do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-563/13: Action brought on 24 October 2013 — Belgium v Commission
Date: 2013-10-24
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Belgium, agricultural expenditure, financing level, public expenditure








C_2013367EN.01003801.xml










14.12.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 367/38





Action brought on 24 October 2013 — Belgium v Commission
(Case T-563/13)
2013/C 367/68
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: J.-C. Halleux and M. Jacobs, acting as Agents, assisted by F. Tuytschaever and M. Varga, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Declare the present application for annulment admissible and well-founded, and accordingly annul the contested decision in so far as it concerns the expenditure incurred by the Kingdom of Belgium amounting to € 4 108 237,42, or in any event to limit the amount to be reduced from the financing to € 1 268 963,04;










—


Order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant seeks the partial annulment of Commission Implementing Decision 2013/433/EU of 13 August 2013 on excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), (1) in so far as it concerns the expenditure incurred by the Kingdom of Belgium.
In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging breach of the duty to state reasons and the principle of legal certainty, due to the contested implementing decision not sufficiently allowing the applicant to know the breach of which it is accused.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging breach of Articles 122, 125b(1), and 125d of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 (2) and of Articles 25, 28(1), 29 and 33 of Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007, (3) due to the Commission determining that Greenbow cvba was wrongfully recognised as a producer organisation.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of proportionality due to the Commission not having limited the financial correction to the expenditure relating to the Greenbow members that could not be autonomously recognised as producer organisations.






(1)  OJ 2013 L 219, p. 49.

(2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (OJ 2007 L 299, p. 1).

(3)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 of 21 December 2007 laying down implementing rules of Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector (OJ 2007 L 350, p. 1).
Case C-548/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción n °2 de Marchena (Spain) lodged on 24 October 2013 — Caixabank SA v Francisco Javier Brenes Jiménez and Andrea Jiménez Jiménez
Date: 2013-10-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, interest, real estate credit, unfair terms of contract








C_2014024EN.01000202.xml










25.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/2





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción no 2 de Marchena (Spain) lodged on 24 October 2013 — Caixabank SA v Francisco Javier Brenes Jiménez and Andrea Jiménez Jiménez
(Case C-548/13)
2014/C 24/03
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción no 2 de Marchena

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Caixabank SA

Defendants: Francisco Javier Brenes Jiménez and Andrea Jiménez Jiménez

Questions referred







1.


Under Council Directive 93/13/EEC (1) of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, and in particular Article 6(1) thereof, and in order to ensure the protection of consumers and users in accordance with the principles of equivalence and effectiveness, must a national court, when it finds there to be an unfair default-interest clause in mortgage loans, declare the clause void and not binding or, on the contrary, must it moderate the interest clause, referring the matter back to the party seeking enforcement or lender for recalculation of the interest?










2.


Is the Second Transitional Provision of Law 1/2013 of 14 May 2013 nothing more than a clear limitation on the protection of consumer interests, by implicitly imposing upon the court the obligation to moderate a default-interest clause which is tainted by unfairness, recalculating the stipulated interest and maintaining in force a stipulation which was unfair, instead of declaring the clause to be void and not binding upon the consumer?










3.


Does the Second Transitional Provision of Law 1/2013 of 14 May 2013 contravene Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, and in particular Article 6(1) thereof, by preventing application of the principles of equivalence and effectiveness in relation to consumer protection and avoiding application of the penalty of nullity and lack of binding force in respect of default-interest clauses tainted by unfairness and stipulated in mortgage loans entered into prior to the entry into force of Law 1/2013 of 14 May 2013?






(1)  OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29.
Case T-558/13: Action brought on 24 October 2013 — FSA v OHIM — Motokit Veículos e Acessórios (FSA K-FORCE)
Date: 2013-10-24
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, two-wheeled vehicle, vehicle parts








C_2014024EN.01002301.xml










25.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/23





Action brought on 24 October 2013 — FSA v OHIM — Motokit Veículos e Acessórios (FSA K-FORCE)
(Case T-558/13)
2014/C 24/40
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: FSA Srl (Busnago, Italy) (represented by: M. Locatelli and M. Cartella, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Motokit Veículos e Acessórios, SA (Vagos, Portugal)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 5 August 2013 given in Case R 436/2012-2;










—


Order that the word mark FSA K-FORCE be registered;










—


Order the defendant and the intervener to pay the costs of proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: The word mark FSA K-FORCE — Community trade mark registration No 9 191 909

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The applicant

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: The grounds were those laid down in Article 53(1)(a) CTMR in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) CTMR

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Declared the registration of the CTM invalid

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 53(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) CTMR and Article 75 CTMR.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1043/2013 of 24 October 2013 establishing a prohibition of fishing for ling in EU and international waters of V by vessels flying the flag of France
Date: 2013-10-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU waters, Faroes, France, Iceland, catch by species, catch quota, fishing area, fishing rights, international waters, sea fish, sea fishing, ship's flag








L_2013284EN.01001001.xml










26.10.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 284/10








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 1043/2013
of 24 October 2013
         
establishing a prohibition of fishing for ling in EU and international waters of V by vessels flying the flag of France


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 40/2013 of 21 January 2013 fixing for 2013 the fishing opportunities available in EU waters and, to EU vessels, in certain non-EU waters for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks which are subject to international negotiations or agreements (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, 24 October 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 23, 25.1.2013, p. 54.




ANNEX






No


58/TQ40




Member State


France




Stock


LIN/05EI.




Species


Ling (Molva molva)




Zone


EU and international waters of V




Date


29.9.2013
Case C-431/12: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 24 October 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție — Romania) — Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală v SC Rafinăria Steaua Română SA (Taxation — Value added tax — Refund of excess VAT by set-off — Annulment of set-off decision — Obligation to pay default interest to the taxable person)
Date: 2013-10-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, clearing agreement, deadline for payment, interest, interpretation of the law, tax rebate








C_2013367EN.01001901.xml










14.12.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 367/19





Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 24 October 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție — Romania) — Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală v SC Rafinăria Steaua Română SA
(Case C-431/12) (1)

(Taxation - Value added tax - Refund of excess VAT by set-off - Annulment of set-off decision - Obligation to pay default interest to the taxable person)
2013/C 367/32
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală

Defendant: SC Rafinăria Steaua Română SA

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție — Interpretation of Article 183 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) — Refund of excess VAT by set-off — Obligation on the tax authorities to pay default interest where the set-off decisions are annulled by a court

Operative part of the judgment

Article 183 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as precluding a situation in which a taxable person, having made a claim for refund of excess input value added tax over the value added tax which it is liable to pay, cannot obtain from the tax authorities of a Member State default interest on a refund made late by those authorities in respect of a period during which administrative measures precluding the refund, which were subsequently annulled by a court ruling, were in force.


(1)  OJ C 399, 22.12.2012.
Case C-220/12: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 24 October 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Hannover — Germany) — Andreas Ingemar Thiele Meneses v Region Hannover (Citizenship of the Union — Articles 20 TFEU and 21 TFEU — Right of free movement and residence — National of a Member State — Studies pursued in another Member State — Education or training grant — Permanent residence requirement — Place of education or training located in the applicant’s State of residence or in a neighbouring State — Limited exception — Applicant’s specific circumstances)
Date: 2013-10-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European citizenship, education grant, foreign national, freedom of movement, interpretation of the law, residence








C_2013367EN.01001501.xml










14.12.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 367/15





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 24 October 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Hannover — Germany) — Andreas Ingemar Thiele Meneses v Region Hannover
(Case C-220/12) (1)

(Citizenship of the Union - Articles 20 TFEU and 21 TFEU - Right of free movement and residence - National of a Member State - Studies pursued in another Member State - Education or training grant - Permanent residence requirement - Place of education or training located in the applicant’s State of residence or in a neighbouring State - Limited exception - Applicant’s specific circumstances)
2013/C 367/24
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Hannover

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Andreas Ingemar Thiele Meneses

Defendant: Region Hannover

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Verwaltungsgericht Hannover — Interpretation of Articles 20 and 21 TFEU — Education or training grant (‘BAföG’) — Member State’s legislation making its award subject to the condition that its nationals who are resident abroad show ‘special circumstances’ and restricting the place of education or training to the Member State of residence or a neighbouring State

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 20 TFEU and 21 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which, as a rule, makes the award of an education or training grant for studies pursued in another Member State subject to the sole condition of having established a permanent residence, within the meaning of that legislation, on national territory and which, in a case where the applicant is a national of that State with no permanent residence within that State, provides for a grant for education or training abroad only in the applicant’s State of residence or in a neighbouring State thereof and only where specific circumstances justify such a grant.


(1)  OJ C 287, 22.9.2012.
Decision of the Ministerial Council of the Energy Community D/2013/03/MC-EnC on extending the duration of the Energy Community Treaty
Date: 2013-10-24
Institutions: Energy Community
Subjects: Central and Eastern European countries, agreement (EU), electrical energy, energy cooperation, natural gas, renewal of an agreement








L_2013320EN.01008101.xml










30.11.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 320/81








            DECISION OF THE MINISTERIAL COUNCIL OF THE ENERGY COMMUNITY
         
D/2013/03/MC-EnC
on extending the duration of the Energy Community Treaty


THE MINISTERIAL COUNCIL OF THE ENERGY COMMUNITY,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the Energy Community (“the Treaty”), and in particular Article 97 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


The Treaty was signed on 25 October 2005 and entered into force on 1 July 2006.












(2)


According to its Article 97, the Treaty is concluded for a period of 10 years from the date of entry into force and requires a decision by the Ministerial Council for its extension.












(3)


The Energy Community has proven to be an efficient framework for regional cooperation in the energy field.












(4)


The Energy Community is following closely developments in the European Union’s energy policy and has entered into commitments that go beyond 2016.












(5)


The extension of the Treaty has been openly supported by the European Union institutions (1), as well as by the Permanent High Level Group at its meetings of 19 June and 23 October 2013,





ADOPTS THIS DECISION:



Article 1

Extension of the duration of the Energy Community Treaty

The duration of the Treaty is extended for a period of 10 years.


Article 2

Entry into force

This Decision enters into force upon its adoption.




Done in Belgrade, 24 October 2013.


For the Ministerial Council,
Z. MIHAJLOVIĆ
            





(1)  Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council under Article 7 of Decision 2006/500/EC, 10.3.2011, COM(2011) 105 final; Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on security of energy supply and international cooperation - The EU Energy Policy: Engaging with Partners beyond Our Borders, 7.9.2011, COM(2011) 539 final; Conclusions of the meeting of 24 November 2011 of the Council of the European Union on strengthening the external dimension of the EU energy policy.
Case C-440/12: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 24 October 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg — Germany) — Metropol Spielstätten Unternehmergesellschaft (haftungsbeschränkt) v Finanzamt Hamburg-Bergedorf (Taxation — VAT — Betting and gaming — Legislation of a Member State under which VAT and a special tax are to be levied cumulatively on the operation of low-prize slot machines — Whether permissible — Basis of assessment — Whether the taxable person can pass on the VAT)
Date: 2013-10-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, game of chance, interpretation of the law, tax collection, tax relief








C_2013367EN.01001902.xml










14.12.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 367/19





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 24 October 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg — Germany) — Metropol Spielstätten Unternehmergesellschaft (haftungsbeschränkt) v Finanzamt Hamburg-Bergedorf
(Case C-440/12) (1)

(Taxation - VAT - Betting and gaming - Legislation of a Member State under which VAT and a special tax are to be levied cumulatively on the operation of low-prize slot machines - Whether permissible - Basis of assessment - Whether the taxable person can pass on the VAT)
2013/C 367/33
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Metropol Spielstätten Unternehmergesellschaft (haftungsbeschränkt)

Defendant: Finanzamt Hamburg-Bergedorf

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Hamburg — Interpretation of the first sentence of Article 1(2), Article 73, Article 135(1)(i) and Article 401 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) — Taxation of betting and gaming — Legislation of a Member State under which VAT and a special tax are to be levied cumulatively on the operation of low-prize slot machines

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 401 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, read in conjunction with Article 135(1)(i) thereof, must be interpreted as meaning that value added tax and a special national tax on games of chance may be levied cumulatively, provided that the special national tax cannot be characterised as a tax on turnover;










2.


The first sentence of Article 1(2) and Article 73 of Directive 2006/112 must be interpreted as not precluding a national provision or practice whereby, in the operation of gaming machines offering the possibility of winnings, the amount of the cash receipts from those machines is used after a set interval as the basis of assessment;










3.


Article 1(2) of Directive 2006/112 must be interpreted as not precluding a national system regulating an unharmonised tax, under which the value added tax owed is to be set in full against that tax.






(1)  OJ C 389, 15.12.2012.
Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections  Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty
Date: 2013-10-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Scotland, State aid, United Kingdom, advertising, aid to agriculture, control of State aid








C_2013309EN.01000101.xml










24.10.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 309/1





Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU
Cases where the Commission raises no objections
(Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty)
2013/C 309/01







Date of adoption of the decision


20.9.2013




Reference number of State Aid


SA.36625 (13/N)




Member State


United Kingdom




Region


Scotland


—




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


QMS Meat Quality Advertising Scheme




Legal basis








 


Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006










 


The Quality Meat Scotland Order 2008








Type of measure


Scheme


—




Objective


Advertising (AGRI)




Form of aid


Other — Provision of services on preferential terms




Budget


Overall budget: GBP 8 million




Intensity


100 %




Duration (period)


1.4.2014-31.3.2017




Economic sectors


Agriculture, forestry and fishing




Name and address of the granting authority







Quality Meat Scotland




The Rural Centre




Ingliston




Midlothian




EH28 8NZ




UNITED KINGDOM








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