do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-81/09: Action brought on 24 February 2009 — Greece v Commission
Date: 2009-02-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, Greece, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, interpretation of the law, judicial proceedings, principle of proportionality








C_2009129EN.01001401.xml










6.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/14





Action brought on 24 February 2009 — Greece v Commission
(Case T-81/09)
2009/C 129/24
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Hellenic Republic (represented by K. Meidanis and E. Lampadarios, assisted by M. Tassopoulou)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought







—


annul Commission Decision C (2008) 8573 of 15 December 2008 reducing the financial assistance of the European Regional Development Fund (‘ERDF’) which was granted to Greece under Objective 1 of the operational programme ‘Accessibility and Trunk Roads’ by Commission Decision C (94) 3579 of 16 December 1994 authorising financial assistance from the ERDF, CCI No 94.08.09.019, in so far as it reduces the financial aid by imposing financial corrections amounting to EUR 11 946 583,53 and EUR 17 488 622, as more specifically set out in the application;










—


order the Commission to pay all the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant contends that the contested decision should be annulled for the following reasons.
First, in the applicant’s submission, the contested decision was adopted in breach of an essential procedural requirement laid down by Article 23(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88, (1) since the check on the basis of which the decision was adopted and financial corrections were imposed in respect of certain works was carried out by, amongst others, persons who were not Commission officials. Furthermore, in breach of the principle of transparency, the report on the check does not mention the names of the auditors from the private firm who participated in the check, nor is the report signed by them.
Second, the applicant pleads that the decision was adopted without full, clear and sufficient reasons being stated.
Third, the applicant submits that the contested decision was adopted in breach of the law, in particular (i) it was adopted pursuant to a rule which had not been enacted in the programme period 1994-99 and (ii) the Commission misinterpreted the provisions of Greek law transposing a Community directive, or in the alternative the statement of reasons is insufficient.
Fourth, the applicant maintains that in adopting the decision the Commission misappraised the factual circumstances (error as to the facts) and infringed the principle of proportionality.


(1)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 of 19 December 1988, laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural Funds between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial instruments (OJ 1988 L 374, p. 1).
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2009-02-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate

24.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 45/21

IV

(Notices)

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND
BODIES

COMMISSION

Euro exchange rates (1)

23 February 2009

(2009/C 45/03)

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

1,2798

AUD Australian dollar

121,09

7,4504

0,878

11,135

CAD

HKD

NZD

SGD

Canadian dollar

Hong Kong dollar

New Zealand dollar

Singapore dollar

1,9796

1,6001

9,9226

2,4967

1,9537

1,4908

KRW South Korean won

1 910,81

8,719

1,9558

28,451

ZAR

CNY

HRK

IDR

South African rand

Chinese yuan renminbi

Croatian kuna

Indonesian rupiah

15,6466

MYR Malaysian ringgit

297,05

3,4528

0,707

4,6435

4,2822

2,1552

PHP

RUB

THB

BRL

Philippine peso

Russian rouble

Thai baht

Brazilian real

MXN Mexican peso

INR

Indian rupee

12,7708

8,7487

7,4617

15 255,22

4,6783

61,37

46,0205

45,593

3,0459

18,8611

63,766

(1) Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case F-16/09: Action brought on 24 February 2009 — De Britto Patricio-Dias v Commission
Date: 2009-02-24
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), professional career, report








C_2009090EN.01004101.xml










18.4.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 90/41





Action brought on 24 February 2009 — De Britto Patricio-Dias v Commission
(Case F-16/09)
2009/C 90/67
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Jorge de Britto Patricio-Dias (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: L. Massaux, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision rejecting the applicant’s complaint against the decision relating to his appraisal during 2007

Form of order sought

The applicant claims the Tribunal should:






—


Annul the Appointing Authority’s decision of 21 November 2008 and, so far as necessary, the career development report covering the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2007;










—


Order the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs.
Case C-78/09 P: Appeal brought on 24 February 2009 by Compagnie des bateaux mouches SA against the judgment delivered on 10 December 2008 in Case T-365/06 Bateaux mouches v OHIM
Date: 2009-02-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, appeal, pleasure craft, trade-mark law








C_2009102EN.01001303.xml










1.5.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 102/13





Appeal brought on 24 February 2009 by Compagnie des bateaux mouches SA against the judgment delivered on 10 December 2008 in Case T-365/06 Bateaux mouches v OHIM
(Case C-78/09 P)
2009/C 102/22
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Compagnie des bateaux mouches SA (represented by: G. Barbaut, lawyer)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Jean-Noël Castanet

Form of order sought







—


Declare the appeal of Compagnie des bateaux mouches admissible;










—


set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 10 December 2008 (Case T-365/06);










—


Order the Court of First Instance of the European Communities to pay all the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellant raises two pleas in support of its appeal.
By its first plea, the appellant alleges breach by the Court of First Instance of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark. (1) In that regard, it complains first that the Court of First Instance disregarded the intrinsic distinctive character which the mark had from the outset. Secondly, that distinctive character was even maintained and reinforced over time by the use made thereof by the appellant. The mark ‘BATEAUX MOUCHES’ is displayed on the boats used by the appellant — and by it alone — for tourist trips on the River Seine, the use of the terms ‘bateaux mouches’ on Internet search engines leads directly to the appellant’s website and the appellant has implemented an active policy of defending its mark against all abusive use.
By its second plea, the appellant complains that the Court of First Instance wrongly interpreted the criteria laid down by case-law enabling establishment of the acquisition by use of the distinctive character of the mark ‘BATEAUX MOUCHES’. The factors capable of demonstrating the mark’s distinctive character, such as the market share held by the mark, the intensity, geographical spread and duration of the use of that mark, the size of the investment made by the company to promote it, the proportion in the relevant fields of those who identify the product or service as coming from a particular undertaking because of the mark, should have been examined, as a whole and not merely in part, by the Court of First Instance.


(1)  OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1.
Case T-236/08: Order of the Court of First Instance of 24 February 2009 — HPA v Commission
Date: 2009-02-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Economic Interest Grouping, European Commission, General Court (EU), debt, limitation of legal proceedings, principle of proportionality








C_2009090EN.01003902.xml










18.4.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 90/39





Order of the Court of First Instance of 24 February 2009 — HPA v Commission
(Case T-236/08) (1)

2009/C 90/63

Language of the case: Dutch

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


(1)  OJ C 223, 30.8.2008.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 156/2009 of 24 February 2009 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2009-02-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: citrus fruit, common agricultural policy, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit

25.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 52/1

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

I

REGULATIONS

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 156/2009

of 24 February 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 25 February 2009.

Article 2

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

Done at Brussels, 24 February 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 52/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

25.2.2009

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

MA
MK
TR
ZZ

MA
TR
ZZ

EG
ZZ

EG
IL
MA
TN
TR
ZZ

IL
MA
TR
ZZ

IL
JM
MA
PK
TR
ZZ

MA
TR
ZZ

CA
CL
CN
MK
US
ZZ

AR
CL
CN
US
ZA
ZZ

46,5
101,1
82,1
76,6

102,4
143,3
93,6
113,1

58,6
90,9
74,8

91,3
91,3

44,4
60,6
54,2
44,8
83,1
57,4

146,7
111,1
73,0
110,3

90,1
95,1
141,8
50,8
67,0
89,0

53,4
52,1
52,8

89,6
67,7
72,7
25,7
108,0
72,7

102,1
73,7
49,3
110,5
100,8
87,3

(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’.
Special Report No 8/2008 Is cross compliance an effective policy?
Date: 2009-02-24
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: European Court of Auditors, report, socioeconomic conditions, terms for aid

C 45/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.2.2009

EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS

Special Report No 8/2008 ‘Is cross compliance an effective policy?’

(2009/C 45/04)

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 8/2008 ‘Is cross compliance an
effective policy?’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors' website:
www.eca.europa.eu

A hard copy and a CD-ROM version of the report may be obtained free of charge on request to the Court
of Auditors:

European Court of Auditors
Communication and Reports Unit
12, rue Alcide De Gasperi
L-1615 Luxembourg
Tel. (352) 4398-1
E-mail: euraud@eca.europa.eu

or by filling in an electronic order form on EU-Bookshop.
Special Report No 11/2008 The management of the European Union support for the public storage operations of cereals
Date: 2009-02-24
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: European Court of Auditors, aid to agriculture, cereals, financial management, report, storage of food

24.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 45/23

Special Report No 11/2008 ‘The management of the European Union support for the public storage
operations of cereals’

(2009/C 45/05)

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 11/2008 ‘The management of
the European Union support for the public storage operations of cereals’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors' website:
www.eca.europa.eu

A hard copy and a CD-ROM version of the report may be obtained free of charge on request to the Court
of Auditors:

European Court of Auditors
Communication and Reports Unit
12, rue Alcide De Gasperi 1
L-1615 Luxembourg
Tel. (352) 4398-1
E-mail: euraud@eca.europa.eu

or by filling in an electronic order form on EU-Bookshop.