Examples of using Essential procedural in English and their translations into Bulgarian
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Official
-
Medicine
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
First plea in law: breach of essential procedural requirements.
Infringement of Article[107 TFEU] by the direct award of the concession for the construction and the management of the Passante di Mestre to CAV',and, second,‘Infringement of essential procedural requirements.
Eighth plea in law, alleging a violation of an essential procedural requirement(right to be heard).
The first plea in law,alleging infringement of essential procedural requirements, lack of and contradictory nature of grounds and the infringement of Article 107 TFEU, as regards the direct award to CAV of the concession for the construction and management of the Passante.
Sixth plea in law, alleging a violation of essential procedural requirements.
Second plea in law: flagrant breach of essential procedural requirements by reason of an inadequate statement of reasons for the contested decisions.
The two pleas in law presented by the applicant are entitled,first,‘Infringement of essential procedural requirements.
The first alleges an infringement of essential procedural requirements and of the rights of the defence.
Customs union- Imports of raw cane sugar from the Netherlands Antilles- Post‑clearance recovery of import duties- Request for remission of import duties- Article 220(2)(b) and Article 239 of Regulation(EEC)No 2913/92- Infringement of essential procedural requirements.
A- The plea in law alleging infringement of essential procedural requirements and of the rights of the defence.
The Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria, the Code of Penal Procedure, as well as a number of international instruments to which the Republic of Bulgaria is a party state that the accused has the right to protection andviolation of this right is an essential procedural violation that may compromise the entire criminal process.
First plea in law: flagrant breach of essential procedural requirements by reason of a lack of(full) disclosure of the contested decisions.
The Slovak Republic and Hungary claim that, since the Council made substantial amendments to the Commission's initial proposal and adopted the contested decision withoutagain consulting the Parliament, it breached the essential procedural requirements laid down in Article 78(3) TFEU, and that the contested decision should therefore be annulled.
First plea in law: flagrant breach of essential procedural requirements by reason of a lack of(full) disclosure of the contested decisions.
The Commission claims that the applicant challenges only the substance of the assessment of its services concerning the insufficiency of relevant factors to pursue the examination of the complaint,by relying on grounds alleging an infringement of an essential procedural requirement, an inadequate statement of reasons, and an infringement of Article 107 TFEU, as well as a distortion of the facts.
The complaints alleging infringement of essential procedural requirements, infringement of the obligation to state reasons and distortion of the facts.
Public service contracts- Community tendering procedure- Provision of services relating to the maintenance anddevelopment of the information systems of the Directorate-General for Regional Policy- Rejection of a tender- Action for annulment- Equal treatment- Duty to state reasons- Infringement of essential procedural requirements- Manifest error of assessment- Non‑contractual liability.
The use of that procedure must, therefore, be regarded as an essential procedural requirement within the meaning of Article 263(2) TFEU.
Hungary's sixth plea,alleging breach of essential procedural requirements in that, when adopting the contested decision, the Council did not comply with the language rules of Union law.
Under Article 63(2) of Regulation No 40/94, the Court may annul or alter a decision of a Board of Appeal of OHIM only‘on grounds of lack of competence,infringement of an essential procedural requirement, infringement of the Treaty, of[Regulation No 40/94] or of any rule of law relating to their application or misuse of power'.
Hungary's sixth plea,alleging breach of essential procedural requirements in that, when adopting the contested decision, the Council did not comply with the rules of EU law on the use of languages.
As stated in Article 63(2) of Regulation No 40/94, the Court of First Instance may annul or alter a decision of a Board of Appeal of OHIM only‘on grounds of lack of competence,infringement of an essential procedural requirement, infringement of the Treaty, of[the] Regulation or of any rule of law relating to their application or misuse of power'.
The second plea in law,alleging infringement of essential procedural requirements, lack of and contradictory nature of grounds, distortion of facts, and infringement of Article 107 TFEU, as regards the toll increase on the Tangenziale.
Case T-25/04: González y Díez, SAv Commission of the European Communities(State aid- Aid to cover exceptional restructuring costs- Withdrawal of an earlier decision- Expiry of the ECSC Treaty- Competence of the Commission- Continuity of the Community legal order- No infringement of essential procedural requirements- Protection of legitimate expectations- Manifest error of assessment).
Third ground of appeal: infringement of law and/or infringement of essential procedural requirements by the General Court in that it wrongly considered the fines to be proportionate and adequate.
Actions brought by officials- Interest in bringing proceedings- Plea based on infringement of essential procedural requirements- Linked jurisdiction of the administration- Invalid plea in law.
On the basis of its duty to state reasons,which is an essential procedural requirement, the Council must state, in the grounds for its fund-freezing decisions, the decisions of competent national authorities which specifically examined and found the terrorist acts which it uses as a factual basis for its own decisions.
The second part of the Slovak Republic's fourth plea and Hungary's third plea,alleging breach of essential procedural requirements in that the Council did not act unanimously, contrary to Article 293(1) TFEU.
Hungary claims that the Council breached an essential procedural requirement in that it adopted the contested decision although the text of the decision put to the vote was not available in all the official languages of the Union.
The third part of the Slovak Republic's third plea and the first part of its fourth plea, and Hungary's fifth plea,alleging breach of essential procedural requirements in that the Council did not comply with the obligation to consult the Parliament laid down in Article 78(3) TFEU.