do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-337/09: Action brought on 24 August 2009 — Colegio Oficial de Farmacéuticos de Valencia v Commission
Date: 2009-08-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, access to information, action for annulment (EU), interpretation of the law, pharmacy, professional association








C_2009256EN.01003203.xml










24.10.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 256/32





Action brought on 24 August 2009 — Colegio Oficial de Farmacéuticos de Valencia v Commission
(Case T-337/09)
2009/C 256/58
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Colegio Oficial de Farmacéuticos de Valencia (Valencia, Spain) (represented by: E. Navarro Varona, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought







—


annul, under Articles 230 and 231 EC, the Commission decision of 15 June 2009 partly denying access to information requested by the applicant by means of its initial application of 23 October 2008 and its confirmatory application of 19 January 2009.










—


order the Commission to pay the costs incurred by the applicant.





Pleas in law and main arguments

This action is brought against the decision of the Commission of the European Communities partly refusing access to certain documents drawn up by the consultants ECORYS Nederland BV for the preparation of the report titled ‘Study of regulatory restrictions in the field of pharmacies’ of 22 June 2007 for the defendant’s Directorate General Internal Market and Services.
In support of its claims, the applicant alleges infringement of Article 4(2) and Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents. (1)

The applicant claims that the contested decision:






—


does not contain an adequate statement of reasons.










—


errs in its assessment of the exception relating to the commercial interests of a legal person, including intellectual property.










—


contains a manifest error of reasoning, by not taking into account that there is an overriding public interest.










—


Fails to comply with the prescribed periods for replying to the confirmatory application for access to the documents.






(1)  OJ L 145 of 31.5.2001, p. 43
Case C-339/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 24 August 2009 — Skoma-Lux sro v Celní ředitelství Olomouc
Date: 2009-08-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, beet sugar, common customs tariff, interpretation of the law, marketing, processed food product, wine








C_2009282EN.01002501.xml










21.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/25





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 24 August 2009 — Skoma-Lux sro v Celní ředitelství Olomouc
(Case C-339/09)
2009/C 282/43
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší správní soud

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Skoma-Lux sro

Defendant: Celní ředitelství Olomouc

Question referred

Must goods labelled as ‘red dessert wine Kagor VK’, contained in 0.75 litre bottles with an alcohol content of 15.8 % — 16.1 % by volume, to which beet sugar and corn alcohol have been added during their manufacture, those substances not originating from fresh grapes, be classified under heading 2204 or heading 2206 of the combined nomenclature of the customs tariff?
Case T-329/09: Action brought on 24 August 2009 — Fédération Internationale des Logis v OHIM (Brown convex square)
Date: 2009-08-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2009267EN.01006902.xml










7.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 267/69





Action brought on 24 August 2009 — Fédération Internationale des Logis v OHIM (Brown convex square)
(Case T-329/09)
2009/C 267/126
Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties


Applicant: Fédération Internationale des Logis (Paris, France) (represented by C. Champagner Katz, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 June 2009 in Case R 0202/2009-1 and allow registration of the trade mark applied for;










—


Order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: Mark representing a brown convex square for the goods and services in Classes 3, 18, 24, 43 and 44 — Application No 6468722

Decision of the Examiner: Rejection of the application for registration

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 as the representation of a special and specific square with convex edges in a particular and specific brown colour is distinctive with respect to the goods and services for which registration was sought, in so far as those elements give the mark a particular appearance for those goods and services.
Case C-334/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Meiningen (Germany) lodged on 24 August 2009 — Frank Scheffler v Landkreis Wartburgkreis
Date: 2009-08-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, driving licence, interpretation of the law, traffic regulations








C_2009267EN.01004201.xml










7.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 267/42





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Meiningen (Germany) lodged on 24 August 2009 — Frank Scheffler v Landkreis Wartburgkreis
(Case C-334/09)
2009/C 267/73
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Meiningen

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Frank Scheffler

Defendant: Landkreis Wartburgkreis

Question referred

May a Member State, in accordance with Article 1(2) and Article 8(2) and (4) of Directive 91/439/EEC, (1) exercise its authority under Article 8(2) of Directive 91/439/EEC — to apply its national provisions on the restriction, suspension, withdrawal or cancellation of the right to drive to the holder of a driving licence issued by another Member State — in relation to a certificate of aptitude to drive submitted by the holder of a driving licence issued by another Member State if the certificate was issued after the date of issue of the driving licence and is also based on an examination of the party concerned carried out after the issue of the driving licence, but relates to circumstances that took place prior to the issue of the driving licence.


(1)  Council Directive 91/439/EEC of 29 July 1991 on driving licences (OJ L 237, 24.8.1991, p. 1).
Case C-338/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat Wien (Austria) lodged on 24 August 2009 — Yellow Cab Verkehrsbetriebs GmbH
Date: 2009-08-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: bus, competition, freedom to provide services, interpretation of the law, profitability, public service, right of establishment, trade licence








C_2009282EN.01002401.xml










21.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/24





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat Wien (Austria) lodged on 24 August 2009 — Yellow Cab Verkehrsbetriebs GmbH
(Case C-338/09)
2009/C 282/42
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat Wien

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Yellow Cab Verkehrsbetriebs GmbH

Defendant: Magistrat der Stadt Wien

Questions referred







1.


Is it compatible with the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services within the meaning of Article 49 et seq. EC and with EU competition law for the purposes of Article 81 et seq. EC for a provision of national law relating to the grant of authorisation to operate a motor vehicle service, and thus to provide public transport, where fixed stopping points are called at regularly in accordance with a timetable, to lay down the following as conditions for such authorisation:






(a)


that the EU undertaking making the application must already have a registered office or a branch in the State of the authorising authority before commencing operation of the service and in particular at the time the licence is granted;










(b)


that the EU undertaking making the application must already have a registered office or a branch in the State of the authorising authority at the latest from the time operation of the service commences?














2.


Is it compatible with the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services within the meaning of Article 49 et seq. EC and with EU competition law for the purposes of Article 81 et seq. EC for a provision of national law relating to the grant of authorisation to operate a motor vehicle service, and thus to provide public transport where fixed stops are called at regularly in accordance with a timetable, to provide that authorisation is to be refused where, if the motor vehicle service applied for commences, the revenues of a competing undertaking running on a partially or entirely identical short route will be so substantially reduced by this service that the continued running of the service operated by the competing undertaking will no longer be economically viable?
Case T-335/09: Action brought on 24 August 2009 — Groupement Adriano, Jaime Ribeiro, Conduril-Construção v Commission
Date: 2009-08-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, European Commission, Portugal, action for annulment (EU), contract, payment, road building








C_2009267EN.01007201.xml










7.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 267/72





Action brought on 24 August 2009 — Groupement Adriano, Jaime Ribeiro, Conduril-Construção v Commission
(Case T-335/09)
2009/C 267/131
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicants: Groupement Adriano, Jaime Ribeiro, Conduril-Construção (Póvoa de Varzim, Portugal) (represented by A. Pinto Cardoso and L. Fuzeta da Ponte, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought







—


annulment of the Commission’s decision contained in debit note No 3230905272 of 12 June 2009 and of the decision contained in the notification of 3 August 2009 ordering the applicant to pay that note within a period of 15 days, together with default interest, in performance of Contract AH 04/2004, concluded for the construction of a section of highway between Tangiers and Saida (‘Mediterranean Bypass Project’), financed by the Community under Programme MEDA I;










—


an order that the Commission should pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The measures are actionable, for they are decisive and definitive in nature and have binding effect, and the parties have capacity to bring proceedings.
Both measures are marred by:






 


Absolute lack of powers: the defendant is not the ‘pouvoir adjudicateur’ (the contracting authority), because there is no contractual provision whatsoever to support the defendant’s conduct. The defendant thus not only lacks powers, but also any competence in these proceedings.










 


Breach of essential procedural requirements, in particular, the duty to state reasons: as provided for in Article 253 of the Treaty, reasons must be given for Community measures. In accordance with the case-law, the reasoning must be express, clear, coherent and relevant. The measure may not be implied or based on tacit grounds, nor may it be clothed in obscurity. There must be no contradiction between the grounds or between the grounds and the enacting terms. The contested decisions lack any grounds whatsoever. There is also a breach of the essential procedural requirement of an indication of the legal remedies.










 


infringement of the rules of the Treaty, that is to say, of Articles 211 to 219, of the defendant’s own internal regulations and of the principle ‘pacta sunt servanda’.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 769/2009 of 24 August 2009 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2009-08-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: citrus fruit, common agricultural policy, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit








L_2009221EN.01000501.xml










25.8.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 221/5








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 769/2009
of 24 August 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 25 August 2009.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 24 August 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 


MK 


33,6 




XS 


27,8 




ZZ 


30,7 




0707 00 05 


MK 


33,2 




TR 


101,7 




ZZ 


67,5 




0709 90 70 


TR 


108,1 




ZZ 


108,1 




0805 50 10 


AR 


84,2 




UY 


79,3 




ZA 


88,3 




ZZ 


83,9 




0806 10 10 


EG 


174,8 




IL 


86,7 




TR 


110,7 




ZA 


151,7 




ZZ 


131,0 




0808 10 80 


AR 


111,5 




BR 


72,6 




CL 


81,1 




NZ 


83,2 




US 


95,4 




UY 


42,1 




ZA 


84,4 




ZZ 


81,5 




0808 20 50 


AR 


113,9 




CN 


60,3 




TR 


132,7 




ZA 


100,6 




ZZ 


101,9 




0809 30 


TR 


134,5 




ZZ 


134,5 




0809 40 05 


TR 


90,9 




ZZ 


90,9 






(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’.