natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Finally, there are three noteworthy judgments concerning the eective judicial protection of rights derived from Community law that is to be enjoyed by individuals.
Kadar določeno področje ni urejeno s pravom Skupnosti, urejajo morebitno sprejetje začasnih odredb merila nacionalnega prava, če sta spoštovani navedeni načeli enakovrednosti in učinkovitosti.
This procedural autonomy, which is limited by the principles of equivalence and eectiveness, could be called into question only if it were apparent from the overall scheme of the national legal system in question that no legal remedy exists which makes it possible to ensure, even indirectly, respect for an individual’s rights under Community law.
I-2107) je Sodišče med drugim spomnilo na to, da imajo posamezniki, če je država članica pobrala davke s kršitvijo pravil prava Skupnosti, pravico do vračila neupravičeno obračunanega davka in tudi zneskov, ki so bili plačani in so neposredno povezani s tem davkom.
That having been said, the Court observed that the principle of eective judicial protection of an individual’s rights under Community law does not require domestic law to provide a free-standing action for an examination of whether national provisions are compatible with Community law, provided that other eective legal remedies, which are no less favourable than those governing similar domestic actions, make it possible for such a question of compatibility to be determined as a preliminary issue, which is a matter for the national court to establish.
To pomeni, da kadar se izkaže, da pomeni zakonodaja države članice oviro za svobodo ustanavljanja, ki je prepovedana s členom 43 ES, lahko predložitveno sodišče pri določitvi škode, ki jo je treba povrniti, preveri, ali so oškodovanci ravnali z razumno skrbnostjo, da bi se tej škodi izognili ali da bi zmanjšali njen obseg, in zlasti ali so pravočasno uporabili vsa pravna sredstva, ki so jih imeli na voljo.
In concrete terms, if an individual is forced to be subject to administrative or criminal proceedings and to any penalties that may result as the sole form of legal remedy for disputing the compatibility of the contested national provision with Community law, his judicial protection is not eectively secured.
Nemogoča ali preveč otežena bi bila tudi uporaba določb, ki se nanašajo na svobodo ustanavljanja, če bi bilo treba zahtevke za vračilo ali zahtevke za povrnitev škode, ki bi temeljili na kršitvi prava Skupnosti, zavrniti ali zmanjšati samo zato, ker zadevne družbe od davčne uprave niso zahtevale, da bi pri vračilu posojila povezani družbi nerezidentki lahko plačale obresti, ne da bi bile te opredeljene kot razdeljeni dobiček, čeprav je v obravnavanih okoliščinah nacionalno pravo, v tem primeru v povezavi z upoštevnimi določbami sporazuma o izogibanju dvojnega obdavčevanja, določalo tako opredelitev.
Finally, the Court inferred from the principle of eective judicial protection that the Member States are obliged to provide for the possibility of interim relief being granted to an individual until the competent court has given a ruling on whether the national provisions at issue are compatible with Community law, where the grant of such relief is necessary to ensure the full eectiveness of the judgment to be given.
Nato je Sodišče spomnilo tudi na to, da je treba pri ugotavljanju, ali je podana dovolj resna kršitev prava Skupnosti, upoštevati vse dejavnike, ki so značilni za zadevo, predloženo nacionalnemu sodišču.
In the absence of relevant Community legislation, the grant of any interim relief is governed by the criteria in national law, subject to observance of the principles of equivalence and eectiveness referred to above.
Slednje mora na področju, kot je področje neposrednih davkov, upoštevati, da so bile posledice, ki izhajajo iz prostega pretoka in jih zagotavlja Pogodba, le postopno pojasnjene, zlasti z načeli, ki jih je določilo Sodišče v sodni praksi.
In Case C-524/04 Test Claimants in the Thin Cap Group Litigation [2007] ECR I-2107, the Court pointed out that, where a Member State has levied charges in breach of the rules of Community law, individuals are entitled to reimbursement of the tax unduly levied and of the amounts paid which relate directly to that tax.
V združenih zadevah van der Weerd in drugi (sodba z dne 7. junija 2007, od C-222/05 do C-225/05) je Sodišče odločalo zlasti o vprašanju, ali pravo Skupnosti v okviru sodnega postopka o zakonitosti upravnega akta nacionalnemu sodišču nalaga, naj opravi preizkus po uradni dolžnosti na podlagi meril, ki niso bila navedena v podlagi spora, ampak izhajajo iz Direktive 85/511 o uvedbi ukrepov Skupnosti za obvladovanje slinavke in parkljevke.14
As regards other loss or damage which a person has sustained by reason of a breach of Community law for which a Member State is liable, the latter is under a duty to make reparation for the loss or damage caused in the circumstances set out in the Court’s caselaw and — subject to the principles of equivalence and eectiveness — on the basis of the rules of national law on liability.
Sodišče je odgovorilo nikalno in je menilo, da niti načelo enakovrednosti niti načelo učinkovitosti, ki ju opredeljuje sodna praksa, nacionalnemu sodišču ne nalagata, naj po uradni dolžnosti preizkusi razlog kršitve določb prava Skupnosti.
Specically, where it is established that the legislation of a Member State constitutes an obstacle to freedom of establishment prohibited by Article 43 EC, the national court may, in order to establish the recoverable losses, determine whether the injured parties have shown reasonable diligence in order to avoid those losses or to limit their extent and whether, in particular, they availed themselves in time of all legal remedies available to them.
Glede prvega načela je Sodišče presodilo, da navedene določbe zadevne direktive ne določajo niti pogojev, v katerih bi se lahko začeli postopki na področju obvladovanja slinavke in parkljevke, niti organov, ki so v njihovem okviru pristojni za določitev obsega pravic in obveznosti posameznikov, tako da jih ni mogoče šteti za enakovredne nacionalnim pravilom javnega reda, ki so podlaga za nacionalne postopke, ker opredeljujejo pogoje, na podlagi katerih se slednji lahko začnejo, in organe, ki so v njihovem okviru pristojni za določitev obsega pravic in obveznosti posameznikov.
However, the application of the provisions relating to freedom of establishment would be rendered impossible or excessively dicult if claims for restitution or compensation based on infringement of those provisions were rejected or reduced solely because the companies concerned had not applied to the tax authorities to be allowed to pay interest on loans granted by a nonresident parent company without that interest being treated as a distribution when, in the circumstances at issue, national law, combined, where appropriate, with the relevant provisions of the double taxation conventions, provided for such treatment to apply.
Glede drugega načela je Sodišče potrdilo, da kadar imajo stranke dejansko možnost pri nacionalnem sodišču uveljavljati razlog, ki temelji na pravu Skupnosti, načelo učinkovitosti ne nasprotuje določbi notranjega prava, ki nacionalnim sodiščem preprečuje, da bi po uradni dolžnosti preizkusila razlog
Proceedings
Državljanstvo Unije
In a eld such as direct taxation, the national court must take into account the fact that the consequences arising from the freedoms of movement guaranteed by the Treaty have been only gradually made clear, in particular by the principles identied by the Court’s case-law.
Sodišče je v več zadevah preizkusilo nacionalne določbe, s katerimi bi se lahko neupravičeno omejevalo prosto gibanje državljanov Unije.
In Joined Cases C-222/05 to C-225/05 van der Weerd and Others (judgment of 7 June 2007), the Court was asked in particular whether, in judicial proceedings concerning the legality of an administrative measure, Community law required a national court to conduct an examination of its own motion of grounds which were outside the terms of the dispute but based on Directive 85/511 introducing Community measures for the control of foot-and-mouth disease (14).
Na področju pomoči pri usposabljanju in študiju je Sodišče v združenih zadevah Morgan in Bucher (sodba z dne 23. oktobra 2007, C-11/06 in C-12/06) izhajalo iz ugotovitve, da imajo državljani države članice, ki študirajo v drugi državi članici, v skladu s členom 17(1) ES status državljanov Unije in torej lahko uveljavljajo pravice, ki se nanašajo na tak status, in sicer tudi proti svoji državi članici izvora.
The Court replied in the negative, holding that neither the principle of equivalence nor the principle of eectiveness enshrined in its caselaw required the national court to raise of its own motion a plea alleging infringement of Community law.
Sodišče je nato menilo, da mora država članica – čeprav ima načeloma pravico, da zato, da pomoči pri usposabljanju študentom, ki želijo študirati v drugih državah članicah, ne bi postale pretirana obremenitev, take pomoči dodeli le študentom, ki so izkazali določeno stopnjo vključitve v družbo – vseeno skrbeti za to, da podrobni pogoji dodeljevanja teh pomoči neupravičeno ne omejujejo prostega gibanja oseb in da so skladni in sorazmerni s cilji zagotavljanja čim hitrejšega zaključka študija ali olajševanja razumne izbire usposabljanja.
As regards the principle of equivalence, the Court held, more specically, that the provisions of the directive which were at issue laid down neither the conditions in which procedures relating to the control of foot-and-mouth disease could be initiated nor the authorities which had the power, within the framework of those procedures, to determine the extent of the rights and obligations of individuals.
Sodišče je ugotovilo, da člena 17 ES in 18 ES nasprotujeta določbam – ki za podelitev pomoči pri usposabljanju študentu za študij v drugi državi članici, katere državljan ni, določata pogoj, da je ta študij nadaljevanje študija, ki je v njegovi državi članici izvora trajalo vsaj eno leto – ker državljane Unije odvračajo od izvrševanja pravice prostega gibanja in prebivanja na ozemlju držav članic iz člena 18 ES.
Those provisions could not therefore be considered equivalent to the national rules of public policy, which lay at the very basis of the national procedures since they dened the conditions in which those procedures could be initiated and the authorities which had the power, within the framework of those procedures, to determine the extent of the rights and obligations of individuals.
Na področju davčne zakonodaje je Sodišče v zadevah Schwarz in Gootjes-Schwarz ter Komisija proti Nemčiji (sodbi z dne 11. septembra 2007, C-76/05 in C-318/05) preizkusilo določbe nemškega zakona o dohodnini, da je davčni zavezanec upravičen do davčne olajšave za šolnino za svoje otroke, ki jo je plačal nekaterim zasebnim šolam, če imajo slednje sedež na nacionalnem ozemlju.
European citizenship
Sodišče je v svoji obrazložitvi razlikovalo med dvema vrstama nanciranja šol.
In several cases the Court examined national provisions that can improperly limit the free movement of citizens of the Union.
Na svobodo opravljanja storitev se lahko sklicujejo zgolj šole, ki se pretežno nancirajo z zasebnimi sredstvi.
Council Directive 85/511/EEC of 18 November 1985 introducing Community measures for the control of foot-and-mouth disease (OJ 1985 L 315, p.
Za šole s sedežem v državi članici, ki ni Nemčija, ki se pretežno ne nancirajo z zasebnimi sredstvi, se svoboda opravljanja storitev ne uporablja, vendar pa davčne olajšave za šolnino za te šole vseeno ni mogoče zavrniti.
11), as amended by Council Directive 90/423/EEC of 26 June 1990 (OJ 1990 L 224, p. 13).
Pravice, ki jih imajo državljani Unije, nasprotujejo takemu nepriznavanju: tudi otrok v nizki starosti se lahko sklicuje na pravice prostega gibanja in prebivanja, zadevne določbe pa neupravičeno prikrajšajo
Court of Justice
Sodišče otroke, ki so šli v šolo s sedežem v drugi državi članici, v razmerju do tistih, ki niso uporabili pravice prostega gibanja.
With regard to education and training grants, in its judgment of 23 October 2007 in Joined Cases C-11/06 and C-12/06 Morgan and Bucher the Court proceeded on the basis that nationals of a Member State studying in another Member State enjoy the status of citizens of the Union under Article 17(1) EC and may therefore rely on the rights conferred on those having that status, inter alia against their Member State of origin.
Na področju prostega pretoka blaga se je Sodišče izreklo o združljivosti več nacionalnih ureditev z določbami Pogodbe.
The Court then held that while, in principle, a Member State is entitled, in order to prevent education or training grants to students wishing to study in other Member States from becoming an unreasonable burden, to grant such assistance only to students who have demonstrated a certain degree of social integration, it must nevertheless see to it that the detailed rules for the award of the grants do not create an unjustied restriction of the free movement of citizens and that they are consistent with and proportionate to the objectives of ensuring that courses are completed in a short period of time or of facilitating an appropriate choice of education or training course.
Najprej naj omenimo sodbo Rosengren in drugi (sodba z dne 5. junija 2007, C-170/04), ki jo je Sodišče sprejelo na podlagi predloga za sprejetje predhodne odločbe v zvezi s tem, ali je s Pogodbo ES združljiva švedska zakonodaja, ki posameznikom prepoveduje uvoz alkoholnih pijač, katerih prodaja na drobno je na Švedskem podvržena monopolni ureditvi, določeni v istem zakonu. Sodišče je presodilo, da ta ukrep prepovedi ni združljiv s pravom Skupnosti, potem ko je ugotovilo, da ga je treba presojati v smislu člena 28 ES in ne člena 31 ES v zvezi s tržnimi državnimi monopoli, ker ne pomeni pravila o obstoju oziroma delovanju tega monopola, ki bi se nanašal na prodajo na drobno, razen na uvoz.
The Court drew the conclusion that Articles 17 and 18 EC preclude provisions under which the award of an education or training grant to a student who is studying in a Member State other than that of which he is a national is subject to the condition that those studies must be a continuation of studies pursued for at least one year in his Member State of origin, in that such provisions are liable to deter citizens of the Union from making use of their freedom, provided for in Article 18 EC, to move and reside within the territory of the Member States.
Sodišče je v ta namen ugotovilo, da pomeni švedski ukrep količinsko omejitev uvoza v smislu člena 28 ES, na eni strani zaradi možnosti imetnika monopola, da zavrne naročilo blaga, torej v tem primeru uvoz zadevne pijače, in na drugi strani zaradi nevšečnosti, ki jih imajo zaradi takega ukrepa potrošniki. Sodišče je nato menilo, da ta ukrep ne more biti utemeljen na podlagi člena 30 ES zaradi varovanja zdravja in življenja ljudi.
With regard to tax legislation, in its judgments of 11 September 2007 in Case C-76/05 Schwarz and Gootjes-Schwarz and C-318/05 Commission v Germany, the Court examined provisions of the German law on income tax according to which taxpayers are granted tax relief for their children’s school fees paid to certain private schools, provided that the schools are established on German territory.
Švedska zakonodaja namreč ni primerna za uresničitev cilja na splošno omejiti uživanje alkohola, ker so njeni učinki v zvezi s tem postranski, in ni sorazmerna z uresničitvijo cilja varovati mlajše pred hudimi posledicami takega uživanja, saj se prepoved uvoza uporablja ne glede na starost posameznika, ki si želi priskrbeti zadevne pijače.
The Court held that Community law precluded the tax relief from being refused generally for school fees paid to schools in another Member State.
Drugič, v sodbi Komisija proti Nemčiji (sodba z dne 15. novembra 2007, C-319/05) je Sodišče na podlagi tožbe zaradi neizpolnitve obveznosti ponovno obravnavalo uvrstitev snovi med zdravila ali med živila.
In its reasoning, the Court distinguished two types of school nancing.
Zvezna republika Nemčija je uvrstila med zdravila česnov preparat v obliki kapsul, ki se v drugih državah članicah trži kot prehransko dopolnilo, in je zato za njegovo trženje določila pridobitev predhodnega dovoljenja za dajanje živil v promet.
Only schools essentially nanced by private funds could rely on the freedom to provide services.
V skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso je Sodišče ugotovilo, da Zvezna republika Nemčija s tem ni izpolnila obveznosti iz členov 28 ES in 30 ES.
In the case of schools established in a Member State other than Germany which were not essentially nanced from private funds, the freedom to provide services did not apply but the tax relief nonetheless could not be refused.
Sodišče je na podlagi ugotovitve, da zadevni proizvod ne ustreza niti opredelitvi zdravila po opisu niti opredelitvi zdravila glede na zdravilno učinkovino v smislu zadevne ureditve Skupnosti15, presodilo, da nemški ukrep ustvarja oviro za trgovino znotraj Skupnosti.
The rights conferred on citizens of the European Union prevented such an exclusion: even a young child could make use of the rights of free movement and residence, and the provisions at issue placed at an unjustiable disadvantage children who went to a school established in another Member State by comparison with those who had not availed themselves of their freedom of movement.
Zadevni ukrep niti ne more biti utemeljen z varovanjem javnega zdravja v skladu s členom 30 ES, ker mora taka določba temeljiti na poglobljeni oceni zatrjevanega zdravstvenega tveganja in ker bi cilju varovanja javnega zdravja lahko ustrezal ukrep, ki bi manj omejeval prosti pretok blaga, kot je primerna označba, ki bi potrošnike opozorila pred potencialnimi tveganji v zvezi z uživanjem tega proizvoda.
In the eld of the free movement of goods, the Court was required to rule on the compatibility of various national rules with the Treaty.
Na koncu je treba omeniti sodbo v zadevi Komisija proti Nizozemski (sodba z dne 20. septembra 2007, C-297/05), s katero se je nadgradila sodna praksa Sodišča o nacionalnih
First, the judgment of 5 June 2007 in Case C-170/04 Rosengren and Others resulted from a reference for a preliminary ruling relating to the compatibility with the EC Treaty of a
Direktiva 2001/83/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 6. novembra 2001 o zakoniku Skupnosti o zdravilih za uporabo v humani medicini (UL L 311, str. 67).
Swedish law prohibiting the importation by private individuals of alcoholic beverages, the sale of which is subject, in Sweden, to a monopoly established by the same law.
Razvoj in dejavnost predpisih v zvezi z uvozom vozil, registriranih v drugi državi članici.
The Court held this prohibition to be incompatible with Community law, having first established that the prohibition had to be assessed in the light of Article 28 EC, and not in the light of Article 31 EC on State monopolies of a commercial character, since it did not amount to a rule relating to the existence or operation of the monopoly, which concerned retail sale and not importation.
Na podlagi vprašanja, ali je s pravom Skupnosti združljiva nizozemska ureditev, ki pred registracijo takih vozil na Nizozemskem zahteva pregled z namenom njihove identikacije in tudi tehnični pregled, je Sodišče najprej menilo, da pregled z namenom identikacije vozil ne ovira prostega pretoka blaga.
In so holding, the Court found that the Swedish measure amounted to a quantitative restriction on imports within the meaning of Article 28 EC given, first, the possibility for the holder of the monopoly to refuse an order for the supply and therefore, if necessary, the importation of the beverages concerned and, second, the inconveniences of such a measure for consumers.
Nato se je Sodišče izreklo o združljivosti tehničnega pregleda splošnega stanja vozil ob njihovi registraciji na Nizozemskem s členoma 28 ES in 30 ES in ugotovilo, da tak omejevalni ukrep, kadar se uporablja za vozila, starejša od treh let, ki so bila predhodno registrirana v drugi državi članici, ni sorazmeren z vidika legitimnih ciljev prometne varnosti in varstva okolja.
The Court then found that the measure could not be justied, under Article 30 EC, on grounds of protection of the health and life of humans: the Swedish law was unsuitable for attaining the objective of limiting alcohol consumption generally, because of the marginal nature of its eects in that regard, and was not proportionate to the objective of protecting young persons against the harmful eects of such consumption, since the prohibition was applied irrespective of the age of the private individual wishing to obtain the beverages concerned.
Sodišče je glede tega poudarilo, da obstajajo manj omejevalni ukrepi, na primer priznavanje dokazila, izdanega v drugi državi članici, da je vozilo, registrirano na njenem ozemlju, opravilo tehnični pregled, in sodelovanje nizozemske carinske uprave z ustreznimi organi drugih držav članic v zvezi z morebitnimi manjkajočimi podatki.
Second, in Case C-319/05 Commission v Germany (judgment of 15 November 2007), the Court was faced once again, in an action for failure to full obligations under the Treaty, with the question whether a substance should be classied as a medicinal product or as a foodstu.
Sodna praksa na tem področju je bila še posebej raznovrstna in jo je težje sistematično predstaviti, zlasti zato, ker se zadeve, o katerih je odločalo Sodišče, pogosto nanašajo na izvrševanje več svoboščin hkrati. Zato smo se odločili, da jo bomo razdelili na štiri sklope.
The Federal Republic of Germany had classied as a medicinal product a garlic preparation in capsule form that was legally marketed as a food supplement in other Member States, and had consequently required prior marketing authorisation to be obtained for it.
Trije sklopi, pri katerih smo uporabili sektorski pristop, se nanašajo na prosto gibanje delavcev, pravico ustanavljanja in svobodo opravljanja storitev, prosti pretok kapitala, četrti sklop, pri katerem smo uporabili transverzalni pristop, pa vsebuje omejitve, ki jih te svoboščine nalagajo izvrševanju davčne pristojnosti držav članic.
In accordance with its settled caselaw the Court found that, in so doing, the Federal Republic of Germany had failed to full its obligations under Articles 28 and 30 EC.
Na področju prostega gibanja zičnih oseb, to je delavcev, se je Sodišče med drugim izreklo o pravici prebivanja družinskih članov – državljanov tretjih držav – državljanov Skupnosti, zlasti delavcev migrantov Skupnosti, ter o socialnih ugodnostih, ki jih lahko uveljavljajo družinski člani.
After establishing that the product did not satisfy either the denition of medicinal product by presentation or the denition of medicinal product by function for the purposes of the relevant Community legislation (15), the Court held that the German measure created an obstacle to intra-Community trade.
Omeniti je treba tudi to, da je Sodišče v zadevi Hartmann (sodba z dne 18. julija 2007, C-212/05) natančneje opredelilo pojem „delavec migrant“.
Furthermore, the measure could not be justied by reasons relating to the protection of public health, in accordance with Article 30 EC, since a provision of that type had to be based on a detailed assessment of the alleged health risk and a measure that restricted the free movement of goods less, such as suitable labelling warning consumers of the potential risks related to taking the product, could have met the objective of protecting health.
Tako se državljan države članice, ki je prenesel svoje stalno prebivališče v drugo državo članico in obdržal zaposlitev v prvi državi ter odtlej opravlja poklicno dejavnost kot obmejni delavec, lahko sklicuje na status„delavca migranta“ v smislu Uredbe št. 1612/68.16
Finally, it is appropriate to mention the judgment of 20 September 2007 in Case C-297/05 Commission v Netherlands, which renes the Court’s caselaw concerning national rules applicable to the import of vehicles registered in another Member State.
Glede pravice do prebivanja družinskih članov – državljanov tretje države – državljana Skupnosti, ki je uporabil pravico do prostega gibanja, še zlasti izstopata zadevi Jia (sodba z dne 9. januarja 2007, C-1/05) in Eind (sodba z dne 11. decembra 2007, C-291/05).