do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7428 — Iridium/DIF/Concession Businesses)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-11-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Europe, North America, Spain, economic concentration, investment company, medical institution, merger control, public works, public-private partnership, renewable energy, transport infrastructure








C_2014391EN.01000101.xml










6.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 391/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7428 — Iridium/DIF/Concession Businesses)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2014/C 391/01
On 30 October 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language 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/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7428. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Notice of open competition
Date: 2014-11-06
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: EPSO, administrator, competition (EU), data protection








C_2014391EN.01003001.xml










6.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 391/30





NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITION
2014/C 391/05
The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising the following open competition:
EPSO/AD/294/14 — Administrators (AD 6) in the field of data protection.
The competition notice is published in 24 languages in Official Journal C 391 A of 6 November 2014.
Further information can be found on the EPSO website: http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/eu-careers.info/
Case C-385/13 P: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 November 2014  — Italian Republic v European Commission (Appeal — European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) — Campania Regional Operational Programme (ROP) 2000‐2006 — Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 — Article 32(3)(f) — Infringement procedure in respect of the Italian Republic concerning waste management in the Campania region — Decision not to make interim payments in connection with the ROP measure concerning waste management and disposal)
Date: 2014-11-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Campania, European Regional Development Fund, Italy, infringement of EU law, operational programme, regional aid, waste management








C_2015007EN.01000901.xml










12.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/9





Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 November 2014 — Italian Republic v European Commission
(Case C-385/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) - Campania Regional Operational Programme (ROP) 2000‐2006 - Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 - Article 32(3)(f) - Infringement procedure in respect of the Italian Republic concerning waste management in the Campania region - Decision not to make interim payments in connection with the ROP measure concerning waste management and disposal))
(2015/C 007/11)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Appellant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and by P. Gentili, avvocato dello Stato)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: D. Recchia and A. Steiblytė, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Dismisses the appeal.










2)


Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 252, 31.8.2013.
Corrigendum to Commission communication concerning Article 4(3) of Directive 2009/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on injunctions for the protection of consumers' interests, which codifies Directive 98/27/EC, concerning the entities qualified to bring an action under Article 2 of this Directive ( OJ C 363, 14.10.2014 )
Date: 2014-11-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, consumer information, consumer movement








C_2014391EN.01003101.xml










6.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 391/31





Corrigendum to Commission communication concerning Article 4(3) of Directive 2009/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on injunctions for the protection of consumers' interests, which codifies Directive 98/27/EC, concerning the entities qualified to bring an action under Article 2 of this Directive
(
Official Journal of the European Union C 363 of 14 October 2014
)
2014/C 391/06
On page 43, part ROMANIA, column Contact details:

for:







‘Bd. N. Băalcescu nr. 32-34, et. 4,




Cam. 16, sector 1,




RO-010055, Bucuresti;




Tel. 021 311 02 43;




Fax 021 315 71 49;




E-mail: office@apc-romania.ro;




Website: www.apc-romania.ro.’,






read:







‘Intr. Licurici 2, bloc 2, ap. 2, sector 3




030894 Bucureşti




ROMÂNIA




Tel./fax +40 213110243




E-mail: office@apc-romania.ro




Internet: www.apc-romania.ro’.
Case C-494/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 6 November 2014  — European Union, acting through the European Commission v Axa Belgium SA
Date: 2014-11-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, indemnification, motor vehicle insurance, transport accident








C_2015034EN.01000801.xml










2.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 34/8





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 6 November 2014 — European Union, acting through the European Commission v Axa Belgium SA
(Case C-494/14)
(2015/C 034/07)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de première instance de Bruxelles

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: European Union, acting through the European Commission

Defendant: Axa Belgium SA

Questions referred







1)


Must the term ‘the third party [who caused the death, accidental injury or sickness of a person]’ used in Article 85a(1) of the Staff Regulations of European officials be interpreted autonomously in EU law, or does it refer to the meaning that the term has in national law?










2)


If the term has an autonomous scope, must it be interpreted as referring to any person who caused the death, accidental injury or sickness of a person or only a person who is liable by reason of a fault that that person has committed?










3)


If the term ‘the third party [who caused the death, accidental injury or sickness of a person]’ is to be interpreted in accordance with national law, does EU law require the national court to allow a subrogated claim lodged by the European Union where one of its officials has been the victim of a road traffic accident involving a vehicle in respect of which liability has not been established, inasmuch as Article 29a of the Law of 21 November 1989 on compulsory insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles provides for the automatic compensation of vulnerable road users by insurers who cover the civil liability of the owner, driver or keeper of the motor vehicle involved in the accident, without the civil liability of the owner, driver or keeper having to be established?










4)


Does the content of or system established by the Staff Regulations mean that the expenses incurred by the European Union under Articles 73 and 78 of those regulations must definitively remain its own responsibility?
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2014-11-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2014391EN.01000201.xml










6.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 391/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

5 November 2014
2014/C 391/02

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2480




JPY


Japanese yen


143,21




DKK


Danish krone


7,4426




GBP


Pound sterling


0,78430




SEK


Swedish krona


9,2164




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2043




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,5740




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,823




HUF


Hungarian forint


309,05




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2336




RON


Romanian leu


4,4193




TRY


Turkish lira


2,7919




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4494




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4281




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,6747




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6135




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6170




KRW


South Korean won


1 360,83




ZAR


South African rand


13,9000




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,6310




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,6628




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 223,74




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,1798




PHP


Philippine peso


56,288




RUB


Russian rouble


55,3520




THB


Thai baht


40,993




BRL


Brazilian real


3,1428




MXN


Mexican peso


16,9834




INR


Indian rupee


76,7511






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-610/13 P: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 November 2014  — Kingdom of the Netherlands v European Commission (Appeal — EAGGF, EAGF and EAFRD — Expenditure excluded from European Union financing — Expenditure incurred by the Netherlands)
Date: 2014-11-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, EAGGF, EU expenditure, Netherlands








C_2015007EN.01001101.xml










12.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/11





Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 November 2014 — Kingdom of the Netherlands v European Commission
(Case C-610/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - EAGGF, EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from European Union financing - Expenditure incurred by the Netherlands))
(2015/C 007/14)
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Appellant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M. Bulterman and M. de Ree, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouquet and H. Kranenborg, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Dismisses the appeal.










2)


Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 31, 1.2.2014.
Case C-4/13: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 November 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Agentur für Arbeit Krefeld — Familienkasse v Susanne Fassbender-Firman (Social security — Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Family benefits — Rules governing cases of overlapping entitlements to family benefits)
Date: 2014-11-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: cumulative pension entitlement, family benefit, social-security harmonisation








C_2015007EN.01000301.xml










12.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/3





Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 November 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Agentur für Arbeit Krefeld — Familienkasse v Susanne Fassbender-Firman
(Case C-4/13) (1)

((Social security - Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 - Family benefits - Rules governing cases of overlapping entitlements to family benefits))
(2015/C 007/03)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Agentur für Arbeit Krefeld — Familienkasse

Respondant: Susanne Fassbender-Firman

Operative part of the judgment

Article 76(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community, as amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1606/98 of 29 June 1998, must be interpreted as authorising the Member State of employment to provide in its legislation for suspension by the competent institution of entitlement to family benefits when no application has been made for family benefits in the Member State of residence. In such circumstances, if the Member State of employment provides for such suspension of entitlement to family benefits in its national legislation, the competent institution is bound to apply that suspension in accordance with Article 76(2) of Regulation No 1408/71, provided that the conditions for the application of that legislation are met, and has no discretion in that regard.


(1)  OJ C 101, 6.4.2013.
Case C-495/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Regionale di Giustizia Amministrativa di Trento (Italy) lodged on 6 November 2014  — Antonio Tita and Others v Ministero della Giustizia and Others
Date: 2014-11-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, Italy, award of contract








C_2015026EN.01001201.xml










26.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/12





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Regionale di Giustizia Amministrativa di Trento (Italy) lodged on 6 November 2014 — Antonio Tita and Others v Ministero della Giustizia and Others
(Case C-495/14)
(2015/C 026/15)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Regionale di Giustizia Amministrativa di Trento

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Antonio Tita, Alessandra Carlin, Piero Constantini

Defendant: Ministero della Giustizia, Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, Segretario Generale del Tribunale Regionale di Giustizia Amministrativa di Trento (TRGA)

Question referred

Do the principles fixed by Directive 2007/66/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2007 (1) and by Council Directives 89/665/EEC (2) and 92/13/EEC (3) , with regard to improving the effectiveness of review procedures concerning the award of public contracts, preclude a provision of national law, such as that on the lump sum payable in respect of court fees laid down in Articles 9, 13(6)bis and (6)bis1 and 14(3)ter of Decree of the President of the Republic No 115 of 30 May 2002 (as progressively amended by subsequent legislative interventions), and in Article 1(27) of Law No 228 of 24 December 2012, which laid down high amounts for the lump sum payable for access to administrative proceedings relating to public procurement procedures.


(1)  Directive 2007/66/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2007 amending Council Directives 89/665/EEC and 92/13/EEC with regard to improving the effectiveness of review procedures concerning the award of public contracts (OJ 2007 L 335, p. 31).

(2)  Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts (OJ 1989 L 395, p. 33).

(3)  Council Directive 92/13/EEC of 25 February 1992 coordinating the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of Community rules on the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors (OJ 1992 L 76, p. 14).
Case T-17/13: Order of the General Court of 6 November 2014 — ANKO v Commission (Arbitration clause — Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) — Contract concerning the Pocemon project — Repayment of the sums advanced — Letter giving notice of the issue of a debit note — Reminder letter — Lack of interest in bringing proceedings — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2014-11-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Framework Programme for Research and Development, contract terms, debt, indemnification, project evaluation, redemption








C_2015016EN.01003701.xml










19.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 16/37






Order of the General Court of 6 November 2014 — ANKO v Commission
(Case T-17/13) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) - Contract concerning the Pocemon project - Repayment of the sums advanced - Letter giving notice of the issue of a debit note - Reminder letter - Lack of interest in bringing proceedings - Inadmissibility)
(2015/C 016/58)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: ANKO AE Antiprosopeion, Emporiou kai Viomichanias (Athens, Greece) (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal and A. Cordewener, acting as Agents, assisted by S. Drakakakis, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought under Article 272 TFEU, seeking a declaration by the General Court first, that the applicant is not obliged to repay the whole sum paid to it by the Commission in relation to the Pocemon project, concluded under the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013), secondly, that the applicant is not required to pay flat-rate compensation in relation to that project and, thirdly, that the Commission is not entitled to set off the amounts that it owes to the applicant.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


ANKO AE Antiprosopeion, Emporiou kai Viomichanias is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 79, 16.3.2013.
Case T-64/13: Order of the General Court of 6 November 2014 — ANKO v Commission (Arbitration clause — Sixth Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2002-2006) — Contract concerning the Doc@Hand project — Repayment of the sums advanced — Letter giving notice of the issue of a debit note — Lack of interest in bringing proceedings — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2014-11-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Framework Programme for Research and Development, contract terms, debt, indemnification, project evaluation, redemption








C_2015016EN.01003702.xml










19.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 16/37






Order of the General Court of 6 November 2014 — ANKO v Commission
(Case T-64/13) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Sixth Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2002-2006) - Contract concerning the Doc@Hand project - Repayment of the sums advanced - Letter giving notice of the issue of a debit note - Lack of interest in bringing proceedings - Inadmissibility)
(2015/C 016/59)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: ANKO AE Antiprosopeion, Emporiou kai Viomichanias (Athens, Greece) (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal and A. Cordewener, acting as Agents, assisted by S. Drakakakis, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought under Article 272 TFEU, seeking a declaration by the General Court first, that the applicant is not obliged to repay the whole sum paid to it by the Commission in relation to the Doc@Hand project, concluded under the Sixth Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2002-2006), secondly, that the applicant is not required to pay flat-rate compensation in relation to that project and, thirdly, that the Commission is not entitled to set off the sums it owes the applicant.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


ANKO AE Antiprosopeion, Emporiou kai Viomichanias is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 86, 23.3.2013.
Case F-4/14: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 6 November 2014  — DH v Parliament (Civil service — Probationary official — Article 34 of the Staff Regulations — Probation report establishing the obvious inadequacy of the probationary official — Extension of the probationary period — Reassignment — Dismissal at the end of the probationary period — Conditions under which the probationary period progressed — Professional incompetence — Duty of care — Principle of sound administration)
Date: 2014-11-06
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, reassignment, termination of employment, traineeship








C_2014448EN.01003801.xml










15.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 448/38





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 6 November 2014 — DH v Parliament
(Case F-4/14) (1)

((Civil service - Probationary official - Article 34 of the Staff Regulations - Probation report establishing the obvious inadequacy of the probationary official - Extension of the probationary period - Reassignment - Dismissal at the end of the probationary period - Conditions under which the probationary period progressed - Professional incompetence - Duty of care - Principle of sound administration))
(2014/C 448/47)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: DH (represented by: A. Salerno and B. Cortese, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: S. Alves and M. Ecker, Agents)

Re:

Application to annul the decision to dismiss the applicant at the end of the probationary period.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders DH to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Parliament.






(1)  OJ C 61, 1/3/2014, p. 22.
Case T-283/12: Judgment of the General Court of 6 November 2014  — FIS'D v Commission (Erasmus Mundus action programme — Framework partnership agreement — Specific grant agreement — EACEA decision to rescind the framework agreement and amend the specific agreement — Administrative appeal before the Commission — Commission decision dismissing the administrative appeal as unfounded — Infringement of the agreements and the administrative and financial manual)
Date: 2014-11-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU programme, Italy, administrative procedure, cooperation agreement, cooperation in the field of education, economic support, framework agreement, university








C_2014448EN.01001801.xml










15.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 448/18





Judgment of the General Court of 6 November 2014 — FIS'D v Commission
(Case T-283/12) (1)

((Erasmus Mundus action programme - Framework partnership agreement - Specific grant agreement - EACEA decision to rescind the framework agreement and amend the specific agreement - Administrative appeal before the Commission - Commission decision dismissing the administrative appeal as unfounded - Infringement of the agreements and the administrative and financial manual))
(2014/C 448/23)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: FIS’D — Formazione integrata superiore del design (Catanzaro, Italy) (represented by: initially, S. Bariatti and A. Sodano, then, F. Sutti and A. Boso Caretta, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially, M. Van Hoof, then, C. Cattabriga and D. Roussanov and finally, C. Cattabriga, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) (represented by: H. Monet, acting as Agent, M. Merola and C. Santacroce, lawyers)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission decision of 12 April 2012 (ref. Ares (2012) 446225) dismissing the administrative appeal against the decision of the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) of 13 January 2012 by which the latter rescinded early the framework partnership agreement 2011/0181 which it had concluded with the Università degli Studi Mediterranea di Reggio Calabria (Mediterranea University of Reggio Calabria, Italy) and amended the specific grant agreement which it had concluded with that university

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders FIS’D — Formazione integrata superiore del design to bear its own costs and those of the European Commission.










3.


Orders the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 243, 11.8.2012.