natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
50320" R‹" qot‹fgv" hqt" uqekcnrqnkvkm" umcn" u¹tnkiv" vq" fqoog" p¹xpgu0" K" fgp" h¼tuvg" fqo." Cncdcuvgt/ucigp"*fqo"ch"520504226."uci"E/369124."Uon0"K."u0"5323+."umwnng"Fqouvqngp"r‹" cpoqfpkpi"htc"Eqwtv"qh"Crrgcn"vcig"uvknnkpi"vkn."qo"fgt"xgf"dgtgipkpigp"ch"fgp"nqxdguvgovg" dctugnu{fgnug"umwnng"vcigu"jgpu{p"vkn"n¼phqtj¼lgnugt0"
15 and for payment for the hours they the 48-hour limit laid down by Directive 93/104 worked in excess of that weekly limit.
Hqt"u‹"xkfv"cpi‹t"uciudgjcpfnkpiuvkfgp"gt"fgppg"uvgigv"ngv"k"hqtjqnf"vkn"fg"ugpguvg"vtg"‹t < " K"4226"xct"fgp"igppgoupkvnkig"uciudgjcpfnkpiuvkf"44.8"o‹pgfgt"hqt"cpftg"ucigt"gpf" fgo."fgt"xgft¼tgt"u¹tnkig"qot‹fgt."u‹uqo"koocvgtkcntgv"qi"rgtuqpcngucigt0
The average duration of proceedings increased slightly compared with the preceding three years: in 2004 the average duration was 22.6 months for cases other than those falling within the special areas constituted by intellectual property cases and staff cases.
Cmvkpfukiv
Access to the file
Ur¼tiuo‹ngv" gt" qhvg" dngxgv" tgluv" qo." jxqtxkfv" xktmuqojgfgtpg." fgt" gt" cftguucvgt" hqt" fg" dgunwvpkpigt."fgt"gt"vcigv"k"jgpjqnf"vkn"ctvkmgn"33."uvm0"7."k"hqtqtfpkpi"pt0"3938."jct"gp"cduqnwv"tgv" vkn"cv"p¹ivg"cv"wfvcng"uki"k"hqtdkpfgnug"ogf."cv"fg"dnkxgt"dgfv"qo"cv"htgougpfg"xkuug"qrn{upkpigt0" Fqouvqngp" *fqoogpg" ch" 3:03203;:;." uci" E/5961:9."Qtmgo" oqf" Mqookuukqpgp." Uon0"" u0"54:5."qi"ch"3703204224."hqtgpgfg"ucigt"E/45:1;;"R."E/4661;;"R."E/4671;;"R."E/4691;;"R." E/4721;;" R" Î" E/4741;;" R" qi" E/4761;;" R." Nkodwtiug" Xkp{n" Occvuejcrrkl" o0Þ0 oqf Mqookuukqpgp." Uon0" K." u0" :597+" qi" Tgvvgp" *fqo" ch" 420404223." uci" V/3341;:." Ocppguocppt…jtgp/Ygtmg"oqf"Mqookuukqpgp."Uon0"KK."u0"94;+"jct"kh¼nig"hcuv"tgvurtcmuku" hwpfgv."cv"cpgtmgpfgnugp"ch"fgppg"tgv"vkn"cv"p¹ivg"cv"wfvcng"uki"u‹ngfgu"xknng"x¹tg"ogtg" xkfvi‹gpfg"gpf"p¼fxgpfkiv"hqt"cv"ukmtg"xktmuqojgfgtpgu"tgv"vkn"hqtuxct"qi"xknng"wfi¼tg"gp" wdgitwpfgv"jkpftkpi"hqt"Mqookuukqpgpu"qrh{nfgnug"ch"rnkivgp"vkn"cv"r‹ug."cv"mqpmwttgpegtgingtpg" qxgtjqnfgu"kpfgp"hqt"h¹nnguoctmgfgv."qi"cv"gp"tgv"vkn"cv"p¹ivg"cv"wfvcng"uki"mcp"mwp"cpgtmgpfgu." u‹htgov"fgp"qojcpfngfg"xktmuqojgf"fgtxgf"vxkpigu"vkn"cv"chikxg"vknuv‹gnug"qo"cv"jcxg"dgi‹gv" tgvuuvtkfkig"jcpfnkpigt."uqo"fgv"r‹jxkngt"Mqookuukqpgp"cv"h¼tg"dgxku"hqt0"Fgv"h¼nigt"jgtch."cv" Mqookuukqpgp" hqt" cv" ukmtg." cv" dguvgoognugtpg" k" ctvkmgn" 33" k" hqtqtfpkpi" pt0" 39" h‹t" hwnf" igppgounciumtchv."jct"dgh¼lgnug"vkn"cv"r‹n¹iig"xktmuqojgfgt"fgnu"cv"ogffgng"cnng"p¼fxgpfkig" qrn{upkpigt"qo"fg"qouv¹pfkijgfgt."uqo"xktmuqojgfgtpg"mcp"v¹pmgu"cv"x¹tg"dgmgpfv" ogf."fgnu."qo"p¼fxgpfkiv."cv"htgon¹iig"fg"fqmwogpvgt"qo"fkuug"qouv¹pfkijgfgt."uqo" xktmuqojgfgtpg"gt"k"dgukffgnug"ch."ugnx"qo"fg"xkn"mwppg"cpxgpfgu"uqo"dgxku"hqt."cv"fgt"gt" dngxgv" jcpfngv" k" uvtkf" ogf" mqpmwttgpegtgingtpg0" Fgv" h¼nigt" ch" fg" ucoog" fqoog." cv" Mqookuukqpgpu"qrn{upkpiudgh¼lgnug"kmmg"gt"k"uvtkf"ogf"ctvkmgn"8."uvm0"3"qi"4."k"mqpxgpvkqpgp" vkn"dgum{vvgnug"ch"ogppgumgtgvvkijgfgt"qi"itwpfn¹iigpfg"htkjgfutgvvkijgfgt0"
Orkem v Commission [1989] ECR 3283 and Joined Cases C-238/99 P, C-244/99 P, C-245/99 P, C-247/99 P, C-250/99 P to C-252/99 P and C-254/99 P Limburgse Vinyl Maatschappij and Others v Commission [2002] ECR I-8375) and the Court of First Instance (Case T-112/98 Mannesmannröhren-Werke v Commission [2001] ECR II-729) have consistently held that to acknowledge the existence of such a right would be to go beyond what is necessary in order to preserve the rights of defence of undertakings and would constitute an unjustified hindrance to the Commission’s performance of its duty to ensure that the rules on competition within the common market are observed and that a right to silence can be recognised only to the extent that the undertaking concerned would be compelled to provide answers which might involve an admission on its part of the existence of an infringement which it is incumbent upon the Commission to prove.
Cmvkpfukiv
Court of First Instance
Î" Cmvkpfukiv"000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000";3
– Access to the file ....................................................................................91
I0"Cmvkpfukiv"00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000"339
G. Access to documents........................................................................................ 117
D0"Xguvgtfqth."rt¹ukfgpv"hqt"Tgvvgp R0"Nkpfj."chfgnkpiuhqtocpf L0"C¦k¦k."chfgnkpiuhqtocpf L0"Rkttwpi."chfgnkpiuhqtocpf J0"Ngicn."chfgnkpiuhqtocpf T0"Icte‡c/Xcnfgecucu"{"Hgtpƒpfg¦."fqoogt X0"Vkknk."fqoogt L0F0"Eqqmg."fqoogt O0"Lcgigt."fqoogt R0"Ogpiq¦¦k."fqoogt C0Y0J0"Ogkl."fqoogt O0"Xknctcu."fqoogt P0L0"Hqtyqqf."fqoogt O0G0"Octvkpu"fg"Pc¦ctfi"Tkdgktq."fqoogt H0"Fgjqwuug."fqoogt
B. Vesterdorf, President of the Court of First Instance P. Lindh, President of Chamber J. Azizi, President of Chamber J. Pirrung, President of Chamber H. Legal, President of Chamber R. García-Valdecasas y Fernández, Judge V. Tiili, Judge J.D. Cooke, Judge M. Jaeger, Judge P. Mengozzi, Judge A.W.H. Meij, Judge M. Vilaras, Judge N.J. Forwood, Judge M.E. Martins de Nazaré Ribeiro, Judge F. Dehousse, Judge
Unqxgpkgpu"lwuvkvuokpkuvgt."Kxcp"Dk¦lcm
Mr Ivan Bizjak, Minister for Justice of Slovenia
Ucongv"qxgtukiv"hqt"Fqouvqngp
General activity of the Court
ÇU¹tnkig tgvvgticpiuhqtogtÅ qohcvvgt < hcuvu¹vvgnug ch uciuqomquvpkpigt *rtqegutgingogpvgvu ctvkmgn 96+. htk rtqegu *rtqegutgingogpvgvu ctvkmgn 98+. dgi¹tkpi qo igpqrvcignug ch gp fqo *rtqegutgingogpvgvu ctvkmgn ;6+. vtgflgocpfukpfukignugt *rtqegutgingogpvgvu ctvkmgn ;9+. hqtvqnmpkpi ch gp fqo *rtqegutgingogpvgvu ctvkmgn 324+. gmuvtcqtfkp¹t igpqrvcignug *rtqegutgingogpvgvu ctvkmgn ;:+. dgtkivkignug ch gp fqo *rtqegutgingogpvgvu ctvkmgn 88+. dgi¹tkpi qo wfn¹i gnngt cttguv *rtqvqmqnngp xgft¼tgpfg rtkxkngikgt qi koowpkvgvgt+ qi ucigt qo koowpkvgvuur¼tiuo‹n"*rtqvqmqnngp"xgft¼tgpfg"rtkxkngikgt"qi"koowpkvgvgt+0 38:
The following are considered to be ‘special forms of procedure’: taxation of costs (Article 74 of the Rules of Procedure); legal aid (Article 76 of the Rules of Procedure); application to set a judgment aside (Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure); third party proceedings (Article 97 of the Rules of Procedure); interpretation of a judgment (Article 102 of the Rules of Procedure); revision of a judgment (Article 98 of the Rules of Procedure); rectification of a judgment (Article 66 of the Rules of Procedure); attachment procedure (Protocol on Privileges and Immunities); cases concerning immunity (Protocol on Privileges and Immunities).
Chfgnkpigt"ogf vtg fqoogtg 56.3:'
Chambers (3 judges)34,18%
Chfgnkpigt"ogf hgo" fqoogtg 43.29'
Chambers (3 judges)6,79%
Chfgnkpigt"ogf vtg" fqoogtg Chfgnkpigt"ogf" hgo" fqoogtg Gpgfqoogt Tgvvgpu"rt¹ukfgpv
Nature of proceedings (2000-2004)Subject-matter of the action (2000-2004)
DE EUROPÆISKEFÆLLESSKABERS DOMSTOL
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
ÅRSRAPPORT 2006
ANNUAL REPORT 2006
Oversigt over arbejdet ved De Europæiske Fællesskabers Domstol, De Europæiske Fællesskabers Ret i Første Instansog Retten for EU-Personalesager
Synopsis of the Work of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, the Court of First Instance of the European Communities and the European Union Civil Service Tribunal
De Europæiske Fællesskabers Domstol L-2925 Luxembourg Tlf. (352) 43 03-1Justitskontorets telex: 2510 CURIA LUDomstolens telefax: (352) 43 03-2600
Court of Justice of the European Communities L-2925 Luxembourg Telephone: (352) 43 03-1Telex (Registry): 2510 CURIA LUFax (Court of Justice): (352) 43 03-2600
De Europæiske Fællesskabers Ret i Første Instans L-2925 Luxembourg Tlf. (352) 43 03-1Rettens telefax: (352) 43 03-2100
Court of First Instance of the European Communities L-2925 Luxembourg Telephone: (352) 43 03-1Fax (Court of First Instance): (352) 43 03-2100
Retten for EU-Personalesager L-2925 Luxembourg Tlf. (352) 43 03-1
European Union Civil Service Tribunal L-2925 Luxembourg Telephone: (352) 43 03-1
Presse- og Informationsafdelingens telefax: (352) 43 03-2500
Fax (Press and Information Division): (352) 43 03-2500
Den Interne Tjenestes telefax – Publikationsafdelingen: (352) 43 03-2650
Fax (Internal Services Division — Publications Section): (352) 43 03-2650
Redaktionen afsluttet den 31. december 2006
Completed on: 31 December 2006
Gengivelse tilladt med kildeangivelse.
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
Fotografierne må alene gengives i forbindelse med denne publikation.
The photographs may be reproduced only in the context of this publication.
Til enhver anden brug skal tilladelse indhentes hos De Europæiske Fællesskabers Publikationskontor
For any other use, authorisation must be sought from the Oce for Ocial Publications of the European Communities.
Forord ved Domstolens præsident, Vassilios Skouris ........................................................................................................................................... 5
Foreword, by Mr Vassilios Skouris, President of the Court of Justice ........................................5
A – Domstolens udvikling og arbejde i 2006 ................................................................................9
A — The Court of Justice in 2006: changes and proceedings ..................................................9
Domstolens sammensætning efter rangfølge .............................................................. 75
Former Members of the Court of Justice ........................................................................ 75
C – Statistik over retssagerne ved Domstolen ........................................................................... 79
C — Statistics concerning the judicial activity of the Court of Justice ................................ 77
A – Arbejdet ved Retten i Første Instans i 2006 ......................................................................109
A — Proceedings of the Court of First Instance in 2006 ........................................................107
B – Retten i Første Instans’ sammensætning ...........................................................................155
B — Composition of the Court of First Instance .......................................................................153
Retten i Første Instans’ medlemmer ..............................................................................157
Members of the Court of First Instance ........................................................................155
Ændringer i Retten i Første Instans’ sammensætning i 2006 ................................167
Changes in the composition of the Court of First Instance in 2006 ...................165
Årsrapport 2006
Annual Report 2006
Indholdsfortegnelse
Court of Justice
Retten for EU-Personalesager
The European Union Civil Service Tribunal
A – Retten for EU-personalesagers arbejde i 2006 ................................................................197
A — Proceedings of the Civil Service Tribunal in 2006 ...........................................................195
B – Retten for EU-personalesagers sammensætning ..........................................................203
B — Composition of the Civil Service Tribunal .........................................................................201
Retten for EU-personalesagers medlemmer ..............................................................205
Members of the Civil Service Tribunal ..........................................................................203
Sammensætning efter rangfølge ...................................................................................209
C — Statistics concerning the judicial activity of the Civil Service Tribunal ...................209
A – Officielle besøg og arrangementer ved Domstolen, Retten i Første Instans og EU-Personaleretten ............................................................................................................221
A — Ocial visits and events at the Court of Justice, the Court of First Instance and the Civil Service Tribunal .................................................................................................219
B – Studiebesøg .................................................................................................................................223
B — Study visits .................................................................................................................................... 223
C – Højtidelige retsmøder ..............................................................................................................227
C — Formal sittings .............................................................................................................................227
D – Besøg og deltagelse i officielle arrangementer ...............................................................229
D — Visits and participation in ocial functions .....................................................................229
I det år, der netop er gået til ende, er der blevet iværksat en refleksionsproces, som i nær fremtid skal føre til vedtagelsen af en ny type procedure.
In the year which has just drawn to a close, discussion began with a view to the adoption, in the not too distant future, of a new type of procedure.
Da den er tiltænkt en hurtig behandling af præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende bestemmelser vedtaget inden for området for frihed, sikkerhed og retfærdighed, kunne den kaldes den »præjudicielle hasteprocedure«.
The procedure is intended to deal expeditiously with references for a preliminary ruling on provisions adopted relating to the area of freedom, security and justice, and might be called ‘the emergency preliminary ruling procedure’.
Faktisk kræver visse anmodninger om præjudiciel afgørelse inden for dette område, som befinder sig i en rivende udvikling, en særlig hurtig behandling, enten på grund af sagens følsomme natur eller som følge af de meget strenge frister, der er fastsat i fællesskabsretsforskrifter.
Certain references for a preliminary ruling in this rapidly developing field will need to be handled with particular expedition, whether because of their sensitive nature or because of very strict time limits laid down by the Community legislation.
Da de nuværende processuelle rammer ikke kan opfylde sådanne krav, er det alene en ny type procedure, som kan sikre den nødvendige effektivitet.
Since the current procedural framework is not suited to meeting such needs, only a new type of procedure is capable of providing the necessary guarantees of eciency.
Dernæst har 2006 været kendetegnet ved en delvis udskiftning af Domstolen, hvilket indebar seks medlemmers fratræden.Ved udnævnelserne i forbindelse med denne delvise udskiftning har medlemsstaternes regeringer taget hensyn til ønsket om at bevare institutionens stabilitet, hvilket har givet denne mulighed for gnidningsløst at udfylde sin rolle.
Also, 2006 was marked by the partial renewal of the membership of the Court, entailing the departure of six of its members. When the new appointments were made, the Governments of the Member States were concerned to safeguard the stability of the institution, thereby enabling it to continue smoothly in the performance of its task.
Domstolen kan kun glæde sig herover.
The Court cannot but welcome this.
De efterfølgende sider i denne rapport indeholder en samlet fremstilling af institutionens udvikling og arbejde i 2006.
This Report contains a full record of changes aecting the institution and of its work in 2006.
Sædvanen tro er en væsentlig del helliget en kortfattet, men udtømmende, beskrivelse af selve det judicielle arbejde ved Domstolen, Retten i Første Instans og EU-Personaleretten, ledsaget af statistiske oplysninger.
As usual, a substantial part of the Report is devoted to succinct but exhaustive accounts of the main judicial activity of the Court of Justice, the Court of First Instance and the Civil Service Tribunal, accompanied by statistics.
V. Skouris Domstolens præsident
V. Skouris President of the Court of Justice
Udviklingen og arbejdet
Proceedings
A – Domstolens udvikling og arbejde i 2006
A — The Court of Justice in 2006: changes and proceedings
Ved Domstolens præsident, Vassilios Skouris
By Mr Vassilios Skouris, President of the Court of Justice
Denne del af årsrapporten indeholder en sammenfatning af Domstolen for De Europæiske Fællesskabers virke i 2006.
This part of the Annual Report gives an overview of the activity of the Court of Justice of the European Communities in 2006.
For det første giver den en oversigt over institutionens udvikling i dette år med vægt på de institutionelle ændringer, der har haft indvirkning på Domstolen, og på udviklingen med hensyn til den interne organisation og dens arbejdsmetoder (afsnit 1).
It describes, first, how the institution evolved during that year, with the emphasis on the institutional changes aecting the Court and developments relating to its internal organisation and working methods (Section 1).
For det andet indeholder den en analyse af statistikkerne vedrørende udviklingen i institutionens arbejdsbyrde samt den gennemsnitlige sagsbehandlingstid (afsnit 2).
It includes, second, an analysis of the statistics in relation to developments in the Court’s workload and the average duration of proceedings (Section 2).
For det tredje præsenteres den væsentligste udvikling i retspraksis, inddelt efter emne (afsnit 3).
It presents, third, as each year, the main developments in the case-law, arranged by subject-matter (Section 3).
Domstolens institutionelle udvikling i 2006 er hovedsageligt blevet kendetegnet ved vedtagelsen af foranstaltninger til forberedelse af Republikken Bulgariens og Rumæniens tiltrædelse den 1. januar 2007 (afsnit 1.1).
The main development in 2006 for the Court as an institution was constituted by the adoption of preparatory measures for the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and of Romania on 1 January 2007 (Section 1.1).
Det forgangne år var ligeledes EU-Personalerettens første arbejdsår (afsnit 1.2) og det år, hvori den lovgivningsproces, der skal føre til indførelsen af en procedure, der giver mulighed for en hurtig og hensigtsmæssig behandling af præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende området for frihed, sikkerhed og retfærdighed, er blevet iværksat (afsnit 1.3).
The past year was also the first in which the Civil Service Tribunal operated (Section 1.2), and a legislative process was embarked upon to establish a procedure for the expeditious and appropriate handling of references for preliminary rulings concerning the area of freedom, security and justice (Section 1.3).
Halvandet år efter udvidelsen i 2004 og modtagelsen af 20 nye dommere ved institutionen måtte Domstolen påbegynde forberedelserne af Republikken Bulgariens og Rumæniens tiltrædelse den 1. januar 2007.
A year and a half after the enlargement in 2004 when 20 new judges were welcomed to the institution, the Court of Justice had to commence preparations for the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and of Romania on 1 January 2007.
I januar 2006 blev der nedsat en ad hocarbejdsgruppe, som skulle identificere de forskellige tjenestegrenes behov og sikre en koordinering af samtlige forberedelser på administrativt niveau.
In January 2006 an ad hoc working group was set up in order to identify the needs of the various departments and to ensure coordination of all the preparatory work at administrative level.
Desuden er man allerede den 1. juli 2006 begyndt at ansætte personalet til disse to nye sprogafdelinger i oversættelsestjenesten.
In addition, from 1 July 2006, members of staff were recruited to work in the two new language units in the Translation Directorate.
For så vidt angår tilrettelæggelsen af det judicielle arbejde har Domstolen med henblik på Republikken Bulgariens og Rumæniens tiltrædelse besluttet at oprette en ny afdeling med fem dommere samt en ny afdeling med tre dommere.
As regards the organisation of judicial work, the Court decided, in view of the forthcoming accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and of Romania, to create an additional chamber of five judges and an additional chamber of three judges.
Ved Domstolen er der således fremover fire afdelinger med fem dommere (Første, Anden, Tredje og Fjerde Afdeling) og fire afdelinger med tre dommere (Femte, Sjette, Syvende og Ottende Afdeling).
The Court now has four five-judge chambers (the First, Second, Third and Fourth Chambers) and four three-judge chambers (the Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Chambers).
Der er tilknyttet seks dommere til hver afdeling med fem dommere og fem dommere til hver afdeling med tre dommere. Afdelingerne sættes efter den rotationsordning, der er fastsat i procesreglementet 1.
Each five-judge chamber is composed of six judges, and each three-judge chamber of five judges, who sit in rotation in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Rules of Procedure 1.
Ved afgørelse af 2. december 2005, offentliggjort i Den Europæiske Unions Tidende den 12. december 2005, blev det konstateret, at Retten for EU-personalesager var gyldigt oprettet.
By decision of 2 December 2005, published in the Ocial Journal on 12 December 2005, it was declared that the European Union Civil Service Tribunal was duly constituted.
2006 blev således det første hele kalenderår, hvori denne nye jurisdiktion har virket, og dens første dom blev afsagt den 26. april 2006.
Thus, 2006 was the first full calendar year in which this new body has operated, and it delivered its first judgment on 26 April 2006.
Efter tiltrædelsen af de bulgarske og rumænske dommere er der tilknyttet syv dommere til Anden og Tredje Afdeling og seks dommere til Sjette og Syvende Afdeling.
Once the Bulgarian and Romanian Judges arrive, the Second and Third Chambers will comprise seven judges, while the Sixth and Seventh Chambers will each be composed of six judges.
Som følge af formandskabets konklusioner fra det Europæiske Råd i Bruxelles den 4. og 5. november 2004 er Domstolen og Den Europæiske Unions politiske organer begyndt at overveje, hvilke foranstaltninger der kunne vedtages for at sikre en hurtig behandling af præjudicielle forelæggelser vedrørende området for frihed, sikkerhed og retfærdighed.
In response to the Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels European Council of 4 and 5 November 2004, the Court of Justice and the political organs of the European Union began consideration of the measures which could be adopted in order to ensure the expeditious handling of references for a preliminary ruling concerning the area of freedom, security and justice.
I den sammenhæng har Domstolen den 25. september 2006 fremlagt et første oplæg vedrørende behandling af præjudicielle spørgsmål inden for området for frihed, sikkerhed og retfærdighed 2. I dette dokument har Domstolen bl.a. konstateret, at de eksisterende procedurer, herunder hasteproceduren i procesreglementets artikel 104a, ikke kan sikre en tilstrækkelig hurtig behandling af denne sagstype, og anført, at det ville være hensigtsmæssigt at påtænke en ny procedure, som kunne kaldes den »præjudicielle hasteprocedure«. Domstolen har herved fremlagt to forslag til denne procedure.
On 25 September 2006, the Court of Justice submitted an initial discussion paper on the treatment of questions referred for a preliminary ruling concerning the area of freedom, security and justice 2.
Den 14. december 2006 forelagde Domstolen Rådet for Den Europæiske Union et supplement til oplægget, som indeholder en mere deltaljeret gennemgang af disse to procedureforslag 3.
On 14 December 2006, the Court submitted to the Council of the European Union a supplement to that discussion paper, which contains a more detailed analysis of the two procedural options 3.
Den nu iværksatte lovgivningsprocedure vil føre til vedtagelsen af nødvendige ændringer til Domstolens statut og procesreglement, således at Domstolen kan imødegå denne søgsmålstype så effektivt som muligt.
This legislative process which is now under way will lead to the adoption of the necessary amendments to the Statute of the Court of Justice and its Rules of Procedure, so that the Court may deal with this type of case with maximum eciency.