do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-429/05: Judgment of the General Court of 3 March 2010 — Artegodan v Commission (Non-contractual liability — Medicinal products for human use — Decision requiring the withdrawal of marketing authorisations — Annulment of the decision by a judgment of the Court of First Instance — Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals)
Date: 2010-03-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EC action to establish liability, European Commission, indemnification, market approval, medicinal product, pharmaceutical industry








C_2010100EN.01003602.xml










17.4.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 100/36





Judgment of the General Court of 3 March 2010 — Artegodan v Commission
(Case T-429/05) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Medicinal products for human use - Decision requiring the withdrawal of marketing authorisations - Annulment of the decision by a judgment of the Court of First Instance - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals)
2010/C 100/55
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Artegodan GmbH (Lüchow, Germany) (represented by: U. Doepner, then A. Lensing-Kramer and subsequently by U. Reese and A. Sandrock, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Stromsky and M. Heller)

Intervening in support of the form of order sought by the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: M. Lumma and U. Forsthoff, Agents)

Re:

Application for compensation under Article 235 EC and the second paragraph of Article 288 EC for damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the adoption of Commission Decision C (2000) 453 of 9 March 2000 concerning the withdrawal of marketing authorisations for medicinal products for human use containing amfepramone

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders Artegodan GmhH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.










3.


Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 48, 25.2.2006.
Case T-321/07: Judgment of the General Court of 3 March 2010 — Lufthansa AirPlus Servicekarten v OHIM — Applus Servicios Tecnológicos (A+) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark A+ — Earlier Community word mark AirPlus International — Relative grounds for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Lack of similarity between the signs — Duty to state reasons — Rights of the defence — Articles 8(1)(b) and (5), 73, 74 and 79 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Articles 8(1)(b) and (5), 75, 76 and 83 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
Date: 2010-03-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), air transport, trade-mark law








C_2010100EN.01003801.xml










17.4.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 100/38





Judgment of the General Court of 3 March 2010 — Lufthansa AirPlus Servicekarten v OHIM — Applus Servicios Tecnológicos (A+)
(Case T-321/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark A+ - Earlier Community word mark AirPlus International - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Lack of similarity between the signs - Duty to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Articles 8(1)(b) and (5), 73, 74 and 79 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Articles 8(1)(b) and (5), 75, 76 and 83 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2010/C 100/58
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Lufthansa AirPlus Servicekarten GmbH (Neu-Isenburg, Germany) (represented by G. Würtenberger, R. Kunze and T. Wittman, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court: Applus Servicios Tecnológicos, SL (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by E. Torner Lasalle, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 June 2007 (Case R 310/2006-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Lufthansa AirPlus Servicekarten GmbH and Applus Servicios Tecnológicos, SL.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders Lufthansa AirPlus Servicekarten GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 182/2010 of 3 March 2010 entering a name in the register of traditional specialities guaranteed (Belokranjska pogača (TSG))
Date: 2010-03-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Slovenia, biscuit factory, brand name, confectionery product, pastry-making, product designation








L_2010053EN.01000101.xml










4.3.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 53/1








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 182/2010
of 3 March 2010
         
entering a name in the register of traditional specialities guaranteed (Belokranjska pogača (TSG))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 509/2006 of 20 March 2006 on agricultural products and foodstuffs as traditional specialities guaranteed (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 9(4) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


In accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 8(2) of Regulation (EC) No 509/2006, and pursuant to Article 19(3) of the same Regulation, the application submitted by Slovenia to register the name ‘Belokranjska pogača’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no objection pursuant to Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 509/2006 has been received by the Commission, this name should be entered in the register.












(3)


The application also requested protection pursuant to Article 13(2) of Regulation (EC) No 509/2006. That protection should be granted to the name ‘Belokranjska pogača’ in so far as, in the absence of objections, it could not be demonstrated that the name is used in a lawful, renowned and economically significant manner for similar agricultural products or foodstuffs,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.
Protection as referred to in Article 13(2) of Regulation (EC) No 509/2006 shall apply.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following 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, 3 March 2010.


For the Commission


The President

José Manuel BARROSO
            





(1)  
            OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ C 137, 17.6.2009, p. 19.




ANNEX
Foodstuffs referred to in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 509/2006:

Class 2.3.   Confectionery, bread, pastry, cakes, biscuits and other baker’s wares

SLOVENIA
Belokranjska pogača (TSG)
The use of the name is reserved.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 183/2010 of 3 March 2010 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2010-03-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit








L_2010053EN.01000301.xml










4.3.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 53/3








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 183/2010
of 3 March 2010
         
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables


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),


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 4 March 2010.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 3 March 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 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 


JO 


67,6 




MA 


114,4 




TN 


135,3 




TR 


129,4 




ZZ 


111,7 




0707 00 05 


EG 


211,5 




JO 


145,3 




MK 


147,9 




TR 


154,5 




ZZ 


164,8 




0709 90 70 


MA 


135,4 




TR 


90,4 




ZZ 


112,9 




0709 90 80 


EG 


40,8 




ZZ 


40,8 




0805 10 20 


CL 


52,4 




EG 


44,1 




IL 


56,9 




MA 


47,1 




TN 


55,1 




TR 


46,3 




ZZ 


50,3 




0805 50 10 


EG 


76,3 




IL 


76,3 




MA 


59,9 




TR 


74,0 




ZZ 


71,6 




0808 10 80 


CA 


76,4 




CN 


69,3 




MK 


24,7 




US 


98,2 




ZZ 


67,2 




0808 20 50 


AR 


82,2 




CL 


188,1 




CN 


54,8 




US 


95,6 




ZA 


90,3 




ZZ 


102,2 






(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’.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5804 — Samsung Electronics Co/Samsung Digital Imaging Co) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2010-03-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, exchange of information, household electrical appliance, information technology, information technology industry, marketing, merger control, mobile phone, photographic industry








C_2010053EN.01000901.xml










3.3.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/9





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.5804 — Samsung Electronics Co/Samsung Digital Imaging Co)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2010/C 53/05






1.


On 24 February 2010, 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 Samsung Electronics Co, Ltd (‘SEC’, South Korea) enters into a full merger within the meaning of Article 3(1)(a) of the EC Merger Regulation with the undertaking Samsung Digital Imaging Co, Ltd (‘SDIC’, South Korea).










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for undertaking SEC: manufacture and sale of household appliances, mobiles phones and communication systems, semi-conductors and LCD display panels,










—


for undertaking SDIC: development, manufacture and sale of digital cameras.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope the EC Merger Regulation. 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 22964301), by e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5804 — Samsung Electronics Co/Samsung Digital Imaging Co, 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 (the ‘EC Merger Regulation’).
Case T-163/05: Judgment of the General Court of 3 March 2010 — Bundesverband deutscher Banken v Commission (State aid — Transfer of public assets to Landesbank Hessen-Thüringen Girozentrale — Decision declaring the aid to be, in part, incompatible with the common market and ordering its recovery — Private investor test — Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based)
Date: 2010-03-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, Germany, State aid, action for annulment (EU), bank, capital movement, control of State aid, share capital, tax relief








C_2010100EN.01003601.xml










17.4.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 100/36





Judgment of the General Court of 3 March 2010 — Bundesverband deutscher Banken v Commission
(Case T-163/05) (1)

(State aid - Transfer of public assets to Landesbank Hessen-Thüringen Girozentrale - Decision declaring the aid to be, in part, incompatible with the common market and ordering its recovery - Private investor test - Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based)
2010/C 100/54
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Bundesverband deutscher Banken eV (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: H.-J. Niemeyer, K.-S. Scholz and J.-O. Lenschow, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: N. Khan and T. Scharf, Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by M. Lumma and C. Schulze-Bahr, acting as Agents, and by J. Witting, lawyer); Land Hessen (Germany) (represented initially by H.-J. Freund and M. Holzhäuser, and subsequently by H.-J. Freund and S. Lehr, lawyers); and Landesbank Hessen-Thüringen Girozentrale (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by H.-J. Freund, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2006/742/EC of 20 October 2004 on aid granted by Germany [to] Landesbank Hessen-Thüringen — Girozentrale (OJ 2006 L 307, p. 159)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Orders the documents produced by the Bundesverband deutscher Banken eV at Annexes 9 and 10 to the reply to be removed from the file;










2.


Dismisses the application;










3.


Orders the Bundesverband deutscher Banken to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission, the Land Hessen and Landesbank Hessen-Thüringen Girozentrale;










4.


Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 155, 25.6.2005.
Case C-114/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg, Brussels lodged on 3 March 2010 — Belpolis Benelux SA v Belgische Staat
Date: 2010-03-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, VAT, VAT rate, interpretation of the law, provision of services








C_2010134EN.01002201.xml










22.5.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 134/22





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg, Brussels lodged on 3 March 2010 — Belpolis Benelux SA v Belgische Staat
(Case C-114/10)
2010/C 134/33
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank van eerste aanleg, Brussels

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Belpolis Benelux SA

Defendant: Belgische Staat

Question referred







1.


Does Community law, in particular the principle of the freedom to provide services as laid down in Article 56 TFEU, preclude rules such as those laid down in Articles 1 and 1a of Belgian Royal Decree No 20 of 20 July 1970, under which the reduced rate of VAT (6 %) may be applied to construction work only if the service provider is registered in Belgium as a contractor in accordance with Articles 400 and 401 of the Wetboek van Inkomstenbelastingen (Belgian Income Tax Code) 1992?










2.


Do the provisions contained in Article 1 and 1a of Royal Decree No 20 of 20 July 1970 contravene the principle of fiscal neutrality and/or the general Community law principle of equal treatment by allowing the reduced rate of VAT (6 %) on construction work to apply only if the service provider is registered as a contractor in Belgium in accordance with Articles 400 and 401 of the Belgian Income Tax Code 1992?
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5755 — Schneider Electric/Areva T&D Distribution activities) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2010-03-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electrical energy, energy distribution, energy policy, exchange of information, management, merger control








C_2010053EN.01001201.xml










3.3.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/12





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.5755 — Schneider Electric/Areva T&D Distribution activities)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2010/C 53/08






1.


On 22 February 2010, 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 Schneider Electric Industries SAS (‘SE’, France), controlled by Schneider Electric Holding SA (‘SE Holding’, France), acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the EC Merger Regulation sole control of the distribution (medium voltage) activities of Areva T&D Holding SA (‘Areva T&D’, France), controlled by Areva (‘Areva’, France) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for SE: design, manufacture and sale of products and systems in energy management,










—


for Areva T&D (MV activities): provision of products, systems and services that assist in the transmission and distribution of medium voltage electrical power.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope the EC Merger Regulation. 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 22964301), by e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5755 — Schneider Electric/Areva T&D Distribution activities, 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 (the ‘EC Merger Regulation’).
Joined Cases T-102/07 and T-120/07: Judgment of the General Court of 3 March 2010 — Freistaat Sachsen and Others v Commission (State aid — Aid granted by Germany in the form of a participation and loan guarantees — Decision declaring aid incompatible with the common market — General aid scheme approved by the Commission — Concept of a firm in difficulty — Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty — Amount of aid — Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based)
Date: 2010-03-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, Germany, State aid, action for annulment (EU), aid to undertakings, company in difficulties, control of State aid








C_2010100EN.01003702.xml










17.4.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 100/37





Judgment of the General Court of 3 March 2010 — Freistaat Sachsen and Others v Commission
(Joined Cases T-102/07 and T-120/07) (1)

(State aid - Aid granted by Germany in the form of a participation and loan guarantees - Decision declaring aid incompatible with the common market - General aid scheme approved by the Commission - Concept of a firm in difficulty - Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty - Amount of aid - Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based)
2010/C 100/57
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicants: Freistaat Sachsen (Germany) (represented by: C. von Donat and G. Quardt, lawyers) (Case T-102/07), MB Immobilien Verwaltungs GmbH (Neukirch, Germany) (represented initially by: G. Brüggen, and subsequently by A. Seidl, K. Lengert and W. Sommer, lawyers) and MB System GmbH & Co. KG, (Nordhausen, Germany) (represented by: G. Brüggen, lawyer) (Case T-120/07)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Gross and T. Scharf, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2007/492/EC of 24 January 2007 on the State aid C 38/2005 (ex NN 52/2004) implemented by Germany for the Biria Group (OJ 2007 L 183, p. 27)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Commission Decision 2007/492/EC of 24 January 2007 on the State aid C 38/2005 (ex NN 52/2004) implemented by Germany for the Biria Group.










2.


Orders the Commission to pay the costs, including those relating to the interim proceedings in Case T-120/07.






(1)  OJ C 129, 9.6.2007.