do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-427/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corte Suprema di Cassazione (Italy) lodged on 31 August 2010 — Banca Antoniana Popolare Veneta s.p.a., incorporating Banca Nazionale Dell’Agricoltura s.p.a. v Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia delle Entrate
Date: 2010-08-31
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, VAT, interpretation of the law, tax system








C_2010288EN.01002601.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/26






Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corte Suprema di Cassazione (Italy) lodged on 31 August 2010 — Banca Antoniana Popolare Veneta s.p.a., incorporating Banca Nazionale Dell’Agricoltura s.p.a. v Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia delle Entrate
(Case C-427/10)
()
(2010/C 288/44)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte Suprema di Cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Banca Antoniana Popolare Veneta spa, incorporating Banca Nazionale Dell’Agricoltura spa

Defendants: Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia delle Entrate

Questions referred







1.


Do the principles of effectiveness, non-discrimination and tax neutrality in respect of value added tax preclude a national framework or practice that construes the right of the purchaser/client to reimbursement of VAT paid in error as a right to a payment due under the ordinary law, unlike that exercised by the principal debtor (supplier/provider of the service), with a time limit for the former significantly longer than that applied to the latter, such that the claim of the purchaser/client, brought when the time limit for the supplier/provider of the service has already expired, can give rise to an order for reimbursement against the latter, who can no longer claim reimbursement from the tax authority, and with no provision for any bridging instrument to prevent conflicts or disputes between the proceedings brought or to be brought before the various courts?










2.


Furthermore, are the above-mentioned principles compatible with a national practice or case-law that allows a reimbursement order to be made in favour of the purchaser/client against the supplier/provider of the service that has not brought its reimbursement claim before another court within the time limits imposed on it, relying on a judicial interpretation, implemented by administrative practice, that the transaction was subject to VAT?
Communication from the Minister for Economic Affairs of the Kingdom of the Netherlands pursuant to Article 3(2) of Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons
Date: 2010-08-31
Institutions: Netherlands
Subjects: Netherlands, energy site, exchange of information, exploitation of resources, hydrocarbon, mineral prospecting








C_2010235EN.01001101.xml










31.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 235/11





Communication from the Minister for Economic Affairs of the Kingdom of the Netherlands pursuant to Article 3(2) of Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons
2010/C 235/05
The Minister for Economic Affairs hereby gives notice that an application has been received for authorisation to extract hydrocarbons in the area known as Akkrum 11, which lies in the province of Friesland and is bounded by the straight lines joining the points A-B, B-C, C-D, D-E and E-A. The coordinates of the points are as follows:







Point


X


Y




A


205444,75


558988,28




B


208120,00


561040,00




C


209823,97


560049,72




D


208431,75


558470,58




E


206770,00


558366,60




The coordinates are expressed in accordance with the national triangulation system (RD).
On the basis of this description of the boundaries, the surface area is 6,38 km2.
With reference to the Directive mentioned in the introduction and Article 15 of the Mining Act (Mijnbouwwet) (Bulletin of Acts and Decrees (Staatsblad) 2002, No 542), the Minister for Economic Affairs hereby invites interested parties to submit a competing application for authorisation to extract hydrocarbons in the area bounded by the above-mentioned points and coordinates.
The Minister for Economic Affairs is the competent authority for the granting of authorisations. The criteria, conditions and requirements referred to in Articles 5(1), 5(2) and 6(2) of the above-mentioned Directive are set out in the Mining Act (Bulletin of Acts and Decrees 2002, No 542).
Applications may be submitted during the 13 weeks following the publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union and should be sent to:





The Minister for Economic Affairs




For the attention of J.C. De Groot, Director for the Energy Market




ALP A/562




Bezuidenhoutseweg 30




Postbus 20101




2500 EC Den Haag




NEDERLAND




Applications received after the expiry of this period will not be considered.
A decision on the applications will be taken not later than 12 months after this period has expired.
Further information can be obtained by calling E.J. HOPPEL on the following telephone number: +31 703797088.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2010-08-31
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2010235EN.01000201.xml










31.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 235/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

30 August 2010
2010/C 235/02

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2700




JPY


Japanese yen


107,54




DKK


Danish krone


7,4468




GBP


Pound sterling


0,81650




SEK


Swedish krona


9,3872




CHF


Swiss franc


1,3055




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,9650




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


24,808




EEK


Estonian kroon


15,6466




HUF


Hungarian forint


283,49




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7087




PLN


Polish zloty


3,9806




RON


Romanian leu


4,2344




TRY


Turkish lira


1,9297




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4161




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3333




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,8806




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7903




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7190




KRW


South Korean won


1 514,22




ZAR


South African rand


9,2997




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,6398




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,2740




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


11 452,86




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


3,9850




PHP


Philippine peso


57,282




RUB


Russian rouble


39,0046




THB


Thai baht


39,719




BRL


Brazilian real


2,2241




MXN


Mexican peso


16,5790




INR


Indian rupee


59,5820






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5765 — Foxconn/Dell (Products) Poland)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2010-08-31
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electronics industry, exchange of information, information technology industry, merger control, provision of services








C_2010235EN.01001001.xml










31.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 235/10





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.5765 — Foxconn/Dell (Products) Poland)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2010/C 235/04






1.


On 24 August 2010, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., Ltd (‘Hon Hai group’, Taiwan), the parent company of Foxconn group (‘Foxconn’, Taiwan), acquires sole control over Dell Products (Poland) Sp. z o.o (‘Dell (Products) Poland’, Poland), a wholly owned subsidiary of Dell Global BV and Dell International Holdings VIII BV by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Hon Hai group and Foxconn: provision of electronic manufacturing services to original equipment manufacturers,










—


for Dell (Products) Poland: construction, configuration and assembly of personal computers and servers.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5765 — Foxconn/Dell (Products) Poland, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




J-70




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘EC Merger Regulation’).
Case T-353/10: Action brought on 31 August 2010 — Lito Maieftiko Ginaikologiko kai Khirourgiko Kentro v Commission
Date: 2010-08-31
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment, infringement of EU law, right to justice








C_2010288EN.01005501.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/55






Action brought on 31 August 2010 — Lito Maieftiko Ginaikologiko kai Khirourgiko Kentro v Commission
(Case T-353/10)
()
(2010/C 288/102)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Lito Maieftiko Ginaikologiko kai Khirourgiko Kentro A.E. (Athens, Greece) (represented by: E. Tzannini, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


uphold the present action;










—


annul the contested debit note;










—


take account of the applicant’s submissions if it holds that the amounts as accepted by the applicant in its memorandum of 5 November 2009 are to be refunded;










—


annul the contested measure also in so far as it relates to third instalment which has not been paid;










—


set any amounts that are to be refunded against the amounts never paid by way of the third instalment, which has remained outstanding for five years;










—


hold that the present action constitutes an event interrupting the limitation period for the claim for payment of the third instalment;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

By the present action, the applicant seeks annulment of the Commission decision which is contained in debit note No 3241007362 of 22 July 2010 and relates to the applicant’s participation in DICOEMS research programme No 507760 and to implementation of the results of financial audit No 09-BA74-028.
The applicant puts forward the following grounds in support of its pleas:






—


infringement of the general principle of law that an unfavourable measure must incorporate a statement of reasons in order for the legality of the reasoning to be reviewed, since the contested debit note does not state any reasons;










—


error in the assessment of the facts, since the defendant did not take account of the evidence and in particular the timesheets which the applicant submitted as an attachment to its memorandum of 5 November 2009;










—


error of law and defective reasoning, since the defendant did not take account of the applicant’s actual submissions and rejected them in a wrongful manner and without stating reasons;










—


infringement of the principle of good faith and of legitimate expectations, since the defendant wrongfully failed to pay the applicant the final instalment of the programme and nullified all its research work, five years after the programme’s closure.
Case T-299/10 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 31 August 2010 — Babcock Noell v The European joint undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy (Application for interim measures — Public contracts — Tendering procedure — Rejection of a tender — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — Prima facie case — Urgency — Balance of interests)
Date: 2010-08-31
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: energy industry, invitation to tender, summary procedure








C_2010301EN.01003102.xml










6.11.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 301/31





Order of the President of the General Court of 31 August 2010 — Babcock Noell v The European joint undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy
(Case T-299/10 R)
(Application for interim measures - Public contracts - Tendering procedure - Rejection of a tender - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - Prima facie case - Urgency - Balance of interests)
2010/C 301/53
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Babcock Noell GmbH (Würzburg, Germany) (represented by: M. Werner and C. Elbrecht, lawyers)

Defendant: The European joint undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy (represented by: A. Verpont, Agent, assisted by C. Kennedy-Loest, K. Wilson and C. Thomas, Solicitors, and N. Pourbaix, lawyer)

Re:

Application for suspension of operation of decisions taken by the defendant, in the context of a tendering procedure, to reject the applicant’s tenders and to award to another tenderer Lot D of the contract for the supply of ITER toroidal field coils winding packs

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


Costs are reserved.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5766 — ENBW/PRE)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2010-08-31
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electrical energy, energy industry, exchange of information, gas, merger control








C_2010235EN.01000101.xml










31.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 235/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.5766 — ENBW/PRE)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2010/C 235/01
On 25 August 2010, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M5766. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case C-425/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany) lodged on 31 August 2010 — Barbara Szeja, Maria-Magdalena Szeja, Marlon Szeja v Land Berlin
Date: 2010-08-31
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, foreign national, interpretation of the law, residence permit








C_2010301EN.01001302.xml










6.11.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 301/13





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany) lodged on 31 August 2010 — Barbara Szeja, Maria-Magdalena Szeja, Marlon Szeja v Land Berlin
(Case C-425/10)
()
2010/C 301/19
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Barbara Szeja, Maria-Magdalena Szeja, Marlon Szeja

Defendant: Land Berlin

Questions referred







1.


Is the first sentence of Article 16(1) of Directive 2004/38/EC (1) to be interpreted as conferring on Union citizens who have resided legally for more than five years on the basis only of national law in the territory of a Member State, but who did not during that period fulfil the conditions laid down in Article 7(1) of Directive 2004/38/EC, a right of permanent residence in that Member State?










2.


Are periods of residence of Union citizens in the host Member State which took place before the accession of their Member State of origin to the European Union also to be counted towards the period of lawful residence under Article 16(1) of Directive 2004/38/EC?






(1)  OJ 2004 L 158, p. 77.
Case C-424/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany) lodged on 31 August 2010 — Tomasz Ziolkowski v Land Berlin
Date: 2010-08-31
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, foreign national, interpretation of the law, residence permit








C_2010301EN.01001301.xml










6.11.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 301/13





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany) lodged on 31 August 2010 — Tomasz Ziolkowski v Land Berlin
(Case C-424/10)
()
2010/C 301/18
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Tomasz Ziolkowski

Defendant: Land Berlin

Questions referred







1.


Is the first sentence of Article 16(1) of Directive 2004/38/EC (1) to be interpreted as conferring on Union citizens who have resided legally for more than five years on the basis only of national law in the territory of a Member State, but who did not during that period fulfil the conditions laid down in Article 7(1) of Directive 2004/38/EC, a right of permanent residence in that Member State?










2.


Are periods of residence of Union citizens in the host Member State which took place before the accession of their Member State of origin to the European Union also to be counted towards the period of lawful residence under Article 16(1) of Directive 2004/38/EC?






(1)  OJ 2004 L 158, p 77.