do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Regulation (EU) No 982/2012 of 18 October 2012 establishing a prohibition of fishing for mackerel in VIIIc, IX and X; EU waters of CECAF 34.1.1 by vessels flying the flag of Germany
Date: 2012-10-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Atlantic Ocean, EU waters, Germany, catch by species, catch quota, fishing rights, sea fish, ship's flag








L_2012295EN.01000501.xml










25.10.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 295/5








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 982/2012
of 18 October 2012
         
establishing a prohibition of fishing for mackerel in VIIIc, IX and X; EU waters of CECAF 34.1.1 by vessels flying the flag of Germany


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 44/2012 of 17 January 2012 fixing for 2012 the fishing opportunities available in EU waters and, to EU vessels, in certain non- EU waters for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks which are subject to international negotiations or agreements (2), lays down quotas for 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 2012.












(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 2012 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, 18 October 2012.


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 25, 27.1.2012, p. 55.




ANNEX






No


60/TQ44




Member State


Germany




Stock


MAC/8C3411




Species


Mackerel (Scomber scombrus)




Zone


VIIIc, IX and X; EU waters of CECAF 34.1.1




Date


3.10.2012
Case C-37/11: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 18 October 2012 — European Commission v Czech Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Admissibility — Regulation No 1234/2007 — Article 115 — Annex XV — Point I(2) — Appendix to Annex XV — Part A — Sales designations ‘butter’ and ‘dairy spread’ — Sales designation ‘pomazánkové máslo’ (butter spread) — List of derogations)
Date: 2012-10-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: brand name, butter, product designation








C_2012379EN.01000602.xml










8.12.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 379/6





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 18 October 2012 — European Commission v Czech Republic
(Case C-37/11) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Admissibility - Regulation No 1234/2007 - Article 115 - Annex XV - Point I(2) - Appendix to Annex XV - Part A - Sales designations ‘butter’ and ‘dairy spread’ - Sales designation ‘pomazánkové máslo’ (butter spread) - List of derogations)
2012/C 379/10
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: Z. Malůšková and H. Tserepa-Lacombe, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, T. Müller and J. Očková, acting as Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 115 of 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 (OJ 2007 L 299, p. 1), in conjunction with point I(2) of Annex XV to that regulation and part A of the appendix to that annex — Legislation of a Member State authorising the marketing of a product corresponding to the sales designation ‘dairy spread’ under the sales designation ‘pomazánkové máslo’ (butter spread)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by authorising pomazánkové máslo (butter spread) to be sold under the designation ‘máslo’ (butter) even though that product has a milk fat content of less than 80 % and water and dry non-fat milk-material contents of more than 16 % and 2 % respectively, the Czech Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 115 of 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) in conjunction with the first and second subparagraphs of point I(2) of Annex XV to that regulation and points 1 and 4 of part A of the appendix to that annex;










2.


Orders the Czech Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 80, 12.3.2011.
Case C-371/11: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 18 October 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Beroep te Gent — Belgium) — Punch Graphix Prepress Belgium NV v Belgische Staat (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Admissibility — Reference by domestic law to European Union law — Directive 90/435/EEC — Directive 90/434/EEC — Prevention of economic double taxation — Exception — Liquidation of a subsidiary upon a merger — Distribution of profits — Concept of ‘liquidation’ )
Date: 2012-10-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, double taxation, liquidation, merger, tax exemption








C_2012379EN.01001001.xml










8.12.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 379/10





Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 18 October 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Beroep te Gent — Belgium) — Punch Graphix Prepress Belgium NV v Belgische Staat
(Case C-371/11) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Admissibility - Reference by domestic law to European Union law - Directive 90/435/EEC - Directive 90/434/EEC - Prevention of economic double taxation - Exception - Liquidation of a subsidiary upon a merger - Distribution of profits - Concept of ‘liquidation’)
2012/C 379/16
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van Beroep te Gent

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Punch Graphix Prepress Belgium NV

Defendant: Belgische Staat

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hof van Beroep te Gent — Interpretation of Article 4(1) of Council Directive 90/435/EEC of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States (OJ 1990 L 225, p. 6) — Prevention of economic double taxation — Exception in respect of profits distributed when a subsidiary is liquidated — Concept of liquidation — Merger by acquisition whereby the subsidiary companies acquired are wound up without going into liquidation — Possibility, for the national tax authorities, of considering that such an operation entails liquidation, pursuant to national tax legislation which treats identically that operation and a merger which actually entails a liquidation

Operative part of the judgment

The concept of ‘liquidation’ in Article 4(1) of Council Directive 90/435/EEC of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States, as amended by Council Directive 2006/98/EC of 20 November 2006, must be interpreted as meaning that the dissolution of a company in the context of a merger by acquisition cannot be considered to be such a liquidation.


(1)  OJ C 282, 24.9.2011.
Call for proposals under the 2013 work programme ‘People’ of the seventh EC framework programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities
Date: 2012-10-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, Framework Programme for Research and Development, invitation to tender, reintegration into working life








C_2012314EN.01000601.xml










18.10.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 314/6





Call for proposals under the 2013 work programme ‘People’ of the seventh EC framework programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities
2012/C 314/06
Notice is hereby given of the launch of a call for proposals under the 2013 work programme ‘People’ of the seventh framework programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007 to 2013).
Proposals are invited for the following call. Call deadline and budget are given in the call text, which is published on the CORDIS website.

‘People’ specific programme:







Call title


Call identifier




Reintegration grants


FP7-PEOPLE-2013-CIG





This call for proposals relates to the 2013 work programme adopted by Commission Decision C(2012) 4561 of 9 July 2012.

Information on the modalities of the call, the work programme, and the guide for applicants on how to submit proposals is available through the CORDIS website:
http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/calls/
Case T-402/11: Order of the General Court of 18 October 2012 — Preparados Alimenticios del Sur v Commission
Date: 2012-10-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, customs, foodstuff, import licence








C_2012373EN.01001301.xml










1.12.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 373/13





Order of the General Court of 18 October 2012 — Preparados Alimenticios del Sur v Commission
(Case T-402/11) (1)

2012/C 373/22
Language of the case: Spanish
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 282, 24.9.2011.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6705 — Procter & Gamble/Teva Pharmaceuticals OTC II)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2012-10-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: cosmetic product, economic concentration, merger control, pharmaceutical industry, polishing and scouring preparations








C_2012314EN.01001501.xml










18.10.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 314/15





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6705 — Procter & Gamble/Teva Pharmaceuticals OTC II)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2012/C 314/12






1.


On 9 October 2012, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Procter & Gamble (the United States of America) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of over-the-counter (‘OTC’) businesses of Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd (Israel) by way of contributing assets to a newly created entity.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Procter & Gamble: manufacturing, distribution and marketing of household care, beauty care, health care and wellbeing, baby and family care products,










—


for Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd.: production, distribution and marketing of affordable generic drugs, innovative and special pharmaceuticals and active pharmaceutical ingredients,










—


Teva Pharmaceuticals OTC business: Teva's over-the-counter pharmaceutical business, initially acquired by Procter & Gamble from Teva in 2011 (see COMP/M.6280) and Teva's over-the-counter pharmaceutical business acquired through its acquisition of Cephalon Inc. in 2011 (see COMP/M.6258).














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.6705 — Procter & Gamble/Teva Pharmaceuticals OTC II, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




J-70




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘EC Merger Regulation’).
Case C-402/11 P: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 October 2012 — Jager & Polacek GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (Appeal — Community trade mark — Opposition — Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 — Rule 18(1) — Legal nature of a communication from OHIM informing a party that an opposition has been found to be admissible — Right to an effective legal remedy)
Date: 2012-10-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, recording equipment, registered trade mark, right of action, trade-mark law








C_2012379EN.01001002.xml










8.12.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 379/10





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 October 2012 — Jager & Polacek GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(Case C-402/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Opposition - Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 - Rule 18(1) - Legal nature of a communication from OHIM informing a party that an opposition has been found to be admissible - Right to an effective legal remedy)
2012/C 379/17
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Jager & Polacek GmbH (represented by: A. Renck, Rechtsanwalt)

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

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 12 May 2011 in Case T-488/09 Jager & Polacek v OHIM (REDTUBE) dismissing the action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 September 2009 (Case R 442/2009-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Jager & Polacek GmbH and RT Mediasolutions s.r.o. — Infringement of Article 80(1) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Right to an effective legal remedy

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 12 May 2011 in Case T-488/09 Jager & Polacek v OHIM (REDTUBE);










2.


Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 29 September 2009 (Case R 442/2009-4) concerning opposition proceedings between Jager & Polacek GmbH and RT Mediasolutions s.r.o.;










3.


Orders the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) to pay the costs of both the proceedings at first instance and the appeal proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 6, 7.1.2012.
Case C-234/11: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 October 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad, Varna, Bulgaria) — TETS Haskovo AD v Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i upravlenie na izpalnenieto’ — Varna pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite (Taxation — VAT — Right of deduction — Contribution in kind — Destruction of property — New buildings — Adjustment)
Date: 2012-10-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Bulgaria, VAT, building industry, tax relief








C_2012379EN.01000901.xml










8.12.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 379/9





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 October 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad, Varna, Bulgaria) — TETS Haskovo AD v Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i upravlenie na izpalnenieto’ — Varna pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite
(Case C-234/11) (1)

(Taxation - VAT - Right of deduction - Contribution in kind - Destruction of property - New buildings - Adjustment)
2012/C 379/14
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Administrativen sad, Varna

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: TETS Haskovo AD

Defendant: Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i upravlenie na izpalnenieto’ — Varna pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Administrativen sad — Varna — Requirements to adjust input VAT deducted on acquisition of property — National legislation providing for adjustment of input VAT deductions upon destruction of property — Destruction of buildings with sole aim of constructing in their place new buildings fulfilling the same purpose, and used for future supplies giving entitlement to deduction of input VAT

Operative part of the judgment

Article 185(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that the destruction, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, of several buildings intended for energy production and their replacement by more modern buildings which fulfil the same purpose as the demolished buildings does not constitute a change, after the VAT return was made, in the factors used to determine the amount of VAT to be deducted as input tax, and, therefore, does not lead to an obligation to adjust the deduction made.


(1)  OJ C 232, 6.8.2011.
Case C-466/12: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Svea hovrätt (Sweden) lodged on 18 October 2012 — Nils Svensson, Sten Sjögren, Madelaine Sahlman, Pia Gadd v Retreiver Sverige AB
Date: 2012-10-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Internet site, copyright








C_2012379EN.01001901.xml










8.12.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 379/19





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Svea hovrätt (Sweden) lodged on 18 October 2012 — Nils Svensson, Sten Sjögren, Madelaine Sahlman, Pia Gadd v Retreiver Sverige AB
(Case C-466/12)
2012/C 379/31
Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Svea hovrätt

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Nils Svensson, Sten Sjögren, Madelaine Sahlman, Pia Gadd

Defendant: Retreiver Sverige AB

Questions referred







1.


If anyone other than the holder of copyright in a certain work supplies a clickable link to the work on his website, does that constitute communication to the public within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society? (1)











2.


Is the assessment under question 1 affected if the work to which the link refers is on a website on the Internet which can be accessed by anyone without restrictions or if access is restricted in some way?










3.


When making the assessment under question 1, should any distinction be drawn between a case where the work, after the user has clicked on the link, is shown on another website and one where the work, after the user has clicked on the link, is shown in such a way as to give the impression that it is appearing on the same website?










4.


Is it possible for a Member State to give wider protection to authors’ exclusive right by enabling ‘communication to the public’ to cover a greater range of acts than provided for in Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society?






(1)  OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10.
No State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement
Date: 2012-10-18
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: Iceland, State aid, control of State aid, hoisting equipment, shipbuilding








C_2012314EN.01000301.xml










18.10.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 314/3





No State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement
2012/C 314/03
The EFTA Surveillance Authority considers that the following measure does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement:







Date of adoption of the decision


:


30 May 2012




Case number


:


68531




Decision number


:


213/12/COL




EFTA State


:


Iceland




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


:


On the grant of State aid in connection with repairs of the ship lift in the Westman Islands




Legal basis


:


Article 61(1) of the EEA




Type of measure


:


No aid




Economic sectors


:


Ship building/repairs




The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:
http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/
Case C-525/11: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 October 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās tiesas Senāts — Latvia) — Mednis SIA v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests (VAT — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 183 — Conditions for the refund of the excess VAT — National legislation deferring the refund of part of the excess VAT pending examination of the taxable person’s annual tax return — Principles of fiscal neutrality and proportionality)
Date: 2012-10-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, financial year, tax harmonisation, tax rebate








C_2012379EN.01001201.xml










8.12.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 379/12





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 October 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās tiesas Senāts — Latvia) — Mednis SIA v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests
(Case C-525/11) (1)

(VAT - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 183 - Conditions for the refund of the excess VAT - National legislation deferring the refund of part of the excess VAT pending examination of the taxable person’s annual tax return - Principles of fiscal neutrality and proportionality)
2012/C 379/19
Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākās tiesas Senāts

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Mednis SIA

Defendant: Valsts ieņēmumu dienests

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Augstākās tiesas Senāts — Interpretation of Article 183 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) — Deduction of input VAT — National legislation limiting monthly VAT refund — Deferment, until examination of annual tax return, of the refund of the part of overpaid VAT that exceeds 18 % of the total value of the taxable transactions carried out during the tax month in question

Operative part of the judgment

Article 183 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as not authorising the tax authority of a Member State to defer, without undertaking a specific analysis and solely on the basis of an arithmetical calculation, the refund of part of the excess VAT which has arisen during a one-month tax period, pending the examination by that authority of the taxable person’s annual tax return.


(1)  OJ C 6, 7.1.2012.