do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-664/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 14 December 2015 — Protect Natur-, Arten- und Landschaftsschutz Umweltorganisation v Bezirkshauptmannschaft Gmünd
Date: 2015-12-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: access to information, access to the courts, administrative procedure, environmental impact, environmental protection, right to justice, water resources








C_2016111EN.01000401.xml










29.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 111/4





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 14 December 2015 — Protect Natur-, Arten- und Landschaftsschutz Umweltorganisation v Bezirkshauptmannschaft Gmünd
(Case C-664/15)
(2016/C 111/05)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant on a point of law: Protect Natur-, Arten- und Landschaftsschutz Umweltorganisation

Respondent authority: Bezirkshauptmannschaft Gmünd

Questions referred







1.


Does Article 4 of Directive 2000/60/EC (1) establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (‘the Water Framework Directive’) or the Water Framework Directive as a whole confer on an environmental organisation, in a procedure which is not subject to an environmental impact assessment under Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (‘the EIA Directive’), rights for the protection of which it has access to administrative or judicial procedures under Article 9(3) of the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, which was approved on behalf of the European Community by Council Decision 2005/370/EC of 17 February 2015 (‘the Aarhus Convention’)?
If question 1 is answered in the affirmative:










2.


Is it necessary under the provisions of the Aarhus Convention to be able to assert those rights at the stage of the procedure before the administrative authority or is the possibility of being granted judicial protection against the decision of the administrative authority sufficient?










3.


Is it permissible for national procedural law (Paragraph 42 of the AVG) to require the environmental organisation — like other parties — to raise its objections not only in an appeal to the Verwaltungsgericht, but in good time at the stage of the procedure before the administrative authorities, failing which it loses its status as a party and is also no longer able to bring an appeal at the Verwaltungsgericht?






(1)  Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (OJ 2000 L 327, p. 1).
Decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 14 December 2015 amending the Implementing Measures for the Statute for Members of the European Parliament
Date: 2015-12-14
Institutions: Bureau of the European Parliament
Subjects: Member of the European Parliament, Statute for Members of the Parliament, application of EU law, assistant, remuneration of work








C_2015435EN.01000601.xml










24.12.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 435/6





DECISION OF THE BUREAU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
of 14 December 2015
amending the Implementing Measures for the Statute for Members of the European Parliament
(2015/C 435/03)
THE BUREAU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 223(2) thereof,
having regard to the Statute for Members of the European Parliament (1),
having regard to Rules 10 and 25 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure,
Whereas:






(1)


Pursuant to Article 69(2) of the Implementing Measures for the Statute for Members of the European Parliament (2) (‘the Implementing Measures’), the maximum amount of parliamentary assistance costs defrayable in respect of the personal staff referred to in Article 33(4) of those measures is, where appropriate, index-linked annually on the basis of data established pursuant to Article 65 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union laid down by Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 (3).










(2)


In that connection, the Commission has fixed the adjustment rate for 2015 at 2,4 %. Accordingly, the maximum monthly amount defrayable for parliamentary assistance expenses should be increased to EUR 21 892 with effect from 1 July 2015. In the light of the Bureau decision of 26 October 2015 (4), that amount should be increased to EUR 23 392 with effect from 1 January 2016,




HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
In Article 33 of the Implementing Measures, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

‘4.   The maximum monthly amount defrayable in respect of all the personal staff referred to in Article 34 shall be EUR 21 892 for the period from 1 July 2015 to 31 December 2015. With effect from 1 January 2016, that amount shall be EUR 23 392.’

Article 2
1.   This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
2.   This Decision shall apply from 1 July 2015.


(1)  Decision 2005/684/EC, Euratom of the European Parliament of 28 September 2005 adopting the Statute for Members of the European Parliament (OJ L 262, 7.10.2005, p. 1).

(2)  Decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 19 May and 9 July 2008 concerning implementing measures for the Statute for Members of the European Parliament (OJ C 159, 13.7.2009, p. 1).

(3)  OJ L 56, 4.3.1968, p. 1.

(4)  Decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 26 October 2015 amending the Implementing Measures for the Statute for Members of the European Parliament (OJ C 397, 28.11.2015, p. 2).
Case C-668/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret (Denmark) lodged on 14 December 2015 — Jyske Finans A/S v Ligebehandlingsnævnet, acting on behalf of Ismar Huskic
Date: 2015-12-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European identity, equal treatment, ethnic discrimination, money laundering, terrorism








C_2016068EN.01002301.xml










22.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 68/23





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret (Denmark) lodged on 14 December 2015 — Jyske Finans A/S v Ligebehandlingsnævnet, acting on behalf of Ismar Huskic
(Case C-668/15)
(2016/C 068/31)
Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Vestre Landsret

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Jyske Finans A/S

Defendant: Ligebehandlingsnævnet, acting on behalf of Ismar Huskic

Questions referred







1.


Must the prohibition on direct discrimination on grounds of ethnic origin in Article 2(2)(a) of Council Directive 2000/43/EC (1) of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin be interpreted as precluding a practice such as the one in the present case, by which persons in an equivalent situation who are born outside the Nordic countries, a Member State, Switzerland and Liechtenstein are treated less favourably than persons born in the Nordic countries, a Member State, Switzerland and Liechtenstein?










2.


If the first question is answered in the negative: does such a practice thus give rise to indirect discrimination on grounds of ethnic origin within the meaning of Article 2(2)(b) of Council Directive 2000/43/EC — unless it is objectively justified by a legitimate aim and the means of achieving that aim are appropriate and necessary?










3.


If the second question is answered in the affirmative, can such a practice in principle be justified as an appropriate and necessary means for safeguarding the enhanced customer due diligence measures provided for in Article 13 of Directive 2005/60/EC (2) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing?






(1)  OJ 2000 L 180, p. 22.

(2)  OJ 2005 L 309, p. 15.
Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union
Date: 2015-12-14
Institutions: Court of Justice of the European Union
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union








C_2015414EN.01000101.xml










14.12.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 414/1





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

(2015/C 414/01)

Last publication


OJ C 406, 7.12.2015


Past publications


OJ C 398, 30.11.2015


OJ C 389, 23.11.2015


OJ C 381, 16.11.2015


OJ C 371, 9.11.2015


OJ C 363, 3.11.2015


OJ C 354, 26.10.2015

These texts are available on:
EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu
Case C-662/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 14 December 2015 — Lohmann & Rauscher International GmbH & Co. KG v BIOS Naturprodukte GmbH
Date: 2015-12-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EC conformity marking, labelling, launching of a product, medical device








C_2016118EN.01000401.xml










4.4.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 118/4





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 14 December 2015 — Lohmann & Rauscher International GmbH & Co. KG v BIOS Naturprodukte GmbH
(Case C-662/15)
(2016/C 118/05)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant and appellant: Lohmann & Rauscher International GmbH & Co. KG

Defendant and respondent: BIOS Naturprodukte GmbH

Question referred

Are Article 1(2)(f), Article 11, point 13 of Annex I and the last indent of point 3 of Annex VII [to Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning medical devices] (1) to be interpreted as meaning that a further conformity assessment procedure is required for the marketing of a Class I medical device, which has been made subject to a conformity assessment procedure by the manufacturer and lawfully bears the CE marking affixed by the manufacturer, where the information relating to the central pharmaceutical number (Pharmazentralnummer) on the outer packaging of the medical device has been concealed by a sticker which provides the importer’s details and the central pharmaceutical number granted to that importer, the other information remaining visible?


(1)  OJ 1993 L 169, p. 1.
Case C-665/15: Action brought on 14 December 2015 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
Date: 2015-12-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European driving licence, infringement of EU law








C_2016059EN.01001001.xml










15.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 59/10





Action brought on 14 December 2015 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
(Case C-665/15)
(2016/C 059/10)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: P. Guerra e Andrade and J. Hottiaux, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Form of order sought







—


Declare that, by failing to be connect to the European Union driving licence network, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7(5)(d) of Directive 2006/126/EC (1).










—


order Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

It is apparent from Directive 2006/126 and from case-law that a Member State which issues a driving licence is required to verify whether the minimum requirements for the issue of driving licences are fulfilled.
If the Portuguese Republic is not connected to the European Union driving licence network (RESPER), it cannot verify whether the minimum requirements for the issue of driving licences are fulfilled. It cannot, in particular, verify whether the applicant already holds a driving licence in another Member State.
Moreover, as the Portuguese Republic is not connected to RESPER, other Member States cannot verify, together with Portugal, whether the minimum requirements for the issue of driving licences are fulfilled.
It should be added that other Member States cannot carry out any form of control, together with Portugal, in cases in which the minimum requirements for the issue of driving licences are clearly not fulfilled.
Accordingly, as Portugal is not connected to RESPER, it undermines the essential purpose of the requirement to be connected to the network and of Directive 2006/126, namely to improve road safety and facilitate the free movement of persons.
Article 7(5)(d) of Directive 2006/126 clearly establishes that Member States must use the EU driving licence network, in particular in order to carry out checks and especially in order to prevent a licence holder having more than one driving licence.
Under Article 16(2) of the directive, Member States were required to apply Article 7(5) of the directive as from 19 January 2013.


(1)  Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on driving licences (recast) (OJ 2006 L 403, p. 18).
Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/2336 of 14 December 2015 amending Decision 2010/279/CFSP on the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL AFGHANISTAN)
Date: 2015-12-14
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Afghanistan, EU police mission, police cooperation








L_2015329EN.01001601.xml










15.12.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 329/16








            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2015/2336
of 14 December 2015
         
amending Decision 2010/279/CFSP on the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL AFGHANISTAN)


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union and in particular Article 28, Article 42(4) and Article 43(2) thereof,


Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:







(1)


On 18 May 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/279/CFSP (1) on the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL AFGHANISTAN).












(2)


On 17 December 2014, the Council adopted Decision 2014/922/CFSP (2) amending and extending Decision 2010/279/CFSP, in particular by extending EUPOL AFGHANISTAN until 31 December 2016 and providing for a financial reference amount for the period until 31 December 2015.












(3)


Decision 2010/279/CFSP should be amended to provide for a financial reference amount for the period from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2016,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
In Article 13(1) of Decision 2010/279/CFSP, the following sub-paragraph is added:

                  ‘The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EUPOL AFGHANISTAN for the period from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2016 shall be EUR 43 650 000.’
               


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




Done at Brussels, 14 December 2015.


For the Council


The President

F. MOGHERINI
            





(1)  Council Decision 2010/279/CFSP of 18 May 2010 on the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL AFGHANISTAN) (OJ L 123, 19.5.2010, p. 4).

(2)  Council Decision 2014/922/CFSP of 17 December 2014 amending and extending Decision 2010/279/CFSP on the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL AFGHANISTAN) (OJ L 363, 18.12.2014, p. 152).
Case C-666/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Noord-Holland (Netherlands) lodged on 14 December 2015 — X, GoPro Coöperatief UA v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst Douane, kantoor Rotterdam Rijnmond
Date: 2015-12-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, audiovisual document, audiovisual equipment, information technology applications, software, specification of tariff heading








C_2016106EN.01001001.xml










21.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 106/10





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Noord-Holland (Netherlands) lodged on 14 December 2015 — X, GoPro Coöperatief UA v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst Douane, kantoor Rotterdam Rijnmond
(Case C-666/15)
(2016/C 106/13)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank Noord-Holland

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: X, GoPro Coöperatief UA

Defendant: Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst Douane, kantoor Rotterdam Rijnmond

Questions referred







1.


Are the Commission’s explanatory notes to subheading 8525 80 30 and to subheadings 8525 80 91 and 8525 80 99 of the Combined Nomenclature to be interpreted as meaning that there are also ‘at least 30 minutes in a single sequence of video’ in the case where, by means of a ‘video record’ mode, sequences of video together lasting longer than 30 minutes are recorded, but those sequences of video are recorded in separate files, each with a duration of less than 30 minutes, and the user must, when playing back, open each file with a duration of less than 30 minutes separately, although it is possible, with the aid of the software supplied by GoPro, to place the sequences, which have been incorporated into those files, on a personal computer one after another and thereby save a single video sequence of more than 30 minutes’ duration in a single file on a personal computer?










2.


Is classification, under CN subheading 8525 80 99, of video camera recorders which can record sequences from external sources precluded in the case where the sequences cannot be played back via an external TV receiver or an external monitor because those video camera recorders, such as the GoPro Hero 3 Silver Edition, can play back, on an external screen or monitor, only files which they have recorded via their own lenses?
Case C-667/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen (Belgium) lodged on 14 December 2015 — Loterie Nationale — Nationale Loterij NV v Paul Adriaensen and Others
Date: 2015-12-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, economic offence, payment, restriction on competition








C_2016106EN.01001002.xml










21.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 106/10





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen (Belgium) lodged on 14 December 2015 — Loterie Nationale — Nationale Loterij NV v Paul Adriaensen and Others
(Case C-667/15)
(2016/C 106/14)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van beroep te Antwerpen

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Loterie Nationale — Nationale Loterij NV

Respondents: Paul Adriaensen, Werner De Kesel, The Right Frequency VZW

Question referred

Does the application of paragraph 14 of Annex I to Directive 2005/29/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council require that a prohibited pyramid promotional scheme exists only if the realisation of the financial promise to existing members:






—


depends primarily or mostly on the direct transfer of the contributions of the new members (‘direct link’),
or










—


does it suffice that the realisation of the financial promise to existing members depends primarily or mostly on an indirect payment through the contributions of existing members, i.e. existing members do not obtain their compensation primarily or mostly from their own sale or their own consumption of goods or services, but depend for the realisation of the financial promise primarily or mostly on the subscription and contributions of new members (‘indirect link’)?






(1)  OJ 2005 L 149, p. 22.
Council Decision of 14 December 2015 appointing the members and alternates of the Advisory Committee for the Coordination of Social Security Systems for Denmark
Date: 2015-12-14
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Denmark, advisory committee (EU), appointment of members, social security








C_2015418EN.01000401.xml










16.12.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/4





COUNCIL DECISION
of 14 December 2015
appointing the members and alternates of the Advisory Committee for the Coordination of Social Security Systems for Denmark
(2015/C 418/02)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems (1), and in particular Article 75 thereof,
Having regard to the lists of candidates submitted to the Council by the Governments of the Member States,
Whereas:






(1)


By its Decision of 13 October 2015 (2), the Council appointed the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee for the Coordination of Social Security Systems for the period 20 October 2015 to 19 October 2020.










(2)


The Government of Denmark has submitted further nominations for several posts to be filled,




HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The following are hereby appointed members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee for the Coordination of Social Security Systems from 20 October 2015 to 19 October 2020:
I.   GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES







Country


Members


Alternates




Denmark


Ms Karin MØHL LARSEN


Ms Marie-Louise OUTZEN







II.   TRADE UNION REPRESENTATIVES







Country


Members


Alternates




Denmark


Mr Christian SØLYST


Ms Tine SKOV JENSEN







III.   REPRESENTATIVES OF EMPLOYERS' ORGANISATIONS







Country


Members


Alternates




Denmark


Ms Christiane MIßLBECK-WINBERG


Mr Henning GADE




Article 2
The Council will appoint the members and the alternate members who have not yet been nominated at a later date.
Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 14 December 2015.


For the Council


The President

F. ETGEN




(1)  OJ L 166, 30.4.2004, p. 1.

(2)  Council Decision of 13 October 2015 appointing the members and alternates of the Advisory Committee for the Coordination of Social Security Systems (OJ C 341, 16.10.2015, p. 4).