do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 164/2011 of 19 December 2011 amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement
Date: 2011-12-19
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: European Aviation Safety Agency, European Economic Area, operation of the Institutions, revision of an agreement




L_2012076EN.01005601.xml










15.3.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 76/56








            DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE
         
No 164/2011
of 19 December 2011
         
amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement


THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Annex XIII to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 152/2011 of 2 December 2011 (1).












(2)


Commission Regulation (EC) No 690/2009 of 30 July 2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Aviation Safety Agency, and repealing Council Directive 91/670/EEC, Regulation (EC) No 1592/2002 and Directive 2004/36/EC (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following shall be added in point 66n (Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Annex XIII to the Agreement:

                  ‘, as amended by:






—



32009 R 0690: Commission Regulation (EC) No 690/2009 of 30 July 2009 (OJ L 199, 31.7.2009, p. 6).’
                     






Article 2
The text of Regulation (EC) No 690/2009 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.


Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on 20 December 2011, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1), or on the day of the entry into force of Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 163/2011 of 19 December 2011 (3), whichever is the later.


Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 19 December 2011.


For the EEA Joint Committee


The President

Kurt JÄGER
            





(1)  See page 36 of this Official Journal.

(2)  
            OJ L 199, 31.7.2009, p. 6.

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

(3)  See page 51 of this Official Journal.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1366/2011 of 19 December 2011 approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Pataca de Galicia / Patata de Galicia (PGI)]
Date: 2011-12-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Galicia, Spain, designation of origin, potato, product designation








L_2011341EN.01002901.xml










22.12.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 341/29








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1366/2011
of 19 December 2011
         
approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Pataca de Galicia / Patata de Galicia (PGI)]


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


By virtue of the first subparagraph of Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, the Commission has examined Spain’s application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected geographical indication ‘Pataca de Galicia / Patata de Galicia’ registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 148/2007 (2).












(2)


Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union, as required by the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of that Regulation (3). As no statement of objection within the meaning of Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been sent to the Commission, the amendments should be approved,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name contained in the Annex to this Regulation are hereby approved.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth 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, 19 December 2011.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
Dacian CIOLOȘ
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

(2)  
            OJ L 46, 16.2.2007, p. 14.

(3)  
            OJ C 108, 7.4.2011, p. 19.




ANNEX
Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.6.   Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed

SPAIN
Pataca de Galicia/Patata de Galicia (PGI)
Case C-651/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 19 December 2011 — Staatssecretaris van Financiën, other party: X BV
Date: 2011-12-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, interpretation of the law, provision of services, shareholding








C_2012073EN.01001701.xml










10.3.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 73/17





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 19 December 2011 — Staatssecretaris van Financiën, other party: X BV
(Case C-651/11)
2012/C 73/30
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Other Party: X BV

Questions referred







1.


Is the disposal of 30 % of the shares in a company — to which the transferor of those shares supplies services that are subject to value added tax (VAT) — equivalent to the transfer of (part of) a totality of assets within the meaning of Article 5(8) and/or of services within the meaning of Article 6(5) of the Sixth Directive? (1)











2.


If the answer to Question 1 is in the negative, is the disposal referred to in that question equivalent to the transfer of (part of) a totality of assets within the meaning of Article 5(8) and/or of services within the meaning of Article 6(5) of the Sixth Directive, where the other shareholders, who also supply services that are subject to VAT to the company whose shares have been disposed of, transfer all the other shares in that company to the same person (almost) at the same time?










3.


If the answer to the second question is also in the negative, can the disposal referred to in Question 1 be regarded as the transfer of (part of) the undertaking for the purposes of Article 5(8) and/or Article 6(5) of the Sixth Directive, taking into account the fact that that disposal is closely linked to management activities carried out for that participation?






(1)  Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1).
Council Decision 2011/859/CFSP of 19 December 2011 amending Decision 2010/232/CFSP renewing restrictive measures against Burma/Myanmar
Date: 2011-12-19
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Myanmar/Burma, international sanctions, technology transfer, trade restriction








L_2011338EN.01005501.xml










21.12.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 338/55








            COUNCIL DECISION 2011/859/CFSP
of 19 December 2011
         
amending Decision 2010/232/CFSP renewing restrictive measures against Burma/Myanmar


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,


Having regard to Council Decision 2010/232/CFSP of 26 April 2010 renewing restrictive measures against Burma/Myanmar (1), and in particular Article 14 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


On 26 April 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/232/CFSP renewing restrictive measures against Burma/Myanmar.












(2)


The information relating to one entity on the list in Annex I to Decision 2010/232/CFSP should be updated.












(3)


Annex I to Decision 2010/232/CFSP should be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
In Annex I to Decision 2010/232/CFSP, the entry for Mayar (H.K) Ltd shall be replaced by the following:






                     ‘Mayar India Ltd (Yangon Branch)




37, Rm (703/4), Level (7), Alanpya Pagoda Rd, La Pyayt Wun Plaza, Dagon, Yangon.’
                  






Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 19 December 2011.


For the Council


The President

M. KOROLEC
            





(1)  
            OJ L 105, 27.4.2010, p. 22.
Case C-1/11 SA: Application for authorisation to serve a garnishee order brought on 19 December 2011 — Luigi Marcuccio v European Commission
Date: 2011-12-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, claim, deduction at source, seizure of goods








C_2012089EN.01000201.xml










24.3.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 89/2





Application for authorisation to serve a garnishee order brought on 19 December 2011 — Luigi Marcuccio v European Commission
(Case C-1/11 SA)
2012/C 89/02
Language of the case: Italian.

Parties


Applicant: Luigi Marcuccio (represented by G. Cipressa, avvocato)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


lift the immunity enjoyed by the Commission and authorise him to serve a garnishee order, which may also be in the form, in so far as is legally possible, of an order for the attachment of the assets necessary to cover the claim relating to the debt owed to him by the European Commission, in accordance with the summary payment order issued by the Giudice di pace di Tricase on 1 February 2010;










—


serve on the European Commission all necessary documents and, in general, do all this is required by law for the enforcement of the summary payment order and, in general, for the settlement of the claim;










—


order the European Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

According to the applicant, the Commission owes him a sum by way of court expenses. The Commission has not yet paid that debt.
Case T-647/11: Action brought on 19 December 2011 — Asos v OHIM — Maier (ASOS)
Date: 2011-12-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012058EN.01001101.xml










25.2.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 58/11





Action brought on 19 December 2011 — Asos v OHIM — Maier (ASOS)
(Case T-647/11)
2012/C 58/20
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Asos plc (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: P. Kavanagh, Solicitor)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Roger Maier (San Pietro di Stabio, Switzerland)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 17 October 2011 in case R 2215/2010-4;










—


Authorise registration of the application mark in respect of all of the goods and services covered by the specification of the application mark; and










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs of the action.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘ASOS’, for goods and services in classes 3, 14, 18, 25 and 35 — Community trade mark application No 4524997

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No 4580767 of the word mark ‘ASSOS’, for goods in classes 3, 12 and 25

Decision of the Opposition Division: Partially upheld the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Partially annulled the decision of the opposition division

Pleas in law: The Board of Appeal failed to properly consider co-existence and its effect on the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion, and erred in dismissing the relevance of the evidence of co-existence. Further, the Board of Appeal erred in its assessment of the conceptual meaning of the application mark and failed to take into account the correct conceptual meaning of the application mark in assessing likelihood of confusion based on a global assessment.
Case C-648/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) (United Kingdom) made on 19 December 2011 — MA, BT, DA v Secretary of State for the Home Department
Date: 2011-12-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, child protection, competence of the Member States, interpretation of the law, right of asylum








C_2012065EN.01000602.xml










3.3.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 65/6





Reference for a preliminary ruling from Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) (United Kingdom) made on 19 December 2011 — MA, BT, DA v Secretary of State for the Home Department
(Case C-648/11)
2012/C 65/12
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: MA, BT, DA

Defendants: Secretary of State for the Home Department

Interested party: Aire Centre

Questions referred







1.


In Regulation 343/2003/EC establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national (OJ L 50 25 February 2003 p. l), where an applicant for asylum who is an unaccompanied minor with no member of his or her family legally present in another Member State has lodged claims for asylum in more than one Member State, which Member State does the second paragraph of article 6 make responsible for determining the application for asylum?
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1362/2011 of 19 December 2011 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Ptujski lük (PGI)]
Date: 2011-12-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Slovenia, bulb vegetable, designation of origin, product designation








L_2011341EN.01002101.xml










22.12.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 341/21








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1362/2011
of 19 December 2011
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Ptujski lük (PGI)]


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Slovenia’s application to register the name ‘Ptujski lük’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth 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, 19 December 2011.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
Dacian CIOLOȘ
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

(2)  
            OJ C 108, 7.4.2011, p. 23.




ANNEX
Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.6.   Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed

SLOVENIA
Ptujski lük (PGI)
Case C-650/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās tiesas Senāts (Republic of Latvia), lodged on 19 December 2011 — Ilgvars Brunovskis v Lauku atbalsta dienests
Date: 2011-12-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: aid system, farmers' income, indemnification, interpretation of the law, livestock farming, production aid








C_2012049EN.01001802.xml










18.2.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 49/18





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās tiesas Senāts (Republic of Latvia), lodged on 19 December 2011 — Ilgvars Brunovskis v Lauku atbalsta dienests
(Case C-650/11)
2012/C 49/31
Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākās tiesas Senāts

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Ilgvars Brunovskis

Respondent: Lauku atbalsta dienests

Questions referred







1.


Should Article 125(1) of Regulation No 1782/2003 (1) be interpreted as meaning that the premium which is to be established per suckler cow is applicable to all suckler cows which come into existence during the calendar year?










2.


Should Article 102(2) of Regulation No 1973/2004 (2) be interpreted as meaning that the period of six months should be regarded as a time-limit for lodging applications for a premium?










3.


If the answer to the second question is affirmative, where a Member State has reduced that time-limit, would the Member State be obliged to pay compensation for losses incurred by a farmer if he did not have the opportunity to make full use of the time-limit for applications established in the regulation?






(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers and amending Regulations (EEC) No 2019/93, (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC) No 1453/2001, (EC) No 1454/2001, (EC) No 1868/94, (EC) No 1251/1999, (EC) No 1254/1999, (EC) No 1673/2000, (EEC) No 2358/71 and (EC) No 2529/2001 (OJ 2003 L 270, p. 1).

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1973/2004 of 29 October 2004 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 as regards the support schemes provided for in Titles IV and IVa of that Regulation and the use of land set aside for the production of raw materials (OJ 2004 L 345, p. 1).
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1367/2011 of 19 December 2011 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Figue de Solliès (PDO)]
Date: 2011-12-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: France, designation of origin, pip fruit, product designation








L_2011341EN.01003101.xml










22.12.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 341/31








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1367/2011
of 19 December 2011
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Figue de Solliès (PDO)]


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, France's application to register the name ‧Figue de Solliès‧ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth 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, 19 December 2011.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
Dacian CIOLOȘ
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

(2)  
            OJ C 119, 16.4.2011, p. 15.




ANNEX
Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.6.   Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed

FRANCE
Figue de Solliès (PDO)