do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-545/08: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 6 May 2010 — European Commission v Republic of Poland (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Electronic communications — Directives 2002/21/EC and 2002/22/EC — High-speed internet access provider — Obligation to obtain authorisation for the access tariffs to high-speed internet services and to fix those tariffs on the basis of the costs of the provision of such services — No market analysis)
Date: 2010-05-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Poland, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, market, provision of services








C_2010179EN.01000801.xml










3.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 179/8






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 6 May 2010 — European Commission v Republic of Poland
(Case C-545/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Electronic communications - Directives 2002/21/EC and 2002/22/EC - High-speed internet access provider - Obligation to obtain authorisation for the access tariffs to high-speed internet services and to fix those tariffs on the basis of the costs of the provision of such services - No market analysis)
(2010/C 179/11)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: A. Nijenhuis and K. Mojzesowicz, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Poland (represented by: M. Dowgielewicz and M. Szpunar, acting as Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 16 and 17 of Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive)(OJ 2002 L 108, p. 51), and Articles 16 and 27 of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive) (OJ 2002 L 108, p. 33) — Imposing on an operator a requirement to obtain authorisation for the tariff for providing retail access services to high-speed internet without a market analysis having been carried out.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


By regulating retail tariffs for access to high-speed internet without carrying out a prior market analysis, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations Articles 16 and 17 of Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive) and Articles 16 and 27 of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive);










2.


Orders the Republic of Poland to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 82 of 4.4.2009
Corrigendum to Commission Directive 2010/17/EU of 9 March 2010 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC to include malathion as active substance ( OJ L 60, 10.3.2010 )
Date: 2010-05-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: chemical product, food safety, health risk, marketing standard, pharmaceutical product, plant health legislation, plant health product, toxic substance








L_2010113EN.01005801.xml










6.5.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 113/58







Corrigendum to Commission Directive 2010/17/EU of 9 March 2010 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC to include malathion as active substance
(
Official Journal of the European Union L 60 of 10 March 2010
)

On page 19, in the Annex, in the column ‘Expiration of inclusion’, the following date is added:‘30 April 2020’.
Case C-63/09: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 6 May 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n °4 de Barcelona — Spain) — Axel Walz v Clickair S.A. (Air transport — Montreal Convention — Liability of carriers in respect of checked baggage — Article 22(2) — Limits of liability in case of destruction, loss, damage or delay of baggage — Concept of ‘damage’ — Material and non-material damage)
Date: 2010-05-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Spain, air transport, damages, interpretation of the law, personal effects, transport regulations








C_2010179EN.01001001.xml










3.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 179/10






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 6 May 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil no 4 de Barcelona — Spain) — Axel Walz v Clickair S.A.
(Case C-63/09) (1)

(Air transport - Montreal Convention - Liability of carriers in respect of checked baggage - Article 22(2) - Limits of liability in case of destruction, loss, damage or delay of baggage - Concept of ‘damage’ - Material and non-material damage)
(2010/C 179/15)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Mercantil no 4 de Barcelona

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Axel Walz

Defendant: Clickair S.A.

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Juzgado de lo Mercantil no 4 (Barcelona) — Interpretation of Article 22(2) of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (Montreal Convention), (Council Decision 2001/539/EC, OJ 2001 L 194, p. 39) — Jurisdiction of the Court — Interpretation of Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2027/97 of 9 October 1997 on air carrier liability in the event of accidents (OJ 1997 L 285, p. 1) — Air carrier liability in respect of the carriage of passengers and their baggage by air — Limit of liability in case of destruction, loss, damage or delay of baggage — Material and non-material damage

Operative part of the judgment

The term ‘damage’, which underpins Article 22(2) of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air, concluded in Montreal on 28 May 1999, that sets the limit of an air carrier’s liability for the damage resulting, inter alia, from the loss of baggage, must be interpreted as including both material and non-material damage.


(1)  OJ C 102, 1.5.2009.
Case C-218/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Germany) lodged on 6 May 2010 — ADV Allround Vermittlungs AG in liquidation v Finanzamt Hamburg-Bergedorf
Date: 2010-05-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, VAT, approximation of laws, interpretation of the law, provision of services, self-employed person, self-employment, tax relief








C_2010221EN.01001601.xml










14.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/16





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Germany) lodged on 6 May 2010 — ADV Allround Vermittlungs AG in liquidation v Finanzamt Hamburg-Bergedorf
(Case C-218/10)
()
2010/C 221/25
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: ADV Allround Vermittlungs AG in liquidation

Defendant: Finanzamt Hamburg-Bergedorf

Questions referred







1.


Is the sixth indent of Article 9(2)(e) 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 (‘Directive 77/388’) (1) [subsequently, Article 56(1)(f) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, in the version in force until 31 December 2009 (‘Directive 2006/112’)] to be interpreted as meaning that ‘supply of staff’ also includes the supply of self-employed persons not in the employ of the trader providing the service?










2.


Are Articles 17(1), 17(2)(a), 17(3)(a) and 18(1)(a) of Directive 77/388 [now Articles 167, 168(a), 169(a) and 178(a) of Directive 2006/112] to be interpreted as meaning that provision must be made in national procedural law to ensure that the taxability and liability to tax of one and the same service are assessed in the same way in relation to the trader providing the service and the trader receiving it, even where the two traders fall within the jurisdiction of different tax authorities?




Only if the answer to Question 2 is in the affirmative:






3.


Are Articles 17(1), 17(2)(a), 17(3)(a) and 18(1)(a) of Directive 77/388 [now Articles 167, 168(a), 169(a) and 178(a) of Directive 2006/112] to be interpreted as meaning that the period within which the recipient of a service may apply for a deduction of the input tax connected with the service received must not expire before a decision on taxability and liability to tax which is binding on the trader providing the service has been adopted?






(1)  OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1.
Case C-572/08: Order of the President of the First Chamber of the Court of 6 May 2010 — European Commission v Italian Republic
Date: 2010-05-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: action for failure to fulfil an obligation, infringement of EU law, lubricants, tax system, used oil








C_2010234EN.01003002.xml










28.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 234/30





Order of the President of the First Chamber of the Court of 6 May 2010 — European Commission v Italian Republic
(Case C-572/08) (1)

()
2010/C 234/50
Language of the case: Italian
The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 55, 7.3.2009.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 392/2010 of 6 May 2010 granting no export refund for butter in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 619/2008
Date: 2010-05-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, butter, export refund








L_2010114EN.01001101.xml










7.5.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 114/11








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 392/2010
of 6 May 2010
         
granting no export refund for butter in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 619/2008


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 164(2), in conjunction with Article 4, thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Regulation (EC) No 619/2008 of 27 June 2008 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds concerning certain milk products (2) provides for a permanent tender.












(2)


Pursuant to Article 6 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1454/2007 of 10 December 2007 laying down common rules for establishing a tender procedure for fixing export refunds for certain agricultural products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate not to grant any refund for the tendering period ending on 4 May 2010.












(3)


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 the standing invitation to tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 619/2008, for the tendering period ending on 4 May 2010, no export refund shall be granted for the products and destinations referred to in points (a) and (b) of Article 1 and in Article 2 of that Regulation.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 7 May 2010.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 6 May 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 168, 28.6.2008, p. 20.

(3)  
            OJ L 325, 11.12.2007, p. 69.
Case T-208/10: Action brought on 6 May 2010 — Cree v OHIM (TRUEWHITE)
Date: 2010-05-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, United States, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2010179EN.01005302.xml










3.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 179/53






Action brought on 6 May 2010 — Cree v OHIM (TRUEWHITE)
(Case T-208/10)
(2010/C 179/91)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Cree Inc (Durham, USA) (represented by V. Schiller, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 17 February 2010 in Case R 985/2009-2;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘TRUEWHITE’ for goods in Classes 9 and 11.

Decision of the Examiner: Rejection of the application.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 4, Article 7(1)(b) and Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, (1) because the trade mark concerned is distinctive.
Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) and Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, (2) because the trade mark concerned is not descriptive.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).

(2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Case T-100/08 P: Order of the General Court of 6 May 2010 — Kerelov v Commission (Appeal — Civil Service — Recruitment — General competition — Refusal by the Director of EPSO to communicate to a candidate information and documents relating to the admission test — Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)
Date: 2010-05-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EPSO, European Commission, appeal, competition (EU), data processing








C_2010179EN.01003901.xml










3.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 179/39






Order of the General Court of 6 May 2010 — Kerelov v Commission
(Case T-100/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - Civil Service - Recruitment - General competition - Refusal by the Director of EPSO to communicate to a candidate information and documents relating to the admission test - Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)
(2010/C 179/67)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Georgi Kerelov (Pazardzhik, Bulgaria) (represented by: A. Kerelov, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: B. Eggers and K. Herrmann, Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Second Chamber) of 12 December 2007 in Case F-110/07 Kerelov v Commission, not published in the ECR, asking for that order to be set aside.

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Georgi Kerelov is ordered to bear his own costs and pay the costs incurred by the Commission in the context of the present proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 69 of 21.3.2009
CFP: repeal of Directive 83/515/EEC and 11 obsolete Decisions * European Parliament legislative resolution of 6 May 2009 on the proposal for a Council decision repealing Directive 83/515/EEC and 11 obsolete decisions in the field of the Common Fisheries Policy (COM(2009)0088 – C6-0094/2009 – 2009/0022(CNS))
Date: 2010-05-06
Institutions: Committee on Fisheries, European Parliament
Subjects: catch quota, fishing industry, fishing regulations, fishing rights, repeal, simplification of legislation








CE2010212EN.01024901.xml










5.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 212/249





Wednesday 6 May 2009CFP: repeal of Directive 83/515/EEC and 11 obsolete Decisions *
P6_TA(2009)0350
European Parliament legislative resolution of 6 May 2009 on the proposal for a Council decision repealing Directive 83/515/EEC and 11 obsolete decisions in the field of the Common Fisheries Policy (COM(2009)0088 – C6-0094/2009 – 2009/0022(CNS))
2010/C 212 E/35
(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,
having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2009)0088),
having regard to Article 37, Article 300(2) and the first subparagraph of Article 300(3) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6-0094/2009),
having regard to Rule 51 and Rule 43(1) of its Rules of Procedure,
having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries (A6-0203/2009),






1.


Approves the Commission proposal;










2.


Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;










3.


Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the Commission proposal substantially;










4.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 393/2010 of 6 May 2010 granting no export refund for skimmed milk powder in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 619/2008
Date: 2010-05-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, export refund, skimmed milk powder








L_2010114EN.01001201.xml










7.5.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 114/12








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 393/2010
of 6 May 2010
         
granting no export refund for skimmed milk powder in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 619/2008


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 164(2), in conjunction with Article 4, thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Regulation (EC) No 619/2008 of 27 June 2008 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds concerning certain milk products (2) provides for a standing invitation to tender procedure.












(2)


Pursuant to Article 6 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1454/2007 of 10 December 2007 laying down common rules for establishing a tender procedure for fixing export refunds for certain agricultural products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate not to grant any refund for the tendering period ending on 4 May 2010.












(3)


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 the standing invitation to tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 619/2008, for the tendering period ending on 4 May 2010, no export refund shall be granted for the product and destinations referred to in point (c) of Article 1 and in Article 2 respectively of that Regulation.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 7 May 2010.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 6 May 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 168, 28.6.2008, p. 20.

(3)  
            OJ L 325, 11.12.2007, p. 69.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2010-05-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2010117EN.01000801.xml










6.5.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 117/8





Euro exchange rates (1)

5 May 2010
2010/C 117/02

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2924




JPY


Japanese yen


122,66




DKK


Danish krone


7,4427




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85510




SEK


Swedish krona


9,6419




CHF


Swiss franc


1,4325




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,8165




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


25,878




EEK


Estonian kroon


15,6466




HUF


Hungarian forint


276,83




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7067




PLN


Polish zloty


4,0320




RON


Romanian leu


4,1713




TRY


Turkish lira


1,9606




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4250




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3280




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,0374




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,8014




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7904




KRW


South Korean won


1 453,21




ZAR


South African rand


9,8233




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,8223




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,2545




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


11 819,16




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,1751




PHP


Philippine peso


58,178




RUB


Russian rouble


38,5110




THB


Thai baht


41,790




BRL


Brazilian real


2,2866




MXN


Mexican peso


16,2789




INR


Indian rupee


58,0800






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5675 — Syngenta/Monsanto's Sunflower Seed Business) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2010-05-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agro-industry, chemical industry, economic concentration, exchange of information, merger control, seed








C_2010117EN.01002101.xml










6.5.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 117/21





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.5675 — Syngenta/Monsanto's Sunflower Seed Business)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2010/C 117/05






1.


On 28 April 2010, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration, following a referral pursuant to Article 22 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1), by which the undertaking Syngenta Crop Protection AG (‘Syngenta CP’, Switzerland) belonging to the group Syngenta AG (Switzerland) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of part of Monsanto Company's (‘Monsanto’, USA) assets pertaining to Monsanto's global hybrid sunflower seed business (‘Monsanto's sunflower seed business’) by way of purchase of assets.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


Syngenta CP is active in the agribusiness. It develops, produces and sells agrochemicals, in particular crop protection products and seeds, among other sunflower seeds and sunflower seed treatments,










—


Monsanto's sunflower seed business consists of assets pertaining to Monsanto's global hybrid sunflower business.














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.5675 — Syngenta/Monsanto's Sunflower Seed Business, 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’).