natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Ordningen fastsætter indefrysning af midler, der tilhører de personer, enheder eller organer, der er opregnet af Sikkerhedsrådet, samt indefrysning af midler, der tilhører enheder, der ejes eller kontrolleres af sådanne enheder, som er blevet anset for at deltage, være direkte associeret med eller støtte den nukleare spredning.
According to caselaw, the action for damages provided for in Article 235 EC is an independent form of action, and such an action seeking to challenge a measure cannot be inferred to be inadmissible from the fact that an action for annulment brought against that measure is inadmissible.
Med hjemmel i®denne forordning blev en iransk bank og dens datterselskab i®Det Forenede Kongerige, der var 100% ejet af moderselskabet, genstand for en afgørelse om indefrysning af midler, henset til den rolle, de blev anset for at have som mellemled i®forbindelse med Den Islamiske Republik Irans følsomme aktiviteter, der bestod i®formidling af en lang række indkøb af følsomme materialer til Irans nuklear- og missilprogrammer og levering af nansielle tjenesteydelser.
Thus, individuals who would not be directly and individually concerned by a legislative measure do not, for this reason alone, lack entitlement to bring an action seeking to render the Community liable for the unlawfulness of that measure (33).
Selv om Retten i®disse domme henviste til de principper, der allerede er udviklet i®retspraksis vedrørende indefrysning af midler i®bestræbelserne på at bekæmpe terrorisme, gav den alligevel en særlig redegørelse.
In Case T-166/08 Ivanov v Commission (order of 30 September 2009, not published, under appeal), the Court clari¤ed the limits of the independence of actions for annulment and actions for damages, stating that it cannot be a consequence of the independence of those forms of action that an individual who has allowed the time limit for bringing an action laid down in the ¤fth paragraph of Article 230 EC to pass may escape being time-barred by seeking to obtain, through an action for damages, the bene¤t which he could have obtained if he had brought an action for annulment within the time limit.
Som svar på Melli®Bank plc’s ulovlighedsindsigelse vedrørende forordning nr.®423/2007, for så vidt som den tilsidesætter proportionalitetsprincippet, bemærkede Retten, at lovligheden af foranstaltninger, hvorved de erhvervsdrivende forbydes at udøve en økonomisk virksomhed, er betinget af, at foranstaltningerne er egnede til og nødvendige for at nå de mål, der lovligt forfølges med de pågældende bestemmelser.
Consequently, the fact that an application for annulment is time-barred, which is a matter of public policy, means that an application for damages which is closely linked to the application for annulment is time-barred too.
Såfremt der er mulighed for at vælge mellem ¯ere egnede foranstaltninger, skal den mindst bebyrdende foranstaltning vælges, og byrderne må ikke være uforholdsmæssige i®forhold til de tilsigtede mål 28.
Thus, an action for damages must be declared inadmissible where it is actually aimed at securing withdrawal of an individual decision which has become de¤nitive and it would, if upheld, nullify the legal e¥ects of that decision.
Den præciserede, at forordning nr.®423/2007 har til formål at hindre den nukleare spredning og nansieringen heraf og således lægge pres på Den Islamiske Republik Iran med henblik på, at den ophører med de pågældende aktiviteter.
The Court nevertheless pointed out that an applicant remains entitled to contest, by means of an action for damages, the wrongful acts or omissions resulting from the conduct of an institution where that conduct is subsequent to decisions whose legality he has not contested within the time limit.
Dette formål er en del af den mere generelle indsats forbundet med bevarelsen af freden og den internationale sikkerhed og er derfor lovligt.
In Case T-440/03 Arizmendi and Others v Council and Commission (judgment of 18 December 2009), the Court applied innovative reasoning to the question of the admissibility of an action seeking compensation for loss or damage allegedly su¥ered as a result of the Commission’s sending to a Member State a reasoned opinion stating that it was failing to ful¤l its obligations under the applicable Community legislation.
Derudover er indefrysning af midler tilhørende enheder, der ejes eller kontrolleres af en enhed, som anses for involveret i®den nukleare spredning, knyttet til dette formål, når der forligger en ikke ubetydelig risiko for, at en sådan enhed lægger pres på de enheder, den ejer eller kontrollerer, for at omgå virkningen af de foranstaltninger, den er omfattet af, ved at opfordre dem til enten direkte eller indirekte at overføre deres midler til enheden eller
In the case in point, following receipt of the reasoned opinion the French Republic had in fact repealed the statutory monopoly held by shipbrokers, who constituted
Rådets forordning (EF) nr.®423/2007 af 19.4.2007 om restriktive foranstaltninger over for Iran (EUT L®103, s.®1).Domstolens dom af 13.11.1990, sag®C-331/88, Fedesa m.¯., Sml. I, s.®4023, præmis®13.
) Joined Cases C-39/05°P and C-52/05°P Sweden and Turco v Council [2008] ECR I-4723, paragraph 57.
Arbejdet at gennemføre transaktioner, som den ikke selv kan gennemføre på grund af indefrysningen af midler.
Proceedings a body of persons enjoying a hybrid status combining that of holder of a professional oce having a monopoly over certain operations and that of trader.
Endelig fremgår det af retspraksis, at ejendomsretten og retten til at udøve økonomisk virksomhed ikke er absolutte prærogativer, og at udøvelsen heraf kan være genstand for restriktioner, der er berettigede ved formål af almen interesse, som Fællesskabet forfølger.
According to settled caselaw, an action for damages founded on the fact that the Commission has not instituted infringement proceedings under Article 226 EC is inadmissible.
Betydningen af de formål, der forfølges med de omtvistede forskrifter, kan efter deres art begrunde selv betydelige negative følger for visse erhvervsdrivende 29.
Since the Commission is not bound to institute infringement proceedings under Article 226 EC, its decision not to institute such proceedings is not in any event unlawful, so that it cannot give rise to non-contractual liability on the part of the Community (34).
Retten fastslog imidlertid, at de påførte ulemper ikke var uforholdsmæssige i®forhold til de omhandlede mål, henset til den overordnede betydning af opretholdelse af freden og den internationale sikkerhed.
The Commission considered that solution to be applicable by analogy to situations where it has not refrained from instituting infringement proceedings but, on the contrary, has issued a reasoned opinion, which constitutes a stage preliminary to infringement proceedings before the Court of Justice.
I®den anden af de ovenfor nævnte domme gav Retten en vigtig præcisering af forpligtelsen til at give de omhandlede personer oplysninger om baggrunden for de foranstaltninger, der, selv om de har generel rækkevidde, alligevel berører dem umiddelbart og individuelt, og som kan begrænse udøvelsen af deres grundlæggende rettigheder.
The General Court rejected that line of argument, recalling that the action for damages is an independent form of action, with a particular purpose to ful¤l within the context of legal remedies in that it seeks compensation for damage resulting from a measure or unlawful conduct attributable to a Community institution.
Den fastslog, at Rådet har pligt til i®videst muligt omfang at oplyse de enheder, som er omfattet af foranstaltningerne med henblik på indefrysning af midler, om disse ved en individuel underretning.
Accordingly, irrespective of whether it constitutes an act that can be challenged in an action for annulment, every measure of an institution, even if it has been adopted by the institution in the exercise of a discretion, is, in principle, capable of being the subject of an action for damages; that discretion does not have the e¥ect of freeing the institution from its obligation to act in accordance with higher rules of law, such as the Treaty and general principles of Community law, and with the relevant secondary legislation.
Reglen, hvorefter ukendskab til loven ikke diskulperer, kan nemlig ikke påberåbes i®en sag, hvor den pågældende retsakt over for den pågældende har karakter af en individuel retsakt. I®den foreliggende sag®foretog Rådet imidlertid ikke en individuel underretning, selv om det kendte sagsøgerens adresse.
Consequently, while, within the framework of its powers under Article 226 EC, the Commission enjoys a discretion in deciding whether to send a reasoned opinion to a Member State, it is conceivable that, in quite exceptional circumstances, a person may demonstrate that such an opinion is vitiated by unlawfulness that constitutes a suciently serious breach of a rule of law such as to cause him loss or damage.
Retten fastslog derfor, at Rådet ikke havde overholdt pligten til at oplyse sagsøgeren om begrundelsen for den anfægtede afgørelse.
In order for the Community to incur non-contractual liability, the applicant must establish a suf-
Det fremgår imidlertid af sagsakterne, at det franske banktilsyn oplyste sagsøgerens lial i®Pa-ris om vedtagelsen af den anfægtede afgørelse og om o©entliggørelsen heraf i®EU-Tidende, som fandt sted samme dag.
In the context of an application seeking compensation for the damage allegedly caused to the applicants by the Commission’s decision to withdraw authorisation for the import from Costa Rica of animals from aquaculture, the Court stated in Case T-238/07 Ristic and Others v Commission (judgment of 9 July 2009, not published) that, in order to ensure the practical e¥ect of the condition relating to breach of a rule conferring rights on individuals, it is necessary for the protection o¥ered by the rule invoked to be e¥ective in relation to the person who invokes it and, therefore, that that person be among those upon whom the rule in question confers rights.
Den pågældende er således rettidigt og fra en o§ciel kilde blevet oplyst om både vedtagelsen af den anfægtede afgørelse og muligheden for at konsultere begrundelsen for afgørelsen i®EU-Tidende, således at den konstaterede tilsidesættelse under disse særlige omstændigheder ikke kan begrunde en annullation af den anfægtede afgørelse.
A rule not protecting the person against the unlawfulness he invokes, but protecting another person, cannot be accepted as a source of damages. In the case in point, the applicants could not therefore invoke, in their application for damages, unlawfulness resulting from the alleged breach of Costa Rica’s right to be heard and of the right of the Federal Republic of Germany to participate in the procedure.
Godkendelse af markedsføring af plantebeskyttelsesmidler
) Orders in Case C-72/90 Asia Motor France v Commission [1990] ECR°I-2181, paragraphs 13 to 15, Case T-201/96
Retten afsagde i®løbet af 2009 adskillige domme vedrørende beslutninger, som Kommissionen har vedtaget i®henhold til direktiv®91/414, der indfører en fællesskabsordning om godkendelser og tilbagekaldelse af godkendelser til markedsføring af plantebeskyttelsesmidler.
Smanor and Others v Commission [1997] ECR II-1081, paragraphs 30 and 31, and Case T-202/02 Makedoniko Metro and Michaniki v Commission [2004] ECR°II-181, paragraphs 43 and 44.
Jf. i®denne retning Domstolens dom af 30.7.1996, sag®C-84/95, Bosphorus, Sml. I, s.®3953, præmis®21-23.
) Case C-352/98°P Bergaderm and Goupil v Commission [2000] ECR°I-5291, paragraphs 42 and 43.
Det kan således ikke udledes af henvisningen i®direktiv®91/414 til »den foreliggende tekniske og videnskabelige viden«, at virksomheder, der har anmeldt et aktivt stof, og som risikerer, at det besluttes ikke at optage dette stof blandt de godkendte sto©er, skal have adgang til at fremlægge nye undersøgelser og data, så længe der er usikkerhed om sto©ets uskadelighed.
Also, in Arizmendi and Others v Council and Commission, the Court observed that during an infringement procedure the Commission can only give an opinion regarding a Member State’s failure to comply with Community law, since ultimately the Court of Justice alone has jurisdiction to ¤nd that a Member State has failed to ful¤l its obligations under Community law.
En sådan fortolkning ville stride mod formålet om et højt beskyttelsesniveau i®forhold til miljøet og menneskers og dyrs sundhed, for så vidt som det ville svare til at indrømme den part, der anmelder et aktivt stof, og som for det første har bevisbyrden for dets uskadelighed og for det andet har det bedste kendskab til det omhandlede stof, ret til at nedlægge veto mod en eventuel beslutning om ikke at godkende det omhandlede stof.
In so far as, in that opinion, the Commission merely sets out its view as to whether a Member State has failed to ful¤l its Community law obligations, the adoption of the opinion cannot result in a suciently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals.
I®forbindelse med videnskabelig usikkerhed kan der desuden ikke stilles det krav til en risikoevaluering, at den nødvendigvis skal give fællesskabsinstitutionerne afgørende videnskabelige beviser for, at der er en risiko, og hvilket omfang de potentielle skadevirkninger har, såfremt denne risiko indtræder.
Therefore, even where the view as to the purport of Community law which the Commission sets out in a reasoned opinion is incorrect, that cannot constitute a suciently serious breach capable of causing the Community to incur non-contractual liability.
Idet Retten bemærkede, at det af sagsøgeren anmeldte dossier var mangelfuldt, således at der ikke kunne drages nogen pålidelig konklusion vedrørende dichlorvos’genotoksiske og kræftfremkaldende egenskaber, konkluderede den med henvisning til de foreliggende toksikologiske data, til usikkerheden vedrørende dichlorvos’skadelige virkninger og til dossierets dårlige kvalitet, at Kommissionen ikke havde anlagt et åbenbart urigtigt skøn, da den vedtog den anfægtede beslutning.
On the other hand, if assessments set out in a reasoned opinion go beyond determination as to whether a Member State has failed to ful¤l its obligations or if other conduct on the part of the Commission in an infringement procedure, for example the wrongful disclosure of trade secrets or of information damaging a person’s reputation, exceeds the powers which are conferred upon it, those assessments or that conduct can constitute a breach such as to render the Community liable.
Aktindsigt iinstitutionernes dokumenter
Two of those cases merit particular attention.
Sagen Borax Europe mod Kommissionen (dom af 11.3.2009, forenede sager T-121/05 og T-166/05, ikke trykt i®Samling af Afgørelser) foranledigede Retten til nærmere at præcisere undtagelserne fra retten til aktindsigt i®dokumenter, som fællesskabsinstitutionerne er i®besiddelse af, dels for så vidt angår beskyttelsen af privatlivets fred og personers integritet, dels for så vidt angår beskyttelsen af beslutningsprocessen.
First, in Case T-404/06 P ETF v Landgren (judgment of 8 September 2009), the Court upheld the innovatory position of the Civil Service Tribunal that grounds must be stated for every decision terminating a contract of inde¤nite duration, on the basis of reasoning founded on the requirements of the Sta¥ Regulations and on the inseparable link between the obligation to state reasons and exercise of the power of judicial review.
I®denne sag®havde sagsøgeren fået afslag på aktindsigt i®visse mødedokumenter og båndoptagelser, der bl.a. vedrørte kommentarer og udtalelser fra eksperter og repræsentanter fra industrien, der var fremkommet i®forbindelse med en procedure for klassicering af borsyre og borater, og som mundede ud i®Kommissionens o©entliggørelse af disse eksperters endelige rapport, hvori®det blev anbefalet at klassicere disse produkter som toksiske sto©er.
Second, in Case T-58/08°P Commission v Roodhuijzen (judgment of 5 October 2009), the Court held that the conditions for the extension of the Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme to the spouse of an ocial under Article 72(1) of the Sta¥ Regulations of Ocials of the European Communities do not mean that a non-marital partnership between an ocial and that ocial’s partner must be equivalent to marriage.
Som begrundelse for afslaget henviste Kommissionen bl.a. til, at en udbredelse af disse dokumenter ville indebære en tilsidesættelse af retten til beskyttelse af personoplysninger i®forordning nr.®45/2001 31 og ville gøre det muligt at udpege de omhandlede eksperter, og at disse kunne risikere at blive udsat for pres, henset til de væsentlige økonomiske interesser, der er på spil.
In order for a qualifying non-marital partnership to exist, it is necessary only that there be a union between two persons and that they produce a document recognised by a Member State acknowledging their status as non-marital partners; there is no need to verify whether the consequences stemming from the partnership entered into by the ocial concerned are similar to those stemming from a marriage.
I, s.®2265, præ-mis®99, og Rettens dom af 11.9.2002, sag®T-13/99, Pzer Animal Health mod Rådet, Sml. II, s.®3305, præmis®139.
In 2009, 24 applications for interim measures were brought before the General Court, an appreciable reduction compared with the number of applications made in the preceding year (58).
Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EF) nr.®45/2001 af 18.12.2000 om beskyttelse af fysiske personer i®forbindelse med behandling af personoplysninger i®fællesskabsinstitutionerne og -organerne og om fri®ud-veksling af sådanne oplysninger (EFT 2001 L®8, s.®1).
The case giving rise to this order formed part of a series of cases in which the President of the Court had, in 2007 and 2008, dismissed six other applications for the suspension of decisions prohibiting the marketing of certain substances. They were dismissed for lack of urgency, because the damage
Arbejdet hvordan aktindsigten i®de omhandlede dokumenter konkret og faktisk kunne være til skade for den interesse, som er beskyttet af den omhandlede undtagelse.
Proceedings alleged was not irreparable and was not suciently serious as it represented less than 1% of the worldwide turnover of the group to which the applicant companies belonged.
Indledningsvis præciserede Retten, at Kommissionen ikke kunne begrunde sit afslag med henvisning til det tilsagn, den havde afgivet over for eksperterne om, at disse frit kunne give deres mening til kende, og at deres identitet og tilkendegivelser ikke ville blive udbredt.
While, in the seventh order, made in United Phosphorus, the President of the Court accepted that serious and irreparable harm was imminent, he did so because of the particular circumstances of the case, namely the deep crisis from which the world economy had been su¥ering for months and which was affecting the value of numerous undertakings and their capacity to secure liquidity.
Eftersom den fortrolighedserklæring, som Kommissionen påstår at have afgivet over for eksperterne, udelukkende er indgået mellem eksperterne og denne institution, kan den ikke gøres gældende over for Borax, hvis ret til aktindsigt følger af betingelserne og begrænsningerne i®forordning nr.®1049/2001.
The group to which the applicant belonged had lost much of its value, which showed that the damage alleged was serious.
Et afslag om aktindsigt i®de dokumenter, som en institution er i®besiddelse af, kan desuden udelukkende begrundes i®undtagelserne i®artikel®4 i®forordning nr.®1049/2001, hvorfor den pågældende institution ikke kan afslå at efterkomme en anmodning om aktindsigt med henvisning til de tilsagn, som visse af mødedeltagerne er fremkommet med, eftersom sådanne tilsagn ikke er omfattet af disse undtagelser.
While acknowledging that the mere possibility of bringing an action for damages is sucient to show that ¤nancial harm is in principle reparable, the President of the Court added that he is not obliged to apply the relevant conditions ‘mechanically and rigidly’, but must determine, in the light of the circumstances of the case, the manner in which urgency is to be veri¤ed.
Retten understregende desuden, at det forhold, at lovgiver har fastsat en særlig undtagelse for retten til aktindsigt i®institutionernes dokumenter for så vidt angår juridisk rådgivning, ikke indebærer, at det samme er tilfældet for andre former for rådgivning, navnlig ikke videnskabelig rådgivning, såsom den rådgivning, der er optaget på de omtvistede båndoptagelser.
In the case in point, the President of the Court took account in particular of the fact that, in parallel with the administrative procedure that had led to the decision prohibiting the products at issue, the applicant had resubmitted its application for authorisation of those products, under a newly created accelerated procedure that was capable of being concluded only a few months after the date imposed for the withdrawal of the products from the market and in the framework of which it was able to present all of the scienti¤c data alleged to have been improperly neglected in the procedure that had led to the decision prohibiting the products.
Eftersom der ifølge retspraksis ikke er et generelt behov for at bevare fortroligheden af udtalelser fra Rådets Juridiske Tjeneste vedrørende lovgivningsspørgsmål 32, må det samme princip gælde for den omtvistede rådgivning, som fællesskabslovgiver ikke har fastsat nogen særlig undtagelse for, og som er underlagt de almindelige regler vedrørende o©entlighedens adgang til dokumenter.
The President of the Court stated that it would be unreasonable to allow the prohibition of the marketing of a product in respect of which it was not improbable that its marketing would be authorised only a few months later. Also, a number of factors indicated that a return of the applicant to the market in question appeared problematic by reason of the fact that, at the crucial point in time, it would probably not have available to it any source for the supply of the product.
Heraf følger, at den rådgivning af videnskabelig karakter, som en institution indhenter med henblik på udarbejdelsen af en lovgivningstekst, i®princippet skal udbredes, også selv om teksten dermed gøres til genstand for kritik, eller de personer, som har deltaget i®udarbejdelsen af teksten, afholdes fra at deltage i®den pågældende institutions beslutningsproces.
That conclusion was supported, at the level of balancing the interests involved, by the ¤nding of a certain slowness in the administrative procedure which showed that the Commission itself did not see any speci¤c reason why the product in question had to be withdrawn from the market as quickly as possible, and by the circumstance that the contested decision itself laid down a period of 13 months for the sale of existing stocks, a fact which indicated that the use of the product was hardly of such a kind as to involve serious risks to public health.
Risikoen for – som Kommissionen frygter det – at den o©entlige debat, der opstår på baggrund af udbredelsen af eksperternes stillingtagen, vil være med til at afholde disse fra at deltage i®Kommissionens beslutningsproces, er uadskilleligt forbundet med den regel, som anerkender princippet om aktindsigt i®dokumenter, der indeholder meningstilkendegivelser til internt brug som led i®drøftelser og indledende konsultationer.
The President of the Court accepted that there was a prima facie case, on the ground that the action in the main proceedings prima facie raised complex, delicate and highly technical issues which called for a detailed examination that could not be carried out in the proceedings for interim measures but had to be the subject of the proceedings in the main action.