do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-131/11: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 15 November 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf, Germany) — Pfeifer & Langen KG v Hauptzollamt Aachen (Agriculture — Regulation (EEC) No 1443/82 — Article 3(4) — Application of the quota system in the sugar sector — Surplus quantity of sugar found by the national authorities of a Member State during an a posteriori investigation carried out at the producer’s premises — Whether that surplus is to be taken into account when establishing the final production figures for the marketing year during which the difference came to light)
Date: 2012-11-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: agricultural quota, agricultural surplus, interpretation of the law, marketing, sugar








C_2013009EN.01001102.xml










12.1.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 9/11





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 15 November 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf, Germany) — Pfeifer & Langen KG v Hauptzollamt Aachen
(Case C-131/11) (1)

(Agriculture - Regulation (EEC) No 1443/82 - Article 3(4) - Application of the quota system in the sugar sector - Surplus quantity of sugar found by the national authorities of a Member State during an a posteriori investigation carried out at the producer’s premises - Whether that surplus is to be taken into account when establishing the final production figures for the marketing year during which the difference came to light)
2013/C 9/16
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Pfeifer & Langen KG

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Aachen

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Interpretation of Article 3(4) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1443/82 of 8 June 1982 laying down detailed rules for the application of the quota system in the sugar sector (OJ 1982 L 158, p. 17) — Surplus quantity of isoglucose found subsequently by the authorities of a Member State during an inspection — Whether it is possible to take that surplus into account when establishing the final production figures for the marketing year during which the surplus came to light

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3(4) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1443/82 of 8 June 1982 laying down detailed rules for the application of the quota system in the sugar sector, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 392/94 of 23 February 1994, must be interpreted as not being applicable in a situation in which a surplus quantity of sugar has been found by the national authorities in the context of an a posteriori investigation carried out at the producer’s premises if the surplus quantity constitutes C sugar.


(1)  OJ C 179, 18.6.2011.
Addendum to the reserve lists — Open competition EPSO/AST/117/11 — Assistants (AST 1) in the secretarial field ( OJ C 288 A, 25.9.2012 )
Date: 2012-11-15
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: EPSO, assistant, competition (EU), secretarial staff








CA2012349EN.01000101.xml










15.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CA 349/1





ADDENDUM TO THE RESERVE LISTS (1)

OPEN COMPETITION EPSO/AST/117/11
Assistants (AST 1) in the secretarial field

(Official Journal of the European Union C 288 A of 25 September 2012)

(2012/C 349 A/01)
On page 7:
Having French (FR) as their main language






BROECKX


Fanny




GALLARDO FANJUL


Virginia




on page 8:
Having Italian (IT) as their main language






SARACCO


Roberta






(1)  A successful candidate may explicitly request her/his name not be published.
Case T-286/11 P: Order of the General Court of 15 November 2012 — Marcuccio v Commission (Appeal — Civil service — Officials — Non-contractual liability — Compensation for the damage resulting from the fact that a letter concerning the costs in a case was sent to the lawyer who represented the appellant in that case — Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)
Date: 2012-11-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European civil service, contractual liability, indemnification, legal expenses








C_2013009EN.01003603.xml










12.1.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 9/36





Order of the General Court of 15 November 2012 — Marcuccio v Commission
(Case T-286/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Non-contractual liability - Compensation for the damage resulting from the fact that a letter concerning the costs in a case was sent to the lawyer who represented the appellant in that case - Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)
2013/C 9/65
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Appellant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by: G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and C. Berardis-Kayser, agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Second Chamber) of 16 March 2011 in Case F-21/10 Marcuccio v Commission, not published in the ECR, seeking to have that order set aside.

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Mr Luigi Marcuccio is ordered to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission in the appeal proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 232, 6.8.2011.
Case C-417/11 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 15 November 2012 — Council of the European Union v Nadiany Bamba, European Commission (Appeal — Common foreign and security policy — Specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d’Ivoire — Freezing of funds — Article 296 TFEU — Obligation to state the reasons on which a decision is based — Rights of the defence — Right to an effective legal remedy — Right to respect for property)
Date: 2012-11-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Côte d'Ivoire, capital movement, common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, international sanctions, ownership, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2013009EN.01001802.xml










12.1.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 9/18





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 15 November 2012 — Council of the European Union v Nadiany Bamba, European Commission
(Case C-417/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Common foreign and security policy - Specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d’Ivoire - Freezing of funds - Article 296 TFEU - Obligation to state the reasons on which a decision is based - Rights of the defence - Right to an effective legal remedy - Right to respect for property)
2013/C 9/28
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bishop and B. Driessen and by E. Dumitriu-Segnana, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Nadiany Bamba, (represented: initially by P. Haïk, and subsequently by P. Maisonneuve, lawyers), European Commission (represented by: E. Cujo and M. Konstantinidis, Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and É. Ranaivoson, Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 8 June 2011 in Case T-86/11 Bamba v Council in which the General Court annulled Council Decision 2011/18/CFSP of 14 January 2011 amending Council Decision 2010/656/CFSP renewing the restrictive measures against Côte d’Ivoire and Council Regulation (EU) No 25/2011 of 14 January 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 560/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d’Ivoire (OJ 2011 L 11, p. 1), in so far as those measures concern Ms Nadiany Bamba — Freezing of funds — Obligation to state reasons — Error of law

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 8 June 2011 in Case T-86/11 Bamba v Council;










2.


Dismisses Ms Bamba’s action;










3.


Orders Ms Bamba to pay, in addition to her own costs, those incurred by the Council of the European Union in connection with the present appeal and at first instance;










4.


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






(1)  OJ C 311, 22.10.2011.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6737 — Ruukki/CapMan/Fortaco)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2012-11-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Northern Europe, Russia, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, steel








C_2012349EN.01002001.xml










15.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 349/20





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6737 — Ruukki/CapMan/Fortaco)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2012/C 349/08






1.


On 6 November 2012, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Rautaruukki (‘Ruukki’, Finland) and CapMan (‘CapMan’, Finland) acquire, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation, joint control of Fortaco (‘Fortaco’, Finland) by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Ruukki: production of energy-efficient steel solutions, operating in three business areas: Ruukki Construction, Ruukki Metals and Ruukki Engineering,










—


for CapMan: private equity fund manager with operations in the Nordic countries and Russia controlling portfolio companies, one of which is Komas Group Oy (‘Komas’, Finland) which assembles and supplies mechanical components and solutions for the transportation, construction, military, energy, mining and other industries,










—


for Fortaco: manufacture and sale of operator cabins and steel components for the mechanical engineering industry.














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.6737 — Ruukki/CapMan/Fortaco, 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’).
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6673 — Bolloré/Havas) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2012-11-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, means of communication, merger control, miscellaneous industries








C_2012349EN.01002101.xml










15.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 349/21





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6673 — Bolloré/Havas)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2012/C 349/09






1.


On 7 November 2012, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the Bolloré group (France) acquire(s) within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the undertaking Havas SA (France) purchase of shares following a public offer launched by Havas SA.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


Havas SA is the company leading the Havas group, which is active in the sector of communications services, including traditional advertising, direct marketing, media planning and buying, corporate communications, sales promotion, design, human resources, sports marketing, multimedia interactive communications and public relations,










—


The Bolloré group is a diversified group operating in industry, energy distribution, transportation and logistics, media and telecoms.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the EC Merger Regulation (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.










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 email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.6673 — Bolloré/Havas, 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’).

(2)  OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32 (‘Notice on a simplified procedure’).