do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-167/09 P: Appeal brought on 24 April 2009 by the Commission of the European Communities against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 17 February 2009 in Case F-38/08 Liotti v Commission
Date: 2009-04-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European civil service, European official, appeal, promotion, regulations for civil servants








C_2009167EN.01001401.xml










18.7.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 167/14





Appeal brought on 24 April 2009 by the Commission of the European Communities against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 17 February 2009 in Case F-38/08 Liotti v Commission
(Case T-167/09 P)
2009/C 167/29
Language of the case: French

Parties


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

Other party to the proceedings: Amerigo Liotti (Senningerberg, Luxembourg)

Form of order sought by the appellant







—


Set aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 17 February 2009 in Case F-38/08 Liotti v Commission;










—


order the applicant to pay the costs of the proceedings before the Civil Service Tribunal and of the appeal.





Pleas in law and main arguments

By this appeal, the Commission of the European Communities asks the Court of First Instance to set aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’) of 17 February 2009 in Case F-38/08 Liotti v Commission, by which the Tribunal annulled Mr Liotti’s career development report (CDR) for the period from 1 January to 31 December 2006.
In support of its appeal, the Commission advances three pleas in law, alleging:






—


an infringement of Community law in so far as Article 8(7) of the general provisions for implementing Article 43 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities (‘the GIP’) does not lay down an obligation at countersigning officer level, or even at Director-General level, to consider the application of appraisal rules in all draft CDRs for a particular grade;










—


breaches of procedure before the Tribunal adversely affecting the Commission’s interests since, by raising of its own motion at the hearing the requirements of concertation and consistency provided for in Article 8(7) of the GIP, the Tribunal infringed the Commission’s rights of defence by depriving it of the opportunity to produce conclusive factual evidence to prove that there was no infringement of Article 8(7) of the GIP when the CDR at issue was drawn up;










—


an error of law in so far as the Tribunal treated the failure to take account of the provisions of Article 8(3) of the GIP as an infringement of an essential procedural requirement and/or a substantial irregularity resulting in the annulment of the CDR in dispute before the Tribunal.
Case C-144/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 24 April 2009 — Hotel Alpenhof GesmbH v Oliver Heller
Date: 2009-04-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Austria, Internet, Internet site, civil law, commercial law, hotel industry, interpretation of the law








C_2009153EN.01002601.xml










4.7.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 153/26





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 24 April 2009 — Hotel Alpenhof GesmbH v Oliver Heller
(Case C-144/09)
2009/C 153/47
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Hotel Alpenhof GesmbH

Claimant: Oliver Heller

Question referred

Is the fact that a website of the party with whom a consumer has concluded a contract can be consulted on the internet sufficient to justify a finding that an activity is being ‘directed’, within the terms of Article 15(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 (‘the Brussels I Regulation’)? (1)



(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters; OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1.
Information on the date of entry into force of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Albania, of the other part
Date: 2009-04-24
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Albania, European Community, association agreement, economic development, economic stabilisation, market stabilisation, ratification of an agreement








L_2009104EN.01005701.xml










24.4.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 104/57








            INFORMATION ON THE DATE OF ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES AND THEIR MEMBER STATES, OF THE ONE PART, AND THE REPUBLIC OF ALBANIA, OF THE OTHER PART
         

On 9 November 2006 and 26 February 2009 respectively, the Government of the Republic of Albania and the European Communities notified each other of the completion of the procedures necessary for the entry into force of the Agreement (1).
The Agreement entered into force on 1 April 2009, in accordance with Article 135 thereof.


(1)  
            OJ L 107, 28.4.2009, p. 166.
Case C-106/08: Order of the President of the Court of 24 April 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic
Date: 2009-04-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Greece, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, drivers, ordinance, road transport, traffic control








C_2009180EN.01003602.xml










1.8.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 180/36





Order of the President of the Court of 24 April 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic
(Case C-106/08) (1)

2009/C 180/63

Language of the case: Greek

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


(1)  OJ C 128, 24.5.2008.
Case C-147/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Wien (Austria) lodged on 24 April 2009 — Ronald Seunig v Maria Hölzel
Date: 2009-04-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Austria, civil law, commercial law, interpretation of the law, provision of services








C_2009153EN.01002701.xml










4.7.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 153/27





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Wien (Austria) lodged on 24 April 2009 — Ronald Seunig v Maria Hölzel
(Case C-147/09)
2009/C 153/50
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Wien

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Ronald Seunig

Respondent: Maria Hölzel

Questions referred







1.








(a)


Is the second indent of Article 5(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (1) (‘Regulation No 44/2001’) applicable in the case of a contract for the provision of services also where the services are, by agreement, provided in several Member States?
If the answer to that question is in the affirmative,
Should the provision referred to be interpreted as meaning that










(b)


the place of performance of the obligation that is characteristic of the contract must be determined by reference to the place where the service provider’s centre of business is located, which is to be determined by reference to the amount of time spent and the importance of the activity;










(c)


in the event that it is not possible to determine a centre of business, an action in respect of all claims founded on the contract may be brought, at the applicant’s choice, in any place of performance of the service within the Community?














2.


If the answer to the first question is in the negative,
Is Article 5(1)(a) of Regulation No 44/2001 applicable in the case of a contract for the provision of services also where the services are, by agreement, provided in several Member States?






(1)  OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1.
Case T-52/09 R: Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 24 April 2009 — Nycomed Danmark v EMEA (Application for interim measures — Marketing authorisation for a medicinal product — Ultrasound echocardiographic imaging agent for diagnostic purposes (perflubutane) — Refusal by the EMEA to grant a waiver from the obligation to submit a paediatric investigation plan — Application for suspension of operation of a measure and interim measures — No urgency)
Date: 2009-04-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Medicines Agency, action for annulment (EU), derogation from EU law, medical diagnosis, medicinal product








C_2009141EN.01004301.xml










20.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 141/43





Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 24 April 2009 — Nycomed Danmark v EMEA
(Case T-52/09 R)
(Application for interim measures - Marketing authorisation for a medicinal product - Ultrasound echocardiographic imaging agent for diagnostic purposes (perflubutane) - Refusal by the EMEA to grant a waiver from the obligation to submit a paediatric investigation plan - Application for suspension of operation of a measure and interim measures - No urgency)
2009/C 141/91
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Nycomed Danmark ApS (Roskilde, Denmark) (represented by: C. Schoonderbeek and H. Speyart van Woerden, lawyers)

Defendant: European Medicines Agency (EMEA) (represented by: V. Salvatore and N. Rampal Olmedo, Agents)

Re:

APPLICATION, first, for suspension of the operation of the EMEA’s decision of 28 November 2008 rejecting the application for a product-specific waiver concerning perflubutane and, secondly, for the grant of interim measures.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


Costs are reserved.
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 47/2009 of 24 April 2009 amending Annex XI (Telecommunication services) to the EEA Agreement
Date: 2009-04-24
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: European Economic Area, agreement (EU), confidentiality, data protection, information processing, protocol to an agreement, telecommunications industry




L_2009162EN.01002801.xml










25.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 162/28








            DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE
         
No 47/2009
of 24 April 2009
         
amending Annex XI (Telecommunication services) to the EEA Agreement


THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Annex XI to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 31/2009 of 17 March 2009 (1).












(2)


Commission Decision 2008/393/EC of 8 May 2008 pursuant to Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the adequate protection of personal data in Jersey (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement.












(3)


In the joined cases C-317/04 and C-318/04 the European Court of Justice annulled Commission Decision 2004/535/EC (3), which is incorporated into the Agreement and which is consequently to be deleted under the Agreement,





HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:



Article 1
Annex XI to the Agreement shall be amended as follows:






1.


the following point shall be inserted after point 5ej (Commission Decision 2004/535/EC):






‘5ek.



32008 D 0393: Commission Decision 2008/393/EC of 8 May 2008 pursuant to Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the adequate protection of personal data in Jersey (OJ L 138, 28.5.2008, p. 21).’;














2.


the text of point 5ej (Commission Decision 2004/535/EC) shall be deleted.






Article 2
The text of Decision 2008/393/EC in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.


Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on 25 April 2009, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).


Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 24 April 2009.


For the EEA Joint Committee


The President

Alan SEATTER
            





(1)  
            OJ L 130, 28.5.2009, p. 25.

(2)  
            OJ L 138, 28.5.2008, p. 21.

(3)  
            OJ L 235, 6.7.2004, p. 11.

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 50/2009 of 24 April 2009 amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement
Date: 2009-04-24
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: European Economic Area, agreement (EU), civil aviation, data recording, dissemination of information, information processing, protocol to an agreement, transport policy




L_2009162EN.01003101.xml










25.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 162/31








            DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE
         
No 50/2009
of 24 April 2009
         
amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement


THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Annex XIII to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 35/2009 of 17 March 2009 (1).












(2)


Commission Regulation (EC) No 1330/2007 of 24 September 2007 laying down implementing rules for the dissemination to interested parties of information on civil aviation occurrences referred to in Article 7(2) of Directive 2003/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement.












(3)


Due to the bilateral cooperation with Switzerland as regards civil aviation occurrences in Liechtenstein, Liechtenstein will handle incoming requests according to Regulation (EC) No 1330/2007 in close collaboration with Switzerland,





HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:



Article 1
The following point shall be inserted after point 66ga (Commission Regulation (EC) No 1321/2007) of Annex XIII to the Agreement:






‘66gb.



32007 R 1330: Commission Regulation (EC) No 1330/2007 of 24 September 2007 laying down implementing rules for the dissemination to interested parties of information on civil aviation occurrences referred to in Article 7(2) of Directive 2003/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 295, 14.11.2007, p. 7).’






Article 2
The text of Regulation (EC) No 1330/2007 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.


Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on 25 April 2009, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).


Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 24 April 2009.


For the EEA Joint Committee


The President

Alan SEATTER
            





(1)  
            OJ L 130, 28.5.2009, p. 29.

(2)  
            OJ L 295, 14.11.2007, p. 7.

(*1)  Constitutional requirements indicated.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5431 — ADM/Schokinag) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2009-04-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: cereal product, cereals, cocoa, economic concentration, exchange of information, food processing, marketing, merger control, vegetable oil








C_2009095EN.01002801.xml










24.4.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 95/28





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.5431 — ADM/Schokinag)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2009/C 95/08






1.


On 17 April 2009, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 and following a referral pursuant to Article 4(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Archer Daniels Midland Company (‘ADM’, USA) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the undertakings Hermann GmbH (‘Hermann’, Germany), Schokinag-Schokolade-Industrie Herrmann GmbH & Co. KG (‘Schokinag KG’, Germany) and Ammon & Hermann GmbH & Co. KG (‘Ammon KG’, Germany), these three companies being hereinafter collectively referred as ‘Schokinag’, by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for undertaking ADM: procurement, transport, storing, processing and merchandising agricultural commodities and products, including oil seed, corn, wheat and cocoa,










—


for undertaking Schokinag: production, sale and distribution of semi-finished cocoa and chocolate products.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed 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.5431 — ADM/Schokinag, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




J-70




B-1049 Brussels










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-145/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof Baden-Württemberg (Germany) lodged on 24 April 2009 — Land Baden-Württemberg v Panagiotis Tsakouridis
Date: 2009-04-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU institution, EU relations, application of EU law, interpretation of the law, public safety, residence permit








C_2009153EN.01002602.xml










4.7.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 153/26





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof Baden-Württemberg (Germany) lodged on 24 April 2009 — Land Baden-Württemberg v Panagiotis Tsakouridis
(Case C-145/09)
2009/C 153/48
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof Baden-Württemberg

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Land Baden-Württemberg

Defendant: Panagiotis Tsakouridis

Questions referred







1.


Is the expression ‘imperative grounds of public security’ used in Article 28(3) of Directive 2004/38/EC (1) of 29 April 2004 to be interpreted as meaning that only irrefutable threats to the external or internal security of the Member State can justify an expulsion, that is, only to the existence of the State and its essential institutions, their ability to function, the survival of the population, external relations and peaceful relations between nations?










2.


Under what conditions can the right to enhanced protection against expulsion achieved following ten years of residence in the host Member State laid down in Article 28(3)(a) of Directive 2004/38/EC subsequently be lost? Is the condition for the loss of the right of permanent residence laid down in Article 16(4) of the directive to be applied mutatis mutandis in that context?










3.


If the question in point 2 above is to be answered in the affirmative and Article 16(4) of the directive to be applied mutatis mutandis: is the enhanced protection against expulsion lost by lapse of time alone, irrespective of the reasons for the absence?










4.


Also if the question in point 2 above is to be answered in the affirmative and Article 16(4) of the directive to be applied: can an enforced return to the host Member State in the context of criminal proceedings before expiry of the two-year period have the effect of maintaining the right to increased protection against expulsion, even where following that return the fundamental freedoms cannot be exercised for some time?






(1)  Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 158, 30.4.2004, p. 77, and Corrigenda in OJ L 229, 29.6.2004, p. 35 and L 204, 4.8.2007, p. 28.
Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities * European Parliament legislative resolution of 24 April 2009 on the proposal for a Council decision concerning the conclusion, by the European Community, of the Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (COM(2008)0530 – C6-0117/2009 – 2008/0171(CNS))
Date: 2009-04-24
Institutions: Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, European Parliament
Subjects: European Community, UN convention, disabled person, fundamental rights, integration of people with disabilities, signature of an agreement








CE2010184EN.01041401.xml










8.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 184/414





Friday 24 April 2009Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities *
P6_TA(2009)0313
European Parliament legislative resolution of 24 April 2009 on the proposal for a Council decision concerning the conclusion, by the European Community, of the Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (COM(2008)0530 – C6-0117/2009 – 2008/0171(CNS))
2010/C 184 E/77
(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,
having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2008)0530),
having regard to the Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (‘the Optional Protocol’), adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 13 December 2006,
having regard to Articles 13(1) and 300(2), first subparagraph, of the EC Treaty,
having regard to Article 300(3), first subparagraph, of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6-0117/2009),
having regard to Rules 51 and 83(7) of its Rules of Procedure,
having regard to the report of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Women's rights and Gender Equality (A6-0230/2009),






1.


Approves conclusion of the Optional Protocol;










2.


Calls on the Member States and the Commission to report every three years to the Council and to Parliament on the status of implementation of the Optional Protocol in accordance with their respective fields of competence;










3.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.