do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-246/12 P: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 28 February 2013 — Ellinika Nafpigia AE v European Commission (Appeal — State aid — Shipbuilding — Decision declaring aid measures incompatible with the common market — Protection of the essential interests of national security — Competition conditions in the internal market)
Date: 2013-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Greece, State aid, aid for restructuring, common market, shipbuilding








C_2013114EN.01002102.xml










20.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 114/21





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 28 February 2013 — Ellinika Nafpigia AE v European Commission
(Case C-246/12 P) (1)

(Appeal - State aid - Shipbuilding - Decision declaring aid measures incompatible with the common market - Protection of the essential interests of national security - Competition conditions in the internal market)
2013/C 114/31
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Appellant: Ellinika Nafpigia AE (represented by: I. Drosos and V. Karagiannis, dikigori)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: C. Urraca Caviedes and M. Konstantinidis, Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 15 March 2012 in Case T-391/08 Ellinika Nafpigia v Commission dismissing an action for the partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2008) 3118 final of 2 July 2008 declaring incompatible with the common market aid granted by the Greek authorities in favour of Ellinika Nafpigia (Hellenic Shipyards ‘HSY’), in the context of amendments to the initial investment plan relating to the restructuring of that shipyard (State aid C 16/2004 (ex NN 29/2004, CP 71/2002 and CP 133/2005))

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Ellinika Nafpigia AE to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 200, 7.7.2012.
Case C-544/11: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 28 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Rheinland-Pfalz — Germany) — Helga Petersen, Peter Petersen v Finanzamt Ludwigshafen (Freedom to provide services — Freedom of movement for workers — Legislation of a Member State allowing exemption from taxation on income received for work carried out in another State in the context of development aid — Conditions — Establishment of the employer within the national territory — Refusal where the employer is established in another Member State)
Date: 2013-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, development aid, free movement of workers, freedom to provide services, interpretation of the law, tax exemption








C_2013114EN.01001501.xml










20.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 114/15





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 28 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Rheinland-Pfalz — Germany) — Helga Petersen, Peter Petersen v Finanzamt Ludwigshafen
(Case C-544/11) (1)

(Freedom to provide services - Freedom of movement for workers - Legislation of a Member State allowing exemption from taxation on income received for work carried out in another State in the context of development aid - Conditions - Establishment of the employer within the national territory - Refusal where the employer is established in another Member State)
2013/C 114/20
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Rheinland-Pfalz

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Helga Petersen, Peter Petersen

Defendant: Finanzamt Ludwigshafen

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Rheinland-Pfalz — Interpretation of Article 56 TFEU — Restrictions on the freedom to provide services within the European Union — Legislation of a Member State allowing exemption from taxation of income received for work carried out abroad in the context of development aid — Restriction of that exemption to situations where the employer is established within the national territory

Operative part of the judgment

Article 45 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding national legislation of a Member State pursuant to which income received for employment activities by a taxpayer who is resident in that Member State and has unlimited tax liability is exempt from income tax if the employer is established in that Member State, but is not so exempt if that employer is established in another Member State.


(1)  OJ C 25, 28.1.2012.
Case C-99/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour constitutionnelle (Belgium) lodged on 28 February 2013 — Guy Kleynen v Council of Ministers
Date: 2013-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, bank, interest rate subsidy, interpretation of the law, tax exemption, tax system








C_2013141EN.01001403.xml










18.5.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 141/14





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour constitutionnelle (Belgium) lodged on 28 February 2013 — Guy Kleynen v Council of Ministers
(Case C-99/13)
2013/C 141/25
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour constitutionnelle

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Guy Kleynen

Defendant: Council of Ministers

Question referred

Must Articles 56 and 63 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Articles 36 and 41 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area be interpreted as precluding a Member State from introducing and maintaining a system of higher taxation of the interest paid by non-resident banks through the application of a tax exemption or a lower tax rate solely to the interest paid by Belgian banks?
Publication of Aust-Agder County’s notification of tender procedure pursuant to Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council on public passenger transport services by rail and by road and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 1191/69 and (EEC) No 1107/70
Date: 2013-02-28
Institutions: EFTA Secretariat
Subjects: Norway, bus, inland transport, negotiated contract, public service, school transport








C_2013058EN.01000301.xml










28.2.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 58/3





Publication of Aust-Agder County’s notification of tender procedure pursuant to Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council on public passenger transport services by rail and by road and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 1191/69 and (EEC) No 1107/70
2013/C 58/03
1.   Name and address of the competent authority:






Aust-Agder County




Plan- og samferdselsavdelingen




Hilde Bergersen




Box 788 Stoa




4809 Arendal




NORWAY




As of mid-2013, the responsibility for the tender will be transferred to:





Agder kollektivtrafikk AS




Kjell Sverre Drange




Vestre Strandgt. 33




4611 Kristiansand




NORWAY




2.   Type of award envisaged:

Open tender procedure
3.   Services and areas potentially covered by the award:

Bus services in Aust-Agder county (the municipalities of Risør, Gjerstad, Tvedestrand, Vegårshei, Arendal, Grimstad and Lillesand). The contract includes both scheduled routes and school transport.
Case C-555/10: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 28 February 2013 — European Commission v Republic of Austria (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Transport — Development of the Community’s railways — Directive 91/440/EEC — Article 6(3) and Annex II — Directive 2001/14/EC — Articles 4(2) and 14(2) — Infrastructure manager — Organisational and decision making independence — Holding company structure — Incomplete transposition)
Date: 2013-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Austria, charges for use of infrastructure, infringement of EU law, national implementing measure, rail transport, transport infrastructure








C_2013114EN.01000602.xml










20.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 114/6





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 28 February 2013 — European Commission v Republic of Austria
(Case C-555/10) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Transport - Development of the Community’s railways - Directive 91/440/EEC - Article 6(3) and Annex II - Directive 2001/14/EC - Articles 4(2) and 14(2) - Infrastructure manager - Organisational and decision making independence - Holding company structure - Incomplete transposition)
2013/C 114/06
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braun, B. Simon, R. Vidal Puig and H. Støvlbæk, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Austria (represented by: C. Pesendorfer and U. Zechner, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and S. Fiorentino, avvocato dello Stato)

Re:

Failure of Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt, within the prescribed time-limit, all the measures necessary to comply with Article 6(3) of and Annex II to Council Directive 91/440/EEC of 29 July 1991 on the development of the Community’s railways (OJ 1991 L 237, p. 25) and with Articles 4(2) and 14(2) of Directive 2001/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2001 on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification (OJ 2001 L 75, p. 29).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs;










3.


Orders the Italian Republic to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 30, 29.1.2011.
Commission notice on current State aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates for 27 Member States applicable as from 1 March 2013 (Published in accordance with Article 10 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 of 21 April 2004 ( OJ L 140, 30.4.2004, p. 1 ))
Date: 2013-02-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, State aid, interest, reimbursement of aid








C_2013058EN.01000201.xml










28.2.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 58/2





Commission notice on current State aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates for 27 Member States applicable as from 1 March 2013
(Published in accordance with Article 10 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 of 21 April 2004 (OJ L 140, 30.4.2004, p. 1))
2013/C 58/02
Base rates calculated in accordance with the Communication from the Commission on the revision of the method for setting the reference and discount rates (OJ C 14, 19.1.2008, p. 6). Depending on the use of the reference rate, the appropriate margins have still to be added as defined in this Communication. For the discount rate this means that a margin of 100 basis points has to be added. The Commission Regulation (EC) No 271/2008 of 30 January 2008 amending the Implementing Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 foresees that, unless otherwise provided for in a specific decision, the recovery rate will also be calculated by adding 100 basis points to the base rate.
Modified rates are indicated in bold.
Previous table published in OJ C 402, 29.12.2012, p. 16.

































From


To


AT


BE


BG


CY


CZ


DE


DK


EE


EL


ES


FI


FR


HU


IE


IT


LT


LU


LV


MT


NL


PL


PT


RO


SE


SI


SK


UK




1.3.2013


…


0,66


0,66


1,53


0,66



0,88



0,66


0,85


0,66


0,66


0,66


0,66


0,66


6,65


0,66


0,66



1,12



0,66



1,32



0,66


0,66


4,80


0,66


6,18


1,91


0,66


0,66


1,19




1.1.2013


28.2.2013



0,66




0,66




1,53




0,66




1,09




0,66




0,85




0,66




0,66




0,66




0,66




0,66




6,65




0,66




0,66




1,37




0,66




1,58




0,66




0,66




4,80




0,66




6,18




1,91




0,66




0,66




1,19
Case C-246/11 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 28 February 2013 — Portuguese Republic v European Commission (Appeal — European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) — Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 — Article 13(3) — Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 — Article 21(1) — Global grant for local development in Portugal — Reduction in financing)
Date: 2013-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Regional Development Fund, Portugal, financial aid, investment aid








C_2013114EN.01001002.xml










20.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 114/10





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 28 February 2013 — Portuguese Republic v European Commission
(Case C-246/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) - Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 - Article 13(3) - Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 - Article 21(1) - Global grant for local development in Portugal - Reduction in financing)
2013/C 114/13
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Appellant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, S. Rodrigues and A. Gattini, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, A. Steiblytė and P. Guerra e Andrade, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 3 March 2011 in Case T-387/07 Portugal v Commission by which that court dismissed the application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2007) 3772 of 31 July 2007 reducing the final assistance granted by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) towards the global grant for local development in Portugal pursuant to Commission Decision C(95) 1769 of 28 July 1995

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 3 March 2011 in Case T-387/07;










2.


Annuls Commission Decision C(2007) 3772 of 31 July 2007 reducing the final assistance granted by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) towards the global grant for local development in Portugal pursuant to Commission Decision C(95) 1769 of 28 July 1995;










3.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs at first instance and on appeal.






(1)  OJ C 219, 23.7.2011.
Case C-168/11: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 28 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Manfred Beker, Christa Beker v Finanzamt Heilbronn (Free movement of capital — Income tax — Income from capital — Convention for the avoidance of double taxation — Dividends distributed by companies established in Member States and third countries — Calculation of the maximum amount of foreign withholding tax deductible against national income tax — Failure to take account of personal and lifestyle costs — Justification)
Date: 2013-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, basis of tax assessment, double taxation, free movement of capital, interpretation of the law, tax on income








C_2013114EN.01000902.xml










20.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 114/9





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 28 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Manfred Beker, Christa Beker v Finanzamt Heilbronn
(Case C-168/11) (1)

(Free movement of capital - Income tax - Income from capital - Convention for the avoidance of double taxation - Dividends distributed by companies established in Member States and third countries - Calculation of the maximum amount of foreign withholding tax deductible against national income tax - Failure to take account of personal and lifestyle costs - Justification)
2013/C 114/11
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Manfred Beker, Christa Beker

Defendant: Finanzamt Heilbronn

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Bundesfinanzhof — Interpretation of Article 56 EC — National legislation on income tax on natural persons which allows deduction of income tax paid abroad only with regard to the share of national income tax charged on the foreign revenue — Method of determining that share of national income tax resulting in deductible expenses and extraordinary costs also being allocated proportionately to the foreign income, and thus resulting in a corresponding reduction of the maximum amount deductible with regard to taxes paid abroad

Operative part of the judgment

Article 63 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding rules of a Member State under which, in the context of a system aimed at limiting double taxation, where persons subject to unlimited tax liability pay on foreign income, in the State where that income originates, a tax equivalent to the income tax levied by the said Member State, the offsetting of that foreign tax against the amount of income tax levied in the said Member State is carried out by multiplying the amount of the tax due in respect of taxable income in the same Member State, including foreign income, by the proportion that that foreign income bears to total income, that latter sum not taking into account special expenditure or extraordinary costs such as costs relating to lifestyle or to personal and family circumstances.


(1)  OJ C 211, 16.7.2011.
Case F-47/12: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 28 February 2013 — M v EMA
Date: 2013-02-28
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: disability insurance, indemnification








C_2013114EN.01004803.xml










20.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 114/48





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 28 February 2013 — M v EMA
(Case F-47/12) (1)

2013/C 114/75
Language of the case: French
The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 227, 28.7.2012, p. 37.
Recruitment notice PE/163/S
Date: 2013-02-28
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Parliament, administrator, recruitment, translation








C_2013058EN.01000401.xml










28.2.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 58/4





Recruitment notice PE/163/S
2013/C 58/04
The European Parliament is organising the following selection procedure:

PE/163/S — Head of Unit (AD 12) — English and Irish Translation Unit
Candidates in this selection procedure are required to have a level of education which corresponds to completed university studies attested by a diploma officially recognised in one of the European Union Member States.
By the closing date for applications candidates must, after obtaining the above qualification, have acquired at least 10 years’ experience in a field relevant to the job description, including five years in a managerial position in translation.
This recruitment notice is published only in English and Irish. The full text is in Official Journal C 58 A in those languages.
Case C-563/11: Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 28 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās tiesas Senāts — Latvia) — SIA Forvards V v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests (Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure — Taxation — VAT — Sixth Directive — Right to deduct — Refusal — Invoice issued by a company considered fictitious)
Date: 2013-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Latvia, VAT, interpretation of the law, invoicing, tax evasion, tax relief, tax system








C_2013129EN.01000202.xml










4.5.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/2





Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 28 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās tiesas Senāts — Latvia) — SIA Forvards V v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests
(Case C-563/11) (1)

(Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure - Taxation - VAT - Sixth Directive - Right to deduct - Refusal - Invoice issued by a company considered fictitious)
2013/C 129/03
Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākās tiesas Senāts

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: SIA Forvards V

Defendant: Valsts ieņēmumu dienests

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Augstākās tiesas Senāts — Interpretation of Article 17(2)(a) of 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) — Right to deduct input VAT — Taxable person fulfilling the requirements imposed by national law for deduction of the tax paid when goods are purchased, without any abusive conduct having been demonstrated — Refusal of the right to deduct VAT if it is established that the other party to the transaction is unable to supply the goods listed on the invoice which is formally in order

Operative part of the order

Article 17(2)(a) of 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, as amended by Council Directive 95/7/EC of 10 April 1995, must be interpreted as precluding the recipient of an invoice from being denied the right to deduct input value added tax on the ground that, in the light of the fraud or irregularities committed by the issuer of that invoice, the transaction corresponding to the invoice is considered not to have been actually carried out, unless it is established, on the basis of objective factors and without requiring of the recipient of the invoice checks which are not its responsibility, that the recipient knew or should have known that that transaction was connected with value added tax fraud, a matter which it is for the referring court to determine.


(1)  OJ C 13, 14.1.2012