do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/597 of 15 March 2017 approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Estepa (PDO))
Date: 2017-03-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Andalusia, Spain, designation of origin, labelling, olive oil, product designation








L_2017081EN.01001501.xml










28.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 81/15








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2017/597
of 15 March 2017
         
approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Estepa (PDO))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined Spain's application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected designation of origin ‘Estepa’, registered under Commission Regulation (EU) No 900/2010 (2).












(2)


Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (3) as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation.












(3)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the amendments to the specification should be approved,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Estepa’ (PDO) are hereby approved.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 15 March 2017.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Phil HOGAN
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  Commission Regulation (EU) No 900/2010 of 8 October 2010 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Estepa (PDO)) (OJ L 266, 9.10.2010, p. 52).

(3)  
            OJ C 453, 3.12.2016, p. 14.
Corrigendum to Commission Communication in the framework of the implementation of Commission Regulation (EU) No 932/2012 implementing Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to ecodesign requirements for household tumble driers and of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 392/2012 supplementing Directive 2010/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to energy labelling of household tumble driers (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under Union harmonisation legislation) (OJ C 460, 9.12.2016)
Date: 2017-03-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Cenelec, European standard, eco-label, energy consumption, energy saving, harmonisation of standards, household electrical appliance, labelling, technical standard








C_2017080EN.01000801.xml










15.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 80/8





Corrigendum to Commission Communication in the framework of the implementation of Commission Regulation (EU) No 932/2012 implementing Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to ecodesign requirements for household tumble driers and of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 392/2012 supplementing Directive 2010/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to energy labelling of household tumble driers (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under Union harmonisation legislation)
(
Official Journal of the European Union C 460 of 9 December 2016
)
(2017/C 80/05)
 
The publication of Commission Communication 2016/C 460/02 is to be considered null and void.
Case T-177/17: Action brought on 15 March 2017 — EKETA v Commission
Date: 2017-03-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU aid, claim, expenditure, financial aid, information technology applications, reimbursement of aid, research project, scientific research








C_2017151EN.01004101.xml










15.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/41





Action brought on 15 March 2017 — EKETA v Commission
(Case T-177/17)
(2017/C 151/53)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Ethniko Kentro Erevnas kai Technologikis Anaptyxis (EKETA) (Thessaloniki, Greece) (represented by: V. Christianos and S. Paliou, lawyers

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


declare that the request made by the European Commission to ΕΚΕΤΑ to reimburse the amount of EUR 211 185,95 of the payment received by it for the ASK-IT project, that request being made in the debit note 3241615292/29.11.2016, is unfounded with respect to the sum of EUR 143 910,77;










—


declare that the sum of EUR 143 910,77 constitutes eligible costs and that ΕΚΕΤΑ is not obliged to repay that sum to the European Commission, and










—


order the European Commission to pay the applicant’s costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments







1.


By this action, the Ethniko Kentro Erevnas kai Technologikis Anaptyxis (EKETA) challenges the requests made by the Commission by means of its debit note 3241615292/29.11.2016, in relation to participation in the ASK-IT project. By means of that debit note, the Commission requested that ΕΚΕΤΑ reimburse part of the payment received by it for the ASK-IT project, a sum of EUR 211 185,95. The request follows an on-the-spot audit which was carried out by the European Commission at the applicant’s premises.










2.


In that context, the applicant claims that the General Court of the European Union, under Article 272 TFEU, should declare that, out of the above amount stated in the debit note, the sum of EUR 143 910,77 constitutes eligible costs and that ΕΚΕΤΑ is not obliged to repay that sum to the Commission.










3.


ΕΚΕΤΑ maintains that the above amount of EUR 143 910,77 constitutes eligible staff costs, subcontracting costs and indirect costs, which the Commission wrongly rejected as being ineligible. The eligibility of the applicant’s costs is demonstrated by the evidence that it submitted to the European Commission at the on-the-spot audit and in subsequent correspondence and that it submits to the General Court.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 15 March 2017 on the draft Council implementing decision on the launch of automated data exchange with regard to vehicle registration data in Denmark (12212/2016 — C8-0476/2016 — 2016/0815(CNS))
Date: 2017-03-15
Institutions: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: Denmark, cross-frontier data flow, data protection, exchange of information, information system, personal data, vehicle registration








C_2018263EN.01036101.xml










25.7.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 263/361






P8_TA(2017)0079
Launch of automated data exchange with regard to vehicle registration data in Denmark *
European Parliament legislative resolution of 15 March 2017 on the draft Council implementing decision on the launch of automated data exchange with regard to vehicle registration data in Denmark (12212/2016 — C8-0476/2016 — 2016/0815(CNS))
(Consultation)
(2018/C 263/34)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the Council draft (12212/2016),










—


having regard to Article 39(1) of the Treaty on European Union, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, and Article 9 of Protocol No 36 on transitional provisions, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0476/2016),










—


having regard to Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (1), and in particular Article 33 thereof,










—


having regard to its resolution of 10 October 2013 on strengthening cross-border law-enforcement cooperation in the EU: the implementation of the ‘Prüm Decision’ and the European Information Exchange Model (2),










—


having regard to its resolution of 9 July 2015 on the European Agenda on Security (3),










—


having regard to Rule 78c of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0051/2017),












1.


Approves the Council draft;












2.


Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;












3.


Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament;












4.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.






(1)  OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 1.

(2)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0419.

(3)  Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0269.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 15 March 2017 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and the Federative Republic of Brazil pursuant to Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions in the schedule of the Republic of Croatia in the course of its accession to the European Union (13037/2016 — C8-0490/2016 — 2016/0307(NLE))
Date: 2017-03-15
Institutions: Committee on International Trade, European Parliament
Subjects: Brazil, Croatia, GATT, accession to the European Union, agreement (EU), ratification of an agreement, tariff preference








C_2018263EN.01036001.xml










25.7.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 263/360






P8_TA(2017)0078
EU-Brazil Agreement: modification of concessions in the schedule of Croatia in the course of its accession ***
European Parliament legislative resolution of 15 March 2017 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and the Federative Republic of Brazil pursuant to Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions in the schedule of the Republic of Croatia in the course of its accession to the European Union (13037/2016 — C8-0490/2016 — 2016/0307(NLE))
(Consent)
(2018/C 263/33)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the draft Council decision (13037/2016),










—


having regard to the draft Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and the Federative Republic of Brazil pursuant to Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions in the schedule of the Republic of Croatia in the course of its accession to the European Union (13038/2016),










—


having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 207(4) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0490/2016),










—


having regard to Rule 99(1) and (4) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade (A8-0052/2017),












1.


Gives its consent to conclusion of the agreement;












2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Federative Republic of Brazil.
Case C-135/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 15 March 2017 — X-GmbH v Finanzamt Stuttgart — Körperschaften
Date: 2017-03-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: application of the law, basis of tax assessment, capital movement, direct investment, shareholding, third country








C_2017221EN.01000401.xml










10.7.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/4





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 15 March 2017 — X-GmbH v Finanzamt Stuttgart — Körperschaften
(Case C-135/17)
(2017/C 221/05)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: X-GmbH

Defendant: Finanzamt Stuttgart — Körperschaften

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 57(1) EC (now Article 64(1) TFEU) to be interpreted as meaning that a restriction in a Member State which existed on 31 December 1993 in respect of the movement of capital to and from third countries involving direct investments is not affected by Article 56 EC (now Article 63 TFEU) even if the national law in force at the relevant date restricting the movement of capital to and from third countries essentially applied only to direct investments but was extended after that date to cover also investment holdings in foreign companies below the shareholding threshold of 10 %?










2.


If the first question is to be answered in the affirmative: Is Article 57(1) EC to be interpreted as meaning that a national-law restriction in respect of the movement of capital to or from third countries involving direct investments is to be regarded as applicable on the relevant date of 31 December 1993, if later national law substantially corresponding to the restriction in force at the relevant date enters into force, the restriction existing at the relevant date being nevertheless substantially amended for a short time by legislation which formally entered into force but was in practice never applied due to the fact that it was replaced by the legislation at present in force before it could be applied to a specific case for the first time?










3.


If either of the first two questions is to be answered in the negative: Does Article 56 EC preclude legislation of a Member State under which the basis of assessment to tax of a taxable person resident in that Member State, which holds at least 1 % of the shares in a company established in another State (in the present case, Switzerland), includes positive income earned by that company derived from capital investments pro rata, in the amount of the shareholding, where such income is taxed at a lower rate than in the Member State?
Case C-253/16: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 15 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles — Belgium) — FlibTravel International SA, Léonard Travel International SA v AAL Renting SA and Others (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 96 TFEU — Applicability — National legislation prohibiting taxi services from offering individual seats — National legislation prohibiting taxi services from predetermining their destination — National legislation prohibiting taxi services from touting for custom)
Date: 2017-03-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: common transport policy, consumer protection, provision of services, taxi, transport regulations








C_2017151EN.01001302.xml










15.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/13





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 15 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles — Belgium) — FlibTravel International SA, Léonard Travel International SA v AAL Renting SA and Others
(Case C-253/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 96 TFEU - Applicability - National legislation prohibiting taxi services from offering individual seats - National legislation prohibiting taxi services from predetermining their destination - National legislation prohibiting taxi services from touting for custom))
(2017/C 151/18)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Bruxelles

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: FlibTravel International SA, Léonard Travel International SA

Respondents: AAL Renting SA, Haroune Tax SPRL, Saratax SCS, Ryad SCRI, Taxis Bachir & Cie SCS, Abdelhamid El Barjraji, Abdelouahab Ben Bachir, Sotax SCRI, Mostapha El Hammouchi, Boughaz SPRL, Sahbaz SPRL, Jamal El Jelali, Mohamed Chakir Ben Kadour, Taxis Chalkis SCRL, Mohammed Gheris, Les délices de Fes SPRL, Abderrahmane Belyazid, E.A.R. SCS, Sotrans SPRL, B.M.A. SCS, Taxis Amri et Cie SCS, Aramak SCS, Rachid El Amrani, Mourad Bakkour, Mohamed Agharbiou, Omar Amri, Jmili Zouhair, Mustapha Ben Abderrahman, Mohamed Zahyani, Miltotax SPRL, Lextra SA, Ismail El Amrani, Farid Benazzouz, Imad Zoufri, Abdel-Ilah Bokhamy, Ismail Al Bouhali, Bahri Messaoud & Cie SCS, Mostafa Bouzid, BKN Star SPRL, M.V.S. SPRL, A.B.M.B. SCS, Imatrans SPRL, Reda Bouyaknouden, Ayoub Tahri, Moulay Adil El Khatir, Redouan El Abboudi, Mohamed El Abboudi, Bilal El Abboudi, Sofian El Abboudi, Karim Bensbih, Hadel Bensbih, Mimoun Mallouk, Abdellah El Ghaffouli, Said El Aazzoui

Operative part of the judgment

Article 96(1) TFEU must be interpreted as not applying to restrictions, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, imposed on taxi operators.


(1)  OJ C 260, 18.7.2016.
Case C-515/16: Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 15 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Versailles — France) — Enedis, SA v Axa Corporate Solutions SA, Ombrière Le Bosc SAS (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Articles 107 and 108 TFEU — State aid — Concept of ‘intervention by the State or through State resources’ — Solar power — Obligation to purchase at a price higher than the market price — Compensation in full — No prior notification)
Date: 2017-03-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: State aid, control of State aid, electrical energy, intervention policy, market intervention, price of energy, purchase price, solar energy








C_2017168EN.01001901.xml










29.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 168/19





Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 15 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Versailles — France) — Enedis, SA v Axa Corporate Solutions SA, Ombrière Le Bosc SAS
(Case C-515/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Articles 107 and 108 TFEU - State aid - Concept of ‘intervention by the State or through State resources’ - Solar power - Obligation to purchase at a price higher than the market price - Compensation in full - No prior notification))
(2017/C 168/24)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Versailles

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Enedis, SA

Defendants: Axa Corporate Solutions SA, Ombrière Le Bosc SAS

Operative part of the order







1)


Article 107(1) TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that an obligation, such as that introduced by the national legislation at issue in the main proceedings, to purchase electricity generated by plants which use solar radiation energy at a price higher than the market price and that is financed by all final consumers of electricity must be regarded as intervention by the State or through State resources.










2)


Article 108(3) TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that where a national measure constituting State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU has not been notified to the European Commission in advance, it is for the national courts to draw all the inferences of that unlawfulness, in particular as regards the validity of the measures implementing that measure.






(1)  OJ C 475, 19.12.2016.
Case T-455/16 P: Judgment of the General Court of 15 March 2017 — Fernández González v Commission (Appeal — Civil service — Temporary staff — Recruitment — Employment of temporary staff in permanent posts — Plea of illegality — Error of law)
Date: 2017-03-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: competition (EU), full-time employment, legality, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU)








C_2017144EN.01004201.xml










8.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 144/42





Judgment of the General Court of 15 March 2017 — Fernández González v Commission
(Case T-455/16 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - Temporary staff - Recruitment - Employment of temporary staff in permanent posts - Plea of illegality - Error of law))
(2017/C 144/56)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Elia Fernández González (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M. Casado García-Hirschfeld and É. Boigelot, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and G. Bersheid, Agents, and, initially, D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, and subsequently A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Single Judge) of 14 June 2016, Fernández González v Commission (F-121/15, EU:F:2016:128), and seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Single Judge) of 14 June 2016, Fernández González v Commission (F-121/15, EU:F:2016:128);










2.


Refers the case to a Chamber of the General Court other than that which has ruled on the present appeal;










3.


Reserves the costs.






(1)  OJ C 383, 17.10.2016.