do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-467/09: Action brought on 19 November 2009 — Stelzer v Commission
Date: 2009-11-19
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EC Directive, Germany, access to information, access to the courts, action for annulment (EU), development plan, environmental protection, national implementing measure, transparency in decision-making








C_2010024EN.01006002.xml










30.1.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/60





Action brought on 19 November 2009 — Stelzer v Commission
(Case T-467/09)
2010/C 24/107
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Dierk Stelzer (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: F. Weiland, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought







—


annul the decisions in the form of refusals by the Directorate-General Environment of the Commission of 6 August 2009 and the Secretariat-General of the Commission of 29 October 2009 (correct date must be 29 September 2009);










—


order the defendant to pay the applicant’s costs incurred out of court.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant contests in particular the Commission decision dated 29 October 2009, by which his second application for inspection of the compliance study on the transposition of Directive 2003/35/EC (1) was partially rejected.
In support of its action the applicant claims that the reasons invoked by the defendant for the rejection of access to the document applied for, based on protection of the purpose of investigations (Article 4(2), third indent, of Regulation [EC] No 1049/2001 (2)) and on protection of the decision-making process (Article 4(3) of Regulation No 1049/2001) were erroneous. The applicant also claims that the request for partial access to the document applied for under Article 4(6) of Regulation No 1049/2001 was wrongly rejected. Furthermore there is an overwhelming public interest in the dissemination of the study in question. Finally the applicant complains that the defendant failed to comply with the obligation to state reasons.


(1)  Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 providing for public participation in respect of the drawing up of certain plans and programmes relating to the environment and amending with regard to public participation and access to justice Council Directives 85/337/EEC and 96/61/EC (OJ 2003 L 156, p. 17).

(2)  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 (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43).
Case C-461/08: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 19 November 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Don Bosco Onroerend Goed BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (Sixth VAT Directive — Interpretation of Articles 13B(g) and 4(3)(a) — Supply of land occupied by a partly demolished building in place of which a new building is to be constructed — VAT Exemption)
Date: 2009-11-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, building industry, interpretation of the law








C_2010024EN.01001302.xml










30.1.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/13





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 19 November 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Don Bosco Onroerend Goed BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën
(Case C-461/08) (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive - Interpretation of Articles 13B(g) and 4(3)(a) - Supply of land occupied by a partly demolished building in place of which a new building is to be constructed - VAT Exemption)
2010/C 24/21
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Don Bosco Onroerend Goed BV

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hoge Raad der Nederlanden, The Hague — Interpretation of Article 4(3)(a), read in conjunction with Article 13B(g), of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — Taxation of the supply of a building or part of a building and the adjacent ground prior to its first occupation — Supply of a partially demolished building by reason of its replacement by a new building to be constructed

Operative part of the judgment

Article 13B(g) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, in conjunction with Article 4(3)(a) of the directive must be interpreted as meaning that the exemption from value added tax provided for in Article 13B(g) does not cover the supply of land still occupied by a dilapidated building that is to be demolished and replaced by a new building and whose demolition, paid for by the vendor, had already begun before the actual supply took place. For value added tax purposes, such supply and such demolition form a single transaction, given that, taken as a whole, the aim of the transactions was not to supply the existing building and the land it stands on but land that has not been built on, regardless of how far demolition of the old building had progressed at the moment the land was actually supplied.


(1)  OJ C 69 of 21.03.2009
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5626 — ADECCO/SPRING) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2009-11-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: United Kingdom, disclosure of information, economic concentration, merger control, provision of services, recruitment, restrictive-practice authorisation, staff








C_2009279EN.01000402.xml










19.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 279/4





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.5626 — ADECCO/SPRING)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2009/C 279/03
On 16 October 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:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/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 (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32009M5626. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Sixty-second amendment of the State aid Guidelines — EFTA Surveillance Authority decision to propose appropriate measures
Date: 2009-11-19
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: EFTA, State aid, control of State aid, information, innovation, research and development, terms for aid








C_2009279EN.01002501.xml










19.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 279/25





Sixty-second amendment of the State aid Guidelines
EFTA Surveillance Authority decision to propose appropriate measures
2009/C 279/13







Date of adoption


:


7 February 2007




EFTA State


:


Iceland
Norway
Liechtenstein




Case number


:


59185




Title


:


EFTA Surveillance Authority decision amending for the sixty-second time the procedural and substantive rules in the field of State aid — New Chapter 14 State aid for Research and Development and Innovation. Proposal for appropriate measures.




Legal basis


:


College Decision No 14/07/COL




Decision


:


The appropriate measures, proposed by the Authority and accepted by the EFTA States are as follows: to amend, where necessary such schemes in order to bring them into line with Chapter 14 within 12 months after its adoption with the following exceptions: (i) EFTA States have 24 months to introduce amendments regarding the provisions covered in point 3.1.1 of Chapter 14; (ii) the new threshold for large individual projects will apply as from the entry into force of Chapter 14; (iii) the duty to provide more detailed annual reports pursuant to point 9.1.1 and the duty to submit information sheets pursuant to point 9.1.3 will apply to existing aid schemes six months after the entry into force of Chapter 14.
Special Report No 13/2009 Delegating implementing tasks to executive agencies: a successful option?
Date: 2009-11-19
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU office or agency, European Court of Auditors, disclosure of information, operation of the Institutions, powers of the institutions (EU), report








C_2009279EN.01001201.xml










19.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 279/12





Special Report No 13/2009 ‘Delegating implementing tasks to executive agencies: a successful option?’
2009/C 279/09
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 13/2009 ‘Delegating implementing tasks to executive agencies: a successful option?’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://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




1615 Luxembourg




LUXEMBOURG




Tel. +352 4398-1




E-mail: euraud@eca.europa.eu




or by filling in an electronic order form on EU-Bookshop.
Case T-94/07: Order of the Court of First Instance of 19 November 2009 — EREF v Commission (Actions for annulment — Representation by a lawyer is not a third party — Manifestly inadmissible)
Date: 2009-11-19
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: State aid, action for annulment (EU), control of State aid, credit insurance, nuclear power station








C_2010024EN.01005201.xml










30.1.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/52





Order of the Court of First Instance of 19 November 2009 — EREF v Commission
(Case T-94/07) (1)

(Actions for annulment - Representation by a lawyer is not a third party - Manifestly inadmissible)
2010/C 24/91
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Renewable Energies Federation (EREF) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: D. Fouquet, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: N. Khan, acting as Agent)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C (2006) 4963 final of 24 October 2006, concerning a Syndicated loan and bilateral loan for the construction by Framatome ANP of a nuclear power station for Teollisuuden Voima Oy.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2.


European Renewable Energies Federation ASBL (EREF) must bear its own costs and those incurred by the Commission of the European Communities.






(1)  OJ C 117 of 29.5.2007.
Case T-40/08: Order of the Court of First Instance of 19 November 2009 — EREF v Commission (Action for annulment — Representation by a lawyer who is not a third party — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2009-11-19
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, Finland, State aid, action for annulment (EU), control of State aid, credit insurance, nuclear power station








C_2010024EN.01005202.xml










30.1.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/52





Order of the Court of First Instance of 19 November 2009 — EREF v Commission
(Case T-40/08) (1)

(Action for annulment - Representation by a lawyer who is not a third party - Inadmissibility)
2010/C 24/92
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Renewable Energies Federation ASBL (EREF) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: D. Fouquet, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: N. Kahn and B. Martenczuk, Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Commission Decision C (2007) 4323 final of 25 September 2007 concerning the measure C 45/2006 implemented by France in the context of the construction by Areva NP of a nuclear power plant for Teollisuuden Voima Oy.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible;










2.


European Renewable Energies Federation ASBL (EREF) shall bear its own costs and pay those of the Commission of the European Communities;










3.


It is not necessary to decide on the applications for leave to intervene brought by the French Republic, the Republic of Finland, Greenpeace France and Greenpeace Nordic.






(1)  OJ C 107, 26.4.2008.
Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EC) No 508/1999 of 4 March 1999 amending Annexes I to IV of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 laying down a Community procedure for the establishment of maximum residue limits of veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal origin ( OJ L 60, 9.3.1999 )
Date: 2009-11-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: animal product, food inspection, veterinary drug, veterinary legislation, waste








L_2009304EN.01002401.xml










19.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 304/24







Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EC) No 508/1999 of 4 March 1999 amending Annexes I to IV of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 laying down a Community procedure for the establishment of maximum residue limits of veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal origin
(
Official Journal of the European Communities L 60 of 9 March 1999
)

On page 38, Annex II, category 2 ‘Organic compounds’, under the entry for the pharmacologically active substance Rifaximin, third column ‘Other provisions’:
for:

               ‘For intramammary use, except if the udder may be used as food for human consumption’,
read:

               ‘For intramammary use, except if the udder may be used as food for human consumption, and intrauterine use only’.
Case C-450/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Niedersächsisches Finanzgericht (Germany) lodged on 19 November 2009 — Ulrich Schröder v Finanzamt Hameln
Date: 2009-11-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, interpretation of the law, property tax, tax on income, tax relief, tax system








C_2010037EN.01000301.xml










13.2.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 37/3





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Niedersächsisches Finanzgericht (Germany) lodged on 19 November 2009 — Ulrich Schröder v Finanzamt Hameln
(Case C-450/09)
2010/C 37/04
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Niedersächsisches Finanzgericht

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Ulrich Schröder

Defendant: Finanzamt Hameln

Question referred

The following question is referred, pursuant to Article 234(3) EC, for a preliminary ruling:
Is a situation where a relative with domestically limited tax liability, unlike a person with unlimited tax liability, may not deduct from his total income, as special expenditure, annuities paid in connection with income from letting or leasing, contrary to Articles 56 and 12 EC?
Case T-298/06: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 19 November 2009 — Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v OHIM (1000) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark 1000 — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
Date: 2009-11-19
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2010011EN.01002202.xml










16.1.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 11/22





Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 19 November 2009 — Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v OHIM (1000)
(Case T-298/06) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark 1000 - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2010/C 11/41
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol sp. z o.o. (Częstochowa, Poland) (represented by: V. von Bomhard, A. Renck and T. Dolde, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 August 2006 (Case R 447/2006-4), relating to the application for registration of the word mark 1000 as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 310, 16.12.2006.
Case T-334/07: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 19 November 2009 — Denka International v Commission (Plant-protection products — Active substance dichlorvos — Non-inclusion in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC — Evaluation procedure — Opinion of an EFSA Scientific Panel — Plea of illegality — Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 1490/2002 — Submission of new studies and data during the evaluation procedure — Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 451/2000 — Article 28(1) of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 — Legitimate expectations — Proportionality — Equal treatment — Principle of sound administration — Rights of the defence — Principle of subsidiarity — Article 95(3) EC and Articles 4(1) and 5(1) of Directive 91/414)
Date: 2009-11-19
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), dangerous substance, marketing restriction, pharmaceutical product, plant health legislation, plant health product, withdrawal from the market








C_2010011EN.01002302.xml










16.1.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 11/23





Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 19 November 2009 — Denka International v Commission
(Case T-334/07) (1)

(Plant-protection products - Active substance dichlorvos - Non-inclusion in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC - Evaluation procedure - Opinion of an EFSA Scientific Panel - Plea of illegality - Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 1490/2002 - Submission of new studies and data during the evaluation procedure - Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 451/2000 - Article 28(1) of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 - Legitimate expectations - Proportionality - Equal treatment - Principle of sound administration - Rights of the defence - Principle of subsidiarity - Article 95(3) EC and Articles 4(1) and 5(1) of Directive 91/414)
2010/C 11/44
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Denka International BV (Barneveld, Netherlands) (represented by: C. Mereu and K. Van Maldegem, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: B. Doherty and L. Parpala, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2007/387/EC of 6 June 2007 concerning the non-inclusion of dichlorvos in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC and the withdrawal of authorisations for plant protection products containing that substance (OJ 2007 L 145, p. 16)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Denka International BV to bear its own costs and to pay those of the Commission of the European Communities.






(1)  OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5708 — KKR/General Atlantic/TASC) — Candidate case for simplified procedure Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2009-11-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: consultancy, economic concentration, exchange of information, financial management, financial services, investment company, merger control, public safety, share








C_2009279EN.01003001.xml










19.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 279/30





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.5708 — KKR/General Atlantic/TASC)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2009/C 279/16






1.


On 11 November 2009, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which KKR & Co. L.P. (together with its affiliates, ‘KKR’, USA) and General Atlantic LLC (‘GA’, USA) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation joint control over TASC Inc. (USA) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


KKR: global alternative asset manager, which offers a broad range of alternative asset management services to public and private market investors and provides capital markets solutions for the firm, its portfolio companies and clients,










—


GA: general partner of a leading global growth equity firm providing capital and strategic support for growth companies (‘GA Group’),










—


TASC: active in the provision of analytical and advisory services to various agencies of the US Government in the field of defense and national security.














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. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.










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 22964301 or 22967244) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5708 — KKR/General Atlantic/TASC, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

(2)  OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32.
Joined Cases T-200/07 to T-202/07: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 19 November 2009 — Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v OHIM (222, 333 and 555) (Community trade mark — Applications for Community word marks 222, 333 and 555 — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
Date: 2009-11-19
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), document, trade-mark law, user guide








C_2010011EN.01002301.xml










16.1.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 11/23





Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 19 November 2009 — Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v OHIM (222, 333 and 555)
(Joined Cases T-200/07 to T-202/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Applications for Community word marks 222, 333 and 555 - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2010/C 11/43
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol sp. z o.o. (Częstochowa, Poland) (represented by: D. Rzążewska, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: O. Montalto and K. Zajfert, Agents)

Re:

Three actions brought against the decisions of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 March 2007 (Cases R 1276/2006-4, R 1277/2006-4 and R 1278/2006-4), concerning the applications for registration of the word marks 222, 333 and 555 as Community trade marks.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the actions;










2.


Orders Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 183, 4.8.2007.