do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Decision of 18 July 2013 appointing the members of the European Consumer Consultative Group and their alternates
Date: 2013-07-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU office or agency, appointment of members, consumer information, consumer movement








C_2013210EN.01000401.xml










24.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 210/4





COMMISSION DECISION
of 18 July 2013
appointing the members of the European Consumer Consultative Group and their alternates
2013/C 210/04
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Commission Decision 2009/705/EC of 14 September 2009 setting up a European Consumer Consultative Group (1), and in particular Article 4 thereof,
Whereas:






(1)


The mandate of the current members of the European Consumer Consultative Group expired on 28 February 2013.










(2)


Therefore, it is necessary to appoint new members and alternates for a three-year period, on the basis of the proposals put forward by the Member States and the European consumer organisations,




HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Sole Article
The following persons are appointed members or alternates of the European Consumer Consultative Group for a three-year term of office:






Members


Alternates




Gilles DE HALLEUX (BE)


Pieter-Jan DE KONING (BE)




Bogomil NIKOLOV (BG)


Daniela IVANOVA (BG)




Libor DUPAL (CZ)


Pavel STAŘIČNÝ (CZ)




Benedicte FEDERSPIEL (DK)


Vagn JELSØE (DK)




Isabelle Marie Charlotte BUSCKE (DE)


Heinz WILLNAT (DE)




Helle ARUNIIT (EE)


Tiiu MÜÜRSEPP (EE)




Dermott JEWELL (IE)


Michael KILCOYNE (IE)




Evangelia KEKELEKI (EL)


Fotios SPYROPOULOS (EL)




Concepción MARTIN REY (ES)


Eugenio RIBÓN SEISDEDOS (ES)




Karine DE CRESCENZO (FR)


Sandrine PERROIS (FR)




Massimiliano DONA (IT)


Giovanni FERRARI (IT)




Fryni MICHAEL (CY)


Loucas ARISTODEMOU (CY)




Baiba MILTOVIČA (LV)


Aivars SMAGARS (LV)




Rūtenis PAUKŠTE (LT)


Eglė KYBARTIENĖ (LT)




Eugène KIRSCH (LU)


Bob SCHMITZ (LU)




Dóra GRAFNÉ BARANYI (HU)


György BARANOVSZY (HU)




Antoine GRIMA (MT)


Pauline AZZOPARDI (MT)




Michiel KARSKENS (NL)


Jacobus T. PETERS (NL)




Gabriele ZGUBIC-ENGLEDER (AT)


Ulrike DOCEKAL (AT)




Kamil PLUSKWA-DĄBROWSKI (PL)


Grazyna ROKICKA (PL)




Luís Sieuve DE LIMA DA SILVEIRA RODRIGUES (PT)


Lina Maria CARDOSO LOPES (PT)




Sorin-George TOMA (RO)


Emil BOJIN (RO)




Živa DROL NOVAK (SI)


Breda KUTIN (SI)




Petra VARGOVÁ ČASKOVSKÁ (SK)


Božena STAŠENKOVÁ (SK)




Juha BEURLING (FI)


Ilkka SALMINEN (FI)




Jens HENRIKSSON (SE)


Jan BERTOFT (SE)




Michelle SMYTH (UK)


Antoinette McKEOWN (UK)




Stephen RUSSELL (ANEC)


Chiara GIOVANNINI (ANEC)




Monique GOYENS (BEUC)


Ursula PACHL (BEUC)





Done at Brussels, 18 July 2013.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
Paola TESTORI COGGI

Director-General for Health and Consumers





(1)  OJ L 244, 16.9.2009, p. 21.
Case C-265/12: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 18 July 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Brussel — Belgium) — Citroën Belux NV v Federatie voor Verzekerings- en Financiële Tussenpersonen (FvF) (Article 56 TFEU — Freedom to provide services — Directive 2005/29/EC — Unfair commercial practices — Consumer protection — Combined offers involving at least one financial service — Prohibition — Exceptions)
Date: 2013-07-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, financial services, freedom to provide services, offer price, restriction on competition








C_2013260EN.01001701.xml










7.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/17





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 18 July 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Brussel — Belgium) — Citroën Belux NV v Federatie voor Verzekerings- en Financiële Tussenpersonen (FvF)
(Case C-265/12) (1)

(Article 56 TFEU - Freedom to provide services - Directive 2005/29/EC - Unfair commercial practices - Consumer protection - Combined offers involving at least one financial service - Prohibition - Exceptions)
2013/C 260/28
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van beroep te Brussel

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Citroën Belux NV

Defendant: Federatie voor Verzekerings- en Financiële Tussenpersonen (FvF)

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Hof van beroep te Brussel (Belgium) — Interpretation of Article 56 TFEU and of Article 3(9) of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) (OJ 2005 L 149, p. 22) — National consumer-protection legislation which prohibits generally, subject to exceptions exhaustively set out, any combined offer containing at least one financial service

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3(9) of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) must be interpreted, as must Article 56 TFEU, as not precluding a national provision, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which lays down a general prohibition — save in the cases exhaustively listed by the national legislation — of combined offers made to consumers where at least one of the components of those offers is a financial service.


(1)  OJ C 258, 25.8.2012.
Case C-412/12: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 18 July 2013 — European Commission v Republic of Cyprus (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 1999/31/EC — Landfill of waste — Operation in the absence of a conditioning plan for the site — Obligation to close down the site)
Date: 2013-07-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: national implementing measure, storage of waste, waste disposal








C_2013260EN.01001901.xml










7.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/19





Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 18 July 2013 — European Commission v Republic of Cyprus
(Case C-412/12) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 1999/31/EC - Landfill of waste - Operation in the absence of a conditioning plan for the site - Obligation to close down the site)
2013/C 260/31
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: G. Zavvos and D. Düsterhaus, Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Cyprus (represented by: M. Chatzigeorgiou and K. Lykourgos, Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 14 of Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste (OJ 1999 L 182, p. 1) — Continued operation of the landfill sites of Nicosia and Limassol in the absence of conditioning plans for the sites

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by failing to close down all the landfill sites for the uncontrolled disposal of waste (XADA) which are operated on its territory or in failing to comply with Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste, the Republic of Cyprus has failed to fulfill its obligations under Article 14 of that directive;










2.


Orders the Republic of Cyprus to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 366, 24.11.2012.
Case C-520/11: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 18 July 2013 — European Commission v French Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Decision 2009/726/EC — Non-compliance — Imports of milk and milk products — Origin — At-risk holdings in terms of cases of spongiform encephalopathies — National prohibitions)
Date: 2013-07-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: animal disease, enforcement of ruling, food safety, import (EU), import restriction, marketing restriction, milk








C_2013260EN.01000802.xml










7.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/8





Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 18 July 2013 — European Commission v French Republic
(Case C-520/11) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Decision 2009/726/EC - Non-compliance - Imports of milk and milk products - Origin - At-risk holdings in terms of cases of spongiform encephalopathies - National prohibitions)
2013/C 260/14
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: F. Jimeno Fernández and D. Bianchi, acting as Agents)

Defendant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and S. Menez, and by C. Candat and R. Loosli-Surrans, acting as Agents)

Re:

Failure to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Arts 4(3) TEU and 288 TFEU — Failure to comply with Commission Decision 2009/726/EC of 24 September 2009 concerning interim protection measures taken by France as regards the introduction onto its territory of milk and milk products coming from a holding where a classical scrapie case is confirmed (OJ 2009 L 258, p. 27)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by failing to comply with Commission Decision 2009/726/EC of 24 September 2009 concerning interim protection measures taken by France as regards the introduction onto its territory of milk and milk products coming from a holding where a classical scrapie case is confirmed, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 4(3) TEU and 288 TFEU.










2.


The French Republic is ordered to pay costs.






(1)  OJ C 362, 10.12.2011.
Case C-204/11 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 July 2013 — Fédération internationale de football association (FIFA) v European Commission, Kingdom of Belgium, and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Appeals — Television broadcasting — Directive 89/552/EEC — Article 3a — Measures taken by the Kingdom of Belgium concerning events of major importance for the society of that Member State — Football World Cup — Decision declaring the measures compatible with European Union law — Statement of reasons — Articles 43 EC and 49 EC — Right to property)
Date: 2013-07-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: copyright, pay television, professional sport, sports body








C_2013260EN.01000302.xml










7.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/3





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 July 2013 — Fédération internationale de football association (FIFA) v European Commission, Kingdom of Belgium, and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
(Case C-204/11 P) (1)

(Appeals - Television broadcasting - Directive 89/552/EEC - Article 3a - Measures taken by the Kingdom of Belgium concerning events of major importance for the society of that Member State - Football World Cup - Decision declaring the measures compatible with European Union law - Statement of reasons - Articles 43 EC and 49 EC - Right to property)
2013/C 260/04
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Fédération internationale de football association (FIFA) (represented by: A. Barav and D. Reymond, avocats)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: E. Montaguti and N. Yerrell, acting as Agents, and M. Gray, Barrister), Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: C. Pochet and J.-C. Halleux, acting as Agents, and A. Joachimowicz and J. Stuyck, advocaten), United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: S. Ossowski and J. Beeko, and Agents, assisted by T. de la Mare QC)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 17 February 2011 in Case T-385/07 Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) v Commission, dismissing an action seeking the annulment of Commission Decision 2007/479/EC of 25 June 2007 declaring compatible with Community law measures taken by Belgium pursuant to Article 3a(1) of Council Directive 89/552/EEC of 3 October 1989 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities (OJ 2007 L 180, p. 24)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders the Fédération internationale de football association (FIFA) to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 232, 6.8.2011.
Corrigendum to the reserve list of competition EPSO/AD/235/12 — Croatian-language (HR) Lawyer-linguists (AD7) ( OJ C 182 A, 27.6.2013 )
Date: 2013-07-18
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: Croatia, EPSO, administrator, competition (EU), lawyer








CA2013204EN.01000301.xml










18.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CA 204/3





Corrigendum to the reserve list of competition EPSO/AD/235/12 — Croatian-language (HR) Lawyer-linguists (AD7)

(
Official Journal of the European Union C 182 A of 27 June 2013
)

(2013/C 204 A/03)
On page 1:
for:







‘BIŽAJIĆ


Robert’,





read:







‘BIJAŽIĆ


Robert’.
Case C-26/12: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 18 July 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te Leeuwarden — Netherlands) — Fiscale eenheid PPG Holdings BV cs te Hoogezand v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Noord/kantoor Groningen (Value added tax — Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC — Articles 17 and 13B(d)(6) — Exemptions — Deduction of input tax — Pension fund — Concept of ‘management of special investment funds’ )
Date: 2013-07-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, investment company, provision of services, supplementary pension, tax relief








C_2013260EN.01001002.xml










7.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/10





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 18 July 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te Leeuwarden — Netherlands) — Fiscale eenheid PPG Holdings BV cs te Hoogezand v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Noord/kantoor Groningen
(Case C-26/12) (1)

(Value added tax - Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC - Articles 17 and 13B(d)(6) - Exemptions - Deduction of input tax - Pension fund - Concept of ‘management of special investment funds’)
2013/C 260/18
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Gerechtshof te Leeuwarden

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Fiscale eenheid PPG Holdings BV cs te Hoogezand

Defendant: Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Noord/kantoor Groningen

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Gerechtshof te Leeuwarden — Interpretation of Articles 13B(d)(6) and 17 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) and of Articles 135(1)(g), 168 and 169 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 concerning the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) — Deduction of input tax — Taxable person having, under national legislation on pensions, set up a pension fund in order to safeguard the pension rights of his employees as members of that fund — Deduction of input tax on services supplied to him for the purposes of the management of the pension fund

Operative part of the judgment

Article 17 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 must be interpreted as meaning that a taxable person who has set up a pension fund in the form of a legally and fiscally separate entity, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, in order to safeguard the pension rights of his employees and former employees, is entitled to deduct the value added tax he has paid on services relating to the management and operation of that fund, provided that the existence of a direct and immediate link is apparent from all the circumstances of the transactions in question.


(1)  OJ C 98, 31.3.2012.
Case C-261/11: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 July 2013 — European Commission v Kingdom of Denmark (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Freedom of establishment — Article 49 TFEU — Article 31 of the EEA Agreement — Restrictions — Tax legislation — Transfer of assets to another Member State — Immediate taxation of unrealised capital gains)
Date: 2013-07-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: capital transfer, firm governed by commercial law, tax system








C_2013260EN.01000501.xml










7.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/5





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 July 2013 — European Commission v Kingdom of Denmark
(Case C-261/11) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Freedom of establishment - Article 49 TFEU - Article 31 of the EEA Agreement - Restrictions - Tax legislation - Transfer of assets to another Member State - Immediate taxation of unrealised capital gains)
2013/C 260/07
Language of the case: Danish

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal and N. Fenger, acting as Agents.)

Defendant: Kingdom of Denmark (represented by: C. Vang and V. Pasternak Jørgensen, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: K. Petersen and T. Henze, acting as Agents), Kingdom of Spain (represented by: A. Rubio González, acting as Agent), Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: C. Schillemans, C. Wissels and J. Langer, acting as Agents), Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, acting as Agent), Republic of Finland (represented by: M. Pere, acting as Agent), Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: A. Falk and U. Persson, acting as Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 49 TFEU and Article 31 EEA — Tax provisions laying down immediate taxation on exit for companies transferring assets to another Member State but not laying down an equivalent tax on transfers of assets within national territory

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by adopting and maintaining in force Paragraph 8(4) of the Law on taxation of the income of share companies and other matters (Lov om indkomstbeskatning af aktieselskaber m.v., lovbekendtgørelse nr. 1376, 7 December 2010), concerning the immediate taxation of the income of share companies, and consequently a tax system providing for the immediate taxation of unrealised capital gains relating to a transfer of assets by a company established in Denmark to another Member State of the European Union or to a non-member country party to the Agreement on the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992, the Kingdom of Denmark has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 TFEU and Article 31 of the EEA Agreement;










2.


Orders the Kingdom of Denmark to pay the costs;










3.


Orders the Federal Republic of Germany, the Kingdom of Spain, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Portuguese Republic, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 238, 13.8.2011.
Agreement between the European Community and the Kingdom of Denmark on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters
Date: 2013-07-18
Institutions: Denmark, European Community
Subjects: Denmark, civil law, commercial law, enforcement of ruling, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, mutual recognition principle








L_2013195EN.01000101.xml










18.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 195/1







Agreement between the European Community and the Kingdom of Denmark on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters

According to Article 4 of the Agreement of 19 October 2005 between the European Community and the Kingdom of Denmark on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (1) (hereinafter ‘the Agreement’), concluded by Council Decision 2006/325/EC (2), whenever implementing measures are adopted pursuant to Article 74(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (3), Denmark’s decision on whether or not to implement the content of such measures shall be notified to the Commission.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1142/2011 establishing Annexes X and XI to Council Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and cooperation in matters relating to maintenance obligations (4) was adopted on 10 November 2011. In accordance with Article 3(2) of the Agreement, Denmark has already, by letter of 14 January 2009, notified the Commission of its decision to implement the content of Council Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 (5) to the extent that it amends Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 (6).
In accordance with Article 4 of the Agreement, Denmark has, by letter of 11 January 2012, notified the Commission of its decision to implement the content of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1142/2011. This means that the provisions of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1142/2011 will be applied to relations between the European Union and Denmark.
In accordance with Article 4(4) of the Agreement, the Danish notification creates mutual obligations between Denmark and the European Union. Thus, Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1142/2011 constitutes an amendment to the Agreement to the extent that it amends Regulation (EC) No 44/2001, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 4/2009, and is considered annexed thereto.
With reference to Article 4(3) of the Agreement, implementation of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1142/2011 in Denmark can take place administratively under Section 9 of the Danish Law No 1563 of 20 December 2006 on the Brussels I Regulation. The necessary administrative measures entered into force on 11 January 2012.


(1)  
            OJ L 299, 16.11.2005, p. 62.

(2)  
            OJ L 120, 5.5.2006, p. 22.

(3)  
            OJ L 12, 16.1.2001, p. 1.

(4)  
            OJ L 293, 11.11.2011, p. 24.

(5)  
            OJ L 7, 10.1.2009, p. 1.

(6)  
            OJ L 149, 12.6.2009, p. 80.