do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 341/2011 of 7 April 2011 not fixing a minimum selling price in response to the nineteenth individual invitation to tender for the sale of skimmed milk powder within the tendering procedure opened by Regulation (EU) No 447/2010
Date: 2011-04-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, market intervention, minimum price, selling price, skimmed milk powder








L_2011094EN.01002701.xml










8.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 94/27








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 341/2011
of 7 April 2011
         
not fixing a minimum selling price in response to the nineteenth individual invitation to tender for the sale of skimmed milk powder within the tendering procedure opened by Regulation (EU) No 447/2010


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), and in particular Article 43(j), in conjunction with Article 4 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Regulation (EU) No 447/2010 (2) has opened the sales of skimmed milk powder by a tendering procedure, in accordance with the conditions provided for in Commission Regulation (EU) No 1272/2009 of 11 December 2009 laying down common detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards buying-in and selling of agricultural products under public intervention (3).












(2)


In the light of the tenders received in response to individual invitations to tender, the Commission should fix a minimum selling price or should decide not to fix a minimum selling price, in accordance with Article 46(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1272/2009.












(3)


In the light of the tenders received for the nineteenth individual invitation to tender, no minimum selling price should be fixed.












(4)


The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
For the nineteenth individual invitation to tender for selling of skimmed milk powder within the tendering procedure opened by Regulation (EU) No 447/2010, in respect of which the time limit for the submission of tenders expired on 5 April 2011, no minimum selling price for skimmed milk powder shall be fixed.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 8 April 2011.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 7 April 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 126, 22.5.2010, p. 19.

(3)  
            OJ L 349, 29.12.2009, p. 1.
Case C-431/10: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 7 April 2011 — European Commission v Ireland (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 2005/85/EC — Right of asylum — Procedure for granting and withdrawing refugee status — Minimum standards — Failure to transpose provisions fully within the prescribed period)
Date: 2011-04-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU policy, Ireland, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, admission of aliens, refugee, right of asylum








C_2011160EN.01001001.xml










28.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 160/10





Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 7 April 2011 — European Commission v Ireland
(Case C-431/10) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2005/85/EC - Right of asylum - Procedure for granting and withdrawing refugee status - Minimum standards - Failure to transpose provisions fully within the prescribed period)
2011/C 160/09
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: M. Condou Durande and A.-A. Gilly, Agents)

Defendant: Ireland (represented by: D. O’Hagan, Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt within the prescribed period the provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status (OJ 2005 L 326, p. 13)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed period the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 43 of that directive;










2.


Orders Ireland to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 301, 6.11.2010.
Case C-402/09: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 7 April 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Sibiu — Romania) — Ioan Tatu v Statul român prin Ministerul Finanțelor și Economiei, Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice Sibiu, Administrația Finanțelor Publice Sibiu, Administrația Fondului pentru Mediu, Ministerul Mediului (Internal taxation — Article 110 TFEU — Pollution tax charged on first registration of motor vehicles — Neutrality of tax between imported second-hand motor vehicles and similar vehicles already on the domestic market)
Date: 2011-04-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: anti-discriminatory measure, environmental tax, infringement of EU law, interpretation of the law, motor vehicle, national law, regions of Romania








C_2011160EN.01000801.xml










28.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 160/8





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 7 April 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Sibiu — Romania) — Ioan Tatu v Statul român prin Ministerul Finanțelor și Economiei, Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice Sibiu, Administrația Finanțelor Publice Sibiu, Administrația Fondului pentru Mediu, Ministerul Mediului
(Case C-402/09) (1)

(Internal taxation - Article 110 TFEU - Pollution tax charged on first registration of motor vehicles - Neutrality of tax between imported second-hand motor vehicles and similar vehicles already on the domestic market)
2011/C 160/05
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Sibiu

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Ioan Tatu

Defendants: Statul român prin Ministerul Finanțelor și Economiei, Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice Sibiu, Administrația Finanțelor Publice Sibiu, Administrația Fondului pentru Mediu, Ministerul Mediului

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunalul Sibiu — Registration of second-hand vehicles previously registered in other Member States — National legislation subjecting first registration of those vehicles to payment of an environment tax, whereas second-hand vehicles already on the national market are exempted from payment of that tax on a subsequent registration — Compatibility of the national legislation with Article 90 EC — Obstacle to the free movement of goods

Operative part of the judgment

Article 110 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding a Member State from introducing a pollution tax levied on motor vehicles on their first registration in that Member State if that tax is arranged in such a way that it discourages the placing in circulation in that Member State of second-hand vehicles purchased in other Member States without discouraging the purchase of second-hand vehicles of the same age and condition on the domestic market.


(1)  OJ C 24, 30.1.2010.
Case C-20/09: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 7 April 2011 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Admissibility of the action — Free movement of capital — Article 56 EC — Article 40 of the EEA Agreement — Public debt securities — Preferential tax treatment — Justification — Combating of tax evasion — Combating of tax avoidance)
Date: 2011-04-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, European Economic Area, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, heritage protection, regions of Portugal, tax system








C_2011160EN.01000701.xml










28.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 160/7





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 7 April 2011 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
(Case C-20/09) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Admissibility of the action - Free movement of capital - Article 56 EC - Article 40 of the EEA Agreement - Public debt securities - Preferential tax treatment - Justification - Combating of tax evasion - Combating of tax avoidance)
2011/C 160/03
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal and A. Caeiros, Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, C. Guerra Santos and J. Menezes Leitão, Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Infringement of Articles 56 EC and 40 EEA Agreement — Public debt securities — Preferential tax treatment for securities issued by the Portuguese State

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


By providing under the exceptional tax regularisation scheme for assets not in Portuguese territory on 31 December 2004 (‘regime excepcional de regularização tributária de elementos patrimoniais que não se encontrem no território português em 31 de Dezembro de 2004’) established by Law No 39-A/2005 of 29 July 2005, for preferential tax treatment of public debt securities issued only by the Portuguese State, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 56 EC and Article 40 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992.










2.


The Portuguese Republic is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 82, 4.4.2009.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 345/2011 of 7 April 2011 establishing a prohibition of fishing for red seabream in EU and international waters of VI, VII and VIII by vessels flying the flag of France
Date: 2011-04-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU waters, France, common fisheries policy, fishing area, fishing regulations, fishing rights, sea fish, ship's flag








L_2011096EN.01001701.xml










9.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 96/17








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 345/2011
of 7 April 2011
         
establishing a prohibition of fishing for red seabream in EU and international waters of VI, VII and VIII by vessels flying the flag of France


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), and in particular Article 36(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Council Regulation (EU) No 1225/2010 of 13 December 2010 fixing for 2011 and 2012 the fishing opportunities for EU vessels for fish stocks of certain deep-sea fish species (2), lays down quotas for 2011 and 2012.












(2)


According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2011.












(3)


It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1

Quota exhaustion

The fishing quota allocated to the Member State referred to in the Annex to this Regulation for the stock referred to therein for 2011 shall be deemed to be exhausted from the date set out in that Annex.


Article 2

Prohibitions

Fishing activities for the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein shall be prohibited from the date set out in that Annex. In particular it shall be prohibited to retain on board, relocate, tranship or land fish from that stock caught by those vessels after that date.


Article 3

Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 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, 7 April 2011.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
Lowri EVANS
            

Director-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ L 336, 21.12.2010, p. 1.




ANNEX






No


6/DSS




Member State


France




Stock


SBR/678-




Species


Red seabream (Pagellus bogaraveo)




Zone


EU and international waters of VI, VII and VIII




Date


29 January 2011
Case T-12/09: Judgment of the General Court of 7 April 2011 — Gruber v OHIM (Run the globe) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark Run the globe — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
Date: 2011-04-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2011152EN.01001902.xml










21.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 152/19





Judgment of the General Court of 7 April 2011 — Gruber v OHIM (Run the globe)
(Case T-12/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark Run the globe - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2011/C 152/34
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Alexander Gruber (Ulm, Germany) (represented by: T. Kienle and M. Krinke, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Schnäffner, Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 November 2008 (Case R 1779/2007-1) concerning a request for registration of the word sign Run the globe as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Alexander Gruber to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 69, 21.3.2009.
Case C-291/09: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 7 April 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van koophandel te Brussel — Belgium) — Francesco Guarnieri & Cie v Vandevelde Eddy VOF (Free movement of goods — Article 34 TFEU — Cautio judicatum solvi — Company governed by Monegasque law — First paragraph of Article 18 TFEU)
Date: 2011-04-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Monaco, guarantee, interpretation of the law, legal action, legal expenses, regions and communities of Belgium








C_2011160EN.01000702.xml










28.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 160/7





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 7 April 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van koophandel te Brussel — Belgium) — Francesco Guarnieri & Cie v Vandevelde Eddy VOF
(Case C-291/09) (1)

(Free movement of goods - Article 34 TFEU - Cautio judicatum solvi - Company governed by Monegasque law - First paragraph of Article 18 TFEU)
2011/C 160/04
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank van koophandel te Brussel

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Francesco Guarnieri & Cie

Defendant: Vandevelde Eddy VOF

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Rechtbank van Koophandel te Brussel — Interpretation of Articles 28 EC, 29 EC and 30 EC — Whether security for costs and damages (cautio judicatum solvi) is an infringement of Community rules in relation to the free movement of goods

Operative part of the judgment

Article 34 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding the legislation of a Member State from requiring the provision of security pending judgment, by a claimant of Monegasque nationality which has brought proceedings before one of the civil courts of that State against a national of that State in order to obtain payment of invoices relating to the delivery of goods assimilated to Community goods, although such a requirement is not imposed on nationals of that Member State.


(1)  OJ C 267, 7.11.2009.
Corrigendum to Commission Decision 2001/548/EC of 9 July 2001 on the setting up of a committee in the area of supplementary pensions ( OJ L 196, 20.7.2001 )
Date: 2011-04-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: committee (EU), supplementary pension








L_2011093EN.01003801.xml










7.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 93/38







Corrigendum to Commission Decision 2001/548/EC of 9 July 2001 on the setting up of a committee in the area of supplementary pensions
(
Official Journal of the European Communities L 196 of 20 July 2001
)

On page 26, Article 3(2), second indent:
for:


                  ‘four seats for the other EFA member countries (one seat for the European Free Trade Association liaison office and one seat per country involved)’,

read:


                  ‘four seats for the other EEA member countries (one seat for the European Free Trade Association liaison office and one seat per country involved)’.
Case T-84/08: Judgment of the General Court of 7 April 2011 — Intesa Sanpaolo v OHIM — MIP Metro (COMIT) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark COMIT — Earlier national figurative mark Comet — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) — Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 216/96)
Date: 2011-04-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), banking, trade-mark law








C_2011152EN.01001901.xml










21.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 152/19





Judgment of the General Court of 7 April 2011 — Intesa Sanpaolo v OHIM — MIP Metro (COMIT)
(Case T-84/08) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark COMIT - Earlier national figurative mark Comet - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) - Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 216/96)
2011/C 152/33
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Intesa Sanpaolo SpA (Turin, Italy) (represented by: A. Perani and P. Pozzi, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Botis, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by R. Kaase, J.-C. Plate and M. Berger, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 December 2007 (Case R 138/2006-4), concerning opposition proceedings between MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG and Intesa Sanpaolo SpA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 19 December 2007 (Case R 138/2006-4) to the extent that it dismisses the claim made by Intesa Sanpaolo SpA in respect of the goods in Class 16;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders OHIM to bear its own costs, together with half of the costs incurred by Intesa Sanpaolo;










4.


Orders MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 116, 9.5.2008.
Corrigendum to call for proposals — EACEA/36/10 — EU-US Cooperation in Higher Education and Vocational Training — Atlantis: Actions for Transatlantic Links and Academic Networks in Training and Integrated Studies — Call for proposals 2011 ( OJ C 2, 5.1.2011 )
Date: 2011-04-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU relations, European cooperation, education, vocational training








C_2011108EN.01002601.xml










7.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 108/26





Corrigendum to call for proposals — EACEA/36/10 — EU-US Cooperation in Higher Education and Vocational Training — Atlantis: Actions for Transatlantic Links and Academic Networks in Training and Integrated Studies — Call for proposals 2011
(
Official Journal of the European Union C 2 of 5 January 2011
)
2011/C 108/12
On page 4, paragraph 6, the date for the deadline of applications has been modified as follows:
for:
‘7 April 2011.’,
read:
‘24 May 2011.’.
Case C-170/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 7 April 2011 — Maurice Robert Josse Marie Ghislain Lippens and Others v Hendrikus Cornelis Kortekaas and Others, other party: Ageas NV, previously Fortis N.V
Date: 2011-04-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Netherlands, interpretation of the law, judicial proceedings, proof








C_2011179EN.01001201.xml










18.6.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 179/12





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 7 April 2011 — Maurice Robert Josse Marie Ghislain Lippens and Others v Hendrikus Cornelis Kortekaas and Others, other party: Ageas NV, previously Fortis N.V
(Case C-170/11)
2011/C 179/22
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: 






 


Maurice Robert Josse Marie Ghislain Lippens










 


Gilbert Georges Henri Mittler










 


Jean Paul François Caroline Votron




Defendants: 






 


Hendrikus Cornelis Kortekaas










 


Kortekaas Entertainment Marketing B.V.










 


Kortekaas Pensioen B.V.










 


Dirk Robbard De Kat










 


Johannes Hendrikus Visch










 


Euphemia Joanna Bökkerink










 


Laminco Gld N-A




Other party: Ageas NV, previously Fortis N.V

Question referred

Must the EC Evidence Regulation, (1) in particular Article 1(1) thereof, be interpreted as meaning that a judge wishing to hear a witness who resides in another Member State must always, for that form of the taking of evidence, use the methods put in place by the EC Evidence Regulation, or does he have the power to use the methods provided by his own national procedural law such as summoning the witness to appear before him?


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 174, p.1).
Corrigendum to Directive 97/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 May 1997 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States concerning pressure equipment ( OJ L 181, 9.7.1997 )
Date: 2011-04-07
Institutions: Council of the European Union, European Parliament
Subjects: EC conformity marking, approximation of laws, pressure equipment, safety standard, technical regulations








L_2011093EN.01003802.xml










7.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 93/38







Corrigendum to Directive 97/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 May 1997 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States concerning pressure equipment
(
Official Journal of the European Communities L 181 of 9 July 1997
)

On page 11, Article 13(1), first subparagraph:
for:

               ‘… for the purposes of the tasks referred to in Annex I, sections 3.2.2 and 3.1.3.’,
read:

               ‘… for the purposes of the tasks referred to in Annex I, sections 3.1.2 and 3.1.3.’.