do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-519/11 P: Order of the General Court of 6 September 2012 — Gozi v Commission (Appeal — Civil service — Officials — Request for assistance — Commission decision not to reimburse to the applicant the costs incurred in proceedings before a national criminal court — Appeal partly clearly inadmissible and partly clearly unfounded)
Date: 2012-09-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: civil service, criminal procedure, legal expenses, redemption








C_2012319EN.01001001.xml










20.10.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 319/10





Order of the General Court of 6 September 2012 — Gozi v Commission
(Case T-519/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Request for assistance - Commission decision not to reimburse to the applicant the costs incurred in proceedings before a national criminal court - Appeal partly clearly inadmissible and partly clearly unfounded)
2012/C 319/17
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Appellant: Sandro Gozi (Soglianó Al Rubicone, Italy) (represented by: G. Passalacqua and G. Calcerano, lawyers)

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

Re:

Appeal against judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (First Chamber) of 20 July 2011 in Case F-116/10 Gozi v Commission, not yet reported, seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Mr Sandro Gozi is ordered to bear his own costs and those incurred by the European Commission in the present proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 347, 26.11.2011.
Case C-190/11: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 6 September 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — Daniela Mühlleitner v Ahmad Yusufi, Wadat Yusufi (Jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters — Jurisdiction over consumer contracts — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Article 15(1)(c) — Possible limitation of that jurisdiction to distance contracts)
Date: 2012-09-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Austria, commercial contract, distance selling, jurisdiction








C_2012355EN.01000601.xml










17.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 355/6





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 6 September 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — Daniela Mühlleitner v Ahmad Yusufi, Wadat Yusufi
(Case C-190/11) (1)

(Jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters - Jurisdiction over consumer contracts - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Article 15(1)(c) - Possible limitation of that jurisdiction to distance contracts)
2012/C 355/08
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Daniela Mühlleitner

Defendants: Ahmad Yusufi, Wadat Yusufi

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Oberster Gerichtshof — Interpretation of Article 15(1)(c) 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) — Jurisdiction over consumer contracts — Possible limitation of that jurisdiction to distance contracts

Operative part of the judgment

Article 15(1)(c) 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 not requiring the contract between the consumer and the trader to be concluded at a distance.


(1)  OJ C 204, 9.7.2011.
Case C-38/10: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 6 September 2012 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Article 49 TFEU — Tax legislation — Transfer of residence for tax purposes — Transfer of assets — Immediate exit tax)
Date: 2012-09-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: corporation tax, legal domicile, right of establishment, transfer of businesses








C_2012355EN.01000201.xml










17.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 355/2





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 6 September 2012 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
(Case C-38/10) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 49 TFEU - Tax legislation - Transfer of residence for tax purposes - Transfer of assets - Immediate exit tax)
2012/C 355/02
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal, G. Braga da Cruz and P. Guerra e Andrade, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Fernandes and J. Menezes Leitão, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Denmark (represented by: C. Vang, acting as Agent), Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: C. Blaschke and K. Petersen, acting as Agents), Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M. Muñoz Pérez and A. Rubio González, acting as Agents), French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and N. Rouam, acting as Agents), Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: C. Wissels and M. de Ree, acting as Agents), Republic of Finland (represented by: J. Heliskoski, acting as Agent), Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: A. Falk and S. Johannesson, acting as Agents), United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: S. Hathaway and A. Robinson, acting as Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 49 TFEU and of Article 31 of the EEA Agreement — Provisions of tax legislation by virtue of which companies ceasing to be resident for tax purposes in Portugal or transferring their assets to another State must immediately pay an exit tax

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by adopting and maintaining in force Articles 76 A and 76 B of the Corporation Tax Code (Código do Imposto sobre o Rendimento das Pessoas Colectivas), which are applicable in the case of transfer, by a Portuguese company, of its registered office and its effective management to another Member State or in the case of transfer, by a company not resident in Portugal, of some or all of the assets attached to a Portuguese permanent establishment from Portugal to another Member State, and which prescribe the immediate taxation of unrealised capital gains relating to the assets concerned but not of unrealised capital gains resulting from purely national operations, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 TFEU;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 80, 27.3.2010.
Case T-145/09: Order of the General Court of 6 September 2012 — Bredenkamp and Others v Commission (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures adopted having regard to the situation in Zimbabwe — Withdrawal from the list of persons concerned — Action for annulment — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2012-09-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Zimbabwe, common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, international sanctions








C_2012331EN.01002303.xml










27.10.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 331/23






Order of the General Court of 6 September 2012 — Bredenkamp and Others v Commission
(Case T-145/09) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted having regard to the situation in Zimbabwe - Withdrawal from the list of persons concerned - Action for annulment - No need to adjudicate)
(2012/C 331/44)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: John Arnold Bredenkamp (Harare, Zimbabwe) and the other applicants whose names appear on the annex to this order (represented by: D. Vaughan QC, P. Moser, Barrister, and R. Khan, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. van Nuffel, T. Scharf and M. Konstantinidis, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defandant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented initially by E. Jenkinson, I. Rao and F. Penlington and subsequently by E. Jenkinson, I. Rao and C. Murrell, acting as Agents, and D. Beard QC, and by the Council of the European Union (represented by M. Bishop and R. Szostak, acting as Agents)

Re:

ACTION for the annulment of Commission Regulation (EC) No 77/2009 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 concerning certain restrictive measures in respect of Zimbabwe (OJ 2009 L 23, p. 5), as amended by Commission Regulation (EU) No 173/2010 of 25 February 2010 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 concerning certain restrictive measures in respect of Zimbabwe (OJ 2010 L 51, p. 13) in so far as it concerns the applicants.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no need to adjudicate on this action.










2.


The European Commission shall bear, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by John Arnold Bredenkamp, Alpha International (PVT) Ltd, Breco (Asia Pacific) Ltd, Breco (Eastern Europe) Ltd, Breco (South Africa) Ltd, Breco (UK) Ltd, Breco Group, Breco International, Breco Nominees Ltd, Breco Services Ltd, Corybantes Ltd, Echo Delta Holdings, Masters International Ltd, Piedmont (UK) Ltd, Raceview Enterprises, Scottlee Holdings (PVT) Ltd, Scottlee Resorts Ltd, Timpani Exports Ltd and Tremalt Ltd.










3.


The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Council of the European Union shall each bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 141, 20.6.2009.
Case C-471/11: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 September 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās Tiesas Senāts — Latvia) — Cido Grupa SIA v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests (Accession of new Member States — Transitional measures — Agricultural products — Sugar — Regulation (EC) No 60/2004 — Basis of assessment and rate applicable for the charge on surplus stocks)
Date: 2012-09-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: accession to the European Union, agricultural product, agricultural surplus, basis of tax assessment, interpretation of the law, sugar, tax








C_2012331EN.01001101.xml










27.10.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 331/11






Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 September 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās Tiesas Senāts — Latvia) — Cido Grupa SIA v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests
(Case C-471/11) (1)

(Accession of new Member States - Transitional measures - Agricultural products - Sugar - Regulation (EC) No 60/2004 - Basis of assessment and rate applicable for the charge on surplus stocks)
(2012/C 331/16)
Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākās Tiesas Senāts

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Cido Grupa SIA

Defendant: Valsts ieņēmumu dienests

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Augstākās tiesas Senāts — Interpretation of Article 4(1) and 6(3) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 60/2004 of 14 January 2004 laying down transitional measures in the sugar sector by reason of the accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia to the European Union (OJ 2004 L 9, p. 8) — Calculation of tax on surplus sugar stocks held by operators — Notions of ‘quantity in question’ and ‘product concerned’ in the case of sugar syrup

Operative part of the judgment

The third subparagraph of Article 6(3) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 60/2004 of 14 January 2004 laying down transitional measures in the sugar sector by reason of the accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1667/2005 of 13 October 2005, must be interpreted as meaning that the basis of assessment for the charge payable on a surplus stock of sugar syrup (CN code 2106 90 59) is the quantity of white sugar (CN code 1701 99 10) actually contained in that product and the rate of that charge is the rate of the import charge applicable to white sugar, increased by EUR 1,21/100 kg.


(1)  OJ C 331, 12.11.2011.
Case C-150/11: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 6 September 2012 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 1999/37/EC — Registration documents for vehicles — Vehicles previously registered in another Member State — Change of ownership — Requirement of a roadworthiness test — Requirement of production of a certificate of conformity — Roadworthiness test carried out in another Member State — Non-recognition — Lack of justification)
Date: 2012-09-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: free movement of goods, roadworthiness tests, technical standard, vehicle documents, vehicle registration








C_2012355EN.01000502.xml










17.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 355/5





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 6 September 2012 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium
(Case C-150/11) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 1999/37/EC - Registration documents for vehicles - Vehicles previously registered in another Member State - Change of ownership - Requirement of a roadworthiness test - Requirement of production of a certificate of conformity - Roadworthiness test carried out in another Member State - Non-recognition - Lack of justification)
2012/C 355/07
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: O. Beynet and A. Marghelis, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: T. Materne and J.-C. Halleux, acting as Agents, and by F. Libert and S. Rodrigues, avocats)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 34 TFEU and of Council Directive 1999/37/EC of 29 April 1999 on the registration documents for vehicles (OJ 1999 L 138, p. 57) — National legislation requiring the production of a certificate of conformity of a vehicle for the purpose of a roadworthiness test prior to the registration of a vehicle which was previously registered in another Member State — Non-recognition of the results of the roadworthiness tests carried out in other Member States — Restriction on the free movement of goods — Absence of justifications

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by requiring systematically, in addition to production of a certificate of registration, production of a vehicle’s certificate of conformity, for the purpose of a roadworthiness test prior to the registration of a vehicle previously registered in another Member State, and by making such vehicles, when there is a change of ownership, subject to a roadworthiness test prior to their registration, without taking into account the results of the roadworthiness test carried out in another Member State, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4 of Council Directive 1999/37/EC of 29 April 1999 on the registration documents for vehicles, as amended by Council Directive 2006/103/EC of 20 November 2006, and under Article 34 TFEU;










2.


Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 160, 28.5.2011.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2012-09-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2012269EN.01000201.xml










6.9.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

5 September 2012
2012/C 269/02

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2578




JPY


Japanese yen


98,67




DKK


Danish krone


7,4509




GBP


Pound sterling


0,79035




SEK


Swedish krona


8,4415




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2014




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,3070




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


24,794




HUF


Hungarian forint


284,60




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,6962




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2009




RON


Romanian leu


4,4883




TRY


Turkish lira


2,2905




AUD


Australian dollar


1,2337




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,2422




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,7566




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5847




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5702




KRW


South Korean won


1 429,81




ZAR


South African rand


10,5560




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,9860




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4628




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 048,55




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


3,9262




PHP


Philippine peso


52,792




RUB


Russian rouble


40,6550




THB


Thai baht


39,331




BRL


Brazilian real


2,5695




MXN


Mexican peso


16,5615




INR


Indian rupee


70,3000






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-399/12: Action brought on 6 September 2012 — Cosma Moden v OHIM — s.Oliver Bernd Freier (COSMA)
Date: 2012-09-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, textile industry, trade-mark law








C_2012331EN.01003101.xml










27.10.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 331/31






Action brought on 6 September 2012 — Cosma Moden v OHIM — s.Oliver Bernd Freier (COSMA)
(Case T-399/12)
(2012/C 331/59)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Cosma Moden GmbH & Co. KG (Emsdetten, Germany) (represented by: J. Meyer, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: s.Oliver Bernd Freier GmbH & Co. KG (Rottendorf, Germany)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 4 July 2012 in Case R 2010/2010-4 in respect of Community trade mark application No 6 593 479 and alter that decision to the effect that the appeal is well founded and that the opposition must as a result also be rejected as to the remainder;





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant

Community trade mark concerned: the figurative mark including the word element ‘COSMA’ for goods and services in Classes 24, 25 and 35 — Community trade mark application No 6 593 479

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: s.Oliver Bernd Freier GmbH & Co. KG

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the figurative mark including the word element ‘comma’ and the national word mark ‘comma’ for goods and services in Classes 3, 6, 9, 14, 18, 20, 25, 26, 28 and 35

Decision of the Opposition Division: the opposition was upheld in part

Decision of the Board of Appeal: the appeal was dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009
Case C-490/10: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 6 September 2012 — European Parliament v Council of the European Union (Action for annulment — Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 617/2010 — Notification to the Commission of investment projects in energy infrastructure within the European Union — Choice of legal basis — Article 337 TFEU and Article 187 EA — Article 194 TFEU)
Date: 2012-09-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU competence, energy policy, investment project








C_2012331EN.01000202.xml










27.10.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 331/2






Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 6 September 2012 — European Parliament v Council of the European Union
(Case C-490/10) (1)

(Action for annulment - Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 617/2010 - Notification to the Commission of investment projects in energy infrastructure within the European Union - Choice of legal basis - Article 337 TFEU and Article 187 EA - Article 194 TFEU)
(2012/C 331/03)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: European Parliament (represented by: M. Gómez-Leal, J. Rodrigues and L. Visaggio, Agents)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Simm and A. Lo Monaco, Agents)

Intervening parties in support of the defendant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and A. Adam, Agents); European Commission (represented by: P. Oliver and O. Beynet, Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment — Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 617/2010 of 24 June 2010 concerning the notification to the Commission of investment projects in energy infrastructure within the European Union and repealing Regulation (EC) No 736/96 (OJ 2010 L 180, p. 7) — Choice of the dual legal basis of Articles 337 TFEU and 187 EA — Measures falling within the specific responsibilities of the Union in relation to energy and requiring the legal basis of Article 194 TFEU only

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 617/2010 of 24 June 2010 concerning the notification to the Commission of investment projects in energy infrastructure within the European Union and repealing Regulation (EC) No 736/96;










2.


Maintains the effects of Regulation No 617/2010 until the entry into force, within a reasonable period, of a new regulation adopted on the appropriate legal basis, namely Article 194(2) TFEU;










3.


Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs except those of the French Republic and the European Commission;










4.


Orders the French Republic and the European Commission to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 13, 15.1.2011.
Case T-180/10: Order of the General Court of 6 September 2012 — Nickel Institute v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Classification, packaging and labelling of certain nickel carbonate compounds as dangerous substances — Directives 2008/58/EC and 2009/2/EC — 30th and 31st adaptations to technical progress of Directive 67/548/EEC — Partial refusal of access — Action for annulment — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2012-09-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, classification, dangerous substance, labelling, packaging, provision of documents








C_2012331EN.01002401.xml










27.10.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 331/24






Order of the General Court of 6 September 2012 — Nickel Institute v Commission
(Case T-180/10) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Classification, packaging and labelling of certain nickel carbonate compounds as dangerous substances - Directives 2008/58/EC and 2009/2/EC - 30th and 31st adaptations to technical progress of Directive 67/548/EEC - Partial refusal of access - Action for annulment - No need to adjudicate)
(2012/C 331/45)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Nickel Institute (Toronto, Canada) (represented by: initially, K. Nordlander, lawyer, and H. Pearson, Solicitor, and, subsequently, K. Nordlander)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Oliver and P. Costa de Oliveira, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the applicant: Republic of Finland (represented by: J. Heliskoski and M. Pere, acting as Agents) and Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: A. Falk, K. Petkovska, C. Meyer-Seitz and S. Johannesson, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 8 February 2010 (reference SG.E3/HP/psi — Ares(2010)65824) concerning the refusal to grant Nickel Institute full access to certain internal documents, in particular to opinions of the Commission’s Legal Service, drawn up in the context of two consecutive procedures which resulted in the classification of, inter alia, certain nickel carbonate compounds in Annex I to Council Directive 67/548/EEC of 27 June 1967 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances (OJ, English Special Edition 1967, p. 234).

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


The European Commission shall bear its own costs as well as half of the costs incurred by Nickel Institute.










3.


Nickel Institute shall bear half of its own costs.










4.


The Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden shall bear their own respective costs.






(1)  OJ C 161, 19.6.2010.