do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-377/08 P: Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2009 — Commission v Birkhoff (Appeal — Staff case — Officials — Social security — Health insurance — Reimbursement of medical expenses — Annulment at first instance of the decision refusing the prior authorisation for reimbursement of the costs of acquisition of a wheelchair — Distortion of the clear sense of evidence)
Date: 2009-12-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, action by staff, appeal, facilities for people with disabilities, health insurance, retired person








C_2010024EN.01004902.xml










30.1.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/49





Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2009 — Commission v Birkhoff
(Case T-377/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - Staff case - Officials - Social security - Health insurance - Reimbursement of medical expenses - Annulment at first instance of the decision refusing the prior authorisation for reimbursement of the costs of acquisition of a wheelchair - Distortion of the clear sense of evidence)
2010/C 24/86
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and B. Eggers, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: Gerhard Birkhoff (Weitnau, Germany) (represented by: C. Inzillo, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 8 July 2008 in Case F 76/07 Birkhoff v Commission, seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 8 July 2008 in Case F-76/07 Birkhoff v Commission, not published in the ECR;










2.


Sets aside the decision of the Settlements Office of 8 November 2006.










3.


Orders Mr Gerhard Birkhoff and the European Commission to bear their own costs in relation to the present instance.










4.


Orders the Commission to pay all the costs relating to the proceedings at first instance.






(1)  OJ C 327, 20.12.2008.
Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2009-12-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Finland, Germany, State aid, control of State aid, maritime transport, rail transport








C_2009299EN.01000501.xml










9.12.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 299/5





Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty
Cases where the Commission raises no objections
(Text with EEA relevance)
2009/C 299/02






Date of adoption of the decision


11.11.2009




Reference number of State Aid


N 300/09




Member State


Finland




Region


—




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


Valtiontuki miehistön matka- ja vaihtokustannuksiin




Legal basis


Merimieslaki 1978/423, merimiesten vuosilomalaki 1984/433 ja merityöaikalaki 1976/296.




Type of measure


Aid scheme




Objective








1.


To maintain employment in the maritime sector.










2.


To improve the competitiveness of the Finnish maritime transport industry and safeguard the Finnish flag.








Form of aid


Direct grants




Budget


EUR 1,05 million per annum




Intensity


50 %




Duration (period)


31 December 2011




Economic sectors


Maritime transport




Name and address of the granting authority







Merenkulkulaitos/Finnish Maritime Administration




Merenkulkulaitoksen Keskushallinto




Porkkalankatu 5




PL 171




FI-00181 Helsinki




SUOMI/FINLAND








Other information


—




The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:
http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/state_aids_texts_en.htm






Date of adoption of the decision


5.11.2009




Reference number of State Aid


N 324/09




Member State


Germany




Region


—




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


Förderung von Maßnahmen der Lärmminderung an bestehenden Güterwagen im Rahmen des Pilotprojekts „Leiser Rhein“




Legal basis


Allgemeine Verwaltungsvorschriften (VV-BHO) zu §§ 23, 44 Bundeshaushaltsordnung (BHO)




Type of measure


Aid scheme




Objective


Grant funding for the retrofitting of railway freight wagons with noise-reduced composite brakes (Verbundstoffbremssohlen) under the pilot project ‘Silent Rhine’




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


Total budget of EUR 20 million




Intensity


50 % (60 % SMEs; 70 % small enterprises)




Duration (period)


1 July 2009 to 31 December 2012




Economic sectors


Rail transport




Name and address of the granting authority







Eisenbahn-Bundesamt




Heinemannstraße 6




53175 Bonn




DEUTSCHLAND








Other information


—




The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:
http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/state_aids_texts_en.htm
Case C-510/09: Action brought on 9 December 2009 — European Commission v French Republic
Date: 2009-12-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, administrative order, disclosure of information, pharmaceutical product, plant health product, technical regulations, technical standard








C_2010037EN.01002401.xml










13.2.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 37/24





Action brought on 9 December 2009 — European Commission v French Republic
(Case C-510/09)
2010/C 37/29
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: M. Patakia and G. Zavvos, acting as Agents)

Defendant: French Republic

Form of order sought







—


Declare that, by not notifying at the planning stage the decree of 13 March 2006 concerning the use of unprepared blends of products referred to in Paragraph L.253-1 of the Rural Code in the context of the procedure provided for by Directive 98/34/EC of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules on Information Society services, as amended by Directive 98/48/EC of 20 July 1998 (1), the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 8(1) of that directive;










—


order the French Republic to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

By its action, the European Commission complains that the defendant did not notify it, before its adoption, of the ministerial decree at issue concerning the use of unprepared blends of phytopharmaceutical products with an agricultural value, although that decree clearly constitutes a technical rule within the meaning of Directive 98/34 and which should, on that ground, have been notified to it at the planning stage since it is not covered by the derogation under Article 10 of that directive.
According to the Commission, the defendant acknowledged the relevance of that infringement since, following the receipt of the reasoned opinion, the French authorities notified the Commission of a draft decree repealing the ministerial decree at issue and reproducing its substance. However, at the date the present action was brought, that draft decree had still not been adopted by the French authorities or, in any event, the Commission had still not been informed thereof.


(1)  Directive 98/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 July 1998 amending Directive 98/34/EC laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations (OJ 1998 L 217, p. 18).
Case C-528/08 P: Order of the Court of 9 December 2009 — Luigi Marcuccio v European Commission (Appeal — Officials — Social security — Implied refusal of a request for 100 % reimbursement of certain medical costs incurred by an official — Order of declining jurisdiction from the Civil Service Tribunal — Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)
Date: 2009-12-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: action for annulment (EU), health expenditure, ordinance, redemption, social security








C_2010100EN.01001102.xml










17.4.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 100/11





Order of the Court of 9 December 2009 — Luigi Marcuccio v European Commission
(Case C-528/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - Officials - Social security - Implied refusal of a request for 100 % reimbursement of certain medical costs incurred by an official - Order of declining jurisdiction from the Civil Service Tribunal - Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)
2010/C 100/17
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Appellant: Luigi Marcuccio (represented by: G. Cipressa, avvocato)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and C. Berardis-Kayser, Agents, and A. dal Ferro, avvocato)

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 9 September 2008 in Case T-144/08 Marcuccio v Commission, by which the Court of First Instance dismissed as inadmissible an action for annulment of the decision to refuse the appellant’s request for 100 % reimbursement of certain medical expenses, and seeking an order that the Commission pay the appellant the amount of EUR 89.56 as a supplementary reimbursement of his medical expenses or as compensation for loss.

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Mr Marcuccio shall pay the costs of the appeal.






(1)  OJ C 32, 07.02.2009.
Case T-484/08: Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2009 — Longevity Health Products v OHIM (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark Kids Vits — Earlier Community word mark VITS4KIDS — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
Date: 2009-12-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), dietary product, pharmaceutical product, trade-mark law








C_2010024EN.01005001.xml










30.1.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/50





Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2009 — Longevity Health Products v OHIM
(Case T-484/08) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark Kids Vits - Earlier Community word mark VITS4KIDS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2010/C 24/87
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Longevity Health Products, Inc. (Nassau, Bahamas) (represented by: J. Korab, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: Merck KGaA (Darmstadt, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 August 2008 (Case R 716/2007-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Merck KGaA and Longevity Health Products, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


dismisses the action;










2.


orders Longevity Health Products, Inc. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 32, 7.2.2009.
Case T-498/09 P: Appeal brought on 9 December 2009 by Petrus Kerstens against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 29 September 2009 in Case F-102/07, Kerstens v Commission
Date: 2009-12-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Civil Service Tribunal, European Commission, action for annulment (EU), administrator, equal treatment, personnel administration, staff assessment








C_2010051EN.01003501.xml










27.2.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 51/35





Appeal brought on 9 December 2009 by Petrus Kerstens against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 29 September 2009 in Case F-102/07, Kerstens v Commission
(Case T-498/09 P)
2010/C 51/67
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Petrus Kerstens (Overijse, Belgium) (represented by C. Mourato, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought by the appellant







—


Set aside the judgment under appeal;










—


Refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union;










—


Order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

By this appeal, the appellant requests the Court to set aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (CST) of 29 September 2009, delivered in Case F-102/07 Kerstens v Commission, by which the CST dismissed as unfounded an action seeking the annulment of various Commission decisions concerning the award to the applicant of directorate general priority points (PPDG) and/or priority points in recognition of additional tasks carried out in the interests of the institution (PPII) under the 2004, 2005 and 2006 promotion exercises.
In support of his appeal, the applicant submits two grounds of appeal alleging






—


that the CST erred in law in the application of the principle of equal treatment, of Article 5 of the General Provisions for implementing Article 45 of the Staff Regulations and of the criteria laid down by the director of the Office for the Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements in respect of the award of priority points for the 2005 promotion exercise under the abovementioned provision, and that the evidence was distorted;










—


that the rights of the defence were not observed in so far as the CST based its decision on an alleged extract from a 2004 Career Development Report which was not produced and could not be challenged by the parties.
Case T-481/07: Order of the General Court of 9 December 2009 — Deltalinqs and SVZ v Commission (State aid — System of aid granted by the Belgian authorities in support of inter-modal transport by inland waterways — Decision of the Commission not to object — Action for annulment brought by associations representing the interests of undertakings established in the port area of Rotterdam — Absence of any significant effect on a competitive position — Manifest inadmissibility)
Date: 2009-12-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Belgium, European Commission, Netherlands, action for annulment (EU), combined transport, economic discrimination, economic support, fishing port








C_2010037EN.01003701.xml










13.2.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 37/37





Order of the General Court of 9 December 2009 — Deltalinqs and SVZ v Commission
(Case T-481/07) (1)

(State aid - System of aid granted by the Belgian authorities in support of inter-modal transport by inland waterways - Decision of the Commission not to object - Action for annulment brought by associations representing the interests of undertakings established in the port area of Rotterdam - Absence of any significant effect on a competitive position - Manifest inadmissibility)
2010/C 37/50
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicants: Deltalinqs (Rotterdam, Netherlands) and SVZ, Havenondernemersvereninging Rotterdam (Rotterdam) (represented by: M. Meulenbelt, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Conte and S. Noë, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the form of order sought by the defendant: Vlaams Gewest (Brussels, Belgium) and Waterwegen en Zeekanaal NV (Willebroek, Belgium) (represented by: Y. van Gerven, lawyer)

Re:

Annulment of Commission Decision C (2007) 1939 final of 10 May 2007 not to object, following the preliminary examination procedure laid down in Article 88(3) EC, to the system of aid envisaged by the Vlaams Gewest (Flemish Region, Belgium) in support of inter-modal transport via inland waterways (State aid N 682/2006 — Belgium)

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2.


Deltaqings and SVZ, Havenondernemersvereninging Rotterdam shall bear their own costs and those incurred by the Commission.










3.


Vlaams Gewest and Waterwegen en Zeekanaal NV shall bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 64, 8.3.2008.
Corrigendum to Commission Decision 2009/721/EC of 24 September 2009 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) ( OJ L 257, 30.9.2009 )
Date: 2009-12-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU financing, agricultural expenditure, common agricultural policy, fund (EU)








L_2009322EN.01004002.xml










9.12.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 322/40







Corrigendum to Commission Decision 2009/721/EC of 24 September 2009 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)
(
Official Journal of the European Union L 257 of 30 September 2009
)

On page 37, Annex, in the table ‘Budget item 6711’, column ‘Masure’:
for:

               ‘Rural Development EAFRD Axis 2 (2007 DE06RPO 020)’,
read:

               ‘Rural Development EAFRD Axis 2 (2007 DE06RPO 019)’.