natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It contends that the coefficient relating to the duration of the infringement, determined unilaterally by the Commission without considering the extent to which the judgment has been complied with, does not reflect the existing situation and would be unfair to the Hellenic Republic.
Ona smatra da koeficijent koji se odnosi na trajanje povrede, a koji je Komisija jednostrano odredila ne uzimajući u obzir doseg u kojem se postupalo u skladu s presudom, ne odražava postojeću situaciju te bi bio nepravedan prema Helenskoj Republici.
While the Commission has a discretion to determine coefficients relating to seriousness, duration and the Member States' ability to pay, without their assent, it is exclusively for the Court to assess what is just, proportionate and equitable.
Prema mišljenju te vlade, iako Komisija ima diskrecijsku ovlast da odredi koeficijente s obzirom na težinu povrede, njezino trajanje i platežnu sposobnost država članica bez njihove suglasnosti, isključivo je na Sudu da procijeni što je pravedno, proporcionalno i pravično.
81 As to that, Article 171(1) of the Treaty provides that, if the Court finds that a Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaty, that State is required to take the necessary measures to comply with the Court's judgment.
81 U tom pogledu valja podsjetiti da članak 171. stavak 1. Ugovora predviđa da ako Sud utvrdi da je država članica povrijedila obvezu na temelju Ugovora, od te se države zahtijeva da poduzme potrebne mjere za postupanje u skladu s presudom Suda.
82 Article 171 of the Treaty does not specify the period within which a judgment must be complied with.
82 U članku 171. Ugovora nije određen rok u kojem se mora postupiti u skladu s presudom.
However, in accordance with settled case-law, the importance of immediate and uniform application of Community law means that the process of compliance must be initiated at once and completed as soon as possible (Case 131/84 Commission v Italy [1985] ECR 3531, paragraph 7, Case 169/87 Commission v France [1988] ECR 4093, paragraph 14, and Case C-334/94 Commission v France, cited above).
Međutim, u skladu s ustaljenom sudskom praksom, važnost žurne i ujednačene primjene prava Zajednice znači da postupak izvršenja treba započeti odmah i završiti ga što je prije moguće (presuda od 6. studenoga 1985., Komisija/Italija, 131/84, Zb., str. 3531., t. 7.; presuda od 13. srpnja 1988., Komisija/Francuska, 169/87, Zb., str. 4093., t. 14. i navedena presuda od 7. ožujka 1996., Komisija/Francuska, t. 31.).
83 If the Member State concerned has not taken the necessary measures to comply with the Court's judgment within the time-limit laid down by the Commission in the reasoned opinion adopted pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 171(2) of the Treaty, the Commission may bring the case before the Court.
83 Ako država članica na koju se to odnosi ne poduzme potrebne mjere za postupanje u skladu s presudom Suda u roku koji Komisija odredi u svojem obrazloženom mišljenju donesenom na temelju članka 171. stavka 2. podstavka 1. Ugovora, Komisija može predmet uputiti Sudu.
As provided in the second subparagraph of Article 171(2), the Commission is to specify the amount of the lump sum or penalty payment to be paid by the Member State concerned which it considers appropriate in the circumstances.
U smislu članka 171. stavka 2. podstavka 2. Ugovora Komisija određuje visinu paušalnog iznosa ili novčane kazne koju je država članica na koju se to odnosi dužna platiti, a koju smatra primjerenom s obzirom na okolnosti.
84 In the absence of provisions in the Treaty, the Commission may adopt guidelines for determining how the lump sums or penalty payments which it intends to propose to the Court are calculated, so as, in particular, to ensure equal treatment between the Member States.
84 Budući da u Ugovoru ne postoje odredbe u tom pogledu, valja priznati da Komisija može donijeti smjernice za određivanje izračuna paušalnih iznosa ili novčanih kazni koje namjerava predložiti Sudu, posebno kako bi osigurala jednako postupanje među državama članicama.
85 Memorandum 96/C 242/07 states that decisions as to the amount of a fine or penalty payment must be taken with an eye to their purpose, namely the effective enforcement of Community law.
85 U tom pogledu u navedenoj obavijesti 96/C 242/07 navodi se da kod određivanja iznosa kazne ili novčane kazne treba imati u vidu svrhu tog instrumenta, a to je učinkovita provedba prava Zajednice.
The Commission therefore considers that the amount must be calculated on the basis of three fundamental criteria: the seriousness of the infringement, its duration and the need to ensure that the penalty itself is a deterrent to continuation of the infringement and to further infringements.
Komisija stoga smatra da se iznos mora izračunati na osnovi triju temeljnih kriterija, tj. težine povrede, njezina trajanja te potrebe da se osigura da sama kazna ima odvraćajući učinak kojim se sprečava nastavak povrede ili ponovna povreda.
86 Communication 97/C 63/02 identifies the mathematical variables used to calculate the amount of penalty payments, that is to say a uniform flat-rate amount, a coefficient of seriousness, a coefficient of duration, and a factor intended to reflect the Member State's ability to pay while ensuring that the penalty payment is proportionate and has a deterrent effect, calculated on the basis of the gross domestic product of the Member States and the weighting of their votes in the Council.
86 U gore navedenoj obavijesti 97/C 3/02 utvrđuju se matematičke varijable korištene za izračun iznosa novčane kazne, odnosno ujednačeni paušalni iznos, koeficijent težine povrede, koeficijent trajanja i faktor koji odražava platežnu sposobnost države članice istovremeno osiguravajući da je novčana kazna proporcionalna te da ima odvraćajući učinak, da je izračunana na temelju bruto domaćeg proizvoda država članica i ponderiranja njihovih glasova u Vijeću.
87 Those guidelines, setting out the approach which the Commission proposes to follow, help to ensure that it acts in a manner which is transparent, foreseeable and consistent with legal certainty and are designed to achieve proportionality in the amounts of the penalty payments to be proposed by it.
87 Ta indikativna pravila kojima se utvrđuju smjernice koje Komisija namjerava slijediti pomažu osigurati da ona djeluje na transparentan, predvidljiv način u skladu s pravnom sigurnosti te s ciljem postizanja proporcionalnosti iznosa novčanih kazni koje ona predlaže.
88 The Commission's suggestion that account should be taken both of the gross domestic product of the Member State concerned and of the number of its votes in the Council appears appropriate in that it enables that Member State's ability to pay to be reflected while keeping the variation between Member States within a reasonable range.
88 U tom pogledu prijedlog Komisije da se vodi računa i o bruto domaćem proizvodu predmetne države članice i broju glasova koje ona ima u Vijeću primjeren je budući da se njime vodi računa o platežnoj sposobnosti te države članice pri čemu zadržava razlike između država članica u razumnom okviru.
89 It should be stressed that these suggestions of the Commission cannot bind the Court.
89 Valja naglasiti da ovi prijedlozi Komisije ne mogu biti obvezujući za Sud.
It is expressly stated in the third subparagraph of Article 171(2) of the Treaty that the Court, if it finds that the Member State concerned has not complied with its judgment ... may impose a lump sum or a penalty payment on it.
Ustvari, u članku 171. stavku 2. podstavku 3. Ugovora izričito se navodi da „Utvrdi li Sud da država članica nije postupila sukladno njegovoj presudi, može joj odrediti plaćanje paušalnog iznosa ili novčane kazne."
However, the suggestions are a useful point of reference.
Međutim, ti prijedlozi predstavljaju korisnu referentnu osnovicu.
90 First, since the principal aim of penalty payments is that the Member State should remedy the breach of obligations as soon as possible, a penalty payment must be set that will be appropriate to the circumstances and proportionate both to the breach which has been found and to the ability to pay of the Member State concerned.
90 Prvo, s obzirom da je glavni cilj novčane kazne da država članica okonča povredu obveze što je prije moguće, iznos novčane kazne mora se odrediti na način da je primjerena okolnostima i proporcionalna utvrđenoj povredi kao i platežnoj sposobnosti države članice na koju se odnosi.
91 Second, the degree of urgency that the Member State concerned should fulfil its obligations may vary in accordance with the breach.
91 Drugo, stupanj žurnosti ispunjenja obveza predmetne države članice može varirati u skladu s povredom.
92 In that light, and as the Commission has suggested, the basic criteria which must be taken into account in order to ensure that penalty payments have coercive force and Community law is applied uniformly and effectively are, in principle, the duration of the infringement, its degree of seriousness and the ability of the Member State to pay.
92 U tom pogledu i u skladu s prijedlogom Komisije osnovni kriteriji koji se moraju uzeti u obzir kako bi se osigurao prisilni karakter novčane kazne s ciljem jednake i učinkovite primjene prava Zajednice su, u načelu, trajanje povrede, stupanj težine povrede i platežna sposobnost države članice.
In applying those criteria, regard should be had in particular to the effects of failure to comply on private and public interests and to the urgency of getting the Member State concerned to fulfil its obligations.
Kod primjene tih kriterija treba posebno uzeti u obzir posljedice koje povreda ima na privatne i javne interese te žurnost zbog koje predmetna država članica treba ispuniti svoje obveze.
93 In the present case, having regard to the nature of the breaches of obligations, which continue to this day, a penalty payment is the means best suited to the circumstances.
93 U ovom predmetu valja napomenuti da, s obzirom na prirodu povreda obveza koje još uvijek traju, novčana je kazna najbolje sredstvo primjereno okolnostima.
94 As regards the seriousness of the infringements and in particular the effects of failure to comply on private and public interests, the obligation to dispose of waste without endangering human health and without harming the environment forms part of the very objectives of Community environmental policy as set out in Article 130r of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 174 EC).
94 S obzirom na težinu povreda te, posebno, posljedice koje povrede imaju na privatne i javne interese, obveza zbrinjavanja otpada na način koji ne ugrožava zdravlje ljudi i ne šteti okolišu sastavni je dio samih ciljeva politike Zajednice u području zaštite okoliša u skladu s člankom 130. R Ugovora o EZ-u (koji je nakon izmjene postao članak 174. UEZ-a).
The failure to comply with the obligation resulting from Article 4 of Directive 75/442 could, by the very nature of that obligation, endanger human health directly and harm the environment and must, in the light of the other obligations, be regarded as particularly serious.
Povreda obveze koja proizlazi iz članka 4. Direktive 75/442 mogla bi zbog same prirode te obveze izravno ugroziti zdravlje ljudi i štetiti okolišu te se mora, s obzirom na ostale obveze, smatrati osobito teškom.
95 The failure to fulfil the more specific obligations of drawing up a waste disposal plan and drawing up, and keeping up to date, plans for the disposal of toxic and dangerous waste, imposed by Article 6 of Directive 75/442 and Article 12 of Directive 78/319 respectively, must be regarded as serious in that compliance with those specific obligations was necessary in order for the objectives set out in Article 4 of Directive 75/442 and Article 5 of Directive 78/319 to be fully achieved.
95 Povreda posebnih obveza izrade planova za zbrinjavanje otpada te izrade i ažuriranja planova za zbrinjavanje toksičnog i opasnog otpada predviđenih člankom 6. Direktive 75/442 i člankom 12. Direktive 78/319 treba se smatrati teškom zato što je ispunjavanje tih posebnih obveza bilo potrebno kako bi se u potpunosti postigli ciljevi predviđeni u članku 4. Direktive 75/442 i članku 5. Direktive 78/319.
96 Thus, contrary to the Commission's submissions, the fact that specific measures have been taken, in accordance with Article 5 of Directive 78/319, to reduce the quantities of toxic and dangerous waste cannot have a bearing on the seriousness of the failure to comply with the obligation, under Article 12 of Directive 78/319, to draw up, and keep up to date, plans for the disposal of toxic and dangerous waste.
96 Stoga, suprotno tvrdnjama Komisije, činjenica da su poduzete posebne mjere u skladu s člankom 5. Direktive 78/319 kako bi se smanjile količine toksičnog i opasnog otpada ne može utjecati na težinu povrede obveze izrade i ažuriranja planova za zbrinjavanje toksičnog i opasnog otpada na temelju članka 12. Direktive 78/319.
97 In addition, account should be taken of the fact that it has not been proved that the Hellenic Republic has failed fully to comply with the obligation to dispose of toxic and dangerous waste from the area of Chania in accordance with Article 5 of Directive 78/319.
97 Nadalje valja uzeti u obzir činjenicu da nije dokazano da je Helenska Republika u potpunosti povrijedila obvezu zbrinjavanja toksičnog i opasnog otpada iz područja prefekture Chania u skladu s člankom 5. Direktive 78/319.
98 As regards the duration of the infringement, suffice it to state that it is considerable, even if the starting date be that on which the Treaty on European Union entered into force and not the date on which the judgment in Case C-45/91 was delivered.
98 S obzirom na trajanje povrede, dovoljno je navesti da je ona znatna čak i ako je počela s danom stupanja na snagu Ugovora o Europskoj uniji, a ne na dan donošenja gore navedene presude Komisija/Grčka.
99 Having regard to all the foregoing considerations, the Hellenic Republic should be ordered to pay to the Commission, into the account EC own resources, a penalty payment of EUR 20 000 for each day of delay in implementing the measures necessary to comply with the judgment in Case C-45/91, from delivery of the present judgment until the judgment in Case C-45/91 has been complied with.
99 Uzevši u obzir sva prethodna razmatranja, Helenskoj Republici valja naložiti da Komisiji uplati na račun „Vlastita sredstva Europske zajednice" novčanu kaznu u iznosu od 20 000 eura za svaki dan kašnjenja u provedbi mjera potrebnih za postupanje u skladu s presudom Komisija/Grčka, računajući od objave ove presude do postupanja u skladu s presudom Komisija/Grčka.
Decision on costs
Troškovi
Costs 100 Under Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs if they have been applied for in the successful party's pleadings.
100 Na temelju članka 69. stavka 2. Poslovnika, stranka koja ne uspije u postupku dužna je snositi troškove, ako je takav zahtjev postavljen.
Since the Commission has applied for costs and the Hellenic Republic has essentially been unsuccessful, the latter must be ordered to pay the costs.
Budući da je Komisija postavila zahtjev da se Helenskoj Republici naloži snošenje troškova i da ona nije uspjela u postupku, Helenskoj Republici nalaže se snošenje troškova.
The United Kingdom is to bear its own costs, in accordance with Article 69(4) of the Rules of Procedure.
U skladu s člankom 69. stavkom 4. Poslovnika Ujedinjena Kraljevina će snositi vlastite troškove.
On those grounds, THE COURT hereby:
Slijedom navedenoga, Sud proglašava i presuđuje:
1. Declares that, by failing to take the measures necessary to ensure that waste is disposed of in the area of Chania without endangering human health and without harming the environment in accordance with Article 4 of Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste and by failing to draw up for that area plans for the disposal of waste, pursuant to Article 6 of Directive 75/442, and of toxic and dangerous waste, pursuant to Article 12 of Council Directive 78/319/EEC of 20 March 1978 on toxic and dangerous waste, the Hellenic Republic has not implemented all the necessary measures to comply with the judgment of the Court of 7 April 1992 in Case C-45/91 Commission v Greece and has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 171 of the EC Treaty;
1. Budući da nije poduzela potrebne mjere kako bi osigurala zbrinjavanje otpada na području prefekture Chania na način koji ne ugrožava zdravlje ljudi i ne šteti okolišu, u skladu s člankom 4. Direktive 75/442/EEZ od 15. srpnja 1975. o otpadu i budući da zbog toga nije izradila planove zbrinjavanja otpada za tu regiju u skladu s člankom 6. Direktive 75/442, ni programe zbrinjavanja toksičnog i opasnog otpada u skladu s člankom 12. Direktive 78/319/EEZ, Helenska Republika nije poduzela sve potrebne mjere za postupanje u skladu s presudom od 7. travnja 1992., Komisija/Grčka (C-45/91) te je time povrijedila svoje obveze na temelju članka 171. Ugovora o EZ-u.
2. Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay to the Commission of the European Communities, into the account EC own resources, a penalty payment of EUR 20 000 for each day of delay in implementing the measures necessary to comply with the judgment in Case C-45/91, from delivery of the present judgment until the judgment in Case C-45/91 has been complied with;
2. Helenskoj Republici nalaže se da Komisiji Europskih zajednica uplati na račun „Vlastita sredstva Europske zajednice" novčanu kaznu u iznosu od 20.000 eura za svaki dan kašnjenja u provedbi mjera potrebnih za postupanje u skladu s gore navedenom presudom Komisija/Grčka, računajući od objave ove presude do postupanja u skladu s navedenom presudom Komisija/Grčka.
3. Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs;
3. Helenskoj Republici nalaže se snošenje troškova.
4. Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear its own costs.
4. Ujedinjenoj Kraljevini Velike Britanije i Sjeverne Irske nalaže se snošenje vlastitih troškova.
Judgment of the Court of 14 March 2000. - Free movement of capital - Direct foreign investments - Prior authorisation - Public policy and public security.
PRESUDA SUDA 14. ožujka 2000. () „Slobodno kretanje kapitala - Izravna strana ulaganja - Prethodno odobrenje - Javni poredak i javna sigurnostˮ
REFERENCE to the Court under Article 177 of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Conseil d'État, France, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
povodom zahtjeva za prethodnu odluku na temelju članka 177. Ugovora o EZ-u (koji je postao članak 234. UEZ-a), koji je uputio Conseil d'État (Francuska), u postupku koji se vodi pred tim sudom između
Association Église de Scientologie de Paris,
Association Église de Scientologie de Paris,
Scientology International Reserves Trust
Scientology International Reserves Trust
and The Prime Minister
i predsjednika Vlade
on the interpretation of Article 73d(1)(b) of the EC Treaty (now Article 58(1)(b) EC),
o tumačenju članka 73.d stavka 1. točke (b) Ugovora o EZ-u [koji je postao članak 58. stavak 1. točka (b) UEZ-a],
THE COURT,
SUD
composed of: G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias, President, J.C. Moitinho de Almeida, D.A.O. Edward, R. Schintgen (Presidents of Chambers), P.J.G. Kapteyn, C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), J.-P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch, H. Ragnemalm, M. Wathelet and V. Skouris, Judges,
u sastavu: G. C. Rodríguez Iglesias, predsjednik, J. C. Moitinho de Almeida, D. A. O. Edward i R. Schintgen, predsjednici vijeća, P. J. G. Kapteyn, C. Gulmann (izvjestitelj), J.-P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch, H. Ragnemalm, M. Wathelet i V. Skouris, suci,
Advocate General: A. Saggio,
nezavisni odvjetnik: A. Saggio,
Association Église de Scientologie de Paris and Scientology International Reserves Trust, by E. Piwnica and J. Molinié, Avocats having right of audience before the Conseil d'État and the Cour de Cassation,
za Association Église de Scientologie de Paris i Scientology International Reserves Trust, E. Piwnica i J. Molinié, Avocats s pravom zastupanja pred Conseil d'État i Cour de Cassation,
the French Government, by R. Abraham, Director of Legal Affairs in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and S. Seam, Foreign Affairs Secretary in the Legal Affairs Directorate of that Ministry, acting as Agents,
za francusku vladu, R. Abraham, direktor pravnih poslova u Ministarstvu vanjskih poslova i S. Seam, tajnik za vanjske poslove u upravi za pravne poslove tog ministarstva, u svojstvu agenta,
the Commission of the European Communities, by M. Patakia, of its Legal Service, acting as Agent,
za Komisiju Europskih zajednica, M. Patakia, članica pravne službe, u svojstvu agenta,
after hearing the oral observations of the French Government, represented by R. Abraham and S. Seam; the Greek Government, represented by F. Spathopoulos, Head of the Legal Service in the Ministry of Economic Affairs, acting as Agent; and the Commission, represented by M. Patakia, at the hearing on 7 September 1999,
saslušavši usmena očitovanja francuske vlade, koju zastupaju R. Abraham i S. Seam, grčke vlade, koju zastupa F. Spathopoulos, voditelj pravne službe u Ministarstvu gospodarstva, u svojstvu agenta, te Komisije koju zastupa M. Patakia, na raspravi održanoj 7. rujna 1999.,
1 By decision of 6 January 1999, received at the Court on 16 February 1999, the French Conseil d'État (Council of State) referred for a preliminary ruling under Article 177 of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) a question concerning the interpretation of Article 73d(1)(b) of the EC Treaty (now Article 58(1)(b) EC).
1 Odlukom od 6. siječnja 1999., koju je Sud zaprimio 16. veljače 1999., Conseil d'État je na temelju članka 177. Ugovora o EZ-u (koji je postao članak 234. UEZ-a) postavio prethodno pitanje o tumačenju članka 73.d stavka 1. točke (b) Ugovora o EZ-u [koji je postao članak 58. stavak 1. točka (b) UEZ-a].
2 This question has arisen in proceedings between, on the one hand, Association Église de Scientologie de Paris, an association constituted under French law, and Scientology International Reserves Trust, a trust established in the United Kingdom, and, on the other, the Prime Minister of France, concerning the latter's implied decision rejecting the applicants' request for repeal of the provisions governing the system of prior authorisation laid down by French law for certain categories of direct foreign investments.
2 To je pitanje postavljeno u okviru spora između Association Église de Scientologie de Paris, pravne osobe francuskog prava, i Scientology International Reserves Trust, zaklade osnovane u Ujedinjenoj Kraljevini, i predsjednika francuske vlade, u vezi s njegovom prešutnom odlukom o odbijanju njihovog zahtjeva za ukidanje odredaba kojima se uređuje sustav prethodnog odobrenja utvrđen francuskim pravom za određene kategorije izravnih stranih ulaganja.
The relevant Community law
Pravni okvir Zajednice
3 Article 73b(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 56(1) EC) provides:
3 Članak 73.b stavak 1. Ugovora o EZ-u (koji je postao članak 56. stavak 1. UEZ-a) propisuje:
Within the framework of the provisions set out in this Chapter, all restrictions on the movement of capital between Member States and between Member States and third countries shall be prohibited.
„U okviru odredaba određenih ovim poglavljem, zabranjena su sva ograničenja kretanja kapitala među državama članicama te između država članica i trećih zemalja.ˮ
4 Article 73d of the Treaty provides as follows:
4 Članak 73.d Ugovora propisuje sljedeće:
1. The provisions of Article 73b shall be without prejudice to the right of Member States:
„1. Odredbe članka 73.b ne dovode u pitanje pravo država članica:
(a) ...
(a) [...]