text:
 11.10.2008
 SV
 Europeiska unionens officiella tidning
 C 260/3
 Domstolens dom (första avdelningen) av den 10 juli 2008 (begäran om förhandsavgörande från Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny we Wrocławiu (Polen)) – Alicja Sosnowska mot Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej we Wrocławiu Ośrodek Zamiejscowy w Wałbrzychu
 (Mål C-25/07) (1)
 (Mervärdesskatt - Direktiven 67/227/EEG och 77/388/EEG - Nationell lagstiftning om villkoren för återbetalning av överskjutande mervärdesskatt - Principen om skatterättslig neutralitet och proportionalitetsprincipen - Särskilda åtgärder som avviker från bestämmelserna i direktiv 77/388/EEG)
 (2008/C 260/04)
 Rättegångsspråk: polska
 Hänskjutande domstol
 Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny we Wrocławiu
 Parter i målet vid den nationella domstolen
 Klagande: Alicja Sosnowska
 Motpart: Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej we Wrocławiu Ośrodek Zamiejscowy w Wałbrzychu
 Saken
 Begäran om förhandsavgörande – Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny we Wrocławiu – Tolkningen av artikel 5 tredje stycket EG, artikel 2 i rådets första direktiv 67/227/EEG av den 11 april 1967 om harmonisering av medlemsstaternas lagstiftning om omsättningsskatter (EGT 71, s. 1301; svensk specialutgåva, område 9, volym 1, s. 3) samt av artiklarna 18.4 och 27.1 i rådets sjätte direktiv 77/388/EEG av den 17 maj 1977 om harmonisering av medlemsstaternas lagstiftning rörande omsättningsskatter – Gemensamt system för mervärdesskatt: enhetlig beräkningsgrund (EGT L 145, s. 1; svensk specialutgåva, område 9, volym 1, s. 28) – Nationell lagstiftning om omsättningsskatter i vilken, vad avser fristen för återbetalning av överskjutande belopp, mindre förmånliga villkor föreskrivs för skattskyldiga som påbörjar skattepliktig verksamhet och som är registrerade i egenskap av skattskyldiga som genomför gemenskapsinterna leveranser – Principen om skatterättslig neutralitet och proportionalitetsprincipen
 Domslut
 1)
 Artikel 18.4 i rådets sjätte direktiv 77/388/EEG av den 17 maj 1977 om harmonisering av medlemsstaternas lagstiftning rörande omsättningsskatter – Gemensamt system för mervärdesskatt: enhetlig beräkningsgrund, i dess lydelse enligt rådets direktiv 2005/92/EG av den 12 december 2005, och proportionalitetsprincipen utgör hinder för nationell lagstiftning som den som är aktuell i målet vid den nationella domstolen, i vilken det, i syfte att möjliggöra kontroller som är nödvändiga för att hindra skatteflykt och skatteundandragande, föreskrivs om en förlängning från 60 till 180 dagar, från det att den skattskyldige har lämnat in sin mervärdesskattedeklaration, av den frist inom vilken den nationella skattemyndigheten ska återbetala överskjutande mervärdesskatt till en viss kategori skattskyldiga, såvida inte dessa har ställt en säkerhet på 250 000 PLN.
 2)
 Bestämmelser som de som är aktuella i målet vid den nationella domstolen utgör inte ”särskilda åtgärder som avviker [från bestämmelserna i sjätte direktivet]” och som ska hindra vissa typer av skatteflykt eller skatteundandragande, i den mening som avses i artikel 27.1 i nämnda direktiv.
 (1) EUT C 69, 24.3.2008.


type: contracts

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 30.6.2011
 MT
 Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea
 L 171/39
 DEĊIŻJONI TAL-KUMITAT KONĠUNT TAŻ-ŻEE
 Nru 38/2011
 tal-1 ta’ April 2011
 li temenda l-Anness XIII (Trasport) tal-Ftehim taż-ŻEE
 IL-KUMITAT KONĠUNT TAŻ-ŻEE,
 Wara li kkunsidra l-Ftehim dwar iż-Żona Ekonomika Ewropea, kif emendat mill-Protokoll li jaġġusta l-Ftehim dwar iż-Żona Ekonomika Ewropea, minn issa ‘l quddiem imsejjaħ “il-Ftehim”, u b’mod partikolari l-Artikolu 98 tiegħu,
 Billi:
 (1)
 L-Anness XIII tal-Ftehim kien emendat bid-Deċiżjoni tal-Kumitat Konġunt taż-ŻEE Nru 5/2011 tal-11 ta’ Frar 2011 (1).
 (2)
 Ir-Rakkomandazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni 2010/379/UE tal-5 ta’ Lulju 2010 dwar il-valutazzjoni tar-riskju tan-nuqqasijiet li jinstabu waqt spezzjonijiet tekniċi (ta’ vetturi kummerċjali) fit-triq skont id-Direttiva 2000/30/KE tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill (2) għandha tiġi inkorporata fil-Ftehim,
 IDDEĊIEDA KIF ĠEJ:
 Artikolu 1
 Taħt l-intestatura “ATTI LI TAGĦHOM IL-PARTIJIET KONTRAENTI GĦANDHOM JIEĦDU NOTA” il-punt li ġej għandu jiġi mdaħħal wara l-punt 36b (Rakkomandazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni 2010/19/UE) tal-Anness XIII tal-Ftehim:
 “36c.
 32010 H 0379: Ir-Rakkomandazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni 2010/379/UE tal-5 ta’ Lulju 2010 dwar il-valutazzjoni tar-riskju tan-nuqqasijiet li jinstabu waqt spezzjonijiet tekniċi (ta’ vetturi kummerċjali) fit-triq skont id-Direttiva 2000/30/KE tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill (ĠU L 173, 8.7.2010, p. 97).”
 Artikolu 2
 It-testi tar-Rakkkomandazzjoni 2010/379/UE fil-lingwa Islandiża u dik Norveġiża, li għandhom jiġu ppubblikati fis-Suppliment taż-ŻEE f’Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea, għandhom ikunu awtentiċi.
 Artikolu 3
 Din id-Deċiżjoni għandha tidħol fis-seħħ fit-2 ta’ April 2011, sakemm in-notifiki kollha skont l-Artikolu 103(1) tal-Ftehim ikunu saru lill-Kumitat Konġunt taż-ŻEE (*).
 Artikolu 4
 Din id-Deċiżjoni għandha tiġi ppubblikata fit-Taqsima taż-ŻEE ta’ Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea u fis-Suppliment taż-ŻEE tiegħu.
 Magħmul fi Brussell, l-1 ta’ April 2011.
 Għall-Kumitat Konġunt taż-ŻEE
 L-Aġent President
 Gianluca GRIPPA
 (1) ĠU L 93, 7.4.2011, p. 33.
 (2) ĠU L 173, 8.7.2010, p. 97.
 (*) L-ebda rekwiżiti kostituzzjonali ma huma indikati.


type: legislation

text:
 19.3.2019
 NL
 Publicatieblad van de Europese Unie
 L 75/66
 UITVOERINGSVERORDENING (EU) 2019/430 VAN DE COMMISSIE
 van 18 maart 2019
 tot wijziging van Verordening (EU) nr. 1178/2011 voor wat betreft de uitoefening van beperkte bevoegdheden zonder toezicht vóór de afgifte van een bevoegdheidsbewijs als recreatief vlieger
 (Voor de EER relevante tekst)
 DE EUROPESE COMMISSIE,
 Gezien het Verdrag betreffende de werking van de Europese Unie,
 Gezien Verordening (EU) 2018/1139 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 4 juli 2018 tot vaststelling van gemeenschappelijke regels op het gebied van burgerluchtvaart en tot oprichting van een Europees Agentschap voor de veiligheid van de luchtvaart, tot wijziging van de Verordeningen (EG) nr. 2111/2005, (EG) nr. 1008/2008, (EU) nr. 996/2010, (EU) nr. 376/2014 en Richtlijnen 2014/30/EU en 2014/53/EU van het Europees Parlement en de Raad, en houdende intrekking van Verordeningen (EG) nr. 552/2004 en (EG) nr. 216/2008 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad en Verordening (EEG) nr. 3922/91 van de Raad (1), en met name artikel 23, lid 1,
 Overwegende hetgeen volgt:
 (1)
 In subdeel B van bijlage I (deel-FCL) bij Verordening (EU) nr. 1178/2011 van de Commissie (2) zijn de eisen voor bevoegdheidsbewijzen als recreatief vlieger (LAPL) vastgesteld.
 (2)
 Overeenkomstig artikel 12, lid 2 bis, punt 3, van Verordening (EU) nr. 1178/2011 mogen de lidstaten tot 8 april 2020 nationale regels voor de afgifte van bevoegdheidsbewijzen toepassen die, in vergelijking met een LAPL, voorzien in vroegere toegang tot bepaalde pilootbevoegdheden. Deze nationale regels worden ook gebruikt om op modulaire wijze LAPL-opleidingen aan te bieden, waarbij de voltooiing van bepaalde LAPL-opleidingsmodules het mogelijk maakt om vroeger toegang te krijgen tot bepaalde bevoegdheden, vóór de afgifte van een LAPL.
 (3)
 De lidstaten die dergelijke modulaire LAPL-opleidingen aanbieden, hebben aan de Commissie en aan het Agentschap van de Europese Unie voor de veiligheid van de luchtvaart (het Agentschap) meegedeeld dat deze opleidingen bevorderlijk zijn voor de luchtsport en voor activiteiten als recreatief piloot. Dit ligt in de lijn van de doelstellingen van het stappenplan voor de general aviation, namelijk een meer evenredig, flexibel en proactief regelgevingssysteem tot stand brengen (3).
 (4)
 Overeenkomstig artikel 4, lid 7, van Verordening (EU) nr. 1178/2011 mogen de lidstaten leerling-piloten toestaan zonder toezicht en onder bepaalde voorwaarden te vliegen met eenmotorige zuigervliegtuigen met een maximale startmassa van hoogstens 2 000 kg, alvorens een LAPL is afgegeven.
 (5)
 Om een flexibeler regelgevingskader voor de general aviation te bevorderen, moet artikel 4, lid 7, van Verordening (EU) nr. 1178/2011 worden gewijzigd om de lidstaten in staat te stellen leerling-piloten die een LAPL-opleiding volgen, toestemming te geven om na voltooiing van bepaalde opleidingsmodules zonder toezicht beperkte bevoegdheden uit te oefenen, rekening houdende met de mate van opleiding die nodig is voor het beoogde bekwaamheidsniveau van de piloot, vóór zij voldoen aan alle vereisten voor de afgifte van een LAPL voor vleugelvliegtuigen, helikopters, zweefvliegtuigen of luchtballonnen.
 (6)
 De lidstaten moeten de Commissie en het Agentschap regelmatig op de hoogte stellen als zij de in artikel 4, lid 7, van Verordening (EU) nr. 1178/2011 bedoelde toestemming geven aan leerling-piloten, en moeten toezicht houden op die toelatingen om een aanvaardbaar niveau van veiligheid van de luchtvaart in stand te houden.
 (7)
 Bovendien moet artikel 4, lid 8, van Verordening (EU) nr. 1178/2011 worden gewijzigd om de periode te verlengen waarin de lidstaten toestemming kunnen geven om bepaalde beperkte bevoegdheden voor het vliegen met vleugelvliegtuigen volgens instrumentvliegvoorschriften uit te oefenen alvorens de piloot voldoet aan alle eisen voor de afgifte van een bevoegdverklaring voor instrumentvliegen. Deze verlenging is noodzakelijk in afwachting van de invoering van een basisinstrument-bevoegdverklaring.
 (8)
 De maatregelen van deze verordening zijn voorgesteld in Advies nr. 08/2017 van het Agentschap, overeenkomstig artikel 19, lid 1, van Verordening (EG) nr. 216/2008 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad (4).
 (9)
 De in deze verordening vervatte maatregelen zijn in overeenstemming met het advies van het bij artikel 127 van Verordening (EU) 2018/1139 ingestelde comité,
 HEEFT DE VOLGENDE VERORDENING VASTGESTELD:
 Artikel 1
 Artikel 4 van Verordening (EU) nr. 1178/2011 wordt als volgt gewijzigd:
 1)
 Lid 7 wordt vervangen door:
 „7. Een lidstaat mag toestaan dat leerling-piloten die een LAPL-opleiding volgen, beperkte bevoegdheden uitoefenen zonder toezicht vóór zij voldoen aan alle eisen voor de afgifte van een LAPL, onder de volgende voorwaarden:
 a)
 het toepassingsgebied van de bevoegdheden is gebaseerd op een door de lidstaat uitgevoerde veiligheidsrisicobeoordeling, waarbij rekening wordt gehouden met de mate waarin opleiding nodig is om ervoor te zorgen dat de vaardigheden van de piloot het gewenste niveau bereiken;
 b)
 de bevoegdheden blijven beperkt tot:
 i)
 het nationale grondgebied van de lidstaat die toestemming verleent, of een deel daarvan;
 ii)
 luchtvaartuigen die geregistreerd zijn in de lidstaat die toestemming verleent;
 iii)
 eenmotorige zuigervliegtuigen en -helikopters met een maximale startmassa van hoogstens 2 000 kg, zweefvliegtuigen en luchtballonnen;
 c)
 als de houder van de toestemming een aanvraag voor een LAPL indient, krijgt hij vrijstellingen voor de opleiding die hij in het kader van de toestemming heeft gevolgd, die door de lidstaat worden bepaald op basis van een aanbeveling van een ATO of een DTO;
 d)
 de lidstaat dient om de drie jaar periodieke verslagen en veiligheidsrisicobeoordelingen in bij de Commissie en het Agentschap;
 e)
 de lidstaten houden toezicht op het gebruik van de in het kader van deze alinea verleende toestemmingen, teneinde een aanvaardbaar niveau van luchtvaartveiligheid te garanderen en passende maatregelen te nemen in geval van een verhoogd veiligheidsrisico of andere veiligheidsproblemen.”.
 2)
 In de inleidende zin van lid 8 wordt „8 april 2019” vervangen door „8 april 2021”.
 Artikel 2
 Deze verordening treedt in werking op de twintigste dag na die van de bekendmaking ervan in het Publicatieblad van de Europese Unie.
 Deze verordening is verbindend in al haar onderdelen en is rechtstreeks toepasselijk in elke lidstaat.
 Gedaan te Brussel, 18 maart 2019.
 Voor de Commissie
 De voorzitter
 Jean-Claude JUNCKER
 (1) PB L 212 van 22.8.2018, blz. 1.
 (2) Verordening (EU) nr. 1178/2011 van de Commissie van 3 november 2011 tot vaststelling van technische eisen en administratieve procedures met betrekking tot de bemanning van burgerluchtvaartuigen, overeenkomstig Verordening (EG) nr. 216/2008 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad (PB L 311 van 25.11.2011, blz. 1).
 (3) https://www.easa.europa.eu/easa-and-you/general-aviation/general-aviation-road-map
 (4) Verordening (EG) nr. 216/2008 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 20 februari 2008 tot vaststelling van gemeenschappelijke regels op het gebied van burgerluchtvaart en tot oprichting van een Europees Agentschap voor de veiligheid van de luchtvaart, houdende intrekking van Richtlijn 91/670/EEG, Verordening (EG) nr. 1592/2002 en Richtlijn 2004/36/EG (PB L 79 van 19.3.2008, blz. 1).


type: other

text:
There is no provision in either Regulation No 1782/2003, establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, or Regulation No 795/2004, laying down detailed rules for the implementation of the single payment scheme provided for in Regulation No 1782/2003, which provides that the lessee is required, on the expiry of the lease, to deliver to the lessor not only the leased land but also the payment entitlements accumulated thereon or relating thereto. Nė vienoje Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003, nustatančio bendrąsias tiesioginės paramos schemų pagal bendrą žemės ūkio politiką taisykles ir nustatančio tam tikras paramos schemas ūkininkams, ir Reglamento Nr. 795/2004, nustatančio išsamias bendrosios išmokos schemos, pateiktos Reglamente Nr. 1782/2003, įgyvendinimo taisykles, nuostatoje nenumatyta, kad nuomininkas pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai privalo perduoti nuomotojui išnuomotą žemę kartu su šios žemės atžvilgiu nustatytomis arba su ja susijusiomis teisėmis į išmokas.
 On the contrary, it is apparent from both the objectives and the scheme of Regulation No 1782/2003 that, in the absence of a clause to the contrary, payment entitlements remain with the lessee on the expiry of the lease.
 Tačiau tiek iš Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 tikslų, tiek iš struktūros išplaukia, kad, nesant priešingos nuostatos, pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai teisės į išmokas lieka nuomininkui.
 First, in accordance with the second indent of Article 1 of Regulation No 1782/2003, the single payment scheme constitutes an income support for farmers, the objective of which is to ensure a fair standard of living for the agricultural community. In accordance with Article 43(1) of that regulation, the payment entitlements granted to a farmer under the single payment scheme depend on the number of hectares which he held during the reference period and the payments which he was granted under the support schemes laid down in the annex to the regulation. In that context, Article 36(1) of Regulation No 1782/2003 states that aid under the single payment scheme is to be paid in respect of payment entitlements accompanied by an equal number of eligible hectares. By contrast, it is not apparent from Article 36(1) that the payment entitlements are linked to specific parcels, in particular to those which the farmer held during the reference period.
 Iš tiesų pagal Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 1 straipsnio antrą pastraipą bendrosios išmokos schema yra ūkininkų pajamų rėmimo schema, kurios tikslas – užtikrinti tinkamą žemės ūkio bendruomenės pragyvenimo lygį. Remiantis šio reglamento 43 straipsnio 1 dalimi, pagal bendrosios išmokos schemą ūkininkui suteiktos teisės į išmokas priklauso nuo per referencinį laikotarpį jo turimų hektarų skaičiaus bei nuo išmokų, kurios jam buvo išmokėtos pagal šio reglamento priede nurodytas paramos schemas. Tokiomis aplinkybėmis Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 36 straipsnio 1 dalyje nurodyta, kad pagal bendrosios išmokos schemą skiriama parama mokama pagal teises į išmokas, siejamas su vienodu reikalavimus atitinkančių hektarų skaičiumi. Tačiau iš šio straipsnio visiškai neišplaukia, kad teisės į išmokas yra susijusios su konkrečiais sklypais, t. y. su tais, kuriuos ūkininkas turėjo referenciniu laikotarpiu.
 Article 46 of Regulation No 1782/2003 which provides for the possibility to transfer payment entitlements in accordance with the objective referred to in recital 30 in the preamble to that regulation states, in particular, in paragraph 2 thereof that, in the case of a lease or similar types of transactions, payment entitlements may be transferred only if the payment entitlements transferred are accompanied by the transfer of an equivalent number of eligible hectares. That provision seeks to avoid speculative transfers leading to the accumulation of payment entitlements without a corresponding agricultural basis, in accordance with the objective laid down in recital 30. Moreover, under Article 33(1)(a) of Regulation No 1782/2003 in conjunction with Article 2(a) and (c) thereof, the single payment scheme is aimed at farmers, namely persons who exercise an ‘agricultural activity’, consisting of the production, rearing or growing of agricultural products or maintaining the land in good agricultural and environmental condition. However, a lessor of land is not necessarily a farmer within the meaning of Article 2(a) of that regulation. Accordingly, if the Community legislature had wanted payment entitlements to revert back to the lessor in all circumstances on the expiry of the lease, it would have enacted a provision to that effect.
 Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 46 straipsnyje, kuriame reglamentuojama galimybė perduoti teises į išmokas pagal šio reglamento trisdešimtoje konstatuojamojoje dalyje nurodytą tikslą, o visų pirma jo 2 dalyje numatyta, kad nuomos ar panašių rūšių sandorių atveju perduoti teises į išmokas leidžiama tik tada, jeigu jas perduodant kartu perduodamas ir atitinkamas reikalavimus atitinkančių hektarų skaičius. Šia nuostata, laikantis minėtoje trisdešimtoje konstatuojamojoje dalyje numatyto tikslo, siekiama išvengti spekuliacinių perdavimų, dėl kurių būtų kaupiamos teisės į išmokas neturint atitinkamo žemės ūkio pagrindo. Be to, remiantis Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 33 straipsnio 1 dalies a punkto nuostatomis kartu su šio reglamento 2 straipsnio 1 dalies a ir c punktų nuostatomis, bendrosios išmokos schema skirta ūkininkams, t. y. asmenims, kurie vykdo žemės ūkio veiklą, apimančią gamybą, gyvulininkystę, žemės ūkio produktų kultūrų auginimą ar geros agrarinės ir aplinkosauginės būklės žemės išlaikymą. Tačiau žemės nuomotojas nebūtinai yra ūkininkas šio reglamento 2 straipsnio a punkto prasme. Šiomis aplinkybėmis, jei Bendrijos teisės aktų leidėjas būtų norėjęs, kad pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai teisės į išmokas visais atvejais būtų perduodamos nuomotojui, jis būtų numatęs atitinkamą nuostatą.
 Consequently, Community law does not require a lessee, on the expiry of the lease, to deliver to the lessor not only the leased land, but also the payment entitlements accumulated thereon or relating thereto, or to pay him compensation.
 Todėl pagal Bendrijos teisę nuomininkas neįpareigojamas pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai nei perduoti nuomotojui išsinuomotą žemę kartu su šiai žemei nustatytomis arba su ja susijusiomis teisėmis į išmokas, nei jam sumokėti kompensaciją.
 (see paras 25-28, 30, 32, 34-38, 43, operative part)
 (žr. 25–28, 30, 32, 34–38, 43 punktus ir rezoliucinę dalį)
 In Case C‐470/08,
 Byloje C‐470/08
 REFERENCE for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Gerechtshof te Arnhem (Netherlands), made by decision of 28 October 2008, received at the Court on 3 November 2008, in the proceedings
 dėl Gerechtshof te Arnhem (Nyderlandai) 2008 m. spalio 28 d. Sprendimu, kurį Teisingumo Teismas gavo 2008 m. lapkričio 3 d., pagal EB 234 straipsnį pateikto prašymo priimti prejudicinį sprendimą byloje
 Kornelis van Dijk Kornelis van Dijk v
 Gemeente Kampen, Gemeente Kampen ,
 composed of A. Tizzano, President of the First Chamber, acting as the President of the Fifth Chamber, A. Borg Barthet (Rapporteur) and M. Ilešič, Judges,
 kurį sudaro pirmosios kolegijos pirmininkas A. Tizzano, einantis penktosios kolegijos pirmininko pareigas, teisėjai A. Borg Barthet (pranešėjas) ir M. Ilešič,
 – Mr van Dijk, by J. van Mierlo, advocaat,
 – K. van Dijk, atstovaujamo advokato J. van Mierlo,
 – the Gemeente Kampen, by G.F. Snijders, advocaat,
 – Gemeente Kampen , atstovaujamos advokato G. M. F. Snijders,
 – the Greek Government, by E. Leftheriotou and A. Vasilopoulou, acting as Agents,
 – Graikijos vyriausybės, atstovaujamos E. Leftheriotou ir A. Vasilopoulou,
 – the Commission of the European Communities, by F. Clotuche-Duvieusart and B. Burggraaf, acting as Agents,
 – Europos Sąjungos Komisijos, atstovaujamos F. Clotuche‐Duvieusart ir B. Burggraaf,
 1. This reference for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers and amending Regulations (EEC) No 2019/93, (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC) No 1453/2001, (EC) No 1454/2001, (EC) 1868/94, (EC) No 1251/1999, (EC) No 1254/1999, (EC) No 1673/2000, (EEC) No 2358/71 and (EC) No 2529/2001 (OJ 2003 L 270, p. 1, and the corrigendum thereto, OJ 2004 L 94, p. 70), and Commission Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 of 21 April 2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of the single payment scheme provided for in Regulation No 1782/2003 (OJ 2004 L 141, p. 1). 1. Prašymas priimti prejudicinį sprendimą susijęs su 2003 m. rugsėjo 29 d. Tarybos reglamento (EB) Nr. 1782/2003, nustatančio bendrąsias tiesioginės paramos schemų pagal bendrą žemės ūkio politiką taisykles ir nustatančio tam tikras paramos schemas ūkininkams bei iš dalies keičiančio Reglamentus (EEB) Nr. 2019/93, (EB) Nr. 1452/2001, (EB) Nr. 1453/2001, (EB) Nr. 1454/2001, (EB) Nr. 1868/94, (EB) Nr. 1251/1999, (EB) Nr. 1254/1999, (EB) Nr. 1673/2000, (EEB) Nr. 2358/71 ir (EB) Nr. 2529/2001 (OL L 270, p. 1; 2004 m. specialusis leidimas lietuvių k., 3 sk., 40 t., p. 269, ir klaidų ištaisymas OL L 94, 2004, p. 70), ir 2004 m. balandžio 21 d. Komisijos reglamento (EB) Nr. 795/2004, nustatančio išsamias bendrosios išmokos schemos, pateiktos Tarybos reglamente (EB) Nr. 1782/2003, nustatančiame bendrąsias tiesioginės paramos schemų pagal bendrą žemės ūkio politiką taisykles ir nustatančiame tam tikras paramos schemas ūkininkams, įgyvendinimo taisykles (OL L 141, p. 1; 2004 m. specialusis leidimas lietuvių k., 3 sk., 44 t., p. 226), išaiškinimu.
 2. The reference has been made in the context of a dispute between Mr van Dijk and the Gemeente Kampen (Commune of Kampen) regarding the nature and extent of the obligations resulting from an agricultural lease. 2. Šis prašymas pateiktas nagrinėjant ginčą tarp K. van Dijk ir Gemeente Kampen (Kampeno savivaldybė) dėl įsipareigojimų pagal ūkio nuomos sutartį pobūdžio ir apimties.
 Legal context Teisinis pagrindas Community law Bendrijos teisės aktai Regulation No 1782/2003 Reglamentas Nr. 1782/2003
 3. Regulation No 1782/2003 establishes, inter alia, an income support scheme for farmers. In the second indent of Article 1 of the regulation that scheme is referred to as the ‘single payment scheme’. 3. Reglamente Nr. 1782/2003 visų pirma įtvirtinama ūkininkų pajamų rėmimo schema. Šio reglamento 1 straipsnio antrojoje pastraipoje ši schema apibrėžiama kaip „bendrosios išmokos schema“.
 4. According to recital 21 in the preamble to Regulation No 1782/2003:
 4. Pagal Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 dvidešimt pirmą konstatuojamąją dalį:
 „Bendros žemės ūkio politikos paramos schemose numatytas tiesioginis pajamų rėmimas siekiant užtikrinti tinkamą žemės ūkio bendruomenės pragyvenimo lygį. Šis tikslas yra glaudžiai susijęs su kaimo vietovių išlaikymu. Siekiant išvengti neteisingo Bendrijos fondų paskirstymo, paramos išmokos neturėtų būti mokamos ūkininkams, dirbtinai sukūrusiems sąlygas, reikalingas tokioms išmokoms gauti.“
 5. Recital 29 in the preamble to the regulation states: 5. Šio reglamento dvidešimt devintoje konstatuojamojoje dalyje numatyta:
 ‘In order to establish the amount to which a farmer should be entitled under the new scheme, it is appropriate to refer to the amounts granted to him during a reference period. To take account of specific situations, a national reserve should be established. That reserve may also be used to facilitate the participation of new farmers in the scheme. The single payment should be established at farm level.’
 „Siekiant nustatyti sumą, kurią ūkininkas turėtų teisę gauti pagal naują schemą, reikėtų remtis sumomis, kurios jam buvo sumokėtos referenciniu laikotarpiu. Siekiant atsižvelgti į specifines situacijas, reikėtų kaupti nacionalinį rezervą. Toks rezervas taip pat galėtų būti naudojamas padedant naujiems ūkininkams dalyvauti schemoje. Bendroji išmoka turėtų būti apskaičiuojama ūkiui.“
 6. Recital 30 in the preamble to the regulation states, inter alia: 6. Minėto reglamento trisdešimtoje konstatuojamojoje dalyje įtvirtinta:
 ‘The overall amount to which a farm is entitled should be split into parts (payment entitlements) and linked to a certain number of eligible hectares to be defined, in order to facilitate transfer of the premium rights. To avoid speculative transfers leading to the accumulation of payment entitlements without a corresponding agricultural basis, in granting aid, it is appropriate to provide for a link between entitlements and a certain number of eligible hectares ...’
 „Visa suma, kurią ūkis turi teisę gauti, turėtų būti padalinta į dalis (teises į išmokas) ir susieta su tam tikru nustatytinu reikalavimus atitinkančių hektarų skaičiumi, kad būtų palengvintas teisių į išmokas perdavimas. Siekiant išvengti spekuliacinių perdavimų, dėl kurių būtų kaupiamos teisės į išmokas neturint atitinkamo žemės ūkio pagrindo, teikiant pagalbą reikėtų numatyti ryšį tarp teisių į išmokas ir tam tikro reikalavimus atitinkančių hektarų skaičiaus < ... > .“ 7. Article 2 of the regulation provides:
 7. Pagal šio reglamento 2 straipsnį:
 ‘... the following definitions shall apply:
 „a) „ūkininkas“ – tai fizinis ar juridinis asmuo arba fizinių ar juridinių asmenų grupė, < ... > kurie užsiima žemės ūkio veikla;
 (a) “farmer” means a natural or legal person, or a group of natural or legal persons ... who exercises an agricultural activity,
 c) „žemės ūkio veikla“ – tai žemės ūkio produktų gamyba ir auginimas, įskaitant derliaus nuėmimą, melžimą, [ūkinės paskirties] gyvūnų veisimą ir ūkinės paskirties gyvūnų laikymą ar žemės išlaikymą geroje agrarinėje ir aplinkosauginėje būklėje, kaip nustatyta 5 straipsnyje;
 (c) “agricultural activity” means the production, rearing or growing of agricultural products including harvesting, milking, breeding animals and keeping animals for farming purposes, or maintaining the land in good agricultural and environmental condition as established under Article 5,
 8. Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 III dalies „Bendrosios išmokos schema“ 1–4 skyriuose įtvirtintos bazinės taisyklės, taikomos šiai „atsietai“ nuo gamybos ūkininkų pajamų rėmimo sistemai. Iš šio reglamento 33 straipsnio 1 dalies a punkto, 37 straipsnio 1 dalies ir 38 bei 41 straipsnių matyti, kad ūkininkai, kurie referenciniu laikotarpiu, apimančiu 2000–2002 kalendorinius metus, gavo išmoką bent pagal vieną minėto reglamento VI priede nurodytų pagalbos schemų, turi teisę į pagalbą, apskaičiuotą remiantis referencine suma, kurią sudaro kiekvienam ūkininkui pagal šias schemas per šį periodą suteiktų visų išmokų metinis vidurkis.
 8. Title III of Regulation No 1782/2003, entitled ‘Single payment scheme’, contains, in Chapters 1 to 4 thereof, the basic rules applicable to that income support scheme for farmers ‘decoupled’ from production. It is apparent from Articles 33(1)(a), 37(1), 38 and 41 of that regulation that farmers who, during a reference period comprising the calendar years 2000 to 2002, benefited from a payment under at least one of the aid schemes referred to in Annex VI to that regulation are entitled to aid calculated on the basis of a reference amount obtained, for each farmer, from the yearly average for that period of the total amount of payments granted under those schemes. 9. Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 36 straipsnio 1 dalyje nurodyta:
 9. Article 36(1) of Regulation No 1782/2003 states:
 „Pagal bendrosios išmokos schemą skiriama pagalba mokama pagal 3 skyriuje apibrėžtas teises į išmokas, siejamas su vienodu reikalavimus atitinkančių hektarų, kaip apibrėžta 44 straipsnio 2 dalyje, skaičiumi.“
 ‘Aid under the single payment scheme shall be paid in respect of payment entitlements as defined in Chapter 3, accompanied by an equal number of eligible hectares as defined in Article 44(2).’
 10. Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 III dalies 3 skyrius apima 1 skirsnį „Plotais paremtos teisės į išmokas“. Šiame reglamento skirsnyje įtvirtinto 43 straipsnio 1 dalyje nurodyta:
 10. Chapter 3 of Title III of Regulation No 1782/2003 contains Section 1, headed ‘Payment entitlements based on areas’. Article 43(1) of the regulation, which forms part of that section, states, inter alia: „Nepažeisdamas 48 straipsnio, ūkininkas gauna teisę į išmoką už hektarą, kuri apskaičiuojama padalijant referencinę sumą iš visų hektarų, už kuriuos referenciniu laikotarpiu buvo suteikta teisė gauti VI priede išvardytas tiesiogines išmokas, skaičiaus trejų metų vidurkio.
 ‘Without prejudice to Article 48, a farmer shall receive a payment entitlement per hectare which is calculated by dividing the reference amount by the three-year average number of all hectares which in the reference period gave right to direct payments listed in Annex VI.
 Visas teisių į išmokas skaičius yra lygus pirmiau paminėtam hektarų skaičiaus vidurkiui.
 The total number of payment entitlements shall be equal to the abovementioned average number of hectares.
 11. Pagal šio reglamento 44 straipsnį:
 11. Under Article 44 of Regulation No 1782/2003: „1. Teisė į išmoką, susieta su reikalavimus atitinkančiu hektaru, suteikia teisę gauti ja nustatyto dydžio išmoką.
 2. „Reikalavimus atitinkantis hektaras“ – tai valdos žemės ūkio paskirties žemė, kurioje yra ariamoji žemė ir daugiametė ganykla, išskyrus daugiametėmis kultūromis apsėtus plotus, miškus ar ne žemės ūkio veiklai naudojamus plotus.
 2. “Eligible hectare” shall mean any agricultural area of the holding taken up by arable land and permanent pasture except areas under permanent crops, forests or used for non agricultural activities.
 3. Ūkininkas deklaruoja sklypus, nurodydamas reikalavimus atitinkančius hektarus, susietus su teise į išmoką. Išskyrus force majeure ar išimtines aplinkybes, šiais sklypais ūkininkas turi būti naudojęsis ne trumpesnį kaip 10 mėnesių laikotarpį, prasidedantį nuo valstybės narės nustatytinos dienos, bet ne anksčiau nei kalendorinių metų, buvusių prieš paraiškos dėl dalyvavimo bendrosios išmokos schemoje pateikimo metus, rugsėjo 1 dienos.
 3. The farmer shall declare the parcels corresponding to the eligible hectare accompanying any payment entitlement. Except in case of force majeure or exceptional circumstances, these parcels shall be at the farmer’s disposal for a period of at least 10-months, starting from a date to be fixed by the Member State, but not earlier than 1 September of the calendar year preceding the year of lodging the application for participation in the single payment scheme. 4. Tinkamai pagrįstomis aplinkybėmis valstybė narė gali leisti ūkininkams keisti savo deklaraciją, jei išlaikomas hektarų, atitinkančių jo teises į išmokas, skaičius ir laikomasi bendrosios išmokos skyrimo už atitinkamą plotą reikalavimų.“
 4. Member States may, in duly justified circumstances, authorise the farmer to modify his declaration on condition that he respects the number of hectares corresponding to his payment entitlements and the conditions for granting the single payment for the area concerned.’
 12. Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 46 straipsnyje „Teisių į išmokas perdavimas“ nurodyta:
 12. Article 46 of Regulation No 1782/2003, headed ‘Transfer of payment entitlements’, states: „1. Teisės į išmokas gali būti perleistos tik kitam toje pačioje valstybėje narėje įsisteigusiam ūkininkui, išskyrus perdavimą faktinio ar numatyto paveldėjimo keliu. ‘1. Payment entitlements may only be transferred to another farmer established within the same Member State except in case of transfer by actual or anticipated inheritance.
 2. Teisės į išmokas gali būti perduodamos jas parduodant arba kitu galutinio perdavimo keliu su žeme ar be jos. Priešingai, nuoma ar panašių rūšių sandoriai leidžiami tik tada, jei perduodant teises į išmokas perduodamas ir atitinkamas reikalavimus atitinkančių hektarų skaičius.
 2. Payment entitlements may be transferred by sale or any other definitive transfer with or without land. In contrast, lease or similar types of transactions shall be allowed only if the payment entitlements transferred are accompanied by the transfer of an equivalent number of eligible hectares.
 Išskyrus force majeure ar išimtines aplinkybes, nurodytas 40 straipsnio 4 dalyje, ūkininkas gali perleisti savo teises į išmokas be žemės tik tada, jei išnaudoja, kaip apibrėžta 44 straipsnyje, ne mažiau kaip 80 % savo teisių į išmokas bent per vienerius kalendorinius metus arba jei savanoriškai į nacionalinį rezervą atiduoda visas pirmaisiais bendrosios išmokos schemos taikymo metais nepanaudotas teises į išmokas.
 Except in case of force majeure or exceptional circumstances as referred to in Article 40(4), a farmer may transfer his payment entitlements without land only after he has used, within the meaning of Article 44, at least 80% of his payment entitlements during at least one calendar year or, after he has given up voluntarily to the national reserve all the payment entitlements he has not used in the first year of application of the single payment scheme.
 3. Parduodant teises į išmokas su žeme arba be jos, valstybės narės, laikydamosi Bendrijos teisės bendrųjų principų, gali nuspręsti, kad dalis parduotų teisių į išmokas būtų grąžinama į nacionalinį rezervą arba jų vieneto vertė būtų sumažinama ja padidinant nacionalinį rezervą pagal kriterijus, kuriuos turi nustatyti Komisija 144 straipsnio 2 dalyje nurodyta tvarka.“
 3. In case of sale of payment entitlements, with or without land, Member States may, acting in compliance with the general principles of Community law, decide that part of the payment entitlements sold revert to the national reserve or that their unit value is reduced in favour of the national reserve, according to criteria to be fixed by the Commission in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 144(2).’
 13. Šio reglamento III dalies 5 skyriaus „Regioninis ir savarankiškas įgyvendinimas“ nuostatose valstybėms narėms leidžiama iki 2004 m. rugpjūčio 1 d. nuspręsti taikyti III dalies 1–4 skyriuose numatytą bendrosios išmokos schemą regioniniu lygiu arba taikyti ją iš dalies. 13. The provisions of Chapter 5 of Title III of the regulation, entitled ‘Regional and optional implementation’, permit the Member States to decide, by 1 August 2004 at the latest, to apply the single payment scheme provided for in Chapters 1 to 4 of Title III, in particular at regional level or partially. 14. Pagal šio reglamento 58 straipsnio 1 ir 3 dalis, 59 straipsnio 1 ir 2 dalis valstybė narė gali regionuoti bendrosios išmokos schemą, jos nacionalinę viršutinę ribą dalydama ne individualiai šios valstybės ūkininkams remiantis atitinkamomis jų referencinėmis sumomis, bet įvairiems jos teritorijai priklausantiems regionams, ir taip gautą kiekvieną regioninę viršutinės ribos fiksuotą sumą padalydama visiems atitinkamo regiono ūkininkams, kiekvienam jų suteikiant teisę į išmoką, kurios vieneto vertė apskaičiuojama regioninę viršutinę ribą padalijant iš regioniniu lygiu nustatyto reikalavimus atitinkančių hektarų skaičiaus. 14. Pursuant to Articles 58(1) and (3) and 59(1) and (2) of the regulation, a Member State may regionalise the single payment scheme by dividing its national ceiling, not individually among the farmers of that State on the basis of their respective reference amounts, but among the different regions which make up its territory, and by distributing the amount of each regional ceiling thus obtained at a standard rate between all the farmers of the region concerned, each of them receiving entitlements the unit of which is calculated by dividing that regional ceiling by the number of eligible hectares established at regional level.
 Reglamentas Nr. 1234/2007
 Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 15. 2007 m. spalio 22 d. Tarybos reglamento (EB) Nr. 1234/2007, nustatančio bendrą žemės ūkio rinkų organizavimą ir konkrečias tam tikriems žemės ūkio produktams taikomas nuostatas (OL 299, p. 1), 74 straipsnio 4 dalyje nurodyta:
 15. Article 74(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (OJ 2007 L 299, p. 1) states:
 „Nesant šalių susitarimo, jei nuoma pasibaigia ir nėra jokios galimybės jos atnaujinti panašiomis sąlygomis, arba yra susiklosčiusios panašias teisines pasekmes turinčios situacijos, paskirtos individualios kvotos arba jų dalis yra perduodamos jas perimančiam gamintojui laikantis valstybės narės patvirtintų nuostatų, atsižvelgiant į teisėtus šalių interesus.“
 ‘Where there is no agreement between the parties, in the case of tenancies due to expire without any possibility of renewal on similar terms, or in situations involving comparable legal effects, the individual quotas in question shall be transferred in whole or in part to the producer taking them over, in accordance with provisions adopted by the Member States, taking account of the legitimate interests of the parties.’
 Nacionalinės teisės aktai National legislation 16. Nei Nutarime dėl bendros žemės ūkio politikos – 2006 m. pajamų rėmimas ( Regeling GLB – inkomenssteun 2006), priimtame taikant Reglamentus Nr. 1782/2003 ir Nr. 795/2004, nei Civilinio kodekso 7 knygos 5 skyriuje, susijusiame su ūkio nuoma, nėra konkrečių nuostatų dėl to, kas atsitinka su pagal Reglamentą Nr. 1782/2003 suteiktomis teisėmis į išmokas pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai ir kokia jų vertė.
 16. Neither the Regulation on Common Agricultural Policy Income Support 2006 (Regeling GLB – inkomenssteun 2006), adopted pursuant to Regulations Nos 1782/2003 and 795/2004, nor Title 5 of Book 7 of the Civil Code, concerning agricultural leases, contains any specific provisions on the treatment to be given at the end of the lease to payment entitlements granted under Regulation No 1782/2003 or to their value. Pagrindinė byla ir prejudiciniai klausimai The dispute in the main proceedings and the questions referred for a preliminary ruling 17. Nuo 1982 m. K. van Dijk iš Gemeente Kampen nuomojasi kelis žemės ūkio paskirties sklypus, kurių bendrą plotą sudaro 34 hektarai ir 2,36 aro. Jų sudarytoje nuomos sutartyje nėra jokių sąlygų, susijusių su pajamų rėmimo schema arba teisėmis į išmokas.
 17. Since 1982 Mr van Dijk has leased from the Gemeente Kampen a number of parcels of agricultural land totalling 34 hectares, 2 acres and 36 centiares. The lease between the two parties does not contain any clause relating to the income support scheme or payment entitlements. 18. Kelerius metus K. van Dijk 1992 m. birželio 30 d. Tarybos reglamento (EEB) Nr. 1765/92 dėl tam tikrų lauko kultūrų augintojų paramos sistemos sukūrimo (OL L 181, p. 12) ir 1999 m. gegužės 17 d. Tarybos reglamento (EB) Nr. 1251/1999 dėl tam tikrų lauko kultūrų augintojų paramos sistemos sukūrimo (OL L 160, p. 1; 2004 m. specialusis leidimas lietuvių k., 3 sk., 25 t., p. 322) pagrindu gavo kompensacines išmokas pagal gamintojų rėmimo programą, susijusią su atitinkamų kultūrų auginimu. Įsigaliojus Reglamentui Nr. 1782/2003 jam buvo suteiktos teisės į išmokas pagal šio reglamento 33 straipsnio 1 dalį, 38 straipsnį ir 43 straipsnio 1 dalį bei 2 dalies a punktą.
 18. For a number of years Mr van Dijk has received, on the basis of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1765/92 of 30 June 1992 establishing a support system for producers of certain arable crops (OJ 1992 L 181, p. 12), and Council Regulation (EC) No 1251/1999 of 17 May 1999 establishing a support system for producers of certain arable crops (OJ 1999 L 160, p. 1), compensatory payments under the support scheme for producers which was linked to the production of certain crops. Following the entry into force of Regulation No 1782/2003, he was granted entitlement to payment under Articles 33(1), 38 and 43(1) and (2)(a) of that regulation. 19. Tarp K. van Dijk ir Gemeente Kampen kilo ginčas dėl įsipareigojimų pagal jų sudarytą nuomos sutartį pobūdžio ir apimties.
 19. A dispute arose between Mr van Dijk and the Gemeente Kampen regarding the nature and the extent of the obligations under the lease. 20. 2007 m. rugsėjo 25 d. Sprendimu Rechtbank Zwolle‐Lelystad nusprendė, kad pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai K. van Dijk turėjo Gemeente Kampen grąžinti nuomos sutartyje nurodytą žemę, įskaitant šios žemės atžvilgiu nustatytas arba su ja susijusias teises į išmokas už šių teisių į išmokas pusės vertės atlyginimą. Šis teismas taip pat nusprendė, kad negavęs išankstinio Gemeente Kampen sutikimo K. Van Dijk negali šių teisių į išmokas perleisti.
 20. By judgment of 25 September 2007 the Rechtbank Zwolle‐Lelystad (District Court, Zwolle‐Lelystad) (Netherlands) ruled that Mr van Dijk was obliged, on the expiry of the lease, to transfer to the Gemeente Kampen the land subject to the lease, including the payment entitlements accumulated on or relating to that land, in return for compensation equivalent to half of the value of those entitlements. That court also held that Mr van Dijk was not permitted to transfer those payment entitlements without the prior approval of the Gemeente Kampen. 21. 2007 m. spalio 24 d. raštu K. van Dijk pateikė apeliacinį skundą dėl šio sprendimo Gerechtshof te Arnhem . Jo teigimu, iš Reglamentų Nr. 1782/2003 ir Nr. 795/2004 matyti, kad pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai teisės į išmokas turi likti nuomininkui. Be to, K. van Dijk tvirtina, kad, kitaip nei pieno kvotų, kurios iš esmės susijusios su žeme, kurią pieninių galvijų laikytojas arba žemdirbys naudojo referenciniu laikotarpiu, atveju, teisės į išmokas susijusios su ūkininko asmeniu.
 21. By notice of 24 October 2007, Mr van Dijk brought an appeal against that judgment before the Gerechtshof te Arnhem (Regional Court of Appeal, Arnhem) (Netherlands). In his view, it is apparent from Regulations Nos 1782/2003 and 795/2004 that payment entitlements must remain with the lessee on the expiry of the lease. Mr van Dijk also claims that, unlike milk quotas which in principle are linked to the land which the milk producer or farmer used during the reference period, the payment entitlements are attached to the actual farmer. 22. Gemeente Kampen tvirtina, kad nei Reglamente Nr. 1782/2003, nei Reglamente Nr. 795/2004 nenurodyta, kas atsitinka teisėms į išmokas pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai. Iš to ji daro išvadą, jog nuomininko ir nuomotojo teisinius santykius reglamentuoja nacionalinė teisė.
 22. The Gemeente Kampen contends that neither Regulation No 1782/2003 nor Regulation No 795/2004 specifies what is to happen to the payment entitlements on the expiry of the lease. It infers from this that the legal relations between the lessee and the lessor are regulated by national law. 23. Manydamas, kad jo nagrinėjamos bylos baigtis priklauso nuo taikomų Bendrijos teisės aktų aiškinimo, Gerechtshof te Arnhem nusprendė sustabdyti bylos nagrinėjimą ir pateikti Teisingumo Teismui šiuos prejudicinius klausimus: 23. Since it considers that the outcome of the proceedings pending before it depends on the interpretation of the applicable Community rules, the Gerechtshof te Arnhem decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling:
 „1. Ar, remiantis Reglamentu Nr. 1782/2003 ir Reglamentu Nr . 795/2004 arba bendraisiais Bendrijos teisės principais, visų pirma nepagrįsto praturtėjimo draudimo principu, nesant nacionalinės teisės nuostatų šiuo klausimu, pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai nuomininkas privalo perduoti nuomotojui išsinuomotą žemę kartu su jai nustatytomis arba su ja susijusiomis teisėmis į išmokas?
 ‘1. Do Regulation No 1782/2003 and Regulation No 795/2004, or the general principles of Community law, in particular the principle of the prohibition of unjustified enrichment, require a lessee, in the absence of national rules in this respect, to deliver to the lessor the leased land, including the payment entitlements accumulated thereon or relating thereto, on the expiry of the lease?
 2. Jeigu atsakymas į [pirmąjį] klausimą < ... > būtų teigiamas: ar, remiantis Reglamentu Nr. 1782/2003 ir Reglamentu Nr. 795/2004 arba bendraisiais Bendrijos teisės principais, visų pirma nepagrįsto praturtėjimo draudimo principu, nesant nacionalinės teisės nuostatų šiuo klausimu, nuomotojas privalo sumokėti nuomininkui kompensaciją už jam perleistas teises į išmokas, ir, jei atsakymas būtų teigiamas, ar nuomotojas turi atlyginti visą šių teisių vertę, ar tik jos dalį, o pastaruoju atveju – kokią dalį?
 2. If the answer to [the first] question ... is in the affirmative: do Regulation No 1782/2003 and Regulation No 795/2004, or the general principles of Community law, in particular the principle of the prohibition of unjustified enrichment, require a lessor, in the absence of national rules in this respect, to pay to the lessee compensation for the payment entitlements transferred to the lessor, an d if so, should the lessor compensate the lessee for the full value of those entitlements or for only a proportion of that value, and, if the latter, for what proportion?
 3. Jeigu atsakymas į [pirmąjį] klausimą < ... > būtų neigiamas: ar, remiantis Reglamentu Nr. 1782/2003 ir Reglamentu Nr. 795/2004 arba bendraisiais Bendrijos teisės principais, visų pirma nepagrįsto praturtėjimo draudimo principu, nesant nacionalinės teisės nuostatų šiuo klausimu, nuomininkas privalo sumokėti nuomotojui kompensaciją už nuomininkui liekančias teises į išmokas, ir, jei atsakymas būtų teigiamas, ar nuomininkas turi atlyginti visą šių teisių vertę, ar tik jos dalį, o pastaruoju atveju – kokią dalį?“
 3. If the answer to [the first] question ... is in the negative: do Regulation No 1782/2003 and Regulation No 795/2004, or the general principles of Community law, in particular the principle of the prohibition of unjustified enrichment, require a lessee, in the absence of national rules in this respect, to pay to the lessor compensation for the payment entitlements retained by the lessee, and if so, should the lessee compensate the lessor for the full value of those entitlements or for only a proportion of that value, and, if the latter, for what proportion?’
 Dėl prejudicinių klausimų The questions referred 24. Pateikęs tris klausimus, kuriuos reikia nagrinėti kartu, prašymą priimti prejudicinį sprendimą pateikęs teismas iš esmės siekia išsiaiškinti, ar Bendrijos teisė pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai įpareigoja nuomininką nuomotojui perduoti išnuomotą žemę kartu su šios žemės atžvilgiu nustatytomis arba su ja susijusiomis teisėmis į išmokas, ar jam sumokėti kompensaciją.
 24. By its three questions, which should be dealt with together, the national court essentially asks whether Community law requires a lessee, on the expiry of the lease, to deliver to the lessor the leased land along with the payment entitlements accumulated thereon or relating thereto, or to pay him compensation. 25. Pirmiausia reikia pripažinti, kad nė vienoje Reglamentų Nr. 1782/2003 ir Nr. 795/2004 nuostatoje nenumatyta, kad nuomininkas pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai privalo perduoti nuomotojui išnuomotą žemę kartu su šios žemės atžvilgiu nustatytomis arba su ja susijusiomis teisėmis į išmokas. Šiuo klausimu bendrosios išmokos schema skiriasi nuo pieno kvotų schemos, kurią pagal Reglamento Nr. 1234/2007 74 straipsnio 1 dalį reglamentuoja kvotų perdavimo kartu su ūkiu principas.
 25. It should be noted, at the outset, that there is no provision in either Regulation No 1782/2003 or Regulation No 795/2004 which provides that the lessee is required, on the expiry of the lease, to deliver to the lessor the leased land along with the payment entitlements accumulated thereon or relating thereto. In that respect, the single payment scheme differs from the milk quota scheme which, pursuant to Article 74(1) of Regulation No 1234/2007, is governed by the principle that quotas are transferred with the holding. 26. Tačiau tiek iš Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 tikslų, tiek iš struktūros išplaukia, kad, nesant priešingos nuostatos, pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai teisės į išmokas lieka nuomininkui.
 26. However, it is apparent from both the objectives and the scheme of Regulation No 1782/2003 that, in the absence of a clause to the contrary, payment entitlements remain with the lessee on the expiry of the lease. 27. Pirma, reikia priminti, kad pagal Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 1 straipsnio antrąją pastraipą bendrosios išmokos schema yra ūkininkų pajamų rėmimo schema, kurios tikslas, kaip nurodyta šio reglamento dvidešimt pirmoje konstatuojamojoje dalyje, yra užtikrinti tinkamą žemės ūkio bendruomenės pragyvenimo lygį. Pagal šio reglamento 33 straipsnio 1 dalį naudotis bendrosios išmokos schema gali tie ūkininkai, kuriems referenciniu laikotarpiu buvo skirta išmoka pagal bent jau vieną šio reglamento VI priede nurodytą paramos schemą.
 27. First, in accordance with the second indent of Article 1 of Regulation No 1782/2003, the single payment scheme constitutes an income support for farmers, the objective of which is, as stated in recital 21 in the preamble to that regulation, to ensure a fair standard of living for the agricultural community. Under Article 33(1) of that regulation, farmers have access to the single payment scheme if, inter alia, they have been granted a payment in the reference period under at least one of the support schemes referred to in Annex VI to that regulation. 28. Remiantis Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 43 straipsnio 1 dalimi, pagal bendrosios išmokos schemą ūkininko teisė į išmokas priklauso nuo per referencinį laikotarpį jo turimų hektarų skaičiaus bei nuo išmokų, kurios jam buvo išmokėtos pagal minėtas paramos schemas.
 28. In accordance with Article 43(1) of Regulation No 1782/2003, the payment entitlements granted to a farmer under the single payment scheme depend on the number of hectares which he held during the reference period and the payments which he was granted under those support schemes. 29. Be to, minėto reglamento 44 straipsnio 1 dalyje pripažįstamas ryšys tarp teisių į išmokas ir žemės ūkio paskirties žemės taip, kad kiekviena teisė į išmoką, susijusi su reikalavimus paramai gauti atitinkančiu hektaru, suteikia teisę gauti ja nustatyto dydžio išmoką.
 29. In addition, Article 44(1) of that regulation recognises that there is a link between payment entitlements and agricultural areas in that each payment entitlement which corresponds to an eligible hectare gives a right to payment of the amount fixed by the payment entitlement.
 30. Tokiomis aplinkybėmis Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 36 straipsnio 1 dalyje nurodyta, kad pagal bendrosios išmokos schemą skiriama parama mokama pagal teises į išmokas, siejamas su vienodu reikalavimus atitinkančių hektarų skaičiumi.
 30. It is in that context that Article 36(1) of Regulation No 1782/2003 states that aid under the single payment scheme is to be paid in respect of payment entitlements accompanied by an equal number of eligible hectares. 31. Šiuo klausimu reikia nurodyti, kad, kaip matyti iš Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 trisdešimtos konstatuojamosios dalies, teisės į išmokas susiejimu su reikalavimus atitinkančiais hektarais visų pirma siekiama išvengti spekuliacinių perdavimų, dėl kurių būtų kaupiamos teisės į išmokas neturint atitinkamo žemės ūkio pagrindo.
 31. In that regard, as is apparent from recital 30 in the preamble to Regulation No 1782/2003, such a link exists between payment entitlements and eligible hectares, inter alia in order to avoid speculative transfers leading to the accumulation of payment entitlements without a corresponding agricultural basis. 32. Tačiau iš šio 36 straipsnio 1 dalies visiškai neišplaukia, kad teisės į išmokas yra susijusios su konkrečiais sklypais, t. y. su tais, kuriuos ūkininkas turėjo referenciniu laikotarpiu.
 32. By contrast, it is not apparent from Article 36(1) that the payment entitlements are linked to specific parcels, in particular to those which the farmer held during the reference period. 33. Taigi, galiausiai suteikiant paramą svarbiausia yra tai, kad ūkininko turimų teisių į išmokas kiekis atitiktų lygiavertišką reikalavimus paramai gauti atitinkančių hektarų skaičių, o ne konkrečius sklypus. Be to, Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 44 straipsnio 4 dalyje aiškiai numatyta galimybė valstybėms narėms tinkamai pagrįstomis aplinkybėmis leisti ūkininkams keisti savo deklaraciją, susijusią su sklypais, apimančiais reikalavimus teisei į išmokas atitinkantį plotą, jei išlaikomas hektarų, atitinkančių jo teises į išmokas, skaičius ir laikomasi bendrosios išmokos skyrimo už atitinkamą plotą reikalavimų.
 33. Thus, what ultimately matters is that, for the grant of the aid, the number of a farmer’s payment entitlements corresponds to an equivalent number of eligible hectares, and not to specific parcels. Article 44(4) of Regulation No 1782/2003 also expressly provides for the possibility for the Member States, in duly justified circumstances, to authorise a farmer to modify his declaration in relation to the parcels corresponding to the eligible area linked to a payment entitlement, on condition that he respects the number of hectares corresponding to his payment entitlements and the conditions for granting the single payment for the area concerned.
 34. Antra, reikia nurodyti, kad Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 46 straipsnyje reglamentuojama galimybė perduoti teises į išmokas pagal šio reglamento trisdešimtoje konstatuojamojoje dalyje nurodytą tikslą.
 34. Second, it should be noted that Article 46 provides for the possibility to transfer payment entitlements in accordance with the objective referred to in recital 30 in the preamble to Regulation No 1782/2003. 35. Konkrečiai kalbant, šio straipsnio 2 dalyje numatyta, kad teisės į išmokas gali būti perduodamos be žemės tik galutinai perduodant. Tokiu atveju ūkininkas, iki tol turėjęs teises į išmokas, galutinai jų atsisako, parduodamas kitam ūkininkui, kuris tada pradeda jomis naudotis. Tam, kad galėtų reikšti reikalavimus sumokėti šias išmokas, atitinkamas ūkininkas pagal Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 44 straipsnio 1 dalį privalo turėti pakankamai reikalavimus paramai gauti atitinkančių žemės ūkio paskirties hektarų, kad būtų užtikrintas pakankamas žemės ūkio pagrindas teisėms į išmokas gauti.
 35. In particular, Article 46(2) provides that payment entitlements without land may by transferred only by definitive transfer. In such a case, a farmer who benefited from payment entitlements up until that point definitively waives his claims on the sale of his entitlements to another farmer, who then activates them for his benefit. In order to be able to claim payment of those entitlements, in accordance with Article 44(1) of Regulation No 1782/2003, the farmer concerned would have to have a sufficient number of eligible hectares of agricultural land in order to ensure the existence of a sufficient agricultural basis for the payment entitlements. 36. Tačiau nuomos ar panašių rūšių sandorių atveju perduoti teises į išmokas leidžiama tik tada, jeigu jas perduodant kartu perduodamas ir atitinkamas reikalavimus atitinkančių hektarų skaičius. Šia Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 46 straipsnio 2 dalyje įtvirtinta nuostata, laikantis reglamento trisdešimtoje konstatuojamojoje dalyje numatyto tikslo, siekiama išvengti spekuliacinių perdavimų, dėl kurių būtų kaupiamos teisės į išmokas neturint atitinkamo žemės ūkio pagrindo.
 36. By contrast, in the case of a lease or similar types of transactions, payment entitlements may be transferred only if the payment entitlements transferred are accompanied by the transfer of an equivalent number of eligible hectares. That rule laid down in Article 46(2) of Regulation No 1782/2003 seeks to avoid speculative transfers leading to the accumulation of payment entitlements without a corresponding agricultural basis, in accordance with the objective laid down in recital 30 in the preamble to that regulation. 37. Be to, Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 46 straipsnio 1 dalyje nurodyta, kad, išskyrus faktinio ar numatyto paveldėjimo keliu perdavimo atvejus, teisės į išmokas gali būti perleistos tik kitam toje pačioje valstybėje narėje įsisteigusiam ūkininkui. Šiuo klausimu reikia priminti, kad, remiantis Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 33 straipsnio 1 dalies a punkto nuostatomis kartu su šio reglamento 2 straipsnio 1 dalies a ir c punktų nuostatomis, bendrosios išmokos schema skirta ūkininkams, t. y. asmenims, kurie vykdo „žemės ūkio veiklą“, apimančią gamybą, gyvulininkystę, žemės ūkio produktų kultūrų auginimą ar geros agrarinės ir aplinkosauginės būklės žemės išlaikymą.
 37. Article 46(1) of Regulation No 1782/2003 also states that, except in the case of transfer by actual or anticipated inheritance, payment entitlements may only go to another farmer established within the same Member State. In that regard, it should be noted that, under Article 33(1)(a) of Regulation No 1782/2003 in conjunction with Article 2(a) and (c) thereof, the single payment scheme is aimed at farmers, namely persons who exercise an ‘agricultural activity’, consisting of the production, rearing or growing of agricultural products or maintaining the land in good agricultural and environmental condition. 38. Tačiau žemės nuomotojas nebūtinai yra ūkininkas Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 2 straipsnio a punkto prasme. Šiomis aplinkybėmis, jei Bendrijos teisės aktų leidėjas būtų norėjęs, kad pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai teisės į išmokas visais atvejais būtų perduodamos nuomotojui, jis būtų numatęs atitinkamą nuostatą.
 38. However, a lessor of land is not necessarily a farmer within the meaning of Article 2(a) of Regulation No 1782/2003. Accordingly, if the Community legislature had wanted payment entitlements to revert back to the lessor in all circumstances on the expiry of the lease, it would have enacted a provision to that effect. 39. Atsižvelgiant į tai, kas išdėstyta reikia pripažinti, kad Reglamentuose Nr. 1782/2003 ir Nr. 795/2004 nėra jokio įpareigojimo žemę išsinuomojusiam ūkininkui pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai perduoti savo teises į išmokas nuomotojui.
 39. The inevitable conclusion from the above considerations is that Regulations Nos 1782/2003 and 795/2004 do not contain any obligation on farmers who have leased land to transfer their payment entitlements to the lessor on the expiry of the lease. 40. Nėra reikalo daryti prielaidos, kad nepagrįstą praturtėjimą draudžiantis principas įpareigoja ūkininką pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai perduoti savo teises į išmokas nuomotojui arba sumokėti jam kompensaciją.
 40. There is also no reason to suppose that the principle prohibiting unjust enrichment requires a farmer, on the expiry of the lease, to transfer his payment entitlements to the lessor or to pay him compensation. 41. Iš tiesų pagal valstybių narių teisės sistemoms bendrus principus teisė išieškoti nuostolių atlyginimą iš praturtėjusio asmens gali būti įgyvendinama, jei nėra tokio praturtėjimo teisinio pagrindo (2008 m. gruodžio 16 d. Sprendimo Masdar (UK) prieš Komisiją , C‐47/07 P, Rink. p. I‐0000, 44–46 ir 49 punktai).
 41. In accordance with the principles common to the laws of the Member States, the right to restitution from the person enriched is conditional upon there being no valid legal basis for the enrichment at issue (Case C‐47/07 P Masdar (UK) v Commission [2008] ECR I‐0000, paragraphs 44 to 46 and 49). 42. Tačiau negali būti laikoma, kad ūkininko turimos teisės į išmokas neturi teisinio pagrindo, nes buvo jam suteiktos pagal Reglamento Nr. 1782/2003 nuostatas.
 42. It cannot be considered that the payment entitlements which a farmer enjoys are devoid of any legal basis in so far as they were attributed to him in accordance with the provisions of Regulation No 1782/2003. 43. Iš visų šių vertinimų matyti, kad pagal Bendrijos teisę nuomininkas neįpareigojamas pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai nei perduoti nuomotojui išsinuomotą žemę kartu su šiai žemei nustatytomis arba su ja susijusiomis teisėmis į išmokas, nei jam sumokėti kompensaciją.
 43. It is apparent from all of the above considerations that Community law does not require a lessee, on the expiry of the lease, to deliver to the lessor the leased land, including the payment entitlements accumulated thereon or relating thereto, or to pay him compensation. Dėl bylinėjimosi išlaidų Costs 44. Kadangi šis procesas pagrindinės bylos šalims yra vienas iš etapų prašymą priimti prejudicinį sprendimą pateikusio teismo nagrinėjamoje byloje, išlaidų klausimą turi spręsti šis teismas. Išlaidos, susijusios su pastabų pateikimu Teisingumo Teismui, išskyrus tas, kurias patyrė minėtos šalys, nėra atlygintinos.
 44. Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the national court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court. Costs incurred in submitting observations to the Court, other than the costs of those parties, are not recoverable.
 Community law does not require a lessee, on the expiry of the lease, to deliver to the lessor the leased land, including the payment entitlements accumulated thereon or relating thereto, or to pay him compensation. Pagal Bendrijos teisę nuomininkas neįpareigojamas pasibaigus nuomos sutarčiai nei perduoti nuomotojui išsinuomotą žemę kartu su šiai žemei nustatytomis arba su ja susijusiomis teisėmis į išmokas, nei jam sumokėti kompensaciją. Top


type: wikipedia

text:
Лада, по мнение на неколцина изследователи (А. С. Фаминцин, Б. А. Рибаков и неговите последователи), е божество в славянската митология; богиня на хармонията, радостта, младостта, красотата, брака и любовта. Голяма част от съвременните учени смятат, че Лада е плод на „кабинетна митология“, научна фикция. Вместването ѝ в пантеона на славянските богове е пример за мистификация или грешка. Вероятно даването на гласност на това твърдение е продукт на романтични и неоезически опити за съживяване на старата славянска митология, въз основа нов прочит на фолклора на славянските народи, след смели изводи, лишени от самокритика.
 За верен спътник на Лада се смята богът на насладата Ослад, така както бракът и любовта винаги вървят редом с пирове и наслаждения (срв. в древногръцката митология Химер и Потос – спътници на Афродита).
 Произход
 Към най-старите писмени източници, споменаващи Лада, се отнасят полските църковни забрани за езически обреди, отнасящи се към първата четвърт на XV век, публикувани от Станислав Урбанчик. Лада се споменава през епохата на Ренесанса, когато славянските историци, вероятно под влиянието на техните френски, италиански, английски колеги започват да проявяват засилен интерес към древните митологии. Някои от тях, най-вече чешки и полски историци, правят опити да построят отново забравения пантеон на славянските богове. Въпреки че някои от тях се опитват да изследват критически езическата история на славяните, повечето от резултатите са напълно псевдонаучни. Например някои историци като Козма Пражки и Ян Длугош изказват твърдения, че славяните са почитали Юпитер, Марс и други римски божества. Тази тенденция, описана с английската дума fakelore, продължава до ХХ век. През 1981 г. съветският учен Борис Рибаков изучава следната песен, записана през XVIII век от хърватски монах:
 Lepi Ive trga rože,
 Tebi Lado sveti Bože:
 Lado slušaj nas Lado.
 При което, в усърдието си да докаже твърденията си, умишлено или по грешка, превежда хърватското Bože ( в звателен падеж) като божество, с което променя смисъла на песента. В днешни дни все още се прокрадва твърдението, че славяните са се кланяли на такава богиня на любовта.
 Вижте също
 Славянски божества
 Славянска религия
 Външни препратки
 Богиня Лада
 Славянски богини


text:
Regulamentul (CE) nr. 2271/96 al Consiliului din 22 noiembrie 1996 de protecție împotriva efectelor aplicării extrateritoriale a unei legislații adoptate de către o țară terță, precum și a acțiunilor întemeiate pe aceasta sau care rezultă din aceasta
 1996R2271 — RO — 20.02.2014 — 002.001
 REGULAMENTUL (CE) NR. 2271/96 AL CONSILIULUI
 din 22 noiembrie 1996
 de protecție împotriva efectelor aplicării extrateritoriale a unei legislații adoptate de către o țară terță, precum și a acțiunilor întemeiate pe aceasta sau care rezultă din aceasta
 (JO L 309, 29.11.1996, p.1)
 REGULAMENTUL (UE) NR. 37/2014 AL PARLAMENTULUI EUROPEAN ȘI AL CONSILIULUI din 15 ianuarie 2014
 având în vedere Tratatul de instituire a Comunității Europene, în special articolele 73c, 113 și 235,
 întrucât Comunitatea are ca obiectiv inclusiv contribuția la dezvoltarea armonioasă a comerțului mondial și la eliminarea progresivă a restricțiilor la schimburile comerciale internaționale;
 întrucât Comunitatea depune eforturi pentru a realiza cât de mult posibil obiectivul de liberă circulație a capitalurilor între statele membre și țările terțe și, mai ales, eliminarea oricărei restricții asupra investițiilor directe, inclusiv investițiile imobiliare, asupra stabilirii, prestării de servicii financiare sau asupra admiterii de titluri pe piețele de capitaluri;
 întrucât o țară terță a promulgat anumite acte cu putere de lege, norme administrative și alte instrumente legislative care vizează reglementarea activităților persoanelor fizice sau juridice din jurisdicția statelor membre;
 întrucât, prin aplicarea lor extrateritorială, aceste acte cu putere de lege, norme administrative și alte instrumente legislative, încalcă dreptul internațional și împiedică realizarea obiectivelor citate anterior;
 întrucât aceste acte cu putere de lege, inclusiv norme administrative și alte instrumente legislative, precum și acțiunile întemeiate pe acestea sau care decurg din acestea afectează sau sunt susceptibile de a afecta ordinea juridică stabilită și lezează interesele Comunității și pe cele ale persoanelor fizice sau juridice care își exercită drepturile în temeiul Tratatului de instituire a Comunității Europene;
 întrucât, în aceste împrejurări excepționale, este necesar a se întreprinde o acțiune la nivelul Comunității pentru a proteja ordinea juridică stabilită, precum și interesele Comunității și ale persoanelor fizice și juridice menționate anterior, în speță prin eliminarea, neutralizarea, blocarea sau contracararea de orice fel a efectelor legislației străine respective;
 întrucât cererea de transmitere de informații în baza prezentului regulament nu împiedică un stat membru să ceară ca informații de aceeași natură să fie furnizate autorităților sale;
 întrucât Consiliul adoptă Acțiunea comună 96/668/PESC din 22 noiembrie 1996 ( 2 ) pentru a se asigura că statele membre iau măsurile necesare în vederea protejării persoanelor fizice sau juridice ale căror interese sunt afectate de actele citate anterior, precum și de acțiunile bazate pe ele sau care decurg din acestea, în măsura în care aceste interese nu sunt protejate prin prezentul regulament;
 întrucât se cuvine ca, în aplicarea prezentului regulament, Comisia să fie asistată de un comitet compus din reprezentanți ai statelor membre;
 întrucât acțiunile prevăzute prin prezentul regulament sunt necesare pentru atingerea obiectivelor Tratatului de instituire a Comunității Europene;
 întrucât, pentru adoptarea anumitor dispoziții din prezentul regulament, tratatul nu prevede alte puteri decât cele din articolul 235,
 Prezentul regulament are drept scop asigurarea protecției împotriva aplicării extrateritoriale a actelor cu putere de lege citate în anexă, inclusiv norme administrative și alte instrumente legislative, și împotriva acțiunilor bazate pe ele sau care decurg din acestea, precum și contracararea efectelor, atunci când această aplicare afectează interesele persoanelor menționate la articolul 11, implicate în comerțul internațional și/sau mișcări de capital și activități comerciale conexe între Comunitate și țări terțe.
 Comisia este împuternicită să adopte acte delegate în conformitate cu articolul 11a, pentru a adăuga la anexa la prezentul regulament acte normative, regulamente sau alte instrumente legislative din țări terțe cu aplicare extrateritorială și care determină efecte adverse asupra intereselor Uniunii și a intereselor persoanelor fizice și juridice care își exercită drepturile în conformitate cu Tratatul privind funcționarea Uniunii Europene, precum și pentru a elimina acte normative, regulamente sau alte instrumente legislative atunci când acestea încetează să mai aibă astfel de efecte.
 Atunci când interesele economice și/sau financiare ale oricărei persoane menționate la articolul 11 sunt afectate, direct sau indirect, de actele cu putere de lege citate în anexă sau de acțiunile întemeiate pe acestea sau care decurg din acestea, această persoană anunță Comisia în termen de 30 de zile de la data la care a obținut informația; în măsura în care interesele persoanei juridice sunt afectate, această obligație se aplică administratorilor, directorilor și altor persoane care exercită funcții de conducere ( 3 ).
 La cererea Comisiei, persoana implicată furnizează toate informațiile în sensul prezentului regulament, în conformitate cu cererea Comisiei, în termen de 30 de zile de la data acesteia.
 Toate informațiile sunt transmise Comisiei fie direct, fie prin intermediul autorităților competente ale statelor membre. În cazul în care ele sunt transmise direct Comisiei, aceasta anunță imediat autoritățile competente ale statului membru în care persoana care a furnizat informațiile își are reședința sau sediul societății.
 Toate informațiile furnizate în conformitate cu articolul 2 nu vor fi utilizate decât în scopurile pentru care au fost transmise.
 Informațiile de natură confidențială sau furnizate cu titlu confidențial se supun obligației de secret profesional. Ele nu sunt divulgate de către Comisie fără autorizația expresă a persoanei care le-a furnizat.
 Comunicarea acestor informații este permisă atunci când Comisia este obligată sau autorizată în acest sens, în special în cadrul unei acțiuni în justiție. Această comunicare trebuie să țină cont de interesul legitim al persoanei implicate de a nu divulga secretele sale de afaceri.
 Prezentul articol nu reprezintă un obstacol în divulgarea de informații generale de către Comisie. Această divulgare nu este autorizată în cazul în care este incompatibilă cu scopurile pentru care informațiile în chestiune au fost prevăzute inițial.
 În caz de violare a caracterului confidențial al informațiilor, persoana care le-a transmis are dreptul să obțină eliminarea, ignorarea sau rectificarea lor, după caz.
 Nici o hotărâre a vreunei instanțe de judecată sau autorități administrative din afara Comunității care pune în vigoare, direct sau indirect, actele cu putere de lege citate în anexă sau acțiunile întemeiate pe acestea sau care decurg din acestea nu este recunoscută și nu poate fi executată în nici un fel.
 Nici o persoană menționată la articolul 11 nu se conformează, direct sau prin filială sau intermediar, activ sau prin omisiune voită, dispozițiilor sau interdicțiilor, inclusiv somațiilor unor instanțe de judecată străine, întemeiate pe sau care rezultă, direct sau indirect, din actele cu putere de lege precizate în anexă sau pe acțiunile întemeiate pe acestea sau care decurg din acestea.
 Conform procedurilor prevăzute în articolele 7 și 8, o persoană poate fi autorizată să se conformeze integral sau parțial dispozițiilor sau interdicțiilor citate în măsura în care nerespectarea acestora ar leza în mod grav interesele sale sau pe cele ale Comunității. Criteriile pentru aplicarea prezentei dispoziții sunt fixate după procedura prevăzută în articolul 8. Atunci când există suficiente dovezi pentru a stabili că nerespectarea dispozițiilor și interdicțiilor citate ar provoca o daună gravă unei persoane fizice sau juridice, Comisia supune prompt comitetului vizat în articolul 8 un proiect de măsuri adecvate ce trebuie luate în sensul prezentului regulament.
 Orice persoană menționată la articolul 11, care exercită o activitate menționată la articolul 1, este îndreptățită să obțină orice despăgubiri, inclusiv cheltuieli de judecată, datorate pentru orice daună care i-a fost adusă în urma aplicării actelor cu putere de lege citate în anexă sau a acțiunilor întemeiate pe acestea sau care decurg din acestea.
 Despăgubirea poate fi obținută de la persoana fizică sau juridică sau de la oricare altă entitate care a produs dauna, sau de la oricare altă persoană care acționează în numele său sau în calitate de intermediar.
 Convenția de la Bruxelles din 27 septembrie 1968 privind competența judecătorească și executarea hotărârilor în materie civilă și comercială se aplică procedurilor inițiate și hotărârilor pronunțate în sensul prezentului articol. Despăgubirea poate fi obținută în temeiul dispozițiilor secțiunilor 2-6 din titlul II al convenției, precum și, în conformitate cu articolul 57 alineatul (3) din convenție, printr-o procedură judiciară introdusă înaintea instanțelor de judecată oricărui stat membru în care persoana respectivă sau entitatea care acționează în numele său sau în calitate de intermediar deține bunuri.
 Fără a aduce atingere altor mijloace disponibile și în conformitate cu legislația aplicabilă, despăgubirea poate lua forma sechestrului și vânzării bunurilor deținute în Comunitate de aceste persoane sau entități care acționează în numele lor sau în calitate de intermediari, inclusiv părțile sau acțiunile deținute de o persoană juridică care își are sediul ca societate în Comunitate.
 În sensul aplicării prezentului regulament, Comisia:
 (a) informează de indată și pe deplin Parlamentul European și Consiliul cu privire la efectele actelor cu putere de lege, normelor administrative și ale altor instrumente legislative, precum și ale acțiunilor întemeiate pe acestea sau care decurg din acestea, care sunt menționate în articolul 1, pe baza informațiilor obținute în baza prezentului regulament, și prezintă în mod regulat un raport public complet despre acest subiect;
 (b) acordă autorizații în condițiile enunțate în articolul 5 și, când stabilește termenele acordate comitetului pentru a-și da avizul, ține cont pe deplin de termenele de respectat de către persoanele care trebuie să facă obiectul unei autorizații;
 (d) publică în Jurnalul Oficial al Comunităților Europene o opinie referitoare la deciziile jurisdicționale sau administrative cărora li se aplică articolele 4 și 6;
 (e) publică în Jurnalul Oficial al Comunităților Europene numele și adresele autorităților competente ale statelor membre menționate la articolul 2.
 (1) În scopul aplicării articolului 7 litera (b), Comisia este asistată de Comitetul privind legislația extrateritorială. Actele de punere în aplicare în cauză se adoptă în conformitate cu procedura de examinare menționată la alineatul (2) din prezentul articol. Respectivul comitet este un comitet în sensul Regulamentului (UE) nr. 182/2011 ( 4 ).
 Fiecare stat membru determină sancțiunile aplicabile în cazul nerespectării oricărei dispoziții relevante a prezentului regulament. Aceste sancțiuni trebuie să fie eficiente, proporționale și disuasive.
 Comisia și statele membre se informează reciproc despre măsurile luate în baza prezentului regulament și își comunică toate celelalte informații relevante în legătură cu prezentul regulament.
 1. oricărei persoane fizice care are reședința în Comunitate ( 5 ) și care este cetățean al unui stat membru;
 2. oricărei persoane juridice care își are sediul ca societate în Comunitate;
 3. oricărei persoane fizice sau juridice la care se face referire în articolul 1, alineatul (2) din Regulamentul (CEE) nr. 4055/86 ( 6 );
 4. oricărei alte persoane fizice care are reședința în Comunitate, cu excepția cazului în care această persoană se află în țara de rezidență;
 5. oricărei alte persoane fizice care se află în Comunitate, inclusiv în apele teritoriale și spațiul său aerian sau la bordul oricărei aeronave sau oricărui vas relevant care ține de jurisdicția sau de controlul unui stat membru și acționând în calitate profesională.
 (2) Competența de a adopta acte delegate menționată la articolul 1 se conferă Comisiei pentru o perioadă de cinci ani de la 20 februarie 2014. Comisia prezintă un raport privind delegarea de competențe cel târziu cu nouă luni înainte de încheierea perioadei de cinci ani. Delegarea de competențe se prelungește tacit cu perioade de timp identice, cu excepția cazului în care Parlamentul European sau Consiliul se opun prelungirii respective cel târziu cu trei luni înainte de încheierea fiecărei perioade.
 (3) Delegarea de competențe menționată la articolul 1 poate fi revocată oricând de Parlamentul European sau de Consiliu. O decizie de revocare pune capăt delegării de competențe specificată în decizia respectivă. Decizia produce efecte din ziua următoare datei publicării acesteia în Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene sau de la o dată ulterioară specificată în decizie. Decizia nu aduce atingere actelor delegate care sunt deja în vigoare.
 (5) Un act delegat adoptat în temeiul articolului 1 intră în vigoare numai în cazul în care nici Parlamentul European și nici Consiliul nu a exprimat obiecțiuni în termen de două luni de la notificarea acestuia către Parlamentul European și Consiliu, sau în cazul în care, înainte de expirarea termenului respectiv, Parlamentul European și Consiliul au informat Comisia că nu vor formula obiecții. Respectivul termen se prelungește cu patru luni la inițiativa Parlamentului European sau a Consiliului.
 Prezentul regulament întră în vigoare în ziua publicării sale în Jurnalul Oficial al Comunităților Europene.
 ACTE CU PUTERE DE LEGE, NORME ADMINISTRATIVE ȘI ALTE INSTRUMENTE LEGISLATIVE ( 7 )
 menționate la articolul 1
 1. „Legea de autorizare privind apărarea națională pentru anul fiscal 1993”, Titlul XVII – „Legea privind democrația în Cuba, 1992”, secțiunile 1704 și 1706
 Dispoziții a căror respectare este cerută:
 Aceste dispoziții sunt integrate în titlul I din „Legea privind solidaritatea democratică și libertatea în Cuba, 1996” (a se vedea mai jos).
 Posibile prejudicii aduse intereselor Uniunii Europene:
 Obligațiile aferente au fost integrate în „Legea privind solidaritatea democratică și libertatea în Cuba 1996” (a se vedea mai jos).
 2. „Legea privind solidaritatea democratică și libertatea în Cuba, 1996”
 A se respecta embargoul economic și financiar instituit de către Statele Unite ale Americii cu privire la Cuba, și, mai ales: a nu se exporta spre Statele Unite bunuri sau servicii de origine cubaneză sau conținând materiale sau bunuri originare din Cuba, fie direct sau prin intermediul unei țări terțe; a nu se efectua tranzacții comerciale care implică mărfuri care se găsesc sau s-au găsit în Cuba, sau care au fost transportate de Cuba, sau care au tranzitat prin Cuba; a nu reexporta spre Statele Unite zahăr originar din Cuba fără notificarea din partea autorității naționale competente a exportatorului; a nu se importa în Statele Unite produse pe bază de zahăr fără a avea siguranța că aceste produse nu sunt produse cubaneze; a se îngheța lichiditățile cubaneze și operațiunile financiare cu Cuba.
 Interdicția pentru un vas de a încărca sau descărca navlu în orice loc din Statele Unite, sau de a pătrunde într-un port din Statele Unite; refuzul de a importa bunuri sau servicii originare din Statele Unite; blocarea operațiunilor financiare care implică Cuba.
 Titlurile III și IV:
 A se pune capăt tuturor operațiunilor (trafic) legate de bunurile care au aparținut cetățenilor americani (inclusiv cubanezi care au obținut naționalitatea americană) expropriați de către regimul cubanez. (Asemenea operațiuni includ: folosirea, vânzarea, cedarea, controlul, gestiunea și alte activități în beneficiul unei persoane.)
 Acțiuni în justiție, întemeiate pe o răspundere deja angajată, intentate în Statele Unite împotriva cetățenilor sau societăților comerciale din Uniunea Europeană implicați în operațiunile menționate anterior, care duc la hotărâri judecătorești care le condamnă să plătească compensații (multiple) părții americane.
 Interzicerea intrării în Statele Unite pentru persoanele implicate în asemenea operațiuni, inclusiv a soțului/soției lor, a copiilor minori și a reprezentanților lor.
 3. „Lege privind impunerea de sancțiuni pentru Iran și Libia, 1996”
 A nu se realiza, în Iran sau în Libia, pe o perioadă de 12 luni, investiții cu o valoare mai mare de 40 de milioane de dolari SUA, care contribuie direct și semnificativ la intensificarea capacității Iranului sau Libiei de a-și dezvolta resursele petroliere. (Noțiunea de investiție acoperă faptul de a semna un contract în vederea dezvoltării numitelor resurse, de a garanta un asemenea contract, de a profita sau de a dobândi părți ale unor proprietăți.)
 NB: Investițiile cu titluri de contracte care existau înainte de 5 august 1996 sunt excluse.
 A se respecta embargoul instituit față de Libia prin Rezoluțiile 748 (1992) și 883 (1993) ale Consiliului de Securitate al Națiunilor Unite ( 8 ).
 Măsurile luate de către președintele Statelor Unite ale Americii pentru limitarea importurilor sau furnizărilor către Statele Unite; interdicția de a fi desemnat ca operator primar sau depozitar de fonduri ale guvernului american; refuzul de acces la împrumuturile instituțiilor financiare americane; restricții de export impuse de către Statele Unite, sau refuz de asistență de către EXIM-Bank.
 NORME ADMINISTRATIVE:
 1. 31 CFR (Codul Regulamentelor Federale) Ch. V (ediția 7-1-95) Partea 515 – Regulamente privind controlul bunurilor provenite din Cuba, subsecțiunea B (Interdicții), E (Licențe, Autorizații și Declarații privind Politica de acordare a licențelor) și G (Penalități)
 Interdicțiile sunt reluate în titlul I din „Legea privind solidaritatea democratică și libertatea în Cuba 1996” (a se vedea mai sus). În plus, sunt cerute licențe și/sau autorizații pentru activitățile economice care implică Cuba.
 În caz de încălcare a regulamentului: amenzi, confiscări, pedeapsă cu închisoare.
 ( 1 ) Aviz din data de 25 octombrie 1996 (JO C 347, 18.11.1996).
 ( 2 ) JO L 309, 29.11.1996, p. 7.
 ( 3 ) Informațiile sunt furnizate la adresa următoare: Comisia Europeană, Direcția generală I, Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 200, B-1049 Bruxelles [telefax: (32-2) 295 65 05)].
 ( 4 ) Regulamentul (UE) nr. 182/2011 al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului din 16 februarie 2011 de stabilire a normelor și principiilor generale privind mecanismele de control de către statele membre al exercitării competențelor de executare de către Comisie (JO L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
 ( 5 ) În sensul prezentului regulament, expresia „care are reședința în Comunitate” înseamnă „care a fost stabilită legal în Comunitate pe o perioadă de cel puțin șase luni de-a lungul celor douăsprezece luni care preced data la care a apărut o obligație sau s-a exercitat un drept”.
 ( 6 ) Regulamentul (CEE) nr. 4055/86 al Consiliului din 22 decembrie 1986 de aplicare a principiului libertății de a presta servicii în transporturile maritime între state membre și între state membre și țări terțe (JO L 378, 31.12.1986, p. 1). Regulament, astfel cum a fost modificat ultima dată prin Regulamentul (CEE) nr. 3573/90 (JO L 353, 17.12.1990, p. 16).
 ( 7 ) Informații suplimentare referitoare la actele cu putere de lege și normele administrative menționate mai sus pot fi obținute de la Comisia Europeană, Direcția generală I.E.3, Rue de la Loi/Wetsraat 200 B-1049, Bruxelles [telefax: (32 2) 295 65 05)].
 ( 8 ) Punerea în aplicare a acestor dispoziții de către Comunitate prin Regulamentul (CE) nr. 3274/93 al Consiliului (JO L 295, 30.11.1993, p. 1).


text:
Jonas Alströmer, före adlandet Alström, född 7 januari 1685 i Alingsås, död 2 juni 1761 i Stockholm, var en av den industriella revolutionens förgrundsfigurer i Sverige. Han importerade såväl maskiner som kunnande från utlandet och grundade flera företag, bland annat Alingsås manufakturverk.
 Jonas Alströmer var en av de sex instiftarna av Kungliga Vetenskapsakademien 1739. Mest känd är mångsysslaren Alströmer för sitt stora intresse för jordbruk; han populariserade odlandet av potatis som livsmedel och tog även fram nya metoder därvidlag. Han är också känd som de svenska slöjdernas fader.
 Biografi
 Jonas Alströmer var son till borgaren Tore Karlsson (1652–1702) i Alingsås och Annika Gislesdotter (1666–1739; paret gifte sig 1683), vars far Gisle Björnsson likaså var borgare i Alingsås. Alströmers föräldrar var fattiga, så han var tvungen att lämna hemmet tidigt och försörja sig själv. Han fick därför mycket lite skolundervisning. Han arbetade som bodgosse i Eksjö, som renskrivare, och i Ryssgården. År 1707 följde han med sin vän Alberg till London för att hjälpa denne att starta en affär. 1710 övertog han affären och skötte den framgångsrikt.
 1709 blev han borgare i London och naturaliserad engelsman. Han lade märke till den stora skillnaden mellan Englands och Sveriges industriella utveckling.
 Då tänkte han att man i Sverige borde införa eller återupprätta de näringar, som var viktigast för rikets välstånd.
 När Karl XII återkommit från Turkiet begav sig Alströmer (1715) till Göteborg och erbjöd sig att arbeta för kungen. Här stannade han i två år och använde tiden till att, genom resor i bergslagerna och till de främsta städerna, lära känna landets förhållanden och produkter. Därefter reste han genom norra Tyskland till Nederländerna och bodde två år i Amsterdam för att lära känna detta lands handel och industriella arrangemang. År 1719 återvände han till England och reste till norra Englands viktigaste industristäder. Han fick också i uppdrag att inkassera de pengar som Storbritannien i det nyligen uppgjorda fredsfördraget hade förbundit sig att betala till Sverige.
 Sedan Sverige efter Karl XII:s död slutit fred med sina många fiender, ljusnade utsikterna för genomförande av Alströmers planer. 1723 återvände han till Sverige via Frankrike. Nu startade han ett manufakturverk i Alingsås. De första väveriarbetarna lejdes i Frankrike och Nederländerna. Fastän utförsel av maskiner, redskap och råmaterial var strängt förbjudet, lyckades han i Nederländerna lasta ett fartyg med sådana varor. Efter stora svårigheter med myndigheter och fabrikanter, som försökte hindra exporten, lyckades han skaffa maskiner även från England.
 Alströmers stora planer var nära att stranda på grund av penningbrist, men med finansiering huvudsakligen från värmländska bruksägare, lyckades han 1725 bilda ett bolag. Vid 1726 års riksdag togs flera beslut, som var viktiga för att företaget skulle kunna verka. Konung Fredrik gick själv in som delägare i företaget. Vid ett besök i Alingsås, när verksamheten kommit igång, lät han hela sin betjäning klä upp sig med de nya alstren från Alströmers företag.
 Detta blev grundvalen för den svenska industrin. I Alingsås, vars folkmängd inom kort växte från 300 till 1 800 invånare, upprättades tid efter annan klädes-, fris- och yllevävstolar, bomullsväveri, vaddmakeri, spinnerier för ull, kamelhår, silke, lin och bomull, stora ylle- och silkesfärgerier, kattuns-tryckerier med flera verk. De utländska mästare, som Alströmer hade fört med sig, undervisade efter hand ett stort antal svenska lärlingar. Genom dessa spreds yrkesfärdigheten också till andra städer.
 Det var inte bara i England och Nederländerna som Alströmer hade problem för sina textila ambitioner. Göteborgs köpmän befarade att de skulle drabbas av minskad lönsamhet, om Sverige kunde tillverka mångt och mycket inom sina egna gränser och därmed minskade importen. Köpmännen i Göteborg gjorde vad de kunde för att motarbeta Alströmer.
 Tillväxten av industrin var mycket god och 1754 var 14 000 och sju år senare 18 000 personer sysselsatta vid väverierna. Värdet av de exporterade slöjdvarorna uppgick till 50 tunnor guld, varav två tredjedelar blev inkomst till staten. En viktig orsak till framgången var att Alströmer så långt möjligt använde sig av inhemska råvaror. För detta ändamål ägnade han särskild uppmärksamhet åt fåraveln och importerade avelsfår från England och Spanien. På kungsgården Höjentorp inrättades ett stamschäferi. En stor dag för Alströmer var den 7 augusti 1754, då han fick visa upp sitt schäferi för kung Adolf Fredrik och drottning Lovisa Ulrika vid deras resa genom Västergötland. Han berättade efteråt i ett brev till sina söner hur kungaparet "togo i ett nådigt ögnasikte" hela hans schäferi "till antal av ungefär 400 stycken, alla av fullkomlig god spansk race, vaktade av 5 stycken schäferdrängar och gossar, som låto höra sig utur sina horn och lurar". För bomullstygs- och klädesfabrikationen infördes från Nederländerna flera olika färgväxter, som Alströmer lät utplantera på sina gårdar.
 För att värna om den gryende industrin tog Alströmer efter det engelska mönstret och fick igenom ett omfattande skyddsnät, som bland annat lade hög tull på, eller helt förbjöd import av vissa konkurrerande varor. Han inrättade en särskild manufakturfond, där fabrikanterna kunde få räntefria lån. Ibland kunde uppmuntringsgratifikationer delas ut för att främja export. I syfte att sätta fart på affärerna bildade Alströmer flera handelskompanier, och han genomdrev viktiga handelsfördrag mellan Sverige och en del andra länder.
 Han såg också till att ett sockerraffineringsverk anlades i Göteborg. På Kungsholmen i Stockholm anlades det första engelska garveriet i Sverige. Han ägnade sig också åt järnförädling och populariserade odlingen av potatis och tobak i Sverige. Det är dock en myt, att det var Alströmer som införde potatisen i Sverige, då det redan innan Alströmers födelse växte potatis i Uppsala botaniska trädgård dit den införts av Olof Rudbeck den äldre omkring 1655; denne hade dock kallat dem "peruansk nattskatta". Alströmer gjorde dock själv gällande att det var han som infört potatisen. Uppfattningen att Alströmer införde tobaksplantan i Sverige är inte heller riktig utan tobak hade tidigare odlats i Skåne.
 Genom den av Alströmer upplivade industrin bringades Sveriges handelsbalans från ett betydande underskott till ett överskott av fyra miljoner daler silvermynt. Redan på hans egen tid riktades klander mot honom för att hans anläggningar var alltför mångskiftande och att en del av dem endast genom konstlade medel kunde hållas i gång. Men i sin helhet hade ändå Alströmers verksamhet stor positiv betydelse för den svenska industrins grundande och tidiga utveckling.
 Alströmer var från 1731 gift med Margareta Clason (1709–1738), dotter till brukspatronen Johan Clason, och fick fem barn med henne, däribland två söner vilka upphöjdes till friherrar. Efter Margaretas död 1738 gifte han om sig 1741 med Hedvig Elisabeth Paulin (1716–1806), dotter till handlanden Elias Paulin i Stockholm, och fick tre barn i det äktenskapet.
 Bilder
 Övrigt
 Alströmer bidrog till stiftandet av Vetenskapsakademin år 1739 och anlade i Alingsås ett bibliotek, ett naturhistoriskt museum och en modellkammare. År 1736 föddes sonen Clas Alströmer. Han blev överuppsyningsman över schäferistaten 1738 och kommerseråd 1739, men fick den därmed förenade lönen först 1747. Alströmer blev Riddare av Nordstjärneorden 1748 och adlades 1751, varefter han antog namnet Alströmer från att tidigare ha kallat sig Alström. Alströmer dog 2 juni 1761 på grund av slaganfall. Gymnasieskolan i Alingsås, Alströmergymnasiet, är uppkallad efter honom.
 Hedersbetygelser
 Till Alströmers ära har minnesmynt utgivits vid flera tillfällen och vid 200-årsminnet av hans död 1961 utgavs ett frimärke med hans bild i valörerna 15 öre brunviolett och 90 öre blågrön.
 Statyer
 1790 uppställdes Alströmers byst utförd av Pierre Hubert L'Archevêque vid Börshuset i Stockholm.
 28 december 1905 avtäcktes Jonas Alströmers staty utförd i brons av John Börjeson vid Lilla Torget i Göteborg.
 1905 uppsattes Alströmers byst på Stora torget i Alingsås utförd av Aron Sandberg. Initiativtagare till statyns tillkomst var landsfiskal Gustav Nilsson och den dåtida ägaren av Nolhaga slott, Claes Adelsköld. De startade en insamling, som bekostade statyn.
 Bibliografi
 Källor
 Anrep, Gabriel, Svenska adelns Ättar-taflor
 Uppfinningarnas Bok, band 6, 1875.
 Noter
 Vidare läsning
 Externa länkar
 Alingsås kommun om Jonas Alströmer
 Alströmer nr 1938, Adelsvapen-Wiki, adelsvapen.com.
 Avlidna 1761
 Födda 1685
 Personer under frihetstiden
 Jonas
 Ledamöter av Kungliga Vetenskapsakademien
 Män
 Svenska agronomer
 Personer i Göteborgs historia
 Personer från Alingsås
 Svenskt adlade
 Svenska eponymer
 Ugglan
 Personer inom Sveriges näringsliv under 1700-talet
 Riddare av Nordstjärneorden