Traduction de «Lieu d'exécution de l'obligation » (Français → Anglais) :

1. For the enforcement of the obligations under Directive 96/71/EC, in particular Article 6 thereof, and this Directive, Member States shall ensure that there are effective mechanisms for posted workers to lodge complaints against their employers directly, as well as the right to institute judicial or administrative proceedings, also in the Member State in whose territory the workers are or were posted, where such workers consider they have sustained loss or damage as a result of a failure to apply the applicable rules, even after the relationship in which the failure is alleged to have occurred has ended.

1. In carrying out the obligations laid down in Articles 6(3) and 9(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC, the employer shall assess all risks for workers arising from electromagnetic fields at the workplace and, if necessary, measure or calculate the levels of electromagnetic fields to which workers are exposed.

In its Altmark judgment, the Court stated that public service compensation does not constitute an economic advantage in the meaning of Article 107(1) of the EC Treaty if all of the following four conditions are met: 1. the recipient undertaking must actually have a public service mandate and the tasks and related obligations must be clearly defined; 2. the parameters of the compensation must be established in advance in an objective and transparent manner; 3. the compensation must not exceed the costs incurred in discharging the public service mandate; 4. in order to ensure the least cost to the community, the company which is to disc ...[+++]harge public service obligations is chosen either through public procurement, or the costs of providing the services of general economic interest are determined on the basis of the costs of a typical, well-run undertaking.

The trader should be regarded as having fully performed his obligations when he has delivered the goods or has fully provided the services ordered by the consumer.

The four conditions are: (a) the beneficiary of a State funding mechanism for an SGEI must be formally entrusted with the provision and discharge of an SGEI, the obligations of which must be clearly defined; (b) the parameters for calculating the compensation must be established beforehand in an objective and transparent manner, to avoid it conferring an economic advantage which may favour the recipient undertaking over competing undertakings; (c) the compensation cannot exceed what is necessary to cover all or part of the costs incurred in the discharge of the SGEI, taking into account the relevant receipts and a reasonable profit for ...[+++] discharging those obligations; and (d) where the beneficiary is not chosen pursuant to a public procurement procedure, the level of compensation granted must be determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs which a typical undertaking, well run, would have incurred in discharging those obligations, taking into account the relevant receipts and a reasonable profit.

In this judgment, the Court stated that public service compensation does not constitute an advantage in the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty if all of the following four conditions are met: (1) the recipient undertaking must actually have public service obligations to discharge and these obligations must be clearly defined, (2) the parameters of the compensation must be established in advance in an objective and transparent manner, (3) the compensation does not exceed the costs incurred in discharging the public service obligations, (4) in order to ensure the least costs to the community, the company which is to discharge public ...[+++] service obligations is chosen either pursuant to a public procurement, or if not, the level of compensation is determined based on the costs of a typical, well run undertaking.