alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal C 116/2018

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 116 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6128 March 2018 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 116

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6128 March 2018

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| 2018/C 116/01 | Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security for the financial year 2018 | 1 |
| 2018/C 116/02 | Statement of revenue and expenditure of the SESAR Joint Undertaking (SESAR 1) for the financial year 2018 | 5 |
| 2018/C 116/03 | Statement of revenue and expenditure of the SESAR Joint Undertaking (SESAR 2020) for the financial year 2018 | 10 |
| 2018/C 116/04 | Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights for the financial year 2017 — amending budget No 1 | 15 |
| 2018/C 116/05 | Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security for the financial year 2017 — amending budget No 1 | 18 |
| 2018/C 116/06 | Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European GNSS Agency for the financial year 2018 — amending budget No 1 | 21 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

2018/C 116/01

Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security for the financial year 2018

1

2018/C 116/02

Statement of revenue and expenditure of the SESAR Joint Undertaking (SESAR 1) for the financial year 2018

5

2018/C 116/03

Statement of revenue and expenditure of the SESAR Joint Undertaking (SESAR 2020) for the financial year 2018

10

2018/C 116/04

Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights for the financial year 2017 — amending budget No 1

15

2018/C 116/05

Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security for the financial year 2017 — amending budget No 1

18

2018/C 116/06

Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European GNSS Agency for the financial year 2018 — amending budget No 1

21

---

All amounts in this budget document are expressed in euro unless otherwise indicated.

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
----

REPORT

on the annual accounts of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the financial year 2004 together with the Centre's replies

(2005/C 332/09)

CONTENTS

Tables 1 to 4

The Centre's replies

INTRODUCTION

THE COURT'S OPINION

Reliability of the accountsThe Centre's accounts for the financial year ended 31 December 2004 are, in all material respects, reliable.Legality and regularity of the underlying transactionsExcept for the situations described in paragraph 10, the transactions underlying the Centre's annual accounts, taken as a whole, are legal and regular.

OBSERVATIONS

This report was adopted by the Court of Auditors in Luxembourg at its meetings of 5 October and 7 December 2005.

For the Court of Auditors

Hubert WEBER

President

----

(1)OJ L 39, 13.2.1975, p. 1.

(2)OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

(3)  These accounts were drawn up on 12 September 2005 and received by the Court on 13 September 2005.

(4)  The canteen's revenue and expenditure for the financial year 2004 amounted to 137 000 euro and 133 500 euro respectively.

(5)  Article 35 of the Centre's financial regulation.

(6)  Contract 2004-FWC14/RP/D/CMC/VCPOD/013/04).

----

Table 1

European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Thessaloniki)

Table 2

European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training — Implementation of the budget for the financial year 2004

Table 3

European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training — Revenue and expenditure account for the financial years 2004 and 2003

Table 4

European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training — Balance sheet at 31 December 2004 and 31 December 2003

----

(1)  This is the amount published in the Official Journal and represents the total amount of commitment appropriations allocated to Cedefop in the Commission's budget. In the annual accounts published by the Centre, it preferred to report the amount of the corresponding payment appropriations (13 700 000 euro).

NDA: non-differentiated appropriations (commitment appropriations are equal in amount to payment appropriations).

DA: differentiated appropriations (commitment appropriations may differ in amount from payment appropriations).

CA: commitment appropriations in the context of differentiated appropriations.

PA: payment appropriations in the context of differentiated appropriations.

Source: Information supplied by the Centre — This table summarises the data provided by the Centre in its annual accounts.

----

THE CENTRE'S REPLIES

----
# C_2015236EN.01001101.xml

| 20.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 236/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 236/11

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 21 May 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Verder LabTec GmbH & Co. KG v Finanzamt Hilden

(Case C-657/13) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Freedom of establishment - Article 49 TFEU - Restrictions - Staggered recovery of tax on unrealised capital gains - Preservation of allocation of powers of taxation between Member States - Proportionality))

(2015/C 236/14)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Finanzgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Verder LabTec GmbH & Co. KG

Applicant:

Defendant: Finanzamt Hilden

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 49 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding tax legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which, in the case of a transfer of assets from a company located within the territory of that Member State to a permanent establishment of that company located within the territory of another Member State, provides for the disclosure of unrealised capital gains pertaining to those assets which have been generated within the territory of that first Member State, the taxation of such capital gains and the staggered recovery of the tax relating to those gains over 10 annual instalments.

---

(1)  OJ C 71, 8.3.2014.

1

---
# C_2008223EN.01004303.xml

| 30.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/43

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 26 June 2008 — Pfizer v OHIM — Isdin (FOTOPROTECTOR ISDIN)

(Case T-354/07 to T-356/07) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Action for annulment - Invalidity - No need to adjudicate)

(2008/C 223/75)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Pfizer Ltd (Sandwich, Kent, United Kingdom) (represented by: V. von Bomhard, A. Renck, T. Dolde, lawyers, and M. Hawkins, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: Ó. Mondéjar Ortuño, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Isdin, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: M. Esteve Sanz, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance:

Re:

Three actions brought against the decisions of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 June 2007 (Cases R 567/2006-1, R 566/2006-1 and R 565/2006-1) concerning invalidity proceedings between Pfizer Ltd and Isdin, SA.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | Isdin, SA is order to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM). Pfizer Ltd is ordered to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Isdin, SA is order to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM). Pfizer Ltd is ordered to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.

1

---
# CE2004065EN.01015901.xml

| 13.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 65/159 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 65/159

---

(2004/C 65 E/174)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2468/03

by Catherine Stihler (PSE) to the Commission

(24 July 2003)

Subject:   Introduction of digital tachographs

Subject:

Regulation (EEC) 3820/85 (1) lays out the rules relating to the acceptable driving, resting and working times of drivers of commercial vehicles and buses. The hours of such drivers are recorded and controlled by use of tachographs in accordance with Regulation (EEC) 3821/85 (2). More recently Regulation (EC) 2135/98 (3) was published, paving the way for the introduction of digital tachographs (which record on smart cards) in place of the current tachographs (which record on paper charts).

1

2

3

Article 2, paragraph 1 (a) of Regulation 2135/98 states:

| | 24 months from the date of publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities of the act to be adopted pursuant to Article 17(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85, as amended by this Regulation, vehicles put into service for the first time must be fitted with recording equipment in accordance with the requirements of Annex IB to Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85. |
| --- | --- |

24 months from the date of publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities of the act to be adopted pursuant to Article 17(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85, as amended by this Regulation, vehicles put into service for the first time must be fitted with recording equipment in accordance with the requirements of Annex IB to Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85.

Would the Commission please confirm that the act referred to in this paragraph is that which was published as Regulation (EC) 1360/2002, published on 5 August 2002 (4)?

4

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(24 September 2003)

(24 September 2003)

Herewith the Commission confirms that Commission Regulation (EC) No 1360/2002 (5) is the act referred to in Article 2, paragraph 1 (a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2135/98 (6).

5

6

---

(1)  OJ L 370, 31.12.1985, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ L 370, 31.12.1985, p. 8.

2

(3)  OJ L 274, 9.10.1998, p. 1.

3

(4)  OJ L 207, 5.8.2002, p. 1.

4

(5)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1360/2002 of 13 June 2002 adapting for the seventh time to technical progress Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport, OJ L 207, 5.8.2002.

5

(6)  Council Regulation (EC) No 2135/98 of 24 September 1998 amending Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport and Directive 88/599/EEC concerning the application of Regulations (EEC) No 3820/84 and (EEC) No 3821/85, OJ L 274, 9.10.1998.

6

---
EXHIBIT 31.2 

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, J. Roe Buckley, Chief Financial Officer of Mewbourne Development Corporation, Managing General Partner of Mewbourne Energy Partners 05-A, L.P. (the“Registrant”), certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterlyreport on Form 10-Q of Mewbourne Energy Partners 05-A, L.P. 

 

2. Based on myknowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 

 

3. Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: 

 

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant is made known to us particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; 

 

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of thisquarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and 

 

(c)presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

(a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and 

 

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrols; and 

 

6. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I haveindicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date or our most recent evaluation, including anycorrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. 

 

Date: November 14, 2005
# C_2013026EN.01003901.xml

| 26.1.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 26/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 26/39

---

Judgment of the General Court of 29 November 2012 — CB v Commission

(Case T-491/07) (1)

1

(Competition - Decision of an association of undertakings - Market for issuing payment cards in France - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Tariff measures applicable to ‘new entrants’ - Membership fees and so-called ‘regulation of customer function’ and ‘sleeper member fee’ mechanisms - Relevant market - Object of the measures at issue - Restriction of competition by object - Article 81(3) EC - Manifest errors of assessment - Principle of sound administration - Proportionality - Legal certainty)

2013/C 26/73

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Groupement des cartes bancaires ‘CB’ (Paris, France) (represented by: A. Georges, J. Ruiz Calzado, É. Barbier de la Serre, then J. Ruiz Calzado and F. Pradelles, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented: initially by F. Arbault, O. Beynet and V. Bottka, then O. Beynet, V. Bottka and B. Mongin, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the applicant: BNP Paribas (Paris, France) (represented by: O. de Juvigny and D. Berg, lawyers); BPCE, formerly Caisse nationale des caisses d’épargne et de prévoyance (CNCEP) (Paris) (represented by: B. Bär-Bouyssière and A. de Beaugrenier, lawyers); and Société Générale (Paris) (represented by: A. Barav and D. Reymond, lawyers).

Interveners in support of the applicant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2007) 5060 final of 17 October 2007 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC (Case COMP/D1/38.606 — Groupement des Cartes Bancaires ‘CB’).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Groupement des cartes bancaires ‘CB’ to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Groupement des cartes bancaires ‘CB’ to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

| 3. | Orders BPCE, BNP Paribas and Société Générale to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders BPCE, BNP Paribas and Société Générale to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 64, 8.3.2008.

1

---
# C_2022427EN.01004901.xml

| 9.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 427/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 427/49

---

KEY DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES JOINT UNDERTAKING

Publication of the final accounts for the financial year 2021

(2022/C 427/49)

The complete version of the final accounts may be found at the following address:

https://www.kdt-ju.europa.eu/transparency-reporting

---
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

October 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136714 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

Justices 

v SC: 136714 

 COA: 283883 

Washtenaw CC: 07-001192-FH 

JESUS MIGUEL LION, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 30, 2008 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

1015 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

October 22, 2008 

 Clerk
STATE of North Carolina v. Douglas Wayne HOWELL

No. COA16-1172

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: August 1, 2017

VACATED. REMANDED.
In the MATTER OF: A.P.

No. COA17-291

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: September 19, 2017

VACATED. REMANDED.
Colleen BLONDELL v. Shakil AHMED, Shabana Ahmed, Michael Fekete, and Susan Elizabeth Fekete

No. 275A16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Filed September 29, 2017

Martin & Gifford, PLLC, Winston-Salem, by William H. Gifford, Jr., for plaintiff-appellee.

Jordan Price Wall Gray Jones & Carlton, PLLC, by J. Matthew Waters and Lori P. Jones, Raleigh, for defendant-appellants Shakil and Shabana Ahmed.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.
# Official Journal L 102/11 A

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 102 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 4911 April 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 102

English edition

Legislation

Volume 4911 April 2006

---

| Contents | | I   Acts whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and amending Council Regulations (EEC) No 3821/85 and (EC) No 2135/98 and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85
   (1) | 1 |
| Statement | 14 |
| | * | Directive 2006/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the management of waste from extractive industries and amending Directive 2004/35/EC | 15 |
| Statement by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission | 34 |
| | * | Directive 2006/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on minimum conditions for the implementation of Council Regulations (EEC) No 3820/85 and (EEC) No 3821/85 concerning social legislation relating to road transport activities and repealing Council Directive 88/599/EEC
   (1) | 35 |
| Statements | 44 |

Contents

I   Acts whose publication is obligatory

page

*

Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and amending Council Regulations (EEC) No 3821/85 and (EC) No 2135/98 and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85
   (1)

1

Statement

14

*

Directive 2006/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the management of waste from extractive industries and amending Directive 2004/35/EC

15

Statement by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission

34

*

Directive 2006/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on minimum conditions for the implementation of Council Regulations (EEC) No 3820/85 and (EEC) No 3821/85 concerning social legislation relating to road transport activities and repealing Council Directive 88/599/EEC
   (1)

35

Statements

44

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
STATE of North Carolina v. Lester Gerard PACKINGHAM

No. 366PA13

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 27, 2017

G. Glenn Gerding, Attorney at Law, Southport, for Packingham, Lester Gerard.

Anne M. Middleton, Special Deputy Attorney General, David L. Elliott, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Roger A. Echols, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina

**ORDER**

In light of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Packingham v. North Carolina, 582 U.S. ----, 137 S. Ct. 1730, --- L.Ed. 2d ---- (2017), reversing our judgement in State v. Packingham, 368 N.C. 380, 777 S.E.2d 738 (2015), and remanding the case to this Court, we now remand this case to the Court of Appeals, with instructions to remand it to the Superior Court, Durham County, for vacatur of its judgment against defendant entered on 30 May 2012.
STATE v. William Earl ASKEW

133P15-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 1, 2018

John R. Green, Jr., Special Deputy Attorney General, N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

William Earl Askew, for Askew, William Earl.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 4th of January 2018 by Defendant for Petition for Discretionary Review:

*593"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 1st of March 2018."
STATE of North Carolina v. Lance Devaney MARSHALL, Defendant.

No. COA17-749

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 19, 2017

AFFIRMED.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MARCH 6, 2013

NO. 03-12-00240-CV

Michael McDermott, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas; Eduardo Espinosa, Temporary Receiver of Retirement Value, LLC; 

and Donald Taylor, Temporary Receiver of Hill Country Funding, LLC, Appellees

APPEAL FROM 126TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PEMBERTON AND ROSE

DISMISSED ON APPELLANT’S MOTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE ROSE

THIS DAY came to be submitted appellant’s motion to dismiss the appeal in the above cause, 

and the Court having fully considered said motion is of the opinion that same should be granted. 

IT IS THEREFORE ordered that said motion is granted and that the appeal is dismissed. It is 

FURTHER ordered that the appellant pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and 

the court below, and that this decision be certified below for observance.