do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-338/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil (France) lodged on 4 July 2011 — Santander Asset Management SGIIC SA, on behalf of FIM Santander Top 25 Euro Fi v Direction des résidents à l’étranger et des services généraux
Date: 2011-07-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, free movement of capital, interpretation of the law, investment company








C_2011269EN.01003301.xml










10.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/33





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil (France) lodged on 4 July 2011 — Santander Asset Management SGIIC SA, on behalf of FIM Santander Top 25 Euro Fi v Direction des résidents à l’étranger et des services généraux
(Case C-338/11)
2011/C 269/64
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Société Santander Asset Management SGIIC SA, on behalf of FIM Santander Top 25 Euro Fi

Defendant: Direction des résidents à l’étranger et des services généraux

Questions referred







1.


Must the situation of the shareholders be taken into account together with that of undertakings for collective investments in transferable securities (UCITS)?










2.


If so, what are the conditions under which the withholding tax at issue may be regarded as consistent with the principle of free movement of capital?
Commission Regulation (EU) No 647/2011 of 4 July 2011 correcting the Slovenian version of Regulation (EU) No 258/2010 imposing special conditions on the imports of guar gum originating in or consigned from India due to contamination risks by pentachlorophenol and dioxins, and repealing Decision 2008/352/EC  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-07-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: India, chemical product, food additive, food inspection, food safety, foodstuffs legislation, health certificate, health risk, originating product








L_2011176EN.01001701.xml










5.7.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 176/17








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 647/2011
of 4 July 2011
         
correcting the Slovenian version of Regulation (EU) No 258/2010 imposing special conditions on the imports of guar gum originating in or consigned from India due to contamination risks by pentachlorophenol and dioxins, and repealing Decision 2008/352/EC
(Text with EEA relevance)


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (1), and in particular Article 53 (1) (b) (ii) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


On 25 March 2010, the Commission adopted Regulation (EU) No 258/2010 (2) imposing special conditions on the imports of guar gum and repealing Decision 2008/352/EC. In the Slovenian language version of that Regulation, the wording ‘feed and food business operators’ was translated incorrectly and therefore a correction of that language version is necessary. The other language versions are not affected.












(2)


Regulation (EU) No 258/2010 should therefore be corrected accordingly.












(3)


The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
This correcting regulation concerns only the Slovenian language version.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of 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, 4 July 2011.


For the Commission


The President

José Manuel BARROSO
            





(1)  
            OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ L 80, 26.3.2010, p. 28.
Case C-342/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil (France) lodged on 4 July 2011 — SICAV KBC Select Immo v Ministre du budget, des comptes publiques, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat
Date: 2011-07-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, free movement of capital, interpretation of the law, investment company








C_2011269EN.01003403.xml










10.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/34





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil (France) lodged on 4 July 2011 — SICAV KBC Select Immo v Ministre du budget, des comptes publiques, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat
(Case C-342/11)
2011/C 269/68
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: SICAV KBC Select Immo

Defendant: Ministre du budget, des comptes publiques, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat

Questions referred







1.


Must the situation of the shareholders be taken into account together with that of undertakings for collective investments in transferable securities (UCITS)?










2.


If so, what are the conditions under which the withholding tax at issue may be regarded as consistent with the principle of free movement of capital?
Case C-339/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal administratif de Montreuil (France) lodged on 4 July 2011 — Santander Asset Management SGIIC SA, on behalf of Cartera Mobiliaria SA SICAV v Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat
Date: 2011-07-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, free movement of capital, interpretation of the law, investment company








C_2011269EN.01003302.xml










10.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/33





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal administratif de Montreuil (France) lodged on 4 July 2011 — Santander Asset Management SGIIC SA, on behalf of Cartera Mobiliaria SA SICAV v Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat
(Case C-339/11)
2011/C 269/65
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal administratif de Montreuil

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Santander Asset Management SGIIC SA, on behalf of Cartera Mobiliaria SA SICAV

Defendant: Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat

Questions referred







1.


Must the situation of the shareholders be taken into account together with that of undertakings for collective investments in transferable securities (UCITS)?










2.


If so, what are the conditions under which the withholding tax at issue may be regarded as consistent with the principle of free movement of capital?
Case C-349/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de Première Instance de Liège (Belgium) lodged on 4 July 2011 — Auditeur du Travail v Yangwei SPRL
Date: 2011-07-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, interpretation of the law, part-time employment, work contract








C_2011282EN.01000502.xml










24.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/5





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de Première Instance de Liège (Belgium) lodged on 4 July 2011 — Auditeur du Travail v Yangwei SPRL
(Case C-349/11)
2011/C 282/10
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de Première Instance de Liège

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Auditeur du Travail

Defendant: Yangwei SPRL

Question referred

Must Clause 5.1(a) of the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC, annexed to Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC (1), be interpreted as precluding national legislation such as:






—


The obligation to keep a copy of the part-time employment contract or an extract, containing the work schedule, identity and signature of the two parties at the place where the rules governing employment can be consulted (Article 157 of the Programme Law);










—


The obligation that it must be possible to ascertain at any time when the cycle commences (Article 158 of the Programme Law);










—


As regards variable work schedules, the obligation for the employer to notify the worker by notice five days in advance; a notice must furthermore be displayed at the beginning of the day containing the individual work schedule of each part-time worker; this notice must furthermore be retained for one year (Article 159 of the Programme Law);










—


The obligation for an employer who employs part-time workers to have a document recording all the departures from work schedules referred to in Articles 157 to 159 (Article 160 of the Programme Law), a document that must be kept in accordance with certain conditions specified in Article 161 of the Programme Law?






(1)  OJ 1998, L 14, p. 9
Case C-350/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Antwerpen (Belgium) lodged on 4 July 2011 — Argenta Spaarbank NV v Belgische Staat
Date: 2011-07-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Netherlands, interpretation of the law, tax relief, venture capital








C_2011282EN.01000601.xml










24.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/6





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Antwerpen (Belgium) lodged on 4 July 2011 — Argenta Spaarbank NV v Belgische Staat
(Case C-350/11)
2011/C 282/11
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Antwerpen

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Argenta Spaarbank NV

Defendant: Belgische Staat

Question referred

Does Article 43 EC [now Article 49 TFEU] preclude national tax legislation pursuant to which, for the purposes of the calculation of its taxable profit, a company subject to unlimited tax liability in Belgium cannot apply a deduction in respect of risk capital in the amount of the positive difference between (i) the net book value of the assets of the establishments that that company runs in another Member State of the European Union and (ii) the total liabilities that are imputable to those establishments, whereas it can apply a deduction in respect of risk capital if that positive difference can be imputed to a permanent establishment located in Belgium?
Case C-347/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil (France) lodged on 4 July 2011 — Generali Investments Deutschland Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH, on behalf of AMB Generali Aktien Euroland v Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat
Date: 2011-07-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, free movement of capital, interpretation of the law, investment company








C_2011269EN.01003504.xml










10.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/35





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil (France) lodged on 4 July 2011 — Generali Investments Deutschland Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH, on behalf of AMB Generali Aktien Euroland v Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat
(Case C-347/11)
2011/C 269/73
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Generali Investments Deutschland Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH, on behalf of AMB Generali Aktien Euroland

Defendant: Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat

Questions referred







1.


Must the situation of the shareholders be taken into account together with that of undertakings for collective investments in transferable securities (UCITS)?










2.


If so, what are the conditions under which the withholding tax at issue may be regarded as consistent with the principle of free movement of capital?
Case C-345/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil (France) lodged on 4 July 2011 — Continental Small Company Series of the DFA Investment Trust Company v Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat
Date: 2011-07-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, free movement of capital, interpretation of the law, investment company








C_2011269EN.01003502.xml










10.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/35





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil (France) lodged on 4 July 2011 — Continental Small Company Series of the DFA Investment Trust Company v Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat
(Case C-345/11)
2011/C 269/71
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Continental Small Company Series of the DFA Investment Trust Company

Defendant: Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat

Questions referred







1.


Must the situation of the shareholders be taken into account together with that of undertakings for collective investments in transferable securities (UCITS)?










2.


If so, what are the conditions under which the withholding tax at issue may be regarded as consistent with the principle of free movement of capital?
2011/396/EU: Commission Implementing Decision of 4 July 2011 authorising a laboratory in Japan to carry out serological tests to monitor the effectiveness of rabies vaccines (notified under document C(2011) 4595)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-07-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Japan, health control, rabies, research body, vaccine








L_2011176EN.01005101.xml










5.7.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 176/51








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION
         
of 4 July 2011
         
authorising a laboratory in Japan to carry out serological tests to monitor the effectiveness of rabies vaccines
(notified under document C(2011) 4595)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2011/396/EU)


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Decision 2000/258/EC of 20 March 2000 designating a specific institute responsible for establishing the criteria necessary for standardising the serological tests to monitor the effectiveness of rabies vaccines (1), and in particular Article 3(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Decision 2000/258/EC designates the Agence nationale de sécurité sanitaire de l’alimentation, de l’environnement et du travail (ANSES) in Nancy, France (previously known as the Agence française de sécurité sanitaire des aliments, AFSSA), as the specific institute responsible for establishing the criteria necessary for standardising the serological tests to monitor the effectiveness of rabies vaccines.












(2)


That Decision also provides that the ANSES is to document the appraisal of laboratories in third countries that have applied to carry out serological tests to monitor the effectiveness of rabies vaccines.












(3)


The competent authority of Japan has submitted an application for approval of a laboratory in that third country to perform such serological tests. That application is supported by a favourable report by the ANSES dated 4 February 2011 of the appraisal of that laboratory.












(4)


That laboratory should therefore be authorised to carry out serological tests to monitor the effectiveness of rabies vaccines in dogs, cats and ferrets.












(5)


The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
In accordance with Article 3(2) of Decision 2000/258/EC, the following laboratory is authorised to perform the serological tests to monitor the effectiveness of rabies vaccines in dogs, cats and ferrets:





Laboratory Department, Animal Quarantine Service




Ministry of Agriculture, forestry and fisheries




11-1, Haramachi, Isogo-ku




Yokohama




Kanagawa 235-0008




JAPAN






Article 2
This Decision shall apply from 1 August 2011.


Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.




Done at Brussels, 4 July 2011.


For the Commission

John DALLI
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 79, 30.3.2000, p. 40.
Case T-275/09: Order of the General Court of 4 July 2011 — Sepracor Pharmaceuticals v Commission (Action for annulment — Medicinal products for human use — Active substance eszopiclone — Marketing authorisation — Refusal of recognition as a new active substance — Act not amenable to review — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2011-07-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Ireland, marketing, pharmaceutical product, plant health product, toxic substance








C_2011282EN.01001702.xml










24.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/17





Order of the General Court of 4 July 2011 — Sepracor Pharmaceuticals v Commission
(Case T-275/09) (1)

(Action for annulment - Medicinal products for human use - Active substance eszopiclone - Marketing authorisation - Refusal of recognition as a new active substance - Act not amenable to review - Inadmissibility)
2011/C 282/31
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sepracor Pharmaceuticals (Ireland) Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: I. Dodds-Smith, Solicitor, D. Anderson QC, and J. Stratford, Barrister)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Sipos, and subsequently by M. Wilderspin and M. Šimerdová, Agents)

Re:

ACTION for annulment of the decision in the letter of the Commission addressed to the applicant on 6 May 2009 in the context of the procedure for authorising the placing on the market of Lunivia, inasmuch as it concerns classification of the active substance eszopiclone

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


Sepracor Pharmaceuticals (Ireland) Ltd shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 220, 12.9.2009.
Case C-346/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administratrif de Montreuil (France) lodged on 4 July 2011 — SICAV GA Fund B v Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat
Date: 2011-07-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, free movement of capital, interpretation of the law, investment company








C_2011269EN.01003503.xml










10.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/35





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administratrif de Montreuil (France) lodged on 4 July 2011 — SICAV GA Fund B v Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat
(Case C-346/11)
2011/C 269/72
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal Administratrif de Montreuil

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: SICAV GA Fund B

Defendant: Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat

Questions referred







1.


Must the situation of the shareholders be taken into account together with that of undertakings for collective investments in transferable securities (UCITS)?










2.


If so, what are the conditions under which the withholding tax at issue may be regarded as consistent with the principle of free movement of capital?
Case T-367/11: Action brought on 4 July 2011 — Lyder Enterprises v CPVO Liner Plants NZ (1993) (Southern Splendour)
Date: 2011-07-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Community Plant Variety Office, judicial proceedings, plant variety right








C_2011282EN.01002801.xml










24.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/28





Action brought on 4 July 2011 — Lyder Enterprises v CPVO Liner Plants NZ (1993) (Southern Splendour)
(Case T-367/11)
2011/C 282/57
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Lyder Enterprises Ltd (Auckland, New Zealand) (represented by: G. Pickering, Solicitor)

Defendant: Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Liner Plants NZ (1993) Ltd (Waitakere, New Zealand)

Form of order sought







—


Set aside and annul the decision of the Board of Appeal of the Community Plant Variety Office of 18 February 2011 in case A007/2010; and










—


Stay the proceedings until the final decision of the High Court of New Zealand in case No CIV:2011:404:2969 is taken.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for Community plant variety right: The applicant

Community plant variety right concerned: Southern Splendour — Community plant variety right application No 2006/1888

Objector to the Community plant variety right application: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Grounds of the objection: The objection was based on the contention that the applicant was not the person who bred, or discovered and developed the variety, or his successor in title

Decision of the Committee of the CPVO: Refused the application No 2006/1888 for the variety ‘Southern Splendour’ (Decision No R972)

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of the audi alteram partum rule, lack of competence, failure to understand the fundamental rules of natural justice and infringement of an essential procedural requirement, as the Board of Appeal decided that the evidence contained in the applicant’s letters was not acceptable as it was not in affidavit format.
Case C-344/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil (France) lodged on 4 July 2011 — International Values Series of the DFA Investment Trust Company v Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat
Date: 2011-07-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, free movement of capital, interpretation of the law, investment company








C_2011269EN.01003501.xml










10.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/35





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil (France) lodged on 4 July 2011 — International Values Series of the DFA Investment Trust Company v Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat
(Case C-344/11)
2011/C 269/70
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal Administratif de Montreuil

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: International Values Series of the DFA Investment Trust Company

Defendant: Ministre du budget, des comptes publics, de la fonction publique et de la réforme de l’Etat

Questions referred







1.


Must the situation of the shareholders be taken into account together with that of undertakings for collective investments in transferable securities (UCITS)?










2.


If so, what are the conditions under which the withholding tax at issue may be regarded as consistent with the principle of free movement of capital?