do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-368/06: Order of the Court of First Instance of 5 May 2008 — Rath v OHIM — Sanorell Pharma (Immunocel)
Date: 2008-05-05
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), dietary product, food supplement, trade-mark law, vitamin

C 183/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.7.2008

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant disputes the Commission's decision to reject its
application to participate in invitation to tender ADMIN/D1/PR/
the
2008/004 regarding
European Union (EU)
in
Brussels (OJ 2008/S 44-060121), on the ground that the appli-
cation was submitted after the deadline stated in the contract
notice.

language
institutions, bodies and agencies

training

staff

for

at

In support of its action, the applicant submits that the contested
decision is based on an incorrect supposition that the awarding
authority is required to reject all late applications to participate.
The applicant takes the view, on the contrary, that the awarding
authority has a margin of discretion in that regard.

Furthermore, the applicant submits that the contested decision
is not sufficiently reasoned, since the Commission has not
explained why it has not exercised its discretionary powers.

Finally, the applicant raises a plea alleging breach of Article 123
of the implementing rules (1), according to which the number of
candidates invited to tender must be sufficient to ensure genuine
competition, and the disproportionate nature of the rejection of
the applicant's application.

(1) Commission Regulation

of
23 December 2002 laying down detailed rules for the implementa-
tion of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the
Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European
Communities (OJ L 357, p. 1).

Euratom) No

2342/2002

(EC,

Order of the Court of First Instance of 23 May 2008 —
FagorBrandt v Commission

(Case T-273/04) (1)

(2008/C 183/56)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case
be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 251, 9.10.2004.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 5 May 2008 —
Rath v OHIM — Sanorell Pharma (Immunocel)

(Case T-368/06) (1)

(2008/C 183/57)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case
be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 56, 10.3.2007.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 2 June 2008 —
Avaya v OHIM — ZyXEL Communications (VANTAGE
CNM)

(Case T-171/07) (1)

(2008/C 183/58)

Language of the case: English

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be
removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 170, 21.7.2007.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 9 June 2008 —
Malheiro v Commission

(Case T-228/07) (1)

(2008/C 183/59)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case
be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 24, 8.9.2007.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 397/2008 of 5 May 2008 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2008-05-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit

L 118/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.5.2008

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 397/2008

of 5 May 2008

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and
vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty
Community,

establishing the European

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007
of 21 December 2007 laying down implementing rules of
Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and
(EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector (1), and in
particular Article 138(1) thereof,

Whereas:

the standard values for imports from third countries, in
respect of the products and periods stipulated in the
Annex thereto.

(2)

In compliance with the above criteria,
the standard
import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the
Annex to this Regulation,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 138 of Regu-
lation (EC) No 1580/2007 shall be fixed as indicated in the
Annex hereto.

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 lays down, pursuant to
the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade
negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes

This Regulation shall enter into force on 6 May 2008.

Article 2

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

Done at Brussels, 5 May 2008.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY
Director-General for Agriculture and
Rural Development

(1) OJ L 350, 31.12.2007, p. 1.

6.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 118/9

to Commission Regulation of 5 May 2008 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry
price of certain fruit and vegetables

ANNEX

CN code

0702 00 00

0707 00 05

0709 90 70

0805 10 20

0805 50 10

0808 10 80

Third country code (1)

Standard import value

(EUR/100 kg)

MA
TN
TR
ZZ

JO
TR
ZZ

TR
ZZ

EG
IL
MA
TN
TR
ZZ

AR
IL
TR
ZA
ZZ

AR
BR
CL
CN
MK
NZ
US
UY
ZA
ZZ

63,1
102,3
147,8
104,4

178,8
109,5
144,2

139,7
139,7

49,8
54,9
48,9
52,0
53,3
51,8

112,6
130,3
130,7
118,5
123,0

89,4
85,2
91,6
85,5
65,0
119,9
106,3
78,3
74,5
88,4

(1) Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1833/2006 (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 19). Code ‘ZZ’ stands for ‘of

other origin’.
Case C-187/08: Action brought on 5 May 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium
Date: 2008-05-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, European Commission, Walloon region (Belgium), action for failure to fulfil an obligation, building, energy policy, energy saving

21.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 158/15

Pleas in law and main arguments

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium

According to Article 18 of Regulation No 648/2004,
the
Member States are to adopt, no later than 8 October 2005,
dissuasive, effective and proportionate sanctions for any infrin-
gement of that regulation and they are immediately to inform
the Commission thereof. At the date at which the present action
was brought,
the defendant had still not adopted sanctions
pursuant to the abovementioned article or, at least, had not
informed the Commission thereof.

(1) OJ 2004 L 104, p. 1.

Form of order sought

— Declare that by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive
2002/91/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 16 December 2002 on the energy performance of build-
ings (1) or by not informing the Commission thereof, the
Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under
Article 15 of the Directive;

— Order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

Action brought on 5 May 2008 — Commission of the
European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium

Pleas in law and main arguments

(Case C-187/08)

(2008/C 158/23)

Language of the case: French

Parties

for

time-limit

transposing the Directive 2002/91/EC
The
expired on 4 January 2006. At the date on which the present
action was brought, the defendant had still not adopted the
measures necessary to transpose the directive in regard to the
Walloon Region or, at least, had not informed the Commission
thereof.

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: B. Schima and J.-B. Laignelot, acting as Agents)

(1) OJ 2003 L 1, p. 65.