do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-504/14: Action brought on 2 July 2014  — Sertrans Catalunya v Commission
Date: 2014-07-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, State aid, control of State aid, hire purchase








C_2014282EN.01005501.xml










25.8.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/55





Action brought on 2 July 2014 — Sertrans Catalunya v Commission
(Case T-504/14)
2014/C 282/73
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Sertrans Catalunya, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: J. De Juan Casadevall, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


in the alternative, if the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ (STLS) is held to be unlawful State aid, order recovery only until the date of publication in the Official Journal of the European Union of the decision initiating the formal investigation, namely, 21 September 2011; and










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are those raised in Case T-500/14 Derivados del Flúor v Commission.
Case C-316/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Rüsselsheim (Germany) lodged on 2 July 2014  — Marc Hußock, Ute Hußock, Michelle Hußock, Florian Hußock v Condor Flugdienst GmbH
Date: 2014-07-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air transport, delegation of power, transport company








C_2014303EN.01002801.xml










8.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/28





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Rüsselsheim (Germany) lodged on 2 July 2014 — Marc Hußock, Ute Hußock, Michelle Hußock, Florian Hußock v Condor Flugdienst GmbH
(Case C-316/14)
2014/C 303/35
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Rüsselsheim

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Marc Hußock, Ute Hußock, Michelle Hußock, Florian Hußock

Defendant: Condor Flugdienst GmbH

Questions referred







1.


Are adverse actions by third parties acting on their own responsibility and to whom certain tasks that constitute part of the operation of an air carrier have been entrusted, to be deemed to be extraordinary circumstances within the meaning of Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004? (1)











2.


If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative, does the assessment of the situation depend on who (airline, airport operator etc.) entrusted the task(s) to the third party?






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).
Case F-63/13: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (1st Chamber) of 2 July 2014  — Psarras v ENISA (Civil service — Member of the temporary staff — Termination of contract — Article 41(2)(a), of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Right to be heard — Non-pecuniary harm — Resulting unlawful decision — Excessive breach of the rights of a third party — Automatic compensation order — Non-compliance with an annulment judgment)
Date: 2014-07-02
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: accountant, damages, dismissal, indemnification, rights of the defence, servant (EU), termination of a contract








C_2014351EN.01003001.xml










6.10.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 351/30





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (1st Chamber) of 2 July 2014 — Psarras v ENISA
(Case F-63/13) (1)

((Civil service - Member of the temporary staff - Termination of contract - Article 41(2)(a), of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Right to be heard - Non-pecuniary harm - Resulting unlawful decision - Excessive breach of the rights of a third party - Automatic compensation order - Non-compliance with an annulment judgment))
2014/C 351/39
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Aristidis Psarras (Heraklion, Greece) (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Agency for Network and Information Security (represented initially by P. Empadinhas, acting as Agent and subsequently by S. Purser, acting as Agent, and C. Meidanis, lawyer)

Re:

Action for annulment, firstly, of the decision to dismiss the applicant and, secondly, of the decision, adopted after the judgment of the CST in Case F-118/10, to appoint another member of staff to the post of accountant and, finally, compensation for the non-pecuniary harm suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Annuls the decision of 4 September 2012 of the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security terminating Mr Psarras’s temporary staff contract;










2.


Orders the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security to pay Mr Psarras the sum of EUR 40  000 euros;










3.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










4.


Declares that the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security is to bear its own costs and orders it to pay the costs incurred by Mr Psarras.






(1)  OJ C 336, 16.11.2013, p. 31.
European Parliament decision of 2 July 2014 on the numerical strength of the committees (2014/2702(RSO))
Date: 2014-07-02
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: EP Committee, composition of a parliamentary committee








C_2016224EN.01003401.xml










21.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 224/34





P8_TA(2014)0001
Numerical strength of committees
European Parliament decision of 2 July 2014 on the numerical strength of the committees (2014/2702(RSO))
(2016/C 224/09)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the proposal by the Conference of Presidents,










—


having regard to its decision of 15 January 2014 on the powers and responsibilities of the standing committees (1),










—


having regard to Rule 196 of its Rules of Procedure,












1.


Decides that the numerical strength of the committees shall be as follows:






I.


Committee on Foreign Affairs: 71 members,










II.


Committee on Development: 28 members,










III.


Committee on International Trade: 41 members,










IV.


Committee on Budgets: 41 members,










V.


Committee on Budgetary Control: 30 members,










VI.


Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs: 61 members,










VII.


Committee on Employment and Social Affairs: 55 members,










VIII.


Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety: 69 members,










IX.


Committee on Industry, Research and Energy: 67 members,










X.


Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection: 40 members,










XI.


Committee on Transport and Tourism: 49 members,










XII.


Committee on Regional Development: 43 members,










XIII.


Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development: 45 members,










XIV.


Committee on Fisheries: 25 members,










XV.


Committee on Culture and Education: 31 members,










XVI.


Committee on Legal Affairs: 25 members,










XVII.


Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs: 60 members,










XVIII.


Committee on Constitutional Affairs: 25 members,










XIX.


Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality: 35 members,










XX.


Committee on Petitions: 35 members,




Subcommittee on Human Rights: 30 members,
Subcommittee on Security and Defence: 30 members;












2.


Decides, with reference to the decision of the Conference of Presidents of 26 June 2014 relating to the composition of committee bureaux, that the committee bureaux may consist of up to four vice-chairs;












3.


Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission, for information.






(1)  Texts adopted of that date, P7_TA(2014)0018.
Case T-502/14: Action brought on 2 July 2014  — Torrevisa v Commission
Date: 2014-07-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, State aid, control of State aid, hire purchase








C_2014282EN.01005401.xml










25.8.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/54





Action brought on 2 July 2014 — Torrevisa v Commission
(Case T-502/14)
2014/C 282/71
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Torrevisa, SA (Torrevieja, Spain) (represented by: J. De Juan Casadevall, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


in the alternative, if the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ (STLS) is held to be unlawful State aid, order recovery only until the date of publication in the Official Journal of the European Union of the decision initiating the formal investigation, namely, 21 September 2011; and










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are those raised in Case T-500/14 Derivados del Flúor v Commission.
Case T-511/14: Action brought on 2 July 2014 — Novartis Europharm v Commission
Date: 2014-07-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: drug surveillance, market approval, medicinal product








C_2014388EN.01001701.xml










3.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 388/17





Action brought on 2 July 2014 — Novartis Europharm v Commission
(Case T-511/14)
2014/C 388/21
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Novartis Europharm Ltd (Horsham, United Kingdom) (represented by: C. Schoonderbeek, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision; and










—


order the European Commission to pay its own costs and those of Novartis.





Pleas in law and main arguments

By its present action, the applicant seeks the annulment of Commission Decision C (2014) 2155 final of 27 March 2014 granting a marketing authorisation to Teva Generics for the medicinal product for human use ‘Zoledronic acid Teva Generics — Zoledronic Acid’.
In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, essentially identical or similar to the plea in law relied on in Cases T-472/12 Novartis Europharm v Commission
 (1) and T-67/13 Novartis Europharm v Commission
 (2).


(1)  OJ 2012 C 389, p. 8.

(2)  OJ 2013 C 101, p. 24.
Case C-317/14: Action brought on 2 July 2014  — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium
Date: 2014-07-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, diploma, equal treatment, free movement of workers, infringement of EU law, job vacancy, language policy








C_2014303EN.01002802.xml










8.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/28





Action brought on 2 July 2014 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium
(Case C-317/14)
2014/C 303/36
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: J. Enegren and D. Martin, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium

Form of order sought

The Commission claims that the Court should:






—


find that, in requiring persons applying for positions with local services established in French-speaking or German-speaking regions who do not have diplomas or certificates to show that they have completed their studies in the language concerned to obtain the certificate issued by SELOR (having taken the exam organised by that body), and in making that certificate the only way in which those persons can prove that they have the language skills needed for such positions, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 45 TFEU and Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on freedom of movement for workers within the Union; (1)











—


order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The condition, set out in Belgian legislation, under which persons applying for vacant positions with local public services in French-speaking or German-speaking regions who do not have diplomas to show that they have completed their studies in the language concerned are required to prove their language skills before they can fill such positions and are given only one way in which they can do so constitutes discrimination prohibited by Article 45 TFEU and Regulation (EU) No 492/2011.


(1)  OJ 2011 L 141, p. 1.
Case C-22/14 P: Appeal brought on 17 January 2014 by Three-N-Products Private Ltd against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 7 November 2013 in Case T-63/13 Three-N-Products Private Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Date: 2014-07-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, medical plant, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014315EN.01003302.xml










15.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 315/33





Appeal brought on 17 January 2014 by Three-N-Products Private Ltd against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 7 November 2013 in Case T-63/13 Three-N-Products Private Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
(Case C-22/14 P)
2014/C 315/54
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Three-N-Products Private Ltd (represented by: M. Thewes and T. Chevrier, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
By order of 2 July 2014, the Court of Justice (Sixth Chamber) dismissed the appeal.
Case C-315/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 2 July 2014  — Marchon Germany GmbH v Yvonne Karaszkiewicz
Date: 2014-07-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, approximation of laws, sales representative








C_2014329EN.01000301.xml










22.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 329/3





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 2 July 2014 — Marchon Germany GmbH v Yvonne Karaszkiewicz
(Case C-315/14)
2014/C 329/04
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Defendant and appellant: Marchon Germany GmbH

Applicant and respondent: Yvonne Karaszkiewicz

Question referred

Must the first indent of Article 17(2)(a) [of Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents] (1) be interpreted as precluding the application of a national provision under which ‘new customers’ can also be customers acquired by the commercial agent who have already maintained business relations with the principal for products sold by him from a range of products but not for products whose sole representation the principal has entrusted to the agent?


(1)  OJ 1986 L 382, p. 17.
Case T-503/14: Action brought on 2 July 2014  — Euroways v Commission
Date: 2014-07-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, State aid, control of State aid, hire purchase








C_2014282EN.01005402.xml










25.8.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/54





Action brought on 2 July 2014 — Euroways v Commission
(Case T-503/14)
2014/C 282/72
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Euroways, SL (Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain) (represented by: J. De Juan Casadevall, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


in the alternative, if the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ (STLS) is held to be unlawful State aid, order recovery only until the date of publication in the Official Journal of the European Union of the decision initiating the formal investigation, namely, 21 September 2011; and










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are those raised in Case T-500/14 Derivados del Flúor v Commission.
Special Report No 9/2014 — ‘Is the EU investment and promotion support to the wine sector well managed and are its results on the competitiveness of EU wines demonstrated?’
Date: 2014-07-02
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU aid, competitiveness, investment aid, viticulture, wine








C_2014205EN.01000901.xml










2.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 205/9





Special Report No 9/2014
‘Is the EU investment and promotion support to the wine sector well managed and are its results on the competitiveness of EU wines demonstrated?’
(2014/C 205/05)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 9/2014 ‘Is the EU investment and promotion support to the wine sector well managed and are its results on the competitiveness of EU wines demonstrated?’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu
A hard copy version of the report may be obtained free of charge on request to the Court of Auditors:





European Court of Auditors




Publications (PUB)




12, rue Alcide de Gasperi




1615 Luxembourg




LUXEMBOURG




Tel. +352 4398-1




e-mail: eca-info@eca.europa.eu




or by filling in an electronic order form on EU-Bookshop.
Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 0,15 % on 1 July 2014 — Euro exchange rates
Date: 2014-07-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Central Bank, euro, exchange rate, financing, interest








C_2014205EN.01000301.xml










2.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 205/3





Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):
0,15 % on 1 July 2014
Euro exchange rates (2)

1 July 2014
(2014/C 205/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3688




JPY


Japanese yen


138,98




DKK


Danish krone


7,4557




GBP


Pound sterling


0,79810




SEK


Swedish krona


9,1600




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2138




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,4380




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,433




HUF


Hungarian forint


310,43




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1582




RON


Romanian leu


4,3881




TRY


Turkish lira


2,9066




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4479




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4587




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,6083




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5624




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7054




KRW


South Korean won


1 384,55




ZAR


South African rand


14,5848




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,4883




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5800




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 251,94




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,3893




PHP


Philippine peso


59,764




RUB


Russian rouble


46,8950




THB


Thai baht


44,367




BRL


Brazilian real


3,0349




MXN


Mexican peso


17,7759




INR


Indian rupee


82,2307






(1)  Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is the marginal rate.

(2)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-327/14 P: Appeal brought on 2 July 2014 by Ms Galina Meister against the order of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 5 December 2013 in Case T-390/13 Galina Meister v European Commission
Date: 2014-07-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: access to the courts, infringement of EU law








C_2015107EN.01001402.xml










30.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 107/14






Appeal brought on 2 July 2014 by Ms Galina Meister against the order of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 5 December 2013 in Case T-390/13 Galina Meister v European Commission

(Case C-327/14 P)
(2015/C 107/19)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Galina Meister (represented by: W. Becker, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
The Court of Justice of the European Union (Sixth Chamber) dismissed the appeal by order of 12 February 2015 and ordered the appellant to bear her own costs.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7215 — AMEC/Foster Wheeler) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-07-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, energy industry, merger control, project management








C_2014205EN.01001301.xml










2.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 205/13





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7215 — AMEC/Foster Wheeler)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2014/C 205/08)






1.


On 24 June 2014 the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking AMEC plc (‘AMEC’ of United Kingdom) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Foster Wheeler AG (‘Foster Wheeler’ of Switzerland) by way of public bid.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


AMEC is a global supplier of consultancy, engineering and project management services to customers in the world’s oil and gas, mining, clean energy and environment and infrastructure industry segments.










—


Foster Wheeler is a global engineering, construction and project management contractor and power equipment supplier amongst others in the oil and gas, chemicals, power, environment and pharmaceuticals segments.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the 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 Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (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 M.7215 — AMEC/Foster Wheeler, 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 ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.