do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Notice concerning a request in accordance with Article 30 of Directive 2004/17/EC — Deadline extension — Request from a contracting entity
Date: 2013-11-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Austria, award of contract, competition, market access, postal service








C_2013339EN.01000801.xml










20.11.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 339/8





Notice concerning a request in accordance with Article 30 of Directive 2004/17/EC — Deadline extension
Request from a contracting entity
2013/C 339/05
On 1 October 2013, the Commission received a request in accordance with Article 30(5) of Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors (1).
The request, from Österreichische Post AG, concerns postal services and other services as referred to in Article 6(2)(b) and (c) of Directive 2004/17/EC in Austria. The relevant notice was published in OJ C 303, 19.10.2013, p. 28. The initial deadline was 2 January 2014.
In accordance with the second sentence of Article 30(6), since the Commission needs to obtain and examine additional information, the period within which the Commission must take a decision on this request has been extended by three months.
The final deadline is therefore 2 April 2014.


(1)  OJ L 134, 30.4.2004, p. 1.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.7085 — CBRE/NHL) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2013-11-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Ireland, Singapore, United Kingdom, United States, economic concentration, merger control, real estate business








C_2013339EN.01000901.xml










20.11.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 339/9





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.7085 — CBRE/NHL)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2013/C 339/06






1.


On 14 November 2013, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which CBRE Group, Inc. (‘CBRE’, the United States of America) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of Norland Holdings Limited and all its subsidiaries (‘NHL’, the United Kingdom) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


CBRE is a publicly-listed corporation active in the real estate sector in several countries including the United Kingdom and Ireland,










—


NHL is a facilities management services provider active in the United Kingdom, Ireland, Singapore and the United States.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the EC Merger Regulation (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.7085 — CBRE/NHL, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘EC Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32 (‘Notice on a simplified procedure’).
Case C-591/13: Action brought on 20 November 2013 — European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany
Date: 2013-11-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, capital gains tax, infringement of EU law, right of establishment, share capital, transfer of property








C_2014024EN.01001101.xml










25.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/11





Action brought on 20 November 2013 — European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany
(Case C-591/13)
2014/C 24/20
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: W. Mölls, W. Roels, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany

Forms of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare that, by adopting and retaining provisions under which the tax on hidden reserves, which have been realised upon the sale for consideration of certain capital assets, is deferred by ‘transfer’ to newly purchased or produced capital assets until their sale, in so far as the latter assets belong to the capital assets of a taxpayer’s domestic permanent establishment, whereas such a deferral is not possible in so far as the same assets belong to the capital assets of a taxpayer’s permanent establishment which is located in another Member State or in another State of the European Economic Area, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 TFEU and Article 31 of the EEA Agreement (1);










—


order the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

Under the German provisions, the resulting profit on the sale of certain capital assets of a business is not immediately taxed where the taxpayer goes on to purchase anew or produce certain capital assets of the business within a certain time period. In that case, the taxation of the aforementioned profit from the sale of the original assets is deferred by way of a ‘transfer’ of the corresponding hidden reserves until the sale of the newly purchased or produced assets. That deferral can, however, be granted only where the newly purchased or produced assets belong to the capital assets of a domestic permanent establishment, and not, however, where the permanent establishment concerned is located in another Member State or in another State of the European Economic Area. According to the Commission, that rule infringes the freedom of establishment.


(1)  Agreement of 2 May 1992 on the European Economic Area, OJ 1994 L 1, p. 3.
Case C-593/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 20 November 2013 — Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri and Others v Rina Services SpA and Others
Date: 2013-11-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: application of the law, freedom to provide services, head office, legal domicile, national law, public limited company, right of establishment








C_2014061EN.01000201.xml










1.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 61/2





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 20 November 2013 — Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri and Others v Rina Services SpA and Others
(Case C-593/13)
2014/C 61/02
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri and Others

Respondents: Rina Services SpA and Others

Questions referred







1.


Do the TFEU principles of freedom of establishment (Article 49 TFEU) and freedom to provide services (Article 56 TFEU) and the principles laid down in Directive 2006/123/EC (1) … preclude the adoption and application of national legislation under which SOAs constituted as limited companies ‘must have their seat in Italian territory’?










2.


Must the derogation provided for in Article 51 TFEU be interpreted as covering an activity such as the certification carried out by private-law bodies which, on the one hand, are required to be formed as limited companies and operate in a competitive market and, on the other hand, are connected with the exercise of official authority and, for that reason, are subject to authorisation and rigorous controls by the Supervisory Authorities?






(1)  Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market (OJ 2006 L 376, p. 36).
Case T-616/13: Action brought on 20 November 2013 — AIC v OHIM — ACV Manufacturing (Heat exchanger inserts)
Date: 2013-11-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, heat pump, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014024EN.01003501.xml










25.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/35





Action brought on 20 November 2013 — AIC v OHIM — ACV Manufacturing (Heat exchanger inserts)
(Case T-616/13)
2014/C 24/65
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: AIC S.A. (Gdynia, Poland) (represented by: J. Radłowski, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: ACV Manufacturing (Seneffe, Belgium)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 10 September 2013 given in Case R 293/2012-3;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs of the present proceedings and those incurred before the Board of Appeal.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Registered Community design in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: The design for a product described as ‘heat exchanger inserts’ — Registered Community Design No 1 137 152-0001

Proprietor of the Community design: The applicant

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

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: It was alleged that the design did not fulfil the requirements of Article 4(1) and (2), in conjunction with Articles 5 and 6 and in particular Article 8(1) and (2) CDR

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Declared the contested RCD invalid

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 25(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 4(2) CDR.
Corrigendum to the Communication from the Minister for Economic Development of the Italian Republic pursuant to Article 3(2) of Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons ( OJ C 106, 12.4.2013 )
Date: 2013-11-20
Institutions: Italy
Subjects: Italy, extraction of oil, hydrocarbon, petroleum exploration, public contract








C_2013339EN.01001001.xml










20.11.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 339/10





Corrigendum to the Communication from the Minister for Economic Development of the Italian Republic pursuant to Article 3(2) of Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons
(
Official Journal of the European Union C 106 of 12 April 2013
)
2013/C 339/07
On page 2 of the Contents and on page 8, the title should read as follows:
for:

read:

on page 8, in the second paragraph:
for:

‘Within three months of the date of publication of the above Decree in the Official Journal of the European Union, interested bodies may under the rules in force submit applications for authorisation for oil and gas prospection and exploration in the extended areas referred to in paragraph 1 of the Decree.’,

read:

‘After three months from the date of publication of the above Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, interested bodies may under the rules in force submit applications for authorisation for oil and gas prospection and exploration in the extended areas referred to in paragraph 1 of the Decree.’.
2014/94/EU: Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 2013 on the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument
Date: 2013-11-20
Institutions: Council of the European Union, European Parliament
Subjects: European Social Fund, France, Italy, Spain, commitment of expenditure, distribution of EU funding, financial instrument, general budget (EU), supplementary financing








L_2014048EN.01000801.xml










19.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 48/8








            DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
         
of 20 November 2013
         
on the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument
(2014/94/EU)


THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (1), and in particular point 27 thereof,


Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,


Whereas, after having examined all possibilities for re-allocating appropriations under heading 1b, it appears necessary to mobilise the Flexibility Instrument to complement the financing in the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013, beyond the ceiling of heading 1b, of EUR 134 049 037 towards the financing of the European Social Fund to increase the allocations to France, Italy and Spain for the year 2013 by a total amount of EUR 150 000 000,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
For the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013, the Flexibility Instrument shall be used to provide the sum of EUR 134 049 037 in commitment appropriations in heading 1b.
That amount shall be used to complement the financing of the European Social Fund under heading 1b.


Article 2
This decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Strasbourg, 20 November 2013.


For the European Parliament


The President

M. SCHULZ
            



For the Council


The President

V. LEŠKEVIČIUS
            





(1)  
            OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.
Case C-590/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte Suprema di Cassazione (Italy) lodged on 20 November 2013 — Idexx Laboratoires Italia srl v Agenzia delle Entrate
Date: 2013-11-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, accounting, tax collection, tax harmonisation, tax relief








C_2014024EN.01001002.xml










25.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/10





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte Suprema di Cassazione (Italy) lodged on 20 November 2013 — Idexx Laboratoires Italia srl v Agenzia delle Entrate
(Case C-590/13)
2014/C 24/19
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte Suprema di Cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Idexx Laboratoires Italia srl

Defendant: Agenzia delle Entrate

Questions referred







1.


Are the principles established by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in its judgment in Joined Cases C-95/07 and C-96/07 [Ecotrade spa v Agenzia delle Entrate [2008] ECR I-3457] — to the effect that Article 18(1)(d) and Article 22 of Sixth Directive 77/388, (1) as amended by Directive 91/680/EEC (2) on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, preclude a practice whereby declarations are reassessed and value added tax recovered which penalises a failure to comply with, first, the formal requirements laid down by national law in implementation of Article 18(1)(d) and, second, obligations relating to accounts and tax returns under Article 22(2) and (4) respectively, by denying the right to deduct where the reverse charge procedure applies — also applicable in the case of total failure to comply with the obligations laid down by national law where there is, however, no doubt as to the status of a person as a person liable for payment of the tax or that person’s right to deduct?










2.


Do the expressions ‘obblighi sostanziali’, ‘substantive requirements’ and ‘exigences de fond’ used by the CJEU in the various language versions of the judgment delivered on 8 May 2008 in Joined Cases C-95/07 and C-96/07 refer, with regard to situations entailing reverse charge VAT, to the requirement to pay VAT or the requirement of assumption of liability for the tax, or to the existence of substantive conditions which justify the imposition of VAT on the taxable person and govern the right to deduct, which is intended to safeguard the principle of VAT neutrality and of a single European system — for example, the presumption that there is an inherent connection between the goods purchased and the business carried on (‘inerenza’), whether VAT may be charged and whether it is totally deductible?






(1)  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).

(2)  Council Directive 91/680/EEC of 16 December 1991 supplementing the common system of value added tax and amending Directive 77/388/EEC with a view to the abolition of fiscal frontiers (OJ 1991 L 376, p. 1).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.7046 — Parkwind/Summit renewable Energy Belwind 1/Belwind)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2013-11-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Belgium, Japan, North Sea, distribution business, economic concentration, energy industry, merger control, wind energy








C_2013339EN.01000301.xml










20.11.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 339/3





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.7046 — Parkwind/Summit renewable Energy Belwind 1/Belwind)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2013/C 339/02
On 11 November 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 32013M7046. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 20 November 2013 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement between the European Union and the Russian Federation on drug precursors (12221/2013 — C7-0308/2013 — 2013/0005(NLE))
Date: 2013-11-20
Institutions: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, Committee on International Trade, Committee on Legal Affairs, Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety, European Parliament
Subjects: Russia, agreement (EU), consent procedure, drug traffic, fight against crime, illicit trade, narcotic, ratification of an agreement








C_2016436EN.01020901.xml










24.11.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/209





P7_TA(2013)0479
EU-Russia agreement on drug precursors ***
European Parliament legislative resolution of 20 November 2013 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement between the European Union and the Russian Federation on drug precursors (12221/2013 — C7-0308/2013 — 2013/0005(NLE))
(Consent)
(2016/C 436/34)

The European Parliament,







—


having regard to the draft Council decision (12221/2013),










—


having regard to the draft agreement between the European Union and the Russian Federation on drug precursors (08178/2013),










—


having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 207(4) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0308/2013),










—


having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade and the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A7-0342/2013),












1.


Consents to conclusion of the agreement;












2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Russian Federation.
Case C-592/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) of 20 November 2013 — Ministero dell'Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare, Ministero della Salute, Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico v Ediltecnica SpA
Date: 2013-11-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, environmental liability, environmental protection, polluter pays principle








C_2014052EN.01002601.xml










22.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 52/26





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) of 20 November 2013 — Ministero dell'Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare, Ministero della Salute, Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico v Ediltecnica SpA
(Case C-592/13)
2014/C 52/46
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: Ministero dell'Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare, Ministero della Salute, Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico

Respondent: Ediltecnica SpA

Question referred for a preliminary ruling

Do the European Union principles relating to the environment, laid down in Article 191(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and in Directive 2004/35/EC (1) of 21 April 2004 (Articles 1 and 8(3) and recitals 13 and 24 in the preamble) — specifically, the ‘polluter pays’principle, the precautionary principle and the principles that preventive action should be taken and that environmental damage should be rectified at source as a matter of priority — preclude national legislation, such as the rules set out in Articles 244, 245 and 253 of Legislative Decree No 152 of 3 April 2006, which, in circumstances in which it is established that a site is contaminated and in which it is impossible to identify the polluter or to have that person adopt the restoration measures, do not permit the administrative authority to require the owner (who is not responsible for the pollution) to implement the emergency safety and decontamination measures, merely attributing to that person financial liability limited to the value of the site once the decontamination measures have been carried out?


(1)  Directive 2004/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage (OJ 2004 L 143, p. 56).