do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
European Parliament legislative resolution of 18 April 2013 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine amending the Agreement between the European Community and Ukraine on the facilitation of the issuance of visas (12282/2012 — C7-0200/2012 — 2012/0138(NLE))
Date: 2013-04-18
Institutions: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, Committee on Foreign Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: EU visa policy, Ukraine, agreement (EU), consent procedure, ratification of an agreement, revision of an agreement








C_2016045EN.01018001.xml










5.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 45/180





P7_TA(2013)0177
Amendment of the EC-Ukraine Agreement on the facilitation of the issuance of visas ***
European Parliament legislative resolution of 18 April 2013 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine amending the Agreement between the European Community and Ukraine on the facilitation of the issuance of visas (12282/2012 — C7-0200/2012 — 2012/0138(NLE))
(Consent)
(2016/C 045/35)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the draft Council decision (12282/2012),










—


having regard to the Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine amending the Agreement between the European Community and Ukraine on the facilitation of the issuance of visas (11044/2012),










—


having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 77(2), point (a) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0200/2012),










—


having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A7-0059/2013);












1.


Consents to conclusion of the agreement;












2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of Ukraine.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6833 — Goldman Sachs/TPG Lundy/Britannia Living Group Limited)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2013-04-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, financial services, household electrical appliance, investment company, maintenance, merger control








C_2013111EN.01000101.xml










18.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 111/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6833 — Goldman Sachs/TPG Lundy/Britannia Living Group Limited)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2013/C 111/01
On 8 March 2013, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M6833. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6837 — Goldman Sachs/TPG Lundy/Exception Group Limited)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2013-04-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electronics industry, financial services, merger control








C_2013111EN.01000202.xml










18.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 111/2





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6837 — Goldman Sachs/TPG Lundy/Exception Group Limited)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2013/C 111/04
On 25 March 2013, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M6837. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6865 — Oaktree/Countryside)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2013-04-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: building industry, economic concentration, merger control, property development








C_2013111EN.01000102.xml










18.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 111/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6865 — Oaktree/Countryside)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2013/C 111/02
On 26 March 2013, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M6865. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6773 — Canon/Iris)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2013-04-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: audiovisual industry, automation, economic concentration, information system, merger control, software








C_2013111EN.01000301.xml










18.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 111/3





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6773 — Canon/Iris)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2013/C 111/05
On 18 February 2013, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M6773. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case C-565/11: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 April 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Sibiu — Romania) — Mariana Irimie v Administrația Finanțelor Publice Sibiu, Administrația Fondului pentru Mediu (Repayment of taxes levied by a Member State in breach of European Union law — National system limiting the interest payable by the Member State on the repaid tax — Interest calculated from the day following the date of the claim for repayment of the tax — Non-compliance with European Union law — Principle of effectiveness)
Date: 2013-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, indemnification, infringement of EU law, interest, interpretation of the law, principle of proportionality, redemption, tax collection








C_2013164EN.01000502.xml










8.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 164/5





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 April 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Sibiu — Romania) — Mariana Irimie v Administrația Finanțelor Publice Sibiu, Administrația Fondului pentru Mediu
(Case C-565/11) (1)

(Repayment of taxes levied by a Member State in breach of European Union law - National system limiting the interest payable by the Member State on the repaid tax - Interest calculated from the day following the date of the claim for repayment of the tax - Non-compliance with European Union law - Principle of effectiveness)
2013/C 164/08
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Sibiu

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Mariana Irimie

Defendants: Administrația Finanțelor Publice Sibiu, Administrația Fondului pentru Mediu

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Tribunalul Sibiu — Interpretation of the principles of equivalence, effectiveness and proportionality, and of Article 6 TEU and Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Whether it is permissible for national legislation to restrict the amount which may be obtained by way of compensation for damage suffered by individuals as a result of the breach of European Union law by a Member State — Reimbursement of statutory interest relating to a tax refund

Operative part of the judgment

European Union law must be interpreted as precluding a national system, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which limits the interest granted on repayment of a tax which was levied in breach of European Union law to that accruing from the day following the date of the claim for repayment of that tax.


(1)  OJ C 25, 28.1.2012.
Case C-463/11: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 18 April 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof Baden-Württemberg — Germany) — L v M (Directive 2001/42/EC — Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment — Article 3(4) and (5) — Determination of the type of plans likely to have significant environmental effects — Building plan ‘for development within an urban area’ exempted from an environmental assessment under national legislation — Incorrect assessment of the qualitative condition of ‘inner city development’ — No effect on the legal validity of the building plan — Effectiveness of the directive undermined)
Date: 2013-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, Germany, environmental impact, interpretation of the law, national implementing measure, project evaluation, town-planning scheme








C_2013164EN.01000401.xml










8.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 164/4





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 18 April 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof Baden-Württemberg — Germany) — L v M
(Case C-463/11) (1)

(Directive 2001/42/EC - Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment - Article 3(4) and (5) - Determination of the type of plans likely to have significant environmental effects - Building plan ‘for development within an urban area’ exempted from an environmental assessment under national legislation - Incorrect assessment of the qualitative condition of ‘inner city development’ - No effect on the legal validity of the building plan - Effectiveness of the directive undermined)
2013/C 164/06
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof Baden-Württemberg

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: L

Defendant: M

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Verwaltungsgerichtshof Baden-Württemberg — Interpretation of Article 3(4) and (5), of Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment (OJ 2001 L 197, p. 30) — Scope — National legislation providing for an accelerated procedure not including an environmental impact assessment for the adoption of development plans relating to small areas at local level which meet certain qualitative and quantitative — Incorrect assessment of the qualitative criteria

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3(5) of Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment, read in conjunction with Article 3(4) thereof, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, pursuant to which breach of a qualitative condition, imposed by the implementing provision of that directive to exempt the adoption of a particular type of building plan from an environmental assessment under that directive, is irrelevant to the legal validity of that plan.


(1)  OJ C 355, 3.12.2011.
Case C-103/11 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 18 April 2013 — European Commission v Systran SA, Systran Luxembourg SA (Appeals — Articles 225(1) EC, 235 EC and 288, second paragraph, EC — Action in non-contractual liability against the European Community — Assessment of the non-contractual character of the dispute — Jurisdiction of the Community Courts)
Date: 2013-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Luxembourg, computer piracy, copyright, software








C_2013164EN.01000202.xml










8.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 164/2





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 18 April 2013 — European Commission v Systran SA, Systran Luxembourg SA
(Case C-103/11 P) (1)

(Appeals - Articles 225(1) EC, 235 EC and 288, second paragraph, EC - Action in non-contractual liability against the European Community - Assessment of the non-contractual character of the dispute - Jurisdiction of the Community Courts)
2013/C 164/03
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: European Commission (represented by: T. van Rijn, E. Montaguti and J. Samnadda, acting as Agents, assisted by A. Berenboom, avocaat, and M. Isgour, avocat)

Other parties to the proceedings: Systran SA, Systran Luxembourg SA (represented by: J.-P. Spitzer and E. De Boissieu, avocats)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 16 December 2010 in Case T-19/07 Systran and Systran Luxembourg v Commission, concerning an action for damages in respect of the damage allegedly suffered by the applicants at first instance as a result of unlawful conduct which occurred following a Commission invitation to tender concerning the maintenance and linguistic strengthening of its system of automatic translation — Erroneous assessment and contradictions concerning the non-contractual nature of the dispute — Infringement of the rights of the defence — Disregard of the rules concerning the taking of evidence — Manifest error of assessment regarding the sufficiently serious nature of the breach constituted by the Commission’s supposed fault — Failure to state reasons

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 16 December 2010 in Case T-19/07 Systran and Systran Luxembourg v Commission;










2.


Dismisses the action of Systran SA and Systran Luxembourg SA in Case T-19/07;










3.


Orders Systran SA and Systran Luxembourg SA to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission before the Court of Justice of the European Union and the General Court of the European Union.






(1)  OJ C 145, 14.5.2011.
Case T-506/11: Judgment of the General Court of 18 April 2013 — Peek & Cloppenburg v OHIM — Peek & Cloppenburg (Peek & Cloppenburg) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark Peek & Cloppenburg — Earlier national commercial name Peek & Cloppenburg — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2013-04-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2013156EN.01004101.xml










1.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 156/41





Judgment of the General Court of 18 April 2013 — Peek & Cloppenburg v OHIM — Peek & Cloppenburg (Peek & Cloppenburg)
(Case T-506/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark Peek & Cloppenburg - Earlier national commercial name Peek & Cloppenburg - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2013/C 156/75
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Peek & Cloppenburg KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: initially S. Abrar, then P. Lange, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Peek & Cloppenburg (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: A. Renck, V. von Bomhard, T. Heitmann, M. Petersenn, lawyers, and I. Fowler, solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 February 2011 (Case R 262/2005-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Peek & Cloppenburg and Peek & Cloppenburg KG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Peek & Cloppenburg KG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 362, 10.12.2011.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 18 April 2013 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova amending the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Moldova on the facilitation of the issuance of visas (12012/2012 — C7-0201/2012 — 2012/0140(NLE))
Date: 2013-04-18
Institutions: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, Committee on Foreign Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: EU visa policy, Moldova, agreement (EU), consent procedure, ratification of an agreement, revision of an agreement








C_2016045EN.01018002.xml










5.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 45/180





P7_TA(2013)0178
EU-Moldova Agreement on the facilitation of the issuance of visas ***
European Parliament legislative resolution of 18 April 2013 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova amending the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Moldova on the facilitation of the issuance of visas (12012/2012 — C7-0201/2012 — 2012/0140(NLE))
(Consent)
(2016/C 045/36)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the draft Council decision (12012/2012),










—


having regard to the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova amending the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Moldova on the facilitation of the issuance of visas (10871/2012),










—


having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 77(2), point (a) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0201/2012),










—


having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0128/2013),










1.


Consents to conclusion of the agreement;










2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Republic of Moldova.
Case C-206/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Sicilia (Italy) lodged on 18 April 2013 — Cruciano Siragusa v Regione Sicilia — Soprintendenza Beni Culturali e Ambientali di Palermo
Date: 2013-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, building permit, countryside conservation, interpretation of the law, principle of proportionality








C_2013207EN.01001001.xml










20.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/10





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Sicilia (Italy) lodged on 18 April 2013 — Cruciano Siragusa v Regione Sicilia — Soprintendenza Beni Culturali e Ambientali di Palermo
(Case C-206/13)
2013/C 207/17
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Sicilia

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Cruciano Siragusa

Defendant: Regione Sicilia — Soprintendenza Beni Culturali e Ambientali di Palermo

Questions referred

Do Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the principle of proportionality, as a general principle of European Union law, preclude the application of a provision of national law such as Article 167(4)(a) of Legislative Decree No 42 of 2004, under which a ‘landscape compatibility clearance’ [(autorizzazione paesaggistica)] may not be issued by way of retrospective regularisation in any cases where human activity has resulted in an increase in floor area and volume, regardless of whether a specific appraisal has been undertaken as to whether the activity in question is compatible with the features of the landscape of the particular site which merit protection?
Case T-507/11: Judgment of the General Court of 18 April 2013 — Peek & Cloppenburg v OHIM — Peek & Cloppenburg (Peek & Cloppenburg) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark Peek & Cloppenburg — Earlier national commercial name Peek & Cloppenburg — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2013-04-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2013156EN.01004102.xml










1.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 156/41





Judgment of the General Court of 18 April 2013 — Peek & Cloppenburg v OHIM — Peek & Cloppenburg (Peek & Cloppenburg)
(Case T-507/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark Peek & Cloppenburg - Earlier national commercial name Peek & Cloppenburg - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2013/C 156/76
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Peek & Cloppenburg KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: initially S. Abrar, then P. Lange, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Peek & Cloppenburg (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: A. Renck, V. von Bomhard, T. Heitmann, M. Petersenn, lawyers, and I. Fowler, solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 February 2011 (Case R 262/2005-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Peek & Cloppenburg and Peek & Cloppenburg KG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Peek & Cloppenburg KG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 362, 10.12.2011.
Case F-6/13: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 18.4.2013 — Rosenbaum v Commission
Date: 2013-04-18
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: rights of civil servants, servant (EU), wage determination








C_2013171EN.01004104.xml










15.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/41





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 18.4.2013 — Rosenbaum v Commission
(Case F-6/13) (1)

2013/C 171/87
Language of the case: French
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 108, 13.4.2013, p. 39.