do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the Court of 15 May 2013 in Case E-13/12 — EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland (Failure by a Contracting Party to fulfil its obligations — Council Directive 90/167/EEC of 26 March 1990 laying down the conditions governing the preparation, placing on the market and use of medicated feedingstuffs in the Community)
Date: 2013-05-15
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: Iceland, animal feedingstuffs, infringement of EU law, national implementing measure








C_2013277EN.01001001.xml










26.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 277/10





JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
of 15 May 2013
in Case E-13/12
EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland
(Failure by a Contracting Party to fulfil its obligations — Council Directive 90/167/EEC of 26 March 1990 laying down the conditions governing the preparation, placing on the market and use of medicated feedingstuffs in the Community)
2013/C 277/08
In Case E-13/12, EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland — APPLICATION for a declaration that, by failing, within the time limits prescribed, to adopt, or to notify the EFTA Surveillance Authority of, the measures necessary to implement into its national legislation the Act referred to at point 10 of part 7.1 of Chapter I of Annex I to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Council Directive 90/167/EEC of 26 March 1990 laying down the conditions governing the preparation, placing on the market and use of medicated feedingstuffs in the Community), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 15 of the Directive and under Article 7 EEA, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 15 May 2013, the operative part of which is as follows:
The Court hereby:






1.


declares that, by failing, within the time limit prescribed, to adopt the measures necessary to implement into its national legislation the Act referred to at point 10 of part 7.1 of Chapter I of Annex I to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, i.e. Council Directive 90/167/EEC of 26 March 1990 laying down the conditions governing the preparation, placing on the market and use of medicated feedingstuffs in the Community, as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, or to notify ESA thereof, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 15 of the Directive and under Article 7 of the EEA Agreement;










2.


orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2013-05-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2013136EN.01000601.xml










15.5.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 136/6





Euro exchange rates (1)

14 May 2013
2013/C 136/05

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2977




JPY


Japanese yen


131,88




DKK


Danish krone


7,4531




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84815




SEK


Swedish krona


8,6333




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2416




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,5405




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


25,887




HUF


Hungarian forint


295,53




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,6993




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1665




RON


Romanian leu


4,3315




TRY


Turkish lira


2,3506




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3080




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3157




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,0726




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5757




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6108




KRW


South Korean won


1 441,01




ZAR


South African rand


11,9560




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,9715




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5630




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 642,00




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


3,8787




PHP


Philippine peso


53,430




RUB


Russian rouble


40,6650




THB


Thai baht


38,555




BRL


Brazilian real


2,6053




MXN


Mexican peso


15,7759




INR


Indian rupee


71,0690






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-413/12: Order of the General Court of 15 May 2013 — Post Invest Europe Sàrl v European Commission (Action for annulment — State aid — Aid granted by the Belgian authorities to De Post-La Poste (now bpost) — Compensation for public service costs — Decision declaring the aid in part incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery — Lack of interest in bringing proceedings — Inadmissibility — Offers of further evidence)
Date: 2013-05-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Belgium, State aid, control of State aid, domestic market, postal service, public sector








C_2013225EN.01008103.xml










3.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 225/81





Order of the General Court of 15 May 2013 — Post Invest Europe Sàrl v European Commission
(Case T-413/12) (1)

(Action for annulment - State aid - Aid granted by the Belgian authorities to De Post-La Poste (now bpost) - Compensation for public service costs - Decision declaring the aid in part incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - Lack of interest in bringing proceedings - Inadmissibility - Offers of further evidence)
2013/C 225/181
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Post Invest Europe Sàrl (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: B. van de Walle de Ghelcke and T. Franchoo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: É. Gippini Fournier and D. Grespan, Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Articles 2 and 5 to 7 of Commission Decision 2012/321/EU of 25 January 2012 on the measure SA.14588 (C-20/09) implemented by Belgium in favour of De Post-La Poste (now bpost) (OJ 2012 L 170, p. 1).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


There is no need to adjudicate on the application for leave to intervene made by the Kingdom of Belgium.










3.


Post Invest Europe Sàrl shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 343, 10.11.2012.
Case C-264/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen (Belgium) lodged on 15 May 2013 — Provincie Antwerpen v Mobistar NV
Date: 2013-05-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, economic activity, interpretation of the law, public property, tax, telecommunications industry








C_2013207EN.01002802.xml










20.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/28





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen (Belgium) lodged on 15 May 2013 — Provincie Antwerpen v Mobistar NV
(Case C-264/13)
2013/C 207/46
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van beroep te Antwerpen

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Provincie Antwerpen

Respondent: Mobistar NV

Question referred

Must Article 6 and/or Article 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services (Authorisation Directive) be interpreted as precluding a public authority of a Member State from being allowed to tax, for budgetary or other reasons, the economic activity of telecommunications operators which arises in the territory or a part thereof through the presence on public or private property of GSM masts, pylons or antennae which are used for that activity?


(1)  OJ 2002 L 108, p. 21.
Case T-278/13: Action brought on 15 May 2013 — Now Wireless/OHIM — Starbucks (HK) (now)
Date: 2013-05-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, telecommunications industry, trade-mark law








C_2013207EN.01005001.xml










20.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/50





Action brought on 15 May 2013 — Now Wireless/OHIM — Starbucks (HK) (now)
(Case T-278/13)
2013/C 207/82
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Now Wireless Ltd (Guildford, United Kingdom) (represented by: T. Alkin, Barrister)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Starbucks (HK) Ltd (Hong Kong, China)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the contested decision; and










—


Order Community Trade Mark Registration No 1421700 to be revoked on grounds of non-use;










—


Order the registered proprietor to pay the costs incurred by the applicant.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Registered Community trade mark in respect of which an application for revocation has been made: The figurative mark containing the word element ‘now’ for services in classes 35, 41 and 42 — Community trade mark No 1 421 700

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Party applying for revocation of the Community trade mark: The applicant

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Partially revoked the Community trade mark registration

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) and (2) of Council Regulation No 207/2009.
Case C-267/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 15 May 2013 — Nutricia NV; other party: Staatssecretaris van Financiën
Date: 2013-05-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, Netherlands, beverage, interpretation of the law, medicinal product, therapeutics, undernourishment








C_2013207EN.01003001.xml










20.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/30





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 15 May 2013 — Nutricia NV; other party: Staatssecretaris van Financiën
(Case C-267/13)
2013/C 207/49
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Nutricia NV

Other party: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Questions referred







1.


Must the concept of ‘medicament’ within the meaning of heading 3004 of the Combined Nomenclature be interpreted as also including food preparations such as the products at issue, which are intended exclusively to be administered enterally (by means of a stomach tube) under medical supervision to persons who are undergoing medical treatment for a disease or ailment and who have the product administered to them as part of the control of that disease or ailment in order to control or prevent malnutrition?










2.


Must the concept of ‘beverages’ within the meaning of heading 2202 of the Combined Nomenclature be interpreted as including liquid foodstuffs such as the products at issue, which are not intended to be drunk but to be administered enterally (by means of a stomach tube)?
Judgment of the Court of 15 May 2013 in Case E-12/12 — EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland (Failure by a Contracting Party to fulfill its obligations — Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC)
Date: 2013-05-15
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: Iceland, consumer credit, contract, infringement of EU law, national implementing measure








C_2013277EN.01000801.xml










26.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 277/8





JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
of 15 May 2013
in Case E-12/12
EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland
(Failure by a Contracting Party to fulfill its obligations — Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC)
2013/C 277/06
In Case E-12/12, EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland — APPLICATION for a declaration that, by failing, within the time limit prescribed, to adopt, or to notify the EFTA Surveillance Authority of the measures necessary to implement into its national legislation the Act referred to at point 7h of Annex XIX to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, i.e. Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC, as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 27 of the Directive and under Article 7 of the EEA Agreement, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 15 May 2013, the operative part of which is as follows:
The Court hereby:






1.


Declares that, by failing within the time limit prescribed to adopt the measures necessary to implement into its national legislation the Act referred to at point 7h of Annex XIX to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, i.e. Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC, as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, or to notify ESA thereof, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 27 of the Directive and under Article 7 of the EEA Agreement.










2.


Orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings.
Case T-322/09: Order of the General Court of 15 May 2013 — Al-Faqih and MIRA v Council and Commission (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken against persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban — Freezing of funds — Withdrawal from the list of persons concerned — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2013-05-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Afghanistan, air traffic, capital movement, export restriction, international sanctions, religious fundamentalism, terrorism








C_2013225EN.01007802.xml










3.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 225/78





Order of the General Court of 15 May 2013 — Al-Faqih and MIRA v Council and Commission
(Case T-322/09) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban - Freezing of funds - Withdrawal from the list of persons concerned - No need to adjudicate)
2013/C 225/174
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Saad Al-Faqih (London, United Kingdom) and Movement for Islamic Reform in Arabia (MIRA) (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: J. Jones, Barrister, and A. Raja, solicitor)

Defendants: Council of the European Union (represented initially by R. Szostak and E. Finnegan, then by E. Finnegan and J.-P. Hix, agents); and European Commission (represented by T. Scharf and M. Konstantinidis, agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27 May 2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 467/2001 prohibiting the export of certain goods and services to Afghanistan, strengthening the flight ban and extending the freeze of funds and other financial resources in respect of the Taliban of Afghanistan (OJ 2002 L 139, p. 9), as amended for the 42nd time by Commission Regulation (EC) No 14/2005 of 5 January 2005 (OJ 2005 L 5, p. 10), for the 48th time by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1190/2005 of 20 July 2005 (OJ 2005 L 193, p. 27), for the 75th time by Commission Regulation (EC) No 492/2007 of 3 May 2007 (OJ 2007 L 116, p. 5) and for the 116th time by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1102/2009 of 16 November 2009 (OJ 2009 L 303, p. 39), and/or an application for annulment of Regulations Nos 14/2005, 1190/2005, 492/2007 and 1102/2009, in so far as they concern the applicants

Operative part of the order

The General Court orders:






1.


There is no need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


The Council of the European Union and the European Commission shall jointly and severally pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 113, 1.5.2010.
Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2013-05-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: France, State aid, control of State aid, economic recession, financial services








C_2013136EN.01000201.xml










15.5.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 136/2





Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU
Cases where the Commission raises no objections
(Text with EEA relevance)
2013/C 136/02







Date of adoption of the decision


11.2.2013




Reference number of State Aid


SA.36059 (13/N)




Member State


France




Region


—


—




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


Banque PSA Finance (Peugeot Citroën)




Legal basis


article 85 de la loi no 2012-1510 du 29 décembre 2012 de finances rectificatives




Type of measure


Ad hoc aid


Banque PSA Finance




Objective


Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy




Form of aid


Guarantee




Budget








 


Overall budget: EUR 1 200 million










 


Annual budget: EUR 1 200 million








Intensity


Measure does not constitute aid




Duration (period)


From 25.3.2013




Economic sectors


Financial service activities, except insurance and pension funding




Name and address of the granting authority







Direction générale du Trésor




Ministère de l'Économie et des Finances, ministère du Commerce extérieur




Direction générale du Trésor — Teledoc 230




139 rue de Bercy




75572 Paris Cedex




FRANCE








Other information


—




The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:
http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm
Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures
Date: 2013-05-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Belarus, China, Russia, Thailand, Ukraine, anti-dumping duty, import (EU), iron, originating product, steel








C_2013136EN.01002501.xml










15.5.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 136/25





Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures
2013/C 136/10
1.   As provided for in Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (1), the Commission gives notice that, unless a review is initiated in accordance with the following procedure, the anti-dumping measures mentioned below will expire on the date mentioned in the table below.
2.   Procedure

Union producers may lodge a written request for a review. This request must contain sufficient evidence that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury.
Should the Commission decide to review the measures concerned, importers, exporters, representatives of the exporting country and Union producers will then be provided with the opportunity to amplify, rebut or comment on the matters set out in the review request.
3.   Time limit

Union producers may submit a written request for a review on the above basis, to reach the European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade (Unit H-1), N-105 8/20, 1049 Brussels, Belgium (2) at any time from the date of the publication of the present notice but no later than three months before the date mentioned in the table below.
4.   This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009.









Product


Country(ies) of origin or exportation


Measures


Reference


Date of expiry (3)





Certain welded tubes and pipes of iron or non-alloy steel


Belarus, People's Republic of China, Russia, Thailand, Ukraine


Anti-dumping duty


Council Regulation (EC) No 1256/2008 (OJ L 343, 19.12.2008, p. 1)


20.12.2013






(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.

(2)  Fax +32 22956505.

(3)  The measure expires at midnight of the day mentioned in this column.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6918 — Rhône Capital/CSM Bakery Supplies)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2013-05-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: confectionery, economic concentration, investment company, merger control








C_2013136EN.01000501.xml










15.5.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 136/5





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6918 — Rhône Capital/CSM Bakery Supplies)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2013/C 136/04
On 7 May 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 32013M6918. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case C-266/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 15 May 2013 — L. Kik, other party: Staatssecretaris van Financiën
Date: 2013-05-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Netherlands, Panama, Switzerland, United Kingdom, continental shelf, interpretation of the law, migrant worker, pay, ship's flag, tax on income








C_2013207EN.01002902.xml










20.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/29





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 15 May 2013 — L. Kik, other party: Staatssecretaris van Financiën
(Case C-266/13)
2013/C 207/48
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: L. Kik

Respondent: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Questions referred







1.








(a)


Must the rules regarding the personal scope of application of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (1) and the rules which determine the territorial scope of the designation rules in Title II of that regulation be interpreted as meaning that those designation rules apply in a case such as the present, which concerns (a) a worker residing in the Netherlands who (b) is a national of the Netherlands, (c) in any event, was previously compulsorily insured in the Netherlands, (d) is employed as a seafarer by an employer established in Switzerland, (e) carries out his work on board a pipelayer which flies the Panamanian flag, and (f) carries out those activities first outside the territory of the Union (approximately 3 weeks above the continental shelf of the United States and approximately 2 weeks in international waters) and then above the continental shelf of the Netherlands (periods of one month and approximately one week) and of the United Kingdom (a period of slightly more than one week), while (g) the income earned thereby is subject to income tax levied by the Netherlands?










(b)


If so, is Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 then only applicable on the days when the person concerned works above the continental shelf of a Member State of the Union, or also during the preceding period in which he worked elsewhere outside the territory of the Union?














2.


If Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 applies to a worker as referred to in question 1(a), what legislation or sets of legislation does the Regulation then designate as applicable?






(1)  Council Regulation of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community (OJ, English Special Edition 1971(II), p. 416).