do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-70/14: Order of the Court of 11 December 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administrativo e Fiscal de Viseu — Portugal) — Agrocaramulo — Empreendimentos Agro-Pecuários do Caramulo SA v Instituto de Financiamento da Agficultura e Pescas, IP (IFAP) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 — Agriculture — Common organisation of the markets — Export refunds — Poultrymeat — ‘Cull hens’  — Agricultural product nomenclature for export refunds — Classification)
Date: 2014-12-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: agricultural product nomenclature, common organisation of markets, export refund, poultry, poultrymeat








C_2015065EN.01001602.xml










23.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 65/16





Order of the Court of 11 December 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administrativo e Fiscal de Viseu — Portugal) — Agrocaramulo — Empreendimentos Agro-Pecuários do Caramulo SA v Instituto de Financiamento da Agficultura e Pescas, IP (IFAP)
(Case C-70/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 - Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Export refunds - Poultrymeat - ‘Cull hens’ - Agricultural product nomenclature for export refunds - Classification))
(2015/C 065/23)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Administrativo e Fiscal de Viseu

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Agrocaramulo — Empreendimentos Agro-Pecuários do Caramulo SA

Defendant: Instituto de Financiamento da Agricultura e Pescas, IP (IFAP)

Operative part of the order

Annex I to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 of 17 December 1987 establishing an agricultural product nomenclature for export refunds, as most recently amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2091/2005 of 15 December 2005, must be interpreted as meaning that laying hens put down at the end of their laying period, when their skeleton is completely ossified, known as ‘cull hens’, do not fall within the description ‘others’ under product headings 0207 12 10 9900 and 0207 12 90 9190 set out in that annex.


(1)  OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.
Case C-576/13: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 December 2014  — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Article 49 TFEU — Freedom of establishment — Dock-work undertakings — Management of workers for the provision of cargo-handling services — Prohibition on using workers on the employment market)
Date: 2014-12-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Spain, carriage of goods, harbour installation, infringement of EU law, port traffic, public limited company, right of establishment








C_2015046EN.01001401.xml










9.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 46/14





Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 December 2014 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain
(Case C-576/13) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 49 TFEU - Freedom of establishment - Dock-work undertakings - Management of workers for the provision of cargo-handling services - Prohibition on using workers on the employment market))
(2015/C 046/18)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: L. Nicolae and S. Pardo Quintillán, Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: A. Rubio González, Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by obliging undertakings of other Member States wishing to exercise the activity of cargo-handling in Spanish ports of general interest, first, to register with the Dockers’ Management Public Limited Liability Company (‘Sociedad Anónima de Gestion de Estibadores Portuarios’) and, as appropriate, to hold shares in that company and, secondly, to employ as a priority workers provided by that company, including a minimum number on permanent contracts, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 TFEU;










2.


Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 24, 25.1.2014.
Case C-574/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) lodged on 11 December 2014  — PGE Górnictwo i Energetyka Konwencjonalna SA v Prezes Urzędu Regulacji Energetyki
Date: 2014-12-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: State aid, control of State aid, energy production, interpretation of the law, legal methodology








C_2015089EN.01000202.xml










16.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 89/2





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) lodged on 11 December 2014 — PGE Górnictwo i Energetyka Konwencjonalna SA v Prezes Urzędu Regulacji Energetyki
(Case C-574/14)
(2015/C 089/03)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Najwyższy

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: PGE Górnictwo i Energetyka Konwencjonalna SA

Defendant: Prezes Urzędu Regulacji Energetyki

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 107 TFEU, in conjunction with Article 4(3) TEU and Article 4(2) of the Decision of the European Commission of 25 September 2007 (1), to be interpreted as meaning that, where the European Commission classifies State aid as being compatible with the common market, the national court is not entitled to review whether the domestic provisions which have been deemed to constitute permitted State aid are consistent with the assumptions made in the Commission Communication relating to the methodology for analysing State aid linked to stranded costs (‘the Stranded Costs Methodology’)?










2.


Is Article 107 TFEU, in conjunction with Article 4(3) TEU and Article 4(1) and (2) of the Decision of the European Commission of 25 September 2007, interpreted in the light of points 3.3 and 4.2 of the Stranded Costs Methodology, to be interpreted as meaning that, in the context of the implementation of a State aid programme which the European Commission has found to be compatible with the common market, the annual adjustment of the stranded costs incurred by group-affiliated power generators is carried out on the assumption that the position with respect to the group affiliation of the power generator as recorded in the annexes to the legislative measure examined by the Commission is alone decisive, or is it necessary to verify in respect of every year for which stranded costs are adjusted whether, during that period, the beneficiary of the State aid programme linked to the stranded costs actually belongs to the group to which the other power generators covered by the aid programme also belong?






(1)  Commission Decision 2009/287/EC of 25 September 2007 on State aid awarded by Poland as part of Power Purchase Agreements and the State aid which Poland is planning to award concerning compensation for the voluntary termination of Power Purchase Agreements (notified under document number C(2007) 4319) (OJ 2009 L 83, p. 1).