do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
2010/323/: Commission Decision of 10 June 2010 granting a derogation from implementing Regulation (EC) No 1165/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning livestock and meat statistics with regard to Bulgaria and Germany (notified under document C(2010) 3617)
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Bulgaria, Germany, agricultural census, agricultural statistics, application of EU law, derogation from EU law, livestock, meat, statistical method




L_2010145EN.01001501.xml










11.6.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 145/15








            COMMISSION DECISION
         
of 10 June 2010
         
granting a derogation from implementing Regulation (EC) No 1165/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning livestock and meat statistics with regard to Bulgaria and Germany
(notified under document C(2010) 3617)
(Only the Bulgarian and German texts are authentic)
(2010/323/EU)


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1165/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 concerning livestock and meat statistics and repealing Council Directives 93/23/EEC, 93/24/EEC and 93/25/EEC (1), and in particular Article 20(1) thereof,


Having regard to the request made by Bulgaria on 10 February 2009,


Having regard to the request made by Germany on 20 March 2009,

Whereas:







(1)


In accordance with Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 1165/2008, the Commission may grant Member States a derogation from implementing that Regulation in so far as applying it to their national statistical systems requires major adaptations and is likely to cause significant practical problems.












(2)


Such derogations should be granted, at their request, to Bulgaria and Germany.












(3)


In accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1165/2008, a Member State having been granted a derogation until 1 January 2010 shall continue to apply the provisions of Council Directives 93/23/EEC (2), 93/24/EEC (3) and 93/25/EEC (4) until that date.












(4)


In accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1165/2008, a Member State having been granted a derogation until 1 January 2011 shall continue to apply the provisions of Council Directive 93/25/EEC until that date,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1

1.   Bulgaria and Germany shall be granted a derogation from application of Regulation (EC) No 1165/2008 for a period ending on 1 January 2010.


2.   Germany shall be granted a derogation from application of Regulation (EC) No 1165/2008 concerning sheep and goats for a period ending on 1 January 2011.



Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Republic of Bulgaria and the Federal Republic of Germany.
This Decision shall apply as from 1 January 2009.




Done at Brussels, 10 June 2010.


For the Commission

Olli REHN
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 321, 1.12.2008, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ L 149, 21.6.1993, p. 1.

(3)  
            OJ L 149, 21.6.1993, p. 5.

(4)  
            OJ L 149, 21.6.1993, p. 10.
Case C-498/09 P: Order of the Court of 10 June 2010 — Thomson Sales Europe v European Commission (Appeal — Customs Code — Remission of import duties — Waiver of post-clearance recovery — Anti-dumping duties — No obvious negligence — Complexity of the legislation — Professional experience — Operator’s diligence — Colour televisions made in Thailand — Challengeable acts)
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: CCT duties, Thailand, action for annulment, anti-dumping duty, import, judicial proceedings, redemption, rights of the defence, television equipment








C_2010288EN.01001702.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/17






Order of the Court of 10 June 2010 — Thomson Sales Europe v European Commission
(Case C-498/09 P) (1)

(Appeal - Customs Code - Remission of import duties - Waiver of post-clearance recovery - Anti-dumping duties - No obvious negligence - Complexity of the legislation - Professional experience - Operator’s diligence - Colour televisions made in Thailand - Challengeable acts)
(2010/C 288/28)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Thomson Sales Europe (represented by: F. Foucault and F Goguel, avocats)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: L. Bouyon and H. van Vliet, Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of 29 September 2009 of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) in Joined Cases T-225/07 and T-364/07 Thomson Sales Europe v Commission by which the Court dismissed the appellant’s action for annulment of Commission Decision REM No 03/05 of 7 May 2007 informing the French authorities that remission of import duties on the colour television receivers manufactured in Thailand covered by their application of 14 September 2005 was not justified, and for annulment of the Commission’s letter of 20 July 2007 not confirming entitlement to a waiver of post-clearance recovery of import duties on those items — Procedure relating to the application for remission of duties claimed on the basis of Article 239 of the Customs Code and for waiver of post-clearance recovery of those duties on the basis of Article 220(2)(b) of the Code — Failure to respect the rights of the defence — Error in the legal characterisation of the facts

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed;










2.


Thomson Sales Europe shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 80, of 27.03.2010.
Joined Cases C-395/08 and C-396/08: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 10 June 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corte d’appello di Roma (Italy)) — Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) v Tiziana Bruno, Massimo Pettini (C-395/08), Daniela Lotti, Clara Matteucci (C-396/08) (Directive 97/81/EC — Framework Agreement on part-time work — Equal treatment of part-time and full-time workers — Calculation of the period of service required to obtain a retirement pension — Periods not worked disregarded — Discrimination)
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, anti-discriminatory measure, interpretation of the law, part-time employment, transfer of pension rights








C_2010274EN.01000201.xml










9.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 274/2





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 10 June 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corte d’appello di Roma (Italy)) — Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) v Tiziana Bruno, Massimo Pettini (C-395/08), Daniela Lotti, Clara Matteucci (C-396/08)
(Joined Cases C-395/08 and C-396/08) (1)

(Directive 97/81/EC - Framework Agreement on part-time work - Equal treatment of part-time and full-time workers - Calculation of the period of service required to obtain a retirement pension - Periods not worked disregarded - Discrimination)
2010/C 274/02
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte d’appello di Roma

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS)

Defendants: Tiziana Bruno, Massimo Pettini (C-395/08), Daniela Lotti, Clara Matteucci (C-396/08)

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Corte d’appello di Roma (Italy) — Interpretation of Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC — Annex: Framework agreement on part-time work (OJ 1998 L 14, p. 9) — Part-time workers working some months of the year and resting in the other months — Exclusion of periods not worked in the calculation of pension rights

Operative part of the judgment







1.


With regard to retirement pensions, Clause 4 of the Framework Agreement on part-time work annexed to Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which, for vertical-cyclical part-time workers, disregards periods not worked in calculating the period of service required to qualify for such a pension, unless such a difference in treatment is justified on objective grounds.










2.


If the referring court reached the conclusion that the national legislation at issue in the main proceedings is incompatible with Clause 4 of the Framework Agreement, Clauses 1 and 5(1) of the agreement would have to be interpreted as also precluding such legislation.






(1)  OJ C 327, 20.12.2008.
Case C-140/09: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 June 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Genova (Italy)) — Fallimento Traghetti del Mediterraneo SpA v Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri (State aid — Subsidies paid to a maritime transport undertaking discharging public service obligations — National Law providing for the possibility of making payments on account prior to the approval of an agreement)
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: State aid, competition law, control of State aid, infringement of EU law, interpretation of the law, maritime transport, public service, restriction on competition








C_2010209EN.01000901.xml










31.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 209/9





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 June 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Genova (Italy)) — Fallimento Traghetti del Mediterraneo SpA v Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri
(Case C-140/09) (1)

(State aid - Subsidies paid to a maritime transport undertaking discharging public service obligations - National Law providing for the possibility of making payments on account prior to the approval of an agreement)
2010/C 209/12
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Genova

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Fallimento Traghetti del Mediterraneo SpA

Defendant: Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale di Genova — State aid — Compatibility with Articles 86 to 88 EC of national legislation under which State aid can be paid to maritime transport undertakings responsible for the performance of public service contracts, in the absence of agreements between those undertakings and the administrative authorities and without the prior establishment of precise and stringent criteria capable of ensuring that payment of the aid cannot give rise to distortion of competition

Operative part of the judgment

Under European Union law subsidies paid in circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, pursuant to national legislation providing for payments on account prior to the approval of an agreement, constitute State aid if those subsidies are liable to affect trade between Member States and distort or threaten to distort competition, which it is for the national court to determine.


(1)  OJ C 153, 4.7.2009.
Case C-58/09: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 10 June 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Leo-Libera GmbH v Finanzamt Buchholz in der Nordheide (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Value added tax — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 135(1)(i) — Exemption of betting, lotteries and other forms of gambling — Conditions and limitations — Discretionary power of the Member States)
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, financial institution, financial legislation, game of chance, interpretation of the law, tax system








C_2010221EN.01001002.xml










14.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/10





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 10 June 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Leo-Libera GmbH v Finanzamt Buchholz in der Nordheide
(Case C-58/09) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Value added tax - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 135(1)(i) - Exemption of betting, lotteries and other forms of gambling - Conditions and limitations - Discretionary power of the Member States)
2010/C 221/16
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Leo-Libera GmbH

Defendant: Finanzamt Buchholz in der Nordheide

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesfinanzhof — Interpretation of Article 135(1)(i) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) — National legislation exempting from VAT only certain forms of betting and lotteries and excluding from that exemption all other forms of gambling

Operative part of the judgment

Article 135(1)(i) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that the exercise of the discretionary power of the Member States to fix conditions and limitations on the exemption from value added tax provided for by that provision allows those States to exempt from that tax only certain forms of gambling.


(1)  OJ C 113, 16.5.2009.
Information notice pursuant to Article 10(3)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 732/2008 — Countries benefiting from the Special Incentive Arrangement for Sustainable Development and Good Governance as from 1 July 2010 to 31 December 2011
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Panama, common commercial policy, developing countries, development aid, generalised preferences, information, sustainable development








C_2010151EN.01002201.xml










10.6.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/22





Information notice pursuant to Article 10(3)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 732/2008
Countries benefiting from the Special Incentive Arrangement for Sustainable Development and Good Governance as from 1 July 2010 to 31 December 2011
2010/C 151/09
Council Regulation (EC) No 732/2008 of 22 July 2008 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences for the period from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2011 (the Regulation) establishes the Special Incentive Arrangement for Sustainable Development and Good Governance (the GSP+). The Regulation envisages under Article 9(1)(a)(ii) a possibility to grant GSP+ as from 1 July 2010 to developing countries which submitted a request in this respect by 30 April 2010.
By 30 April 2010 the Commission received a request from the Republic of Panama to benefit from the special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance as from 1 July 2010. The Commission examined it in accordance with Article 10(1) of the Regulation and on 9 June 2010 adopted Decision 2010/318/UE on the beneficiary countries which qualify for the special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance for the period from 1 July 2010 to 31 December 2011, as provided in Council Regulation (EC) No 732/2008 (1) granting the GSP+ arrangement to the Republic of Panama as from 1 July 2010.
According to Article 9(3) of the Regulation, countries that were granted the GSP+ by Commission Decision 2008/938/EC of 9 December 2008 on the list of the beneficiary countries which qualify for the special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance for the period from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2011 (2) were not required to re-submit a request for GSP+ under Article 9(1)(a)(ii) and continue to benefit from GSP+.


(1)  OJ L 142, 10.6.2010.

(2)  OJ L 334, 12.12.2008, p. 90.
Case C-378/09: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 10 June 2010 — European Commission v Czech Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 85/337/EEC — First, second and third paragraphs of Article 10a — National legislation restricting the right of action against decisions in the environmental field — Failure to transpose within the time-limit prescribed)
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Czechia, European Commission, access to the courts, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, environmental protection








C_2010209EN.01001002.xml










31.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 209/10





Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 10 June 2010 — European Commission v Czech Republic
(Case C-378/09) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 85/337/EEC - First, second and third paragraphs of Article 10a - National legislation restricting the right of action against decisions in the environmental field - Failure to transpose within the time-limit prescribed)
2010/C 209/14
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: M. Šimerdová and J.-B, Laignelot, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek and J. Jirkalová)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of the first, second and third paragraphs of Article 10a of Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (OJ 1985 L 175, p. 40), as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC (OJ 1997 L 73, p. 5) and Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2003 L 156, p. 17) — National legislation restricting public participation in decision making procedure in the environmental field.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by failing to adopt within the time-limit prescribed the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the first, second and third paragraphs of Article 10a of the Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003, the Czech Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;










2.


Orders the Czech Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 312, 19.12.2009.
Case T-482/08: Judgment of the General Court of 10 June 2010 — Atlas Transport v OHIM — Hartmann (ATLAS TRANSPORT) (Community trade mark — Revocation proceedings — Community word mark ATLAS TRANSPORT — Genuine use of the trade mark — Articles 15 and 50(1) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Articles 15 and 51(1) of Regulation No 207/2009))
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, carriage of goods, trade-mark law








C_2010209EN.01003501.xml










31.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 209/35





Judgment of the General Court of 10 June 2010 — Atlas Transport v OHIM — Hartmann (ATLAS TRANSPORT)
(Case T-482/08) (1)

(Community trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Community word mark ATLAS TRANSPORT - Genuine use of the trade mark - Articles 15 and 50(1) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Articles 15 and 51(1) of Regulation No 207/2009))
2010/C 209/51
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Atlas Transport GmbH (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: U. Hildebrandt, K. Schmidt-Hern and B. Weichhaus, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Alfred Hartmann (Leer, Germany) (represented by C. Drews, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 September 2008 (Case R 1858/2007-4) relating to revocation proceedings between Alfred Hartmann and Atlas Transport GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 9 September 2008 in Case R 1858/2007-4;










2.


Orders OHIM to bear its own costs as well as those incurred by Atlas Transport GmbH;










3.


Orders Alfred Hartmann to bear his own costs.






(1)  OJ C 32, 7.2.2009.
Case T-258/10: Action brought on 10 June 2010 — France Télécom v Commission
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: France, State aid, action for annulment (EU), control of State aid








C_2010234EN.01004002.xml










28.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 234/40





Action brought on 10 June 2010 — France Télécom v Commission
(Case T-258/10)
()
2010/C 234/74
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: France Télécom (Paris, France) (represented by: M. van der Woude and D. Gillet, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Declare the present action admissible;










—


Annul the decision; and










—


Order the Commission to pay all the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant seeks annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 7426 final of 30 September 2009, (1) declaring that the compensation for public service charges in the amount of EUR 59 million, granted by the French authorities to a group of undertakings for the establishment and operation of a very high-speed broadband electronic communications network (project THD 92) in the French Hauts-de-Seine department, does not constitute State aid.
In support of its action, the applicant raises two pleas in law, alleging:






—


an infringement of the notion of State aid for the purposes of Article 107(1) TFEU, since the Commission committed an error of law in applying the four ‘Altmark’ criteria in the present case, in so far as:






—


Project THD92 does not pursue an objective of general economic interest, but a competitive one on the part of Hauts-de-Seine department as an international business centre;










—


Project THD92 is taking place in a ‘black area’ and does not respond to a market failure;










—


the compensation in the amount of EUR 59 million is disproportionate and was granted on the basis of previously unknown selection criteria; and














—


an infringement of Article 108(2) TFEU since the Commission infringed the applicant's procedural rights by not initiating the formal investigation procedure, thus depriving the applicant of the possibility of voicing its point of view as an interested third party.






(1)  State Aid N 331/2008 — France.
Case C-290/10 P: Appeal brought on 10 June 2010 by Franssons Verkstäder AB against the order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 10 May 2010 in Case T-98/10: Franssons Verkstäder v OHIM and Lindner Recyclingtech (Chaff Cutters)
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, agricultural machinery, appeal, trade-mark law








C_2010328EN.01001003.xml










4.12.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 328/10





Appeal brought on 10 June 2010 by Franssons Verkstäder AB against the order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 10 May 2010 in Case T-98/10: Franssons Verkstäder v OHIM and Lindner Recyclingtech (Chaff Cutters)
(Case C-290/10 P)
()
2010/C 328/17
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Franssons Verkstäder AB (represented by: O. Öhlén, advokat)

Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
By order of 09 September 2010 the Court of Justice (Eighth Chamber) held that the appeal was inadmissible.