do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-09-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: carcinogenic substance, chemical compound, chemical product, health control, health risk, market approval, marketing standard, toxic substance








C_2015288EN.01000401.xml










2.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/4





Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)
(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1))
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 288/05)

Decisions granting an authorisation













Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holder of the authorisation


Authorisation number


Authorised use


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2015) 6007


1 September 2015


Diarsenic trioxide
EC No 215-481-4
CAS No 1327-53-3


Linxens France, 37, Rue des Closeaux, 78200 Mantes La Jolie, France


REACH/15/4/0
REACH/15/4/1


The formulation of diarsenic trioxide into a mixture
The industrial use of diarsenic trioxide as processing aid in gold electroplating


21 May 2022


In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socioeconomic benefits outweigh the risk to human health arising from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies in terms of their technical and economic feasibility, while work towards potential implementation of an alternative in a period of not less than 3 to 5 years is ongoing.






(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/chemicals/reach/about/index_en.htm
Case T-688/14: Order of the General Court of 2 September 2015 — Airport Handling v Commission
Date: 2015-09-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: State aid, aid to undertakings, airport, control of State aid








C_2015381EN.01006102.xml










16.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/61





Order of the General Court of 2 September 2015 — Airport Handling v Commission
(Case T-688/14) (1)

(2015/C 381/85)
Language of the case: Italian
The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 388, 3.11.2014.
Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 0,05 % on 1 September 2015 — Euro exchange rates
Date: 2015-09-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Central Bank, euro, exchange rate, financing, interest, money








C_2015288EN.01000201.xml










2.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/2





Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):
0,05 % on 1 September 2015
Euro exchange rates (2)

1 September 2015
(2015/C 288/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1236




JPY


Japanese yen


134,87




DKK


Danish krone


7,4634




GBP


Pound sterling


0,73280




SEK


Swedish krona


9,4954




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0825




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,3560




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,022




HUF


Hungarian forint


314,50




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2375




RON


Romanian leu


4,4407




TRY


Turkish lira


3,2845




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5956




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4856




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,7079




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7749




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5869




KRW


South Korean won


1 321,48




ZAR


South African rand


15,0403




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,1514




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5520




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 856,11




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7000




PHP


Philippine peso


52,515




RUB


Russian rouble


72,9868




THB


Thai baht


40,165




BRL


Brazilian real


4,1066




MXN


Mexican peso


18,9495




INR


Indian rupee


74,5056






(1)  Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is the marginal rate.

(2)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-505/15: Action brought on 2 September 2015 — Hungary v European Commission
Date: 2015-09-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, agricultural expenditure, aid evaluation, aid to agriculture, audit, sanction (EU)








C_2015381EN.01004701.xml










16.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/47





Action brought on 2 September 2015 — Hungary v European Commission
(Case T-505/15)
(2015/C 381/57)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties


Applicant: Hungary (represented by: M.Z. Fehér, G.Koos and A. Pálfy, Agents)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Annul in part Commission Implementing Decision C(2015) 4076 of 22 June 2015 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) insofar as it excludes from European Union financing EUR 6 3 24  349,33 relating to the cross compliance audit, and










—


Order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant disputes the findings of the Commission.
In that regard, the applicant states that the Commission complains that, in accordance with the fundamental principles applicable to the verification of aid, both the sanctions not imposed because of the inadequate or wholly absent verifications of cross compliance (the legal requirements of management and good agricultural and ecological conditions) and the sanctions provided for by the rules but deprived of their deterrent effect because they have not been applied or have been applied incorrectly must be regarded as fundamentally deficient verifications. Further, the Commission complains that, in a case of non-compliance considered to be ‘minor’ within the meaning of Article 24(2) of Regulation No 73/2009/EC, the Hungarian authorities applied tolerance thresholds on the basis of which no sanctions were imposed but which did not take into account aspects relating to animal and human health, in breach of the provisions of the EU legislation.