natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
( declaring that there is no need to give a decision or referring a case to the General Court).
Sklepi, s katerimi se postopek konča (ki niso sklepi, s katerimi se postopek konča z izbrisom zadeve, z ustavitvijo postopka ali z vrnitvijo zadeve Sodišču prve stopnje v ponovno odločanje).
( entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, Articles 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU), Article 244 EC (now Article 280 TFEU) or the corresponding provisions of the EA and CS Treaties, or following an appeal against an order concerning interim measures or intervention.
Sklepi, izdani na podlagi predloga, ki temelji na členih 242 ES in 243 ES (po začetku veljavnosti Lizbonske pogodbe postala člena 278 PDEU in 279 PDEU) ali na podlagi člena 244 ES (postal člen 280 PDEU) ali na podlagi določb Pogodb AE ali na podlagi pritožbe zoper sklep o začasni odredbi ali o intervenciji.
( referral to the General Court.
Sklepi, s katerimi se postopek konča z izbrisom zadeve, z ustavitvijo postopka ali z vrnitvijo zadeve Sodišču prve stopnje v ponovno odločanje.
Chambers (5 judges) 57.17%
Senati petih sodnikov 57,17 %
Chambers (3 judges) 33.54%
Senati treh sodnikov 33,54 %
President 1.01%
Predsednik 1,01 %
Full Court Grand Chamber Chambers (5 judges)Chambers (3 judges)President
Veliki senat Veliki senat Senati petih sodnikov Senati treh sodnikov Predsednik
Cases completed by judgments, by opinions or by orders
Zadeve, končane s sodbo, mnenjem ali sklepom (2005–2009)1, 2
 Orders
 Sodbe/mnenja
Judgments/Opinions Orders
Sodbe/mnenja Sklepi
Cases completed by judgments, by opinions or by orders involving a judicial determination — Subject matter of the action (2005–09) (1)
Zadeve, končane s sodbo, mnenjem ali sklepom – Predmet tožbe
Territories Brussels Convention Commercial policy Common Customs Tari¥Common foreign and security policy Community own resources Company law Competition Customs union Economic and monetary policy Energy Environment and consumers European citizenship External relations Fisheries policy Free movement of capital Free movement of goods Freedom of establishment Freedom of movement for persons Freedom to provide services Industrial policy Intellectual property Justice and home a ¥ air s Law governing the institutions Principles of Community law Privileges and immunities Regional policy Rome Convention Social policy Social security for migrant workers State aid Taxation Transport
Bruseljska konvencija Carinska unija Državne pomoči Ekonomska in monetarna politika Energija Evropsko državljanstvo Industrijska politika Intelektualna lastnina Kmetijstvo Konkurenca Lastna sredstva Skupnosti Načela prava Skupnosti Obdavčitev Območje svobode, varnosti in pravice Okolje in potrošniki Podjetniško pravo Politika na področju ribištva Pravo institucij Pravosodje in notranja politika Približevanje zakonodaj Pridruževanje čezmorskih držav in ozemelj Pristop novih držav Privilegiji in imunitete Promet Prosti pretok blaga Prosti pretok kapitala Prosto gibanje oseb Regionalna politika Rimska konvencija Skupna carinska tarifa Skupna zunanja in varnostna politika Socialna politika Socialna varnost delavcev migrantov Svoboda opravljanja storitev Svoboda ustanavljanja Trgovinska politika Zunanji odnosi
( der of cases on the ground of similarity (one case number = one case).
Navedene številke (bruto številke) označujejo skupno število zadev, ne glede na združitve povezanih zadev (številka zadeve = ena zadeva).
Cases completed by judgments, by opinions or by orders involving a judicial determination — Subject matter of the action (2009) (1)
Zadeve, končane s sodbo, mnenjem ali sklepom – Predmet tožbe
Orders (²)
Sodbe/mnenja
Accession of new States Agriculture Approximation of laws Area of freedom, security and justice Brussels Convention Commercial policy Common Customs Tari¥Common foreign and security policy Community own resources Company law Competition Customs union Economic and monetary policy Energy Environment and consumers European citizenship External relations Fisheries policy Free movement of capital Free movement of goods Freedom of establishment Freedom of movement for persons Freedom to provide services Industrial policy Intellectual property Law governing the institutions Principles of Community law Regional policy Rome Convention Social policy Social security for migrant workers State aid Taxation Transport
Bruseljska konvencija Carinska unija Državne pomoči Ekonomska in monetarna politika Energija Evropsko državljanstvo Industrijska politika Intelektualna lastnina Kmetijstvo Konkurenca Lastna sredstva Skupnosti Načela prava Skupnosti Obdavčitev Območje svobode, varnosti in pravice Okolje in potrošniki Podjetniško pravo Politika na področju ribištva Pravo institucij Približevanje zakonodaj Pristop novih držav Promet Prosti pretok blaga Prosti pretok kapitala Prosto gibanje oseb Regionalna politika Rimska konvencija Skupna carinska tarifa Skupna zunanja in varnostna politika Socialna politika Socialna varnost delavcev migrantov Svoboda opravljanja storitev Svoboda ustanavljanja Trgovinska politika Zunanji odnosi
C y p r u s
, pr e e ob v
5 t the number of cases af is m is se d D t
5 ve ev ilo zadevo bu po št vr ni ta Z up no št
Ne the r
Nemčija
 References for a preliminary ruling
 Direktne tožbe
 Direct actions
 Pritožbe
References for a preliminary ruling Urgent preliminary ruling procedure
Predlogi za sprejetje predhodne odločbe Nujni postopki za predhodno odločanje
The following types of cases are ex- cluded from the calculation of the duration of proceedings: cases involving an interlocutory judgment or a°measure of inquiry; opinions; special forms of procedure (namely taxation of costs, legal aid, application to set aside, third-party proceedings, interpretation, revision, recti¤cation, attachment procedure); cases terminated by an order removing the case from the register, declaring that there is no need to give a decision or referring the case to the General Court; proceedings for interim measures and appeals concerning interim measures and interventions.
Pri izračunu trajanja postopkov so izključeni: zadeve, v¥katerih je izdana vmesna sodba ali v kateri so bili sprejeti pripravljalni ukrepi, mnenja, posebni postopki (in sicer: odmera stroškov, pravna pomoč, ugovor zoper sodbo, ugovor tretjega, razlaga sodbe, obnova postopka, poprava sodbe, postopek v zvezi z izvršbo), postopki, ki se končajo s sklepom o izbrisu zadeve, s sklepom o¥ustavitvi postopka, s sklepom o vrnitvi zadeve v ponovno odločanje Splošnemu sodišču, postopki za izdajo začasnih odredb ter pritožbe zoper začasne odredbe in v zvezi z intervencijo.
Cases pending as at 31 December — Nature of proceedings (2005–09) (1)
Nerešene zadeve na dan 31. decembra – Vrste postopkov
 Special forms of procedure
 Posebni postopki
 Opinions of the Court
 Mnenja
References for a preliminary ruling Direct actions Appeals Special forms of procedure Opinions of the Court
Direktne tožbe Pritožbe Posebni postopki Mnenja
Chambers (5 judges) 22.81%
Senat 5 sodnikov 22,81 %
Chambers (3 judges) 1.89%
Senat 3 sodnikov 1,89 %
President 0.27%
Predsednik 0,27 %
Not assigned Full Court Grand Chamber Chambers (5 judges)Chambers (3 judges)President
Nedodeljeno Veliki senat Veliki senat Senat 5 sodnikov Senat 3 sodnikov Predsednik
Appeals Special forms of procedure
Pritožbe Posebni postopki
) A case before the Court of Justice may be dealt with under such a procedure pursuant to the provisions of Art- icles 62a and 104a of the Rules of Procedure, as amended with e¥ect from 1 July 2000.
Obravnavanje zadeve po hitrem postopku pred Sodiščem je mogoče v skladu z določbami členov 62a in 104a Poslovnika, ki sta začela veljati 1. julija 2000.
) Since 1 March 2008, pursuant to the provisions of Article 104b of the Rules of Procedure, an urgent preliminary ruling procedure has been available for cases falling within the area of freedom, security and justice.
Od 1. marca 2008 se lahko na podlagi določb člena 104a Poslovnika uporabi nujni postopek predhodnega odločanja v zadevah, ki se nanašajo na območje svobode, varnosti in pravice.
Outcome er im t er im t tions er or en v or in eg ist er es t ea decision ed t ed t an er n ing in on c tions fa m e as ur om the r o gi v an rG es and in ea ls c ot gr N edf rv w a pp lic e w a pp m e as ur
Vrsta odločitve e db dr as ne a en ci jo v er t gi op ko st as ni ho er za č op ed lo ve v pe ez iz in v v it ene z ž da jo za č rn it va Z ol je ni pr v
N e no need t
, v lo e e ali v z gi za iz
Competition Law governing the institutions Environment and consumers
Konkurenca Pravo institucij Okolje in potrošniki
Total EC Treaty OVERALL TOTAL
Pogodba ESSKUPAJ SPLOŠNO
General trend in the work of the Court (1952–2009) —New cases and judgments
Splošni razvoj sodne dejavnosti (1952–2009) – Vložene zadeve in sodbe
(1) Gross ¤gures; special forms of procedure are not included.(2) Net ¤gures.
Bruto številke; brez posebnih postopkov.Neto številke.
(¹) ea r) or k of the C
ES javnosti
General trend in the work of the Court (1952–2009) — New references for a preliminary ruling (by Member State and by court or tribunal)
Splošni razvoj sodne dejavnosti (1952–2009) – Vloženi predlogi za sprejetje predhodne odločbe (po državi članici in po pristojnem sodišču)
The Complaints Board of the European Schools (
Cour de justice Benelux/Benelux Gerechtshof1Odbor za pritožbe Evropskih šol2
(1) Case C-265/00 Campina Melkunie.(2) Case C-196/09 Miles and Others.
Zadeva Campina Melkunie, C-265/00.Zadeva Miles in drugi (C-196/09)
Court of Justice o
Sodišče in AE
A and 348
Členi člen 88 P
The General Court
V obravnavanem primeru sta Republika Poljska in Republika Ciper trdili, da
A — Proceedings of the General Court in 2009
Pravila o konkurenci za podjetja
The growth in this Court’s membership as enlargements have taken place means that it is becoming rare for a year to pass without a change in the Court’s composition, even disregarding any partial renewal of its membership. Thus, 2009 saw the departure of two members, Ms Virpi Tiili, a Judge at the Court since 1995, and Mr Daniel Šváby, a Judge at the Court since 2004, who were replaced by Mr Heikki Kanninen and Mr Juraj Schwarcz respectively.
Splošno sodišče je v sodbi z dne 17.¥decembra¥2009 v zadevi Solvay proti Komisiji (T-58/01, še neobjavljena) razsodilo, da tudi če se lahko pojavijo posebne okoliščine, ki omogočajo obrnjeno dokazno breme glede trajanja kršitve, Komisija zato ni razbremenjena obveznosti, da se v odločbi o ugotovitvi kršitve člena¥81(1)¥ES podrobno izreče glede trajanja kršitve in poda informacije o navedenem trajanju, ki jih ima.
From a statistical point of view, the past year has been one of continuity. A large number of new cases were brought (568); although this ¤gure shows a slight reduction compared with 2008, it remains well above the ¤gures recorded in previous years.
Splošno sodišče ob poudarjanju, da izpodbijana odločba vsebuje protislovja glede konca kršitve, meni, da Komisija, na kateri je predvsem bilo dokazno breme, ni dokazala, da se je zadevna kršitev nadaljevala do konca leta 1990.
Consequently, although the signi¤cant improvement in the number of cases disposed of has also been con¤rmed (with 555 cases completed), the number of cases pending could not be reduced despite sustained e¥orts to achieve this.
Splošno sodišče zato meni, da je treba izpodbijano odločbo spremeniti, tako da se globa, naložena tožeči stranki, zmanjša za 25¥%.
First, this Court celebrated the completion of its ¤rst 20 years.
V obravnavanem primeru je matična družba hčerinske družbe, ki je bila udeležena v omejevalnem sporazumu na trgu jeklenih nosilcev, poudarjala, da dejanja, ki pretrgajo petletno zastaranje, učinkujejo le proti podjetjem, ki so sodelovala pri kršitvi.
The colloquium ‘From 20 to 2020 — Building the CFI of tomorrow on solid foundations’, which was organised to mark this anniversary, gave rise to outstanding discussions and contributions on the part of participants from a wide variety of backgrounds (1).
Ker matična družba v upravnem postopku, pri katerem je prišlo do dejanja, ki pretrga zastaranje, ni bila tako opredeljena niti ni bilo nanjo naslovljeno obvestilo o ugotovitvah o možnih kršitvah, je torej nasprotovala temu, da bi lahko Komisija proti njej uveljavljala učinek pretrganja zastaranja tega dejanja.
Avenues concerning important matters related to the Court’s future, its tasks and its operation were explored, strengthening the Court’s conviction that it is necessary to pursue reforms, including of a structural nature, in order to ensure an ever increasing level of judicial protection.
Splošno sodišče to razlago zavrača s pojasnilom, da ta opredelitev pomeni objektivno dejstvo, in sicer sodelovanje pri kršitvi, ki se razlikuje od subjektivnega in naključnega elementa, kot je opredelitev takega podjetja med upravnim postopkom.
Second, 2009 was the year in which the Treaty of Lisbon entered into force.
Podjetje je namreč lahko sodelovalo pri kršitvi, ne da bi Komisija to vedela ob storitvi dejanja, ki pretrga zastaranje.
While the major impact of this Treaty concerning the European project does not concern the Courts of the European Union ¤rst and foremost, mention should nevertheless be made of certain aspects that will not fail to a¥ect this Court.
Zastaranje se ne pretrga le glede podjetij, ki so bila predmet preiskovalnega ali procesnega dejanja, ampak tudi glede podjetij, ki so sodelovala pri kršitvi, vendar zanje Komisija še ne ve in zato niso bila predmet nobenega preiskovalnega ukrepa niti naslovniki nobenega procesnega akta.
First, the Court has a new name: the‘Court of First Instance of the European Communities’ has been renamed the‘General Court of the European Union’in order to take account of its appellate jurisdiction in sta¥ cases.
Splošno sodišče na področju zadržanja zastaranja pojasnjuje, da čeprav Uredba (ES) št.¥1/200311 natančno določa, da pretrganje velja za vsa podjetja ali podjetniška združenja, ki so udeležena pri kršitvi, to ne velja za zadržanje.
Next, the conditions governing the admissibility of actions brought by individuals for the annulment of regulatory acts have been relaxed.
Preverilo je torej, ali je imela vložitev pravnega sredstva pri njem relativni učinek zgolj za podjetje, tožečo stranko, oziroma ali je imela erga omnes učinek za vsa podjetja, ki so sodelovala pri kršitvi, ne glede na to, ali so vložila pravno sredstvo ali ne.
Also, this Court’s jurisdiction has been extended to cover certain actions brought by individuals in the ¤elds of, ¤rst, common foreign and security policy and, second, police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters.
Glede tega najprej poudarja, da je treba tako kot pretrganje zastaranja tudi zadržanje zastaranja, ki je izjema od načela petletnega zastaranja, razlagati restriktivno.
Finally, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has been elevated to the rank of the Treaties.
Ni torej mogoče predpostavljati, da je želel zakonodajalec za oba položaja uporabiti enako ureditev.
These changes, which constitute important steps forward for judicial protection, could have a signi¤cant impact on both the number and the nature of cases brought before the General Court.
Poleg tega se drugače od pretrganja zastaranja, katerega namen je omogočiti Komisiji, da učinkovito vodi postopke o¥kršitvah pravil o konkurenci in jih sankcionira, zadržanje zastaranja nanaša per denitionem na primer, ko je Komisija že sprejela odločbo.
The following account is intended to provide an overview of this Court’s diverse, and sometimes complex, ¤eld of activity when it exercises its jurisdiction in proceedings concerning the legality of measures (I), actions for damages (II), appeals (III) and applications for interim measures (IV).
Učinek inter partes sodnih postopkov in njihove nujne posledice načeloma nasprotujejo temu, da bi imelo pravno sredstvo, ki ga vloži podjetje, naslovnik
) Those contributions are available on the website http://www.curia.europa.eu and the colloquium papers will be published in the course of 2010.
Uredba Sveta (ES) št.¥1/2003 z dne 16.¥decembra¥2002 o izvajanju pravil konkurence iz členov¥81¥[ES] in 82¥[ES] (UL 2003, L¥1, str.¥1).
Proceedings concerning the legality of measures
Dejavnost izpodbijane odločbe, kakršen koli vpliv na položaj drugih naslovnikov.
Measures against which an action may be brought under Article 230 EC are those producing binding legal e¥ects of such a kind as to a¥ect the applicant’s interests by signi¤cantly altering his legal
Splošno sodišče je na podlagi navedenega ugotovilo, da se je desetletni zastaralni rok za eno od tožečih strank iztekel, in je izpodbijano odločbo razglasilo za nično v delu, v katerem se nanaša nanjo.
In the case in point the contested measure was the Commission’s letter informing the applicant of its refusal to disclose the composition of the committee evaluating the tenders submitted. The procedure for obtaining access to Commission documents, which is governed by Articles 6 to 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (3), takes place in two stages.
Splošno sodišče je v sodbi z dne 1.¥julija¥2009 v zadevi ThyssenKrupp Stainless proti Komisiji (T-24/07, še neobjavljena, v pritožbenem postopku) opozorilo, da zato, da bi se Komisiji omogočilo vzpostaviti ravnotežje med, na eni strani, nujnostjo ohraniti pravico do obrambe strank z¥omogočanjem čim širšega vpogleda v spis in, na drugi strani, interesom varstva zaupnih podatkov drugih strank ali tretjih oseb, morajo te stranke in tretje osebe Komisiji posredovati vse koristne podatke.
First, the applicant must send the Commission an initial application for access to documents.
Navaja, da če stranka po vpogledu v spis meni, da je za njeno obrambo nujno poznavanje nekega nedostopnega podatka, lahko Komisiji predloži obrazloženo zahtevo.
Second, in the event of a total or partial refusal, the applicant may make a con¤rmatory application to the Secretary-General of the Commission. In the event of a further total or partial refusal, the applicant may institute court proceedings against the Commission under the conditions laid down in Article 230 EC.
Glede tega Splošno sodišče meni, da splošne zahteve, ki ni podrobno predstavljena za vsak dokument posebej in ne odgovori na vprašanje Komisije, zakaj bi bili nedostopni podatki pomembni za obrambo same tožeče stranke, ni mogoče šteti za obrazloženo zahtevo.
The Court concluded that the action for annulment, brought in respect of the refusal of the initial application, was in principle inadmissible. However, the Court noted that in its letter refusing the initial application the Commission had omitted to inform the applicant of its right to make a con¤rmatory application, although it was required to do so by Regulation No 1049/2001.
Poleg tega Splošno sodišče opozarja, da bi morala Komisija zaradi spoštovanja pravice podjetij do obrambe zadevnim strankam zagotoviti pravico do zaslišanja pred sprejetjem ene od odločitev, predvidenih v členih¥7, 8, 23 in 24(2) Uredbe št.¥1/2003.
Such an irregularity had the consequence of rendering admissible, exceptionally, an action for the annulment of the refusal of the initial application. If it were otherwise, the Commission might be able to avoid judicial review by reason of a breach of procedure attributable to it.
Kadar so dokumenti poslani tožeči stranki po sprejetju ene od zgoraj navedenih odločitev, kakršno je obvestilo o ugotovitvah o možnih kršitvah, pravica te stranke do obrambe vseeno ni kršena, če Komisija ni spremenila očitkov iz navedene odločbe in zato ne upošteva dejstev, o katerih se zadevno podjetje ni moglo izreči.
Standing to bring proceedings
Časovna uporaba prava
Under the fourth paragraph of Article 230 EC actions brought by individuals against acts of which they are not the addressees are admissible subject to the twofold condition that the applicants be directly and individually concerned by the contested act.
Splošno sodišče je v skladu z načeli, izpeljanimi iz zadev v zvezi z omejevalnimi sporazumi glede „jekla za armiranje betona“12, v zgoraj navedenih sodbah ArcelorMittal Luxembourg in drugi proti Komisiji in ThyssenKrupp Stainless proti Komisiji ter v sodbi z dne 6.¥maja¥2009 v zadevi Outokumpu in Luvata proti Komisiji (T-122/04, še neobjavljena) opozorilo, da čeprav je dejstvo, da je pravni okvir Pogodbe ES 24.¥julija¥2002 nadomestil pravni okvir Pogodbe ESPJ povzročilo spremembo veljavnih pravnih podlag, postopkov in temeljnih pravil, je treba to spremembo obravnavati v povezavi z enotnostjo in neprekinjenostjo pravnega reda Skupnosti in njegovih ciljev.
(2) Case 60/81 IBM v Commission [1981] ECR 2639, paragraph 9.(3) Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L°145, p. 43).
Sodba z dne 25.¥oktobra¥2007 v združenih zadevah SP in drugi proti Komisiji (T-27/03, T-46/03, T-58/03, T-79/03, T-80/03, T-97/03 in T-98/03, ZOdl., str.¥II-4331).
General Court legal persons other than those to whom a decision is addressed may claim to be individually concerned only if that decision a¥ects them by reason of certain attributes which are peculiar to them or by reason of circumstances in which they are di¥erentiated from all other persons, and by virtue of those factors distinguishes them individually just as in the case of the person addressed (4).
Splošno sodišče obveznosti, ki so naložene ex tempore državam članicam in posameznikom na podlagi Pogodbe ESPJ in pravil, sprejetih za njeno uporabo. To se zahteva še toliko bolj, če bi izkrivljanje konkurence, ki izhaja iz neupoštevanja pravil glede kartelov, lahko po prenehanju veljavnosti Pogodbe ESPJ razširilo časovne učinke v okviru Pogodbe ES.
Furthermore, in order to be of direct concern to an individual, the contested measure must directly a¥ect the applicant’s legal situation and its implementation must be purely automatic and result from the rules alone without the application of other intermediate rules (5).
Uredbo št.¥1/2003 je treba zato razlagati tako, da lahko Komisija po 23.¥juliju¥2002 ugotavlja in naloži sankcije za omejevalne sporazume, ustvarjene v teh sektorjih, za katere se ratione materiae in ratione temporis uporablja Pogodba ESPJ.
Under that legislation, the Member States were obliged to amend or withdraw existing authorisations for plant protection products containing chlorothalonil which failed to comply with those conditions.
V zadevi Peugeot in Peugeot Nederland proti Komisiji (sodba z dne 9.¥julija¥2009, T-450/05, še neobjavljena) sta tožeči stranki izpodbijali zlasti oceno teže kršitve, ki jo je podala Komisija.
As the directive concerned was a measure of general application, the Court pointed out that, although the fourth paragraph of Article 230 EC makes no express provision regarding the admissibility of actions brought by natural or legal persons for annulment of a directive, it is clear from the case-law that that fact in itself is not sucient to render such actions inadmissible.
Prvič, kršitev je bila opredeljena kot „zelo resna“ v smislu točke¥1A smernic iz leta 199813, saj je Peugeot na Nizozemskem med letoma 1997 in 2003 uvedel sistem premij, namenjen temu, da bi nizozemski koncesionarji omejili vzporedni uvoz.
The institutions cannot, merely by means of their choice of legal instrument, deprive individuals of the judicial protection which they are a¥orded by that provision of the Treaty, as the fact that the contested measure is of general application does not preclude it from being of direct and individual concern to certain natural and legal persons.
V utemeljitev ugotovitve, da Komisija pri izvajanju diskrecijske pravice ni storila napake s tem, da je naravo kršitve opredelila kot zelo resno, Splošno sodišče zlasti poudarja, da je ta kršitev zaradi svoje narave izrazito težka, še posebej ob upoštevanju hinavskih načinov, s katerimi se je zagotavljal obstoj sistema nadomestil do leta 2003, in to v okviru, v katerem sta predhodna praksa Komisije in ustaljena sodna praksa na področju vzporednega uvoza, zlasti v avtomobilskem sektorju, jasno svarili pred nezakonitostjo takega sistema.