do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Regulation (EC) No 264/2001 of 8 February 2001 concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 2014/2000
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: ACP countries, award of contract, common wheat, export licence, export refund

9.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 39/19

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 264/2001

of 8 February 2001

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of common
wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 2014/2000

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 7 thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of
to certain ACP States was opened
common wheat
pursuant
to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2014/
2000 (5).

Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 allows the
Commission to decide, in accordance with the procedure
laid down in Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92

and on the basis of the tenders notified, to make no
award.

(3)

(4)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of
Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 a maximum refund should
not be fixed.

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 2 to 8
February 2001 in response to the invitation to tender for the
refund for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation
(EC) No 2014/2000.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 9 February 2001.

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 241, 26.9.2000, p. 23.
Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EC) No 2666/2000 of 5 December 2000 on assistance for Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1628/96 and amending Regulations (EEC) No 3906/89 and (EEC) No 1360/90 and Decisions 97/256/EC and 1999/311/EC (OJ L 306 of 7.12.2000)
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Central and Eastern Europe, EU programme, aid system, cooperation policy, higher education, non-refundable aid

8.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 38/51

CORRIGENDA

Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EC) No 2666/2000 of 5 December 2000 on assistance for Albania, Bosnia
and Herzegovina, Croatia, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
repealing Regulation (EC) No 1628/96 and amending Regulations (EEC) No 3906/89 and (EEC) No 1360/90 and
Decisions 97/256/EC and 1999/311/EC

(Official Journal of the European Communities L 306 of 7 December 2000)

On page 4, Article 9(2):

For:

Read:

‘2.
Decisions amending Decisions referred to in Article 10(1) shall be adopted by the Commission where they
do not comprise substantial changes to the nature of the programmes referred to in the said paragraph and, as
regards the financial element, where they do not exceed 20 % of the total amount allocated for the programme in
question, subject to a limit of EUR 4 million. The CARDS Committee referred to in Article 10 shall be notified of
all revised decisions.’,

‘2.
Decisions amending Decisions adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 10(2) shall be
adopted by the Commission where they do not comprise substantial changes to the nature of the original
programmes and actions and, as regards the financial element, where they do not exceed 20 % of the total amount
allocated for the programme or action in question, subject to a limit of EUR 4 million. The CARDS Committee
referred to in Article 10 shall be notified of all amended decisions.’

Corrigendum to the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Cyprus adopting the
terms and conditions for the participation of the Republic of Cyprus in Community programmes in the fields of
training, education and youth

(Official Journal of the European Communities L 29 of 31 January 2001)

On page 40, final formula:

for:

‘Done at Brussels, 22 December 2000.’

read:

‘Done at Brussels on the eleventh day of January in the year two thousand and one.’
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0254/01 by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Redundancies.
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Portugal, Structural Funds, fight against unemployment, modernisation aid, transfer of businesses

3.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 187 E/209

(2001/C 187 E/227)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0254/01

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 February 2001)

Subject: Redundancies

The C. & J. Clark footwear manufacturers in Arouca (Portugal) intend to make 368 workers redundant on
the grounds that orders have fallen off.

However, according to the footwear workers(cid:146) union (Sindicato dos OperÆrios da Indœstria de Cal(cid:231)ado,
Malas e Afins) of the Aveiro and Coimbra districts, the company has transferred various pieces of modern
equipment from that plant to other manufacturing plants which it owns in Castelo de Paiva.

It would appear that
the company has received national and Community subsidies towards plant
modernisation, job creation and professional training, which has also been used to support another of
the company(cid:146)s manufacturing units in India.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. What Community aid has the company received?

2.

If the company received subsidies aimed at creating or maintaining jobs, what measures will it take to
defend the jobs of workers at the C. & J. Clark plant in Arouca, Portugal?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 2001)

The Honourable Member(cid:146)s question concerns the management of projects cofinanced by the Structural
Funds.
In accordance with Community rules and in line with the principle of subsidiarity, project
management is the responsibility of the Member States.

The Commission does not currently have sufficient information to reply to this question. It will ask the
Portuguese authorities for the necessary information and forward it directly to the Honourable Member as
soon as it has been received.

(2001/C 187 E/228)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0256/01

by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 February 2001)

Subject: Right of Resale

Does the Commission envisage the establishment of a centralised European register of all qualifying artists
and their heirs under the draft Directive? If not, how are the natural or legal persons referred to in Article
9 supposed to determine the rights to a work in the event of a claim from two or more persons from
outside the jurisdiction of the Member State concerned?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0251/01 by Astrid Lulling (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Commission position on the European capital.
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, European Parliament, interinstitutional relations (EU), seat of institution

C 187 E/208

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

Terrorism, no matter who the perpetrators, is an outrage and an affront to human rights and, as such, is
unacceptable. But why does the Commission make recognition of (cid:145)certain(cid:146) (why not all?) forms of cultural
identity conditional upon their not advocating separatism? Is the Commission opposed to exercise of the
right to self-determination by peaceful and democratic means?

(1) OJ C 163 E, 6.6.2001, p. 85.

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(19 March 2001)

The Union(cid:146)s aim, as set out in the proposed Accession Partnership with Turkey,
is to ensure cultural
diversity and guarantee cultural rights for all citizens irrespective of their origin. Any legal provisions
preventing the enjoyment of these rights should be abolished, including in the field of education.

The Commission(cid:146)s regular reports, to which the Honourable Member refers, were drawn up on the basis of
an objective and balanced analysis of all relevant aspects of the situation in Turkey.

(2001/C 187 E/226)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0251/01

by Astrid Lulling (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 February 2001)

Subject: Commission position on (cid:145)the European capital(cid:146)

A French newspaper article, headed (cid:145)MEPs unhappy with Strasbourg(cid:146), has claimed that Mr Romano Prodi,
President of the Commission, stated in Strasbourg that Brussels would inevitably become Europe(cid:146)s capital
city.

Will the Commission confirm whether this reflects its position on the seat of the institutions and whether
it discussed the issue before allowing its President to review its point of view in Strasbourg?

Is the Commission prepared to recognise that decisions regarding the seats of the European Union(cid:146)s bodies
and agencies do not fall within its sphere of competence and that it is therefore required to show
discretion and restraint on this matter and to respect the letter, if not the spirit, of the decisions taken by
the Council in Edinburgh?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(5 March 2001)

The seats of Union institutions and bodies were laid down in the Decision on the location of the seats of
the institutions and of certain bodies and departments of the European Communities as well as of Europol,
annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaties establishing the three Communities. The
Decision was adopted when the Amsterdam Treaty was concluded. An annex to the Treaty recently signed
at Nice includes a declaration on the proceedings of the European Councils. Statements by the President of
the Commission represent his assessment of the scope of the latter decision and cannot therefore be
interpreted differently and taken out of context.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, euro, exchange rate, national currency

8.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 42/1

I

(Information)

COMMISSION

Euro exchange rates (1)

7 February 2001

(2001/C 42/01)

1 euro

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

7,4631

Danish krone

8,9125

Swedish krona

0,6384

Pound sterling

0,9325

United States dollar

1,4092

Canadian dollar

108,36

Japanese yen

1,5392

Swiss franc

8,1875

Norwegian krone

79,56

Icelandic kr(cid:243)na (2)

1,703

Australian dollar

2,1062

New Zealand dollar

7,2945

South African rand (2)

(1) Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
(2) Source: Commission.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 267/2001 of 8 February 2001 concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of oats issued in Regulation (EC) No 2097/2000
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Finland, Sweden, award of contract, export licence, export refund, oats

L 39/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

9.2.2001

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 267/2001

of 8 February 2001

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of oats issued in
Regulation (EC) No 2097/2000

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),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2097/2000
of 3 October 2000 on a special
intervention measure for
cereals in Finland and Sweden (5), and in particular Article 8
thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of
oats produced in Finland and Sweden for export from
Finland or Sweden to all third countries was opened
pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 2097/2000.

(2)

(3)

(4)

Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 2097/2000 provides
that the Commission may, on the basis of the tenders
notified, in accordance with the procedure laid down in
Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92, decide to
make no award.

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of
Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 a maximum refund should
not be fixed.

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 2 to 8
February 2001 in response to the invitation to tender for the
refund for the export of oats issued in Regulation (EC) No
2097/2000.

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 249, 4.10.2000, p. 15.
Communication from the EFTA Surveillance Authority under Article 7 of the Act referred to in point 18 of Annex VII to the EEA Agreement (Council Directive 85/384/EEC of 10 June 1985 on the mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications in architecture, including measures to facilitate the effective exercise of the right of establishment and freedom to provide services)
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: Liechtenstein, agreement (EU), freedom to provide services, recognition of diplomas, right of establishment, town-planning profession

C 42/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

8.2.2001

EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA

EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY

Communication from the EFTA Surveillance Authority under Article 7 of the Act referred to in
point 18 of Annex VII to the EEA Agreement (Council Directive 85/384/EEC of 10 June 1985 on
the mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications in
architecture, including measures to facilitate the effective exercise of the right of establishment
and freedom to provide services)

(2001/C 42/12)

Diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications in architecture which are the
object of mutual recognition under the EEA Agreement

The EFTA Surveillance Authority has the task, in accordance with Article 7 of the Act referred to in point
18 of Annex VII to the EEA Agreement (Council Directive 85/384/EEC of 10 June 1985 on the mutual
recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications in architecture, including
measures to facilitate the effective exercise of the right of establishment and freedom to provide services),
as adopted by way of Protocol 1 to the EEA Agreement and by sectoral adaptations to Annex VII to the
Agreement (hereinafter referred to as (cid:145)the Act(cid:146)), to publish diplomas in architecture awarded by Norway,
Iceland and Liechtenstein, which meet the criteria laid down in Articles 3 and 4 of the Act.

As this communication concerns the first communication by an EFTA State to the EFTA Surveillance
Authority of a diploma in architecture under Article 7 of the Act, the following list contains only one
diploma. This diploma is to be recognised by the contracting parties to the EEA Agreement in respect of
those students who began their studies in architecture in the academic year of 1999/2000.

The Act also provides for the recognition of other qualifications in architecture. These are listed in Articles
5, 12 and 14 of the Act.

Updatings of this list shall be published periodically by the EFTA Surveillance Authority pursuant to
Article 7(2) of the Act.

Country

Title of diploma

Body awarding diploma

Certificate accompanying diploma

Liechtenstein

Dipl.-Arch. FH

Fachhochschule Liechtenstein
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.2336 — Thomson/Technicolor) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Commission, audiovisual industry, economic concentration, electronics industry, exchange of information, merger control

8.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 42/9

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.2336 (cid:151) Thomson/Technicolor)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(2001/C 42/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 30 January 2001 the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to
1.
Article 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1310/97 (2),
by which the French company Thomson Multimedia SA acquires, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of
the Regulation, control of the whole of the UK based Technicolor Group by way of purchase of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

(cid:151) Thomson Multimedia SA: production of consumer electronics, new media services, patents and

licensing,

(cid:151) Technicolor Group: motion picture film processing, replication of DVDs, CDs and videocassettes,

distribution services.

3.
On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified concentration could fall within
the scope of Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant
to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (3), it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under
the procedure set out in the notice.

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.2336 (cid:151) Thomson/Technicolor, 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.
(3) OJ C 217, 29.7.2000, p. 32.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0265/01 by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission. City guides.
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Union, Spain, advertising malpractice, consumer protection, distance selling, national implementing measure, tourist guide, town

C 235 E/166

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.8.2001

(2001/C 235 E/192)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0265/01

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(8 February 2001)

Subject: City guides

In answering Written Question E-3650/00 (1), did the Commission assume that this was purely a Spanish
matter? Will the Commission reconsider its answer in view of the fact that this guide is promoted across
Europe, with misleading distance-selling?

(1) OJ C 151 E, 22.5.2001, p. 198.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(3 April 2001)

The Commission is fully aware of the cross-border character of the case as described by the Honourable
Member in his Written Question E-3650/00 and did not assume that it was a purely internal Spanish
matter. Thus the Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written
Question E-3650/00 and repeats that it is not within the Commission(cid:146)s competencies to take action.

With regard to legal issues and in order to be more specific the Commission considers that the way the
City Guide in question is promoted according to the description of the Honourable Member may
constitute misleading advertising. Such a case could fall within the scope of Council Directive of
10 September 1984 relating to the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions
of the Member States concerning misleading advertising (1). The purpose of this Directive is to protect
(cid:145)consumers, persons carrying on a trade or business or practising a craft or profession and the interests of
the public in general against misleading advertising and the unfair consequences thereof(cid:146) (Article 1 of this
Directive). According to the information contained in the Honourable Member(cid:146)s question, the (cid:145)small
traders(cid:146) who are invited to be included in the City Guide belong to the group of persons protected by this
Directive. However,
it is for the national authorities, and not the Commission, to take action under
applicable national law, into which the above mentioned Directive has been transposed.

Directive 97/7/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 1997 on the protection of consumers in
respect of distance contracts (2) and of the Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in
consumer contracts (3) aim at protecting consumers, but do not appear to apply to the situation as
described in the Honourable Member(cid:146)s question.

(1) OJ L 250, 19.9.1984.
(2) OJ L 144, 4.6.1997.
(3) OJ L 95, 21.4.1993.

(2001/C 235 E/193)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0267/01

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(8 February 2001)

Subject: URBAN II Programme

What is the Commission(cid:146)s timetable for the assessment of bids under the new URBAN II Programme?