natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Suivi des Affaires: Suivi des Affaires is a computerised tool in the CJEU that allows a follow-up of the progress in the management of pending cases. 
Suivi des Affaires: Suivi des Affaires r ett datoriserat verktyg som anvnds inom EU-domstolen fr att flja upp framsteg i handlggningen av pgende ml.
Suspensions (stay of proceedings): The proceedings may be stayed if the Court of Justice and the General Court are seized of cases with the same subject matter, raising the same issue or calling into question the validity of the same act. 
6 Vilandefrklaring: Frfarandet fr frklaras vilande om domstolen och tribunalen behandlar renden som avser samma sak eller samma tolkningsfrgor eller angr giltigheten av samma rttsakt.
7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I. Our review of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) was designed to assess the performance of its case management process, in particular whether the procedures in place promoted the efficient handling of the cases lodged and whether their timely resolution could be enhanced. 
7 SAMMANFATTNING I. Vr granskning av Europeiska unionens domstol (EU-domstolen) syftade till att bedma effektiviteten i handlggningen av ml, framfr allt huruvida befintliga frfaranden frmjar en effektiv hantering av anhngiggjorda ml och huruvida tidstgngen fr att avgra mlen skulle kunna frkortas.
We also sought to examine the assessment and accountability tools in place at the CJEU. 
Vi ville ocks underska de verktyg fr utvrdering och redovisningsskyldighet som anvnds inom EU-domstolen.
In recent years the CJEU has taken significant organizational and procedural actions to enhance efficient case handling and the reporting thereon. 
P senare r har EU-domstolen vidtagit betydande organisatoriska och procedurmssiga tgrder fr att ka effektiviteten i handlggningen av ml och rapporteringen om denna.
In particular, the introduction of indicative time-frames for the accomplishment of key steps in the lifecycle of a case, together with the progressive development of monitoring tools and reports, has increased the focus on timeliness. 
Framfr allt har infrandet av vgledande tidsramar fr slutfrandet av viktiga steg i ett mls livscykel tillsammans med en stndig utveckling av vervakningsverktyg och rapporter satt kat fokus p tidsaspekten.
Progress has been made by the end of 2016 to reduce the significant backlog of cases that had built up at the General Court, this before the reform of that Court, which will double the number of Judges and their respective Cabinets, had yet to have an impact. 
Framsteg hade gjorts i slutet av 2016 fr att minska den stora efterslpningen av ml vid tribunalen, och detta redan innan den reform av tribunalen som ska dubblera antalet domare och deras respektive kabinett nnu hade kunnat ge resultat.
The review concluded that the CJEU could further enhance these positive results by considering a move towards more active individual case management, using tailored time-frames and monitoring the actual use of the human resources employed. 
Vi drog slutsatsen att EU-domstolen skulle kunna frstrka dessa positiva resultat ytterligare genom att vervga en vergng till en mer aktiv, individuell handlggning av ml med anvndning av skrddarsydda tidsramar och vervakning av det faktiska utnyttjandet av personalresurser.
Measuring performance on this basis, instead of using indicative time-frames to be respected on average, would inform management of both problem cases and elements of good practice. 
Att mta effektiviteten p sdana grunder, i stllet fr att anvnda vgledande tidsramar som ska respekteras i genomsnitt, skulle ge information till ledningen om bde problemfall och goda exempel.
This approach would provide management information to support decision-making so as to drive further efficiency gains. 
Med den metoden skulle ledningsinformation erhllas som kan stdja beslutsfattandet s att ytterligare effektivitetsvinster kan uppns.
This information could also be used to improve reporting on performance to enhance accountability, providing insight on the proper functioning of the CJEU and on the use of its resources available. 8 
Informationen skulle ocks kunna anvndas till att frbttra resultatrapporteringen och strka redovisningsskyldigheten, genom att ge insyn i huruvida EU-domstolen fungerar korrekt och hur den utnyttjar tillgngliga resurser. 8
THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION (CJEU) 1. 
EUROPEISKA UNIONENS DOMSTOL (EU-DOMSTOLEN) 1.
The CJEU is the judicial authority of the European Union (EU). 
EU-domstolen r Europeiska unionens (EU:s) rttsliga myndighet.
Its task is to ensure compliance with European law by overseeing the interpretation and uniform application of the Treaties1. 
Dess uppgift r att skerstlla att EU-lagstiftningen fljs genom att vervaka tolkningen och den enhetliga tillmpningen av frdragen1.
The CJEU consists of two Courts: the Court of Justice and the General Court. The Court of Justice is made up of 28 Judges, assisted by 11 Advocates-General2. 
EU-domstolen bestr av tv domstolar: domstolen och tribunalen Domstolen r sammansatt av 28 domare och bists av 11 generaladvokater2.
There are currently 45 Judges at the General Court; this figure should rise to 56 by 2019. 
Tribunalen har fr nrvarande 45 domare, och antalet ska ka till 56 fram till 2019.
Judges and Advocates-General are appointed by common accord of the governments of Member States for a renewable fixed term of six years. 
Domare och generaladvokater utses av medlemsstaternas regeringar i samfrstnd fr en mandattid p sex r som kan frnyas.
The Judges and Advocates-General are assisted by 386 staff who work in their Cabinets. 
Domarna och generaladvokaterna bitrds av 386 anstllda som arbetar inom deras kabinett.
There are 2 168 staff in the institution as a whole3. 
Totalt har institutionen 2 168 anstllda3.
Linguistic, information technology (IT) and other services are common to both Courts. 
Sprktjnster, it och andra tjnsteavdelningar r gemensamma fr de bda domstolarna.
The overall cost of the CJEU to the EU budget is around 400 million euro in 2017. 
De totala kostnaderna fr EU-domstolen i EU-budgeten r omkring 400 miljoner euro 2017.
The Court of Justice and the General Court deal with different types of proceedings (see Box 1). 
Domstolen och tribunalen hanterar olika typer av ml (se ruta 1).
Box 1 Đ Types of proceedings at the Court of Justice and at the General Court The Court of Justice deals mainly with references for preliminary rulings from national courts as to the interpretation of EU law or as to the validity of an act adopted by an institution, a body or an agency of the Union; appeals against decisions of the General Court; certain direct actions for failure to act or for seeking annulment of certain EU acts; actions referred to by the Commission or a Member State for failure to fulfil obligations under EU law by another Member State; requests for an opinion on the compatibility with the Treaties of an agreement which the EU envisages concluding 1 2 9 3 Annual activity report of the CJEU for the year 2016, Annex 1. 
Ruta 1 Đ Typer av ml vid domstolen och tribunalen Domstolen hanterar frmst ml som rr begran om frhandsavgrande frn nationella domstolar angende tolkningen av EU-lagstiftningen eller giltigheten hos en rttsakt som antagits av en EU-institution, en EU-byr eller ett EU-organ, verklagande av tribunalens avgranden, direkt talan om underltenhet att vidta tgrder (passivitetstalan) eller om ogiltigfrklaring av vissa EU-rttsakter, talan om frdragsbrott som vcks av kommissionen eller en medlemsstat i fall dr en annan medlemsstat inte har uppfyllt sina skyldigheter enligt EU-lagstiftningen samt begran om yttrande om frenligheten med frdragen i samband med en verenskommelse som EU avser att ing med ett 1 2 9 3 EU-domstolens rliga verksamhetsrapport fr 2016, bilaga 1.
Article 19 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). 
Artikel 19 i frdraget om Europeiska unionen (EU-frdraget).
Advocates-General are appointed under Article 252 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and have the task of presenting reasoned submissions, which are written (non-binding) opinions, in cases assigned to them. 
Generaladvokater utses i enlighet med artikel 252 i frdraget om Europeiska unionens funktionsstt (EUF-frdraget) och deras uppgift r att lgga fram motiverade yttranden i form av skriftliga (icke bindande) frslag till avgranden i de ml som de tilldelats.
with a non-Member State or an international organisation. 
land utanfr EU eller en internationell organisation.
The General Court hears cases brought by individuals and companies against EU acts which are addressed to them or which are of direct and individual concern to them, actions seeking compensation for damage caused by EU institutions and bodies, and also certain actions brought by the Member States. 
Tribunalen behandlar ml som rr talan som vcks av enskilda personer eller fretag avseende ogiltigfrklaring av EU-rttsakter som r riktade till dem eller som direkt och personligen berr dem, talan i syfte att f ersttning fr skada som orsakats av Europeiska unionens institutioner och organ samt ven i vissa fall talan som vcks av medlemsstaterna.
The disputes which it hears are mostly economic in nature, concerning competition and State aid, measures to protect trade and intellectual property. 
De tvister som tribunalen prvar r mestadels av ekonomisk natur och rr konkurrens och statligt std samt handelspolitiska skyddstgrder och immateriella rttigheter.
They also include: agriculture, access to documents, public procurement and restrictive measures. 
De rr ven jordbruk, tillgng till handlingar, offentlig upphandling och sanktioner.
Following the dissolution of the EU Civil Service Tribunal on 31 August 2016, the General Court is also now competent to hear, at first instance, disputes between the EU and its servants. 
Efter att Europeiska unionens personaldomstol upplstes den 31 augusti 2016 r tribunalen numera ocks behrig att, i frsta instans, prva tvister mellan EU och dess anstllda.
The Courts must consider all cases referred to them by national courts, Member States, EU institutions, bodies, offices or agencies of the Union, and natural and legal persons. 
Domstolarna mste beakta alla renden som hnskjuts till dem av nationella domstolar, medlemsstater, EU:s institutioner, byrer och organ samt fysiska och juridiska personer.
This is a factor which is beyond their control. 
Det r en faktor som ligger utanfr deras kontroll.
During the period 2006-2016, some 1.500 cases were lodged on average each year at the CJEU. 
Under tiden 2006Đ2016 anhngiggjordes cirka 1 500 ml i genomsnitt varje r vid EU-domstolen.
The overall number of cases yet to be heard (stock of pending cases) rose by around 20 % (see Figure 1). 
Det totala antalet ml som nnu inte avgjorts (mngden pgende ml) kade med omkring 20 % (se figur 1).
Figure 1 Đ General evolution of the judicial activity for the period 2006-2016 10 950 900 850 800 750 700 650 600 550 500 Court of Justice - number of cases 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 New cases Closed cases Pending cases 
Figur 1 Đ Allmn utveckling av den dmande verksamheten under perioden 2006Đ2016 10 950 900 850 800 750 700 650 600 550 500 Domstolen Đ antal ml 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Nya ml Avslutade ml Pgende ml
11 1 550 1 350 1 150 950 750 550 350 General Court - number of cases 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 New cases Closed cases Pending cases 250 200 150 100 50 Civil Service Tribunal - number of cases 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 New cases Closed cases Pending cases Note: As from 1st September 2016, the jurisdiction of the Civil Service Tribunal was transferred to the General Court. 
11 1 550 1 350 1 150 950 750 550 350 Tribunalen Đ antal ml 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Nya ml Avslutade ml Pgende ml 250 200 150 100 50 Personaldomstolen Đ antal ml 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Nya ml Avslutade ml Pgende ml Anmrkning: Frn och med den 1 september 2016 verfrdes personaldomstolens behrighet till tribunalen.
Source: Based on the data published in the CJEU Annual reports. 
Klla: Baserat p uppgifter offentliggjorda i EU-domstolens rsrapporter.
Cases can be brought before either Court in any of the 24 official languages of the EU. 
Ml kan anhngiggras vid de bda domstolarna p vilket som helst av EU:s officiella sprk.
The Judges deliberate in French. 
Domarna verlgger p franska.
The CJEU must deliver justice of irreproachable quality, in a reasonable time4, whilst as an EU institution also ensuring it uses the public funds at its disposal as efficiently and as effectively as possible, and according to the principles of sound financial management5. 
EU-domstolen mste leverera rttsskipning av oklanderlig kvalitet inom sklig tid4 och samtidigt, i egenskap av EU-institution, anvnda de offentliga medel som den frfogar ver p ett s ndamlsenligt och effektivt stt som mjligt och i enlighet med principerna om sund ekonomisk frvaltning5.
The quality and rapidity with which the CJEU delivers its decisions can have important consequences for individuals, legal persons, Member States and the EU as a whole. 
Kvaliteten och snabbheten med vilken EU-domstolen levererar sina avgranden kan f betydande konsekvenser fr enskilda, juridiska personer, medlemsstater och EU som helhet.
Any failure by the CJEU to adjudicate within a reasonable time may give rise to significant costs for the parties concerned, as well as direct costs to the EU budget for any damages6 arising from the excessive length of time taken7. 
Om EU-domstolen inte lyckas avgra ett ml inom sklig tid kan det leda till betydande kostnader fr de berrda parterna svl som direkta kostnader fr EU-budgeten fr eventuellt skadestnd6 till fljd av att rendet tagit fr lng tid7.
Cases referred to the CJEU are quite often the consequence of proceedings initiated in the Member States. 
Ml som hnskjuts till EU-domstolen r ganska ofta fljder av frfaranden som inletts i medlemsstaterna.
4 5 6 7 One of the EU fundamental rights for citizens and firms is to have a case decided within a reasonable time which is also a condition to obtain an effective remedy. 
I sdana fall, vilket r srskilt relevant fr domstolen, kan avslutandet av mlet inom sklig tid spela en 4 5 6 7 En av de grundlggande rttigheterna fr EU:s medborgare och fretag r att f ett rende prvat inom sklig tid vilket ocks r en frutsttning fr ett effektivt rttsmedel.
See Articles 41(1) (Right to good administration) and the first and second paragraph of Article 47 (Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. 
Se artikel 41.1 (Rtt till god frvaltning) och frsta och andra stycket i artikel 47 (Rtt till ett effektivt rttsmedel och till en opartisk domstol) i Europeiska unionens stadga om de grundlggande rttigheterna.
Article 30 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OL L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 
Artikel 30 i Europaparlamentets och rdets frordning (EU, Euratom) nr 966/2012 av den 25 oktober 2012 om finansiella regler fr unionens allmnna budget och om upphvande av rdets frordning (EG, Euratom) nr 1605/2002 (EUT L 298, 26.10.2012, s. 1).
The budget allocated for these costs in 2017 is some 850 000 euro. 
Den anslagna budgeten fr dessa kostnader 2017 r cirka 850 000 euro.
See, to that effect, case C-385/07 P Der Grne Punkt - Duales System Deutschland v Commission, case C-40/12 P Gascogne Sack Deutschland v Commission and case C-58/12 P Gascogne v Commission where the Court of Justice found that the General Court (until December 2009 known as the Court of First Instance) had exceeded the reasonable period of time within which a litigant is entitled to expect judgment to be delivered. As a result, the CJEU noted that the applicants could bring actions for damages seeking compensation for possible damage which they may have suffered as a result of the excessive length of the proceedings before the General Court. 
Se i det avseendet domstolens dom av den 16 juli 2009, Der Grne Punkt Đ Duales System Deutschland mot kommissionen, C-385/07 P, ECLI:EU:C:2009:456, domstolens dom av den 26 november 2013, Gascogne Sack Deutschland mot kommissionen, C-40/12 P, ECLI:EU:C:2013:768 och domstolens dom av den 26 november 2013, Groupe Gascogne mot kommissionen, C-58/12 P, ECLI:EU:C:2013:770 dr domstolen fann att frfarandet vid tribunalen (fram till december 2009 benmnd frstainstansrtten) hade verskridit den skliga tid inom vilken en part har rtt att f sin sak prvad.
The first case on this issue to be adjudicated was case T-577/14 Gascogne Sack Deutschland and Gascogne v European Union. 
Det frsta mlet dr denna frga prvades var ml T-577/14, Gascogne Sack Deutschland och Gascogne mot Europeiska unionen.
In its judgment of 10 January 2017, the General Court ordered the EU to pay more than 50.000 euro in damages to the applicants to compensate material and non-material harm caused by the excessive length of the proceedings. 
I sin dom av den 10 januari 2017 lade tribunalen EU att betala mer n 50 000 euro i skadestnd till skandena som ersttning fr den materiella och immateriella skada de lidit till fljd av den lnga handlggningstiden.
Other cases in which undertakings have been seeking damages for the excessive length of proceedings were adjudicated in February 2017 (cases T-479/14 Kendrion v European Union and T-725/14 Aalberts Industries v European Union), in June 2017 (case T-673/15 Guardian Europe v European Union) or are still pending. 12 
Andra ml dr fretag har yrkat skadestnd fr oskligt lng handlggningstid avgjordes i februari 2017 (mlen T-479/14, Kendrion mot Europeiska unionen och T-725/14, Aalberts Industries mot Europeiska unionen), i juni 2017 (ml T-673/15, Guardian Europe mot Europeiska unionen) eller r pgende. 12
Over time the CJEU has put an increasing focus on operating efficiently. 
Med tiden har EU-domstolen kat sitt fokus p att fungera effektivt.
In particular, it has addressed the backlog of cases (notably at the General Court, see paragraph 59). 
Framfr allt har den tagit itu med efterslpningen av renden (det gller srskilt tribunalen, se punkt 59).
In this perspective, the CJEU has taken a number of organizational and procedural actions to enhance its efficiency, such as: - adapting the Rules of Procedure of both the Court of Justice and the General Court in order to accelerate the handling of cases, - monitoring the progress of individual cases against indicative internal deadlines for the main stages of the judicial procedures, - digitising procedural documentary flows, and - enhancing accountability8. 
I det perspektivet har EU-domstolen vidtagit ett antal organisatoriska och frfarandemssiga tgrder fr att ka sin effektivitet, bland annat fljande: - Anpassning av bde domstolens och tribunalens rttegngsregler i syfte att pskynda handlggningen av ml. - vervakning av framstegen i enskilda ml i frhllande till vgledande interna tidsfrister fr de viktigaste stegen i de rttsliga frfarandena. - Digitalisering av utbytet av rttegngshandlingar. - Frstrkning av redovisningsskyldigheten8.
These measures have contributed to reducing the average time taken to adopt judicial decisions in both Courts. 
Dessa tgrder har bidragit till att minska den genomsnittliga tidstgngen fr rttsliga avgranden i bda domstolarna.
For example, in 2016 the overall average duration of proceedings was 14.7 months at the Court of Justice and 18.7 months at the General Court representing a reduction of 0.9 and 1.9 months respectively as compared to 2015. 
Exempelvis var den totala genomsnittliga handlggningstiden under 2016 14,7 mnader vid domstolen och 18,7 mnader vid tribunalen vilket motsvarar en minskning med 0,9 respektive 1,9 mnader jmfrt med 2015.
However, no downward trend can yet be confirmed for each type of proceedings (see Figure 2). 
Men ingen nedtgende trend kan nnu bekrftas fr varje typ av frfarande (se figur 2).
13 8 The CJEU publishes statistics and analysis on the outcome of the judicial activity. 
13 8 EU-domstolen offentliggr statistik och resultatanalyser avseende den dmande verksamheten.
The average duration of proceedings, or the time taken between the date where the case is lodged at the Registry and the date of the final judicial decision, is one of the main indicators published each year by the CJEU, combined with the ratio of the number of closed cases to the number of incoming cases. 
Den genomsnittliga handlggningstiden, eller den tid det tar frn den dag d ett ml anhngiggrs vid kansliet till den dag d det slutliga rttsliga avgrandet meddelas, r en av de viktiga indikatorer som EU-domstolen offentliggr varje r tillsammans med frhllandet mellan antalet avslutade ml och antalet inkomna ml.
The CJEU also publishes detailed data on the judicial activity, notably on the nature of proceedings and their subject matter, as well as on the number of new, completed and pending cases. 
EU-domstolen offentliggr ocks detaljerade uppgifter om den dmande verksamheten, framfr allt typen av ml och deras mnesomrden, liksom antalet nya, avslutade och pgende ml.
Figure 2 Đ Average duration (in months) of cases closed in the period 2006-2016 at the Court of Justice and the General Court 14 25 20 15 10 Court of Justice - average case duration (in months) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 References for a preliminary ruling 2012 2013 Direct actions 2014 2015 2016 Appeals 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Intellectual property 2013 2014 Other direct actions 2015 2016 Appeals General Court - average case duration (in months) State aid Competition Source: Based on the data published in the CJEU Annual reports. 10. 
Figur 2 Đ Genomsnittlig handlggningstid (i mnader) fr ml som avslutades under perioden 2006Đ2016 vid domstolen och tribunalen 14 25 20 15 10 Domstolen Đ genomsnittlig handlggningstid fr ml (i mnader) 2006 2007 2008 Begran om frhandsavgrande 2011 2012 2013 Direkt talan 2014 2015 2016 verklaganden 2009 2010 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 2006 2007 2008 2010 2011 2012 Konkurrens 2013 2014 2015 2016 Immateriella rttigheter Tribunalen Đ genomsnittlig handlggningstid fr ml (i mnader) 2009 vriga fall av direkt talan verklaganden Statligt std Klla: Baserat p uppgifter offentliggjorda i EU-domstolens rsrapporter.
In 2015 the EU decided to reform the judicial structure of the CJEU, notably by doubling the number of Judges in the General Court by 2019, while subsuming the work of the Civil Service Tribunal into the General Court as from 1st September 20169. 
10. r 2015 beslutade EU om en reform av EU-domstolens rttsliga struktur som framfr allt innebar en dubblering av antalet domare vid tribunalen fram till 2019 och verfring av personaldomstolens verksamhet till tribunalen frn och med den 1 september 20169.
This was intended to reduce the backlog of pending cases10, to engender a positive impact on the quality of the judgments, and to increase flexibility and rapidity by allocating Judges to the Chambers according to the caseload in different areas11. 
Avsikten var att minska efterslpningen av pgende ml10, att skapa en positiv effekt p kvaliteten i domarna och att ka flexibiliteten och snabba p handlggningen genom att frdela domare till avdelningarna baserat p mngden ml inom olika mnesomrden11.
The net additional financial cost of the reform was estimated by the Legislator at 13.5 million euro yearly when fully implemented12, or around 3.4 % of the total budget of the CJEU. 
Den tillkommande finansiella nettokostnaden fr reformen uppskattades av EU:s lagstiftare till 13,5 miljoner euro per r efter fullstndigt genomfrande12, vilket motsvarar cirka 3,4 % av EU-domstolens totala budget.