do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-161/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Simvoulio tis Epikratias (Greece) lodged on 8 May 2009 — Κ. Frangopoulos kai Sia OE v Nomarkhiaki Avtodiikisi Korinthias
Date: 2009-05-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Greece, fruit, fruit-growing, grape, interpretation of the law, national implementing measure, product quality








C_2009153EN.01002901.xml










4.7.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 153/29





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Simvoulio tis Epikratias (Greece) lodged on 8 May 2009 — Κ. Frangopoulos kai Sia OE v Nomarkhiaki Avtodiikisi Korinthias
(Case C-161/09)
2009/C 153/54
Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Simvoulio tis Epikratias

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Κ. Frangopoulos kai Sia OE

Defendant: Nomarkhiaki Avtodiikisi Korinthias

Questions referred







1.


Can a company operating under the conditions under which the applicant operates, that is to say, as a dried grape processing and packing company established in a specific area of the country to which it is prohibited by law to bring different varieties of drying grapes from other areas of the country for the purpose of processing and packing, thereby preventing it from exporting dried grapes which it would have processed from such drying grapes, plead in court that the legislative measures in question conflict with Article 29 EC?










2.


If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, do provisions such as those in internal Greek law governing the dispute at issue which, on the one hand, prohibit drying grapes from being brought from different areas of the country, for the purpose of storage, processing and onward export, to a specific area in which it is only permitted to process locally grown drying grapes and, on the other hand, reserve the possibility of recognising protected designation of origin solely for drying grapes which have been processed and packed in the specific area in which they were grown, conflict with Article 29 EC which prohibits quantitative restrictions on exports or measures having equivalent effect?










3.


If the answer to the second question is in the affirmative, does protection of the quality of a product which is defined geographically by the national law of a Member State and which has not been granted the possibility of bearing a particular distinguishing name which would mark its generally acknowledged superior quality and uniqueness due to its originating from a certain geographical area, constitute, within the meaning of Article 30 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, a legitimate objective of overriding public interest which justifies a derogation from Article 29 EC prohibiting quantitative restrictions on exports of the said product and measures having equivalent effect?
Case C-159/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de commerce de Bourges (France) lodged on 8 May 2009 — Lidl SNC v Vierzon Distribution SA
Date: 2009-05-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: commercial court, comparative advertising, food consumption, food production, foodstuff, interpretation of the law, professional experience








C_2009180EN.01002701.xml










1.8.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 180/27





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de commerce de Bourges (France) lodged on 8 May 2009 — Lidl SNC v Vierzon Distribution SA
(Case C-159/09)
2009/C 180/46
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de commerce de Bourges

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Lidl SNC

Defendant: Vierzon Distribution SA

Question referred

Is Article 3a of Directive 84/450 (1), as amended by Directive 97/55 (2), to be interpreted as meaning that it is unlawful to engage in comparative advertising on the basis of the price of products meeting the same needs or intended for the same purpose, that is to say, products which are sufficiently interchangeable, on the sole ground that, in regard to food products, the extent to which consumers would like to eat those products, or, in any case, the pleasure of consuming them, is completely different according to the conditions and the place of production, the ingredients used and the experience of the producer?


(1)  Council Directive 84/450/EEC of 10 September 1984 relating to the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning misleading advertising (OJ 1984 L 250, p. 17).

(2)  Directive 97/55/EC of European Parliament and of the Council of 6 October 1997 amending Directive 84/450/EEC concerning misleading advertising so as to include comparative advertising (OJ 1997 L 290, 23.10.1997, p. 18).
Prior notification of a concentration — (Case COMP/M.5467 — RWE/Essent) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2009-05-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electricity supply, exchange of information, gas supply, heating, merger control








C_2009106EN.01002601.xml










8.5.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 106/26





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.5467 — RWE/Essent)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2009/C 106/09






1.


On 29 April 2009, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking RWE Aktiengesellschaft (‘RWE’, Germany) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Essent N.V. (‘Essent’, the Netherlands) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


RWE: electricity and natural gas,










—


Essent: electricity, natural gas and heating.














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 2964301 or 2967244) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5467 — RWE/Essent, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




J-70




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 377/2009 of 8 May 2009 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2009-05-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: citrus fruit, common agricultural policy, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit








L_2009116EN.01000101.xml










9.5.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 116/1








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 377/2009
of 8 May 2009
         
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 establishing the European Community,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (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,

Whereas:

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


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 9 May 2009.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 8 May 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.




ANNEX
Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables







(EUR/100 kg)




CN code


Third country code (1)



Standard import value




0702 00 00 


MA 


64,3 




TN 


115,0 




TR 


116,4 




ZZ 


98,6 




0707 00 05 


MA 


32,7 




TR 


123,2 




ZZ 


78,0 




0709 90 70 


TR 


120,2 




ZZ 


120,2 




0805 10 20 


EG 


45,5 




IL 


55,9 




MA 


48,3 




TN 


52,5 




TR 


95,9 




US 


68,2 




ZZ 


61,1 




0805 50 10 


TR 


50,6 




ZA 


56,2 




ZZ 


53,4 




0808 10 80 


AR 


82,4 




BR 


69,3 




CA 


127,2 




CL 


82,0 




CN 


90,7 




NZ 


103,6 




US 


124,5 




UY 


71,7 




ZA 


83,2 




ZZ 


92,7 






(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’.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 381/2009 of 8 May 2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 2092/2004 laying down detailed rules of application for an import tariff quota of dried boneless beef originating in Switzerland
Date: 2009-05-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Switzerland, beef, boned meat, dried product, import, originating product, tariff quota








L_2009116EN.01001601.xml










9.5.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 116/16








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 381/2009
of 8 May 2009
         
amending Regulation (EC) No 2092/2004 laying down detailed rules of application for an import tariff quota of dried boneless beef originating in Switzerland


THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1), and in particular Article 144(1), in conjunction with Article 4 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


In accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 2092/2004 (2) certificates of authenticity attesting that the products originate in Switzerland are to be issued before certain products are imported. The name of the issuing authority for those certificates is given in Annex III to that Regulation. Article 4(2) of that Regulation provides that Annex III may be revised in case a new issuing authority is appointed.












(2)


Switzerland has notified the Commission that it has appointed a new body that will be authorised to issue certificates of authenticity.












(3)


Regulation (EC) No 2092/2004 should therefore be amended accordingly.












(4)


The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 2092/2004 is replaced by the text set out in the Annex to this Regulation.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 8 May 2009.


For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ L 362, 9.12.2004, p. 4.




ANNEX




                     ‘ANNEX III

List of authorities in exporting countries empowered to issue certificates of authenticity

SWITZERLAND






—


Office fédéral de l'agriculture/Bundesamt für Landwirtschaft/Ufficio federale dell'agricoltura.’
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2009-05-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2009106EN.01002401.xml










8.5.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 106/24





Euro exchange rates (1)

7 May 2009
2009/C 106/07

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3363




JPY


Japanese yen


132,72




DKK


Danish krone


7,4487




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88470




SEK


Swedish krona


10,4770




CHF


Swiss franc


1,5166




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,6200




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


26,463




EEK


Estonian kroon


15,6466




HUF


Hungarian forint


276,60




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7091




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3038




RON


Romanian leu


4,1180




TRY


Turkish lira


2,0601




AUD


Australian dollar


1,7591




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5569




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,3566




NZD


New Zealand dollar


2,2385




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,9591




KRW


South Korean won


1 681,34




ZAR


South African rand


11,1581




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


9,1160




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,3629




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


13 891,45




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7098




PHP


Philippine peso


63,152




RUB


Russian rouble


43,6295




THB


Thai baht


46,630




BRL


Brazilian real


2,8060




MXN


Mexican peso


17,3576




INR


Indian rupee


65,6120






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-162/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) (United Kingdom) made on 8 May 2009 — Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Taous Lassal
Date: 2009-05-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU national, European citizenship, free movement of workers, interpretation of the law, limitation of legal proceedings, residence permit








C_2009153EN.01002902.xml










4.7.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 153/29





Reference for a preliminary ruling from Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) (United Kingdom) made on 8 May 2009 — Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Taous Lassal
(Case C-162/09)
2009/C 153/55
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Defendant: Taous Lassal

Questions referred







1)


In circumstances where (i) an EU citizen came to the United Kingdom in September 1999 as a worker and remained as a worker until February 2005 (H) the EU citizen then left the United Kingdom and returned to the Member State of which she is a national for a period of 10 months (iii) the EU citizen returned to the United Kingdom in December 2005 and resided there continuously until November 2006, when she made a claim for social security assistance:




Is Article 16(1) of Directive 2004/38 of the European Parliament and the Council of 29 April 2004 to be interpreted as entitling that EU citizen to a right of permanent residence by virtue of the fact that she had been legally resident, in accordance with earlier Community law instruments conferring rights of residence on workers, for a continuous period of five years which ended prior to 30 April 2006 (the date by which Member States had to transpose the Directive)?
Case C-164/09: Action brought on 8 May 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic
Date: 2009-05-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Italy, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, bird, protected species, protection of animal life








C_2009180EN.01002801.xml










1.8.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 180/28





Action brought on 8 May 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic
(Case C-164/09)
2009/C 180/48
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: C. Zadra and D. Recchia, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Italian Republic

Form of order sought







—


Declare that the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 9 of Directive 79/409/EEC, (1) since the Veneto Region has adopted and applies rules concerning authorisation to derogate from the system of protection for wild birds which fail to satisfy the conditions laid down in Article 9 of Directive 79/409;










—


Order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission submits that the legislation adopted by the Veneto Region does not comply with the requirements laid down in Article 9 of Directive 79/409.
Law No 13 of 2005, in force at the time of expiry of the reasoned opinion, does not comply with the requirements laid down in Article 9 of Directive 79/409 in so far as:






—


it identifies generally and in the abstract, without imposing any temporal limits, the species and the numbers covered by the derogation;










—


the derogations for individual species of birds are provided for collectively on the basis of a general reference to all the circumstances listed in points (a) and (c) of Article 9, without appropriate explanations being given concerning the specific reasons;










—


it does not lay down the requirement that it must be ascertained that there is no other satisfactory solution, or that the individual derogation measures must specify the conditions of risk, the circumstances of place and those who are authorised to apply the derogations;










—


it allows the small numbers to be determined without an adequate scientific basis.




The Commission submits that the measures adopted after the expiry of the period prescribed in the reasoned opinion not only fail to cure the defects already identified, but actually reproduce them in substance. The measures concerned are, inter alia, Decree No 140 of the President of the Regional Council of 20 June 2006, Decree No 230 of the President of the Regional Council of 18 October 2006, Regional Law No 24 of 16 August 2007, Decree No 167 of the President of the Regional Council of 4 September 2007, and Regional Law No 13 of 14 August 2008.


(1)  Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ 1979 L 103, p. 1).
Ex post publicity of Eurostat grants in 2008
Date: 2009-05-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Eurostat, dissemination of EU information, economic support








C_2009106EN.01002501.xml










8.5.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 106/25






Ex post publicity of Eurostat grants in 2008
2009/C 106/08
In accordance with Article 110(2) of the Financial Regulation and Article 169 of its implementing rules, the public is hereby informed of the actions subsidised by Eurostat in the year 2008.
The electronic file showing the actions concerned can be found in list form on the EUROPA server (http://europa.eu.int). You can access this list via ‘Services’, ‘Grants’, ‘Statistics’, ‘Eurostat Grants’ and the file ‘List of grants awarded in 2008’.
The list gives the file number, the unit concerned, the name and country of the beneficiaries, the title of the action, the amount of the grant and the rate of Community co-financing for the action.
Case C-160/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Simvoulio tis Epikratias (Greece) lodged on 8 May 2009 — Ioannis Katsivardas — Nikolaos Tsitsikas O.E. v Ipourgos Ikonomikon
Date: 2009-05-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law, European Community, Greece, VAT, excise duty, interpretation of the law, tax system, tropical fruit








C_2009153EN.01002802.xml










4.7.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 153/28





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Simvoulio tis Epikratias (Greece) lodged on 8 May 2009 — Ioannis Katsivardas — Nikolaos Tsitsikas O.E. v Ipourgos Ikonomikon
(Case C-160/09)
2009/C 153/53
Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Simvoulio tis Epikratias

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Ioannis Katsivardas — Nikolaos Tsitsikas O.E.

Defendant: Ipourgos Ikonomikon

Question referred

Can an individual (an importer of bananas from Ecuador) who claims the refund of domestic excise duty as having been wrongly paid plead before the national court that the national tax rule (Article 7 of Law 1798/1988, as amended by Article 10 of Law 1914/1990) is incompatible with Article 4 of the 1984 agreement between the European Economic Community and the member countries of the Cartagena Agreement, which was approved by Council Regulation (ΕEC) No 1591/84? (1)



(1)  OJ L 153, 8.6.1984, p. 1.
Case T-170/07: Order of the Court of First Instance of 8 May 2009 — Opus Arte UK v OHIM — Arte (OPUS ARTE)
Date: 2009-05-08
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, General Court (EU), ordinance, trade-mark law








C_2009153EN.01005002.xml










4.7.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 153/50





Order of the Court of First Instance of 8 May 2009 — Opus Arte UK v OHIM — Arte (OPUS ARTE)
(Case T-170/07) (1)

2009/C 153/95

Language of the case: English

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


(1)  OJ C 170, 21.7.2007.