do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 254/2011 of 15 March 2011 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2011-03-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit








L_2011069EN.01001301.xml










16.3.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 69/13








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 254/2011
of 15 March 2011
         
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 16 March 2011.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 15 March 2011.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,

José Manuel SILVA RODRÍGUEZ
            

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 


MA 


53,2 




TN 


109,4 




TR 


83,7 




ZZ 


82,1 




0707 00 05 


JO 


158,2 




TR 


151,8 




ZZ 


155,0 




0709 90 70 


MA 


40,0 




TR 


127,1 




ZZ 


83,6 




0805 10 20 


EG 


55,3 




IL 


75,7 




JM 


51,6 




MA 


47,8 




TN 


46,2 




TR 


72,9 




ZZ 


58,3 




0805 50 10 


EG 


67,3 




TR 


55,1 




ZZ 


61,2 




0808 10 80 


AR 


96,2 




BR 


91,4 




CA 


91,4 




CL 


114,1 




CN 


89,0 




MK 


50,2 




US 


130,2 




ZA 


67,5 




ZZ 


91,3 




0808 20 50 


AR 


93,9 




CL 


71,8 




CN 


65,4 




US 


79,9 




ZA 


90,5 




ZZ 


80,3 






(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 F-28/10: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 15 March 2011 — VE (*) v Commission (Staff cases — Contractual agents — Remuneration — Expatriation allowance — Conditions laid down in Article 4 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations — Habitual residence prior to taking up duties)
Date: 2011-03-15
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: bonus payment, job mobility, servant (EU)




C_2012138EN.01002303.xml










12.5.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/23






Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 15 March 2011 —  VE (*1) v Commission
(Case F-28/10) (1)

(Staff cases - Contractual agents - Remuneration - Expatriation allowance - Conditions laid down in Article 4 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations - Habitual residence prior to taking up duties)
(2012/C 138/45)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: VE (*1) (represented by: L. Vogel, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Martin and B. Eggers, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision putting an end to the payment of the expatriation allowance previously paid to the applicant

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the action brought by  VE (*1);










2.


Orders  VE (*1) to pay all the costs.






(*1)  Information erased or replaced within the framework of protection of personal data and/or confidentiality.

(1)  OJ C 179, 3.7.2010, p. 58.
Case C-29/10: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 15 March 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel — Luxembourg) — Heiko Koelzsch v État du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg (Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations — Contract of employment — Choice made by the parties — Mandatory rules of the law applicable in the absence of choice — Determination of that law — Notion of the country in which the employee ‘habitually carries out his work’ — Employee carrying out his work in more than one Contracting State)
Date: 2011-03-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, Luxembourg, interpretation of the law, labour law, provision of services, work contract, workplace








C_2011139EN.01000901.xml










7.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 139/9





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 15 March 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel — Luxembourg) — Heiko Koelzsch v État du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg
(Case C-29/10) (1)

(Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations - Contract of employment - Choice made by the parties - Mandatory rules of the law applicable in the absence of choice - Determination of that law - Notion of the country in which the employee ‘habitually carries out his work’ - Employee carrying out his work in more than one Contracting State)
2011/C 139/14
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d’appel

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Heiko Koelzsch

Defendant: État du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Cour d’appel — Interpretation of Article 6(2)(a) of the Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations opened for signature in Rome on 19 June 1980 (OJ 1980 L 266, p. 1) — Determination of the law applicable to an action for wrongful dismissal in the absence of a choice by the parties to an individual employment contract — Concept of place‘in which the employee habitually carries out his work’ — Employee working in more than one country but returning systematically to one of them

Operative part of the judgment

Article 6(2)(a) of the Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations, opened for signature in Rome on 19 June 1980, must be interpreted as meaning that, in a situation in which an employee carries out his activities in more than one Contracting State, the country in which the employee habitually carries out his work in performance of the contract, within the meaning of that provision, is that in which or from which, in the light of all the factors which characterise that activity, the employee performs the greater part of his obligations towards his employer.


(1)  OJ C 80, 27.3.2010.
Moving abroad? What about your family? : your answer on europa.eu/youreurope.
Date: 2011-03-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Internet site, citizens' Europe, communications policy, free movement of persons, public awareness campaign

Moving abroad?
What about
             your family?

Your answer on  (cid:76)(cid:92)(cid:89)(cid:86)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:21)(cid:76)(cid:92)(cid:22)(cid:96)(cid:86)(cid:92)(cid:89)(cid:76)(cid:92)(cid:89)(cid:86)(cid:87)(cid:76)
or call(cid:3)(cid:23)(cid:23)(cid:3)(cid:31)(cid:23)(cid:23)(cid:3)(cid:29)(cid:30)(cid:3)(cid:31)(cid:32)(cid:3)(cid:24)(cid:23)(cid:3)(cid:24)(cid:24)(cid:3)(cid:15)(cid:44)(cid:92)(cid:89)(cid:86)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:3)(cid:43)(cid:80)(cid:89)(cid:76)(cid:74)(cid:91)(cid:16)

-

-

-

P
N
E
7
1
5
0
1
1
3
M
K

-

-
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2011-03-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2011081EN.01000601.xml










15.3.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 81/6





Euro exchange rates (1)

14 March 2011
2011/C 81/04

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3948




JPY


Japanese yen


114,16




DKK


Danish krone


7,4584




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86590




SEK


Swedish krona


8,8405




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2941




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,8290




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


24,331




HUF


Hungarian forint


273,05




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7066




PLN


Polish zloty


4,0315




RON


Romanian leu


4,1838




TRY


Turkish lira


2,2024




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3846




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3597




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,8694




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,8918




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7692




KRW


South Korean won


1 570,42




ZAR


South African rand


9,6345




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


9,1603




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,3885




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 221,50




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,2339




PHP


Philippine peso


60,727




RUB


Russian rouble


39,8377




THB


Thai baht


42,304




BRL


Brazilian real


2,3210




MXN


Mexican peso


16,6373




INR


Indian rupee


62,8501






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on coordination of safeguards which, for the protection of the interests of members and others, are required by Member States of companies within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 54 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in respect of the formation of public limited liability companies and the maintenance and alteration of their capital, with a view to making such safeguards equivalent’ (recast) COM(2011) 29 final — 2011/0011 (COD)
Date: 2011-03-15
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: codification of EU law, legal status, protection of shareholders, public limited company, right of establishment, share capital








C_2011132EN.01011301.xml










3.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 132/113





Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on coordination of safeguards which, for the protection of the interests of members and others, are required by Member States of companies within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 54 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in respect of the formation of public limited liability companies and the maintenance and alteration of their capital, with a view to making such safeguards equivalent’ (recast)
COM(2011) 29 final — 2011/0011 (COD)
2011/C 132/22
On 15 February 2011, the Council and, on 14 February 2011, the European Parliament decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), on the

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on coordination of safeguards which, for the protection of the interests of members and others, are required by Member States of companies within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 54 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in respect of the formation of public limited liability companies and the maintenance and alteration of their capital, with a view to making such safeguards equivalent (Recast)

COM(2011) 29 final — 2011/0011 COD.
Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 470th plenary session of 15/16 March 2011 (meeting of 15 March), by 180 votes to two with 21 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 15 March 2011.


The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Staffan NILSSON
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6110 — Aegon/Unnim/Caixasabadell Vida)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-03-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: credit institution, economic concentration, insurance company, life assurance, merger control








C_2011081EN.01000501.xml










15.3.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 81/5





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6110 — Aegon/Unnim/Caixasabadell Vida)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 81/02
On 2 March 2011, 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 32011M6110. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case F-120/07: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 15 March 2011 — Strack v European Commission (Civil service — Officials — Carry-over of days of annual leave — Article 4 of Annex V to the Staff Regulations — Reasons attributable to the interests of the service — Article 73 of the Staff Regulations — Directive 2003/88/EC — Right to paid annual leave — Sick leave)
Date: 2011-03-15
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, indemnification, paid leave, regulations for civil servants








C_2011252EN.01004802.xml










27.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/48





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 15 March 2011 — Strack v European Commission
(Case F-120/07) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Carry-over of days of annual leave - Article 4 of Annex V to the Staff Regulations - Reasons attributable to the interests of the service - Article 73 of the Staff Regulations - Directive 2003/88/EC - Right to paid annual leave - Sick leave)
2011/C 252/102
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Guido Strack (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: H. Tettenborn, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and B. Eggers, Agents)

Re:

Annulment of several decisions of the Commission concerning the application to carry over from 2004 to 2005 a number of days of unused annual leave exceeding the limit of 12 days. An order that the European Commission pay the applicant compensation for the 26.5 days of unused leave in respect of which no compensation has been paid with interest at a rate of 2 % per year.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Annuls the decision of the European Commission of 15 March 2007 rejecting the request by Mr Strack to carry over the balance of his days of annual leave from 2004;










2.


Dismisses the remainder of the application;










3.


Orders the European Commission to pays its own costs and those of Mr Strack.






(1)  OJ C 315, 22.12.2007, p. 50.
Case T-167/11: Action brought on 15 March 2011 — Centre national de la recherche scientifique v Commission
Date: 2011-03-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, appeal, gender equality, human rights, motherhood, payment appropriation, public contract








C_2011145EN.01003401.xml










14.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 145/34





Action brought on 15 March 2011 — Centre national de la recherche scientifique v Commission
(Case T-167/11)
2011/C 145/56
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Centre national de la recherche scientifique (Paris, France) (represented by: N. Lenoire, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


declare the action admissible and well-founded;










—


order the Commission to refund the sum of EUR 20 989,82 allegedly receivable and claimed by the Commission pursuant to the contract in its debit note No 2010-1232 of 26 October 2010 which gave rise to the set-off measure of 17 December 2010 (Ref: BUDG/C3 D(2010) B.2 — 1232) together with interest on late payment at the statutory rate in accordance with Belgian law governing the contract;










—


order the Commission to pay all the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging violation of Article II.19(1) of the general conditions of Contract LSHB — CT-2004-503319 concerning the ‘ALLOSTEM’ project under the Sixth Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (2002-2006) (‘the ALLOSTEM Contract’), as the Commission limited, or deprived, the applicant of the possibility to adduce evidence of the proper performance of the contract with respect to the eligibility of personnel costs by failing to observed the criteria for defining eligible costs.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging breach of the contractual obligations arising from Articles II.19 and II.20 of the general conditions of the ALLOSTEM Contract, as the Commission excluded the eligibility of costs relating to the ‘provision for loss of employment’ and maternity leave for a biologist recruited under a temporary contract.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 12 of the ALLOSTEM Contract by making the assessment of whether all debts arising under the contract were certain subject to Belgian law. The applicant claims that:






—


The Commission relied only on European Union law and not Belgian law in order to determine whether the debt claimed was certain, and










—


That the debt was the subject of a serious dispute preventing it from being certain.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6125 — Reale/Unnim/CSG)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-03-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: credit institution, economic concentration, insurance company, life assurance, merger control








C_2011081EN.01000502.xml










15.3.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 81/5





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6125 — Reale/Unnim/CSG)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 81/03
On 8 March 2011, 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 32011M6125. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case T-50/09: Judgment of the General Court of 15 March 2011 — Ifemy’s v OHIM — Dada & Co Kids (Dada & Co. kids) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark Dada & Co. kids — Earlier national word mark DADA — Relative ground for refusal — Absence of genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
Date: 2011-03-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, toy industry, trade-mark law








C_2011130EN.01001501.xml










30.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 130/15





Judgment of the General Court of 15 March 2011 — Ifemy’s v OHIM — Dada & Co Kids (Dada & Co. kids)
(Case T-50/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark Dada & Co. kids - Earlier national word mark DADA - Relative ground for refusal - Absence of genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2011/C 130/26
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Ifemy’s Holding GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: H.-G. Augustinowski, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Dada & Co. Kids Srl (Prato, Italy)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 November 2008 (Case R 911/2008-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Ifemy’s Holding GmbH and Dada & Co. Kids Srl.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Ifemy’s Holding GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 90, 18.4.2009.
Case T-161/11: Action brought on 15 March 2011 — High Tech v OHIM — Vitra Collections (Shape of a chair)
Date: 2011-03-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), furniture industry, trade-mark law








C_2011139EN.01002602.xml










7.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 139/26





Action brought on 15 March 2011 — High Tech v OHIM — Vitra Collections (Shape of a chair)
(Case T-161/11)
2011/C 139/50
Language in which the application was lodged: Italian

Parties


Applicant: High Tech Srl (Milan, Italy) (represented by: G. Floridia and R. Floridia, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Vitra Collections AG

Form of order sought







—


Annul the contested decision and declare Community trade mark No 2.298.420 invalid





Pleas in law and main arguments


Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: A three-dimensional figurative mark based on the ‘Alu chair’ (Community trade mark No 2 298 420), for goods in Class 20

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: Vitra Collections AG

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: High Tech Srl

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: Infringement of Article 7(1)(e)(iii) of Regulation 207/2009. The applicant also claimed that the mark should be declared invalid on the ground that its registration is intended to exclude the applicant from the market in design objects that have entered the public domain and therefore the registration was in bad faith.

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Rejection of the application for a declaration of invalidity

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Misinterpretation and misapplication of Articles 7(1)(e)(iii) and 52(1)(b) of Regulation 207/2009.