do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-80/14: Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — PT Musim Mas v Council (Dumping — Imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia — Definitive collection of provisional anti-dumping duties — Definitive anti-dumping duties — Rights of the defence — Article 2(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Normal value — Production costs)
Date: 2016-09-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Indonesia, anti-dumping duty, biofuel, import (EU), originating product, production cost, rights of the defence








C_2016402EN.01002801.xml










31.10.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/28





Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — PT Musim Mas v Council
(Case T-80/14) (1)

((Dumping - Imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia - Definitive collection of provisional anti-dumping duties - Definitive anti-dumping duties - Rights of the defence - Article 2(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 - Normal value - Production costs))
(2016/C 402/30)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: PT Perindustrian dan Perdagangan Musim Semi Mas (PT Musim Mas) (Medan, Indonesia) (represented by: J. García-Gallardo Gil-Fournier, A. Verdegay Mena, lawyers, and C. Humpe, Solicitor)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by S. Boelaert, and subsequently by H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents, and by R. Bierwagen and C. Hipp, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by J.-F. Brakeland, M. França and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents) and European Biodiesel Board (EBB) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by O. Prost and M.-S. Dibling, lawyers)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFUE for annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1194/2013 of 19 November 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina and Indonesia (OJ 2013 L 315, p. 2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Articles 1 and 2 of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1194/2013 of 19 November 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina and Indonesia, in so far as they concern PT Perindustrian dan Perdagangan Musim Semi Mas (PT Musim Mas);










2.


Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by PT Musim Mas;










3.


Orders the European Commission and the European Biodiesel Board (EBB) to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 102, 7.4.2014.
Cases T-353/14 and T-17/15: Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — Italy v Commission (Language regime — Notice of open competition for the recruitment of administrators — Choice of second language from three languages — Regulation No 1 — Article 1d(1), Article 27 and Article 28(f) of the Staff Regulations — Principle of non-discrimination — Proportionality)
Date: 2016-09-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EPSO, administrator, candidate, competition (EU), linguistic discrimination, principle of proportionality








C_2016392EN.01002602.xml










24.10.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 392/26





Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — Italy v Commission
(Cases T-353/14 and T-17/15) (1)

((Language regime - Notice of open competition for the recruitment of administrators - Choice of second language from three languages - Regulation No 1 - Article 1d(1), Article 27 and Article 28(f) of the Staff Regulations - Principle of non-discrimination - Proportionality))
(2016/C 392/31)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and by P. Gentili, avvocato dello Stato)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially J. Currall and G. Gattinara (Cases T-353/14 and T-17/15) and F. Simonetti (Case T-17/15), then G. Gattinara and F. Simonetti, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Republic of Lithuania (represented by: D. Kriaučiūnas and V. Čepaitė, acting as Agents)

Re:

In Case T-353/14, application based on Article 263 TFEU and asking for annulment of the notice of open competition EPSO/AD/276/14, to constitute a reserve list for administrators (OJ 2014 C 74 A, p. 4), and, in Case T-17/15, application based on Article 263 TFEU and asking for annulment of the notice of open competition EPSO/AD/294/14 to constitute a reserve list of administrators in the field of data protection for the European Data Protection Supervisor (OJ 2014 C 391 A, p. 1.)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Joins Cases T-353/14 and T-17/15 for the purposes of the judgment;










2)


Annuls the notice of open competition EPSO/AD/276/14, to constitute a reserve list for administrators and the notice of open competition EPSO/AD/294/14 to constitute a reserve list of administrators in the field of data protection for the European Data Protection Supervisor;










3)


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Italian Republic;










4)


Orders the Republic of Lithuania to bear its own costs relating to its intervention in Case T-17/15.






(1)  OJ C 212, 7.7.2014.
Corrigendum to the average costs of benefits in kind — 2013 (OJ C 280, 2.8.2016)
Date: 2016-09-15
Institutions: Administrative Commission for the Coordination of Social Security Systems, European Commission
Subjects: Ireland, Netherlands, Portugal, United Kingdom, family benefit, fringe benefit, migrant worker, redemption, social-security harmonisation








C_2016338EN.01001501.xml










15.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/15





Corrigendum to the average costs of benefits in kind — 2013
(
Official Journal of the European Union C 280 of 2 August 2016
)
(2016/C 338/17)
On page 3, point II — Application of Article 95 of Regulation (EEC) No 574/72, the entry of the United Kingdom in the table should read as follows:









‘Article 95


Annual


Net Monthly
X = 0,20 


Net Monthly
X = 0,15  (1)





United Kingdom


GBP 4 288,95 


GBP 285,93 


GBP 303,80 







(1)  With respect to Article 64(7) of Regulation (EC) No 987/2009, the reduction applied to the monthly fixed amount shall be equal to 15 % (x = 0,15) for pensioners and members of their family when the competent Member State is not listed in Annex IV of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004.’
European Parliament decision of 15 September 2016 concerning the adoption of amendments to a Commission proposal (interpretation of Rule 61(2) of the Rules of Procedure) (2016/2218(REG))
Date: 2016-09-15
Institutions: Committee on Constitutional Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: amendment, interpretation of the law, parliamentary rules of procedure, parliamentary vote








C_2018204EN.01021101.xml










13.6.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 204/211





P8_TA(2016)0362
Adoption of amendments to a Commission proposal (interpretation of Rule 61(2) of the Rules of Procedure)
European Parliament decision of 15 September 2016 concerning the adoption of amendments to a Commission proposal (interpretation of Rule 61(2) of the Rules of Procedure) (2016/2218(REG))
(2018/C 204/26)

The European Parliament,







—


having regard to the letter of 13 September 2016 from the Chair of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs,










—


having regard to Rule 226 of its Rules of Procedure,












1.


Decides to append the following interpretation to Rule 61(2) of the Rules of Procedure:
‘Nothing prevents Parliament from deciding to hold, if appropriate, a concluding debate following the report by the Committee responsible to which the matter has been referred back.’












2.


Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission, for information.
Case T-755/14: Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — Herbert Smith Freehills v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Documents relating to discussions preceding the adoption of the directive on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products — Refusal to grant access — Exception relating to the protection of legal advice — Rights of the defence — Overriding public interest)
Date: 2016-09-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, approximation of laws, rights of the defence, tobacco industry








C_2016392EN.01003001.xml










24.10.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 392/30





Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — Herbert Smith Freehills v Commission
(Case T-755/14) (1)

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to discussions preceding the adoption of the directive on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products - Refusal to grant access - Exception relating to the protection of legal advice - Rights of the defence - Overriding public interest))
(2016/C 392/36)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Herbert Smith Freehills LLP (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: P. Wytinck, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Van Nuffel, J. Baquero Cruz and F. Clotuche-Duvieusart, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: E. Rebasti, J. Herrmann and M. Veiga, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Commission Decision Gestdem 2014/2070 of 24 September 2014 refusing access to certain documents relating to the adoption of Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products and repealing Directive 2001/37/EC (OJ 2014 L 127, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Herbert Smith Freehills LLP to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2015.
Case C-494/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale civile di Trapani (Italia) lodged on 15 September 2016 — Giuseppa Santoro v Comune di Valderice, Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri
Date: 2016-09-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: indemnification, public service employee, remuneration of work, temporary employment, work contract








C_2016454EN.01001801.xml










5.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 454/18






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale civile di Trapani (Italia) lodged on 15 September 2016 — Giuseppa Santoro v Comune di Valderice, Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri
(Case C-494/16)
(2016/C 454/32)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale civile di Trapani

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Giuseppa Santoro

Defendants: Comune di Valderice, Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri

Questions referred







1.


Is the granting of compensation in the amount of between 2,5 and 12 monthly payments of the last overall salary payment (Article 32(5) of Law No 183/2010) to a public employee, who is a victim of the unlawful successive renewal of fixed-term contracts, who may obtain full compensation only by proving the loss of other work opportunities or by proving that, if he had participated in an open competition, he would have been successful, an equivalent and effective measure within the meaning of the judgments of the Court of Justice in Mascolo [and Others (C-22/13, C-61/13 to C-63/13 and C-418/13)] and Marrosu [and Sardino] (C-53/04)?










2.


Must the principle of equivalence referred to by the Court of Justice (inter alia) in those judgments, be interpreted as meaning that, when the Member State decides not to apply the conversion of the employment relationship (as awarded in the private sector) to the public sector, it must nevertheless provide the worker with the same benefit, if necessary through compensation which must relate to the value of the employment contract of indefinite duration?
Case T-633/15: Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — JT International v EUIPO — Habanos (PUSH) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark PUSH — Earlier Benelux and national word and figurative marks PUNCH — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Identity of the goods — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2016-09-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, tobacco, trade-mark law








C_2016402EN.01004401.xml










31.10.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/44





Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — JT International v EUIPO — Habanos (PUSH)
(Case T-633/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark PUSH - Earlier Benelux and national word and figurative marks PUNCH - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Identity of the goods - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2016/C 402/51)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: JT International SA (Geneva, Switzerland) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC and K.E. Gilbert and J. Gilbert, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Bonne, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Corporación Habanos, SA (Havana, Cuba) (represented by: M. Escudero Pérez, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 August 2015 (Case R 3046/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Corporación Habanos and JT International

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders JT International SA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Corporación Habanos, SA.






(1)  OJ C 27, 25.1.2016.
Case T-117/14: Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — Cargill v Council (Dumping — Imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina — Definitive anti-dumping duty — Action for annulment — Direct concern — Individual concern — Admissibility — Article 2(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Normal value — Production costs)
Date: 2016-09-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Argentina, anti-dumping duty, biofuel, import (EU), originating product, production cost








C_2016402EN.01003101.xml










31.10.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/31





Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — Cargill v Council
(Case T-117/14) (1)

((Dumping - Imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina - Definitive anti-dumping duty - Action for annulment - Direct concern - Individual concern - Admissibility - Article 2(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 - Normal value - Production costs))
(2016/C 402/33)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Cargill SACI (Buenos Aires, Argentina) (represented by: J.-F. Bellis, R. Luff and G. Bathory, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by S. Boelaert and B. Driessen, and subsequently by H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents, and by R. Bierwagen and C. Hipp, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by M. França and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents) and European Biodiesel Board (EBB) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by O. Prost and M.-S. Dibling, lawyers)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFUE for annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1194/2013 of 19 November 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina and Indonesia (OJ 2013 L 315, p. 2) in so far as it imposes an anti-dumping duty on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Articles 1 and 2 of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1194/2013 of 19 November 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina and Indonesia, in so far as they concern Cargill SACI;










2.


Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Cargill;










3.


Orders the European Commission and the European Biodiesel Board (EBB) to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 151, 19.5.2014.
Call for the submission of claims — Deadlines
Date: 2016-09-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Belgium, bank, bankruptcy, claim, credit institution








C_2016338EN.01000801.xml










15.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/8





CALL FOR THE SUBMISSION OF CLAIMS — DEADLINES
(2016/C 338/10)
By means of a judgment issued at 11.14 a.m. on 15 June 2016 by Ghent Commercial Court (Ghent Division, Belgium), bankruptcy was declared in respect of:
NV OPTIMA BANK: registered office at 9000 Ghent (Belgium), Keizer Karelstraat 75; business registration number 0445.21 0.006 (bank/credit institution).

Bankruptcy judges: Mr Hugo VAN HOECKE and Ms Ann DE CAUSMAECKER.
Date on which payments suspended: 14 June 2016.
Claims to be submitted to: Registry of the Ghent Commercial Court (Ghent Division), Opgeëistenlaan 401/E, 9000 Ghent (Belgium).
The right to have a claim accepted expires one year after the date on which the judgment declaring bankruptcy was issued, except in the case of a claim established in an intervention or indemnification procedure pursued or instigated during liquidation. The right to have a claim accepted during liquidation ordered by a court other than the court that declared the bankruptcy expires six months after the date on which the final judgment acquires the force of res judicata.

(see Article 72 of the Bankruptcy Act)
First report examining the claims submitted to be lodged at the Registry on: 6 September 2016.
Persons who have personally stood surety free of charge for the bankrupt entity (such as persons acting as guarantors) may notify the Registry of this fact (Article 72a and Article 72b of the Bankruptcy Act).

Liquidators: Mr Geert DEFREYNE (lawyer; address: 9000 Ghent (Belgium), Kortrijksesteenweg 361), Mr Matthias GESQUIERE (lawyer; address: 9000 Ghent (Belgium), Rijsenbergstraat 148) and Mr Hans DE MEYER (lawyer; address: 9000 Ghent (Belgium), Coupure 373).
Internet: www.faillissementoptimabank.eu
Case T-120/14: Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — PT Ciliandra Perkasa v Council (Dumping — Imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia — Definitive anti-dumping duty — Article 2(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Normal value — Production costs)
Date: 2016-09-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Indonesia, anti-dumping duty, biofuel, import (EU), originating product, production cost








C_2016402EN.01003201.xml










31.10.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/32





Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — PT Ciliandra Perkasa v Council
(Case T-120/14) (1)

((Dumping - Imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia - Definitive anti-dumping duty - Article 2(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 - Normal value - Production costs))
(2016/C 402/35)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: PT Ciliandra Perkasa (Jakarta, Indonesia) (represented by: F. Graafsma and J. Cornelis, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by S. Boelaert, and subsequently by H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents, and by R. Bierwagen and C. Hipp, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by J.-F. Brakeland, M. França and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents) and European Biodiesel Board (EBB) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by O. Prost and M.-S. Dibling, lawyers)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFUE for annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1194/2013 of 19 November 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina and Indonesia (OJ 2013 L 315, p. 2) in so far as it imposes an anti-dumping duty on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Articles 1 of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1194/2013 of 19 November 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina and Indonesia, in so far as it concerns PT Ciliandra Perkasa;










2.


Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by PT Ciliandra Perkasa;










3.


Orders the European Commission and the European Biodiesel Board (EBB) to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 112, 14.4.2014.