do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-570/10: Order of the President of the Court of 2 May 2011 — European Commission v Ireland
Date: 2011-05-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Ireland, land transport, transport of dangerous goods








C_2011252EN.01002805.xml










27.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/28





Order of the President of the Court of 2 May 2011 — European Commission v Ireland
(Case C-570/10) (1)

2011/C 252/64
Language of the case: English
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 63, 26.2.2011.
Case C-207/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione tributaria regionale di Milano (Italy) lodged on 2 May 2011 — 3D I srl v Agenzia delle Entrate — Ufficio di Cremona
Date: 2011-05-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, demerger, interpretation of the law, merger, tax, tax system








C_2011211EN.01001401.xml










16.7.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 211/14





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione tributaria regionale di Milano (Italy) lodged on 2 May 2011 — 3D I srl v Agenzia delle Entrate — Ufficio di Cremona
(Case C-207/11)
2011/C 211/26
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Commissione tributaria regionale di Milano

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: 3D I srl

Defendant: Agenzia delle Entrate — Ufficio di Cremona

Question referred

Where the legislation of a Member State — such as the Italian legislation laid down in Article 2(2) of Legislative Decree No 544 of 30 December 1992 — provides that, in consequence of a transfer or exchange of shares, the transferring company is to be taxed on the capital gains arising from the transfer and the capital gain is to be deemed to correspond to the difference between the initial cost of acquiring the shares or holdings transferred and their current market value, unless the transferring company carries over in its own balance sheet a special reserve fund equivalent to the capital gains arising upon the transfer, is that legislation, in the circumstances of the case covered by the present proceedings, incompatible with Articles 2, 4 and 8(1) and (2) of Council Directive 90/434/EEC (1) of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States?


(1)  OJ L 225, p. 1.
Case C-206/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 2 May 2011 — Georg Köck v Schutzverband gegen unlauteren Wettbewerb
Date: 2011-05-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Austria, advertising malpractice, judicial proceedings








C_2011226EN.01001101.xml










30.7.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 226/11





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 2 May 2011 — Georg Köck v Schutzverband gegen unlauteren Wettbewerb
(Case C-206/11)
2011/C 226/20
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Georg Köck

Respondent: Schutzverband gegen unlauteren Wettbewerb

Question referred

Do Articles 3(1) and 5(5) of Directive 2005/29/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Unfair Commercial Practices Directive) or other provisions of that directive preclude a national provision under which the announcement of a clearance sale without the authorisation of the competent administrative authority is not permitted and for that reason must be prohibited in court proceedings, without it being necessary in those proceedings for the court to consider whether such a commercial practice is misleading, aggressive or otherwise unfair?


(1)  Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ 2005 L 149, p. 22).
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 429/2011 of 2 May 2011 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2011-05-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, perennial vegetable, pip fruit








L_2011113EN.01000801.xml










3.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 113/8








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 429/2011
of 2 May 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 3 May 2011.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 2 May 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 


JO 


78,3 




MA 


36,7 




TN 


112,2 




TR 


87,3 




ZZ 


78,6 




0707 00 05 


AL 


107,4 




EG 


152,2 




TR 


113,8 




ZZ 


124,5 




0709 90 70 


JO 


78,3 




MA 


78,8 




TR 


129,8 




ZZ 


95,6 




0709 90 80 


EC 


33,0 




ZZ 


33,0 




0805 10 20 


EG 


58,1 




IL 


81,6 




MA 


53,3 




TN 


51,7 




TR 


68,8 




ZZ 


62,7 




0805 50 10 


TR 


46,0 




ZZ 


46,0 




0808 10 80 


AR 


78,0 




BR 


82,1 




CA 


111,8 




CL 


89,9 




CN 


89,1 




MA 


86,7 




MK 


50,2 




NZ 


112,0 




US 


128,6 




UY 


62,5 




ZA 


85,8 




ZZ 


88,8 






(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’.
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position at its meeting of 2 May 2011 concerning a draft decision relating to Case COMP/39.796 — Suez Environnement — Breach of seal — Rapporteur: Czech Republic
Date: 2011-05-02
Institutions: Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions
Subjects: Czechia, dominant position, fine, infringement procedure (EU), offence, transport under customs control, water supply








C_2011251EN.01000201.xml










27.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 251/2





Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position at its meeting of 2 May 2011 concerning a draft decision relating to Case COMP/39.796 — Suez Environnement — Breach of seal
Rapporteur: Czech Republic
2011/C 251/02






1.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that Lyonnaise des Eaux France SA and Suez Environnement Company SA, at least by negligence, infringed Article 23(1)(e) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.










2.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the factors taken into account by the Commission when calculating the level of the fine for Lyonnaise des Eaux France SA and Suez Environnement Company SA pursuant to Article 23(1)(e) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.










3.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the actual level of the fine proposed by the Commission.










4.


The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.
2011/286/EU: Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 May 2011 on mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund, in accordance with point 26 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management
Date: 2011-05-02
Institutions: Council of the European Union, European Parliament
Subjects: Croatia, Czechia, EU aid, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, fund (EU)








L_2011132EN.01001301.xml










19.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 132/13








            DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
         
of 2 May 2011
         
on mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund, in accordance with point 26 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management
(2011/286/EU)


THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (1), and in particular point 26 thereof,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund (2),


Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

Whereas:







(1)


The European Union has created a European Union Solidarity Fund (the ‘Fund’) to show solidarity with the population of regions struck by disasters.












(2)


The Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 allows the mobilisation of the Fund within the annual ceiling of EUR 1 billion.












(3)


Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 contains the provisions whereby the Fund may be mobilised.












(4)


Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Croatia and Romania submitted their application to mobilise the Fund, concerning disaster caused by landslides and heavy flooding,





HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
For the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2011, the European Union Solidarity Fund shall be mobilised to provide the sum of EUR 182 388 893 in commitment and payment appropriations.


Article 2
This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 2 May 2011.


For the European Parliament


The President

J. BUZEK
            



For the Council


The President


               CSÉFALVAY Z.





(1)  
            OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ L 311, 14.11.2002, p. 3.
2011/268/EU: Council Decision of 2 May 2011 appointing one Bulgarian member of the European Economic and Social Committee
Date: 2011-05-02
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Bulgaria, European Economic and Social Committee, appointment of members








L_2011118EN.01000801.xml










6.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 118/8








            COUNCIL DECISION
         
of 2 May 2011
         
appointing one Bulgarian member of the European Economic and Social Committee
(2011/268/EU)


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 302 thereof,


Having regard to the proposal of the Bulgarian Government,


Having regard to the opinion of the European Commission,

Whereas:







(1)


On 13 September 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/570/EU, Euratom appointing the members of the European Economic and Social Committee for the period from 21 September 2010 to 20 September 2015 (1).












(2)


A member’s seat on the European Economic and Social Committee has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Jeliazko CHRISTOV,





HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:



Article 1
Mr Ivan KOKALOV, Vice-President of КНСБ (CITUB, Confederation of Independent Trade Unions of Bulgaria), is hereby appointed as a member of the European Economic and Social Committee for the remainder of the current term of office, which is until 20 September 2015.


Article 2
This Decision shall take effect on the day of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 2 May 2011.


For the Council


The President


               MARTONYI J.





(1)  
            OJ L 251, 25.9.2010, p. 8.
Case F-53/11: Action brought on 2 May 2011 — ZZ v Commission
Date: 2011-05-02
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, European official, competition (EU)








C_2011186EN.01003702.xml










25.6.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 186/37





Action brought on 2 May 2011 — ZZ v Commission
(Case F-53/11)
2011/C 186/71
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, E. Marchal and D. Abreu Caldas, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision not to list the applicant as a successful candidate in competition EPSO/AD/168/09-PL.

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the selection board in competition EPSO/AD/168/09-PL not to list the applicant as a successful candidate in that competition;










—


Order the Commission to pay the costs.
Case T-231/11: Action brought on 2 May 2011 — Fraas v OHIM (Dark grey, light grey, light blue, dark blue, ochre and beige coloured checked pattern)
Date: 2011-05-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011238EN.01001802.xml










13.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 238/18





Action brought on 2 May 2011 — Fraas v OHIM (Dark grey, light grey, light blue, dark blue, ochre and beige coloured checked pattern)
(Case T-231/11)
2011/C 238/32
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: V. Fraas GmbH (Helmbrechts-Wüstenselbitz, Germany) (represented by R. Kunze and G. Würtenberger, lawyers)

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

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of 4 March 2011 in Case R 2041/2010-4 relating to Community trade mark application No 008 423 626 (figurative mark);










—


Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark representing a dark grey, light grey, light blue, dark blue, ochre and beige coloured checked pattern for goods in Classes 18, 24, and 25 — application No 8 423 626.

Decision of the Examiner: Partial rejection of the application

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009, as the Community trade mark at issue has distinctive character, and infringement of Articles 75 and 76 of Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal did not examine the extensive factual and legal submissions of the applicant.