do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Corrigendum to Political and Security Committee Decision Atalanta/3/2010 (2010/317/CFSP) of 28 May 2010 on the appointment of an EU Operation Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast (Atalanta) ( OJ L 142, 10.6.2010 )
Date: 2010-08-06
Institutions: Political and Security Committee
Subjects: EU military mission, Somalia, appointment of staff, common foreign and security policy, maritime transport, piracy, terrorism








L_2010205EN.01001101.xml










6.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 205/11







Corrigendum to Political and Security Committee Decision Atalanta/3/2010 (2010/317/CFSP) of 28 May 2010 on the appointment of an EU Operation Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast (Atalanta)
(
Official Journal of the European Union L 142 of 10 June 2010
)

On page 9, recital 2:
for:







‘(2)


The United Kingdom has proposed that Major-General Buster HOWE replace …’,





read:







‘(2)


The United Kingdom has proposed that Major-General Buster HOWES replace …’;





on page 9, Article 1:
for:

               ‘Major-General Buster HOWE is hereby appointed …’,
read:

               ‘Major-General Buster HOWES is hereby appointed …’.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 710/2010 of 6 August 2010 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Podkarpacki miód spadziowy (PDO))
Date: 2010-08-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Poland, designation of origin, honey, labelling, location of production, product designation, product quality








L_2010208EN.01000101.xml










7.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 208/1








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 710/2010
of 6 August 2010
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Podkarpacki miód spadziowy (PDO))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Poland’s application to register the name ‘Podkarpacki miód spadziowy’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of objection pursuant to Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 6 August 2010.


For the Commission


The President

José Manuel BARROSO
            





(1)  
            OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

(2)  
            OJ C 299, 9.12.2009, p. 18.




ANNEX
Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.4.   Other products of animal origin (eggs, honey, various dairy products except butter, etc.)

POLAND
Podkarpacki miód spadziowy (PDO)
Information concerning the entry into force of the Agreement between the European Community and Australia on trade in wine
Date: 2010-08-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Australia, European Community, designation of origin, product designation, trade agreement (EU), trade promotion, viticulture, wine








L_2010205EN.01000101.xml










6.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 205/1







Information concerning the entry into force of the Agreement between the European Community and Australia on trade in wine

The Agreement between the European Community and Australia on trade in wine (1), signed on 1 December 2008, shall, in accordance with Article 44 thereof, enter into force on 1 September 2010.


(1)  
            OJ L 28, 30.1.2009, p. 3.
Case C-402/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’Etat (France) lodged on 6 August 2010 — Société Groupe Limagrain Holding v FranceAgrimer
Date: 2010-08-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU customs procedure, accounting, agricultural product, carriage of goods, export, interpretation of the law








C_2010288EN.01002201.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/22






Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’Etat (France) lodged on 6 August 2010 — Société Groupe Limagrain Holding v FranceAgrimer
(Case C-402/10)
()
(2010/C 288/37)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’Etat

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Société Groupe Limagrain Holding

Respondent: FranceAgriMer

Questions referred







1.


Is the failure, in disregard of the obligations imposed on the warehouse keeper under the Community customs legislation, to keep stock records of products or goods placed under the customs warehousing procedure sufficient to deprive the exporter who has placed his products or his goods in that warehouse of entitlement to the advance payment provided for by the provisions of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 (1) relating to the system of export refunds in conjunction with the provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No 565/80 of 4 March 1980 on the advance payment of export refunds in respect of agricultural products (2)?










2.


If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, what conclusions should be drawn as regards the sums paid to the recipient?




In particular:






(a)


in the event that it is proved that the goods have actually been exported, can the exporter be regarded as having obtained the amount of the refunds relating to those exports, wholly or in part; if in part, is it appropriate to adopt the rates of refunds as pre-established under the regulations relating to advance payment of export refunds or the rates applicable on the date of actual exportation, whether higher or lower than the pre-established rate?










(b)


in the event that there is an obligation to repay all or part of the sums received, is it appropriate, pursuant to Article 33 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 relating to the system of export refunds, to add, to the amount to be repaid as unduly received, the penalty provided for by that article, although the responsibility for keeping stock records rests with the warehouse keeper, where, as in the present case, the customs warehouse is a type C private warehouse maintained by the exporter of the agricultural goods himself?






(1)  Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products (OJ 1987 L 351, p. 1)

(2)  OJ 1980 L 62, p. 5
Corrigendum to the definitive adoption of the European Union's general budget for the financial year 2010 ( OJ L 64, 12.3.2010 )
Date: 2010-08-06
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Union, adoption of the budget, financial year, general budget (EU)








L_2010206EN.01002101.xml










6.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 206/21







Corrigendum to the definitive adoption of the European Union's general budget for the financial year 2010

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 64 of 12 March 2010
)


On page 781, in Article 09 06 04 ‘Growth and the audiovisual sector: preparatory actions under the i2i audiovisual initiative’, figures must be read as follows:











‘Appropriations 2010


Appropriations 2009


Outturn 2008




Commitments


Payments


Commitments


Payments


Commitments


Payments




—


p.m.


—


p.m.


0,—


0,—’





on page 782, in Article 09 06 05 ‘Preparatory action — Erasmus for Journalists’, figures must be read as follows:











‘Appropriations 2010


Appropriations 2009


Outturn 2008




Commitments


Payments


Commitments


Payments


Commitments


Payments




500 000 


500 000 ’
Case C-400/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court (Ireland) made on 6 August 2010 — J. McB. v L. E.
Date: 2010-08-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Ireland, application of EU law, interpretation of the law, judicial cooperation, jurisdiction, matrimonial law, parental responsibility








C_2010260EN.01001302.xml










25.9.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/13





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court (Ireland) made on 6 August 2010 — J. McB. v L. E.
(Case C-400/10)
()
2010/C 260/17
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Supreme Court, Ireland

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: J. McB.

Defendant: L. E.

Question referred

Does Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (1) of 27th November 2003 on the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 (2), whether interpreted pursuant to Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union or otherwise, preclude a Member State from requiring by its law that the father of a child who is not married to the mother shall have obtained an order of a court of competent jurisdiction granting him custody in order to qualify as having ‘custody rights’ which render the removal of that child from its country of habitual residence wrongful for the purposes of Article 2.11 of that Regulation?


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000
OJ L 338, p. 1

(2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 of 29 May 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility for children of both spouses
OJ L 160, p. 19
Case F-65/10: Action brought on 6 August 2010 — Mata Blanco v Commission
Date: 2010-08-06
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action for annulment, competition (EU)








C_2010288EN.01007302.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/73






Action brought on 6 August 2010 — Mata Blanco v Commission
(Case F-65/10)
()
(2010/C 288/138)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: José Manuel Mata Blanco (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the EPSO decision not to include the applicant on the reserve list for internal competition ‘COM/INT/OLAF.09/AD10 — Administrators specialised in anti-fraud’ and the reserve list and all the decisions taken on the basis of that list

Form of order sought







—


annul the EPSO decision of 11 May 2010 confirming, after re-examination, its decision of 9 March 2010 not to include the applicant on the reserve list for internal competition ‘COM/INT/OLAF/09/AD10 — Administrators specialised in anti-fraud’;










—


annul the reserve list for internal competition ‘COM/INT/OLAF/09/AD10 — Administrators specialised in anti-fraud’ in so far as it does not include the applicant’s name and all other decision taken on the basis of that list;










—


order, as measures of organisation of procedure (cf. Article 55 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court), the production by the defendant of the criteria used by the jury for the oral test, the questions put to him by the competition jury during his oral test and the copy of the jury’s assessment sheet relating to that oral test together with the criteria used in their marking.