do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-256/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-León (Spain) lodged on 25 May 2010 — David Barcenilla Fernández v Gerardo García, S.L.
Date: 2010-05-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Spain, interpretation of the law, noise, noise level, occupational health, occupational safety








C_2010221EN.01002001.xml










14.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/20





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-León (Spain) lodged on 25 May 2010 — David Barcenilla Fernández v Gerardo García, S.L.
(Case C-256/10)
()
2010/C 221/32
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-León

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: David Barcenilla Fernández

Defendant: Gerardo García, S.L.

Questions referred







1.


Are Articles 3, 5(2), 6 and 7 of Directive 2003/10/EC (1) to be interpreted as meaning that a company in which the workers’ daily noise exposure level is above 85 dbA (measured without taking account of the effect of hearing protectors) fulfils the obligations to take preventive measures laid down in that Directive in respect of physical working conditions by providing those workers with hearing protectors so that, with the level of attenuation provided by those protectors, the workers’ daily noise exposure level is reduced to less than 80 dbA?










2.


Is Article 5(2) of Directive 2003/10/EC to be interpreted as meaning that the ‘programme of technical and/or organisational measures’ which must be adopted by a company in which the workers’ daily noise exposure level is above 85 dbA (measured without taking account of the effect of hearing protectors) is intended to reduce the noise exposure level to below 85 dbA?










3.


If question 1 is answered in the negative, does Directive 2003/10/EC preclude a national rule or judicial approach which exempts a company from making a monetary payment, which in principle it must pay to workers affected by daily noise exposure levels of over 85 dbA, because the company has provided those workers with hearing protectors whose attenuating effect causes daily exposure to remain under 80 dbA?






(1)  Directive 2003/10/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 February 2003 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (noise) (Seventeenth individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) (OJ 2003 L 42, p. 38).
Commission Regulation (EU) No 451/2010 of 25 May 2010 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2010-05-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit








L_2010127EN.01001001.xml










26.5.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 127/10








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 451/2010
of 25 May 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 26 May 2010.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 25 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 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 


MA 


65,7 




MK 


59,4 




TN 


114,9 




TR 


66,6 




ZZ 


76,7 




0707 00 05 


MA 


41,0 




MK 


59,4 




TR 


120,4 




ZZ 


73,6 




0709 90 70 


TR 


124,7 




ZZ 


124,7 




0805 10 20 


EG 


58,9 




IL 


60,4 




MA 


59,0 




PY 


48,3 




ZA 


66,7 




ZZ 


58,7 




0805 50 10 


AR 


94,8 




BO 


58,6 




BR 


117,8 




TR 


84,2 




ZA 


107,9 




ZZ 


92,7 




0808 10 80 


AR 


84,1 




BR 


78,0 




CA 


111,7 




CL 


80,1 




CN 


74,0 




MK 


31,8 




NZ 


111,6 




US 


116,0 




ZA 


84,4 




ZZ 


85,7 




0809 20 95 


TR 


367,5 




US 


328,1 




ZZ 


347,8 






(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’.
Case T-246/10: Action brought on 25 May 2010 — Industrias Francisco Ivars v OHIM — Motive (Speed reducers)
Date: 2010-05-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, action for annulment (EU), electrical engineering, trade-mark law








C_2010195EN.01003103.xml










17.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 195/31





Action brought on 25 May 2010 — Industrias Francisco Ivars v OHIM — Motive (Speed reducers)
(Case T-246/10)
2010/C 195/51
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Industrias Francisco Ivars, SL (Xeraco, Spain) (represented by: E. Caballero Oliver and A. Sanz-Bermell y Martínez, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Motive S.r.l.

Form of order sought







—


annul the contested decision and, accordingly, dismiss the opposition brought by MOTIVE S.r.l., and declare that the grant of Community Design No 000625702-001 for ‘reducers’ is well founded;










—


order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: Community Design No 625702-0001 for Reducers in Class 15/01 (Motors)).

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: Industrias Francisco Ivars, SL

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity: Motive S.r.l.

Trade mark right of applicant for the declaration: Community Design No 73952-0001

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Dismissal of the application for a declaration of invalidity

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the decision of the Cancellation Division and declaration of invalidity of the Community design concerned.

Pleas in law: Incorrect interpretation and application of Articles 4, 5 and 7 of Regulation No 6/2002 on Community designs.
2010/303/: Council Decision of 25 May 2010 appointing one Danish member of the Committee of the Regions
Date: 2010-05-25
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Committee of the Regions, appointment of members








L_2010129EN.01006901.xml










28.5.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 129/69








            COUNCIL DECISION
         
of 25 May 2010
         
appointing one Danish member of the Committee of the Regions
(2010/303/EU)


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,


Having regard to the proposal of the Danish Government,

Whereas:







(1)


On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU and 2010/29/EU appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015 (1).












(2)


A member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of term of Mr Jens Jørgen NYGAARD,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following is hereby appointed to the Committee of the Regions as member for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2015:






—


Hr. Jan BOYE

Rådmand







Article 2
This Decision shall take effect on the day of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 25 May 2010.


For the Council


The President

M. SEBASTIÁN
            





(1)  
            OJ L 348, 29.12.2009, p. 22 and OJ L 12, 19.1.2010, p. 11.
Case C-299/09: Order of the President of the Court of 25 May 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud — Czech Republic) — DAR Duale Abfallwirtschaft und Verwertung Ruhrgebiet GmbH v Ministerstvo životního prostředí
Date: 2010-05-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: energy production, interpretation of the law, payment, recycling of capital, waste incineration, waste management








C_2010288EN.01002703.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/27






Order of the President of the Court of 25 May 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud — Czech Republic) — DAR Duale Abfallwirtschaft und Verwertung Ruhrgebiet GmbH v Ministerstvo životního prostředí
(Case C-299/09) (1)

()
(2010/C 288/48)
Language of the case: Czech
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 267, 7.11.2009.
Case C-261/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-León (Spain) lodged on 25 May 2010 — Pedro Antonio Macedo Lozano v Gerardo García, S.L.
Date: 2010-05-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Spain, interpretation of the law, noise, noise level, occupational health, occupational safety








C_2010221EN.01002101.xml










14.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/21





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-León (Spain) lodged on 25 May 2010 — Pedro Antonio Macedo Lozano v Gerardo García, S.L.
(Case C-261/10)
()
2010/C 221/34
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-León

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Pedro Antonio Macedo Lozano

Defendant: Gerardo García, S.L.

Questions referred







1.


Are Articles 3, 5(2), 6 and 7 of Directive 2003/10/EC (1) to be interpreted as meaning that a company in which the workers’ daily noise exposure level is above 85 dbA (measured without taking account of the effect of hearing protectors) fulfils the obligations to take preventive measures laid down in that Directive in respect of physical working conditions by providing those workers with hearing protectors so that, with the level of attenuation provided by those protectors, the workers’ daily noise exposure level is reduced to less than 80 dbA?










2.


Is Article 5(2) of Directive 2003/10/EC to be interpreted as meaning that the ‘programme of technical and/or organisational measures’ which must be adopted by a company in which the workers’ daily noise exposure level is above 85 dbA (measured without taking account of the effect of hearing protectors) is intended to reduce the noise exposure level to below 85 dbA?










3.


If question 1 is answered in the negative, does Directive 2003/10/EC preclude a national rule or judicial approach which exempts a company from making a monetary payment, which in principle it must pay to workers affected by daily noise exposure levels of over 85 dbA, because the company has provided those workers with hearing protectors whose attenuating effect causes daily exposure to remain under 80 dbA?






(1)  Directive 2003/10/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 February 2003 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (noise) (Seventeenth individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) (OJ 2003 L 42, p. 38).
Case C-258/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Dâmbovița (Romania) lodged on 25 May 2010 — Nicușor Grigore v Regia Națională a Pădurilor Romsilva — Direcția Silvică București
Date: 2010-05-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: arrangement of working time, forest ranger, interpretation of the law, labour law, liability, working time








C_2010221EN.01002002.xml










14.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/20





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Dâmbovița (Romania) lodged on 25 May 2010 — Nicușor Grigore v Regia Națională a Pădurilor Romsilva — Direcția Silvică București
(Case C-258/10)
()
2010/C 221/33
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Dâmbovița

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Nicușor Grigore

Defendant: Regia Națională a Pădurilor Romsilva — Direcția Silvică București

Questions referred







1.


Does the time during which a forester, who works eight hours a day under his individual contract of employment, is required to carry out wardenship duties in respect of a certain section of the forest for which he is liable to disciplinary action, the payment of compensation and civil or criminal sanctions, as the case may be, for any damage ascertained in the area under his control, regardless of the time when the damage occurs, constitute ‘working time’ within the meaning of Article 2(1) of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time? (1)











2.


Is the answer to question 1 different where the forester resides in accommodation provided for him within the section of the forest with the management of which he is entrusted?










3.


Are the provisions of Article 6 of Directive 2003/88/CE, entitled ‘Maximum weekly working time’, infringed where, even though the individual contract of employment provides for a maximum working time of 8 hours a day and 40 hours a week, the forester must in fact, because of legal obligations, carry out wardenship duties on a continuous basis in respect of the section of the forest with the management of which he is entrusted?










4.


In the event that question 1 is answered in the affirmative, is the employer obliged to pay wages or similar remuneration in respect of the time during which the forester is required to carry out wardenship duties?










5.


In the event that question 1 is answered in the negative, what legal rules apply to the hours during which a forester is responsible for carrying out wardenship duties in respect of the forest with the management of which he is entrusted?






(1)  OJ 2003 L 299, p. 9.
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting on 25 May 2010 concerning a draft decision relating to Case COMP/39.092 (1) — Bathroom fittings and fixtures — Rapporteur: France
Date: 2010-05-25
Institutions: Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions
Subjects: administrative offence, cartel, plumbing equipment, restriction on competition








C_2011348EN.01000701.xml










29.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 348/7





Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting on 25 May 2010 concerning a draft decision relating to Case COMP/39.092 (1) — Bathroom fittings and fixtures
Rapporteur: France
2011/C 348/06






1.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission’s assessment of the facts as an agreement and/or concerted practice within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.










2.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission’s assessment of the products affected by the cartel.










3.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission’s assessment of the geographic area affected by the cartel.










4.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission's assessment that the agreement and/or concerted practice in the concerned Member States of the EU were capable of having an appreciable effect upon trade between Member States.










5a.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission’s assessment that the cartel constitutes a single and continuous infringement.










5b.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission’s assessment on the liability of each undertaking regarding the different geographic scopes of the single and continuous infringement.










6.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission’s assessment on the duration of the infringement.










7.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission as regards the addressees of the draft decision, specifically with reference to imputation of liability to parent companies of the groups concerned.










8.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that there are no aggravating circumstances applicable.










9.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that there are no attenuating circumstances applicable.










10.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission’s assessment of the applications made under the 2002 Leniency Notice.










11.


The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Case C-257/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Regeringsrätten (Sweden) lodged on 25 May 2010 — Försäkringskässan v Elisabeth Bergström
Date: 2010-05-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Sweden, family benefit, interpretation of the law, social legislation, social-security benefit, worker (EU)








C_2010195EN.01001501.xml










17.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 195/15





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Regeringsrätten (Sweden) lodged on 25 May 2010 — Försäkringskässan v Elisabeth Bergström
(Case C-257/10)
2010/C 195/22
Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Regeringsrätten

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Försäkringskässan

Defendant: Elisabeth Bergström

Questions referred







1.


Under Union law, in particular the Agreement with Switzerland on the free movement of persons and Article 72 of Regulation No 1408/71, (1) can a qualification period for family benefit in the form of income-related benefit for childcare be completed in its entirety through employment and insurance in Switzerland?










2.


Under Union law, in particular the Agreement with Switzerland on the free movement of persons and Articles 3(1) and 72 of Regulation No 1408/71, is income earned in Switzerland to be equated with domestic income in the determination of entitlement to family benefit in the form of income-related benefit for childcare?






(1)  OJ 1971 L 149, p. 2.
Council Decision of 25 May 2010 appointing the President, the Vice-President, the President of the Boards of Appeal and three chairmen of a Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (trade marks and designs)
Date: 2010-05-25
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Union Intellectual Property Office, appointment of members, president of an institution, vice-president of an institution








C_2010152EN.01000101.xml










11.6.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 152/1





COUNCIL DECISION
of 25 May 2010
appointing the President, the Vice-President, the President of the Boards of Appeal and three chairmen of a Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (trade marks and designs)
2010/C 152/01
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (1), and in particular Articles 125 and 136 thereof,
Having regard to the candidatures presented by the Administrative Board of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (trade marks and designs) on 12 April 2010,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
Mr António-Serge DE PINHO CAMPINOS, born in Poitiers (France) on 24 October 1968, is hereby appointed President of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (trade marks and designs) for a term of 5 years.
Mr Christian L.L.G. ARCHAMBEAU, born in Vielsalm (Belgium) on 11 April 1960, is hereby appointed Vice-President of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (trade marks and designs) for a term of 5 years.
Mr Paul Alexandre MAIER, born in Strasbourg (France) on 4 May 1958, is hereby appointed President of the Boards of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (trade marks and designs) for a term of 5 years.
Mr Théophilos MARGELLOS, born in Athens (Greece) on 21 November 1953, is hereby appointed chairman of a Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (trade marks and designs) for a term of 5 years.
Mr Tomás DE LAS HERAS LORENZO, born in Zamora (Spain) on 22 July 1951, is hereby appointed chairman of a Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (trade marks and designs) for a term of 5 years.
Mr Detlef Michael SCHENNEN, born in Münster (Germany) on 10 September 1956, is hereby appointed chairman of a Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (trade marks and designs) for a term of 5 years.
Article 2
The dates on which the 5-year terms referred to in Article 1 shall commence shall be determined by the Administrative Board of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (trade marks and designs).
Article 3
The present Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 25 May 2010.


For the Council


The President

M. SEBASTIÁN




(1)  OJ L 78, 24.3.2009, p. 1.