do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-384/15: Action brought on 13 July 2015 — EDF Luminus v Parliament
Date: 2015-07-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Brussels region, contract terms, electrical energy, electricity supply, equal treatment, interest, price of energy, principle of legal certainty








C_2015337EN.01002401.xml










12.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 337/24





Action brought on 13 July 2015 — EDF Luminus v Parliament
(Case T-384/15)
(2015/C 337/24)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: EDF Luminus (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: D. Verhoeven and O. Vanden Berghe, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought







—


Declare the action admissible and well founded;










—


Consequently, order the European Parliament:










—


to pay EDF Luminus the sum of EUR 4 39  672 ,95;










—


to pay EDF Luminus the contractual interest on that sum from the date on which the invoices were payable;










—


to pay the costs and disbursements.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, alleging infringement of the applicable legal and contractual conditions and the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination, since the Parliament refuses to reimburse the applicant for the contributions relating to the electricity which it paid to the Région de Bruxelles — Capitale. The applicant submits that the disputed contributions must fall to be paid by the Parliament since they were brought about by the supply of electricity to the Parliament.
Case C-355/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 13 July 2015 — Bietergemeinschaft: Technische Gebäudebetreuung GesmbH and Caverion Österreich GmbH
Date: 2015-07-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative procedure, appeal, appeal to an administrative authority, award of contract, invitation to tender








C_2015320EN.01001701.xml










28.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/17





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 13 July 2015 — Bietergemeinschaft: Technische Gebäudebetreuung GesmbH and Caverion Österreich GmbH
(Case C-355/15)
(2015/C 320/24)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: Bietergemeinschaft: Technische Gebäudebetreuung GesmbH and Caverion Österreich GmbH

Other parties: Universität für Bodenkultur Wien, VAMED Management und Service GmbH & Co KG in Vienna

Questions referred







1.


In the light of the principles established in the judgment of the Court of Justice of 4 July 2013 in Case C-100/12 (1)
Fastweb SpA, is Article 1(3) of Directive 89/665/EEC 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 (2), in the version amended by Directive 2007/66/EC 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 (3) (‘Directive 89/665’), to be interpreted as meaning that a tenderer whose bid was definitively excluded by the contracting authority and who is therefore not a tenderer concerned within the meaning of Article 2a of Directive 89/665 may be refused access to a review of the award decision (decision on the conclusion of a framework agreement) and of the conclusion of the contract (including the award of damages required under Article 2(7) of the Directive), even where only two tenderers submitted bids and the bid submitted by the successful tenderer, to whom the contract was awarded, should, in the submission of the tenderer not concerned, also have been excluded?
If the answer to Question 1 is in the negative:










2.


In the light of the principles established in the judgment of the Court of Justice of 4 July 2013 in Case C-100/12 Fastweb SpA, is Article 1(3) of Directive 89/665 to be interpreted as meaning that the tenderer not concerned (within the meaning of Article 2a of the Directive) must be granted access to a review only:






(a)


where it is apparent from the documents forming part of the review procedure that the successful tenderer’s bid is not valid; or










(b)


where the successful tenderer’s bid is not valid on identical grounds?










(1)  ECLI:EU:C:2013:448.

(2)  OJ 1989 L 395, p. 33.

(3)  OJ 2007 L 335, p. 31.
Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union
Date: 2015-07-13
Institutions: Court of Justice of the European Union
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union








C_2015228EN.01000101.xml










13.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 228/1





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

(2015/C 228/01)

Last publication


OJ C 221, 6.7.2015


Past publications


OJ C 213, 29.6.2015


OJ C 205, 22.6.2015


OJ C 198, 15.6.2015


OJ C 190, 8.6.2015


OJ C 178, 1.6.2015


OJ C 171, 26.5.2015

These texts are available on:
EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu
Case C-356/15: Action brought on 13 July 2015 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium
Date: 2015-07-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, migrant worker, social security legislation, social-security benefit, social-security contribution, social-security harmonisation








C_2015302EN.01002501.xml










14.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 302/25





Action brought on 13 July 2015 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium
(Case C-356/15)
(2015/C 302/32)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: D. Martin, acting as Agent)

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium

Form of order sought







—


Declare that by adopting Articles 23 and 24 of the programme law of 27 December 2012, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 11, 12 and 76(6) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems, Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 (2) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 and Decision Al of the Administrative Commission for the Coordination of Social Security Systems (3).










—


order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

With the adoption of Articles 23 and 24 of the programme law of 27 December 2012, the Commission considers that the Kingdom of Belgium has infringed Articles 11, 12 and 76 of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 and Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004, and Decision Al of the Administrative Commission for the Coordination of Social Security Systems by failing to recognise the binding nature of a document issued by the Member State of origin of a posted worker attesting that he is subject to the social security legislation of that Member State.


(1)  OJ 2004 L 166, p. 1.

(2)  OJ 2009 L 284, p. 1.

(3)  OJ C 106 of 24.4.2010, p. 1.
Case C-354/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação de Évora (Portugal) lodged on 13 July 2015 — Andrew Marcus Henderson v Novo Banco SA
Date: 2015-07-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: access to the courts, correspondence, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, judicial proceedings, legal domicile








C_2015302EN.01002402.xml










14.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 302/24





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação de Évora (Portugal) lodged on 13 July 2015 — Andrew Marcus Henderson v Novo Banco SA
(Case C-354/15)
(2015/C 302/31)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal da Relação de Évora

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Andrew Marcus Henderson

Respondent: Novo Banco SA

Questions referred







1.


Where a Portuguese court hearing a civil action against an individual residing in another Member State of the European Union has ordered that notice of service of those proceedings be served on that individual by registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt, and the corresponding acknowledgment of receipt has not been returned, may the Portuguese court consider, in the light of the above Regulation [EC 1393/2007] (1) and the principles underlying it, that such service was effected, on the basis of the documents of the postal authority of the state in which the addressee of the letter resides which prove that the registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt was delivered to the addressee?










2.


Does the application of Article 230 of the Portuguese Code of Civil Procedure, in the case referred to the first question, infringe the Regulation and the principles underlying it?










3.


Does the application of Article 191(2) of the Portuguese Code of Civil Procedure in the present case infringe the Regulation and principles underlying it?






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (service of documents), and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000 (OJ 2007 L 324, p. 79).
Council Decision (EU) 2015/1147 of 13 July 2015 appointing a Greek alternate member of the Committee of the Regions
Date: 2015-07-13
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Committee of the Regions, Greece, appointment of members








L_2015186EN.01000101.xml










14.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 186/1








            COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2015/1147
of 13 July 2015
         
appointing a Greek alternate member of the Committee of the Regions


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,


Having regard to the proposal of the Greek Government,

Whereas:







(1)


On 26 January, on 5 February and on 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.












(2)


An alternate member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Kostas BAKOGIANNIS,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following is hereby appointed as alternate member to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:






—


Mr Theodoros GOTSOPOULOS, Politically accountable to the Regional Council of Attica







Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 13 July 2015.


For the Council


The President

F. ETGEN
            





(1)  
            OJ L 20, 27.1.2015, p. 42.

(2)  
            OJ L 31, 7.2.2015, p. 25.

(3)  
            OJ L 159, 25.6.2015, p. 70.
Council Decision (EU) 2015/1140 of 13 July 2015 appointing two Dutch members and two Dutch alternate members of the Committee of the Regions
Date: 2015-07-13
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Committee of the Regions, Netherlands, appointment of members








L_2015185EN.01001701.xml










14.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 185/17








            COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2015/1140
of 13 July 2015
         
appointing two Dutch members and two Dutch alternate members of the Committee of the Regions


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,


Having regard to the proposal of the Dutch Government,

Whereas:







(1)


On 26 January, on 5 February and on 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.












(2)


Two members' seats have become vacant following the end of the terms of office of Mr Onno HOES and Mr Henri LENFERINK.












(3)


Two alternate members' seats would become vacant following the appointment of Mr R. (Rob) JONKMAN and Mr N.A. (André) VAN DE NADORT as members of the Committee of the Regions,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following are hereby appointed as members to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:






—


Mr R. (Rob) JONKMAN, Member of the executive council of Opsterland











—


Mr N.A. (André) VAN DE NADORT, Mayor of the municipality of Ten Boer







Article 2
The following are hereby appointed as alternate members to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:






—


Mrs M.T.M. (Marcelle) HENDRICKX, Member of the executive council of Tilburg











—


Mr H.J.J. (Henri) LENFERINK, Mayor of Leiden







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




Done at Brussels, 13 July 2015.


For the Council


The President

F. ETGEN
            





(1)  
            OJ L 20, 27.1.2015, p. 42.

(2)  
            OJ L 31, 7.2.2015, p. 25.

(3)  
            OJ L 159, 25.6.2015, p. 70.
Case T-205/15: Order of the General Court of 13 July 2015 — Aguirre and Company v OHIM — Puma (Representation of a sports shoe)
Date: 2015-07-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: designs and models, footwear industry, sports equipment








C_2015320EN.01005201.xml










28.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/52





Order of the General Court of 13 July 2015 — Aguirre and Company v OHIM — Puma (Representation of a sports shoe)
(Case T-205/15) (1)

(2015/C 320/72)
Language of the case: Spanish
The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 205, 22.6.2015.
Draft guidelines for citizens and civil society participation in EU transport policies and projects : study abstract.
Date: 2015-07-13
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: civil society, common transport policy, decision-making, reduction of gas emissions, social participation, transport economics, transport infrastructure, transport network

Draft guidelines for citizens and civil society 
participation in EU transport policies and projects 

Study abstract 

This  study  was  carried  out  by  Per  Boqvist  following  a  call  for  tenders  launched  by  the  European 
Economic  and  Social  Committee.  The  information  and  views  set  out  in  this  study  are  those  of  the 
author  and  do  not  necessarily  reflect  the  official  opinion  of  the  European  Economic  and  Social 
Committee.  The  European Economic  and  Social  Committee does  not  guarantee the accuracy  of  the 
data  included  in  this  study.  Neither  the  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  nor  any  person 
acting  on  the  Committee’s  behalf  may  be  held  responsible  for  the  use  which  may  be  made  of  the 
information contained therein.   

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The study proposes draft guidelines to serve as a framework for participatory dialogues to facilitate 
planned Commission initiatives to implement the 2011 transport policy White Paper or infrastructure 
projects on the TEN-T Core Network Corridors. 

Participants will vary depending on the context. 

Dialogues  should  be  early,  transparent,  open  and  managed  in  a  neutral  fashion.  Interventions  shall 
receive  a  rapid  reaction  and  follow-up  shall  include  information  about  the  final  outcome  of  the 
initiative. The limits of what a dialogue can achieve must be clear. 

Neutral management by the EESC is vital for inspiring confidence that will attract participants. 

Dialogues can take place through events, over the internet or a combination of both. For efficiency, 
flexibility and financial reasons the study prefers internet dialogues. 

Most costs should be borne by the party initiating the dialogue; the European Commission for policy 
and legislative proposals and Member States concerned or project promoters for TEN-T projects. 

The study also outlines a project for finalising the guidelines through a cooperative process, including 
one or more test dialogues.   

 
 
 
 
Rue Belliard/Belliardstraat 99 

1040 Bruxelles/Brussel 
BELGIQUE/BELGIË 

www.eesc.europa.eu 

© European Union, 2015 
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged 

QE-01-15-438-EN-N 
ISBN:978-92-830-2792-8 
doi:10.2864/860855
Case C-353/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte di Appello di Bari (Italy) lodged on 13 July 2015 — Leonmobili Srl, Gennaro Leone v Homag Holzbearbeitungssysteme GmbH and Others
Date: 2015-07-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: financial solvency, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, residence








C_2015302EN.01002401.xml










14.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 302/24





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte di Appello di Bari (Italy) lodged on 13 July 2015 — Leonmobili Srl, Gennaro Leone v Homag Holzbearbeitungssysteme GmbH and Others
(Case C-353/15)
(2015/C 302/30)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte di Appello di Bari

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Leonmobili Srl, Gennaro Leone

Defendants: Homag Holzbearbeitungssysteme GmbH, Curatela del Fallimento Leonmobili Srl, ICO Srl, Arturo Salice SpA, Grafiche Ricciarelli di Ricciarelli Bernardino, Deutsche Bank SpA, Fida Srl, Elica SpA

Questions referred







a)


In the absence of any establishment in another Member State may the presumption provided for by the last part of Article 3(1) and Article 3(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 (1) be rebutted in a challenge to jurisdiction by evidence that the centre of main interests of a company is in a different State from the one where the company has its registered office.










b)


If the answer to the preceding question is in the affirmative, may that evidence be derived from another presumption, that is to say, from the assessment of information from which it can be logically deduced that the centre of main interests is in another Member State.






(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings (OJ 2000 L 160, p. 1).
Case F-69/14: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 13 July 2015 — Carreira v ESMA
Date: 2015-07-13
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: EU office or agency, activity report, staff assessment








C_2015279EN.01006202.xml










24.8.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 279/62






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 13 July 2015 — Carreira v ESMA
(Case F-69/14) (1)

(2015/C 279/81)
Language of the case: French
The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  
            OJ C 380, 27/10/2014, p. 27.