do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-203/17: Action brought on 3 April 2017 — GY v Commission
Date: 2017-04-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EPSO, administrator, competition (EU), professional qualifications








C_2017195EN.01003201.xml










19.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 195/32





Action brought on 3 April 2017 — GY v Commission
(Case T-203/17)
(2017/C 195/45)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: GY (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

Declare and rule that






—


The decision of the selection board for competition EPSO/AD/293/14 of 23 December 2016 not to admit the applicant to the assessment centre is annulled;










—


The European Commission is ordered to pay a sum assessed ex aequo et bono at EUR 5 000 in respect of the non-pecuniary harm suffered;










—


The European Commission is, in any event, ordered to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement by the selection board of the obligation to state reasons insofar as it did not disclose to the applicant the marking criteria which it adopted in execution of the judgment of 20 July 2016, GY v Commission, F-123/15, EU:F:2016:160.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement by the selection board of the competition notice insofar as it arbitrarily restricted its assessment of the applicant’s professional experience by, in connection with three questions, looking only at the duration of that experience.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging numerous manifest errors of assessment committed by the selection board of the competition, which render its decision to grant the applicant only 17 points out of 56 (the threshold being 22 points) unlawful.
Case C-165/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 3 April 2017 — Morgan Stanley & Co International plc v Ministre de l’Économie et des Finances
Date: 2017-04-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, VAT, branch, commercial transaction, head office, tax relief








C_2017213EN.01002001.xml










3.7.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/20





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 3 April 2017 — Morgan Stanley & Co International plc v Ministre de l’Économie et des Finances
(Case C-165/17)
(2017/C 213/26)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Morgan Stanley & Co International plc

Respondent: Ministre de l’Économie et des Finances

Questions referred







1.


In circumstances where expenditure of a branch established in one Member State is exclusively used for the transactions of its principal establishment established in another Member State, must the provisions of Article 17(2), (3) and (5) and Article 19(1) of the Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC, (1) incorporated in Articles 168, 169 and 173 to 175 of Directive 2006/112/EC, (2) be interpreted to the effect that the Member State in which the branch is registered is to apply to that expenditure the branch’s deductible proportion, determined according to the transactions carried out in the Member State in which it is registered and according to the rules applicable in that State, or to apply the proportion applicable to the principal establishment, or to deduct a specific proportion combining the rules applicable in the Member States in which the branch and the principal establishment are registered, with regard in particular to a possible option mechanism for imposing value added tax on transactions?










2.


What rules should be applied in the specific case where expenditure borne by the branch is used both for transactions in the Member State where it is registered and for transactions of the principal establishment, particularly as regards the concept of general costs and the proportion of tax deductible?






(1)  Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1).

(2)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).
Case T-28/16: Judgment of the General Court of 3 April 2017 — Germany v Commission (EAGF and EAFRD — Expenditure excluded from financing — Rural development — Land consolidation and village renewal — Criteria used for selection of operations — Principle of sincere cooperation — Subsidiarity — Legitimate expectations — Proportionality — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2017-04-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture, closing of accounts, common agricultural policy, principle of proportionality, principle of subsidiarity, rural development, town and country planning








C_2017151EN.01003402.xml










15.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/34





Judgment of the General Court of 3 April 2017 — Germany v Commission
(Case T-28/16) (1)

((EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Rural development - Land consolidation and village renewal - Criteria used for selection of operations - Principle of sincere cooperation - Subsidiarity - Legitimate expectations - Proportionality - Obligation to state reasons))
(2017/C 151/44)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented: initially by T. Henze and A. Lippstreu, and subsequently by T. Henze and D. Klebs, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Aquilina and B. Eggers, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Article 1 and the Annex of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/2098, of 13 November 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) (OJ 2015 L 303, p. 35), in so far as the payments made by the agency responsible for payment in the Federal Republic of Germany under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), in the total amount of EUR 7 719 920,30, are excluded from EU financing.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 98, 14.3.2016.
Case T-145/16: Order of the General Court of 3 April 2017 — Corsini Santolaria v EUIPO — Molins Tura (biombo 13)
Date: 2017-04-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, clothing, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017178EN.01003303.xml










6.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 178/33





Order of the General Court of 3 April 2017 — Corsini Santolaria v EUIPO — Molins Tura (biombo 13)
(Case T-145/16) (1)

(2017/C 178/50)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 222, 20.6.2016.
Case T-206/17: Action brought on 3 April 2017 — Argus Security Projects v Commission and EUBAM
Date: 2017-04-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU police mission, Libya, award of contract, border control, equal treatment, international security, security services, tendering








C_2017195EN.01003301.xml










19.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 195/33





Action brought on 3 April 2017 — Argus Security Projects v Commission and EUBAM
(Case T-206/17)
(2017/C 195/46)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Argus Security Projects Ltd (Limassol, Cyprus) (represented by: T. Bontinck and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendants: European Commission, European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul the decision of EUBAM of 24 January 2017, replacing the initial decision of 16 February 2014, not to accept the tender submitted by the Argus company in a call for tenders concerning the supply of security services as part of the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (contract EUBAM-13-020), and to award the contract to Garda;










—


order the defendants to pay 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 110 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ 2012 L 298, p. 1), of the rules laid down in the specifications for the award of the contract, in particular points 4.1 and 12.1 of the instructions to tenderers, and of the principles of equal treatment of tenderers and of non-discrimination. This plea is divided into three parts:






—


first part, alleging a failure to mobilise technical and operational resources in accordance with the terms of the contract;










—


second part, alleging a failure to mobilise human resources in accordance with the terms of the contract;










—


third part, alleging that the mobilisation plan was artificial and criticising the taking into account of the prior experience of tenderers in hostile environments.














2.


Second plea in law, alleging a substantive amendment to the initial conditions of the contract and infringement of the principle of equal treatment. This plea is divided into two parts:






—


first part, relating to the assessment of human resources;










—


second part, relating to the assessment of technical resources and the mobilisation plan.
Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2017/663 of 3 April 2017 appointing a member, proposed by the Kingdom of Sweden, of the European Economic and Social Committee
Date: 2017-04-03
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Economic and Social Committee, Sweden, appointment of members








L_2017094EN.01003701.xml










7.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 94/37








            COUNCIL DECISION (EU, Euratom) 2017/663
of 3 April 2017
         
appointing a member, proposed by the Kingdom of Sweden, of the European Economic and Social Committee


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 302 thereof,


Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 106a thereof,


Having regard to the proposal of the Swedish Government,


Having regard to the opinion of the European Commission,

Whereas:







(1)


On 18 September 2015 and 1 October 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU, Euratom) 2015/1600 (1) and (EU, Euratom) 2015/1790 (2) appointing the members of the European Economic and Social Committee for the period from 21 September 2015 to 20 September 2020.












(2)


A member's seat on the European Economic and Social Committee has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Oskar WALLNER,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Ms Imse SPRAGG NILSSON, Expert, National Council of Swedish Youth Organisations (LSU), is hereby appointed as a member of the European Economic and Social Committee for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 20 September 2020.


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




Done at Luxembourg, 3 April 2017.


For the Council


The President

R. GALDES
            





(1)  Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2015/1600 of 18 September 2015 appointing the members of the European Economic and Social Committee for the period from 21 September 2015 to 20 September 2020 (OJ L 248, 24.9.2015, p. 53).

(2)  Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2015/1790 of 1 October 2015 appointing the members of the European Economic and Social Committee for the period from 21 September 2015 to 20 September 2020 (OJ L 260, 7.10.2015, p. 23).
Case C-167/17: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court (Ireland) made on 3 April 2017 — Volkmar Klohn v An Bord Pleanála
Date: 2017-04-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, environmental protection, judicial proceedings, national implementing measure, national law








C_2017178EN.01001201.xml










6.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 178/12





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court (Ireland) made on 3 April 2017 — Volkmar Klohn v An Bord Pleanála
(Case C-167/17)
(2017/C 178/14)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Supreme Court

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Volkmar Klohn

Defendant: An Bord Pleanála

Question referred







1.


Can the ‘not prohibitively expensive’ provisions of Art. 10a of the Public Participation Directive potentially have any application in a case such as the instant case where the development consent challenged in the proceedings was granted prior to the latest date for transposition of that directive and where the proceedings challenging the relevant development consent were also commenced prior to that date? If so have the ‘not prohibitively expensive’ provisions of the Public Participation Directive potential application to all costs incurred in the proceedings or only to costs incurred after the latest date for transposition?










2.


Is a national court which enjoys a discretion concerning the award of costs against an unsuccessful party, in the absence of any specific measure having been adopted by the member state in question for the purposes of transposing Art. 10a of the Public Participation Directive, obliged, when considering an order for costs in proceedings to which that provision applies, to ensure that any order made does not render the proceedings ‘prohibitively expensive’ either because the relevant provisions are directly effective or because the court of the member state concerned is required to interpret its national procedural law in a manner, to the fullest extent possible, which fulfils the objectives of Article 10a?










3.


Where an order for costs is unqualified and would, by virtue of the absence of any appeal, be regarded as final and conclusive as a matter of national law, does Union law require that either






a)


a Taxing Master charged in accordance with national law with the task of quantifying the amount of costs reasonably incurred by the successful party; or










b)


a court asked to review a decision of such a Taxing Master nonetheless have an obligation to depart from otherwise applicable measures of national law and determine the amount of costs to be awarded in such a way as ensures that the costs so awarded do not render the proceedings prohibitively expensive?
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/630 of 3 April 2017 amending for the 264th time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with the ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaeda organisations
Date: 2017-04-03
Institutions: European Commission, Service for Foreign Policy Instruments
Subjects: economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person, terrorism, trade restriction








L_2017090EN.01000601.xml










4.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 90/6








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2017/630
of 3 April 2017
         
amending for the 264th time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with the ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaeda organisations


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27 May 2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with the ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaeda organisations (1), and in particular Article 7(1)(a) and Article 7a(5) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 lists the persons, groups and entities covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources under that Regulation.












(2)


On 29 March 2017, the Sanctions Committee of the United Nations Security Council decided to amend one entry in its list of persons, groups and entities to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources should apply. Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Regulation.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 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, 3 April 2017.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,


Acting Head of the Service for Foreign Policy Instruments






(1)  
            OJ L 139, 29.5.2002, p. 9.




ANNEX
In Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002, the identifying data for the following entry ‘Radi Abd El Samie Abou El Yazid El Ayashi, (alias Mera'i). Address: Via Cilea 40, Milan, Italy (domicile). Date of birth: 2.1.1972. Place of birth: El Gharbia (Egypt). Other information: (a) In custody in Italy, due for release on 6.1.2012; (b) Subject to expulsion from Italy after serving the sentence. Date of designation referred to in Article 2a (4)(b): 12.11.2003.’, under the heading ‘Natural persons’, is replaced by the following:


            ‘Radi Abd El Samie Abou El Yazid El Ayashi, (alias Mera'i). Address: Via Cilea 40, Milan, Italy (domicile). Date of birth: 2.1.1972. Place of birth: El Gharbia Governorate (Egypt). Nationality: (a) Egypt. Date of designation referred to in Article 7d(2)(i): 12.11.2003.’
Case C-164/17: Reference for a preliminary ruling from Supreme Court (Ireland) made on 3 April 2017 — Edel Grace, Peter Sweetman v An Bord Pleanala
Date: 2017-04-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: biotope, building industry, development plan, protected area








C_2017178EN.01001102.xml










6.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 178/11





Reference for a preliminary ruling from Supreme Court (Ireland) made on 3 April 2017 — Edel Grace, Peter Sweetman v An Bord Pleanala
(Case C-164/17)
(2017/C 178/13)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Supreme Court

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Edel Grace, Peter Sweetman

Defendant: An Bord Pleanala

Question referred

Where






a)


a protected site has as its essential purpose the provision of habitat for a specified species










b)


the nature of the habitat which is beneficial for that species means that the part of the site which is beneficial will necessarily alter over time, and










c)


as part of a proposed development a management plan for the site as a whole (including changes to the management of parts of the site not directly affected by the development itself) is to be put in place which is designed to ensure that, at any given time, the amount of the site suitable as habitat as aforesaid is not reduced and indeed may be enhanced; but










d)


some of the site will, for the lifetime of the development project, be excluded from having the potential to provide appropriate habitat,
can such measures as are described in (c) properly be regarded as mitigatory?
Council Decision of 3 April 2017 adopting the Council’s position on draft amending budget No 1 of the European Union for the financial year 2017
Date: 2017-04-03
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU expenditure, amending budget, draft budget (EU), financial year, general budget (EU)








C_2017109EN.01000201.xml










7.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 109/2





COUNCIL DECISION
of 3 April 2017
adopting the Council’s position on draft amending budget No 1 of the European Union for the financial year 2017
(2017/C 109/02)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 314 thereof, in conjunction with the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 106a thereof,
Having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (1) and in particular Article 41 thereof,
Whereas:






—


the Union’s budget for the financial year 2017 was definitively adopted on 1 December 2016 (2),










—


on 26 January 2017, the Commission submitted a proposal containing draft amending budget No 1 to the general budget for the financial year 2017,




HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Sole Article
The Council’s position on draft amending budget No 1 of the European Union for the financial year 2017 was adopted on 3 April 2017.
The full text can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the Council’s website: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/

Done at Luxembourg, 3 April 2017.


For the Council


The President

R. GALDES




(1)  OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 51, 28.2.2017, p. 1.
Council Decision (EU) 2017/651 of 3 April 2017 appointing a member, proposed by the Kingdom of the Netherlands, of the Committee of the Regions
Date: 2017-04-03
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Committee of the Regions, Netherlands, appointment of members








L_2017092EN.01009901.xml










6.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 92/99








            COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2017/651
of 3 April 2017
         
appointing a member, proposed by the Kingdom of the Netherlands, of the Committee of the Regions


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,


Having regard to the proposal of the Dutch Government,

Whereas:







(1)


On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.












(2)


A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the mandate on the basis of which Ms A. (Annemiek) JETTEN (Mayor of Sluis) was proposed,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following is hereby appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:






—


Ms A. (Annemiek) JETTEN, Mayor of the municipality of Vlaardingen (change of mandate).






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




Done at Luxembourg, 3 April 2017.


For the Council


The President

R. GALDES
            





(1)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/116 of 26 January 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 20, 27.1.2015, p. 42).

(2)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/190 of 5 February 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 31, 7.2.2015, p. 25).

(3)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/994 of 23 June 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 159, 25.6.2015, p. 70).