do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
Date: 2013-08-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Norwegian Sea, Portugal, catch by species, catch quota, fishing rights, sea fish, ship's flag








C_2013249EN.01000402.xml










30.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 249/4





Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
2013/C 249/07
In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:






Date and time of closure


30.7.2013




Duration


30.7.2013-31.12.2013




Member State


Portugal




Stock or group of stocks


COD/1/2B




Species


Cod (Gadus Morhua)




Zone


I and IIb




Type(s) of fishing vessels


—




Reference number


22/TQ40






(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 846/2013 of 30 August 2013 establishing a prohibition of fishing for herring in Union waters of Subdivisions 25-27, 28.2, 29 and 32 by vessels flying the flag of Germany
Date: 2013-08-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Baltic Sea, EU waters, Germany, catch by species, catch quota, fishing rights, sea fish, ship's flag








L_2013234EN.01001901.xml










3.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 234/19








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 846/2013
of 30 August 2013
         
establishing a prohibition of fishing for herring in Union waters of Subdivisions 25-27, 28.2, 29 and 32 by vessels flying the flag of Germany


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), and in particular Article 36(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Council Regulation (EU) No 1088/2012 of 20 November 2012 fixing for 2013 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks applicable in the Baltic Sea (2), lays down quotas for 2013.












(2)


According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2013.












(3)


It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1

Quota exhaustion

The fishing quota allocated to the Member State referred to in the Annex to this Regulation for the stock referred to therein for 2013 shall be deemed to be exhausted from the date set out in that Annex.


Article 2

Prohibitions

Fishing activities for the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein shall be prohibited from the date set out in that Annex. In particular it shall be prohibited to retain on board, relocate, tranship or land fish from that stock caught by those vessels after that date.


Article 3

Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 August 2013.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
Lowri EVANS
            

Director-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ L 323, 22.11.2012, p. 2.




ANNEX






No


32/BAL




Member State


Germany




Stock


HER/3D-R30




Species


Herring (Clupea harengus)




Zone


Union waters of Subdivisions 25-27, 28.2, 29 and 32




Date


7.8.2013
Case T-461/13: Action brought on 30 August 2013 — Kingdom of Spain v Commission
Date: 2013-08-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, State aid, equal treatment, high-definition television, infringement of EU law, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, principle of subsidiarity, reimbursement of aid, restriction on competition, right to information








C_2013304EN.01002302.xml










19.10.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 304/23





Action brought on 30 August 2013 — Kingdom of Spain v Commission
(Case T-461/13)
2013/C 304/41
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: A. Rubio González)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The action is brought against the decision of the Commission of 19 June 2013, on State aid SA.28599 (C 23/2010) (ex NN 36/010, ex CP 163/2009) implemented by the Kingdom of Spain for the deployment of digital terrestrial television in remote and less-urbanised areas (other than Castilla-La Mancha). That decision found that that aid was partly incompatible with the internal market and therefore ordered that it be recovered.
In support of the action, the applicant relies on five 11 pleas in law.






1.


First plea: infringement of Article 107(1) TFEU, in the absence, in the present case, of any economic advantage granted to an entity engaged in an economic activity, of selectivity of that measure and of distortion of competition.










2.


Second plea: infringement of Article 106(2) TFEU, and Article 107(3)(c) TFEU, given that it has not been established that the principle of technological neutrality was breached.










3.


Third plea: infringement of the procedure in State aid cases, having regard, in the present case, to its excessive duration, to the failure to take into account evidence that was presented, as well as lack of consistency and objectivity during the appraisal.










4.


The fourth plea, in the alternative: infringement of the principles of legal certainty, equality, proportionality and subsidiarity, and absence of the obligation to recover the resulting aid, in so far as Article 14 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (OJ 1999 L 83, p. 1) waives that recovery requirement where the general principles of European Union law have been disregarded.










5.


Fifth plea, likewise in the alternative: breach of the right to information, enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and of the lack of a requirement to recover the resulting aid.
EU-27 ethyl alcohol balance for 2012 (Established on 28 July 2013 in accordance with Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 2336/2003)
Date: 2013-08-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU market, balance sheet, ethanol, exchange of information








C_2013249EN.01000501.xml










30.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 249/5





EU-27 ethyl alcohol balance for 2012
(Established on 28 July 2013 in accordance with Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 2336/2003 (1))
2013/C 249/08









 


EU-27 ethyl alcohol balance for 2012
Established on 28 July 2013 in accordance with Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 2336/2003 (1)



In hectolitres of pure alcohol (HPA)




1.


Initial stock


—










—


Agricultural origin






12 877 024










—


Non-agricultural origin






—




2.


Production


—










—


Agricultural origin






59 836 531










—


Non-agricultural origin






—




3.


Imports (2)
 (3)



5 363 316










—


0 % Duty






2 736 652










—


Reduced duty






—










—


100 % duty






2 626 664




4.


Total resources


78 076 871




5.


Exports


678 830




6.


Internal consumption


63 362 444




 


Agricultural origin


Non-agricultural origin


Total




Food use


7 878 457


 


 




Industrial use


7 861 975


 


 




Fuel (3)



45 076 265


 


 




Other


2 545 747


 


 




 


Total


63 362 444


 


 




7.


Final stock


—










—


Agricultural origin






14 035 597










—


Non-agricultural origin






—





Sources: Communications from the Member States/Eurostat COMEXT.






(1)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2336/2003 of 30 December 2003 introducing certain detailed rules for applying Council Regulation (EC) No 670/2003 laying down specific measures concerning the market in ethyl alcohol of agricultural origin (OJ L 346, 31.12.2003, p. 19).

(2)  Includes only products under codes CN 2207 10, CN 2207 20, CN 2208 90 91 and CN 2208 90 99.

(3)  4 million HPA under CN 3824 90 97 and 1,4 million HPA of ETBE under CN 2909 19 10 used to produce fuel have been excluded.

Sources: Communications from the Member States/Eurostat COMEXT.
Case T-471/13: Action brought on 30 August 2013 — Xellia Pharmaceuticals and Zoetis Products v Commission
Date: 2013-08-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: fine, patent law, pharmaceutical industry, restriction on competition, rights of the defence








C_2013325EN.01004701.xml










9.11.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 325/47





Action brought on 30 August 2013 — Xellia Pharmaceuticals and Zoetis Products v Commission
(Case T-471/13)
2013/C 325/75
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Xellia Pharmaceuticals ApS (Copenhagen, Denmark) and Zoetis Products, LLC (New Jersey, United States) (represented by: D. Hull, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul Articles 1(3), 2(3) and 3 of Commission Decision C(2013) 3803 final of 19 June 2013 (COMP/39.229 — Lundbeck) in so far as they concern the applicants; or










—


In the alternative, declare Article 1(3) of the Decision partially null and void, and reduce the amount of the fine imposed; and










—


Order the Commission to bear the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in finding that the restrictions set forth in the Settlement Agreement exceeded the scope of Lundbeck’s patents.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging an error of law in using the wrong legal standard to determine whether Alpharma was a potential competitor; and a manifest error of assessment in finding that Alpharma was a potential competitor.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in finding that the Settlement Agreement constituted a restriction of competition ‘by object’.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging an error of law in finding a restriction of competition within the meaning of Article 101 despite the fact that the Settlement Agreement solely reflected the exclusionary scope of Lundbeck’s patents, which, as a matter of law, must be presumed to be valid.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging violation of the Applicants’ rights of defence by belatedly notifying them of (i) the existence of the investigation and (ii) the Commission’s specific objections.










6.


Sixth plea in law, alleging violation of the principle of non-discrimination by addressing the Decision to Zoetis.










7.


Seventh plea in law, alleging an error of law in calculating the fine without taking into account the limited gravity of the alleged infringement and a manifest error of assessment in setting the fine proportionately higher than the fine imposed on Lundbeck and failing to take into account the uncertainty in the law, the less serious nature of the infringement, and the geographic scope.










8.


Eighth plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in applying the 10 % fine cap to A.L. Industrier based upon its 2011 turnover instead of its significantly higher 2012 turnover, thereby forcing the Applicants to pay a higher proportion of the fine