do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-77/09: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 22 December 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale del Lazio (Italy)) — Gowan Comércio Internacional e Serviços Lda v Ministero della Salute (Plant protection products — Directive 2006/134/EC — Validity — Restrictions on the use of fenarimol as an active substance)
Date: 2010-12-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, chemical product, environmental risk prevention, interpretation of the law, scientific report, technology assessment








C_2011063EN.01000301.xml










26.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/3





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 22 December 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale del Lazio (Italy)) — Gowan Comércio Internacional e Serviços Lda v Ministero della Salute
(Case C-77/09) (1)

(Plant protection products - Directive 2006/134/EC - Validity - Restrictions on the use of fenarimol as an active substance)
2011/C 63/04
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale amministrativo regionale del Lazio

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Gowan Comércio Internacional e Serviços Lda

Defendant: Ministero della Salute

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale del Lazio — Validity, as regards the limitations on the use of fenarimol as an active substance, of Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (OJ 1991 L 230, p. 1)

Operative part of the judgment

Consideration of the question referred for a preliminary ruling has disclosed nothing to affect the validity of Commission Directive 2006/134/EC of 11 December 2006 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC to include fenarimol as active substance.


(1)  OJ C 102, 1.5.2009.
Case C-287/10: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 22 December 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal administratif — Luxembourg) — Tankreederei I SA v Directeur de l’administration des contributions directes (Freedom to provide services — Free movement of capital — Tax credit for investments — Grant linked to the physical use of the investments on national territory — Use of inland navigation vessels used in other Member States)
Date: 2010-12-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Luxembourg, approximation of laws, free movement of capital, interpretation of the law, right of establishment








C_2011063EN.01001202.xml










26.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/12





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 22 December 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal administratif — Luxembourg) — Tankreederei I SA v Directeur de l’administration des contributions directes
(Case C-287/10) (1)

(Freedom to provide services - Free movement of capital - Tax credit for investments - Grant linked to the physical use of the investments on national territory - Use of inland navigation vessels used in other Member States)
2011/C 63/22
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal administratif

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Tankreederei I SA

Defendant: Directeur de l’administration des contributions directes

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal administratif de Luxembourg — Interpretation of Articles 49 EC and 56 EC — Tax credits for investments — Legislation under which such a credit is granted only if the investment is made in an establishment situated in national territory and physically used in that territory — Company engaged in international shipping activities which is established and taxable in Luxembourg but has made an investment consisting of the acquisition of an asset used primarily outside of the national territory — Obstacle to the freedom to provide services and the free movement of capital

Operative part of the judgment

Article 56 TFEU is to be interpreted as precluding a provision of a Member State pursuant to which the benefit of a tax credit for investments is denied to an undertaking which is established solely in that Member State on the sole ground that the capital goods, in respect of which that credit is claimed, are physically used in the territory of another Member State.


(1)  OJ C 221, 14.08.2010.
Case C-12/10: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 22 December 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf, Germany) — Lecson Elektromobile GmbH v Hauptzollamt Dortmund (Common Customs Tariff — Tariff classification — Combined Nomenclature — Section XVII — Transport equipment — Chapter 87 — ‘Vehicles other than railway or tramway rolling stock, and parts and accessories thereof’ — Headings 8703 and 8713 — Three or four-wheeled electric vehicles designed for the transport of one person, reaching a maximum speed of 6 to 15 km/h and having a separate, adjustable steering column, known as ‘electric mobility scooters’ )
Date: 2010-12-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, common customs tariff, electronics, interpretation of the law, motor car








C_2011063EN.01001101.xml










26.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/11





Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 22 December 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf, Germany) — Lecson Elektromobile GmbH v Hauptzollamt Dortmund
(Case C-12/10) (1)

(Common Customs Tariff - Tariff classification - Combined Nomenclature - Section XVII - Transport equipment - Chapter 87 - ‘Vehicles other than railway or tramway rolling stock, and parts and accessories thereof’ - Headings 8703 and 8713 - Three or four-wheeled electric vehicles designed for the transport of one person, reaching a maximum speed of 6 to 15 km/h and having a separate, adjustable steering column, known as ‘electric mobility scooters’)
2011/C 63/19
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Lecson Elektromobile GmbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Dortmund

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Interpretation of Annex 1 to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1810/2004 of 7 September 2004 (OJ 2004 L 327, p. 1) — Three or four-wheeled electric vehicles designed for the transport of one person and reaching a maximum speed of 6 to 15 km/h — Classification under heading 8713 or heading 8703 of the Combined Nomenclature?

Operative part of the judgment

Heading 8703 of the Combined Nomenclature in Annex 1 to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1810/2004 of 7 September 2004 must be interpreted as covering three or four-wheeled vehicles designed for the transport of one person who is not necessarily a disabled person, powered by a battery-operated electric motor, reaching a maximum speed of 6 to 15 km/h and equipped with a separate, adjustable steering column, known as electric ‘mobility scooters’, such as those at issue in the main proceedings.


(1)  OJ C 80, 27.03.2010.
Statement of revenue and expenditure for the European GNSS Supervisory Authority for the financial year 2010 — Amending Budget No 1
Date: 2010-12-22
Institutions: European GNSS Agency
Subjects: EU office or agency, expenditure, financial year, publication of accounts, revenue








C_2010351EN.01002901.xml










22.12.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 351/29





Statement of revenue and expenditure for the European GNSS Supervisory Authority for the financial year 2010 — Amending Budget No 1
(2010/C 351/08)
REVENUE









Title
Chapter


Heading


Budget 2010


Amending budget No 1


New amount





2






PAYMENTS FROM THE INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES





2 0


PAYMENTS FROM THE INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES


7 890 000


3 406 675


11 296 675




 



Title 2 — Total




7 890 000




3 406 675




11 296 675






9






MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE





 



Title 9 — Total




p.m.



 



p.m.





 



GRAND TOTAL




7 890 000




3 406 675




11 296 675





EXPENDITURE












Title
Chapter


Heading


Appropriations 2010


Amending budget No 1


New amount




Commitments


Payments


Commitments


Payments


Commitments


Payments





1






STAFF





1 1


STAFF EXPENDITURE


3 650 000


3 650 000


– 205 000


– 205 000


3 445 000


3 445 000




 



Title 1 — Total




4 090 000




4 090 000




– 205 000




– 205 000




3 885 000




3 885 000






2






BUILDINGS, EQUIPMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS OPERATING EXPENDITURE





2 3


CURRENT ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE


130 000


130 000


150 000


150 000


280 000


280 000




2 5


EXPENDITURE ON MEETINGS


120 000


120 000


55 000


55 000


175 000


175 000




 



Title 2 — Total




1 400 000




1 400 000




205 000




205 000




1 605 000




1 605 000






3






OPERATIONAL EXPENDITURE





3 1


EXPENDITURE ON STUDIES


2 350 000


2 350 000


 


800 000


2 350 000


3 150 000




3 9


OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES — BATCH 1


p.m.


p.m.


p.m.


2 606 675


p.m.


2 606 675




 



Title 3 — Total




2 400 000




2 400 000




p.m.




3 406 675




2 400 000




5 806 675





 



GRAND TOTAL




7 890 000




7 890 000




p.m.




3 406 675




7 890 000




11 296 675





Establishment plan







Function group and grade


Temporary posts




2010


2009




AD 16


—


—




AD 15


—


—




AD 14


1


1




AD 13


—


—




AD 12


—


—




AD 11


2


2




AD 10


3


1




AD 9


2


1




AD 8


5


4




AD 7


7


7




AD 6


3


2




AD 5


1


—




Total AD


24


18




AST 11


—


—




AST 10


—


—




AST 9


—


—




AST 8


—


—




AST 7


—


—




AST 6


—


—




AST 5


1


—




AST 4


1


2




AST 3


—


1




AST 2


2


—




AST 1


—


2




Total AST


4


5





Grand total




28




23
2010/813/EU: Decision of the European Central Bank of 22 December 2010 amending Decision ECB/2009/25 on the approval of the volume of coin issuance in 2010 (ECB/2010/32)
Date: 2010-12-22
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: European Central Bank, euro, issuing of currency, participating country (euro area)








L_2010343EN.01007801.xml










29.12.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 343/78








            DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
         
of 22 December 2010
         
amending Decision ECB/2009/25 on the approval of the volume of coin issuance in 2010
(ECB/2010/32)
(2010/813/EU)


THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 128(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


The European Central Bank (ECB) has the exclusive right from 1 January 1999 to approve the volume of coins issued by the Member States whose currency is the euro (hereinafter the ‘participating Member States’).












(2)


Based on the estimates of demand for coins in 2010 that the participating Member States submitted to the ECB, the ECB approved the total volume of coins intended for circulation and collector coins not intended for circulation in 2010 in Decision ECB/2009/25 of 10 December 2009 on the approval of the volume of coin issuance in 2010 (1).












(3)


On 26 November 2010 the Belgian Ministry of Finance requested that the volume of euro coins that Belgium may issue in 2010 be increased by EUR 20 million to be able to respond to an unexpected demand for coins, and the ECB has approved this request. As a result, the table in Article 1 of Decision ECB/2009/25 needs to be replaced,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The table in Article 1 of Decision ECB/2009/25 is replaced by the following:






(EUR million)




 


Issuance of coins intended for circulation and issuance of collector coins (not intended for circulation) in 2010




Belgium


125,2 




Germany


668,0 




Ireland


43,0 




Greece


55,0 




Spain


210,0 




France


290,0 




Italy


283,0 




Cyprus


18,1 




Luxembourg


40,0 




Malta


10,5 




Netherlands


54,0 




Austria


306,0 




Portugal


50,0 




Slovenia


30,0 




Slovakia


62,0 




Finland


60,0 ’






Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the participating Member States.




Done at Frankfurt am Main, 22 December 2010.


The President of the ECB

Jean-Claude TRICHET
            





(1)  
            OJ L 7, 12.1.2010, p. 21.
Action brought on 22 December 2010 by the Principality of Liechtenstein against the EFTA Surveillance Authority (Case E-17/10)
Date: 2010-12-22
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: EFTA Court, Liechtenstein, action for annulment, investment company, tax exemption, tax system








C_2011058EN.01001201.xml










24.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 58/12





Action brought on 22 December 2010 by the Principality of Liechtenstein against the EFTA Surveillance Authority
(Case E-17/10)
2011/C 58/06
An action against the EFTA Surveillance Authority was brought before the EFTA Court on 22 December 2010 by the Principality of Liechtenstein, represented by Dr Andrea Entner-Koch, acting as Agent for the Principality of Liechtenstein, EEA Coordination Unit, Austrasse 79/Europark, 9490 Vaduz, Fürstentum Liechtenstein.
The Principality of Liechtenstein requests the EFTA Court to:






1.


annul the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s Decision No 416/10/COL of 3 November 2010 regarding the taxation of investment undertakings under the Liechtenstein Tax Act;










2.


in the alternative, declare void Articles 3 and 4 of the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s Decision No 416/10/COL of 3 November 2010, to the extent that they order the recovery of the aid referred to in Article 1 of that Decision;
and










3.


order the EFTA Surveillance Authority to pay the costs of the proceedings.





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







—


The EFTA Surveillance Authority’s Decision No 416/10/COL of 3 November 2010 declared that the tax exemptions applicable to investment companies, and which were repealed with effect from 30 June 2006, were not compatible with Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.










—


The EFTA Surveillance Authority further decided that the alleged aid constituted unlawful aid subject to recovery from investment companies receiving it from 15 March 1997 until the date in which beneficiaries last benefitted from the exemptions following their repeal in 2006.










—


The EFTA Surveillance Authority held that recovery should be affected without delay, and in any event by 3 March 2011, in accordance with the procedures of national law, provided they allow the immediate and effective execution of the decision.










—


The applicant contends that the tax provisions at stake do not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.










—


The applicant claims that the EFTA Surveillance Authority:






—


erred when it applied Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement to the taxation of investment companies under the Liechtenstein Tax Act, and when it ordered the repayment of the alleged unlawful aid from the investment companies as from 15 March 1997,










—


violated the general principles of EEA law in ordering the recovery of alleged unlawful aid,










—


did not provide adequate reasoning in its contested Decision, as required by Article 16 of the Surveillance and Court Agreement.
Case T-580/10: Action brought on 22 December 2010 — Wohlfahrt v OHIM — Ferrero (Kindertraum)
Date: 2010-12-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, food industry, trade-mark law








C_2011063EN.01002901.xml










26.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/29





Action brought on 22 December 2010 — Wohlfahrt v OHIM — Ferrero (Kindertraum)
(Case T-580/10)
2011/C 63/55
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Harald Wohlfahrt (Rothenburg o.d. Tauber, Germany) (represented by: N. Scholtz-Recht, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Ferrero SpA (Alba, Italy)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Opposition Division of 27 May 2009 (Opposition No B 668 600) and the decision of the Board of Appeal of 20 October 2010 in Case R 815/2009-4;










—


Order that Community trade mark ‘Kindertraum’, application No 002773059, be registered also for all goods applied for in Classes 16 and 28;










—


Order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant.

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘Kindertraum’ for goods in Classes 15, 16, 20, 21 and 28.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Ferrero SpA.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: A total of 32 older marks which, in part figuratively, in part as a component of a multi-word mark and in part as a single word, contain the word ‘kinder’, in particular the Italian word mark ‘kinder’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 16, 28, 30 and 42.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition and refused registration.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 42(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (1) on the ground of missing evidence of use after expiry of the period of protected use during the opposition proceedings. Formal lack of grounds for the contested decision, since the Board of Appeal, in its decision, failed to examine the abusive trade mark application alleged in the grounds for the appeal and extensively supported by evidence. Further, an abusive trade mark application, since the sole aim of the proprietors of the opposing mark is to monopolise the term ‘kinder’ in the widest possible manner. Finally, infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, since there is no likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Case C-276/10: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 22 December 2010 — European Commission v Czech Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Environment — Directive 2006/118/EC — Protection of groundwater against pollution and deterioration — Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)
Date: 2010-12-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Czechia, European Commission, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, groundwater, national implementing measure, pollution control, pollution control measures








C_2011063EN.01001201.xml










26.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/12





Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 22 December 2010 — European Commission v Czech Republic
(Case C-276/10) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Environment - Directive 2006/118/EC - Protection of groundwater against pollution and deterioration - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)
2011/C 63/21
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: S. Pardo Quintillán and L. Jelinek, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek and J. Jirkalová, acting as Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt, or to communicate within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to comply with Directive 2006/118/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the protection of groundwater against pollution and deterioration (OJ 2006 L 372, p. 19)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary to comply with Directive 2006/118/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the protection of groundwater against pollution and deterioration, the Czech Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 12 of that directive.










2.


Orders the Czech Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 209, 31.07.2010.
Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work for the financial year 2010 — Amending Budget No 2
Date: 2010-12-22
Institutions: European Agency for Safety and Health at Work
Subjects: EU office or agency, European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, expenditure, financial year, publication of accounts, revenue








C_2010351EN.01000101.xml










22.12.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 351/1





Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work for the financial year 2010 — Amending Budget No 2
(2010/C 351/01)
REVENUE









Title
Chapter


Heading


Budget 2010


Amending budget No 2


New amount





1






EUROPEAN COMMUNITY SUBSIDY





1 0


EUROPEAN COMMUNITY SUBSIDY


14 770 731


346 335


15 117 066




 



Title 1 — Total




14 770 731




346 335




15 117 066






2






OTHER SUBSIDIES





2 0


OTHER SUBSIDIES


126 100


73 900


200 000




 



Title 2 — Total




126 100




73 900




200 000






5






MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE





 



Title 5 — Total




207 131



 



207 131






6






REVENUE FROM SERVICES RENDERED AGAINST PAYMENT





 



Title 6 — Total




p.m.



 



p.m.





 



GRAND TOTAL




15 103 962




420 235




15 524 197





EXPENDITURE









Title
Chapter


Heading


Appropriations 2010


Amending budget No 2


New amount





1






STAFF





1 1


STAFF IN ACTIVE EMPLOYMENT


5 480 700


–10 000


5 470 700




1 4


SOCIOMEDICAL INFRASTRUCTURE


33 000


10 000


43 000




 



Title 1 — Total




5 528 700




0




5 528 700






2






BUILDINGS, EQUIPMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS OPERATING EXPENDITURE





2 0


RENTAL OF BUILDINGS AND ASSOCIATED COSTS


958 635


59 306


1 017 941




2 1


INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES


359 438


170 259


529 697




2 2


MOVABLE PROPERTY ASSOCIATED COSTS


36 962


8 700


45 662




2 4


POSTAGE AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS


139 765


5 735


145 500




 



Title 2 — Total




1 547 400




244 000




1 791 400






3






OPERATING EXPENDITURE





3 0


EUROPEAN RISK OBSERVATORY — ANTICIPATING CHANGE


1 055 225


246 000


1 301 225




3 1


WORKING ENVIRONMENT INFORMATION


1 165 470


–10 000


1 155 470




3 2


COMMUNICATION, CAMPAIGNING AND PROMOTION


4 110 000


– 280 000


3 830 000




3 3


NETWORKING AND COORDINATION


1 176 436


220 235


1 396 671




 



Title 3 — Total




7 507 131




176 235




7 683 366






4






EXPENDITURE FOR IMPLEMENTING SPECIAL PROJECTS FUNDED BY SPECIFIC OTHER SUBSIDY





 



Title 4 — Total




520 731



 



520 731






5






RESERVE





 



Title 5 — Total




p.m.



 



p.m.





 



GRAND TOTAL




15 103 962




420 235




15 524 197