do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-383/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 5 July 2013 — M.G., N.R.; other party: Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie
Date: 2013-07-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative structures, foreign national, illegal migration, imprisonment, interpretation of the law, rights of the defence, third country








C_2013260EN.01003401.xml










7.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/34





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 5 July 2013 — M.G., N.R.; other party: Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie
(Case C-383/13)
2013/C 260/62
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: M.G.
N.R.
Other party: Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie

Questions referred







1.


Does infringement by the national administrative authority of the general principle of respect for the rights of the defence, which is also given expression in Article 41(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, (1) in (the course of the preparation of) an extension decision within the terms of Article 15(6) of Directive 2008/115/EC (2) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals, automatically and in all cases mean that the detention must be lifted?










2.


Does that general principle of respect for the rights of the defence leave scope for a balancing of interests in which, in addition to the seriousness of the infringement of that principle and the interests of the foreign national adversely affected thereby, the interests of the Member State served by the extension of the detention measure are also taken into account?






(1)  OJ 2000 C 364, p. 1.

(2)  OJ 2008 L 348, p. 98.
Joined Cases T-148/10 and T-149/10: Order of the General Court of 5 July 2013 — SK Hynix v Commission
Date: 2013-07-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, fine, infringement of EU law, patent, transparency in decision-making, unfair terms of contract








C_2013260EN.01005102.xml










7.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/51





Order of the General Court of 5 July 2013 — SK Hynix v Commission
(Joined Cases T-148/10 and T-149/10) (1)

2013/C 260/92
Language of the case: English
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the joined cases be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 148, 5.6.2010.
Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union
Date: 2013-07-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, common customs tariff, footwear industry, sports equipment








C_2013194EN.01000801.xml










5.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/8





Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union
2013/C 194/04
Pursuant to the second indent of Article 9(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (1), the Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union (2) are hereby amended as follows:






 



Page 251

The Explanatory Note to heading 6402 is deleted.










 



Page 252

The last paragraph of the Explanatory Note to heading 6403 is deleted.










 



Page 253

The Explanatory Note to heading 6404 is deleted.










 



Page 254








6404 11 00




Sports footwear; tennis shoes, basketball shoes, gym shoes, training shoes and the like





The third paragraph of the Explanatory Note to subheading 6404 11 00 is deleted and replaced by the following paragraph:

‘The term “tennis shoes, basketball shoes, gym shoes, training shoes and the like” of this subheading covers shoes which, by virtue of their shape, cut and look, show that they are designed for a sporting activity, for example sailing, squash, table tennis, volleyball. However, footwear worn mainly or exclusively for, for example, white water canoeing, walking, trekking, hiking, mountain climbing is excluded.’

After the last paragraph of the Explanatory Note to subheading 6404 11 00 the following new paragraph is inserted:

‘Shoes which because of their size are meant to be worn by children and young people can also be covered by this subheading.’







(1)  OJ L 256, 7.9.1987, p. 1.

(2)  OJ C 137, 6.5.2011, p. 1.
Case C-384/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) lodged on 5 July 2013 — Estación de Servicio Pozuelo 4, S.L. v GALP Energía España, S.A.U.
Date: 2013-07-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Spain, interpretation of the law, land use, market-sharing agreement, petroleum product








C_2013274EN.01000901.xml










21.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 274/9





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) lodged on 5 July 2013 — Estación de Servicio Pozuelo 4, S.L. v GALP Energía España, S.A.U.
(Case C-384/13)
2013/C 274/15
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Estación de Servicio Pozuelo 4, S.L.

Other party: GALP Energía España, S.A.U.

Questions referred







1.


Can a contract such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which a supplier of petroleum-based products is granted a right known as a ‘surface right’ for a period of 45 years for the purpose of building a service station and letting it to the owner of the land for a period equivalent to the duration of the right, and which contains an exclusive purchasing obligation for the same period, be regarded as being of negligible importance and as not being caught by the prohibition laid down in Article 81(1) EC (now Article 101(1) TFEU) on the grounds, principally, of the supplier’s modest market share of less than 3 %, compared to the total market share of about 70 % held by three suppliers alone, even though the duration of this contract exceeds the average duration of contracts generally concluded on the relevant market?










2.


If the reply were to be in the negative and the agreement were to fall to be examined under Regulation No 1984/83 (1) and Regulation No 2790/99, (2) may Article 12(2) of Regulation No 2790/99 in conjunction with Article 5(a) of the same regulation be interpreted as meaning that, in view of the reseller’s not being the owner of the land and the remaining duration of the contract’s being more than five years on 1 January 2002, the contract will become void on 31 December 2006?






(1)  Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1984/83 of 22 June 1983 on the application of Article 85(3) of the Treaty to categories of exclusive purchasing agreements (OJ 1983 L 173, p. 5).

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2790/1999 of 22 December 1999 on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices (OJ 1999 L 336, p. 21).
Case T-309/12 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 5 July 2013 — Zweckverband Tierkörperbeseitigung v Commission (Interim measures — Payment of contributions to an association governed by public law — State aid — Obligation to recover — Application to suspend enforcement — Urgency)
Date: 2013-07-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Germany, State aid, public institution, social-security contribution








C_2013260EN.01004201.xml










7.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/42





Order of the President of the General Court of 5 July 2013 — Zweckverband Tierkörperbeseitigung v Commission
(Case T-309/12 R)
(Interim measures - Payment of contributions to an association governed by public law - State aid - Obligation to recover - Application to suspend enforcement - Urgency)
2013/C 260/74
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Zweckverband Tierkörperbeseitigung in Rhineland-Palatinate, Saarland, Rheingau-Taunus-Kreis and Landkreis Limburg-Weilburg (Rivenich, Germany) (represented by: A. Kerkmann, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Sauer and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Saria Bio Industries AG & Co. KG (Selm, Germany); SecAnim GmbH (Lünen, Germany); and Knochen- und Fett-Union (KFU) GmbH (Selm) (represented by: U. Karpenstein and C. Johann, lawyers)

Re:

Application for suspension of enforcement of Commission Decision (2102/485/EU) of 25 April 2012 on State aid SA.25051 (C 19/10) (ex NN 23/2010) granted by Germany to the Zweckverband Tierkörperbeseitigung in Rhineland-Palatinate, Saarland, Rheingau-Taunus-Kreis and Landkreis Limburg-Weilburg (OJ 2012 L 236, p. 1).

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


Costs are reserved.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2013-07-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2013194EN.01000701.xml










5.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/7





Euro exchange rates (1)

4 July 2013
2013/C 194/03

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2984




JPY


Japanese yen


129,64




DKK


Danish krone


7,4603




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85980




SEK


Swedish krona


8,7080




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2328




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,9350




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


26,050




HUF


Hungarian forint


295,80




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7019




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3083




RON


Romanian leu


4,4340




TRY


Turkish lira


2,5343




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4239




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3690




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,0677




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6655




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6525




KRW


South Korean won


1 479,92




ZAR


South African rand


13,0791




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,9537




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4928




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 906,59




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,1298




PHP


Philippine peso


56,322




RUB


Russian rouble


43,1050




THB


Thai baht


40,393




BRL


Brazilian real


2,9432




MXN


Mexican peso


16,8402




INR


Indian rupee


78,1960






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Corrigendum to Council Implementing Decision 2013/48/EU of 22 January 2013 amending Implementing Decision 2011/77/EU on granting Union financial assistance to Ireland ( OJ L 21, 24.1.2013 )
Date: 2013-07-05
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Community loan, EU aid, Ireland, aid for restructuring, banking system, central bank, debt reduction, economic stabilisation, financial aid, reflation








L_2013186EN.01001201.xml










5.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 186/12







Corrigendum to Council Implementing Decision 2013/48/EU of 22 January 2013 amending Implementing Decision 2011/77/EU on granting Union financial assistance to Ireland
(
Official Journal of the European Union L 21 of 24 January 2013
)

On page 30, Article 1(1), new point (c) of paragraph 8:
for:

               ‘… amortisation established under the 2011 PLAR, …’,
read:

               ‘… amortisation in line with the 2011 PLAR, …’;
on page 31, Article 1(2), new point (b) of paragraph 10:
for:

               ‘… amortisation established under the 2011 PLAR, …’,
read:

               ‘… amortisation in line with the 2011 PLAR, …’.
Opinion of the European Central Bank of 5 July 2013 on a proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 974/98 as regards the introduction of the euro in Latvia and on a proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 2866/98 as regards the conversion rate to the euro for Latvia (CON/2013/48)
Date: 2013-07-05
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: EU financial instrument, Latvia, conversion rate, euro, exchange rate, monetary union, national currency, transitional period (EU)








C_2013204EN.01000101.xml










18.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 204/1





OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
of 5 July 2013
on a proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 974/98 as regards the introduction of the euro in Latvia and on a proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 2866/98 as regards the conversion rate to the euro for Latvia
(CON/2013/48)
2013/C 204/01

Introduction and legal basis

On 18 June 2013, the European Central Bank (ECB) received a request from the Council of the European Union for an opinion on a proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 974/98 as regards the introduction of the euro in Latvia (1). On 3 July 2013, the ECB received a request from the Council of the European Union for an opinion on a proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 2866/98 as regards the conversion rate to the euro for Latvia (2).
The ECB’s competence to deliver an opinion is based on Article 140(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. In accordance with the first sentence of Article 17.5 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Central Bank, the Governing Council has adopted this opinion.

Observations







1.


The proposed regulations will enable the introduction of the euro as the currency of Latvia following the abrogation of Latvia’s derogation in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 140(2) of the Treaty.










2.


The ECB welcomes the proposed regulations.





Done at Frankfurt am Main, 5 July 2013.


The President of the ECB

Mario DRAGHI




(1)  COM(2013) 337 final.

(2)  COM(2013) 492 final.
Case T-357/13: Action brought on 5 July 2013 — European Space Imaging v Commission
Date: 2013-07-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: common agricultural policy, invitation to tender, principle of proportionality, provision of documents, satellite communications, transparency in decision-making








C_2013260EN.01004402.xml










7.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/44





Action brought on 5 July 2013 — European Space Imaging v Commission
(Case T-357/13)
2013/C 260/80
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: European Space Imaging GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: W. Trautner, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision notified by letter of 5 June 2013 concerning the annulment of the restricted procedure;










—


annul the decision notified by letter of 5 June 2013 to hold a new procurement procedure by way of an open procedure;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of proportionality
The applicant claims that, by annulling the procurement procedure for the supply of satellite remote sensing data and associated services in support of checks within the common agricultural policy (OJ 2012/S 183 299769), the Commission has infringed the principle of proportionality laid down in Article 89(1) of the Financial Regulation. (1) The applicant claims in that connection, inter alia, that the Commission’s course of action runs counter to the general principle that the annulment of a procurement procedure should be a measure of last resort (‘ultima ratio’). The applicant is of the view that the Commission ought to have requested candidates to submit specific offers before it could decide that in fact no economic offer would be considered.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of transparency
The applicant claims in this plea that by refusing to give specific information on the grounds for annulling the procurement procedure, the Commission infringed the principle of transparency laid down in Article 89(1) of the Financial Regulation. In particular, the applicant is not able to ascertain whether the grounds alleged are applicable. The applicant moreover claims that the highly specialised nature of the relevant market for the supply of satellite remote sensing data means that the number of potential tenderers is very limited and alleges that, prior to its decision to annul the procurement procedure, the Commission failed to make it known that there was a possibility that the procedure would be annulled if a given number of applicants was not reached.






(1)  Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1).