do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
P7_TA(2014)0285 Reduction or elimination of customs duties on goods originating in Ukraine ***I European Parliament legislative resolution of 3 April 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the reduction or elimination of customs duties on goods originating in Ukraine (COM(2014)0166 — C7-0103/2014 — 2014/0090(COD)) P7_TC1-COD(2014)0090 Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 3 April 2014 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No …/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the reduction or elimination of customs duties on goods originating in Ukraine
Date: 2014-04-03
Institutions: Committee on Foreign Affairs, Committee on International Trade, European Parliament
Subjects: Ukraine, free-trade area, import (EU), originating product, suspension of customs duties, tariff exemption, tariff quota, tariff reduction








C_2017408EN.01059801.xml










30.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 408/598





P7_TA(2014)0285
Reduction or elimination of customs duties on goods originating in Ukraine ***I
European Parliament legislative resolution of 3 April 2014 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the reduction or elimination of customs duties on goods originating in Ukraine (COM(2014)0166 — C7-0103/2014 — 2014/0090(COD))
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)
(2017/C 408/33)
The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2014)0166),










—


having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 207(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0103/2014),










—


having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,










—


having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 27 March 2014 to approve Parliament's position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,










—


having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade (A7-0238/2014),










1.


Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;










2.


Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;










3.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.






P7_TC1-COD(2014)0090
Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 3 April 2014 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No …/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the reduction or elimination of customs duties on goods originating in Ukraine

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 374/2014.)
Case C-281/13 P: Order of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 3 April 2014 — Lord Inglewood and Others v European Parliament (Appeal — Additional pension scheme for Members of the European Parliament — Amendment to the additional pension scheme in 2009 — Decisions rejecting the appellants’ applications to benefit from the provisions in force before amendment of the scheme — Errors of law — Legal certainty — Legitimate expectations — Equal treatment — Principle of proportionality)
Date: 2014-04-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Member of the European Parliament, equal treatment, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, supplementary pension








C_2014184EN.01000701.xml










16.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 184/7





Order of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 3 April 2014 — Lord Inglewood and Others v European Parliament
(Case C-281/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Additional pension scheme for Members of the European Parliament - Amendment to the additional pension scheme in 2009 - Decisions rejecting the appellants’ applications to benefit from the provisions in force before amendment of the scheme - Errors of law - Legal certainty - Legitimate expectations - Equal treatment - Principle of proportionality))
2014/C 184/09
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellants: Lord Inglewood, Georges Berthu, Guy Bono, David Robert Bowe, Brendan Donnelly, Catherine Guy-Quint, Christine Margaret Oddy, Nicole Thomas-Mauro, Gary Titley, Maartje van Putten, Vincenzo Viola (represented by: S. Orlandi, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament (represented by: M. Windisch and S. Seyr, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 13 March 2013 in Joined Cases T-229/11 and T-276/11 Inglewood and Others v Parliament, by which the General Court dismissed the appellants’ action for annulment of the decisions of the European Parliament refusing to grant them their voluntary additional pension, early, at the age of 60 or in part in the form of a lump sum — Errors of law — Infringement of acquired rights — Infringement of the principles of legitimate expectations, legal certainty, equal treatment and proportionality

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Lord Inglewood, Mr Georges Berthu, Mr Guy Bono, Mr David Robert Bowe, Mr Brendan Donnelly, Ms Catherine Guy-Quint, Ms Christine Margaret Oddy, Ms Nicole Thomas-Mauro, Mr Gary Titley, Ms Maartje van Putten and Mr Vincenzo Viola are ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 226, 03.08.2013.
Case C-428/12: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 3 April 2014  — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Articles 34 TFEU and 36 TFEU — Measures of equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions on imports — Complementary private goods transport — The first vehicle of the fleet of a company — Rules for obtaining the road transport authorisation — Road safety and environmental protection)
Date: 2014-04-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Spain, carriage of goods, environmental protection, import restriction, infringement of EU law, road safety, road transport, transport authorisation








C_2014159EN.01000501.xml










26.5.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 159/5





Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 3 April 2014 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain
(Case C-428/12) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Articles 34 TFEU and 36 TFEU - Measures of equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions on imports - Complementary private goods transport - The first vehicle of the fleet of a company - Rules for obtaining the road transport authorisation - Road safety and environmental protection))
2014/C 159/06
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: I. Galindo Marin and G. Wilms, Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: J. García-Valdecasas Dorrego and Centeno Huerta, Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 34 TFEU and 36 TFEU — Granting of authorisations for motor vehicles — National legislation requiring, in order to obtain an ‘authorisation for private, own-account transport’, no more than five months to have elapsed since the first registration of the first heavy goods vehicle of an undertaking’s fleet

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


declares that by requiring, in Article 31 of Ministerial Decree FOM/734/2007 of 20 March 2007 implementing the Law on the Regulation of Inland Transport in respect of authorisations for the transport of goods by road for vehicles with a maximum authorised mass exceeding 3,5 tons, that, in order to obtain an authorisation for the private, own-account transport of goods, no more than five months must have elapsed since the first registration of the first vehicle of an undertaking’s fleet, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 34 TFEU;










2)


orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 379, 08.12.2012.
Case C-153/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 3 April 2014  — Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken; other parties: K and A
Date: 2014-04-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: examination, family migration, integration of migrants, language teaching, principle of proportionality, residence permit








C_2014194EN.01001401.xml










24.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/14





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 3 April 2014 — Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken; other parties: K and A
(Case C-153/14)
2014/C 194/17
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken

Other parties: K, A

Questions referred







1.








(a)


Can the term ‘integration measures’ — contained in Article 7(2) of … Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification (OJ 2003 L 251, [p. 12] ) … — be interpreted as meaning that the competent authorities of the Member States may require a member of a sponsor’s family to demonstrate that he or she has knowledge of the official language of the Member State concerned at a level corresponding to level A1 of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, as well as a basic knowledge of the society of that Member State, before those authorities authorise that family member’s entry and residence?










(b)


Is it relevant to the answer to that question that, also in the context of the proportionality test as described in the European Commission’s Green Paper of 15 November 2011 (1) on the right to family reunification [of third-country nationals living in the European Union], the national legislation containing the requirement referred to in Question 1(a) provides that, leaving aside the case in which the family member has shown that, due to a mental or physical disability, he/she is permanently unable to take the civic integration examination, it is only in the case where there is a combination of very special individual circumstances which justifies the assumption that the family member will be permanently unable to comply with the integration measures that the request for authorisation of entry and residence cannot be rejected?














2.


Does the purpose of Directive 2003/86/EC, and in particular Article 7(2) thereof, given the proportionality test as described in the abovementioned Green Paper, preclude costs of EUR 350 per attempt for the examination which assesses whether the family member complies with the aforementioned integration measures, and costs of EUR 110 as a single payment for the pack to prepare for the examination?






(1)  COM(2011)735 final.
Case T-7/13: Order of the General Court of 3 April 2014 — ADEAS v Commission (Action for annulment — State aid — Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market on certain conditions — Association — Not individually affected — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2014-04-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: France, State aid, civil servant, control of State aid, domestic market, financing, pension scheme, telecommunications industry, trade union








C_2014184EN.01003002.xml










16.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 184/30





Order of the General Court of 3 April 2014 — ADEAS v Commission
(Case T-7/13) (1)

((Action for annulment - State aid - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market on certain conditions - Association - Not individually affected - Inadmissibility))
2014/C 184/52
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Association pour la défense de l’épargne et de l’actionnariat des salariés de France Télécom-Orange (ADEAS) (Paris, France) (represented by: A.-L. Lefort des Ylouses and A.-S. Gay, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, D. Grespan and B. Stromsky, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2012/540/EU of 20 December 2011 concerning State aid No C 25/2008 (ex NN 23/2008) — Reform of the method of financing the pensions of public-service employees working for France Télécom implemented by the French Republic in favour of France Télécom (OJ 2012 L 279, p. 1).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


There is no need to adjudicate on the application for leave to intervene of the French Republic.










3.


The Association pour la défense de l’épargne et de l’actionnariat des salariés de France Télécom-Orange (ADEAS) shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.










4.


The French Republic shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 79, 16.3.2013.
Case C-284/13 P: Order of the President of the Court of 3 April 2014  — Henkel AG & Co. KGaA, Henkel France v European Commission
Date: 2014-04-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, fine, legal expenses, provision of documents, rights of the defence








C_2014261EN.01001803.xml










11.8.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 261/18





Order of the President of the Court of 3 April 2014 — Henkel AG & Co. KGaA, Henkel France v European Commission
(Case C-284/13 P) (1)

2014/C 261/30
Language of the case: English
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 215, 27.7.2013.
Case T-2/13: Order of the General Court of 3 April 2014 — CFE-CGC France Télécom-Orange v Commission (Action for annulment — State aid — Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market on certain conditions — Trade union — Not individually affected — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2014-04-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: France, State aid, civil servant, control of State aid, domestic market, financing, pension scheme, telecommunications industry, trade union








C_2014184EN.01003001.xml










16.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 184/30





Order of the General Court of 3 April 2014 — CFE-CGC France Télécom-Orange v Commission
(Case T-2/13) (1)

((Action for annulment - State aid - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market on certain conditions - Trade union - Not individually affected - Inadmissibility))
2014/C 184/51
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: CFE-CGC France Télécom-Orange (Paris, France) (represented by: A.-L. Lefort des Ylouses and A.-S. Gay, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, D. Grespan and B. Stromsky, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2012/540/EU of 20 December 2011 concerning State aid No C 25/2008 (ex NN 23/2008) — Reform of the method of financing the pensions of public-service employees working for France Télécom implemented by the French Republic in favour of France Télécom (OJ 2012 L 279, p. 1).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


There is no need to adjudicate on the application for leave to intervene of the French Republic.










3.


CFE-CGC France Télécom-Orange shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.










4.


The French Republic shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 79, 16.3.2013.