do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-373/08: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 11 February 2010 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Hoesch Metals and Alloys GmbH v Hauptzollamt Aachen (Community Customs Code — Article 24 — Non-preferential origin of goods — Origin-conferring processing or working — Silicon blocks originating in China — Separation, crushing and purification of the blocks and the sieving, sorting by size and packaging of the grains in India — Dumping — Validity of Regulation (EC) No 398/2004)
Date: 2010-02-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, customs regulations, interpretation of the law, originating product, semi-metal








C_2010080EN.01000201.xml










27.3.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 80/2





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 11 February 2010 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Hoesch Metals and Alloys GmbH v Hauptzollamt Aachen
(Case C-373/08) (1)

(Community Customs Code - Article 24 - Non-preferential origin of goods - Origin-conferring processing or working - Silicon blocks originating in China - Separation, crushing and purification of the blocks and the sieving, sorting by size and packaging of the grains in India - Dumping - Validity of Regulation (EC) No 398/2004)
2010/C 80/03
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Hoesch Metals and Alloys GmbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Aachen

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) — Interpretation of Article 24 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1) — Validity of Council Regulation (EC) No 398/2004 of 2 March 2004 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of silicon originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2004 L 66, p. 15) — Meaning of ‘substantial processing or working’ conferring origin on a product — Cleaning and crushing of silicon metal blocks originating in China and sorting, separating and packaging of the silicon grains thus obtained

Operative part of the judgment







1.


The separation, crushing and purification of silicon metal blocks and the subsequent sieving, sorting and packaging of the silicon grains resulting from the crushing, as carried out in the main proceedings, do not constitute origin-conferring processing or working for the purposes of Article 24 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code.










2.


The examination of the second question raised by the referring court has not revealed any factors of such a kind as to affect the validity of Council Regulation (EC) No 398/2004 of 2 March 2004 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of silicon originating in the People’s Republic of China.






(1)  OJ C 272, 25.10.2008.
International recovery of child support and other forms of family maintenance * European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2010 on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion by the European Community of the Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance (COM(2009)0373 – C7-0156/2009 – 2009/0100(NLE))
Date: 2010-02-11
Institutions: Committee on Legal Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: European convention, breadwinner, family, human nutrition, maintenance obligation, marital status, tax collection, tax system








CE2010341EN.01009801.xml










16.12.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 341/98





Thursday 11 February 2010International recovery of child support and other forms of family maintenance *
P7_TA(2010)0027
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2010 on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion by the European Community of the Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance (COM(2009)0373 – C7-0156/2009 – 2009/0100(NLE))
2010/C 341 E/23
(Consultation)

The European Parliament,
having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2009)0373),
having regard to Articles 61(c) 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 (C7-0156/2009),
having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council entitled ‘Consequences of the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon for ongoing interinstitutional decision-making procedures’ (COM(2009)0665),
having regard to Articles 81(3) and 218(6)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU,
having regard to Rules 55 and 90(8) of its Rules of Procedure,
having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A7-0005/2010),






1.


Approves conclusion of the Convention;










2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2010-02-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2010034EN.01000101.xml










11.2.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 34/1





Euro exchange rates (1)

10 February 2010
2010/C 34/01

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3740




JPY


Japanese yen


123,01




DKK


Danish krone


7,4449




GBP


Pound sterling


0,87980




SEK


Swedish krona


10,0335




CHF


Swiss franc


1,4658




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,1110




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


26,108




EEK


Estonian kroon


15,6466




HUF


Hungarian forint


271,55




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7091




PLN


Polish zloty


4,0663




RON


Romanian leu


4,1180




TRY


Turkish lira


2,0791




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5700




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4667




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,6766




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,9827




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,9483




KRW


South Korean won


1 591,64




ZAR


South African rand


10,5998




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


9,3847




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,3230




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 871,34




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7149




PHP


Philippine peso


63,800




RUB


Russian rouble


41,5800




THB


Thai baht


45,576




BRL


Brazilian real


2,5411




MXN


Mexican peso


17,9438




INR


Indian rupee


63,8840






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-58/10: Action brought on 11 February 2010 — Phoenix-Reisen and DRV v Commission
Date: 2010-02-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, Germany, State aid, action for annulment (EU), control of State aid, financial solvency








C_2010113EN.01004901.xml










1.5.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 113/49





Action brought on 11 February 2010 — Phoenix-Reisen and DRV v Commission
(Case T-58/10)
2010/C 113/79
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicants: Phoenix-Reisen GmbH (Bonn, Germany) and Deutscher Reiseverband eV (DRV) (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: R. Gerharz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Annul the defendant’s decision of 20 November 2009, notified by letter of 11 December 2009, by which it refused to take action against State aid granted by the Federal Republic of Germany in the form of insolvency payments;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants’ action is directed against Commission Decision C(2009) 8707 final of 19 November 2009 concerning State aid NN 55/2009 — Germany; alleged State aid in the form of insolvency payments and the financing thereof. The Commission came to the conclusion in that decision that the measure in question does not constitute State aid for the purposes of Article 87(1) EC.
In support of their claim, the applicants maintain that the subsidisation of insolvent undertakings cannot be justified on the basis of Directive 80/987/EEC (1) as it serves solely to protect the employees of the insolvent undertaking, not the undertaking itself. The applicants take the view that the legal practice applied in the Federal Republic of Germany is such that insolvent undertakings profit directly from insolvency payments. Furthermore, the applicants submit that examples from other countries in the Community show that Directive 80/987/EEC can be transposed without competitors being unlawfully subsidised as a result.


(1)  Council Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 October 1980 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer (OJ 1980 L 283, p. 23).
Case C-83/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil de Pontevedra (Spain) lodged on 11 February 2010 — Aurora Sousa Rodriguez y otros v Air France S.A.
Date: 2010-02-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air transport, approximation of laws, carrier, consumer protection, indemnification, interpretation of the law








C_2010113EN.01002401.xml










1.5.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 113/24





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil de Pontevedra (Spain) lodged on 11 February 2010 — Aurora Sousa Rodriguez y otros v Air France S.A.
(Case C-83/10)
2010/C 113/37
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Mercantil de Pontevedra

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Aurora Sousa Rodríguez, Yago López Sousa, Rodrigo Puga Lueiro, Luis Rodríguez González, María del Mar Pato Barreiro, Manuel López Alonso, Yaiza Pato Rodríguez

Defendant: Air France S.A.

Questions referred







1.


Is the term ‘cancellation’, defined in Article 2(l) of [Regulation EC No 261/2004], (1) to be interpreted as meaning only the failure of the flight to depart as planned or is it also to be interpreted as meaning any circumstance as a result of which the flight on which places are reserved takes off but fails to reach its destination, including the case in which the flight is forced to return to the airport of departure for technical reasons?










2.


Is the term ‘further compensation’ used in Article 12 of the regulation to be interpreted as meaning that, in the event of a cancellation, the national court may award compensation for damage, including non-material damage, for breach of a contract of carriage by air in accordance with rules established in national legislation and case-law on breach of contact or, on the contrary, must such compensation relate solely to appropriately substantiated expenses incurred by passengers and not adequately indemnified by the carrier in accordance with the requirements of Articles 8 and 9 of Regulation 261/2004/EC, even if such provisions have not been expressly relied upon or, lastly, are the two aforementioned definitions of the term further compensation compatible one with another?






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (Text with EEA relevance) — Commission Statement (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).
Commission Regulation (EU) No 125/2010 of 11 February 2010 fixing the maximum reduction in the duty on maize imported under the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 676/2009
Date: 2010-02-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: CCT duties, Spain, award of contract, import, maize, tariff quota, tariff reduction, third country








L_2010039EN.01000301.xml










12.2.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 39/3








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 125/2010
of 11 February 2010
         
fixing the maximum reduction in the duty on maize imported under the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 676/2009


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


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)


An invitation to tender for the maximum reduction in the duty on maize imported into Spain from third countries was opened by Commission Regulation (EC) No 676/2009 (2).












(2)


Under Article 8 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1296/2008 of 18 December 2008 laying down detailed rules for the application of tariff quotas for imports of maize and sorghum into Spain and imports of maize into Portugal (3) the Commission, in accordance the procedure laid down in Article 195(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, may decide to fix a maximum reduction in the import duty. In fixing this maximum the criteria provided for in Articles 7 and 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1296/2008 must be taken into account.












(3)


A contract is awarded to any tenderer whose tender is equal to or less than the maximum reduction in the duty.












(4)


The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
For tenders lodged from 29 January to 11 February 2010 under the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 676/2009, the maximum reduction in the duty on maize imported shall be 19,61 EUR/t for a total maximum quantity of 8 000 t.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 12 February 2010.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 11 February 2010.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,

Jean-Luc DEMARTY
            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development






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

(2)  
            OJ L 196, 28.7.2009, p. 6.

(3)  
            OJ L 340, 19.12.2008, p. 57.
Case C-523/08: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 11 February 2010 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 2005/71/EC — Specific procedure for admitting third-country nationals for the purposes of scientific research — Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)
Date: 2010-02-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Spain, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, fine, foreign national, free movement of persons, third country








C_2010080EN.01000301.xml










27.3.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 80/3





Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 11 February 2010 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain
(Case C-523/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2005/71/EC - Specific procedure for admitting third-country nationals for the purposes of scientific research - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)
2010/C 80/05
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: M. Condou-Durande and M.-A. Rabanal Suárez, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: B. Plaza Cruz, acting as Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt within the prescribed period the provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2005/71/EC of 12 October 2005 on a specific procedure for admitting third-country nationals for the purposes of scientific research (OJ 2005 L 289, p. 15)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2005/71/EC of 12 October 2005 on a specific procedure for admitting third-country nationals for the purposes of scientific research, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;










2.


Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 19, 24.01.2009.
Case T-289/08: Judgment of the General Court of 11 February 2010 — Deutsche BKK v OHIM (Deutsche BKK) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark Deutsche BKK — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character and no distinctive character — No distinctive character acquired through use — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) — Article 73 and Article 74(1), first sentence, of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 75 and Article 76(1), first sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009))
Date: 2010-02-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), health insurance, insurance company, trade-mark law








C_2010080EN.01002402.xml










27.3.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 80/24





Judgment of the General Court of 11 February 2010 — Deutsche BKK v OHIM (Deutsche BKK)
(Case T-289/08) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark Deutsche BKK - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character and no distinctive character - No distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) - Article 73 and Article 74(1), first sentence, of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 75 and Article 76(1), first sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009))
2010/C 80/42
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Deutsche BKK (Wolfsburg, Germany) (represented by: H.-P. Schrammek, C. Drzymalla and S. Risthaus, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: B. Schmidt, Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 May 2008 (Case R 318/2008-4) concerning an application for registration of the word mark ‘Deutsche BKK’ as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Deutsche Betriebskrankenkasse (Deutsche BKK) to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 247, 27.9.2008.
Public holidays in 2010: EEA EFTA States and EEA institutions
Date: 2010-02-11
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: EFTA, EFTA Court, EFTA countries, public holiday








C_2010034EN.01000201.xml










11.2.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 34/2





Public holidays in 2010: EEA EFTA States and EEA institutions
2010/C 34/02










2010


Iceland


Liechtenstein


Norway


EFTA Surveillance Authority


EFTA Court




1 January


X


X


X


X


X




2 January


 


X


 


 


 




6 January


 


X


 


 


 




2 February


 


X


 


 


 




19 March


 


X


 


 


 




1 April


X


 


X


 


 




2 April


X


X


X


X


 




5 April


X


X


X


X


X




22 April


X


 


 


 


 




1 May


X


X


X


X


X




13 May


X


X


X


X


X




14 May


 


 


 


X


 




17 May


 


 


X


 


 




24 May


X


X


X


X


X




3 June


 


X


 


 


 




17 June


X


 


 


 


 




23 June


 


 


 


 


X




2 August


X


 


 


 


 




8 September


 


X


 


 


 




1 November


 


X


 


X


X




8 December


 


X


 


 


 




25 December


X


X


X


X


X




26 December


X


X


X


X


X




31 December


 


X
Amendment of Council Regulation (EC) No 1085/2006 of 17 July 2006 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) ***I European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2010 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1085/2006 of 17 July 2006 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) (COM(2009)0588 – C7-0279/2009 – 2009/0163(COD))#P7_TC1-COD(2009)0163 Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 February 2010 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No …/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1085/2006 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA)
Date: 2010-02-11
Institutions: Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: EU aid, EU financing, Iceland, accession to the European Union, pre-accession strategy








CE2010341EN.01009701.xml










16.12.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 341/97





Thursday 11 February 2010Amendment of Council Regulation (EC) No 1085/2006 of 17 July 2006 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) ***I
P7_TA(2010)0026
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2010 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1085/2006 of 17 July 2006 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) (COM(2009)0588 – C7-0279/2009 – 2009/0163(COD))
2010/C 341 E/22
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,
having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2009)0588),
having regard to Article 181a of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7-0279/2009),
having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council entitled ‘Consequences of the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon for ongoing interinstitutional decision-making procedures’ (COM(2009)0665),
having regard to Article 294(3) and Article 212(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU,
having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,
having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A7-0003/2010),






1.


Adopts the position at first reading hereinafter set out;










2.


Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;










3.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, to the Commission and to the national parliaments.






Thursday 11 February 2010P7_TC1-COD(2009)0163
Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 February 2010 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No …/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1085/2006 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA)

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 540/2010.)