pravno shvaćanje oor Engels

pravno shvaćanje

voorbeelde

U tom smislu zauzeta su razlicita pravna shvaćanja kako u sudskoj praksi ,tako i u pravnoj doktrini.
In that sense private person is better than official one

Potonjeg, ako su činjenice nepromijenjene, obvezuje pravno shvaćanje Žalbenog vijeća.
The latter one shall, in so far as the facts are the same, be bound by the ratio decidendi of the Board of Appeal.

Drukčija pravna ocjena Općeg suda prekoračuje sudsku praksu Suda te se temelji na pogrešnom pravnom shvaćanju relevantnog tržišta.
The General Court’s legal assessment, which found otherwise, goes beyond the Court of Justice’s case-law and is based on a legally erroneous understanding of the relevant market.

– da ukine pobijanu presudu i vrati predmet Općem sudu, kako bi isti donio odluku sukladno pravnim shvaćanjima Suda;
– set aside the judgment under appeal and refer the case back to the General Court for it to be reheard in the light of the issues of law settled by the Court of Justice;

Takvo je i pravno shvaćanje Komisije u njenoj izjavi.
This is also the legal understanding of the Commission in its declaration.

Ova argumentacija je uostalom logična posljedica talijanskog pravnog shvaćanja.
Nevertheless, this argument is the logical consequence of the legal position adopted by Italy.

Drukčija pravna ocjena Općeg suda prekoračuje sudsku praksu Suda te se temelji na pogrešnom pravnom shvaćanju relevantnog tržišta.
The General Court’s alternative legal assessment departs from the case-law of the Court of Justice and is based upon a misunderstanding of the relevant market that constitutes an error in law.

Međutim, talijanska pravna shvaćanja se mogu zastupati, osobito jer presuda koja se treba provesti u nekim točkama treba tumačenje.
The legal positions adopted by Italy are, however, defensible, in particular because certain aspects of the judgment to be implemented require interpretation.

Kako je proizišlo iz rasprave, čini se da su stajališta zastupana u predmetnom postupku više stvar afiniteta nego pravnog shvaćanja.
As the hearing made clear, it seems that the approaches taken in these proceedings are more a matter of preference than legal reasoning.

Konačno, Opći je sud svoje zaključke utemeljio na pogrešnom pravnom shvaćanju, kada se protivio provođenju kvantitativne usporedbe – utemeljene na graničnim vrijednostima – različitih razina zaštite.
Finally, the Court’s findings are based on an incorrect understanding of the law in so far as it precluded a quantitative comparison of the level of protection based on limit values.

Međutim takvo pravno shvaćanje treba s obzirom na tekst i nastanak odredbe, među ostalim i namjeru zakonodavca Unije, gledati kao pogrešku koja se tiče prava.
Such a legal position must, however, be regarded as erroneous in law, especially in view of the wording as well as the origin of the provision, including the intention of the European Union legislature.

Dostatno je da žalbeno vijeće izloži činjenice i pravna shvaćanja koja imaju ključnu važnost u strukturi odluke (vidjeti presudu od 30. lipnja 2010., Matratzen Concord/OHIM – Barranco Schnitzler (MATRATZEN CONCORD), T-351/08, EU:T:2010:263, t. 18. i navedenu sudsku praksu).
It is sufficient if the Boards of Appeal set out the facts and legal considerations having decisive importance in the context of the decision (see judgment of 30 June 2010 in Matratzen Concord v OHIM — Barranco Schnitzler (MATRATZEN CONCORD), T‐351/08, EU:T:2010:263, paragraph 18 and the case-law cited).

Naime, ta dva prigovora dovode u pitanje dvije pravne premise u shvaćanju Općeg suda.
Those two complaints call into question two legal premisses underpinning the reasoning of the General Court.

36 Iz prethodno navedenog proizlazi da su, protivno onomu što navodi tužitelj, odlučujuće činjenice i pravna shvaćanja koja imaju ključnu važnost u strukturi odluke u pobijanoj odluci jasno izloženi te, s jedne strane, omogućuju tužitelju da se upozna s obrazloženjima pobijane presude kako bi obranio svoja prava i, s druge strane, omogućuju sudu Unije da provodi nadzor zakonitosti.
36 It is clear from the foregoing that, contrary to what the applicant claims, the relevant facts and the legal considerations having decisive importance in the context of the contested decision are clearly set out in the contested decision and that they inform the applicant of the justification for the contested decision so that it can protect its rights and enable the EU judicature to exercise its power to review the legality of the decision.

Sažetak : Autor ističe utjecaj rimsko- kanonskoga kaznenoga postupka , nezanemarujući time i slavenske elemente , koji , iako ne pretežito, ipak djeluju na dalmatinsko statutarno kazneno procesno pravo. Autor posebno ističe otvorenost dalmatinskih gradova premanajnovijim pravnim shvaćanjima toga vremena , te navodi da jenjihov kazneni postupak " ... suvremen , usmjeren na čuvanjekomunalne autonomije , te nastoji osigurati sustavni kazneniprogon uz ograničenje mogućih zloupotreba " .
Summary : The author points out the influence of the penal procedure ofCanon law without , however , neglecting Slavic elements which , although not dominant , had an effect on Dalmatian criminalprocedure . The author especially emphasizes the openness ofDalmatian towns towards the newest legal opinions of those times , and he says that their criminal procedure was " modern and aimedat preserving communal autonomy and securing systematic criminalprosecution and control over possible abuse " .

Kao prvo, pobijana odluka donesena je samo s obzirom na široko i pravno pogrešno shvaćanje pojma protutržišnog cilja, koje je Europsku komisiju navelo da ne provede analizu ili barem dokaže učinke teritorijalnih klauzula.
First, the contested decision was adopted only on the basis of a broad and legally erroneous interpretation of the concept of an anti-competitive object, which resulted in the European Commission failing to examine, or at least to show, the effects of the territoriality clauses.

43 U ovom slučaju, uzimajući u obzir sudsku praksu iz gore navedenih točaka 31. i 42., s obzirom na to da je žalbeno vijeće dostatno izložilo činjenice i pravna shvaćanja koja imaju ključnu važnost u strukturi pobijane odluke, od njega se nije tražilo da donese posebno obrazloženje kako bi opravdalo svoju odluku u odnosu na ranije OHIM‐ove odluke navedene u pismenima stranaka ili u odnosu na sudsku praksu Unije.
43 In the present case, in the light of the case-law cited in paragraphs 31 and 42 above, and given that the Board of Appeal sufficiently set out the facts and the legal considerations having decisive importance in the context of the contested decision, it was not required to give specific reasons in order to justify its decision relating to OHIM’s earlier decisions cited in the parties’ written pleadings or relating to EU case-law.

Vijeće ističe da se glavni argument Parlamenta temelji na pogrešnom shvaćanju ispravne pravne osnove pobijanih odluka.
The Council submits that the Parliament’s principal argument is based on an erroneous understanding of the correct legal basis for the contested decisions.