ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Liste of accredited environmental verifiers for the purposes of the Community eco management and audit scheme (Council Regulation (EEC) No 1836/93 as included in point 2f of Annex XX to the Agreement on the European Economic Area) (97/C 275/06)

The list of accredited environmental verifiers for the purposes of the Community eco management and audit scheme (1) is published so as to comply with Article 7 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1836/93 (2) as included in point 2f of Annex XX to the Agreement on the European Economic Area.

This Regulation establishes a voluntary environmental management scheme, based on harmonized lines and principles throughout the European Economic Area, open to companies in the industrial sector operating in the European Economic Area.

The overall objective of the scheme is to promote continuous environmental performance improvements of industrial activities by committing sites to evaluate and improve their environmental performance and provide relevant information to the public.

Sites that wish to be registered in the scheme must have their environmental policy, programme management system, review or audit procedure and environmental statement or statements examined, to verify that they meet the requirements of this Regulation and the environmental statements validated. This verification and validation must be carried out by an independent, appropriately accredited, environmental verifier.

Pursuant to Article 7 of the Regulation in conjunction with Article 1 (1) (b) of Protocol 1 to the Agreement on a Standing Committee of the EFTA States, the Standing Committee of the EFTA States is to publish in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Communities a list of all the accredited environmental verifiers in the EFTA States.

The list contains details of all environmental verifiers in the European Economic Area whose registration has been notified to the Standing Committee and the European Commission, by the accreditation systems in the EEA States, up to and including 15 April 1997.

(1) OJ C 276, 11. 9. 1997, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 168, 10. 7. 1993, p. 1.
Annotated presentation of regulated markets in accordance with Article 16 of Directive 93/22/EEC on investment services in the securities field (ISD)

(2004/C 88/11)

1. Council Directive 93/22 EEC on investment services in the securities field (ISD) authorises each Member State to confer the status of "regulated market" on those markets constituted on its territory and which comply with its regulations.

2. Article 1(13) of Directive 93/22 EEC defines a "regulated market" as a market for the financial instruments listed in section B of the annex to the ISD, which;

- is recognised as such by its home Member States (where Home Member State is determined in accordance with Article 1(6)c of the ISD);

- functions regularly;

- is characterised by the fact that regulations issued or approved by the competent authorities define the conditions for the operation of the market, the conditions for access to the market and where Directive 79/279/EEC on admission to official listing is applicable, the conditions governing admission to listing imposed in that Directive and, where that Directive is not applicable, the conditions that must be satisfied by a financial instrument before it can effectively be dealt with on the market;

- complies with all the reporting and transparency requirements laid down pursuant to Articles 20 and 21 of ISD.

3. Article 16 of Directive 93/22 EEC requires that each Member State maintain an updated list of regulated markets authorised by it. This information should be communicated to other Member States and the Commission. Under the same article, the Commission is required to publish a list of regulated markets notified to it on a yearly basis. An annotated presentation of regulated markets in the EU Member States was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities on 16 November 2002(1).

4. Paragraph 6(b) of Protocol 1 to the EEA Agreement requires that where according to an act, facts, procedures, reports and the like are to be published in the Official Journal of the European Union the corresponding information regarding the EFTA States shall be published in a separate section thereof.

5. The present list was drawn up by the Standing Committee of the EFTA States on the basis of information supplied by the EFTA States concerned. The list indicates the title of the individual markets, which are recognised by national competent authorities as complying with the definition of "regulated market". In addition, it indicates the entity responsible for managing these markets and the competent authority responsible for issuing or approving the rules of the market.

>TABLE>

(1) OJ C 280, 16.11.2002, p. 2.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 40/19

National reference laboratory designated by Norway in accordance with Council Decision 1999/313/EC on reference laboratories for monitoring bacteriological and viral contamination of bivalve molluscs

(2005/C 40/12)
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 61/5

EMAS

The Eco-Management and Audit Scheme

List of registered sites in Norway in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 761/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council

(2008/C 61/06)
EN Official Journal of the European Union L 53/19

DECISION OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE OF THE EFTA STATES

No 1/2010/SC

of 28 January 2010

establishing an EEA Financial Mechanism Interim Committee 2009-2014

THE STANDING COMMITTEE OF THE EFTA STATES,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as adjusted by the Protocol Adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as the EEA Agreement,

Having regard to the agreement to be concluded establishing a new EEA Financial Mechanism for the period 2009-2014,

Considering the agreement between the Kingdom of Norway and the European Community to establish a Norwegian Financial Mechanism for the period 2009-2014,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

1. An EEA Financial Mechanism Interim Committee 2009-2014, hereinafter referred to as the Interim Committee, which should be operative as soon as possible, is hereby established.

2. The Interim Committee shall assist the EFTA States in preparing for the implementation of the EEA Financial Mechanism for 2009-2014.

3. The Interim Committee shall report to the Standing Committee.

4. The Interim Committee may be assisted by the Missions of the EEA EFTA States to the EU.

5. The Interim Committee shall on the day of entering into force or on the day of provisional application of the legal act establishing the EEA Financial Mechanism 2009-2014 be replaced by an EEA Financial Mechanism Committee 2009-2014.

6. The Interim Committee shall discuss and assess possible coordination between the EEA Financial Mechanism and the Norwegian Financial Mechanism.

7. The Interim Committee shall agree upon a Chairman who shall be confirmed by the Standing Committee.

Article 2

This Decision shall take immediate effect.

Article 3

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 195/24

Dangerous substances — List of authorisation decisions taken by the EEA EFTA States in accordance with Article 64(8) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH) in the first half of 2016

(2018/C 195/09)

Subcommittee I on the free movement of goods

To be noted by the EEA Joint Committee

With reference to EEA Joint Committee Decision No 25/2008 of 14 March 2008, the EEA Joint Committee is invited to note the following lists concerning authorisation decisions adopted on the basis of Article 64(8) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH) for the period 1 January – 30 June 2016, at their meeting on 2 December 2016.
Official Journal of the European Union

Dangerous substances – List of authorisation decisions taken by the EEA EFTA States in accordance with Article 64(8) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH) in the second half of 2018

(2020/C 123/09)

Subcommittee I on the free movement of goods

To be noted by the EEA Joint Committee

With reference to EEA Joint Committee Decision No 25/2008 of 14 March 2008, the EEA Joint Committee is invited to note the following lists concerning authorisation decisions adopted on the basis of Article 64(8) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH) for the period 1 July-31 December 2018, at their meeting on 29 March 2019.
Dangerous substances – List of authorisation decisions taken by the EEA EFTA States in accordance with article 64(8) of regulation (EC) 1907/2006 (REACH) in the second half of 2021

(2022/C 306/07)

Subcommittee I on the free movement of goods

(Text with EEA relevance)

With reference to EEA Joint Committee Decision No 25/2008 of 14 March 2008, the EEA Joint Committee is invited to note the following lists concerning authorisation decisions adopted on the basis of Article 64(8) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH) for the period 1 July – 31 December 2021, at their meeting on 18 March 2022.
COMPOSITION OF THE EFTA COURT (95/C 312/12)

1. Composition of the Court

Following the accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden to the European Union, and according to the Agreement on Transitional Arrangement for a period after the accession of certain EFTA States to the European Union, the appointment of the judges nominated by these States terminated on 30 June 1995.

The EEA Agreement entered into force with regard to the Principality of Liechtenstein on 1 May 1995. Upon nomination by the Government of Liechtenstein Mr Carl Baudenbacher was appointed Judge of the EFTA Court by common accord of the three Contracting Parties to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice (the ESA/Court Agreement) for the period from 6 September 1995 to 5 September 2001. At a public sitting of the EFTA Court on 6 September 1995 Mr Carl Baudenbacher took the oath prescribed in Protocol 5, Article 2 of the ESA/Court Agreement.

2. Election of the President of the Court

After the appointment of the new judge to the EFTA Court Mr Bjørn Haug resigned from his position as President in order to make it possible for all three judges to participate in the election. Thereafter, on 6 September 1995, Mr Bjørn Haug was elected as President for the EFTA Court pursuant to Article 30 of the ESA/Court Agreement for the period from 6 September 1995 to 31 December 1996.

3. Appointment of the Registrar of the EFTA Court

Mr Per Christiansen was appointed as Registrar of the EFTA Court pursuant to Protocol 5, Article 9 of the ESA/Court Agreement for the period from 1 September 1995 to 31 August 1998, to succeed Ms Karin Hökborg. At a public sitting of the EFTA Court on 6 September 1995 Mr Per Christiansen took the oath prescribed in Protocol 5, Article 10 of the ESA/Court
ADVISORY OPINION OF THE COURT 19 December 1996 (1*) (Council Directive 77/187/EEC - transfer of an undertaking) (97/C 90/07)

THE COURT,

in Case E-2/96, in answer to the questions referred to it by Inderøy herredsrett by an order of 11 March 1996, hereby gives the following advisory opinion:

1. Article 1 (1) of the Act referred to in point 23 of Annex XVIII to the EEA Agreement (Council Directive 77/187/EEC of 14 February 1977 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of businesses) is to be interpreted so that the absence of a direct contractual relationship between the transferor and the transferee does not exclude the application of the Directive if other factors result in an assessment of the transaction as constituting a transfer within the meaning of the Directive.

2. Whether the transferee takes over property or moveable assets from the transferor is a factor which must be taken into account in the overall assessment of the situation to be made by the national court. The fact that no property or moveables are transferred does not as such exclude the applicability of the Directive, provided that other factors result in an assessment of the transaction as constituting a transfer within the meaning of the Directive.

3. Whether the transferee employs some of the employees of the transferor is a factor that must be taken into account in the overall assessment of the situation to be made by the national court.

4. The fact that a contract for the provision of services is awarded under tender procedures which do not follow from EEA rules does not exclude the applicability of the Directive. Nor is it decisive for the application of the Directive that the provision of the service is limited in time.

Bjørn HAUG Thór VILHJÁLMSSON Carl BAUDENBACHER

Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 19 December 1996.

Per CHRISTIANSEN

Registrar Bjørn HAUG

President

(1*) Language of the request for an advisory opinion: Norwegian.
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT of 19 June 1998 in Case E-10/97: EFTA Surveillance Authority v. The Kingdom of Norway (Failure of a contracting party to fulfil its obligations - health protection for workers exposed to vinyl chloride monomer - Council Directive 78/610/EEC) (98/C 275/05)

In Case E-10/97: EFTA Surveillance Authority v. The Kingdom of Norway - Application for a declaration that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed time limit, the national provisions necessary to comply with the Act referred to in point 2 of Annex XVIII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, i.e. Council Directive 78/610/EEC of 29 June 1978 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States on the protection of the health of workers exposed to vinyl chloride monomer, as adapted by way of Protocol 1 to the EEA Agreement, the Kingdom of Norway has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 11 of that Act and Article 7 of the EEA Agreement, the Court, composed of Bjørn Haug, President, Thór Vilhjálmsson and Carl Baudenbacher (judge-rapporteur), judges, gave a judgment on 19 June 1998, the operative part of which is as follows:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed time limit, the national provisions necessary to comply with the Act referred to in point 2 of Annex XVIII to the EEA Agreement (Council Directive 78/610/EEC of 29 June 1978 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States on the protection of the health of workers exposed to vinyl chloride monomer), as adapted by way of Protocol 1 to the EEA Agreement, the Kingdom of Norway has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 11 of that Act and Article 7 of the EEA Agreement.

2. Orders the Kingdom of Norway to pay the
ADVISORY OPINION OF THE COURT of 10 December 1998 in Case E-3/98 (Request for an advisory opinion from the Administrative Court for the Principality of Liechtenstein): Herbert Rainford-Towning (1) (Right of establishment - Residence requirement for managing director of a company) (Pursuant to Article 27(5) of the Rules of Procedure only the English and German texts are authentic) (1999/C 62/13)

In Case E-3/98: request to the Court pursuant to Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice by Verwaltungsbeschwerdeinstanz des Fürstentums Liechtenstein (Administrative Court for the Principality of Liechtenstein), for an advisory opinion in the case pending before it concerning Herbert Rainford-Towning, on the interpretation of Articles 31 et seq. and 112 of the EEA Agreement and Protocol 15 to the EEA Agreement, the Court, composed of: Bjørn Haug (Judge-Rapporteur), President, Thór Vilhjálmsson and Carl Baudenbacher, Judges; and Gunnar Selvik, Registrar, gave an advisory opinion on 10 December 1998, the operative part of which is as follows:

1. A national provision such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which requires the managing director of a legal person to reside in the State concerned, constitutes indirect discrimination contrary to Article 31 of the EEA Agreement.

2. A national provision such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which requires the managing director of a legal person to reside in the State concerned, cannot be justified by Protocol 15 to the EEA Agreement, Article 112 of the EEA Agreement or the EEA Council Declaration on free movement of persons (OJ L 86, 20.4.1995, p. 80).

3. A national provision such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which requires the managing director of a legal person to reside in the State concerned, cannot be justified on grounds of public policy within the meaning of Article 33 of the EEA Agreement.

(1) OJ C 331, 29.10.1998, p. 24.
Judgment of the Court

of 5 April 2001

in Case E-3/00: EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Kingdom of Norway

Failure of a contracting party to fulfil its obligations - Fortification of foodstuffs with iron and vitamins - Protection of public health - Precautionary principle

(2001/C 164/05)

In Case E-3/00: EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Kingdom of Norway - application for a declaration that, by applying its legislation so as to prohibit the import and marketing in Norway of corn flakes, fortified per 100 g with 1 mg thiamine, 1 mg riboflavin, 10 mg niacin and 7 mg iron, which have been lawfully manufactured and marketed in other EEA States, the Kingdom of Norway has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 11 of the EEA Agreement, the Court, composed of: Thór Vilhjálmsson, President, Carl Baudenbacher (Judge-Rapporteur) and Per Tresselt, Judges, gave a judgment of 5 April 2001, the operative part of which is as follows.

1. Declares that, by applying its legislation so as to prohibit the import and marketing in Norway of corn flakes, fortified per 100 g with 1 mg thiamine, 1 mg riboflavin, 10 mg niacin and 7 mg iron, which have been lawfully manufactured and marketed in other EEA States, the Kingdom of Norway had, at the relevant time, i.e. 14 January 2000, failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 11 of the EEA Agreement.

2. Orders the Kingdom of Norway to pay the costs of the proceedings.
Judgment of the Court

of 22 February 2002

in Case E-2/01: Dr Franz Martin Pucher

Right of establishment - Residence requirement for at least one board member of a domiciliary company

(2002/C 115/06)

In Case E-2/01: Dr Franz Martin Pucher - Request to the Court under Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice by Verwaltungsbeschwerdeinstanz des Fürstentums Liechtenstein (/Administrative Court of the Principality of Liechtenstein) for an Advisory Opinion in the appeal by Dr Franz Martin Pucher against the decision of the Government of the Principality of Liechtenstein on the interpretation of Articles 4, 31 and 33 of the EEA Agreement, the Court, composed of: Thór Vilhjálmsson, President, Carl Baudenbacher and Per Tresselt (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges, gave an Advisory Opinion on 22 February 2002, the operative part of which is as follows:

1. A provision of the national law of an EEA State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, requiring that at least one member of the board of directors of a domiciliary company, having authority to manage and represent same, must be permanently residing in that State, constitutes a restriction on the freedom of establishment within the meaning of Article 31 EEA.

2. Such a national provision cannot be justified on grounds of public policy and/or public security within the meaning of Article 33 EEA.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 17/11

Order of the EFTA Court of 3 October 2007

(Case E-9/04)

(2008/C 17/07)

In Case E-9/04 COSTS II,

The Bankers' and Securities Dealers' Association of Iceland against the EFTA Surveillance Authority,

(Taxation of costs)

In Case E-9/04 COSTS II, the Bankers' and Securities Dealers' Association of Iceland, represented by Dr Hans-Jörg Niemeyer, Rechtsanwalt, Brussels, Belgium and Dr Ralf Sauer, Rechtsanwalt, Berlin, Germany against EFTA Surveillance Authority, represented by Niels Fenger, Director, and Bjørnar Alterskjær, Officer, Department of Legal and Executive Affairs, acting as Agents, Brussels, Belgium — application for taxation of the costs to be recovered from the EFTA Surveillance Authority by the Bankers' and Securities Dealers' Association of Iceland pursuant to the judgment of the EFTA Court of 7 April 2006 in Case E-9/04 The Bankers' and Securities Dealers' Association of Iceland v EFTA Surveillance Authority [2006 EFTA Court Report, p. 45] — the EFTA Court, composed of: Carl Baudenbacher, President, Thorgeir Örlygsson, Judge, Henrik Bull, Judge-Rapporteur, and Skúli Magnússon, Registrar, has made an Order of 3 October 2007, the operative part of which is as follows:

The total amount of the costs to be paid by the EFTA Surveillance Authority to the Bankers' and Securities Dealers' Association of Iceland is fixed at EUR 145 934,50.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 297/51

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 3 May 2006

in Case E-3/05

EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Kingdom of Norway

(Failure of a Contracting Party to fulfil its obligations — free movement of workers — social security for migrant workers with family members residing in an EEA State other than the State of employment — regional residence requirement for family benefits — Article 73 of Regulation EEC 1408/71 — Article 7(2) of Regulation EEC 1612/68 — discrimination — justification on grounds of promoting sustainable settlement)

(2006/C 297/18)

In Case E-3/05, EFTA Surveillance Authority v the Kingdom of Norway –APPLICATION for a declaration that the Kingdom of Norway has failed to fulfil its obligations pursuant to Article 73 of the Act referred to at point 1 of Annex VI to the EEA Agreement (Council Regulation EEC No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community), as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto; alternatively by maintaining the same requirement, failed to fulfil its obligations pursuant to Article 7(2) of the Act referred to at Point 2 of Annex V (Council Regulation EEC No 1612/68 of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community), as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto, the Court, composed of: Carl Baudenbacher, President, Henrik Bull and Thorgeir Örlygsson (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges, gave judgment on 3 May 2006, the operative part of which is as follows:

1. Dismisses the application.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 111/24

ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT

22 December 2006

in Case E-4/06, KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v Staten v/ Finansdepartementet (The Norwegian State, represented by the Ministry of Finance)

(2007/C 111/12)

with respect to the Request for an Advisory Opinion from Borgarting lagmannsrett of 16 October 2006, on the legal basis and the prerequisites for a claim for reimbursement of taxes which a Member State has collected in conflict with provisions of the EEA Agreement,

the President of the Court made an Order of 22 December 2006, the operative part of which orders:

Case E-4/06 to be removed from the Register.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 232/9

Composition of the EFTA Court

Appointment of the Registrar of the EFTA Court

(2007/C 232/04)

Mr Skúli Magnússon was appointed Registrar of the EFTA Court pursuant to Article 9, Protocol 5 of the ESA/Court Agreement for the period from 15 April 2007 to 14 April 2010, to succeed Mr Henning Harborg.