do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
List of natural mineral waters in Iceland and Norway pursuant to Article 1 of Council Directive 80/777/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the exploitation and marketing of natural mineral waters (Annuls and replaces the text published in OJ C 297, 20.11.2008, p. 17 and EEA Supplement No 69, 20.11.2008 , p. 1)
Date: 2009-01-29
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: Iceland, Norway, approximation of laws, marketing, mineral water

29.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 23/11

NOTICES CONCERNING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA

STANDING COMMITTEE OF THE EFTA STATES

List of natural mineral waters in Iceland and Norway pursuant to Article 1 of Council Directive
80/777/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the exploitation and
marketing of natural mineral waters

(Annuls and replaces the text published in OJ C 297, 20.11.2008, p. 17 and EEA Supplement No 69,
20.11.2008, p. 1)

(2009/C 23/08)

LIST OF NATURAL MINERAL WATERS RECOGNISED BY ICELAND:

Trade Name

Name of source

Place of exploitation

Icelandic Glacial

Ölfus Spring

Hlíðarendi, Ölfus, Selfoss

LIST OF NATURAL MINERAL WATERS RECOGNISED BY NORWAY:

Trade Name

Name of source

Place of exploitation

Best naturlig mineralvann

Kastbrekka

Kambrekka/Trondheim

Bonaqua Silver

Farris

Fjellbekk

Modal

Telemark kilden

Kong Olavs kilde

Ivar Aasen kilde

Modal kilden

Fyresdal

Larvik

Volda

Fyresdal

Naturlig mineralvann fra Villmark
kilden på Rustad Gård

Villmark kilden på Rustad Gård

Rustad/Elverum

Olden

Osa

Blåfjell kilden

Osa kilden

Olderdalen

Ulvik/Hardanger
Case T-4/08: Order of the Court of First Instance of 29 January 2009 — EMSA v Portugal
Date: 2009-01-29
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Maritime Safety Agency, European official, General Court (EU), Portugal, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, seat of institution, vehicle registration

4.4.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/35

Order of the Court of First Instance of 6 February 2009 —
Air One v Commission

Order of the Court of First Instance of 29 January 2009 —
EMSA v Portugal

(Case T-344/02) (1)

(2009/C 82/60)

Language of the case: Italian

(Case T-4/08) (1)

(2009/C 82/61)

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

Language of the case: Portuguese

(1) OJ C 31, 8.2.2003.

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

(1) OJ C 183, 19.7.2008.
Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2009-01-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: France, State aid, control of State aid, exchange of information, maritime transport

29.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 23/1

II

(Information)

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

COMMISSSION

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2009/C 23/01)

Date of adoption of the decision

5.12.2008

Reference number of the aid

NN 40/08

Member State

Region

France

Métropole et départements d'outre-mer

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) Modification du régime de remboursement aux entreprises maritimes des
charges sociales patronales relatives au chômage et aux allocations familiales —
Modification du régime d'aide N 88/01

Legal basis

Loi no 2006-1666 du 21 décembre 2006

Loi no 2005-412 du 3 mai 2005

Type of measure

Aid scheme

Objective

Form of aid

Budget

Intensity

Duration

Sectoral development

Exemption from employers' contributions to unemployment benefit and exemp-
tion from family allowance contributions

EUR 16 million

100 %

Indefinite

Economic sectors

Maritime transport

Name and address of
authority

the granting

—

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be
found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/
Commission Regulation (EC) No 90/2009 of 29 January 2009 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2009-01-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: citrus fruit, common agricultural policy, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit

30.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 26/1

(Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory)

I

REGULATIONS

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 90/2009

of 29 January 2009

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

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Whereas:

Having regard to the Treaty
Community,

establishing the European

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of
22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agri­
cultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agri­
cultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (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 the standard values
for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and
periods stipulated in Annex XV, Part A thereto,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007
of 21 December 2007 laying down implementing rules for
Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and
(EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector (2), and in
particular Article 138(1) thereof,

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

This Regulation shall enter into force on 30 January 2009.

Article 2

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

Done at Brussels, 29 January 2009.

For the Commission

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

(1) OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 350, 31.12.2007, p. 1.

L 26/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.1.2009

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

0709 90 80

0805 10 20

0805 20 10

0805 20 30, 0805 20 50, 0805 20 70,
0805 20 90

0805 50 10

0808 10 80

0808 20 50

Third country code (1)

Standard import value

(EUR/100 kg)

MA
TN
TR
ZZ

JO
MA
TR
ZZ

MA
TR
ZZ

EG
ZZ

EG
IL
MA
TN
TR
ZZ

IL
MA
TR
ZZ

CN
IL
JM
PK
TR
ZZ

EG
MA
TR
ZZ

CA
CL
CN
MK
US
ZZ

CL
CN
TR
US
ZA
ZZ

49,3
134,4
103,9
95,9

167,2
116,0
185,3
156,2

135,2
170,0
152,6

82,9
82,9

51,8
53,9
65,3
57,2
57,6
57,2

159,7
91,5
64,0
105,1

61,6
92,7
97,0
46,6
61,2
71,8

48,1
67,1
73,2
62,8

84,9
67,8
66,4
31,6
106,8
71,5

71,6
66,8
40,0
113,5
134,7
85,3

(1) Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1833/2006 (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 19). Code ‘ZZ’ stands

for ‘of other origin’.
Case F-98/07: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 29 January 2009 — Petrilli v Commission (Staff cases — Auxiliary contract staff — Admissibility — Act causing adverse effect — Article 3c and Article 88 of the Conditions of employment of other servants — Duration of the contract — Article 3(1) of the Commission Decision of 28 April 2004 on the maximum duration for the recourse to non-permanent staff in the Commission services — Legality)
Date: 2009-01-29
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: Civil Service Tribunal, European Commission, labour law, regulations for civil servants, servant (EU), termination of a contract, work contract








C_2009102EN.01003702.xml










1.5.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 102/37





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 29 January 2009 — Petrilli v Commission
(Case F-98/07) (1)

(Staff cases - Auxiliary contract staff - Admissibility - Act causing adverse effect - Article 3c and Article 88 of the Conditions of employment of other servants - Duration of the contract - Article 3(1) of the Commission Decision of 28 April 2004 on the maximum duration for the recourse to non-permanent staff in the Commission services - Legality)
2009/C 102/54
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Nicole Petrilli (Woluwé-Saint-Étienne,Belgium) (represented by: J.-L. Lodomez, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: D. Martin and B. Eggers, Agents)

Re:

First, annulment of the decision of the appointing authority rejecting, pursuant to the Commission Decision of 28 April 2004 on the maximum duration for the recourse to non-permanent staff in the Commission services, the applicant's request for renewal of her contract as a member of contract staff and, second, an action for damages

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


annuls the decision of the Commission of the European Communities of 20 July 2007 rejecting Ms Petrilli's request for an extension of her contract as an auxiliary member of contract staff;










2.


orders the parties to transmit to the Tribunal, within three months of delivery of the present interim judgment, either the amount of the monetary compensation agreed between the parties in respect of the illegality of the decision of 20 July 2007 or their conclusions, with supporting figures, as to that amount;










3.


reserves the costs.






(1)  OJ C 297 of 8.12.2008, p. 48.
Case C-40/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from VAT and Duties Tribunal, Manchester (United Kingdom) made on 29 January 2009 — Astra Zeneca UK Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Date: 2009-01-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, interpretation of the law, provision of services, remuneration of work, tax system, work contract








C_2009090EN.01001102.xml










18.4.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 90/11





Reference for a preliminary ruling from VAT and Duties Tribunal, Manchester (United Kingdom) made on 29 January 2009 — Astra Zeneca UK Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
(Case C-40/09)
2009/C 90/17
Language of the case: English

Referring court

VAT and Duties Tribunal, Manchester

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Astra Zeneca UK Limited

Defendant: Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Questions referred







1)


In the circumstances of this case, where an employee is entitled under the terms of his or her contract of employment to opt to take part of his or her remuneration as a face value voucher, is Article 2(1) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC (1) [now Article 2(1)(c) of the Principal VAT Directive] to be interpreted such that the provision of that voucher by the employer to the employee constitutes a supply of services for consideration?










2)


If the answer to question 1 is no, is Article 6(2)(b) [now Article 26(1)(b)] to be interpreted as requiring the provision of the voucher by the employer to the employee in accordance with the contract of employment to be treated as a supply of services, in circumstances where the voucher is to be used by the employee for his or her private purposes?










3)


If the provision of the voucher is neither a supply of services for consideration within the meaning of Article 2(1) nor is to be treated as a supply of services under Article 6(2)(b), is Article 17(2) [now Article 168] to be interpreted so as to permit the employer to recover the value added tax it has incurred in purchasing and providing the voucher to the employee in accordance with the contract of employment in circumstances where the voucher is to be used by the employee for his or her private purposes?






(1)  Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment OJ L 145, p. 1
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2009-01-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate

C 23/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

29.1.2009

IV

(Notices)

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND
BODIES

COMMISSION

Euro exchange rates (1)

28 January 2009

(2009/C 23/07)

1 euro =

Currency

Exchange rate

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

JPY

DKK

GBP

SEK

CHF

ISK

NOK

BGN

CZK

EEK

HUF

LTL

LVL

PLN

RON

TRY

US dollar

Japanese yen

Danish krone

Pound sterling

Swedish krona

Swiss franc

Iceland króna

Norwegian krone

Bulgarian lev

Czech koruna

Estonian kroon

Hungarian forint

Lithuanian litas

Latvian lats

Polish zloty

Romanian leu

Turkish lira

1,326

AUD Australian dollar

118,57

7,4525

0,92725

10,6145

CAD

HKD

NZD

SGD

Canadian dollar

Hong Kong dollar

New Zealand dollar

Singapore dollar

1,9815

1,6161

10,2881

2,5024

1,9869

1,5163

KRW South Korean won

1 806,68

8,887

1,9558

27,351

ZAR

CNY

HRK

IDR

South African rand

Chinese yuan renminbi

Croatian kuna

Indonesian rupiah

13,1241

9,0672

7,3618

15 016,95

15,6466

MYR Malaysian ringgit

284,8

3,4528

0,7019

4,345

4,231

PHP

RUB

THB

BRL

Philippine peso

Russian rouble

Thai baht

Brazilian real

MXN Mexican peso

2,1408

INR

Indian rupee

4,7557

61,67

44,7265

46,264

3,0381

18,6953

64,875

(1) Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Judgment of the Court of 1 February 2008 in Case E-4/07 Jón Gunnar Þorkelsson v Gildi-lífeyrissjóður (Gildi Pension Fund) (Invalidity pension rights — Free movement of workers — Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Regulation (EEC) No 574/72)
Date: 2009-01-29
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: EFTA Court, Iceland, incapacity for work, social security legislation, social-security benefit, supplementary pension, worker (EU)

29.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 23/13

COURT PROCEEDINGS

EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA

EFTA COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 1 February 2008

in Case E-4/07 Jón Gunnar Þorkelsson v Gildi-lífeyrissjóður (Gildi Pension Fund)

(Invalidity pension rights — Free movement of workers — Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Regulation (EEC)
No 574/72)

(2009/C 23/10)

In Case E-4/07 between Jón Gunnar Þorkelsson and Gildi-lífeyrissjóður (Gildi Pension Fund) — Request to
the Court by Héraðsdómur Reykjavíkur (Reykjavík District Court), Iceland, concerning rules on the free
movement of workers within the EEA, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Henrik Bull,
Judge-Rapporteur, and Thorgeir Örlygsson, Judge, gave judgment on 1 February 2008, the operative part of
which is as follows:

1. the term ‘social security’, as it

is to be understood under Article 29 EEA and Regulation (EEC)
No 1408/71, covers the entitlement to an invalidity benefit that arises in pension fund schemes such as
the one at issue in the main proceedings, including pensions based on projected rights;

2.

it is not compatible with Article 45(5) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 to subject the entitlement to
invalidity benefits based on projected rights, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, to the condi-
tion that a member of a pension fund must have paid contributions to a fund belonging to a certain
group of funds for a specific period preceding the date of an accident and thereby exclude contributions
paid into social security systems in other EEA States in relation to work there;

3. under Regulation (EEC) No 574/72, persons shall present their claims in the State where they were resi-
dent and where they had social security entitlements at the time of their injury. However, the lodging of
a claim with the relevant institution of another EEA State is without prejudice to the right to benefits
under Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71. It is in any case for each institution concerned to make the final
decision as to whether the claimant must be awarded the benefit claimed from that institution.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5360 — RBSK Group/DZ Bank Group/RZB Group/HVB Banca Pentru Locuinte) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2009-01-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: bank, economic concentration, exchange of information, financial institution, insurance, merger control, savings

C 23/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

29.1.2009

(Case COMP/M.5360 — RBSK Group/DZ Bank Group/RZB Group/HVB Banca Pentru Locuinte)

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2009/C 23/04)

On 3 December 2008, 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 Regu-
lation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public
after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

— from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This
website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case
number, date and sectoral indexes,

— in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5360. EUR-Lex is the

on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5372 — Société Générale/La Caixa/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2009/C 23/05)

On 5 December 2008, 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 Regu-
lation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public
after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

— from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This
website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case
number, date and sectoral indexes,

— in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5372. EUR-Lex is the

on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).
Case C-41/09: Action brought on 29 January 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of the Netherlands
Date: 2009-01-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Netherlands, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, animal nutrition, foodstuff, human nutrition, import, tax system








C_2009129EN.01000202.xml










6.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/2





Action brought on 29 January 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of the Netherlands
(Case C-41/09)
2009/C 129/03
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: D. Triantafyllou and W. Roels, Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of the Netherlands

Form of order sought







—


rule that, by applying a reduced rate of VAT to the supply, importation and intra-Community acquisition of certain live animals, in particular horses, which are not normally intended for the preparation or production of foodstuffs for human or animal consumption, the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 12 of, in conjunction with Annex H to, the Sixth VAT Directive, (1) and under Articles 96, 97, 98 and 99(1) of, in conjunction with Annex III to, the VAT Directive; (2)











—


order the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission takes the view that the Netherlands Wet op de omzetbelasting (Law on turnover tax) breaches the provisions of Articles 96, 97, 98 and 99(1) of, in conjunction with Annex III to, the VAT Directive by applying a reduced rate of VAT to the supply of certain live animals (in particular, horses) even in cases where those animals are not intended for the preparation or production of foodstuffs. More specifically, the Commission is of the opinion that live animals — and, in particular, horses — which are not normally intended for use as foodstuffs do not come under Category 1 of Annex III to the VAT Directive.
According to settled case-law, Category 1 of Annex III to the VAT Directive must, in the same way as any other provision concerning the reduced rates of VAT, be subject to strict interpretation. Furthermore, in the light of the wording of Category 1 of Annex III to the Directive, the reduced rate applies to foodstuffs.


(1)  Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1).

(2)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5372 — Société Générale/La Caixa/JV) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2009-01-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: bank, economic concentration, exchange of information, financial institution, merger control

C 23/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

29.1.2009

(Case COMP/M.5360 — RBSK Group/DZ Bank Group/RZB Group/HVB Banca Pentru Locuinte)

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2009/C 23/04)

On 3 December 2008, 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 Regu-
lation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public
after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

— from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This
website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case
number, date and sectoral indexes,

— in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5360. EUR-Lex is the

on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5372 — Société Générale/La Caixa/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2009/C 23/05)

On 5 December 2008, 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 Regu-
lation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public
after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

— from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This
website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case
number, date and sectoral indexes,

— in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5372. EUR-Lex is the

on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).