish Seamen’s Union (judgment of 11 December 2007), relating to collective action engaged in by trade union organisations against a provider of services established or wishing to establish itself in another Member State, deserve particularly close attention.
Derimod er skoler, som ikke hovedsageligt er nansieret med private midler, herunder navnlig oentlige skoler, udelukket fra tjenesteydelsesbegrebet, eftersom staten ved at organisere og drive et oentligt undervisningssystem, der i almindelighed nansieres over det oentlige budget og ikke af eleverne eller deres forældre, alene varetager sine opgaver over for befolkningen på det sociale, kulturelle og uddannelsesmæssige område.
While in The International Transport Workers’ Federation and The Finnish Seamen’s Union a Finnish maritime transport company wished to establish itself in Estonia so as to register one of its vessels there, in order to be more competitive, in Laval un Partneri a Latvian construction company wished to exercise its freedom to provide services in Sweden, in particular by the posting of Latvian workers to one of its Swedish subsidiaries.
Dernæst fastslog Domstolen for det første, at når skoler, som hovedsageligt er nansieret med private midler, og som er etableret uden for Tyskland, har til hensigt at tilbyde undervisning til børn af tyske statsborgere, indebærer udelukkelsen af deres skolepenge fra skattefradraget, at der er tale om en hindring for den frie udveksling af tjenesteydelser, og for det andet, at selv om den frie udveksling af tjenesteydelser ikke nder anvendelse på skoler, som ikke hovedsageligt er nansieret med private midler, bør skattefradraget alligevel ikke nægtes for skolepenge betalt til disse skoler.
In both cases, the companies in question had to negotiate with trade unions in relation to the companies’ signing of, and compliance with, the collective agreements applicable to their respective sectors.
Det er som allerede anført den frie bevægelighed for Den Europæiske Unions borgere, som er til hinder for en sådan udelukkelse.
In the former case, the trade union, aliated to a federation of trade unions based in the United Kingdom, sought application of the Finnish collective agreement to the crew of the vessel which would be ying the Estonian ag.
Domstolen har siden fastslået, at fællesskabsretten er til hinder for, at skattefradraget generelt nægtes for skolepenge betalt til skoler beliggende i andre medlemsstater.
In the latter case, the trade union demanded that the Latvian company should, by way of guarantee as to the rate of pay, sign the Swedish collective agreement and apply it to its posted workers.
Endelig udgør en sådan lovgivning også en hindring for etableringsfriheden for lønmodtagere og selvstændige erhvervsdrivende, der har yttet deres bopæl, eller som arbejder i den omhandlede
Since negotiations were unsuccessful in each case, the trade unions exercised their right of collective action, in particular by use of the right to strike, to compel the companies to sign and implement the collective
Udviklingen og arbejdet medlemsstat, og hvis børn fortsat går i en betalingspligtig skole i en anden medlemsstat.
Proceedings agreements. Accordingly, the national courts essentially asked the Court whether collective action constitutes a restriction within the meaning of Articles 43 and 49 EC.
Disse arbejdstagere er således ikke omfattet af skattefradraget, mens de ville være omfattet heraf, hvis deres børn gik i en skole i Tyskland.
The Court held that, although the right to take collective action must be recognised as a fundamental right that forms an integral part of the general principles of Community law the observance of which the Court ensures, the exercise of that right may nonetheless be subject to certain restrictions.
I Stamatelaki-sagen fastslog Domstolen, at en national lovgivning, der udelukker enhver refusion fra et nationalt socialsikringsorgan af udgifter i anledning af hospitalsbehandling af forsikrede personer på et privat behandlingssted i en anden medlemsstat, bortset fra udgifter til behandling af børn under 14 år, udgør en hindring for den frie udveksling af tjenesteydelser.
Accordingly, such collective action initiated by a trade union or a group of trade unions against an undertaking in order to induce that undertaking to enter into an agreement, the terms of which are liable to deter it from exercising the freedom of establishment or freedom to provide services, constitutes a restriction on those freedoms.
En sådan foranstaltning, hvis ubetingede formulering, med forbehold af undtagelsen for børn under 14 år, ikke stemmer overens med det forfulgte mål, kan ikke begrundes med, at der foreligger en risiko for et alvorligt indgreb i den sociale sikringsordnings økonomiske ligevægt, eftersom der kan træes foranstaltninger, som er mindre restriktive, og som i højere grad overholder den grundlæggende frihed til udveksling af tjenesteydelser, såsom en forudgående tilladelsesordning, der overholder de fællesskabsretlige krav, samt i givet fald fastsættelse af satser for refusion af udgifterne.
However, the Court made it clear that a restriction of that kind may, in principle, be justied by an overriding reason of public interest, such as the protection of the workers of the host State against possible social dumping, provided that it is established that the restriction is suitable for ensuring the attainment of the legitimate objective pursued and does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve that objective.
Endelig bør særligt fremhæves sagerne Laval un Partneri (dom af 18.12.2007, sag C-341/05) samt The International Transport Workers’ Federation og The Finnish Seamen’s Union (dom af 11.12.2007, sag C-438/05) vedrørende kollektive aktioner iværksat af fagforeninger over for en tjenesteyder, der har hjemsted, eller som ønsker at etablere sig i en anden medlemsstat.
On the other hand, the Court held in Laval un Partneri that national rules which fail to take into account, irrespective of their content, collective agreements to which undertakings that post workers to the host Member State are already bound in the Member State in which they are established give rise to discrimination against such undertakings, in so far as under those national rules they are treated in the same way as national undertakings which have not concluded a collective agreement.
I sagen The International Transport Workers’ Federation og The Finnish Seamen’s Union ønskede et finsk søtransportselskab at etablere sig i Estland med henblik på af konkurrencehensyn at lade et af dets skibe registrere dér, mens Laval-sagen vedrørte et lettisk byggerma, som ønskede at udøve sin ret til fri udveksling af tjenesteydelser i Sverige, navnlig ved udstationering af dets lettiske arbejdstagere i et af dets svenske datterselskaber.
Three judgments concerning the free movement of capital will be accorded particular attention, the first being the judgment of 23 October 2007 in Case C-112/05 Commission v Germany, relating to the law known as the ‘Volkswagen law’.
I begge sager måtte de omhandlede selskaber imidlertid forhandle med fagforeningerne om deres tiltræden til og overholdelse af de kollektive overenskomster, som fandt anvendelse på deres respektive overenskomstområder.
The Court held that, by maintaining in force the provisions of this law which, in derogation from the general law, cap the voting rights of any Volkswagen shareholder at 20 % of the share capital, require a majority of more than 80 % of the share capital in order for certain resolutions of the general assembly of shareholders to be passed and confer upon the State and a regional authority the right to appoint two representatives each to the company’s supervisory board, the Federal Republic of Germany had failed to full its obligations under Article 56(1) EC.
I den første sag stillede fagforeningen, som var en del af et engelsk fagforbund, krav om, at den finske kollektive overenskomst skulle nde anvendelse på besætningen på det skib, som skulle registreres i Estland.
The Court stated that the fact that the threshold for a majority was set at more than 80 % of the share capital aorded any shareholder holding 20 % of the share capital a blocking minority and enabled both public authorities to procure for themselves the ability to oppose important resolutions on the basis of a lower level of investment than would be required under the general law.
I den anden sag stillede fagforeningen krav om, at det lettiske selskab med henblik på garanti af lønsatsen tiltrådte den svenske kollektive overenskomst og anvendte denne på sine udstationerede arbejdstagere.
Furthermore, by capping voting rights at 20 %, the legislation helped to give those authorities the opportunity to exercise considerable inuence.
Da forhandlingerne strandede i begge sager, gjorde fagforeningerne brug af deres ret til kollektive aktioner, herunder navnlig deres strejkeret, for at tvinge de omhandlede selskaber til at tiltræde og anvende de kollektive overenskomster.
Those provisions therefore limited the possibility for other shareholders to participate in the company, to establish or maintain lasting and direct economic links with it and to participate eectively in its management or control.
De forelæggende retter ønskede nærmere bestemt oplyst af Domstolen, om kollektive aktioner udgør restriktioner i henhold til artikel 43 EF og 49 EF.
By diminishing the interest in acquiring a stake in the company’s capital, those measures were liable to deter direct investors from other Member States and thus constituted a restriction on the free movement of capital.
Det følger desuden af fast retspraksis, at udøvelsen af de grundlæggende rettigheder ikke falder uden for anvendelsesområdet for traktatens bestemmelser og bør forenes med krav, der knytter sig til de rettigheder, der er beskyttet i traktaten, og være i overensstemmelse med proportionalitetsprincippet.
The same was true of the right, enjoyed by the public authorities alone, to appoint two representatives to the supervisory board.
Kollektive aktioner iværksat af en fagforening eller et fagforbund over for en virksomhed med henblik på at få sidstnævnte til at indgå en overenskomst, hvis indhold er egnet til at afholde den fra at gøre brug af etableringsfriheden eller den frie udveksling af
By enabling those authorities to participate in a more signicant manner in the activity of the supervisory
Domstolen tjenesteydelser, udgør således restriktioner for disse friheder. Domstolen præciserede imidlertid, at sådanne restriktioner i princippet kan begrundes i tvingende almene hensyn, såsom beskyttelse af arbejdstagere i modtagerstaten mod social dumping, på betingelse af, at det dokumenteres, at de er egnede til at sikre virkeliggørelsen af et legitimt mål og ikke går videre end nødvendigt for at nå dette mål.
Court of Justice board, this measure in fact allowed them to exercise an inuence which exceeded their levels of investment and was greater than their status as shareholders would normally allow.
Desuden fastslog Domstolen i Laval un Partneri-sagen, at en lovgivning, som ikke tager hensyn til kollektive overenskomster, som virksomheder, der udstationerer arbejdstagere i værtsmedlemsstaten, allerede er bundet af i den medlemsstat, hvor de har hjemsted, uanset overenskomsternes indhold, forskelsbehandler disse virksomheder, for så vidt som den underkaster dem samme behandling som indenlandske virksomheder, der ikke har tiltrådt en kollektiv overenskomst.
Second, Case C-370/05 Festersen [2007] ECR I-1129 should be noted, in which the Court held that Article 56 EC precludes national legislation from laying down as a condition for acquiring an agricultural property the requirement that the acquirer take up his xed residence on that property for a period of eight years, irrespective of particular circumstances relating to individual characteristics of the agricultural land concerned.
På området for de frie kapitalbevægelser må særlig tre domme fremhæves.
Such legislation therefore does pursue a public interest objective in a Member State in which agricultural land is a limited natural resource.
For det første bør nævnes sagen Kommissionen mod Tyskland (dom af 23.10.2007, sag C-112/05) vedrørende den såkaldte »Volkswagen-lov«.
However, the Court held the residence requirement to be a measure going beyond what is necessary to attain such an objective.
Domstolen fastslog, at Tyskland har tilsidesat sine forpligtelser i henhold til artikel 56, stk. 1, EF, idet den har opretholdt bestemmelserne i denne lov, der som en fravigelse af almindelige regler begrænser stemmeretten for enhver aktionær i Volkswagen til 20% af stamkapitalen, opstiller et krav om et ertal på mere end 80% af stamkapitalen for så vidt angår visse beslutninger truet af generalforsamlingen, og som giver staten og en regional myndighed ret til hver at udpege to medlemmer af selskabets bestyrelse.
First, it is particularly restrictive in that it limits not only the free movement of capital but also the right of the acquirer to choose his place of residence freely, which is guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights and protected under Community law, thereby adversely aecting a fundamental right.
Fastsættelsen af ertalsgrænsen til mere end 80% af stamkapitalen giver således enhver aktionær, som besidder 20% af stamkapitalen, mulighed for at råde over et blokerende mindretal, og gør det muligt for oentlige aktører – via en investering, som er mindre end den, der kræves efter almindelige regler – at modsætte sig vigtige beslutninger.
Second, there is nothing to support the conclusion that measures less restrictive than that requirement could not be adopted to achieve the objective sought.
Ved at fastsætte et stemmerettighedsloft på 20% bidrager denne lovgivning til at give oentlige aktører mulighed for at udøve en væsentlig indydelse.
Such an obligation, particularly when coupled with a condition that residence be maintained for a number of years, therefore goes beyond that which could be regarded as necessary having regard to the public interest objective pursued.
Disse bestemmelser begrænser derfor andre aktionærers mulighed for at deltage i selskabet, at etablere eller opretholde varige og direkte økonomiske forbindelser med dette selskab og deres mulighed for faktisk deltagelse i driften af og kontrollen med dette selskab.
Finally, in Holböck the Court applied Article 57(1) EC which lays down, for restrictions existing on 31 December 1993 that relate to the movement of capital involving direct investment, an exception to the prohibition of restrictions on the movement of capital between Member States and non-member countries.
Disse foranstaltninger, som begrænser interessen i at erhverve aktier i dette selskab, er egnede til at afholde direkte investorer fra andre medlemsstater og udgør derfor en restriktion for de frie kapitalbevægelser. Det samme gælder retten til at udpege to medlemmer af bestyrelsen, som alene er indført til fordel for oentlige aktører.
The Court noted first of all that the concept of direct investments concerns investments of any kind undertaken by natural or legal persons which serve to establish or maintain lasting and direct links between the persons providing the capital and the undertakings to which that capital is made available in order to carry out an economic activity.
Denne foranstaltning, som giver sidstnævnte større mulighed for at deltage i bestyrelsens virksomhed, sætter dem således i stand til at udøve en indydelse, som går videre, end deres investering og deres aktionærstatus normalt berettiger.
As regards shareholdings in undertakings, the objective of establishing or maintaining lasting economic links presupposes that the shares held by the shareholder enable him to participate eectively in the management of the company or in its control.
For det andet må nævnes Festersen-sagen (dom af 25.1.2007, sag C-370/05), hvori Domstolen fastslog, at artikel 56 EF er til hinder for, at der i en national lovgivning som betingelse for erhvervelse af en landsbrugsejendom stilles krav om, at erhververen tager fast bopæl på ejendommen i otte år, uanset de konkrete omstændigheder, der måtte foreligge som følge af den pågældende landbrugsejendoms egen beskaenhed.
The Court then stated that Article 57(1) EC also applies to national measures which restrict payments of dividends deriving from investments.
Ifølge Domstolen må det ganske vist erkendes, at en national lovgivning, der indebærer en sådan bopælspligt, har til formål at undgå, at landbrugsjord erhverves i rent spekulativt øjemed, og som således skal bidrage til, at disse jorder først og fremmest erhverves af personer, der ønsker at drive dem.
Consequently, the Court held that a restriction on capital movements, such as a less favourable tax treatment of foreign-sourced dividends, comes within the scope of Article 57(1) EC, inasmuch as it relates to holdings acquired with a view to establishing or maintaining lasting and direct economic links between the shareholder and the company concerned and which allow the shareholder to participate eectively in the management of the company or in its control.
En sådan lovgivning opfylder et alment hensyn i en medlemsstat, hvori landbrugsjord udgør en begrænset naturressource. Domstolen fandt imidlertid, at
Article 57(1) EC must therefore be interpreted as meaning that Article 56 EC is without prejudice to the application by a Member State of legislation which existed on 31 December 1993 under which a shareholder in receipt of dividends from a company established in a non-member country, who holds two thirds of the share capital in that company, is taxed at a rate higher than that imposed on a shareholder in receipt of dividends from a resident company.
Udviklingen og arbejdet bopælspligten udgør en foranstaltning, der går ud over, hvad der er nødvendigt for at opfylde dette formål.
The Court had many opportunities to consider the powers of direct taxation retained by the Member States and the limits on the exercise of those powers.
Pligten er for det første særligt indgribende, da den ikke blot begrænser de frie kapitalbevægelser, men også erhververens ret til frit at vælge sit opholdssted, der sikres ved den europæiske menneskerettighedskonvention og beskyttes i fællesskabsretten, og den indskrænker således en grundlæggende rettighed.
It ruled on various national fiscal measures concerning, first, the taxation of companies and their shareholders and, second, the taxation of individuals.
For det andet kan det ikke fastslås, at der ikke kan træes andre, mindre indgribende foranstaltninger end denne forpligtelse for at opfylde det forfulgte formål.
Some of these measures were held compatible, and others incompatible, with Community law.
Endelig anvendte Domstolen i Holböcksagen artikel 57, stk. 1, EF, som indeholder en undtagelse til forbuddet mod restriktioner for de frie kapitalbevægelser mellem medlemsstaterne og tredjelande for så vidt angår restriktioner, som fandtes pr. 31. december 1993, og som vedrører kapitalbevægelser, som involverer direkte investeringer.
With regard to the taxation of companies, first, a number of national measures were held entirely incompatible with the fundamental freedoms in the Treaty.