type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 22.2.2014
 EL
 Επίσημη Εφημερίδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης
 C 52/45
 Προσφυγή της 30ής Δεκεμβρίου 2013 — Bankia κατά Επιτροπής
 (Υπόθεση T-700/13)
 2014/C 52/87
 Γλώσσα διαδικασίας: η ισπανική
 Διάδικοι
 Προσφεύγουσα: Bankia, SA (Βαλένθια, Ισπανία) (εκπρόσωποι: J.L. Buendía Sierra, E. Abad Valdenebro, R. Calvo Salinero, A. Lamadrid de Pablo και A. Biondi, δικηγόροι)
 Καθής: Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή
 Αιτήματα της προσφεύγουσας
 Η προσφεύγουσα ζητεί από το Γενικό Δικαστήριο:
 —
 να ακυρώσει την προσβαλλόμενη απόφαση καθόσον χαρακτηρίζει το σύνολο των μέτρων που κατ’ αυτήν αποτελούν το ισπανικό σύστημα χρηματοδοτικής μισθώσεως νέα και ασυμβίβαστη με την εσωτερική αγορά κρατική ενίσχυση,
 —
 επικουρικώς, να ακυρώσει τα άρθρα 1 και 4 της προσβαλλόμενης αποφάσεως, κατά τα οποία οι επενδυτές των ομίλων οικονομικού σκοπού είναι δικαιούχοι των φερόμενων ενισχύσεων και μοναδικοί δικαιούχοι της διαταγής ανακτήσεως,
 —
 επικουρικώς, να ακυρώσει το άρθρο 4 της προσβαλλόμενης αποφάσεως, καθόσον διατάσσει την ανάκτηση των φερόμενων ενισχύσεων κατά παραβίαση των γενικών αρχών του δικαίου της Ένωσης,
 —
 να ακυρώσει το άρθρο 4 της προσβαλλόμενης αποφάσεως, καθόσον αποφαίνεται ως προς τη νομιμότητα των συμβάσεων του ιδιωτικού δικαίου που συνήφθησαν μεταξύ των επενδυτών και άλλων φορέων, και
 —
 να καταδικάσει την Επιτροπή στα δικαστικά έξοδα της παρούσας διαδικασίας.
 Λόγοι ακυρώσεως και κύρια επιχειρήματα
 Η προσβαλλόμενη απόφαση στο πλαίσιο της παρούσας διαδικασίας είναι η ίδια με την προσβαλλόμενη απόφαση στην υπόθεση Τ-515/13, Ισπανία κατά Επιτροπής (ΕΕ C 336, σ. 29).
 Προς στήριξη της προσφυγής της, η προσφεύγουσα προβάλλει πέντε λόγους.
 1)
 Πρώτος λόγος
 —
 Η προσφεύγουσα θεωρεί ότι η προσβαλλόμενη απόφαση προσβάλλει το άρθρο 107 ΣΛΕΕ, καθόσον χαρακτηρίζει το επονομαζόμενο SEAF και τα ατομικά μέτρα εφαρμογής του ως κρατική ενίσχυση. Η προσφεύγουσα προβάλλει ότι η Επιτροπή υπέπεσε σε πλάνη περί το δίκαιο, καθόσον αξιολόγησε συνολικώς και προσήψε στο Βασίλειο της Ισπανίας τη λήψη ενός συνόλου ανεξάρτητων και αυτοτελών δημόσιων και ιδιωτικών μέτρων. Η προσφεύγουσα αρνείται επιπλέον ότι τα επίμαχα μέτρα μπορούν να της προσδώσουν ένα επιλεκτικό οικονομικό πλεονέκτημα στους φερόμενους δικαιούχους τους, καθώς και την πιθανότητα στρεβλώσεως του ανταγωνισμού μεταξύ των εν λόγω δικαιούχων και άλλων φορέων και την υποτιθέμενη επίπτωση επί των εμπορικών συναλλαγών μεταξύ κρατών μελών.
 2)
 Δεύτερος λόγος
 —
 Δεύτερον, η προσφεύγουσα υποστηρίζει ότι η Επιτροπή υπέπεσε σε πρόδηλη πλάνη περί το δίκαιο και ότι παρέβη τα άρθρα 107 και 108 ΣΛΕΕ, καθόσον χαρακτήρισε την εφαρμογή του καθεστώτος της φορολογήσεως με κριτήριο τη χωρητικότητα σε συγκεκριμένες περιπτώσεις ως νέα ενίσχυση αντί υφιστάμενης ενισχύσεως. Στον βαθμό που η Επιτροπή ενέκρινε το 2002 το καθεστώς της φορολογήσεως με κριτήριο τη χωρητικότητα στην Ισπανία, αν η Επιτροπή επιθυμούσε να αμφισβητήσει την εφαρμογή του, θα έπρεπε να το είχε πράξει ακλουθώντας την εφαρμοστέα στις κρατικές ενισχύσεις διαδικασία. Οι προσφεύγουσες θεωρούν ότι τα επιχειρήματα που προβλήθηκαν στην προσβαλλόμενη απόφαση προς θεμελίωση της υπάρξεως νέας ενισχύσεως είναι προδήλως αβάσιμα.
 3)
 Τρίτος λόγος
 —
 Με τον τρίτο λόγο ακυρώσεως η προσφεύγουσα προβάλλει, επικουρικώς, παράβαση των άρθρων 107 και 296 ΣΛΕΕ, δεδομένου ότι η Επιτροπή σφάλλει, και εν πάση περιπτώσει δεν αιτιολογεί δεόντως, ως προς τους λόγους για τους οποίους φορείς όπως η προσφεύγουσα (επενδυτές στις AIEs που διενήργησαν πράξεις οι οποίες εμπίπτουν στην οδηγία) θεωρούνται οι τελευταίοι και μοναδικοί δικαιούχοι των επίμαχων μέτρων.
 4)
 Τέταρτος λόγος
 —
 Τέταρτον, η προσφεύγουσα προβάλλει, επίσης επικουρικώς, ότι η εντολή περί ανακτήσεως που διαλαμβάνει το άρθρο 4 της προσβαλλόμενης αποφάσεως προσβάλλει τη γενική αρχή ασφάλειας δικαίου, δεδομένου ότι εισάγει ένα χρονικό όριο κατά την εφαρμογή της εν λόγω αρχής.
 5)
 Πέμπτος λόγος
 —
 Με τον πέμπτο λόγο ακυρώσεως η προσφεύγουσα εκθέτει τους λόγους για τους οποίους η προσβαλλόμενη απόφαση προσβάλλει και την αρχή της δοτής αρμοδιότητας, παραβαίνει τα άρθρα 107 και 108 ΣΛΕΕ, το άρθρο 14 του κανονισμού του Συμβουλίου 659/1999 και το άρθρο 16 του Χάρτη των Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων της ΕΕ, καθόσον η προσβαλλόμενη απόφαση αφορά το κύρος συμβατικών ρητρών που περιέχονται σε συμβάσεις ιδιωτικού δικαίου μεταξύ επενδυτών και άλλων φορέων του ιδιωτικού τομέα.


type: legislation

text:
 5.11.2014
 SL
 Uradni list Evropske unije
 L 318/1
 IZVEDBENA UREDBA KOMISIJE (EU) št. 1188/2014
 z dne 24. oktobra 2014
 o odobritvi večje spremembe specifikacije za ime, vpisano v registru zaščitenih označb porekla in zaščitenih geografskih označb (Ekstra deviško oljčno olje Slovenske Istre (ZOP))
 EVROPSKA KOMISIJA JE –
 ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije,
 ob upoštevanju Uredbe (EU) št. 1151/2012 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 21. novembra 2012 o shemah kakovosti kmetijskih proizvodov in živil (1) ter zlasti člena 52(2) Uredbe,
 ob upoštevanju naslednjega:
 (1)
 Komisija je v skladu s prvim pododstavkom člena 53(1) Uredbe (EU) št. 1151/2012 preučila vlogo Slovenije za odobritev spremembe specifikacije za zaščiteno označbo porekla „Ekstra deviško oljčno olje Slovenske Istre“, registrirano v skladu z Uredbo Komisije (ES) št. 148/2007 (2).
 (2)
 Ker zadevna sprememba ni manjša v smislu člena 53(2) Uredbe (EU) št. 1151/2012, je Komisija v skladu s členom 50(2)(a) navedene uredbe vlogo za spremembo objavila v Uradnem listu Evropske unije
 (3).
 (3)
 Ker v skladu s členom 51 Uredbe (EU) št. 1151/2012 Komisija ni prejela nobene izjave o ugovoru, bi bilo treba spremembo specifikacije odobriti –
 SPREJELA NASLEDNJO UREDBO:
 Člen 1
 Sprememba specifikacije, objavljena v Uradnem listu Evropske unije v zvezi z imenom „Ekstra deviško oljčno olje Slovenske Istre“ (ZOP), se odobri.
 Člen 2
 Ta uredba začne veljati dvajseti dan po objavi v Uradnem listu Evropske unije.
 Ta uredba je v celoti zavezujoča in se neposredno uporablja v vseh državah članicah.
 V Bruslju, 24. oktobra 2014
 Za Komisijo
 V imenu predsednika
 Dacian CIOLOȘ
 Član Komisije
 (1) UL L 343, 14.12.2012, str. 1.
 (2) Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 148/2007 z dne 15. februarja 2007 o vnosu nekaterih imen v Register zaščitenih označb porekla in zaščitenih geografskih označb (Geraardsbergse mattentaart (ZGO) – Pataca de Galicia ali Patata de Galicia (ZGO) – Poniente de Granada (ZOP) – Gata-Hurdes (ZOP) – Patatas de Prades ali Patates de Prades (ZGO) – Mantequilla de Soria (ZOP) – Huile d'olive de Nîmes (ZOP) – Huile d'olive de Corse ali huile d'olive de Corse-Oliu di Corsica (ZOP) – Clémentine de Corse (ZGO) – Agneau de Sisteron (ZGO) – Connemara Hill Lamb ali Uain Sléibhe Chonamara (ZGO) – Sardegna (ZOP) – Carota dell'Altopiano del Fucino (ZGO) – Stelvio ali Stilfser (ZOP) – Limone Femminello del Gargano (ZGO) – Azeitonas de Conserva de Elvas e Campo Maior (ZOP) – Chouriça de Carne de Barroso – Montalegre (ZGO) – Chouriço de Abóbora de Barroso – Montalegre (ZGO) – Sangueira de Barroso – Montalegre (ZGO) – Batata de Trás-os-Montes (ZGO) – Salpicão de Barroso – Montalegre (ZGO) – Alheira de Barroso – Montalegre (ZGO) – Cordeiro de Barroso, Anho de Barroso ali Borrego de leite de Barroso (ZGO) – Azeite do Alentejo Interior (ZOP) – Paio de Beja (ZGO) – Linguíça do Baixo Alentejo ali Chouriço de carne do Baixo Alentejo (ZGO) – Ekstra deviško oljčno olje Slovenske Istre (ZOP)), (UL L 46, 16.2.2007, str. 14).
 (3) UL C 182, 14.6.2014, str. 23.


type: wikipedia

text:
Община Мадан се намира в Южна България и е една от съставните общини на област Смолян.
 География
 Географско положение, граници, големина
 Общината се намира в източната част на област Смолян. С площта си от 174,951 km2 е 7-а по големина сред 10-те общини на областта, което съставлява 5,48% от територията на областта. Границите ѝ са следните:
 на югозапад – община Рудозем;
 на северозапад – община Смолян;
 на север – община Баните;
 на североизток – община Ардино, област Кърджали;
 на изток – община Неделино;
 на югоизток – община Златоград.
 Природни ресурси
 Релеф
 Релефът на общината е ниско и средно планински и се простира в крайната югозападната част на Източните Родопи и в малка част от Западните Родопи.
 Южната половина на общината, на юг от дълбоката долина на река Арда попада в югозападната част на източнородопския рид Жълти дял. Максималната височина на общината е връх Бучовица 1406,6 m, разположен на границата с община Златоград, на 1 km южно от село Крушев дол.
 На север от долината на Арда на територията на община Мадан се простира крайната югоизточна част на дългия и тесен безименен западнородопски планински рид, отделящ се от Переликско-Преспанския дял източно от седловината Рожен и простиращ се в югоизточна посока между долините на реките Малка Арда и Черна (леви притоци на Арда). В пределите на общината максималната му височина е връх Света Неделя 1336,9 m, издигащ се на югозапад от село Купен.
 Югоизточно от село Дирало, на границата с община Ардино, в коритото на река Арда се намира най-ниската ѝ точка – 567 m н.в.
 Води
 Основна водна артерия на община Мадан е река Арда. Тя протича през средата на общината от запад на изток в дълбока и тясна долина с множество планински меандри, на протежение от около 22 km, с част от горното си течение. Навлиза в община Мадан южно от село Рустан, минава през село Средногорци и покрай селата Леска, Цирка и Дирало и югоизточно от последното напуска нейните предели. Основни нейни притоци на територията ѝ са реките: Маданска река (десен), Черна (ляв, около 4 km от най-долното ѝ течение е в община Мадан), Малката река (ляв) и Буковска река (десен).
 Население
 Етнически състав (2011)
 Численост и дял на етническите групи според преброяването на населението през 2011 г.:
 Движение на населението (1934 – 2011)
 Населени места
 Общината има 44 населени места с общо население от 12 276 жители (към 1 февруари 2011).
 Административно-териториални промени
 МЗ No 2820/обн. 14 август 1934 г. – преименува м. Бекировци на м. Батинци;
 – преименува с. Бориево на с. Бориново;
 – преименува с. Чамладжа на с. Боровина;
 – преименува м. Ескилер на м. Вехтино;
 – преименува с. Узунци на с. Високите;
 – преименува м. Хасановска на м. Вранинци;
 – преименува с. Союджук на с. Върбина;
 – преименува м. Касап на м. Касапско;
 – преименува м. Кориете на м. Кориите;
 – преименува с. Пъндаджик (Фъндаджик) на с. Лещак;
 – преименува м. Рахманска на м. Ловци;
 – преименува м. Ардашли на м. Мъглища;
 – преименува м. БЧобан на м. Пастирци;
 – преименува к. Османлийци на к. Планинци;
 – преименува м. Рустан дере на м. Рустан;
 – преименува с. Топуклу на с. Средногорци;
 – преименува м. Кайрякът на м. Тънкото;
 МЗ No 3775/обн. 7 декември 1934 г. – преименува м. Гарабина на м. Габрина;
 МЗ No 1014/обн. 11 май 1942 г. – признава м. Буковска поляна за с. Буковска поляна;
 – признава м. Буково за с. Буково;
 – признава м. Вехтино за с. Вехтино;
 – признава м. Равнил за с. Равнил;
 Указ No 292/обн. 25 август 1953 г. – преименува м. Борова река на м. Бориева река и я признава за пром.с. Бориева река;
 – признава н.м. Върба за отделно населено място – м. Върба;
 – признава н.м. Галище (от с. Буково) за отделно населено място – м. Галище;
 – признава н.м. Крайна (от община Мадан) за отделно населено място – м. Крайна;
 – признава н.м. Кралевски дол (от община Мадан) за отделно населено място – м. Кралевски дол;
 – признава н.м. Крушев дол (Крушов дол) за отделно населено място – пром.с. Крушев дол;
 – признава с. Мадан за гр. Мадан;
 – признава н.м. Петровица за отделно населено място – пром.с. Петровица;
 – признава н.м. Уручовци (Уручевци) за отделно населено място – м. Уручовци;
 Указ No 317/обн. 13 декември 1955 г. – преименува м. Батинци на м. Батанци и я признава за с. Батанци;
 Указ No 582/обн. 29 декември 1959 г. – заличава м. Малка река и я присъединява като квартал на гр. Мадан;
 Указ No 381/обн. 25 октомври 1960 г. – преименува м. Поляна на м. Студена;
 Указ No 960/обн. 4 януари 1966 г. – уточнява името на м. Аврамовци на м. Аврамовска;
 – осъвременява името на с. Буковска поляна на с. Букова поляна;
 – уточнява името на м. Ливада на м. Ливаде;
 – уточнява името на м. Еновска на м. Яновска;
 Указ No 757/обн. 8 май 1971 г. – заличава м. Пастирци и я присъединява като квартал на с. Върбина;
 Указ No 196/обн. 30 януари 1970 г. – заличава м. Аврамовска, с. Батанци, пром.с. Бориева река и м. Яновска и ги присъединява като квартали на гр. Мадан;
 Указ No 2294/обн. 26 декември 1978 г. – заличава м. Кралевски дол и пром.с. Петровица поради изселване;
 Указ No 250/обн. 22 август 1991 г. – признава м. Галище за с. Галище;
 – признава м. Крайна за с. Крайна;
 На основание §7 (т.3) от Закона за административно-териториалното устройство на Република България (ДВ, бр. 63/1995 г.) всички махали, колиби, гари, минни и промишлени селища придобиват статут на села.
 Транспорт
 През общината преминават частично 3 пътя от Републиканската пътна мрежа на България с обща дължина 40,1 km:
 участък от 9,7 km от Републикански път II-86 (от km 120,6 до km 130,3);
 началният участък от 16,6 km от Републикански път III-865 (от km 0 до km 16,6);
 началният участък от 13,8 km от Републикански път III-867 (от km 0 до km 13,8).
 Топографска карта
 Външни препратки
 Официален сайт на община Мадан
 Източници
 Мадан


type: contracts

text:
 Fógra dlíthiúil tábhachtach
 |
 12006E/APP/03
 Leasuithe ar an reachtaíocht phríomha de bharr aontachas phoblacht na Bulgáire agus na Rómáine leis an Aontas Eorpach - III. Prótacal ar reacht na Cúirte Breithiúnais
 Official Journal C 321 E , 29/12/2006 P. 0329 - 0329
 LEASUITHE AR AN REACHTAÍOCHT PHRÍOMHA DE BHARR AONTACHAS PHOBLACHT NA BULGÁIRE AGUS NA RÓMÁINE LEIS AN AONTAS EORPACH.Tar éis an Conradh i dtaobh Aontachas Phoblacht na Bulgáire agus na Rómáine leis an Aontas Eorpach a theacht i bhfeidhm, leasaítear mar a leanas na hAirteagail seo a leanas.III. PRÓTACAL AR REACHT NA CÚIRTE BREITHIÚNAIS1. In Airteagal 9, cuirtear an méid seo a leanas in ionad na chéad mhíre:"Nuair a athrófar cuid de na Breithiúna gach trí bliana, athrófar ceithre Bhreitheamh déag agus trí Bhreitheamh déag díobh gach re seach."2. Cuirtear an méid seo a leanas in ionad Airteagal 48:"Seacht mBreitheamh is fiche a bheidh ar an gCúirt Chéadchéime."--------------------------------------------------


text:
 |
 52013PC0621
 Förslag till EUROPAPARLAMENTETS OCH RÅDETS FÖRORDNING om ändring av rådets förordning (EG) nr 718/1999 om en politik för gemenskapens flottkapacitet inom inlandssjöfarten för att främja transporter på de inre vattenvägarna /* COM/2013/0621 final - 2013/0303 (COD) */
 MOTIVERING
 1. BAKGRUND TILL FÖRSLAGET
 Genom rådets förordning (EG) nr 718/1999 av
 den 29 mars 1999 om en politik för gemenskapens flottkapacitet inom
 inlandssjöfarten för att främja transporter på de inre vattenvägarna[1] infördes en regleringsmekanism
 för flottkapacitet (regeln ”gammalt mot nytt”) som syftade till att förebygga
 att det på marknaden för inlandssjöfart i EU uppstår överkapacitet i flottan
 eller att överkapaciteten förvärras. I april 2003 omvandlades regeln ”gammalt
 mot nytt” till en övervakningsmekanism som ska aktiveras om det uppstår sådana
 allvarliga störningar på marknaden som avses i direktiv 96/75/EG[2].
 I linje med sin politik för flottkapacitet upprättade de medlemsstater vars
 inre vattenvägar är förbundna med inre vattenvägar i en annan medlemsstat och
 som har en flotta på totalt över 100 000 ton en fond för inlandssjöfarten
 (reservfonden) på grundval av artikel 3 i förordning (EG) nr 718/1999.
 Reservfonden finansieras med resterande medel
 från åtgärder för strukturförbättringar som genomförts fram till den 28 april
 1999 och de särskilda bidrag som erhållits inom ramen för regeln ”gammalt mot
 nytt”. Fonden består enbart av ekonomiska bidrag från transporter på inre
 vattenvägar, och dess ackumulerade värde uppgår i dagsläget till cirka 35
 miljoner euro.
 Medlen förvaltas av de behöriga myndigheterna
 i de berörda medlemsstaterna enligt deras nationella lagstiftning och med deras
 egna förvaltningsresurser. Nationella organisationer som företräder
 inlandssjöfarten deltar i denna förvaltning i enlighet med artikel 3.2 i
 förordning (EG) nr 718/1999.
 I enlighet med artikel 3.4 och 3.5 i
 förordningen, får reservfonden utnyttjas i endast två situationer[3]:
 A. Vid allvarlig störning på marknaden
 för transporter på inre vattenvägar, enligt artikel 7 i direktiv 96/75/EG, får
 kommissionen, på en medlemsstats begäran vidta lämpliga åtgärder, bland annat
 åtgärder som syftar till att förebygga nya ökningar av den transportkapacitet
 som erbjuds på marknaden.
 Enligt artikel 6 i förordning (EG) nr 718/1999
 ska med lämpliga åtgärder avses en aktivering av regeln ”gammalt mot nytt” för
 en begränsad tidsperiod, eventuellt tillsammans med åtgärder för strukturella
 förbättringar, t.ex. utbetalning från reservfonden av premier för skrotning av
 fartyg.
 B. Vid enhällig begäran från de
 organisationer som företräder inlandssjöfarten. I sådana fall får varje
 medlemsstat vidta de åtgärder som avses i artikel 8 i förordning (EG) nr
 718/1999.
 I samband med moderniseringen och
 omstruktureringen av EU-flottorna kan följande åtgärder vidtas för att skapa
 förhållanden som är gynnsamma för miljö och säkerhet:
 –
 Underlätta för transportörer inom inlandssjöfarten
 som lämnar branschen att få förtidspension eller att övergå till annan
 ekonomisk verksamhet.
 –
 Organisera yrkesutbildnings- eller
 omskolningsåtgärder för arbetstagare som lämnar branschen.
 –
 Uppmuntra privata fartygsägare som själva bedriver
 transport att gå samman i handelsföreningar.
 –
 Främja en anpassning av fartygen till den tekniska
 utvecklingen för att förbättra arbetsvillkoren och tillgodose tekniska
 säkerhetskrav.
 –
 Förbättra aktörernas kvalifikationer för att
 säkerställa yrkets utveckling och framtid.
 Hittills har kapitalet i reservfonden aldrig
 utnyttjats. Under 2009 informerade Nederländerna kommissionen om en allvarlig störning
 som sades ha uppstått på landets marknad för transporter på inre vattenvägar
 och uppmanade kommissionen att vidta lämpliga åtgärder i enlighet med direktiv
 96/75/EG (situation A). På grundval av den information som lämnats kunde dock
 inte kommissionen bekräfta att det uppstått en allvarlig marknadsstörning i den
 mening som avses i direktivet.
 Branschorganisationerna på EU-nivå kontaktade
 kommissionen en gång, under 2003, för att utreda möjligheterna att utnyttja
 fonden (situation B). De planerade åtgärderna ansågs dock ligga utanför
 tillämpningsområdet för artikel 8 i förordning (EG) nr 718/1999.
 2. RESULTAT AV SAMRÅD MED
 BERÖRDA PARTER OCH KONSEKVENSBEDÖMNINGAR
 Kommissionen rådgjorde med
 branschorganisationerna den 11 april 2013 om orsakerna till att reservfonden
 aldrig utnyttjats, trots nedgången i sektorn, och om möjliga lösningar. De
 bekräftade att det begränsade tillämpningsområdet för artikel 8 var ett hinder
 för utnyttjandet av fonden. De gav sitt stöd för en utvidgning av
 tillämpningsområdet för artikeln, så att de befintliga åtgärderna kan tillämpas
 på yrkesutbildning eller omskolning för alla besättningsmedlemmar som lämnar
 sektorn. De nuvarande bestämmelsernas formulering utesluter fartygsägare som
 själva bedriver transport, vilket innebär att en stor procentuell andel av
 sektorn inte har möjlighet att utnyttja fonden för detta ändamål, även om
 utbildningsbehoven för arbetstagare inte skiljer sig från andra
 besättningsmedlemmars behov. Berörda parter ansåg också att åtgärder bör vidtas
 för att stärka branschorganisationer som kan bidra till att begränsa
 fragmenteringen av sektorn. Dessutom ansåg de att det skulle vara lämpligt med
 en ytterligare åtgärd för innovation av fartyg och en anpassning av fartygen
 till den tekniska utvecklingen på miljöområdet, vilket speglar verkligheten
 inom sektorn då dess utsläpp jämförs med utsläppen från andra transportsätt.
 3. FÖRSLAGETS RÄTTSLIGA
 ASPEKTER
 De åtgärder som avses i artikel 8 i förordning
 (EG) nr 718/1999 täcker endast sociala aspekter. Dessa åtgärder skulle dock
 kunna utvidgas, särskilt för att bredda utbildningsåtgärderna, förbättra
 organisationen av sektorn och skapa förhållanden som är gynnsamma för
 innovation och bättre miljöprestanda.
 Det föreslås därför att åtgärderna i artikel 8
 utvidgas enligt följande:
 ·
 Ge möjlighet att organisera yrkesutbildnings- och
 omskolningsåtgärder för alla besättningsmedlemmar som lämnar branschen, inte
 bara för anställda (eller arbetstagare).
 ·
 Tillåta stöd för att stärka branschorganisationer
 på unionsnivå.
 ·
 Främja innovation av fartyg och deras anpassning
 till den tekniska utvecklingen på miljöområdet.
 2013/0303 (COD)
 Förslag till
 EUROPAPARLAMENTETS OCH RÅDETS FÖRORDNING
 om ändring av rådets förordning (EG) nr
 718/1999 om en politik för gemenskapens flottkapacitet inom inlandssjöfarten
 för att främja transporter på de inre vattenvägarna
 EUROPAPARLAMENTET OCH EUROPEISKA
 UNIONENS RÅD HAR ANTAGIT DENNA FÖRORDNING
 med beaktande av fördraget om Europeiska
 unionens funktionssätt, särskilt artikel 91.1,
 med beaktande av Europeiska kommissionens
 förslag,
 efter översändande av utkastet till
 lagstiftningsakt till de nationella parlamenten,
 med beaktande av Europeiska ekonomiska och
 sociala kommitténs yttrande[4],
 med beaktande av Regionkommitténs yttrande[5],
 i enlighet med det ordinarie
 lagstiftningsförfarandet, och
 av följande skäl:
 1. I rådets förordning (EG) nr
 718/1999 fastställs unionens politik för flottkapacitet för fartyg som används
 för transport av gods på inre vattenvägar i medlemsstaterna.
 2. I samband med att flottorna
 moderniseras och omstruktureras bör sociala åtgärder planeras till förmån för
 arbetstagare som vill lämna sektorn för inlandssjöfart eller omskola sig för
 sysselsättning i en annan sektor liksom åtgärder för att främja skapande av
 företagsgrupperingar, förbättra aktörernas kvalifikationer samt främja en
 anpassning av fartygen till den tekniska utvecklingen.
 3. För detta ändamål skulle den
 reservfond som inrättats i varje medlemsstat vars inre vattenvägar är förbundna
 med inre vattenvägar i en annan medlemsstat och som har en flotta på över 100 000
 ton kunna användas, om detta enhälligt begärs av de organisationer som
 företräder inlandssjöfarten.
 4. Reservfonden, som endast
 består av ekonomiska bidrag från sektorn, har aldrig utnyttjats.
 5. De åtgärder i samband med
 moderniseringen av EU:s flotta som avses i artikel 8 i förordning (EG) nr
 718/1999 gäller endast sociala frågor. Det finns inga bestämmelser om andra
 typer av stödåtgärder för att skapa förhållanden som är gynnsamma för
 innovation och miljö.
 6. De åtgärder som avses i
 artikel 8 i förordning (EG) nr 718/1999 rörande yrkesutbildning eller
 omskolning är relevanta för alla besättningsmedlemmar som lämnar sektorn,
 inklusive fartygsägare som själva bedriver transport, och inte bara dem som
 betraktas som arbetstagare.
 7. I artikel 8 i förordning
 (EG) nr 718/1999 föreskrivs åtgärder som uppmuntrar fartygsägare som själva
 bedriver transport att gå samman i handelsföreningar, men inte åtgärder som
 stärker de organisationer som företräder inlandssjöfarten på unionsnivå, trots
 att starkare unionsövergripande organisationer kan bidra till att begränsa
 fragmenteringen inom sektorn.
 8. Artikel 8 i förordning (EG)
 nr 718/1999 bör därför kompletteras med åtgärder som syftar till att skapa
 utbildnings- eller omskolningsåtgärder för andra besättningsmedlemmar än dem
 som betraktas som ”arbetstagare” och som lämnar branschen, uppmuntra aktörer
 att gå samman i handelsföreningar, stärka branschorganisationer och främja
 innovation av fartyg och deras anpassning till den tekniska utvecklingen på
 miljöområdet; artikeln bör ändras i enlighet med detta.
 HÄRIGENOM FÖRESKRIVS FÖLJANDE.
 Artikel 1
 Artikel 8 i förordning (EG)
 nr 718/1999 ska ersättas med följande:
 ”Artikel 8
 Utan att det påverkar tillämpningen av artikel
 3.5 får varje medlemsstat vidta åtgärder för att bland annat
 –
 underlätta för transportörer inom inlandssjöfarten
 som lämnar branschen att få förtidspension eller att övergå till annan
 ekonomisk verksamhet,
 –
 organisera yrkesutbildnings- eller
 omskolningsåtgärder för besättningsmedlemmar som lämnar yrket,
 –
 förbättra kvalifikationerna inom inlandssjöfarten
 för att säkerställa yrkets utveckling och framtid,
 –
 uppmuntra fartygsägare som själva bedriver
 transport att gå samman i handelsföreningar och stärka de organisationer som
 företräder inlandssjöfarten på unionsnivå,
 –
 främja en anpassning av fartygen till den tekniska
 utvecklingen för att förbättra arbetsvillkoren och främja säkerheten,
 –
 uppmuntra innovation av fartyg och deras anpassning
 till den tekniska utvecklingen på miljöområdet.”
 Artikel 2
 Denna förordning träder i kraft den tjugonde
 dagen efter det att den har offentliggjorts i Europeiska unionens officiella
 tidning.
 Denna
 förordning är till alla delar bindande och direkt tillämplig i alla
 medlemsstater.
 Utfärdad i Bryssel den
 På Europaparlamentets vägnar På
 rådets vägnar
 Ordförande Ordförande
 [1] EGT L 90, 2.4.1999, s. 1.
 [2] Rådets direktiv 96/75/EG av den 19 november 1996 om
 system för befraktning och prissättning inom området nationella och
 internationella transporter av varor på inre vattenvägar inom gemenskapen, EGT
 L 304, 27.11.1996, s. 12.
 [3] I Tyskland och Nederländerna används dock inkomsterna
 från fonden för att stödja transporter på inre vattenvägar, särskilt för att
 stödja innovation (NL) eller tillhandahålla yrkesutbildning för arbetstagare
 inom inlandssjöfarten på utbildningsfartyg (DE). Reservfonden i sig har dock
 aldrig utnyttjats.
 [4] EUT C , , s. .
 [5] EUT C , , s. .


text:
Robert Schumann (Zwickau, 8. lipnja 1810. – Endenich kraj Bonna, 29. srpnja 1856.), njemački je skladatelj.
 Jedan je od glavnih predstavnika glazbenog romantizma. Po svom umjetničkom stajalištu, naravi i umjetničkim afinitetima je izraziti romantik. Središnja su mu djela klavirske kompozicije i solopjesme, a majstor je produhovljene romantičke pjesme ugođaja, čiji je prototip "Mjesečina". 1843. Felix Mendelssohn ga angažira za nastavnika glasovira i kompozicije na novoosnovanom konzervatoriju u Leipzigu. Od 1850. do 1853. Schumann djeluje kao gradski glazbeni direktor u Düsseldorfu. Od velikih ličnosti, osobito je utjecao na Brahmsa.
 Studirao je pravo, no zapravo se dvoumio između književničkog i glazbeničkoga poziva. Odlučivši se postati pijanistom, uzimao je poduku kod glasovitoga glasovirskog pedagoga iz Leipziga, Friedricha Wiecka, čijom se kćeri, uglednom pijanisticom Clarom, unatoč protivljenju njezina oca, 1840. i oženio. Zbog ozljede prsta opredijelio se ipak za skladateljsku karijeru, a također je osnovao (1834) i deset godina uređivao Novi časopis za glazbu (Neue Zeitschrift für Musik), u kojem je kritizirao površnost onodobnoga njemačkog glazbenog života te promicao ideale njemačke romantičke glazbe kao što su utemeljenost u glazbenoj tradiciji, prožimanje različitih umjetničkih grana te jedinstvo umjetnosti i života. Potom je u kraćim razdobljima preuzimao različite profesorske i dirigentske dužnosti, no zbog uznapredovale duševne bolesti, čiji su se prvi simptomi, sklonost depresiji, pojavili već u mladosti, posljednje je dvije godine života proveo u psihijatrijskoj ustanovi, gdje je i umro.
 Velik utjecaj na Schumanna imao je doživljaj romantičke književnosti, s ekscentričnim i maštovitim svijetom koje se identificirao (npr. putem svoja dva kritičarska lica kao alter ega, impulzivnoga Florestana i povučenog Eusebiusa, koje prepoznajemo kako u skladbama, tako i u kritičkim napisima) te iz njega crpio izravno nadahnuće. Model cikličke organizacije lirski intoniranih glasovirskih minijatura asocijativnim slijedom, a na temelju zajedničke »poetičke« ideje koja često izvire iz subjektivnih doživljaja samoga skladatelja, izgradio je u ciklusu, a nastavio u glasovirskim ciklusima, i, te u mnogobrojnim ciklusima solo pjesama. Pošto je u ranim glasovirskim djelima i Liedu pružio svoj najizvorniji skladateljski doprinos, Schumann je tek 1840-ih počeo sustavno komponirati »klasičnije« žanrove simfonijske, komorne i oratorijske glazbe, među kojima se posebno izdvajaju četiri simfonije, te klavirska trija. Od brojnih glazbenoscenskih planova realizirala se jedino dramski slabija opera .
 Schumann je za života bio utjecajniji kao glazbeni kritičar, odredivši odnos romantizma prema izravnim pretečama L. van Beethovenu i F. Schubertu, te upozorivši na domete suvremenika kao što su F. Chopin, F. Mendelssohn, H. Berlioz i F. Liszt, ali i nasljedovatelja, poput mladoga J. Brahmsa. Na području estetike, unatoč tomu što se nadahnjivao kvalitetnim književnim djelima, nije bio zagovornik programne glazbe. Kristalizacijom tipičnih obilježja romantizma u svojem opusu – poput izvornosti ali i jednostavnosti melodije, ritmičke i harmonijske nestalnosti sloga, postizanja strukturnoga jedinstva slobodnim variranjem i motivsko-tematskom preobrazbom umjesto arhitektonikom forme, te, konačno, istančane izražajnosti, pogodne za dočaravanje najrazličitijih ugođaja – Schumann se ipak i kao skladatelj pokazao jednako utjecajnim za skladateljski razvoj glazbe XIX. stoljeća.
 Njemački skladatelji
 Skladatelji glazbe romantizma


text:
 4.5.2013
 MT
 Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea
 C 129/20
 Digriet tal-Qorti Ġenerali tas-7 ta’ Marzu 2013 — Henkel u Henkel France vs Il-Kummissjoni
 (Kawża T-607/11) (1)
 (Rikors għal annullament - Talba tal-Awtorità tal-kompetizzjoni Franċiża sabiex tinkiseb it-trazmissjoni ta’ ċerti dokumenti li jagħmlu parti mill-fajl tal-Kummissjoni dwar proċedura fil-qasam tal-kompetizzjoni fir-rigward tas-suq Ewropew tal-produtturi ta’ deterġenti domestiċi - Użu fil-kuntest ta’ proċedura nazzjonali dwar is-settur tal-prodotti għall-ħasil fi Franza - Tmiem tal-interess ġuridiku - Ma hemmx lok li tingħata deċiżjoni - Inammissibbiltà)
 2013/C 129/40
 Lingwa tal-kawża: l-Ingliż
 Partijiet
 Rikorrenti: Henkel AG & Co. KGaA (Düsseldorf, il-Ġermanja) u Henkel France (Boulogne-Billancourt, Franza) (rappreżentanti: R. Polley, T. Kuhn, F. Brunet u É. Paroche, avukati)
 Konvenuta: Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea (rappreżentanti: N. Khan u P. J. Van Nuffel, aġenti)
 Parti intervenjenti insostenn tar-rikorrenti:Ir-Renju tad-Danimarka (rappreżentant: C.Vang, aġent)
 Suġġett
 Minn naħa, talba għall-annullament tad-deċiżjoni li allegatament tinsab f’ittra tal-Kummissjoni tat-30 ta’ Settembru 2011 (Każ COMP/39.579 — Deterġenti domestiċi u Każ 09/0007 F) li permezz tagħha din tiċħad it-talba tal-Awtorità tal-Kompetizzjoni (Franza) li jiġulha ttrasferiti, fil-kuntest tal-Każ 09/0007 F dwar is-settur Franċiż tad-deterġenti, diversi dokumenti prodotti fil-Każ COMP/39.597 u, min-naħa l-oħra, talba sabiex il-Qorti Ġenerali tordna lill-Kummissjoni tawtorizza lir-rikorrenti jinvokaw id-dokumenti inkwistjoni fil-proċedura quddiem l-Awtorità tal-kompetizzjoni u tieħu kwalunkwe miżura xierqa oħra.
 Dispożittiv
 (1)
 Ma għadx hemm lok li tingħata deċiżjoni fuq l-ewwel kap ta’ talbiet tar-rikors, intiżi għall-annullament tad-deċiżjoni tal-Kummissjoni Ewropea li allegatament tinsab fl-ittra tagħha tat-30 ta’ Settembru 2011, mibgħuta lill-Awtorità tal-kompetizzjoni Franċiża.
 (2)
 Il-kumplament tar-rikors huwa miċħud.
 (3)
 Ma għadx hemm lok li tingħata deċiżjoni dwar it-talba ta’ intervent ta’ Unilever PLC u Unilever NV.
 (4)
 Ir-rikorrenti, Henkel AG & Co. KGaA u Henkel France, għandhom ibatu l-ispejjeż tagħhom kif ukoll dawk sostnuti mill-Kummissjoni, inkluż dawk relatati mal-proċedura għal miżuri provviżorji fil-Kawża T-607/11 R. Ir-Renju tad-Danimarka għandu jbati l-ispejjeż tiegħu.
 (1) ĠU C 25, 28.01.2012.


text:
 |
 52015PC0098
 Proposta de DECISÃO DO CONSELHO relativa às orientações para as políticas de emprego dos Estados-Membros /* COM/2015/098 final - 2015/0051 (NLE) */
 EXPOSIÇÃO DE MOTIVOS
 O Tratado sobre o Funcionamento
 da União Europeia estabelece que os Estados-Membros devem considerar as suas
 políticas económicas e a promoção do emprego como questões de interesse comum e
 coordenar a sua ação nestes domínios no âmbito do Conselho. Em dois artigos
 distintos, o Tratado estabelece que o Conselho deve adotar orientações gerais
 para as políticas económicas (artigo 121.o) e definir orientações em matéria de
 emprego (artigo 148.o), sendo especificado que estas últimas devem ser
 coerentes com as primeiras. Atendendo a esta base jurídica, as orientações para
 as políticas de emprego e para as políticas económicas são apresentadas em dois
 instrumentos jurídicos distintos, mas intrinsecamente interligados:
 ·
 Uma Recomendação do Conselho relativa às
 orientações gerais para as políticas económicas dos Estados-Membros e da União
 - parte I das Orientações Integradas;
 ·
 Uma Decisão do Conselho relativa às orientações
 para as políticas de emprego dos Estados-Membros - parte II das Orientações
 Integradas.
 As orientações foram pela
 primeira vez adotadas em conjunto (como «pacote integrado») em 2010, como base
 da estratégia Europa 2020. Nesse ano, foi também decidido que as orientações
 integradas deviam manter-se globalmente estáveis até 2014. Contrariamente às
 orientações gerais para as políticas económicas, que se mantém válidas no
 tempo, as orientações para o emprego têm de ser reformuladas todos os anos.
 Para além de definirem o âmbito
 e a orientação da coordenação das políticas dos Estados-Membros, as orientações
 constituem também a base de recomendações específicas por país nos domínios
 respetivos.
 As atuais orientações
 integradas devem servir de fundamento à estratégia Europa 2020, no contexto da
 nova abordagem da conceção de políticas económicas assentes no investimento,
 nas reformas estruturais e na responsabilidade em matéria orçamental, tal como
 foi referido na Análise Anual do Crescimento 2015 da Comissão. Ao mesmo tempo,
 devem contribuir para um crescimento inteligente, sustentável e inclusivo, bem
 como para a consecução dos objetivos do Semestre Europeu de coordenação das
 políticas económicas.
 As «Orientações Integradas» são as
 seguintes:
 Orientação n.o 1: Promover o
 investimento
 Orientação n.o 2: Reforçar o
 crescimento através da implementação de reformas estruturais
 Orientação n.o 3: Suprimir as
 barreiras ao crescimento e ao emprego na UE
 Orientação n.o 4: Melhorar a
 sustentabilidade das finanças públicas e torná-las mais favoráveis ao
 crescimento
 Orientação n.o 5: Dinamizar a procura
 de mão-de-obra
 Orientação n.o 6: Reforçar a oferta e
 as competências da mão-de-obra
 Orientação n.o 7: Reforçar o
 funcionamento dos mercados de trabalho
 Orientação n.o 8: Garantir justiça,
 combater a pobreza e promover a igualdade de oportunidades
 2015/0051 (NLE)
 Proposta de
 DECISÃO DO CONSELHO
 relativa às orientações para as políticas de
 emprego dos Estados-Membros
 O CONSELHO DA UNIÃO EUROPEIA,
 Tendo em conta o Tratado sobre o Funcionamento
 da União Europeia, nomeadamente o artigo 148.o, n.o 2,
 Tendo em conta a proposta da Comissão
 Europeia,
 Tendo em conta o parecer do Parlamento Europeu[1],
 Tendo em conta o parecer do Comité Económico e
 Social Europeu[2],
 Tendo em conta o parecer do Comité das Regiões[3],
 Tendo em conta o parecer do Comité do Emprego,
 Considerando o seguinte:
 (1) Os Estados-Membros e a União
 devem empenhar-se em desenvolver uma estratégia coordenada em matéria de
 emprego e, em especial, em promover uma mão de obra qualificada, formada e
 adaptável, bem como mercados de trabalho capazes de reagir à evolução
 económica, tendo em vista alcançar os objetivos de pleno emprego e de progresso
 social enunciados no artigo 3.o do Tratado da União Europeia. Em função
 das práticas nacionais associadas às responsabilidades dos parceiros sociais,
 os Estados-Membros devem considerar a promoção do emprego uma questão de
 interesse comum e coordenar a sua ação neste domínio no âmbito do Conselho.
 (2) A União deve combater a
 exclusão social e a discriminação, garantir a igualdade de acesso aos direitos fundamentais
 e promover a justiça e a proteção social. Ao definir e implementar as suas
 políticas e ações, a União deve ter em conta as exigências associadas à
 garantia de uma proteção social adequada, à luta contra a exclusão social e a
 um nível elevado de educação e formação.
 (3) As orientações para o emprego
 são coerentes com as orientações gerais para as políticas económicas.
 (4) Os Estados-Membros devem
 considerar as suas políticas económicas como uma questão de interesse comum e
 coordená-las no Conselho. O Conselho deve adotar orientações em matéria de
 emprego e orientações gerais para as políticas económicas, a fim de guiar as
 políticas dos Estados-Membros e da União.
 (5) Em conformidade com as
 disposições do Tratado, a União concebeu e implementou instrumentos de
 coordenação no domínio da política orçamental e das políticas macroestruturais.
 O Semestre Europeu conjuga os diferentes instrumentos num quadro abrangente de
 supervisão económica e orçamental multilateral integrada. A racionalização e a consolidação
 do Semestre Europeu, tal como referidas na Análise Anual do Crescimento 2015 da
 Comissão, contribuirão para melhorar o seu funcionamento.
 (6) A crise económica e
 financeira revelou e exacerbou importantes fragilidades na economia da União e
 dos seus Estados-Membros. Realçou igualmente a estreita interdependência das
 economias e dos mercados de trabalho dos Estados-Membros. O principal desafio
 que hoje se nos coloca é conduzir a União a uma situação de crescimento forte,
 sustentável e inclusivo e de criação de emprego, o que implica uma ação
 política coordenada e ambiciosa, quer a nível da União quer dos
 Estados-Membros, em sintonia com as disposições do Tratado e da governação
 económica da União. Conjugando medidas do lado da oferta e da procura, estas
 ações devem passar por um impulso ao investimento, um compromisso renovado para
 com reformas estruturais e a promoção de uma atitude responsável em matéria
 orçamental.
 (7) Os Estados-Membros e a União
 devem ainda dar resposta ao impacto social da crise e ter por objetivo a
 criação de uma sociedade coesa, na qual as pessoas disponham dos meios de
 antecipar e gerir a mudança e possam participar ativamente na sociedade e na
 economia. Há que garantir a todas a igualdade de acesso e de oportunidades e reduzir
 a exclusão social, assegurando para tal o bom funcionamento dos mercados de
 trabalho e dos sistemas de previdência social e eliminando obstáculos à
 participação no emprego. Os Estados-Membros deverão ainda assegurar que todos
 os cidadãos e todas as regiões tiram partido dos benefícios do crescimento
 económico.
 (8) Uma ação conforme com as
 orientações contribuirá significativamente para a consecução das metas da
 estratégia Europa 2020. As orientações constituem um conjunto integrado de
 políticas europeias e nacionais, que os Estados-Membros e a União devem
 implementar a fim de materializarem os efeitos positivos das reformas
 estruturais coordenadas e garantirem a conjugação certa de políticas económicas
 e um contributo mais coerente das políticas europeias para os objetivos da
 estratégia Europa 2020.
 (9) Ainda que estas orientações
 tenham como destinatários os Estados-Membros e a União, é desejável que sejam
 aplicadas em parceria com todas as autoridades nacionais, regionais e locais,
 procurando associar estreitamente os parlamentos, os parceiros sociais e os
 representantes da sociedade civil.
 (10) As orientações gerais para as
 políticas económicas guiam os Estados-Membros na implementação das reformas,
 refletindo assim a interdependência entre as economias. Estão também em
 conformidade com o Pacto de Estabilidade e Crescimento. As orientações devem
 constituir a base para recomendações específicas que o Conselho pretenda
 eventualmente dirigir aos Estados-Membros.
 ADOTOU A PRESENTE DECISÃO:
 Artigo 1.o
 São adotadas as Orientações para as Políticas
 de Emprego dos Estados-Membros, conforme apresentadas em anexo. Estas
 orientações farão parte integrante das «Orientações integradas».
 Artigo 2.o
 As orientações que constam do anexo devem ser
 tidas em conta nas políticas de emprego e nos programas de reforma dos
 Estados-Membros, que devem ser objeto de um relatório, em conformidade com o
 artigo 148.o, n.o 3, do Tratado.
 Os Estados-Membros são os destinatários da
 presente decisão.
 Feito em Bruxelas, em
 Pelo
 Conselho
 O
 Presidente
 [1] JO C ..., p.. .
 [2] JO C ..., p.. .
 [3] JO C ..., p.. .
 ANEXO
 Orientações para as políticas de
 emprego dos Estados-Membros
 Parte II das Orientações Integradas
 Orientação n.o 5: Dinamizar a procura de
 mão-de-obra
 Os Estados-Membros devem facilitar a criação
 de emprego, reduzir os obstáculos à contratação de efetivos, promover o
 empreendedorismo e, em especial, favorecer a criação e o crescimento de
 pequenas empresas, a fim de aumentar a taxa de emprego de homens e mulheres. Os
 Estados-Membros devem também promover ativamente a economia social e fomentar a
 inovação social.
 Há que transferir a carga fiscal sobre o
 trabalho para outras fontes de tributação que sejam menos prejudiciais ao
 emprego e ao crescimento, ao mesmo tempo que se salvaguardam receitas para
 assegurar uma proteção social adequada e permitir despesas com medidas
 favoráveis ao crescimento. A redução da tributação do trabalho deve incidir
 sobre as componentes relevantes da carga fiscal e a supressão de obstáculos e
 desincentivos à participação no mercado de trabalho, em especial para aquelas
 pessoas que dele estão mais afastadas.
 Em conjugação com os parceiros sociais, os
 Estados-Membros devem incentivar a instituição de mecanismos de fixação de
 salários que permitam uma capacidade de resposta à evolução da produtividade.
 Neste contexto, há que ter em conta as diferenças nas competências e nas
 condições do mercado de trabalho local, bem como as divergências em termos de
 desempenho económico entre regiões, setores e empresas. Ao fixar salários mínimos, os Estados-Membros e os parceiros sociais
 devem considerar o seu impacto na pobreza dos que trabalham, na criação de
 emprego e na competitividade.
 Orientação n.o 6: Reforçar a oferta de
 mão-de-obra e as competências
 Os Estados-Membros devem promover a
 produtividade e a empregabilidade, através de uma oferta adequada de
 conhecimentos e competências relevantes. Devem fazer os investimentos
 necessários nos sistemas de ensino e de formação profissional, ao mesmo tempo
 que melhoram a sua eficácia e eficiência para elevarem o nível de competências
 da mão-de-obra, permitindo-lhe assim antecipar mais eficazmente e dar respostas
 à rápida evolução das necessidades de mercados de trabalho dinâmicos, numa
 economia cada vez mais digital. Os Estados-Membros devem intensificar esforços
 no sentido de melhorar o acesso a uma aprendizagem de qualidade para todos os
 adultos e pôr em prática estratégias em prol de um envelhecimento ativo que
 permita vidas profissionais mais longas.
 Há que solucionar o problema do elevado
 desemprego e prevenir o desemprego de longa duração. O número de desempregados
 de longa duração deve ser significativamente reduzido, através de estratégias
 globais e sinergéticas, incluindo a prestação de apoios ativos específicos para
 que essas pessoas possam regressar ao mercado de trabalho. A resposta ao
 problema do desemprego dos jovens deve ser exaustiva, passando por dotar as
 instituições relevantes dos meios necessários para executarem, de forma plena e
 coerente, os respetivos planos nacionais no contexto da Garantia para a
 Juventude.
 Devem ser corrigidas as fragilidades
 estruturais dos sistemas de educação e formação, de modo a garantir a qualidade
 dos resultados da aprendizagem e prevenir e solucionar o problema do abandono
 escolar precoce. Os Estados-Membros devem aumentar os níveis de habilitações,
 considerar sistemas de aprendizagem em alternância e atualizar a formação
 profissional, ao mesmo tempo que facilitam o reconhecimento de aptidões obtidas
 fora do sistema de educação formal.
 Há que reduzir os obstáculos à participação no
 mercado de trabalho, em especial das mulheres, dos trabalhadores mais velhos,
 dos jovens, das pessoas com deficiência e dos migrantes legais. Deve
 assegurar-se a igualdade entre homens e mulheres no mercado de trabalho,
 designadamente no que respeita à remuneração, bem como o acesso a estruturas de
 ensino e acolhimento da primeira infância, com qualidade e a preços
 suportáveis.
 Os Estados-Membros devem fazer uso pleno dos
 apoios do Fundo Social Europeu e de outros fundos da União para melhorar o
 emprego, a inclusão social, a educação e a administração pública.
 Orientação n.o 7: Melhorar o
 funcionamento dos mercados de trabalho
 Os Estados-Membros devem reduzir a segmentação
 do mercado de trabalho. As regras em matéria de proteção do emprego e as
 instituições devem proporcionar um quadro favorável à contratação de mão de
 obra, oferecendo, ao mesmo tempo, níveis adequados de proteção social para os
 que trabalham, os que estão à procura de emprego, os empregados com contratos
 temporários ou os trabalhadores com contratos independentes. Há que assegurar a
 qualidade do emprego em termos de segurança socioeconómica, oportunidades de
 educação e formação, condições de trabalho (incluindo saúde e segurança) e
 equilíbrio entre vida profissional e familiar.
 Em função das práticas nacionais, os
 Estados-Membros devem envolver os parlamentos nacionais e os parceiros sociais
 na conceção e na implementação de reformas e políticas relevantes, ao mesmo
 tempo que contribuem para a melhoria do funcionamento e da eficácia do diálogo
 social a nível nacional.
 Os Estados-Membros devem reforçar as políticas
 ativas do mercado de trabalho, melhorando a sua especificidade, o seu alcance e
 a interação com as medidas passivas. Estas políticas devem visar o
 aperfeiçoamento da correspondência entre oferta e procura no mercado de
 trabalho e apoiar transições viáveis no mercado de trabalho, com os serviços
 públicos de emprego a prestar apoio individualizado e a implementar sistemas de
 medição de desempenho. Os Estados-Membros devem ainda velar por que os sistemas
 de proteção social ativem eficazmente e habilitem as pessoas que podem
 participar no mercado de trabalho, protejam os (temporariamente) excluídos e/ou
 os que não estão em condições de participar no mercado laboral, e preparar os
 indivíduos para riscos potenciais através de investimento em capital humano.
 Devem ainda promover mercados de trabalho inclusivos e abertos a todos e pôr em
 prática medidas eficazes de luta contra a discriminação.
 Para explorar o pleno potencial de um mercado
 de trabalho europeu, deve assegurar-se a mobilidade dos trabalhadores,
 designadamente pelo reforço da transferibilidade das pensões e do
 reconhecimento das qualificações. Os Estados-Membros devem, ao mesmo tempo,
 salvaguardar as regras existentes contra possíveis abusos.
 Orientação n.o 8: Garantir justiça,
 combater a pobreza e promover a igualdade de oportunidades
 Os Estados-Membros devem modernizar os
 respetivos sistemas de proteção social de forma a providenciar uma proteção
 eficiente, eficaz e adequada em todos as fases da vida dos indivíduos,
 assegurando a justiça e corrigindo as desigualdades. É necessário simplificar e
 melhorar a orientação das políticas sociais, complementadas por estruturas de
 ensino e acolhimento de crianças, de qualidade e a preços suportáveis, assistência
 na formação e no emprego, apoios em matéria de habitação e cuidados de saúde
 acessíveis, acesso a serviços básicos como uma conta bancária e a Internet, e
 medidas para prevenir o abandono escolar precoce e combater a exclusão social.
 Com este fim, deve recorrer-se a um conjunto
 de instrumentos a utilizar em complementaridade, nomeadamente serviços de
 ativação da mão-de-obra, serviços facilitadores e de apoio ao rendimento,
 adaptados às necessidades dos indivíduos. Os sistemas de proteção social devem
 ser concebidos de forma a facilitarem o acesso de todas as pessoas que a eles
 têm direito, apoiarem o investimento em capital humano e ajudarem a prevenir e
 a reduzir a pobreza, ao mesmo tempo que protegem as pessoas dos riscos que lhes
 estão associados.
 Os regimes de pensões devem ser alvo de
 reformas que visem garantir a sua viabilidade e adequação, tanto para os homens
 como para as mulheres, num contexto de longevidade acrescida e evolução
 demográfica, designadamente através da ligação da idade legal de reforma à
 esperança de vida, do aumento da idade de reforma efetiva e do desenvolvimento
 de mecanismos de poupanças que complementem as pensões.
 Os Estados-Membros devem melhorar a
 acessibilidade, a eficiência e a eficácia dos sistemas de saúde e de cuidados
 prolongados, garantindo, ao mesmo tempo, a viabilidade orçamental.


text:
The America's Cup World Series are match races and fleet regattas used as heats for the 2013 America's Cup and the 2017 America's Cup.
 The Yachts
 AC45 and AC45F
 The World Series uses AC45 catamarans, a one-design wingsail catamaran designed specifically for the event by Oracle Racing. The AC45 was conceived as a smaller version of the larger AC72 class rule which was used for the 2013 America's Cup. In 2015, the class was modified to AC45F which incorporated hydrofoiling capability for improved performance, with boats achieving peak speeds of 37kt.
 The AC45 has the following specifications:
 design: Mike Drummond & Oracle Racing
 builder: Core Builders Composites (NZ) & TP Cookson (NZ)
 build: honeycomb core, carbonfiber sandwich
 length:
 beam:
 weight:
 maximum draught :
 air draught : without extension, with extension
 wing: wing element with three slotted flaps
 extension: high, area
 jib area: , provided by sail loft of team's choice (2011–2013 series), provided by North Sails (2015–2016 series)
 gennaker area: , provided by sail loft of team's choice (2011–2013 series), provided by North Sails (2015–2016 series)
 crew: 5 + 1 guest
 daggerboards: two conventional leeboards (2011–2013 series) with raking L-type elevators (2015–2016 series)
 rudders: two balanced spade rudders (2011–2013 series) with T-type horizontal stabilizers (2015–2016 series)
 Testing platform
 The AC45 are authorized to be taken out of measurement to serve as a testing platform for the America's Cup. Oracle Racing released photographs of an AC45 hydrofoiling with L-type appendages on June 18, 2012, a premonition of Team New Zealand's larger foiling AC72 Aotearoa test boat first spotted in Auckland on August 29, 2012. In February 2015 Oracle Racing and Artemis Racing tested two AC45s modified by Core Builders; They featured L-type hydrofoils, horizontal rudder stabilizers, lengthened crossbeams (herego wide beam), a shortened jib-only bowsprit extending into a centerline pod under the wing, flaring topsides, closed transoms, opened hulls with deep cockpits for binnacles and wheels, replacing the tiller. The authorization does not permit to lengthen the hulls. All other teams carried out similar experiments with the platform.
 2011–13 World Series
 Nine events were held between 2011 and 2012 in the lead up to the 2013 America's Cup.
 In August 2013, the competition jury received a report from Oracle Team USA that their boat and others they had loaned had unauthorized modifications. Since they were using one of these modified boats, the BAR team withdrew from the competition on 7 August 2013. Oracle Team USA withdrew the day after. Penalties imposed included expelling three team members, a $250,000 fine, and a one-point penalty for each of the first two races of the Match in which they would otherwise score a point.
 2015–16 World Series
 The series was revived as heats of nine two-day events in eight venues in the run up to the 2017 America's Cup. The races used a single boat design, known as AC45f, which was based on AC45 with added hydrofoil daggerboards and rudders.
 The overall winner of the competition was Land Rover BAR, with Oracle Team USA being the runner up. The winner of the series earned two points and the runner-up received a single point in the new America's Cup Qualifiers. The boats are similar to the AC50 used in the 2017 America's Cup.
 Cancelled 2018 and 2020 World Series
 Prior to the 2017 America's Cup, several of the competing syndicates signed an agreement to hold World Series prior to the next two America's Cups, then scheduled for 2019 and 2021. These two World Series would be used as selection series to determine which teams would compete at the 2019 and 2021 Louis Vuitton Cups Challenger Selection Series. These two seasons would have used the AC50-class yachts, instead of the AC45 or AC45F classes. However, the winner of the 35th America's Cup, Emirates Team New Zealand was not a signatory to the agreement for the 36th and 37th America's Cup, making these plans obsolete.
 Footnotes
 References
 Sailing series
 America's Cup World Series


text:
La Villa romana de El Val era un asentamiento dedicado a la ganadería y la agricultura, distante 5 km al este de Complutum (actual Alcalá de Henares) en la vega del río Henares y aledaña a la vía que se encaminaba hacia Caesaraugusta. Se dedicaba principalmente a la cría de caballos para las carreras de cuadrigas, en ella se aprecia un conjunto palacial con dependencias agropecuarias, en cuya decoración destaca el Mosaico del Auriga Victorioso. Ha sido declarada Bien de Interés Cultural por la Comunidad de Madrid.
 Historia
 Esta villa romana se situaba estratégicamente en el Itinerario Antonino A-25, entre Augusta Emerita (Mérida) y Caesaraugusta (Zaragoza), en la vega del río Henares, zona muy fértil para la agricultura. Históricamente su desarrollo consta de tres fases. Sus primeros vestigios arquitectónicos son del siglo I d.C., periodo altoimperial; aunque sus edificios fueron remodelados durante la segunda mitad siglo III y principios del siglo IV, en la época bajoimperial. Al cristianizarse en el siglo V aparecen nuevas estructuras, una basílica y una necrópolis (denominada actualmente de "Los Afligidos", por el nombre del camino más próximo) en la que se han desenterrado unas cien sepulturas visigodas de los siglos VI y VII.
 La singularidad de la Villa de El Val era su dedicación a la cría de caballos de raza hispana, muy caros y apreciados para el tiro de las cuadrigas. Se destinaban a los espectáculos circenses por todo Imperio Romano, en especial en el Circo Máximo de Roma. En la ornamentación de sus principales edificios se repetían los temas relacionados con las carreras de carros, tanto en la pintura mural como en los mosaicos. Destaca en especial un gran mosaico, “El Auriga Victorioso”, que ocupaba la gran sala de recepción. Del que se ha conseguido recuperar y restaurar unos 90 m2. El mosaico esta datado entre los últimos años del siglo III y principios del IV d.C. Su diseño se compone de un campo geométrico periférico, y un emblema central en el que se representa un auriga, con gesto vencedor, sobre un carro tirado por caballos.
 El estudio de este yacimiento arqueológico se inició en 1970, y las excavaciones duraron hasta 1990. Estos trabajos contaron como base con el equipo arqueológico del Taller Escuela de Arqueología y Rehabilitación del Ayuntamiento de Alcalá de Henares, con la colaboración del Departamento de Arqueología de la Comunidad de Madrid. El yacimiento, aunque está cercado dentro de una parcela propiedad del consistorio complutense, está en mal estado de conservación y las ruinas no se pueden visitar.
 Características arqueológicas
 La Villa de El Val era una gran residencia compuesta de diversos edificios asentados a lo largo de 500 m. El principal y más lujoso era el palacio, dispuesto en torno a un gran jardín semicircular. Además, había una gran sala de recepción y un mausoleo funerario de planta cruciforme. Hacia el norte y el oeste las fachadas se completaban con unos torreones circulares y rectangulares. En el sur se ubicaban unas termas privadas y un edificio de planta basilical. El conjunto albergaba también talleres, almacenes y establos.
 Bien de interés cultural
 Desde 1988, es un yacimiento arqueológico declarado Bien de Interés Cultural por la Dirección General de Patrimonio Cultural de la Comunidad de Madrid, con el código ARI-55-0000234.
 Véase también
 Casa de Hippolytus
 Castillo de Alcalá la Vieja (Alcalá de Henares)
 Historia de Alcalá de Henares
 Patrimonio Cultural Inmueble de Alcalá de Henares
 Villa romana de Almenara-Puras
 Villa romana de Carranque
 Villa romana de El Vergel
 Villa romana de Noheda
 Villa romana en Los Villares
 Villa romana La Dehesa (Las Cuevas de Soria)
 Villa romana La Olmeda
 Villa romana La Tejada
 Rutas por Alcalá de Henares
 Yacimiento del Ecce Homo
 Anexo:Bienes de interés cultural de la Comunidad de Madrid
 Anexo:Edificios de Alcalá de Henares
 Referencias
 Enlaces externos
 Yacimiento Arqueológico de Complutum
 Corpvs Inscriptionvm Latinarvm II. Universidad de Alcalá
 Ciudad romana de Complutum
 Complutum (vídeo de 2011)
 Yacimientos arqueológicos de la Comunidad de Madrid
 Monumentos de Alcalá de Henares
 Bienes de interés cultural de Alcalá de Henares
 Iter XXV
 Itinerario Antonino A-24
 Ciudades de la Antigua Roma en España


jurisdiction: US

text:
 252 Md. 26 (1969)
 248 A.2d 867
 FRIEDMAN
 v.
 CLARK
 [No. 14, September Term, 1968.]
 Court of Appeals of Maryland.
 Decided January 10, 1969.
 *27 The cause was argued before HAMMOND, C.J., and MARBURY, BARNES, McWILLIAMS, SINGLEY and SMITH, JJ.
 Alfred S. Fried, with whom was Harold J. Rogers on the brief, for appellant.
 Glenn A. Mitchell for appellee.
 SINGLEY, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.
 Mrs. Deena Clark brought suit in the Circuit Court for Prince George's County against I.R. Friedman and Empire Construction Company (Empire) for breach of contract and of warranty. The declaration also sounded in negligence, but this was not considered below and will not be considered by us. From a judgment for $6,893.50 with interest and costs (there having been added to the costs $88.50 incurred in the taking of depositions), entered in Mrs. Clark's favor against both defendants, Mr. Friedman has appealed.
 Mrs. Clark lives at 2440 Kalorama Road, in the District of Columbia. Sometime late in February or early in March 1966, Mr. Friedman, who was vice president and treasurer of Empire, came to Mrs. Clark's house to discuss some work which Mrs. Clark wanted to have done. As Mrs. Clark explained, "* * * [T]he house was going to be on a charity tour for the benefit [of] the Home for Incurables, and I wanted a professional all over job so it would be in tiptop shape for that tour." After Mrs. Clark had explained in detail what she wanted, Mr. Friedman prepared a contract:
 "March 5, 1966
 "This agreement made this 5 day of March 1966, by and between Empire Const. Co. and Mr. and Mrs. Clark hereinafter called the homeowner.
 "Contractor agrees to furnish all labor and materials necessary to execute the following work on the premises located at 2440 Kalorama Road N.W. Washington D.C.
 1. Repair all concrete on walls of stairs leading to house. Repair walls on driveway. Paint same areas.
 *28 2. Repair gutter on front repair gutter over sun porch, and downspout on same area. Clean same out.
 3. Sand ceiling in living room and paint same two coats.
 4. Patch cracked wall in living room and fill out and paint same wall two coats.
 5. Patch cracked walls in sun porch and fill out and paint entire room two coats but do not paint trim.
 6. Paint entire outside of home with special masonry paint one coat only. Scrape stucco where necessary and patch. All bad trim to be scraped and two coats applied.
 7. The work shall be done in a good workmanlike manner, and with best quality materials. All standards guaranteed by manufacturers of materials.
 "In witness whereof the parties hereto have set their hands this 5 day of March 1966.
 Total price (3790.00). To be paid
 on completion.
 /s/ Deena Clark
 OWNER (Mrs. Blake Clark)
 EMPIRE CONST. CO.
 /s/ BY: I.R. Friedman
 CONTRACTOR."
 At this time, Mrs. Clark was not aware that Empire was a corporation with little or no assets, primarily engaged in estimating repair costs for insurance companies, nor did she know that Empire had neither the facilities nor the personnel which would be required to perform the contract, and proposed to have all of the work done by subcontractors.
 According to Mrs. Clark, at the time the contract was signed, the following colloquy took place with Mr. Friedman:
 "* * * I had to go with my husband to Hawaii on a business trip, therefore, couldn't supervise it.
 "He said, `I will supervise it. I will be here. I will *29 see everything they do. I will see that everything you want done is carried out.'"
 In response to the question, "Did you give him any consideration for that personal guarantee you just told us about?" Mrs. Clark replied, "Of my own volition I gave him a check for $1,000. He had assured me that he would do a first rate job, and to show my faith in him I volunteered to give him $1,000 in advance, and I did."
 When Mrs. Clark returned from Hawaii, she realized that the work had not been satisfactorily performed. This inspired a more significant conversation between Mrs. Clark and Mr. Friedman on 1 April. As she described it,
 "Q. Now, immediately upon your return from Hawaii did you make a further payment to Mr. Friedman? A. Yes. He admitted that all of these things were wrong on the third floor. He looked at the concrete and he said, `That is terrible. We will just do that over.'
 "And I showed him the sills that needed repainting. He said, `That certainly will be done over. That is terrible.'
 "I took him on the second floor and showed him where it hadn't been painted. He said, `That will be done over.'
 "And he sent a man to do it over. Everything I showed him he said it was quite right, that he agreed to do it over, that it was wrong.
 "Q. Did you make a payment to him then? A. Yes, because he came to me. He said everything was going to be done correctly. I believed him. And so I said, `Well, all right, I will give you another $1,000 if you personally guarantee that this is going to be done.'
 "He said, `I personally guarantee it.'
 "So, I sat down to make out the check.
 "And he said, `Mrs. Clark, could you make that $1,700, and then it will be just an even $1,000 you will owe upon completion.'
 *30 "Q. Subsequent  A. So, I made him a check for $1,700."[1]
 "Question: Did you orally warrant the work done under
 the contract?
 "Answer: Yes.
 "Question: And in addition you warranted it in the
 contract?
 "Answer: Yes.
 "Question: You personally?
 "Answer: Yes."
 Mrs. Clark produced testimony that the exterior paint had peeled, the concrete work had disintegrated, the leaks in the house and the gutters had not been repaired, the plaster had cracked, and the interior painting and carpentry had not been properly done. The lower court concluded that a workmanlike job would involve an outlay of $5,000 for sandblasting, $1,400 for painting, $394 for repairs to concrete, and $99.50 for replacement of shrubbery and entered judgment for $6,893.50 against Empire and Friedman.
 Friedman assigns two reasons for the reversal of the judgment against him:
 1. A contract signed "Empire Construction Company by I.R. Friedman, Contractor" imposes no personal liability on Friedman.
 2. Friedman's guaranty that the work would be done in a workmanlike manner was not supported by consideration, and a claim based upon it is barred by the Statute of Frauds.
 For the purposes of this opinion, we shall assume the correctness of Friedman's first contention, and consider the second, which we regard as the only issue in the case.
 As we see it, Friedman's argument that his personal guaranty *31 was not supported by consideration is without merit. Clearly it was his agreement to supervise the work personally which induced Mrs. Clark to advance $1,000 on 5 March and his personal guaranty which led her to pay $1,790 on 1 April. Under the terms of the contract no payment was due until the work was completed. It is of no consequence that the advance payments were not received by Friedman. Consideration can be found in the detriment to Mrs. Clark. Clay v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co., 184 F.2d 995 (D.C. Cir.1950); Owens v. Liff, 65 A.2d 921 (D.C. Mun. App. 1949); Belfiore v. B.J. Crivella, Inc., 60 A.2d 542 (D.C. Mun. App. 1948); Humbird v. Humbird, 162 Md. 582, 160 A. 623 (1932); Hercules Powder Co. v. Harry T. Campbell Sons Co., 156 Md. 346, 144 A. 510 (1929); Chicora Fertilizer Co. v. Dunan, 91 Md. 144, 156, 46 A. 347 (1900); Restatement, Contracts (1932) § 75. Under our decisions, the fact that the checks were received by Empire, of which Friedman was an officer and stockholder, was of sufficient benefit to him to support his promise. Gordon v. State Nat'l Bank, 249 Md. 378, 384, 239 A.2d 915 (1968); Foland v. Hoffman, 186 Md. 423, 47 A.2d 62 (1946).
 Nor are we persuaded by Friedman's argument that Mrs. Clark's claim on his guaranty is barred by the Statute of Frauds. In the first place, this question was not raised below. Maryland Rule 885, which provides that "This Court will not ordinarily decide any point or question which does not plainly appear by the record to have been tried and decided by the lower court; * * *" is enunciatory of long established practice. Chapter 117, Laws of Maryland (1825); Maryland Code (1951) Art. 5, § 10; Gordon v. State Nat'l Bank, supra, 249 Md. at 383; Schiller v. Lefkowitz, 242 Md. 461, 219 A.2d 378 (1966). In J.A. Laporte Corp. v. Pennsylvania-Dixie Cement Corp., 164 Md. 642, 165 A. 195, 168 A. 844, 108 A.L.R. 1474 (1933) our predecessors held that the Statute of Frauds could not be raised for the first time on appeal. In passing, we note that Friedman would have shouldered a more onerous burden in the District of Columbia, where the Statute must be affirmatively pleaded as a defense. Cavalier v. Weinstein, 80 A.2d 918 (D.C. Mun. App. 1951); Saunders System Washington Co. v. Kuffner, 75 A.2d 136 (D.C. Mun. App. 1950).
 *32 The result would not, however, have been different had the Statute of Frauds been raised as a defense below. District of Columbia Code (1967) § 28-3502 provides:
 "An action may not be brought * * * to charge the defendant upon a special promise to answer for the debt, default, or miscarriage of another person * * * unless the agreement upon which the action is brought, or a memorandum or note thereof, is in writing, which need not state the consideration and signed by the party to be charged therewith or a person authorized by him."
 For the purposes of this case, there is no significant difference between the form of the Statute in force in the District and 29 Car. 2 (1676), Chapter 3, Section IV (2), 2 Alexander's British Statutes (Coe Ed., 1912) at 509, which is in force in Maryland. Consequently, there is no need for us to consider whether the Statute is of a substantive or procedural nature. Simmons Co. v. Crew, 84 F.2d 82 (4th Cir.1936); Lams v. F.H. Smith Co., 36 Del. (6 Harr.) 477, 178 A. 651 (Super. Ct. 1935); Restatement, Conflict of Laws (1934) § 334, comment b at 412, § 598, comment a at 715, § 602, comment a at 719; 2 Corbin, Contracts (1950) § 293 at 68. Compare, however, Fort Worth Packing Co. v. Consumers' Meat Co., 86 Md. 635, 39 A. 746 (1898).
 Decisions of this Court recognize that testimony recorded in open court will, under appropriate circumstances, take the case out of the Statute. Janowitz v. Slagle, 250 Md. 140, 242 A.2d 123 (1968); Pollin v. Perkins, 223 Md. 532, 165 A.2d 908 (1960); Dove v. White, 211 Md. 228, 126 A.2d 835 (1956); Kaufmann v. Adalman, 186 Md. 639, 47 A.2d 755 (1946); Sealock v. Hackley, 186 Md. 49, 45 A.2d 744 (1946); Trossbach v. Trossbach, 185 Md. 47, 42 A.2d 905 (1945); 2 Corbin, supra, § 320 at 152. Compare, however, Lambdin v. Przyborowski, 250 Md. 108, 242 A.2d 150 (1968).
 As Judge (later Chief Judge) Markell, speaking for this Court in Trossbach v. Trossbach, supra, said:
 "Under existing procedure, the purpose of the Statute of Frauds is to protect a party, not from temptation *33 to commit perjury but from perjured evidence against him. The purpose of evidence is to prove facts. Admissions of a party in testifying, though in form evidence, are in essence not mere evidence, but make evidence against him unnecessary. * * * We think the Statute of Frauds requires no more.
 "Furthermore, admissions of a party in the form of testimony would constitute sufficient `memoranda' under Section 4 or Section 17, or `writings' under Section 7, of the statute. For this purpose we think recorded testimony should be regarded as equivalent to signed depositions." 185 Md. at 55, 56.
 So far as we have been able to ascertain, the courts of the District of Columbia have not addressed themselves to this question, and we assume that the District will follow Maryland law in instances where its courts have not spoken. Seidenberg v. Seidenberg, 126 F. Supp. 19, 22 (D.D.C. 1954).
 Had Friedman relied on the Statute of Frauds, we would have concluded that his admission that he had guaranteed the work took the case out of the Statute and would have amply supported the result reached below.
 Judgment affirmed; costs to be paid by appellant.
 NOTES
 [1] This check, offered in evidence in the case, was actually for $1,790.


type: other

text:
Časopis Všehrd · SLEDOVANIE OSÔB A VECÍ V SLOVENSKOM TRESTNOM PRÁVE PROCESNOM
 Prvým spomedzi prostriedkov operatívno-pátracej činnosti, ktorý je upravený v Piatej hlave zákona č. 301/2005 Z. z., Trestného poriadku (ďalej len „Trestný poriadok“ alebo „TP“), je sledovanie osôb a vecí. Operatívno-pátracie prostriedky predstavujú súhrn opatrení policajných orgánov uskutočňovaných podľa Trestného poriadku a v súlade s ďalšími predpismi, ktorých účelom je predchádzanie, odhaľovanie a objasňovanie trestnej činnosti, ako aj pátranie po skrývajúcich sa páchateľoch, pátranie po hľadaných nezvestných osobách a pátranie po vecných dôkazoch. 1
 Sledovanie osôb a vecí je prostriedkom, prostredníctvom ktorého je možné získavať poznatky dôležité pre trestné konanie o pohybe a činnosti osôb alebo vecí, ktoré majú určitý význam pre trestné konanie. Spravodajský, teda utajený spôsob ich výkonu zabezpečuje získanie pomerne hodnoverných, objektívnych a neskreslených údajov a informácií. Osoby, ktorých sa toto sledovanie dotýka, nemajú vedomosť o použití tohto prostriedku proti nim a práve v dôsledku toho je možné získavať veľmi dôležité a hodnoverné informácie pre trestné konanie. V prípade zákonného použitia tohto prostriedku je informáciám takto získaným priznaná v trestnom konaní povaha dôkazu. S cieľom dokumentácie priebehu úkonu a jeho obsahu sa pri sledovaní osôb a vecí využívajú technické prostriedky, ktoré umožňujú zaznamenanie priebehu úkonu, čo má význam pre využitie takto získaných informácií.2
 Ale vzhľadom k tomu, že sledovanie osôb a vecí, najmä ak sa používa práve s takýmito prostriedkami zaznamenania priebehu úkonu alebo aj prostriedkami technického sledovania a informačno-technickými prostriedkami, zasahuje do práva na súkromie, podobne ako ostatné prostriedky zabezpečovania informácií dôležitých pre trestné konanie. V tomto článku sa preto príslušná právna úprava tohto prostriedku operatívno-pátracej činnosti analyzuje v súvislosti so stretom verejného záujmu na objasňovaní trestnej činnosti a zisťovaní jej páchateľa na strane jednej a právom na súkromie na strate druhej s cieľom sformulovať relevantné závery k skúmanej tematike.
 Právna úprava sledovania osôb a vecí
 Utajovaný spôsob realizácie sledovania osôb a vecí smeruje k získaniu neskreslených, záujmami dotknutých subjektov neovplyvnených informácií a poznatkov o osobách a veciach, čo je zásadný element pre ich využiteľnosť v trestnom konaní a pre význam (dôkaznú hodnotu), ktorú v trestnom konaní môžu nadobudnúť. Je zrejmé, že ak by dotknuté osoby mali v konkrétnom čase a mieste vedomosť o tom, že ich činnosť, aktivity, operácie s vecami, ich stav a povaha boli takýmto spôsobom sledované, svoju činnosť by modifikovali tak, aby sa vyhli prípadnému trestnému postihu, aby sa tieto aktivity a operácie javili ako súladné (aprobované) s právom (napr. na základe vytvorenej krycej legendy) tak, aby vyvracali podozrenia odôvodňujúce použitie inštitútu sledovania osôb a vecí voči nim. Práve utajený spôsob realizácie sledovania osôb a vecí smeruje k dosiahnutiu účelu použitia tohto prostriedku, ktorý by bol vedomosťou dotknutých osôb o tomto použití zrejme zmarený. Prirodzene, že nielen spôsob realizácie ale aj samotná povaha sledovania osôb a vecí ako prostriedku operatívno-pátracej činnosti naznačujú, že jeho výkonom sa spravidla veľmi intenzívne zasahuje do oblasti ľudských práv a základných slobôd garantovaných nielen na ústavnej úrovni, ale aj vo viacerých dokumentoch európskej či medzinárodnej povahy. Okrem celého radu osobnostných práv je možné spomenúť tiež právo na ochranu súkromia a rodinného života, právo na zachovávanie tajomstva prepravovaných správ, právo na ochranu prejavov súkromnej povahy a pod. So zreteľom na korelácie medzi záujmom štátu na boji proti najzávažnejším formám kriminality a ľudskými právami jednotlivcov zohráva trestno-procesná úprava (podmienky a možnosti využitia inštitútu sledovania osôb a vecí v konkrétnych prípadoch, jej povaha a garancie, ktoré sa pomocou nej vytvárajú) veľmi dôležitú úlohu. Úlohou trestno-právnej úpravy je totiž pre oblasť trestného konania vytvoriť garancie dôslednej ochrany ľudských práv a základných slobôd pred neprimeranými, neodôvodnenými a v každom prípade nezákonnými zásahmi do týchto práv a slobôd zo strany orgánov štátu, ako aj vytvoriť možnosti ochrany dotknutých osôb v smere dosiahnutia ochrany ich subjektívnych práv v konaní pred súdom.3
 Zákonnú úpravu sledovania osôb a vecí (ďalej len „sledovanie“) predstavuje § 113 Trestného poriadku. Z tohto ustanovenia vyplýva, že sledovanie osôb a vecí nemožno vykonávať v obydlí, ale možno ho vykonávať v iných priestoroch, ktoré neslúžia na bývanie, a na pozemkoch, ktoré nie sú verejne prístupné.
 Právna úprava sledovania vytvára najbenevolentnejšie podmienky pre sledovanie, ktoré nie je spojené so vstupom ani do týchto iných priestorov alebo na takéto pozemky. V takomto prípade možno sledovanie vykonať v trestnom konaní o úmyselnom trestnom čine, ak možno dôvodne predpokladať, že ním budú zistené skutočnosti významné pre trestné konanie. Môže sa tak urobiť na základe príkazu na sledovanie, ktorý vydáva písomne predseda senátu a pred začatím trestného stíhania a v prípravnom konaní prokurátor. Príkaz na sledovanie sa môže vydať len základe písomnej žiadosti policajta alebo príslušného orgánu Policajného zboru a v konaní pred súdom na písomnú žiadosť prokurátora. Žiadosť sa musí odôvodniť podozrením z konkrétnej trestnej činnosti a tiež údajmi o osobách a veciach, ktoré majú byť sledované, ak sú tieto údaje známe. V príkaze sa musí ustanoviť čas, v ktorom sa bude sledovanie vykonávať, a to najviac šesť mesiacov. Ten, kto vydal príkaz na sledovanie, môže dobu sledovania písomne predĺžiť najviac o ďalších šesť mesiacov, a to aj opakovane. Ak sledovanie trvá dlhšie ako dvanásť mesiacov, príkaz na sledovanie pred začatím trestného stíhania a v prípravnom konaní vydáva sudca pre prípravné konanie.
 Ak nejde o sledovanie, ktoré by bolo spojené so vstupom do iných priestorov, ktoré neslúžia na bývanie, alebo na pozemky, ktoré nie sú verejne prístupné, sledovanie možno začať aj bez príkazu. Ďalšími zákonnými podmienkami pre takýto postup je, že vec neznesie odklad a písomný príkaz nemožno získať vopred. Policajt alebo príslušný útvar Policajného zboru je však povinný bez meškania dodatočne požiadať o vydanie príkazu. Ak príkaz nebude do 24 hodín vydaný, musí sa sledovanie skončiť a takto získané informácie nemožno použiť a musia sa predpísaným spôsobom bez meškania zničiť.
 Ide o podobné ustanovenie ako sú ustanovenia § 114 ods. 2 pri vyhotovovaní obrazových, zvukových alebo obrazovo-zvukových záznamov, § 115 ods. 2 pri odpočúvaní alebo § 117 ods. 6 pri použití agenta, ktoré orgánom činným v trestnom konaní umožňujú flexibilnejšie reagovať na vzniknuté situácie, v ktorých je potrebné okamžite začať s určitým úkonom, resp. postupom. Podľa § 114 ods. 2 môže za určitých podmienok vydať príkaz na vyhotovovanie obrazových, zvukových alebo obrazovo-zvukových záznamov prokurátor namiesto sudcu pre prípravné konanie (na dobu 24 hodín); podľa § 115 ods. 2 takisto; podľa § 117 ods. 6 za predpokladu splnenia príslušných zákonných podmienok môže prokurátor vydať príkaz na použitie agenta namiesto sudcu pre prípravné konanie dokonca aj ústne, a to na dobu 72 hodín. V praxi sa síce tieto ustanovenia využívajú minimálne, a hoci zákonná úprava neumožňuje využitie získaných informácií ako dôkazov v trestnom konaní, ktoré by sa získali napríklad pri sledovaní podľa § 113 ods. 7, ak do 24 hodín nie je vydaný príkaz, pretože toto ustanovenie ukladá policajtovi alebo príslušnému útvaru Policajného zboru, aby v takomto prípade sledovanie ukončili a získané informácie bez meškania predpísaným spôsobom zničili, ale aj napriek tomu, ak nejaké informácie získajú, môžu mať pre nich istú taktickú hodnotu.
 Podľa § 113 ods. 6 TP policajt alebo príslušný útvar Policajného zboru je povinný sústavne skúmať trvanie dôvodov, ktoré viedli k vydaniu príkazu na sledovanie. Ak dôvody pominuli, sledovanie sa musí skončiť, a to aj pred uplynutím času uvedeného v odseku 5, teda napríklad pred uplynutím šiestich mesiacov, ak sa čas sledovania ani raz nepredĺžil. Túto skutočnosť bez meškania písomne oznámi tomu, kto vydal príkaz, v prípravnom konaní tiež prokurátorovi. Ak pri sledovaní neboli zistené skutočnosti dôležité pre trestné konanie, musí sa vyhotovený záznam predpísaným spôsobom bez meškania zničiť (odsek 10). O zničení tohto záznamu alebo aj iného výsledku sledovania osôb a vecí sa vyhotovuje zápisnica v nej musia byť uvedené dôvody, pre ktoré bol záznam zničený, označenie tej osoby, ktorá nariadila alebo schválila sledovanie ako aj označenie osoby, ktorá nariadila i schválila zničenie záznamu alebo iného výsledku sledovania. Prirodzene, je vylúčené, aby bol záznam či iný výsledok sledovania pred týmto zničením skopírovaný či inak prepísaný.4
 Oveľa problematickejšie je sledovanie osôb a vecí, ak je spojené so vstupom do iných priestorov, ktoré neslúžia na bývanie, a na pozemky, ktoré nie sú verejne prístupné, pretože podľa výkladu Európskeho súdu pre ľudské práva (ďalej len „Európsky súd“) by aj takéto iné priestory, ako napríklad kancelárie, obchodné priestory, sídla či pobočky firiem a podnikov, mohli poskytovať oprávneným užívateľom určitú mieru súkromia5, a taktiež aj v spojitosti s § 113 ods. 11 Trestného poriadku. Právna úprava takéhoto sledovania je problematická aj z toho dôvodu, že sa pri sledovaní osôb a vecí môže, ak je to potrebné, použiť nielen prostriedok na zaznamenanie priebehu úkonu, ale aj prostriedok technického sledovania. Navyše § 113 ods. 4 pripúšťa aj použitie informačno-technického prostriedku. To znamená, že aj pri sledovaní sa môže výrazným spôsobom zasiahnuť do práva na súkromie.
 Sledovanie osôb a vecí a garancie práva na súkromie
 Sledovanie, ktoré je spojené so vstupom do iných priestorov, ktoré neslúžia na bývanie, a na pozemky, ktoré nie sú verejne prístupné, je upravené v § 113 ods. 4 TP. Podľa tohto ustanovenia, ak je nevyhnutne potrebné, aby sa sledovanie vykonalo v iných priestoroch, alebo ak sa má popri sledovaní súčasne použiť informačno-technický prostriedok a sledovanie nie je spojené so vstupom do obydlia, príkaz na sledovanie vydáva predseda senátu, pred začatím trestného stíhania alebo v prípravnom konaní sudca pre prípravné konanie na návrh prokurátora, ak skutočnosti významné pre trestné konanie nemožno získať pri vykonaní sledovania iným spôsobom; v príkaze sa uvedú iné priestory alebo pozemky, ktoré nie sú verejne prístupné, v ktorých sa má vykonať sledovanie, a druh informačno-technického prostriedku, ktorý sa má použiť. Ak vec neznesie odklad, môže namiesto príslušného sudcu pre prípravné konanie vydať príkaz sudca pre prípravné konanie súdu, v ktorého obvode sa má vykonať sledovanie. Pri vstupe do priestorov neslúžiacich na bývanie alebo na pozemky, ktoré nie sú verejne prístupné, sa nesmú vykonať iné úkony ako tie, ktoré sú nevyhnutné na vykonanie sledovania.
 Na tomto ustanovení, ako aj na celom § 113 TP, je problematické, že neobsahuje dostatočné garancie ochrany súkromia. Toto ustanovenie síce vyžaduje, aby bola naplnená podmienka subsidiarity, pretože z neho celkom jasne vyplýva, že takéto sledovanie je možné iba vtedy, ak by nebolo možné informácie dôležité pre trestné konanie získať iným spôsobom 6, a taktiež aj podmienka proporcionality, ktorá je daná v odseku 1 slovami „ak možno dôvodne predpokladať, že ním budú zistené skutočnosti významné pre trestné konanie“, ale pri porovnaní s ostatnými ustanoveniami, ktoré upravujú informačno-technické prostriedky a použitie agenta, sa táto podmienka, tzn. podmienka subsidiarity spolu s podmienkou proporcionality javí ako nedostatočná. Je totiž evidentné, že nejde o bežný spôsob získavania informácií dôležitých pre trestné konanie, preto by okruh trestných činov, pri ktorých je možné vykonať takéto sledovanie, mal byť stanovený striktnejšie, resp. užšie ako je tomu pri sledovaní, pri ktorom k takému zásahu do iného priestoru, ktorý neslúži na bývanie, alebo pozemku, ktorý nie je verejne prístupný, nedochádza, minimálne nie v takej intenzite (takéto sledovanie možno vykonať v trestnom konaní vedenom pre akýkoľvek úmyselný trestný čin bez ohľadu na jeho závažnosť).
 Túto skutočnosť si všíma napríklad aj Čerňanský, ktorý píše, že „zákonodarca pomerne široko formuluje vecnú pôsobnosť tohto prostriedku operatívno-pátracej činnosti, keď stanovuje, že je ho možné využiť v trestnom konaní o úmyselnom trestnom čine. Ide o veľmi širokú skupinu trestných činov rôznorodej povahy, keďže jediným kritériom určujúcim vecnú pôsobnosť možnosti použitia sledovania osôb a vecí je forma zavinenia trestného činu tvoriaceho predmet trestného konania. Z hľadiska závažnosti tak môže ísť o prečiny, o zločiny i o obzvlášť závažné zločiny ako podkategóriu zločinov, ako úmyselných trestných činov z hľadiska formy zavinenia.“ 7
 Samozrejme, že sledovanie osôb a vecí, podobne ako použitie agenta, je svojou povahou iným prostriedkom ako vyhotovovanie obrazových, zvukových alebo obrazovo-zvukových záznamov či odpočúvanie a záznam telekomunikačnej prevádzky, pretože ide prostriedok operatívno-pátracej činnosti, ale keďže aj pri tomto prostriedku sa môžu použiť informačno-technické prostriedky, ktorými sa zasahuje do súkromia, právna úprava sledovania, ktorá ich použitie umožňuje, najmä garancií práva na súkromie, by mala byť porovnateľná s právnou úpravou, ktorá upravuje tieto informačno-technické prostriedky. Okruh trestných činov, pri ktorých sa takéto sledovanie umožňuje, by preto mal byť stanovený oveľa užšie, napríklad tak, ako je tomu pri vyhotovovaní obrazových, zvukových alebo obrazovo-zvukových záznamov, ak nie je spojené so vstupom do obydlia, ktoré je možné v trestnom konaní pre úmyselný trestný čin, na ktorý zákon ustanovuje trest odňatia slobody s hornou hranicou trestnej sadzby prevyšujúcou tri roky, korupciu, alebo iný úmyselný trestný čin, o ktorom na konanie zaväzuje medzinárodná zmluva (§114 ods. 1).
 Otázne sú aj garancie ochrany súkromia. Napríklad pri pohľade na ustanovenie § 114 ods. 8 TP je evidentné, že ochrana súkromia pri vyhotovovaní obrazových, zvukových alebo obrazovo-zvukových záznamov je zabezpečená prísnejšie ako pri sledovaní, pretože toto ustanovenie napríklad stanovuje pre príslušné orgány povinnosť informovať dotknutú osobu, ktorej bolo pri vyhotovovaní takýchto záznamov zasiahnuté do súkromia, o tomto zásahu, čo pri úprave sledovania absentuje, hoci aj pri sledovaní zákon pripúšťa použitie informačno-technických prostriedkov. Právna úprava odpočúvania a záznamu telekomunikačnej prevádzky okrem takejto povinnosti obsahuje aj možnosť obrátiť sa na Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky s návrhom na preskúmanie zákonnosti príkazu na odpočúvanie a záznam telekomunikačnej prevádzky.
 Ak sa by preto pri sledovaní osôb a vecí zasiahlo do súkromia napríklad tým, že by bolo vykonané v inom priestore, ktorý neslúži na bývanie, mohla by sa tiež zvážiť úprava povinnosti informovať dotknutú osobu o uskutočnenom sledovaní, a tým aj zásahu do jej súkromia podobne ako je tomu napríklad pri vyhotovovaní obrazových, zvukových alebo obrazovo-zvukových záznamov.
 Na tento problém poukazujú viacerí autori. Napríklad Perhács píše, že o skutočnosti, že sledovanie osôb a vecí veľmi intenzívne zasahuje do ľudských práv a základných slobôd, vzhľadom na svoju povahu i utajený spôsob realizácie, nie je potrebné diskutovať. V každom prípade, ak majú mať osoby dotknuté výkonom inštitútu sledovania osôb a vecí možnosť súdnou či inou cestou brániť sa pred neoprávneným zásahom do svojich práv, musia sa v prvom rade dozvedieť o tom, že tento prostriedok sa vo vzťahu k nim využil. 8
 Na Perhácsa nadväzuje i Čerňanský. Podľa neho je zaujímavé, že pri iných zabezpečovacích inštitútoch vo vzťahu k informáciám dôležitým pre trestné konanie (pri informačno-technických prostriedkoch ako sú odpočúvanie a záznam telekomunikačnej prevádzky a oznámenie údajov o uskutočnenej telekomunikačnej prevádzke) zákonodarca túto povinnosť formuluje, hoci taktiež nie celkom dôsledne. V prípade sledovania osôb a vecí ju však neformuluje vôbec. Jednoznačne tak s cieľom odstránenia tohto nedostatku nielen vo vzťahu k ústavnoprávnej, ale aj európskej a medzinárodnej rovine ochrany ľudských práv a základných slobôd je vhodné na tomto mieste formulovať požiadavku, aby zákonodarca v procese novelizácií trestných predpisov doplnil do ustanovenia § 113 TP povinnosť príslušných orgánov informovať dotknuté osoby o použití inštitútu sledovania osôb a vecí voči nim s výnimkou prípadov, ak:
 by sa takto mohol zmariť účel tohto úkonu alebo trestného konania ako celku (hlavne v prípadoch spolupáchateľstva, v prípadoch trestných činov páchaných organizovanými, zločineckými či teroristickými skupinami, v prípadoch trestnej súčinnosti, kde sa vo vzťahu k jednému či viacerým páchateľom ešte právoplatne trestné stíhanie nezastavilo resp. neskočilo),
 osoba, do práv ktorej sa týmto prostriedkom zasiahlo, mala inú možnosť dozvedieť sa o tom, že sa vo vzťahu k nej využilo sledovanie osôb a vecí (hlavne v rámci možnosti, ktoré jej poskytuje právo nahliadať do spisov).9
 Na druhej strane treba povedať, že dôvernosť vzťahu medzi obvineným a jeho obhajcom sa chráni obdobne ako pri iných prostriedkoch získavania informácií. Podľa § 113 ods. 3 TP ak sa pri sledovaní zistí, že obvinený komunikuje so svojim obhajcom, takto získané informácie nemožno použiť na účely trestného konania a musia sa predpísaným spôsobom bez meškania zničiť; to neplatí, ak ide o informácie, ktoré sa vzťahujú na vec, v ktorej advokát nezastupuje obvineného ako obhajca.
 Ak je so sledovaním osôb a vecí spojený vstup do iných priestorov, ktoré neslúžia na bývanie, pri právnej úprave takéhoto sledovania by sa dalo vysloviť niekoľko pripomienok. To isté platí aj pre sledovanie, pri ktorom sa použijú informačno-technické prostriedky podľa § 113 ods. 4.
 Na ustanovení § 113 TP je problematické, že neobsahuje dostatočné garancie ochrany súkromia. Toto ustanovenie síce upravuje zásady subsidiarity a proporcionality, ale pri porovnaní s ustanoveniami, ktoré upravujú informačno-technické prostriedky a použitie agenta, tieto podmienky nie sú dostatočnými právnymi garanciami ochrany súkromia. Keďže aj pri sledovaní sa môžu použiť informačno-technické prostriedky, ktorými sa zasahuje do súkromia, právna úprava sledovania, by mala byť porovnateľná s právnou úpravou informačno-technických prostriedkov. Okruh trestných činov, pri ktorých sa takéto sledovanie umožňuje, by preto mal byť stanovený oveľa užšie, napríklad porovnateľne s § 114 ods. 1 TP, ktorý stanovuje okruh trestných činov pre vyhotovovanie obrazových, zvukových alebo obrazovo-zvukových záznamov, ktoré nie je spojené so vstupom do obydlia (nevylučuje vstup do iných priestorov neslúžiacich na bývanie) a podľa ktorého je takéto sledovanie možné nariadiť v trestnom konaní vedenom pre úmyselný trestný čin, na ktorý zákon ustanovuje trest odňatia slobody s hornou hranicou trestnej sadzby prevyšujúcou tri roky, korupciu, alebo iný úmyselný trestný čin, o ktorom na konanie zaväzuje medzinárodná zmluva.
 Pri pohľade na ustanovenie § 114 TP je tiež evidentné, že ochrana súkromia pri vyhotovovaní obrazových, zvukových alebo obrazovo-zvukových záznamov je zabezpečená prísnejšie ako pri sledovaní osôb a vecí. Ak by sa preto pri sledovaní osôb a vecí zasiahlo do súkromia tým, že by bolo vykonané v inom priestore, ktorý neslúži na bývanie, ale ktorý zároveň v zmysle judikatúry Európskeho súdu takisto poskytuje oprávnenému užívateľovi určité súkromie, alebo ak by sa pri sledovaní použili informačno-technické prostriedky, mohla by sa tiež zvážiť úprava povinnosti informovať dotknutú osobu o uskutočnenom sledovaní, a tým aj o zásahu do jej súkromia, podobne, ako je tomu pri vyhotovovaní obrazových, zvukových alebo obrazovo-zvukových záznamov alebo pri odpočúvaní, čo v právnej úprave sledovania osôb a vecí v súčasnosti absentuje.
 JUDr. Miloš Deset, PhD.
 Fryšták, M. Dokazování v přípravném řízení. Brno: Masarykova univerzita, 2014, s 323. ↩
 Záhora, J. a kolektív. Dokazovanie v trestnom konaní. 1. vydanie. Praha: Leges, 2013, s. 268 – 269. ↩
 Čerňanský, M. Limity využívania prostriedkov operatívno-pátracej činnosti v trestnom konaní. Dizertačná práca. Školiteľ: Doc. JUDr. Peter Polák, PhD. Paneurópska vysoká škola. Fakulta práva. Ústav verejného práva. Bratislava, 2016, s. 37 – 38. ↩
 Záhora, J. a kolektív. Dokazovanie v trestnom konaní. 1. vydanie. Praha: Leges, 2013, s. 270. ↩
 Pozri napríklad rozhodnutia Niemietz proti Nemecku (rozhodnutie zo 16. decembra 1992), Chappell proti Spojenému kráľovstvu (rozhodnutie z 30. marca 1989), Klass a ostatní proti Spolkovej republike Nemecko (rozhodnutie zo 6. septembra 1978), Gillow proti Spojenému kráľovstvu (rozhodnutie z 24. novembra 1986), Buckley proti Spojenému kráľovstvu (rozhodnutie z 26. augusta 1996), Mentes a ostatní proti Turecku (rozhodnutie z 27. júla 1998), Société Colas Est. proti Francúzsku (rozhodnutie zo 16. apríla 2002), Crémieux proti Francúzsku (rozhodnutie z 25. februára 1993) a Miailhe proti Francúzsku (rozhodnutie z 25. februára 1993). ↩
 Ivor, J. a kol. Trestné právo procesné. Druhé prepracované a doplnené vydanie. Bratislava: Iura Edition, 2010, s. 397. ↩
 Čerňanský, M. Limity využívania prostriedkov operatívno-pátracej činnosti v trestnom konaní. Dizertačná práca. Školiteľ: Doc. JUDr. Peter Polák, PhD. Paneurópska vysoká škola. Fakulta práva. Ústav verejného práva. Bratislava, 2016, s. 42. ↩
 Perhács, Z. Sprístupnenie informácií o tajnom sledovaní osôb mocenskými zložkami štátu. In Bulletin slovenskej advokácie, 2015, roč. XXI, č. 4, s. 6-15. ↩
 Čerňanský, M. Limity využívania prostriedkov operatívno-pátracej činnosti v trestnom konaní. Dizertačná práca. Školiteľ: Doc. JUDr. Peter Polák, PhD. Paneurópska vysoká škola. Fakulta práva. Ústav verejného práva. Bratislava, 2016, s. 72. ↩
 Článek vyšel 3.10.2017v rubrice Trestní právo


text:
 20.11.2010
 LT
 Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys
 C 317/10
 2010 m. rugsėjo 30 d. Teisingumo Teismo (septintoji kolegija) sprendimas byloje (Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny Izba Finansowa Wydział I (Lenkijos Respublika) prašymas priimti prejudicinį sprendimą) Oasis East sp z o.o. prieš Minister Finansów
 (Byla C-395/09) (1)
 (Šeštoji PVM direktyva - Direktyva 2006/112/EB - Naujos valstybės narės įstojimas - Teisė atskaityti pirkimo mokestį - Nacionalinės teisės aktai, pagal kuriuos neatskaitomas mokestis, susijęs su tam tikrų paslaugų teikimu - Prekybos partneriai, įsteigti „mokesčių rojaus“ teritorijoje - Valstybių narių teisė toliau taikyti atskaitos apribojimus, galiojusius įsigaliojant Šeštajai PVM direktyvai)
 2010/C 317/19
 Proceso kalba: lenkų
 Prašymą priimti prejudicinį sprendimą pateikęs teismas
 Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny Izba Finansowa Wydział I
 Šalys pagrindinėje byloje
 Ieškovė: Oasis East sp z o.o.
 Atsakovas: Minister Finansów
 Dalykas
 Prašymas priimti prejudicinį sprendimą — Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — 1977 m. gegužės 17 d. Šeštosios Tarybos direktyvos 77/388/EEB dėl valstybių narių apyvartos mokesčių įstatymų derinimo — Bendra pridėtinės vertės mokesčio sistema: vienodas vertinimo pagrindas (OL L 145, p. 1; 2004 m. specialusis leidimas lietuvių k., 9 sk., 1 t., p. 23) 17 straipsnio 6 dalies bei 2006 m. lapkričio 28 d. Tarybos direktyvos 2006/112/EB dėl pridėtinės vertės mokesčio bendros sistemos (OL L 347, p. 1) 176 straipsnio aiškinimas — Iki įstojimo į Bendriją galiojusi nacionalinės teisės nuostata, pagal kurią teisė į mokesčio atskaitą nesuteikiama paslaugų, už kurias sumokama teisės subjektui, kurio gyvenamoji, buveinės ar administracijos vieta yra teritorijoje, kuri laikoma „mokesčių rojumi“, atžvilgiu
 Rezoliucinė dalis
 1977 m. gegužės 17 d. Šeštosios Tarybos direktyvos 77/388/EEB dėl valstybių narių apyvartos mokesčių įstatymų derinimo — Bendra pridėtinės vertės mokesčio sistema: vienodas vertinimo pagrindas, iš dalies pakeista 1995 m. balandžio 10 d. Direktyva 95/7/EB, kurios nuostatos iš esmės buvo perkeltos į 2006 m. lapkričio 28 d. Tarybos direktyvą 2006/112/EB dėl pridėtinės vertės mokesčio bendros sistemos, 17 straipsnio 6 dalis turi būti aiškinama taip, kad pagal ją draudžiama toliau taikyti nacionalinės teisės nuostatas, taikytas atitinkamoje valstybėje narėje įsigaliojus Direktyvai 77/388, pagal kurias bendrai neleidžiama atskaityti pirkimo PVM, sumokėto įsigyjant importuotas paslaugas, už kurias tiesiogiai ar netiesiogiai sumokama asmeniui, įsisteigusiam valstybėje ar teritorijoje, pagal šias nuostatas kvalifikuojamoje kaip „mokesčių rojus“.
 (1) OL C 312, 2009 12 19.