type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 9.10.2010
 HU
 Az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja
 C 274/13
 2010. július 30-án benyújtott kereset — Európai Bizottság kontra Belga Királyság
 (C-383/10. sz. ügy)
 ()
 2010/C 274/20
 Az eljárás nyelve: francia
 Felek
 Felperes: Európai Bizottság (képviselők: R. Lyal és F. Dintilhac meghatalmazottak)
 Alperes: Belga Királyság
 Kereseti kérelmek
 —
 A Bíróság állapítsa meg, hogy a Belga Királyság — mivel olyan adószabályozást vezetett be és tartott fenn hatályában, amely alapján a kizárólag a belga bankok által fizetett kamatokra vonatkozó adómentesség alkalmazásával a Belgiumon kívül letelepedett bankok által fizetett kamatokat hátrányosan megkülönböztető módon adóztatták — nem teljesítette az Európai Unió működéséről szóló Szerződés 56. cikkéből és 63. cikkéből (korábban az EK-Szerződés 49., illetve 56. cikke), valamint az Európai Gazdasági Térség létrehozásáról szóló megállapodás 36. és 40. cikkéből eredő kötelezettségeit; és
 —
 a Belga Királyságot kötelezze a költségek viselésére.
 Jogalapok és fontosabb érvek
 A Bizottság a szóban forgó nemzeti rendelkezéseket annyiban kifogásolja, amennyiben azok hatása az, hogy visszatartják a belgiumi illetőségű személyeket attól, hogy az Európai Unió más tagállamaiban letelepedett bankok szolgáltatásait vegyék igénybe, mivel az ez utóbbiak által fizetett kamatok nem részesülhetnek a kizárólag a belga bankok által fizetett kamatokra alkalmazandó adómentességben.
 Először is a Bizottság elutasítja többek között az alperes azon érvelését, miszerint a közvetlen adóztatás a tagállamok kizárólagos hatásköre, és arra hivatkozik, hogy e terület hallgatólagosan, ám szükségképpen benne foglaltatik a belső piaccal kapcsolatos hatáskörben, amely az Unió és a tagállamok megosztott hatáskörét képezi.
 A belga hatóságok által felhozott ellenérvekre válaszul a Bizottság először is hangsúlyozza, hogy nem bír relevanciával az, hogy a pénzügyi szektortól e téren nem érkezett panasz, mivel a kötelezettségszegés megállapítására irányuló kereset objektív jellegű, ezért az nem köthető ahhoz a feltételhez, hogy előzetesen panaszt tegyenek. Másodszor és harmadszor a Bizottság vitatja egyfelől azt az érvelést, miszerint a fent hivatkozott intézkedéseket az adóellenőrzések hatékonyságának biztosításában álló nyomós közérdek igazolja, másfelől azt az állítást, miszerint a szóban forgó szabályozás szociálpolitikai jellegű intézkedés, amely a közérdek védelmére irányul. Negyedszer a felperes nem tartja elfogadhatónak a belga hatóságok arra alapított igazolását, hogy e mentesség kiterjesztésének elenyésző lenne a hatékonysága, és azzal érvel, hogy az ezen intézkedés által címzett adóalanyokat a más tagállamokban letelepedett bankok szolgáltatásai is érdekelhetik. Ötödször a Bizottság vitatja az alperes azon érvelését, amely az Unióban a fogyasztóknak a bankok fizetésképtelensége esetén történő védelme terén meglévő eltérésekre utal, és megállapítja, hogy e terület Európai Uniós harmonizáció tárgyát képezi. Végül a Bizottság azzal érvel, hogy Belgiumban három hivatalos nyelv van (holland, francia és német), ezért álláspontja szerint nem elfogadhatók az arra alapított ellenérvek, hogy a Belgiumon kívül letelepedett bankok esetén megnő az információhiány kockázata a Belgiumban nem beszélt nyelvek használata miatt.


type: wikipedia

text:
Yves Laplace (* 23. Mai 1958 in Genf) ist ein Schweizer Schriftsteller.
 Leben
 Yves Laplace ist der ältere Bruder des Schriftstellers Benoît Damon (bürgerlich Serge Laplace). Er hat zahlreiche Bücher, vor allem Romane und Theaterstücke, aber auch Essays veröffentlicht. Daneben arbeitet er als Lehrer, Literaturkritiker, Fotograf und Fussballschiedsrichter.
 Laplace ist Mitglied des Vereins Autorinnen und Autoren der Schweiz (AdS) und lebt in Bellevue GE.
 Auszeichnungen
 1989: Einzelwerkpreis der Schweizerischen Schillerstiftung
 1992: Prix Michel Dentant
 2001: Prix Pittard de l’Andelyn
 2015: Prix Alice Rivaz
 2016: Schweizer Literaturpreis für Plaine des héros
 Werke
 Le Garrot. Roman. Lattès, Paris 1977
 Lahore. Roman. Lattès, Paris 1978
 Sarcasme ou un Homme exemplaire. Edilig, Paris 1984
 Un Homme exemplaire. Roman. Éditions du Seuil, Paris 1984
 Ein vorbildlicher Mann. Deutsch von Markus Hediger. Nachwort von Jürg Altwegg. Lenos, Basel 1994, ISBN 3-85787-232-2
 Mes chers enfants. Roman. Éditions du Seuil, Paris 1985
 Nationalité française. Éditions du Seuil, Paris 1986
 Fils de perdition. Roman. Éditions du Seuil, Paris 1989
 Staël: communauté européenne; Trois soldats: simple pochade. Éditions du Seuil, Paris 1989
 On. Roman. Éditions du Seuil, Paris 1992
 Feu Voltaire suivi de Maison commune et Du bon usage des auteurs vivants. Éditions Théâtrales, Paris 1993
 Nos Fantômes. L’affaire Mahomet: mascarade. Éditions Zoé, Genf 1994
 La Réfutation. Éditions du Seuil, Paris 1996
 L’Âge d’homme en Bosnie. Petit guide d’une nausée suisse. Éditions d’en bas, Lausanne 1997
 Considérations salutaires sur le désastre de Srebrenica. Éditions du Seuil, Paris 1998
 L’Usage du football. Éditions Zoé, Genf 1999
 Les hautes œuvres. Trois apprentissages. Stock, Paris 2001
 L’Inséminateur. Stock, Paris 2001
 Kennel club. Éditions Comp’Act, Chambéry 2001
 Les dépossédés. Bosnie, Liban: inventaire d’après-guerres (mit Valérie Frey). Stock, Paris 2001
 Un mur cache la guerre. Roman. Stock, Paris 2003
 L’Homme exemplaire. Roman. Stock, Paris 2004
 L’Original. Roman. Stock, Paris 2004
 Outrages. Éditions Métropolis, Genf 2005
 Butin. Roman. Stock, Paris 2006
 Les Larmes d’Arshavin. Retour de l’Eurofoot. Éditions de l’Aire, Vevey 2009
 Guerre et lumières. Pièces choisies 1984–2010. Campiche, Orbe 2011
 Reprise: de Sarajevo à Srebrenica vingt ans plus tard. Éditions d’en bas, Lausanne 2015
 Plaine des héros. Roman. Fayard, Paris 2015
 L’Exécrable. Roman. Fayard, Paris 2020
 Weblinks
 Werkverzeichnis auf viceversaliteratur.ch
 Einzelnachweise
 Autor
 Literatur (20. Jahrhundert)
 Literatur (21. Jahrhundert)
 Literatur (Französisch)
 Literatur (Schweiz)
 Roman, Epik
 Erzählung
 Essay
 Drama
 Schriftsteller (Genf)
 Schweizer
 Geboren 1958
 Mann


text:
Olszanka – leśny rezerwat przyrody w gminie Jabłonna, w powiecie lubelskim, w województwie lubelskim. Leży w granicach Krzczonowskiego Parku Krajobrazowego, na terenie Nadleśnictwa Świdnik.
 powierzchnia (według aktu powołującego): 8,75 ha
 powierzchnia (dane z nadleśnictwa): 8,53 ha
 rok utworzenia: 1983
 dokument powołujący: Zarządzenie Ministra Leśnictwa i Przemysłu Drzewnego z 22 kwietnia 1983 roku w sprawie uznania za rezerwat przyrody (MP nr 16, poz. 91).
 cel ochrony (według aktu powołującego): zachowanie starodrzewu dębowego z domieszką grabu i sosny oraz wieloma chronionymi gatunkami roślin w runie
 W bogatym runie rezerwatu występują m.in.: gnieźnik leśny, miodownik melisowaty, lilia złotogłów, podkolan biały, podkolan zielonawy, czerniec gronkowy, zerwa kłosowa, jaskier kosmaty.
 Teren rezerwatu wchodzi w skład obszaru siedliskowego sieci Natura 2000 „Olszanka” PLH060012, który jest trochę większy – zajmuje powierzchnię 10,97 ha. W pobliżu znajduje się położony w obrębie tego samego kompleksu leśnego rezerwat „Chmiel”.
 Przypisy
 Rezerwaty przyrody w województwie lubelskim
 Chmiel Drugi


type: legislation

text:
 4.8.2005
 DE
 Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union
 L 203/22
 BESCHLUSS DES RATES
 vom 29. Juli 2005
 zur Ernennung von vier Mitgliedern des Verwaltungsrats der Europäischen Arzneimittel-Agentur (EMA)
 (2005/594/EG)
 DER RAT DER EUROPÄISCHEN UNION —
 gestützt auf den Vertrag zur Gründung der Europäischen Gemeinschaft,
 gestützt auf die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 726/2004 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 31. März 2004 zur Festlegung von Gemeinschaftsverfahren für die Genehmigung und Überwachung von Human- und Tierarzneimitteln und zur Errichtung einer Europäischen Arzneimittel-Agentur (1), insbesondere auf Artikel 65 Absätze 1 und 4,
 in Anbetracht der von der Kommission am 25. Februar 2005 vorgelegten Kandidatenliste,
 nach Stellungnahme des Europäischen Parlaments —
 BESCHLIESST:
 Artikel 1
 Frau Mary Geraldine BAKER, geboren am 27. Oktober 1936 in London (Vereinigtes Königreich),
 Herr Jean GEORGES, geboren am 11. Juli 1966 in Esch-sur-Alzette (Luxemburg),
 Frau Lisette TIDDENS-ENGWIRDA, geboren am 25. Juni 1950 in Amsterdam (Niederlande), und Herr Fritz Rupert UNGEMACH, geboren am 6. Februar 1947 in München (Deutschland), werden für einen Zeitraum von drei Jahren zu Mitgliedern des Verwaltungsrats der Europäischen Arzneimittel-Agentur (EMA) ernannt.
 Artikel 2
 Der Zeitpunkt, zu dem die in Artikel 1 genannte Amtszeit von drei Jahren beginnt, wird vom Verwaltungsrat der Europäischen Arzneimittel-Agentur (EMA) festgelegt.
 Geschehen zu Brüssel am 29. Juli 2005.
 Im Namen des Rates
 Der Präsident
 J. STRAW
 (1) ABl. L 136 vom 30.4.2004, S. 1.


type: other

jurisdiction: US

text: b' TIRNO-99-D-0005, Report on Compliance With\n Requirements Applicable to Major Programs and\n on Internal Control Over Compliance in\n Accordance With the Office of Management and\n Budget Circular A-133, Fiscal Year 2003\n\n August 2004\n\n Reference Number: 2004-1C-136\n\n\n\n\n This report has cleared the Treasury Inspector General For Tax Administration\ndisclosure review process and information determined to be restricted from public\n release has been redacted from this document.\n\x0c DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY\n WASHINGTON, D.C. 20220\n\n\n\nINSPECTOR GENERAL\n for TAX\n ADMINISTRATION\n\n\n\n August 9, 2004\n\n\n MEMORANDUM FOR DAVID A. GRANT\n DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT\n INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE\n\n\n\n\n FROM: Daniel R. Devlin\n Assistant Inspector General for Audit (Headquarters Operations\n and Exempt Organizations Programs)\n\n SUBJECT: TIRNO-99-D-0005, Report on Compliance With Requirements\n Applicable to Major Programs and on Internal Control Over\n Compliance in Accordance With the Office of Management and\n Budget Circular A-133, Fiscal Year 2003 (Audit #20041C0236)\n\n\n The Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) audited the contractor\xe2\x80\x99s compliance with\n the requirements described in the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133\n Compliance Supplement that are applicable to its major Federal Government programs.\n The DCAA also audited the contractor\xe2\x80\x99s January 8, 2004, certified final indirect cost rate\n proposal and related books and records for reimbursement of Fiscal Year 2003 incurred\n costs. The purpose of the audit was to determine the allowability and allocability of\n direct and indirect costs and form the basis for negotiated indirect cost rates for the\n period ended October 5, 2003.\n The DCAA questioned $49,812 of overhead and $89,234 of General and Administrative\n (G&A) costs. The Internal Revenue Service\xe2\x80\x99s (IRS) portion of the questioned costs\n were $1,183 in overhead and $4,336 in G&A costs. In addition, the DCAA reallocated\n $211,990 of corporate G&A expenses to the sponsors. This resulted in an increased\n allocation to the IRS of $159,076.\n The DCAA noted claimed direct costs, subject to the qualification stated below, are\n provisionally approved pending final acceptance. The audit of direct costs disclosed no\n exceptions at this time.\n The DCAA stated that another Federal Government audit organization has audit\n responsibility for the direct costs claimed on programs identified as Special Projects.\n The DCAA was able to evaluate the indirect costs applicable to this organization.\n\x0c 2\n\nHowever, the DCAA was unable to satisfy itself as to the contractor\xe2\x80\x99s compliance with\nCircular A-133 requirements or the allowability of the direct costs. The DCAA qualified\nits audit report because results of the assist audits evaluating these costs had not been\nreceived.\nThe information in this report should not be used for purposes other than those intended\nwithout prior consultation with the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration\nregarding their applicability.\nIf you have any questions, please contact me at (202) 622-8500 or John R. Wright,\nDirector, at (202) 927-7077.\n\n\nAttachment\n\x0c NOTICE:\nThe Office of Inspector General for Tax Administration has no objection to the\nrelease of this report, at the discretion of the contracting officer, to duly\nauthorized representatives of the contractor.\n\nThe contractor information contained in this report is proprietary information. The\nrestrictions of 18 U.S.C. \xc2\xa7 1905 must be followed in releasing any information to\nthe public.\n\nThis report may not be released without the approval of this office, except to an\nagency requesting the report for use in negotiating or administering a contract\nwith the contractor.\n\n The TIGTA seal was removed due to its size.\n\x0c'


type: contracts

text:
 15.6.2013
 HU
 Az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja
 L 163/30
 AZ AKCS–EU NAGYKÖVETEK BIZOTTSÁGÁNAK 2/2013 HATÁROZATA
 (2013. május 29.)
 a Mezőgazdasági és Vidéki Együttműködés Technikai Központja (CTA) igazgatótanácsa tagjainak kinevezéséről
 (2013/289/EU)
 AZ AKCS–EU NAGYKÖVETEK BIZOTTSÁGA,
 tekintettel az első alkalommal 2005. június 25-én Luxembourgban módosított (1) és második alkalommal 2010. június 22-én Ouagadougouban módosított (2), az egyrészről az afrikai, karibi és csendes-óceáni államok, másrészről az Európai Közösség és tagállamai között Cotonouban 2000. június 23-án aláírt partnerségi megállapodásra (3) és különösen annak III. melléklete 3. cikkének (5) bekezdésére,
 tekintettel az AKCS–EK Nagykövetek Bizottságának a Mezőgazdasági és Vidéki Együttműködés Technikai Központjának (CTA) alapszabályáról és eljárási szabályzatáról szóló, 2006. szeptember 27-i 4/2006 határozatára (4) és különösen annak 4. cikke (3) bekezdésére,
 mivel:
 (1)
 A Mezőgazdasági és Vidéki Együttműködés Technikai Központjának az AKCS–EU Nagykövetek Bizottsága 2/2011 határozatával (5) módosított összetételű igazgatótanácsa jelenlegi tagjainak hivatali ideje 2013. május 21-én lejár.
 (2)
 Ezért új határozat meghozatalára van szükség,
 A KÖVETKEZŐKÉPPEN HATÁROZOTT:
 1. cikk
 A Mezőgazdasági és Vidéki Együttműködés Technikai Központja jelenlegi igazgatótanácsi tagjainak hivatali ideje 3 hónapos időszakra, azaz 2013. augusztus 21-ig meghosszabbításra kerül.
 A CTA igazgatótanácsa az alábbi tagokból áll:
 —
 Dr. Daoussa BICHARA CHERIF (Csád)
 —
 Kahijoro KAHUURE (Namíbia)
 —
 Dr. Faletoi Suavi TUILAEPA (Szamoa)
 —
 Prof. Raul BRUNO DE SOUSA (Portugália)
 —
 Prof. Eric TOLLENS (Belgium)
 —
 Edwin Anthony VOS (Hollandia)
 2. cikk
 Ez a határozat az elfogadásának napján lép hatályba.
 Kelt Brüsszelben, 2013. május 29-én.
 az AKCS–EU Nagykövetek Bizottsága részéről
 az elnök
 S. O. OUTLULE
 (1) Megállapodás a Cotonouban 2000. június 23-án, egyrészről az Afrikai, Karibi és Csendes-óceáni Államok Csoportjának tagjai, másrészről az Európai Közösség és tagállamai között aláírt partnerségi megállapodás módosításáról (HL L 209., 2005.8.11., 27. o.).
 (2) Megállapodás a Cotonouban 2000. június 23-án, egyrészről az afrikai, karibi és csendes-óceáni államok csoportjának tagjai, másrészről az Európai Közösség és tagállamai között aláírt és Luxembourgban 2005. június 25-én első alkalommal módosított partnerségi megállapodás második alkalommal történő módosításáról (HL L 287., 2010.11.4., 3. o.).
 (3) HL L 317., 2000.12.15., 3. o.
 (4) HL L 350., 2006.12.12., 10. o.
 (5) HL L 110., 2011.4.29., 35. o.


text:
Både kreditor og dennes repræsentant fundet erstatningsansvarlige for indlevering af uretmæssig konkursbegæring - U.2011.596H
 Højesteret besluttede den 24. november 2010, at både en fagforening og dennes medlem solidarisk skulle betale erstatning til det selskab, der uretmæssigt var indleveret en konkurs-begæring imod. Erstatningen blev ud fra sagens faktiske forhold fastsat til kr. 94.410,50, hvortil kom renter samt sagens omkostninger med kr. 62.820,00. Medlemmet blev endvidere dømt til at betale en godtgørelse for tort med kr. 10.000,00.
 Den i sagen omhandlede konkursbegæring blev behandlet på et møde i skifteretten den 20. januar, hvor retten valgte at udsætte sagen til den 1. marts på procedure om, hvorvidt konkurs-betingelserne var opfyldt. Mødet den 1. marts blev imidlertid aldrig afholdt, da konkursbegæringen blev trukket tilbage den 20. februar.
 Selskabet, der var indleveret konkursbegæring mod, indleverede herefter stævning ved Sø- og Handelsretten mod fagforeningen og dennes medlem med påstand om, at begge skulle betale erstatning og tort for uretmæssig indlevering af konkursbegæringen.
 Sø- og Handelsretten fandt, at konkursbegæringen var indleveret uretmæssigt, og at begge parter var erstatningsansvarlige - dog efter hver sit regelsæt. Medlemmet fandtes ansvarlig på baggrund af konkurslovens § 28, stk. 1 som den direkte fordringshaver, hvilket ud fra forarbejderne til konkursloven og litteraturen i øvrigt efter Rettens vurdering ikke også omfattede fagforeningen. Derimod fandtes fagforeningen ansvarlig efter dansk rets almindelige erstatningsregler ved at have indleveret den uretmæssige konkursbegæring på medlemmets vegne.
 For så vidt angik tortgodtgørelsen fandt Sø- og Handelsretten, at denne alene kunne knyttes til konkurslovens regler og ikke de almindelige erstatningsregler, hvorfor kun medlemmet blev dømt til at betale en godtgørelse for tort.
 Højesteret tiltrådte Sø- og Handelsrettens begrundelse vedrørende erstatningsansvaret og de to forskellige ansvarsgrundlag. Da der ikke for Højesteret var nedlagt påstand om, at fagforeningen ligeledes skulle betale en godtgørelse for tort, har Højesteret ikke taget stilling til, om fagforeningen kunne idømmes en sådan godtgørelse. Højesteret tiltrådte imidlertid, at medlemmet skulle betale tortgodtgørelse af samme niveau som fastsat af Sø- og Handelsretten.
 Med dommen er det slået fast, at såvel et medlem af en faglig organisation som den faglige organisation kan belastes for indlevering af en uretmæssig konkursbegæring.
 For så vidt angår ansvaret for en repræsentant for en fordringshaver, er dette ikke direkte hjemlet i konkursloven, men dommen falder i tråd med det faktiske forhold, at en repræsentant, det være sig en faglig organisation eller en anden, ofte i situationen vil have fungeret som rådgiver for den direkte fordringshaver i forbindelse med forsøg på at formå en skyldner at betale sin gæld.
 Rådgiverens opgaver bør i den forbindelse bl.a. omfatte undersøgelser vedrørende kravets eksistens og skyldnerens solvens, både for at sikre at kravet reelt består, men også om den manglende betaling ikke blot beror på uvilje fra skyldners side. Tilsidesættes sådanne undersøgelser, med det resultat at en konkursbegæring findes uberettiget, har repræsentanten handlet ansvarspådragende, og Højesteret har altså nu bestemt, at repræsentanten i en sådan situation kan mødes med et erstatningskrav.
 Da en del af repræsentantens arbejde imidlertid kun kan blive så godt, som de informationer en fordringshaver afleverer (her tænkes primært på et kravs eksistens), synes det fortsat berettiget, at også den direkte fordringshaver kan blive mødt med et erstatningskrav, således som hjemlet i konkurslovens § 28, stk. 1, da det kan have konsekvenser, for den der er blevet mødt med konkursbegæringen, at blive forbundet med konkurs.
 For så vidt angår en godtgørelse for tort, havde det været ønskeligt om Højesteret havde haft mulighed for at tage stilling hertil. Det vurderes dog, at Højesteret havde været enig med Sø- og Handelsretten og fundet, at alene medlemmet, som den direkte fordringshaver, skulle betale en godtgørelse for tort, da en sådan er objektiv efter konkurslovens § 28, stk. 2 men ikke ellers hjemlet efter dansk rets almindelige erstatningsregler.
 Fremadrettet må repræsentanter for fordringshavere herunder faglige organisationer, når og hvis disse selv forestår indgivelse af konkursbegæringer, i særlig grad være opmærksomme på, om konkurslovens betingelser for indgivelse af konkursbegæringer er opfyldt for at undgå ansvar for sig selv og for medlemmet, som jo i mange tilfælde slet ikke er informeret om, hvilke retlige skridt der indledes, og derfor heller ikke har mulighed for at sikre sig.


text:
 9 . 2. 73 Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee N. L 37/5
 REGOLAMENTO (CEE) N. 326/73 DELLA COMMISSIONE
 dell'8 febbraio 1973
 che fissa il correttivo applicabile alla restituzione per i cereali
 LA COMMISSIONE DELLE COMUNITÀ EUROPEE, grafo 2, del regolamento n. 140/67/CEE (6),
 visto il trattato che istituisce la Comunità economica modificato dal regolamento (CEE) n. 2435/70 (7),
 europea,
 prendendo come base, per ciascun mese di validità
 del titolo d'esportazione, il prezzo cif calcolato sulla
 visto il regolamento n. 120/67/CEE del Consiglio, del base delle offerte d'imbarco nel mese nel quale sarà
 13 giugno 1967, relativo all'organizzazione comune effettuata l'esportazione ;
 dei mercati nel settore dei cereali (*), modificato per considerando che il correttivo così fissato sarà
 ultimo dall'atto (2) allegato al trattato relativo al
 l'adesione dei nuovi Stati membri alla Comunità modificato quando l'applicazione della regola del
 calcolo di cui sopra comporterà una modifica del suo
 economica europea e alla Comunità europea del importo superiore a 0,125 unità di conto ;
 l'energia atomica (3), firmato a Bruxelles il 22 gen
 naio 1972, in particolare l'articolo 16, paragrafo 4, considerando tuttavia che, secondo l'articolo 2 del
 primo comma, terza frase, regolamento n. 633/67/CEE, il correttivo applicabile
 all'importo della restituzione fissata in anticipo per
 considerando che in virtù dell'articolo 16, paragrafo una esportazione da effettuarsi dopo il terzo mese
 4, del regolamento n. 120/67/CEE la restituzione seguente quello in cui il titolo è stato rilasciato, deve
 applicabile alle esportazioni di cereali nel giorno essere fissato in funzione delle prospettive di
 della presentazione della domanda del titolo, adot evoluzione del mercato ; che si possono quindi
 tata in funzione del prezzo d'entrata che sarà in prendere in considerazione le disponibilità e l'evolu
 vigore nel mese dell'esportazione, deve essere appli zione prevedibili del mercato comunitario da un
 cata, dietro richiesta, ad un'esportazione da effettuare lato, e d'altro lato, l'evoluzione a termine del
 durante la validità del titolo ; che in questo caso un mercato mondiale ed in particolare dei mercati le cui
 correttivo deve essere applicato alla restituzione ; esigenze specifiche hanno resa necessaria la fissazione
 considerando che il regolamento n. 633/67/CEE (4), di restituzioni differenziate ;
 modificato per ultimo dal regolamento (CEE) n.
 1461 /72 ( 5 ), ha stabilito le modalità della fissazione considerando che risulta dall'insieme delle disposi
 zioni citate innanzi che il correttivo deve essere
 anticipata della restituzione all'esportazione dei
 cereali ; fissato come è indicato nella tabella allegata al
 presente regolamento ;
 considerando che in virtù di detto regolamento la
 restituzione applicabile nel giorno della presentazione considerando che le misure previste dal presente
 della domanda deve essere, in caso di fissazione regolamento sono conformi al parere del Comitato di
 anticipata, diminuita di un importo eguale, al gestione per i cereali,
 massimo, alla differenza tra il prezzo cif d'acquisto a
 termine ed il prezzo cif allorquando il primo è HA ADOTTATO IL PRESENTE REGOLAMENTO :
 superiore al secondo di più di un'unità di conto ; Articolo 1
 che la restituzione deve essere, d'altra parte,
 aumentata di un importo eguale, al massimo, alla Il correttivo applicabile alle restituzioni fissate
 differenza tra il prezzo cif e il prezzo cif d'acquisto a anticipatamente per le esportazioni di cereali, di cui
 termine allorquando il primo è superiore al secondo all'articolo 16, paragrafo 4, del regolamento n. 120/
 di più di un'unità di conto ; 67/CEE, è fissato nella tabella allegata al presente
 regolamento.
 considerando che il prezzo cif è quello determinato
 Articolo 2
 conformemente all'articolo 13 del regolamento n .
 120/67/CEE ; che il prezzo cif d'acquisto a termine è Il presente regolamento entra in vigore il 9 febbraio
 quello stabilito conformemente all'articolo 3, para 1973 .
 II presente regolamento è obbligatorio in tutti i suoi elementi e direttamente applicabile
 in ciascuno degli Stati membri .
 Fatto a Bruxelles, l'8 febbraio 1973 .
 Per la Commissione
 P. J. LARDINOIS
 Membro della Commissione
 (J) CU ri . 117 del 19.6.1967, pag. 2269/67.
 (l) GU n L 73 del 27. 3 . 1972, pag. 14 .
 (3) GU n . I. 73 del 27. 3 . 1972 , pag . 5 .
 (<) GU n . 233 de ! 28 . 9. 1967, pag. 9. («) GUn . 125 del 26. 6. 1967, pag. 2456/67.
 («) GUn. L 155 dell'll . 7. 1972, pag. 35. (7) GUn. L 262 del 3. 12. 1970, pag. 3.
 ---pagebreak--- N. L 37 /6 Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee 9. 2. 73
 ALLEGATO
 al regolamento della Commissione dell'8 febbraio 1973 che fissa il correttivo applicabile
 alla restituzione per i cereali
 (u.c./t )
 Numero
 della tariffa Corrente 1° term . 2° terin . 3 o term . 4o term . 5 o term . 6o temi .
 doganale Designazione dei prodotti 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
 comune
 10.01 A Frumento tenero e frumen
 to segalato
 10.01 B Frumento duro — — — — — — —
 10 02 Segala — __ — — —
 — —
 10.03 Orzo — — — — — — —
 10.04 Avena — — — —
 —
 — —
 10.05 B Granturco diverso dal
 granturco ibrido destina
 to alla semina
 10.07 C Sorgo
 N.B. : Le zone sono quelle stabilite nell'allegato del regolamento (CEE) n. 941/72 (GU n. L 107 del 6. 5. 1972).


text:
19.5.2001 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning C 150/25
 1) Talan ogillas. FÖRSTAINSTANSRÄTTENS DOM
 2) Vardera parten skall bära sin rättegångskostnad. av den 13 mars 2001
 (1) EGT C 79, 18.3.00. i mål T-116/00: Benthe Hørbye-Möller mot Europeiska
 gemenskapernas kommission (1)
 (Tjänstemän — Befordran — Jämförelse av kvalifikationer
 — Talan om ogiltigförklaring)
 (2001/C 150/49)
 FÖRSTAINSTANSRÄTTENS DOM
 av den 31 januari 2001 (Rättegångsspråk: franska)
 i mål T-24/00, the Sunrider Corporation mot Byrån för Förstainstansrätten (ensamdomare: J.D. Cooke; justitiesekrete-
 harmonisering inom den inre marknaden (varumärken, rare: byrådirektören D. Christensen) har den 13 mars 2001
 mönster och modeller) (1) avkunnat dom i mål T-116/00: Benthe Hørbye-Möller, tjänste-
 man vid Europeiska gemenskapernas kommission, Igel (Tysk-
 (Gemenskapsvarumärke — Uttrycket VITALITE — Absolut land) (ombud: advokaten L. Tinti, med delgivningsadress i
 registreringshinder — Artikel 7.1 c i förordning (EG) Luxemburg) mot Europeiska gemenskapernas kommission
 nr 40/94) (ombud: C. Berardis-Kayser) angående en talan om ogiltigför-
 klaring av kommissionens beslut att inte befordra sökanden
 till lönegrad B2 för året 1999. Domslutet i denna dom har
 (2001/C 150/48) följande lydelse:
 1) Talan ogillas.
 (Rättegångsspråk: engelska)
 2) Vardera parten skall stå sina kostnader i målet.
 Förstainstansrätten, andra avdelningen (ordföranden J. Pirrung
 samt domarna A. Potocki och A.W.H. Meij; justitiesekreterare:
 byrådirektören J. Palacio González), har den 31 januari 2001 (1) EGT C 192, 8.7.2000.
 avkunnat dom i mål T-24/00, The Sunrider Corporation,
 Torrance, Kalifornien (Amerikas förenta stater) (ombud: advo-
 katen A. Kockläuner, München, delgivningsadress: patentbyrån
 Ernest T. Freylinger, 234, route d’Arlon, Luxemburg) mot
 Byrån för harmonisering inom den inre marknaden (varumär-
 ken, mönster och modeller) (ombud: tjänstechefen C. Rusconi,
 administrationen för varumärkesregister, och G. Humphreys),
 angående en talan som väckts mot det beslut som fattats av FÖRSTAINSTANSRÄTTENS DOM
 andra överklagandenämnden vid Byrån för harmonisering
 inom den inre marknaden (varumärken, mönster och modeller)
 den 26 november 1999 (ärende R 137/1999-2) avseende av den 22 februari 2001
 registrering av uttrycket VITALITE som gemenskapsvarumär-
 ke. Domslutet i denna dom har följande lydelse: i mål T-144/00: Daniela Tirelli mot Europaparlamentet (1)
 1) Det beslut som fattats av andra överklagandenämnden vid
 (Tjänstemän — Övergång till en högre kategori — Sekreta-
 Byrån för harmonisering inom den inre marknaden (varumär-
 riatstillägg — Artikel 46 i tjänsteföreskrifterna — Förflytt-
 ken, mönster och modeller) (ärende R 137/1999-2) ogiltigför-
 ning mellan institutioner — Avvisning)
 klaras vad beträffar följande varor: ”spädbarnsmat” och ”mine-
 ral- och kolsyrat vatten”.
 (2001/C 150/50)
 2) Talan ogillas i övrigt.
 3) Sökanden skall bära sina kostnader och ersätta hälften av (Rättegångsspråk: franska)
 svarandens kostnader. Svaranden skall bära den andra hälften
 av sina kostnader.
 Förstainstansrätten, femte avdelningen (ordföranden P. Lindh
 samt domarna R. Garcı́a-Valdecasas och J.D. Cooke ; justitiese-
 (1) EGT C 135, 13.5.2000. kreterare: byrådirektören G. Herzig), har den 22 februari 2001
 avkunnat dom i mål T-144/00: Daniela Tirelli, tjänsteman vid
 Europaparlamentet, Dahlem (Luxemburg), (ombud: advokater-
 na G. Vogel och F. Burg, med delgivningsadress i Luxemburg)


text:
 302 Md. 175 (1985)
 486 A.2d 196
 RODNEY LORENZO SMITH
 v.
 STATE OF MARYLAND.
 No. 82, September Term, 1983.
 Court of Appeals of Maryland.
 January 10, 1985.
 Julia A. Doyle, Asst. Public Defender, Baltimore (Alan H. Murrell, Public Defender, Baltimore, on brief), for appellant.
 Richard B. Rosenblatt, Asst. Atty. Gen., Baltimore (Stephen H. Sachs, Atty. Gen., Baltimore, on brief), for appellee.
 Argued before MURPHY, C.J., ELDRIDGE, COLE, DAVIDSON,[*] RODOWSKY and COUCH, JJ., and CHARLES E. ORTH, Jr., Associate Judge of the Court of Appeals (retired) specially assigned.
 ELDRIDGE, Judge.
 The issue in this case is whether the trial court erred in denying the petitioner's request to have the jury instructed on alibi after the petitioner testified at trial that he "was in Texas at the time the crimes were committed" in Maryland. We hold that the trial court's refusal to instruct the jury on alibi constituted error, and we therefore reverse.
 The petitioner, Rodney Lorenzo Smith, was charged in an eight count indictment with armed robbery and related offenses arising out of the August 30, 1981, robbery of a desk clerk at a Holiday Inn. On May 15, 1982, Smith was tried before a jury in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County. At the trial, the desk clerk positively identified Smith as one of the robbers. On the other hand, Smith specifically testified that he was not at the Holiday Inn on August 30, 1981, that he was not "even in the State at that time," and that he was in Texas when the robbery occurred. Smith's aunt, Agnes Pearman, testified that Smith had been in Texas for over six months in 1981, and that she had seen him in Maryland after his return on September 4, 1981. She was not, however, able to testify as to Smith's whereabouts on August 30, 1981. Smith's attorney submitted to the court, in writing, a proposed jury instruction on alibi. The requested instruction stated, in part, as follows:
 "The defendant has offered testimony to establish an alibi. An alibi is a defense which is based on evidence that the accused was not present at the time when, or at the place when he is alleged to have committed the offense charged.
 "The claim of alibi is legitimate, legal and proper. When such a claim is thoroughly established, it precludes the possibility of guilt.
 "The presence of the defendant at the time and place of the criminal act is not to be presumed or assumed. In every case where the presence of the defendant at the commission of the crime is essential to his conviction, the state must establish his presence beyond a reasonable doubt.
 "You are not to weigh merely the evidence relating to the alibi and determine from that alone whether you have a reasonable doubt of guilt. You should consider such evidence along with all of the other evidence. In this connection you should consider whether the alibi testimony covered the entire period of time during which the crime may have been committed."
 The trial judge refused to give any jury instruction on alibi, stating that "there's no alibi evidence.... No character reference. No accomplices' testimony."
 Smith was convicted of armed robbery and the use of a handgun in the commission of a crime of violence. The court imposed a fifteen year sentence for the robbery offense, a concurrent five year sentence for the handgun offense, and ordered restitution. The Court of Special Appeals affirmed in an unreported opinion. The intermediate appellate court took the position that, in order for a defendant to be entitled to an alibi instruction, his alibi testimony must be corroborated. The Court of Special Appeals went on to state that Smith's testimony was not
 "sufficiently corroborated. Mrs. Pearman was not only unable to relate when the appellant had been in Texas, but testified that she was unsure as to when he returned to Maryland. Needless to say, such testimony would not reasonably exclude the possibility of the appellant's presence at the time and place of the alleged offense. We hold, therefore, that the evidence by the appellant was insufficient to require the trial court to give an instruction as to the issue of alibi."
 The defendant Smith filed a petition for a writ of certiorari presenting two questions, the first relating to the alibi issue and the second challenging the order for restitution. In light of the Court of Special Appeals' holding that a defendant's alibi testimony must be corroborated for him to be entitled to an alibi instruction, we granted the petition limited to the first question, which was set forth in our certiorari order as follows:
 "Did the Court of Special Appeals err in holding that the Petitioner's testimony that he was in another state when the armed robbery was committed was not sufficient to generate the alibi issue in the absence of full corroboration by other evidence and that the trial court was not required to give the requested instruction on the alibi issue?"
 The State, in its brief and oral argument before this Court, disagreed with the reasoning of the Court of Special Appeals and took the position that a defendant's alibi testimony need not be corroborated in order for a defendant to be entitled to an alibi instruction. Nevertheless, the State argued that an accused, to be entitled to an alibi instruction, must present evidence clearly generating the issue. In the present case, according to the State, Smith's testimony as a whole was so inconsistent that it was "totally without value." Consequently, according to the State, the defendant was not entitled to an alibi instruction in this case.
 We shall first deal with the corroboration issue, and then we shall address the State's argument.
 (1)
 We note at the outset that "it is incumbent upon the court, ... when requested in a criminal case, to give an ... instruction on every essential question or point of law supported by evidence." Bruce v. State, 218 Md. 87, 97, 145 A.2d 428, 433 (1958). See, e.g., Blackwell v. State, 278 Md. 466, 477, 365 A.2d 545, cert. denied, 431 U.S. 918, 97 S. Ct. 2183, 53 L. Ed. 2d 229 (1976); Dillon v. State, 277 Md. 571, 584-585, 357 A.2d 360 (1976); England & Edwards v. State, 274 Md. 264, 275-276, 334 A.2d 98 (1975); Hardison v. State, 226 Md. 53, 60-61, 172 A.2d 407 (1961). This principle was embodied in former Maryland Rule 757(b) which stated that "[t]he court may, and at the request of any party shall, give those ... instructions to the jury as correctly state the applicable law."[1] This Court has held that the word "shall," as employed in Rule 757(b), renders the rule mandatory. See, e.g., Lansdowne v. State, 287 Md. 232, 238-239, 412 A.2d 88 (1980), and cases there cited.
 The Court of Special Appeals, as well as a majority of cases throughout the country, have held that when the evidence in a criminal case generates the issue of alibi, and when the defendant requests an instruction specifically addressed to the matter of alibi, the defendant is entitled to a specific alibi instruction, and that the trial court's general instructions concerning the prosecution's burden of proof, etc., are not deemed to "fairly cover" the matter of alibi. Pulley v. State, 38 Md. App. 682, 688-691, 382 A.2d 621 (1978), and cases there cited. Cf. State v. Grady, 276 Md. 178, 345 A.2d 436 (1975) (holding that a jury instruction which placed an impermissible burden of proof upon the defendant to establish his alibi constituted reversible error). We agree with the holding of the Court of Special Appeals in the Pulley case.
 Of the cases which ordinarily require the trial court to instruct the jury concerning alibi when the alibi issue is presented by the evidence and the instruction is requested by the defendant, the overwhelming majority hold that the defendant's uncorroborated testimony, that he was at some other place at the time of the crime, is sufficient to generate the issue. See, e.g., Hudson v. State, 381 So. 2d 344 (Fla. App. 1980); Pippins v. State, 224 Ga. 462, 162 S.E.2d 338, 340 (1968); People v. Jones, 47 Ill. 2d 135, 265 N.E.2d 125 (1970); People v. McGinnis, 402 Mich. 343, 262 N.W.2d 669 (1977); State v. Slay, 406 S.W.2d 575, 579 (Mo. 1966); Commonwealth v. Pounds, 490 Pa. 621, 417 A.2d 597 (1980); State v. Robbins, 275 S.C. 373, 271 S.E.2d 319 (1980).[2] In Hudson, supra, 381 So.2d at 346, in holding that an accused's uncorroborated testimony, standing by itself, is sufficient to require an alibi instruction, the court stated:
 "A defendant's testimony may not be totally disregarded merely because he is the defendant. His testimony must be weighed just as that of any other witness."
 In People v. McGinnis, supra, the Supreme Court of Michigan held that a defendant's uncorroborated testimony placing him "elsewhere than at the scene of the crime" is sufficient to require a defendant-requested jury instruction on alibi, stating that a defendant's alibi testimony "is alibi testimony the same as if another witness had given the testimony." 262 N.W.2d at 671. The Michigan court noted that
 "a defendant may offer uncorroborated testimony and thereupon become entitled to an instruction on such defenses as self-defense, accident, mistake, duress, intoxication, consent, non-culpable intent, provocation mitigating murder to manslaughter, or law enforcement or other public duty. But undeniably such defenses can be maintained solely on the defendant's testimony, and upon proffering such uncorroborated testimony the defendant would be entitled to an appropriate instruction." Ibid.
 We can discern no principled reason for treating the alibi issue differently than all other issues in criminal cases by requiring corroboration of an accused's alibi testimony in order that the jury be instructed on alibi.[3]
 (2)
 As previously discussed, the State conceded in this Court that corroboration of an accused's testimony should not be a prerequisite for an alibi instruction. The State argued, however, that the trial judge's failure to instruct the jury on alibi was excusable because the appellant's testimony "was so inconsistent as to be totally without evidentiary value." The State's reliance was upon Kucharczyk v. State, 235 Md. 334, 201 A.2d 683 (1964).
 In Kucharczyk, the defendant was convicted of assault and battery, based on the alleged attempted buggery of a sixteen year old boy. The prosecuting witness's testimony furnished the only evidence against the defendant. This witness was mentally deficient and, according to a psychologist called by the State, had a full scale I.Q. of only 56. The witness, twice on direct examination and once on cross-examination, "testified that nothing happened. Thus, there were unqualified statements by the prosecuting witness that the crime for which the appellant was convicted never in fact occurred." 235 Md. at 337-338, 201 A.2d 683. On this ground, the Court reversed the conviction, stating that
 "the testimony of the prosecuting witness, who was the only person that testified as to any overt act on the part of the appellant, was so contradictory that it lacked probative force and was thus insufficient to support a finding beyond a reasonable doubt of the facts required to be proven." Id. at 337, 201 A.2d 683.
 The State in the case at bar asserts that Smith's testimony falls within the doctrine set forth in Kucharczyk. This reliance is misplaced.
 The doctrine set forth in Kucharczyk is extremely limited in scope. See Bailey v. State, 16 Md. App. 83, 93-97, 294 A.2d 123 (1972), and the cases there cited. See also Wilkins v. State, 239 Md. 692, 693, 211 A.2d 308 (1964). The State points to inconsistencies and confusion in Smith's testimony, particularly the following exchange:
 "Q Do you remember what month that was in 1981 that you were in fact in the Holiday Inn?
 "A Do I know what date it was?
 "Q What  yes, what month it was.
 "A I don't know. Could have been around in, uh, no I don't know. I couldn't say 'cause when I came back from Texas I was a little, you know, fuzzy in the head 'cause I was out there and they locked me up. I got locked up for some charges that I was supposed to had and this and that and that and the other which I couldn't have committed because I was out there and not here.
 "Q You were here and not there.
 "A Or vice versa.
 "Q Right. Okay. You're saying that you were accused of committing crimes in Texas which you couldn't have committed because you were in Maryland at that time.
 "A I was in Texas at the time the crimes were committed here."
 The type of confusion and inconsistency contained in this and other testimony given by Smith at trial neither rises to, nor even approaches, the level of unreliability which would place it within the narrow ambit of the principle set forth by the Court in Kucharczyk. We agree with the rule stated in Hudson v. State, supra, 381 So.2d at 346, that
 "It is not the function of the trial judge to weigh the evidence and select some cases in which to give the alibi instruction. The instruction should be given in every case where there is sufficient evidence to take the issue to the jury."
 The testimony of the defendant Smith, flatly stating that he was in Texas when the crime was committed, was sufficient evidence to take the issue to the jury.
 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS REVERSED, AND CASE REMANDED TO THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS WITH DIRECTIONS TO REVERSE THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY AND REMAND THE CASE TO THAT COURT FOR A NEW TRIAL. COSTS TO BE PAID BY ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY.
 NOTES
 [*] Davidson, J., participated in the hearing of the case and in the conference in regard to its decision, but died prior to the adoption of the opinion by the Court.
 [1] Effective July 1, 1984, former Rule 757(b) was replaced by new Rule 4-325(c), which states as follows:
 "The court may, and at the request of any party shall, instruct the jury as to the applicable law and the extent to which the instructions are binding. The court may give its instructions orally or, with the consent of the parties, in writing instead of orally. The court need not grant a requested instruction if the matter is fairly covered by instructions actually given."
 [2] The only case, of which we are aware, which seems to be contrary is Beasley v. State, 539 S.W.2d 820 (Tenn.Cr.App. 1976).
 [3] For criminal cases holding that generally the testimony of a single witness is sufficient to generate an issue, see, e.g., Mobley and King v. State, 270 Md. 76, 89, 310 A.2d 803 (1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 975, 94 S. Ct. 2003, 40 L. Ed. 2d 564 (1974); Caviness v. State, 244 Md. 575, 579, 224 A.2d 417 (1966); Hammond v. State, 241 Md. 733, 736, 217 A.2d 569 (1966); Wesbecker v. State, 240 Md. 41, 46, 212 A.2d 737 (1965).


text:
 27.8.2011
 LV
 Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis
 C 252/38
 Prasība, kas celta 2011. gada 24. jūnijā — Italiana Calzature/ITSB — Vicini (“Giuseppe GIUSEPPE ZANOTTI DESIGN”)
 (Lieta T-336/11)
 2011/C 252/85
 Valoda, kādā sagatavots prasības pieteikums — itāļu
 Lietas dalībnieki
 Prasītāja: Società Italiana Calzature SpA (Milāna, Itālija) (pārstāvji — A. Rapisardi un C. Ginevra, advokāti)
 Atbildētājs: Iekšējā tirgus saskaņošanas birojs (preču zīmes, paraugi un modeļi)
 Otra procesa ITSB Apelāciju padomē dalībniece: Vicini SpA (San Mauro Pascoli, Itālija)
 Prasītājas prasījumi
 —
 atcelt Apelāciju otrās padomes 2008. gada 8. aprīļa lēmumu procesā Nr. R 0634/2010-2 un tādējādi apstiprināt Iebildumu nodaļas 2010. gada 5. marta lēmumu, kas attiecas uz iebildumu procesu Nr. 1350711;
 —
 piespriest ITSB atlīdzināt tiesāšanās izdevumus šajā instancē.
 Pamati un galvenie argumenti
 Kopienas preču zīmes reģistrācijas pieteikuma iesniedzēja: VICINI SpA
 Attiecīgā Kopienas preču zīme: grafiska preču zīme, kas ietver vārdisku elementu “GIUSEPPE” (reģistrācijas pieteikums Nr. 6.513.386) attiecībā uz precēm un pakalpojumiem, kas ietilpst 18. un 25. klasē
 Iebildumu procesā pretstatītās preču zīmes vai apzīmējuma īpašniece: prasītāja
 Pretstatītā preču zīme vai apzīmējums: Kopienas vārdiska preču zīme “ZANOTTI” (Nr. 244.277) attiecībā uz precēm, kas ietilpst 25. klasē, un Itālijas grafiska preču zīme, kas ietver vārdisku elementu “Zanotti”, attiecībā uz precēm, kas ietilpst 18. un 25. klasē
 Iebildumu nodaļas lēmums: daļēji apmierināt iebildumus
 Apelāciju padomes lēmums: pilnībā noraidīt iebildumus
 Izvirzītie pamati: Regulas Nr. 207/2009 par Kopienas preču zīmi 8. panta 2. punkta b) apakšpunkta nepareiza interpretācija un piemērošana


text:
 18.7.2016
 HR
 Službeni list Europske unije
 C 260/27
 Zahtjev za prethodnu odluku koji je 2. svibnja 2016. uputio Oberster Gerichtshof (Austrija) – Austria Asphalt GmbH & Co OG protiv Bundeskartellanwalta
 (Predmet C-248/16)
 (2016/C 260/34)
 Jezik postupka: njemački
 Sud koji je uputio zahtjev
 Oberster Gerichtshof
 Stranke glavnog postupka
 Tužitelj: Austria Asphalt GmbH & Co OG
 Tuženik: Bundeskartellanwalt
 Prethodno pitanje
 Treba li članak 3. stavak 1. točku (b) i članak 4. Uredbe Vijeća (EZ) br. 139/2004 (1) od 20. siječnja 2004. o kontroli koncentracija između poduzetnika (Uredba o koncentracijama) tumačiti na način da u slučaju promjene s isključive na zajedničku kontrolu postojećeg poduzetnika, pri čemu poduzetnik koji je prethodno imao isključivu kontrolu i dalje sudjeluje u izvršavanju zajedničke kontrole, koncentracija postoji samo ako taj poduzetnik trajno obavlja sve funkcije samostalne jedinice?
 (1) Uredba Vijeća (EZ) br. 139/2004 od 20. siječnja 2004. o kontroli koncentracija između poduzetnika (Uredba EZ o koncentracijama) (SL L 24, str. 1.) (SL, posebno izdanje na hrvatskom jeziku, poglavlje 8., svezak 5., str. 73.)


text:
 |
 52014PC0261
 Proposta de REGULAMENTO DO CONSELHO que altera o Regulamento (UE) n.o 1388/2013 relativo à abertura e ao modo de gestão de contingentes pautais autónomos da União para determinados produtos agrícolas e industriais /* COM/2014/0261 final - 2014/0137 (NLE) */
 EXPOSIÇÃO DE MOTIVOS
 1. CONTEXTO DA PROPOSTA
 É conveniente definir contingentes pautais
 autónomos da União relativamente a produtos cuja produção na União é
 insuficiente para responder às necessidades da indústria transformadora da
 União no atual período de contingentamento. Na sequência de pedidos formulados
 por diversos Estados-Membros, os serviços da Comissão, em cooperação com os
 peritos governamentais competentes, decidiram analisar se seria oportuno abrir
 contingentes pautais autónomos para certos produtos agrícolas e industriais.
 Em 17 de dezembro de 2013, o Conselho adotou o
 Regulamento (UE) n.o 1388/2013 relativo à abertura e ao modo de gestão de
 contingentes pautais autónomos da União para determinados produtos agrícolas e
 industriais, de modo a satisfazer a procura a nível da União nas condições mais
 favoráveis.
 Deverá proceder-se à abertura de contingentes
 pautais da União a taxas de direitos zero ou reduzidas relativamente a volumes
 adequados, sem perturbar os mercados desses produtos. As discussões nas
 reuniões do Grupo «Questões Económicas Pautais» revelaram que os
 Estados-Membros estão dispostos a abrir os contingentes pautais para os
 produtos enumerados no anexo I da presente proposta de regulamento, sem
 perturbar os mercados desses produtos.
 Além disso, tornou-se necessário adaptar os
 contingentes pautais enumerados no anexo II da presente proposta:
 para os números de ordem 09.2631 e 09.2806,
 teve de ser alterada a designação,
 para o número de ordem 09.2629, teve de ser
 eliminado um código TARIC e
 para os números de ordem 09.2818, 09.2668 e
 09.2669, os volumes foram aumentados.
 O contingente pautal autónomo com o número de
 ordem 09.2930 é suprimido do anexo do Regulamento (UE) n.o 1388/2013 do
 Conselho, uma vez que não é do interesse da União continuar a conceder tal
 contingente.
 A proposta está em conformidade com as
 políticas em matéria de agricultura, comércio, empresas, desenvolvimento e
 relações externas. Mais concretamente, não prejudica os países que beneficiam
 de um acordo comercial preferencial com a UE (por exemplo, SPG, regime ACP,
 países candidatos e potenciais candidatos).
 2. RESULTADOS DAS CONSULTAS DAS
 PARTES INTERESSADAS E DAS AVALIAÇÕES DE IMPACTO
 Foi consultado o Grupo «Questões Económicas
 Pautais», no qual estão representadas as autoridades competentes de todos os
 Estados-Membros. Todos os contingentes enumerados traduzem acordos ou
 compromissos alcançados nas discussões do grupo.
 Não foi mencionada a existência de riscos
 potencialmente graves e com consequências irreversíveis.
 A presente proposta seguirá um procedimento de
 consulta interserviços e será publicada após a sua adoção pelo Conselho.
 3. ELEMENTOS JURÍDICOS DA
 PROPOSTA
 A base jurídica da proposta de regulamento é o
 artigo 31.o do Tratado sobre o Funcionamento da União Europeia (TFUE).
 Por força do artigo 31.o do TFUE, as
 suspensões e os contingentes pautais autónomos são fixados pelo Conselho,
 deliberando por maioria qualificada, sob proposta da Comissão. Por conseguinte,
 um regulamento é o instrumento adequado.
 A proposta é da competência exclusiva da
 União. Por conseguinte, o princípio da subsidiariedade não é aplicável.
 A proposta respeita o princípio da
 proporcionalidade visto que este conjunto de medidas está de acordo com os
 princípios relativos à simplificação dos procedimentos a seguir pelos
 operadores do comércio externo e em conformidade com a Comunicação da Comissão
 sobre as suspensões e os contingentes pautais autónomos (JO C 363 de
 13.12.2011, p. 6).
 4. INCIDÊNCIA ORÇAMENTAL
 Não cobrança de direitos aduaneiros num
 montante total de cerca de 5,9 milhões de euros/ano. A incidência nos recursos
 próprios tradicionais do orçamento representa -4,4 milhões de euros/ano
 (75 % x 5,9 milhões de euros/ano).
 2014/0137 (NLE)
 Proposta de
 REGULAMENTO DO CONSELHO
 que altera o Regulamento (UE) n.o 1388/2013
 relativo à abertura e ao modo de gestão de contingentes pautais autónomos da
 União para determinados produtos agrícolas e industriais
 O CONSELHO DA UNIÃO EUROPEIA,
 Tendo em conta o Tratado sobre o Funcionamento
 da União Europeia, nomeadamente o artigo 31.o,
 Tendo em conta a proposta da Comissão
 Europeia,
 Considerando o seguinte:
 (1) Para assegurar fornecimentos
 suficientes e ininterruptos de certos produtos insuficientemente produzidos na
 União e para evitar quaisquer perturbações no mercado para certos produtos
 agrícolas e industriais, foram abertos pelo Regulamento (UE) n.o 1388/2013 do
 Conselho[1]
 contingentes pautais autónomos. Os produtos no âmbito desses contingentes
 pautais podem ser importados para a União a taxas de direitos zero ou
 reduzidas. Pelas razões indicadas, é necessário abrir, com efeitos a partir de
 1 de julho de 2014, contingentes pautais de direito zero para um volume
 adequado relativamente a seis novos produtos.
 (2) Além disso, em certos casos,
 os contingentes pautais autónomos da União existentes devem ser adaptados. Em
 dois casos, a descrição do produto deve ser alterada para efeitos de
 clarificação e a fim de ter em conta os mais recentes desenvolvimentos em
 matéria de produtos. Num outro caso, um dos códigos TARIC deve ser suprimido,
 uma vez que a dupla classificação se tornou obsoleta, e, noutros três casos, os
 volumes dos contingentes devem ser reforçados, uma vez que tal é do interesse
 dos operadores económicos e da União.
 (3) Por último, em dois casos, os
 contingentes pautais autónomos da União devem ser encerrados, com efeitos a
 partir de 1 de julho de 2014 e 1 de janeiro de 2015, respetivamente, uma vez
 que não é do interesse da União continuar a conceder tais contingentes a partir
 dessas datas.
 (4) O Regulamento (UE) n.o
 1388/2013 deve, por conseguinte, ser alterado em conformidade.
 (5) Uma vez que é necessário que
 algumas das alterações dos contingentes pautais estabelecidos no presente
 regulamento produzam efeitos a partir de 1 de julho de 2014, o presente
 regulamento deve aplicar-se a partir dessa data e entrar em vigor no dia da sua
 publicação no Jornal Oficial da União Europeia.
 ADOTOU O PRESENTE REGULAMENTO:
 Artigo 1.o
 O anexo do Regulamento
 (UE) n.o 1388/2013 é alterado do seguinte modo:
 1) As linhas relativas aos
 contingentes pautais com os números de ordem 09.2830, 09.2831, 09.2832,
 09.2834, 09.2835 e 09.2836 constantes do anexo I do presente regulamento são
 aditadas de acordo com a ordem dos códigos NC indicados na segunda coluna do quadro
 constante do anexo do Regulamento (UE)
 n.o 1388/2013;
 2) As linhas relativas aos
 contingentes pautais com os números de ordem 09.2629, 09.2631, 09.2639,
 09.2668, 09.2669, 09.2806 e 09.2818 são substituídas pelas linhas constantes do
 anexo II do presente regulamento;
 3) A linha relativa ao
 contingente pautal com o número de ordem 09.2930 é suprimida;
 4) A linha relativa ao
 contingente pautal com o número de ordem 09.2639 é suprimida.
 Artigo 2.o
 O presente regulamento entra em vigor no dia
 da sua publicação no Jornal Oficial da União Europeia.
 O presente regulamento é aplicável a partir de
 1 de julho de 2014.
 Não obstante, o artigo 1.o, ponto 4, é
 aplicável a partir de 1 de janeiro de 2015.
 O presente regulamento é obrigatório
 em todos os seus elementos e diretamente aplicável em todos os Estados-Membros.
 Feito em Bruxelas, em
 Pelo
 Conselho
 O
 Presidente
 FICHA FINANCEIRA LEGISLATIVA
 1. DENOMINAÇÃO DA PROPOSTA:
 Regulamento do Conselho que altera o
 Regulamento (UE) n.o 1388/2013 relativo à abertura e ao modo de gestão de
 contingentes pautais autónomos da União para determinados produtos agrícolas e
 industriais
 2. RUBRICAS ORÇAMENTAIS
 Capítulo e artigo: Capítulo 12, artigo 120.o
 Montante inscrito no orçamento para o exercício de 2014:
 16 185 600 000 euros (PO 2014)
 3. INCIDÊNCIA FINANCEIRA
 ̈ A proposta não tem incidência financeira.
 X A proposta não tem incidência
 financeira nas despesas, embora tenha nas receitas. O efeito é o seguinte:
 (em
 milhões de euros, até às décimas)
 Rubrica orçamental || Receita[2] || Período de seis meses com início em dd/mm/aaaa || [Exercício de 2/2014]
 Artigo 120.o || Incidência nos recursos próprios || 1/7/2014 || -2,2
 (em
 milhões de euros, até às décimas)
 Situação após a ação
 || [2015-2018]
 Artigo 120.o || -4,4 / ano
 Os aditamentos ao presente regulamento terão
 como resultado um aumento anual de direitos não cobrados estimado em 5,9
 milhões de euros.
 Com base no que precede, a incidência da perda
 de receitas resultante da aplicação do presente regulamento pode ser estimada
 em 4,4 milhões de euros/ano para o período de 1.1.2015 em diante
 (5,9 milhões de euros montante bruto x 0,75) e 2,2 milhões de
 euros para o período de 1.7.2014 - 31.12.2014.
 4. MEDIDAS ANTIFRAUDE
 Serão efetuados controlos sobre o destino
 final de alguns produtos abrangidos pelo presente regulamento do Conselho, em
 conformidade com os artigos 291.o a 300.o do Regulamento (CEE) n.o 2454/93
 da Comissão.
 [1] O Regulamento (UE) n.o 1388/2013 do Conselho, de 17 de
 dezembro de 2013, relativo à abertura e ao modo de gestão de contingentes
 pautais autónomos da União para determinados produtos agrícolas e industriais e
 que revoga o Regulamento (UE) n.o 7/2010 (JO L 354 de 28.12.2013, p. 319).
 [2] No que diz respeito aos recursos próprios tradicionais
 (direitos agrícolas, quotizações sobre o açúcar, direitos aduaneiros), os
 montantes indicados devem ser valores líquidos, isto é, os montantes brutos
 deduzidos de 25 %, a título de despesas de cobrança.
 ANEXOS
 Anexo
 I
 Contingentes pautais referidos no artigo 1.o,
 ponto 1
 Número de ordem || Código NC || TARIC || Designação das mercadorias || Período de contingen-tamento || Quantidade do contingente || Taxa dos direitos do con-tingente (%)
 09.2830 || ex 2906 19 00 || 40 || Ciclopropilmetanol (CAS RN 2516-33-8) || 01.07.-31.12. || 10 toneladas || 0 %
 09.2831 || ex 2932 99 00 || 40 || 1,3:2,4-bis-O-(3,4-dimetilbenzilideno)-D-glucitol (CAS RN 135861-56-2) || 01.07.-31.12. || 300 toneladas || 0 %
 09.2832 || ex 3808 92 90 || 40 || Preparação contendo, em peso, 38 % ou mais, mas não mais de 50 %, de piritiona zíncica (DCI) (CAS RN 13463-41-7) numa dispersão aquosa || 01.07.-31.12. || 250 toneladas || 0 %
 09.2834 || ex 7604 29 10 || 20 || Barras de ligas de alumínio com um diâmetro de 200 mm ou superior, mas não superior a 300 mm || 01.07.-31.12. || 500 toneladas || 0 %
 09.2835 || ex 7604 29 10 || 30 || Barras de ligas de alumínio com um diâmetro de 300,1 mm ou superior, mas não superior a 533,4 mm || 01.07.-31.12. || 250 toneladas || 0 %
 09.2836 || ex 9003 11 00 ex 9003 19 00 || 10 20 || Armações para óculos, de plástico ou de metais comuns, para utilização no fabrico de óculos de correção (1) || 01.07.-31.12. || 2 900 000 peças || 0 %
 Anexo
 II
 Contingentes pautais referidos no artigo 1.o,
 ponto 2
 Número de ordem || Código NC || TARIC || Designação das mercadorias || Período de contingen-tamento || Quantidade do contingente || Taxa dos direitos do con-tingente (%)
 09.2806 || ex 2825 90 40 || 30 || Trióxido de tungsténio, incluindo óxido de tungsténio azul (CAS RN 1314-35-8 ou CAS RN 39318-18-8) || 01.01.-31.12. || 12 000 toneladas || 0 %
 09.2639 || 3905 30 00 || || Poli(álcool vinílico), mesmo que contenham grupos acetato não hidrolisados || 01.01.-31.12. || 18 000 toneladas || 0 %
 09.2818 || ex 6902 90 00 || 10 || Tijolos refratários com — || uma aresta de comprimento superior a 300 mm e
 — || teor ponderal de TiO2 não superior a 1 % e
 — || teor ponderal de Al2O3 não superior a 0,4 % e
 — || uma variação de volume, a 1700° C, inferior a 9 %
 01.01.-31.12.
 225 toneladas
 0 %
 09.2629 || ex 8302 49 00 || 91 || Pegas telescópicas de alumínio, destinadas a ser utilizadas no fabrico de bagagens (1) || 01.07.-31.12. || 800 000 peças || 0 %
 09.2668 || ex 8714 91 10 ex 8714 91 10 || 21 31 || Quadro de bicicleta, construído com fibras de carbono e resina artificial, pintado, lacado e/ou polido, para utilização no fabrico de bicicletas (1) || 01.01.-31.12. || 125 000 peças || 0 %
 09.2669 || ex 8714 91 30 ex 8714 91 30 || 21 31 || Forquilha dianteira de bicicleta, construída com fibras de carbono e resina artificial, pintada, lacada e/ou polida, para utilização no fabrico de bicicletas (1) || 01.01.-31.12. || 97 000 peças || 0 %
 09.2631 || ex 9001 90 00 || 80 || Lentes, prismas e elementos cementados, não montados, de vidro, para utilização no fabrico ou reparação de produtos dos códigos NC 9002, 9005, 9013 10 e 9015 (1) || 01.01.-31.12. || 5 000 000 peças || 0 %
 (1) A suspensão dos direitos está sujeita ao disposto nos artigos 291.o a 300.o do Regulamento (CEE) n.o 2454/93, que fixa determinadas disposições de aplicação do Regulamento (CEE) no 2913/92 do Conselho que estabelece o Código Aduaneiro Comunitário (JO L 253 de 11.10.1993, p. 1).


text:
''Šis straipsnis yra apie banko paslaugų teikimą telefoniniu ryšiu. Banko paslaugų teikimas specifinėmis mobiliųjų telefonų technologijomis (SMS, WAP) yra aptariamas straipsnyje Mobilioji bankininkystė
 Telefoninė bankininkystė – banko paslaugų teikimas telefonu.
 Rūšys
 Skiriamos dvi telefoninės bankininkystės rūšis – automatizuotos paslaugos, kai klientas bendrauja su automatu, kurį valdo spausdamas telefono mygtukus, bei banko specialisto paslaugos.
 Kliento atpažinimui paprastai naudojama slaptažodžių sistema.
 Automatinės paslaugos
 Klientas bendrauja su autoatsakikliu (vadinamąja IVR sistema), kurį valdo mygtuko paspaudimais (DTMF signalais).
 Šiuo būdu paprastai iš banko sužinoma informaciją apie sąskaitos likutį, atliktas praeitas operacijas, taip pat kitokią bankinę informaciją, pavyzdžiui, valiutų kursus.
 Taip pat kartais galima atlikti veiksmus su sąskaitomis, pavyzdžiui, pervesti pinigus į kitą sąskaitą.
 Automatinės paslaugos paprastai teikiamos visą parą.
 Specialisto paslaugos
 Šiuo būdu telefonu kalbamasi su banko specialistu. Paprastai toks specialistas gali padaryti tą patį, ką ir banko darbuotoja banko padalinyje, išskyrus grynųjų pinigų priėmimą ar išmokėjimą.
 Tokiu būdu dažniausiai galima atlikti daugiau bankinių operacijų, nei automatizuotąja sistema, tačiau specialisto paslaugos taip pat yra brangesnės.
 Elektroninė bankininkystė
 Telefonija


text:
(também escrito como (48639) 1995 TL8) é um corpo menor que está localizado no disco disperso, uma região do Sistema Solar, que possui uma magnitude absoluta de 5,4 e um diâmetro estimado de 194 km que é derivado de um suposto albedo de 0,09, sendo típico de objetos transnetunianos. Esse objeto tem um satélite natural relativamente grande, o S/2002 (48639) 1 que tem um diâmetro estimado de 161 km. O astrônomo Mike Brown lista este corpo celeste em sua página na internet como um candidato a possível planeta anão.
 Descoberta
 foi descoberto no dia 15 de outubro de 1995 pelo astrônomo Arianna E. Gleason como parte do projeto Spacewatch, ele foi o primeiro dos corpos atualmente classificados como um objeto do disco disperso (SDO) a ser descoberto, que antecede o protótipo SDO por quase um ano.
 Características orbitais
 A órbita de 65803 Didymos tem uma excentricidade de 0,234 e possui um semieixo maior de 52,401 UA. O seu periélio leva o mesmo a uma distância de 40,123 UA em relação ao Sol e seu afélio a 64,680 UA.
 Satélite
 O companheiro de , o S/2002 (48639) 1 foi descoberto por Denise C. Stephens e Keith S. Noll no dia 9 de novembro de 2002 a partir de observações feitas com o Telescópio Espacial Hubble e foi anunciado em 5 de outubro de 2005. O satélite, designado de S/2002 (48639) 1, é relativamente grande, tendo uma massa susceptível de cerca de 10% do corpo primário. A sua órbita ainda não foi determinada, mas tinha uma separação de apenas cerca de 420 km de distância do primário no momento da sua descoberta, com um eventual período orbital de cerca de meio dia e um diâmetro estimado de 161 km.
 Ver também
 Lista de asteroides
 Satélite de asteroide
 Referências
 Ligações externas
 Orbital simulation from JPL (Java) / Horizons Ephemeris
 1999 MPEC listing
 2000 MPEC listing
 IAU minor planet lists
 Objetos do disco disperso
 Objetos separados
 Candidatos a planeta anão
 Objetos transnetunianos
 Objetos astronômicos descobertos em 1995


text:
25 юли е 206-ият ден в годината според григорианския календар (207-и през високосна година). Остават 159 дни до края на годината.
 Събития
 1139 г. – Афонсу I побеждава маврите в Битката при Урике и се обявява за крал на Португалия.
 1261 г. – Армиите на никейския император Михаил VIII Палеолог завладяват Константинопол и ликвидират Латинската империя, с което е възстановена Византийска империя.
 1593 г. – Кралят на Франция Анри IV публично се отрича от протестантството и приема католицизма.
 1567 г. – Джеймс VI става крал на Шотландия.
 1862 г. – Във Варна тържествено е осветена сградата на Българското централно училище с главен учител Сава Доброплодни.
 1869 г. – В Букурещ започва да излиза вестникът на Добродетелната дружина Отечество.
 1878 г. – В Пловдив излиза първият брой на вестника Марица, първият български вестник след Освобождението с издател Христо Г. Данов.
 1893 г. – Коринтският канал е отворен за морски трафик.
 1907 г. – Корея става протекторат на Япония.
 1909 г. – Французинът Луи Блерио първи прелита над Ламанша с моноплана Блерио XI за 37 минути.
 1916 г. – В САЩ за първи път в света е използван противогаз при спасяването на 32 души, затрупани след експлозия в мина.
 1926 г. – Основан е футболен клуб Локомотив Пловдив.
 1935 г. – В Москва започва VII конгрес на Коминтерна, на който за генерален секретар е избран Георги Димитров.
 1943 г. – Бенито Мусолини е принуден да подаде оставка и крал Виктор Емануил III назначава маршал Бадолио за министър-председател на Италия.
 1946 г. – Правителството на Царство България внася в Народното събрание законопроект за референдум за премахване на монархията и за създаване на народна демократична република.
 1946 г. – В лагуната на атола Бикини САЩ извършва първия в света подводен ядрен опит.
 1968 г. – Папа Павел VI издава енцикликата Humanae Vitae, с която забранява на католиците използването на изкуствени методи (презерватив, противозачатъчни таблетки и др.) за контрол върху забременяването.
 1973 г. – Изстрелян е съветският космически апарат Марс 5, който достига планетата Марс през февруари 1974 г.
 1978 г. – В Англия е родено първото в света бебе, заченато инвитро.
 1982 г. – Лидерът на палестинците Ясер Арафат подписва документ, който приема решението на ООН за правото на съществуване на Израел.
 1984 г. – Светлана Савицка става първата жена космонавт, излязла в открития космос.
 1995 г. – Радован Караджич и Ратко Младич са обвинени в геноцид, военни престъпления и престъпления срещу човечеството от Международния наказателен трибунал за бивша Югославия.
 1996 г. – XXXVII народно събрание приема Закон за националните символи и герба на България.
 2000 г. – Самолет Конкорд на Air France катострофира при излитането си от Летище Шарл дьо Гол в Париж, загиват 109 души на борда и 4 на земята.
 Родени
 1016 г. – Казимир I, полски княз († 1058 г.)
 1109 г. – Афонсу I, първи крал на Португалия († 1185 г.)
 1575 г. – Кристоф Шайнер, германски астроном († 1650 г.)
 1848 г. – Артър Балфур, министър-председател на Обединеното кралство († 1930 г.)
 1870 г. – Максфийлд Периш, американски илюстратор († 1966 г.)
 1875 г. – Джим Корбет, британски писател и ловец († 1955 г.)
 1878 г. – Стоян Бъчваров, български актьор († 1949 г.)
 1894 г. – Гаврило Принцип, сръбски националист, застрелял Франц Фердинанд († 1918 г.)
 1894 г. – Уолтър Бренан, американски актьор († 1974 г.)
 1905 г. – Елиас Канети, австрийски писател, роден в България, Нобелов лауреат за 1981 г. († 1994 г.)
 1910 г. – Петър Стъпов, български писател († 1992 г.)
 1920 г. – Розалинд Франклин, английски биофизик († 1958 г.)
 1923 г. – Свами Сатянанда, индийски гуру († 2009 г.)
 1929 г. – Василий Шукшин, руски писател, кинорежисьор и актьор († 1974 г.)
 1930 г. – Атанас Славов, български писател, изкуствовед, семиотик, поет и сценарист († 2010 г.)
 1933 г. – Георги Атанасов, български политик († 2022 г.)
 1934 г. – Георги Кордов, български поп певец, композитор и педагог († 2006 г.)
 1935 г. – Миле Неделковски, македонски писател († 2020 г.)
 1950 г. – Хулио Каплан, американски шахматист
 1952 г. – Сашо Диков, български журналист
 1957 г. – Даниел Бурш, американски астронавт
 1957 г. – Живка Гичева, българска телевизионна водеща († 2009 г.)
 1961 г. – Боби Ийкс, американска актриса и певица
 1961 г. – Катрин Кели Ланг, американска актриса
 1963 г. – Къци Вапцаров, режисьор, актьор и телевизионен водещ
 1967 г. – Мат Ле Блан, американски актьор
 1967 г. – Александра Карамихалева, български църковен деятел и писател
 1976 г. – Йовица Тасевски - Етерниян, македонски писател
 1976 г. – Тера Патрик, американска порноактриса
 1979 г. – Алистър Картър, английски професионален играч на снукър
 1985 г. – Джеймс Лафърти, американски актьор
 Починали
 306 г. – Констанций I Хлор, римски император (* 250 г.)
 1034 г. – Констанца Арлска, кралица на Франция (* 986 г.)
 1492 г. – Инокентий VIII, римски папа (* 1432 г.)
 1564 г. – Фердинанд I Хабсбургски, пръв крал на Бохемия и Унгария, император на Свещената римска империя (* 1503 г.)
 1572 г. – Исак Лурия, еврейски равин, основоположник на съвременната Кабала (* 1534 г.)
 1794 г. – Андре Мари Шение, френски поет и публицист (* 1762 г.)
 1834 г. – Самюъл Колридж, английски поет (* 1772 г.)
 1902 г. – Никола Козлев, български книжовник и революционер (* 1824 г.)
 1903 г. – Кръстьо Асенов, български революционер (* 1877 г.)
 1904 г. – Харалан Ангелов, български поет (* 1845 г.)
 1908 г. – Йордан Секулички, български революционер (* ? г.)
 1908 г. – Йордан Спасов, български революционер (* 1875 г.)
 1909 г. – Неофит VIII Константинополски, цариградски патриарх (* 1832 г.)
 1925 г. – Емануил Иванов, български математик (* 1857 г.)
 1934 г. – Енгелберт Долфус, канцлер на Австрия (* 1892 г.)
 1934 г. – Нестор Махно, украински анархист (* 1888 г.)
 1936 г. – Хайнрих Рикерт, германски философ (* 1863 г.)
 1942 г. – Георги Григоров, български партизанин (* 1919 г.)
 1950 г. – Елизабет Ланггесер, германска писателка (* 1899 г.)
 1958 г. – Янко Анастасов, български художник (* 1892 г.)
 1977 г. – Луис Физер, американски химик (* 1899 г.)
 1980 г. – Владимир Висоцки, руски поет, певец и актьор (* 1938 г.)
 1986 г. – Винсънт Минели, американски режисьор (* 1903 г.)
 1987 г. – Вера Иванова-Мавродинова, български учен (* 1896 г.)
 2003 г. – Джон Шлезинджър, американски режисьор (* 1926 г.)
 2011 г. – Михалис Какоянис, гръцки режисьор (* 1922 г.)
 2015 г. – Григор Кумитски, български телевизионен и кинооператор (* 1979 г.)
 2018 г. – Серджо Маркионе, италианско-канадски бизнесмен (* 1952 г.)
 Празници
 Православна и Католическа църква – Успение на света Анна (на картинката)
 Галиция (Испания) – Национален ден
 Пуерто Рико – Ден на конституцията (1952 г., национален празник)
 Тунис – Ден на републиката (1957 г.)
 725