do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Procedure with joint committee meetings, coordinator meetings and the supply of information to non-attached Members (interpretation of Rules 51 and 192) European Parliament decision of 13 September 2011 concerning the procedure with joint committee meetings, coordinator meetings and the supply of information to non-attached Members (interpretation of Rules 51 and 192)
Date: 2011-09-13
Institutions: Committee on Constitutional Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: international agreement, legislative procedure, operation of the Institutions, powers of parliament, rules of procedure








CE2013051EN.01015101.xml










22.2.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 51/151





Tuesday 13 September 2011Procedure with joint committee meetings, coordinator meetings and the supply of information to non-attached Members (interpretation of Rules 51 and 192)
P7_TA(2011)0368
European Parliament decision of 13 September 2011 concerning the procedure with joint committee meetings, coordinator meetings and the supply of information to non-attached Members (interpretation of Rules 51 and 192)
2013/C 51 E/27

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the letters of 12 July 2011 from the Chair of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs,










—


having regard to Rule 211 of its Rules of Procedure,










1.


Decides to append the following interpretation to Rule 51:
"This Rule can be applied to the procedure leading to a recommendation to approve or reject the conclusion of an international agreement pursuant to Rules 90(5) and 81(1) provided that the conditions set out in it are fulfilled.";










2.


Decides to append the following interpretation to Rule 192:






 


"Non-attached Members do not constitute a political group within the meaning of Rule 30 and they cannot therefore designate coordinators, who are the only Members entitled to attend coordinator meetings.










 


The function of coordinator meetings is to prepare committee decisions and they may not replace committee meetings without explicit delegation. Hence ex-ante delegation is required for decisions taken at coordinator meetings. In the absence of such delegation, coordinators may only adopt recommendations requiring formal ex-post approval by the committee.










 


In all cases, non-attached Members must be guaranteed access to information, in accordance with the principle of non-discrimination, through the supply of information and the presence of a member of the non-attached Members’ secretariat at coordinator meetings.";














3.


Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission, for information.
Case F-68/10: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 13 September 2011 — Behnke v Commission (Civil Service — Officials — 2009 appraisal and promotion exercise — Statement of reasons of the opinion of the Joint Appraisal and Promotion Committee — Manifest error of assessment)
Date: 2011-09-13
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, appointment of staff, joint committee on EU matters, professional career, staff assessment








C_2011340EN.01003702.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/37





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 13 September 2011 — Behnke v Commission
(Case F-68/10) (1)

(Civil Service - Officials - 2009 appraisal and promotion exercise - Statement of reasons of the opinion of the Joint Appraisal and Promotion Committee - Manifest error of assessment)
2011/C 340/74
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Thorsten Behnke (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and É. Marchal, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Bersheid and C. Berardis-Kayser, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision to classify the applicant in performance group II and to award him 5 promotion points in his career development report for the period from 1 January to 31 December 2008.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the application;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay, in addition to its own costs, one quarter of the costs incurred by Mr Behnke;










3.


Orders Mr Behnke to pay three quarters of his own costs.






(1)  OJ C 288, 23.10.10, p. 74.
Case T-397/10: Order of the General Court of 13 September 2011 — ara v OHIM (Community trade mark — Opposition procedure — Failure to submit the statement of grounds of appeal to the Board of Appeal within the prescribed time-limit Decision of the Board of Appeal rejecting an application of the full re-establishment of the applicant's rights — Action manifestly lacking a legal basis)
Date: 2011-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, footwear industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011331EN.01002103.xml










12.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 331/21





Order of the General Court of 13 September 2011 — ara v OHIM
(Case T-397/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition procedure - Failure to submit the statement of grounds of appeal to the Board of Appeal within the prescribed time-limit Decision of the Board of Appeal rejecting an application of the full re-establishment of the applicant's rights - Action manifestly lacking a legal basis)
2011/C 331/42
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: ara AG (Langenfeld, Germany) (represented by: M. Gail, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Allrounder SARL (Sarrebourg, France)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 June 2010 (Case R 1543/2009-1) concerning the applicant's application for full re-establishment of the its rights

Operative part of the order







1.


The application is dismissed as manifestly lacking a legal basis.










2.


ara AG is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 301, 6.11.2010.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 915/2011 of 13 September 2011 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2011-09-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: common organisation of markets, fruit, import (EU), import price, vegetable








L_2011237EN.01001701.xml










14.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 237/17








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 915/2011
of 13 September 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 Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors (2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,

Whereas:

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 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 XVI, Part A thereto,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex hereto.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 14 September 2011.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 13 September 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 157, 15.6.2011, 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 


AR 


33,3 




ZZ 


33,3 




0707 00 05 


EG 


135,3 




TR 


127,4 




ZZ 


131,4 




0709 90 70 


TR 


124,0 




ZZ 


124,0 




0805 50 10 


AR 


78,8 




CL 


87,4 




MX 


39,8 




TR 


67,0 




UY 


77,5 




ZA 


75,5 




ZZ 


71,0 




0806 10 10 


EG 


156,9 




TR 


101,8 




ZA 


59,8 




ZZ 


106,2 




0808 10 80 


AR 


147,6 




CL 


148,5 




NZ 


110,7 




US 


82,6 




ZA 


90,7 




ZZ 


116,0 




0808 20 50 


AR 


215,6 




CN 


70,0 




TR 


121,0 




ZA 


126,6 




ZZ 


133,3 




0809 30 


TR 


138,9 




ZZ 


138,9 






(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 T-523/08: Order of the General Court of 13 September 2011 — Ruiz de la Prada de Sentmenat v OHIM — Quant Cosmetics Japan (AGATHA RUIZ DE LA PRADA) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark AGATHA RUIZ DE LA PRADA — Earlier national and Community figurative marks representing a black and white flower — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2011-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011311EN.01003801.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/38





Order of the General Court of 13 September 2011 — Ruiz de la Prada de Sentmenat v OHIM — Quant Cosmetics Japan (AGATHA RUIZ DE LA PRADA)
(Case T-523/08) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark AGATHA RUIZ DE LA PRADA - Earlier national and Community figurative marks representing a black and white flower - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2011/C 311/67
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Agatha Ruiz de la Prada de Sentmenat (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: R. Bercovitz Álvarez, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: Mary Quant Cosmetics Japan Ltd (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: R. Arnold and C. Hicks, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 September 2008 (Case R 1522/2007-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Mary Quant Cosmetics Japan Ltd and Agatha Ruiz de la Prada de Sentmenat

Operative part of the order







1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders Agatha Ruiz de la Prada de Sentmenat to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 32, 7.2.2009.
Case T-62/10 P: Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2011 — Zangerl-Posselt v Commission (Appeal — Civil service — Recruitment — Notice of competition — General competition — Non-admission to practical tests and orals — Conditions of admission — Diplomas required — Article 5(3)(a)(ii) of the Staff Regulations — Interpretation — Consideration of different language versions — Preparatory documents)
Date: 2011-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: competition (EU), diploma, information profession








C_2011311EN.01004302.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/43





Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2011 — Zangerl-Posselt v Commission
(Case T-62/10 P) (1)

(Appeal - Civil service - Recruitment - Notice of competition - General competition - Non-admission to practical tests and orals - Conditions of admission - Diplomas required - Article 5(3)(a)(ii) of the Staff Regulations - Interpretation - Consideration of different language versions - Preparatory documents)
2011/C 311/79
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Brigitte Zangerl-Posselt (Merzig, Germany) (represented by: S. Paulmann, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and B. Eggers, agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (First Chamber) of 30 November 2009 in Case F-83/07 Zangerl-Posselt v Commission and applying for that judgment to be set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Ms Brigitte Zangerl-Posselt to bear her own costs and those incurred by the European Commission in the present proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 113, 1.5.2010.
Information on the date of signature of the Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Partnership Agreement in the fisheries sector between the European Union and the Republic of Cape Verde
Date: 2011-09-13
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Cabo Verde, fishing agreement, fishing permit, interim agreement (EU), protocol to an agreement, signature of an agreement








L_2011236EN.01000101.xml










13.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 236/1







Information on the date of signature of the Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Partnership Agreement in the fisheries sector between the European Union and the Republic of Cape Verde

The European Union and the Government of the Republic of Cape Verde signed the Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Partnership Agreement in the fisheries sector in Brussels on 27 July 2011.
The Protocol accordingly applies provisionally from 1 September 2011 pursuant to Article 15 thereof.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6329 — Total Energie Developpement/Tenesol)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-09-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, gas, merger control, petroleum, solar energy








C_2011270EN.01000101.xml










13.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6329 — Total Energie Developpement/Tenesol)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 270/01
On 22 August 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 French 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 32011M6329. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
International Tropical Timber Agreement *** European Parliament legislative resolution of 13 September 2011 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the 2006 International Tropical Timber Agreement (05812/2011 – C7-0061/2011 – 2006/0263(NLE))
Date: 2011-09-13
Institutions: Committee on International Trade, European Parliament
Subjects: UNO, forest conservation, international agreement, trade agreement (EU), tropical wood








CE2013051EN.01016602.xml










22.2.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 51/166





Tuesday 13 September 2011International Tropical Timber Agreement ***
P7_TA(2011)0351
European Parliament legislative resolution of 13 September 2011 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the 2006 International Tropical Timber Agreement (05812/2011 – C7-0061/2011 – 2006/0263(NLE))
2013/C 51 E/36
(Consent)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the draft Council decision (05812/2011),










—


having regard to the draft 2006 International Tropical Timber Agreement (11964/2007),










—


having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Articles 192, 207 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0061/2011),










—


having regard to Rules 81 and 90(8) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade (A7-0280/2011),










1.


Consents to conclusion of the Agreement;










2.


Calls on the Commission to provide, whenever requested by Parliament, any relevant information regarding the implementation of this Agreement, namely on action plans and programmes, as well as the decisions taken by the bodies established by the Agreement;










3.


Calls on the Commission to submit a review of the implementation of the Agreement to Parliament and the Council in the final year of application, before negotiations are opened on the renewal of the Agreement, in particular in relation to the Union’s own forest law enforcement, governance and trade instruments;










4.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States and to the International Tropical Timber Organization.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 919/2011 of 13 September 2011 establishing a prohibition of fishing for roundnose grenadier in EU and international waters of VIII, IX, X, XII and XIV by vessels flying the flag of a Member State of the European Union
Date: 2011-09-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, EU waters, catch quota, fishing rights, international waters, sea fish, ship's flag








L_2011238EN.01002601.xml










15.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 238/26








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 919/2011
of 13 September 2011
         
establishing a prohibition of fishing for roundnose grenadier in EU and international waters of VIII, IX, X, XII and XIV by vessels flying the flag of a Member State of the European Union


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 States 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 States 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 States 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 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, 13 September 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


37/DSS




Member State


European Union – All Member States




Stock


RNG/8X14-




Species


Roundnose grenadier (Coryphaenoides rupestris)




Zone


EU and international waters of VIII, IX, X, XII and XIV




Date


8.8.2011
Case F-100/09: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 13 September 2011 Michail v Commission (Civil service — Official — Res judicata — Duty to provide assistance — Article 24 of the Staff Regulations — Psychological harassment)
Date: 2011-09-13
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, enforcement of ruling, psychological harassment








C_2011362EN.01002202.xml










10.12.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 362/22





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 13 September 2011 Michail v Commission
(Case F-100/09) (1)

(Civil service - Official - Res judicata - Duty to provide assistance - Article 24 of the Staff Regulations - Psychological harassment)
2011/C 362/35
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Christos Michail (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: C. Meïdanis, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission (represented by: J. Currall and J. Baquero Cruz, Agents, and by E. Bourtzalas and E. Antypa, lawyers)

Re:

Annulment of the defendant’s decision to reject the request for assistance made under Article 24 of the Staff Regulations in respect of the psychological harassment which the applicant claims to have suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Michail to bear his own costs and those of the Commission.






(1)  OJ C 63, 13.3.2010, p. 52.