natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Dette er desuden den eneste fortolkning, der er i overensstemmelse med formålet med artikel 7 i direktiv 93/13.
Furthermore, that is the only interpretation consistent with the purpose of Article 7 of Directive 93/13.
Det ville således formindske effektiviteten af de søgsmål med påstand om, at anvendelsen af retsstridige klausuler bringes til ophør, som direktivbestemmelsen tager sigte på, betydeligt, hvis sådanne søgsmål kun kunne rejses i den stat, hvor den erhvervsdrivende er hjemmehørende.
Accordingly, the efficacy of the actions under that provision to prevent the continued use of unlawful terms would be considerably diminished if those actions could be brought only in the State where the trader is domiciled.
Karl Heinz Henkel og den franske regering har imidlertid gjort gældende, at der i Bruxelleskonventionens artikel 5, nr. 3, lægges vægt på det sted, hvor skadetilføjelsen er sket, og at bestemmelsen således, allerede efter sin ordlyd, forudsætter, at der foreligger en skade.
Finally, Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, while not applicable ratione temporis to the main proceedings, is such as to confirm the interpretation that Article 5(3) of the Brussels Convention does not presuppose the existence of damage. That regulation clarified the wording of
Endelig kan Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 44/2001 af 22. december 2000 om retternes kompetence og om anerkendelse og fuldbyrdelse af retsafgørelser på det civil- og handelsretlige omrade selv om forordningen ikke rent tidsmæssigt finder anvendelse på hovedsagen bekræfte, at Bruxelleskonventionens artikel 5, nr. 3, skal fortolkes således, at bestemmelsen ikke forudsætter, at der er indtrådt en skade. Ved forordnincen er affattelsen af Bruxelles-
Mr Henkel and the French Government have, however, submitted that Article 5(3) of the Brussels Convention refers to the place where the harmful event occurred and therefore presupposes, according to its actual terms, the existence of damage.
konventionens artikel 5, nr. 3, således blevet præciseret, idet bestemmelsen i dens nye affattelse som følge af forordningen omfatter »det sted, hvor skadetilføjelsen er foregået eller vil kunne foregå«.
In the absence of any reason for interpreting the two provisions in question differently, consistency requires that Article 5(3) of the Brussels Convention be given a scope identical to that of the equivalent provision of Regulation No 44/2001.
Da intet hensyn påbyder en forskellig fortolkning af de to bestemmelser, må kravet om den fornødne sammenhæng indebære, at Bruxelleskonventionens artikel 5, nr. 3, antages at have samme rækkevidde som den
This is all the more necessary given that that regulation is intended to replace the Brussels Convention in relations between Member States with the exception of the Kingdom of Denmark, with that convention continuing to apply between the Kingdom of Denmark and the Member States bound by that regulation.
»Kompetencereglerne i konventionen af 27. september 1968 om retternes kompetence og om fiddbyrdelse af retsafgørelser i borgerlige sager, herunder handelssager, som ændret ved konventionen af 9. oktober 1978 om Kongeriget Danmarks, Irlands og Det Forenede Kongerige Storbritannien og Nordirlands tiltrædelse, ved konventionen af 25. oktober 1982 om Den Hellenske Republiks tiltrædelse, ved konventionen af 26. maj 1989 om Kongeriget Spaniens og Den Portugisiske Republiks tiltrædelse og ved konventionen af 29. november 1996 om Republikken Østrigs, Republikken Finlands og Kongeriget Sveriges tiltrædelse, skal fortolkes således, at et præventivt søgsmål, som errejstafenforbrugerbeskyttelsesorganisation med påstand om, at en erhvervsdrivende tilpligtes at undlade at anvende vilkår, der anses for urimelige, i kontrakter med privatpersoner, er en sag om erstatning uden for kontrakt i konventionens artikel 5, nr. 3's forstand.«
' The rules on jurisdiction laid down in the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters of 27 September 1968, as amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the Accession of the Kingdom, of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, by the Convention of 25 October 1982 on the Accession of the Hellenic Republic, by the Convention of 26 May 1989 on the Accession of the Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese Republic and by the Convention of 29 November 1996 on the Accession of the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden, must be interpreted as meaning that a preventive action brought by a consumer protection organisation for the purpose of preventing a trader from using terms considered to be unfair in contracts with private individuals is a matter relating to tort, delict or quasidelict within the meaning of Article 5(3) ofthat convention.'
Generaladvokat F.G. Jacobs fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Sjette Afdeling) den 14. marts 2002.
Advocate General EG. Jacobs delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Sixth Chamber on 14 March 2002.
3. oktober 2002 fastsættelse forud for
He proposed that the Court should answer as follows:
Præjudiciel »Forordning (EØF) nr. 1408171 - artikel 1, litra r) og s), og artikel 46, stk. 2 af pensionsrettigheder forsikringsperioder, der er tilbagelagt forsikringsbegivenhedens indtræden — fiktive bidragsperioder«
'An action brought by a consumers' association under national consumer protection legislation to obtain an injunction prohibiting the use of unlawful or unconscionable general contractual terms and conditions is a matter relating to tort, delict or quasidelict within the meaning of Article 5(3) of the Brussels Convention on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.'
INSS beregnede det teoretiske beløb for ydelsen efter artikel 46, stk. 2, litra a), i forordning nr. 1408/71 ved til den bidragsperiode på 9 395 dage, der faktisk var tilbagelagt i Spanien og Tyskland (5 344 + 4 051), at tillægge den fiktive bidragsperiode på 3 005 dage, der tildeles arbejdstageren i medfør af den spanske lovgivning, som beskrevet ovenfor.
However, in order for an entitlement to a Spanish pension to arise, it was necessary to aggregate all of the periods of insurance completed in Germany and Spain pursuant to Article 45 of Regulation No 1408/71, owing to the fact that the periods completed in Spain did not add up to the 15-year qualifying period.
Ved kendelse af 17. juli 2000, indgået til Domstolen den 20. september 2000, har Juzgado de lo Social n° 3 de Orense i medfør af artikel 234 EF forelagt to præjudicielle spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen af artikel 1, litra r) og s), og artikel 46, stk. 2, i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1408/71 af 14. juni 1971 om anvendelse af de sociale sikringsordninger på arbejdstagere, selvstændige erhvervsdrivende og deres familiemedlemmer, der flytter inden for Fællesskabet, som ændret og ajourført ved Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 118/97 af 2. december 1996.
By order of 17 July 2000, received at the Court on 20 September 2000, the Juzgado de lo Social (Social Court) No 3, Orense, referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC two questions on the interpretation of Article l(r) and (s) and Article 46(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to selfemployed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community, as amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996.
Spørgsmålet er blevet rejst under en sag anlagt af Ángel Barreira Pérez mod Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (herefter »INSS«) vedrørende fastsættelsen af dennes ret til alderspension efter spansk lovgivning.
Those questions were raised in proceedings between Mr Barreira Pérez and the Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (National Social Security Institute) ('the INSS') concerning the award of his old-age pension rights under Spanish legislation.
Tvisten i hovedsagen
The dispute before the national court
Ángel Barreira Pérez, der er spansk statsborger, har arbejdet i Tyskland og Spanien.
Mr Barreira Pérez, who is of Spanish nationality, has worked in Germany and Spain.
Han gjorde i oktober 1999, i en alder af 65 år, krav på sin ret til pension efter tysk og spansk lovgivning.
In October 1999, aged 65, he asserted his rights to a retirement pension under German and Spanish legislation.
INSS medregnede imidlertid ikke denne fiktive bidragsperiode ved beregningen af den forholdsmæssige ydelse efter artikel 46, stk. 2, litra b), i forordning nr. 1408/71.
Under Article 46(2) (a) of Regulation No 1408/71, the INSS calculated the theoretical amount of the benefit, adding to the 9 395 days of actual contribution completed in Spain and Germany (5 344 + 4 051) the 3 005 days of notional contribution attributed to Mr Barreira Pérez under Spanish legislation, as described above.
Da Ángel Barreira Pérez havde indbetalt bidrag for 4 501 dage i Tyskland mellem juni 1963 og marts 1975, var han berettiget til en selvstændig tysk alderspension, dvs. uden at der skulle tages hensyn til forsikringsperioder tilbagelagt efter spansk lovgivning, og følgelig uden at de regler om sammenlægning og forholdsmæssig beregning, der er omhandlet i artikel 46, stk. 2, i forordning nr. 1408/71. fandt anvendelse.
Since he had paid contributions in Germany in respect of 4 051 days between June 1963 and March 1975, Mr Barreira Pérez was entitled to an independent German old-age pension, that is to say without periods of insurance completed under Spanish legislation being taken into account and, therefore, without application of the
Det var derimod nødvendigt at sammenlægge samtlige de forsikringsperioder, som han havde tilbagelagt i Tyskland og Spanien, i medfør af artikel 45 i forordning 1408/71, med henblik på erhvervelse af ret til spansk pension, idet de perioder, der var tilbagelagt i Spanien, ikke dækkede den nødvendige minimumsperiode på 15 år.
However, the INSS did not take that period of notional contribution into account in the calculation of the pro rata benefit under Article 46(2) (b) of Regulation No 1408/71.
De forsikringsperioder, der er tilbagelagt i Spanien, udgør således 5 344 dage, hvortil skal lægges 3 005 dage, der svarer til fiktive bidrag, som i henhold til den anden overgangsbestemmelse, stk. 3, litra b), i den ministerielle bekendtgørelse godskrives
Accordingly, that period was added neither to the 5 344 days of contribution completed in Spain, referred to in the numerator, nor to the 9 395 days of
rettigheder, der er under optjening i henhold til gamle alderdomsforsikringsordninger, der i dag er ophævet.
contribution completed in the two Member States, referred to in the denominator of the coefficient by which the theoretical amount of the old-age benefit is multiplied in order to determine the actual amount of benefit: as a result the coefficient used by the INSS was lower than the one which would have been applied if the period of notional contribution had been taken into account when the apportionment rule was applied.
dem, der er omhandlet i den spanske lovgivning, og som tildeles i forbindelse med fastsættelsen af pensionsrettigheder for at tage hensyn til de rettigheder, der er under optjening i henhold til gamle alderdomsforsikringsordninger, der i dag er ophævet, skal medregnes ved beregningen af det faktiske pensionsbeløb.
In that regard, it is apparent from the documents before the Court that the grant of additional periods provided for in paragraph 3 of the second transitional provision of the Ministerial Order is intended, generally speaking, to protect, by reference to the recipient's age on 1 January 1967 and in accordance with a fixed scale provided for that purpose, rights which were in the course of being acquired under previous insurance schemes and which the worker would otherwise have lost.
Tillægsperioder som dem, der er omtvistet i hovedsagen, skal, i modsætning til det af INSS og den spanske regering anførte, anses for at være forsikringsperioder, der er tilbagelagt forud for forsikringsbegivenhedens indtræden, i den forstand, hvori udtrykket anvendes i artikel 46, stk. 2, litra b), i forordning nr. 1408/71.
Mr Barreira Pérez brought an action against the INSS's decision determining his old-age pension on that basis.
Indholdet af begrebet »forsikringsperioder« er defineret i artikel 1, litra r), i forordning nr. 1408/71, hvorefter der ved dette begreb forstås »bidrags- eller beskæftigelsesperioder eller perioder med selvstændig virksomhed, der i den lovgivning, hvorefter de er tilbagelagt eller anses for at være tilbagelagt, betegnes eller anerkendes som forsikringsperioder, samt alle dermed ligestillede perioder, for så vidt de efter denne lovgivning anses for ligestillet med forsikringsperioder«.
Although they are not taken into account in the calculation of the qualifying period for entitlement to an old-age pension, those additional periods are nevertheless added to periods of actual insurance in the calculation of the amount of the pension.
Det følger heraf, at definitionen dækker forsikringsperioder som fastlagt alene i henhold til national lovgivning, herunder perioder, der efter denne lovgivning ligestilles med forsikringsperioder, hvorved det dog er en forudsætning, at der sker en iagttagelse af artikel 39 EF og 42 EF.
Since it took the view that the case before it turned on an interpretation of the relevant Community law, the Juzgado de lo Social No 3, Orense, decided to stay proceedings and to refer two questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling.
Det forhold, at perioderne først tildeles ved fastsættelsen af pensionen, modsiger ikke denne vurdering, idet det samme er tilfældet for samtlige faktiske forsikringsperioder, der medregnes ved beregningen af det teoretiske og det faktiske beløb efter artikel 46, stk. 2, i forordning nr. 1408/71.
By its first question the national court is essentially seeking to ascertain whether the proper construction of Article l(r) and (s) of Regulation No 1408/71 is that additional periods such as those provided for by Spanish legislation, attributed when pension rights are awarded in order to take account of rights which were in the course of being acquired under previous old-age insurance schemes which have now been discontinued, are to be regarded as periods of insurance within the meaning of that regulation.
Det fremgår i den forbindelse af sagen, at tildelingen af de tillægsperioder, der er omhandlet i stk. 3 i den anden overgangsbestemmelse i den ministerielle bekendtgørelse, generelt har til formål at sikre de rettigheder — i forhold til den berettigedes alder den 1. januar 1967 og i henhold til en fast tabel, der er fastsat herfor — der er under optjening i henhold til de gamle pensionsordninger, og som arbejdstageren ellers ville miste.
By its second question, the national court is essentially seeking to ascertain whether the proper construction of Article 46(2)(b) of Regulation No 1408/71 is that additional periods such as those provided for by Spanish legislation, attributed when pension rights are awarded in order to take account of rights which were in the course of being acquired under previous old-age insurance schemes which have now been discontinued, are to be taken into account in the calculation of the actual amount of the pension.
Selv om tillægsperioderne ikke medregnes ved beregningen af den minimumsperiode, der er en betingelse for erhvervelse af retten til alderspension, lægges de ikke desto mindre til de faktiske forsikringsperioder ved beregningen af pensionsbeløbet.
In that regard, contrary to the view expressed by the INSS and the Spanish Government, additional periods such as those at issue in the main proceedings are periods of insurance completed before materialisation of the risk for the purposes of Article 46(2)(b) of Regulation No 1408/71.
De tillægsperioder, der er omhandlet i hovedsagen, må under disse omstændigheder anses for at være forsikringsperioder i den forstand, hvori udtrykket anvendes i artikel 1, litra r), i forordning nr. 1408/71.
'Periods of insurance' is defined in Article l(r) of Regulation No 1408/71 as 'periods of contribution or period[s] of employment or selfemployment as defined or recognised as periods of insurance by the legislation under which they were completed or considered as completed, and all periods treated as such, where they are regarded by the said legislation as equivalent to periods of insurance'.
Med det andet spørgsmål ønsker den forelæggende ret nærmere bestemt oplyst, om artikel 46, stk. 2, litra b), i forordning nr. 1408/71 skal fortolkes således, at tillægsperioder som
The grant of additional periods provided for by the Spanish transitional legislation in point before the national court is intended specifically to protect rights which were in the course of being acquired under previous old-age insurance schemes.
Det forhold, at de tillægsperioder, der er omtvistet i hovedsagen, ikke kan fastsættes tidsmæssigt, således at de kan falde sammen med forsikringsperioder, der er tilbagelagt efter lovgivningen i en anden medlemsstat, er heller ikke til hinder for, at de medregnes ved beregningen af pensionen.
It follows that that definition encompasses periods of insurance determined under national legislation alone, in particular periods treated by that legislation as periods of insurance, provided, however, that Articles 39 EC and 42 EC are observed.
indtræden« i artikel 46, stk. 2, litra b), i forordning nr. 1408/71 (jf. i denne retning dom af 18.2.1992, sag C-5/92, Di Prinzio, præmis 54).
insurance or residence completed under the legislation of another Member State and are, where advantageous, to be taken into account.
Dette indebærer, at det faktiske beløb skal beregnes på grundlag af samtlige fiktive bidragsperioder, herunder de tillægsperioder, der er omtvistet i hovedsagen, som ligger forud for forsikringsbegivenhedens indtræden, og som lægges til eller ligestilles med de faktiske forsikringsperioder efter den lovgivning, der gælder for den kompetente institution.
The fact that those periods are attributed only at the time when pension rights are awarded is not at variance with that analysis, since the same is true of any periods of actual insurance which are taken into account in the calculation of the theoretical amount and the actual amount in accordance with Article 46(2) of Regulation No 1408/71.
Det skal derfor fastslås, at i et tilfælde, som det i hovedsagen foreliggende, hvor de tillægsperioder, der anerkendes af den gældende nationale lovgivning, ligger forud for forsikringsbegivenhedens indtræden, skal disse perioder medregnes ikke blot ved beregningen af det teoretiske beløb efter artikel 46, stk. 2, litra a), i forordning nr. 1408/71, men også ved beregningen af det faktiske ydelsesbeløb, således som det i øvrigt udtrykkeligt fremgår af udtrykket »forsikring- eller bopælsperioder, der er tilbagelagt [...] forud for forsikringsbegivenhedens
The Court therefore concludes that in a case such as that in the main proceedings where the additional periods recognised by the applicable national legislation occur prior to the materialisation of the risk, those periods must be taken into account not only in the calculation of the theoretical amount under Article 46(2)(a) of Regulation No 1408/71 but also in the calculation of the actual amount of the benefit, as is, moreover, apparent from the express terms 'periods of insurance ... completed before the materialisation of the risk' in Article 46(2)(b) of that regulation (see, to that effect, Case C-5/91 Di Prinzio [1992], paragraph 54).
Artikel 46, stk 2, litra b), i forordning nr. 1408/71, som ændret og ajourført ved forordning nr. 118/97, skal fortolkes således, at tillægsperioder som dem, der er omhandlet i den spanske lovgivning, og som tildeles i forbindelse med fastsættelsen af pensionsrettigheder for at tage hensyn til de rettigheder, der er under optjening i henhold til gamle alderdomsfornkringsordninger, der i dag er ophævet, skal medregnes ved beregningen af det faktiske pensionsbeløb.«
The proper construction of Article 46(2) (b) of Regulation No 1408/71, as amended and updated by Regulation No 118/97, is that additional periods such as those provided f or by Spanish legislation, attributed when pension rights are awarded in order to take account of rights which were in the course of being acquired under previous old-age insurance schemes which have now been discontinued, are to be taken into account in the calculation of the actual amount of the pension.'
Sag C-47/01 Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber / Kongeriget Spanien Miljø- og forbrugerbeskyttelse
Case C-47/01 Commission of the European Communities ν Kingdom of Spain Environment and consumers
»Traktatbrud -- artikel 4, stk. 1, og artikel 11 i direktiv 96/59/EF om bortskaffelse af polychlorbiphenyler og polychlorterphenyler (PCB/PCT)« (Fjerde Afdeling) fremsatte den en begrundet udtalelse den 18. september 2000. Kongeriget Spanien blev heri anmodet om at træffe de nødvendige foranstaltninger for at efterkomme udtalelsen inden for en frist på to måneder fra dens meddelelse.
(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Articles 4(1) and 11 of Directive 96/59/EC on the disposal of pofychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls (PCB/PCT)) (Fourth Chamber) showed that that Member State had not yet complied with its obligations under Articles 4(1) and 11 of the Directive, and hence issued a reasoned opinion, on 18 September 2000, calling on the Kingdom of Spain to take the measures necessary to comply with that opinion within two months of its notification.
Ved stævning indleveret til Domstolens Justitskontor den 5. februar 2001 har Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber i medfør af artikel 226 EF anlagt sag med påstand om, at det fastslås, at Kongeriget Spanien har tilsidesat sine forpligtelser i henhold til Rådets direktiv 96/59/EF af 16. september 1996 om bortskaffelse af polychlorbiphenyler og polychlorterphenyler (PCB/PCT), idet det ikke har udarbejdet eller i det mindste ikke har tilsendt Kommissionen planen, den skitserede plan samt sammenfatningen af fortegnelsen, således som det er foreskrevet i direktivets artikel 4, stk. 1, og artikel 11.
By application lodged at the Court Registry on 5 February 2001, the Commission of the European Communities brought an action under Article 226 EC for a declaration that, by failing to draw up, or in any event to communicate to the Commission, the plan, outline and summary of the inventory provided for in Articles 4(1) and 11 of Council Direttive 96/59/EC of 16 September 1996 on the disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls (PCB/PCT), the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under those provisions of the Directive.
De spanske myndigheder besvarede den begrundede udtalelse ved skrivelse af 6. november 2000, der var vedlagt afgørelsen om, at den nationale plan for dekontaminering og bortskaffelse af PCB- og PCT-affald samt af apparater indeholdende disse stoffer, der var fremsat af generaldirektøren for miljøkvalitet og -vurdering under Miljøministeriet, skulle sendes til offentlig høring.
The Spanish authorities replied to that opinion by letter of 6 November 2000, to which was appended a copy of the opinion submitting to a public inquiry the decision taken by the Director-General of environmental quality and assessment at the Ministry of the Environment in respect of the national plan for decontamination and disposal of PCB and PCT discharges and equipment containing those substances.
Da Kommissionen fandt, at Kongeriget Spanien ikke havde overholdt de forpligtelser, som følger af direktivet, har den anlagt denne sag.
Taking the view that the Kingdom of Spain had not complied with its obligations under the Directive, the Commission decided to bring the present action.