Traduction de «azione per accertamento della responsabilità » (Italien → Anglais) :

May EU law, and more particularly Article 4(3) TEU in conjunction with Article 325 TFEU and Directive 2006/112/EC, which oblige the Member States to provide effective, dissuasive and proportionate penalties to protect the financial interests of the European Union, be interpreted as precluding the enactment of a national provision which exempts the defendant (whether a director, legal representative, person to whom responsibility for fiscal matters has been delegated or an accessory to the offence) from liability to punishment, if the ...[+++]entity with legal personality concerned has made late payment both of the tax itself and of the administrative penalties owed in connection with VAT, even though the tax assessment has already been made, criminal proceedings and indictment initiated, and the establishment of inter partes proceedings duly confirmed, but before trial proceedings have been declared opened, in a system that does not impose on that director, legal representative, or delegate and accessory to the offence any other penalty, not even an administrative penalty?

The European Consensus on Development of 22 December 2005 and the Council Conclusions of 14 May 2012 on ‘Increasing the impact of EU development policy: an Agenda for Change’ should provide the general policy framework to guide the programming and implementation of the 11th EDF, including the internationally agreed principles on aid effectiveness, such as the principles set out in the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (2005), the EU Code of Conduct on Division of Labour in Development Policy (2007), the EU Guidelines for the Accra Agenda for Action (2008), the EU common position, including on the EU Transparency Guarantee and other aspects of transparency and accountability, for the fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Busan ...[+++], which resulted in, inter alia, the Busan Outcome Document (2011), the Gender Action Plan for external action (2010) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to which the Union is a party.

Article 3(1) of Regulation No 1346/2000 must be interpreted as meaning that the courts of the Member State in the territory of which insolvency proceedings regarding a company’s assets have been opened have jurisdiction to hear and determine an action, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, brought by the liquidator in the insolvency proceedings against the managing director of that company for reimbursement of payments made after the company became insolvent or after it had been established that the company’s liabilities exceeded its assets, where the managing director is domiciled not in another Member State but, as is the situ ...[+++]ation in the main proceedings, in a contracting party to the Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, signed on 30 October 2007, which was approved on behalf of the Community by Council Decision 2009/430/EC of 27 November 2008.

Under most MS jurisdictions confiscation is a sanction linked to a criminal conviction. However, a new legal instrument could introduce instances where confiscation takes place without a prior criminal conviction (thereby transposing FATF Recommendation 3[13] into EU legislation).

The financial responsibility of the Member States for failure to establish entitlements thus making the debt out of time within the meaning of Article 221(3) of the Customs Code, and responsibility in relation to requests to write amounts off has always been implemented and has been standard practice since 1989, without any serious challenge of the legal basis by the Member States.

work out appropriate procedures for the determination of liability and compensation for damage resulting from pollution deriving from violations of the provisions of the Convention.