do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Rights to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings ***I European Parliament legislative resolution of 16 June 2010 on the draft directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the rights to interpretation and to translation in criminal proceedings (00001/2010 – C7-0005/2010 – 2010/0801(COD))#P7_TC1-COD(2010)0801 Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 16 June 2010 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2010/…/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings
Date: 2010-06-16
Institutions: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: European arrest warrant, criminal procedure, exchange of information, fundamental rights, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, mutual recognition principle, rights of the defence, translation








CE2011236EN.01018501.xml










12.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 236/185





Wednesday 16 June 2010Rights to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings ***I
P7_TA(2010)0220
European Parliament legislative resolution of 16 June 2010 on the draft directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the rights to interpretation and to translation in criminal proceedings (00001/2010 – C7-0005/2010 – 2010/0801(COD))
2011/C 236 E/45
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,
having regard to the initiative of a group of Member States (00001/2010),
having regard to point (b) of Article 76 and point (b) of the second subparagraph of Article 82(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the initiative was submitted to Parliament (C7-0005/2010),
having regard to Article 294(3) and (15) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
having regard to the Commission proposal (COM(2010)0082), which has the same legislative objective,
having regard to the reasoned opinions sent to its President by national parliaments on whether the initiative complies with the principle of subsidiarity,
having regard to Rules 44 and 55 of its Rules of Procedure,
having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0198/2010),






1.


Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;










2.


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






Wednesday 16 June 2010P7_TC1-COD(2010)0801
Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 16 June 2010 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2010/…/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive 2010/64/EU)
Case T-265/10: Action brought on 16 June 2010 — Spain v Commission
Date: 2010-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Regional Development Fund, European Social Fund, anti-discriminatory measure, operation of the Institutions, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, regions of Spain








C_2010221EN.01005302.xml










14.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/53





Action brought on 16 June 2010 — Spain v Commission
(Case T-265/10)
()
2010/C 221/85
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: Mrs Nuria Díaz Abad, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the European Commission of 15 April 2010 declaring the suspension of the interim payment application submitted by Spain on 11 December 2009 on the grounds stated in Section I of the legal reasoning set out in the originating application;










—


Uphold the claim that the European Commission should pay interest on account of the delay in the actual payment of the interim sums applied for and improperly suspended;










—


Order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The present action is brought against the Commission’s decision to interrupt the payment deadline in respect of the interim payment application submitted by Spain on 11 December 2009. That interim payment application, for a total amount of EUR 27 754 408,38,relates to the Operational Programmes for Community Assistance of the European Social Fund in the framework of the Objectives of Convergence for the Autonomous Community of Galicia (CCI 2007ES051PO004).
The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those already raised in Case T-263/10 Spain v Commission.
Case C-298/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesarbeitsgericht (Germany) lodged on 16 June 2010 — Land Berlin v Alexander Mai
Date: 2010-06-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, age discrimination, collective agreement, collective bargaining, interpretation of the law, wage determination








C_2010260EN.01000401.xml










25.9.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/4





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesarbeitsgericht (Germany) lodged on 16 June 2010 — Land Berlin v Alexander Mai
(Case C-298/10)
()
2010/C 260/04
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesarbeitsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Land Berlin

Defendant: Alexander Mai

Question referred

Taking into account the right of parties to a collective agreement to collective bargaining which is guaranteed by primary law (now Article 28 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, ‘CFREU’), does a collective pay agreement for public sector employees, which, as in Paragraph 27 of the Bundes-angestelltentarifvertrag (Federal collective agreement for contractual public sector employees, ‘BAT’) in conjunction with the Vergütungstarifvertrag (collective pay agreement) No 35 under the BAT, determines basic pay in individual salary groups by age categories, infringe the primary-law prohibition of age discrimination (now Article 21(1) of the CFREU) as given expression by Directive 2000/78/EC? (1)



(1)  Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation; OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16.
Case T-264/10: Action brought on 16 June 2010 — Spain v Commission
Date: 2010-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Regional Development Fund, European Social Fund, anti-discriminatory measure, operation of the Institutions, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality








C_2010221EN.01005301.xml










14.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/53





Action brought on 16 June 2010 — Spain v Commission
(Case T-264/10)
()
2010/C 221/84
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: Mrs Nuria Díaz Abad, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the European Commission of 10 May 2010 declaring the suspension of the interim payment application submitted by Spain on 18 December 2009 on the grounds stated in Section 1 of the legal reasoning set out in the originating application;










—


Uphold the claim that the European Commission should pay interest on account of the delay in the actual payment of the interim sums applied for and improperly suspended;










—


Order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The present action is brought against the Commission’s decision to interrupt the payment deadline in respect of the interim payment application submitted by Spain on 18 December 2009. That interim payment application, for a total amount of EUR 37 320 854,12, relates to the Operational Programme for Community Assistance of the European Social Fund for Fighting Discrimination in the framework of the Objectives of Convergence and Regional Competitiveness and Employment in Spain (CCI 2007ES05UPO002).
The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those already raised in Case T-263/10 Spain v Commission.
Case F-46/10: Action brought on 16 June 2010 — AD v Commission
Date: 2010-06-16
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: Belgium, European Commission, European official, action for annulment, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, family benefit, marriage, regulations for civil servants








C_2010246EN.01004103.xml










11.9.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 246/41





Action brought on 16 June 2010 — AD v Commission
(Case F-46/10)
()
2010/C 246/72
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: AD (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: E. Boigelot, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the decision not to grant the applicant the household allowance

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision taken by the Office for Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (PMO) on 13 November 2009 not to allocate to the applicant the household allowance provided for in Article 1(2) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations;










—


In any event, annul the decision taken by the PMO on 9 September 2009 not to allocate to the applicant the household allowance provided for in Article 1(2) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations in so far as that ‘decision’ may be considered to adversely affect him;










—


In the alternative, should the Tribunal take the view that Article 1(2) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations permitted the authority authorised to conclude contracts (AACC) to refuse to allocate to the applicant the household allowance although it is impossible for the couple of which he is part to marry because their sexual orientation is rendered illegal by the national law to which his partner is subject, acknowledge that Article 1(2)(c)(iv) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations is unlawful in so far as it provides for a reference to the law of one of the Member States in assessing the possibility of access to marriage and, consequently, not apply that condition in the present case;










—


Order the European Commission to pay the costs.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 521/2010 of 16 June 2010 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2010-06-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit, stone fruit








L_2010151EN.01001601.xml










17.6.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 151/16








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 521/2010
of 16 June 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 17 June 2010.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 16 June 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 


IL 


132,1 




MA 


44,4 




MK 


45,6 




TR 


50,2 




ZZ 


68,1 




0707 00 05 


MA 


37,3 




MK 


45,6 




TR 


119,1 




ZZ 


67,3 




0709 90 70 


TR 


101,8 




ZZ 


101,8 




0805 50 10 


AR 


83,9 




BR 


112,1 




TR 


94,3 




US 


83,2 




ZA 


93,7 




ZZ 


93,4 




0808 10 80 


AR 


106,2 




BR 


77,3 




CA 


127,1 




CL 


97,4 




CN 


53,8 




NZ 


126,0 




US 


123,5 




UY 


123,8 




ZA 


111,6 




ZZ 


105,2 




0809 10 00 


TR 


228,7 




ZZ 


228,7 




0809 20 95 


SY 


245,9 




TR 


345,1 




US 


576,0 




ZZ 


389,0 




0809 30 


TR 


158,2 




ZZ 


158,2 






(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’.
Case T-271/10: Action brought on 16 June 2010 — H v Council and Others
Date: 2010-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Bosnia and Herzegovina, action for annulment (EU), common foreign and security policy, competence of the institution, operation of the Institutions, police cooperation, the EU's international role








C_2010221EN.01005501.xml










14.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/55





Action brought on 16 June 2010 — H v Council and Others
(Case T-271/10)
()
2010/C 221/88
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: H (Catania, Italy) (represented by: C. Mereu and M. Velardo, lawyers)

Defendants: Council of the European Union, European Commission and European Union Police Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (“EUPM”)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the Contested Decision of 7 April 2010 and, if needed, the Decision of 30 April 2010;










—


Order the defendants to pay the damages suffered by the applicant, assessed at 30 000,00 Euro; and










—


Order the defendants to pay the costs of the proceedings, as well as an interest of 8 %.





Pleas in law and main arguments

By means of its application, the applicant seeks, pursuant to Article 263 TFEU, the annulment of the Decision rendered by the European Union Police Mission (EUPM) in Bosnia and Herzegovina of 7 April 2010 and, if necessary, of the subsequent confirmation Decision of 30 April 2010, where it was decided to reassign the applicant from the main headquarters of the Mission in Sarajevo to the Regional Office in Banja Luka, as well as the downgrading of the applicant. Furthermore, the applicant seeks, pursuant to Article 340 TFEU, the award of damages in the amount of 30 000,00 Euro.
The applicant submits that the General Court has jurisdiction to rule in this case following the Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 9 October 2006 in case F-53/06 Gualtieri v Commission.
In support of its submissions, the applicant puts forward the following pleas in law:






 


Firstly, the applicant claims misuse of powers, as there was no objective reason justifying the redeployment.










 


Secondly, the applicant claims that the Contested Decision is flawed for lack of motivation, as the European Union Police Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina did not substantiate the operational reasons underlying the redeployment.










 


Thirdly, there has been a manifest error of appraisal, as there was no need to urgently redeploy a prosecutor to the Regional Office in Banja Luka.










 


In addition, there has been an infringement of Council Decision No 2009/906/CFSP of 8 December 2009 (1) as the Head of Mission was not entitled to reassign the staff but only to provide the management of the staff on a daily basis.










 


Finally, the applicant seeks the award of damages due to moral harassment.






(1)  Council Decision 2009/906/CFSP of 8 December 2009 on the European Union Police Mission (EUPM) in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) (OJ 2009 L 322, p. 22).
Statute of the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) *** European Parliament legislative resolution of 16 June 2010 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Statute of the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) by the European Union (08612/2010 – C7-0109/2010 – 2009/0085(NLE))
Date: 2010-06-16
Institutions: Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, European Parliament
Subjects: EU office or agency, EU programme, environmental impact, environmental protection, operation of the Institutions, renewable energy








CE2011236EN.01017802.xml










12.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 236/178





Wednesday 16 June 2010Statute of the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) ***
P7_TA(2010)0215
European Parliament legislative resolution of 16 June 2010 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Statute of the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) by the European Union (08612/2010 – C7-0109/2010 – 2009/0085(NLE))
2011/C 236 E/41
(Consent - renewed referral)

The European Parliament,
having regard to the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Statute of the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) by the European Union (08612/2010),
having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2009)0326),
having regard to its position of 20 October 2009 (1),
having regard to the Communication from the Commission to Parliament and the Council entitled ‘Consequences of the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon for ongoing interinstitutional decision-making procedures’ (COM(2009)0665 and COM(2010)0147),
having regard to Article 194(2) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council requested the consent of Parliament (C7-0109/2010),
having regard to Rules 59(3), 81 and 90(8) of its Rules of Procedure,
having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A7-0176/2010),






1.


Consents to conclusion of the Statute;










2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.






(1)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2009)0030.
Case T-24/09: Order of the General Court of 16 June 2010 — Biocaps v Commission (Competition — Administrative procedure — Decision ordering an inspection — Article 20(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Existence of the addressee of the decision — Action manifestly unfounded in law)
Date: 2010-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment, biology, health care, pharmacist, research body, services contract








C_2010221EN.01004402.xml










14.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/44





Order of the General Court of 16 June 2010 — Biocaps v Commission
(Case T-24/09) (1)

(Competition - Administrative procedure - Decision ordering an inspection - Article 20(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Existence of the addressee of the decision - Action manifestly unfounded in law)
2010/C 221/73
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Biocaps (Orsay, France) (represented by: Y.-R. Guillou, H. Speyart van Woerden and T. Verstraeten, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouquet and É. Gippini Fournier, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2008) 6524 of 29 October 2008, in Case COMP/39510, ordering Laboratoire Champagnat Desmounlins Philippakis, and all of the entities controlled directly or indirectly by it, to submit to an inspection pursuant to Article 20(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 [EC] and 82 [EC] (OJ 2002 L 1, p. 1).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as manifestly unfounded in law;










2.


Biocaps is ordered to bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 55, 7.3.2009.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2010-06-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2010156EN.01000301.xml










16.6.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 156/3





Euro exchange rates (1)

15 June 2010
2010/C 156/02

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2258




JPY


Japanese yen


111,77




DKK


Danish krone


7,4377




GBP


Pound sterling


0,83200




SEK


Swedish krona


9,6215




CHF


Swiss franc


1,3998




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,8515




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


25,663




EEK


Estonian kroon


15,6466




HUF


Hungarian forint


280,10




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7076




PLN


Polish zloty


4,0734




RON


Romanian leu


4,2358




TRY


Turkish lira


1,9316




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4301




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,2629




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,5500




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7668




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7110




KRW


South Korean won


1 505,77




ZAR


South African rand


9,4245




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,3760




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,2130




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


11 263,11




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,0036




PHP


Philippine peso


57,053




RUB


Russian rouble


38,4800




THB


Thai baht


39,708




BRL


Brazilian real


2,2132




MXN


Mexican peso


15,5142




INR


Indian rupee


57,0310






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.