Дахно І.І. Право Європейського Союзу: Англо-Українсько-Російський Глосарій
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
221
rangements for such ac-
cess were laid down b
y
the Permanent Repre-
sentatives Committee on
8 November, in a re
p
or
t
concernin
g
the internal
procedure to be fol-
lowed.
Under the Treaty of Am-
sterdam, a new Article
on trans
p
arenc
y
was
written into the EC
Treat
y
(
Article 255
)
. I
t
states that an
y
citizen of
the Euro
p
ean Union an
d
any natural or legal per-
son residing or having its
re
g
istered office in a
Member State has a right
of access to Euro
p
ean
Parliament, Council o
r
Commission documents.
As a result of Article
255, which was imple-
mented by the Regula-
tion of 30 May 2001, the
Council once a
g
ain
amended its Rules of
Procedure. The
g
eneral
p
ublic can now consul
t
the results and explana-
tions of Council votes
and all Council state-
ments on the a
pp
lication
or interpretation of leg-
islation under prepara-
tion.
, B
%$ -
$ . ; -
-
5 $
8 -
,
, -
. ! 1-
)
-
&-
0
$)
#
(
255
)
. ' ,
)-
0
$)
)-
*
,
-
$
*
— ,
-
0$)-
, B
5%. (
)
255, -
B-
30
2001
, B
«;
».
))
$-
) $
-
B -
B -
,
)).
, #
(
1995
)
5 , -
>$
-
) ) -
, # $-
$ -
)$ . ;-
$ -
> -
> 5 -
> -
$ 8 ,
-
,
>
)-
. ; 1
)
> -
& K-
$ #
() 255). 4 -
, $ -
K
$
*-
, -
>$
*
—
,
K$ -
, # 5-
. 5
)
) 255,
> B-
30
2001 , # )
«;-
>». -
)
> -
)
)
W -
#
#
> -
).
222
Treaty of Amsterdam
The Treaty of Amster-
dam is the result of the
Intergovernmental Con-
ference launched at the
Turin Euro
p
ean Council
on 29 March 1996. I
t
was adopted at the Am-
sterdam European Coun-
cil on 16 and 17 June
1997 and si
g
ned on 2
October 1997 b
y
the
Forei
g
n Ministers of the
fifteen Member States. It
entered into force on 1
Ma
y
1999
(
the first da
y
of the second month
followin
g
ratification b
y
the last Member State
)
after ratification b
y
all
the Member States in ac-
cordance with their re-
s
p
ective constitutional
requirements.
From the le
g
al
p
oint of
view, the Treat
y
amends
certain
p
rovisions of the
EU Treat
y
, the Treaties
establishing the Euro-
p
ean Communities an
d
certain related acts. I
t
does not re
p
lace the
other Treaties; rather, i
t
stands alongside them.
9 -
&
1
) -
% *%, -
% )$ 0-
$)$ B 29
1996
. '
$$ -
)$ 0$-
)$ B 16 17 -
1997 -
$ 2 1997
-
’-
— -
. ' -
1
1999
(
*-
% ) -
—
)
*% -
— -
%
$ -
. ! % -
$ &
-
) &-
0
$)$
#, &
,
) 0$)-
# -
.
'
&,
.
9 -
& 1 -
) -
)$
*, -
$
K$ # 29
1996 . 4
> -
K$ #-
16 17
1997 2
1997 -
>
-
— . 4
1
1999
(
>$
)
* -
—
) *-
-
— -
-
> -
. #
$
J &-
>
& K$-
#, &
,
K$-
# -
>
>
. 4
&, -
.
Treaty of Nice
Ado
p
ted in Decembe
r
2000, at the conclusion
of the Nice Euro
p
ean
Council, and si
g
ned on
26 Februar
y
2001, the
Treaty of Nice concluded
the Inter
g
overnmental
Conference
(
IGC
)
tha
t
b
e
g
an in Februar
y
2000,
the objective of which
^
;
$$
2000 ) -
)% 0$)% B-
$ 26
2001 , -
)$ -
6 -
*
(
IGC
)
,
2000 , %
^
;
2000
-
K$ #-
26 *-
2001 , -
$
6 -
* (IGC), -
*
2000 , ) $
223
was to
g
ear the workin
g
of the European institu-
tions to the arrival of
new Member States.
It o
p
ened the wa
y
to the
institutional refor
m
needed for the forth-
comin
g
EU enlar
g
emen
t
with the accession of
candidate countries fro
m
eastern and southern
Europe.
The main chan
g
es i
t
b
rin
g
s relate to limitin
g
the size and com
p
osition
of the Commission, ex-
tending qualified major-
it
y
votin
g
, a new
wei
g
htin
g
of votes
within the Council an
d
makin
g
the stren
g
thene
d
cooperation arrange-
ments more flexible. In
addition to discussions
on these four ke
y
issues,
other institutional ques-
tions were tackled: sim-
plification of the treaties,
the definition of
p
owers,
the inte
g
ration of the
Charter of Fundamental
Rights and the role of the
national parliaments. The
Declaration on the Fu-
ture of the Union, an-
nexed to the Treat
y
, se
t
out the next ste
p
s to be
taken to deepen the in-
stitutional reforms and to
make sure that the Treaty
of Nice is
j
ust one sta
g
e
in this process.
The Treat
y
of Nice has
b
een ratified b
y
all the
Member States, in accor-
dance with their respec-
tive constitutional rules,
and came into force on 1
February 2003.
* -
$)
$
— . '
-
$% *, -
%
0
$) #
.
8 ,
),
)
5%, -
-
* )
B
)% -
-
.
$
-
, -
$ -
: -
, -
, «
%
*
)
»
) )
. «&-
$ #-
», &-
, -
,
) $, -
$ -
* , -
, )$ -
*-
)
.
$
* -
— -
% -
$ -
-
1 2003 -
.
-
*-
$ -
>
>
—
. 4
>
) -
)$ *, -
$ -
K
$ #.
8> , -
> , -
-
5-
, -
*-
> )
#
)$ -
> $-
. '
-
J >
> , -
-
)>-
: -
, -
, -
« *-
)>
»
) )> -
. &
#, -
&
,
-
,
>
> >) $>
-
)$ *>
, > -
, $
-
$
*
$ J
. $ -
> *-
-
— -
-
-
224
)> -
1 * 2003 .
Troïka
The «Troïka» consists of
the Member State which
currentl
y
holds the
Presidency of the Coun-
cil, the Member State
which held it for the pre-
cedin
g
six months an
d
the Member State which
will hold it for the nex
t
six months. The Troïka
is assisted by the Com-
mission and re
p
resents
the Union in external re-
lations comin
g
under the
common foreign and se-
curity policy.
The Troïka in its
p
resen
t
form has been altered b
y
the Treaty of Amsterdam
and replaced by a system
whereb
y
the Presidenc
y
is assisted by the Secre-
tar
y
-General of the
Council, in his ca
p
acit
y
as Hi
g
h Re
p
resentative
for the common forei
g
n
and securit
y
p
olic
y
, an
d
by the Commission.
=
«<
$» )
— ,
-
B,
—
, -
-
— -
, $ -
-
. 5-
$
#
-
, )
)
. <
$,
%%
$
*
,
1)-
-
,
) 8-
)$
B %$ '-
;
)% % -
-
5.
=
«<
$»
— ,
> -
#, -
— , -
-
— ,
-
) -
-
. 5 -
$ -
# -
> -
,
. <
$,
>$
*
,
> 1-
-
-
,
8
)>$
) # -
'>
; -
$ $ -
.
Tying or tied selling
Commercial
p
ractice of
conditionin
g
the sale of
one product on the pur-
chase of another product.
If tying is not objectively
j
ustified b
y
the nature of
the
p
roducts or thei
r
commercial usa
g
e, such
p
ractice ma
y
restric
t
com
p
etition. Economic
theor
y
su
gg
ests that a
firm
:’ ’-
$
5
$
,
-
-
. ( ’
’ -
-
% $-
-
"/ -
$
5 -
, -
-
.
K > -
W -
$
-
)-
,
225
which en
j
o
y
s marke
t
power in one market (ty-
in
g
market
)
ma
y
, unde
r
certain conditions, be able
to levera
g
e this marke
t
p
osition or dominance
into another market
(
tie
d
market), squeeze com-
petitors out of this sec-
ond market and then
raise
p
rices above the
com
p
etitive level. In a
competition analysis per-
spective, the main nega-
tive effect of t
y
in
g
on
competition is, therefore,
p
ossible foreclosure on
the market of the tie
d
product. In addition tying
may lead to higher prices
for both the tying and the
tied product.
. K
,
*
,
-
(’$ )
,
,
-
-
$
(’$ ), -
)
$
). 4, -
$ -
$ -
% -
’-
.
, ’
-
, ’-
, ’-
.
)
. G-
-
,
*
,
>$
) >-
(>$ >-
) , -
>
,
>) -
) J >-
-
$
> (>$ >-
), >) -
J
> >-
) > >,
>$ ).
@, -
-
) -
>
-
-
>.
' , >-
>> -
,
>,
.
226
Undertaking
For the
p
ur
p
ose of EU
antitrust law, an
y
entit
y
en
g
a
g
ed in an economic
activity, that is an activ-
it
y
consistin
g
in offerin
g
g
oods or services on a
g
iven market, re
g
ardless
of its le
g
al status and the
way in which it is fi-
nanced, is considered an
undertakin
g
. To
q
ualif
y
,
no intention to earn
p
rofits is re
q
uired, no
r
are
p
ublic bodies b
y
definition excluded. The
rules governing
concentrations s
p
eak of
«undertakings
concerned», that is the
direct
p
artici
p
ants in a
merger or in the acquisi-
tion of control.
>#
& $ -
0$)-
#
)-
,
$ ),
-
%
, -
$ -
$ *, -
) .
& ,
, -
)
-
) -
. ;, -
)
,
)
«
»,
-
-
.
>
& $ -
K$-
# -
, $-
J-
$ ), -
>,
*-
, -
.
& > -
) -
-
)
>)
-
> -
>. ;, -
,
«$-
> »,
)
>
-
.
Uniform electoral pro-
cedure, Statute for
Members of the Euro-
pean Parliament and for
European political par-
ties
Article 190 of the EC
Treaty (former Article
, "
!
!-
( -
(
# 190 &
0$) #-
3 -
,
3-
-
3
(
(
#) 190 &
K$ #-
U
u
227
138) requires the Euro-
p
ean Parliament to draw
up proposals for elec-
tions b
y
direct universal
suffrage under a uniform
p
rocedure in all the
Member States, which is
not the case at
p
resen
t
(
re
g
ional lists coexis
t
with national lists
)
. This
would ensure that the
different European po-
litical tendencies were
more faithfully repre-
sented in the Euro
p
ean
Parliament. However, all
concrete
p
ro
p
osals alon
g
these lines in the
p
as
t
have foundered on na-
tional electoral tradi-
tions.
A common statute for all
Members of the Euro-
pean Parliament, in-
tended to eliminate dif-
ferences in treatmen
t
between nationalities and
ensure greater transpar-
enc
y
— included in the
Amsterdam Treaty at the
re
q
uest of the Euro
p
ean
Parliament — is still be-
in
g
ne
g
otiated between
the Parliament and the
Council. With the entr
y
into force of the Treat
y
of Nice, the Statute will
have to
g
o before the
Council for a
pp
roval b
y
q
ualified ma
j
orit
y
, with
the exception of the pro-
visions relating to taxa-
tion, which should
g
ive
real prospects for agree-
ment on a sub
j
ect which
has been
p
endin
g
since
1998.
The Treat
y
of Nice has
su
pp
lemented Article
191 of the EC Treat
y
with a legal base allowi-
(
138
)
0$) -
-
$
)
*-
— -
, ) -
()
) -
)
)
. +
,
$) -
-
0$)-
. '
,
% )
) -
. !-
)$
0
$)
, -
$
-
)%
,
—
$ 1-
)$
0$)-
,—
) -
% ;-
B. !
) , #-
$ B
-
* )-
, -
),
)
, -
) ) -
)
, $
1998 .
)$ -
(
> ) 138
)
K$-
-
$ -
) >
-
-
$
—
, J >
(
)>
)> -
)
. G
), > -
>
$
-
> -
>
K$ -
. ' , -
>
J
) -
)> )>
. 4$ -
K-
$ -
,
>$
$
-
)$ -
, — >$
1$ -
) K-
$ -
, — -
-
;-
#. # -
-
/
) #-
-
*> )-
, -
$, -
-
,
>
)
228
ng adoption, via the co-
decision
p
rocedure, of a
statute for European-
level
p
olitical
p
arties
g
overnin
g
, in
p
articular,
the criteria for their rec-
o
g
nition and the rules
governing their financ-
in
g
. A corres
p
ondin
g
proposal is currently be-
fore the European Par-
liament.
191 &-
0
$)
# -
, -
$,
)
$
), #
% -
$)
, $,
, -
% % -
,
) %
*. '-
-
) 0$-
) .
J -
, >$ -
1998
. $ -
)
191 & K-
$ #
$ $, -
$
,
-
> -
$, /
$
,
>$, ,
-
,
*. #-
-
>
K$ -
.
229
Wei
g
htin
g
of votes in
the Council
When a decision is taken
by
q
ualified ma
j
orit
y
in
the Council, the weight-
in
g
of votes is the resul
t
of a compromise be-
tween Member States
which, althou
g
h e
q
ual in
law, differ in various re-
spects. One factor deter-
minin
g
the number of
votes a Member State
has is the size of its
population, with an ad-
j
ustment which leads to
relative over-
re
p
resentation of the
countries with a small
population.
This s
y
stem has worke
d
well so far, since it has
g
iven le
g
itimac
y
to the
decisions taken. With the
current distribution of
votes it is im
p
ossible fo
r
the «lar
g
e» countries to
combine to
p
ut the
«small» countries in a
minorit
y
and vice versa.
This
g
ives a
g
uarantee
that decisions taken b
y
q
ualified ma
j
orit
y
have
the broadest
p
ossible
support.
With a view to enlarge-
ment, the last Intergov-
:$
&
5 $-
)
*
) B, -
-
)
— -
, ,
, ) -
. 4-
, -
)) -
,
—
, %% -
, ,
) -
-
% -
.
+ -
)
,
) -
$
. ! -
)
«»
% ’,
)
«» % -
. +
,
,
$
* )-
, ) $-
,
.
! -
*+
"
5 -
*-
> )
#,
-
)
—
, >,
> , -
. 4
*, -
-
, -
— , -
-
, $, -
-
) -
)
> .
G
>,
)
>
.
; > -
-
«)» -
W, -
> ) )-
«>» -
>
. G
,
, >
*>
W
w
230
ernmental Conference
(IGC) implemented a re-
vision of the scale of
weightings to ensure that
the relative weight of the
«small» and «medium-
sized» countries is no
t
out of
p
ro
p
ortion to the
size of their
p
o
p
ulation.
The number of votes of
the most populous coun-
tries has thereby been in-
creased further relative
to the others, to enable
the le
g
itimac
y
of the
Council’s decisions to be
maintained in terms of
demographic representa-
tiveness. The new system
of wei
g
htin
g
will come
into force on 1 Novem-
ber 2004.
The IGC has also de-
cided on the number of
votes to be allocated to
the new members afte
r
accession.
As well as ad
j
ustin
g
the
number of votes, the
Treaty of Nice has intro-
duced the double major-
ity system.
In the approach to en-
lar
g
ement, the
q
uestion
of the weighting of votes
in the Council is closel
y
linked to that of the
number and nationalit
y
of the Commissioners
and the extension of
qualified majority vot-
in
g
. The
g
reater the
scope of qualified ma-
j
orit
y
votin
g
, the more
b
eneficial fair wei
g
htin
g
of the votes in the Coun-
cil will be for decision-
makin
g
, as it will avoi
d
the risk of veto. On the
q
uestion of the numbe
r
and nationality of Com-
, 6-
*
(IGC) -
-
-
, -
«»
«
)
»
%
%
. 5))
$) -
% -
-
,
) B
*
.
-
1 -
2004 .
IGC
$
))
, ) -
.
4 -
) , )-
$
$% -
). ! -
, -
B
’ )
5-
*-
). `
) -
*-
), -
)
-
B
$ ), -
)
)
. !
)) -
5,
),
-
, )
.
# -
, 6-
) -
*
(
IGC
)
-
-
, > -
)>$ «>»
«
»
>
. 5
-
> > -
> )
, > )
> -
-
$ # -
*
). -
-
1
2004 .
IGC -
-
, > >
) >
-
.
5
,
$
$ )-
. # -
, -
-
#
5-
-
-
*> )-
. ` )-
W
,
> -