natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
36 — Jf. bl.a. kendelse af 17.2.2005, sag C-250/03, Mauri, Sml. I, s. 1267, præmis 30, og dom i Cipolla m.fl.-sagen, præmis 47.
36 — See, in particular, the order in Case C-250/03 Mauri [2005] ECR I-1267, paragraph 30, and Cipolla and Others, paragraph 47.
34 — Samme dom, præmis 46.
34 — Ibid., paragraph 46.
37 — Sag C-35/99, Sml. I, s. 1529.
37 — Case C-35/99 [2002] ECR I-1529.
Heller intet i sagsakterne antyder, at loven af 1958 forstærker en allerede bestående aftale.
Nor is there any evidence in the documents before the Court to suggest that the law in question reinforces a pre-existing agreement.
Endelig giver den forelæggende ret ikke nogen indikation af de omstændigheder, hvorunder loven af 1958 blev vedtaget, der kunne lede tanken hen på, at Kongeriget Belgien havde delegeret ansvaret for at træffe en afgørelse om reklame vedrørende tandpleje, som loven af 1958 kun udgjorde kodificeringen af, til private erhvervsdrivende.
Finally, the referring court provides no indication as to the circumstances in which the Law of 1958 was adopted, which would support the assumption that the Kingdom of Belgium had delegated to economic operators responsibility for taking a decision on advertising in the dental care sector and that the Law of 1958 simply codified that decision.
Det udtaltes, at det ikke kunne antages, at den pågældende medlemsstat havde delegeret ansvaret for at træffe afgørelser om økonomiske indgreb til private erhvervsdrivende, hvilket ville have medført, at den pågældende nationale foranstaltning ville blive frataget sin statslige karakter, eller at den havde foreskrevet eller fremmet indgåelsen af aftaler, der er i strid med artikel 81 EF, eller forstærket virkningerne heraf 39.
The Court held that the Member State concerned, on the one hand, could not be said to have delegated to private economic operators responsibility for taking decisions affecting the economic sphere, which would have the effect of depriving the national measure at issue of the character of legislation, or, on the other hand, to have required or encouraged the adoption of agreements, decisions or concerted practices contrary to Article 81 EC or to have reinforced their effects. 39
Det må konstateres, at intet i sagen her kan godtgøre, at loven af 1958 fremmer, forstærker eller kodificerer en aftale eller en vedtagelse inden for sammenslutninger af virksomheder.
Clearly, there is no evidence in this case to show that the Law of 1958 encourages, reinforces or codifies concerted practices or decisions by undertakings.
Det bemærkes, at begrundelsen for, at den forelæggende ret har stillet Domstolen det undersøgte præjudicielle spørgsmål, på ingen måde vedrører en af de situationer for anvendelse af artikel 10 EF sammenholdt med 81 EF, der er udledt ved retspraksis.
It should be noted, in this regard, that the grounds on which the national court referred the question for a preliminary ruling under consideration to the Court are unrelated to either of the situations for the combined application of Articles 10 EC and 81 EC which have been established by case-law.
Der erindres om, at den forelæggende ret var i tvivl om anvendelsen af disse artikler i hovedsagen på grund af dels de mulige virkninger af loven af 1958 på konkurrencen mellem medlemsstaterne, dels det forhold, at Ioannis Doulamis kan anses for en virksomhed ifølge definitionen af begrebet »virksomhed« i retspraksis.
It should be recalled that the referring court has questioned whether those articles are applicable in the main proceedings because of the possible effects of the Law of 1958 on competition between the Member States and the fact that Mr Doulamis may be deemed to be an undertaking according to the definition of the term ‘undertaking’ given in case-law.
Som Kommissionen har påpeget, hverken foreskriver eller fremmer denne lov ved at forbyde reklame af enhver art vedrørende tandpleje indgåelsen af aftaler, der er i strid med artikel 81 EF.
Thus, as the Commission observes, that law, in prohibiting advertising of any kind in the dental care sector, neither requires nor encourages the adoption of agreements, decisions or concerted practices contrary to Article 81 EC.
Efter min mening ligger loven af 1958 uden for anvendelsesområdet for artikel 81 EF, sammenholdt med artikel 10 EF.
That is why I am of the opinion that the Law of 1958 does not fall within the scope of Article 81 EC, read in conjunction with Article 10 EC.
Jeg foreslår derfor Domstolen at svare den forelæggende ret, at artikel 81 EF og artikel 3, stk. 1, litra g), EF, sammenholdt med artikel 10, afsnit 2, EF, skal fortolkes således, at de ikke er til hinder for en national lov, som forbyder
I therefore propose that the Court’s answer to the referring court should be that Article 81 EC, Article 3(1)(g) EC and the second paragraph of Article 10 EC, read in conjunction, must be interpreted as
DOULAMIS personer, der yder tandpleje inden for rammerne af et liberalt erhverv eller en tandlægepraksis, direkte eller indirekte at gøre nogen som helst offentlig reklame for deres ydelser.
DOULAMIS meaning that they do not preclude a national law which prohibits dental care providers, in the context of professional services or a dental surgery, from engaging in advertising of any kind of their services, whether directly or indirectly, to the general public.
grænseoverskridende karakter.
crossborder element.
I henhold til fast retspraksis kan bestemmelserne ikke anvendes på en situation, hvis samtlige relevante elementer findes inden for en enkelt medlemsstat 42.
It is settled caselaw that those provisions cannot be applied to situations which are confined in all respects within a single Member State.
En statsborger fra en medlemsstat kan således ikke påberåbe sig fællesskabsretten, hvis han ikke har udøvet sit erhverv eller fået sin uddannelse i en anden af Den Europæiske Unions stater 43.
42Thus, a national of a Member State cannot rely on Community law if he has not exercised his profession or acquired his training in another State of the European Union. 43
Foreneligheden af loven af 1958 med etableringsfriheden og retten til fri udveksling af tjenesteydelser
Whether the Law of 1958 is compatible with the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services
Ifølge de af den forelæggende ret fremsendte oplysninger ses det ikke, at hovedsagen har nogen forbindelse med fællesskabsretten.
In the light of the information provided by the referring court, there does not appear to be anything to link the dispute in the main proceedings to Community law.
Ifølge disse oplysninger udøver Ioannis Doulamis rent faktisk sin virksomhed i Belgien, hvor han er etableret, og retsforfølges dér for at have indrykket reklameannoncer i en national telefonbog.
According to that information, Mr Doulamis pursues his activities in Belgium, where he is established, and has been prosecuted in that Member State for having placed advertisements in a national telephone directory.
Endvidere fremgår det af sagsakterne, at han har fået sine kvalifikationsbeviser i tandproteseteknik og virksomhedsledelse i Belgien.
Moreover, it is clear from the documents before the Court that he obtained his qualifications as a dental prosthetics technician and in business management in Belgium.
Endelig angiver den forelæggende ret ikke, at Ioannis Doulamis skulle være flyttet inden for Fællesskabet for at udøve sit erhverv.
Finally, the referring court does not indicate that Mr Doulamis has moved within the Community in order to exercise his profession.
Medicinsk og paramedicinsk virksomhed, bl.a. vedrørende tandpleje, omfattes således af anvendelsesområdet for de traktatbestemmelser, der sikrer bevægelsesfrihederne.
Medical and paramedical activities, in particular those which relate to dental care, therefore fall within the scope of the Treaty provisions guaranteeing the freedoms of movement.
Denne vurdering styrkes af ordlyden af artikel 47, stk. 3, EF, for så vidt angår etableringsfriheden.
That analysis is borne out by the wording of Article 47(3) EC with respect to the freedom of establishment.
Den er ligeledes i overensstemmelse med fast retspraksis, for så vidt angår både denne grundlæggende frihed 40 og den frie udveksling af tjenesteydelser 41.
It is also consistent with settled caselaw as regards both that fundamental freedom 40and the freedom to provide services. 41
Det eneste faktiske forhold, der ifølge de af Domstolen fremførte oplysninger ligger uden for Belgien, er Ioannis Doulamis’ fødested, nemlig Grækenland.
The only factor which is external to Belgium, on the basis of the information provided to the Court, is Mr Doulamis’s place of birth, in Greece.
I mangel af oplys-
However, in the
Anvendelsen af traktatens bestemmelser om disse bevægelsesfriheder er ganske vist underordnet forekomsten af et forhold med
It is true that whether the Treaty provisions on those freedoms of movement are applicable depends on whether there is a
41 — Jf. for så vidt angår lægevirksomhed, dom af 31.1.1984, forenede sager 286/82 og 26/83, Luisi og Carbone, Sml. s. 377, samt hvad angår tandpleje, dom af 28.4.1998, sag C-158/96, Kohll, Sml. I, s. 1931.
41 — See, with regard to medical activities, Joined Cases 286/82 and 26/83 Luisi and Carbone [1984] ECR 377, as well as, with regard to dental care and, specifically, orthodontic treatment, Case C-158/96 Kohll [1998] ECR I-1931.
43 — Jf. for så vidt angår en terapeut, dom af 3.10.1990, forenede sager C-54/88, C-91/88 og C-14/89, Nino m.fl., Sml. I, s. 3537, præmis 11.
43 — See, with regard to a therapist, Joined Cases C-54/88, C-91/88 and C-14/89 Nino and Others [1990] ECR I-3537, paragraph 11.
FORSLAG TIL AFGØRELSE FRA GENERALADVOKAT BOT — SAG C-446/05 situation. Denne retspraksis, der er udledt i forbindelse med den frie bevægelighed for varer i dom af 5. december 2000, Guimont 44, er blevet anvendt i forbindelse med de øvrige bevægelsesfriheder 45.
OPINION OF MR BOT — CASE C-446/05 movement of goods in Guimont, 44 has been applied in the context of the other freedoms of movement.
ninger om den berørtes nationalitet er hans fødested ikke tilstrækkeligt til at godtgøre, at han befinder sig i en situation som en fællesskabsstatsborger, der ønsker at udøve selvstændig virksomhed i en anden medlemsstat end sin oprindelsesstat.
45 absence of information on Mr Doulamis’s nationality, his place of birth alone is not sufficient to establish that he is in the position of a Community national wishing to pursue an activity as a selfemployed person in a Member State other than his State of origin.
Det tilkommer den forelæggende ret at efterprøve dette punkt og undersøge, om Ioannis Doulamis er statsborger i en anden medlemsstat end Kongeriget Belgien.
It will be for the referring court to verify that point and to examine whether Mr Doulamis is a national of a Member State other than the Kingdom of Belgium.
Endvidere kan det udledes af forelæggelsesafgørelsens begrundelse, at Tribunal de première instance de Bruxelles søger at vurdere foreneligheden af den nationale lovgivning ikke alene i forhold til artikel 81 EF, sammenholdt med artikel 3, stk. 1, litra g), EF og artikel 10, afsnit 2, EF, men også i forhold til fællesmarkedets regler for gennemførelsen af et indre marked, hvilket nødvendigvis omfatter reglerne om bevægelsesfrihederne.
Moreover, it may be inferred from the grounds of the order for reference that the Tribunal de première instance de Bruxelles is seeking to assess the compatibility of its national legislation not only with Article 81 EC, read in conjunction with Article 3(1)(g) EC and the second paragraph of Article 10 EC, but also with the rules of the common market aimed at establishing a single market, which necessarily includes those relating to the freedoms of movement.
Hvis det ikke er tilfældet, bør det, hvis tvisten i hovedsagen i givet fald ikke indeholder forhold af grænseoverskridende karakter, ikke fritage Domstolen fra at give den forelæggende ret de nødvendige oplysninger til vurdering af, om loven af 1958 er forenelig med artikel 43 EF og 49 EF.
If that is not so, the fact that the dispute in the main proceedings may be devoid of any crossborder element should not, however, discharge the Court from its obligation to provide the referring court with the information needed in order to assess the compatibility of the Law of 1958 with Articles 43 EC and 49 EC.
Endelig må det ikke glemmes, at inden for rammerne af den samarbejdsprocedure, der er indført med artikel 234 EF, har Domstolen til opgave at give den forelæggende ret et hensigtsmæssigt svar, som sætter den i stand til at afgøre den tvist, der verserer for den 46, og at det i henhold til fast retspraksis påhviler Domstolen at fortolke alle de fællesskabsretlige bestemmelser, som den forelæggende ret har behov for til dette
Finally, it should be recalled that, in the procedure laid down by Article 234 EC providing for cooperation between national courts and the Court of Justice, it is for the latter to provide the national court with an answer which will be of use to it and enable it to determine the case before it, 46 and that, in accordance with settled caselaw, the Court
44 — Sag C-448/98, Sml. I, s. 10663, præmis 23.
44 — Case C-448/98 [2000] ECR I-10663, paragraph 23.
45 — Jf. hvad angår frie kapitalbevægelser, dom af 5.3.2002, forenede sager C-515/99, C-519/99 — C-524/99 og C-526/99-C — 540/99, Reisch m.fl., Sml. I, s. 2157, præmis 26, og af 15.5.2003, sag C-300/01, Salzmann, Sml. I, s. 4899, præmis 33.
45 — See, with regard to the free movement of capital, Joined Cases C-515/99, C-519/99 to C-524/99 and C-526/99 to C-540/99 Reisch and Others [2002] ECR I-2157, paragraph 26, and Case C-300/01 Salzmann [2003] ECR I-4899, paragraph 33.
46 — Jf. bl.a. dom af 8.3.2007, sag C-45/06, Campina, Sml. I, s. 2089, præmis 30 og den deri nævnte retspraksis.
46 — See, in particular, Case C-45/06 Campina [2007] ECR I-2089, paragraph 30 and the caselaw cited.
Det fremgår nemlig af Domstolens praksis, at den accepterer at fortolke rækkevidden af de ved traktaten sikrede bevægelsesfriheder, selv om hovedsagen ikke indeholder grænseoverskridende forhold, med den begrundelse, at denne fortolkning kan være anvendelig for den forelæggende ret for løsningen af den verserende hovedsag, såfremt den nationale lovgivning kræver af retten, at en indenlandsk statsborger skal tildeles de samme rettigheder som dem, en statsborger fra en anden medlemsstat ville kunne støtte på fællesskabsretten i samme
It is clear from the caselaw of the Court that it will interpret the scope of the freedoms of movement guaranteed by the Treaty where the dispute in the main proceedings does not contain any crossborder element, on the ground that that interpretation may be useful to the national court in resolving the dispute which has been brought before it in the main proceedings, in circumstances where the national court is bound by its domestic law to allow a national to enjoy the same rights as those which a national of another Member State would derive from Community law in the same situation. That caselaw, which was established in the context of the free
DOULAMIS formål, uanset om der er henvist til disse bestemmelser i de spørgsmål, som den forelæggende ret har stillet den, såfremt denne har givet Domstolen de faktiske og retlige elementer, som gør en sådan fortolkning mulig 47.
DOULAMIS accordance with the caselaw of the Court, that article not only requires the abolition of discriminatory measures but is also applicable, according to the very broad expression often used by the Court, to ‘all measures which prohibit, impede or render less attractive the exercise of that freedom’.
ophævelse af diskriminerende foranstaltninger. Den finder ifølge det af Domstolen ofte brugte brede udtryk anvendelse på »alle foranstaltninger, som forbyder, medfører ulemper for eller gør udøvelsen af denne frihed mindre interessant« 48.
48 has a duty to provide interpretations of all the provisions of Community law which the national court needs for that purpose, even if those provisions are not expressly indicated in the questions referred to it by that court, provided that the latter has furnished the Court with the factual and legal material necessary to enable such an interpretation to be given. 47
Blandt de restriktioner, der således er omhandlet i artikel 43 EF, optræder foranstaltninger, som, selv om de anvendes uden forskel, påvirker udøvelsen af det pågældende erhverv, og som har til virkning, at en erhvervsdrivende fratages en effektiv konkurrencemulighed for at trænge ind på et marked 49.
The restrictions covered in this way by Article 43 EC include measures which, even though they apply without distinction, affect the conditions for pursuing the activity concerned and have the effect of depriving an economic operator of an effective means of competing with a view to penetrating a market. 49
Jeg er derfor af den opfattelse, at der bør gives den forelæggende ret de oplysninger, som med hensyn til rækkevidden af artikel 43 EF og 49 EF er hensigtsmæssige for løsningen af tvisten i hovedsagen.
I am therefore of the opinion that the referring court should be given guidance as to the scope of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC which will be of use to it in resolving the dispute in the main proceedings.
Jeg vil således efter tur anføre, hvorledes en medlemsstats lov som loven af 1958, for så vidt som den forbyder personer, der yder tandpleje, at gøre nogen som helst offentlig reklame for deres ydelser, udgør en begrænsning som omhandlet i disse artikler.
Accordingly, I shall set out in turn the reasons why a law of a Member State such as the Law of 1958, in prohibiting dental care providers from engaging in advertising of any kind of their services to the general public, constitutes a restriction within the meaning of those articles.
Jeg vil dernæst angive, i hvilken udstrækning en sådan begrænsning kan være berettiget.
I shall then indicate the extent to which such a restriction may be justified.
Dette forekommer mig at være tilfældet med en medlemsstats lovgivning, der forbyder at gøre nogen som helst reklame vedrørende tandpleje.
That appears to me to be true of the legislation of a Member State which prohibits advertising of any kind in the dental care sector.
a) Spørgsmålet, om der foreligger en restriktion efter betydningen i artikel 43 EF og artikel 49 EF
(a) Whether there is a restriction within the meaning of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC
Reklamens betydning for at få adgang til et marked er gentagne gange blevet understreget af Domstolen på området for fri varebevægelighed.
The importance of advertising in gaining access to a market has already been highlighted by the Court on a number of occasions in the area of the free movement of goods.
Den ved artikel 43 EF indførte etableringsfrihed indebærer ret til at optage og udøve selvstændig erhvervsvirksomhed i en anden medlemsstat og til at udøve erhvervet vedvarende. I henhold til Domstolens praksis foreskriver denne artikel ikke alene
The freedom of establishment provided for in Article 43 EC includes the right to take up an occupation as a selfemployed person in another Member State and to pursue that occupation there on a permanent basis.
47 — Jf. bl.a. dom af 21.2.2006, sag C-152/03, Ritter-Coulais, Sml. I, s. 1711, præmis 29 og den deri nævnte retspraksis.
47 — See, in particular, Case C-152/03 Ritter­Coulais [2006] ECR I-1711, paragraph 29 and the caselaw cited.
49 — Jf. vedrørende den franske lovgivning om forbud mod at forrente indlån på anfordringskonti, dommen i sagen Caixa-Bank France, præmis 12.
49 — See, as regards the French rules prohibiting the remuneration of sight accounts, CaixaBank France, paragraph 12.
FORSLAG TIL AFGØRELSE FRA GENERALADVOKAT BOT — SAG C-446/05
OPINION OF MR BOT — CASE C-446/05 on the public highway is liable to impede access to the market by products from other Member States more than it impedes access by domestic products, with which consumers are instantly more familiar. 53
det ikke kunne udelukkes, at et fuldstændigt forbud, som gælder i en medlemsstat mod en form for salgsfremmende foranstaltning for en vare, som lovligt sælges i medlemsstaten, i højere grad har indvirkning på varer fra andre medlemsstater.
Thus, in De Agostini and TV­Shop, 50 the Court held that it cannot be excluded that an outright ban, applying in one Member State, of a type of promotion for a product which is lawfully sold there might have a greater impact on products from other Member States.
I dom af 8. marts 2001, Gourmet International Products 51, udtalte Domstolen sig
In Gourmet International Products, 51the Court gave a ruling on legislation prohib-
I dom af 15. juli 2004, Douwe Egberts 54, nåede Domstolen til samme konklusion som i ovennævnte dom i Gourmet International Products-sagen vedrørende et absolut forbud mod reklame for en vares egenskaber, i forbindelse med en national lov med forbud mod i reklame for levnedsmidler at anvende angivelserne slankning og lægelige anbefalinger, attester, erklæringer eller råd eller godkendelser.
In Douwe Egberts, 54the Court reached the same conclusion as in Gourmet Interna­tional Products in relation to national legislation prohibiting references in the advertising of foodstuffs to slimming and to medical recommendations, attestations, declarations or statements of approval.
om en lovgivning med forbud mod enhver udsendelse af reklamemeddelelser for alkoholholdige drikkevarer over for forbrugerne, bortset fra mindre betydningsfulde undtagelser.
iting, with a few insignificant exceptions, the directing of any advertising messages for alcoholic beverages at consumers.
Domstolen udtalte, at et sådant reklameforbud må anses for i højere grad at påvirke afsætningen af varer med oprindelse i andre medlemsstater end indenlandske varer og dermed for at udgøre en hindring for samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne, som er omfattet af anvendelsesområdet for artikel 28 EF 52.
It held that such a prohibition on advertising must be regarded as affecting the marketing of products from other Member States more heavily than the marketing of domestic products and as therefore constituting an obstacle to trade between Member States caught by Article 28 EC. 52
Domstolen byggede denne vurdering på den betragtning, at når der er tale om varer som alkoholholdige drikkevarer, hvis indtagelse er knyttet til samfundsmæssige traditioner samt til skik og brug og lokale sædvaner, kan et forbud mod enhver reklame over for
The Court based that analysis on the fact that, in the case of products such as alcoholic beverages, the consumption of which is linked to traditional social practices and to local habits and customs, a prohibition of all advertising directed at consumers in the form of advertisements in the press, on the radio and on television, the direct mailing of unsolicited material or the placing of posters
Grundene til, at Domstolen nåede til en sådan konklusion inden for rammerne af fortolkningen af artikel 28 EF vedrørende et forbud mod at gøre reklame for varer, kan efter min mening overføres til rammerne for fortolkning af artikel 43 EF i forbindelse med en medlemsstats lovgivning, der forbyder personer, der yder tandpleje, at gøre nogen som helst reklame for deres ydelser.
It appears to me that the grounds on which the Court reached such a conclusion when interpreting Article 28 EC with respect to a ban on the advertising of goods can be applied to the interpretation of Article 43 EC in connection with the legislation of a Member State which prohibits dental care providers from engaging in advertising of any kind of their services.
50 — Sag C-34/95 — C-36/95, Sml.
50 — Joined Cases C-34/95 to C-36/95 [1997] ECR I-3843, paragraph 42.
I, s. 3843, præmis 42.51 — Sag C-405/98, Sml. I, s. 1795.52 — Præmis 25.
51 — Case C-405/98 [2001] ECR I-1795.52 — Paragraph 25.
53 — Præmis 21.54 — Sag C-239/02, Sml. I, s. 7007, præmis 53.
53 — Paragraph 21.54 — Case C-239/02 [2004] ECR I-7007, paragraph 53.
DOULAMIS er stødt på store forhindringer, og hvor den gensidige anerkendelse har nødvendiggjort en omfattende harmonisering fra fællesskabslovgivers side.
DOULAMIS met with significant obstacles and in which the need for mutual recognition has led to extremely wide-ranging harmonisation by the Community legislature.