Traduction de «demande d interprétation d arrêts » (Français → Anglais) :

9. Endorses the concerns voiced by many local authorities in response to the interpretation of the rulings of the Court of Justice in the field of urban development; firmly believes that the operationally and legally strict application of public procurement rules might hinder urban development; calls on the Commission to draw up, in close cooperation with Parliament, the Council and regional and local authorities, the corresponding public procurement rules with sufficient clarity to enable contracting authorities clearly to identify which public works contracts and concessions are subject to the procurement rules and thus distinguish b ...[+++]etween such contracts and concessions and urban development projects which are not subject to those rules, so that land agreements can be facilitated between the public and private sector without the unnecessary requirement of having to issue a call for tenders and without jeopardising the powers and right of local authorities to decide how they want to develop their territory; awaits with great interest the judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-451/08; endorses the view of the Advocate-General of the Court of Justice delivered on 17 November 2009 in Case C-451/08: ‘These broad and ambitious aims must be borne in mind when interpreting the Directive but it should not be assumed that, by appealing to the purpose of the measure, its scope can be extended indefinitely’ (paragraph 35); otherwise there is the risk ‘that all town planning activities are subject to the Directive since, by definition, provisions on the possible execution of building works substantially alter the value of the land in question’.

It may be an interpretation or a response to the rulings of the Supreme Court, but like laws, those rulings are subject to interpretation.

In the Commission Directorate General Interpretation receives and processes interpretation requests centrally.

However, the solution would not take account of the time elapsing between the interpretative judgment in Verkooijen and the judgment providing for a limitation in time or the judgment to be delivered in the present case, and would be liable to penalise excessively those persons who took action before the latter judgment was delivered.

It follows that the rule as thus interpreted may, and must, be applied by the courts even to legal relationships which arose and were established before the judgment ruling on the request for interpretation, provided that the conditions for bringing a dispute relating to the application of that rule before the competent courts are satisfied.

– I should like to ask the President-in-Office of the Council whether she can confirm my belief that European citizens are entitled to benefit from this decision, whether or not the Member States have put provisions in place to interpret the decision?