do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-499/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie van België (Belgium) lodged on 10 November 2014  — VAD BVBA, Johannes Josephus Maria van Aert v Belgische Staat
Date: 2014-11-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, common customs tariff, customs regulations, packaging product, retail selling








C_2015026EN.01001202.xml










26.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/12





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie van België (Belgium) lodged on 10 November 2014 — VAD BVBA, Johannes Josephus Maria van Aert v Belgische Staat
(Case C-499/14)
(2015/C 026/16)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van Cassatie van België

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants in cassation: VAD BVBA, Johannes Josephus Maria van Aert

Respondent in the appeal in cassation: Belgische Staat

Question referred

Are goods put up in sets for retail sale that are presented to customs authorities in separate packages because this is justified, but from which it is clear that they belong together and are intended to be offered as a single unit on the retail market, also to be regarded as goods put up in sets for retail sale, within the meaning of Rule 3(b) of the General Rules for the interpretation of the Combined Nomenclature set out in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 (1) of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1214/2007 (2) of 20 September 2007, in the case where those goods are packed together after the declaration with a view to being offered for sale on the retail market?


(1)  OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1.

(2)  OJ 2007 L 286, p. 1.
Judgment of the Court of 10 November 2014 in Case E-9/14 — Otto Kaufmann AG (Admissibility — Exchange of information on convictions of legal persons — Freedom to provide services — Freedom of establishment — Directive 2004/18/EC — Directive 2006/123/EC)
Date: 2014-11-10
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: access to information, award of contract, criminal record, exchange of information, freedom to provide services, legal person, right of establishment








C_2015183EN.01000601.xml










4.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 183/6





JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
of 10 November 2014
in Case E-9/14
Otto Kaufmann AG
(Admissibility — Exchange of information on convictions of legal persons — Freedom to provide services — Freedom of establishment — Directive 2004/18/EC — Directive 2006/123/EC)
(2015/C 183/07)
In Case E-9/14, Otto Kaufmann AG – REQUEST to the Court under Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice by the Princely Court of Liechtenstein (Fürstliches Landgericht des Fürstentums Liechtenstein) on the interpretation of EEA law with regard to the recording of criminal convictions of legal persons, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 10 November 2014, the operative part of which is as follows:
Articles 31 and 36 of the EEA Agreement do not require that a criminal conviction of a legal person be clearly recorded. Provisions such as Article 45 of Directive 2004/18/EC and Article 33 of Directive 2006/123/EC may require an EEA State to provide information, upon request from another EEA State, on convictions relevant to the competence and professional reliability of legal persons. However, these Directives leave the maintenance and handling of relevant information to national law.
Case T-320/13: Order of the General Court of 10 November 2014  — DelSolar (Wujiang) v Commission (Dumping — Imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells and wafers) originating from China — Provisional anti-dumping duty — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2014-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, import (EU), originating product, semi-metal, solar collector








C_2015026EN.01003301.xml










26.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/33





Order of the General Court of 10 November 2014 — DelSolar (Wujiang) v Commission
(Case T-320/13) (1)

((Dumping - Imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells and wafers) originating from China - Provisional anti-dumping duty - No need to adjudicate))
(2015/C 026/41)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: DelSolar (Wujiang) Ltd (Wujiang City, China) (represented by: initially L. Catrain González, lawyer, E. Wright and H. Zhu, Barristers, then L. Catrain González and E. Wright)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Regulation (EU) No 513/2013 of 4 June 2013 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells and wafers) originating in or consigned from the People’s Republic of China and amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2013 making these imports originating in or consigned from the People’s Republic of China subject to registration (OJ 2013 L 152, p. 5)

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


Each party shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 215, 27.7.2013.
Case T-292/13: Order of the General Court of 10 November 2014  — Evangelou v Commission and ECB (Action for annulment and compensation — Stability support programme for Cyprus — Memorandum of Understanding on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality concluded between the Republic of Cyprus and the ESM — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Causal link — Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Date: 2014-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Cyprus, EU programme, economic stabilisation, indemnification, legal basis, report








C_2015026EN.01003001.xml










26.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/30





Order of the General Court of 10 November 2014 — Evangelou v Commission and ECB
(Case T-292/13) (1)

((Action for annulment and compensation - Stability support programme for Cyprus - Memorandum of Understanding on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality concluded between the Republic of Cyprus and the ESM - Jurisdiction of the General Court - Causal link - Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law))
(2015/C 026/37)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Christos Evangelou (Derynia, Cyprus); and Yvonne Evangelou (Derynia) (represented by: C. Paschalides, Solicitor, and A. Paschalides, lawyer)

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: B. Smulders and J.-P. Keppenne, Agents); and European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: A. Sáinz de Vicuña Barroso, N. Lenihan and F. Athanasiou, Agents, and by W. Bussian, W. Devroe and D. Arts, lawyers)

Re:

First, application for annulment of paragraphs 1.23 to 1.27 of the Memorandum of Understanding on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality concluded between the Republic of Cyprus and the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) on 26 April 2013, and, second, for compensation for damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the inclusion of paragraphs 1.23 to 1.27 in the Memorandum of Understanding and an infringement of the Commission’s supervisory obligation.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


Mr Christos Evangelou and Ms Yvonne Evangelou shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission and by the European Central Bank (ECB).






(1)  OJ C 226, 3.8.2013.
Case C-498/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 10 November 2014 — (Information erased or replaced within the framework of protection of personal data and/or confidentiality.) v (Information erased or replaced within the framework of protection of personal data and/or confidentiality.)
Date: 2014-11-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: descendant, interpretation of the law, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, parental responsibility




C_2015016EN.01001901.xml










19.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 16/19






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 10 November 2014 — RG (*1) v SF (*1)

(Case C-498/14)
(2015/C 016/29)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Bruxelles

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: RG (*1)


Defendant: SF (*1)


Question referred

Are the provisions in Article 11(7) and (8) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 (1) (‘the Brussels IIa Regulation’) to be interpreted as precluding a Member State from:






—


giving preference to the specialisation of courts in situations of parental child abduction with respect to the procedure provided for in those [provisions] even where a court or tribunal has already been seised of proceedings concerning the substance of parental responsibility in relation to the child?










—


removing, from the court seised of proceedings on the substance of parental responsibility in relation to the child, jurisdiction to give judgment on the custody of the child, even though that court has jurisdiction, under international and national law, to give judgment on questions of parental responsibility in relation to the child?






(*1)  Information erased or replaced within the framework of protection of personal data and/or confidentiality.

(1)  OJ 2000 L 338, p. 1.
2014/789/EU: Council Decision of 10 November 2014 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union and its Member States, of the Additional Protocol to the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Korea, of the other part, to take account of the accession of Croatia to the European Union
Date: 2014-11-10
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Croatia, South Korea, accession to the European Union, agreement (EU), free-trade agreement, protocol to an agreement, ratification of an agreement








L_2014329EN.01000101.xml










14.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 329/1








            COUNCIL DECISION
         
of 10 November 2014
         
on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union and its Member States, of the Additional Protocol to the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Korea, of the other part, to take account of the accession of Croatia to the European Union

(2014/789/EU)



THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 91, Articles 100(2) and 167(3) and Article 207, in conjunction with point (a)(v) of the second subparagraph of Article 218(6), thereof,


Having regard to the Act of Accession of Croatia, and in particular the second subparagraph of Article 6(2) thereof,


Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,


Having regard to the consent of the European Parliament,

Whereas:







(1)


In accordance with Council Decision 2014/257/EU (1), the Additional Protocol to the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Korea, of the other part, to take account of the accession of Croatia to the European Union (‘the Additional Protocol’) was signed, and has been applied provisionally as from 1 July 2013, pending the completion of the procedures for its conclusion.












(2)


The Additional Protocol should be approved,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The Additional Protocol to the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Korea, of the other part, to take account of the accession of Croatia to the European Union is hereby approved on behalf of the Union and its Member States (2).


Article 2
The President of the Council shall designate the person(s) empowered to proceed, on behalf of the Union and its Member States, to give the notification referred to in Article 9 of the Additional Protocol regarding completion of the internal procedures for the entry into force.


Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 10 November 2014.


For the Council


The President

M. MARTINA
            





(1)  
            OJ L 140, 14.5.2014, p. 1.

(2)  The text of the Additional Protocol will be published together with the decision on its signature.
Case T-257/12: Order of the General Court of 10 November 2014  — Siegenia-Aubi and Noraa v Commission
Date: 2014-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: fine, iron product, restriction on competition








C_2014462EN.01003202.xml










22.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 462/32





Order of the General Court of 10 November 2014 — Siegenia-Aubi and Noraa v Commission
(Case T-257/12) (1)

(2014/C 462/45)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 227, 28.7.2012.
Case T-289/13: Order of the General Court of 10 November 2014  — Ledra Advertising v Commission and ECB (Action for annulment and compensation — Stability support programme for Cyprus — Memorandum of Understanding on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality concluded between the Republic of Cyprus and the ESM — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Causal link — Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Date: 2014-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Cyprus, EU programme, economic stabilisation, indemnification








C_2015026EN.01002801.xml










26.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/28





Order of the General Court of 10 November 2014 — Ledra Advertising v Commission and ECB
(Case T-289/13) (1)

((Action for annulment and compensation - Stability support programme for Cyprus - Memorandum of Understanding on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality concluded between the Republic of Cyprus and the ESM - Jurisdiction of the General Court - Causal link - Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law))
(2015/C 026/34)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Ledra Advertising Ltd (Nicosia, Cyprus) (represented by: C. Paschalides, Solicitor, and A. Paschalides, lawyer)

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: B. Smulders and J.-P. Keppenne, Agents); and European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: A. Sáinz de Vicuña Barroso, N. Lenihan and F. Athanasiou, Agents, and by W. Bussian, W. Devroe and D. Arts, lawyers)

Re:

First, application for annulment of paragraphs 1.23 to 1.27 of the Memorandum of Understanding on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality concluded between the Republic of Cyprus and the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) on 26 April 2013, and, second, for compensation for damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the inclusion of paragraphs 1.23 to 1.27 in the Memorandum of Understanding and an infringement of the Commission’s supervisory obligation.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


Ledra Advertising Ltd shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission and by the European Central Bank (ECB).






(1)  OJ C 226, 3.8.2013.
Case T-27/14: Order of the General Court of 10 November 2014 — Czech Republic v Commission (Action for annulment — Internal market in natural gas — Article 22 of Directive 2003/55 EC — Letter from the Commission requesting a regulatory authority to annul its decision relating to the grant of a derogation — Measure not subject to review — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2014-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: energy production, energy supply, natural gas, single market








C_2015016EN.01004001.xml










19.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 16/40






Order of the General Court of 10 November 2014 — Czech Republic v Commission
(Case T-27/14) (1)

(Action for annulment - Internal market in natural gas - Article 22 of Directive 2003/55 EC - Letter from the Commission requesting a regulatory authority to annul its decision relating to the grant of a derogation - Measure not subject to review - Inadmissibility)
(2015/C 016/63)
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Vláčil and T. Müller, Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann and P. Němečková, agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision allegedly contained in the Commission’s letter C(2013)7221 final of 4 November 2013, addressed to the Czech Ministry of Trade and Industry, and the Czech Energy Regulatory Office, on the basis of Article 22(4) of Directive 2003/55/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas and repealing Directive 98/30/EC (OJ 2003 L 176, p. 57).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


The Czech Republic shall bear its own costs as well as those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 85, 22.3.2014.
Judgment of the Court of 10 November 2014 in Case E-8/14 — EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland (Failure by a Contracting Party to fulfil its obligations — Directive 2009/38/EC — Failure to implement)
Date: 2014-11-10
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: European Works Council, Iceland, infringement procedure (EU), national implementing measure, worker consultation, worker information








C_2015158EN.01001501.xml










13.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 158/15





JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
of 10 November 2014
in Case E-8/14
EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland
(Failure by a Contracting Party to fulfil its obligations — Directive 2009/38/EC — Failure to implement)
(2015/C 158/09)
In Case E-8/14, EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland — APPLICATION for a declaration that by failing, within the time prescribed to adopt and/or to notify the EFTA Surveillance Authority forthwith of all measures necessary to implement the Act referred to at point 27 of Annex XVIII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, that is Directive 2009/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees (Recast), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto and by EEA Joint Committee Decision No 54/2010 of 30 April 2010, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act and Article 7 EEA, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 10 November 2014, the operative part of which is as follows:
The Court hereby:






1.


Declares that by failing, within the time prescribed, to adopt all the measures necessary to implement the Act referred to at point 27 of Annex XVIII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, that is Directive 2009/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees (Recast), as adapted to the EEA Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto and by Joint Committee Decision No 54/2010, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act and under Article 7 of the Agreement.










2.


Orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings.
Case T-294/13: Order of the General Court of 10 November 2014  — Fialtor v Commission and ECB (Action for annulment and compensation — Stability support programme for Cyprus — Memorandum of Understanding on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality concluded between the Republic of Cyprus and the ESM — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Causal link — Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Date: 2014-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Cyprus, EU programme, economic stabilisation, indemnification, legal basis, report








C_2015026EN.01003102.xml










26.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/31





Order of the General Court of 10 November 2014 — Fialtor v Commission and ECB
(Case T-294/13) (1)

((Action for annulment and compensation - Stability support programme for Cyprus - Memorandum of Understanding on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality concluded between the Republic of Cyprus and the ESM - Jurisdiction of the General Court - Causal link - Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law))
(2015/C 026/39)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Fialtor Ltd (Berlize City, Berlize) (represented by: C. Paschalides, Solicitor, and A. Paschalides, lawyer)

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: B. Smulders and J.-P. Keppenne, Agents); and European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: A. Sáinz de Vicuña Barroso, N. Lenihan and F. Athanasiou, Agents, and by W. Bussian, W. Devroe and D. Arts, lawyers)

Re:

First, application for annulment of paragraphs 1.23 to 1.27 of the Memorandum of Understanding on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality concluded between the Republic of Cyprus and the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) on 26 April 2013, and, second, for compensation for damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the inclusion of paragraphs 1.23 to 1.27 in the Memorandum of Understanding and an infringement of the Commission’s supervisory obligation.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


Fialtor Ltd shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission and by the European Central Bank (ECB).






(1)  OJ C 226, 3.8.2013.