do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-377/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Dolj (Romania) lodged on 26 July 2010 — Adrian Băilă v Administrația Finanțelor Publice a Municipiului Craiova, Administrația Fondului Pentru Mediu
Date: 2010-07-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Romania, domestic product, interpretation of the law, motor vehicle, pollution, tax system








C_2010274EN.01001201.xml










9.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 274/12





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Dolj (Romania) lodged on 26 July 2010 — Adrian Băilă v Administrația Finanțelor Publice a Municipiului Craiova, Administrația Fondului Pentru Mediu
(Case C-377/10)
()
2010/C 274/17
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Dolj

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Adrian Băilă

Defendants: Administrația Finanțelor Publice a Municipiului Craiova, Administrația Fondului Pentru Mediu

Questions referred







1.


Is the first paragraph of Article 110 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (formerly Article 90 EC) to be interpreted as precluding a Member State from introducing a tax with the characteristics of the pollution tax introduced by Government Emergency Order No 50/2008, as amended by Government Emergency Order No 218/2008, from which motor vehicles in category M1 and pollution class Euro 4, with a cylinder capacity of not more than 2 000 cc, are exempt, as are all motor vehicles in category N1 and pollution class Euro 4 which were registered for the first time in Romania or in another Member State between 15 December 2008 and 31 December 2009, but which applies to similar or competing second-hand motor vehicles from other Member States which were registered before 15 December 2008, in that such a tax could amount to a domestic tax on goods from other Member States which is indirectly discriminatory when compared with the tax treatment of domestic goods, thus protecting the domestic manufacture of new motor vehicles?










2.


Is the first paragraph of Article 110 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (formerly Article 90 EC) to be interpreted as precluding a Member State from introducing a tax with the characteristics of the pollution tax introduced by Government Emergency Order No 50/2008, as amended by Government Emergency Order No 218/2008, from which motor vehicles in category M1 and pollution class Euro 4, with a cylinder capacity of not more than 2 000 cc, are exempt, as are all motor vehicles in category N1 and pollution class Euro 4 which were registered for the first time in Romania or in another Member State between 15 December 2008 and 31 December 2009, but which applies to motor vehicles with different technical characteristics from those indicated above, which were registered during the same period in other Member States, in that such a tax could amount to a domestic tax on goods from other Member States which is indirectly discriminatory when compared with the tax treatment of domestic goods, thus protecting the domestic manufacture of new motor vehicles?
COMMISSION OPINION APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE FOR THE PERIOD EXTENDING TO 20-9-2015  Communication of Mr Šefčovič
Date: 2010-07-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, European Council, European Economic and Social Committee, appointment of staff

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 26.7.2010 
SEC(2010) 816 final 

COMMISSION OPINION 

APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE FOR THE PERIOD EXTENDING TO 20-9-2015 

Communication of Mr Šefčovič 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
  
 
COMMISSION OPINION 

APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE FOR THE PERIOD EXTENDING TO 20-9-2015 

Communication of Mr Šefčovič 

According to article 302, second paragraph, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European 
Union,  the  members  of  the  Committee  are  appointed  by  the  Council,  which  consults  the 
Commission.  On  9  June  2010,  the  Council  requested  the  Commission’s  opinion  on  the 
nomination of members of the EESC from 18 Member States (see annex). 

The Commission hereby decides to give a positive answer on the proposed appointment. 

EN 

2 

   EN
Action brought on 26 July 2010 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Norway (Case E-10/10)
Date: 2010-07-26
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: EFTA Court, European standard, Norway, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, national implementing measure








C_2010271EN.01002701.xml










7.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 271/27





Action brought on 26 July 2010 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Norway
(Case E-10/10)
2010/C 271/07
An action against Norway was brought before the EFTA Court on 26 July 2010 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority, represented by Xavier Lewis and Markus Schneider, acting as Agents of the EFTA Surveillance Authority, rue Belliard/Belliardstraat 35, 1040 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË.
The EFTA Surveillance Authority requests the EFTA Court to declare that:






1.


By failing to adopt, or to notify the Authority of, the measures necessary to fully implement into its national legislation the Acts referred to at point 1 and at point 1, indent 2, of Annex VII to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1430/2007 of 5 December 2007 amending Annexes II and III to Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the recognition of professional qualifications) each as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto, within the time prescribed, the Kingdom of Norway has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 63(1) of the Directive and under Article 7 EEA;










2.


The Kingdom of Norway bears the costs of these proceedings.





Legal and factual background and pleas in law adduced in support:







—


The application addresses the failure by Norway to comply with a reasoned opinion issued by the EFTA Surveillance Authority on the failure to adopt, or to notify the Authority of the measures necessary to fully implement the EEA Act corresponding to European Union Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional qualifications as amended.










—


The outstanding Norwegian measures concern amendments of a number of national regulations on the recognition of professional qualifications obtained in other EEA States.










—


The EFTA Surveillance Authority pleads that it has not received information from the Norwegian government indicating that the Act has been fully implemented into national law, nor is it in possession of any other information which would enable it to conclude accordingly.










—


The Norwegian government has not disputed the delay in fully implementing the Act.
Case C-372/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny, Izba Finansowa, Wydział II (Republic of Poland), lodged on 26 July 2010 — Pak-Holdco Sp zoo v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Poznaniu
Date: 2010-07-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: corporation tax, interpretation of the law, tax relief, tax system








C_2010288EN.01002002.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/20






Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny, Izba Finansowa, Wydział II (Republic of Poland), lodged on 26 July 2010 — Pak-Holdco Sp zoo v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Poznaniu
(Case C-372/10)
()
(2010/C 288/34)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny, Izba Finansowa, Wydział II

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Pak-Holdco Sp zoo

Respondent: Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Poznaniu

Questions referred







1.


In interpreting Article 7(1) of Directive 69/335/EEC, (1) must a national court take account of the provisions of amending directives, in particular Directives 73/79/EEC (2) and 73/80/EEC, (3) even though those directives were no longer in force when the Republic of Poland acceded to the European Union?










2.


If the answer to Question 1 is in the negative, does the exclusion of the assets of a capital company from the amount on which capital duty is charged, as laid down in the first indent of Article 5(3) of Directive 69/335/EEC, concern only the assets of a capital company which has had an increase in capital?






(1)  OJ, English Special Edition 1969(II), p. 412.

(2)  OJ 1973 L 103, p. 13.

(3)  OJ 1973 L 103, p. 15.
Action brought on 26 July 2010 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Liechtenstein (Case E-9/10)
Date: 2010-07-26
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: EFTA Court, European standard, Liechtenstein, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, national implementing measure








C_2010271EN.01002601.xml










7.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 271/26





Action brought on 26 July 2010 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Liechtenstein
(Case E-9/10)
2010/C 271/06
An action against Lichtenstein was brought before the EFTA Court on 26 July 2010 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority, represented by Xavier Lewis and Markus Schneider, acting as Agents of the EFTA Surveillance Authority, rue Belliard/Belliardstraat 35, 1040 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË.
The EFTA Surveillance Authority requests the EFTA Court to declare that:






1.


By failing to adopt, or to notify the Authority of, the measures necessary to fully implement the Act referred to at point 1 of Annex VII to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1430/2007 of 5 December 2007 amending Annexes II and III to Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the recognition of professional qualifications and by Commission Regulation (EC) No 755/2008 of 31 July 2008 amending Annex II to Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the recognition of professional qualifications), as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto, within the time prescribed, the Principality of Liechtenstein has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 63(1) of the Directive and under Article 7 EEA;










2.


The Principality of Liechtenstein bears the costs of these proceedings.





Legal and factual background and pleas in law adduced in support:







—


The application addresses the failure by Liechtenstein to comply with a reasoned opinion issued by the EFTA Surveillance Authority on the failure to adopt, or to notify the Authority of the measures necessary to fully implement the EEA Act corresponding to European Union Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional qualifications as amended.










—


The outstanding Liechtenstein measures concern the recognition of professional qualifications obtained in other EEA States regarding the crafts sector.










—


The EFTA Surveillance Authority pleads that it has not received information from the Liechtenstein government indicating that the Act has been fully implemented into national law, nor is it in possession of any other information which would enable it to conclude accordingly.










—


The Liechtenstein government has not disputed the delay in fully implementing the Act.
2011/56/EU: Council Decision of 26 July 2010 on the signing, on behalf of the Union, of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Croatia on the participation of the Republic of Croatia in the work of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction
Date: 2010-07-26
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Croatia, European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, agreement (EU), co-financing, exchange of information, information network, signature of an agreement








L_2011026EN.01000101.xml










29.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 26/1








            COUNCIL DECISION
         
of 26 July 2010
         
on the signing, on behalf of the Union, of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Croatia on the participation of the Republic of Croatia in the work of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction
(2011/56/EU)


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 168(5), in conjunction with Article 218(5), thereof,


Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Whereas:







(1)


Regulation (EC) No 1920/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (1) provides, in Article 21 thereof, that the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction shall be open to the participation of any third country that shares the interests of the Union and its Member States in the Centre’s objectives and work.












(2)


On 11 July 2006 the Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations with the Republic of Croatia for an Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Croatia on the participation of the Republic of Croatia in the work of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (hereinafter ‘the Agreement’). The negotiations were successfully concluded by the initialling of the Agreement.












(3)


The Agreement should be signed on behalf of the Union, subject to its conclusion,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The signing of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Croatia on the participation of the Republic of Croatia in the work of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (hereinafter ‘the Agreement’) is hereby approved on behalf of the Union, subject to the conclusion of the said Agreement.


Article 2
The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to sign the Agreement on behalf of the Union subject to its conclusion (2).


Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 26 July 2010.


For the Council


The President

S. VANACKERE
            





(1)  
            OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The text of the Agreement will be published together with the decision on its conclusion.
2010/596/EU: Decision No 5/2010 of the ACP-EU Committee of Ambassadors of 26 July 2010 appointing a member of the Executive Board of the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA)
Date: 2010-07-26
Institutions: ACP Committee of Ambassadors
Subjects: ACP countries, appointment of members, board of directors, international organisation








L_2010263EN.01001401.xml










6.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 263/14








            DECISION No 5/2010 OF THE ACP-EU COMMITTEE OF AMBASSADORS
         
of 26 July 2010
         
appointing a member of the Executive Board of the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA)
(2010/596/EU)


THE ACP-EU COMMITTEE OF AMBASSADORS,

Having regard to the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States (the ACP) of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou (Benin) on 23 June 2000 (1), as revised by the Agreement amending the said ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, signed in Luxembourg on 25 June 2005 (2), and in particular Article 3(5) of Annex III thereto,

Whereas:







(1)


By Decision No 3/2008 of 22 May 2008, the ACP-EU Committee of Ambassadors appointed the members of the Executive Board of the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (three EU members and three ACP members) for a five-year term of office, subject to review after two and a half years in the case of the ACP members.












(2)


One post has fallen vacant following the death of one of the members.












(3)


It is therefore necessary to appoint a new member of the Executive Board,





HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:



Article 1
The following person shall be appointed a member of the Executive Board of the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation in place of Mr Jean Fritz BOUTIN:






—


Mr Radjiskumar MOHAN (Suriname).






Article 2
Consequently, for the remainder of the current term of office, i.e. until 21 May 2013 — subject to a mid-term review of the initial term in November 2010 — the CTA’s Executive Board shall be composed as follows:






—


Mr Kahijoro KAHUURE (Namibia)










—


Mr Radjiskumar MOHAN (Suriname)










—


Mr Wilson A. SONGA (Kenya)










—


Mr Raul BRUNO DE SOUSA (Portugal)










—


Mr Eric TOLLENS (Belgium)










—


Mr Edwin Anthony VOS (Netherlands).






Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 26 July 2010.


For the ACP-EU Committee of Ambassadors


The Chairman

R. MAKONGO
            





(1)  
            OJ L 317 of 15.12.2000, p. 3.

(2)  
            OJ L 209 of 11.8.2005, p. 27.
Case F-29/07: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 26 July 2010 — Quadu v Parliament
Date: 2010-07-26
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, action by staff, competition (EU), equal treatment, professional career, regulations for civil servants








C_2010288EN.01007604.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/76






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 26 July 2010 — Quadu v Parliament
(Case F-29/07) (1)

()
(2010/C 288/147)
Language of the case: French
The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 117, 26.5.2007, p. 37.
Action brought on 26 July 2010 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Iceland (Case E-8/10)
Date: 2010-07-26
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: EFTA Court, European standard, Iceland, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, national implementing measure








C_2010271EN.01002501.xml










7.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 271/25





Action brought on 26 July 2010 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Iceland
(Case E-8/10)
2010/C 271/05
An action against Iceland was brought before the EFTA Court on 26 July 2010 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority, represented by Xavier Lewis and Markus Schneider, acting as Agents of the EFTA Surveillance Authority, rue Belliard/Belliardstraat 35, 1040 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË.
The EFTA Surveillance Authority requests the EFTA Court to declare that:






1.


By failing to adopt, or to notify the Authority of, all the measures necessary to fully implement into its national legislation the Act referred to at point 1 of Annex VII to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications) as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto, the Republic of Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 63(1) of the Directive and under Article 7 EEA;










2.


The Republic of Iceland bears the costs of these proceedings.





Legal and factual background and pleas in law adduced in support:







—


The application addresses the failure by Iceland to comply with a reasoned opinion issued by the EFTA Surveillance Authority on the failure to adopt, or to notify the Authority of all the measures necessary to fully implement the EEA Act corresponding to European Union Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional qualifications as amended.










—


The outstanding Icelandic measures concern the adoption of national regulations to provide for sector specific rules on the recognition of professional qualifications obtained in other EEA States.










—


The EFTA Surveillance Authority pleads that it has not received information from Iceland indicating that the Act has been fully implemented into national law, nor is it in possession of any other information which would enable it to conclude accordingly.










—


The Icelandic government has not disputed the delay in fully implementing the Act.
2010/424/CFSP: Council Decision 2010/424/CFSP of 26 July 2010 amending Joint Action 2008/736/CFSP on the European Union Monitoring Mission in Georgia, EUMM Georgia
Date: 2010-07-26
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Georgia, common foreign and security policy, fact-finding mission, international security, war




L_2010199EN.01002901.xml










31.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 199/29








            COUNCIL DECISION 2010/424/CFSP
of 26 July 2010
         
amending Joint Action 2008/736/CFSP on the European Union Monitoring Mission in Georgia, EUMM Georgia


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 28 and Article 43(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


On 15 September 2008, the Council adopted Joint Action 2008/736/CFSP on the European Union Monitoring Mission in Georgia, EUMM Georgia (1).












(2)


Joint Action 2008/736/CFSP was last extended by Joint Action 2009/572/CFSP (2) until 14 September 2010. The financial reference amount provided for to cover the expenditure related to EUMM Georgia until that date was set at EUR 49 600 000. The financial reference amount should be increased by EUR 2 500 000 in order to allow for additional operational needs of the Mission.












(3)


Joint Action 2008/736/CFSP should be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Article 14(1) of Joint Action 2008/736/CFSP is hereby replaced by the following:

‘1.   The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to the Mission shall be EUR 52 100 000.’



Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 26 July 2010.


For the Council


The President

C. ASHTON
            





(1)  
            OJ L 248, 17.9.2008, p. 26.

(2)  
            OJ L 197, 29.7.2009, p. 110.