do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 726/2014 of 30 June 2014 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 992/95 as regards a new Union tariff quota for prepared herring originating in Norway
Date: 2014-06-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Norway, import (EU), originating product, prepared foodstuff, sea fish, tariff quota








L_2014192EN.01004101.xml










1.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 192/41








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 726/2014
of 30 June 2014
         
amending Council Regulation (EC) No 992/95 as regards a new Union tariff quota for prepared herring originating in Norway


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 992/95 of 10 April 1995 opening and providing for the administration of Community tariff quotas for certain agricultural and fishery products originating in Norway (1), and in particular Article 5(1)(b) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


By Council Decision 2014/343/EU (2), the signing and the provisional application of an Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway consequent to the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union have been approved.












(2)


The Additional Protocol provides for a new tariff quota for release for free circulation in the European Union of certain prepared herring originating in Norway.












(3)


It is necessary to amend Regulation (EC) No 992/95 in order to implement the new tariff quota.












(4)


The new tariff quota should apply for a period of 12 months. In accordance with Decision 2014/343/EU, it is to apply from the day of the provisional application of the Additional Protocol. This Regulation should therefore apply from the same date.












(5)


The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Customs Code Committee,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The following row is added to the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 992/95:











‘09.0859


ex 1604 12 91 
ex 1604 12 99 


10
11
19


Herring, spiced and/or vinegar cured, in brine


From 1.8.2014 to 31.7.2015


1 400  tonnes net drained weight


0’






Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 1 August 2014.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 June 2014.


For the Commission


The President

José Manuel BARROSO
            





(1)  
            OJ L 101, 4.5.1995, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ L 170, 11.6.2014, p. 3.
Case T-492/14: Action brought on 30 June 2014 — La Perla v OHIM — Alva Management (LA PERLA)
Date: 2014-06-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetics industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014282EN.01005201.xml










25.8.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/52





Action brought on 30 June 2014 — La Perla v OHIM — Alva Management (LA PERLA)
(Case T-492/14)
2014/C 282/68
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: La Perla sp. z o.o. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: M. Siciarek, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Alva Management GmbH (Icking, Germany)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 28 April 2014 given in Case R 626/2013-4;










—


Order the defendant and the other party, should it intervene, to pay the costs of proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘LA PERLA’ for goods and services in Classes 5 and 44 — Community trade mark application No 9 8 54  225

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited in opposition: The word mark ‘PERLAMAR’ registered as Community and national trade mark

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition partially

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulled the contested decision in part

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) CTMR.
Case T-494/14: Action brought on 30 June 2014 — Klymenko v Council
Date: 2014-06-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Ukraine, economic sanctions, international sanctions, rights of the defence








C_2014292EN.01005101.xml










1.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 292/51





Action brought on 30 June 2014 — Klymenko v Council
(Case T-494/14)
2014/C 292/63
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Oleksandr Klymenko (Kyiv, Ukraine) (represented by: M. Shaw, QC, and I. Quirk, Barrister)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Decision 2014/216 and Regulation 381/2014 with immediate effect in so far as they apply to Mr Klymenko, and










—


order the Council to pay Mr Klymenko’s costs of this action.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging breach of the applicant’s rights of defence and of the right to effective judicial protection as the applicant was unaware of the investigation against him, on the basis of which he was included in the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to the contested restrictive measures, and was provided with no details of it by either the Council or the Ukrainian authorities. The applicant further alleges that he was not provided with the grounds for listing nor therefore given an opportunity to submit observations.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging manifest error of assessment of evidence as the facts show that the applicant fought corruption when he was in office in Ukraine and that he was not engaged in embezzlement of Ukrainian state funds.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging failure to state reasons, non-fulfilment of the criteria laid down in Article 1(1) of decision 2014/119 and misuse of powers as the grounds for listing the applicant are vague and non-specific. The applicant submits that the Council has therefore not shown that he falls under the criteria of Article 1(1) of Decision 2014/119, whereby his listing amounts to a misuse of powers.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging breach of the right to property and the principle of proportionality as the freeze of the applicant’s funds constitutes an unnecessary and disproportionate interference with his right to property.
Case T-491/14: Action brought on 30 June 2014  — Bodegas Muga v Commission
Date: 2014-06-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, State aid, control of State aid, hire purchase, wine








C_2014282EN.01005102.xml










25.8.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/51





Action brought on 30 June 2014 — Bodegas Muga v Commission
(Case T-491/14)
2014/C 282/67
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Bodegas Muga, SL (Haro, Spain) (represented by: J.L. Buendía Sierra, E. Abad Valdenebro, R. Calvo Salinero and A. Lamadrid de Pablo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul the contested decision in so far as it categorises the measures which, according to that decision, together constitute the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ as new State aid that is incompatible with the internal market;










—


in the alternative, annul Articles 1 and 4 of the contested decision, which identify the investors in the Economic Interest Groupings (EIGs) as the beneficiaries of the alleged aid and as the sole addressees of the order for recovery;










—


in the alternative, annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it orders recovery of the alleged aid in breach of general principles of EU law;










—


in any event, annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it makes a determination as to the lawfulness of private contracts between the investors and other entities; and










—


order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are those raised in Case T-700/13 Bankia v Commission.
Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union
Date: 2014-06-30
Institutions: Court of Justice of the European Union
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union








C_2014202EN.01000101.xml










30.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 202/1





Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

2014/C 202/01

Last publication


OJ C 194, 24.6.2014


Past publications


OJ C 184, 16.6.2014


OJ C 175, 10.6.2014


OJ C 159, 26.5.2014


OJ C 151, 19.5.2014


OJ C 142, 12.5.2014


OJ C 135, 5.5.2014

These texts are available on:
EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 725/2014 of 30 June 2014 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 499/96 as regards new Union tariff quotas for certain fish and fishery products originating in Iceland
Date: 2014-06-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Iceland, crustacean, fresh fish, frozen product, import (EU), originating product, sea fish, tariff quota








L_2014192EN.01004001.xml










1.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 192/40








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 725/2014
of 30 June 2014
         
amending Council Regulation (EC) No 499/96 as regards new Union tariff quotas for certain fish and fishery products originating in Iceland


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 499/96 of 19 March 1996 opening and providing for the administration of tariff quotas of the Union for certain fish and fishery products originating in Iceland (1), and in particular Article 5(1)(b) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


By Council Decision 2014/343/EU (2), the signing and the provisional application of an Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and Iceland consequent to the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union have been approved.












(2)


The Additional Protocol provides for two new tariff quotas for release for free circulation in the European Union of frozen Norway lobsters and of fresh or chilled fillets of redfish originating in Iceland.












(3)


It is necessary to amend Regulation (EC) No 499/96 in order to implement the new tariff quotas.












(4)


The new tariff quotas should apply for a period of 12 months. In accordance with Decision 2014/343/EU, they are to apply from the day of the provisional application of the Additional Protocol. This Regulation should therefore apply from the same date.












(5)


The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Customs Code Committee,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The following rows are added to the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 499/96:











‘09.0813


0304 49 50 


 


Fillets of redfish (Sebastes spp.), fresh or chilled


From 1.8.2014 to 31.7.2015


100


0




09.0814


0306 15 90 


 


Norway lobsters (Nephrops norvegicus), frozen


From 1.8.2014 to 31.7.2015


60


0’






Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 1 August 2014.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 June 2014.


For the Commission


The President

José Manuel BARROSO
            





(1)  
            OJ L 75, 23.3.1996, p. 8.

(2)  
            OJ L 170, 11.6.2014, p. 3.
Case C-309/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 30 June 2014  — Confederazione Generale Italiana del Lavoro (CGIL), Istituto Nazionale Confederale Assistenza (INCA) v Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, Ministero dell’Interno, Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze
Date: 2014-06-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: foreign national, residence permit, tax








C_2014339EN.01000201.xml










29.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 339/2





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 30 June 2014 — Confederazione Generale Italiana del Lavoro (CGIL), Istituto Nazionale Confederale Assistenza (INCA) v Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, Ministero dell’Interno, Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze
(Case C-309/14)
2014/C 339/02
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Confederazione Generale Italiana del Lavoro (CGIL),
Istituto Nazionale Confederale Assistenza (INCA)

Defendants: Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri,
Ministero dell’Interno,
Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze

Question referred

Do the principles laid down in Council Directive 2003/109/EC (1) as subsequently amended and supplemented, preclude rules of national law, such as those laid down in Article 5(2-ter) of Legislative Decree No 286 of 25 July 1998, in that they provide that ‘the application for the issue and the renewal of the residence permit shall be subject to the payment of a fee, the amount of which shall be set at a minimum of EUR 80 and a maximum of EUR 200 by joint decree of the Ministry of the Economy and Finance and of the Ministry of the Interior which shall also lay down the conditions for the payment …’ thereby fixing a minimum amount for the fee equal to around eight times the charge for the issue of a national identity card?


(1)  Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents (OJ 2004 L 16, p. 44).
Case T-493/14: Action brought on 30 June 2014  — Mayer v EFSA
Date: 2014-06-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to information, data protection, electronic mail, equal treatment, personal data, self-employed person, services contract








C_2014329EN.01001901.xml










22.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 329/19





Action brought on 30 June 2014 — Mayer v EFSA
(Case T-493/14)
2014/C 329/27
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Ingrid Alice Mayer (Ellwangen, Germany) (represented by: T. Mayer, lawyer)

Defendant: European Food Safety Authority

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


extend her secondment up to 30 June 2015;










—


declare unlawful the termination of her secondment agreement, more precisely the EFSA decision ‘Termination of the secondment’ of 16 April 2014;










—


order the defendant not to allow the ‘observer’ position of the seconded national expert on the staff committee to be re-selected;










—


declare unlawful the six-month suspension of her staff-committee activity;










—


order that she be granted access to all e-mails which were exchanged between the EFSA director and a private-law organisation active in the food sector;










—


in the alternative, order that that access to documents be granted to a third party, to be determined by the General Court, in order to examine a possible conflict of interests;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant relies on the following submissions in support of her action.
The applicant submits that she has a legal entitlement to an extension of her secondment as national expert as a result of the general principle of equality, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the prohibition of arbitrary action and Article 2 TEU.
The applicant complains in this regard that the non-extension of the secondment is based on an erroneous selection decision, or even on no selection decision at all.
The applicant also claims that her suspension from the staff committee is unlawful because no reasons were given, no hearing took place and no written decision was issued.
In addition, the applicant asserts a claim to have access to certain e-mails under Article 2 of Regulation No 1049/2001 (1). In this connection, she argues that official e-mails do not fall under the protection of personal data.


(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43).
Case F-60/14: Action brought on 30 June 2014  — ZZ v Commission
Date: 2014-06-30
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: application of EU law, regulations for civil servants, transfer of pension rights








C_2014421EN.01006002.xml










24.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 421/60





Action brought on 30 June 2014 — ZZ v Commission
(Case F-60/14)
2014/C 421/87
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the proposed crediting of pensionable years relating to the transfer of the applicant’s pension rights to the Union pension scheme applying the new GIP relating to Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:






—


declare illegal and inapplicable Article 9 of the general implementing provisions for Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations;










—


annul the decision of 4 November 2013 to quantify pension rights acquired prior to his entering the service, as part of the transfer of those rights to the pension scheme of the institutions of the European Union, pursuant to the general implementing provisions for Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations of 3 March 2011;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.