do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
New types of costs eligible for a contribution from the ESF ***I European Parliament legislative resolution of 2 April 2009 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006 on the European Social Fund to extend the types of costs eligible for a contribution from the ESF (COM(2008)0813 – C6-0454/2008 – 2008/0232(COD))
Date: 2009-04-02
Institutions: Committee on Budgets, Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, Committee on Regional Development, European Parliament
Subjects: European Social Fund, arms policy, economic and social cohesion, economic recession, free movement of workers, gender equality, operation of the Institutions, powers of the institutions (EU), principle of subsidiarity, simplification of formalities








CE2010137EN.01006101.xml










27.5.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 137/61





Thursday 2 April 2009New types of costs eligible for a contribution from the ESF ***I
P6_TA(2009)0200
European Parliament legislative resolution of 2 April 2009 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006 on the European Social Fund to extend the types of costs eligible for a contribution from the ESF (COM(2008)0813 – C6-0454/2008 – 2008/0232(COD))
2010/C 137 E/14
(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,
having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2008)0813),
having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 148 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0454/2008),
having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,
having regard to the report of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Regional Development (A6-0116/2009),






1.


Approves the Commission proposal;










2.


Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;










3.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5492 — Oaktree/Apollo/Countrywide) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2009-04-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, exchange of information, investment, merger control, property market, transfer of businesses








C_2009079EN.01000402.xml










2.4.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 79/4





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.5492 — Oaktree/Apollo/Countrywide)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2009/C 79/05
On 26 March 2009, 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 Regulation (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 32009M5492. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).
Case F-39/09: Action brought on 2 April 2009 — Goddijn v Europol
Date: 2009-04-02
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: Europol, action for annulment (EU), fine








C_2009167EN.01002701.xml










18.7.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 167/27





Action brought on 2 April 2009 — Goddijn v Europol
(Case F-39/09)
2009/C 167/53
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicant: Jaqueline Goddijn (Breda, the Netherlands) (represented by: P. de Casparis)

Defendant: European Police Office (Europol)

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the decision of 12 June 2008 informing the applicant that it was impossible to offer her a permanent post, and the decision of 7 January 2009 rejecting the complaint brought against the first decision.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims the Tribunal should:






—


annul the decision of 12 June 2008 by which the defendant informed the applicant that it could not offer her a permanent post and the decision of 7 January 2009 in response to a complaint, stating that the applicant’s objections to the decision of 12 June 2008 were unfounded;










—


order Europol to pay the costs.
Case C-415/07: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 2 April 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale ordinario di Nocera Inferiore (Italy)) — Lodato Gennaro & C. SpA v Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS), SCCI (State aid for employment — Guidelines on aid to employment — Guidelines on national regional aid — Regulation (EC) No 2204/2002 — Notion of job creation — Calculation of the increase in employment)
Date: 2009-04-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: State aid, control of State aid, employment aid, employment policy, exchange of information, interpretation of the law, job creation








C_2009141EN.01001002.xml










20.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 141/10





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 2 April 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale ordinario di Nocera Inferiore (Italy)) — Lodato Gennaro & C. SpA v Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS), SCCI
(Case C-415/07) (1)

(State aid for employment - Guidelines on aid to employment - Guidelines on national regional aid - Regulation (EC) No 2204/2002 - Notion of ‘job creation’ - Calculation of the increase in employment)
2009/C 141/15
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale ordinario di Nocera Inferiore

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Lodato Gennaro & C. SpA

Defendants: Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS), SCCI

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale ordinario di Nocera Inferiore — Interpretation of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2204/2002 of 12 December 2002 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid for employment (OJ 2002 L 337, p. 3) — Ascertaining compliance with the requirements for obtaining aid — Ascertaining whether there has been an increase in employment — Method of calculation

Operative part of the judgment

In order to determine whether there has been an increase in employment, the guidelines on aid to employment should be interpreted as meaning that the average number of annual working units for the year preceding recruitment should be compared with the average number of annual working units for the year following such recruitment.


(1)  OJ C 283, 24.11.2007.
Case C-431/07 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 2 April 2009 — Bouygues SA, Bouygues Télécom SA v Commission of the European Communities, French Republic, Orange France S.A., Société française du radiotéléphone — SFR (Appeals — State aid — Article 88(2) EC — Conditions for initiation of the formal investigation procedure — Serious difficulties — Criteria for establishing the existence of State aid — State resources — Principle of non-discrimination)
Date: 2009-04-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, France, State aid, appeal, control of State aid, patents licence, telecommunications industry, telephone, waveband








C_2009141EN.01001201.xml










20.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 141/12





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 2 April 2009 — Bouygues SA, Bouygues Télécom SA v Commission of the European Communities, French Republic, Orange France S.A., Société française du radiotéléphone — SFR
(Case C-431/07 P) (1)

(Appeals - State aid - Article 88(2) EC - Conditions for initiation of the formal investigation procedure - Serious difficulties - Criteria for establishing the existence of State aid - State resources - Principle of non-discrimination)
2009/C 141/18
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellants: Bouygues SA, Bouygues Télécom SA (represented by: F. Sureau, D. Théophile, S. Perrotet, A. Bénabent, J. Vogel and L. Vogel, avocats,)

Other parties to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities, (represented by: C. Giolito, Agent), French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues, O. Christmann and A.L. Vendrolini, Agents), Orange France SA (represented by: S. Hautbourg, S. Quesson and L. Olza Moreno, avocats), Société française du radiotéléphone — SFR (represented by: A. Vincent, avocat and by C. Vajda QC)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 4 July 2007 in Case T-475/04 Bouygues and Bouygues Télécom v Commission in which the Court of First Instance dismissed the applicants’ action for annulment of the Commission Decision of 20 July 2004 (State Aid NN 42/2004 — France) concerning alteration of the fees payable by Orange and SFR for UMTS (Universal Mobile Telecommunication System) licences — State aid — Conditions for initiation of the formal investigation procedure under Article 88(2) EC — Criteria for State aid — Concepts of State resources, competitive advantage and non-discrimination.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Bouygues SA and Bouygues Télécom SA to pay the costs;










3.


Orders the French Republic to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.
Case T-129/09: Action brought on 2 April 2009 — Bongrain v OHIM — Apetito (APETITO)
Date: 2009-04-02
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), fine, infringement of EU law, trade-mark law








C_2009141EN.01004701.xml










20.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 141/47





Action brought on 2 April 2009 — Bongrain v OHIM — Apetito (APETITO)
(Case T-129/09)
2009/C 141/98
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicants: Bongrain SA (Viroflay, France) (represented by: C. Hertz-Eichenrode, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Apetito AG (Rheine, Germany)

Form of order sought







—


Set aside the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 2 February 2009 in case R 720/2008-4; and










—


Order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘APETITO’, for goods in class 29 — application No 3 470 598

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited: Community trade mark registration of the word mark ‘apetito’ for goods in classes 5, 11, 21 29, 30, 37, 39, 41 and 42

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation 40/94 (1) (which became Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation 207/2009) as the Board of Appeal erred in its finding that there is similarity of goods and hence likelihood of confusion between the trade marks concerned.


(1)  Replaced by Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark, OJ L 78, p. 1
Case T-473/07 P: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 2 April 2009 — Commission v Berrisford (Appeal — Staff cases — Officials — Promotion — 2005 promotion procedure — Article 45 of the Staff Regulations — Examination of comparative merits — Obligation to take into account the fact that the official concerned was included in the reserve)
Date: 2009-04-02
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Belgium, European Commission, European official, General Court (EU), professional career, regulations for civil servants








C_2009129EN.01001302.xml










6.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/13





Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 2 April 2009 — Commission v Berrisford
(Case T-473/07 P) (1)

(Appeal - Staff cases - Officials - Promotion - 2005 promotion procedure - Article 45 of the Staff Regulations - Examination of comparative merits - Obligation to take into account the fact that the official concerned was included in the reserve)
2009/C 129/22
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: D. Martin and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: Michael Berrisford (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: É. Boigelot, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Third Chamber) of 10 October 2007 in Case F-107/06 Berrisford v Commission (not yet published in the ECR), seeking the setting aside of that judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


dismisses the appeal;










2.


orders the Commission to bear its own cost and to pay those incurred by Mr Michael Berrisford in the present proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 64, 8.3.2008.
Case C-312/08: Order of the President of the Fifth Chamber of the Court of 2 April 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Date: 2009-04-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom, free movement of persons, ordinance








C_2009167EN.01000703.xml










18.7.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 167/7





Order of the President of the Fifth Chamber of the Court of 2 April 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
(Case C-312/08) (1)

2009/C 167/15

Language of the case: English

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


(1)  OJ C 223, 30.08.2008.
Case T-118/06: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 2 April 2009 — Zuffa v OHIM (ULTIMATE FIGHTING CHAMPIONSHIP) (Community trade mark — Application for the Community word mark ULTIMATE FIGHTING CHAMPIONSHIP — Absolute grounds for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Descriptive character — Duty to state reasons — Articles 7(1)(b) and (c) and 73 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
Date: 2009-04-02
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, General Court (EU), action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2009129EN.01001202.xml










6.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/12





Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 2 April 2009 — Zuffa v OHIM (ULTIMATE FIGHTING CHAMPIONSHIP)
(Case T-118/06) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for the Community word mark ULTIMATE FIGHTING CHAMPIONSHIP - Absolute grounds for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Descriptive character - Duty to state reasons - Articles 7(1)(b) and (c) and 73 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
2009/C 129/20
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Zuffa, LLC (Las Vegas, Nevada, United States) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister, M. Blair and C. Balme, Solicitors)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock, Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 January 2006 (Case R 931/2005-1) concerning registration of the word sign ULTIMATE FIGHTING CHAMPIONSHIP as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 30 January 2006 (Case R 931/2005-1) in so far as it dismisses the appeal brought by Zuffa, LLC, on the basis of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Council Regulation (EC) N0 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark;










2.


Orders OHIM to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 131, 3.6.2006.
Case T-130/09: Action brought on 2 April 2009 — Eliza v OHIM — Went Computing Consultancy Group (eliza)
Date: 2009-04-02
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), domestic market, trade-mark law








C_2009153EN.01004001.xml










4.7.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 153/40





Action brought on 2 April 2009 — Eliza v OHIM — Went Computing Consultancy Group (eliza)
(Case T-130/09)
2009/C 153/78
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicants: Eliza Corporation (Beverly, United States) (represented by: R. Köbbing, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Went Computing Consultancy Group BV (Utrecht, The Netherlands)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 2 February 2009 in case R 1244/2008-4; and










—


Order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark “eliza”, for goods and services in classes 9, 37 and 42

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited: Community trade mark registration of the word mark “ELISE” for goods and services in classes 9, 16, 35 and 42

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation 40/94 (1) (which became Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation 207/2009) as the Board of Appeal erred in its holding that there is a likelihood of confusion between the trade marks concerned on the part of the relevant public


(1)  Replaced by Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark, OJ L 78, p. 1
Case C-459/07: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 2 April 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Unabhängiger Finanzsenat, Außenstelle Graz (Austria)) — Veli Elshani v Hauptzollamt Linz (Community Customs Code — Article 202 and point (d) of the first paragraph of Article 233 — Incurrence of a customs debt — Unlawful introduction of goods — Seizure and confiscation — Extinction of the customs debt — Moment at which seizure must take place)
Date: 2009-04-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law, customs debt, customs regulations, interpretation of the law, legal code








C_2009141EN.01001202.xml










20.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 141/12





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 2 April 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Unabhängiger Finanzsenat, Außenstelle Graz (Austria)) — Veli Elshani v Hauptzollamt Linz
(Case C-459/07) (1)

(Community Customs Code - Article 202 and point (d) of the first paragraph of Article 233 - Incurrence of a customs debt - Unlawful introduction of goods - Seizure and confiscation - Extinction of the customs debt - Moment at which seizure must take place)
2009/C 141/19
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Unabhängiger Finanzsenat, Außenstelle Graz

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Veli Elshani

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Linz

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Unabhängiger Finanzsenat, Außenstelle Graz — Interpretation of Article 202 and point (d) of the first paragraph of Article 233 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code — Extinction of the customs debt linked to the seizure of goods upon their unlawful introduction — Seizure of goods in the Member State of destination — Removal of the goods — Moment at which the debt is extinguished

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 202 and point (d) of the first paragraph of Article 233 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2700/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2000, must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to lead to the extinction of the customs debt, the seizure of goods unlawfully introduced into the customs territory of the Community must take place before those goods go beyond the first customs office situated inside that territory.










2.


There is no need to reply to the second question.






(1)  OJ C 297, 8.12.2007.
Case C-401/08: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 2 April 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Austria (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 96/82/EC — Major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances — Article 11(1)(c) — Drawing up of external emergency plans for the measures to be taken outside the establishment — Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)
Date: 2009-04-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Austria, access to information, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, action programme, dangerous substance, internal border of the EU, state of emergency








C_2009141EN.01001902.xml










20.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 141/19





Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 2 April 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Austria
(Case C-401/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 96/82/EC - Major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances - Article 11(1)(c) - Drawing up of external emergency plans for the measures to be taken outside the establishment - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)
2009/C 141/32
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: B. Schima and A. Sipos, Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Austria (represented by: E. Reidl, Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 11(1)(c) of Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances, as amended by Directive 2003/105/EC (OJ 1997 L 10, p. 13) — Failure to draw up certain external emergency plans for the measures to be taken outside the establishments

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by failing to draw up an external emergency plan for all establishments subject to the provisions of Article 9 of Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazard sinvolving dangerous substances, as amended by Directive 2003/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2003, the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 11(1)(c) of that Directive;










2.


Orders the Republic of Austria to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 327, 20.12.2008.