text:
 BREITHIÚNAS NA CÚIRTE (an Mór-Dhlísheomra)
 22 Feabhra 2022 (
 *1
 )
 “Tarchur chun réamhrialú – Treoir 2014/40/AE – Monarú, cur i láthair agus díol táirgí tobac – Táirgí nach gcomhlíonann na huasleibhéil astaíochta – Toirmeasc ar iad a chur ar an margadh – Modh tomhais – Toitíní le scagaire a bhfuil micrea‐phoill aerála acu – Tástálacha astaíochtaí bunaithe ar chaighdeáin ISO – Caighdeáin nár foilsíodh in Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh – Comhréireacht le ceanglais foilsithe dá bhforáiltear in Airteagal 297(1) CFAE, arna léamh i bhfianaise phrionsabal na deimhneachta dlíthiúla – Comhréireacht le prionsabal na trédhearcachta”
 I gCás C-160/20,
 IARRAIDH ar réamhrialú faoi Airteagal 267 CFAE ó Rechtbank Rotterdam (Cúirt Rotterdam, an Ísiltír), trí bhreith an 20 Márta 2020, a fuarthas ag an gCúirt an 24 Márta 2020, sna himeachtaí idir
 Stichting Rookpreventie Jeugd,
 Stichting Inspire2live,
 Rode Kruis Ziekenhuis BV,
 Stichting ClaudicatioNet,
 Nederlandse Vereniging voor Kindergeneeskunde,
 Nederlandse Vereniging voor Verzekeringsgeneeskunde,
 Accare, Stichting Universitaire en Algemene Kinder- en Jeugdpsychiatrie Noord-Nederland,
 Vereniging Praktijkhoudende Huisartsen,
 Nederlandse Vereniging van Artsen voor Longziekten en Tuberculose,
 Nederlandse Federatie van Kankerpatiëntenorganisaties,
 Nederlandse Vereniging Arbeids- en Bedrijfsgeneeskunde,
 Nederlandse Vereniging voor Cardiologie,
 Koepel van Artsen Maatschappij en Gezondheid,
 Koninklijke Nederlandse Maatschappij tot bevordering der Tandheelkunde,
 College van Burgemeester en Wethouders van Amsterdam
 agus
 Staatssecretaris van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport,
 i láthair:
 Vereniging Nederlandse Sigaretten- en Kerftabakfabrikanten (VSK),
 tugann AN CHÚIRT (an Mór-Dhlísheomra),
 comhdhéanta de K. Lenaerts, Uachtarán, A. Arabadjiev, K. Jürimäe, C. Lycourgos, E. Regan, S. Rodin (Rapóirtéir), I. Jarukaitis agus J. Passer, Uachtaráin ar Dhlísheomra, J.-C. Bonichot, M. Safjan, F. Biltgen, P. G. Xuereb, N. Piçarra, L.S. Rossi agus A. Kumin, Breithiúna,
 Abhcóide Ginearálta: H. Saugmandsgaard Øe,
 Cláraitheoir: A. Calot Escobar,
 ag féachaint don nós imeachta i scríbhinn,
 tar éis breithniú a dhéanamh ar na barúlacha i scríbhinn arna dtíolacadh thar ceann na bpáirtithe seo a leanas:
 –
 Stichting Rookpreventie Jeugd, Stichting Inspire2live, Rode Kruis Ziekenhuis BV, Stichting ClaudicatioNet, Nederlandse Vereniging voor Kindergeneeskunde, Nederlandse Vereniging voor Verzekeringsgeneeskunde, Accare, Stichting Universitaire en Algemene Kinder- en Jeugdpsychiatrie Noord-Nederland, Vereniging Praktijkhoudende Huisartsen, Nederlandse Vereniging van Artsen voor Longziekten en Tuberculose, Nederlandse Federatie van Kankerpatiëntenorganisaties, Nederlandse Vereniging Arbeids- en Bedrijfsgeneeskunde, Nederlandse Vereniging voor Cardiologie, Koepel van Artsen Maatschappij en Gezondheid, Koninklijke Nederlandse Maatschappij tot bevordering der Tandheelkunde, College van Burgemeester en Wethouders van Amsterdam, ag Me A. van den Biesen, advocaat,
 –
 Vereniging Nederlandse Sigaretten- en Kerftabakfabrikanten (VSK), ag W. Knibbeler, B. Verheijen agus P.D. van den Berg, advocaten,
 –
 rialtas na hÍsiltíre, ag M. K. Bulterman et C.S. Schillemans, i gcáil Gníomhairí,
 –
 Parlaimint na hEorpa, ag L. Visaggio, R. van de Westelaken agus W. D. Kuzmienko, i gcáil Gníomhairí,
 –
 Comhairle an Aontais Eorpaigh, ag S. Emmerechts agus Á. de Elera-San Miguel Hurtado chomh maith le P. Plaza García, i gcáil Gníomhairí,
 –
 an Coimisiún Eorpach, ag I. Rubene agus S. Delaude chomh maith le F. Thiran agus H. Kranenborg, i gcáil Gníomhairí,
 tar éis éisteacht le tuairim an Abhcóide Ghinearálta ag éisteacht an 15 Iúil 2021,
 an Breithiúnas seo a leanas:
 Breithiúnas
 1
 Baineann an iarraidh ar réamhrialú le bailíocht agus léirmhíniú Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40/AE ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle an 3 Aibreán 2014, maidir le comhfhogasú dlíthe, rialacháin agus fhorálacha riaracháin na mBallstát a bhaineann le monarú, cur i láthair agus díol táirgí tobac agus táirgí gaolmhara agus lena n-aisghairtear Treoir 2001/37/CE (IO 2014 L 127, lch. 1).
 2
 Rinneadh an iarraidh seo i gcomhthéacs imeachtaí idir Stichting Rookpreventie Jeugd (Fondúireacht um chosc ar chaitheamh tobac i measc daoine óga, an Ísiltír) agus 14 eintiteas eile ó Staatssecretaris van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport (Státrúnaí Sláinte, Leasa agus Spóirt, an Ísiltír) (“Státrúnaí”) faoin modh tomhais i leith leibhéil astaíochta tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin ó thoitíní.
 An dlí lena mbaineann
 Dlí idirnáisiúnta
 3
 Tháinig Creat-Choinbhinsiún na hEagraíochta Domhanda Sláinte maidir le Rialú Tobac (“CCRT”), a tugadh chun críche sa Ghinéiv an 21 Bealtaine 2003, a bhfuil an tAontas Eorpach agus a Bhallstáit ina bpáirtithe ann, i bhfeidhm an 27 Feabhra 2005. Foráiltear le hAirteagal 5, mír 3, de CCRT:
 “Agus a mbeartais sláinte poiblí maidir le rialú tobac á sainiú agus á gcur chun feidhme acu, áiritheoidh na Páirtithe nach mbeidh tionchar ag leasanna tráchtála agus leasanna eile thionscal an tobac ar na beartais sin, i gcomhréir leis an dlí náisiúnta.”
 [aistriúchán neamhoifigiúil]
 4
 De réir Airteagal 7 de CCRT:
 “[...] Molann Comhdháil na bPáirtithe treoirlínte iomchuí maidir le cur i bhfeidhm fhorálacha Airteagail [8 go 13 de CCRT].”
 [aistriúchán neamhoifigiúil]
 5
 Baineann Airteagail 8 go 13 de CCRT le bearta chun an t-éileamh ar thobac a laghdú. Baineann siad, faoi seach, le cosaint in aghaidh nochtadh do dheatach tobac, rialáil ábhair táirgí tobac, rialáil na faisnéise atá le soláthar ar tháirgí tobac, pacáistiú agus lipéadú táirgí tobac, oideachas poiblí agus feasacht ar shaincheisteanna rialaithe tobac chomh maith le cosc domhanda ar fhógraíocht, ar chur chun cinn agus ar urraíocht tobac.
 6
 Foráiltear le hAirteagal 9 de CCRT:
 “Molann Comhdháil na bPáirtithe, i gcomhairle le comhlachtaí idirnáisiúnta ábhartha, treoirlínte chun ábhar agus astaíochtaí táirgí tobac a thástáil agus a anailísiú, agus chun an t-ábhar agus na hastaíochtaí sin a rialáil. Déanann gach Páirtí bearta éifeachtacha reachtacha, feidhmiúcháin, riaracháin nó bearta eile a bhaineann leis na tástálacha agus an anailís sin agus na rialacháin sin a ghlacadh agus a chur i bhfeidhm, faoi réir fhormheas na n-údarás náisiúnta inniúil.”
 [aistriúchán neamhoifigiúil]
 Dlí an Aontas Eorpaigh
 Rialachán (AE) Uimh. 216/2013
 7
 Leagtar amach sa chúigiú agus sa séú haithris de Rialachán (AE) Uimh. 216/2013 ón gComhairle an 7 Márta 2013 maidir le foilsiú leictreonach Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh (IO 2013, L 69, lch. 1):
 “(5)
 Chinn Cúirt Bhreithiúnais an Aontais Eorpaigh, i [mbreithiúnas Skoma-Lux (C-161/06
 EU:C:2007:773)] nach bhfuil gníomhartha dlí an Aontais ina gceangal ar dhaoine aonair mura bhfoilsítear iad go cuí san Iris Oifigiúil agus nach ionann iad a chur ar fáil ar líne agus foilsiú bailí san Iris Oifigiúil in éagmais, i ndlí an Aontais, aon riail maidir leis sin.
 (6)
 Dá mba rud é gurbh ionann foilsiú san Iris Oifigiúil i bhfoirm leictreonach agus bailí, d’fhéadfaí rochtain níos gasta agus níos eacnamaíche a fháil ar dhlí an Aontais. Ba cheart go mbeadh an deis i gcónaí ag saoránaigh, áfach, leagan clóite den Iris Oifigiúil a fháil ó Oifig na bhFoilseachán.”
 [aistriúchán neamhoifigiúil]
 8
 Foráiltear le hAirteagal 1 den Rialachán sin:
 “1. Foilsítear an Iris Oifigiúil i bhfoirm leictreonach, i gcomhréir leis an Rialachán seo, i dteangacha oifigiúla institiúidí an Aontais Eorpaigh.
 2. Gan dochar d’Airteagal 3, is í an Iris Oifigiúil amháin a fhoilsítear i bhfoirm leictreonach (“eagrán leictreonach den Iris Oifigiúil”) a bheidh barántúil agus lena mbeidh éifeachtaí dlíthiúla.”
 [aistriúchán neamhoifigiúil]
 Treoir 2014/40
 9
 Leagtar amach in Aithrisí 7, 8 agus 11 de Threoir 2014/40:
 “(7)
 Tá gá le gníomhaíocht reachtach ar leibhéal an Aontais Eorpaigh freisin chun Creat-Choinbhinsiún na hEagraíochta Domhanda Sláinte (EDS) maidir le Rialú Tobac (CCRT) an Bealtaine 2003 a chur chun feidhme, dá bhfuil an tAontas agus a Bhallstáit ina bpáirtithe, agus a bhfuil forálacha an Chreat‐Choinbhinsiúin seo ina gceangal orthu. Ba cheart aird ar leith a thabhairt ar fhorálacha CCRT a bhaineann le hábhar táirgí tobac a rialáil, rialáil nochta faisnéise faoi tháirgí tobac, pacáistiú agus lipéadú táirgí tobac, fógraíocht agus trádáil aindleathach i dtáirgí tobac. Ghlac páirtithe CCRT, lena n-áirítear an tAontas Eorpach agus a Bhallstáit, sraith treoirlínte maidir le cur i bhfeidhm fhorálacha CCRT de chomhthoil ag comhdhálacha éagsúla.
 (8)
 I gcomhréir le hAirteagal 114(3) [CFAE], ba cheart ardleibhéal cosanta sláinte a ghlacadh mar bhonn le tograí reachtacha, agus go háirithe ba cheart aon fhorbairt nua atá bunaithe ar fhíorais eolaíocha a chur san áireamh. Ní gnáth-thráchtearraí táirgí tobac agus, i bhfianaise na n-iarmhairtí an-díobhálach atá ag tobac ar shláinte an duine, ba cheart béim a leagan ar chosaint sláinte chun leitheadúlacht úsáide tobac i measc daoine óga a laghdú, go háirithe.
 [...]
 (11)
 Ba cheart tagairt a dhéanamh do chaighdeáin ISO a aithnítear go hidirnáisiúnta chun an méid tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin i dtoitíní a thomhas [...] Ba cheart an próiseas fíoraithe a chosaint ó thionchar thionscal an tobac trí úsáid a bhaint as saotharlanna neamhspleácha, lena n-áirítear saotharlanna Stáit. [...]”
 [aistriúchán neamhoifigiúil]
 10
 Foráiltear le hAirteagal 1 den Treoir sin:
 “Is é cuspóir na Treorach seo dlíthe, rialacháin agus forálacha riaracháin na mBallstát a chomhfhogasú i ndáil leis na nithe seo a leanas:
 a)
 comhábhair agus astaíochtaí táirgí tobac agus na hoibleagáidí tuairiscithe gaolmhara, lena n-áirítear uasleibhéil astaíochtaí tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin do thoitíní;
 [...]
 d’fhonn feidhmiú cuí an mhargaidh inmheánaigh tobac agus táirgí gaolmhara a éascú, ag glacadh mar bhonn le hardleibhéal cosanta do shláinte an duine, go háirithe do dhaoine óga, agus chun oibleagáidí an Aontais Eorpaigh faoi Chreat‐Choinbhinsiún EDS maidir le Rialú Tobac (CCRT) a chomhlíonadh.”
 [aistriúchán neamhoifigiúil]
 11
 Foráiltear le hAirteagal 2 den Treoir sin:
 “Chun críocha na Treorach seo, beidh feidhm ag na sainmhínithe seo a leanas:
 [...]
 21)
 ciallaíonn ‘astuithe’, substaintí a scaoiltear nuair a úsáidtear tobac nó táirge gaolmhar chun na críche atá beartaithe dó, amhail substaintí atá sa deatach nó substaintí a scaoiltear le linn táirge tobac gan toit a úsáid;
 [...]”
 [aistriúchán neamhoifigiúil]
 12
 De réir Airteagal 3(1) den Treoir chéanna:
 “Ní fhéadfaidh na leibhéil astaíochta ó thoitíní a chuirtear ar an margadh nó a mhonaraítear sna Ballstáit (‘uasleibhéil astaíochtaí’) dul thar:
 a)
 10 mg tarra in aghaidh an toitín;
 b)
 1 mg nicitín in aghaidh an toitín;
 c)
 10 mg aonocsaíde carbóin in aghaidh an toitín.”
 [aistriúchán neamhoifigiúil]
 13
 Foráiltear le hAirteagal 4 de Threoir 2014/40:
 “1. Déanfar astaíochtaí tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin ó thoitíní a thomhas bunaithe ar chaighdeán ISO 4387 do tharra, ar chaighdeán ISO 10315 do nicitín agus ar chaighdeán ISO 8454 d’aonocsaíd charbóin.
 Cinnfear cruinneas tomhais tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin de réir ISO 8243.
 2. Fíorófar na bearta dá dtagraítear i mír 1 i saotharlanna arna bhformheas agus arna maoirsiú ag údaráis inniúla na mBallstát.
 Ní bheidh na saotharlanna sin faoi úinéireacht thionscal an tobac ná ní rialóidh an tionscal sin iad, go díreach nó go hindíreach.
 [...]
 3. Tabharfar de chumhacht don Choimisiún [Eorpach] gníomhartha tarmligthe a ghlacadh i gcomhréir le hAirteagal 27 chun na modhanna tomhais i leith astaíochtaí tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin a oiriúnú de réir mar is gá sin i bhfianaise forbairtí eolaíocha agus teicniúla nó caighdeáin arna nglacadh go hidirnáisiúnta.
 4. Tabharfaidh na Ballstáit fógra don Choimisiún faoi aon mhodhanna tomhais a úsáideann siad le haghaidh astaíochtaí ó thoitíní seachas na cinn dá dtagraítear i mír 3 agus le haghaidh astaíochtaí ó tháirgí tobac seachas toitíní.
 [...]”
 [aistriúchán neamhoifigiúil]
 14
 Foráiltear le hAirteagal 24 den Treoir sin:
 “1. Ní féidir leis na Ballstáit, ar chúiseanna a bhaineann leis na gnéithe a rialaítear leis an Treoir seo agus faoi réir mhíreanna 2 agus 3 den Airteagal seo, toirmeasc nó srian a chur ar tháirgí tobac nó ar tháirgí gaolmhara a chur ar an margadh i gcás ina gcomhlíonann siad an Treoir seo.
 2. Ní dhéanfaidh an Treoir seo difear don cheart atá ag Ballstát ceanglais a choimeád ar bun nó cinn nua a thabhairt isteach, is infheidhme maidir leis na táirgí go léir arna gcur ar an margadh, maidir le pacáistiú táirgí tobac a chaighdeánú, i gcás go mbeidh údar maith leis sin ar fhorais sláinte poiblí, agus an t-ardleibhéal cosanta do shláinte an duine a áirithítear leis an Treoir seo á chur san áireamh. Beidh na bearta sin ina mbearta comhréireacha agus ní bheidh siad ina modh idirdhealaithe threallaigh nó ina srian faoi cheilt ar thrádáil idir na Ballstáit. Cuirfear na bearta sin in iúl don Choimisiún, mar aon leis na cúiseanna a thugann údar lena gcoimeád nó iad a thabhairt isteach.
 3. Féadfaidh Ballstát freisin catagóir áirithe tobac nó táirgí gaolmhara a thoirmeasc ar fhorais a bhaineann le staid shonrach an Bhallstáit sin agus ar choinníoll go bhfuil údar maith leis na forálacha sin mar gheall ar an ngá atá le sláinte an phobail a chosaint, agus an t-ardleibhéal cosanta do shláinte an duine a áirithítear leis an Treoir seo á chur san áireamh. Cuirfear na forálacha náisiúnta sin in iúl don Choimisiún, mar aon leis na cúiseanna a thugann údar dá dtabhairt isteach. Laistigh de 6 mhí ón bhfógra dá bhforáiltear sa mhír seo a fháil, déanfaidh an Coimisiún na forálacha náisiúnta a fhormheas nó a dhiúltú tar éis a chinneadh an bhfuil nó nach bhfuil údar maith leo, an bhfuil siad riachtanach agus comhréireach i bhfianaise a gcuspóirí, agus an t-ardleibhéal cosanta do shláinte an duine a áirithítear leis an Treoir seo á chur san áireamh, nó cibé acu an modh idirdhealaithe threallaigh nó srian faoi cheilt ar thrádáil idir Ballstáit iad. In éagmais cinneadh ón gCoimisiún laistigh den tréimhse sé mhí sin, measfar go mbeidh na forálacha náisiúnta formheasta.”
 [aistriúchán neamhoifigiúil]
 Dlí na hÍsiltíre
 15
 Le hAirteagal 17a, mír 4 den Tabaks- en rookwarenwet (an gníomh um tháirgí tobac agus táirgí caitheamh tobac), lenar trasuíodh Airteagal 24(3) de Threoir 2014/40, ceadaítear don Státrúnaí toirmeasc a chur, le rialachán aireachta ar chúiseanna a bhaineann le sláinte an phobail a chosaint, ar chatagóirí áirithe táirgí tobac a chomhlíonann ar shlí eile na ceanglais dá bhforáiltear le dlí nó a leagtar síos dá bhun.
 Na príomhimeachtaí agus na ceisteanna a tarchuireadh
 16
 I litreacha dar dáta an 31 Iúil agus an 2 Lúnasa 2018, d’iarr na gearánaithe sna príomhimeachtaí ar Nederlandse Voedsel- en Warenautoriteit (Údarás rialaithe táirgí bia agus tomhaltóirí na hÍsiltíre ‘NVWA’) a áirithiú go gcomhlíonann toitíní le scagaire a thairgtear do thomhaltóirí san Ísiltír, nuair a úsáidtear iad chun na críche atá beartaithe dóibh, na huasleibhéil astaíochta tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin a leagtar amach in Airteagal 3 de Threoir 2014/40. D’iarr siad freisin go n-éileodh NVWA ar mhonaróirí, ar allmhaireoirí agus ar dháileoirí táirgí tobac, trí shrian riaracháin, toitíní le scagaire nach gcomhlíonann na huasleibhéil astaíochta sin a tharraingt siar ón margadh.
 17
 Bunaíodh an t-iarratas ar urghair sin ar staideár a rinne an Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu (an institiúid náisiúnta um shláinte phoiblí agus an comhshaol, an Ísiltír, “RIVM”), an 13 Meitheamh 2018, óna ndealraíonn sé, i gcás go gcuirtear an modh tomhais ‘Canadian Intense’ i bhfeidhm seachas an modh a fhorordaítear in Airteagal 4 de Threoir 2014/40, sáraíonn na toitíní le scagaire go léir a dhíoltar san Ísiltír na huasleibhéil astaíochta tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin a leagtar amach in Airteagal 3(1) den Treoir sin. Is é tuairim na ngearánaithe sna príomhimeachtaí nach gcuirtear san áireamh leis an modh tomhais dá bhforáiltear in Airteagal 4 den Treoir sin an bealach a n-úsáidtear scagaire toitíní, is é go mblocálann méara agus liopaí an té a chaitheann tobac na micrea-phoill sa scagaire. Ceadaíonn na micrea-phoill sa scagaire aer glan a tharraingt tríd an scagaire, agus mar sin laghdaítear an méid tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin de réir mar a mheasctar iad. Thaispeánfadh na tomhais a dhéantar ar thoitíní de bhrandaí éagsúla a bhfuil a scagaire aeráilte astaíochtaí ó dhá uair go níos mó ná fiche uair níos ísle ná mar a bhreathnaítear nuair a chlúdaítear an scagaire. Go deimhin, dá n-úsáidfí iad de réir na húsáide atá beartaithe, chuirfí bac ar na micrea-phoill sin den chuid is mó le méara agus liopaí an duine a chaitheann tobac, ionas go n-ionanálódh sé cainníochtaí tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin i bhfad níos airde ná na huasleibhéil astaíochtaí a leagtar síos in Airteagal 3 de Threoir 2014/40.
 18
 An 20 Meán Fómhair 2018, dhiúltaigh NVWA an t-iarratas ar urghaire.
 19
 Chuir na hiarratasóirí sna príomhimeachtaí achomharc riaracháin i gcoinne chinneadh an 20 Meán Fómhair 2018 faoi bhráid an Státrunaí. Trí chinneadh an 31 Eanáir 2019, dhiúltaigh sé an t-achomharc sin de bharr nach raibh bunús leis ós rud é gur thionscain an Stichting Rookpreventie Jeugd é agus mar do-ghlactha ós rud é gur thionscain na hiarratasóirí eile sna príomhimeachtaí é.
 20
 Chuir na hiarratasóirí sna príomhimeachtaí iarratas ar athbhreithniú breithiúnach ansin faoi bhráid na cúirte a rinne an tarchur i gcoinne chinneadh an 31 Eanáir 2019. Thaisc an Vereniging Nederlandse Sigaretten- en Kerftabakfabrikanten (VSK) (comhlachas na hÍsiltíre de mhonaróirí toitíní agus táirgí tobac) iarratas chun idirghabháil a dhéanamh sa nós imeachta, iarratas a deonaíodh.
 21
 Os comhair na cúirte a rinne an tarchur, mhaigh na hiarratasóirí sna príomhimeachtaí nach gceanglaítear le hAirteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 go n‐úsáidfear modh sonrach chun leibhéil astaíochta a thomhas, agus nach bhfuil caighdeáin ISO, ar a mbonn a bheidh na tomhais le déanamh, ina saintreoracha a bhaineann le cur i bhfeidhm ginearálta. D’áitigh siad go n-eascraíonn sé ó staidéir éagsúla, eadhon staidéar RIVM an 13 Meitheamh 2018, agus an ceann a foilsíodh in Journal of the National Cancer Institute an 22 Bealtaine 2017, dar teideal ‘Cigarette Filter Ventilation and its Relationship to Increasing Rates of Lung Adenocarcinoma’, (“Aeráil an scagaire i dtoitíní agus a gaol le rátaí méadaithe adanacarcanóma scamhóg”), chomh maith le litreacha a sheol an Státrúnaí chuig an gCoimisiún, gurb é an modh tomhais ‘Canadian Intense’ an modh tomhais ba cheart a chur i bhfeidhm chun na leibhéil bheachta tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin a astaítear ó thoitíní le scagaire a úsáidtear chun na críche atá beartaithe dó.
 22
 Ar an gcéad dul síos, tugann an chúirt a rinne an tarchur dá haire go bhforáiltear le hAirteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 do thomhas na gcainníochtaí tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin a astaíonn toitíní ar bhonn chaighdeáin ISO nach bhfuil rochtain ag an bpobal orthu go héasca agus ní féidir dul i gcomhairle leo ach ar tháille a íoc, de bhrí go bhfuil an chosaint a thugtar do shaoránaigh le hAirteagal 3(1) de Threoir 2014/40 bunaithe ar na caighdeáin sin. Fiafraíonn an chúirt dá bhrí sin an bhfuil córas rialála den sórt sin ag luí leis an gcóras poiblíochta do ghníomhartha reachtacha an Aontais agus le prionsabal na trédhearcachta.
 23
 Ar an dara dul síos, deir an chúirt a rinne an tarchur, i ngach ceann de chaighdeáin ISO a luaitear in Airteagal 4 de Threoir 2014/40, go ndéantar tagairt, maidir le tomhas an leibhéil astaíochtaí ábhartha, do chaighdeán ISO 3308. Mar sin féin, baineann an caighdeán seo le húsáid de mheaisín caitheamh tobac. Measann an chúirt a rinne an tarchur go leanann sé ón gcaighdeán sin nach mór, ní hamháin na leibhéil tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin a thomhas agus a fhíorú leis an modh forordaithe, ach go bhféadfaí nó go gcaithfear iad a thomhas agus a fhíorú ar bhealaí eile agus le láidreachtaí éagsúla caithimh tobac mheicniúil.
 24
 Ar an tríú dul síos, fiafraíonn an chúirt a rinne an tarchur an bhfuil na modhanna tomhais agus bailíochtaithe dá bhforáiltear in Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 ag teacht le cuspóir na Treorach sin, mar is léir ina réamhrá, agus an é nach féidir na leibhéil astaíochta dá bhforáiltear in Airteagal 3 den Treoir sin a thomhas ach amháin ar bhonn mhodh ISO 3308. Ar thaobh amháin, chuir an chúirt in iúl go maíonn na gearánaithe sna príomhimeachtaí, pointe nach gcuirtear ina aghaidh, gur bunaíodh na modhanna tomhais sin le rannpháirtíocht thionscal an tobac. Ar an taobh eile, shonraigh sí go gcuirfeadh mainneachtain an teorainn a chomhlíonadh ar shubstaintí a astaítear le toitíní le scagaire a úsáid i gcomhréir lena n-úsáid bheartaithe, an cuspóir a leagtar amach in aithris 8 den Treoir sin i mbaol, chun ardleibhéal cosanta sláinte a chinntiú. Is cúis iontais don chúirt a rinne an tarchur mar sin faoin gcoinbhleacht a d’fhéadfadh a bheith ann idir Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 agus Airteagal 114(3) CFAE, CCRT agus Airteagail 24 agus 35 de Chairt um Chearta Bunúsacha an Aontais Eorpaigh (“an Chairt”).
 25
 Ar an gceathrú dul síos, fiafraíonn an chúirt a rinne an tarchur, i gcás go bhfuil Airteagal 4(1), mír 1, de Threoir 2014/40 contrártha go háirithe d’Airteagal 297, mír 1 CFAE, do Rialachán Uimh. 216/2013 agus do phrionsabal na trédhearcachta, an bhfuil Treoir 2014/40 gan éifeacht ina hiomláine nó i dtaca le hAirteagal 4, mír 1, di amháin. Fiafraíonn an chúirt a rinne an tarchur freisin cén modh malartach is féidir nó ba cheart a úsáid agus an bhfuil dlínse ag an gCúirt chun é a fhorordú nó, ar leibhéal níos ísle, an cúram maidir le rialacháin nua a ghlacadh sa réimse seo a chur siar chuig reachtas an Aontais Eorpaigh nó chuig na Ballstáit. Ina theannta sin, cuireann an chúirt a rinne an tarchur in iúl, de réir dhlí na hÍsiltíre a thrasuigh Airteagal 24(3) de Threoir 2014/40, go bhféadfaidh an Státrúnaí, ar chúiseanna a bhaineann le sláinte an phobail a chosaint, a thoirmeasc le rialachán aireachta catagóirí áirithe tobac a chomhlíonann na ceanglais dá bhforáiltear sa dlí nó a leagtar síos de bhun an dlí.
 26
 Sna himthosca sin, chinn Rechtbank Rotterdam (cúirt Rotterdam, an Ísiltír) bac a chur ar na himeachtaí agus na ceisteanna seo a leanas a tharchur chuig an gCúirt le haghaidh réamhrialú:
 “1)
 An gcomhlíonann dearadh an mhodha tomhais dá bhforáiltear in Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40, bunaithe ar chaighdeáin ISO nach bhfuil ar fáil go héasca, Airteagal 297, mír 1, CFAE [agus Rialachán Uimh. 216/2013] chomh maith le prionsabal na trédhearcachta atá, i measc nithe eile, mar bhonn leis?
 2)
 An bhfuil caighdeáin ISO 4387, 10315, 8454 agus 8243, dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40, le léirmhíniú agus le cur i bhfeidhm mar a chiallaíonn, i gcomhthéacs léiriú agus cur i bhfeidhm na forála seo, ní hamháin go gcaithfear astaíochtaí tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin a thomhas (agus a fhíorú) leis an modh forordaithe, ach féadfar nó ní mór iad a thomhas (agus a fhíorú) trí mhodhanna eile agus le láidreacht éagsúil?
 3)
 a)
 An bhfuil Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 contrártha do bhunphrionsabail na Treorach sin agus d’Airteagal 4(2) den Treoir sin agus d’Airteagal 5, mír 3, de [CCRT] ar an bhforas gur imir tionscal an tobac ról i mbunú chaighdeáin ISO a luaitear in Airteagal 4(1)?
 b)
 An bhfuil Airteagal 4, mír 1 de Threoir 2014/40 contrártha do bhunphrionsabail na Treorach sin, d’Airteagal 114(3), CFAE, do raon feidhme an [CCRT] agus d’Airteagal 24 agus d’Airteagal 35 den [Chairt] ar bhonn nach ndéantar leis an modh a fhorordaítear ann na hastaíochtaí a tháirgtear ó thoitíní le scagaire le linn a n-úsáide beartaithe a thomhas, os rud é nach gcuirtear san áireamh leis an modh sin go gcuirtear bac mór, le linn na húsáide atá beartaithe, ar na micrea-phoill aerála atá sna scagairí ag liopaí agus mhéara an chaiteora?
 4)
 a)
 Cén modh tomhais (agus fíorú) eile is féidir nó ba cheart a úsáid má thugann an Chúirt:
 –
 freagra diúltach ar an gcéad cheist
 –
 freagra dearfach ar an dara ceist
 –
 freagra dearfach ar cheist 3(a) agus/nó (b)?
 b)
 Mura bhfuil an Chúirt in ann freagra a thabhairt ar cheist 4 (a), i gcás nach bhfuil modh tomhais ar fáil go sealadach, an bhfuiltear i gcás dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 24(3) de Threoir 2014/40?”
 Maidir leis na ceisteanna a tarchuireadh
 An dara ceist
 27
 Lena dara ceist, ar cheart a scrúdú ar dtús, fiafraíonn an chúirt a rinne an tarchur go bunúsach an gá Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 a léirmhíniú amhail is go bhforáiltear leis ach na huasleibhéil astaíochta tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin ó thoitíní atá beartaithe le cur ar an margadh nó le monarú sna Ballstáit, a leagtar amach in Airteagal 3(1) den Treoir sin, a thomhas trí na modhanna tomhais a dhíorthaítear ó chaighdeáin ISO 4387, 10315, 8454 agus 8243 a chur i bhfeidhm, dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 4(1).
 28
 Mar réamhphointe, ba cheart a thabhairt faoi deara go socraítear le hAirteagal 3(1) de Threoir 2014/40 na huasleibhéil astaíochta tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin ó thoitíní a chuirtear ar an margadh nó a mhonaraítear sna Ballstáit. Foráiltear le hAirteagal 4(1) den Treoir sin go ndéanfar astaíochtaí na substaintí sin a thomhas ar bhonn chaighdeán ISO 4387 maidir le tarra, chaighdeán ISO 10315 maidir le nicitín agus chaighdeán ISO 8454 maidir le haonocsaíd charbóin, agus cruinneas na dtomhas sin á chinneadh i gcomhréir le ISO 8243.
 29
 I gcomhréir le cásdlí socair, agus foráil de dhlí an Aontais Eorpaigh á léirmhíniú, tá sé tábhachtach a chur san áireamh ní hamháin a téarmaí i gcomhréir lena ngnáthbhrí sa teanga laethúil, ach freisin a comhthéacs agus na cuspóirí a shaothraítear sa rialachán ar cuid di é (breithiúnas an 14 Deireadh Fómhair 2021, Dyrektor Z. Oddziału Regionalnego Agencji Restrukturyzacji i Modernizacji Rolnictwa, C-373/20, EU:C:2021:850, mír 36).
 30
 Is léir, ar an gcéad dul síos, ó théarmaí na chéad fhomhíre d’Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40, go háirithe ón bhfrása “a thomhas” a úsáidtear inti, go dtagraíonn an fhoráil sin ar mhodh éigeantach do chaighdeáin ISO 4387, 10315 agus 8454 chun astaíochtaí tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin faoi seach a thomhas agus nach luaitear aon mhodh eile tomhais ann. Is i dtéarmaí ríthábhachtacha freisin atá an dara mír den Airteagal 4(1) sin, go gcinntear cruinneas na dtomhas sin i gcomhréir le caighdeán ISO 8243.
 31
 Maidir le comhthéacs na forála sin, ba cheart a thabhairt faoi deara go gceanglaítear ar na Ballstáit, faoi Airteagal 4(4), fógra a thabhairt don Choimisiún faoi aon mhodhanna tomhais eile a úsáideann siad le haghaidh substaintí seachas tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíd charbóin a astaíonn toitíní agus le haghaidh substaintí a astaíonn táirgí tobac seachas toitíní. Ní leanann sé ó Airteagal 4 de Threoir 2014/40 ná ó aon fhoráil eile di go bhfuil na Ballstáit faoi cheangal ag oibleagáid fógra a thabhairt má úsáideann siad modhanna tomhais le haghaidh tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin a astaíonn toitíní seachas na cinn dá bhforáiltear le caighdeáin ISO 4387, 10315 agus 8454, nó modhanna chun cruinneas tomhais na substaintí sin seachas an ceann dá bhforáiltear i gcaighdeán ISO 8243 a fhíorú. Ós rud é go leagtar béim in aithris 11 den Treoir sin gur cheart leibhéil tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin i dtoitíní a thomhas de réir na gcaighdeán sin a aithnítear ar leibhéal idirnáisiúnta, ba cheart a mheas go ndeimhnítear i gcomhthéacs Airteagal 4(1) den Treoir sin go bhforáiltear do chur i bhfeidhm eisiach na gcaighdeán sin sa fhoráil sin.
 32
 Ar deireadh, ba cheart a mheabhrú go bhfuil dhá chuspóir á saothrú ag Treoir 2014/40, chun feidhmiú ceart an mhargaidh inmheánaigh do tháirgí tobac agus do tháirgí gaolmhara a éascú, ag glacadh ardleibhéal cosanta do shláinte an duine mar bhonn, go háirithe do dhaoine óga (breithiúnas an 22 Samhain 2018, Swedish Match, C-151/17, EU:C:2018:938, mír 40). Mar sin féin, gan dochar don scrúdú ar cheist 3(b), a bhaineann, go bunúsach, le bailíocht Airteagal 4(1), den Treoir sin i bhfianaise an cheanglais maidir le hardleibhéal cosanta do shláinte an duine, dá bhforáiltear go háirithe in Airteagal 114(3) CFAE, de bhrí nach n‐úsáidtear ach na modhanna dá bhforáiltear le caighdeáin ISO a luaitear in Airteagal 4(1) chun leibhéal na n-astaíochtaí tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin ó thoitíní a thomhas, comhlíonann sé an cuspóir sin maidir le feidhmiú ceart an mhargaidh inmheánaigh a mhéid a áirithíonn sé nach gcuirfear bac ar rochtain ar mhargadh an Aontais Eorpaigh do thoitíní agus ar a monarú laistigh den Aontas mar gheall ar chur i bhfeidhm modhanna éagsúla chun leibhéil na substaintí sin a thomhas sna Ballstáit.
 33
 I bhfianaise na mbreithnithe sin go léir, ní mór freagra a thabhairt ar an dara ceist nach mór Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 a léiriú go bhforáiltear leis go bhfuil huasleibhéil astaíochta tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin na dtoitíní atá beartaithe a chur ar an margadh nó a mhonaraítear sna Ballstáit, a leagtar amach in Airteagal 3(1) den Treoir sin, a thomhas ag baint úsáid as na modhanna tomhais a dhíorthaítear ó chaighdeáin ISO 4387, 10315, 8454 agus 8243, dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 4(1).
 An chéad cheist
 34
 Lena céad cheist, fiafraíonn an chúirt a rinne an tarchur, go bunúsach, an bhfuil Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 bailí maidir le prionsabal na trédhearcachta, le Rialachán Uimh. 216/2013, chomh maith le hAirteagal 297(1) CFAE, arna léamh i bhfianaise phrionsabal na deimhneachta dlíthiúla.
 35
 Maidir le bailíocht Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40, ar an gcéad dul síos, i bhfianaise phrionsabal na trédhearcachta, ba cheart a mheabhrú go bhfuil an prionsabal sin, atá dlúthnasctha le prionsabal na hoscailteachta, cumhdaithe sa dara mír d’Airteagal 1, agus in Airteagal 10(3) CAE, in Airteagail 15(1) agus 298(1) CFAE agus in Airteagal 42 den Chairt freisin. Fágann sé gur féidir rannpháirtíocht níos fearr na saoránach sa phróiseas cinnteoireachta a áirithiú chomh maith le dlisteanacht, éifeachtúlacht agus cuntasacht níos fearr a ráthú don riarachán i leith na saoránach i gcóras daonlathach (féach, chuige sin, breithiúnais an 6 Márta 2003, Interporc v an Coimisiún, C-41/00 P, EU:C:2003:125, mír 39, agus an 9 Samhain 2010, Volker und Markus Schecke agus Eifert, C-92/09 agus C-93/09, EU:C:2010:662, mír 68, chomh maith le hordú an 14 Bealtaine 2019, an Ungáir v an Pharlaimint, C-650/18, nár foilsíodh, EU:C:2019:438, mír 13 agus cásdlí dá dtagraítear).
 36
 Go háirithe, foráiltear le hAirteagal 15(1) CFAE, d’fhonn an dea-rialachas a chur chun cinn agus rannpháirtíocht na sochaí sibhialta a áirithiú, go n-oibreoidh institiúidí, comhlachtaí, oifigí agus gníomhaireachtaí an Aontais leis an urraim is mó agus is féidir do phrionsabal na hoscailteachta. Chuige sin, ráthaítear ceart rochtana ar dhoiciméid faoin gcéad fhomhír d’Airteagal 15(3) CFAE agus leagtar amach in Airteagal 42 den Chairt é, ceart a cuireadh chun feidhme, go háirithe, le Rialachán (CE) Uimh. 1049/2001 ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle an 30 Bealtaine 2001 maidir le rochtain phoiblí ar dhoiciméid ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa, ón gComhairle agus ón gCoimisiún Eorpach (IO 2001 L 145, lch. 43).
 37
 Chuige sin, ba cheart a thabhairt faoi deara go ndéantar tagairt in Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 go deimhin do chaighdeáin ISO nár foilsíodh, ag an bpointe seo, in Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh. Ní fhoráiltear leis an bhforáil sin, áfach, d’aon srian ar rochtain ar na caighdeáin sin, lena n-áirítear faoi réir iarraidh ar rochtain arna déanamh faoi Rialachán Uimh. 1049/2001. Ní féidir a mheas, dá bhrí sin, go bhfuil sé neamhbhailí i bhfianaise phrionsabal na trédhearcachta mar a leanann sé ó fhorálacha dhlí príomha an Aontais Eorpaigh dá dtagraítear i mír 35 den bhreithiúnas seo.
 38
 Ar an dara dul síos, maidir le bailíocht Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 i bhfianaise Rialachán Uimh. 216/2013, ba cheart a mheabhrú nach féidir dlíthiúlacht inmheánach gnímh de chuid an Aontais a scrúdú i bhfianaise gnímh eile de chuid an Aontais den stádas céanna faoin ordlathas rialacha dlí, ach amháin má glacadh é de bhun an ghnímh deiridh sin nó má fhoráiltear go sainráite, i gceann amháin den dá ghníomh sin, go bhfuil tosaíocht ag ceann amháin ar an gceann eile (breithiúnas an 8 Nollaig 2020, an Ungáir v an Pharlaimint agus an Chomhairle, C-620/18, EU:C:2020:1001, mír 119). Mar sin féin, níor glacadh Treoir 2014/40 de bhun Rialachán Uimh. 216/2013 agus níl aon fhoráil sa dara ceann lena dtugtar tosaíocht dó go sainráite ar an Treoir sin. Ar aon chuma, trí fhoráil a dhéanamh go bhfoilseofar Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh i bhfoirm leictreonach, i dteangacha oifigiúla institiúidí an Aontais, ní leagtar síos le hAirteagal 1(1) den Rialachán sin aon cheanglas a bhaineann le hinneachar ghníomhartha an Aontais nach mór a fhoilsiú ar an mbealach sin, amhail Treoir 2014/40.
 39
 Ar an tríú dul síos, maidir le bailíocht Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 i bhfianaise Airteagal 297(1) CFAE, arna léamh i bhfianaise phrionsabal na deimhneachta dlíthiúla, ba cheart a mheabhrú go leanann sé ó théarmaí na forála deiridh sin nach féidir le gníomhartha reachtacha teacht i bhfeidhm agus, dá bhrí sin, éifeachtaí dlíthiúla a bheith acu ach amháin tar éis iad a bheith foilsithe in Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh (féach, chuige sin, breithiúnais an 11 Nollaig 2007, Skoma-Lux, C-161/06, EU:C:2007:773, mír 33, agus an 10 Márta 2009, Heinrich, C-345/06, EU:C:2009:140, mír 42).
 40
 Dá bhrí sin, ní féidir na gníomhartha a eascraíonn ó institiúidí an Aontais Eorpaigh a fhorfheidhmiú i gcoinne daoine nádúrtha agus dlítheanacha i mBallstát sula mbeidh deis acu dul i dtaithí orthu trí fhoilsiú ceart in Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh (féach, chuige sin, breithiúnais an 11 Nollaig 2007, Skoma-Lux, C‐161/06, EU:C:2007:773, mír 37, agus an 10 Márta 2009, Heinrich, C-345/06, EU:C:2009:140, mír 43).
 41
 Eascraíonn an ceanglas sin i leith foilsiú ó phrionsabal na deimhneachta dlíthiúla, lena gceanglaítear go gcuirfear ar chumas na ndaoine lena mbaineann eolas a bheith acu ar raon iomlán a n-oibleagáidí a bhforchuirtear orthu faoi dhlí an Aontais. Ní mór go mbeadh dlíthithe, i ndáiríre, in ann a gcearta agus a n‐oibleagáidí a fhionnadh gan athbhrí (féach, go háirithe, breithiúnas an 10 Márta 2009, Heinrich, C‐345/06, EU:C:2009:140, mír 44).
 42
 Is amhlaidh an cás nuair a cheanglaítear le rialachán de chuid an Aontais Eorpaigh, amhail Treoir 2014/40, ar na Ballstáit bearta a ghlacadh, chun é a chur chun feidhme, lena bhforchuirtear oibleagáidí ar dhaoine aonair. Go deimhin, ní mór do na bearta arna nglacadh ag na Ballstáit chun dlí an Aontais a chur chun feidhme prionsabail ghinearálta an dlí sin a chomhlíonadh. Dá bhrí sin, ní mór bearta náisiúnta lena bhforchuirtear, de bhun rialachán de chuid an Aontais Eorpaigh, oibleagáidí ar dhaoine aonair, i gcomhréir le prionsabal na deimhneachta dlíthiúla, a fhoilsiú ionas gur féidir le páirtithe leasmhara eolas a chur orthu. I gcás den sórt sin, ní mór an deis a bheith ag páirtithe leasmhara freisin faisnéis a fháil faoi fhoinse na mbeart náisiúnta lena bhforchuirtear oibleagáidí orthu, i gcás ina bhfuil bearta den sórt sin glactha ag na Ballstáit i gcomhlíonadh oibleagáide a fhorchuirtear le dlí an Aontais Eorpaigh (breithiúnas an 10 Márta 2009, Heinrich, C‐345/06, EU:C:2009:140, míreanna 45 agus 46).
 43
 É sin ráite, de réir chásdlí na Cúirte, toisc nach bhforordaítear modh nó nós imeachta sonrach le foráil, ní chiallaíonn sé sin go sáraíonn sé prionsabal na deimhneachta dlíthiúla (breithiúnas an 4 Bealtaine 2016, Pillbox 38, C‐477/14, EU:C:2016:324, mír 101). Mar sin, ní gá do ghníomh reachtach féin soiléirithe de chineál teicniúil a sholáthar, ionas go mbeidh reachtóir an Aontais Eorpaigh in ann leas a bhaint as creat ginearálta dlí atá, más gá, le sonrú níos déanaí (breithiúnas an 30 Eanáir 2019, Planta Tabak, C‐220/17, EU:C:2019:76, mír 32 agus an cásdlí dá dtagraítear).
 44
 De réir analaí, agus an rogha leathan atá ag reachtóir an Aontais Eorpaigh i bhfeidhmiú na gcumhachtaí a thugtar dó á cur san áireamh freisin nuair a bhíonn roghanna polaitiúla, eacnamaíocha agus sóisialta i gceist lena ghníomhaíocht agus nuair a iarrtar air measúnuithe agus meastóireachtaí casta a dhéanamh (breithiúnas an 30 Eanáir 2019, Planta Tabak, C‐220/17, EU:C:2019:76, mír 44), is féidir leis an reachtóir sin tagairt a dhéanamh, sna gníomhartha a ghlacann sé, do chaighdeáin theicniúla arna mbunú le comhlacht um chaighdeánú, amhail an Eagraíocht Idirnáisiúnta um Chaighdeánú (ISO).
 45
 Ba cheart a shonrú, áfach, go gceanglaítear le prionsabal na deimhneachta dlíthiúla go mbeadh an tagairt do chaighdeáin den sórt sin soiléir, beacht agus intuartha maidir lena héifeachtaí, ionas gur féidir leo siúd lena mbaineann iad féin a dhíriú ar chásanna agus ar chaidreamh dlíthiúil a bhaineann le hord dlíthiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh (breithiúnas an 3 Nollaig 2019, Poblacht na Seice v an Pharlaimint agus an Chomhairle, C-482/17, EU:C:2019:1035, mír 148 agus an cásdlí dá dtagraítear).
 46
 Sa chás seo, ar an gcéad dul síos, ba cheart a thabhairt faoi deara go gcomhlíonann an tagairt a dhéantar in Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 do chaighdeáin ISO an ceanglas sin agus, ar an dara dul síos, is fíor gur foilsíodh Treoir 2014/40, i gcomhréir le hAirteagal 297(1) CFAE, in Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh. Sna himthosca sin, ag féachaint don mhéid a leagtar amach i míreanna 43 agus 44 den bhreithiúnas seo, cé go dtagraítear in Airteagal 4(1) den Treoir sin do chaighdeáin ISO nach bhfuil foilsithe ag an gcéim seo, ní leor sin chun amhras a chaitheamh ar bhailíocht na forála sin faoi Airteagal 297(1) CFAE, arna léamh i bhfianaise phrionsabal na deimhneachta dlíthiúla.
 47
 Is é an toradh atá air sin ná nár nochtadh leis an mbreithniú ar an gcéad cheist a chuir an chúirt a rinne an tarchur aon fhachtóir de chineál a dhéanfadh difear do bhailíocht Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 i bhfianaise phrionsabal na trédhearcachta, Rialachán Uimh. 216/2013 agus Airteagal 297(1) CFAE, arna léamh i bhfianaise phrionsabal na deimhneachta dlíthiúla.
 48
 Ag féachaint d’amhras na cúirte a rinne an tarchur, áfach, ónar tháinig an chéad cheist chun cinn, a bhfuil achoimre uirthi i mír 22 den bhreithiúnas seo, ba cheart a chur in iúl freisin, i gcomhréir le prionsabal na deimhneachta dlíthiúla, mar a shoiléirítear i míreanna 41, 42 agus 45 den bhreithiúnas seo, nach bhféadtar caighdeáin theicniúla arna mbunú ag comhlacht um chaighdeánú, amhail ISO, agus arna ndéanamh éigeantach le gníomh reachtach de chuid an Aontais Eorpaigh a fhorchur i gcoinne daoine aonair i gcoitinne ach amháin má fhoilsítear iad in Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh.
 49
 I gcás go ndéanann comhlacht den sórt sin caighdeáin den sórt sin a oiriúnú, beidh mar thoradh ar an méid sin nach mbeidh ach an leagan de na caighdeáin sin a fhoilsítear ina gceangal ar dhaoine aonair i gcoitinne.
 50
 Sa chás seo, ní féidir le gnóthais, mar is léir ó Airteagail 3(1) agus 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 a léamh le chéile, toitíní a chur ar mhargadh na mBallstát ná a mhonarú, a sáraíonn a leibhéil astaíochta tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin na huasleibhéil a leagtar síos leis an gcéad cheann de na forálacha sin, arna dtomhas trí chur i bhfeidhm na modhanna dá bhforáiltear le caighdeáin ISO dá dtagraítear sa dara ceann de na forálacha sin. Sna himthosca sin, ní mór a mheas go gcuirtear oibleagáid ar na gnóthais sin le hAirteagal 4(1) den Treoir sin.
 51
 Mar sin féin, in éagmais na gcaighdeán dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 a fhoilsiú in Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh, níl sé de chumas daoine aonair i gcoitinne, gan aird a thabhairt ar chásdlí dá dtagraítear i míreanna 41, 42 agus 45 den bhreithiúnas seo, eolas a bheith acu ar na modhanna chun leibhéil na n-astaíochta tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin is infheidhme maidir le toitíní a thomhas.
 52
 Mar sin féin, ba cheart gnéithe sonracha an chórais arna bhunú ag ISO, atá comhdhéanta de líonra de chomhlachtaí náisiúnta um chaighdeánú, a chur san áireamh, lena gceadaítear do na comhlachtaí náisiúnta sin rochtain a thabhairt, arna iarraidh sin, ar an leagan oifigiúil agus barántúil de chaighdeáin arna mbunú ag ISO. Dá bhrí sin, nuair a bheidh rochtain ag na gnóthais ar leagan oifigiúil agus barántúil na gcaighdeán a luaitear in Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40, beidh na caighdeáin sin agus mar sin an tagairt a dhéantar dóibh leis an bhforáil sin ina gceangal orthu.
 53
 I bhfianaise gach a bhfuil thuas, ní mór a thabhairt faoi deara nár nochtadh le breithniú na chéad cheiste aon fhachtóir de chineál a dhéanfadh difear do bhailíocht Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 maidir le prionsabal na trédhearcachta, le Rialachán Uimh. 216/2013 agus Airteagal 297(1) CFAE, arna léamh i bhfianaise phrionsabal na deimhneachta dlíthiúla.
 Ceist 3(a)
 54
 Le ceist 3(a), fiafraíonn an chúirt a rinne an tarchur go bunúsach an bhfuil Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 bailí i bhfianaise bhunphrionsabail na Treorach sin, Airteagal 4(2) den Treoir sin agus Airteagal 5(3) CCRT, toisc go raibh tionscal an tobac rannpháirteach i mbunú na gcaighdeán dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40.
 55
 Mar réamhphointe, ba cheart a thabhairt faoi deara nach bhfuil na bunphrionsabail i dTreoir 2014/40 leagtha amach ag an gcúirt a rinne an tarchur nach mór bailíocht Airteagal 4(1) den Treoir sin a scrúdú ina leith.
 56
 Ba cheart a thabhairt faoi deara freisin go gceanglaítear le hAirteagal 4(2) de Threoir 2014/40 go ndéanfaí fíorú ar na tomhais ar astaíochta tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin ag saotharlanna arna bhformheas agus arna maoirsiú ag údaráis inniúla na mBallstát, nach mbaineann le tionscal an tobac agus nach bhfuil á rialú, go díreach nó go hindíreach, ag an tionscal sin. Dá bhrí sin, ní bhaineann an fhoráil sin le forbairt iarbhír chaighdeán ISO dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40.
 57
 Is gá, dá bhrí sin, bailíocht Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 a scrúdú i bhfianaise Airteagal 5(3) CCRT amháin, toisc gur ghlac tionscal an tobac páirt i mbunú na gcaighdeán atá i gceist leis an Eagraíocht Idirnáisiúnta um Chaighdeánú (ISO).
 58
 Foráiltear le hAirteagal 5(3) CCRT, le linn dóibh a mbeartais sláinte poiblí a shainiú agus a chur i bhfeidhm maidir le rialú tobac, go n-áiritheoidh na páirtithe sa choinbhinsiún sin nach mbeidh tionchar ag na beartais sin ar leasanna an tionscail tobac, de réir na reachtaíochta náisiúnta.
 59
 Is léir ó théarmaí na forála sin nach gcuirtear cosc ar rannpháirtíocht thionscal an tobac i sainmhíniú agus i gcur i bhfeidhm na rialachán frith-chaithimh tobac, ach go ndéantar iarracht cosc a chur ar bheartais frith-thobac na bpáirtithe sa choinbhinsiún sin a bheith faoi thionchar leasanna an tionscail sin.
 60
 Tacaítear leis an léiriú sin ar Airteagal 5(3) CCRT leis na treoracha chun an fhoráil sin a chur i bhfeidhm, nach bhfuil aon fheidhm cheangailteach acu ach atá beartaithe, i gcomhréir le hAirteagail 7 agus 9 CCRT, cabhrú leis na páirtithe conarthacha forálacha ceangailteacha an choinbhinsiúin sin a chur i bhfeidhm. Glacadh na treoracha sin de chomhthoil, lena n-áirítear ag an Aontas Eorpach agus a Bhallstáit, mar a tugadh faoi deara in aithris 7 de Threoir 2014/40 (breithiúnas an 4 Bealtaine 2016, Philip Morris Brands et al., C-547/14, EU:C:2016:325, míreanna 111 agus 112).
 61
 Moltar sna treoracha sin go mbeadh idirghníomhaíochtaí leis an tionscal tobac teoranta agus trédhearcach, agus go seachnófaí coinbhleachtaí leasa i measc oifigeach nó fostaithe gach ceann de na páirtithe in CCRT.
 62
 Dá bhrí sin, ní féidir bailíocht Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 a cheistiú i bhfianaise Airteagal 5(3) CCRT, toisc, mar a léirigh an chúirt a rinne an tarchur, gur ghlac an tionscal tobac páirt i mbunú na gcaighdeán atá i gceist le ISO.
 63
 I bhfianaise na mbreithnithe thuas, ba cheart a thabhairt faoi deara nár nochtadh le scrúdú ar cheist 3(a), aon fhachtóir de chineál a dhéanfadh difear do bhailíocht Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 faoi Airteagal 5(3) CCRT.
 Ceist 3(b)
 64
 Le ceist 3(b), fiafraíonn an chúirt a rinne an tarchur, go bunúsach, an bhfuil Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 bailí i bhfianaise bhunphrionsabail na Treorach sin, Airteagal 114(3) CFAE, CCRT chomh maith le hAirteagail 24 agus 35 den Chairt toisc go dtaispeántar le staidéir eolaíocha nach léirítear leis na modhanna tomhais dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 4(1) den Treoir sin na leibhéil tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin ó thoitíní arna n-ionanálú iarbhír ag daoine a chaitheann tobac.
 65
 Mar réamhphointe, is fiú an cinneadh a rinneadh i mír 55 den bhreithiúnas seo a mheabhrú nach bhfuil na bunphrionsabail leagtha amach ag an gcúirt a rinne an tarchur ar cheart bailíocht Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 a scrúdú ina leith.
 66
 Mar thaca leis an gceist dá dtagraítear i mír 64 den bhreithiúnas seo, luann an chúirt a rinne an tarchur doiciméid éagsúla a thug Stichting Rookpreventie Jeugd ar aird sa díospóid sna príomhimeachtaí, a luaitear i mír 21 den bhreithiúnas seo.
 67
 Mar sin féin, leanann sé ó chásdlí socraithe na Cúirte nach mór bailíocht gnímh de chuid an Aontais Eorpaigh a mheasúnú i ndáil leis an bhfaisnéis atá ar fáil do reachtas an Aontaois Eorpaigh ar dháta glactha na reachtaíochta atá i gceist (breithiúnas an 3 Nollaig 2019, Poblacht na Seice v an Pharlaimint agus an Chomhairle, C-482/17, EU:C:2019:1035, mír 80).
 68
 Ós rud é go mbaineann na staidéir agus na doiciméid eile dá dtagraítear i mír 21 den bhreithiúnas seo le dáta tar éis an 3 Aibreán 2014, an dáta ar glacadh Treoir 2014/40, ní féidir iad a chur san áireamh agus bailíocht Airteagal 4(1) den Treoir sin á meas.
 69
 Dá bhrí sin, níor nochtadh le scrúdú ar cheist 3(b) aon fhachtóir de chineál a dhéanfadh difear do bhailíocht Airteagal 4, mír 1, de Threoir 2014/40 maidir le hAirteagal 114, mír 3, CFAE, le CCRT mar aon le hAirteagail 24 agus 35 den Chairt.
 Ceist 4(a)
 70
 Le ceist 4(a), fiafraíonn an chúirt a rinne an tarchur, go bunúsach, mura bhfuil Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 in-fhorfheidhmithe i gcoinne daoine aonair, cén modh tomhais i leith astaíochta tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin ó thoitíní is féidir a úsáid chun comhlíonadh na n-uasleibhéal astaíochtaí a leagtar amach in Airteagal 3(1) de Threoir 2014/40, a fhíorú.
 71
 Tagann an cheist sin chun cinn i gcomhthéacs díospóid a bhaineann le diúltú NVWA ordú a thabhairt do mhonaróirí, d’allmhaireoirí agus do dháileoirí táirgí tobac, trí shrianadh riaracháin, toitíní le scagaire a thairgtear do thomhaltóirí san Ísiltír a aistarraingt ón margadh, nach gcomhlíonann, nuair a úsáidtear iad mar atá beartaithe, na leibhéil astaíochta a leagtar amach in Airteagal 3(1) de Threoir 2014/40.
 72
 Chuige sin, ba cheart a thabhairt faoi deara nach mór do thoitíní a bheartaítear a chur ar margadh an Aontais Eorpaigh nó a mhonarú ann cloí leis na huasleibhéil astaíochtaí tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin a leagtar síos in Airteagal 3(1) de Threoir 2014/40.
 73
 Ba cheart a mheabhrú, áfach, nach bhfuil Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40, a mhéid a thagraítear san fhoráil sin do chaighdeáin ISO nach bhfuil foilsithe in Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh, in-fhorfheidhmithe i gcoinne daoine aonair i gcoitinne.
 74
 Dá réir sin, is faoin gcúirt a rinne an tarchur atá sé, chun an díospóid atá os a comhair a réiteach, a mheas cibé an gcomhlíontar Treoir 2014/40 leis na modhanna a úsáidtear go hiarbhír chun leibhéil astaíochta na substaintí sin a thomhas, gan Airteagal 4, mír 1 a chur san áireamh.
 75
 I dtaca leis sin, ba cheart a thabhairt faoi deara, ar dtús, gur léir ó Airteagal 2(21) den Treoir sin go dtagraítear leis an téarma “astaíochtaí” do na “substaintí a scaoiltear nuair a úsáidtear táirge tobac nó táirge gaolmhar chun na críche atá beartaithe dó, amhail substaintí atá i ndeatach nó substaintí a scaoiltear le linn táirge tobac gan toit a úsáid”.
 76
 Ar an dara dul síos, faoi Airteagal 4(2) den Treoir sin, déanann saotharlanna atá formheasta agus faoi mhaoirseacht údaráis inniúla na mBallstát tomhais ar leibhéil astaíochta tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin a fhíorú. Ní bhaineann na saotharlanna sin le tionscal an tobac agus níl siad faoina rialú, go díreach nó go hindíreach,.
 77
 Ar an tríú dul síos, de réir Airteagal 4(3) de Threoir 2014/40, ní mór forbairtí eolaíocha agus teicniúla nó caighdeáin arna nglacadh ar an leibhéal idirnáisiúnta a chur san áireamh agus na modhanna arna nglacadh ag an gCoimisiún chun na leibhéil astaíochta sin a thomhas a oiriúnú.
 78
 Ar an gceathrú dul síos, ní mór d’aon mhodh chun na huasleibhéil astaíochta a leagtar amach in Airteagal 3(1) den Treoir sin a thomhas cuspóir na Treorach sin a chomhlíonadh go héifeachtach, a léirítear ina céad Airteagal, chun ardleibhéal cosanta do shláinte an duine a áirithiú, go háirithe do dhaoine óga.
 79
 Dá bhrí sin, ní mór gurb é an freagra ar cheist 4(a) nach mór, mura mbeidh Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 in-fhorfheidhmithe i gcoinne daoine aonair, go mbeadh an modh a úsáidtear chun Airteagal 3(1) den Treoir sin a chur i bhfeidhm a bheith iomchuí, de réir na bhforbairtí eolaíocha nó teicniúla nó na gcaighdeán arna nglacadh go hidirnáisiúnta, chun leibhéil na n-astaíochtaí a scaoiltear nuair a úsáidtear toitín chun na críche atá beartaithe dó a thomhas, bunaithe ar ardleibhéal cosanta do shláinte an duine, go háirithe do dhaoine óga, agus déanfar cruinneas na dtomhas a fhaightear leis an modh sin a fhíorú ag na saotharlanna formheasta agus faoi mhaoirseacht údaráis inniúla na mBallstát dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 4(2) den Treoir sin.
 Ceist 4(b)
 80
 Le ceist 4(b), fiafraíonn an chúirt a rinne an tarchur, go bunúsach, an bhfuil feidhm ag Airteagal 24(3) de Threoir 2014/40 maidir leis an díospóid sna príomhimeachtaí.
 81
 Le hAirteagal 17a(4) den ghníomh um tháirgí tobac agus táirgí caithimh tobac lenar trasuíodh Airteagal 24(3) de Threoir 2014/40, ceadaítear don Státrúnaí toirmeasc a chur ar rialachán aireachta, ar chúiseanna a bhaineann le cosaint shláinte an phobail, catagóirí áirithe táirgí tobac a chomhlíonann ar shlí eile na ceanglais dá bhforáiltear leis an dlí nó a leagtar síos dá bhun.
 82
 Ba cheart a mheabhrú, de réir chásdlí socair na Cúirte, go mbaineann toimhde ábharthachta le ceisteanna maidir le léirmhíniú dhlí an Aontais Eorpaigh arna dtarchur ag cúirt náisiúnta sa chomhthéacs reachtach agus fíorasach ar faoin gcúirt sin atá sé a shainiú, agus nach faoin gCúirt atá sé cruinneas a fhíorú. Ní féidir leis an gCúirt diúltú do rialú a dhéanamh ar iarraidh arna déanamh ag cúirt náisiúnta ach amháin má dhealraíonn sé go follasach nach bhfuil baint ar bith ag an léirmhíniú arna n-iarraidh ar dhlí an Aontais Eorpaigh le fíricí iarbhír nó le cuspóir na díospóide sna príomhimeachtaí, más fadhb de chineál hipitéiseach í nó mura bhfuil an fhaisnéis fhíorasach agus dhlíthiúil is gá ag an gCúirt chun freagra úsáideach a thabhairt ar na ceisteanna a cuireadh uirthi (breithiúnas an 20 Nollaig 2017, Erzeugerorganisation Tiefkühlgemüse, C-516/16, EU:C:2017:1011, mír 80).
 83
 Ní dhealraíonn sé, áfach, ó aon fhianaise sa chomhad os comhair na Cúirte go mbaineann an díospóid sna príomhimeachtaí, fiú go páirteach, leis an rogha atá ar fáil don Státrúnaí faoi Airteagal 17a(4) den ghníomh um tháirgí tobac agus táirgí caithimh tobac, lenar trasuíodh Airteagal 24(3) de Threoir 2014/40.
 84
 Dá bhrí sin, is léir gurb ionann ceist 4(b) a fhreagairt sna himthosca seo agus tuairim chomhairleach a thabhairt ar cheist hipitéiseach, gan aird ar an gcúram a shanntar don Chúirt i gcomhthéacs an chomhair bhreithiúnaigh a bhunaítear le hAirteagal 267 CFAE (féach, chuige sin, breithiúnas an 20 Nollaig 2017, Erzeugerorganisation Tiefkühlgemüse, C-516/16, EU:C:2017:1011, mír 82).
 85
 Dá bhrí sin, tá ceist 4(b) do-ghlactha.
 Costais
 86
 Ós rud é, a mhéid a bhaineann sé leis na príomhpháirtithe sna príomhimeachtaí, go bhfuil na himeachtaí mar chéim sa chás os comhair na cúirte náisiúnta, baineann ceist na gcostas leis an gcúirt sin. Níl na costais a tabhaíodh trí bharúlacha a chur faoi bhráid na Cúirte, seachas costais na bpáirtithe sin, inghnóthaithe..
 Ar na forais sin, rialaíonn an Chúirt (an Mór-Dhlísheomra) mar seo a leanas:
 1.
 Ní mór Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40/AE ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle, an 3 Aibreán 2014, maidir le comhfhogasú dhlíthe, rialacháin agus fhorálacha riaracháin na mBallstát a bhaineann le monarú, cur i láthair agus díol tobac agus táirgí gaolmhara, agus lena n-aisghairtear Treoir 2001/37/CE, a léirmhíniú amhail is go bhforáiltear léi go ndéanfar na huasleibhéil astaíochta tarra, nicitín agus aonocsaíde carbóin ó thoitíní atá beartaithe a chur ar an margadh nó a mhonarú sna Ballstáit, a shocraítear in Airteagal 3(1) den Treoir sin, a thomhas trí úsáid a bhaint as na modhanna tomhais a dhíorthaítear ó chaighdeáin ISO 4387, 10315, 8454 agus 8243, dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 4(1).
 2.
 Níor nochtadh le scrúdú ar an gcéad cheist aon fhachtóir den sórt sin a dhéanfadh difear do bhailíocht Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 i bhfianaise phrionsabal na trédhearcachta, Rialachán (AE) Uimh. 216/2013 ón gComhairle an 7 Márta 2013 maidir le foilsiú leictreonach Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh agus Airteagal 297(1) CFAE, arna léamh i bhfianaise phrionsabal na deimhneachta dlíthiúla.
 3.
 Níor nochtadh le scrúdú ar cheist 3(a), aon fhachtóir de chineál a dhéanfadh difear do bhailíocht Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 i bhfianaise Airteagal 5(3) de Chreat-Choinbhinsiún na hEagraíochta Domhanda Sláinte maidir le Rialú Tobac.
 4.
 Níor nochtadh le scrúdú ar cheist 3(b), aon fhachtóir de chineál a dhéanfadh difear do bhailíocht Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 i bhfianaise Airteagal 114(3) CFAE, Chreat-Choinbhinsiún na hEagraíochta Domhanda Sláinte maidir le Rialú Tobac agus Airteagail 24 agus 35 de Chairt um Chearta Bunúsacha an Aontais Eorpaigh.
 5.
 Mura mbeidh Airteagal 4(1) de Threoir 2014/40 in-fhorfheidhmithe i gcoinne daoine aonair, ní mór an modh a úsáidtear chun Airteagal 3(1) den Treoir sin a chur i bhfeidhm a bheith iomchuí, de réir forbairtí eolaíocha agus teicniúla nó caighdeáin arna nglacadh go hidirnáisiúnta, chun leibhéil na n-astaíochtaí a scaoiltear nuair a úsáidtear toitín chun na críche atá beartaithe dó a thomhas, agus bunaithe ar ardleibhéal cosanta do shláinte an duine, go háirithe do dhaoine óga, agus déanfar cruinneas na dtomhas a fhaightear leis an modh sin a fhíorú ag na saotharlanna formheasta agus faoi mhaoirseacht údaráis inniúla na mBallstát dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 4(2) den Treoir sin.
 Sínithe:
 (
 *1
 ) Teanga an cháis: an Ollainnis.


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 2.7.2011
 NL
 Publicatieblad van de Europese Unie
 C 194/19
 Beroep ingesteld op 4 mei 2011 — Stichting Greenpeace Nederland en PAN Europe/Commissie
 (Zaak T-232/11)
 2011/C 194/31
 Procestaal: Engels
 Partijen
 Verzoekende partijen: Stichting Greenpeace Nederland (Amsterdam, Nederland) en Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) (Brussel, België) (vertegenwoordiger: B. Kloostra, advocaat)
 Verwerende partij: Europese Commissie
 Conclusies
 —
 verklaren dat het besluit van de Commissie van 1 maart 2011 (Ares (2011)223668) in strijd is met verordening (EG) nr. 1367/2006 (1)
 —
 het besluit van de Commissie van 1 maart 2011 (Ares (2011)223668) nietig verklaren;
 —
 de Commissie gelasten de gegrondheid te beoordelen van het verzoek tot interne herziening van 20 december 2010 binnen een door het Gerecht vastgestelde termijn;
 —
 de Commissie verwijzen in de kosten.
 Middelen en voornaamste argumenten
 Ter ondersteuning van hun beroep voeren verzoekers twee middelen aan.
 1)
 Eerste middel: verwerende partij was verplicht over te gaan tot de interne herziening van richtlijn 2010/77/EU (2), zoals verzocht door verzoekers, op grond dat deze richtlijn niet, zoals verwerende partij stelde, algemeen toepasselijk is, maar wel een handeling is die concrete en individuele beslissingen bevat die op individuele verzoeken van de betrokken producenten zijn gebaseerd.
 2)
 Tweede middel: het bestreden besluit is in strijd met verordening nr. 1367/2006 aangezien richtlijn 2010/77/EU verschillende administratieve handelingen bevat die individuele beslissingen inzake individuele verzoeken betreffen. Aangezien de betrokken richtlijn niet door de Commissie in het kader van haar wetgevende bevoegdheid werd vastgesteld, moet bovendien ten aanzien van een dergelijke richtlijn toegang tot de rechter worden gewaarborgd.
 (1) Verordening (EG) nr. 1367/2006 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 6 september 2006 betreffende de toepassing van de bepalingen van het Verdrag van Aarhus betreffende toegang tot informatie, inspraak bij besluitvorming en toegang tot de rechter inzake milieuaangelegenheden op de communautaire instellingen en organen (PB L 264, blz. 13).
 (2) Richtlijn 2010/77/EU van de Commissie van 10 november 2010 tot wijziging van richtlijn 91/414/EEG van de Raad wat betreft de geldigheidsduur van de opneming van bepaalde werkzame stoffen in bijlage I (PB 2010, L 293, blz. 48).


type: wikipedia

text:
Heraklije I. (grč. Ἡρακλεῖος, Hērakleῖos) (Kapadocija, 575. – Carigrad, 11. veljače 641.), bizantski car (610. – 641.), osnivač dinastije koja je vladala Bizantom od 610. do 717. godine.
 Heraklije je sin egzarha Kartage Heraklija i Epifanije, a rodio se oko 575. godine. Posljednjih godina vladavine cara Foke carstvo su potresali nasilni vjerski sukobi, provale Slavena i neuspješne urote. 608. godine egzarh Kartage Heraklije se pobunio i poslao flotu pod zapovjedništvom svog sina, koji se isto tako zvao Heraklije, da opsjedne Carigrad. Herakliju se pridružio rođak Niketa, koji je preoteo Cirenaiku i Egipat Fokinom generalu Bonosu. Heraklije je stigao do prijestolnice i počeo tajne pregovore s Priskom, jednim od najviših Fokinih vojnih dužnosnika. Car ga je imenovao zapovjednikom tjelesne straže i vjenčao svojom kćeri Domencijom. Uz potporu Priska, carigradskog patrijarha Sergija I., te stranke Zelenih Heraklije Mlađi je zauzeo grad i osobno pogubio Foku, te se 05. 10. 610. proglasio carem. Tada se vjenčao Fabijom, koja je kao carica uzela ime Eudokija. Ona mu je rodila kćer Eudokiju i sina Konstantina III., no umrla je 612. godine od epilepsije. Car je sina proglasio za sucara. 613. godine se vjenčao nećakinjom Martinom, no ni narod ni crkva nisu prihvatili taj brak. Heraklije je ujedno poznat po tome što je pozvao Hrvate u Dalmaciju kako bi se borili protiv Avara.
 Ratovi
 Heraklije se odmah suočio s problemom obrane državnih granica. Naime Avari i Slaveni su prodirali sve dublje na Balkan. Slaveni su kontrolirali Podunavlje, Traciju, Makedoniju, a počeli su prodirati i u središnju Grčku, te na Peloponez. Na istoku su Perzijanci za vladavine Hozroja I. Anuširvana zauzeli 613. Siriju, 614. Palestinu i 619. Egipat. U Jeruzalemu su razorili crkvu Svetog groba i Sveti Križ odnijeli u Perziju. Shvativši da se nije moguće u isto vrijeme uspješno boriti na dvije bojišnice, car je 619. sklopio mir s Avarima i posvetio se prilikama na istoku carstva. Car je 622. godine napustio Carigrad i zaputio se u Malu Aziju i počeo pripreme za rat. U jesen iste godine napao je Armeniju i izvojevao nekoliko pobjeda nad Perzijancima. Kada su za to saznali Avari, počeli su tražiti da im car poveća iznos danka, što je on morao i prihvatiti. Heraklije je tada nastavio rat protiv Perzije, no ubrzo su mu stigle loše vijesti. Perzijanci su sklopili savez s Avarima i napali glavni grad s istoka, dok su Avari, Slaveni i Bugari opsjeli grad s mora i sa zapada. Bizantska mornarica porazila je neprijateljsku flotu, a potom nanijela poraz Avarima i Slavenima u kopnenoj bitki. Kada su Perzijanci vidjeli da su im saveznici poraženi, povukli su se natrag u Perziju.
 Heraklije je nastavio rat na istoku i 627. izvojevao veliku pobjedu kod Ninive i uništio perzijsku vojsku. Nakon toga poraza svrgnut je stari car Hozroje I. Anuširvan, a nasljedio ga je sin Kavad II. Novi je vladar odmah sklopio mir s Bizantincima. Perzijanci su vratili sve osvojene teritorije, a Heraklije je 630. svečano ušao u Jeruzalem i vratio Sveti Križ. Iscrpljeno dugotrajnim ratom protiv Bizanta, Perzijsko carstvo je ubrzo palo pod naletima Arapa, koji su ga zauzeli. Oni su ubrzo napali Bizant i 634. zauzeli Siriju. Car je 636. godine prikupio veliku vojsku, ali je pretrpio težak poraz u bitki kod rijeke Jarmuk, pritoka rijeke Jordan. Arapi su nakon toga zauzeli Mezopotamiju, Palestinu, Armeniju i Egipat.
 Reforme i vjerski sukobi
 Heraklije je čim je došao na vlast, poduzeo sveobuhvatne reforme vojske i državne uprave. Umjesto latinskog jezika, koji je dotada bio službeni, uveo je grčki. Stare rimske titule august i imperator car, zamijenio je novom - bazilej.
 Car je u Maloj Aziji uveo posebne oblasti - teme, u kojima je vojna i civilna vlast bila u rukama vojnih zapovjednika - stratega. U temama je zemlja davana vojnicima na trajno korištenje u zamjenu za vojnu službu i plaćanje poreza. Time je Bizant smanjio troškove za plaćeničku vojsku, koja se u ranijem razdoblju pokazala nepouzdanom. Istodobno su osnovane slobodne seoske općine koje su kao zajednica plaćale porez i imale zajedničko vlasništvo nad zemljom.
 Povratak istočnih provincija 627. godine ponovno je izazvao vjerske sukobe između monofizita i pristaša pravovjerja. Istok carstva bio je uz prve, dok su druge činili stanovnici ostatka carstva. Želeći pomiriti obje strane, carigradski patrijarh Sergije je iznio novi nauk monoenergizam. Tvrdio je da Krist ima dvije prirode, koje pak povezuje jedna energija. No kada je naišao na otpor jeruzalemskog partrijarha Sofronija, razvio je novi nauk - monoteletizam. Monoteletizam je zastupao gledište da Isus Krist ima jednu volju. Car je pristao uz monoteletizam, ali su to kompromisno rješenje odbacili i monofiziti i pravovjerni, a i sam papa.
 Pred kraj Heraklijeva života započela je borba za vlast između njegova prvog sina Konstantina III., te careve druge supruge Martine i njenog sina Heraklone. Car je umro 11. veljače 641., a odredio je da ga nasljede oba sina i Martina.
 Mit
 Mit o dobrom i sposobnom caru Herakliju koji je u potpuno suprotnosti s okrutnim, korumpiranim i nesposobnim Fokom je stvoren tijekom Heraklijeve dinastije. Po tom mitu koji živi i danas za sve vojne poraze tijekom prvih deset godina (610. – 620.) vladavine Heraklija kriv je Foka, za kasnije uspjehe zaslužan je Heraklije (620 - 630.), a za poraze od Arapa i gubitak 2/3 Bizantskog Carstva kriva je sudbina. Činjenica da je Heraklije jedini car u 1500 godina rimske povijesti koji je vlastoručno ubio svog prethodnika se zaboravlja kao i njegov incestni drugi brak protiv crkvene ili narodne volje.
 Izvori
 Vanjske poveznice
 Bizantski carevi


text:
Panama je najjužnija država Srednje Amerike. Obuhvaća dio kopnenog mosta koji spaja kontinente Sjevernu i Južnu Ameriku i koji zovemo Panamskom prevlakom. Panama graniči s Kostarikom na zapadu i Kolumbijom na istoku. Na jugu izlazi na Tihi ocean, a na sjeveru na Karipsko more.
 Strateški položaj Panamske Republike ogleda se u nadzoru važnoga pomorskog i trgovačkog prolaza: Panamskog kanala.
 Povijest
 Prvi tragovi ljudskih populacija na području Paname sežu 12 000 godina u prošlost.
 Prije dolaska Europljana na području Paname žive indijanski narodi Chibchan i Chocoan. Prvi Europljanin koji dolazi na ovaj prostor je Rodrigo de Bastidas ploveći 1501. zapadno od Venezuele u potrazi za zlatom. Godinu dana kasnije Kristofor Kolumbo posjećuje ovo područje i osniva kratkotrajnu naseobinu. Nakon što je Vasco Núnez de Balboa 1513. dokazao da je Panamska prevlaka kopneni put između dva mora, Panama postaje stjecište putova i trgovine Španjolskog carstva u Novom svijetu. Uspjeh Španjolaca imao je i ovdje tamnu stranu - stradanje i pljačku domorodačkog stanovništva.
 Panama je ostala španjolskom kolonijom 300 godina, od 1538. do 1821. kada postaje pokrajinom Kolumbije. U studenome 1903. Sjedinjene Američke Države pomažu panamski ustanak, odcjepljenje i osamostaljenje od Kolumbije. Tijekom 20. stoljeća panamska vlast često prolazi kroz periode političke nestabilnosti i korpucije. 1989. za vrijeme vlasti generala Manuela Noriege vojska SAD-a započinje napad na Panamu, nekoliko dana prije nego što je Panamski kanal trebao prijeći u panamsku nadležnost.
 Sjedinjene Države su predale Panamski kanal, infrastrukturu i administraciju Panami tek 31. prosinca 1999.
 Vanjska politika
 U statusu je promatrača u Andskoj grupi zemalja.
 Gospodarstvo
 Zbog svog ključnog zemljopisnog položaja, ekonomija Paname je orijentirana na pružanje usluga: bankarskih, trgovačkih i turističkih. Nakon dobivanja kontrole nad Panamskim kanalom 1999., otvaraju se mogućnosti za nove projekte.
 Teritorijalna podjela
 Panama se satoji od 9 provincija i 5 regija (comarca)
 Bocas del Toro, glavni grad Bocas del Toro
 Chiriquí, David.
 Coclé, Penonomé
 Colón, Colón City
 Darien, La Palma
 Herrera, Chitré
 Los Santos, Las Tablas
 Panamá, Panama City
 Veraguas, Santiago de Veraguas.
 Comarce
 Embera Comarca, 4.383,6 km2. Glavni grad Union Choco. Utemeljena 1983.
 Kuna Yala Comarca (San Blas). Glavni grad El Porvenir.
 Ngöbe-Buglé Comarca, utemeljena 1997. Glavni grad Chichica.
 Kuna de Madugandí, utemeljena 1996. Glavni grad Akua Yala.
 Kuna de Wargandí, 775 km2 (299 četv. milja); utemeljena 2000. Glavno središte je Nurra.
 Stanovništvo
 Većinu stanovništva čine mestici, te miješano indijansko, španjolsko i kinesko stanovništvo. 194 269 panamskih državljana govori nekim od indijanskih jezika kao materinskim (8.3% od ukupnog stanovništva), a najrasprostranjeniji je guaymi (170 000).
 Dominira katolička vjera: oko 80% populacije. Katoličanstvo je i službena vjera u Panami. Od ostalih vjeroispovjesti ima najviše protestanata, nešto muslimana, pripadnika Bahai vjere, židova i hindusa.
 Indijanci pripadaju grupama poznatim kao Chibchan, Talamancan, Chocoan podijeljenim u više plemena, nasaeljenih uglavnom u tropskoj šumi, to su: Guaymi (Murire, Move ili Ngäbe, Valiente, Urraca †, Doleguas, Muite, Muoi, Penomeño, Nata) †, Dorasque (Burica, Changuena, Dorasque; Chaliva, Changuena, Chiru †, Duy, Escoria), Cuna (San Blas, Cuna, Chucunaque, Bayano, Cueva, Coiba †, Mandinga, Caimanes), Chocó (Catío, Empera, Noanama), Talamanca (Terraba, Tojar †, Teshbi, Bribri).
 Vanjske poveznice


type: other

text:
Tneħħija legali tal-minuri - Polonja
 Is-setgħa tal-ġenituri hija min-natura tagħha eżerċitata konġuntament miż-żewġ ġenituri. Dan jirriżulta mill-Artikolu 97(2) tal-Kodiċi tal-Familja u tal-Kustodja tal-Polonja (kodeks rodzinny i opiekuńczy), skont liema l-ġenituri jiddeċiedu konġuntament dwar kwistjonijiet essenzjali li jikkonċernaw wild u, jekk ma jirnexxilhomx jaslu għal ftehim, tkun il-qorti tal-kustodja li tieħu deċiżjoni dwarhom (sąd opiekuńczy). Huwa biss fi kwistjonijiet inqas importanti li jikkonċernaw wild li kull wieħed mill-ġenituri jiddeċiedi indipendentement, mingħajr ma jkollu għalfejn jikkonsulta lill-ġenitur l-ieħor u jġib il-kunsens tiegħu jew tagħha. Fil-ġurisprudenza tal-Polonja, il-ħruġ ta’ wild barra l-pajjiż, kemm permanentement kif ukoll temporanjament, anki għal btala, huwa kkunsidrat kwistjoni essenzjali.
 Fid-dawl tal-Artikolu 97(2) tal-Kodiċi tal-Familja u tal-Kustodja, ġenitur jista’ joħroġ wild barra l-pajjiż mingħajr il-kunsens tal-ġenitur l-ieħor biss jekk:
 (a) il-ġenitur l-ieħor ikun ġie mċaħħad mis-setgħa tal-ġenituri fuq il-wild permezz ta’ deċiżjoni ta’ qorti Pollakka (l-Artikolu 111 tal-Kodiċi tal-Familja u tal-Kustodja);
 (b) is-setgħa tal-ġenituri tal-ġenitur l-ieħor tkun ġiet sospiża minn deċiżjoni ta’ qorti Pollakka (l-Artikolu 110 tal-Kodiċi tal-Familja u tal-Kustodja);
 (c) il-ġenitur l-ieħor ikollu setgħa tal-ġenituri limitata fuq il-wild għaliex jirrappreżenta theddida għall-benesseri tal-wild (l-Artikolu 109 tal-Kodiċi tal-Familja u tal-Kustodja). Il-qorti tiddeċiedi dwar kif is-setgħa tal-ġenituri għandha tkun limitata billi tapplika l-miżura li tipproteġi bl-aqwa mod il-benesseri tal-wild. B’mod partikolari, il-ġenitur li s-setgħa tal-ġenituri tiegħu tkun ġiet limitata jista’ jiġi mċaħħad mid-dritt li jiddeċiedi dwar kwistjonijiet essenzjali li jikkonċernaw il-wild jew fi wħud minn dawn il-kwistjonijiet. Jekk il-ġenitur l-ieħor ikun ġie mċaħħad mid-dritt li jiddeċiedi dwar ir-residenza abitwali tal-wild permezz ta’ sentenza ta’ din ix-xorta, f’dak il-każ, il-ġenitur ma jkunx jista’ jopponi bidla fir-residenza abitwali tal-wild fil-Polonja għal residenza abitwali barra l-pajjiż.
 (d) id-drittijiet u l-obbligi tal-ġenituri lejn il-wild inbidlu wara sentenza mogħtija fil-proċedimenti għad-divorzju (l-Artikolu 58(1) u (1a) tal-Kodiċi tal-Familja u tal-Kustodja), għall-annullament taż-żwieġ (l-Artikolu 51(1) u (1a), moqri flimkien mal-Artikolu 21 tal-Kodiċi tal-Familja u tal-Kustodja) u għas-separazzjoni (l-Artikolu 58(1) u (1a), moqri flimkien mal-Artikolu 613(1) tal-Kodiċi tal-Familja u tal-Kustodja). Dan japplika wkoll għal deċiżjonijiet mogħtija taħt tal-Artikolu 93(2) (fi proċedimenti għall-paternità), l-Artikolu 106 (fi proċedimenti għall-emendar ta’ sentenza dwar is-setgħa tal-ġenituri u l-mod ta’ kif din is-setgħa tiġi eżerċitata, mogħtija fi proċedimenti għad-divorzju, għas-separazzjoni jew għall-annullament taż-żwieġ) u l-Artikolu 107(1) u (2) tal-Kodiċi tal-Familja u tal-Kustodja (fi proċedimenti għall-affidament tal-eżerċitar tas-setgħa tal-ġenituri lil wieħed mill-ġenituri f’każijiet li fihom dawn ma jgħixux flimkien). B’mod partikolari, il-qorti tista’, f’każijiet ta’ din ix-xorti, tafda l-eżerċitar tas-setgħa tal-ġenituri lil wieħed mill-ġenituri, u tillimita d-drittijiet tal-ġenitur l-ieħor għal drittijiet u obbligi speċifiċi fil-konfront tal-wild. Jekk qorti tad-divorzju tafda l-eżerċitar tas-setgħa tal-ġenituri lil wieħed mill-ġenituri u tillimita s-setgħa tal-ġenituri tal-ġenitur l-ieħor, imbagħad, minkejja li sentenza ta’ din ix-xorta ma ċċaħħadx lill-ġenitur l-ieħor mis-setgħa tal-ġenituri fuq il-wild, dak il-ġenitur jista’ jeżerċita d-drittijiet u l-obbligi tiegħu biss sa fejn il-qorti tippermettilu jagħmel dan. Jekk il-qorti ma tagħtix id-dritt tad-deċiżjoni dwar ir-residenza tal-wild lill-ġenitur l-ieħor, allura, fil-prinċipju, il-ġenitur li jkun ġie fdat bis-setgħa tal-ġenituri jiddeċiedi dwar din ir-residenza waħdu (ara, madanakollu, il-punt 2).
 (e) il-ġenitur l-ieħor ikun ġie mċaħħad mid-dritt ta’ deċiżjoni b’mod konġunt dwar il-bidliet fir-residenza tal-wild permezz ta’ sentenza ta’ qorti barranija rikonoxxuta bħala effettiva fil-Polonja.
 Il-kunsens tal-ġenitur l-ieħor huwa meħtieġ fil-każijiet kollha li mhumiex elenkati fil-punt preċedenti, jiġifieri fis-sitwazzjonijiet li fihom ġenitur ikollu s-setgħa sħiħa tal-ġenituri, jew is-setgħa tal-ġenituri tiegħu tkun ġiet limitata iżda ma jkunx ġie mċaħħad mid-dritt ta’ deċiżjoni dwar ir-residenza tal-wild. Il-ġurisprudenza Pollakka tmur pass lil hinn minn hekk f’dan ir-rigward. Kif spjegat mill-Qorti Suprema (Sąd Najwyższy) fid-deċiżjoni tagħha tal-10 ta’ Novembru 1971 fil-kawża III CZP 69/71, ġenitur li huwa intitolat li jżomm wild fil-post ta’ residenza tiegħu għandu jkollu d-dritt li jieħu deċiżjoni b’mod konġunt dwar il-bidliet fir-residenza abitwali tal-wild jekk tali bidliet jagħmluha fil-fatt impossibbli li dak il-ġenitur jkollu kuntatt mal-wild. Għaldaqstant, fid-dawl ta’ din is-sentenza, anki jekk il-qorti ma tkun tat lill-ġenitur l-ieħor, pereżempju fil-proċedimenti għad-divorzju, id-dritt ta’ deċiżjoni b’mod konġunt dwar ir-residenza abitwali tal-wild, dak il-ġenitur jista’ jitlob li l-wild jirritorna jekk ma jkunx jista’ jeżerċita d-dritt tiegħu li jkollu kuntatt mal-wild.
 F’każijiet ta’ din ix-xorta, għandu jiġi preżentat rikors lill-qorti tal-kustodja fil-Polonja għal kunsens sostitwit sabiex wild ikun jista’ jinħareġ barra l-pajjiż.
 Rikorsi għal kunsens ta’ din ix-xorta jista’ jiġi preżentat mill-ġenituri li ma ġewx imċaħħda mis-setgħa tal-ġenituri jew li s-setgħa tal-ġenituri tagħhom ma ġietx sospiża. Ir-rikorsi jistgħu jiġu preżentati mir-rikorrenti nfushom: f’każijiet bħal dawn, il-liġi Pollakka ma tesiġix li l-partijiet ikunu rappreżentati quddiem il-qorti minn avukat. Il-qorti b’ġurisdizzjoni ratione materiae li tikkunsidra dawn ir-rikorsi hija l-Qorti Distrettwali (sąd rejonowy) (it-taqsima tal-familja u tal-minorenni) bħala l-Qorti tal-Prim’Istanza, filwaqt li l-qorti b’ġurisdizzjoni territorjali hija l-qorti tal-post li fih il-wild ikun jirrisjedi jew qiegħed joqgħod.
 Kif indikat aktar ’il fuq, il-ħruġ ta’ wild barra l-pajjiż għal perjodu qasir ta’ żmien jirrikjedi l-kunsens tal-ġenitur l-ieħor.
 Il-formoli tal-kunsens sabiex wild jinħareġ barra l-pajjiż (permanentement jew temporanjament) ma jintużawx fil-Polonja. Għaldaqstant, il-kunsens jista’ jingħata fi kwalunkwe għamla. Madankollu, jidher li jkun aħjar jekk jinkiseb kunsens bil-miktub, li jista’ jservi ta’ evidenza fi kwalunkwe proċediment għar-ritorn ta’ wild abbażi tal-Konvenzjoni tal-Aja tal-1980. L-assistenza ta’ avukat, konsulent legali jew nutar Pollakk tista’ tkun ta’ siwi fit-tħejjija ta’ tali kunsens.
 L-aħħar aġġornament: 27/06/2017


text:
Córais UPS Dáileoir | Comhpháirteanna Leictreonacha Dáileoir | Components-Shop.com
 Baile > Táirgí > Cosaint Líne, Dáileadh, backups > Córais UPS
 Córais UPS405 Products Found
 Cuid #:SMART750USBTAA
 Tuairisc:UPS SMART PRO TOWER 6 OUTLETS
 $62.386/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:UPSLPB28AH
 $973.437/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SM1000RM2UTAA
 Tuairisc:UPS SMART PRO RACK 6 OUTLETS
 $211.043/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:UPS16166
 Tuairisc:GT SERIES 3000VA 120V TOWER DBL
 $503.002/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SMART1500SLT
 Tuairisc:UPS 1500VA 900W 8OUT USB
 $206.555/pcsFiosrúcháin
 $4968.13/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:UPS1020661
 Tuairisc:PDU FOR GT SERIES 8 & 10KVA
 $195.69/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SUINT2200RTXL2U
 Tuairisc:2200VA 1600W UPS
 $524.009/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:BC PERS450
 Tuairisc:BATT BACKUP 450VA 3OUT 120V
 $45.401/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:ECO550UPSTAA
 Tuairisc:UPS ECO GREEN BATTERY BACK UP
 $40.601/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SMART2200RM2UN
 $498.963/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SU6000RT3UHV
 Tuairisc:UPS TRUE ONLINE 6KVA 4200W RKMNT
 $1214.049/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:2320461
 Tuairisc:QUINT-UPS/ 24DC/12DC/5/24DC/10
 $152.469/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SMART1500LCDT
 Tuairisc:UPS SMART LCD TOWER BATT BACK UP
 $84.72/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SU2200XLA
 $381.332/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:OMNI SMT500PNP
 Tuairisc:BATT BACKUP 500VA 6OUTLET/RJ11
 $77.626/pcsFiosrúcháin
 $1013.945/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SM5000RT3UTAA
 Tuairisc:UPS SMART RACKMOUNT AVR USB DB9
 $1419.311/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:UPSLPB21AH
 $820.863/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:BC PERS300
 Tuairisc:BATT BACKUP 300VA 3OUT 120V
 $40.167/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SU1500RMNAFTA
 Tuairisc:UPS TRUEONLINE 1.5KVA 1200W 6OUT
 I stoc:4299
 Cuid #:UB10.245
 monaróirí:PULS, LP
 Tuairisc:UPS 360W 24V DIN RAIL
 $165.204/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:UPS16327
 Tuairisc:BATT PK FOR GT SERIES 3000 RACKM
 $127.366/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SU1500XL
 Tuairisc:UPS ONLINE 1.5KVA 1200W 6OUT
 $279.251/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SB-15001
 $57.045/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SMART1000LCDTAA
 Tuairisc:UPS SMART TOWER LCD AVR USB COAX
 $84.531/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SM3000NAFTA
 Tuairisc:UPS 3000VA 2400W 8OUT TOWER
 $484.239/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:TE600
 Tuairisc:UPS 600VA 425W 6OUT TOWER
 $102.248/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:2905907
 Tuairisc:UPS 24VDC 2.5A DIN RAIL
 $107.884/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SU3000RTXR3U
 Tuairisc:UPS 3KVA 2400W 9OUT RACK MOUNT
 $681.237/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SMC15002URM
 $202.506/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SM3000RMXL2UTAA
 $508.417/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SU16KRTG
 $3410.542/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SMART1000LCD
 Tuairisc:UPS 1000VA 8OUT LCD DISP USB
 $65.1/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SM3000RM2UNTAA
 Tuairisc:UPS SMART RACKMOUNT
 $621.2/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:UPS1020623
 $261.664/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SMART2200VS
 Tuairisc:UPS SMARTPRO 2.2KVA 1600W 9OUT
 $283.149/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:BCPRO850
 Tuairisc:BATT BACKUP 600W 6 OUTLET 120V
 Cuid #:INTERNET600TAA
 $41.157/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:UPS1020660
 $199.408/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SU2200RTXL2UA
 $466.969/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:UPS1020624
 $255.871/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SMART5000RT-3U
 Tuairisc:UPS 5KVA 4000W 14OUT W/BATTERY
 $1147.391/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:SMART3000SLT
 Tuairisc:UPS SMART TOWER AVR 120V
 $446.071/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:OMNIVSINT800
 Tuairisc:BATTERY BACK UP TOWER AVR 230V
 $81.519/pcsFiosrúcháin
 $2113.88/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:AVR900U
 Tuairisc:UPS 900VA 480W 12OUT RJ/11
 $49.762/pcsFiosrúcháin
 Cuid #:UPS16172
 Tuairisc:GT SERIES 3000VA 208V TOWER DBL
 $516.967/pcsFiosrúcháin


text:
Cameron Langdon Brown (born December 21, 1945) is an American jazz double bassist known for his association with the Don Pullen/George Adams Quartet.
 Biography
 Cameron started studying music at age 10, first on piano, later on clarinet. But, drawn to the bass, he found himself playing a tin bass in a student dance band. As an exchange student in Europe, he worked with George Russell's Sextet and Big Band for one year and played with Don Cherry, Aldo Romano, Booker Ervin, and Donald Byrd. In 1966 he returned to graduate at Columbia College, Columbia University (1969, B.A. in Sociology).
 In 1974, Brown met Sheila Jordan, gigged with free jazz pioneers Roswell Rudd and Beaver Harris, joined Archie Shepp's quintet in 1975, and recorded with Harris' and The 360 Degree Music Experience around that time.
 The famous Don Pullen/George Adams Quartet, with him and drummer Dannie Richmond, developed into an intense and rewarding partnership which lasted during the 1980s. In addition to this quartet, Brown played with Art Blakey's Jazz Messengers, and various groups led by Shepp, Cherry, Rudd, and Richmond. He has also performed and recorded with Ted Curson, Lee Konitz, Chet Baker, Joe Lovano, Mal Waldron, Ricky Ford, Steve Grossman, Betty Carter and the John Hicks Trio, Etta Jones and Jane Ira Bloom.
 Brown has appeared on more than 200 recordings. His first recording as a leader, after nearly 40 years of performing, was published in 2003 with his group The Hear and Now featuring Dewey Redman.
 In addition to playing gigs and touring nationally and internationally, Brown is currently teaching jazz double bass at Green Meadow Waldorf School in Chestnut Ridge, New York, as well as offering private lessons. The musician also substitute teaches music theory classes at The New School for Jazz and Contemporary Music in New York City.
 Discography
 As leader
 Spring Cleaning (VKH, 1992)
 Here and How (Omnitone, 2003)
 Celebration: Live at the Triad (HighNote, 2005)
 Here and How, Vol. 2 (Omnitone, 2008)
 Black Nile (Radiosnj, 2011)
 Is That So? (Stunt, 2014)
 As sideman
 With Archie Shepp
 A Sea of Faces, 1975
 Montreux Two, 1975
 Montreux, Vol. 1, 1975
 Montreux, Vols. 1 & 2, 1975
 U-Jaama (Unite) (1975)
 Steam, 1976
 The Rising Sun Collection, 1977
 Parisian Concert, Vol. 1, 1996
 Tomorrow Will Be Another Day, 2003
 Gemini, 2007
 With Dannie Richmond
 Dannie Richmond Plays Charles Mingus (Timeless, 1980)
 The Last Mingus Band A.D. (Landmark, 1980 [1994])
 Three or Four Shades of Dannie Richmond Quintet (Tutu, 1981 [1994])
 Dionysius (Red, 1983)
 With Connie Crothers
 New York Night 1989
 In Motion 1991
 Love Energy 1992
 Jazz Spring 1993
 Session 1997
 With George Russell
 George Russell Sextet at Beethoven Hall (1965)
 New York Big Band (1978)
 With George Adams & Don Pullen
 All That Funk (Palcoscenico, 1979)
 More Funk (Palcoscenico, 1979)
 Don't Lose Control (Soul Note, 1979)
 Earth Beams (Timeless, 1981)
 Life Line (Timeless, 1981)
 City Gates (Timeless, 1983)
 Live at the Village Vanguard (Soul Note, 1983)
 Live at the Village Vanguard Vol. 2 (Soul Note, 1983)
 Decisions (Timeless, 1984)
 Live at Montmartre (Timeless, 1985)
 Breakthrough (Blue Note, 1986)
 Song Everlasting (Blue Note, 1987)
 With Houston Person
 Christmas with Houston Person and Friends (Muse, 1994)
 With Dewey Redman
 Living on the Edge (Black Saint, 1989)
 Choices (Enja, 1992)
 In London (Palmetto, 1996)
 With Mal Waldron
 Moods (Enja, 1978)
 With Jack Walrath
 Revenge of the Fat People (Stash, 1981)
 With Joe Lovano
 Friendly Fire with Greg Osby (Blue Note, 1998)
 Flights of Fancy: Trio Fascination Edition Two (Blue Note, 2000)
 With Jon Lucien
 Mind's Eye 1974
 Song for My Lady 1975
 With Sheila Jordan
 Confirmation 1975
 I've Grown Accustomed to the Bass 2000
 With Salvatore Bonafede
 Actor Actress 1990
 Plays Gershwin 1993
 With Steve Slagle
 Reincarnation 1994
 New New York 2000
 With others
 1976 Doublet, Mickey Tucker
 1979 Beautiful Africa, Beaver Harris
 1979 Live at Nyon, Beaver Harris
 1982 Real Jazz for the Folks Who Feel Jazz, David Lahm
 1986 A House Full of Love, Grover Washington Jr.
 1992 In the Moment, Richard Tabnik Trio
 1992 Spring Cleaning, Gilbert Isbin
 1992 " Bihogo", Chris Joris
 1992 Travelin' Light, Della Griffin
 1994 360 Aeutopia, Massimo Urbani
 1994 Original Superband, Charlie Persip
 1994 Reverence, Michael Bocian
 1995 Other Half of Me, Bernie Bierman
 1996 Walls–Bridges, Ed Blackwell
 1999 Feeling Free, Grady Tate
 1999 Modern Jazz, Neal Haiduck
 1999 Swimming, Tom Varner
 1999 The Great Bridge, Emil Hess
 1999 Walking Woman, Mary LaRose
 2000 Explosion, Mike Longo
 2001 Group Therapy, Jim McNeely
 2001 Second Communion, Tom Varner
 2002 Into the Sunlight, Bob Magnuson
 2002 Rothko, Dave Ballou
 2003 Ti Adoro, Luciano Pavarotti
 2004 Presence, Lisa Sokolov
 2004 Spirits, Michael Musillami
 2006 Translucent Space, Jason Rigby
 2008 Ceremony, Ceremony
 2008 It's Always You, Lainie Cooke
 2008 Soul & Creation, Raul de Souza
 2011 Just Sayin''', Alan Rosenthal
 2012 Boplicity, Ronnie Cuber
 2012 Early Reflections, Niels Vincentz
 2012 Old LP, Bob Telson
 2013 Sixteen Sunsets'', Jane Ira Bloom
 References
 External links
 Extended homepage with discography
 1945 births
 American jazz double-bassists
 Male double-bassists
 Living people
 21st-century double-bassists
 21st-century American male musicians
 American male jazz musicians
 Columbia College (New York) alumni
 The 360 Degree Music Experience members
 HighNote Records artists


jurisdiction: US

text: b'HHS/OIG, Audit - "Follow-up Review of the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program in\nFlorida," (A-04-07-07022)\nDepartment of Health and Human Services\nOffice of Inspector General -- AUDIT\n"Follow-up Review of the\nMedicaid Drug Rebate Program in Florida," (A-04-07-07022)\nApril 11, 2008\nComplete\nText of Report is available in PDF format (213 kb). Copies can also be obtained by\ncontacting the Office of Public Affairs at 202-619-1343.\nEXECUTIVE SUMMARY:\nWe conducted a follow-up audit of Florida\xc2\x92s Medicaid drug\nrebate program to determine whether the State agency had (1) implemented the\nrecommendations made in our previous audit of the Florida drug rebate program\nand (2) established controls over the drug rebate program, including the\ncollection of rebates on single-source drugs administered by physicians.\nManufacturers may make their outpatient drugs eligible for Federal Medicaid\nfunding by entering into a rebate agreement with CMS and paying quarterly\nrebates to the States.\xc2\xa0 We found that the State had implemented the\nrecommendations from our prior audit.\xc2\xa0 Therefore, this report contains no\nrecommendations.'


type: legislation

text:
 18.6.2018
 IT
 Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea
 L 154/1
 REGOLAMENTO DI ESECUZIONE (UE) 2018/875 DELLA COMMISSIONE
 del 15 giugno 2018
 che modifica il regolamento (CE) n. 1210/2003 del Consiglio relativo a talune specifiche restrizioni alle relazioni economiche e finanziarie con l'Iraq
 LA COMMISSIONE EUROPEA,
 visto il trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea,
 visto il regolamento (CE) n. 1210/2003 del Consiglio, del 7 luglio 2003, relativo a talune specifiche restrizioni alle relazioni economiche e finanziarie con l'Iraq e recante abrogazione del regolamento (CE) n. 2465/1996 (1), in particolare l'articolo 11, lettera b),
 considerando quanto segue:
 (1)
 L'allegato III del regolamento (CE) n. 1210/2003 elenca gli enti pubblici, le entità giuridiche, le agenzie, le persone fisiche e giuridiche, gli organismi e le entità dell'ex governo iracheno a cui si applica, a norma di detto regolamento, il congelamento dei fondi e delle risorse economiche situati fuori dell'Iraq il 22 maggio 2003.
 (2)
 Il 7 giugno 2018 il comitato per le sanzioni del Consiglio di sicurezza delle Nazioni Unite ha deciso di cancellare una voce dall'elenco delle persone o delle entità a cui si applica il congelamento dei fondi e delle risorse economiche.
 (3)
 Occorre pertanto modificare opportunamente l'allegato III del regolamento (CE) n. 1210/2003,
 HA ADOTTATO IL PRESENTE REGOLAMENTO:
 Articolo 1
 L'allegato III del regolamento (CE) n. 1210/2003 è modificato conformemente all'allegato del presente regolamento.
 Articolo 2
 Il presente regolamento entra in vigore il giorno successivo alla pubblicazione nella Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea.
 Il presente regolamento è obbligatorio in tutti i suoi elementi e direttamente applicabile in ciascuno degli Stati membri.
 Fatto a Bruxelles, il 15 giugno 2018
 Per la Commissione,
 a nome del presidente
 Capo del Servizio degli strumenti di politica estera
 (1) GU L 169 dell'8.7.2003, pag. 6.
 ALLEGATO
 La voce seguente dell'allegato III del regolamento (CE) n. 1210/2003 è soppressa:
 «1.
 Central Bank of Iraq, Rashid Street, Baghdad, Iraq. Altre informazioni: l'ex Governatore era il Dott. Issam El Moulla HWEISH; uffici a Mosul e a Basra.»


text:
 18.7.2022
 SK
 Úradný vestník Európskej únie
 L 189/18
 VYKONÁVACIE NARIADENIE KOMISIE (EÚ) 2022/1228
 zo 14. júla 2022
 ktorým sa mení vykonávacie nariadenie (EÚ) 2017/892 na rok 2022, pokiaľ ide o žiadosti o poskytnutie pomoci, ako aj žiadosti o vyplácanie preddavkov a čiastkových platieb v dôsledku krízy spôsobenej inváziou Ruska na Ukrajinu
 EURÓPSKA KOMISIA,
 so zreteľom na Zmluvu o fungovaní Európskej únie,
 so zreteľom na nariadenie Európskeho parlamentu a Rady (EÚ) č. 1308/2013 zo 17. decembra 2013, ktorým sa vytvára spoločná organizácia trhov s poľnohospodárskymi výrobkami a ktorým sa zrušujú nariadenia Rady (EHS) č. 922/72, (EHS) č. 234/79, (ES) č. 1037/2001 a (ES) č. 1234/2007 (1), a najmä na jeho článok 38 písm. c), e) a l),
 keďže:
 (1)
 V dôsledku súčasnej krízy spôsobenej inváziou Ruska na Ukrajinu 24. februára 2022, ktorá sa začala krátko po pandémii ochorenia COVID-19, sa poľnohospodári vo všetkých členských štátoch ocitli v mimoriadne ťažkej situácii. V dôsledku logistických problémov musia poľnohospodári v EÚ čeliť narušeniam hospodárskych a dodávateľských reťazcov spôsobených touto krízou a následným finančným ťažkostiam a problémom s peňažnými tokmi. Vzhľadom na pretrvávajúce narušenia trhu a bezprecedentnú kombináciu okolností sa poľnohospodári vo všetkých členských štátoch stretávajú s mimoriadnymi ťažkosťami pri plánovaní, zavádzaní a vykonávaní schém pomoci stanovených v nariadení (EÚ) č. 1308/2013. Preto je dôležité zmierniť tieto ťažkosti udelením výnimky z určitých ustanovení vykonávacieho nariadenia Komisie (EÚ) 2017/892 (2).
 (2)
 Podľa článku 9 ods. 1 vykonávacieho nariadenia (EÚ) 2017/892 by organizácie výrobcov mali predložiť príslušnému orgánu členského štátu žiadosť o poskytnutie pomoci alebo zostatku pomoci za každý operačný program, na ktorý sa pomoc žiada, a to do 15. februára roku nasledujúceho po roku, na ktorý sa pomoc žiada. Podľa článku 9 ods. 3 prvého pododseku uvedeného vykonávacieho nariadenia sa žiadosti o poskytnutie pomoci môžu za určitých okolností týkať výdavkov, ktoré boli naplánované, ale neboli vynaložené. K týmto okolnostiam patrí napríklad to, že príslušné akcie sa z dôvodov, ktoré príslušná organizácia výrobcov nevedela ovplyvniť, nemohli vykonať do 31. decembra roka vykonávania operačného programu a že tieto akcie možno vykonať do 30. apríla nasledujúceho po roku, na ktorý sa pomoc žiada. V dôsledku invázie Ruska na Ukrajinu je vhodné udeliť výnimku z článku 9 ods. 3 prvého pododseku písm. b) vykonávacieho nariadenia a stanoviť, aby sa žiadosti o poskytnutie pomoci predložené do 15. februára 2023 mohli vzťahovať aj na výdavky na akcie naplánované na rok 2022, ale nerealizované do 31. decembra 2022 za predpokladu, že ich bude možné zrealizovať do 15. augusta 2023.
 (3)
 Podľa článku 11 ods. 1 prvého pododseku vykonávacieho nariadenia (EÚ) 2017/892 sa žiadosti o vyplácanie preddavkov môžu predkladať podľa rozhodnutia členského štátu buď každé tri mesiace v januári, apríli, júli a októbri, alebo štyri mesiace v januári, máji a septembri. Podľa článku 12 ods. 2 uvedeného vykonávacieho nariadenia sa žiadosti o čiastkové platby môžu predkladať kedykoľvek, ale nie viac ako trikrát ročne. V záujme flexibility pri riadení operačných programov, vrátane ich financovania, uznanými organizáciami výrobcov je vhodné odchýliť sa od uvedených ustanovení a stanoviť, že žiadosti o vyplácanie preddavkov sa môžu v roku 2022 predkladať kedykoľvek a žiadosti o čiastkové platby možno v roku 2022 predložiť aj viac ako trikrát.
 (4)
 Vzhľadom na potrebu okamžite konať by toto nariadenie malo nadobudnúť účinnosť dňom nasledujúcim po jeho uverejnení v Úradnom vestníku Európskej únie, Keďže operačné programy sa vykonávajú podľa kalendárneho roka, výnimky týkajúce sa žiadostí o vyplácanie preddavkov a čiastkových platieb stanovené v tomto nariadení by sa mali uplatňovať so spätnou účinnosťou od 1. januára 2022.
 (5)
 Opatrenia stanovené v tomto nariadení sú v súlade so stanoviskom Výboru pre spoločnú organizáciu poľnohospodárskych trhov,
 PRIJALA TOTO NARIADENIE:
 Článok 1
 Výnimky z ustanovení vykonávacieho nariadenia (EÚ) 2017/892
 1. Odchylne od článku 9 ods. 3 prvého pododseku písm. b) vykonávacieho nariadenia (EÚ) 2017/892 môžu žiadosti o poskytnutie pomoci predkladané do 15. februára 2023 obsahovať aj výdavky na akcie naplánované na rok 2022, ale nerealizované do 31. decembra 2022 za predpokladu, že ich bude možné zrealizovať do 15. augusta 2023.
 2. Odchylne od článku 11 ods. 1 prvého pododseku vykonávacieho nariadenia (EÚ) 2017/892 sa žiadosti o vyplácanie preddavkov môžu predkladať kedykoľvek v roku 2022.
 3. Odchylne od článku 12 ods. 2 vykonávacieho nariadenia (EÚ) 2017/892 sa žiadosti o čiastkové platby môžu v roku 2022 predkladať viac ako trikrát ročne.
 Článok 2
 Nadobudnutie účinnosti a uplatňovanie
 Toto nariadenie nadobúda účinnosť dňom nasledujúcim po jeho uverejnení v Úradnom vestníku Európskej únie.
 Článok 1 ods. 2 a 3 sa uplatňujú od 1. januára 2022.
 Toto nariadenie je záväzné v celom rozsahu a priamo uplatniteľné vo všetkých členských štátoch.
 V Bruseli 14. júla 2022.
 Za Komisiu
 predsedníčka
 Ursula VON DER LEYEN
 (1) Ú. v. EÚ L 347, 20.12.2013, s. 671.
 (2) Vykonávacie nariadenie Komisie (EÚ) 2017/892 z 13. marca 2017, ktorým sa stanovujú pravidlá uplatňovania nariadenia Európskeho parlamentu a Rady (EÚ) č. 1308/2013, pokiaľ ide o sektory ovocia a zeleniny a spracovaného ovocia a zeleniny (Ú. v. EÚ L 138, 25.5.2017, s. 57).