do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2017-01-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2017010EN.01000101.xml










13.1.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 10/1





Euro exchange rates (1)

12 January 2017
(2017/C 10/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0679 




JPY


Japanese yen


121,69 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4342 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86843 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,5090 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0742 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,0625 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,021 




HUF


Hungarian forint


307,15 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3765 




RON


Romanian leu


4,4913 




TRY


Turkish lira


4,0319 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4205 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3944 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,2816 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,4980 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5191 




KRW


South Korean won


1 255,40 




ZAR


South African rand


14,3476 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,3621 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5365 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 150,74 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7607 




PHP


Philippine peso


52,939 




RUB


Russian rouble


63,3302 




THB


Thai baht


37,740 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,3718 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,0700 




INR


Indian rupee


72,5955 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-189/14: Judgment of the General Court of 13 January 2017 — Deza v ECHA (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Documents held by the ECHA containing information submitted by an undertaking in connection with its application for authorisation to use di-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) — Decision to disclose certain information considered confidential by the applicant — Exception relating to the protection of commercial interests — Concept of private life — Right to property — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2017-01-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, chemical product, confidentiality, intellectual property, ownership, right to information








C_2017063EN.01002301.xml










27.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/23





Judgment of the General Court of 13 January 2017 — Deza v ECHA
(Case T-189/14) (1)

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents held by the ECHA containing information submitted by an undertaking in connection with its application for authorisation to use di-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) - Decision to disclose certain information considered confidential by the applicant - Exception relating to the protection of commercial interests - Concept of private life - Right to property - Obligation to state reasons))
(2017/C 063/31)
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: Deza, a.s. (Valašské Meziříčí, Czech Republic) (represented by P. Dejl, lawyer)

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented initially by A. Iber, T. Zbihlej and M. Heikkilä, acting as Agents, and subsequently by M. Heikkilä, C. Buchanan and W. Broere, acting as Agents, and by M. Mašková, lawyer)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by F. Clotuche-Duvieusart, P. Ondrůšek and K. Talabér-Ritz, acting as Agents), and ClientEarth (London, United Kingdom), European Environmental Bureau (EEB) (Brussels, Belgium), Vereniging Health Care Without Harm Europe (Rijswijk, Netherlands) (represented by B. Kloostra, lawyer)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of ECHA’s decisions of 24 January 2014 concerning the disclosure of certain information submitted by the applicant in the course of the procedure relating to the application for authorisation to use di-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Dismisses the action;










2)


Orders Deza, a.s., in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay those incurred by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), including those relating to the application for interim measures;










3)


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs;










4)


Orders ClientEarth, European Environmental Bureau (EEB) and Vereniging Health Care Without Harm Europe to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 194, 24.6.2014.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8199 — Bunge/European Oilseed Processing Facilities) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-01-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, food industry, merger control, vegetable oil








C_2017010EN.01000901.xml










13.1.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 10/9





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8199 — Bunge/European Oilseed Processing Facilities)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 10/04)






1.


On 23 December 2016, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Koninklijke Bunge BV (‘Bunge’, the Netherlands) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of two European oilseed processing facilities and dedicated bulk terminal assets from Cargill BV (the Netherlands) and Cargill France SAS (France) respectively by way of purchase of assets.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Bunge: origination, storage, processing and sale of agricultural commodities, principally oilseeds and grains. Bunge is a global processor of oilseeds and a producer of vegetable oils and oilseed meals,










—


the Target Business consists of certain of Cargill’s assets in the Netherlands and France. In the Netherlands, the assets consist of an oilseed crushing facility and seed oil refining facility in the port of Amsterdam. In France the assets consist of an oilseed crushing facility and storage in the port of Brest for the production of oilseed meal and oil. Both facilities are able to handle either soybeans or rapeseed.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference M.8199 — Bunge/European Oilseed Processing Facilities, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).
Case T-21/17: Action brought on 13 January 2017 — RL v Court of Justice of the European Union
Date: 2017-01-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrator, equal treatment, indemnification, pay scale, promotion, staff regulations (EU)








C_2017095EN.01001401.xml










27.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 95/14





Action brought on 13 January 2017 — RL v Court of Justice of the European Union
(Case T-21/17)
(2017/C 095/23)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: RL (represented by: C. Bernard-Glanz and A. Tymen, lawyers)

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the present application admissible;










—


annul the decision adopted on 11 May 2016 by the Registrar of the Court of Justice, the contents of which were communicated to the applicant by letter of 20 May 2016, not to promote the applicant to Grade AD 10 as of 1 July 2015 and, so far as necessary, annul the decision adopted on 6 October 2016 by the Complaints Committee rejecting the complaint brought by the applicant dated 22 July 2016;










—


order the defendant to pay compensation in respect of the material harm suffered by the applicant;










—


order the defendant to pay all the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 45 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and of the internal promotion system in place within the Court of Justice of the European Union;










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the principles of equal treatment and of a single European civil service.
Special Report No 30/2016 — ‘The effectiveness of EU support to priority sectors in Honduras’
Date: 2017-01-13
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU aid, EU relations, Honduras, coordination of aid, development aid, financial aid, homicide, poverty, violence, wooded area








C_2017010EN.01000801.xml










13.1.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 10/8





Special Report No 30/2016
‘The effectiveness of EU support to priority sectors in Honduras’
(2017/C 10/03)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 30/2016 ‘The effectiveness of EU support to priority sectors in Honduras’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu or on EU Bookshop: https://bookshop.europa.eu
Case T-18/17: Action brought on 13 January 2017 — Czech Republic v Commission
Date: 2017-01-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: alcoholic beverage, chemical alcohol, denaturing, excise duty, tax evasion, tax exemption, tax harmonisation








C_2017070EN.01002501.xml










6.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 70/25





Action brought on 13 January 2017 — Czech Republic v Commission
(Case T-18/17)
(2017/C 070/35)
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek and J. Vláčil, Agents)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1867 of 20 October 2016 amending the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 3199/93 on the mutual recognition of procedures for the complete denaturing of alcohol for the purposes of exemption from excise duty; and










—


order the European Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 13(2) of the Treaty on European Union and of Article 27(3) and (4) of Council Directive 92/83/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the harmonization of the structures of excise duties on alcohol and alcoholic beverages. By adopting the contested Regulation the Commission is alleged to have interfered in the Czech national requirements for the complete denaturing of alcohol, despite the fact that the Czech Republic had not sent any communication to the Commission under Article 27(3) of Directive 92/83 and the Commission had repeatedly, on the other hand, communicated that it disagreed with that approach. Under Article 27(4) of Directive 92/83, it is however not permissible to interfere in a Member States national requirements for the complete denaturing of alcohol without a communication from that Member State.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 27(1)(a) of Directive 92/83, since eurodenaturant 1:1:1 does not meet the purpose of that provision in so far as it does not provide sufficient guarantees in the fight against tax evasion. Eurodenaturant 1:1:1 is a very weak denaturing mixture, and alcohol completely denatured with that mixture may easily be misused for the manufacture of alcoholic beverages.
Notice concerning the entry into force of the Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, of the other part
Date: 2017-01-13
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Viet Nam, cooperation agreement (EU), cooperation policy, framework agreement








L_2017009EN.01000101.xml










13.1.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 9/1







Notice concerning the entry into force of the Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, of the other part

Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, of the other part (1) entered into force on 1 October 2016, the procedure provided for in Article 63(1) of the Framework Agreement having been completed on 29 September 2016.


(1)  
            OJ L 329, 3.12.2016, p. 8.
Statement of revenue and expenditure of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency for the financial year 2016 — amending budget No 2
Date: 2017-01-13
Institutions: Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency, European Commission
Subjects: EU expenditure, amending budget, budgetary resources, consumer, executive agency, farming sector, financial year, foodstuff, general budget (EU), public health, publication of accounts








C_2017012EN.01001901.xml










13.1.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 12/19





Statement of revenue and expenditure of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency for the financial year 2016 — amending budget No 2
(2017/C 12/05)

REVENUE










Title
Chapter


Heading


Budget 2016


Amending budget No 2


New amount





1




EUROPEAN UNION SUBSIDY





1 0


EUROPEAN UNION SUBSIDY


8 518 376 


110 000 


8 628 376 




 



Title 1 — Total




8 518 376 




110 000 




8 628 376 






2




PARTICIPATION OF THIRD COUNTRIES





2 0


PARTICIPATION OF EFTA COUNTRIES IN THE EXECUTIVE AGENCY


161 070 


 


161 070 




 



Title 2 — Total




161 070 



 



161 070 





 



GRAND TOTAL




8 679 446 




110 000 




8 789 446 






EXPENDITURE










Title
Chapter


Heading


Appropriations 2016


Amending budget No 2


New amount





1




STAFF EXPENDITURE





1 1


REMUNERATIONS, ALLOWANCES AND CHARGES


4 674 483 


–40 000 


4 634 483 




1 2


PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND SOCIAL EXPENDITURE


281 700 


2 000 


283 700 




 



Title 1 — Total




4 956 183 




–38 000 




4 918 183 






2




INFRASTRUCTURE AND OPERATING EXPENDITURE





2 1


BUILDING EXPENDITURE


1 008 500 


–1 600 


1 006 900 




2 2


ICT


200 000 


12 000 


212 000 




2 3


MOVABLE PROPERTY AND CURRENT OPERATING EXPENDITURE


202 853 


–20 000 


182 853 




 



Title 2 — Total




1 411 353 




–9 600 




1 401 753 






3




PROGRAMME SUPPORT EXPENDITURE





3 1


PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT EXPENDITURE


2 311 910 


157 600 


2 469 510 




 



Title 3 — Total




2 311 910 




157 600 




2 469 510 





 



GRAND TOTAL




8 679 446 




110 000 




8 789 446
Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2016 — amending budget No 1
Date: 2017-01-13
Institutions: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction
Subjects: EU expenditure, European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, amending budget, budgetary resources, financial year, general budget (EU), publication of accounts








C_2017012EN.01000601.xml










13.1.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 12/6





Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2016 — amending budget No 1
(2017/C 12/02)

REVENUE










Title
Chapter


Heading


Budget 2016


Amending budget No 1


New amount





1




EUROPEAN UNION SUBSIDY





1 1


EUROPEAN UNION SUBSIDY


14 794 000 


 


14 794 000 




1 2


EUROPEAN UNION SPECIAL FUNDING FOR SPECIFIC PROJECTS


—


 


—




 



Title 1 — Total




14 794 000 



 



14 794 000 






2




OTHER SUBSIDIES





2 1


NORWAY’S PARTICIPATION


389 962,64 


3 177,99 


393 140,63 




2 2


PRE-ACCESSION STRATEGY


210 000 


 


210 000 




2 3


INCOME FROM SALE OF CURRENT EMCDDA PREMISES


—


 


—




 



Title 2 — Total




599 962,64 




3 177,99 




603 140,63 






3




REVENUE FOR SERVICES RENDERED AGAINST PAYMENT





3 1


REVENUE FOR SERVICES RENDERED AGAINST PAYMENT


p.m.


 


p.m.




 



Title 3 — Total




p.m.



 



p.m.






4




OTHER REVENUE





4 1


INTERNAL ASSIGNED REVENUE


p.m.


19 513,76 


19 513,76 




4 2


INTEREST GENERATED BY FUNDS PAID TO THE EMCDDA


—


4 703,22 


4 703,22 




4 3


MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE


—


 


—




 



Title 4 — Total




p.m.




24 216,98 




24 216,98 





 



GRAND TOTAL




15 393 962,64 




27 394,97 




15 421 357,61 






EXPENDITURE










Title
Chapter


Heading


Appropriations 2016


Amending budget No 1


New amount





1




EXPENDITURE RELATING TO PERSONS WORKING WITH THE EMCDDA





1 1


STAFF IN ACTIVE EMPLOYMENT


9 321 198,92 


 


9 321 198,92 




1 2


PENSIONS AND SEVERANCE GRANTS


—


 


—




 



Title 1 — Total




9 321 198,92 



 



9 321 198,92 






2




EXPENDITURE FOR SUPPORT ACTIVITIES





2 1


ADMINISTRATIVE AND LOGISTIC SUPPORT ACTIVITIES


1 724 288,66 


21 262,15 


1 745 550,81 




 



Title 2 — Total




1 724 288,66 




21 262,15 




1 745 550,81 






3




EXPENDITURE FOR OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES AND PROJECTS





3 1


PROJECT-RELATED ACTIVITIES


4 348 475,06 


6 132,82 


4 354 607,88 




 



Title 3 — Total




4 348 475,06 




6 132,82 




4 354 607,88 






4




EXPENDITURE FOR IMPLEMENTING SPECIAL PROJECTS FUNDED BY SPECIFIC EU SUBSIDIES





4 1


PROJECTS


—


 


—




 



Title 4 — Total




—



 



—






5




RESERVE



 


 


 




 



GRAND TOTAL




15 393 962,64 




27 394,97 




15 421 357,61
Case C-16/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) (Portugal) lodged on 13 January 2017 — TGE Gas Engineering GmbH — Sucursal em Portugal v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
Date: 2017-01-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Economic Interest Grouping, Germany, Portugal, VAT, branch, shareholding, tax relief








C_2017104EN.01003401.xml










3.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/34





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) (Portugal) lodged on 13 January 2017 — TGE Gas Engineering GmbH — Sucursal em Portugal v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
(Case C-16/17)
(2017/C 104/49)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: TGE Gas Engineering GmbH — Sucursal em Portugal

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Questions referred

Must Articles 44, 45, 132(1)(f), 167, 168, 169, 178, 179 and 192a, 193, 194 and 196 of the VAT Directive (Directive 2006/112), (1) Articles 10 and 11 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 282/2011 (2) and the principle of neutrality be interpreted as meaning that they preclude the Portuguese tax authorities from refusing the right to deduction of VAT by a branch of a German company, in circumstances where:






—


the German company obtained a tax identification number in Portugal to carry out an isolated act, namely ‘acquisition of shares’, corresponding to a non-resident entity without a permanent establishment;










—


subsequently, the branch of that German company was registered in Portugal and was assigned its own tax number, as a permanent establishment of that company;










—


later, the German company, using the first identification number, entered into a contract with another company to establish an economic interest group (ACE) to carry out a works contract in Portugal;










—


subsequently, the branch, using its own tax number, entered into a subcontract with the ACE, setting out the reciprocal services between the branch and the ACE and agreeing that the latter would invoice the subcontractors, in the agreed proportions, for the costs which it incurred;










—


the ACE indicated the branch’s tax identification number in the debit notes it issued to invoice costs to that branch, and charged VAT;










—


the branch deducted the VAT charged in the debit notes;










—


the transactions of the ACE (by way of subcontracting) consist of the transactions of the branch and of the other company forming part of the ACE, these latter having invoiced to the ACE the entire revenue that the ACE invoiced to the developer?






(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax

OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.

(2)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 282/2011 of 15 March 2011 laying down implementing measures for Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax

OJ 2011 L 77, p. 1.
Case T-16/17: Action brought on 13 January 2017 — APF v Parliament
Date: 2017-01-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU financing, financial aid, financial legislation, foundation, freedom of association, freedom of expression, guarantee, political parties, rule of law








C_2017063EN.01004302.xml










27.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/43





Action brought on 13 January 2017 — APF v Parliament
(Case T-16/17)
(2017/C 063/56)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Alliance for Peace and Freedom (APF) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: P. Richter, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul Article I.4.1 of the defendant’s decision of 12 December 2016 (Number: FINS 2017 15) relating to the reduction of the pre-financing amount to 33 % of the agreed maximum amount and the order that security be provided;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law, which are essentially identical with or similar to the pleas in law set out in Case T-13/17, Europa Terra Nostra v Parliament.