do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-252/06 P: Order of the Court of First Instance of 12 July 2007 — Beau v Commission (Appeals — Staff cases — Officials — Occupational illness — Appeal manifestly inadmissible — Appeal manifestly unfounded)
Date: 2007-09-22
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action by staff, appeal, health expenditure, medical data, occupational disease, regulations for civil servants

C 223/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.9.2007

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

Order of the Court of First Instance of 9 July 2007 —
wheyco v Commission

Order of the Court of First Instance of 12 July 2007 —
Beau v Commission

(Case T-6/06) (1)

(Case T-252/06 P) (1)

(State aid — Incentive element — Action for annulment —
interest in bringing
Act producing legal effects — Legal

proceedings — Inadmissibility)

(Appeals — Staff cases — Officials — Occupational illness
— Appeal manifestly inadmissible — Appeal manifestly
unfounded)

(2007/C 223/13)

Language of the case: German

(2007/C 223/14)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: wheyco GmbH,
(Altentreptow, Germany)
Schmidt, lawyers)

formerly Mopro-Nord GmbH
(represented by: L. Harings and C.

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: K. Gross, T. Scharf and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, Agents)

Appellant: Marie-Yolande Beau (Paris, France) (represented by: S.
Rodrigues and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities (represented by:
Agents)

the European
J. Currall and K. Herrmann,

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment in part of the Commission's decision
of 6 September 2005 relating to State aid No N 363/2005 for
in Mecklenburg-
the construction of a whey refining plant
Western Pomerania (Germany) (OJ 2005 C 262, p. 5)

Appeal against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the
European Union (Third Chamber) of 28 June 2006 in Case
F-39/05 Beau v Commission, not yet published in the ECR-SC,
seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the order

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

Operative part of the order

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders wheyco GmbH to pay the costs.

Commission.

2. Orders Ms Beau to bear her own costs and to pay those of the

(1) OJ C 74, 25.3.2006.

(1) OJ C 281, 18.11.2006.
Case T-272/07: Action brought on 19 July 2007 — Surcotton v Council and Commission
Date: 2007-09-22
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European Commission, action for annulment (EU), aid system, common agricultural policy, cotton, farm income, support policy

C 223/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.9.2007

Action brought on 19 July 2007 — Devisa v Council and
Commission

Form of order sought

(Case T-270/07)

(2007/C 223/21)

Language of the case: Spanish

— to uphold the present action for damages,

in accordance
with Article 288 EC, and declare the applicant is entitled to
be financially compensated by the Council and the Commis-
sion jointly and severally in the sum total of two million six
hundred and sixty-one thousand four hundred and twenty-
seven euros (EUR 2 661 427);

— order the defendants to pay the costs.

Parties

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant: Nueva Desmotadora Sevillana, SA (Sevilla, Spain)
(represented by: L. Ortiz Blanco, lawyer)

The pleas in law and the main arguments are the same as those
raised in Case T-217/07 Las Palmeras v Council and Commission.

Defendants: Council of the European Union and Commission of
the European Communities

Form of order sought

— to uphold the present action for damages,

in accordance
with Article 288 EC, and declare the applicant is entitled to
be financially compensated by the Council and the Commis-
sion jointly and severally in the sum total of two million
three hundred and eighty-five thousand five hundred and
seventy-one euros (EUR 2 385 571);

— order the defendants to pay the costs.

Action brought on 19 July 2007 — Surcotton v Council and
Commission

(Case T-272/07)

(2007/C 223/23)

Language of the case: Spanish

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and the main arguments are the same as those
raised in Case T-217/07 Las Palmeras v Council and Commission.

Parties

Applicant: Surcotton, SA (Cordoba, Spain)
Ortiz Blanco, lawyer)

(represented by: L.

Defendants: Council of the European Union and Commission of
the European Communities

Action brought on 19 July 2007 — Eurosemillas v Council
and Commission

Form of order sought

(Case T-271/07)

(2007/C 223/22)

Language of the case: Spanish

— to uphold the present action for damages,

in accordance
with Article 288 EC, and declare the applicant is entitled to
be financially compensated by the Council and the Commis-
sion jointly and severally in the sum total of one million
seven hundred and thirty-four thousand and twenty-seven
euros (EUR 1 734 027);

— order the defendants to pay the costs.

Parties

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant: Eurosemillas, SA (Cordoba, Spain) (represented by: L.
Ortiz Blanco, lawyer)

The pleas in law and the main arguments are the same as those
raised in Case T-217/07 Las Palmeras v Council and Commission.

Defendants: Council of the European Union and Commission of
the European Communities
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2007-09-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate

22.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/3

IV

(Notices)

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND
BODIES

COMMISSION

Euro exchange rates (1)

21 September 2007

(2007/C 222/03)

1 euro =

Currency

Exchange rate

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

JPY

DKK

GBP

SEK

CHF

ISK

NOK

BGN

CYP

CZK

EEK

HUF

LTL

LVL

MTL

PLN

US dollar

Japanese yen

Danish krone

Pound sterling

Swedish krona

Swiss franc

Iceland króna

Norwegian krone

Bulgarian lev

Cyprus pound

Czech koruna

Estonian kroon

Hungarian forint

Lithuanian litas

Latvian lats

Maltese lira

Polish zloty

1,4049

RON

Romanian leu

162,46

7,4532

SKK

TRY

Slovak koruna

Turkish lira

0,69730

AUD Australian dollar

CAD

HKD

NZD

SGD

Canadian dollar

Hong Kong dollar

New Zealand dollar

Singapore dollar

3,3993

33,925

1,7294

1,6324

1,4071

10,9352

1,8987

2,1167

KRW South Korean won

1 294,33

ZAR

CNY

HRK

IDR

South African rand

Chinese yuan renminbi

Croatian kuna

Indonesian rupiah

MYR Malaysian ringgit

PHP

RUB

THB

Philippine peso

Russian rouble

Thai baht

9,8870

10,5418

7,3057

12 868,88

4,8392

63,600

35,2460

44,554

9,2060

1,6517

88,07

7,7865

1,9558

0,5842

27,523

15,6466

249,94

3,4528

0,7059

0,4293

3,7655

(1) Source:

reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-271/07: Action brought on 19 July 2007 — Eurosemillas v Council and Commission
Date: 2007-09-22
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European Commission, action for annulment (EU), aid system, common agricultural policy, cotton, farm income, support policy

C 223/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.9.2007

Action brought on 19 July 2007 — Devisa v Council and
Commission

Form of order sought

(Case T-270/07)

(2007/C 223/21)

Language of the case: Spanish

— to uphold the present action for damages,

in accordance
with Article 288 EC, and declare the applicant is entitled to
be financially compensated by the Council and the Commis-
sion jointly and severally in the sum total of two million six
hundred and sixty-one thousand four hundred and twenty-
seven euros (EUR 2 661 427);

— order the defendants to pay the costs.

Parties

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant: Nueva Desmotadora Sevillana, SA (Sevilla, Spain)
(represented by: L. Ortiz Blanco, lawyer)

The pleas in law and the main arguments are the same as those
raised in Case T-217/07 Las Palmeras v Council and Commission.

Defendants: Council of the European Union and Commission of
the European Communities

Form of order sought

— to uphold the present action for damages,

in accordance
with Article 288 EC, and declare the applicant is entitled to
be financially compensated by the Council and the Commis-
sion jointly and severally in the sum total of two million
three hundred and eighty-five thousand five hundred and
seventy-one euros (EUR 2 385 571);

— order the defendants to pay the costs.

Action brought on 19 July 2007 — Surcotton v Council and
Commission

(Case T-272/07)

(2007/C 223/23)

Language of the case: Spanish

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and the main arguments are the same as those
raised in Case T-217/07 Las Palmeras v Council and Commission.

Parties

Applicant: Surcotton, SA (Cordoba, Spain)
Ortiz Blanco, lawyer)

(represented by: L.

Defendants: Council of the European Union and Commission of
the European Communities

Action brought on 19 July 2007 — Eurosemillas v Council
and Commission

Form of order sought

(Case T-271/07)

(2007/C 223/22)

Language of the case: Spanish

— to uphold the present action for damages,

in accordance
with Article 288 EC, and declare the applicant is entitled to
be financially compensated by the Council and the Commis-
sion jointly and severally in the sum total of one million
seven hundred and thirty-four thousand and twenty-seven
euros (EUR 1 734 027);

— order the defendants to pay the costs.

Parties

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant: Eurosemillas, SA (Cordoba, Spain) (represented by: L.
Ortiz Blanco, lawyer)

The pleas in law and the main arguments are the same as those
raised in Case T-217/07 Las Palmeras v Council and Commission.

Defendants: Council of the European Union and Commission of
the European Communities
List of ships that were refused access to Community ports between 1 October 2006 and 31 August 2007 , pursuant to Article 7b of Council Directive 95/21/EC on the port State control of ships
Date: 2007-09-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: common ports policy, dissemination of EU information, maritime safety

C 222/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.9.2007

List of ships that were refused access to Community ports between 1 October 2006 and 31 August
2007, pursuant to Article 7b of Council Directive 95/21/EC on the port State control of ships

(2007/C 222/02)

Under Article 7b(1) of Council Directive 95/21/CE of 19 June 1995 on the port State control of ships (1),
ships which have been detained several times shall be refused access to the ports of the Member States (2).

The table below gives the list of ships that were refused access to Community ports between 1 October
2006 and 31 August 2007.

Name of ship

IMO number

Type of ship

Flag

HAJ YAMAK (1)

KHALDOUN

MALBORK

TRINITY

7312684

7610270

7725520

7614965

Bulk carrier

Georgia

Bulk carrier

Syrian Arab Republic

Bulk carrier

Georgia

Bulk carrier

Cambodia

(1) Ships for which the access refusal order was subsequently lifted in accordance with the procedures described in part B of Annex XI to

Directive 95/21/EC.

(1) Last amended by Directive 2001/106/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 19, 22.1.2002, p. 17).
(2) The first paragraph of Article 7b reads:

‘A Member State shall ensure that a ship in one of the categories of Annex XI, section A, is refused access to its ports,
except in the situations described in Article 11(6), if the ship:
either:
— flies the flag of a State appearing in the black list as published in the annual report of the MOU, and
— has been detained more than twice in the course of the preceding 24 months in a port of a State signatory of the

MOU,

report of the MOU, and

or:
— flies the flag of a State described as “very high risk” or “high risk” in the black list as published in the annual

— has been detained more than once in the course of the preceding 36 months in a port of a State signatory of the

MOU.

The refusal of access shall become applicable immediately the ship has been authorised to leave the port where it has
been the subject of a second or third detention as appropriate.’.
Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 723/2004 of 22 March 2004 amending the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities and the Conditions of employment of other servants of the European Communities ( OJ L 124, 27.4.2004 )
Date: 2007-09-22
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European official, regulations for civil servants, servant (EU)

L 248/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.9.2007

CORRIGENDA

Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 723/2004 of 22 March 2004 amending the Staff
Regulations of Officials of the European Communities and the Conditions of employment of other servants
of the European Communities

(Official Journal of the European Union L 124 of 27 April 2004)

In Annex I, under ‘Amendments to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities’:

On page 16, in point 41(b) (amendment of the seventh subparagraph of Article 41(3)):

for:

read:

‘… weighting referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 3(5) of Annex XI, …’,
‘… weighting referred to in point (a) of Article 3(5) of Annex XI, …’.

On page 39, in point 97(g) (amendment of Article 7(2) of Annex VII):

for:

read:

‘1.
‘2.

The basis for calculating …’,
The basis for calculating …’.

On page 58, point 100(m) (amendment of Article 21, first subparagraph, point (b) of Annex X):

for:

read:

‘(b) transporting his personal effects or of storage of his furniture and personal effects in the event that furnished

accommodation is provided.’,

‘(b) transporting his personal effects and of storage of his furniture and personal effects in the event that

furnished accommodation is provided.’.

In Annex II, under ‘Amendments to the Conditions of employment of other servants of the European Communities’:

On page 94, in point 4 (new Article 3b, introductory wording):

for:

read:

‘… within the time limits set in Article 88 in one of the function groups referred to in Article 89a:’,
‘… within the time limits set in Article 88 in one of the function groups referred to in Article 89:’.

Corrigendum to Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC), laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials and the
Conditions of employment of other servants of the European Economic Community and the European Atomic
Energy Community

(Official Journal of the European Communities 45 of 14 June 1962)

(English Special Edition, Series I, Chapter 1959 to 1962, p. 135)

On page 142, in Article 27 of the Staff Regulations:

the last sentence,
paragraph.

‘No posts shall be reserved for nationals of any specific Member State.’ shall become a separate

in Annex VII of the Staff Regulations ‘Remuneration and reimbursement of expenses’,
On page 169,
in Article 7:
The last two subparagraphs of paragraph 2, ‘An official's place of origin shall be determined …’ and ‘The effect of such a
change shall not however …’, shall be numbered as paragraph 3.
Case C-382/07: Action brought on 8 August 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Portuguese Republic
Date: 2007-09-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Portugal, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, freedom to provide services, freight rate, national implementing measure, rail transport, sustainable mobility, trans-European network, transport network

22.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/9

Action brought on 3 August 2007 — Commission of the
European Communities v Council of the European Union

Action brought on 8 August 2007 — Commission of the
European Communities v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-370/07)

(2007/C 223/11)

Language of the case: English

(Case C-382/07)

(2007/C 223/12)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: G. Valero Jordana and C. Zadra, Agents)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul Council Decision of 24 May 2007 establishing the
position to be adopted on behalf of the European Com-
munity with regard to certain proposals submitted to the
14th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP 14) to
the Convention on International Trade in Endangered
the Hague,
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES),
Netherlands 3-15 June 2007, and to order the Council to
pay costs.

— Order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: N. Yerrell and M. Telles Romão, Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Form of order sought

the European Parliament and of

— declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive
2004/51/EC (1) of
the
Council of 29 April 2004 amending Council Directive
91/440/EEC on the development of the Community's rail-
ways or, in any event, by failing to communicate them to
the Commission, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil
its obligations under that directive;

Pleas in law and main arguments

— order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

The Commission submits that the failure by the challenged
Council decision to refer to the precise provisions of the EC
Treaty on which it is based constitutes an infringement of essen-
tial procedural requirements, notably the obligation to state
reasons contained in Article 253.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposition of the directive into
national law expired on 31 December 2005.

(1) OJ 2004 L 164, p. 164.
Case T-6/06: Order of the Court of First Instance of 9 July 2007 — wheyco v Commission (State aid — Incentive element — Action for annulment — Act producing legal effects — Legal interest in bringing proceedings — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2007-09-22
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, Germany, State aid, action for annulment (EU), building subsidy, dairy industry, investment aid, milk product

C 223/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.9.2007

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

Order of the Court of First Instance of 9 July 2007 —
wheyco v Commission

Order of the Court of First Instance of 12 July 2007 —
Beau v Commission

(Case T-6/06) (1)

(Case T-252/06 P) (1)

(State aid — Incentive element — Action for annulment —
interest in bringing
Act producing legal effects — Legal

proceedings — Inadmissibility)

(Appeals — Staff cases — Officials — Occupational illness
— Appeal manifestly inadmissible — Appeal manifestly
unfounded)

(2007/C 223/13)

Language of the case: German

(2007/C 223/14)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: wheyco GmbH,
(Altentreptow, Germany)
Schmidt, lawyers)

formerly Mopro-Nord GmbH
(represented by: L. Harings and C.

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: K. Gross, T. Scharf and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, Agents)

Appellant: Marie-Yolande Beau (Paris, France) (represented by: S.
Rodrigues and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities (represented by:
Agents)

the European
J. Currall and K. Herrmann,

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment in part of the Commission's decision
of 6 September 2005 relating to State aid No N 363/2005 for
in Mecklenburg-
the construction of a whey refining plant
Western Pomerania (Germany) (OJ 2005 C 262, p. 5)

Appeal against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the
European Union (Third Chamber) of 28 June 2006 in Case
F-39/05 Beau v Commission, not yet published in the ECR-SC,
seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the order

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

Operative part of the order

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders wheyco GmbH to pay the costs.

Commission.

2. Orders Ms Beau to bear her own costs and to pay those of the

(1) OJ C 74, 25.3.2006.

(1) OJ C 281, 18.11.2006.
Case T-326/05: Order of the Court of First Instance of 9 July 2007 — Rath v OHIM — AstraZeneca (VIXACOR)
Date: 2007-09-22
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), pharmaceutical product, trade-mark law

22.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/17

Order of the Court of First Instance of 29 June 2007 —
Keppenne v Commission

Order of the Court of First Instance of 9 July 2007 — Rath
v OHIM — AstraZeneca (VIXACOR)

(Case T-272/04) (1)

(2007/C 223/28)

Language of the case: French

(Case T-326/05) (1)

(2007/C 223/30)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) has
ordered that the case be removed from the register.

The President of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) has
ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 273, 6.11.2004.

(1) OJ C 281, 12.11.2005.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 29 June 2007 —
Keppenne v Commission

(Case T-411/04) (1)

(2007/C 223/29)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) has
ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 300, 4.12.2004.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 12 July 2007 —
Globe v Commission

(Case T-114/06) (1)

(2007/C 223/31)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) has
ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 131, 3.6.2006.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4640 — BAE Systems/VT/JV) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2007-09-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: advanced technology industry, aerospace industry, economic concentration, exchange of information, merger control, new technology, shipbuilding

22.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/21

V

(Announcements)

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION
POLICY

COMMISSION

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.4640 — BAE Systems/VT/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 222/06)

1.
On 12 September 2007, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant
to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertakings BAE Systems plc
(‘BAES’, United Kingdom) and VT Group plc (‘VT’, United Kingdom) acquire within the meaning of
Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation joint control of a newly created company constituting a joint
venture (‘JV’) by way of transfer of shares and assets.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

— for BAES: manufacturer of defence and commercial aerospace systems including military aircraft, surface
ships, submarines, combat vehicles, radar, avionics, communications, electronics and guided weapons
systems,

— for VT: support services and shipbuilding,

— for JV: naval surface shipbuilding and related support activities.

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

3.
scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed

4.
operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication.
Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax ((32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under
reference number COMP/M.4640 — BAE Systems/VT/JV, to the following address:

European Commission
Directorate-General for Competition
Merger Registry
J-70
B-1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

(1) OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.