do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Designation of the Chamber responsible for cases of the kind referred to in Article 107 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court
Date: 2014-12-01
Institutions: Court of Justice, Court of Justice of the European Union
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union, operation of the Institutions, rules of procedure








C_2014431EN.01000401.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/4





Designation of the Chamber responsible for cases of the kind referred to in Article 107 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court
(2014/C 431/06)
At its General Meeting on 7 October 2014, the Court designated the Fourth Chamber as the Chamber that is, in accordance with Article 11(2) of the Rules of Procedure, responsible for cases of the kind referred to in Article 107 of those Rules, for the period from 7 October 2014 to 6 October 2015.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1281/2014 of 1 December 2014 establishing a prohibition of fishing for plaice in VIIh, VIIj and VIIk by vessels flying the flag of Ireland
Date: 2014-12-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Atlantic Ocean, EU waters, Ireland, catch area, catch by species, catch quota, fishing rights, sea fish, sea fishing, ship's flag








L_2014347EN.01001101.xml










3.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 347/11








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 1281/2014
of 1 December 2014
         
establishing a prohibition of fishing for plaice in VIIh, VIIj and VIIk by vessels flying the flag of Ireland


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), and in particular Article 36(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Council Regulation (EU) No 43/2014 (2) lays down quotas for 2014.












(2)


According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2014.












(3)


It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1

Quota exhaustion

The fishing quota allocated to the Member State referred to in the Annex to this Regulation for the stock referred to therein for 2014 shall be deemed to be exhausted from the date set out in that Annex.


Article 2

Prohibitions

Fishing activities for the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein shall be prohibited from the date set out in that Annex. In particular it shall be prohibited to retain on board, relocate, tranship or land fish from that stock caught by those vessels after that date.


Article 3

Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 1 December 2014.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Lowri EVANS
            

Director-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

(2)  Council Regulation (EU) No 43/2014 of 20 January 2014 fixing for 2014 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, to Union vessels, in certain non-Union waters (OJ L 24, 28.1.2014, p. 1).




ANNEX






No


72/TQ43




Member State


Ireland




Stock


PLE/7HJK.




Species


Plaice (Pleuronectes platessa)




Zone


VIIh, VIIj and VIIk




Closing date


24.10.2014
Case F-136/14: Action brought on 1 December 2014  — ZZ v Commission
Date: 2014-12-01
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, expatriate worker, indemnification, regulations for civil servants, retroactivity of a law








C_2015034EN.01005401.xml










2.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 34/54





Action brought on 1 December 2014 — ZZ v Commission
(Case F-136/14)
(2015/C 034/66)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: D. de Abreu Caldas, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision taken by the Commission granting the applicant, retroactively, the expatriation allowance, in so far as the grant is retroactive only to 1 September 2013, the applicant arguing that the Commission ought to grant him that allowance from the date of his recruitment to the Commission on 1 July 1999.

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the PMO of 29 January 2014 to grant the applicant the expatriation allowance, provided for in Article 4 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, with retroactive effect from 1 September 2013, instead of from his date of recruitment of 1 July 1999;










—


Order the European Commission to pay the costs.
Appointment of the First Advocate General
Date: 2014-12-01
Institutions: Court of Justice, Court of Justice of the European Union
Subjects: appointment of members, member of the Court of Justice (EU)








C_2014431EN.01000403.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/4





Appointment of the First Advocate General
(2014/C 431/08)
At its General Meeting on 7 October 2014, the Court of Justice appointed Mr Wathelet as First Advocate General for the period from 7 October 2014 to 6 October 2015.
Designation of the Chamber responsible for cases of the kind referred to in Article 193 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court
Date: 2014-12-01
Institutions: Court of Justice, Court of Justice of the European Union
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union, operation of the Institutions, rules of procedure








C_2014431EN.01000402.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/4





Designation of the Chamber responsible for cases of the kind referred to in Article 193 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court
(2014/C 431/07)
At its General Meeting on 7 October 2014, the Court designated the First Chamber as the Chamber that is, in accordance with Article 11(2) of the Rules of Procedure, responsible for cases of the kind referred to in Article 193 of those Rules, for the period from 7 October 2014 to 6 October 2015.
Case T-786/14: Action brought on 1 December 2014 — Bourdouvali e.a./Council e.a.
Date: 2014-12-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Cyprus, bank, bank deposit, contractual liability, equal treatment, ownership, principle of proportionality, share








C_2015073EN.01004002.xml










2.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 73/40






Action brought on 1 December 2014 — Bourdouvali e.a./Council e.a.
(Case T-786/14)
(2015/C 073/52)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Eleni Pavlikka Bourdouvali (Meneou, Cyprus) and 47 other applicants (represented by: P. Tridimas, Barrister)

Defendants: Council of the European Union, European Commission, European Union represented by the European Commission, Eurogroup represented by Council of the European Union, European Central Bank

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


order the defendants to pay the applicants the sums shown in the Schedule annexed to the application plus interest accruing from 16 March 2013 until the judgment of the Court;










—


order the defendants to pay the costs.




In the alternative, by way of subsidiary claim, the applicants claim that the Court should:






—


find that the European Union and/or the defendant institutions have incurred non-contractual liability;










—


determine the procedure to be followed in order to establish the recoverable loss actually suffered by the applicants;










—


order the defendants to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants (48 in total) are depositors and/or shareholders and/or bondholders of the Bank of Cyprus Public Company Ltd and/or Cyprus Popular Bank Public Co. Ltd. They seek compensation pursuant to Articles 268, 340(2) and 340(3) TFEU, governing the extra-contractual liability of the EU, for the loss that they have suffered as a result of the measures taken by the defendant institutions imposing a bail-in scheme on the Republic of Cyprus.
The applicants consider that the defendant institutions adopted a bail-in scheme for the Republic of Cyprus which led directly to the loss of their deposits and shareholdings. In the view of the applicants, the bail-in measures adopted by the Republic of Cyprus were introduced solely in order to implement measures adopted by the defendants and were also approved by the defendant institutions.
The applicants consider that the bail-in scheme violates the right to property, as protected by Article 17(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention for the Protection of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms. The applicants also argue that the bail-in scheme infringes the principle of proportionality, the principle of protection of legitimate expectations, and the principle of non-discrimination.
Decisions adopted by the Court in its General Meeting on 14 October 2014
Date: 2014-12-01
Institutions: Court of Justice, Court of Justice of the European Union
Subjects: appointment of members, institutional activity, judge, member of the Court of Justice (EU)








C_2014431EN.01000203.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/2





Decisions adopted by the Court in its General Meeting on 14 October 2014
(2014/C 431/04)
At its General Meeting on 14 October 2014, the Court decided to assign Mr Lycourgos to the Second and Seventh Chambers.
Consequently, the composition of the Second and Seventh Chambers is as set out below.
Second Chamber
Ms Silva de Lapuerta, President of the Chamber,
Mr Bonichot, Mr Arabadjiev, Mr Da Cruz Vilaça and Mr Lycourgos, Judges.
Seventh Chamber
Mr Bonichot, President of the Chamber,
Mr Arabadjiev, Mr Da Cruz Vilaça and Mr Lycourgos, Judges.
Election of the Presidents of the Chambers of three Judges
Date: 2014-12-01
Institutions: Court of Justice, Court of Justice of the European Union
Subjects: appointment of members, judge, member of the Court of Justice (EU), president of an institution








C_2014431EN.01000202.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/2





Election of the Presidents of the Chambers of three Judges
(2014/C 431/03)
At a meeting on 7 October 2014, the Judges of the Court of Justice elected, pursuant to Article 12(2) of the Rules of Procedure, Mr Ó Caoimh as President of the Eighth Chamber, Mr Bonichot as President of the Seventh Chamber, Mr Vajda as President of the Tenth Chamber, Mr Rodin as President of the Sixth Chamber and Ms Jürimäe as President of the Ninth Chamber for the period from 7 October 2014 to 6 October 2015.
Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union
Date: 2014-12-01
Institutions: Court of Justice of the European Union
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union








C_2014431EN.01000101.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/1





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

(2014/C 431/01)

Last publication


OJ C 421, 24.11.2014


Past publications


OJ C 409, 17.11.2014


OJ C 395, 10.11.2014


OJ C 388, 3.11.2014


OJ C 380, 27.10.2014


OJ C 372, 20.10.2014


OJ C 361, 13.10.2014

These texts are available on:
EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu
Action brought on 1 December 2014 by Kimek Offshore AS against the EFTA Surveillance Authority (Case E-23/14)
Date: 2014-12-01
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: Norway, regional aid, regional disparity, social-security contribution








C_2015039EN.01000401.xml










5.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 39/4





Action brought on 1 December 2014 by Kimek Offshore AS against the EFTA Surveillance Authority
(Case E-23/14)
(2015/C 39/04)
An action against the EFTA Surveillance Authority was brought before the EFTA Court on 1 December 2014 by Kimek Offshore AS, represented by Bjørnar Alterskjær, advokat, and Robert Lund, advokat, ALT Law Firm, Fridtjof Nansens plass 6, N-0160 Oslo, Norway.
The applicant requests the EFTA Court:






1.


To annul the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s Decision No 225/14/COL of 18 June 2014 on regionally differentiated social security contributions 2014-2020;










2.


To order the EFTA Surveillance Authority to bear the costs of the proceedings.





Legal and factual background and pleas in law adduced in support:







—


The applicant, Kimek Offshore, is part of the Kimek Group. Kimek Offshore is a service company in the oil and gas business and hires out mainly welders, pipe welders, mechanics and engineers. Its administration and management is located in Kirkenes, Norway.










—


The case concerns an application for annulment of a decision by the EFTA Surveillance Authority approving regional aid in Norway for the period 2014-2020.




The applicant claims that the EFTA Surveillance Authority has:






—


breached its obligation to open the formal investigation procedure provided for in Article 1(2) of Part I of Protocol 3 and Article 6(1) in Section II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement (SCA) (Article 4(4) of Section II of Protocol 3 SCA);










—


breached its obligation to state the reasons on which a decision is made with regard to rules on social security taxation pertaining to the hiring of workers, according to Article 16 SCA.
Lists for the purposes of determining the composition of the formations of the Court
Date: 2014-12-01
Institutions: Court of Justice, Court of Justice of the European Union
Subjects: appointment of members, judge, member of the Court of Justice (EU)








C_2014431EN.01000301.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/3





Lists for the purposes of determining the composition of the formations of the Court
(2014/C 431/05)
At its General Meeting on 14 October 2014, the Court drew up the list for determining the composition of the Grand Chamber as follows:
Mr Rosas
Mr Lycourgos
Mr Juhász
Ms Jürimäe
Mr Borg Barthet
Mr Biltgen
Mr Malenovský
Mr Rodin
Mr Levits
Mr Vajda
Mr Ó Caoimh
Mr Da Cruz Vilaça
Mr Bonichot
Mr Fernlund
Mr Arabadjiev
Mr Jarašiūnas
Ms Toader
Ms Prechal
Mr Safjan
Ms Berger
Mr Šváby
At its General Meeting on 14 October 2014, the Court drew up the list for determining the composition of the Second Chamber of five Judges as follows:
Mr Bonichot
Mr Lycourgos
Mr Arabadjiev
Mr Da Cruz Vilaça
At its General Meeting on 14 October 2014, the Court drew up the list for determining the composition of the Seventh Chamber of three Judges as follows:
Mr Arabadjiev
Mr Da Cruz Vilaça
Mr Lycourgos
Case C-553/14 P: Appeal brought on 1 December 2014 by Kyocera Mita Europe BV against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 16 September 2014 in Case T-35/11: Kyocera Mita Europe BV v European Commission
Date: 2014-12-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, common customs tariff, customs duties, interpretation of the law, proof








C_2015046EN.01002702.xml










9.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 46/27





Appeal brought on 1 December 2014 by Kyocera Mita Europe BV against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 16 September 2014 in Case T-35/11: Kyocera Mita Europe BV v European Commission
(Case C-553/14 P)
(2015/C 046/34)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Kyocera Mita Europe BV (represented by: P. De Baere, avocat, P. Muñiz, advogado)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside, in whole, the order delivered by the EU General Court in case T-35/11;










—


rule that the appeal is admissible;










—


return the case to the EU General Court for a ruling on the substantive grounds of appeal;










—


order the Defendant to pay the costs of these proceedings and those before the General Court.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The appeal is based on the following two grounds:
First, the General Court erred in law in the interpretation and application of Article 263 TFUE, when it concluded that the Regulation ‘entailed implementing measures’ within the meaning of that provision.
Secondly, the General Court infringed the Appellant’s right to be heard, erred in the legal characterisation of the evidence submitted by the Appellant, and alternatively distorted such evidence.
Case C-552/14 P: Appeal brought on 1 December 2014 by Canon Europa NV against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 16 September 2014 in Case T-34/11: Canon Europa NV v European Commission
Date: 2014-12-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: common customs tariff, customs duties, interpretation of the law, tariff nomenclature








C_2015046EN.01002701.xml










9.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 46/27





Appeal brought on 1 December 2014 by Canon Europa NV against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 16 September 2014 in Case T-34/11: Canon Europa NV v European Commission
(Case C-552/14 P)
(2015/C 046/33)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Canon Europa NV (represented by: P. De Baere, avocat, P. Muñiz, advogado)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside, in whole, the order delivered by the EU General Court in case T-34/11;










—


rule that the appeal is admissible;










—


return the case to the EU General Court for a ruling on the substantive grounds of appeal;










—


order the Defendant to pay the costs of these proceedings and those before the General Court.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The appeal is based on the following two grounds:
First, the General Court erred in law in the interpretation and application of Article 263 TFUE, when it concluded that the Regulation ‘entailed implementing measures’ within the meaning of that provision.
Secondly, the General Court infringed the Appellant’s right to be heard, erred in the legal characterisation of the evidence submitted by the Appellant, and alternatively distorted such evidence.
Taking of the oath by the new Member of the Court of Justice
Date: 2014-12-01
Institutions: Court of Justice, Court of Justice of the European Union
Subjects: appointment of members, member of the Court of Justice (EU)








C_2014431EN.01000201.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/2





Taking of the oath by the new Member of the Court of Justice
(2014/C 431/02)
Following his appointment as Judge at the Court of Justice for the period from 7 October 2014 to 6 October 2018 by decision of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of the European Union of 24 September 2014 (1), Mr Lycourgos took the oath before the Court of Justice on 8 October 2014.


(1)  OJ L 284, 30.9.2014, p. 46.