natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
»1) Den Franske Republik har tilsidesat sine forpligtelser i henhold til artikel 4, stk 1, i Rådets direktiv 79/409/EØF af 2. april 1979 om beskyttelse af vilde fugle, idet den ikke udlagt nogen del af lokaliteten 'Basses Corbières' til særligt beskyttet område, og har undladt for denne lokalitet at træffe beskyttehesforanstahninger, der for så vidt angår deres geografiske udstrækning er tilstrækkelige.
However, it has not been shown that there are migratory species justifying the classification of the Basses Corbières site as an SPA by virtue of Article 4(2) of the birds directive.
I øvrigt frifindes Den Franske
Moreover, the 231 hectares protected by that decree are not entirely included in that area.
Hver part afholder sine egne omkostninger.«
The Commission's application must therefore be upheld on that point, within the limits stated above.
Generaladvokat S. Alber fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet CSjette Afdeling
Furthermore, it does not appear that the part of the area indicated by the GOR which lies outside the scope of the decree in question is subject to any special conservation measures whatsoever.
Dansk tekst foreligger endnu ikke.
The special conservation measures
Sag C-38/99 Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber / Den Franske Republik Miljø- og forbrugerbeskyttelse
In those circumstances, in the absence of any evidence capable of reopening the question whether the GOR's proposal that the 950-hectare area extending from the Serre de Vingrau-Tautavel to the Trou de Cavali should be classified as an SPA is well founded, it must be held that, since a considerable part of that area does not benefit from a special conservation regime, the special conservation measures taken by the French authorities are insufficient in their geographical extent.
»Traktatbrud — direktiv 79/409/EØF — beskyttelse af vilde fugle — jagttider« (Sjette Afdeling) tidligere åbning og afslutning af jagten på trækfugle havde fremhævet, at disse indeholdt bestemmelser, som tilsyneladende stred mod de i fugledirektivet fastsatte krav, og at den ikke kunne tilslutte sig dem.
The disturbance and deterioration caused by the limestone quarries of Vingrau and Tautavel failed to classify as an SPA a site which should have been so classified, to rely on Article 6(3) and (4) of the habitats directive, that State might enjoy such an advantage.
Kommissionen kunne imidlertid konstatere, at Den Franske Republik ikke havde truffet alle de foranstaltninger, der var nødvendige for fuldt ud at efterkomme forpligtelserne i henhold til fugledirektivet og navnlig dettes artikel 7, og besluttede derfor at anlægge nærværende sag.
It first needs to be considered whether Article 6(2) to (4) of the habitats directive apply to areas which have not been classified as SPAs but should have been so classified.
Ved stævning indgivet til Domstolens Justitskontor den 10. februar 1999 har Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber anlagt sag med påstand om, at det fastslås, at Den Franske Republik har tilsidesat sine forpligtelser i henhold til Rådets direktiv 79/409/EØF af 2. april 1979, idet den ikke korrekt har gennemført direktivets artikel 7, og idet den ikke har givet Kommissionen underretning om samtlige gennemførelsesforanstaltninger for hele det franske område, samt idet den ikke har iværksat nævnte bestemmelse korrekt.
In that respect, it is important to note that the text of Article 7 of the habitats directive expressly states that Article 6(2) to (4) of the directive apply, in substitution for the first sentence of Article 4(4) of the birds directive, to the areas classified under Article 4(1) or (2) of the latter directive.
Den har for det første ikke gennemført princippet om fuldstændig beskyttelse,
It follows that, on a literal interpretation of that passage of Article 7 of the habitats directive, only areas classified as SPAs fall under the influence of Article 6(2) to (4) of that directive.
Den 13. november 1997 tilstillede Kommissionen den franske regering en åbningsskrivelse, idet denne regering efter Kommissionens opfattelse havde tilsidesat fugledirektivet og navnlig dettes artikel 7.
Since no formal measure for classifying such a site as an SPA exists, it is particularly difficult for the Commission, in accordance with Article 155 of the EC Treaty (now Article 211 EC), to carry out effective monitoring of the application by Member States of the procedure laid down by Article 6(3) and (4) of the habitats directive and to establish, in appropriate cases, the existence of possible failures to fulfil the obligations arising thereunder.
— for det andet fastsat alt for tidlige datoer for jagtens åbning,
In particular, the risk is significantly increased that plans or projects not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site, and affecting its integrity, may be accepted by the national authorities in breach of that procedure, escape the Commission's monitoring and cause serious, or irreparable ecological damage, contrary to the conservation requirements of that site.
— for det tredje fastsat alt for sene datoer for jagtens afslutning, og
Natural or legal persons entitled to assert before the national courts interests connected with the protection of nature, and especially wild bird life, which in this case means primarily environmental protection organisations, would face comparable difficulties.
Den franske regering besvarede blot denne åbningsskrivelse ved den 17. juni 1998 at tilstille Kommissionen en kopi af »Rapport du Gouvernement au Parlement sur l'application de la loi n° 94-591 af 15. juli 1994« (regeringens rapport til Parlamentet om gennemførelsen af lov nr. 94-591 af 15.7.1994), der var blevet tilstillet det franske parlament den 16. juni 1998 i henhold til samme lovs artikel 2.
Moreover, the text of Article 7 of the habitats directive states that Article 6(2) to (4) of that directive replace the first sentence of Article 4(4) of the birds directive as from the date of implementation of the habitats directive or the date of classification by a Member State under the birds directive, where the latter date is later.
for det fjerde har den ikke givet Kommissionen underretning om bestemmelserne til gennemførelse af fugledirektivet for så vidt angår departementerne Bas-Rhin, Haut-Rhin og Moselle.
That passage of Article 7 appears to support the interpretation to the effect that the application of Article 6(2) to (4) presupposes the classification of the area concerned as an SPA.
Først behandles det andet anbringende og derefter det tredje og det fjerde og endelig det første.
A situation of this kind would be likely to endanger the attainment of the objective of special protection for wild bird life set forth in Article 4 of the birds directive, as interpreted by the caselaw of the Court (see, in particular, Case C-44/95 Royal Society for the Protection of Birds).
Kommissionen opfordrede Den Franske Republik til at træffe de foranstaltninger, der var nødvendige for at efterkomme denne udtalelse inden to måneder fra dens meddelelse.
It is clear, therefore, that areas which have not been classified as SPAs but should have been so classified continue to fall under the regime governed by the first sentence of Article 4(4) of the birds directive.
Ved skrivelse af 6. oktober 1998 meddelte den franske regering, at den i regeringens rapport til Parlamentet om gennemførelsen af lov nr. 94-591 vedrørende de forskellige lovforslag om den
As the Advocate General has, essentially argued in paragraph 102 of his Opinion, the duality of the regimes applicable, respectively, to areas classified as SPAs and those which should have been so classified gives Member States an
Ved udløbet af nævnte frist var reglerne om tidligere datoer for åbning af jagten på svømmeog vadefugle i de ministerielle bekendtgørelser i
In that respect, if it were lawful for a Member State, which, in breach of the birds directive, has
en fuldstændig beskyttelsesordning for de perioder, i hvilke vilde fugle er særligt truede.
incentive to carry out classifications, in so far as they thereby acquire the possibility of using a procedure which allows them, for imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature, and subject to certain conditions, to adopt a plan or project adversely affecting an SPA
De sidstnævnte bestemmelser udviste dog, for så vidt angår valget af tidligere datoer for åbning af jagten på svømme- og vadefugle, kun ubetydelige forskelle fra det tidligere gældende.
It follows from the above that Article 6(2) to (4) of the habitats directive do not apply to areas which have not been classified as SPAs but should have been so classified.
Dette anbringende skal således undersøges på baggrund af de regler for tidligere åbning af jagten på svømme- og vadefugle, der blev indført ved lov nr. 98-549 om ændring af artikel L. 224-2 i den nye code rural.
The complaint alleging infringement of Article 6(2) to (4) of the habitats directive must therefore be rejected.
Den franske regering har i den foreliggende sag selv erkendt, at de tidligere datoer for åbning af jagten på svømme- og vadefugle i den nye code rural's artikel L. 224-2, stk. 2, som ændret ved lov nr. 98-549, ikke gør det muligt at beskytte alle eksemplarer af arterne i redebygningstiden.
Declares that, by not classifying any part of the Basses Corbières site as a special protection area and by not adopting special conservation measures for that site sufficient in their geographical extent, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1) of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds;
forvaltningen af det fælles eje derved er betroet medlemsstaterne på deres respektive territorier.
(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Conservation of wild birds — Hunting periods) (Sixth Chamber)
Der må i den forbindelse lægges vægt på, at den franske regering ikke har fremlagt noget bevismateriale af denne art.
However, considering that the French Republic had not adopted all the measures needed to comply fully with its obligations under the Wild Birds Directive, in particular Article 7 thereof, the Commission decided to bring the present action.
»Den almindelige jagttid skal ligge mellem følgende datoer:
The Commission charges the French Republic with:
- den 1. februar som dato for den almindelige afslutning af jagten.«
On 13 November 1997 the Commission sent the French Government a letter of formal notice regarding its failure to comply with the Wild Birds Directive, in particular Article 7 thereof.
Gennemførelsen i national ret af bestemmelserne i fugledirektivets artikel 7, stk. 4, andet og tredje punktum
second, setting excessively early opening dates for hunting; third, setting excessively late dates for the closing of hunting; and
Ifølge samme lov træffer præfekten hvert år afgørelse om jagtens åbning.
- fourth, failing to communicate to it all the provisions for transposition of the Wild Birds Directive for the departments of Lower Rhine, Upper Rhine and Moselle.
Det bemærkes for det første, at det er ubestridt, at ved udløbet af den frist, der var fastsat i den begrundede udtalelse, var bestemmelserne i fugledirektivets artikel 7, stk. 4, andet og tredje punktum, ikke formelt gennemført i fransk ret.
In response to that letter of formal notice, the French Government merely sent the Commission, on 17 June 1998, a copy of the 'Government Report to Parliament on the application of Law No 94-591 of 15 July 1994' tabled in the French Parliament on 16 June 1998 pursuant to Article 2 of that Law.
I det omfang der ikke i national ret findes bestemmelser om, at præfekterne for de nævnte departementer ved vedtagelsen af den årlige bekendtgørelse om åbning af jagten skal tage hensyn til forbuddet mod jagt på enhver fugleart i de følsomme tidsrum, der er nævnt i denne dom, rummer den imidlertid et element af retlig usikkerhed, for så vidt angår de forpligtelser, som præfekterne skal opfylde ved vedtagelsen af deres forvaltningsakter.
It is appropriate to consider the second charge first, then the third, then the fourth and, finally, the first.
For det andet bemærkes, at Domstolen ganske vist har fastslået, at det for gennemførelsen af et direktiv i national ret ikke er absolut nødvendigt formelt og ordret at gentage direktivets bestemmelser i udtrykkelige specielle lovbestemmelser, men at det er tilstrækkeligt, at der foreligger en generel retlig ramme, der giver en sikker hjemmel for, at direktivet anvendes fuldt ud på en tilstrækkelig klar og præcis måde.
By letter of 5 August 1998 the Commission issued a reasoned opinion in which it found that, by not correctly transposing Article 7 of the Wild Birds Directive, by not communicating all the transposition measures for the whole of its territory and by failing correctly to implement that provision, the French Republic had failed to fulfil its obligations under the Directive.
Men Domstolen har også fastslået, at en punktlig gennemførelse har en særlig betydning, når der er tale om fugledirektivet, i det omfang
The Commission called on the French Republic to take the measures needed to comply with the reasoned opinion within a period of two months after notification thereof.
»1) Den Franske Republik har tilsidesat sine forpligtelser i henhold til Rådets direktiv 79/409/EØF af 2. april 1979 om beskyttelse af vilde fugle, idet den ikke korrekt har gennemført dette direktivs artikel 7, stk 4, ikke har givet Kommissionen underretning om samtlige foranstaltninger til gennemførelse af direktivet for hele det franske område og ikke korrekt har gennemført nævnte bestemmelse i direktivet.
In that connection it should be borne in mind that, according to settled case-law, the question whether a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations must be determined by reference to the situation prevailing in that State at the end of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (see, in particular, Case C-166/97 Commission ν France).
Generaladvokat D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Sjette Afdeling) den 14. september 2000.
By the end of that period, the procedure for determining early dates for the opening of the hunting of waterfowl, provided for in the ministerial orders adopted under Article R. 224-6 of the New Rural Code, had been replaced by the procedure introduced by Article L. 224-2 of the same code, as amended by Law No 98-549.
Præjudiciel »Ligebehandling af mænd og kvinder — lovgivning om ansættelse med henblik på udøvelse af praktisk juridisk virksomhed i Land Hessen —fortrinsstilling til ansøgere, der har aftjent militær eller civil værnepligt« (Sjette Afdeling)
charge only in relation to the system of closing dates for the hunting of waterfowl and birds of passage introduced by the third paragraph of Article L. 224-2 of the New Rural Code, as amended by Law No 98-549. By the end of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion, that system had superseded the one introduced by the second paragraph of Article L. 224-2 of the New Rural Code, as amended by Law No 94-591.
Ministeriet meddelte ved skrivelse af 11. februar 1998 Julia Schnorbus, der havde opretholdt sin ansøgning, at hun af samme årsag heller ikke kunne opnå ansættelse til næste termin, der begyndte i marts 1998.
That is tantamount to admitting that, for certain of the species concerned and in certain areas, hunting is opened too early.
Spørgsmålene er blevet rejst i en sag mellem Julia Schnorbus og Land Hessen vedrørende udsættelse af hendes ansættelse med henblik på udøvelse af praktisk juridisk virksomhed forud for den anden juridiske statsprøve.
Furthermore, it is clear from a study by the National Hunting Authority of February 1998 regarding two species of birds which may be hunted that the early opening dates for hunting given in the ministerial orders fairly frequently impinge upon the periods in which a significant number of young birds are dependent in so far as they are not yet able to fly.
Sagsøgeren indgav herefter den 13. februar 1998 en administrativ klage over afslaget på udøvelse af praktisk juridisk virksomhed, idet hun navnlig gjorde gældende, at udvælgelsesproceduren var diskriminerende over for kvinder på grund af den fortrinsstilling, der gives ansøgere, der har aftjent den militære eller civile værnepligt, som kun kan aftjenes af mænd.
Given that, as stated in paragraph 21 of this judgment, the system of early opening dates for the hunting of waterfowl provided for in Law No 98-549 displays, as regards the choice of dates, only minimal differences from the system established by the ministerial orders, the information given in the survey referred to in the foregoing paragraph of this judgment remains, for the most part, relevant for assessing the compatibility of the new system with the requirements of the Wild Birds Directive.
Sagsøgerens klage blev afvist den 2. april 1998 med den begrundelse, at den pågældende regel, der har til formål at kompensere ansøgere for den ulempe, der er forbundet med aftjening af militær eller civil værnepligt, var baseret på et sagligt kriterium for forskellig behandling.
As regards the staggering of closing dates for hunting, it must be borne in mind that the national authorities are not empowered by the Wild Birds Directive to lay down dates which vary according to species of bird unless the Member State concerned can adduce evidence, based on scientific and technical data relevant to each individual case, that staggering the closing dates for hunting does not impede the complete protection of species of bird liable to be affected by such staggering.
Det er efter forbundslovgivningen og Land Hessens lovgivning en betingelse for at kunne opnå en stilling som dommer eller en højere offentlig stilling, at den pågældende har udøvet praktisk juridisk virksomhed og derefter bestået den anden juridiske statsprøve. Sagsøgeren ansøgte med dette formål Hessisches Ministerium der Justiz und für Europaangelegenheiten (Land Hessens justits- og Europaministerium) om ansættelse som praktikant med virkning fra januar 1998.
It follows that the system of earlier opening dates for the hunting of waterfowl, as established by Law No 98-549 amending Article L. 224-2 of the New Rural Code, is not capable of fulfilling the requirement laid down in Article 7(4) of the Wild Birds Directive, as interpreted by the Court, that there be a complete system of protection for wild birds over the period in which their survival is particularly threatened.
Ministeriet afviste ved skrivelse af 16. december 1997 Julia Schnorbus' ansøgning, idet det oplyste, at ministeriet på grund af et for stort antal
Closing dates for hunting
Julia Schnorbus indgav samtidig med den administrative klage begæring om foreløbige forholdsregler for Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main med påstand om, at hun skulle ansættes med henblik på udøvelse af praktisk juridisk virksomhed fra marts 1998.
In that regard, it must be made clear at the outset that, it is appropriate to examine this
Retten tog ved kendelse af 23. februar 1998 hendes begæring
The French Government recognises that it had not forwarded any information of that kind by the end of the period prescribed in the reasoned opinion.
til følge, men afgørelsen blev den 27. februar 1998 ophævet af Hessischer Verwaltungsgerichtshof.
Transposition of the provisions of the second and third sentences of Article 7(4) of the Wild Birds Directive
I øvrigt tilkommer det ikke Domstolen at undersøge, om forelæggelsesafgørelsen er afsagt i overensstemmelse med de nationale bestemmelser vedrørende retternes sammensætning og virkemåde.
In response to that submission, it must be observed, first, that it is common ground that the provisions of the second and third sentences of Article 7(4) of the Wild Birds Directive had not been formally incorporated in French law by the end of the period prescribed by the reasoned opinion.
Julia Schnorbus anlagde endelig den 9. april 1998 sag ved Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main for at få fastslået, at ministeriets afslag var retsstridigt, og at Land Hessen var forpligtet til at ansætte hende med henblik på udøvelse af praktisk juridisk virksomhed med virkning fra maj 1998.
Under the same code, it is the responsibility of the prefect to make an annual order for opening of the hunting season.
Efter at Julia Schnorbus ved skrivelse af 28. april 1998 blev meddelt, at der i forbindelse med lodtrækningen for denne ansættelsestermin kunne tildeles hende en uddannelsesplads, frafaldt hun sin påstand vedrørende ansættelsen, men fastholdt sin påstand om at få fastslået, at de forudgående afgørelser var retsstridige, idet de var diskriminerende over for hende som kvinde.
In so far as domestic law contains no provision requiring the prefects of those departments to take account, in adopting the annual order for opening of the hunting season, of the prohibition of hunting any species of bird during the sensitive periods mentioned of this judgment, that law is subject to a degree of legal uncertainty as regards the obligations to be complied with by prefects in adopting measures.
Domstolen er derfor, idet spørgsmålene vedrører fortolkning af fællesskabsretten, principielt forpligtet til at træffe afgørelse herom.
Second, the Court has indeed held that the transposition of a directive into domestic law does not necessarily require the provisions of the directive to be enacted in precisely the same words in a specific, express provision of national law and that a general legal context may be sufficient if it actually ensures the full application of the directive in a sufficiently clear and precise manner.
Det ville kun forholde sig anderledes, hvis det klart fremgår, at den ønskede fortolkning savner enhver forbindelse med realiteten i hovedsagen eller dennes genstand, eller hvis problemet er af hypotetisk karakter, og Domstolen ikke råder over de faktiske og retlige oplysninger, som er nødvendige for, at den kan foretage en saglig korrekt besvarelse af de stillede spørgsmål.
However, the Court has also held that faithful transposition becomes particularly important in the case of the Wild Birds Directive where management of the common heritage is entrusted to the Member States in their respective territories.
Da dette ikke er tilfældet i denne sag, skal de stillede spørgsmål behandles.
It follows that essential provisions of the Wild Birds Directive, such as those of the second and third sentences of Article 7(4), have not in any event been completely, clearly and unambiguously transposed into the French rules.
Formaliteten med hensyn til de præjudicielle spørgsmål
Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.'
Sådanne bestemmelser falder derfor inden for direktivets anvendelsesområde, der omfatter ansættelsesforhold i den offentlige sektor.
Advocate General P. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Sixth Chamber on 14 September 2000.
Den forelæggende ret spørger med disse spørgsmål, som behandles samlet, nærmere bestemt, om det er udelukket, at reglerne kan være berettigede i medfør af direktivets artikel 2, stk. 4, fordi de automatisk ved ansættelse giver en fortrinsstilling for mænd, som denne bestemmelse ikke sigter til, eller om de tværtimod er berettigede, fordi kompenserer for ulemper, som kvinder ikke er udsat for.
Preliminary ruling (Equal treatment for men and women — Rules on access to practical legal training in Land Hesse — Priority for applicants who have completed military or civilian service) (Sixth Chamber)
Ifølge de i Domstolens praksis fastsatte kriterier er det kun de bestemmelser, der finder forskellig anvendelse afhængig af vedkommende personers køn, der kan anses for at udgøre en direkte forskelsbehandling på grundlag af køn.
By order of 18 January 1999, the Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main (Administrative Court, Frankfurt am Main) referred for a preliminary ruling eight questions on the interpretation of Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976.