Examples of using Second phase of the procedure in English and their translations into Slovak
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
-
Medicine
-
Financial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Official/political
-
Computer
-
Programming
First, in the caselaw relied on by Vodafone, the action did notseek the annulment of a decision not to initiate the second phase of the procedure.
Secondly, Article 50(2) TEU states that‘a Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention',thereby activating the second phase of the procedure.
Furthermore, no provision of Directive 2002/21 states that the fact that the Commission does not initiate the second phase of the procedure is to be regarded as equivalent to an approval of the notified draft measure authorising the NRA to act.
In any event, the Commission has sole competence under Directive 2002/21 to decide whether to impose a moratorium on the adoption of a measure notified by an NRA,by initiating the second phase of the procedure.
Since the Commission has sole jurisdiction to assess the compatibility with the commonmarket of State aid or a concentration having a Community dimension,non-initiation of the second phase of the procedure may deprive interested parties of the opportunity to submit their comments before the sole competent authority.
It also points out that it participated in the administrative procedure before the Commission during the first phase of the examination of draft measure ES/2005/0330, submitted comments on the draft measure and would have been entitled toparticipate in the in-depth proceedings before the Commission had the second phase of the procedure been initiated.
To that effect, Vodafone states that it is entitled to appeal against the Commission's decision not to open the second phase of the procedure, on the ground that the only course open to the Commission- faced with the evidence contained in the CMT's notification-was to initiate the second phase of the procedure.
Nor can Vodafone's argument that the contested act is of direct concern to it on account of the procedural rights of which itis deprived by the decision not to initiate the second phase of the procedure provided for in Article 7(4) of Directive 2002/21 succeed.
In the fourth place, Vodafone's argument that the letter of 30 January 2006constitutes an implied decision not to initiate the second phase of the procedure provided for in Article 7(4) of Directive 2002/21 which should accordingly be open to challenge in order to safeguard the procedural rights which it would have enjoyed during that second phase must also be rejected.
Vodafone submits, first, that it is apparent from the content and the context in which it was adopted that the contested act constitutes an authorisation decision, by which the Commission endorsed the CMT's draft measure anddecided not to initiate the second phase of the procedure under Article 7(4) of Directive 2002/21.
Even though the Commission states that the initiation of the second phase of the procedure, under Article 7(4)of Directive 2002/21, is published on the Commission internet site, with a request to interested parties to submit their comments within five working days, the fact that such a procedure is not initiated does not affect the procedural rights of an interested party.
In the first place, it states that, by adopting the contested act, the Commission approved draft measure ES/2005/0330 and decided not to impose the additional moratorium of two months provided for in Article 7(4)of Directive 2002/21 and not to open the second phase of the procedure provided for in that provision, thereby depriving it of its procedural rights.
Vodafone also relies on caselaw concerning State aid, according to which a decision adopted by the Commission pursuant to Article 88(3)EC not to initiate the second phase of the procedure and to approve the grant of new aid notified by a Member State is such that it produces direct effects not only for the Member State, but also for the proposed recipient of the aid and for third party complainants.
In any event, Vodafone submits that the part of the contested act in which the Commission reproduces the wording of Article 7(5) of Directive 2002/21 constitutes an operative part by which, in stating that the CMT may adopt the resulting draft measure andin deciding thus not to initiate the second phase of the procedure, the Commission lifted the only remaining baronthe adoption by CMT of draft measure ES/2005/0330.
By reproducing the wording of Article 7(5) of Directive 2002/21 in the operative part of the contested act but omitting the phrase‘except in cases covered by paragraph 4', which is an integral part of that provision, the Commission clearly decided that the CMT's draft measure did not fall within Article 7(4) of Directive 2002/21 as it had no serious doubts as to the compatibility of the measure with Community law andhad decided not to initiate the second phase of the procedure.
Thirdly, there is an interdependence between the first and second phases of the procedure, which also highlights how the predominance of the unilateral character in the initial phase affects the succeeding phase. .
In the case of requests made by taxpayers before 1 November 2004, in line with the provisions of the Prolongation Protocol,the arbitration procedure(the second phase of the Convention) should be initiated as follows(unlessthe two-year time limit has been extended in accordance with Article 7(4) of the Convention).
It is true that the institutions intervene in a significant manner in the second phase of negotiating the withdrawal procedure.
The second phase has been working on a common asylum procedure and a uniform status for those granted asylum or subsidiary protection.
Therefore, in the second phase of implementing this policy, in which the co decision procedure applies, legislative conditions should be put in place that enable real access for asylum seekers to the labour market and to training programmes.
In order to be in a position to establish the above-mentioned increases of the existing tariff rate quota for high-quality beef, to a total of 21,500 tonnes(first phase) and subsequently,48,200 tonnes foreseen in the second phase of both Memoranda of Understanding starting on 1 August 2012, the legislative procedure needs to be started in a timely manner.
Ordinary legislative procedure- Second phase.
In the second phase, the co-decision procedure will apply, in accordance with Article 294 TFEU, which requires a qualified majority vote in the Council and the involvement of the European Parliament as co-legislator.
This second phase of the infringement procedure for the breach of the 2003 Directives on the opening of the gas and electricity markets concerns Germany, Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Spain, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania.