do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0260/01 by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Right of Resale.
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: VAT, artist's resale right, tax system, work of art

C 187 E/210

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

(2001/C 187 E/229)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0260/01

by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 February 2001)

Subject: Right of Resale

What provisions will the natural or legal persons referred to in Article 9 of the draft Directive on the Right
of Resale be required to make for payment of the potential right in the case of unknown and unknowable
claims?

(2001/C 187 E/230)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0262/01

by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 February 2001)

Subject: Right of Resale

Does the sale price net of tax, on which basis the right is to be claimed in accordance with the draft
Directive, include capital gains tax or its equivalent, and how is this to be calculated in a resale involving
several different national tax laws?

(2001/C 187 E/231)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0264/01

by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 February 2001)

Subject: Right of Resale

In the event of a resale involving persons liable to two or more national VAT and/or sales tax regimes,
how is the sale price net of tax to be calculated for the purposes of the draft Directive on the Right of
Resale? In the event that the VAT/sales tax treatment rules have yet to be agreed, on what basis will the
right be calculated?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-0256/01, E-0260/01, E-0262/01 and E-0264/01
given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(26 March 2001)

On 13 December 2000, Parliament approved several amendments to the Council(cid:146)s common position of
19 June 2000 on the resale right for the benefit of the author of an original work of art (1). Under
Article 251(3) (formerly Article 189b(3)) of the EC Treaty,
it is for the Council to decide on those
amendments. The Commission will therefore take the common position as amended by Parliament as the
basis for its answers to the Honourable Member(cid:146)s questions on certain specific provisions.

The Honourable Member is concerned about the obligations under which this Directive will place the
persons mentioned in Article 9 who, under Article 1(4), will often be liable for the payment of the resale
right if several persons think they are entitled to it, or if the resale right is not claimed.

The procedures for paying the resale right will depend on the way it is managed. According to the
common position as amended, this question is a matter for the Member States, which may adopt specific
solutions. For example, if a Member State opts for compulsory collective management of resale rights, it
will be for the bodies responsible for collective management to deal with these questions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0268/01 by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission. Opel ‐ Netherlands.
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Netherlands, application of EU law, consumer protection, intra-EU trade, motor vehicle industry, trade restriction

21.8.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235 E/167

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(27 March 2001)

In the Communication from the Commission laying down guidelines for the URBAN II Community
Initiative (1), Member States were invited to present their proposals for URBAN II programmes within six
months after its publication, i.e. before 20 November 2000.

Programme proposals have been received from mid-November onwards to reach a total today of 36. Of
these, 28 have been declared admissible by the Commission while the remaining eight have necessitated
further work on the part of the national authorities. Those that have been judged admissable are currently
being examined in depth by the Commission in the light of the requirements of the Structural Funds
regulation and the URBAN II guidelines. In principle the Commission has to take a decision within five
months of receipt of the admissible proposal.

It is expected that a first set of programmes will be approved before July 2001.

(1) OJ C 141, 19.5.2000.

(2001/C 235 E/194)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0268/01

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(8 February 2001)

Subject: Opel (cid:129) Netherlands

Following the fines imposed by the Commission on Opel last September, is the Commission satisfied that
Opel has now ceased to hinder cross-border trade in its products?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 2001)

The Commission has currently no information to indicate that Opel has not now ceased to hinder cross-
border trade in its products following the adoption by the Commission of its decision establishing an
infringement of Article 81(1) (ex Article 85) of the EC Treaty in this respect and imposing fines.

The decision against Opel Nederland B.V. and General Motors Nederland B.V. helps to secure the right of
consumers to buy a new car in the Member State of their choice. It obliges Opel Nederland to refrain from
repeating or continuing any of the measures objected to, and to refrain from applying any measures
having equivalent object or effect. The Commission would not hesitate to act should it become aware of
any violation of this obligation.

(2001/C 235 E/195)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0269/01

by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Kidnapping of Israeli citizen Elchanan Tenenboim

(2 February 2001)

Four months after the kidnapping of Elchanan Tenenboim by the Lebanese Islamic movement, Hezbollah,
there is still no news regarding the Israeli citizen. Despite countless humanitarian appeals by major NGOs
Commission Regulation (EC) No 265/2001 of 8 February 2001 fixing the maximum export refund on barley in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2317/2000
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, barley, export, export refund, third country

L 39/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

9.2.2001

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 265/2001

of 8 February 2001

fixing the maximum export refund on barley in connection with the invitation to tender issued in
Regulation (EC) No 2317/2000

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30
June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in
cereals (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1666/
2000 (2),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of
29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the
application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the
granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be
taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3),
as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2513/98 (4), and in
particular Article 4 thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of
barley to all third countries except for the United States
of America and Canada was opened pursuant
to
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2317/2000 (5).

Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 provides that
the Commission may, on the basis of the tenders noti-
fied,
in accordance with the procedure laid down in
Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92, decide to fix

a maximum export refund taking account of the criteria
referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95.
In that case a contract is awarded to any tenderer whose
bid is equal to or lower than the maximum refund.

The application of the abovementioned criteria to the
current market situation for the cereal in question results
the
in the maximum export refund being fixed at
amount specified in Article 1.

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in
accordance with the opinion of
the Management
Committee for Cereals,

(3)

(4)

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For tenders notified from 2 to 8 February 2001, pursuant to
the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2317/
2000, the maximum refund on exportation of barley shall be
EUR 0,00/t.

This Regulation shall enter into force on 9 February 2001.

Article 2

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

Done at Brussels, 8 February 2001.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 181, 1.7.1992, p. 21.
(2) OJ L 193, 29.7.2000, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7.
(4) OJ L 313, 21.11.1998, p. 16.
(5) OJ L 267, 20.10.2000, p. 23.
Notification of cooperation agreements (Case COMP/C1/38.074 — Vodafone Eurocall and wholesale preferred roaming scheme) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Europe, Internet, access to information, cooperation agreement, radio telecommunications, tariff agreement

8.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 42/13

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.2035 (cid:151) Doughty Hanson/Rank Hovis McDougall)

(2001/C 42/10)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 24 August 2000 the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to
declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in English and will be
made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

(cid:151) as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

(cid:151) in electronic form in the (cid:145)CEN(cid:146) version of the CELEX database, under document No 300M2035. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations (OP/A/4-B),
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 424 55, fax (352) 29 29 427 63.

Notification of cooperation agreements

(Case COMP/C1/38.074 (cid:151) Vodafone Eurocall and wholesale preferred roaming scheme)

(2001/C 42/11)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 1 February 2001 the Commission received from Vodafone Ltd and 10 other companies (the
1.
parties) a notification pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation No 17 of the agreements by which the
parties intend to facilitate the introduction of a flat-rate international roaming tariff in Europe. Further
details on the agreements are available on the Vodafone website at http://www.vodafone.com/regulatory.

Upon preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified cooperation agreements could

2.
fall within the scope of Regulation No 17.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit

3.
proposed operation to the Commission.

their possible observations on the

4.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 20 days following the date of this publi-
cation. Observations can be sent to the Commission under reference number COMP/C1/38.074 by fax (No
(32-2) 295 01 28), by email to Carine.Wilkin@cec.eu.int or by post to:

European Commission,
Directorate-General for Competition,
Office 0/18,
Rue Josef II/Josef II-straat 70,
B-1000 Brussels.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0266/01 by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission. Comitology.
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, codecision procedure, comitology, competence of the institution, executive competence, legislative procedure

C 318 E/30

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.11.2001

The same Article stipulates that the Commission is to submit within a given period all proposals (cid:145)it may
deem necessary in order to enhance the effectiveness of this Directive(cid:146). This provision therefore makes it
possible to ensure that the Directive is applied correctly and, where necessary, to put forward additional
provisions. Such proposals would not affect the field of taxation insofar as this Directive is intended as
a measure to harmonise intellectual property rights and does not impinge upon the tax regimes of the
Member States.

(1) OJ C 178, 21.6.1996.
(2) OJ C 300, 20.10.2000.

(2001/C 318 E/031)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0266/01

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(8 February 2001)

Subject: Comitology

Since the entry into force of the amended Council Decision of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures
for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission (Decision 1999/468/EC) (1):

1. How many instances have there been, under the codecision and other legislative procedures, of new
legislation incorporating each of the types of committee procedure provided for in the Decision?

2. Under

these new procedures, how many implementing measures have been adopted by the

Commission and how many referred to Council under each procedure?

(1) OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23.

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(4 April 2001)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that the data requested are being collected with
a view to drafting the first annual report provided for in Article 7(4) of Council Decision 1999/468/EC of
28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the
Commission.

(2001/C 318 E/032)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0308/01

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 February 2001)

Subject: Desertification threatens Greece

In recent years the speed of desertification of Greece(cid:146)s territory has been accelerating. According to
data from the National Committee to Combat Desertification, 30 % of Greece(cid:146)s territory is at risk of
becoming desert in the immediate future. The problem is particularly serious in eastern regions of Central
and Northern Greece (Thessaly, Macedonia, Thrace), in Southern Greece (the Peloponnese), in the Aegean
islands and in most of Crete.

1. What data does the Commission possess on desertification in Greece?

2. What are the factors which are causing this phenomenon?

3. What are the consequences of the disturbance of the ecological equilibrium by desertification?

Has the Commission been notified by the Greek Government of the steps it intends to take to tackle

4.
the problem of desertification?
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.1873 — Compagnie de Saint-Gobain/Meyer International) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Publications Office of the European Union, database, dissemination of EU information, economic concentration, merger control, restrictive-practice authorisation

C 42/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

8.2.2001

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.2210 (cid:151) Georg Fischer/West LB/Krupp Werner & Pfleiderer)

(2001/C 42/08)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 15 December 2000 the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to
declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in German and will be
made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

(cid:151) as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

(cid:151) in electronic form in the (cid:145)CDE(cid:146) version of the CELEX database, under document No 300M2210. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations (OP/A/4-B),
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 424 55, fax (352) 29 29 427 63.

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.1873 (cid:151) Compagnie de Saint-Gobain/Meyer International)

(2001/C 42/09)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 23 March 2000 the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to
declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in English and will be
made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

(cid:151) as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

(cid:151) in electronic form in the (cid:145)CEN(cid:146) version of the CELEX database, under document No 300M1873. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations (OP/A/4-B),
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 424 55, fax (352) 29 29 427 63.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.2305 — Vodafone Group plc/Eircell) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, radio telecommunications, sale, telecommunications industry, telephone

C 42/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

8.2.2001

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.2305 (cid:151) Vodafone Group plc/Eircell)

(2001/C 42/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

1.
On 1 February 2001 the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to
Article 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1310/97 (2),
by which the undertaking Vodafone Group plc (Vodafone) acquires, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b)
of the Regulation, control of the whole of the Irish mobile telephony company Eircell plc (Eircell),
currently owned by the Irish telecommunications group eircom plc, by way of purchase of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

(cid:151) Vodafone: operation of mobile telecommunications networks and provision of related telecommuni-

cation services,

(cid:151) Eircell: operation of mobile telecommunications networks and provision of related services, and

retailing of mobile telephony products.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified concentration could fall within

3.
the scope of Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit

4.
proposed operation.

their possible observations on the

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication.
Observations can be sent by fax (No (32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference
COMP/M.2305 (cid:151) Vodafone Group plc/Eircell, to:

European Commission,
Directorate-General for Competition,
Directorate B (cid:151) Merger Task Force,
Rue Joseph II/Jozef II-straat 70,
B-1000 Brussels.

(1) OJ L 395, 30.12.1989, p. 1; corrigendum: OJ L 257, 21.9.1990, p. 13.
(2) OJ L 180, 9.7.1997, p. 1; corrigendum: OJ L 40, 13.2.1998, p. 17.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.2210 — Georg Fischer/West LB/Krupp Werner & Pfleiderer) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Publications Office of the European Union, database, dissemination of EU information, economic concentration, merger control, restrictive-practice authorisation

C 42/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

8.2.2001

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.2210 (cid:151) Georg Fischer/West LB/Krupp Werner & Pfleiderer)

(2001/C 42/08)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 15 December 2000 the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to
declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in German and will be
made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

(cid:151) as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

(cid:151) in electronic form in the (cid:145)CDE(cid:146) version of the CELEX database, under document No 300M2210. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations (OP/A/4-B),
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 424 55, fax (352) 29 29 427 63.

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.1873 (cid:151) Compagnie de Saint-Gobain/Meyer International)

(2001/C 42/09)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 23 March 2000 the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to
declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in English and will be
made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

(cid:151) as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

(cid:151) in electronic form in the (cid:145)CEN(cid:146) version of the CELEX database, under document No 300M1873. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations (OP/A/4-B),
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 424 55, fax (352) 29 29 427 63.