do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Joined Cases C-463/10 P and C-475/10 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 13 October 2011 — Deutsche Post AG, Federal Republic of Germany v European Commission (Appeals — State aid — Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 — Article 10(3) — Decision requiring the production of information — Act open to challenge for the purposes of Article 263 TFEU)
Date: 2011-10-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU aid, access to EU information, disclosure of information, right to justice








C_2011355EN.01000701.xml










3.12.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 355/7





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 13 October 2011 — Deutsche Post AG, Federal Republic of Germany v European Commission
(Joined Cases C-463/10 P and C-475/10 P) (1)

(Appeals - State aid - Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 - Article 10(3) - Decision requiring the production of information - Act open to challenge for the purposes of Article 263 TFEU)
2011/C 355/10
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Deutsche Post AG (represented by: J. Sedemund and T. Lübbig, Rechtsanwälte), Federal Republic of Germany (represented by T. Henze, J. Möller and N. Graf Vitzthum, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: B. Martenczuk and T. Maxian Rusche, Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the order of the General Court (First Chamber) of 14 July 2010 in Case T-570/08 Deutsche Post v Commission by which the General Court upheld a plea of inadmissibility put forward by the Commission and accordingly dismissed as inadmissible the action for annulment of the decision contained in the Commission’s letter of 30 October 2008 requiring information to be provided in the proceedings relating to State aid to Deutsche Post AG — Misinterpretation of ‘challengeable act’ for the purposes of Article 230 EC — Failure to have regard to the nature and legal consequences of the contested act — Infringement of the principle of effective judicial protection

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the orders of the General Court of the European Union of 14 July 2010, Deutsche Post v Commission (T-570/08), and Germany v Commission (T-571/08).










2.


Dismisses the objections of inadmissibility raised by the European Commission before the General Court of the European Union.










3.


Refers the cases back to the General Court of the European Union for a decision on the pleas of Deutsche Post AG (T-570/08) and the Federal Republic of Germany (T-571/08) for the annulment of the Commission’s decision of 30 October 2008 ordering the Federal Republic of Germany to provide information in the proceedings concerning State aid in favour of Deutsche Post AG.










4.


Reserves the costs.






(1)  OJ C 328, 4.12.2010.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6313 — Ashland/International Specialty Products) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-10-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: chemical industry, economic concentration, merger control, motor vehicle industry








C_2011302EN.01000102.xml










13.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 302/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6313 — Ashland/International Specialty Products)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 302/02
On 18 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 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 32011M6313. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Dog population management in the European Union Declaration of the European Parliament of 13 October 2011 on dog population management in the European Union
Date: 2011-10-13
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: animal disease, animal welfare, data recording, domestic animal, protection of animals, public awareness campaign, public health, public safety








CE2013094EN.01001501.xml










3.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 94/15





Thursday 13 October 2011Dog population management in the European Union
P7_TA(2011)0444
Declaration of the European Parliament of 13 October 2011 on dog population management in the European Union
2013/C 710 E/05

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to Article 13 TFEU,










—


having regard to its resolution of 5 May 2010 on evaluation and assessment of the Animal Welfare Action Plan 2006-2010 (1),










—


having regard to Rule 123 of its Rules of Procedure,










A.


whereas, according to the Treaty, animals are sentient beings and the EU and Member States must pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals,










B.


whereas in some Member States, stray animals pose a threat to public health and safety,










C.


whereas some Member States are taking extreme measures against stray animals,










1.


Calls on the Commission to ensure that the principle mentioned in Article 13 TFEU is respected by the Member States;










2.


Calls on the Member States to adopt comprehensive dog population management strategies which include measures such as dog control and anti-cruelty laws, support for veterinary procedures including rabies vaccination and sterilisation as necessary to control the number of unwanted dogs, and the promotion of responsible pet ownership;










3.


Ask the Commission to encourage the Member States to introduce the mandatory identification and registration of every dog, by means of EU-wide compatible systems, in order to avoid the spread of diseases;










4.


Instructs its President to forward this declaration, together with the names of the signatories (2), to the Commission and the governments of the Member States.






(1)  OJ C 81 E, 15.3.2011, p. 25.

(2)  The list of signatories is published in Annex 1 to the Minutes of 13 October 2011 (P7_PV(2011)10-13(ANN1)).
Case T-393/09: Judgment of the General Court of 13 October 2011 — NEC Display Solutions Europe GmbH v OHIM — Nokia (NaViKey) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark NaViKey — Earlier Community word mark NAVI — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Breach of the duty to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2011-10-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, action for annulment (EU), computer equipment, trade-mark law








C_2011347EN.01002802.xml










26.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/28





Judgment of the General Court of 13 October 2011 — NEC Display Solutions Europe GmbH v OHIM — Nokia (NaViKey)
(Case T-393/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark NaViKey - Earlier Community word mark NAVI - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Breach of the duty to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)
2011/C 347/43
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: NEC Display Solutions Europe GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: P. Munzinger, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Nokia Corp. (Espoo, Finland) (represented by J. Tanhuanpää, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 June 2009 (Case R 1143/2008-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Nokia Corp. and NEC Display Solutions Europe GMbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders NEC Display Solutions Europe GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 297, 5.12.2009.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2011-10-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2011302EN.01000201.xml










13.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 302/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

12 October 2011
2011/C 302/03

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3766




JPY


Japanese yen


105,77




DKK


Danish krone


7,4444




GBP


Pound sterling


0,87535




SEK


Swedish krona


9,1171




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2367




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,7830




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


24,779




HUF


Hungarian forint


292,03




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7054




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2941




RON


Romanian leu


4,3131




TRY


Turkish lira


2,5188




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3609




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3996




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,7104




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7373




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7583




KRW


South Korean won


1 603,63




ZAR


South African rand


10,7389




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,7534




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4780




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 260,14




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,3038




PHP


Philippine peso


59,782




RUB


Russian rouble


42,8550




THB


Thai baht


42,399




BRL


Brazilian real


2,4462




MXN


Mexican peso


18,2463




INR


Indian rupee


67,3980






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-522/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Giudice di Pace di Lecce (Italy) lodged on 13 October 2011 — Criminal proceedings against Abdoul Khadre Mbaye
Date: 2011-10-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, alternative sentence, illegal migration, interpretation of the law, return migration








C_2011370EN.01001702.xml










17.12.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 370/17





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Giudice di Pace di Lecce (Italy) lodged on 13 October 2011 — Criminal proceedings against Abdoul Khadre Mbaye
(Case C-522/11)
2011/C 370/29
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Giudice di Pace di Lecce

Party to the main proceedings

Abdoul Khadre Mbaye

Questions referred







1.


Does Article 2(2)(b) of Directive 2008/115/EC (1) preclude the possible application of that directive even when the national legislation (Article 10a of Legislative Decree 286/98) penalises an illegal entry or stay by expulsion as an alternative to criminal law sanctions?










2.


Does the Community directive on the return of third-country nationals preclude criminal sanctions where a foreign national is merely unlawfully present on national territory, regardless of whether the administrative return procedure provided for by the national legislation and by the directive itself has been completed?






(1)  OJ 2008 L 348, p. 98.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1028/2011 of 13 October 2011 establishing a prohibition of fishing for alfonsinos in EU and international waters of III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XII and XIV by vessels flying the flag of Portugal
Date: 2011-10-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU waters, Portugal, catch quota, fishing rights, international waters, sea fish, ship's flag








L_2011271EN.01000301.xml










18.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 271/3








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 1028/2011
of 13 October 2011
         
establishing a prohibition of fishing for alfonsinos in EU and international waters of III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XII and XIV by vessels flying the flag of Portugal


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 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 October 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


51/DSS




Member State


Portugal




Stock


ALF/3X14-




Species


Alfonsinos (Beryx spp.)




Zone


EU and international waters of III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XII and XIV




Date


5.9.2011
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1033/2011 of 13 October 2011 establishing a prohibition of fishing for megrims in VIIIa, VIIIb, VIIId and VIIIe by vessels flying the flag of Belgium
Date: 2011-10-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Belgium, EU waters, catch quota, fishing rights, international waters, sea fish, ship's flag








L_2011271EN.01001301.xml










18.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 271/13








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 1033/2011
of 13 October 2011
         
establishing a prohibition of fishing for megrims in VIIIa, VIIIb, VIIId and VIIIe by vessels flying the flag of Belgium


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 57/2011 of 18 January 2011 fixing for 2011 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in EU waters and, for EU vessels, in certain non-EU waters (2), lays down quotas for 2011.












(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 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 October 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 24, 27.01.2011, p. 1.




ANNEX






No


46/T&Q




Member State


Belgium




Stock


LEZ/8ABDE.




Species


Megrims (Lepidorhombus spp.)




Zone


VIIIa, VIIIb, VIIId and VIIIe




Date


13.8.2011
Case C-9/11: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 13 October 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles — Belgium) — Waypoint Aviation SA v État belge — SPF Finances (Freedom to provide services — Tax legislation — Tax credit on income from loans granted for the acquisition of assets used on national territory — Exclusion of assets for which the right to use is transferred to a third party established in another Member State)
Date: 2011-10-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: freedom to provide services, interpretation of the law, loan, tax system








C_2011355EN.01000702.xml










3.12.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 355/7





Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 13 October 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles — Belgium) — Waypoint Aviation SA v État belge — SPF Finances
(Case C-9/11) (1)

(Freedom to provide services - Tax legislation - Tax credit on income from loans granted for the acquisition of assets used on national territory - Exclusion of assets for which the right to use is transferred to a third party established in another Member State)
2011/C 355/11
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Bruxelles

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Waypoint Aviation SA

Defendant: État belge — SPF Finances

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Cour d’appel de Bruxelles — Interpretation of Article 10 EC (Article 4(3) EU) and Article 49 EC (Article 56 TFEU) — National legislation which grants a tax credit to the recipients of income from debt-claims or loans granted to a national coordination centre — Right to use assets acquired using borrowed funds by a resident company in the same group as that to which the coordination centre belongs — Exclusion of non-resident companies in the same group — Restrictions on the freedom to provide services

Operative part of the judgment

Article 49 EC must be interpreted as precluding a legislative provision of a Member State, such as that in issue in the main proceedings, which provides for the grant of a tax credit on income from loans provided to certain companies for the acquisition of new assets used on the national territory subject to the condition that the right to use the asset is not transferred, by the company which acquired it through the loan conferring entitlement to the tax credit or by any other company in the same group, to third parties other than members of that group established in that Member State.


(1)  OJ C 95, 26.3.2011.
Case C-139/10: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 13 October 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Prism Investments BV v J.A. van der Meer, in his capacity as receiver in the liquidation of Arilco Holland BV (Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Enforcement — Grounds for refusing enforcement — Compliance, in the State in which it was delivered, with the judgment in respect of which the declaration of enforceability is sought)
Date: 2011-10-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: civil law, commercial law, jurisdiction, mutual recognition principle








C_2011355EN.01000501.xml










3.12.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 355/5





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 13 October 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Prism Investments BV v J.A. van der Meer, in his capacity as receiver in the liquidation of Arilco Holland BV
(Case C-139/10) (1)

(Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Enforcement - Grounds for refusing enforcement - Compliance, in the State in which it was delivered, with the judgment in respect of which the declaration of enforceability is sought)
2011/C 355/07
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Prism Investments BV

Respondent: J.A. van der Meer, in his capacity as receiver in the liquidation of Arilco Holland BV

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Interpretation of Articles 34, 35, 43, 44 and 45 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1) — Grounds for refusal — Exhaustive list — Performance of the obligation under the national judgment which is the subject of the application for a declaration of enforceability

Operative part of the judgment

Article 45 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as precluding the court with which an appeal is lodged under Article 43 or Article 44 of that regulation from refusing or revoking a declaration of enforceability of a judgment on a ground other than those set out in Articles 34 and 35 thereof, such as compliance with that judgment in the Member State of origin.


(1)  OJ C 134, 22.05.2010.