alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1366/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1366/2014 of 19 December 2014 publishing, for 2015, the agricultural product nomenclature            for export refunds introduced by Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 (Text with EEA relevance)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1366/2014                     

# of 19 December 2014

# publishing, for 2015, the agricultural product nomenclature for export refunds introduced by Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87

# (Text with EEA relevance)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing                           a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79,                           (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 of 17 December 1987 establishing an agricultural product nomenclature                           for export refunds(2), and in particular the fourth paragraph of Article 3 thereof,                        

Whereas:

The full version of the refund nomenclature valid at 1 January 2015, as it ensues from the regulatory provisions on export                           arrangements for agricultural products, should be published,                        

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 is amended as follows:

Annex I is replaced by the text in Annex I to this Regulation;

Annex II is replaced by the text in Annex II to this Regulation.

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

It shall apply from 1 January 2015 and expire on 31 December 2015.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 19 December 2014.

*For the Commission*                            

*The President*                            

Jean-Claude JUNCKER                            

## ANNEX IU.K.

### “ANNEX I**AGRICULTURAL PRODUCT NOMENCLATURE FOR EXPORT REFUNDS**

#### 1.

#### **Cereals and wheat or rye flour, groats or meal**

#### 2.

#### **Rice and broken rice**

#### 3.

#### **Products processed from cereals**

#### 4.

#### **Cereal-based compound feedingstuffs**

#### 5.

#### **Beef and veal**

#### 6.

#### **Pigmeat**

#### 7.

#### **Poultrymeat**

#### 8.

#### **Eggs**

#### 9.

#### **Milk and milk products**

#### 10.

#### **White and raw sugar without further processing**

#### 11.

#### **Syrups and other sugar products**

## ANNEX IIU.K.

### “ANNEX II

#### **Destination codes for export refunds**

1

OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.                           

2

OJ L 366, 24.12.1987, p. 1.
# CE2004088EN.01032601.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/326 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/326

---

(2004/C 88 E/0331)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0547/03

by Struan Stevenson (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 February 2003)

Subject:   Beef and live cattle exports to the Lebanon and Egypt

Subject:

Would the Commission let me know the quantity (expressed in carcass weight equivalent of (1) live cattle and (2) beef exported by the Community to (a) the Lebanon and (b) Egypt in the three most recent calendar years for which figures are available?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(7 March 2003)

(7 March 2003)

The table below shows the Community exports of live bovine animals and beef to Lebanon and Egypt for the calendar years 1999, 2000 and 2001.

Complete statistical data for the calendar year 2002 are not yet available.

EU 15 exports in metric tonne carcass equivalent

| | To Lebanon | To Egypt |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 |
| Live bovines | 53 705 | 49 402 | 40 923 | 8 493 | 14 067 | 277 |
| Beef | 8 506 | 8 022 | 2 339 | 192 271 | 171 107 | 5 436 |

To Lebanon

To Egypt

1999

2000

2001

1999

2000

2001

Live bovines

53 705

49 402

40 923

8 493

14 067

277

Beef

8 506

8 022

2 339

192 271

171 107

5 436

---
**Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Seventh Chamber) of 11 March 2009 – Borax Europe v Commission**

**(Case T-166/05)**

Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Documents and sound recordings – Refusal of access – Exception relating to the protection of the privacy and integrity of the individual – Exception relating to the protection of the decision-making process

European Communities – Institutions – Right of public access to documents – Regulation No 1049/2001 (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Arts 3 and 4(3)) (paras 40-42, 50, 88,
101-105, 108)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | APPLICATION for annulment of the decision of 21 February 2005 of the Secretary-General of the Commission refusing access to certain documents and sound recordings in connection with the 30th adaptation to technical progress of Council Directive 67/548/EEC of 27 June 1967 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances (OJ, English Special Edition 1967(I), p. 234). |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Annuls the decision of 21 February 2005 of the Secretary-General of the Commission refusing Borax Europe Ltd access to the recordings of the meeting of 5 and 6 October 2004, to two drafts of the summary record of that meeting, to thirteen comments from experts, to two comments from industry representatives and to the document submitted by the Danish Rapporteur; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders the Commission to pay the costs. |
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Frank, McClanahan and Retired Judge Hodges*

DOMINIC D. ROBINSON 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION∗∗

v. Record No. 0739-08-1 PER CURIAM 

 AUGUST 19, 2008 

HAMPTON REDEVELOPMENT AND 

 HOUSING AUTHORITY AND VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL 

 GROUP SELF-INSURANCE ASSOCIATION 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Dominic D. Robinson, pro se, on briefs). 

 (Robert A. Rapaport; Kira A. Ligato; Clarke, Dolph, Rapaport, Hull, 

Brunick & Garriott, P.L.C., on brief), for appellees. 

 Dominic D. Robinson (claimant) appeals a decision of the Workers’ Compensation 

Commission finding that (1) the statute of limitations contained in Code §§ 65.2-601 and 

65.2-406 bars her claim filed on September 17, 2007, and, therefore, the commission is without 

jurisdiction to hear it; and (2) claimant failed to prove any legal basis for tolling the statute of 

limitations contained in either code section. We have reviewed the record and the commission’s 

opinion and find that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the commission in its final opinion. See Robinson v. Hampton Redevelopment and Housing 

Authority , VWC File No. 206-31-07 (Mar. 7, 2008). We dispense with oral argument and 

summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

 *

 Retired Judge William H. Hodges took part in the consideration of this case by 

designation pursuant to Code § 17.1-400(D). 

∗∗ Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication. 
- 2 - 

materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. See Code 

§ 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27.1

Affirmed.

 1

 Because we summarily affirm the commission’s decision, we deny appellees’ motions 

to dismiss filed on May 8, 2008 and May 20, 2008. In addition, we deny claimant’s motions 

under Code § 8.01-428, seeking an award of one billion dollars. We note that in rendering our 

decision, we did not consider any evidence that was not properly before the commission when it 

rendered its decision.
STATE v. Michael Scott HAMILTON.

No. 124PA15-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Feb. 26, 2016.

Benjamin Dowling-Sendor, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Hamilton, Michael Scott.

Joseph L. Hyde, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Valerie Mitchell Asbell, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 2nd of April 2015 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

> "Motion Dissolved by order of the Court in conference, this the 26th of February 2016."
701
N Green Valley Pkwy, Suite 200, Henderson, NV
89074     phone 702-990-3387/ fax
702-990-3301

      


      From
The Desk Of:

      Stanley
L. Teeple, Secretary, CFO

      stanteeple@msn.com

      


      30 July
2010

      


      Carr
Miller Capital LLC

      Everett
Miller, Principal

      


      Dear
Everett-

      


      Please acknowledge by signing below
your agreement that per the terms of the Global
Finance Agreement Extension dated February 22, 2010 between
Indigo-Energy, Inc. (“Company”) and Carr Miller Capital LLC (“CMC”) have been
modified as follows:

      


      CMC has
opted to accept the option as described in Section 2. (a) (below):

      


      Section
2.                Funding
Options.  In satisfaction of its commitment under the GFA, CMC
shall, prior to the expiration of the New Funding Date, have the option to (the
“Options”):

      


      
        	
                 
      

              	
                (a)

              	
                Return
      an aggregate of fifteen million shares of the Company’s common stock
      currently registered under CMC’s name to the Company for
      cancellation;

              


      

      


      And, will
return said shares not later than September 30, 2010 as further prescribed
below:

       


      Given
that CMC has funded $75,000 of the 4th tranch
per the GFA, the actual amount of returned shares per Option 2.(a) above is
14,250,000
shares.

       


      Agreed
and accepted this 30th day of
July, 2010 by:

      


      
        
          	
                  Carr
      Miller Capital LLC

                
	 
      
	
                       

                
	
                  Everett
      Miller

                
	 
      
	
                  Indigo-Energy,
      Inc.

                
	 
      
	
                       

                
	
                  Stanley
      L. Teeple, CFO

                
	 
      
	
                  CMC
      Extension - IIR
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Captaris, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended March 31, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-Q/A), I, Peter Papano, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant
to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Form 10-Q/A fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                  
|--------------------------------------------------
|                                                  
|/s/    PETER PAPANO                               
|                                                  
|Peter Papano Chief Financial Officer and Secretary



March 12, 2004
STATE v. David FELTON.

No. 186P10-3.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 5, 2015.

David Felton, Swan Quarter, for Felton, David.

Zachary Padget, Associate Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Roger A. Echols, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 11th of September 2015 by Defendant for Notice of Appeal:

> "Motion Dismissed Ex Mero Motu by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of November 2015."
**Exhibit 99.24**

**CONSENT OF BRAD ARMSTRONG**

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 40-F, and any amendments and exhibitsthereto, of Goldcorp Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2016 (collectively, the “Annual Report”), I, Brad Armstrong, consent to the references to my name in connection with (including, as an expert or“qualified person”) the Annual Report and any of the exhibits thereto, including as to my supervision of the preparation of the mineral reserves figures for Red Lake Mines. 

I also hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of such information contained in the Annual Report and exhibitsthereto into Registration Statement Nos. 333-126039,333-126040,333-151243,333-151251,333-174376,333-181116,333-188805,333-195816 and333-213153 on Form S-8,No. 333-207371 on Form F-3 and No. 333-211892 on Form F-10 of the Company. 

Date: March 16,2017
Helvetia Asset 

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 3, 2014

No. 04-14-00569-CV

Burton KAHN,

Appellant

v.

HELVETIA ASSET RECOVERT, INC.,

Appellee

From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013-CI-18355

Honorable Michael E. Mery, Judge Presiding

ORDER

On November 12, 2014, appellee filed a motion dismiss to dismiss the appeal for want of 

jurisdiction. After reviewing appellee’s motion, we ordered appellant to file a written response 

to appellee’s motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction in this court on or before December 1, 

2014. We ordered appellant to file a written response specifically addressing whether the 

judgment or order from which appellant seeks to appeal in this case, Appellate No. 04-14-00569-

CV, is the same judgment or order from which appellant sought to appeal in Appellate No. 04-

14-00319-CV, which was dismissed by this court upon appellant’s own motion on July 9, 2014. 

Appellant filed a response. We now ORDER appellee to file a written reply to appellant’s 

response in this court on or before December 23, 2014. 

We order the clerk of this court to serve copies of this order on appellant and all counsel. 

_________________________________

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 3rd day of December, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
# Commission Regulation (EU) No 394/2014Show full title

Commission Regulation (EU) No 394/2014 of 11 April 2014 establishing a prohibition of fishing for skates and rays in Union            waters of VIId by vessels flying the flag of the Netherlands         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Regulation (EU) No 394/2014                     

# of 11 April 2014

# establishing a prohibition of fishing for skates and rays in Union waters of VIId by vessels flying the flag of the Netherlands

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring                           compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy(1), and in particular Article 36(2) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Council Regulation (EU) No 43/2014 of 20 January 2014 fixing for 2014 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and                              groups of fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, to Union vessels, in certain non-Union waters(2), lays down quotas for 2014.

(2)According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation                              by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for                              2014.

(3)It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

## Article 1U.K.Quota exhaustion

The fishing quota allocated to the Member State referred to in the Annex to this Regulation for the stock referred to therein                     for 2014 shall be deemed to be exhausted from the date set out in that Annex.                  

## Article 2U.K.Prohibitions

Fishing activities for the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in                     the Member State referred to therein shall be prohibited from the date set out in that Annex. In particular it shall be prohibited                     to retain on board, relocate, tranship or land fish from that stock caught by those vessels after that date.                  

## Article 3U.K.Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 11 April 2014.

*For the Commission,*                            

*On behalf of the President,*                            

Lowri Evans                            

*Director-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries*                            

## ANNEXU.K.

1

OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 24, 28.1.2014, p. 1.
STATE of North Carolina v. Beamon FOWLER.

No. 264P15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 5, 2015.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 27th of July 2015 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> <page vol="778" reporter="S.E.2d" no="90" /> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of November 2015."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND CASH FLOWS FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH YEAR END REPORT ON FORM 10-K.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                             682,000
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,038,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                       280,000
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,328,000
<PP&E>                                           3,787,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                     779,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   6,329,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              430,000
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             5,000
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,123,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     6,329,000
<SALES>                                          2,346,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,346,000
<CGS>                                            1,692,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,692,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    732,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                732,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       732,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.18
        


</TABLE>
# CE2004084EN.01001502.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/15

---

(2004/C 84 E/0017)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2195/03

by Michael Cashman (PSE) to the Council

(2 July 2003)

Subject:   Counterfeiting and piracy

Subject:

It has been forecast that counterfeiting and piracy will cost EU companies with international activities between EUR 400 and EUR 800 million per annum in the internal market and EUR 2 000 million outside it. In addition, Member States suffer enormous loss of revenue from the smuggling of excised goods. Can the Council give assurances that cooperation to deal with this problem will be discussed at forthcoming meetings of Justice and Home Affairs and Internal Market Ministers?

Reply

(8 March 2004)

(8 March 2004)

In February 2003, the Council and the European Parliament had before them a proposal for a Directive on measures and procedures to ensure the enforcement of intellectual property rights (2003/0024(COD)).

This proposal is currently being examined in detail within the Council bodies pending the opinion of the European Parliament at first reading (scheduled for November 2003). The Council can ensure you that it will continue to accord this proposal the priority it deserves.

In this context, it should be noted that on 22 July 2003 the Council also adopted a Regulation concerning customs action against goods suspected of infringing certain intellectual property rights and the measures to be taken against goods found to have infringed such rights (1). The Regulation forms part of the more general framework of cooperation and mutual assistance between customs administrations at Community level.

1

---

(1)  OJ L 196, 2.8.2003, p. 7.

1

---
# Political and Security Committee Decision EUTM MALI/3/2014 (repealed)Show full title

Political and Security Committee Decision EUTM MALI/3/2014 оf 9 October 2014 on the appointment of the EU Mission Commander            for the European Union military mission to contribute to the training of the Malian Armed Forces (EUTM Mali) and repealing            Decision EUTM MALI/1/2014 (2014/719/CFSP) (repealed)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Political and Security Committee Decision EUTM MALI/3/2014                     

# оf 9 October 2014

# on the appointment of the EU Mission Commander for the European Union military mission to contribute to the training of the                        Malian Armed Forces (EUTM Mali) and repealing Decision EUTM MALI/1/2014                     

# (2014/719/CFSP) (repealed)

F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                        

Textual Amendments

F1Repealed by Political and Security Committee Decision (CFSP) 2015/955 of 16 June 2015 on the appointment of the EU Mission Commander for                                 the European Union military mission to contribute to the training of the Malian Armed Forces (EUTM Mali) and repealing Decision                                 EUTM MALI/3/2014 (EUTM MALI/2/2015).