ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 39/3

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 19 November 2013 — European Commission v Council of the European Union

(Case C-63/12) (1)

(Action for annulment - Decision 2011/866/EU - Annual adjustment of the remuneration and pensions of officials and other servants of the European Union - Staff Regulations - Article 65 of the Staff Regulations - Method of adjustment - Article 3 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations - Exception clause - Article 10 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations - Serious and sudden deterioration in the economic and social situation - Adjustment of correction coefficients - Article 64 of the Staff Regulations - Council decision - Refusal to adopt the Commission’s proposal)

2014/C 39/05

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall, D. Martin and J.P. Keppenne, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: European Parliament (represented by: A. Neergaard and S. Seyr, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and J. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, D. Hadroušek and J. Vláčil, acting as Agents), Kingdom of Denmark (represented by: V. Pasternak Jørgensen and C. Thorning, acting as Agents, Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and J. Möller, acting as Agents), Kingdom of Spain (represented by: N. Díaz Abad and S. Centeno Huerta, acting as Agents), Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by C. Wissels and M. Bulterman, acting as Agents), United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: E. Jenkinson and J. Beeko, acting as Agents, and R. Palmer, Barrister)

Re:

Action for annulment — Council Decision 2011/866/EU of 19 December 2011 concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Council Regulation adjusting with effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pension of the officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto OJ 2011 L 341, p. 54) — Non-compliance with method for annual adjustment of the remuneration and pensions of officials and other servants of the European Union — Refusal to adjust correction coefficients relating to places of employment — Misuse of power — Infringement of Articles 64 and 65 of the Staff Regulations and Articles 1, 3 and 10 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations — Infringement of the principle ‘patere legem quam ipse fecisti’ — Infringement of the principle of equal treatment — Insufficient statement of reasons

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the European Commission to pay the costs;

3. Orders the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Kingdom of Spain, the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the European Parliament to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 118, 21.4.2012.
1.

Declares that, by not taking, within the prescribed period, all the measures necessary to recover from Portovesme Srl and Eurallumina SpA the State aid declared unlawful and incompatible with the internal market in Article 2 of Commission Decision 2011/746/EU of 23 February 2011 on State aid measures C 38/B/04 (ex NN 58/04) and C 13/06 (ex N 587/05) granted by Italy to Portovesme Srl, ILA SpA, Eurallumina SpA and Syndial SpA, the Italian Republic failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 3 and 4 of that decision.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 45/10

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 28 November 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Central Administrativo Norte — Portugal) — Maria Albertina Gomes Viana Novo and Others v Fundo de Garantia Salarial IP

(Case C-309/12) (1)

(Request for a preliminary ruling - Directive 80/987/EEC - Directive 2002/74/EC - Protection of employees in the event of employer’s insolvency - Guarantee institutions - Limitation on the payment obligation of the guarantee institution - Wage claims falling due more than six months before the commencement of legal proceedings seeking a declaration of the employer’s insolvency)

2014/C 45/18

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Central Administrativo Norte

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Maria Albertina Gomes Viana Novo, Ezequiel Martins Dias, Gabriel Inácio da Silva Fontes, Marcelino Jorge dos Santos Simões, Manuel Dourado Eusébio, Alberto Martins Mineiro, Armindo Gomes de Faria, José Fontes Cambas, Alberto Martins do Alto, José Manuel Silva Correia, Marilde Marisa Moreira Marques Moita, José Rodrigues Salgado Almeida, Carlos Manuel Sousa Oliveira, Manuel da Costa Moreira, Paulo da Costa Moreira, José Manuel Serra da Fonseca, Ademar Daniel Lourenço Dias, Ana Mafalda Azevedo Martins Ferreira

Defendant: Fundo de Garantia Salarial IP

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal Central Administrativo do Norte — Interpretation of Arts. 4 and 10 of Council Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 October 1980 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer (OJ 1980 L 283, p. 23) — Limitation of the liability of guarantee institutions — National legislation limiting the obligation to pay claims to those falling due during the six-month period preceding the initiation of proceedings for a declaration of the employer’s insolvency — Application of that limitation in cases in which proceedings have been brought before the labour courts to determine the value of claims that have not been paid during the six months following the date on which they fell due.

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 October 1980 relating to the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer, in its original version, as amended by Directive 2002/74/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002, must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude national legislation which does not guarantee wage claims falling due more than six months before the commencement of an action seeking a declaration that the employer is insolvent, even where the workers initiated, prior to the start of that period, legal proceedings against their employer with a view to obtaining a determination of the amount of those claims and an enforcement order to recover those sums.

(1) OJ C 287, 22.9.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 52/12

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 19 December 2013 — Telefónica SA v European Commission

(Case C-274/12 P) (1)

(Appeal - Action for annulment - Fourth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU - Right to bring an action - Standing to bring proceedings - Natural or legal persons - Act of individual concern to them - Regulatory act not entailing implementing measures - Decision declaring a State aid scheme incompatible with the common market - Right to effective judicial protection)

2014/C 52/19

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Appellant: Telefónica SA (represented by: J. Ruiz Calzado and J. Domínguez Pérez, abogados, and M. Núñez Müller, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: P. Němečková and C. Urraca Caviedes, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 21 March 2012 in Case T-228/10 Telefónica v Commission by which the General Court dismissed as inadmissible an action for annulment of Article 1(1) of Commission Decision 2011/5/EC of 28 October 2009 on the tax amortisation of financial goodwill for foreign shareholding acquisitions C 45/07 (ex NN 51/07, ex CP 9/07) implemented by Spain (OJ 2011 L 7, p. 48).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Telefónica SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 227, 28.7.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 52/21

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 19 December 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Kúria — Hungary) — BDV Hungary Trading Kft, in liquidation v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Közép-magyarországi Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága

(Case C-563/12) (1)

(VAT - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 146 - Exemptions on exportation - Article 131 - Conditions laid down by Member States - National legislation requiring that property intended to be exported leave the customs territory of the European Union within a fixed period of 90 days after supply)

2014/C 52/35

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Kúria

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: BDV Hungary Trading Kft, in liquidation

Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Közép-magyarországi Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Kúria — Interpretation of Article 15 of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) and Articles 131, 146 and 273 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) — Exemptions on exportation — Company producing and selling tinned food which sells goods intended to be sold by the purchaser in third countries — National legislation making the right to exemption from VAT with respect to the sale of goods for export outside the European Union subject to the condition that the period between the sale and the date when the goods leave the national territory does not exceed 90 days.

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 146(1) and 131 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which, in the context of a supply for export, goods intended to be exported from the European Union must have left the territory of the European Union within a fixed period of three months or 90 days following the date of supply, where merely exceeding that time-limit results in the definitive loss for the taxable person of the right to exemption in relation to that supply.

(1) OJ C 114, 20.4.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 93/9

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 23 January 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands)) — X BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën

(Case C-380/12) (1)

(Tariff headings - Decolourising earth - Chapter 25 of the Combined Nomenclature - Tariff heading 2508 - Concept of washed products - Elimination of impurities without changing the structure of the product - Chapter 38 of the Combined Nomenclature - Tariff heading 3802)

2014/C 93/14

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: X BV

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Common Customs Tariff — Classification of goods — Decolorising earth — Classification under subheading 2508 40 00 or under subheading 3802 90 00 of the Combined Nomenclature — Notion of ‘eliminating impurities’ within the meaning of Note 1 to Chapter 25 of the Combined Nomenclature

Operative part of the judgment

1. The concept of ‘eliminating impurities’ referred to in Note 1 to Chapter 25 of the Combined Nomenclature constituting Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1549/2006 of 17 October 2006, must be interpreted as covering the elimination of chemical components found in a mineral product in a crude state through natural circumstances, in so far as that elimination takes place with a view to enhancing the ability of the products at issue to fulfil their inherent intended use, which it is for the national court to verify.

2. Note 1 to Chapter 25 of the Combined Nomenclature constituting Annex I to Regulation No 2658/87, as amended by Regulation No 1549/2006, must be interpreted as meaning that products which have undergone treatment involving the use of chemical substances and leading to the elimination of impurities may be classified under CN tariff heading 2508 only if that treatment has not modified their superficial structure, which it is for the national court to determine.

(1) OJ C 303, 6.10.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 85/3

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 15 January 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France)) — Association de médiation sociale v Union locale des syndicats CGT and Others

(Case C-176/12) (1)

(Social policy - Directive 2002/14/EC - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 27 - Subjecting the setting up of bodies representing staff to certain thresholds of employees - Calculation of the thresholds - National legislation contrary to European Union law - Role of the national court)

2014/C 85/04

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Association de médiation sociale

Defendants: Union locale des syndicats CGT, Hichem Laboubi, Union départementale CGT des Bouches-du-Rhône, Confédération générale du travail (CGT),

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Cour de cassation (France) — Interpretation of the provisions of Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community — Joint declaration of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on employee representation (OJ 2002 L 80, p. 29) — Interpretation of Articles 27, 51, 52 and 53 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Interpretation of Article 6(1) and (3) TEU — Whether the aforementioned provisions can be invoked in a dispute between individuals in order to examine whether a national measure transposing the Directive complies with EU law — Lawfulness of a national legislative provision excluding from the calculation of staff numbers of the undertaking, in order to determine, inter alia, the legal thresholds for setting up bodies representing staff, workers holding certain categories of employment contract.

Operative part of the judgment

Article 27 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, by itself or in conjunction with the provisions of Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community, must be interpreted to the effect that, where a national provision implementing that directive, such as Article L. 1111-3 of the French Labour Code, is incompatible with European Union law, that article of the Charter cannot be invoked in a dispute between individuals in order to disapply that national provision.

(1) OJ C 184, 23.6.2012
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 112/3

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 27 February 2014 — Stichting Woonpunt, Stichting Havensteder, formerly Stichting Com.wonen, Woningstichting Haag Wonen, Stichting Woonbedrijf SWS.Hhvl v European Commission

(Case C-132/12 P) (1)

((Appeal - State aid - Schemes for aid granted in favour of housing corporations - Compatibility decision - Commitments provided by the national authorities in order to comply with European Union law - Fourth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU - Action for annulment - Conditions governing admissibility - Interest in bringing proceedings - Locus standi - Beneficiaries who are individually and directly concerned - Notion of a ‘closed circle’))

2014/C 112/04

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Appellants: Stichting Woonpunt, Stichting Havensteder, formerly Stichting Com.wonen, Woningstichting Haag Wonen, Stichting Woonbedrijf SWS.Hhvl (represented by: P. Glazener and E. Henny, advocaten)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: H. van Vliet, S. Noë and S. Thomas, Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 16 December 2011 in Case T-203/10 Stichting Woonpunt and Others v Commission by which the General Court dismissed as inadmissible an application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 9963 final of 15 December 2009 relating to State aid E 2/2005 and N 642/2009 — Netherlands — Existing and special project aid to housing corporations.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside the order of the General Court of the European Union of 16 December 2011 in Case T-203/10 Stichting Woonpunt and Others v Commission in so far as it declares inadmissible the action brought by Stichting Woonpunt, Stichting Havensteder, Woningstichting Haag Wonen and Stichting Woonbedrijf SWS.Hhvl for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 9963 final of 15 December 2009 relating to State aid No E 2/2005 and N 642/2009 — The Netherlands — Existing and special project aid to housing corporations, in so far as that decision concerns aid measure E 2/2005;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the appeal;

3. Declares the action for annulment referred to in paragraph 1 of the present operative part to be admissible;

4. Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union for a decision on the merits concerning the action for annulment referred to in paragraph 1 of the present operative part;

5. Reserves the costs.

(1) OJ C 138, 12.5.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 93/14

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 6 February 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Bonn — Germany) — Mömax Logistik GmbH v Bundesamt für Justiz

(Case C-528/12) (1)

(Request for a preliminary ruling - Company law - Directive 78/660/EEC - Publication of consolidated annual accounts of certain types of company - Application of the rules on the publication of accounts to companies governed by the law of one Member State and forming part of a group whose parent company is governed by the law of another Member State)

2014/C 93/21

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Bonn

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Mömax Logistik GmbH

Defendant: Bundesamt für Justiz

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Landgericht Bonn — Interpretation of Article 49 TFEU and Article 57(1) of Fourth Council Directive 78/660/EEC of 25 July 1978 based on Article 54(3)(g) of the Treaty on the annual accounts of certain types of companies (OJ 1978 L 222, p. 11) — Right of the Member States not to apply to the dependent companies of any group governed by their national laws the provisions of Directive 78/660/EEC concerning the content, auditing and publication of the annual accounts where the dominant company of the group is subject to the laws of a Member State — Legislation of a Member State providing for that possibility where the dominant company is subject to the laws of that Member State and precluding it where it is subject to the laws of another Member State.

Operative part of the judgment

Article 57 of Fourth Council Directive 78/660/EEC of 25 July 1978 based on Article 54(3)(g) of the Treaty on the annual accounts of certain types of companies, as amended by Directive 2006/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2006, must be interpreted as precluding the national legislation of a Member State which exempts a subsidiary undertaking governed by the law of that State from the provisions of that directive concerning the content, auditing and publication of annual accounts only if the parent company is also governed by the law of that State.

(1) OJ C 63, 2.3.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 135/5

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 March 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal administratif de Grenoble — France) — Margaretha Bouanich v Direction départementale des finances publiques de la Drôme

(Case C-375/12) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 63 TFEU - Free movement of capital - Article 49 TFEU - Freedom of establishment - Tax on income of natural persons - Mechanism capping direct taxes by reference to income - Bilateral tax agreement for avoidance of double taxation - Taxation of dividends distributed by a company established in another Member State and already subject to a withholding tax - Failure to take into account or partial taking into account of the tax paid in the other Member State for the calculation of the tax cap - Article 65 TFEU - Restriction - Justification))

2014/C 135/05

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal administratif de Grenoble

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Margaretha Bouanich

Defendant: Direction départementale des finances publiques de la Drôme

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal administratif de Grenoble — Interpretation of Articles 49, 63 and 65 TFEU — National legislation on personal income tax imposing a cap on the proportion of direct tax payable by a taxpayer — Mechanism known as the ‘bouclier fiscal’ (tax shield) — Bilateral tax convention — Taxation of dividends distributed by a company established in another Member State and already subject to a withholding tax — Sums deducted at source partially taken into account for the calculation of the tax cap — Justification of such legislation on the grounds of the cohesion of the tax system, a balanced allocation of taxing powers between the Member States, or any other overriding reason in the public interest.

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 49 TFEU, 63 TFEU and 65 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State under which, where a resident of that Member State who is a shareholder of a company established in another Member State receives dividends taxed in the two Member States and the double taxation is regulated by the imputation in the Member State of residence of a tax credit of an amount corresponding to the tax paid in the State of the distributing company, a mechanism capping various direct taxes at a certain percentage of income received during a year does not take into account, or takes only partially into account, the tax paid in the State of the distributing company.

(1) OJ C 319, 20.10.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 129/5

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 6 March 2014 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione tributaria provinciale Genova (Italy)) — DresserRand SA v Agenzia delle Entrate Direzione Provinciale Ufficio Controlli

(Joined Cases C-606/12 and C-607/12) (1)

((Request for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - VAT - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 17(2)(f) - Condition relating to the return of goods to the Member State from which they were initially dispatched or transported))

2014/C 129/06

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Commissione tributaria provinciale Genova

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: DresserRand SA

Defendant: Agenzia delle Entrate Direzione Provinciale Ufficio Controlli

Re:

Requests for a preliminary ruling — Commissione tributaria provinciale di Genova — Interpretation of Article 17(2)(f) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) — Transfer to another Member State — ‘Work on the goods’ — Verifying the adaptability to other goods — Condition that the goods be returned to the Member State from which they were initially dispatched or transported — Possibility of treating the dispatch as constituting a transfer to another Member State in the case of dispatch to a Member State other than that from which they were sent

Operative part of the judgment

Article 17(2)(f) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that, in order for the dispatch or transport of goods not to be classified as a transfer to another Member State, those goods, after the work on them has been carried out in the Member State in which dispatch or transport of the goods ends, must necessarily be returned to the taxable person in the Member State from which they were initially dispatched or transported.

(1) OJ C 101, 6.4.2013.