utterance
stringlengths 594
850k
| label
sequencelengths 11
11
|
|---|---|
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 334/2000
of 14 February 2000
amending Regulation (EC) No 1547/1999 as regards the control procedures to apply to shipments of certain types of waste to Malaysia
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on supervision and control of shipments of waste within, into and out of the European Community(1), as last amended by Commission Decision 1999/816/EC(2), and in particular Article 17(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Malaysia made an official request on 12 November 1999 to import all categories of waste listed in Annex II to Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 either without any control procedures or under the control procedure applying to waste listed in Annex III to that Regulation.
(2) In accordance with Article 17(3) of Regulation (EEC) No 259/93, that official request was notified on 17 November 1999 to the committee established pursuant to Article 18 of Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste(3), as last amended by Commission Decision 96/350/EC(4).
(3) In order to take account of Malaysia's new position, Commission Regulation (EC) No 1547/1999 of 12 July 1999 determining the control procedures under Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 to apply to shipments of certain types of waste to certain countries to which OECD Decision C(92)39 final does not apply(5) should be amended accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EC) No 1547/1999 is amended as follows:
1. In Annex A, between the text relating to Macau and that relating to Poland, the following text is inserted: "MALAYSIA
1. In section GA (Metal and metal-alloy wastes in mettallic, non-dispersible form):
TABLE
2. In section GG (Other, wastes containing principally inorganic constituents, which may contain metals and organic material).
TABLE
3. All types included in section GH (Solid plastic waste).
4. All types included in section GJ (Textile wastes).
5. All types included in section GK (Rubber waste).
6. All types included in section GM (Waste arising from agro-food industries).
7. All types included in section GN (Wastes arising from tanning and fellmongery operations and leather use).
8. In section GO (Other wastes containing principally organic constituents, which may contain metals and inorganic materials):
TABLE "
2. In Annex B, the text relating to Malaysia is deleted.
3. In Annex D, the text relating to Malaysia is replaced by the following: "MALAYSIA
All types in Annex II except those listed in Annex A."
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 14 February 2000. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1662/2006
of 6 November 2006
amending Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin (1), and in particular Article 10(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
When subject to the provisions of Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004, food business operators should ensure that each product of animal origin has an identification mark applied in compliance with the provisions laid down in Section I of Annex II to that Regulation. Unless expressly indicated and for control reasons, products of animal origin should not bear more than one identification mark.
(2)
Section I of Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 lays down rules on the production and placing on the market of meat from domestic ungulates. Exceptions to the complete skinning of the carcase and other parts of the body intended for human consumption are set out in point 8 of Chapter IV of that Section. Provision should be made to extend these exceptions to the muzzle and lips from bovine animals, provided they comply with the same conditions as those applying to heads of ovine and caprine animals.
(3)
The tonsils serve as a filter of all noxious agents entering the oral cavity of animals and should be removed for hygienic and safety reasons during the process of slaughtering domestic ungulates. Since the removal was inadvertently omitted as mandatory for domestic swine, the requirement for removal of porcine tonsils should be re-inserted.
(4)
Section VIII of Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 sets out the requirements governing the production and placing on the market of fishery products intended for human consumption. Fish oil is included in the definition of fishery products. Specific requirements for production and placing on the market of fish oil for human consumption should, therefore, be laid down. Transitional arrangements should also be foreseen to give the possibility to establishments in third countries to adapt to the new situation.
(5)
Colostrum is considered as a product of animal origin but is not covered by the definition of raw milk as referred to in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004. Colostrum is produced in a similar way and can be considered as presenting a similar risk to human health as raw milk. It is therefore necessary to introduce specific hygiene rules for colostrum production.
(6)
Section XV of Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 sets out the requirements for the production of collagen. It specifies that collagen must be produced using a process that ensures that the raw material is subjected to a treatment involving washing, pH adjustment using acid or alkali followed by one or more rinses, filtration and extrusion or by an approved equivalent process. A different process resulting in a hydrolysed collagen that cannot be extruded was submitted for assessment to EFSA. EFSA adopted on 26 January 2005 an opinion on safety of collagen and a processing method for the production of collagen. It concluded that the production process proposed above ensures equivalent or higher health safety for collagen intended for human consumption compared to the safety achieved by applying the standards of Section XV. The conditions for the production of collagen should therefore be modified.
(7)
Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 should be amended accordingly.
(8)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 is amended as follows:
1.
Annex II is amended in accordance with Annex I to this Regulation.
2.
Annex III is amended in accordance with Annex II to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following 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, 6 November 2006. | [
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 18 April 1994 laying down the system of identification for dogs and cats that are placed on the market in the United Kingdom and Ireland and not originating in those countries (94/274/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 92/65/EEC of 13 July 1992 concerning laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of animals, semen, ova and embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A (I) to Directive 90/425/EEC (1), and in particular Article 10 (3) (a) (iii) thereof,
Whereas it it necessary to establish a system for the identification of dogs and cats that are placed on the market in the United Kingdom and Ireland and not originating in those countries;
Whereas the technology of electronic identification of dogs and cats offers a cheap, fraud-proof and relatively painless system; whereas in these conditions it is appropriate to use an electronic system for identification of dogs and cats;
Whereas, due to the multiplicity of the electronic systems in use, the owner or trader shall be responsible for demonstrating to the satisfaction of the official veterinarian that the dog or cat is correctly identified;
Whereas, as an interim measure, whilst awaiting the development of an international standard, it is appropriate to foresee that the electronic systems that are used are those used in the Member States where the animals originate; whereas this situation will be reviewed in the light of the progress of the harmonization of a standard for electronic identification of dogs and cats;
Whereas this Decision is without prejudice to any future Decision which may be taken in respect of the movement of pet animals within the Community, as the problems posed by the identification of pet animals are of a different nature;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The method of identification used on dogs and cats which are placed on the market in the United Kingdom and Ireland and which do not originate in those countries shall be an electronic system.
Article 2
1. The electronic system referred to in Article 1 shall consist of an implantable transponder and must be one of those used in the Member State of origin of the dogs and cats.
2. Member States shall inform the Commission and each other of the electronic systems in use in their territory for the identification of dogs and cats.
3. The owner or trader shall be responsible for demonstrating to the satisfaction of the official veterinarian that the dog or cat is correctly identified.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 April 1994. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE of 17 December 1974 supplementing Directive No 71/307/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to textile names (75/36/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 100 thereof;
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission;
Having regard to the Opinion of the European Parliament (1);
Having regard to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (2);
Whereas Article 5 (1) of Council Directive No 71/307/EEC (3) of 26 July 1971 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to textile names must be supplemented by the addition of the Danish equivalent of the terms in that paragraph,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
A sixth indent shall be added to Article 5 (1) of Directive No 71/307/EEC:
"- Friskklippet uld."
Article 2
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 17 December 1974. | [
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2157/2005
of 23 December 2005
setting out the licence fees applicable in 2006 to Community vessels fishing in Greenland waters
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1245/2004 of 28 June 2004 on the conclusion of the Protocol modifying the fourth Protocol laying down the conditions relating to fishing provided for in the Agreement on fisheries between the European Economic Community, on the one hand, and the Government of Denmark and the local Government of Greenland, on the other (1), and in particular the second paragraph of Article 4 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1245/2004 provides that owners of Community vessels who receive a licence for a Community vessel authorised to fish in waters in the exclusive economic zone of Greenland are to pay a licence fee in accordance with Article 11(5) of the fourth Protocol.
(2)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2140/2004 of 15 December 2004 laying down detailed rules for the application of Regulation No 1245/2004 as regards applications for fisheries licences in waters in the exclusive economic zone of Greenland (2) implements an Administrative Arrangement on fisheries licences as set out in Article 11(5) of the fourth Protocol.
(3)
Part B.4 of the Administrative Agreement specifies that license fees for 2006 are to be fixed by an annex to that Arrangement and based on 3 % of the price per tonne per species.
(4)
It is appropriate to set out in this Regulation licence fees for 2006, which were agreed by the Community and Greenland on 12 December 2005 in an annex to the Administrative Arrangement.
(5)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on fisheries and aquaculture,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The licence fees for 2006 for Community vessels authorised to fish in waters in the exclusive economic zone of Greenland shall be as set out in the Annex to the Administrative Agreement referred to in Regulation (EC) No 2140/2004.
The text of the Annex to the Administrative Agreement is attached to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 1 January 2006.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 December 2005. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION
of 26 January 1987
accepting on behalf of the Community the European Agreement on the Exchange of Blood-grouping Reagents
(87/68/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 28 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas Article 5(1) of the European Agreement on the Exchange of Blood-grouping Reagents provides that the Contracting Parties shall take all necessary measures to exempt from all import duties the blood-grouping reagents placed at their disposal by the other Parties;
Whereas any derogation from the Common Customs Tariff, whether autonomous or conventional, falls within the sole competence of the Community;
Whereas the entry into force of an Additional Protocol to the Agreement enabling the European Economic Community to become a Contracting Party to that Agreement allows the Community to exercise its competence in this matter; whereas the derogations provided for in the Agreement are already granted by Community rules of relief from customs duty;
Whereas the Community ought therefore to become a Contracting Party to the Agreement,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The European Agreement on the Exchange of Blood-grouping Reagents is hereby accepted on behalf of the European Economic Community.
The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision.
Article 2
The President of the Council is hereby authorized to designate the persons empowered to sign the Agreement in order to bind the Community.
Done at Brussels, 26 January 1987. | [
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 28 February 1985
amending Decision 83/384/EEC as regards the list of establishments in Australia approved for the purpose of importing fresh meat into the Community
(85/183/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 72/462/EEC of 12 December 1972 on health and veterinary inspection problems upon importation of bovine animals and swine and fresh meat from third countries (1), as last amended by Directive 83/91/EEC (2), and in particular Articles 4 (1) and 18 (1) (a) and (b) thereof,
Whereas a list of establishments in Australia, approved for the purpose of the importation of fresh meat into the Community, was drawn up initially by Commission Decision 83/384/EEC (3), as last amended by Decision 84/573/EEC (4);
Whereas a routine inspection under Article 5 of Directive 72/462/EEC and Article 3 (1) of Commission Decision 83/196/EEC of 8 April 1983 concerning on-the-spot inspections to be carried out in respect of the importation of bovine animals and swine and fresh meat from non-member countries (5) has revealed that the level of hygiene of one establishment has altered since the last inspection;
Whereas the list of establishments should, therefore, be amended;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The Annex to Decision 83/384/EEC is hereby replaced by the Annex to this Decision.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 February 1985. | [
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 681/2006
of 2 May 2006
establishing unit values for the determination of the customs value of certain perishable goods
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (1),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 (2) laying down provisions for the implementation of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92, and in particular Article 173(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Articles 173 to 177 of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 provide that the Commission shall periodically establish unit values for the products referred to in the classification in Annex 26 to that Regulation.
(2)
The result of applying the rules and criteria laid down in the abovementioned Articles to the elements communicated to the Commission in accordance with Article 173(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 is that unit values set out in the Annex to this Regulation should be established in regard to the products in question,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The unit values provided for in Article 173(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 are hereby established as set out in the table in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 5 May 2006.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 2 May 2006. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION
of 16 March 1992
establishing a single Advisory Committee for Eurotecnet and Force and amending Decisions 89/657/EEC and 90/267/EEC
(92/170/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 128 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (3),
Whereas, in the interests of greater effectiveness of Community action in the field of vocational training, the activities currently carried out by the Eurotecnet and Force Advisory Committees set up under Article 10 of Decisions 89/657/EEC (4) and 90/267/EEC (5) should be combined to form a single advisory committee, as announced by the Commission in its memorandum on the rationalization and coordination of vocational training programmes at Community level;
Whereas Article 10 of Decisions 89/657/EEC and 90/267/EEC should be amended as a result,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
1. In the implementation of the Eurotecnet and Force programmes, the Commission shall be assisted by an advisory committee composed of two representatives from each Member State and chaired by a representative from the Commission.
The members of the committee may be assisted by experts or advisors.
12 representatives of both sides of industry, appointed by the Commission on the basis of proposals from the organizations representing both sides of industry at Community level, shall participate in the work of the committee as observers.
2. The representative of the Commission shall submit to the committee a draft concerning:
(a)
the general guidelines governing the Eurotecnet and Force programmes;
(b)
the general guidelines on the financial assistance to be provided by the Community (amounts, duration and recipients of assistance);
(c)
questions relating to the overall balance of the Eurotecnet and Force programmes, including the breakdown between the various activities and dovetailing with other Community programmes and initiatives in the field of vocational training;
(d)
questions relating to the evaluation of the programmes and the dissemination of their findings, with a view to the submission of the reports referred to in Article 11 of Decisions 89/657/EEC and 90/267/EEC.
3. The committee shall deliver its opinion on the draft, within a time limit which the chairman may lay down according to the urgency of the matter, if necessary by taking a vote.
4. The opinion shall be recorded in the minutes; in addition, each Member State shall have the right to ask to have its position recorded in the minutes.
5. The Commission shall take the utmost account of the opinion delivered by the committee. It shall inform the committee of the manner in which its opinion has been taken into account.
Article 2
Article 10 of Decision 89/657/EEC is hereby replaced by the following:
‘Article 10
Committee
The Commission shall be assisted in the implementation of this Decision by the advisory committee set up by Article 1 of Decision 92/170/EEC (6).
Article 3
Article 10 of Decision 90/267/EEC is hereby replaced by he following:
‘Article 10
Committee
The Commission shall be assisted in the implementation of this Decision by the advisory committee set up by Article 1 of Decision 92/170/EEC (7).
Article 4
This Decision shall take effect on 1 July 1992.
Done at Brussels, 16 March 1992. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 738/97
of 24 April 1997
derogating temporarily from Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 on rules of application for import and export licences in the beef and veal sector
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 805/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organization of the market in beef and veal (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2222/96 (2), and in particular Articles 9 and 13 thereof,
Whereas Article 10 (1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 of 26 June 1995 on rules of application for import and export licences in the beef and veal sector and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 2377/80 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 266/97 (4), provides that export licences are to be issued on the fifth working day following that on which the application is lodged, provided that no specific action is taken by the Commission in the meantime;
Whereas, in view of the small quantity still available until 30 June 1997 for which licences can be issued and the small number of days on which the Official Journal is to be published in the first 10 days of May 1997, that period for reflection of five days is too short to ensure sound management of the market and should be increased temporarily to six days;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Beef and Veal,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Notwithstanding Article 10 (1) of Regulation (EC) No 1445/95, applications for licences lodged from 28 April to 7 May 1997 shall be issued on the sixth working day following that on which the application is lodged, provided that no specific action as referred to in paragraph 2 of that Article is taken by the Commission in the meantime.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 24 April 1997. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Council Decision
of 23 September 2002
appointing an alternate member of the Committee of the Regions
(2002/774/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 263 thereof,
Having regard to the Council Decision of 22 January 2002(1) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions,
Whereas a seat of an alternate member of the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the resignation of Ms Margherita COGO, alternate member, notified to the Council on 10 April 2002,
Having regard to the proposal from the Italian Government,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Sole Article
Mr Carlo ANDREOTTI is hereby appointed an alternate member of the Committee of the Regions in place of Ms Margherita COGO for the remainder of her term of office, which runs until 25 January 2006.
Done at Brussels, 23 September 2002. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 209/87
of 23 January 1987
on the financing of transport costs resulting from the free distribution of fishery products withdrawn from the market
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3796/81 of 29 December 1981 on the common organization of the market in fishery products (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3879/86 (2), and in particular Article 13 thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3247/81 of 9 November 1981 on the financing by the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, Guarantee Section, of certain intervention measures, particularly those involving the buying in, storage and sale of agricultural products by intervention agencies (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2632/85 (4), and in particular Article 7 thereof,
Whereas Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1501/83 of 9 June 1983 on the disposal of certain fishery products which have been the subject of measures to stabilize the market (5) provides for the distribution free of charge of products withdrawn from the market by producers' organizations in the fisheries sector in the natural state of their own consumption to charitable societies or institutions established in the Community or to persons who, because of inadequate incomes, are recognized by the national legislation of the Member State concerned as being entitled to public assistance;
Whereas on 14 January 1987 the Commission decided, on account of the exceptional weather conditions obtaining, to have agricultural products and fishery products which have been the subject of intervention measures distributed free of charge to charitable institutions established in the Community;
Whereas, in order to make such free distribution more effective, the transport costs, including packaging costs, resulting from the distribution should be defrayed;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation have been examined by the Management Committee for Fishery Products and whereas they are in accordance with the opinion of the EAGGF Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The total amount of the expenditure for transport incurred as a result of the free distribution provided for in Article 1 (a) of Regulation (EEC) No 1501/83 shall be determined as shown below on the basis of the distance between the place of warehousing of the products and their point of distribution and shall be financed within the meaning of Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 3247/81 by means of the following flat-rate amounts:
- distance less than 25 km: 55 ECU/tonne of fish,
- distance not less
than 25 km but less
than 200 km: 90 ECU/tonne of fish,
- distance not less
than 200 km: 124 ECU/tonne of fish.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply from 15 January to 31 March 1987.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 January 1987. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3517/84
of 13 December 1984
on the classification of goods falling within subheading 24.01 B of the Common Customs Tariff
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 97/69 of 16 January 1969 on measures to be taken for uniform application of the nomenclature of the Common Customs Tariff (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2055/84 (2), and in particular Article 3 thereof,
Whereas, in order to ensure that the Common Customs Tariff Nomenclature is applied uniformly, measures must be taken concerning the classification of leave-stalks, stems, ribs and trimmings of tobacco leaves;
Whereas heading No 24.01 of the Common Customs Tariff annexed to Council Regulation (EEC) No 950/68 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3400/84 (4), relates in particular to unmanufactured tobacco; tobacco refuse;
Whereas the products in question have the characteristics of tobacco refuse falling within heading No 24.01 and must therefore be classified in this heading; whereas, within this heading, subheading 24.01 B should be chosen;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Common Customs Tariff Nomenclature,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Leave-stalks, stems, ribs and trimmings of tobacco leaves shall be classified in the Common Customs Tariff within subheading:
24.01 Unmanufactured tobacco; tobacco refuse:
B. Other.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply from 1 January 1985.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 13 December 1984. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 16 December 2003
on the State aid granted by France to EDF and the electricity and gas industries
(notified under document number C(2003) 4637)
(Only the French text is authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2005/145/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 88(2) thereof,
Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof,
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provisions cited above (1) and having regard to their comments,
Whereas:
I. PROCEDURE
(1)
By letter dated 10 July 2001, the Commission invited the French authorities to provide information on certain measures in favour of Electricité de France (EDF) which possibly involved State aid.
(2)
Between July 2001 and June 2002, many letters were exchanged between the Commission and the French authorities (2). A technical meeting was held on 3 September 2002.
(3)
By letter dated 16 October 2002, the Commission informed the French authorities that it had taken three related decisions concerning EDF (3). First, it proposed to the French authorities, as an appropriate measure pursuant to Article 88(1) of the Treaty, that they should withdraw the unlimited State guarantee enjoyed by EDF on all its commitments by virtue of its public enterprise status, which precluded application of the legislation on the administration and compulsory liquidation of firms in difficulty. Second, the Commission initiated a formal investigation under Article 88(2) of the Treaty into the advantage resulting from the non-payment by EDF of the corporation tax due, when it restructured its balance sheet in 1997, on some of the accounting provisions created free of tax for the renewal of the high-voltage transmission network (RAG). Third, it issued an injunction requiring the French authorities to supply information it needed in order to examine that tax concession in the context of the formal investigation procedure.
(4)
In the comments they submitted to the Commission by letter dated 11 December 2002, the French authorities maintained that no State aid was involved in the public enterprise status and refused to implement the proposed appropriate measure. They also denied that EDF had received a tax concession in 1997. A technical meeting was held on 12 February 2003 between the Commission and the French authorities to discuss the issue of the tax concession.
(5)
On 2 April 2003, following the French authorities' refusal to implement the proposed appropriate measure and pursuant to Article 19(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (4), the Commission decided to initiate the formal investigation procedure provided for by Article 88(2) of the Treaty in respect of the unlimited State guarantee which EDF enjoyed on account of the fact that it could not be declared bankrupt (5). By letter dated 12 June 2003, the French authorities sent the Commission their comments in the context of the formal investigation procedure.
(6)
By letter dated 11 November 2003, supplemented by letters dated 21 November and 11 December 2003, the French authorities notified the Commission of a reform of the pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries and transmitted the text of a legislative provision converting EDF into a commercial enterprise governed by ordinary law. They stated that both reforms would be included in the same bill. By letter dated 16 December 2003, the French Government confirmed that it was to lay before Parliament the legislation converting EDF, currently a public enterprise, into an entity governed by ordinary law so that the change of legal status could enter into force by 1 January 2005.
(7)
On 17 November 2003, a further technical meeting was held between the Commission, the French authorities and representatives of EDF to discuss the issue of the tax concession received by EDF. The French authorities also provided additional information on this question by letter dated 20 November 2003.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURES AT ISSUE
(A) Unlimited State guarantee
(8)
EDF produces, transmits and distributes electricity throughout France. It is one of the largest groups on the European energy market and related markets. The group is also present in China, Egypt, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and the United States.
(9)
In 2002, EDF generated turnover of EUR 48,4 billion; the group currently has 32,5 million customer premises in France and 8,9 million in the rest of Europe. Its largest European subsidiaries in the energy sector are EDF Energy (United Kingdom) and EnBW (Germany), but EDF also has stakes in many other European companies.
(10)
EDF was set up by Act No 46-628 of 8 April 1946 in the form of a public enterprise. In France, legal persons governed by public law - the category into which public enterprises fall - are not subject to the ordinary law on the administration and compulsory liquidation of firms in difficulty.
(11)
The inapplicability of insolvency and bankruptcy proceedings to legal persons governed by public law derives from the general principle of the unseizability of the assets of public entities, which has been recognised by French case-law since the end of the 19th Century (6).
(B) Reform of the pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries
(12)
The French authorities notified the Commission of a reform of the pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries.
(13)
The existing pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries is a special arrangement that is separate from the general social security scheme. It is a pay-as-you-go system funded by employees' contributions and a balancing contribution paid by enterprises in the sector, calculated in proportion to their wage bill and intended to balance each year the scheme's pension liabilities. Although the scheme covers the entire sector, it is administered by a joint department attached to EDF and Gaz de France (GDF).
(14)
The reform notified by the French authorities involves the creation of a nationwide joint social security body, the National Fund for the Electricity and Gas Industries (CNIEG), which will be independent of EDF and GDF, will have legal personality as a body governed by private law and will be covered by the Social Security Code. All employees and employers in the electricity and gas industries will be required to join the Fund.
(15)
From an economic standpoint, the reform distinguishes between two types of entitlement:
-
‘basic’ rights, corresponding to pension benefits that would be paid by the ordinary pension schemes (general social security scheme and compulsory supplementary schemes) in return for an ordinary contribution paid in discharge of obligations,
-
specific rights under the scheme for the electricity and gas industries over and above the benefits normally paid by the general scheme and compulsory supplementary schemes. These specific rights therefore correspond to the difference between the benefits paid by the special scheme for the electricity and gas industries and the basic rights.
(a) Basic rights
(16)
As far as basic rights (7) are concerned, the reform involves affiliation of the special scheme for the electricity and gas industries to the general scheme (the National Pension Fund for Employees - CNAV) and the compulsory supplementary schemes (General Association of Pension Institutions for Managerial Staff - AGIRC and Association of Supplementary Pension Schemes - ARRCO). These schemes will pay workers in the sector pension benefits corresponding to the basic rights in return for payment by the enterprises in the sector of an ordinary contribution in discharge of their obligations.
(17)
The social security bodies are to determine the technical arrangements for such affiliation with a view to ensuring financial neutrality for the transferee schemes (8). The affiliation may be effected among other things using the dependency indicators method or the dependency ratios method, both of which have already been used by the French social security bodies during previous affiliations (9).
(18)
In their letter dated 11 December 2003, the French authorities stated:
‘The French authorities undertake to ensure that the agreements concluded between the electricity and gas industries and the general schemes (transferee schemes) and any other measure taken in this context are financially neutral for all parties and for the State.’
(b) Specific rights
(19)
As far as specific rights (10) are concerned, the reform treats past and future specific rights differently.
(20)
Future specific rights, acquired by employees in the sector after the reform, will remain entirely the responsibility of the enterprises under the same conditions as before, however much they increase in line with the evolution of the wage bill.
(21)
Past specific rights already acquired at the date of the reform by employees assigned to electricity and gas transport and distribution activities will no longer be financed by the enterprises in the sector but by a tariff-based contribution. The contribution will be based, for each final consumer, on the component of the standing charge for use of the electricity or gas networks which can be directly imputed to him and which is independent of the energy actually consumed. It will be collected by the entity invoicing the electricity or gas distribution service to the final consumer and will be directly and fully allocated to the new pension fund for the electricity and gas industries.
(22)
Past specific rights already acquired at the date of the reform by employees assigned to activities other than electricity and gas transport and distribution will continue to be financed by the enterprises in the sector. At the date of the reform, the financing of these specific pension rights will be definitively apportioned among all the enterprises in the sector on the basis of two criteria: the wage bill of the enterprises concerned and the length of service with them of the employees covered by the arrangements for the electricity and gas industries.
(23)
As part of the notified reform, the State is also to guarantee the payment of pension benefits corresponding to all past specific rights. This guarantee of last resort will be granted to the National Fund for the Electricity and Gas Industries, not to the enterprises themselves. It could be called upon only after failure of an enterprise had been duly established and prior activation of an inter-company solidarity mechanism up to a given ceiling.
(C) Advantage resulting from the non-payment by EDF in 1997 of corporation tax on some of the accounting provisions created free of tax for the renewal of the high-voltage transmission network
(24)
In 1987, on the ground that the high-voltage transmission network (RAG) had been entrusted to it in 1956 by a concession contract, EDF changed its accounting practice and classified the assets allocated to the RAG under the balance sheet item ‘Assets under concession’. EDF therefore applied to those assets the special accounting rules established in France for assets under concession that have to be returned to the State at the end of the concession period, and created tax-free provisions for the renewal of the RAG.
(25)
Act No 97-1026 of 10 November 1997 nevertheless established that EDF was deemed to have owned the RAG since 1956. The accounting provisions created between 1987 and 1996 under the arrangements for assets under concession therefore became superfluous.
(26)
In 1997, EDF had in its accounts two types of provisions created free of tax for the renewal of the RAG: provisions not yet used, amounting to FRF 38,5 billion, and grantor rights, corresponding to renewal operations already carried out, amounting to FRF 18,345 billion.
(27)
Since these provisions had become superfluous, the French authorities reorganised EDF's balance sheet by means of an act and a ministerial decision.
(28)
First, Act No 97-1026 of 10 November 1997 provided that ‘as at 1 January 1997, the value of the assets in kind allocated under concession to the RAG appearing as liabilities on EDF's balance sheet shall be entered, net of the corresponding revaluation differences, under the item “Capital injections”’. The share of the provisions corresponding to grantor rights was therefore to be reclassified as capital injections without being subject to corporation tax.
(29)
Second, Annex 1 to a letter addressed to EDF on 22 December 1997 by the Minister for Economic Affairs, Finance and Industry, the Secretary of State for the Budget and the Secretary of State for Industry (hereinafter the letter from the Minister for Economic Affairs) explained the restructuring of the upper part of EDF's balance sheet pursuant to Article 4 of Act No 97-1026 of 10 November 1997:
‘-
Reclassification of “Grantor rights” (FRF 18 345 563 605):
-
Consolidation as capital injections of the value of assets in kind allocated under concession to the RAG, amounting to FRF 14 119 065 335.
-
Amalgamation of the revaluation differences for the RAG in 1959 (FRF 2 425 million) and 1976 (non-depreciable fixed assets: FRF 97 million) with the item “Revaluation differences RAG”, which is thus increased from FRF 1 720 million to FRF 4 145 million.
-
Amalgamation of the statutory provisions for the revaluation of depreciable fixed assets in 1976 (FRF 1 704 million), the item thus increasing from FRF 877 million to FRF 2 581 million.
-
Reclassification of the replacement provisions which have become unwarranted (FRF 38 520 943 408) as surplus carried forward, in accordance with National Accountancy Council Opinion No 97-06 of 18 June 1997 on accountancy changes.’
(30)
Annex 3 to the letter from the Minister for Economic Affairs also sets out the tax implications of the reorganisation of EDF's balance sheet. A net asset variation is observed as a result of the reclassification of the unused replacement provisions amounting to FRF 38,5 billion as surplus carried forward and subjected to corporation tax at the rate of 41,66 % applicable in 1997.
(31)
The unused provisions amounting to FRF 38,5 billion were thus correctly taxed by the French authorities, while the share of the provisions corresponding to grantor rights were not taxed.
(32)
In accordance with Act No 97-1026 of 10 November 1997 and the letter from the Minister for Economic Affairs, the revaluation differences were transferred to the item ‘Own assets’ without incurring any tax since they corresponded to revaluation surpluses realised free of tax or under a tax neutrality arrangement pursuant to the 1959 and 1976 revaluation acts.
(33)
In reorganising EDF's balance sheet, the French authorities followed National Accountancy Council Opinion No 97-06 of 18 June 1997 on changes to accounting methods, changes to estimates, changes to tax options and corrections to errors (hereinafter the National Accountancy Council Opinion), which States that corrections to accounting errors, which by their very nature relate to the posting of past transactions, ‘should be posted in the accounts for the financial year in which they are discovered’.
(34)
In its injunction of 15 October 2002, the Commission requested the French authorities to let it have all the necessary documents, information and data for assessing the compatibility of that aid measure, and in particular full copies of the confidential reports issued by the French Court of Auditors on EDF. The French authorities confined themselves to communicating extracts from those reports on the ground that only those extracts had to do with the Commission's investigation and that ‘the Court of Auditors’ special reports on EDF contain names of individuals and/or business secrets'.
(35)
The Commission notes that the documents forwarded were heavily censored. It would stress that it is not for the Member State but for the Commission to assess the relevance of such documents in the context of its investigation. Neither does the existence of business secrets constitute a valid ground for refusing to transmit a document to the Commission, since the Commission is required to treat in confidence any information classed as a business secret. In accordance with Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, the refusal by a Member State to provide a document requested by the Commission entitles the latter to take a decision exclusively on the basis of the information available to it.
III. COMMENTS FROM AN INTERESTED PARTY
(36)
By letter dated 6 January 2003, the National Association of Independent Thermal Electricity Producers (SNPIET) submitted comments to the Commission in the context of the formal investigation procedure initiated in respect of the non-payment by EDF, in 1997, of corporation tax on some of the accounting provisions created free of tax for the renewal of the RAG. The SNPIET alleged that EDF had not complied in its operations with normal practice in industrial and commercial enterprises, contrary to the provisions of Act No 46-628 of 8 April 1946.
IV. COMMENTS FROM THE FRENCH AUTHORITIES IN THE CONTEXT OF THE FORMAL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURES
(37)
The French authorities submitted comments to the Commission in the context of the two formal investigation procedures.
(A) Unlimited State guarantee
(38)
The French authorities submitted their comments to the Commission by letter dated 12 June 2003, in which they reiterated and supplemented the arguments set out in their letter of 11 December 2002.
(39)
In their letter of 11 December 2002, the French authorities disputed the classification of the State guarantee as aid, developing their case at length on the basis of the following arguments:
(a)
Under Act No 80-539 of 16 July 1980 on periodic penalty payments imposed in administrative proceedings and compliance with judgments by legal persons governed by public law, a public enterprise was responsible for settling its debts out of its own assets. If it had insufficient funds, it had to create the necessary resources either by reducing the funds allocated to other expenditures or by increasing its revenues. Where the public enterprise failed to act, the supervisory authority served formal notice for it to do so. If the public enterprise did not comply, the supervisory authority itself issued a mandatory payment order for the expenditure in question, where necessary having first released the necessary resources. According to the French authorities, the State did not therefore take the place of the public enterprise in order to pay its debts; it merely ordered the expenditure should the public enterprise fail to act.
(b)
According to the Commission, it was not the public enterprise status that constituted aid, but the more favourable credit terms it enabled such enterprises to obtain. However, the Commission had not demonstrated in what way the special status enjoyed by public enterprises had actually enabled EDF to obtain real advantages linked to a particular loan or another financial obligation it had entered into.
(c)
The Commission should have carried out an overall assessment of the prerogatives and constraints of public enterprises rather than confining itself to highlighting certain privileges. Public enterprises were subject to certain statutory constraints, such as the principle of specialisation and the ban on arbitration clauses, which disadvantaged them in relation to commercial enterprises. Neither did the Commission take account of the public service obligations incumbent on EDF.
(d)
If it were found that there was an implicit State guarantee, it would in any event be necessary in order to ensure continuity of the public service.
(e)
The Commission decision deprived Article 295 of the Treaty of its effectiveness and ran counter to the principle of equal treatment in that it treated public enterprises and commercial enterprises in the same way although they did not operate in comparable conditions.
(40)
In their letter dated 12 June 2003, the French authorities added further points as set out below.
(41)
As regards the use of State resources, they considered that the Commission's interpretation of Act No 80-539 of 16 July 1980 was incorrect. They stressed that no legal instrument or court decision provided for or sanctioned the existence of an automatic guarantee for the benefit either of EDF or of public enterprises in general. They reiterated that Act No 80-539 of 16 July 1980 had neither the object nor the effect of transferring the burden of a debt to the State and emphasised that, even when public entities in France had faced extremely serious financial difficulties, financial solutions had been found without State intervention. They furthermore took the view that the fact that a public supervisory authority was empowered to increase the resources of a public entity in financial difficulty did not suffice to demonstrate either the existence of a State guarantee of last resort or the use of State resources within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
(42)
With regard to the grant of a selective advantage, the French authorities claimed that the selective nature of the aid measure under examination had not been proven. They argued that the arrangements established by Act No 80-539 of 16 July 1980 formed part of the general scheme of the system that derived from the general principle of the unseizability of the assets of public entities under French law. They also took the view that the Commission had not demonstrated that they enjoyed any discretionary power to assess the appropriateness of issuing a mandatory payment order, for a sum of money that had become due for payment following a court decision, on behalf of a public entity.
(43)
The French authorities thus again disputed the Commission's claim that, by virtue of its status as a public enterprise, EDF enjoyed an unlimited State guarantee constituting aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
(B) Non-payment by EDF of corporation tax on some of the accounting provisions created free of tax for the renewal of the high-voltage transmission network
(44)
The French authorities submitted their comments to the Commission by letter dated 11 December 2002. They disputed the classification as State aid of the non-payment in 1987 of corporation tax on some of the accounting provisions created free of tax for the renewal of the high-voltage transmission network (RAG).
(45)
The French authorities first disputed the amount of the provisions for renewal of the RAG advanced by the Commission. They then argued that, even if EDF had not set aside provisions for the renewal of the RAG, it would still not have been liable for payment of corporation tax between 1987 and 1996 because of the carryover of large tax losses. Furthermore, since the State was both the owner of EDF and the grantor of the concession on the RAG, they considered that the grantor rights did not provide it with a genuinely enforceable claim. Consequently, when the balance sheet was restructured in 1997, they assigned those rights to EDF's capital and reserves in order to correct its undercapitalisation, but without subjecting them to corporation tax. The French authorities took the view that the restructuring of EDF's accounts in 1997 could be interpreted as a capital injection of an amount equivalent to the partial tax exemption.
(46)
They also denied that the remuneration of the State was unduly reduced between 1987 and 1996 as a result of the creation of the provisions in question. They argued that, even if the net result had been higher, the remuneration of the State would not have been increased since, during that period, the level of that remuneration did not correspond to a predetermined percentage of EDF's net result: it was determined freely by the State in absolute terms and did not necessarily depend on EDF's financial situation; neither did the remuneration have to be deducted from the net profits for each year. In view of the foregoing and given the losses carried over by EDF, the French authorities stressed that between 1987 and 1996 the State in fact took a dividend considerably in excess of the levels allowed by the ordinary law on commercial enterprises.
(47)
The French authorities also considered that even if the creation of provisions for the renewal of the RAG had resulted in an advantage, such an advantage had to be regarded as cancelled out by the increase in corporation tax paid in 1997. They claimed that, over the period 1987 to 1996, EDF paid more to the State overall than the corporation tax that would have been paid by a commercial enterprise which did not create provisions for the renewal of the RAG and which paid its shareholder a dividend equal to 37,5 % of its net result after tax.
(48)
The French authorities also argued that if EDF were found to have benefited from an undue advantage, it would constitute existing aid and not new aid on account of the expiry of the ten-year limitation period laid down in Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, which began to run from the date the initial aid was granted. Since the Commission's first request for information was made on 10 July 2001, any aid granted before 1991 would be time-barred. The legislative measures adopted in 1997 did not suspend the limitation period since only action by the Commission could have that effect. The French authorities argued finally that the measure would constitute existing aid in any event since it was granted prior to the liberalisation of the electricity market.
(49)
In their letter dated 20 November 2003, the French authorities reiterated their arguments concerning the revaluation differences included in the amount of the grantor rights appearing in the accounts and concerning application of the limitation rule. They also claimed that the rate of corporation tax that should have been applied when EDF's balance sheet was restructured was the 1996 rate (36,67 %) not the 1997 rate (41,66 %), since the restructuring was carried out on the basis of a tax return lodged on 23 December 1997, after closure of the accounts for 1996 but before the 1997 accounts were finalised.
(50)
The French authorities thus disputed the Commission's claim that EDF benefited from an advantage in 1997 on account of the non-payment of corporation tax on some of the provisions created free of tax for the renewal of the high-voltage transmission network.
(C) Observations by the French authorities on the comments from an interested party
(51)
The SNPIET's comments were forwarded to the French authorities by letter dated 21 January 2003. By letter dated 21 February 2003, the French authorities reacted to those comments by stating, first, that most of the points made by the SNPIET should be declared inadmissible because they did not concern the formal investigation procedure that had been initiated and, second, that the SNPIET had not brought any new fact concerning the procedure to the Commission's attention: they consequently did not have any observations to make in response to the SNPIET's comments.
V. ASSESSMENT OF THE EXISTENCE OF STATE AID
(52)
Article 87(1) of the Treaty (11) provides that ‘any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, insofar as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market’. In determining whether a measure constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty, the Commission has to apply the following criteria: the measure must be imputed to the State and use State resources, it must confer an advantage on certain undertakings or certain sectors which distorts competition and it must affect trade between Member States.
(53)
The Commission reiterates here the points already made in the decisions to propose appropriate measures and open formal investigations (12).
(54)
This Decision is without prejudice to the application of and compliance with the rules of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community.
1. Unlimited State guarantee
(a) State resources
(55)
EDF has had public enterprise status since it was set up by Act No 46-628 of 8 April 1946 on the nationalisation of electricity and gas. Like all public entities, EDF is not subject to the ordinary law on collective proceedings.
(56)
Point 2.1.3 of the Commission notice on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid in the form of guarantees (13) (hereinafter the notice on State aid in the form of guarantees) States that ‘the Commission (…) regards as aid in the form of a guarantee, the more favourable funding terms obtained by enterprises whose legal form rules out bankruptcy or other insolvency proceedings or provides an explicit State guarantee or coverage of losses by the State’. The existence of State aid is therefore established in either of the above instances.
(57)
The Commission takes the view that the fact that EDF cannot be subject to administration or compulsory liquidation proceedings, and therefore cannot be declared bankrupt, is equivalent to a general guarantee covering all its liabilities. Such a guarantee cannot be the subject of any remuneration according to the rules of the market. Such a guarantee, which is unlimited in scope, time and amount, constitutes State aid.
(58)
In accordance with the notice on State aid in the form of guarantees, State aid exists within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty even if no payments are made by the State under the guarantee. The aid is granted at the moment when the guarantee is given, and this took place in the case in point when EDF was set up as a public enterprise, thereby rendering it exempt from insolvency and bankruptcy proceedings. The unlimited State guarantee granted to EDF was thus conferred by an act.
(59)
In its decision to propose appropriate measures and its decision to open a formal investigation, the Commission already classed the unlimited guarantee enjoyed by EDF as existing aid. Under Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, all aid which existed prior to the entry into force of the Treaty in the respective Member State constitutes existing aid. The general principle of the unseizability of the assets of public entities was established by French case-law in the late 19th Century, and EDF's status dates back to 1946.
(60)
Contrary to what the French authorities have claimed, the special procedure for the recovery of claims established by Act No 80-539 of 16 July 1980 (14) is not comparable to Act No 85-98 of 25 January 1985 on the administration and compulsory liquidation of enterprises. Under Act No 85-98, where a commercial enterprise is no longer able to honour its debts and cannot be the subject of an administration measure, it must be put into compulsory liquidation. Its assets are then seized and sold and the proceeds of their sale normally serve to pay off all the creditors. However, since in practice the assets are often worth much less than the liabilities, the proceeds of the sale are seldom sufficient to repay all the claims. The creditors of a commercial enterprise under the ordinary rules are therefore exposed to two risks: not only can the enterprise be put into compulsory liquidation should it suspend payments, but also the procedure does not guarantee that the creditors will recover their claims.
(61)
Public enterprises, on the other hand, cannot be put into compulsory liquidation and their assets are unseizable: they cannot therefore be sold in order to repay creditors. The debts of public entities are paid in accordance with a special procedure established by Act No 80-539 of 16 July 1980, whereby they must, if they have insufficient funds, create the necessary resources. Should the public enterprise fail to act, the supervisory authority serves formal notice for it to do so. If the public enterprise does not comply, the supervisory authority itself issues a mandatory payment order for the expenditure in question. Act No 80-539 and its Implementing Decree do not rule out a State guarantee of last resort, since the latter provides that the supervisory authority ‘shall, where appropriate, release the necessary resources either by reducing the funds allocated to other expenditures and so far unused or by increasing resources’ (15). This instrument does not rule out the possibility of such an increase in resources, following the State intervention, coming from outside the enterprise, at least if there is no other possible solution involving the enterprise's own resources.
(62)
The creditors of a public enterprise are therefore not exposed to any risk of their claims failing to be paid: not only can the enterprise not be declared bankrupt, but also the law guarantees the payment of their claims through special administrative procedures. The special procedure applicable to public enterprises cannot therefore be compared with the compulsory liquidation procedure applicable to commercial enterprises under the ordinary rules. On the contrary, Act No 80-539 of 16 July 1980 strengthens the effect of the unlimited State guarantee enjoyed by EDF on account of the fact that it cannot be declared bankrupt.
(63)
French legal theorists consider that public entities under French law do enjoy a State guarantee of last resort. Where such public entities carry on a strategic activity that is essential to the national economy or national solidarity, the State could not disregard their fate if they were faced with a difficult financial situation. The involvement of the State would be all the more certain where it had exercised decisive control over the activity of the enterprise, for example by setting the prices for its products (16).
(64)
Likewise, in an unpublished opinion, the French Council of State held ‘that the State guarantee [enjoyed by a public enterprise] will derive, in the absence of an explicit legislative provision, from its very nature as a public enterprise’ (17).
(65)
In other words, if the inapplicability of bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings to public entities is a corollary of the principle of the unseizability of their assets, then the obligation on the State to answer for their debts in the event of default derives from the same principle.
(66)
Contrary to what the French authorities have claimed, Act No 80-539 of 16 July 1980 is selective in that it applies only to commercial enterprises with the status of a public entity. It does not therefore constitute a general measure.
(b) Selective advantage and distortion of competition
(67)
A measure constitutes State aid if it confers an advantage on certain specific beneficiaries. All measures that are liable directly or indirectly to favour certain sectors, enterprises or products fall within the concept of economic advantage. State interventions in favour of public enterprises may also involve State aid where they are carried out under abnormal circumstances and confer an advantage on the enterprise in question.
(68)
Since by virtue of its status EDF cannot be declared bankrupt, its liabilities do not give rise to any risk of insolvency. EDF can therefore borrow at lower rates than those normally offered to commercial enterprises that are governed by the ordinary rules and can be the subject of administration and compulsory liquidation proceedings. The credit terms obtained by an enterprise vary according to its risk of insolvency: the higher that risk, the more costly the credit terms it is offered. Enterprises which, like EDF, raise funds by issuing bonds request independent rating agencies regularly to assess their creditworthiness. The ratings assigned in this way to an enterprise determine the amount of the remuneration required by an investor to subscribe to its bond issues. Where an enterprise's rating falls as a result of an increased risk of insolvency, investors will demand greater remuneration and the bond issue will cost it more. On the other hand, an enterprise that is not subject to the ordinary law on bankruptcy and therefore enjoys an unlimited State guarantee does not present any risk of insolvency, which enables it to borrow on more favourable terms.
(69)
The main rating agencies all regard the unlimited State guarantee as a decisive factor in assessing EDF's creditworthiness. Since June 2001, Fitch Ratings has thus assigned EDF a long-term debt rating of AAA and a short-term debt rating of F1+. In a press release, it stressed that those ratings reflected the implicit State guarantee covering EDF's debt and its current legal status and added that, in the absence of such a guarantee, EDF's long-term debt rating would be AA+ (18). In May 2002, Fitch Ratings confirmed those long-term and short-term debt ratings, but gave the group an intrinsic creditworthiness rating of AA (19). The unlimited State guarantee thus enables EDF to obtain a better assessment of its risk of insolvency than would result from a simple analysis of its intrinsic creditworthiness. For its part, in January 2002 Moody's downgraded the outlook for EDF's long-term debt rating of Aaa from ‘stable’ to ‘negative’. In a press release, the agency explained its revision of the rating by the increasing likelihood of EDF's status and control structure having to change in the medium term and stated that if EDF were to lose its current status, which exempted it from the ordinary law on bankruptcy, its long-term debt rating could be lowered by one or two notches (20). The unlimited State guarantee does therefore enable EDF to obtain more favourable credit terms than those available to a commercial enterprise without a State guarantee.
(70)
Insofar as EDF is the only enterprise active on the electricity market that enjoys an unlimited State guarantee by virtue of its status, the advantage is selective.
(71)
EDF is in competition with other Community operators in the markets for the production and distribution of electricity and energy services and with other operators active on energy markets that compete with electricity. The Court of Justice of the European Communities has consistently held (21) that any State aid which strengthens the position of an enterprise in relation to other enterprises competing in intra-Community trade distorts competition.
(72)
The unlimited State guarantee thus confers on EDF an advantage that necessarily strengthens its position in relation to its competitors. It therefore distorts competition within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
2. Reform of the pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries
(a) Selective advantage and distortion of competition
(73)
The affiliation of the pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries to the general schemes does not constitute an advantage insofar as such affiliation is an option open to any special pension scheme that wishes to do so and the financial arrangements, valuation methods and timetable for the affiliation are financially neutral for the transferee schemes and the State.
(74)
In the case in point, the technical arrangements for the affiliation are still to be determined as part of ongoing negotiations between the electricity and gas industries and the transferee schemes. The French authorities have nevertheless formally undertaken by letter dated 11 December 2003‘to ensure that the agreements concluded between the electricity and gas industries and the general schemes (transferee schemes) and any other measure taken in this context are financially neutral for all parties and for the State’.
(75)
The Commission takes the view that, provided the above undertaking is fulfilled in practice, the affiliation of the pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries to the general schemes will not constitute an advantage. Otherwise, the operation would of course have to be re-examined. The Commission stresses that the French authorities would have to notify it formally of the operation if the definitive arrangements for the affiliation were not in line with the principle of financial neutrality.
(76)
In the light of the undertaking given by the French authorities, the Commission considers that the affiliation of the pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries to the general schemes will not involve any State aid provided that such affiliation is financially neutral for the enterprises, the transferee schemes and the State.
(77)
On the other hand, the notified reform relieves enterprises in the electricity and gas industries of the payment of some of the pension liabilities corresponding to rights already acquired at the date of the reform by employees assigned to electricity and gas transport and distribution. Those rights will be financed by the above-mentioned tariff-based contribution. Enterprises in the electricity and gas industries are thus relieved of the payment of some of the pension benefits acquired in the past, something which constitutes an advantage for those industries.
(78)
An advantage is thus conferred on the electricity and gas industries which has not been granted to any other area of the French economy, and in particular to the industries in direct competition (such as the oil and coal industries). It is consequently a selective sectoral advantage.
(79)
The French electricity and gas industries are in competition with the same industries in other Member States. Any State aid that strengthens the position of one industry in relation to other industries competing with it in intra-Community trade distorts competition. The non-payment by enterprises in the electricity and gas industries of some of their past pension liabilities constitutes an advantage for the French electricity and gas industries that necessarily strengthens their position in relation to enterprises in competing industries in the other Member States. The advantage therefore distorts competition within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
(80)
The State guarantee granted to the National Fund for the Electricity and Gas Industries, covering the payment of pensions corresponding to all specific rights acquired in the past, constitutes a guarantee of last resort afforded to the pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries, not to the enterprises themselves. The State guarantee consequently benefits a social security institution that operates on a pay-as-you-go basis and is financed by compulsory contributions. The Court of Justice has consistently held (22) that institutions of that nature are not engaged in an economic activity within the meaning of the Treaty. Any guarantees granted to such institutions do not therefore constitute an advantage caught by Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
(b) State resources
(81)
The reform of the pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries notified by the French authorities involves State resources.
(82)
The cost of the liabilities corresponding to the specific pension rights already acquired at the date of the reform by employees assigned to electricity or gas transport and distribution will be transferred to the National Fund for the Electricity and Gas Industries and will be financed by the tariff-based contribution introduced by the French authorities. The chargeable event for the contribution will be the existence of a connection to an electricity or gas transport or distribution network.
(83)
Payment of the contribution will be compulsory. It will be introduced by an act which will determine the chargeable event, the arrangements for collection and the allocation of the proceeds. The different rates of the contribution will be set by joint order issued by the ministers responsible for the budget and for energy, after consulting the Energy Regulatory Board. In the case in point, although the State is not directly involved in managing the contribution, since it is collected by the entities invoicing the electricity or gas distribution service and paid direct to the new pension fund for the industries, the State nevertheless determines the conditions in which it is collected and the way in which the proceeds are used. Accordingly, the resources collected by way of the tariff-based contribution do constitute State resources.
3. Non-payment by EDF in 1997 of corporation tax on some of the accounting provisions created free of tax for the renewal of the high-voltage transmission network
(a) Selective advantage and distortion of competition
(84)
Since Act No 97-1026 of 10 November 1997 established that EDF was deemed to have been the owner of the high-voltage transmission network (RAG) since 1956, it has to be ascertained whether the Act did not involve a transfer of ownership of the RAG.
(85)
According to the information provided by the French authorities, EDF can reasonably be regarded as the owner of the RAG since the initial contractual conditions dating from 1956. That conclusion is based on the following evidence: the features of the different types of concession contract under French law; the special features of the original concession granted to EDF, which did not include an explicit retrocession clause; the procedure for the acquisition of the assets concerned, for which EDF had to pay a fee similar to compensation under a compulsory purchase procedure; and the conditions for the financing, maintenance and extension of the RAG at EDF's expense. The Commission consequently takes the view that the ‘clarification’ of ownership of the RAG brought about by Act No 97-1026 of 10 November 1997 does not in itself involve any State aid.
(86)
It now has to be examined whether Act No 97-1026 addressed all the tax implications of such ‘clarification’ and, if not, whether a tax concession was thus granted to EDF.
(87)
During the period between 1987 and 1996, EDF created tax-free provisions for the renewal of the RAG. Following the 1997 Act declaring that EDF was deemed to have been the owner of the RAG since 1956, those provisions became superfluous and therefore had to be reallocated to other items in the balance sheet.
(88)
The letter from the Minister for Economic Affairs setting out the tax implications of the restructuring of EDF's balance sheet shows that the unused provisions for renewal of the RAG were subjected by the French authorities to corporation tax at 41,66 %, the rate applicable in 1997.
(89)
On the other hand, pursuant to Article 4 of Act No 97-1026 of 10 November 1997, some of those provisions, namely the grantor rights, corresponding to renewal operations already carried out, were reclassified as capital injections amounting to FRF 14.119 billion without being subjected to corporation tax. The French authorities themselves acknowledge that the transaction was illegal. In a memorandum dated 9 April 2002 addressed by the Directorate-General for Taxation to the Commission, the French authorities Stated that ‘the grantor rights in respect of the RAG represent an unowed debt which was unjustifiably exempted from tax by being incorporated into the capital’ and that ‘before this reserve was incorporated into the capital, it should have been transferred from the enterprise's liabilities, where it was incorrectly posted, to a net assets account, thereby resulting in a positive variation in net worth that was taxable under Article 38(2)’ of the General Tax Code. They noted that ‘the tax concession thus obtained [by EDF in 1997] can be estimated at FRF 5,88 billion (14,119 × 41,66 %)’, equivalent to EUR 888,89 million (23).
(90)
The Commission points out, on the one hand, that, in line with the National Accountancy Council Opinion, corrections to accounting errors should be posted in the accounts for the financial year in which they are discovered. On the other hand, since the unused provisions amounting to FRF 38,5 billion that had been created free of tax were subjected to corporation tax at the rate of 41,66 % in 1997, the Commission can see no objective reason why the rest of the provisions created free of tax should not have been taxed at the same rate.
(91)
The Commission takes the view that the grantor rights should have been taxed at the same time and the same rate as the other accounting provisions created free of tax. This means that the FRF 14,119 billion in grantor rights should have been added to the FRF 38,5 billion in unused provisions and taxed at the rate of 41,66 % applied by the French authorities to the restructuring of EDF's balance sheet. By not paying all the corporation tax due when it restructured its balance sheet, EDF saved EUR 888,89 million.
(92)
The Commission considers that the aid was indeed paid in 1997, since the FRF 14,119 billion was at that time a debt to the State, entered under the balance sheet item of grantor rights, which the State waived by means of Act No 97-1026 of 10 November 1997.
(93)
The French authorities claim that, even if EDF had not set aside provisions for the renewal of the RAG, it would still not have been liable for payment of corporation tax between 1987 and 1996 because of the carryover of large tax losses. The Commission dismisses this argument as irrelevant, since the tax concession dated from 1997 and not previous years. It also notes that, if the provisions had not been set aside, the tax losses carried over would have been gradually absorbed between 1987 and 1996 and the amount of tax payable by EDF in 1997 would have been significantly higher.
(94)
The French authorities also take the view that, even if the creation of provisions for the renewal of the RAG resulted in an advantage, that advantage should be regarded as cancelled out by the increase in corporation tax paid in 1997. The Commission cannot but dismiss this argument. As it has demonstrated above and as the French authorities themselves acknowledge in their memorandum dated 9 April 2002, although the unused replacement provisions were correctly taxed, the grantor rights were reclassified as capital injections without being subjected to corporation tax. The tax paid by EDF in 1997 is therefore lower than the tax normally due.
(95)
The French authorities claim, furthermore, that the restructuring of EDF's accounts in 1997 can be regarded as a capital injection of an amount equivalent to the partial tax exemption: it was therefore an investment by them and not an aid measure. They also argue that, over the period from 1987 to 1996, EDF paid more to the State overall than the corporation tax that would have been paid by a commercial enterprise which did not create provisions for the renewal of the RAG and which paid its shareholder a dividend equal to 37,5 % of its net result after tax.
(96)
The Commission has to dismiss these arguments, since the private investor principle can be applied only in the context of the pursuit of an economic activity, not in the context of the exercise of regulatory powers. A public authority cannot use as an argument any economic benefits it could derive as the owner of an enterprise in order to justify aid granted in a discretionary manner by virtue of the prerogatives it enjoys as the tax authority in relation to the same enterprise.
(97)
While a Member State may act as a shareholder in addition to exercising its powers as a public authority, it must not combine its role as a State wielding public power with that of a shareholder. Allowing Member States to use their prerogatives as public authorities for the benefit of their investments in enterprises operating in markets that are open to competition would render the Community rules on State aid completely ineffective. Furthermore, while in accordance with Article 295 the Treaty is neutral as regards the system of capital ownership, the fact remains that public enterprises must be subject to the same rules as private enterprises. Public and private enterprises would no longer be granted equal treatment if the State were to use the prerogatives of public power for the benefit of the enterprises in which it is a shareholder.
(98)
The French authorities claim that the rate of corporation tax that should have been applied when EDF's balance sheet was restructured was the 1996 rate and not the 1997 rate. As Stated earlier, the Commission would first point out that the National Accountancy Council considers that corrections to accounting errors should be posted in the accounts for the financial year in which they are discovered. Since the provisions for renewal of the RAG became superfluous following Act No 97-1026 of 10 November 1997, they should have been reclassified in the accounts for the 1997 financial year and therefore taxed at the rate of corporation tax applicable to that year. The Commission also notes that the French authorities themselves applied the 1997 rate of corporation tax to the share of the provisions that was taxed.
(99)
The non-payment by EDF, in 1997, of EUR 888,89 million in tax therefore constitutes an advantage for the group. EDF was able to use the amount of the unpaid tax to increase its capital and reserves without having to raise outside finance. The advantage is necessarily selective, since the non-payment of corporation tax on some of the accounting provisions constitutes an exception to the tax treatment normally applicable to such a transaction. The fact that the advantage was granted to EDF by a specific legislative instrument, Act No 97-1026 of 10 November 1997, is proof that it is unique and overrides the rules of ordinary law.
(100)
Like EDF's unlimited State guarantee, this advantage it enjoys necessarily strengthens its position in relation to its competitors. It therefore distorts competition within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
(b) State resources
(101)
The concept of aid embraces not only positive benefits, such as subsidies, but also interventions by the public authorities which mitigate the charges that are normally included in the budget of an undertaking and which have the same effect as subsidies (24). The Court has consistently held (25) that the non-collection by the State of a tax which should normally have been collected is equivalent to the consumption of State resources.
(102)
The non-collection of the full amount of corporation tax due in respect of the 1997 financial year derived directly from a measure adopted by the State, namely Act No 97-1026 of 10 November 1997.
(103)
Consequently, in 1997 EDF received State aid amounting to EUR 888,89 million in the form of a tax concession.
4. Effect on trade between Member States
(104)
From its creation in 1946 until the entry into force of Directive 96/92/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 1996 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity (26), EDF enjoyed a monopoly on the French market, with exclusive rights in respect of the transport, distribution, import and export of electricity. It was, however, already in competition with electricity producers in other Member States even before Directive 96/92/EC entered into force, and free competition also existed on related markets where EDF had already diversified its activities beyond its exclusive rights (in both geographic and sectoral terms). Effects on trade did therefore exist well before the liberalisation provided for by Directive 96/92/EC.
(105)
Electricity was the subject of significant, growing trade between Member States in which EDF was actively engaged. This trade, which was given a further boost by the adoption of Council Directive 90/547/EEC of 29 October 1990 on the transit of electricity through transmission grids (27), took place on the basis of commercial agreements between the different operators of the high-voltage transmission networks in the Member States. In the European OECD member countries, electricity imports grew at an average annual rate of over 7 % between 1980 and 1990. Between 1981 and 1989, EDF multiplied the surplus on its balance of trade in electricity by nine, achieving net exports of 42 TWh, representing 10 % of its total production. In 1985, EDF already exported 19 TWh to other Member States.
(106)
In its annual report for 1997, EDF stated that it ranked ‘among the world's leading operators in the electricity industry, with, outside France, more than FRF 13 billion invested, a total installed production capacity equal to nearly 11 % of the figure for France and over 8 million customers’. The report also stressed that in 1997 EDF had ‘increased the number and size of its investments in Europe by extending its presence to Austria and Poland’ and had ‘exported over 70 TWh in Europe’.
(107)
The 1997-2000 management contract, signed on 8 April 1997 between the French State and EDF, stipulates that EDF is to allocate some FRF 14 billion to its international investments, assigning priority to regions in Europe. Between 2000 and 2002, EDF acquired one third of the capital of the German company EnBW, increased the production and distribution capacities of its United Kingdom subsidiary London Electricity, took direct control of the Italian enterprise Fenice and set up a partnership with Fiat for the purchase of Montedison (now Edison). EDF thus plays a major role in electricity trading between the Member States. In 2001, EDF's electricity exports grew to a record level of 83,9 TWh, contributing EUR 2 300 million to its annual turnover.
(108)
The French electricity market is currently 34,5 % open, with the threshold for eligible customers set at 7 GWh. The market open to competition consists of some 3 100 premises representing demand of over 150 TWh. According to the latest estimates, the market share of EDF's competitors on that market is 18,5 %. 31 European suppliers are present on the French market, and electricity imports into France totalled some 26 TWh in 2001. As regards electricity production in France, EDF is furthermore now in competition with Compagnie Nationale du Rhône, a subsidiary of Electrabel, and Société Nationale d'Electricité et de Thermique, some of whose capital is held by the Spanish company Endesa. EDF is therefore now in competition with other operators on the French market.
(109)
Even before Directive 96/92/EC entered into force in February 1999, certain Member States acted unilaterally to open up their electricity market. In particular, the United Kingdom opened up its market completely for large industrial customers in 1990. Sweden opened up its market completely in 1996, Finland began the process in 1995 and reached 100 % market opening in 1997, Germany completely opened up its market in 1998 and the Netherlands opened up its market completely for industrial customers in 1998. In those circumstances, even before the deadline set by the Directive for opening up the market to competition, State aid granted to enterprises enjoying a monopoly in a Member State that took an active part in intra-Community trade, as in the case of EDF, distorted competition on the electricity market within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
(110)
EDF competed and continues to compete both in France and in other Member States in areas outside its core business of electricity production and distribution, since it has diversified its activities on the markets in services related to energy, which have been entirely liberalised. In 1997, SDS, a wholly owned subsidiary of EDF, brought together its activities associated with the provision of services to individual customers, businesses and local authorities. SDS was active in waste treatment, street lighting and other energy-related services and generated turnover equivalent of EUR 685 million in 1998 as against EUR 650 million in 1997. In 2000, EDF established a partnership with Veolia Environnement via the company Dalkia, the European leader in energy services to businesses and local authorities. It offers energy engineering and maintenance services, manages heating plants and technical services to do with the operation of buildings and operates district heating networks, combined heat and power schemes, and energy production and industrial fluid systems.
(111)
EDF has also developed its activities on the market in renewable energy sources. In 1997, the holding company Chart, a wholly owned EDF subsidiary, brought together its activities in the renewables sector, e.g. geothermal energy and wind power. Its contribution to consolidated turnover that year was EUR 70 million.
(112)
Lastly, as an electricity producer and distributor, EDF was and still is in competition with suppliers of other substitute energy sources such as coal, oil and gas, both on its domestic market and on international markets. In France, for example, EDF has launched a successful campaign to promote the use of electricity for heating. It has thus increased its market share in comparison with its competitors who supply substitute energy sources such as oil or gas. In the steel industry, electric furnaces are in competition with gas and oil-fired furnaces.
(113)
As far as the effect on trade in gas between Member States is concerned, it should be noted that as France has only small gas reserves it has always imported most of its supplies. The gas market has also been the subject of a liberalisation directive: Directive 98/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas, which was to be transposed by all the Member States by August 2000. The Member States had to specify the eligible customers who could choose their supplier. The definition of eligible customers was to result in an opening of the market equal to at least 20 % of annual national gas consumption immediately and then 28 % in 2003.
(114)
A French parliamentary report (28) found that, according to government figures, the consumption of eligible customers who had changed suppliers accounted in early 2002 for around 25 % of the total consumption of eligible customers and 5 % of the total market, and that four new operators had entered the French market.
(115)
It is therefore clear that, in 1997, EDF was already well established on certain markets in other Member States and that the aid resulting from the non-payment by EDF of corporation tax on some of the accounting provisions created free of tax for the renewal of the RAG inevitably affected trade between Member States.
(116)
The unlimited State guarantee has also conferred on EDF an advantage which necessarily strengthens its position in relation to its competitors. In the light of the foregoing considerations, it necessarily affects trade between Member States within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty.
(117)
The reform of the pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries reduces the costs borne by enterprises in those industries and therefore constitutes an advantage for the sector. Since European markets in electricity and gas exist, the grant of an advantage to enterprises in those industries in France necessarily affects trade between Member States.
(118)
Consequently, since they fulfil the four criteria laid down in Article 87(1) of the Treaty, the unlimited State guarantee enjoyed by EDF, the non-payment by enterprises in the electricity and gas industries of some of the pension benefits corresponding to rights acquired in the past, and the non-payment by EDF of corporation tax on some of the accounting provisions created free of tax for the renewal of the RAG constitute State aid. The compatibility of these measures in the light of the Treaty rules now has to be assessed.
5. Assessment of the compatibility of the State aid at issue in the light of the Treaty
(a) Unlimited State guarantee
(119)
The unlimited State guarantee enjoyed by EDF constitutes State aid which enables the group to borrow on more favourable terms on the international financial markets.
(120)
Article 87(1) of the Treaty provides that aid fulfilling the criteria laid down therein is in principle incompatible with the common market. The exceptions to that rule, laid down in Article 87(2), are not applicable in the case in point because of the nature of the aid, which is not intended to achieve any of the objectives listed in that paragraph.
(121)
Neither does the aid measure in question qualify for the exceptions allowed by Article 87(3)(a) or (c), for aid to promote the economic development of certain regions, particularly since it corresponds to operating aid: it is not conditional on investments or on job creation as required by the guidelines on national regional aid (29).
(122)
Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty also allows an exception to be made for aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest. The aid measure under examination does not qualify for this exception.
(123)
As regards the exceptions allowed by Article 87(3)(b) and (d) of the Treaty, the aid measure under examination is not intended to promote the execution of a project of common interest, remedy a serious disturbance in the French economy or promote culture and heritage conservation.
(124)
The compatibility criteria set out in Article 87(2) and (3) of the Treaty are therefore not met.
(125)
The French authorities consider that, in its assessment, the Commission has not taken account of EDF's status and the constraints attached thereto, such as the principle of specialisation and the ban on arbitration clauses. These are provisions of French administrative law that have nothing to do with the issue of State aid. It is the French authorities that decided to confer such status on EDF. The status derives from an act passed by the French Parliament, which can therefore be amended at any time by the same procedure. The Commission notes, however, that the principle of specialisation has not prevented some diversification of EDF's activities.
(126)
Under Article 86(2) of the Treaty, undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest are subject to the rules of the Treaty, and in particular the rules on competition, insofar as the application of such rules does not obstruct the performance, in law or in fact, of the particular tasks assigned to them.
(127)
The Commission does not dispute the fact that EDF has to fulfil public service obligations. On that account and pursuant to Article 86 of the Treaty, EDF could receive financial compensation or enjoy certain prerogatives derogating from the generally applicable rules of law. However, such financial measures or prerogatives must be proportionate to what is necessary in order to compensate for the additional costs incurred by EDF as a result of those public service obligations. The State guarantee enjoyed by EDF, insofar as it covers all EDF's activities and is unlimited in time, is disproportionate. The Commission consequently takes the view that it creates an undue distortion of competition.
(128)
The French authorities have not relied on Article 86(2) of the Treaty, but they have stressed the fact that EDF performs public service tasks. They have not, however, indicated in detail EDF's specific public service obligations or their cost. There is therefore no way of checking whether or not the scope of the State's commitment towards EDF corresponds to the cost of its public service tasks. The Commission stresses in this connection the difficulty of correctly estimating the value of a general guarantee that is unspecified in amount and unlimited in time.
(129)
In the light of the information at its disposal, the Commission considers it impossible to examine whether the conditions formulated by the Court of Justice in Altmark (30) and the criteria for the application of Article 86(2) of the Treaty are fulfilled in the case in point.
(130)
The French authorities argue that the Commission's action deprives Article 295 of the Treaty of its effectiveness. In support of their argument, they cite the Advocate General's Opinion in Cases C-367/98, C-483/99 and C-503/99 concerning golden shares. However, in its judgments the Court of Justice did not follow that interpretation of Article 295 of the Treaty (31). In accordance with Article 295, the Community is neutral with regard to the system of property ownership in the Member States. No provision of the Treaty is an impediment to complete or partial State ownership of enterprises. But, at the same time, the competition rules must apply in the same way to private and public enterprises. The Court of Justice has consistently held that Article 295 does not have the effect of exempting the Member States' systems of property ownership from the fundamental rules of the Treaty (32).
(131)
That case-law was upheld by the judgment delivered by the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 6 March 2003 in West LB (33). According to that judgment, Article 295 of the Treaty cannot be held to restrict the scope of the concept of State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty. The application of the competition rules to undertakings, irrespective of the property systems to which they are subject, does not have the effect of restricting the protection under Article 295 of the Treaty and of leaving the Member States hardly any latitude in the management of public undertakings, in the retention of shareholdings which they have in those undertakings, or in recourse to considerations other than purely profit-making criteria. Where the interests to which that line of argument relates might conflict with the application of the competition rules, they are taken into account by Article 86(2) of the Treaty since it provides that undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest may escape the application of the competition rules if those rules obstruct the performance, in law or in fact, of the particular tasks assigned to those undertakings.
(132)
In the present case, the fact that EDF's capital is owned by the State is not called into question in the slightest: the unlimited State guarantee is linked not to the system of ownership of EDF but to its legal status. If that status has intrinsic features that distort competition, then the status itself must be examined in the light of the State aid rules. The Member States are free to choose the legal status of undertakings but must, in their choice, observe the rules of the Treaty. In this respect, the Commission's action is in line with the principle of equal treatment.
(133)
The Commission has no objection whatsoever to the public ownership of EDF's capital or the public enterprise status itself. It merely examines the effect of the exemption from administration and compulsory liquidation proceedings and the role of the State as the guarantor of last resort of all EDF's debts, including those associated with activities not covered by its public service obligations.
(134)
The unlimited State guarantee enjoyed by EDF thus constitutes State aid that is incompatible with the Treaty rules. In the decision to propose appropriate measures which it adopted in October 2002, the Commission already requested the French authorities to withdraw it.
(135)
In their letter dated 11 November 2003, the French authorities notified the following draft legislative provision to the Commission: ‘The public enterprises Electricité de France and Gaz de France are hereby converted (…) into limited companies governed (…) by the rules applicable to commercial enterprises’. They explain that the effect of converting EDF into a limited company will be to make it subject to the ordinary rules applicable to companies under administration or compulsory liquidation. The Commission considers that making EDF subject to the ordinary law on bankruptcy will have the effect of withdrawing the unlimited State guarantee which it enjoyed.
(136)
In a letter dated 16 December 2003, the French Government confirmed its intention to ‘table before Parliament the measures for converting the legal form of EDF, currently a public enterprise, into a legal form governed by the ordinary rules so that those measures can be put into effect by 1 January 2005’. On the basis of that information, the Commission takes the view that the unlimited State guarantee enjoyed by EDF must be effectively withdrawn by 1 January 2005. Such a deadline is sufficient and reasonable given the legislative and regulatory changes that have to be made.
(b) Reform of the pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries
(137)
The Commission notes that the current pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries in fact constitutes a barrier to entry into the French electricity and gas markets. Firstly, according to the rules of the scheme which are currently applicable to any new entrant, enterprises do not pay a contribution in discharge of their obligations but participate each year in the payment of pensions for the entire sector in proportion to their wage bill. The level of a new entrant's contribution therefore does not depend on a pre-established fixed rate but is determined each year on the basis of the amounts needed to keep the pension scheme in balance. That balance depends on parameters, such as the total wage bill of the sector and its demographic structure, that are established prior to the firm's market entry and are in no way related to its own pension liabilities.
(138)
Secondly, since the electricity and gas industries are highly capital-intensive, it is likely that any new market entrant would be listed on a stock exchange or would have recourse to issuing securities. Once the IAS accounting standards enter into force, such enterprises will have to set aside provisions in their accounts to finance the pension liabilities of the sector that have accumulated prior to their market entry but are chargeable to them in proportion to their current wage bill. This provisioning for past pension liabilities constitutes an additional expense in comparison with those incurred by enterprises subject to the ordinary social security rules, which finance pension schemes by way of contributions in discharge of their obligations and do not therefore have to set aside provisions for such liabilities. Entering a highly capital-intensive market, with large fixed costs, represents such a heavy investment that any additional expense can be seen as a major barrier.
(139)
Lastly, withdrawing the unlimited State guarantee enjoyed by EDF and GDF and therefore making them subject to the ordinary law on bankruptcy, without a concomitant reform of the pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries, would place all the enterprises in the sector, including new entrants, under the obligation to take over the pension liabilities of the two incumbents if they were declared bankrupt. Given the amounts at stake, such a risk cannot be borne by the other enterprises in the sector. The transfer of such a risk to the enterprises in the sector therefore constitutes a barrier to the entry of competitors into the French markets.
(140)
The current pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries therefore creates barriers to entry into the French electricity and gas markets. The reform notified by the French authorities enables these entry barriers to be removed: firstly, it replaces the balancing contributions paid by enterprises in the sector with contributions to the general schemes (basic scheme and compulsory supplementary schemes) that discharge their obligations; secondly, it reduces the amount of the specific pension rights acquired before the reform that exceeds the amount of the ordinary benefits and has to be financed by all enterprises in the sector. At the date of the reform, the specific pension rights that still have to be financed by the enterprises will be definitively apportioned among them on the basis of two criteria: the wage bill of the enterprises concerned and the length of service with them of the employees covered by the arrangements for the electricity and gas industries. The contribution by the enterprises will thus be proportionate to the duration of their presence on the electricity and gas markets; lastly, should the incumbents be declared bankrupt, the enterprises in the sector would take over the specific rights only up to a ceiling that would take account of their own pension liabilities so as not to threaten their viability.
(141)
Since the existing pension scheme is on the point of being abrogated, the Commission does not consider it necessary to examine its compatibility with the Treaty rules. This Decision is confined exclusively to examining the compatibility of the new scheme with the Community rules on State aid.
(142)
As regards the tariff-based contribution accruing to the National Fund for the Electricity and Gas Industries for the purpose of financing some of the pension rights acquired prior to the reform by employees assigned to electricity or gas transport and distribution, it should be noted that the chargeable event is the connection of consumers to the electricity or gas transport and distribution networks. The contribution is based, for each final consumer, on a ‘fixed’ component of the standing charge for use of the network which is independent of the energy actually consumed. It is thus paid by the final consumer, even if the latter does not actually consume any energy; payment of the contribution is not therefore linked to the amount of electricity or gas consumed. It follows that the National Fund for the Electricity and Gas Industries is not financed, through the contribution, by electricity or gas imported from other Member States. The way in which the contribution is collected therefore does not reinforce the effects of the aid on competition and trade between Member States, since it is not charged on imported products. Consequently, it does not create a barrier to entry into the French electricity and gas markets.
(143)
It should also be noted that the specific pension rights acquired prior to the reform constitute past liabilities linked to the previous monopoly situation: payment by enterprises in the electricity and gas industries of benefits corresponding to specific pension rights did not give rise to any difficulty as long as those enterprises operated in a monopoly environment. They did of course incur higher pension costs than enterprises in other sectors, but they were shielded from any intra-industry competition. In addition, the accounting standards did not require them to set aside provisions in their accounts to cover the amount of the specific rights for which they were liable towards their employees. For their part, employees were sure to obtain payment of their specific pension benefits insofar as those rights were managed by the EDF-GDF pension department, which was covered by the unlimited State guarantee. Since the electricity and gas markets have been opened up to competition, these specific rights have become a burden affecting the competitiveness of enterprises in the sector: the specific rights represent additional wage costs for the enterprises which their competitors do not have to bear; and, once the IAS accounting standards enter into force, enterprises will have to set aside provisions in their accounts to cover the specific rights acquired by their employees. At 1 January 2003, these specific pension rights amounted to […]. Payment of the specific pension benefits, which was not an unbearable burden as long as the enterprises were shielded from any intra-industry competition, today constitutes a major difficulty for these enterprises, now that they are in competition with other electricity or gas enterprises.
(144)
These specific pension rights of employees in the electricity and gas industries derive from Article 24 of the National conditions of employment for workers in the electricity and gas industries and Annex 3 thereto, relating to invalidity, pension and death benefits, which date from 1946. These texts have not been amended since 1997.
(145)
As part of the notified reform, enterprises in the sector will not pay benefits corresponding to the specific rights acquired at the date of the reform by employees assigned to electricity and gas transport and distribution activities. The reform is proportionate to what is strictly necessary, since the enterprises are relieved of the payment of only some of the specific pension benefits acquired in the past. While the specific rights acquired in the past by employees in the sector amount to a total of […], the enterprises are relieved of the payment only of the specific pension benefits acquired before the reform by employees assigned to electricity and gas transport and distribution, which represented a total of […] at 1 January 2003. The enterprises in the sector therefore remain responsible for an amount of […]. The reform of the pension scheme, as notified by the French authorities, does not relieve the enterprises in the sector of the payment of all the specific pension benefits acquired in the past, only some of them.
(146)
Any market operating in a monopoly environment has a particular organisation and is not immediately suited to functioning competitively when it is opened up. The liberalisation of the electricity and gas sector therefore requires it to be reorganised so that it can achieve the competitive operation sought. The aid granted by the French State with a view to such sectoral reorganisation is necessary and proportionate: only the electricity and gas transport and distribution activities, traditionally carried on as a monopoly, will receive aid, while the other aspects of the reform do not involve State aid. The aid may therefore be deemed compatible with the common market in accordance with Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty since it allows the development of the activity in question and does not affect trade to an extent contrary to the common interest.
(147)
The Commission regards the situation in the case in point as not dissimilar in nature to that of stranded costs in the energy field. It involves aid aimed at facilitating the transition to a competitive energy sector. Although the methodology which the Commission has adopted for examining aid of that type cannot cover this reform of the pension scheme, the Commission deems it appropriate in the case in point to treat this aid in the same way as compensation for stranded costs and will follow the same approach in its analysis of similar cases.
(148)
By eliminating barriers to entry into the French electricity and gas markets, the reform of the pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries allows competition to be stepped up on those markets. This reform of a special scheme also forms part of the general drive to reform Member States' pension systems advocated by both the Council and the Commission (34).
(c) Advantage resulting from the non-payment by EDF in 1997 of corporation tax on some of the accounting provisions created free of tax for the renewal of the high-voltage transmission network
(149)
Article 87(1) of the Treaty provides that aid fulfilling the criteria laid down therein is in principle incompatible with the common market. The exceptions to that rule, laid down in Article 87(2), are not applicable in the case in point because of the nature of the aid, which is not intended to achieve any of the objectives listed in that paragraph.
(150)
Neither does the aid measure in question qualify for the exceptions allowed by Article 87(3)(a) or (c), for aid to promote the economic development of certain regions, particularly since it corresponds to operating aid: it is not conditional on investments or on job creation as required by the guidelines on national regional aid.
(151)
Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty also allows an exception to be made for aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest. The aid measure under examination does not qualify for this exception. The derogation from the applicable tax law, granted for the benefit of a single enterprise, cannot be regarded as being intended to facilitate the development of an activity. Its sole purpose is to assist an enterprise by reducing its operating costs.
(152)
As regards the exceptions allowed by Article 87(3)(b) and (d) of the Treaty, the aid measure under examination is not intended to promote the execution of a project of common interest, remedy a serious disturbance in the French economy or promote culture and heritage conservation.
(153)
The compatibility criteria set out in Article 87(2) and (3) of the Treaty are therefore not met. Furthermore, as regards compensation for public service costs, the same observation as that made in connection with the unlimited State guarantee enjoyed by EDF is called for: the French authorities have not cited Article 86(2) of the Treaty in defence of the tax concession, but they have stressed the fact that EDF performs public service tasks. They have not, however, provided any assessment of the cost incurred by EDF in carrying out those tasks. The Commission cannot therefore determine whether or not the tax concession in question compensates for any additional cost linked to the public service tasks entrusted to it (35).
(154)
In the light of the foregoing considerations, the Commission accordingly takes the view that the aid under examination constitutes operating aid which has had the effect of strengthening EDF's competitive position in relation to its competitors. It is therefore incompatible with the common market.
(155)
Lastly, the Commission considers that, contrary to what is claimed by the French authorities, the rule on limitation periods does not apply in the case in point. Although EDF created the accounting provisions free of tax between 1987 and 1996, it should be pointed out, on the one hand, that corrections to accounting errors, which by their very nature relate to the posting of past transactions, should according to the National Accountancy Council be posted in the accounts for the financial year in which they are discovered and, on the other hand, that the Act providing that the grantor rights were to be reclassified as capital injections without being subject to corporation tax dates from 10 November 1997. The tax concession therefore dates from 1997 and any new aid paid on that date is therefore not time-barred.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
(156)
This Decision has been drawn up on the basis of the information provided by the French authorities. It should be stressed that, despite the injunction to provide information issued in October 2002, the French authorities persisted in their refusal to supply the Commission with full copies of some of the documents requested. In particular, they communicated only extracts from the French Court of Auditors' reports covered by the injunction.
(157)
The Commission finds, firstly, that the unlimited State guarantee enjoyed by EDF must be withdrawn so that the enterprise is subject to the ordinary law on collective proceedings.
(158)
The Commission takes note of the French authorities' undertaking to ensure that the affiliation of the pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries to the ordinary schemes is in all respects financially neutral for the transferee schemes and for the State. The Commission finds that such affiliation will not involve any State aid provided that this undertaking is fulfilled.
(159)
The Commission notes, secondly, that the specific pension rights acquired at the date of the reform by employees assigned to electricity and gas transport and distribution will no longer be financed by the enterprises in the sector but by a tariff-based contribution. The non-payment by enterprises in the sector of benefits corresponding to some of the specific rights acquired in the past constitutes State aid that is compatible with the common market pursuant to Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty.
(160)
The Commission finds, lastly, that the non-payment by EDF, in 1997, of corporation tax on some of the provisions created free of tax for the renewal of the RAG constitutes State aid that is incompatible with the common market. Such tax aid amounts to EUR 888,89 million,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The unlimited guarantee granted by France to Electricité de France (EDF) constitutes State aid that is incompatible with the common market and must be withdrawn by 1 January 2005.
Article 2
The affiliation of the French pension scheme for the electricity and gas industries to the ordinary pension schemes does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty insofar as such affiliation is financially neutral for the enterprises, the transferee schemes and the State.
The non-payment by enterprises in the electricity and gas industries of benefits corresponding to the specific rights acquired at the date of the reform by employees assigned to electricity and gas transport and distribution and the financing of those rights by a tariff-based contribution constitute State aid that is compatible with the common market pursuant to Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty.
The guarantee granted by France to the National Fund for the Electricity and Gas Industries in respect of those acquired specific rights does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
Article 3
The non-payment by EDF, in 1997, of corporation tax on some of the provisions created free of tax for the renewal of the RAG, corresponding to FRF 14,119 billion in grantor rights reclassified as capital injections, constitutes State aid that is incompatible with the common market.
The aid involved in the non-payment of corporation tax amounts to EUR 888,89 million.
Article 4
France shall take all necessary measures to recover from EDF the aid referred to in Article 3 and unlawfully made available to it.
Recovery shall be effected without delay and in accordance with the procedures of national law provided that they allow the immediate and effective execution of the decision. The aid to be recovered shall include interest from the date on which it was at the disposal of EDF until the date of its recovery. Interest shall be calculated on the basis of the reference rate used for calculating the grant-equivalent of regional aid, applied on a compound basis in accordance with the Commission communication on the interest rates to be applied when aid granted unlawfully is being recovered (36).
Article 5
France shall inform the Commission, within two months of notification of this Decision, of the measures taken to comply with it.
Such information shall be communicated to the Commission with the aid of the form set out in the Annex.
Article 6
This Decision is addressed to the French Republic.
Done at Brussels, 16 December 2003. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 645/92 of 13 March 1992 amending Regulation (EEC) No 19/82 laying down detailed rules for applying Council Regulation (EEC) No 2641/80 with regard to imports of sheepmeat and goatmeat products originating in certain non-member countries
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89 of 25 September 1989 on the common organization of the market in sheepmeat and goatmeat (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1741/91 (2), and in particular Article 15 (2) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2641/80 of 14 October 1980 derogating from certain import rules laid down in Regulation (EEC) No 1837/80 on the common organization of the market in sheepmeat and goatmeat (3), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3939/87 (4), and in particular Article 1 (2) thereof,
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 19/82 of 6 January 1982 laying down detailed rules for applying Regulation (EEC) No 2641/80 with regard to imports of sheepmeat and goatmeat products originating in certain non-member countries (5), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 823/91 (6), relates in particular to licences issued in the framework of voluntary-restraint agreements and Annex III thereof contains a list of authorities in third countries empowered to issue export licences;
Whereas Hungary and Argentina have changed the authority empowered to issue export licences; whereas Annex III to Regulation (EEC) No 19/82 should accordingly be modified by details of the Hungarian and Argentine authorities now empowered to issue export licences;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sheep and Goats,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Annex III to Regulation (EEC) No 19/82 is hereby amended as follows:
1. In point I, 'Junta nacional de carnes' is replaced by 'Secretaria de agricultura, ganaderia y pesca'.
2. In point V, 'TERIMPEX' is replaced by 'Ministry of International Economic Relations'.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply with effect from 1 April 1992. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 13 March 1992. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3426/91 of 26 November 1991 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of the credit guarantee of ECU 500 million for exports of agricultural products and foodstuffs to the Soviet Union
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 599/91 of 5 March 1991 introducing a credit guarantee for exports of agricultural products and foodstuffs from the Community, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Yugoslavia, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia to the Soviet Union (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3281/91 (2), and in particular Article 5 thereof,
Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 599/91 provides for the guarantee to cover not only contracts for supply of agricultural products and foodstuffs between the Soviet Union and undertakings in the Community, but also contracts between the Soviet Union and undertakings in Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Yugoslavia, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia;
Whereas the possibilities for deliveries under the credit guarantee from Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Yugoslavia, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia requires a decision as regards the amount up to which the credit may be used for purchases in these countries;
Whereas the availability for export in the countries concerned of the relevant agricultural products and foodstuffs shall be specifically taken into account when fixing the share that may be used for the said purchases;
Whereas the deliveries from these countries shall cover to the widest extent possible the products which are listed in the Annex to the Agreement in the form of an exchange of letters between the European Economic Community and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on a credit guarantee for exports of agricultural products and foodstuffs to the Soviet Union (3);
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Soviet Union Credit Guarantee Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Up to a maximum of 25 % of the credit which is available for exports of agricultural products and foodstuffs to the Soviet Union may be used for the purchase of these products originating in Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Yugoslavia, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia and for their transport into the Soviet Union.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 26 November 1991. | [
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE of 20 December 1985 adapting, on account of the accession of Spain and Portugal, Directive 85/210/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States concerning the lead content of petrol (85/581/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal, and in particular Articles 27 and 396 thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Whereas, to take account of the accession of Spain and Portugal, Article 12 (2) of Directive 85/210/EEC (1) should be adapted; Whereas, by virtue of Article 2 (3) of the Treaty of Accession, the institutions of the Communities may adopt, before accession, the measures referred to in Article 396 of the Act, such measures entering into force subject to, and on the date of, the entry into force of the said Treaty, HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
In Article 12 (2) of Directive 85/210/EEC, '45 votes' shall be replaced by '54 votes'.
Article 2
This Directive shall take effect on 1 January 1986, subject to the entry into force of the Treaty of Accession of Spain and Portugal.
Article 3
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 20 December 1985. | [
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL AND COMMISSION DECISION
of 25 September 2006
on the conclusion of the Protocol to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Kyrgyzstan, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia, and the Slovak Republic to the European Union
(2006/712/EC, Euratom)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 44(2), the last sentence of Article 47(2), and Articles 55, 57(2), 71, 80(2), 93, 94, 133 and 181a, in conjunction with the second sentence of Article 300(2) and the first subparagraph of Article 300(3), thereof,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular the second paragraph of Article 101 thereof,
Having regard to the Treaty of Accession of 16 April 2003, and in particular Article 2(3) thereof,
Having regard to the Act of Accession annexed to the Treaty of Accession, and in particular Article 6(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
Having regard to the Council's approval pursuant to Article 101 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community,
Whereas:
(1)
The Protocol to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Kyrgyzstan, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia, and the Slovak Republic to the European Union, and providing for certain technical adjustments linked to the institutional and legal developments within the European Union, was signed on behalf of the European Community and the Member States on 30 April 2004 in accordance with Council Decision 2006/711/EC (2).
(2)
Pending its entry into force, the Protocol has been applied on a provisional basis as from the date of accession.
(3)
The Protocol should be concluded,
HAVE DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The Protocol to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Kyrgyzstan, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic to the European Union is hereby approved on behalf of the European Community, the European Atomic Energy Community and the Member States.
The text of the Protocol is attached to this Decision (3).
Article 2
The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the European Community and its Member States, give the notification provided for in Article 4 of the Protocol. The President of the Commission shall simultaneously give such notification on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community.
Done at Brussels, 25 September 2006. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE of 3 May 1988 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States concerning the safety of toys (88/378/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 100A thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
In cooperation with the European Parliament (2),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (3),
Whereas the laws, regulations and administrative provisions in force in the various Member States relating to the safety characteristics of toys differ in scope and content; whereas such disparities are liable to create barriers to trade and unequal conditions of competition within the internal market without necessarily affording consumers in the common market, especially children, effective protection against the hazards arising from the products in question;
Whereas these obstacles to the attainment of an internal market in which only sufficiently safe products would be sold should be removed; whereas, for this purpose, the marketing and free movement of toys should be made subject to uniform rules based on the objectives regarding protection of consumer health and safety as set out in the Council resolution of 23 June 1986 concerning the future orientation of the policy of the European Economic Community for the protection and promotion of consumer interests (4);
Whereas, to facilitate proof of conformity with the essential requirements, it is necessary to have harmonized standards at European level which concern, in particular, the design and composition of toys so that products complying with them may be assumed to conform to the essential requirements; whereas these standards harmonized at European level are drawn up by private bodies and must remain non-mandatory texts; whereas for that purpose the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) and the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization (CENELEC) are recognized as the competent bodies for the adoption of harmonized standards in accordance with the general guidelines for cooperation between the Commission and those two bodies signed on 13 November 1984; whereas, for the purposes of this Directive, a harmonized standard is a technical specification (European standard or harmonization document) adopted by one or both of those bodies upon a remit from the Commission in accordance with the provisions of Council Directive 83/189/EEC of 28 March 1983 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations (5), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal, and on the basis of the general guidelines;
Whereas, in accordance with the Council resolution of 7 May 1985 on a new approach to technical harmonization and standards (6), the harmonization to be achieved should consist in establishing the essential safety requirements to be satisfied by all toys if they are to be placed on the market;
Whereas, in view of the size and mobility of the toy market and the diversity of the products concerned, the scope of this Directive should be determined on the basis of a sufficiently broad definition of 'toys'; whereas, nevertheless, it should be made clear that some products are not to be regarded as toys for the purposes of this Directive either because they are not in fact intended for children or because they call for supervision or special conditions of use;
Whereas toys placed on the market should not jeopardize the safety and/or health either of users or of third parties; whereas the standard of safety of toys should be determined in relation to the criterion of the use of the product as intended, but allowance should also be made for any foreseeable use, bearing in mind the normal behaviour of children who do not generally show the same degree of care as the average adult user;
Whereas the standard of safety of the toy must be considered when it is marketed, bearing in mind the need to ensure that this standard is maintained throughout the foreseeable and normal period of use of the toy;
Whereas compliance with the essential requirements is likely to guarantee consumer health and safety; whereas all toys placed on the market must comply with these requirements and, if they do, no obstacle must be put in the way of their free movement;
Whereas toys may be presumed to comply with these essential requirements where they are in conformity with the harmonized standards, reference numbers of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Communities;
Whereas toys that conform to a model approved by an approved body may also be regarded as complying with the essential requirements; whereas such conformity must be certified by the affixing of a European mark;
Whereas certification procedures must be established to define the way in which national approved bodies have to approve models of toys not in conformity with standards and issue type-examination certificates for them and for toys in conformity with standards, a model of which is submitted to them for approval;
Whereas adequate information for the Member States, the Commission and all the approved bodies must be provided for at the various stages of the certification and inspection procedures;
Whereas Member States must appoint bodies, called 'approved bodies', for the purposes of applying the system introduced for toys; whereas adequate information on these bodies must be provided and they must all comply with minimum criteria for their approval;
Whereas cases might arise where a toy does not satisfy the essential safety requirements; whereas, in such cases, the Member State which ascertains this fact must take all appropriate measures to withdraw the products from the market or to prohibit their being placed on the market; whereas a reason must be given for this decision and, where the reason is a shortcoming in the harmonized standards, these, or a part thereof, must be withdrawn from the list published by the Commission;
Whereas the Commission is to ensure that the harmonized European standards in all the areas covered by the essential requirements listed in Annex II are drawn up in sufficient time to enable Member States to adopt and publish the necessary provisions by 1 July 1989; whereas the national provisions adopted on the basis of this Directive should consequently become effective on 1 January 1990;
Whereas provision must be made for suitable action to be taken against anyone wrongfully affixing a mark of conformity;
Whereas checks on the safety of toys already on the market must be carried out by the competent authorities of the Member States;
Whereas, for some categories of toys that are particularly dangerous or intended for very young children, warnings or details of precautions to be taken must also be given;
Whereas the Commission must receive regular information on activities carried out under this Directive by the approved bodies;
Whereas those to whom any decision taken under this Directive is addressed must know the reason for that decision and the remedies open to them;
Whereas the opinion of the Scientific Advisory Committee for the evaluation of the toxicity and ecotoxicity of chemical compounds has been taken into account with respect to the health-based limits of bioavailability of metallic compounds in toys to children,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
1. This Directive shall apply to toys. A 'toy' shall mean any product or material designed or clearly intended for use in play by children of less than 14 years of age.
2. The products listed in Annex I shall not be regarded as toys for the purposes of this Directive.
Article 2
1. Toys may be placed on the market only if they do not jeopardize the safety and/or health of users or third parties when they are used as intended or in a foreseeable way, bearing in mind the normal behaviour of children.
2. In the condition in which it is placed on the market, taking account of the period of foreseeable and normal use, a toy must meet the safety and health conditions laid down in this Directive.
3. For the purposes of this Directive, the expression 'placed on the market' shall cover both sale and distribution free of charge.
Article 3
Member States shall take all steps necessary to ensure that toys cannot be placed on the market unless they meet the essential safety requirements set out in Annex II.
Article 4
Member States shall not impede the placing on the market on their territory of toys which satisfy the provisions of this Directive.
Article 5
1. Member States shall presume compliance with the essential requirements referred to in Article 3 in respect of toys bearing the EC mark provided for in Article 11, hereinafter referred to as 'EC mark', denoting conformity with the relevant national standards which transpose the harmonized standards the reference numbers of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Communities. Member States shall publish the reference numbers of such national standards.
2. Member States shall presume that toys in respect of which the manufacturer has not applied the standards referred to in paragraph 1, or has applied them only in part, or for which no such standards exist, satisfy the essential requirements referred to in Article 3 where, after receipt of an EEC type-examination certificate, their conformity with the approved model has been certified by the affixation of the EC mark.
Article 6
1. Where a Member State or the Commission considers that the harmonized standards referred to in Article 5 (1) do not entirely satisfy the essential requirements referred to in Article 3, the Commission or the Member State shall refer the matter to the Standing Committee set up under Directive 83/189/EEC, hereinafter referred to as 'the committee', setting out its reasons. The committee shall issue an opinion as a matter of urgency.
After receiving the committee's opinion, the Commission shall notify the Member States whether or not the standards concerned or a part thereof have to be withdrawn from the publications referred to in Article 5 (1).
2. The Commission shall inform the European standardization body concerned and, if necessary, issue a new standardization brief.
Article 7
1. Where a Member State ascertains that toys bearing the EC mark which are used as intended or in accordance with Article 2 are likely to jeopardize the safety and/or health of consumers and/or third parties, it shall take all appropriate measures to withdraw the products from the market, or to prohibit or restrict their placing on the market. The Member State shall inform the Commission immediately of this measure and indicate the reasons for its decision, stating in particular whether the non-compliance results from:
(a) failure to meet the essential requirements referred to in Article 3, if the toy does not meet the standards referred to in Article 5 (1);
(b) incorrect application of the standards referred to in Article 5 (1);
(c) shortcomings in the standards referred to in Article 5 (1).
2. The Commission shall enter into consultation with the parties concerned as soon as possible. Where, after such consultation, the Commission finds that any measure as referred to in paragraph 1 is justified, it shall forthwith so inform the Member State that took the action and the other Member States. Where the decision referred to in paragraph 1 is attributed to shortcomings in the standards, the Commission, after consulting the parties concerned, shall bring the matter before the Committee within two months if the Member State which has taken the measures intends to maintain them and shall initiate the procedures referred to in Article 6.
3. Where the toy which does not comply with the requirements bears the EC mark, the competent Member State shall take appropriate measures and inform the Commission, which shall inform the other Member States.
4. The Commission shall ensure that the Member States are kept informed of the progress and outcome of this procedure.
Article 8
1. (a) Before being placed on the market, toys manufactured in accordance with the harmonized standards referred to in Article 5 (1) must have affixed to them the EC mark by which the manufacturer or his authorized representative established within the Community confirms that the toys comply with those standards;
(b) The manufacturer or his authorized representative established within the Community shall keep the following information available for inspection:
- a description of the means (such as the use of a test report or technical file) whereby the manufacturer ensures conformity of production with the standards referred to in Article 5 (1) and, as appropriate: an EC type-certificate drawn up by an approved body; copies of the documents the manufacturer has submitted to the approved body; a description of the means whereby the manufacturer ensures conformity with the approved model,
- the addresses of the places of manufacture and storage,
- detailed information concerning the design and manufacture.
Where neither the manufacturer nor his authorized representative are established within the Community, the above obligation to keep a dossier available shall be the responsibility of the person who places the toy on the Community market.
2. (a) Toys which do not conform in whole or in part to the standards referred to in Article 5 (1) must have affixed to them, before being placed on the market, the EC mark by which the manufacturer or his authorized representative established within the Community confirms that the toy concerned conforms to the model examined in accordance with the procedures laid down in Article 10 which an approved body has stated complies with the essential requirements referred to in Article 3;
(b) the manufacturer or his authorized representive established within the Community shall keep the following information available for inspection:
- a detailed description of manufacture,
- a description of the means (such as the use of a test report or technical file) whereby the manufacturer ensures conformity with the approved model,
- the addresses of the places of manufacture and storage,
- copies of the documents the manufacturer has submitted to an approved body in accordance with Article 10 (2),
- the test certificate for the sample or a certified copy thereof.
Where neither the manufacturer nor his authorized representative is established within the Community, the above obligation to keep a dossier available shall be the responsibility of the person who places the toy on the market in the Community.
3. In the event of non-observance of the obligations laid down in paragraphs 1 (b) and 2 (b), the competent Member State shall take appropriate measures to ensure that those obligations are observed.
Where non-observance of the obligations is obvious, it may in particular require the manufacturer or his authorized representative established within the Community to have a test performed at his own expense within a specified period by an approved body in order to verify compliance with the harmonized standards and essential safety requirements.
Article 9
1. The minimum criteria which Member States must meet in order to appoint the approved bodies referred to in this Directive are contained in Annex III.
2. Each Member State shall notify the Commission of the approved bodies responsible for carrying out the EC type-examination referred to in Articles 8 (2) and 10. The Commission shall publish a list of these bodies, with the distinguishing numbers it has given them, in the Official Journal of the European Communities for information and shall be responsible for updating it.
3. A Member State which has approved a body shall withdraw approval if it finds that the body no longer meets the criteria listed in Annex III. It shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.
Article 10
1. EC type-examination is the procedure by which an approved body ascertains and certifies that a model of a toy satisfies the essential requirements referred to in Article 3.
2. The application for EC type-examination shall be lodged with an approved body by the manufacturer or by his authorized representative established within the Community.
The application shall include:
- a description of the toy,
- the name and address of the manufacturer or of his authorized representative or representatives, and the place of manufacture of the toy,
- comprehensive manufacturing and design data; and shall be accompanied by a model of the toy to be manufactured.
3. The approved body shall carry out the EC type-examination in the manner described below:
- it shall examine the documents supplied by the applicant and establish whether they are in order,
- it shall check that the toy would not jeopardize safety and/or health, as provided for in Article 2,
- it shall carry out the appropriate examinations and tests - using as far as possible the harmonized standards referred to in Article 5 (1) - in order to check whether the model meets the essential requirements referred to in Article 3,
- it may ask for further examples of the model.
4. If the model complies with the essential requirements referred to in Article 3, the approved body shall draw up an EC type-examination certificate which shall be notified to the applicant. This certificate shall state the conclusions of the examination, indicate any conditions attaching to it and be accompanied by the descriptions and drawings of the approved toy.
The Commission, the other approved bodies and the other Member States may obtain on request a copy of the certificate and, on reasoned request, a copy of the design and manufacturing schedule and the reports on the examinations and tests carried out.
5. An approved body which refuses to issue an EC type-examination certificate shall so inform the Member State which approved it and the Commission, giving the reasons for refusal.
Article 11
1. The EC mark referred to in Articles 5, 7 and 8 and the name and/or trade name and/or mark and address of the manufacturer or his authorized representative or the importer into the Community shall as a rule be affixed either to the toy or on the packaging in a visible, easily legible and indelible form. In the case of small toys and toys consisting of small parts these particulars may be affixed in the same way to the packaging, to a label or to a leaflet. Where the said particulars are not affixed to the toy, the consumer's attention must be drawn to the advisability of keeping them.
2. The EC mark shall consist of the symbol 'CE'.
3. The affixing to toys of marks or inscriptions that are likely to be confused with the EC mark shall be prohibited.
4. The particulars referred to in paragraph 1 may be abbreviated provided that the abbreviation enables the manufacturer, his authorized representative or the importer into the Community to be identified.
5. Annex IV sets out the warnings and indications of precautions to be taken during use that have to be given for certain toys. Member States may require that these warnings and precautions, or some of them, together with the information specified in paragraph 4, be given in their own national language or languages when the toys are placed on the market.
Article 12
1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that sample checks are carried out on toys which are on their market, so as to verify their conformity with this Directive.
The authority responsible for inspection:
- shall obtain access, on request, to the place of manufacture or storage and to the information referred to in Article 8 (1) (b) and (2) (b),
- may ask the manufacturer, his authorized representative or the person responsible for marketing the toy established within the Community to supply the information as provided for in Article 8 (1) (b) and (2) (b) within a period specified by the Member State,
- may select a sample and take it away for examination and testing.
2. Every three years, Member States shall send the Commission a report on the application of this Directive.
3. The Member States and the Commission shall take the necessary measures to guarantee confidentiality with regard to the forwarding of the copies relating to the EC type-examination referred to in Article 10 (4).
Article 13
Member States shall regularly inform the Commission of the activities carried out in pursuance of this Directive by the bodies they have approved so that the Commission may ensure that the inspection procedures are implemented correctly and without discrimination.
Article 14
Any decision taken pursuant to this Directive and involving restrictions on the placing of the toy on the market shall state the exact grounds on which it is based. It shall be notified at the earliest opportunity to the party concerned, who shall at the same time be informed of the remedies available to him under the laws in force in the Member State in question and of the time limits applying to such remedies.
Article 15
1. Member States shall adopt and publish by 30 June 1989 the provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.
They shall apply these provisions from 1 January 1990.
2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the texts of the provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.
Article 16
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 3 May 1988. | [
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2415/88
of 1 August 1988
on the sale by tender, for export, of beef held by certain intervention agencies
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organization of the market in beef and veal (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2248/88 (2), and in particular Article 7 (3) thereof,
Whereas certain intervention agencies have large stocks of beef; whereas there are outlets in certain third countries for the products concerned;
Whereas the meat should be offered for sale by means of a tendering procedure held at regular intervals; whereas, in order to ensure the destination of the products to the specified third countries, it is appropriate to foresee a guarantee to which provisions of Article 3 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 985/81 (3) will apply, as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1809/87 (4);
Whereas, in view of certain special features of the sale and in particular for the purposes of control, the minimum tendering quantity should be set fairly high;
Whereas, in view of the level of stocks in the various Member States, provision should be made for ensuring the sales of meat are organized at least in two Member States;
Whereas products held by intervention agencies and intended for export are subject to the provisions of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 569/88 (5), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2293/88 (6); whereas, however, the Annex to the said Regulation setting out the entries to be made should be expanded;
Whereas the destination of important quantities of meat to the sale in question makes it appropriate to end the sales foreseen by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2670/85 (7) and (EEC) No 1812/86 (8); and to repeal the said Regulations;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Beef and Veal,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. Forequarters and hindquarters held by intervention agencies shall, in accordance with this Regulation, be offered for sale by tender at regular intervals.
2. The products referred to in paragraph 1 shall be sold for export to one or more of the destinations referred to in Annex 1.
3. Subject to the provisions of this Regulation, the sale shall take place in accordance with the provisions of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2173/79 (9), and in particular Articles 6 to 12 thereof.
Article 2
1. Intervention agencies shall, during the period of validity of the standing invitation to tender organize specific sales by invitation to tender in respect of forequarters and hindquarters still available.
The deadlines for submitting tenders in respect of each specific sale by invitation to tender shall be 12.00 on the second Tuesday of the month concerned or, if that day is not a working day, 12.00 on the next working day. The first deadline for submitting tenders shall be 12.00 on 9 August 1988.
Intervention agencies shall draw up a notice of invitation to tender for the specific sale which shall include the following:
(a) the quantities of bone-in beef offered for sale, and
(b) the deadline and place for submitting tenders.
2. By way of derogation from Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 2173/79, the provisions of and the Annexes to this Regulation shall serve as a general notice of invitation to tender for sales held at regular intervals.
3. Interested parties may obtain the details of the quantities available and the places where the products are stored from the addresses listed in Annex II to this Regulation. The intervention agencies shall, moreover, display the notices referred to in paragraph 1 at their head offices and may also publish them elsewhere.
4. By way of derogation from Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 2173/79, tenders shall not indicate at which cold store or stores the products are held.
Article 3
1. (a) An offer shall be valid only if it relates to a quantity of not less than 25 000 tonnes.
(b) It shall relate to an equal weight of forequarters and hindquarters and shall contain a single price per 100 kilograms for the whole quantity specified in the offer.
(c) However, where in a Member State the available quantities do not make it possible to comply with the condition laid down under 1 (b) an offer shall be valid if it relates to the available equal weight of forequarters and hindquarters as well as a single price per 100 kilograms of those products, and:
- either hindquarters as well as a price per 100 kilograms of that product,
- forequarters as well as a price per 100 kilograms of that product.
2. Upon expiry of the time limit for submitting tenders, the operator shall send a copy of his tender by telex to the Commission of the European Communities, Division VI/D/2, 200, rue de la Loi, B-1049 Brussels, (Telex: 22037 B AGREC).
3. After the tenders received in respect of each specific invitation to tender have been examined, either one or more minimum selling prices shall be fixed, taking account in particular that quantities sold from one Member State must not exceed 50 % of the total quantity sold, or the sale will not be proceeded with. Where application is made of paragraph 1 (c) the highest tenderer as referred to in Article 10 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2173/79 is the tenderer who offers the highest weighted average price.
4. The time limit specified in Article 11 of Regulation (EEC) No 2173/79 shall, for the purposes of this Regulation, be three working days instead of five working days.
Article 4
1. Notwithstanding Article 15 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2173/79, the amount of the security shall be 150 ECU per tonne.
2. A security to cover import into one of the destinations provided for in Article 1 (2) shall be put up by the purchaser before the products are taken over. The amount of the security shall be 260 ECU per 100 kilograms.
3. As regards the security referred to in paragraph 2, the provisions of Article 3 (3), and (4) and (5) of Regulation (EEC) No 985/81 shall apply mutatis mutandis.
Article 5
1. The meat shall be taken over by the buyer within five months of the conclusion of the sales contract. However:
- where selling contracts are concluded before 30 September 1988 at least 25 % of the meat covered by those contracts shall be taken over by the buyer before 30 September,
- all the meat contracted under the Regulation must be taken over before 31 March 1989.
2. The customs export formalities must be completed not later than one month after the meat has been taken over.
Article 6
Purchasers shall, when concluding a contract, submit applications for advance fixing of the refunds.
Article 7
The following is hereby added to Part I, 'Products to be exported in the same state as that in which they were when removed from intervention stock', of the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 569/88:
'Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2415/88 of 1 August 1988 on the sale by tender, for export, of beef held by certain intervention agencies (34).
(34) OJ No L 208, 2. 8. 1988, p. 11.'
Article 8
Member States shall, without delay, notify the Commission of:
- the tenders they have received,
- the quantities:
- for which there is a sales contract,
- which have been taken over,
in accordance with this Regulation.
Article 9
Regulations (EEC) No 2670/85 and (EEC) No 1812/86 are hereby repealed.
Article 10
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 1 August 1988. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 23 December 1988
rejecting the complaint lodged by Smith Kline & French Laboratories Limited against Jordan under Council Regulation (EEC) No 2641/84
(Only the English text is authentic)
(89/74/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2641/84 of 17 September 1984 on the strengthening of the common commercial policy with regard in particular to protection against illicit commercial practices (1), and in particular Articles 3 and 5 thereof,
Following consultations in the Advisory Committee set up by the said Regulation,
Whereas:
A. Procedure
(a) Complaint
(1) In June of this year the Commission received a complaint to the effect that Jordan, by promulgating Law 8 of 1986 amending Law 22 of 1953 on patents, had infringed Articles 10 bis and 10 ter of the Paris Convention for the protection of industrial property by depriving Smith Kline & French Laboratories Limited of the protection previously afforded it by the patent for 'new polymorph', which it held in Jordan. The company alleged that in so doing Jordan was guilty of an illicit commercial practice and had caused the Community industry concerned serious injury.
(b) Complainant and Community industry concerned
(2) The complaint was lodged by Smith Kline & French Laboratories Limited, hereinafter referred to as Smith Kline, a company constituted under English Law which produces Tagamet and exports it to Jordan. The product's active substance is cimetidine, developed from the new polymorph which Smith Kline invented.
(c) Products involved
(3) The products involved are the products marketed under the name Tagamet and all products containing cimetidine manufactured from the new polymorph, an invention patented in Jordan by Smith Kline under the number 882. The products fall within CN code 3004 90 99.
B. Plaintiff's allegations
(a) Allegation of illicit ocmmercial practices
(4) Smith Kline asserts that by promulgating Law 8 of 1986 amending Article 4 of Law 22 of 1953 on patents, Jordan infringed Article 10 bis (1) and Article 10 ter of the Paris Convention for the protection of industrial property (hereinafter referred to as the Paris Convention) and is guilty of illicit commercial practices within the meaning of Regulation (EEC) No 2641/84.
(5) The company claims that the adoption of Law 8 was on 'act of unfair competition' on the part of Jordan under Article 10 bis (1), in that, by removing some of the protection which the 1953 Law afforded patented inventions, under the heading of pharmaceutical products, it allowed competing firms to benefit from other firms' investment, without any quid pro quo whatsoever, and this ran counter to fair industrial and commercial practice. Smith Kline added that this amendment had the effect of legitimizing acts of unfair competition which it alleged had been perpetrated by competitors before the Law was amended.
The company asserts that, since adopting Law 8 of 1986, Jordan is also infringing Article 10 ter because it is no longer allowing the 'appopriate legal remedies' to be taken 'effectively to repress' unfair competition.
(b) Allegation of injury
(6) According to Smith Kline, the unfair commercial practice described above caused the Community industry concerned serious injury since the company was thereby prevented from marketing its products in Jordan and on other Arab markets. It claims that is has suffered injury amounting to at least £ 480 000 a year as a result of loss of potential sales.
C. Grounds
(7) Under Article 3 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2641/84, in order to give rise to an examination procedure, a complaint presented under this Regulation must contain sufficient evidence of the existence of illicit commercial practices and the injury resulting therefrom.
(8) As regards the allegation that Jordan infringed Article 10 bis of the Paris Convention, it should be noted that the interpretation generally given to this provision does not corroborate Smith Kline's argument that, by a mending Law 22 of 1953 in such a way as to reduce the protection previously afforded to the patented new polymorph invention, Jordan had perpetrated an 'act of unfair competition' within the meaning of this provision and had thereby infringed the provision.
(9) As paragraph 1 of Article 10 bis does not define an act of unfair competition, the question whether an act by a signatory party can be an act of unfair competition must be examined in the light of the other paragraphs of this provision. In this connection, the second paragraph of Article 10 bis defines an act of unfair competition as 'any act of competition contrary to honest practices in industrial or commercial matters' and the following examples are listed in paragraph 3:
'1. all acts of such a nature as to create confusion by any means whatever with the establishment, the goods, or the industrial or commercial activities, of a competitor;
2. false allegations in the course of trade of such a nature as to discredit the establishment, the goods, or the industrial or commercial activities, of a competitor;
3. indications or allegations the use of which in the course of trade is liable to mislead the public as to the nature, the manufacturing process, the characteristics, the suitability for their purpose, or the quantity of goods.'
(10) It follows from the above that 'acts of unfair competition' within the meaning of Article 10 bis can cover only those acts carried out by competitors and, consequently, cannot include the legislative acts of a signatory State. Hence it follows that Jordan cannot be said to have failed in its duty to provide effective protection against unfair competition on the grounds that, by adopting Law 8 of 1986, it had carried out an 'act of unfair competition'.
(11) The allegation that Article 10 ter of the Paris Convention had been infringed in that Jordan no longer allowed nationals of the other signatory States to take the appropriate legal remedies effectively to repress unfair competition cannot be accepted either, because, as indicated above, the allegation of infringement of Article 10 bis by Jordan is unfounded.
(12) In the light of the arguments put forward by Smith Kline, there are therefore no grounds for concluding that Jordan, by amending its law on patents in the way described by the company in its complaint, carried out an act of unfair competition within the meaning of Article 10 bis of the Paris Convention.
(13) While under Article 10 bis the signatory parties are bound to assure effective protection against unfair ocmpetition, it is up to each individual party to define the acts which it takes to be acts of unfair competition. Lastly, as Article 10 bis does not lay down minimum standards for effective protection for patents, the fact that a State withdraws with retroactive effect the protection given to pharmaceuticals by its national legislation is not an infringement of this provision either. It should be pointed out in this respect that there was no allegation that this withdrawal infringed another rule of international law.
(14) To sum up, the complaint submitted by Smith Kline does not, from a purely legal point of view, contain sufficient evidence of the existence of illicit commercial practices by Jordan. It has therefore to be rejected. Moreover, the lack of factual data produced in support of the allegations could, on its own, have justified its rejection,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The complaint made against Jordan by Smith Kline & French Laboratories Limited, pursuant to Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 2641/84, is hereby rejected.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to Smith Kline & French Laboratories Limited.
Done at Brussels, 23 December 1988. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 948/2009
of 30 September 2009
amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (1), and in particular Articles 9 and 12 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 established a goods nomenclature, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Combined Nomenclature’, to meet, at one and the same time, the requirements of the Common Customs Tariff, the external trade statistics of the Community, and other Community policies concerning the importation or exportation of goods.
(2)
In the interests of legislative simplification, it is appropriate to modernise the Combined Nomenclature and to adapt its structure.
(3)
It is necessary to amend the Combined Nomenclature, in order to take account of the following: changes in requirements relating to statistics and to commercial policy, changes made in order to fulfil international commitments, technological and commercial developments, and the need to align or clarify texts.
(4)
In accordance with Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87, Annex I to that Regulation should be replaced, with effect from 1 January 2010, by a complete version of the Combined Nomenclature, together with the autonomous and conventional rates of duty resulting from measures adopted by the Council or by the Commission.
(5)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Customs Code Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Annex I to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 is replaced by the text set out in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 1 January 2010.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 September 2009. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2999/92 of 15 October 1992 laying down detailed rules for the application of the specific measures for the supply of processed fruit and vegetable products to Madeira
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 of 15 June 1992 concerning specific measures for the Azores and Madeira relating to certain agricultural products (1), and in particular Article 10 thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1676/85 of 11 June 1985 on the value of the unit of account and the conversion rates to be applied for the purposes of the common agricultural policy (2), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2205/90 (3), and in particular Article 12 thereof,
Whereas, in the application of Articles 2 and 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92, it is necessary to determine the quantities of certain processed fruit and vegetable products in the forecast supply balance, falling within CN code 2008 and qualifying for exemption from duty on direct imports from third countries or for aid for consignments from the rest of the Community;
Whereas the amount of the abovementioned aid for the supply of processed fruit products to Madeira should be fixed; whereas that aid must be fixed taking account, in particular, of the cost of supply from the world market, the conditions resulting from that region's geographical situation and current prices for exports to the latter;
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1696/92 (4), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2132/92 (5), lays down common detailed rules for implementation of the specific arrangements for the supply of certain agricultural products to Madeira; whereas it is appropriate to lay down additional detailed rules in line with current commercial practice in the processed fruit and vegetable products sector, in particular regarding the duration of the validity of licences and certificates and the amount of the securities ensuring operators' compliance with their obligations;
Whereas, with a view to sound management of the supply arrangements, provision should be made for a timetable for the lodging of licence and certificate applications and for a period of reflection for their issue;
Whereas, in application of Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92, the supply arrangements apply from 1 July 1992; whereas provision should be made for the detailed rules for their implementation to apply as soon as possible;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Processed Fruit and Vegetables,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. For the purposes of applying Articles 2 and 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92, the quantities covered by the forecast supply balance of processed fruit products qualifying, as the case may be, for exemption from duty on direct import from third countries or for Community aid shall be as set out in the Annex.
2. Without prejudice to a review of the supply balance during the period concerned, the quantities laid down for the various products listed in the Annex may be exceeded by up to 20 % provided that the overall quantity is not exceeded.
Article 2
For the purposes of Article 3 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92, aid amounting to ECU 10 per 100 kilograms shall be granted for the products and quantities covered by the forecast supply balance and coming from the Community market.
Article 3
1. The provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 1696/92 shall apply.
2. Products falling within CN codes 2008 20, 2008 30, 2008 40, 2008 60, 2008 70, 2008 80, 2008 92 and 2008 99, with the exception of those listed in Annex IV to Council Regulation (EEC) No 426/86 (6) shall qualify for exemption from import duties on presentation of an exemption certificate as provided for in Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 1696/92.
Article 4
Portugal shall designate the authority competent for:
(a) the issue of import licences and exemption certificates;
(b) the issue of the aid certificates provided for in Article 4 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1696/92; and
(c) the payment of the aid to the operators concerned.
Article 5
1. Licence and certificate applications shall be submitted to the competent authority during the first five working days of each month. Certificate or licence applications shall be admissible only if:
(a) they do not cover a quantity in excess of that available for each product code as set out in the Annex and published by the competent authority;
(b) before expiry of the period provided for the submission of certificate or licence applications, proof has been provided that the party concerned has lodged a security of ECU 5 per 100 kilograms.
2. Licences and certificates shall be issued by the 10th working day of each month at the latest.
3. Where licences or certificates are issued for quantities lower than the quantities applied for pursuant to Article 5 of Regulation (EEC) No 1696/92, the operator may withdraw his application in writing within three working days of the date of issue; the security covering the licence or certificate shall be released in such cases.
Article 6
The duration of validity of certificates and licences shall expire on the last day of the month following that of their issue.
Article 7
The aid provided for in Article 2 shall be paid in respect of quantities actually supplied.
The rate to be applied for conversion into national currency of the amount of the aid shall be the agricultural conversion rate in force on the first day of the month of submission of the aid certificate application.
Article 8
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 15 October 1992. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 439/85
of 18 February 1985
on the conclusion of the Agreement in the form of an exchange of letters between the European Economic Community and Turkey fixing the additional amount to be deducted from the levy on imports into the Community of untreated olive oil, originating in Turkey, for the period 1 November 1984 to 31 October 1985
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 113 thereof,
Having regard to Decision No 1/77 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council of 17 May 1977 on new concessions for imports of Turkish agricultural products into the Community, and in particular Annex IV thereto,
Having regard to the recommendation from the Commission,
Whereas it is necessary to approve the Agreement in the form of an exchange of letters between the European Economic Community and Turkey fixing the additional amount to be deducted from the levy on imports into the Community of untreated olive oil, falling within subheading 15.07 A I of the Common Customs Tariff and originating in Turkey, for the period 1 November 1984 to 31 October 1985,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The Agreement in the form of an exchange of letters between the European Economic Community and Turkey fixing the additional amount to be deducted from the levy on imports into the Community of untreated olive oil falling within subheading 15.07 A I of the Common Customs Tariff and originating in Turkey, for the period 1 November 1984 to 31 October 1985 is hereby approved on behalf of the Community.
The text of the Agreement is annexed to this Regulation.
Article 2
The President of the Council is hereby authorized to designate the person empowered to sign the Agreement for the purpose of binding the Community.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 February 1985. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Council Decision
of 21 October 2002
on the signing, on behalf of the Community, and provisional application of an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia concerning the system of ecopoints to be applied to transit traffic of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia through Austria
(2003/197/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 71(1), in conjunction with the first sentence of the first subparagraph of Article 300(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas:
(1) The Commission has negotiated an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia concerning the system of ecopoints to be applied to transit traffic of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia through Austria.
(2) Subject to its possible conclusion at a later date, the Agreement initialled on 25 January 2001 should be signed.
(3) Provision should be made for the provisional application of the Agreement from 1 January 2002,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The signing of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia concerning the system of ecopoints to be applied to transit traffic of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia through Austria, is hereby approved on behalf of the Community, subject to the Council Decision concerning the conclusion of the said Agreement.
The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision.
Article 2
The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to sign the Agreement on behalf of the Community subject to its conclusion.
Article 3
Subject to reciprocity, the Agreement referred to in Article 1 shall be applied on a provisional basis from 1 January 2002, pending the completion of the procedures for its formal conclusion.
Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Done at Luxembourg, 21 October 2002. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 1288/93 of 27 May 1993 fixing the guide price for dried fodder for the 1993/94 and 1994/95 marketing years
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 43 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (3),
Whereas Articles 4 (1) and 5 (2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1117/78 of 22 May 1978 on the common organization of the market in dried fodder (4) provide that the guide price and the percentage to be used to calculate the aid are to be fixed in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 43 (2) of the Treaty;
Whereas, pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 1117/78, a guide price must be set for certain dried fodder products; whereas this price must be set for a standard quality;
Whereas, pursuant to Article 5 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1117/78, the aid provided for in paragraph 1 of that Article must be equal to a percentage of the difference between the guide price and the average world market price for the products in question; whereas, by Regulation (EEC) No 2065/92 (5), the Council set the percentage at 70 % for the 1993/94 marketing year; whereas this percentage should be set at 70 % also for the 1994/95 marketing year;
Whereas the Council, pursuant to Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 2065/92, is required, by 31 March 1994 at the latest, to take a decision on whether from 1994/95 onwards the suppprt for the producers of the products in question should be on the basis of a continuation of such specific aid or by inclusion of those products in the general framework of arable crop aids; whereas that decision should, in any event, be carried forward one year, for application from the 1995/96 marketing year onwards, in order to allow for a period of further discussion,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For the 1993/94 and 1994/95 marketing years, the guide price for the products referred to in Article 1 (b), first and third indents, of Regulation (EEC) No 1117/78 shall be ECU 178,61 per tonne.
The price shall be for a product with:
- a moisture content of 11 %,
- a total crude protein content of 18 % by weight in the dry matter.
Article 2
The percentage to be used to calculate the aid referred to in Article 5 of Regulation (EEC) No 1117/78 shall be 70 % for the 1994/95 marketing year.
Article 3
Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 2065/92 is hereby replaced by the following:
'Article 2
In accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 43 (2) of the Treaty, the Council shall, by 31 March 1995 at the latest, take a decision on whether form 1995/96 onwards the support for the producers of these products should be on the basis of a continuation of this specific aid or by inclusion of these products in the general framework of arable crop aids.'
Article 4
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply from 1 May 1993.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 May 1993. | [
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 735/2008
of 29 July 2008
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 of 21 December 2007 laying down implementing rules for Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector (2), and in particular Article 138(1) thereof,
Whereas:
Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XV, Part A thereto,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 138 of Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 are fixed in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 30 July 2008.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 29 July 2008. | [
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2237/2002
of 16 December 2002
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1947/2002(2), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.
(2) In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 17 December 2002.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 16 December 2002. | [
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 20 December 1993 concerning the grant of assistance from the cohesion financial instrument to the following project in Ireland: rail network improvement No CF: 93/07/65/019 93/07/65/023 93/07/65/024 93/07/65/025 (Only the English text is authentic) (94/429/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 792/93 of 30 March 1993 establishing a cohesion financial instrument (1), and in particular Article 8 (6) thereof,
Whereas Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93 establishes a cohesion financial instrument to provide Community support for projects in the fields of the environment and trans-European transport infrastructure networks;
Whereas pursuant to Article 9 of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93 certain provisions of Titles VI and VII of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 of 19 December 1988 concerning the provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural Funds between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial instruments (2), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2082/93 (3), are to apply, mutatis mutandis;
Whereas Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93 defines the types of measures for which the cohesion financial instrument may provide assistance;
Whereas Article 10 of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93 requires the Member States to ensure that adequate publicity is given to the operations of the financial instrument and that measures which are described in Annex V to this Decision are undertaken;
Whereas references to 'project' shall be understood to mean also 'set of projects';
Whereas on 28 July 1993 Ireland has submitted an application for assistance from the cohesion financial instrument for the rail network improvement project;
Whereas that application concerns a project which is eligible under the terms of Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93;
Whereas the application for assistance contains all the information required by Article 8 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93 and satisfies the criteria set out in Article 8 (3) and (5) of that Regulation;
Whereas the project is a transport infrastructure project of common interest;
Whereas the project forms part of the master plan for a trans-European rail network;
Whereas Article 1 of the Financial Regulation of 21 December 1977 applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (4), as last amended by Council Regulation (Euratom ECSC, EEC) No 610/90 (5), states that the legal commitments entered into for measures extending over more than one financial year shall contain a time limit for implementation which must be specified to the recipient in due form when the aid is granted;
Whereas pursuant to Article 9 of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93, the Commission and the Member State will ensure that there is evaluation and systematic monitoring of the project;
Whereas the financial implementation provisions, monitoring and assessment are specified in Annexes III and IV to this Decision;
Whereas failure to comply with those provisions may result in suspension or reduction of the assistance granted pursuant to Article 9 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93;
Whereas all the other conditions laid down have been complied with,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
1. The stage of the rail network improvement project situated in Ireland as described in Annex I hereto is hereby approved for the period 1 January 1993 to 31 March 1994.
2. References to 'project' in the following Articles and Annexes shall be understood to mean also 'stage of project'.
Article 2
1. The maximum eligible expenditure to be taken as the basis for this Decision shall be ECU 18 124 000.
2. The rate of Community assistance granted to the project shall be fixed at 85 %.
3. The maximum amount of the contribution from the cohesion financial instrument shall be fixed at ECU 15 405 400.
4. The contribution is committed from the 1993 budget.
Article 3
1. Community assistance shall be based on the financial plan for the project set out in Annex II.
2. Commitments and payments of Community assistance granted to the project shall be made in accordance with Article 9 of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93 and as specified in Annex III.
3. The amount of the first advance payment shall be fixed at ECU 3 400 000.
Article 4
1. Community assistance shall cover expenditure on the project for which legally binding arrangements have been made in Ireland and for which the requisite finance has been specifically allocated to works to be completed not later than 31 March 1994.
2. Expenditure incurred before 1 January 1993 shall not be eligible for assistance.
3. The closing date for the completion of national payments on the project is fixed not later than 12 months after the date mentioned in subparagraph 1.
Article 5
1. The project shall be carried out in accordance with Community policies, and in particular with Articles 7, 30, 52 and 59 of the Treaty, as well as with Community law, in particular with the Directives coordinating public procurement procedures.
2. This Decision shall not prejudice the right of the Commission to commence infringement proceedings pursuant to Article 169 of the Treaty.
Article 6
Systematic monitoring and assessment of the project take place in accordance with the provisions set out in Annex IV hereto.
Article 7
The Member State concerned shall ensure adequate publicity for the project as specified in Annex V.
Article 8
Each Annex to this Decision shall form an integral part of it.
Article 9
Failure to comply with the provisions of this Decision or its Annexes may entail a reduction or suspension of assistance in accordance with the provisions set out in Annex VI.
Article 10
This Decision is addressed to Ireland.
Done at Brussels, 20 December 1993. | [
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DIRECTIVE 92/15/EEC of 11 March 1992 amending Council Directive 83/229/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to materials and articles made of regenerated cellulose film intended to come into contact with foodstuffs
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 89/109/EEC of 21 December 1988 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to materials and articles intended to come into contact with foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 3 (2) thereof,
Whereas Article 2 of Directive 89/109/EEC lays down that materials and articles, in their finished state, must not transfer their constituents to foodstuffs in quantities which could endanger human health or bring about an unacceptable change in the composition of the foodstuffs;
Whereas the written declaration referred to in Article 6 (5) of Directive 89/109/EEC should be provided for in the event of professional use of regenerated cellulose film for materials and articles intended to come into contact with foodstuffs, except those which are, by their nature, clearly intended for this use;
Whereas Article 4 (2) of Council Directive 83/229/EEC (2), as amended by Directive 86/388/EEC (3), enables Member States to decide whether to allow the use of phthalic esters pending scientific research to assess the risk associated with the use of such substances;
Whereas the scientific data available now make it possible to lay down thresholds below which human exposure to these substances does not involve any risk to human health; whereas, therefore, these substances should be authorized throughout the Community;
Whereas the additives authorized for use in the manufacture of coatings intended to cover regenerated cellulose film should also include the additives used in the manufacture of such film;
Whereas, on the basis of information available, the use of certain new substances may be permitted;
Whereas the Scientific Committee for Food, in accordance with Article 3 of Directive 89/109/EEC, has been consulted on the provisions liable to affect public health;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Foodstuffs,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
Directive 83/229/EEC is hereby amended as follows:
1. the following Article 3a is added:
'Article 3a
1. At the marketing stages other than the retail stage, materials and articles made of regenerated cellulose film intended to come into contact with foodstuffs shall be accompanied by a written declaration in accordance with Article 6 (5) of Directive 89/109/EEC (*).
2. Paragraph 1 does not apply to materials and articles made of regenerated cellulose film which by their nature are clearly intended to come into contact with foodstuffs.
(*) OJ No L 40, 11. 2. 1989, p. 38.';
2. paragraph 2 of Article 4 is deleted;
3. in the first part of Annex II, the letter B is added in the 'Denominations' column before the subtitles: '1. Softeners' and '2. Other additives';
4. in the first part of Annex II the following indent is inserted in the list 'B.1. Softeners'; 'Denominations' column, after sorbitol: '- tetraethyleneglycol';
5. (a) in the first part of Annex II the following indent is inserted after the first indent of subheading 'Third class - Anchoring agents' of heading 'B.2. Other additives', in the 'Denominations' column:
'- condensation products of melamine-urea-formaldehyde modified with tris (2-hydroxyethyl) amine';
(b) against this item and under the column 'Restrictions' the following is added:
'Free formaldehyde content on side in contact with foodstuffs " 0,5 mg/dm2.
Free melamine content on side in contact with foodstuffs " 0,3 mg/dm2';
6. (a) in the Second Part of Annex II, the letter C is added in the 'Denominations' column, before the subtitles '1. Polymes 2. Resins 3. Plasticizers';
(b) the following substances are delected from the 'Denominations' column, section 'C.3. Plasticizers':
'- butyl-methylcarboxybutyl phthalate [=butylphthalyl butyl glycolate]
- di-isobutyl phthalate
- di-(methylcyclohexyl) phthalate and its isomers [=sextolphthalate]
- methyl-methylcarboxyethyl phthalate [=methylphthalyl ethyl glycolate]';
(c) the following is added in the 'Restrictions' column for the substance '- butylbenzylphthalate':
' " 2 mg/dm2 in the coating on the side in contact with foodstuffs';
(d) the following is added in the 'Restrictions' column section 'C.3. Plasticizers' for the substance '-di-n-butyl phthalate':
' " 3 mg/dm2 in the coating on the side in contact with foodstuffs';
(e) the following is added in the 'Restrictions' column section 'C.3. Plasticizers' for the substance '- dicyclohexyl phthalate':
' " 4 mg/dm2 in the coating on the side in contact with foodstuffs';
(f) the following is inserted in the 'Denominations' and 'Restrictions' columns after Section 'C.3. Plasticizers':
'C.4. Other additives " 6 mg/dm2 in total in the uncoated regenerated cellulose film, inclusive of the coating on the side in contact with foodstuffs. C.4.1. Additives listed in the first part Same restrictions as in the first part (however, the quantities in mg/dm2 refer to the uncoated regerated cellulose film, inclusive of the coating on the side in contact with foodstuffs).';
(g) heading 4 'Specific coating additives', in the 'Denominations' column is replaced by 'C.4.2. Specific coating additives';
(h) against the heading 'C.4.2. Specific coating additives' the text in the column 'Restrictions' is replaced by the following:
'The quantity of the substance or group of substances in each indent may not exceed 2 mg/dm2 (or a lower limit where one is specified) in the coating on the side in contact with foodstuffs';
(i) heading 'D. Solvents' is replaced by 'C.5. Solvents'.
Article 2
1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 30 June 1993. They shall immediately inform the Commission thereof.
Those laws, regulations and administrative provisions shall apply as follows:
Member States shall:
- permit, by 30 June 1993, the trade and use of regenerated cellulose film complying with Directive 83/229/EEC, as amended by this Directive,
- prohibit, as from 1 July 1994, the trade and use of regenerated cellulose film which is intended to come into contact with foodstuffs and which does not conform to Directive 83/229/EEC, as amended by this Directive.
2. When Member States adopt the measures reffered to in paragraph 1, the measures shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such reference at the time of their official publication. The procedure for such reference shall be adopted by Member States.
Article 3
This Directive is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 11 March 1992. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COUNCIL DECISION
of 19 June 1989
amending Decision 88/303/EEC recognizing certain parts of the territory of the Community as being either officially swine fever free or swine fever free
(89/383/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 64/432/EEC of 26 June 1964 on animal health problems affecting intra-Community trade in bovine animals and swine (1) as last amended by Directive 88/406/EEC (2) and in particular Article 4 b (1) (c) thereof,
Having regard to Council Directive 72/461/EEC of 12 December 1972 on health problems affecting intra-Community trade in fresh meat (3), as last amended by Directive 87/489/EEC (4), and in particular Article 13 a (2) thereof;
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission;
Whereas Decision 88/303/EEC (5), as amended by Decision 89/20/EEC (6), recognizes certain parts of the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Greece and the Netherlands as being officially swine fever free and certain parts of Belgium, the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Italy and Spain as being swine fever free;
Whereas since then in certain parts of the territory of Belgium, the Federal Republic of Germany and in all regions of Spain swine fever has not been detected for more than one year; whereas vaccination against swine fever has not been authorized for at least the preceding twelve months; whereas the holdings concerned contain no pigs which have been vaccinated against swine fever during the previous twelve months; whereas, consequently, these parts of the territory fulfil the requirements for being recognized as officially swine free for the purpose of intra-Community trade;
Whereas, in certain parts of Belgium and Greece, swine fever has not been detected for more than one year; whereas, consequently, these parts of the territory fulfil the requirements for being recognized as swine fever free for the purpose of intra-Community trade in fresh meat,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Decision 88/303/EEC is hereby amended as follows:
1. in Annex I:
(a) in Chapter 1:
- second indent, insert the term 'Muenster' after the term 'Duesseldorf',
- third indent, insert the term 'Rheinhessen-Pfalz' after the term 'Koblenz';
(b) the following Chapters shall be added:
'CHAPTER 5
Belgium
Provinces:
- Brabant
- Hainaut
- Liège
- Limbourg
- Luxembourg
- Namur
CHAPTER 6
Spain
Autonomous regions:
- Asturias
- Balaeres
- Cantabria
- Madrid
- Murcia
- Rioja (La)
- Navarra
Provinces:
- Almeriá, Cádiz, Córdoba, Granada, Huelva, Jaén, Málaga and Sevilla within the autonomous region of Andalucia,
- Huesca, Teruel and Zarogoza within the autonomous region of Aragón,
- Ávila, Burgos, León, Palencia, Salamanca, Segovia, Soria, Valladolid and Zamora of the autonomous region of Castilla y León,
- Albacete, Ciudad Real, Guadalajara, Cuenca and Toledo within the autonomous region of Casilla la Mancha,
- Barcelona, Gerona, Lérida and Tarragona within the autonomous region of Cataluña,
- Badajoz and Cáceres within the autonomous region of Extremadura,
- Coruña (La), Lugo, Orense and Pontevedra within the autonomous region of Galicia,
- Alicante, Castellón and Valencia within the autonomous region of Valencia,
- Alava Guipúzcoa and Vizcaya within the autonomous region of Pais Vasco,
- Palmas (Las) and Santa Cruz de Tenerife within the autonomous region of Canarias.'
2. in Annex II:
(a) in Chapter 1, the term 'Muenster' shall be deleted;
(b) Chapter 2 (Spain) shall be deleted and Chapters 3, 4 and 5 shall become Chapters 2, 3 and 4 respectively;
(c) the new Chapter 2 (Belgium) shall be replaced by the following.
'CHAPTER 2
Belgium
- The provinces of Antwerp and West Flanders'.
(d) the following Chapter shall be added:
'CHAPTER 5
Greece
Prefectures:
- Evros, with the exception of the Island of Samothrace
- Rhodopi
- Xanthi
- Kavala with the exception of the Island of Thassos
- Drama
- Serres
- Chalkidiki
- Thessaloniki
- Kilkis
- Pella
- Imathia
- Pieria
- Kozani
- Florina
- Kastoria
- Grevena
- Ioannina
- Thesprotia
- Kerkira
- Preveza
- Arta
- Trikala
- Karditsa
- Evritania
- Larissa
- Magnissia with the exception of the Islands of Skiathos, Skopelos and Alonissos
- Fthiotida
- Viotia
- Attiki
- Evia with the exception of the Island of Skyros
- Rhodes with the exception of the other Islands of Dodekanissa
- Argolida with the exception of the Island of Spetses
- Korinthia
- Achaïa
- Fokida
- Aetoloakarnania
- Ilia
- Arkadia
- Messinia
- Lakonia.'
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Luxembourg, 19 June 1989. | [
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Decision of the Council, meeting in the composition of the Heads of State or Government
of 21 March 2003
on an amendment to Article 10.2 of the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank
(2003/223/EC)
THE COUNCIL MEETING IN THE COMPOSITION OF THE HEADS OF STATE OR GOVERNMENT,
Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank(1), and in particular to Article 10.6 thereof,
Having regard to the recommendation from the European Central Bank(2),
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament(3),
Having regard to the opinion of the Commission(4),
Whereas:
(1) The enlargement of the euro area will lead to an increase in the number of members of the Governing Council of the European Central Bank (ECB). There is a need to maintain the Governing Council's capacity for efficient and timely decision-making in an enlarged euro area, irrespective of the number of Member States that adopt the euro. In order to do so, the number of governors having voting rights will have to be smaller than the overall number of governors in the Governing Council. A rotation system is an equitable, efficient and acceptable way of assigning voting rights among the governors in the Governing Council. A number of 15 voting rights for the governors strikes an appropriate balance between, on the one hand, continuity with the existing set-up including a balanced assignment of voting rights between the six members of the Executive Board and the other members of the Governing Council and, on the other hand, the need to ensure efficient decision-making in a substantially enlarged Governing Council.
(2) In view of their appointment at European level by a Treaty procedure and their role at the ECB, the competence of which spans the whole euro area, each member of the Executive Board has to maintain a permanent voting right in the Governing Council.
(3) The voting modalities in the Governing Council are adjusted on the basis of Article 10.6 of the Statute. As this Article only concerns amendments to Article 10.2 of the Statute, any adjustment of the voting modalities has no implications for voting on decisions taken in accordance with Articles 10.3, 10.6 and 41.2 of the Statute.
(4) Five fundamental principles are reflected in the constitutive elements of the chosen rotation system. The "one member, one vote" principle, which is the Governing Council's core decision-making principle, continues to apply to all members of the Governing Council having a voting right. All members of the Governing Council continue to participate in its meetings in a personal and independent capacity, irrespective of whether they have a voting right or not. The rotation system is robust in the sense that it is able to accommodate any euro area enlargements up to the currently envisaged maximum number of Member States. Moreover, the rotation system avoids producing situations in which those governors having a voting right are from the national central banks (NCBs) of Member States which, taken together, are perceived as unrepresentative of the euro area economy as a whole. Finally, the rotation system is transparent.
(5) The allocation of governors to groups and the assignment of specific numbers of voting rights to these groups are designed to ensure that those governors having a voting right are from the NCBs of Member States which, taken together, are representative of the euro area economy as a whole. Governors will exercise their voting right with different frequencies depending on the relative size of their NCB's Member State's economy within the euro area. The allocation of governors to groups is thus dependent on a ranking of their NCB's Member State based on an indicator with two components: the size of the share of their NCB's Member State (i) in the aggregate gross domestic product at market prices (hereinafter GDP mp) of the Member States which have adopted the euro; and (ii) in the total aggregated balance sheet of the monetary financial institutions (hereinafter TABS-MFIs) of the Member States which have adopted the euro. The economic weight of a Member State as reflected in its GDP mp is an appropriate component as the impact of central bank decisions is greater in Member States with larger economies than in those with smaller economies. At the same time, the size of a Member State's financial sector also has a particular relevance for central bank decisions, since the counterparties of central bank operations belong to this sector. A 5/6 weight is attributed to GDP mp and a 1/6 weight to TABS-MFIs. This choice of weights is suitable, as this will mean that the financial sector is sufficiently and meaningfully represented.
(6) In order to provide for the smooth introduction of the rotation system, its establishment takes place in two stages. In the first stage the governors will be allocated to two groups as soon as their number exceeds 15. The frequency of voting rights of the governors allocated to the first group will not be lower than the frequency of voting rights of those of the second group. When a significant number of new Member States have entered the euro area, i.e. the number of governors exceeds 21, they will be allocated to three groups. Within each group governors have a voting right for equal amounts of time. The detailed implementing provisions regarding the two principles as well as any possible decision to postpone the start of the rotation system so as to avoid the situation that governors within any group have a voting frequency of 100 % are to be adopted by the Governing Council, acting by a two-thirds majority of all its members, with and without a voting right.
(7) The shares of each NCB's Member State in the aggregate GDP mp and in the TABS-MFIs of the Member States which have adopted the euro are to be adjusted whenever the aggregate GDP mp is adjusted in accordance with Article 29.3 of the Statute or whenever the number of governors in the Governing Council increases. The new shares resulting from the regular adjustments will apply as from the first day of the following year. Upon one or more governors becoming members of the Governing Council, the reference periods to be used to calculate the shares of their respective NCB's Member State in the aggregate GDP mp and in the TABS-MFI of the Member States which have adopted the euro should be identical to those used for the latest quinquennial adjustment of the shares. The new shares resulting from such non-regular adjustments will apply as from the day on which the governor(s) join(s) the Governing Council. These operational details are part of the implementing provisions to be adopted by the Governing Council,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank is hereby amended as follows:
Article 10.2 of the Statute shall be replaced by the following:
"(10.2) Each member of the Governing Council shall have one vote. As from the date on which the number of members of the Governing Council exceeds 21, each member of the Executive Board shall have one vote and the number of governors with a voting right shall be 15. The latter voting rights shall be assigned and shall rotate as follows:
- as from the date on which the number of governors exceeds 15, until it reaches 22, the governors shall be allocated to two groups, according to a ranking of the size of the share of their national central bank's Member State in the aggregate gross domestic product at market prices and in the total aggregated balance sheet of the monetary financial institutions of the Member States which have adopted the euro. The shares in the aggregate gross domestic product at market prices and in the total aggregated balance sheet of the monetary financial institutions shall be assigned weights of 5/6 and 1/6, respectively. The first group shall be composed of five governors and the second group of the remaining governors. The frequency of voting rights of the governors allocated to the first group shall not be lower than the frequency of voting rights of those of the second group. Subject to the previous sentence, the first group shall be assigned four voting rights and the second group eleven voting rights;
- as from the date on which the number of governors reaches 22, the governors shall be allocated to three groups according to a ranking based on the above criteria. The first group shall be composed of five governors and shall be assigned four voting rights. The second group shall be composed of half of the total number of governors, with any fraction rounded up to the nearest integer, and shall be assigned eight voting rights. The third group shall be composed of the remaining governors and shall be assigned three voting rights;
- within each group, the governors shall have their voting rights for equal amounts of time;
- for the calculation of the shares in the aggregate gross domestic product at market prices Article 29.2 shall apply. The total aggregated balance sheet of the monetary financial institutions shall be calculated in accordance with the statistical framework applying in the European Community at the time of the calculation;
- whenever the aggregate gross domestic product at market prices is adjusted in accordance with Article 29.3, or whenever the number of governors increases, the size and/or composition of the groups shall be adjusted in accordance with the above principles;
- the Governing Council, acting by a two-thirds majority of all its members, with and without a voting right, shall take all measures necessary for the implementation of the above principles and may decide to postpone the start of the rotation system until the date on which the number of governors exceeds 18.
The right to vote shall be exercised in person. By way of derogation from this rule, the Rules of Procedure referred to in Article 12.3 may lay down that members of the Governing Council may cast their vote by means of teleconferencing. These rules shall also provide that a member of the Governing Council who is prevented from attending meetings of the Governing Council for a prolonged period may appoint an alternate as a member of the Governing Council.
The provisions of the previous paragraphs are without prejudice to the voting rights of all members of the Governing Council, with and without a voting right, under Articles 10.3, 10.6 and 41.2.
Save as otherwise provided for in this Statute, the Governing Council shall act by a simple majority of the members having a voting right. In the event of a tie, the President shall have the casting vote.
In order for the Governing Council to vote, there shall be a quorum of two-thirds of the members having a voting right. If the quorum is not met, the President may convene an extraordinary meeting at which decisions may be taken without regard to the quorum."
Article 2
1. This Decision shall be ratified by all Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements. The instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the Government of the Italian Republic.
2. This Decision shall enter into force on the first day of the second month following that in which the instrument of ratification is deposited by the last signatory Member State to fulfil that formality.
Done at Brussels, 21 March 2003. | [
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3049/87
of 12 October 1987
on duties applicable on import into the Community of Ten of avocados consigned from Portugal
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal and in particular subparagraph (4) (b) of Article 243 thereof,
Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 443/86 (1) determined the basic duties to be used in the Community of Ten for calculation of the successive reductions provided for in the Act of Accession;
Whereas since more favourable rates of duty have been negotiated multilaterally under the Generalized System of Preferences arrangements for avocados falling within code 0804 40 of the combined nomenclature the duty applicable on import into the Community of Ten of avocados meeting, in Portugal, the terms of Article 9 (2) of the Treaty should be reduced at a quicker rate than initially provided for from 1 January 1988;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Fruit and Vegetables,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The customs duty applicable on import into the Community of Ten of avocados of code 0804 40 of the combined nomenclature meeting, in Portugal, the terms of Article 9 (2) of the Treaty is hereby set at the following percentages of the basic duty from the following dates:
1.2 // Date // Percentage of basic duty // 1 January 1988 // 31,25 % // 1 January 1989 // 25,00 % // 1 January 1990 // 18,75 % // 1 January 1991 // 12,50 % // 1 January 1992 // duty completely abolished
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 12 October 1987. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 837/2004
of 28 April 2004
opening tendering procedures for the sale of wine alcohol stored in Germany for new industrial uses
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in wine(1), and in particular Article 33 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1623/2000 of 25 July 2000 laying down detailed rules for implementing Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 on the common organisation of the market in wine with regard to market mechanisms(2) lays down, inter alia, the detailed rules for disposing of stocks of alcohol arising from distillation under Articles 27, 28 and 30 of Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 held by intervention agencies.
(2) In accordance with Article 80 of Regulation (EC) No 1623/2000, tendering procedures should be organised for the sale of wine alcohol for new industrial uses with a view to reducing the stocks of wine alcohol in the Community and enabling small-scale industrial projects to be carried out and such alcohol to be processed into goods intended for export for industrial uses. The wine alcohol of Community origin in storage in Germany consists of quantities produced from distillation under Article 30 of Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999.
(3) Since 1 January 1999 and in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 2799/98 of 15 December 1998 establishing agrimonetary arrangements for the euro(3), the prices offered in tenders and securities must be expressed in euro and payments must be made in euro.
(4) Minimum prices should be set for the submission of tenders, broken down according to the type of end use.
(5) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Wine,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Three tendering procedures with the numbers 48/2004 EC, 49/2004 EC and 50/2004 EC are hereby opened for the sale of wine alcohol for new industrial uses. The alcohol concerned has been produced from distillation under Article 30 of Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 and is held by the German intervention agency.
The volume put up for sale is 20358,788 hectolitres of alcohol at 100 % vol, broken down as follows:
(a) tendering procedure 48/2004 EC covers a quantity of 8136 hectolitres of alcohol at 100 % vol;
(b) tendering procedure 49/2004 EC covers a quantity of 8605 hectolitres of alcohol at 100 % vol;
(c) tendering procedure 50/2004 EC covers a quantity of 3617 hectolitres of alcohol at 100 % vol.
The vat numbers, places of storage and the volume of alcohol at 100 % vol contained in each vat are detailed in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
The sale shall be conducted in accordance with Articles 79, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 95, 96, 97, 100 and 101 of Regulation (EC) No 1623/2000 and Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 2799/98.
Article 3
1. Tenders must be lodged with or sent by registered mail to the following intervention agency holding the alcohol concerned:
Bundesanstalt für Landwirtschaft und Ernährung (BLE), Referat 321
Address: Adickesallee 40, D-60322 Frankfurt am Main
Postal address: D-60631 Frankfurt am Main
Telephone: +49-(0)69-1564- 0 (switchboard) or +49-(0)69-1564-479 (direct line)
Fax: +49-(0)69-1564-794
2. Tenders shall be submitted in a sealed double envelope, the inside envelope marked: "Tender under procedures Nos 48/2004 EC, 49/2004 EC and 50/2004 EC for new industrial uses", the outer envelope bearing the address of the intervention agency concerned.
3. Tenders must reach the intervention agency referred to in paragraph 1 not later than 12.00 Brussels time on 21 May 2004.
4. All tenders must be accompanied by proof that a tendering security of EUR 4 per hectolitre of alcohol at 100 % vol has been lodged with the intervention agency referred to in paragraph 1.
Article 4
The minimum prices which may be offered are:
(a) in the case of new industrial uses:
(i) for lot 48/2004 EC, EUR 9 per hectolitre of alcohol at 100 % vol;
(ii) for lots 49/2004 EC and 50/2004 EC, EUR 7 per hectolitre of alcohol at 100 % vol;
(b) in the case of alcohol intended for use as fuel, EUR 6 per hectolitre of alcohol at 100 % vol.
Article 5
The formalities for sampling shall be as set out in Article 98 of Regulation (EC) No 1623/2000. The price of samples shall be EUR 10 per litre.
The intervention agency shall provide all the necessary information on the characteristics of the alcohol put up for sale.
Article 6
The performance guarantee shall be EUR 30 per hectolitre of alcohol at 100 % vol.
Article 7
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day 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, 28 April 2004. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Decision No 2850/2000/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 20 December 2000
setting up a Community framework for cooperation in the field of accidental or deliberate marine pollution
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 175(1) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission(1),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee(2),
Following consultation with the Committee of the Regions,
Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 of the Treaty(3), and in the light of the joint text approved by the Conciliation Committee on 11 October 2000,
Whereas:
(1) The actions taken by the Community in the field of accidental marine pollution since 1978 have made it possible progressively to develop cooperation between the Member States within a Community action programme. The resolution and decisions adopted since 1978(4) constitute the basis for this cooperation.
(2) Several regional agreements on accidental marine pollution, such as the Bonn Cooperation Agreement, already facilitate mutual assistance and cooperation between Member States in this field.
(3) Regard should be had to the international conventions and agreements applicable to European seas and maritime areas, such as the OSPAR Convention, the Barcelona Convention and the Helsinki Convention.
(4) The Community information system has served the purpose of making available to the Member States the data required for the control and reduction of pollution caused by the spillage of hydrocarbons and other harmful substances at sea in large quantities. The information system will be simplified by the use of a modern automatic data-processing system.
(5) A system for the rapid and efficient exchange of information needs to be established.
(6) The Community task force and other actions within the Community action programme have provided practical assistance to operational authorities during marine pollution emergencies and promoted cooperation and preparedness for efficient response to accidents.
(7) The Community programme of policy and action in relation to the environment and sustainable development(5) presented by the Commission envisages that the Community's activities will be stepped up in particular in the field of environmental emergencies which includes accidental or deliberate marine pollution.
(8) Directive 2000/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues(6) is of fundamental importance in the context of this Decision.
(9) Harmful substances means any hazardous or noxious substance liable to raise concern if spilled into the marine environment.
(10) Community cooperation in the field of accidental marine pollution helps, by taking action against the risks, to achieve the objectives of the Treaty by promoting solidarity between Member States and contributing, pursuant to Article 174 of the Treaty, to preserving and protecting the environment and protecting human health.
(11) The establishment of a Community framework for cooperation providing support measures will help to develop cooperation in the field of accidental marine pollution even more efficiently. Such a framework for cooperation should be based to a large extent on experience already gained in this field since 1978.
(12) A Community framework for cooperation will also increase transparency as well as consolidate and strengthen the different actions.
(13) Accidental or deliberate pollution at sea includes pollution from offshore installations and illicit operational spills from vessels.
(14) Action to provide information and prepare those responsible for and involved in dealing with accidental marine pollution in the Member States is important, increases the degree of preparedness for accidents and contributes to preventing the risks.
(15) It is also important to undertake Community action to improve techniques and methods of response and rehabilitation after emergencies.
(16) The provision of operational support in emergency situations to Member States and facilitating the dissemination of experience from such situations among Member States has proved to be of significant value.
(17) Actions under this framework should also promote the polluter-pays principle which should be applied in accordance with the applicable national and international environmental and maritime law.
(18) The measures necessary for implementing this Decision should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission(7).
(19) This Decision lays down, for the entire duration of the cooperation framework, a financial framework constituting the prime reference, within the meaning of point 33 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and improvement of the budgetary procedure(8), for the budgetary authority during the annual budgetary procedure.
(20) The provisions of this Decision take over, in particular, the action programme set up through Council Resolution of 26 June 1978 and the Community information system established through Council Decision 86/85/EEC of 6 March 1986 establishing a Community information system for the control and reduction of pollution caused by the spillage of hydrocarbons and other harmful substances at sea or in major inland waters(9). That Decision should be repealed from the date on which this Decision enters into force,
HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
1. A Community framework for cooperation in the field of accidental or deliberate marine pollution (hereinafter called "the framework for cooperation") is hereby established for the period 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2006.
2. The framework for cooperation is intended:
(a) to support and supplement Member States' efforts at national, regional and local levels for the protection of the marine environment, coastlines and human health against the risks of accidental or deliberate pollution at sea, excluding continuous streams of pollution originating from land-based sources;
accidental marine pollution risks include releases of harmful substances into the marine environment, whatever their origin, both from ships and from the shoreline or estuaries, including those linked to the presence of dumped materials, such as munitions, but excluding authorised discharges and continuous streams of pollution originating from land-based sources;
(b) to contribute to improving the capabilities of the Member States for response in case of incidents involving spills or imminent threats of spills of oil or other harmful substances at sea and also to contribute to the prevention of the risks. In accordance with the internal division of competences within Member States, they shall exchange information on dumped munitions with a view to facilitating risk identification and preparedness measures;
(c) to strengthen the conditions for and facilitate efficient mutual assistance and cooperation between Member States in this field; and
(d) to promote cooperation between Member States in order to provide for compensation for damage in accordance with the polluter-pays principle.
Article 2
Without prejudice to the division of responsibilities between Member States and the Commission, the Commission shall implement the actions under the framework for cooperation, as set out in Annexes I and II.
(a) Within the framework for cooperation, a Community information system for the purpose of exchanging data on the preparedness for and response to accidental or deliberate marine pollution, is established. The system shall consist of at least the components set out in Annex I.
Types of actions under the framework for cooperation and financial arrangements for Community contribution are set out in Annex II.
(b) A three-year rolling plan to implement the framework for cooperation, to be reviewed annually, shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 4(2) and on the basis, inter alia, of the information supplied by Member States to the Commission.
The Commission may, where necessary, arrange additional actions to those set out in Annex II. Such additional actions shall be assessed in the light of the priorities set and the financial resources available and shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 4(2).
(c) The financial framework for the implementation of this Decision for the period 2000 to 2006 is hereby set at EUR 7 million.
The budgetary resources allocated to the actions provided for in this Decision shall be entered into the annual appropriations of the general budget of the European Union. The available annual appropriations shall be authorised by the budgetary authority within the limits of the financial perspectives.
Article 3
1. The rolling plan to implement the framework for cooperation shall contain the individual actions to be undertaken.
2. Individual actions shall be selected primarily on the basis of the following criteria:
(a) contributing to providing information and preparing those responsible for and involved in dealing with accidental or deliberate marine pollution, including where relevant port authorities, in the Member States, in order to increase the degree of preparedness and contribute to preventing the risks;
(b) contributing to improving techniques and methods of response and rehabilitation after emergencies and to improving techniques for the evaluation of damage caused to the marine and coastal environment;
(c) contributing to providing better public information to help clarify risks and relaying accidents information;
(d) contributing to strengthening the cooperation of relevant local bodies and nature protection bodies as regards risk prevention and response;
(e) contributing to providing operational support, by mobilising experts mainly belonging to the Community task force, in emergency situations to Member States and to disseminating experience from such situations among Member States.
3. Each individual action shall be implemented in close cooperation with the competent authorities at national, regional and local levels in the Member States.
Article 4
1. The Commission shall be assisted by a committee.
2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Articles 4 and 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply, having regard to Article 8 thereof.
The period laid down in Article 4(3) of Decision 1999/468/EC shall be set at three months.
3. The Committee shall adopt its rules of procedure.
Article 5
The Commission shall evaluate the implementation of the framework for cooperation at mid term and before its end, and report no later than 36 months after the entry into force of the Decision and thereafter six years after the entry into force of the Decision, to the European Parliament and to the Council. In its final report, the Commission shall, if appropriate, make proposals for new measures to continue this framework.
Article 6
Decision 86/85/EEC shall be repealed.
Article 7
This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
Article 8
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 20 December 2000. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2215/91 of 24 July 1991 re-establishing the levying of customs duties on products of categories 10, 18, 39, 40 and 74 (order Nos 40.0100, 40.0180, 40.0390, 40.0400 and 40.0740, originating in Pakistan, to which the preferential tariff arrangements set out in Council Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90 apply
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90 of 20 December 1990 applying generalized tariff preferences for 1991 in respect of textile products originating in developing countries (1), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3835/90 (2), and in particular Article 12 thereof,
Whereas Article 10 of Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90 provides that preferential tariff treatment shall be accorded, for each category of products subjected in Annexes I and II thereto to individual ceilings, within the limits of the quantities specified in column 8 of Annex I and column 7 of Annex II, in respect of certain or each of the countries or territories of origin referred to in column 5 of the same Annexes;
Whereas Article 11 of the abovementioned Regulation provides that the levying of customs duties may be re-established at any time in respect of imports of the products in question once the relevant individual ceilings have been reached at Community level:
Whereas, in respect of products of categories 10, 18, 39, 40 and 74 (order Nos 40.0100, 40.0180, 40.0390, 40.0400 and 40.0740), originating in Pakistan, the relevant ceilings respectively amount to 1 537 000 pairs, 101, 112 and 37 tonnes and 67 000 pieces;
Whereas on 2 February 1991 imports of the products in question into the Community, originating in Pakistan, a country covered be preferential tariff arrangements, reached and were charged against those ceilings;
Whereas it is appropriate to re-establish the levying of customs duties for the products in question with regard to Pakistan;
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
As from 29 July 1991 the levying of customs duties, suspended pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90, shall be re-established in respect of the following products, imported into the Community and originating in Pakistan:
Order No Category
(unit) CN code Description 40.0100 10 (1 000 pairs) 6111 10 10
6111 20 10
6111 30 10
ex 6111 90 00
6116 10 10
6116 10 90
6116 90 00
6116 92 00
6116 93 00
6116 99 00 Gloves, mittens and mitts, knitted or crocheted 40.0180 18 (tonnes) 6207 11 00
6207 19 00
6207 21 00
6207 22 00
6207 29 00
6207 91 00
6207 92 00
6207 99 00 Men's or boys singlets and other vests, underpants, briefs, nightshirts, pyjamas, bathrobes, dressing gowns and similar articles, other than knitted or crocheted 40.0180 (cont'd) 6208 11 00
6208 19 10
6208 19 90
6208 21 00
6208 22 00
6208 29 00
6208 91 10
6208 91 90
6208 92 10
6208 92 90
6208 99 00 Women's and girls' singlets and other vests, slips, petticoats, briefs, panties, nightdresses, pyjamas, négligés, bathrobes, dressing gowns and similar articles, other than knitted or crocheted 40.0390 39 (tonnes) 6302 51 10
6302 51 90
6302 53 90
ex 6302 59 00
6202 91 10
6202 91 90
6202 93 90
ex 6202 99 00 Tagble linen, toilet and kitchen linen, other than knitted or crocheted, other than of terry towelling or similar terry fabrics of cotton 40.0400 40 (tonnes) ex 6303 91 10
ex 6303 92 90
ex 6303 99 90
6304 19 10
ex 6304 19 90
6304 92 00
ex 6304 93 00
ex 6304 99 00 Woven curtains (including drapes) interior blinds, curtain and bed valances and other furnished articles, other than knitted or crocheted, of wool, of cotton or of man-made fibres 40.0740 74 (1 000 pieces) 6104 11 00
6104 12 00
6104 13 00
ex 6104 19 00
6104 21 00
6104 22 00
6104 23 00
ex 6104 29 00 Women's or girls knitted or crocheted suits and ensembles, of wool, of cotton or man-made fibres, excluding ski suits
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 24 July 1991. | [
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 693/97 of 18 April 1997 initiating an investigation concerning the alleged circumvention of Council Regulation (EC) No 1490/96 on imports of polyester staple fibre originating in Belarus by imports of synthetic filament tow of polyester for conversion in the European Community and making the latter imports subject to registration
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2331/96 (2), and in particular Articles 13 and 14 thereof,
After consulting the Advisory Committee,
Whereas:
A. REQUEST
(1) The Commission has received a request pursuant to Article 13 (3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (hereafter 'the Basic Regulation`):
- to investigate the alleged circumvention of the anti-dumping duties, imposed by Council Regulation (EC) No 1490/96 (3) on imports of polyester staple fibre (hereafter 'PSF`) originating in Belarus, by imports of polyester filament tow (hereafter 'PFT`) originating in Belarus which would subsequently be converted in the Community into PSF,
- to make imports of such PFT subject to registration by the customs authorities pursuant to Article 14 (5) of the Basic Regulation, and
- to propose to the Council the extension, where justified, of the above anti-dumping duties to imports of this PFT.
B. APPLICANTS
(2) The request was lodged on 4 March 1997 by the International Committee of Rayon and Synthetic Fibres (CIRFS) on behalf of Community producers whose collective output is alleged to represent over 90 % of the total Community production of PSF.
C. PRODUCT
(3) The like product, through the importation and conversion of which the alleged circumvention is taking place, is PFT, falling within CN code 5501 20 00, which is used for conversion in the Community into PSF which is currently classifiable within CN code 5503 20 00. The request alleges that this conversion consists of a simple process of mechanical cutting of PFT into PSF and that the PFT originating in Belarus is exclusively used for conversion into PSF. The CN codes mentioned are given for information only and have no binding effect on the classification of the products.
D. EVIDENCE
(4) The request contains sufficient evidence, in accordance with Article 13 of the Basic Regulation, that the anti-dumping measures on imports of PSF originating in Belarus are being circumvented by means of imports of PFT originating in this country which are used in conversion operations in the Community which could be characterized as practices for which there seems to be insufficient due cause or economic justification other than the imposition of the anti-dumping duty.
(5) The evidence is as follows:
(a) A clear change has taken place in the pattern of trade between Belarus and the Community, particularly since March 1996 when the provisional anti-dumping measures on PSF from Belarus entered into force. In this respect, the request points out that imports into the Community of PSF from Belarus decreased from 3 979 tonnes in the period January to February 1996 to 338 tonnes in the period March to August 1996 (i.e. a decrease of 91,5 %), whereas during the same periods imports of PFT from Belarus increased from 99 tonnes to 2 943 tonnes (i.e. an increase of 2 873 %). The imposition of anti-dumping measures would therefore appear to have led to a clear substitution of imports of PSF by imports of PFT.
This change in the pattern of trade is alleged to stem from the conversion in the Community of PFT into PSF, consisting essentially of a simple cutting operation, for which there is insufficient due cause or economic justification, apart from the existence of the anti-dumping duty of 43,5 % on imports of PSF originating in Belarus. As is pointed out in the request, the extra cost incurred by converting PFT into PSF in the Community rather than conducting this operation in an integrated process is not offset by any cost savings but is even compounded because of the relatively high labour cost in the Community.
(b) Furthermore, the request contains evidence which shows that the prices at which PSF resulting from conversion in the Community of PFT imported from Belarus are being sold in the Community, are lower than the non-dumped level of the export price established in the anti-dumping investigation for PSF from Belarus.
(c) Finally, the request contains evidence which shows that the conversion operations of PFT are undermining the remedial effects of the existing antidumping duties on PSF in terms of quantities and prices.
E. PROCEDURE
(6) In the light of the evidence contained in the request, the Commission has concluded that, pursuant to Article 13 (3) of the Basic Regulation, sufficient evidence exists to justify the initiation of an investigation and to make imports of PFT subject to registration.
(i) Questionnaires
(7) In order to obtain the information it deems necessary for its investigation, the Commission will send a questionnaire to the importers, traders and converters of PFT in the Community named in the request. Information, as appropriate, may also be sought from Community producers.
(8) Other interested parties which can show that they are likely to be affected by the outcome of the investigation, should request a questionnaire from the Commission within 15 days of publication of this Regulation in the Official Journal of the European Communities. Any request for questionnaires must be made in writing to the address mentioned below, and should indicate the name, address, telephone and fax numbers of the requesting party.
The authorities of Belarus will be notified of the initiation of the investigation and provided with a copy of the request.
(ii) Certificates of non-circumvention
(9) In accordance with Article 13 (4) of the Basic Regulation, certificates exempting the imports of the product concerned from registration or measures may be issued by the customs authorities to importers when the importation does not constitute circumvention.
Since the issue of this certificate requires the prior authorization of the Community institutions, requests for such authorizations should be addressed by interested importers to the Commission as early as possible in the course of the investigation so that they may be considered on the basis of a thorough appraisal of their merits.
F. TIME LIMIT
(10) In the interest of sound administration, a period should be fixed within which interested parties, provided they can show that they are likely to be affected by the results of the investigation, may make their views known in writing. A period should also be fixed within which interested parties may make a written request for a hearing and show that there are particular reasons why they should be heard.
Furthermore, it should be stated that, in cases in which any interested party refuses access to, or otherwise does not provide necessary information within the time limit, or significantly impedes the investigation, findings, affirmative or negative, may be made in accordance with Article 18 of the Basic Regulation, on the basis of the facts available,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
An investigation, pursuant to Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 384/96, concerning imports into the Community of synthetic filament tow of polyester, currently classifiable within CN code 5501 20 00, originating in Belarus, which is used for conversion in the Community into polyester staple fibre, is hereby initiated.
Article 2
The customs authorities are hereby directed, pursuant to Article 13 (3) and Article 14 (5) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96, to take the appropriate steps to register the imports into the Community of synthetic filament tow of polyester, currently classifiable within CN code 5501 20 00, originating in Belarus in order to ensure that, should the anti-dumping duties applicable to imports of polyester staple fibre originating in Belarus be extended to imports of synthetic filament tow of polyester, they may be collected from the date of such registration.
Registration shall expire nine months following the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Imports shall not be subject to registration where they are accompanied by a customs certificate issued in accordance with Article 13 (4) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96.
Article 3
1. All interested parties, if their representations are to be taken into account during the investigation, must make themselves known, present their views in writing, submit information and apply to be heard by the Commission within 40 days from the date of publication of this Regulation in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This time limit applies to all interested parties, including the parties not named in the request, and it is consequently in the interest of these parties to contact the Commission without delay.
2. Questionnaires should be requested from the Commission within 15 days of publication of this Regulation in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
3. Any information relating to the matter, any request for a hearing or for a questionnaire as well as any request for authorization of certificates of non-circumvention should be sent to the following address:
European Commission,
Directorate-General for External Relations: Commercial Policy and Relations with North America, the Far East, Australia and New Zealand,
Directorate I-C,
Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 200,
B-1049 Brussels (4).
Article 4
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 April 1997. | [
0,
1,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2620/98 of 4 December 1998 laying down detailed rules for the application in 1999 of the arrangements applicable to imports laid down in Council Decision 97/831/EC as regards certain beef and veal products
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Decision 97/831/EC of 27 November 1997 concerning the conclusion of a Cooperation Agreement between the European Community and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (1),
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 77/98 of 9 January 1998 on certain procedures for applying the Cooperation Agreement between the European Community and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (2), and in particular Article 1 thereof,
Whereas Article 15(2) of the Cooperation Agreement annexed to Decision 97/831/EC provides for a tariff quota for 1999 of 1 650 tonnes of products listed in Annex E to the Agreement, expressed in carcase weight; whereas the detailed rules of application for that quota should be adopted;
Whereas, in order to ensure flexible management of the quota, applications should be managed using a system of import rights; whereas, on the basis of those rights, importers may apply for import licences throughout 1999 under Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3719/88 of 16 November 1988 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of import and export licences and advance-fixing certificates for agricultural products (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1044/98 (4), and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 of 26 June 1995 on rules of application for import and export licences in the beef and veal sector and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 2377/80 (5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2365/98 (6), subject to certain complementary provisions;
Whereas, in view of the risk of speculation inherent in these arrangements for beef and veal, clear conditions should be laid down as regards access by operators; whereas verification of the abovementioned conditions requires that applications be submitted in the Member State in which the importer is entered into the value-added tax register;
Whereas, in order to ensure close control of the origin of the products, it should be laid down that either a EUR.1 movement certificate or an invoice declaration in accordance with Protocol 2 of the Cooperation Agreement must be presented;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Beef and Veal,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. A tariff quota of 1 650 tonnes of certain beef and veal products, expressed in carcase weight, originating in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is hereby opened for the period 1 January to 31 December 1999.
The contingent shall bear the serial number 09.4505.
2. Import under the quota referred to in paragraph 1 shall be reserved for certain live animals and certain meat falling within CN codes:
- ex 0102 90 51, ex 0102 90 59, ex 0102 90 71 and ex 0102 90 79,
- ex 0201 10 00,
- ex 0201 20 20,
- ex 0201 20 30,
- ex 0201 20 50,
referred to in Annex E to Decision 97/831/EC.
3. For the purposes of attributing the quota, 100 kilograms live weight shall be equivalent to 50 kilograms carcase weight.
4. The ad valorem customs duty and the specific amounts of customs duty laid down in the Common Customs Tariff (CCT) shall be reduced by 80 % for products imported under the quota.
Article 2
In order to import under the arrangements referred to in Article 1, applicants for import rights must be natural or physical persons who, at the time of submission of applications, can prove to the satisfaction of the competent authorities of the Member State concerned that they have been active in trade in beef and veal and/or live animals of the bovine species with third countries at least once during the previous 12 months; applicants must be entered in a national VAT register.
Article 3
1. The application for import rights may only be presented in the Member State in which the applicant is registered within the meaning of Article 2.
2. The application for import rights must be for a minimum quantity of 15 tonnes carcase weight and not exceed the total quantity of the quota.
3. Applications for import rights may be submitted from 4 to 8 January 1999.
4. Only one application may be submitted by each applicant. Where an applicant submits more than one application, all his applications shall be rejected.
5. Member States shall notify the Commission by 15 January 1999 of all applications received. Notification shall consist of a list of applicants and the quantities applied for.
All notifications, including 'zero` notifications, shall be sent by telex of fax using, where applications have been received, the form set out in the Annex hereto.
Article 4
The Commission shall decide to what extent applications may be granted. If the quantities applied for exceed the quantities available, the Commission shall fix a single percentage reduction to be applied to the quantities applied for.
Article 5
1. Imports of the quantities granted shall be subject to presentation of one or more import licences.
Notwithstanding this Regulation, Regulations (EEC) No 3719/88 and (EC) No 1445/95 shall apply.
2. Licence applications may only be submitted in the Member State in which the importer applied for import rights.
3. The following shall be entered on the licence application and on the licence itself:
(a) in Section 8, 'the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia`; the licence shall carry an obligation to import from that country;
(b) in Section 17, in addition to the number of animals, the relevant liveweight, which must correspond to part or all of the import rights allocated to the operator;
(c) in Section 20, the order number 09.4505 and at least one of the following:
- Reglamento (CE) n° 2620/98
- Forordning (EF) nr. 2620/98
- Verordnung (EG) Nr. 2620/98
- Êáíïíéóìüò (ÅÊ) áñéè. 2620/98
- Regulation (EC) No 2620/98
- Règlement (CE) n° 2620/98
- Regolamento (CE) n. 2620/98
- Verordening (EG) nr. 2620/98
- Regulamento (CE) nº 2620/98
- Asetus (EY) N:o 2620/98
- Förordning (EG) nr 2620/98.
4. Notwithstanding Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1445/95, import licences drawn up in accordance with this Regulation shall be valid until 31 December 1999.
5. Licences shall be valid throughout the Community.
Article 6
The duties referred to in Article 1 shall be applied on presentation either of a EUR.1 movement certificate issued by the exporter country in accordance with Protocol 2 annexed to the Cooperation Agreement or an invoice declaration made out by the exporter in accordance with that Protocol.
Article 7
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply from 1 January 1999.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 4 December 1998. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 23 July 1986
amending Decision 81/713/EEC as regards the list of establishments in Brazil approved for the purpose of importing fresh meat into the Community
(86/391/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 72/462/EEC of 12 December 1972 on health and veterinary inspection problems upon importation of bovine animals and swine and fresh meat from third countries (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3768/85 (2), and in particular Articles 4 (1) and 18 (1) thereof,
Whereas a list of establishments in Brazil, approved for the purpose of importing fresh meat into the Community, was drawn up initially by Commission Decision 81/713/EEC (3), as last amended by Decision 86/53/EEC (4);
Whereas a routine inspection under Article 5 of Directive 72/462/EEC and Article 3 (1) of Commission Decision 83/196/EEC of 8 April 1983 concerning on-the-spot inspections to be carried out in respect of the importation of bovine animals and swine and fresh meat from non-member countries (5) has revealed that the level of hygiene of certain establishments has altered since the last inspection;
Whereas the list of establishments should therefore be amended;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are inaccordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The Annex to Decision 81/713/EEC is hereby replaced by the Annex to this Decision.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 July 1986. | [
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 16 December 1993 concerning the granting of assistance from the cohesion financial instrument to the stage of project concerning the upgrading into motorway of the 'Pathe' national highway (Patras-Athens-Thessaloniki-Evzoni) (Skotina-Katerini section) in Greece No CF: 93/09/65/028 (Only the Greek text is authentic) (94/415/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 792/93 of 30 March 1993 establishing a cohesion financial instrument (1), and in particular Article 8 (6) thereof,
Whereas Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93 establishes a cohesion financial instrument to provide Community support for projects in the fields of the environment and trans-European transport infrastructure networks;
Whereas pursuant to Article 9 of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93 certain provisions of Titles VI and VII of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 of 19 December 1988 concerning the provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural Funds between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial instruments (2), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2082/93 (3), are to apply, mutatis mutandis;
Whereas Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93 defines the types of measure for which the cohesion financial instrument may provide assistance;
Whereas Article 10 of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93 requires the Member States to ensure that adequate publicity is given to the operations of the financial instrument and that the measures which are described in Annex V to this Decision are undertaken;
Whereas references to 'project' shall be understood to mean also 'stage of project';
Whereas on 2 July 1993 Greece submitted an application for assistance from the cohesion financial instrument for the project concerning the upgrading into motorway of the 'Pathe' national highway (Patras-Athens- Thessaloniki-Evzoni) (Skotina-Katerini section);
Whereas that application concerns a project which is eligible under the terms of Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93;
Whereas the application for assistance contains all the information required by Article 8 (4) of the Regulation and satisfies the criteria set out in Article 8 (3) and (5) of the Regulation;
Whereas the project is a transport infrastructure project of common interest;
Whereas the project forms part of the master plan for a trans-European road network;
Whereas, pursuant to Article 9 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93, technically and financially discrete stages of the project have been identified for the purpose of granting assistance from the financial instrument;
Whereas Article 1 of the Financial Regulation of 21 December 1977 applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (4), as last amended by Council Regulation (Euratom, ECSC, EEC) No 610/90 (5), states that the legal commitments entered into for measures extending over more than one financial year shall contain a time limit for implementation which must be specified to the recipient in due form when the aid is granted;
Whereas pursuant to Article 9 or Regulation EEC No 792/93, the Commission and the Member State will ensure that there is evaluation and systematic monitoring of the project;
Whereas the financial implementation provisions, monitoring and assessment are specified in Annexes III and IV to this Decision; whereas failure to comply with those provisions may result in suspension or reduction of the assistance granted pursuant to
Article 9
(3) of that Regulation No 792/93;
Whereas all the other conditions laid down, have been complied with,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
1. The stage of project concerning the upgrading into motorway of the 'Pathe' national highway (Patras-Athens-Thessaloniki-Evzoni) (Skotina- Katerini section) situated in Greece as described in Annex I hereto is hereby approved for the period from 1 January 1993 to 31 March 1994.
2. References to 'project' in the present Decision and Annexes shall be understood to mean also 'stage of project'.
Article 2
1. The maximum eligible expenditure to be taken as the basis for this Decision shall be ECU 7 515 000.
2. The rate of Community assistance granted to the project shall be fixed at 85 %.
3. The maximum amount of the contribution from the cohesion financial instrument shall be fixed at ECU 6 387 750.
4. The contribution is committed from the 1993 budget.
Article 3
1. Community assistance shall be based on the financial plan for the project set out in Annex II.
2. Commitments and payments of Community assistance granted to the project shall be made in accordance with Article 9 of Regulation (EEC) No 792/93 and as specified in Annex III.
3. The amount of the first advance payment shall be fixed at ECU 3 292 666.
Article 4
1. Community assistance shall cover expenditure on the project for which legally binding arrangements have been made in Greece and for which the requisite finance has been specifically allocated to works to be completed not later than 31 March 1994.
2. Expenditure incurred before 1 January 1993 shall not be eligible for assistance.
3. The closing date for the completion of national payments on the project is fixed not later than 12 months after the date mentioned in subparagraph 1.
Article 5
1. The project shall be carried out in accordance with Community policies, and in particular with Articles 7, 30, 52 and 59 of the Treaty, as well as with Community law, in particular with the Directives coordinating public procurement procedures.
2. This Decision shall not prejudice the right of the Commission to commence infringement proceedings pursuant to Article 169 of the Treaty.
Article 6
Systematic monitoring and assessment of the project take place in accordance with the provisions set out in Annex IV hereto.
Article 7
The Member State concerned shall ensure adequate publicity for the project as specified in Annex V.
Article 8
Each Annex to this Decision shall form an integral part of it.
Article 9
Failure to comply with the provisions of this Decision or its Annexes may entail a reduction or suspension of assistance in accordance with the provisions set out in Annex VI.
Article 10
This Decision is addressed to the Hellenic Republic.
Done at Brussels, 16 December 1993. | [
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2018/97 of 15 October 1997 on additional quantities of textile products to be made available to the Republic of Bulgaria
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3030/93 of 12 October 1993 on common rules for imports of certain textile products from third countries (1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1445/97 (2), and in particular Article 8 thereof,
Whereas the competent authorities of the Republic of Bulgaria requested that an additional quantity be made available for Bulgaria for category 2 for the quota year 1997;
Whereas, for the category concerned, the flexibility provisions specified in Annex VIII to Regulation (EEC) No 3030/93 have been used to the full extent;
Whereas, based on commercial links between Bulgarian and Italian economic operators for the processing in Bulgaria of raw cotton originating in Greece into cotton fabric to be re-imported into the Community during 1997, an additional quantity is required for Community industry;
Whereas the Additional Protocol to the Europe Agreement on trade in textile products between the Community and the Republic of Bulgaria will expire, and the quantitative restrictions will be eliminated, on 31 December 1997;
Whereas the quantities in question, in relation to total imports of these products into the European Community, are unlikely to cause market disruption if the goods are released into free circulation;
Whereas Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 3030/93 allows the Commission to open up additional opportunities for imports under particular circumstances;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Textile Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The following additional quantity shall be made available to the Republic of Bulgaria for which it can issue export licenses during the quota year 1997:
- category 2: 1 500 tonnes.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 15 October 1997. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 607/2004
of 31 March 2004
providing for reallocation of import rights under Regulation (EC) No 1146/2003 and derogating from that Regulation
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal(1), and in particular Article 32(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1146/2003 of 27 June 2003 opening and providing for the administration of an import tariff quota for frozen beef intended for processing (1 July 2003 to 30 June 2004)(2) provides for the opening of a tariff quota from 1 July 2003 to 30 June 2004 for 50700 tonnes of frozen beef intended for processing. Article 9 of that Regulation provides for the reallocation of unused quantities on the basis of the actual utilisation of import rights for A-products and B-products respectively by the end of February 2004.
(2) An operator submitted an application for import rights for 225 tonnes of beef for the production of A-products under Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1146/2003. As a result of an administrative error by the competent Danish authority, the application from that operator, forwarded to the Commission in accordance with Article 5(3), concerned 40 tonnes only. The national administration discovered the error only on completion of the procedure for the allocation of import rights referred to in Article 5(4) and notified the Commission accordingly. In order that the operator who submitted the application correctly should not be put at a disadvantage, the necessary measures should be taken to permit the competent Danish authority to remedy the administrative error in an appropriate way. Consequently, by derogation from Article 9 of the above Regulation steps should be taken, firstly, to reduce the overall quantity established in accordance with paragraph 1 of that Article by a quantity corresponding to the difference between the import rights which the operator could legitimately have hoped to receive on the basis of his application and the import rights which he actually received and, secondly, to provide that the competent Danish authority may allocate import rights to the operator concerned on the basis of the application which he submitted under Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1146/2003.
(3) Taking account of this error has resulted in an administrative delay. The deadlines for application and communication referred to in Article 9(4) should be extended therefore.
(4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Beef and Veal,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
By derogation from Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1146/2003, the competent Danish authority is hereby authorised to allocate import rights for 72,199 tonnes of beef to the operator who submitted an application for import rights for 225 tonnes of beef but who, as a result of an error, was taken into consideration in respect of 40 tonnes only under Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1146/2003.
Article 2
1. The quantities to be allocated in accordance with Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1146/2003 amount to 406,58 tonnes.
2. The breakdown referred to in Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1146/2003 shall be as follows:
- 321,20 tonnes intended for A-products,
- 85,38 tonnes intended for B-products.
Article 3
By derogation from Article 9(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1146/2003, the date for application shall be 7 April 2004 and the date for communication shall be 16 April 2004.
Article 4
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, 31 March 2004. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Council Decision
of 23 July 2001
appointing a Spanish member of the Committee of the Regions
(2001/621/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 263 thereof,
Having regard to the Council Decision of 26 January 1998(1) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions,
Whereas a seat as a full member of the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the resignation of Mr Juan José LUCAS GIMÉNEZ, notified to the Council on 9 July 2001;
Having regard to the proposal from the Spanish Government,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Sole Article
Mr Juan Vicente HERRERA CAMPO is hereby appointed a member of the Committee of the Regions in place of Mr Juan José LUCAS GIMÉNEZ for the remainder of his term of office, which runs until 25 January 2002.
Done at Brussels, 23 July 2001. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 85/89
of 16 January 1989
opening compulsory distillation as provided for in Article 39 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 and derogating for the 1988/89 wine year from certain detailed rules for the application thereof
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal, and in particular Article 90 thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 of 16 March 1987 on the common organization of the market in wine (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2964/88 (2), and in particular Article 39 (9), (10) and (11) thereof,
Whereas the data available at present to the Commission, and in particular those in the forward estimate for the 1988/89 wine year, show that a feature of that year is an imbalance on the market for table wine and wine suitable for yielding table wine; whereas the conditions laid down in Article 39 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 for initiating compulsory distillation are therefore fulfilled;
Whereas, in view of the prices and the desirable level of availabilities at the end of the year, the distillation of 9 million hectolitres of table wine appears necessary in the Community,
Whereas, in view of the derogation provided for in Article 39 (10) of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87, it should be specified that the quantity for preventive distillation is to be deducted from the quantity for compulsory distillation in Greece;
Whereas the experience acquired in the 1987/88 marketing year of the option whereby grape must intended for the production after 15 March of products other than table wine may be deducted from the volume to be used for determining the quantity of wine to be delivered for distillation is inadequate for judging the effect of the measure; whereas that option should be made available again in the 1988/89 marketing year so that its impact can be assessed;
Whereas a large number of small producers of grapes belong to cooperative wineries or producer groups; whereas the articles of association of these organizations are such that in certain production regions the delivery obligation provided for in Article 39 of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 falls on the organization as a whole and in others falls on the producers individually; whereas in consequence there is a danger that the exemption provided for small producers will differ greatly in effect between regions; whereas both this fact and the difficulties that were produced by the introduction of a dual exemption arrangement within regions must be taken into account for the fixing of the minimum quantity for delivery by producers;
Whereas experience has shown that the fulfilment of a producers's obligation through the delivery of wine obtained in a region of production other than that of the production of the said wine-grower has contributed to the imbalance on the market in certain regions; whereas the obligation should be considered as fulfilled only where wine delivered and wine which is the subject of the obligation are obtained from the same region;
Whereas application of the rule laid down at the second indent of the second subparagraph of Article 39 (6) of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 leads, in order to ensure a smooth changeover between the guide price percentages set for the 1987/88 and 1990/91 wine years, to fixing at 25 % the percentage of the guide price for each of the wine types concerned to be used for determining the buying-in price of the table wine to be delivered for distillation; whereas, however, since the volume to be compulsorily distilled for the 1988/89 wine year does not require application of this percentage application of the rule laid down in the second subparagraph of Article 39 (6) of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 leads to fixing the price at 50 % of the guide price for each of the table wine types concerned;
Whereas, in accordance with Article 39 (7) of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87, distillers may either receive aid in respect of the product to be distilled or deliver the product obtained from distillation to the intervention agency; whereas the amount of the aid must be fixed on the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 16 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2179/83 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2505/88 (4); whereas to avoid production of wine spirits of mediocre quality and since there are no provisions on the subject, provision should be made for wine spirits produced to comply with national provisions in force;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Wine,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. Distillation as provided for in Article 39 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 is hereby decided on for the 1988/89 wine year.
2. The total quantity of table wine to be destilled shall be 9 million hectolitres.
3. The quantities to be distilled in the regions as referred to in Article 4 (2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 441/88 (1) shall be as follows:
- Region 1: 0 hectolitres,
- Region 2: 0 hectolitres,
- Region 3: 2 470 000 hectolitres,
- Region 4: 6 330 000 hectolitres,
- Region 5: 200 000 hectolitres,
- Region 6: 0 hectolitres.
In the case of Region 5, the quantity provided for preventive distillation in that Region pursuant to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2722/88 (2) shall be deducted from the abovementioned quantity.
Article 2
By way of derogation from Article 6 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 441/88 producers may deduct from the volume indicated in the first paragraph of that Article quantities of grape must intended for the preparation of products other than table wine not yet processed by 15 March, provided that they undertake to process them by 31 August. If such processing has not taken place by the latter date, producers must deliver for compulsory distillation in the form of wine, a quantity resulting from the application of the percentage provided for in Article 8 to the quantity of unprocessed must, plus 20 %. That quantity must be delivered by the date fixed by the competent national authority pursuant to Article 12 (5) of Regulation (EEC) No 441/88.
Article 3
By way of derogation from Article 9 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 441/88 the quantity of table wine below which producers are exempted from the obligation to deliver shall be 5 hectolitres except for producers in the regions indicated in the first indent in the second subparagraph of Article 7 of that Regulation, for whom it shall be 25 hectolitres.
Article 4
1. The percentage referred to in the second indent in the second subparagraph of Article 39 (6) of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 shall be 25.
2. Without prejudice to the application of Article 44 of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87, the buying-in prices for table wine to be delivered for compulsory distillation shall be:
- ECU 1,56 per % vol alcohol and per hectolitre for white table wine of type A I,
- ECU 1,68 per % vol alcohol and per hectolitre for red table wine of type R I or R II.
Article 5
The aid for which the distiller may qualify, as against the prices laid down in Article 4, shall be:
(a) where the product obtained from distillation complies with the definition of neutral spirits as set out in the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 2179/83:
- ECU 1,05 per % vol alcohol per hectolitre where it is obtained from white wine of type A I,
- ECU 1,18 per % vol alcohol per hectolitre where it is obtained from red table wine of type R I or R II;
(b) where the product obtained from distillation is wine spirits complying with the quality criteria laid down by national provisions in force:
- ECU 0,94 per % vol alcohol per hectolitre where it is obtained from white wine of type A I,
- ECU 1,07 per % vol alcohol per hectolitre where it is obtained from red table wine of type R I or R II;
(c) where the product obtained from distillation is raw spirits with an alcoholic strength of at least 52 % vol:
- ECU 0,94 per % vol alcohol per hectolitre where it is obtained from white wine of type A I,
- ECU 1,07 per % vol alcohol per hectolitre where it is obtained from red table wine of type R I or R II.
Article 6
1. The price to be paid to the distiller by the intervention agency for the product delivered in accordance with the second indent of the first subparagraph of Article 39 (7) of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87, as against the prices laid down in Article 4, shall be:
- ECU 2,01 per % vol alcohol per hectolitre where it is obtained from white wine of type A I,
- ECU 2,14 per % vol alcohol per hectolitre where it is obtained from red table wine of type R I or R II.
These prices shall apply to neutral spirits complying with the definition as set out in the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 2179/83.
2. For spirits other than those referred to in paragraph 1, the prices given in that paragraph shall be reduced by ECU 0,11 per % vol alcohol per hectolitre.
Article 7
The aid for which fortifiers of wine for distillation shall qualify, as against the prices laid down in Article 4, shall be:
- ECU 0,92 per % vol alcohol per hectolitre where it is obtained from white wine of type A I,
- ECU 1,04 per % vol alcohol per hectolitre where it is obtained from red table wine of type R I or R II.
Article 8
For the purposes of Article 12 (1) and (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 441/88 the obligation shall be deemed to have been fulfilled only where the wine delivered is obtained from the same region as that of the producer's own production.
Article 9
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 16 January 1989. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1362/85
of 24 May 1985
amending Regulation (EEC) No 2226/78 laying down detailed rules for the application of intervention measures in the beef and veal sector
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organization of the market in beef and veal (1), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Greece, and in particular Article 6 (5) (d) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1308/85 of 23 May 1985 fixing for the 1985/86 marketing year the guide price and intervention price for adult bovine animals (2), and in particular Article 3 (5) (c) thereof,
Whereas Article 3 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1308/85 lays down the rules for activating, suspending and resuming buying in by intervention agencies; whereas the provisions of Article 3 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2226/78 (3) should be adjusted accordingly;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Beef and Veal,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Paragraphs 2 to 4 of Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 2226/78 are hereby replaced by the following:
'2. The market prices referred to in Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 1308/85 shall be recorded each week in each Member State or region of each Member State within the meaning of Article 1 in accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1557/82.
3. The date for activating buying-in operations pursuant to Article 3 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1308/85 and for resuming such operations pursuant to Article 2 (3) of that Regulation shall be on the second Monday following the price recording referred to in paragraph 2. However, where the market situation of a Member State so requires, the activation and resumption of buying-in operations shall be brought forward; in no case may buying in be resumed before the Monday following the recording.
4. The suspension of buying-in provided for in Article 3 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1308/85 shall take place on the second Monday following the price recording referred to in paragraph 2. In this case meat bought in shall be taken over by the intervention agencies by the end of the week following such recording.'
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply from 27 May 1985.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 24 May 1985. | [
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 783/92 of 30 March 1992 adopting definitive measures on the issuing of STM licences for milk and milk products in regard to Spain
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal, and in particular Article 85 (3) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 569/86 of 25 February 1986 laying down general rules for the application of the supplementary mechanism applicable to trade (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3296/88 (2), and in particular Article 7 (1) thereof,
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 606/86 of 28 February 1986 laying down detailed rules for applying the supplementary trade mechanism to milk products imported into Spain from the Community of Ten and Portugal (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 63/92 (4), fixes the indicative ceiling for imports into Spain of certain products in the milk and milk products sector for 1991;
Whereas applications for STM licences lodged solely in the Community of Ten from 10 to 14 February 1992 for milk, buttermilk and whey in containers of a net content not exceeding two litres, relate to quantities in excess of that fraction of the indicative ceiling set aside for the first quarter of 1992;
Whereas the Commission adopted, by an emergency procedure, suitable interim protective measures by Regulation (EEC) No 416/92 (5); whereas definitive measures must be adopted; whereas, in view of the market situation in Spain, an increase in indicative ceilings cannot be contemplated at present;
Whereas, as part of the definitive measures referred to in Article 85 (3) of the Act, the suspension of the issuing of STM licences provided for in the abovementioned Regulation until the end of the first quarter of 1992 should be confirmed;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. The issuing of STM licences applied for in the Community of Ten for products in the milk and milk products sector as referred to in Regulation (EEC) No 416/92 is hereby definitively suspended for the first quarter of 1992.
2. Further applications for STM licences may be lodged from 23 March 1992 for all products in respect of that fraction of the indicative ceiling applicable from 1 April 1992.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 March 1992. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
FINÊCOUN DECISION
of 10 June 1986
adopting a research programme on materials (raw materials and advanced materials) (1986 to 1989)
(86/235/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community and in particular Article 235 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (2),
Whereas Article 2 of the Treaty assigns to the Community the task, inter alia, of promoting throughout the Community a harmonious development of economic activities, a continuous and balanced expansion and an accelerated raising of the standard of living;
Whereas, in its resolution of 14 January 1974 on an initial outline programme of the European Communities in the field of science and technology (3), the Council stated that the whole range of available ways and means should be used as appropriate;
Whereas, in its resolution of 25 July 1983 (4), the Council adopted a first framework programme (1984 to 1987) for Community research, development and demonstration activities, two of the principal objectives of which are met by the proposed research, namely industrial competitiveness and improvement of management of raw materials;
Whereas the economic availability of raw materials and advanced materials is indispensable to maintaining the industrial competitiveness of the Community;
Whereas the programme on recycling of urban and industrial waste adopted by Decision 79/968/EEC (5), as last amended by Decision 83/634/EEC (6), and the programme in the field of raw materials, which includes subprogrammes on metals and mineral substances, wood as a renewable raw material, recycling of non-ferrous metals and substitution and materials technology, adopted by Decision 82/402/EEC (7), have produced encouraging results and opened up promising prospects, relative to the objectives sought;
Whereas, by Decision 84/197/EEC (8), the Council adopted a concerted-action project of the European Economic Community on the use of lignocellulose-containing by-products and other plant residues for animal feeding;
Whereas the Treaty has not provided the specific powers necessary for the adoption of this Decision;
Whereas the Scientific and Technical Research Committee (CREST) has given its opinion on the Commission's proposal,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
1. The Community shall implement, over a period of four years from 1 January 1986, a research programme in the materials sector (raw materials and advanced materials), as described in the Annex.
2. The work shall be carried out as shared-costs contract research, coordination and training activities, and one concerted action, as described in the Annex.
Article 2
1. The amount estimated as necessary to carry out the programme shall be 70 million ECU, including expenditure for a staff of 23.
The breakdown of this amount by subprogramme is given in the Annex by way of indication only.
2. In the light of the experience gained in the course of implementing the programme and after receiving the opinion of the Committee referred to in Article 3, the Commission shall be authorized to transfer funds from one subprogramme to another, provided that the final appropriation for any subprogramme does not differ, upwards or downwards, by more than 15 % from the original appropriation as set out in the Annex for each subprogramme.
Article 3
The Commission shall be responsible for the execution of the programme. It shall be assisted in its task by the Management and Coordination Advisory Committee on Raw Materials and Other Materials set up by Council Decision 84/338/Euratom, ECSC, EEC (9).
Article 4
The programme shall be reviewed at the end of the second year. In the light of this review the Commission may, through the appropriate procedures, present to the Council a proposal for a new four-year programme which would supersede the current programme at the beginning of the third year.
Article 5
1. With regard to the concerted actions, the participating Member States and the Community shall, in accordance with a procedure to be laid down by the Commission, after having consulted the Committee referred to in Article 3, regularly exchange all useful information concerning the execution of the research covered by such activities.
The participating Member States shall provide the Commission with all information relevant for coordination purposes. They shall also endeavour to provide the Commission with information on similar research planned or carried out by bodies which are not under their authority. Any information shall be treated as confidential if so requested by the Member State which provides it.
2. Following completion of the programme, the Commission shall, after having consulted the Committee referred to in Article 3, send to the Member States and the European Parliament a summary report on the implementation and results of the concerted actions.
It shall publish the report referred to in the first subparagraph six months after it has been sent to the Member States, unless a Member State objects. Should a Member State object, the report shall be distributed, in agreement with the Committee referred to in Article 3, only to those institutions and undertakings which request it and whose research or production activities justify access to the results of the research arising from the concerted actions. The Commission shall make the necessary arrangements for the report to remain confidential and not to be divulged to third parties.
Article 6
1. In accordance with Article 228 of the Treaty, the Council may conclude agreements with third States, in particular those involved in European cooperation in the field of scientific and technical research (COST), with a view to associating them wholly or partly with this programme.
2. The Commission is hereby authorized to negotiate the agreements referred to in paragraph 1.
Done at Luxembourg, 10 June 1986. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 9 June 1993 concerning State aid procedure C 32/92 (ex NN 67/92) - Italy (tax credit for professional road hauliers) (Only the Italian text is authentic)
(93/496/EEC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 93 (2) thereof,
Having, in accordance with the abovementioned Article, given notice to the parties concerned to submit their comments,
Whereas:
I By letter dated 15 April 1992, the Commission asked the Italian Government for detailed information concerning the following scheme introducing a tax credit for the road haulage sector:
Ministero dei trasporti - Decreto 28 gennaio 1992
Determinazione dei criteri per la concessione di un credito di imposta a favore delle imprese esercenti l'autotrasporto di merci per conto di terzi (1).
On the basis of the information available to it, the Commission considered that the scheme was covered by Article 92 (1) of the EEC Treaty.
Since no reply was received to the letter of 15 April 1992 a reminder was sent on 6 May 1992. A reply was received by letter of 4 August 1992. This information could not remove the doubts about the incompatibility of the scheme with the common market.
Since the Italian Government did not comply with the prior notification requirement laid down in Article 93 (3), the scheme had been introduced unlawfully. Since the Commission also considered that the scheme cannot be considered compatible with the common market based on Council Regulation (EEC) No 1107/70 of 4 June 1970 on the granting of aid for transport by rail, road and inland waterway (2), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3578/92 (3), and that it does not qualify for any of the exemptions provided for in Article 93 (2) and (3), it has decided to initiate the procedure provided for in Article 93 (2).
By letter of 26 October 1992 it gave notice to the Italian Government to submit its comments and to provide the detailed information requested. A reminder was sent on 12 February 1993. The other Member States and interested third parties were given notice to submit comments by publication of the letter to the Italian Government (4).
II Despite the Commission's request to the Italian authorities, both in its letter dated 26 October 1992 and its letter dated 12 February 1993, to provide detailed information concerning the scheme, no reaction was received.
Under these circumstances, which stem from a lack of cooperation on the part of the Italian Government, the Commission is nevertheless obliged to close the present procedure by adopting its decision on the basis of the information available to it (see judgment of the Court of Justice of 14 February 1990 in Case C-301/87, France v. Commission (5) and that of 10 July 1986 in Case 234/84, Belgium v. Commission (6)).
No other Member States or other interested parties submitted comments.
III According to the Italian Decree of 28 January 1992, professional road hauliers regardless of their legal status, will benefit in 1992 from a tax or on municipal tax or on value added tax. The benefit of the scheme applies only to vehicles of 3 500 Kg or more in weight, provided that the hauliers were registered on 31 December 1991 in the national road haulage register established by Law No 298 of 6 June 1974.
The budget for 1992 amounts to Lit 275 000 million (ECU 179 million). It is understood that this amount was already provided for in 1990. It is further understood that another Lit 300 000 million (ECU 195 million) will be voted soon, which will lead to a total amount to be allocated of ECU 374 million. According to calculations made by the Commission, the first instalment of ECU 179 million will not cover all claims, but the total expected budget of ECU 374 million should show a surplus of about ECU 50 million.
The volume of aid allocated to a particular firm depends on the number and the size of its vehicles. The aid is limited to 13,5 % of real expenditure, VAT excluded, on fuel and lubricants, but the following ceilings would be observed with respect to the total weight (= Gross Vehicle Weight) of each vehicle with its payload:
/* Tables: see OJ */
classes. This means that given a gasoil price of Lit 941,176 per litre (ECU 0,613), VAT excluded, on 15 December 1991, the tax credit covers 3 100 km free for vehicles of class A; 4 900 km for class B; 8 100 for class C and 8 800 km for class D. These figures should be put against an average annual performance in international transport of between 70 000 and 120 000 km.
Furthermore, the aid in terms of the annual vehicle tax covers 88 % for class A vehicles, 132 % for class B, 293 % for class C and 505 % for class D vehicles. It is to be noted that the tax credit grows with the vehicle size in a non-linear way.
The effect of the scheme is a direct net cash flow increase in favour of the undertakings of a particular economic sector only.
According to Europa Transport, a Commission publication on inland transport statistics made available by the Member States (7), intra-Community transport is sizeable and has the following structure (1989 = latest available data):
Intra-Community transport (1)
/* Tables: see OJ */
According to a study carried out by Coopers & Lybrand for the Commission in October 1989, in all Member States other than Greece, national and international road haulage are closely related. Most international hauliers also operate in their own national market, which in most countries is considerably larger than the international market. The vehicles used for international road haulage are not substantially different from those used for national haulage. Thus it is easy for hauliers to move resources between national and international operations depending upon the state of the respective markets. The state of the international road haulage market will therefore reflect the state of the individual and larger national markets.
The aim of Article 92 of the Treaty is to prevent trade between Member States from being affected by benefits granted by the public authorities which, in various forms, distort or threaten to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods. Accordingly, Article 92 does not distinguish between the measures of State intervention concerned by reference to their causes or aims but defines them in relation to their effects.
It is understood that the benefits from the Decree will go to all professional road hauliers, and are not linked to the objectives of restructuring of the sector concerned nor is the aim orientated to a specific region. The only requirement for the recipients is to be included in the register introduced by Law No 298 of 6 June 1974, on 31 December 1991. Therefore, the Decree tends towards a general improvement of the financial situation of all undertakings of the sector concerned and affects the market. When a Member State, by means of financial aid, strengthens the position of undertakings in a particular sector involved in intra-Community trade, the latter must be considered as affected by that aid.
The aid introduced by the Decree is purely and simply an operating aid. It should also be noted that the Commission has always had a negative attitude towards such aid since it may force other Member States to take similar measures at a substantial cost or may transfer difficulties from one Member State to another.
It is also believed that the effects of the Decree will hinder an orderly adaptation of the Italian road haulage market to a new viable economic structure in the longer term and that preserving the status quo will serve only to delay the necessary adjustments in a sector which is characterized by an overcapacity, as is generally admitted. Therefore, it must be concluded that the aid scheme introduced by the Decree goes against the common interest.
In the light of the above, it is estimated that the Decree is liable to affect trade between Member States and to distort competition between transport undertakings established in Italy and other Member States, and between transported goods.
However this view is not shared by the Italian authorities as expressed in their reply from 4 August 1992. The Italian authorities consider that the Decree of 28 January 1992 does not constitute a State aid but a taxation plan. In support of their view, the Italian authorities also argue that the tax burden in Italy on diesel vehicles is particularly high and that this is a major cost factor for the undertakings in question. They also refer to the planned harmonization of taxes between Member States.
As regards the taxation argument and national sovereignty in this domain, it should be pointed out that the rules governing State aid and those governing taxation have different objectives. This means that a national measure may comply with taxation rules but conflict with other provisions such as Articles 92 and 93 of the Treaty. Furthermore, Article 92 does not distinguish between the measures of State intervenion concerned by reference to their causes or aims but defines them in relation to their effects. The effect of the scheme is a direct net cash flow increase in favour of the undertakings of a particular economic sector only. Indeed it should also be pointed out that only operators in the road haulage market registered in Italy can benefit from the measure. Those operators compete with operators in the other means of transport and operators from other Member States. The cash flow which results from the measure thus clearly leads to a distortion of competition in favour of those benefitting from the measure. Consequently, the alleged fiscal nature or social aim of the measure cannot suffice of itself to shield it from the application of Article 92. For this reason tax exemptions granted on a sectoral or regional basis have consistently been treated as constituting State aid.
In the light of the above, the Decree as it stands constitutes a State aid within the meaning of Article 92 (1) of the Treaty.
IV Given the fact that the Decree covers road transport the aid should be assessed on the basis of Regulation (EEC) No 1107/70. That Regulation was introduced to eliminate disparities liable to distort the conditions of competition in the transport market, and allows the granting of aid only in certain circumstances. Article 2 lays down that Articles 92, 93 and 94 shall apply to aid granted for transport. Article 3 lays down the conditions under which aid could be granted.
The aid introduced by the Decree does not, however, comply with the provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 1107/70.
Article 3
of the Regulation states that 'Member States shall not take coordination measures which involve the granting of aids pursuant to Article 77 of the Treaty except in the following cases or circumstances:
(. . .)
(d) until the entry into force of Community rules on access to the transport market, where aid is granted as an exceptional aid and temporary measure, in order to eliminate, as part of a reorganization plan, excess capacity causing serious structural problems, and thus to contribute towards meeting more effectively the needs of the transport market.'
According to the Italian Government there exists a serious imbalance between supply and demand in the road transport market, as expressed in protocols between the Italian Government itself and the trade organizations concerned (8). However, the further conditions which must be satisfied under that Regulation cannot be said to exist since it requires concrete results, i.e. the preparation of a reorganization plan and the reduction of excess capacity, and since the system introduced by the Decree in question is designed to improve the financial position of all undertakings in the sector without requiring any quid pro quo on their part.
Based on what the Commission has pointed out in Decision 90/224/EEC (9), upheld by the Court in its judgment of 3 October 1991 in Case C-261/89, Italy v. Commission (10), it can be concluded that the breach is sufficiently clear to conclude that the Decree is incompatible with the common market. The Commission notes, as an additional argument, that the exceptions mentioned in Article 92 (2) and (3) do not apply.
Article 92
(1) of the EEC Treaty lays down the principle that aid having the characteristics which it specifies, is incompatible with the common market.
As far as the exceptions to that principle are concerned, those provided for in Article 92 (2) do not apply to the case in point, given the nature and objectives of the aid. Furthermore, the Italian authorities have not invoked these exceptions.
As regards aid which may be considered compatible with the common market under Article 92 (3), which paragraph is not invoked by the Italian authorities either, it should be noted, inter alia, that the objectives listed in that provision must be in the interest of the Community and not solely in that of the undertakings receiving the aid. The provisions of that provision must be interpreted strictly in an examination of any regional or sectoral aid programme. Exemptions to the principle of incompatibility of aid with the common market set out in Article 92 (1) apply only if the Commission can establish that, without the aid under consideration, the free interplay of market forces will not in itself ensure that the recipient undertakings take action to help attain one of the objectives of those exemptions.
Aid without any quid pro quo would also be tantamount to giving certain Member States undue advantages, affecting trade between Member States and distorting competition without the justification of being in the Community interest.
A system of aid which does not contribute to the attainment of the objectives of the exemptions provided for in Article 92 (3) and without a quid pro quo, by this very fact alone serves only to improve the financial position of the undertakings in question.
There is no evidence to suggest that undertakings which are beneficiaries under this system are expected to provide anything in return.
Consequently, it is considered that the aid system, by virtue of its scope, i.e. all national undertakings in a given economic sector, irrespective of their location, does not have regional development as an aim as defined in points (a) and (c) of
Article 92
(3).
Nor does the system involve any major project of European interest or remedy a serious disturbance in the Italian economy within the meaning of point (b) of Article 92 (3).
As regards Article 92 (3), point (c), which also deals with aid to promote the development of certain economic activities, it should be noted that the aid in question for which all road hauliers are eligible, is nothing more than an operating aid which is generally acknowleged as not itself satisfying the conditions of point (c); the lack of any quid pro quo makes it impossible to conclude that the aid is to facilitate 'development'.
The fact that the subsidy differs with vehicle size does not affect the above reasoning.
V The aid should have been notified to the Commission as required by Article 93 (3) of the Treaty. Since the Italian Government failed to do so, the Commission was unable to make its position known before the measure was implemented. Since the provisions of Article 93 (3) of the Treaty were not complied with, the aid must be considered to be illegal under Community law.
In this connection it must be pointed out that the imperative character of the procedural rules set out in Article 93 (3), compliance with which is important from the point of view of public order, and the direct effect of which has been recognized by the Court of Justice in its Judgments of 19 June 1973 in Case 77/72 (11), 11 December 1973 in Case 120/73 (12), 22 March 1977 in Case 78/76 (13) and 21 November 1991 in Case C-354/90 (14), is such that the illegality of the aid in question cannot be remedied by subsequent action.
Moreover, where aid is incompatible with the common market, the Commission can make use of the option afforded it by the Judgment of the Court of Justice of 12 July 1973 in Case 70/72 (15), confirmed by the Judgments of 24 February 1987 and 20 September 1990 in Cases 310/85 (16) and C-5/89 (17) and can require Member States to recover from recipients all aid illegally granted.
In view of the above, the aid introduced by the Decree must be abolished and sums paid reimbursed.
Repayment must be made in accordance with the procedures and provisions of Italian law, in particular those concerning interest on overdue payments owed to the State, the interest being calculated from the date the aid in question was paid. This apears necessary in order to restore the previous situation by abolishing all the financial advantages enjoyed by the companies receiving the illegal aid since the date on which it was paid (see the Judgment of the Court of Justice of 21 March 1990 in Case C-142/87, paragraph 66 (18)).
It should be recalled that recovery of aid which has been paid unlawfully is the logical consequence of the fact that its illegality has been established (see Case C-142/87),
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The aid in favour of professional road hauliers in Italy in the form of a tax credit on income tax or on municipal tax or on VAT which was introduced by the Ministerial Decree of 28 January 1992 is unlawful in so far as it is granted in breach of the procedural rules laid down in Article 93 (3) of the EEC Treaty. The aid is also incompatible with the common market within the meaning of Article 92 (1) of the EEC Treaty, in so far as it meets neither the conditions for the exemptions provided for in Article 92 (2) and (3) nor the conditions of Regulation (EEC) No 1107/70.
Article 2
The Italian Republic shall abolish the aid referred to in Article 1 and ensure that the aid granted is recovered within two months of the notification of this Decision. The aid shall be recovered in accordance with the procedures and provisions of national law, in particular those relating to interest on overdue payments owed to the Government, with interest starting to run from the date on which the unlawful aid was granted.
Article 3
The Italian Government shall inform the Commission within two months of the date of notification of this Decision of the measures taken to comply with it.
Article 4
This Decision is adressed to the Italian Republic.
Done at Brussels, 9 June 1993. | [
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 13 December 1994 relating to a proceeding under Article 85 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (IV/32.490 - Eurotunnel) (Only the English and French texts are authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) (94/894/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area,
Having regard to Council Regulation No 17 of 6 February 1962, First Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty (1), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68 of 19 July 1968 applying rules of competition to transport by rail, road and inland waterway (2), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal,
Having regard to the notice (3) published pursuant to Article 19 (3) of Regulation No 17 and Article 26 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68,
After consulting the Advisory Committees on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions,
Whereas:
I. THE FACTS A. The notification (1) On 2 November 1987 the Channel Tunnel Group Limited (hereinafter referred to as CTG), a company incorporated under English law, and France Manche SA (FM), a company incorporated under French law, notified a usage contract concluded on 29 July 1987 by British Railways Board (BR) and Société nationale des chemins de fer français (SNCF), requesting a declaration of non-applicability of the prohibition in Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68, in accordance with Article 5 of that Regulation. The notification was approved by all parties to the contract.
(2) The Commission published a summary of the notification (4) in accordance with Article 12 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68.
(3) The Commission then decided not to express any serious doubts within the period of 90 days laid down in Article 12 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68, thus exempting the contract for three years running from the date of publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities, that is to say until 15 November 1991. This Decision renews that exemption.
B. Brief description of the fixed link (4) The fixed link comprises a twin bored rail tunnel link, with associated service tunnel, under the English Channel between Fréthun in the Pas-de-Calais and Cheriton in Kent, together with terminal areas and dedicated facilities for control of access to and egress from the tunnels, including in particular the frontier control facilities.
There are crossovers between the two single track tunnels to facilitate train and shuttle movements in the reverse direction during periods of maintenance or incidents to trains, shuttles or fixed installations.
(5) The signalling system is designed to a allow three-minute headways between trains and/or shuttles and shorter headways will be possible in future.
The system will be capable of being upgraded to provide fully automatic train operation.
(6) The infrastructure must allow the operation of international trains between United Kingdom and Continental stations and of shuttles carrying cars, coaches, caravans and freight vehicles between Fréthun and Cheriton.
(7) The passenger shuttles will usually consist of two rakes each made up of 13 carrier wagons together with loading and unloading wagons. Wagons will either be double-deck to carry vehicles not exceeding 1,93 metres in height or single-deck to carry vehicles such as coaches and caravans.
(8) The freight shuttles will consist of up to 25 carrier wagons together with two loading and unloading wagons. Carrier wagons will be designed to carry lorries weighing up to 44 tonnes. The length of a freight shuttle excluding the locomotive will be approximately 560 metres and the trailing load will be in the region of 2 000 tonnes.
C. The enterprises (9) The Channel Tunnel Group Ltd (CTG) is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Eurotunnel plc, a company incorporated under English law, whose registered office is in London.
(10) France Manche SA (FM) is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Eurotunnel SA, a company incorporated under French law, whose registered office is in Paris.
(11) The objects of CTG and FM are the planning, financing, construction and operation of the Channel Tunnel.
(12) The object of Eurotunnel SA is the acquisition of shareholdings in companies engaged directly or indirectly in the construction or operation of a fixed cross-Channel link or any other fixed link and, more generally, all operations of a financial, commercial and industrial nature likely to facilitate such activities.
(13) The object of Eurotunnel plc is the acquisition of the entire share capital issued by CTG, thus acting as a holding and coordination company, and the undertaking of all activities relating to the planning, development, construction, financing and operation of tunnels or other fixed transport links under the Channel, together with all other related activities.
(14) CTG and FM are concessionaires for, and managers of, the Channel Tunnel and have for the purpose set up a partnership, Eurotunnel, represented by two joint chairmen. The term 'Eurotunnel' will be used in this Decision to refer to both concessionaires.
(15) British Railways and Société nationale des chemins de fer français are two railway undertakings within the meaning of Article 3 of Council Directive 91/440/EEC (5).
D. The concession (16) By an instrument dated 14 March 1986 CTG and FM were jointly and severally granted by the United Kingdom Secretary of State for Transport and the French Minister for Transport the right to carry out the development, financing, construction and operation of a fixed link under the English Channel between the Department of Pas-de-Calais in France, and the County of Kent in England. The duration of the concession was originally to be 55 years but was extended in 1994 to 65 years.
E. The usage contract (17) The usage contract was concluded on 29 July 1987 by CTG and FM, in their capacity as concessionaires, and by BR and SNCF, in their capacity as railway undertakings which would use the Tunnel.
(18) Generally speaking, the contract covers the use of the Tunnel by passenger and freight trains operated by the railways, and by shuttles carrying motor vehicles and their passengers and operated by Eurotunnel.
(19) According to the parties, the contract is intended to establish an equitable and feasible division of the new infrastructure, i.e. the fixed link, between the two separate markets, consisting, on the one hand, of the markets in the transport of passengers and freight by train, operated by BR and SNCF, and, on the other, the market in the transport of accompanied motor vehicles through a special system of shuttles operated by Eurotunnel. The parties maintain that this separation is justified by the fact that the concessionaires have neither the experience nor the resources necessary to provide by themselves a complete rail-transport service.
(20) Under the contract, the concessionaires undertake to keep the Tunnel open for the passage of trains throughout the term of the agreement and in accordance with the technical specifications which have been laid down.
(21) The capacity of the Tunnel is measured in standard paths per hour in each direction. The concessionaires are to use their best endeavours to ensure that on the commencement date its capacity will be at least 20 standard paths per hour.
(22) The railways undertake to operate regular commercial services for both passenger and freight trains from the specified commencement date throughout the term of the agreement, complying with specified quality and frequency criteria. They must also ensure that the Tunnel carries the highest possible level of traffic compatible with their normal commercial criteria.
(23) BR and SNCF further undertake to have on their own territory sufficient railway infrastructure for transport in the Tunnel, in the 12 months following its opening, of 17 400 000 passengers, 5 200 000 tonnes of non-bulk freight and 2 900 000 tonnes of bulk freight.
(24) BR and SNCF are also required to have, by the time of opening of the Tunnel, enough suitable rolling-stock to carry the traffic.
(25) Under Clause 6.2 of the contract, BR and SNCF are entitled throughout the term of the agreement to 50 % of the capacity of the fixed link, per hour in each direction, to operate international passenger and goods trains unless they agree to surrender part of their entitlement, any withholding of such agreement requiring justification.
(26) Eurotunnel accordingly undertakes to sell to BR and SNCF according to their needs up to 50 % of the capacity of the Tunnel. BR and SNCF undertake to operate the transport services specified in recital 22 but do not undertake to buy 50 % of the capacity of the Tunnel.
(27) In the course of the proceedings BR and SNCF informed the Commission that over 12 years the capacity needed to provide their transport services would average approximately 75 % of the capacity reserved to them by the usage contract.
(28) As consideration for use of the fixed link, the railways are to pay the concessionaires usage charges comprising a fixed component and a variable component. For the first 12 years of usage, these charges will consist of a minimum amount laid down in Clause 7.5 of the contract.
(29) In addition, a portion of the costs incurred by the concessionaires in connection with the operation, maintenance and renewal of the fixed link are to be reimbursed by the railways in accordance with principles laid down in Schedule V to the contract.
(30) Clause 25 of the contract requires the concessionaires and BR and SNCF to discuss the marketing of their services with the aim of ensuring the optimum use of the fixed link.
(31) Furthermore, under Clause 28.5 of the contract, the concessionaires are to use their best endeavours within the framework of the investment programme to allow the railways to operate motorail and motorail sleeper services, it being understood that such operation must not be such as to prejudice the commercial operations of the concessionaires.
(32) The term of the contract is identical to the period of the concession, namely 65 years.
F. The legislative framework in which the agreement operates (33) Article 61 of the EC Treaty lays down that freedom to provide services in the field of transport is governed by the provisions of the Title relating to transport. The principles of freedom to provide services laid down in Articles 59 and 60 of the Treaty must therefore be implemented by establishing the common transport policy based on Article 75 of the Treaty.
(34) That is the objective of Directive 91/440/EEC, which introduces for railway undertakings and international groupings a right of access, on certain conditions, to the railway infrastructure of Member States in order to provide international rail transport services.
(35) That Directive has created a new legal framework within which the rules on competition between enterprises must produce their effects. Within this legal framework, enterprises may conclude agreements whose lawfulness must be assessed in the light of the rules on competition.
(36) The scope of the Directive is defined by applying two criteria:
- the Directive applies, first, to the management of railway infrastructure, as defined in Annex 1.A to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2598/70 of 18 December 1970 specifying the items to be included under the various headings in the forms of accounts shown in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1108/70 of 4 June 1970 (6), with the exception of the final indent,
- the Directive applies, second, to rail transport activities of the railway undertakings established, or to be established, in a Member State, with the exception of undertakings whose activity is limited to the provision of solely urban, suburban or regional services.
(37) Pursuant to Clause 23.1 of the contract, the concessionaires must request the governments of the United Kingdom and France to include the fixed link under the Cotif (7) in the list of lines governed by the uniform rules concerning contracts for international carriage of passengers and luggage by rail (CIV) (8), and the uniform rules concerning contracts for international carriage of goods by rail (CIM) (9). The concessionaires must be indicated as operators of such lines as to the trains.
(38) Furthermore, the fixed link constitutes infrastructure for the passage of international trains and shuttles, the latter forming a rail transport system whose operation is geographically restricted to the Tunnel.
(39) The fixed link thus constitutes railways infrastructure within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 91/440/EEC, Eurotunnel being the manager. BR and SNCF are railway undertakings having rights of access to the railway infrastructure on the conditions laid down in Article 10 of the Directive.
G. Observations received from interested parties (40) After it had published the notice required by Article 19 (3) of Regulation No 17 and Article 26 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68, the Commission received observations from ten interested parties, making three main points:
- care had to be taken to give full effect to the provisions of Directive 91/440/EEC dealing with the conditions of access to infrastructures;
- the proportion of paths reserved to BR and SNCF must not be too high, as this would prevent others from running a sufficient number of trains;
- any exemption must not be for too long a period, given the changes currently under way in the operation of the market.
II. LEGAL ASSESSMENT A. The relevant legal provisions and procedural rules (41) The parties to the contract notified it under the procedural rules in Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68.
(42) However, the contract is concerned not only with transport but also with the provision of infrastructure, which does not constitute transport.
(43) Regulation No 17 was made inapplicable to transport by Council Regulation No 141 (10); this was done in order to take account of the distinctive features of the transport sector.
(44) The third recital to Regulation No 141 states that 'the distinctive features of transport make it justifiable to exempt from the application of Regulation No 17 only agreements, decisions and concerted practices directly relating to the provision of transport services'.
(45) According to Article 1 of Regulation No 141: 'Regulation No 17 shall not apply to agreements, decisions or concerted practices in the transport sector which have as their object or effect the fixing of transport rates and conditions, the limitation or control of the supply of transport or the sharing of transport markets; nor shall it apply to the abuse of a dominant position, within the meaning of Article 86 of the Treaty, within the transport market.' The 'supply of transport' consists, here, in making available to users international trains for the transportation of passengers and goods, together with shuttles capable of transporting road vehicles. Such services are to be regarded as true transport services.
(46) Regulation No 141 and the procedural regulations specific to the transport sector consequently cover only those anti-competitive practices which are concerned with the transport market in the sense that they relate directly to the provision of a transport service.
(47) It is clear from the case-law of the Court of Justice (11) that the organization of dock work, while it may be complementary and indispensable to sea transport, must nevertheless be distinguished from sea transport and constitutes a separate market.
(48) That being so, the Commission takes the view that the business of providing an infrastructure lies outside the scope of the procedural regulations specific to the transport sector, and that it falls under Regulation No 17 where the application of
Articles 85 and 86 of the EC Treaty is concerned.
(49) In the present case, then, the procedural regulation applicable to the provisions of the contract dealing with transport services is Regulation No (EEC) 1017/68, while Regulation No 17 applies in respect of the provision of infrastructure.
(50) Since the contract is liable to produce effects in the territory of the European Economic Area, its lawfulness must also be examined in the light of Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.
B. The relevant markets B.1 The market in the provision of hourly paths for rail transport in the Channel Tunnel (51) The Channel Tunnel is an essential railway infrastructure whose manager sells capacity to railway undertakings wishing to run international trains.
(52) The use of hourly paths on this infrastructure is indispensable to the railway undertakings supplying transport services; they incorporate the purchase price of the paths into the price they charge their customers, who pay an all-in price to the carrier.
(53) The fact that users pay an all-in price to the carrier, however, is not in the Commission's view sufficient to show that the infrastructure manager's activity forms an integral part of the supply of transport within the meaning of Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68.
(54) According to the case-law of the Court of Justice (12) and the Commission's practice as developed in its decisions (13), the provision of port services may constitute a reference market for the purposes of the competition rules.
(55) The Commission considers that this argument may be transposed to the present case, as far as the provision of hourly paths in the Channel Tunnel is concerned.
(56) This infrastructure constitutes an essential facility for railways wishing to provide transport services between the United Kingdom and the Continent.
(57) The Commission concludes that the provision of infrastructure capacity in the Channel Tunnel is a reference market geographically confined to the Channel Tunnel and its access areas. In accordance with the findings of the Court of Justice already referred to, this market constitutes a substantial part of the common market.
B.2 The markets in the international transport of passengers and freight between the United Kingdom and the Continent (58) According to the case-law of the Court of Justice, 'the concept of the . . . . . . market . . . . . . implies . . . . . . that there can be effective competition between the products [or services] which form part of it and this presupposes that there is a sufficient degree of interchangeability between all the [services] forming part of the same market' (14).
(59) Consequently, in the case of transport, technical substitutability between different modes of transport alone is not sufficient to demonstrate that they form part of the same market.
(60) It is necessary to assess whether these different modes of transport are sufficiently interchangeable from the standpoint of users.
(61) Furthermore, the Court of Justice has ruled that there is no global market in transport (15). Possible alternative transport must be appraised in terms of each international route.
(62) It must therefore be concluded in this case that the undertakings which will provide transport services between the United Kingdom and the Continent will be operating on several markets which have different characteristics and where competition between modes of transport functions in different ways. The following markets in particular can be identified.
(63) There is the market in the transport of goods travelling in the same vehicle, container or swap body, the goods remaining unloaded throughout the operation.
Following the opening of the Channel Tunnel this can be done:
- by lorry, using the railway services and shuttles operated by Eurotunnel,
- by lorry, using sea transport services, and
- by international train between a terminal in the United Kingdom and a terminal on the Continent (16).
(64) The transport of passengers travelling in the course of their business and the transport of passengers travelling for leisure purposes are two separate markets, because of the nature of the services they are looking for and the nature of competition between modes of transport.
(65) Business travellers seek a rapid form of transport offering a high level of comfort, and with frequencies and timetables suited to business constraints. The price is not a decisive factor in their choice of mode of transport. The aeroplane, the high-speed train and the high-quality night train are all possibilities.
(66) Those on leisure trips, who bear their own costs, attach greater importance to the price; rapidity, comfort and frequency are not decisive factors. Here rail travel, road travel using a Channel Tunnel shuttle or sea transport for one leg of the journey, and economy-class air travel can constitute substitute modes of transport (17).
(67) Thus the markets described at recitals 62 to 66 do not form an exhaustive list.
C. The concept of agreement (68) The usage contract signed by CTG, FM, BR and SNCF constitutes an agreement within the meaning of Article 85 of the EC Treaty, notwithstanding the terminology used in that contract.
D. Restrictions on competition D.1 Restrictions on competition on the transport markets (69) Pursuant to Article 10 of Directive 91/440/EEC, in the transport of passengers and conventional freight, international groupings of railway undertakings have access rights to the railway infrastructures in the Member States of establishment and transit rights in the infrastructure of other Member States for the purposes of operating international transport services.
(70) In order to operate combined international transport services, each railway undertaking has rights of access to railway infrastructure in the Community.
(71) These rights are available to existing railway undertakings and to any new railway undertakings, including subsidiaries of existing railway undertakings which may establish themselves in a Member State as railway undertakings.
(72) Furthermore, the Directive leaves Member States free to enact more liberal legislation governing access to infrastructure.
(73) In the case at issue here, the usage contract provides for a division of the transport markets between, on the one hand, Eurotunnel, which operates the shuttles and, on the other, BR and SNCF, which operate international trains carrying passengers and freight.
(74) In accordance with Clause 28.5 of the contract, BR and SNCF may operate motorail and motorail sleeper services which may, under certain conditions, compete with shuttles operated by Eurotunnel. However, under the contract, these operations may not be such as to prejudice Eurotunnel's commercial operations.
(75) Eurotunnel, however, as a railway undertaking within the meaning of Directive 91/440/EEC, could legally operate international combined transport trains between the United Kingdom and the Continent in competition with BR and SNCF.
(76) Similarly, Eurotunnel could legally form an international grouping with another railway undertaking and operate international trains carrying passengers or conventional freight in competition with BR and SNCF.
(77) Moreover, the carriage of lorries on shuttles constitutes a form of international combined transport of goods within the meaning of Directive 91/440/EEC.
(78) BR and SNCF may therefore operate such services or passenger transport services individually or as an international grouping under Article 10 of that Directive and in competition with Eurotunnel.
(79) By dividing the abovementioned markets between BR, SNCF and Eurotunnel, the usage contract has as its object and effect an appreciable prevention or restriction of competition in breach of Article 85 (1) of the EC Treaty.
D.2. Restrictions on competition on the market in the provision of hourly paths for rail transport in the Channel Tunnel (80) Eurotunnel, as the Channel Tunnel concessionaire, owns all of the hourly paths for the operation of transport services through the Tunnel.
(81) However, the terms of the contract show that half of the capacity of the Tunnel is reserved for shuttle services and the other half for international passenger and freight trains.
(82) Furthermore, BR and SNCF are at all times entitled to 50 % of the capacity of the Tunnel to operate international trains, or actually 100 % of the hourly paths available for that category of transport unless they surrender part of their entitlement. Under the terms of the contract, BR and SNCF do not undertake to buy 50 % of the capacity of the Tunnel but the managers of the infrastructure undertake to sell that capacity if the need arises.
(83) Accordingly, other railway undertakings cannot obtain from the managers of the infrastructure the hourly paths necessary to operate international trains carrying passengers or freight in competition with BR and SNCF.
(84) It must therefore be concluded that the contract has as its object and effect the restriction of competition on the market in the provision of hourly paths for rail transport in the Tunnel and on the transport markets.
E. Effect on trade between Member States (85) The contract covers the conditions for the use of the Channel Tunnel, which links two Member States. It therefore affects trade between Member States within the meaning of Article 85 of the EC Treaty.
F. Article 85 (3) of the EC Treaty and Article 5 of Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68 (a) Contribution to economic progress (86) The Channel Tunnel constitutes railway infrastructure intended to permit the transport of passengers and freight between the United Kingdom and the Continent.
(87) That transport will be performed by international trains linking stations in the United Kingdom and the Continent, and by shuttles carrying vehicles between France and the United Kingdom.
(88) On the basis of the statistics available, it is difficult to give a definite forecast of the level of traffic services provided by shuttles and by international passenger and freight trains.
(89) In any event it is necessary that road vehicles arriving at an entry to the Tunnel should be carried in satisfactory conditions. Likewise, it is in the interests of consumers to be able to make proper use of international train services from the opening of the Tunnel.
(90) It is important to bear in mind here that the shuttle transport of vehicles and the international rail transport to be offered are new services requiring investment in specialized equipment which will be recovered over long periods.
(91) The specialized shuttle equipment can be used only in the Tunnel. The international trains to be used for transport through the Tunnel could technically be used elsewhere, but this would not be justifiable in commercial terms.
(92) Generally speaking, therefore, transport operators need certain assurances that infrastructure capacity will be available for shuttle operations and for international trains.
(93) The availability of capacity for shuttle services and for international trains is also important in order to ensure the development of competition between these two modes of transport.
(94) The Commission is therefore of the opinion that the division of Channel Tunnel capacity between the shuttle services and international trains is of such a nature as to promote economic progress, having regard to the particular features of the Tunnel.
(95) Furthermore, due account must be taken of the fact that the operation of both shuttle services and international trains requires advanced technology and specialized equipment which are not interchangeable.
(96) Given the particular nature of this case, it may therefore be considered that the specialization of BR and SNCF in international trains and Eurotunnel in shuttles is such as to contribute to economic progress.
(97) It should also be emphasized that construction of the Tunnel involves considerable private investment and that the undertaking on the part of BR and SNCF to operate international trains during the concession period, using the hourly paths sold by Eurotunnel, manifestly contributes to the success of the project. Another point worth emphasizing is that BR and SNCF have undertaken to pay charges in lump-sum form throughout the first 12 years. This undertaking makes a direct contribution to the project's financial equilibrium.
(98) The undertakings given also represent important guarantees for the banks which are providing financing for the overall Eurotunnel project.
(99) The Commission is therefore of the opinion that the agreement involved is such as will promote economic progress.
(b) Benefits to consumers (100) Consumers will benefit directly from the establishment of regular services by shuttles and international trains throughout the term of the contract, providing alternative cross-Channel transport in competition with other forms of transport. They will in particular benefit directly from the increased competition that will result from the introduction of new services.
(c) Indispensable nature of the restrictions (101) The division of the Tunnel's capacity between shuttle services and international trains is indispensable, notably in view of the requirements of the transport policy of the Community and of the Member States.
(102) Nevertheless, in the light of the forecasts of traffic and of the number of paths actually used, the reservation for BR and SNCF of all of the hourly paths available for international trains is not essential to them for the provision of their transport services and contribute to the success of the project. Clause 6.2 of the contract in fact stipulates that the concessionaires may request BR and SNCF to agree to surrender part of their entitlement to use the fixed link and that such agreement is not to be unreasonably withheld. It is in any case necessary to minimize the effects on competition by ensuring that railway undertakings other than BR and SNCF are able to obtain hourly paths to operate international trains. The Commission will therefore attach appropriate conditions and obligations to its decision.
(d) No elimination of competition (103) For the same reasons as are set out in recital 102, the agreement involved must not eliminate all competition and the Commission will therefore attach appropriate conditions and obligations to its decision.
G. Exemption procedures (104) Under Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68 and Article 8 of Regulation No 17, any exemption decision must indicate the period for which it is valid, and conditions and obligations may be attached.
(105) In determining the length of the exemption, account must be taken of the exceptional nature of the infrastructure and of the need to create the conditions for its successful use.
(106) It must be emphasized here that the agreement is of great importance to the project.
(107) The funding for the project is mostly in the form of bank loans, to be repaid essentially over a period of some 30 years. The undertakings given by BR and SNCF under the usage contract manifestly help to guarantee these loans.
(108) The Commission therefore considers that, having regard to the exceptional circumstances of the case, an exemption of 30 years can be granted.
(109) Certain conditions and obligations must nevertheless be attached to the exemption to make sure that the restrictions on competition do not go beyond what is indispensable and that the agreement does not afford the undertakings involved the possibility of eliminating competition.
(110) On this matter, SNCF and BR made the following observations to the Commission:
Given a 12-year time span, and subject to the obvious limits of any forecasts, the capacity needed for all this traffic represents an average of about 75 % of the capacity reserved to BR and SNCF under the usage contract concluded with Eurotunnel. That figure takes account of disparities in the speeds of the various types of traffic in the tunnel. The average rate of 75 % is also liable to fluctuate according to the time of day: it is impossible for the time being to be more categorical, in view of the uncertainties as to the pattern of demand.
Eurotunnel stated that, on the basis of its traffic forecasts, the reservation of 75 % to BR and SNCF seemed unexceptionable.
(111) Under Clause 6.2 of the contract, Eurotunnel may request BR and SNCF to agree to surrender part of their entitlement to buy capacity in the fixed link - such agreement not to be unreasonably withheld.
(112) The Commission therefore considers that BR and SNCF would not be justified in objecting to other railway undertakings buying hourly paths from the manager of the infrastructure in order to provide international passenger or freight train services.
(113) However, BR and SNCF must have available the hourly paths necessary to provide an appropriate level of service, that is 75 % of the capacity of the Tunnel reserved for international trains, so that they can operate their own services and those of their subsidiaires. Although BR and SNCF have stated that 75 % is to be understood as a daily figure, the Commission believes that the reservation of 75 % of capacity for those undertakings alone should be set as an hourly figure, for the following reasons:
(114) In the first place, the agreement between Eurotunnel and BR/SNCF as to the reservation of capacity is expressed on an hourly rather than a daily basis.
(115) In the second place, it is essential that railway undertakings other than BR and SNCF should be able to secure paths at all hours of the day, including peak hours. It is generally agreed that, for any given service, the paths are not all equally useful or equally valuable. In the case of a businessman, for example, it is essential that the services offered shall enable in to reach the main European capitals in the early morning and to return home in the late afternoon. The interchangeability between different international trains is therefore limited within certain fixed periods. Hence it is indispensable that users should genuinely create competition between two or more carriers at the hours which are relevant to them.
(116) This must not prevent the proportion of paths from being adjusted by agreement between the manager of the infrastructure, BR, SNCF and any other railway undertakings concerned.
(117) Thus BR and SNCF should be able to use more than 75 % of the hourly capacity if the need arises and if the infrastructure manager has capacity available.
(118) The other railway undertakings should likewise be able to use more than 25 % of the hourly capacity if the manager has capacity available.
(119) Such adjustment must not restrict the right of BR and SNCF to use up to 75 % of the hourly paths reserved for international trains, nor the right of the other railway undertakings to use up to 25 %.
(120) The fixing of the percentage of hourly paths actually needed by BR and SNCF is linked to traffic forecasts, which are very difficult to make over a period of 30 years.
(121) The proportion of paths reserved to BR and SNCF, 75 %, must therefore be re-examined by the Commission after 12 years, that is to say, not later than 31 December 2006.
(122) In view of the length of the period of exemption, the railways involved must also inform the Commission every year of the number of hourly paths actually used, and Eurotunnel must inform it of the number of any applications for paths which could not be met because none was available.
(123) This Decision does not prejudice the applicability of Article 86 of the EC Treaty, in particular as regards the fixing of charges for use of the Tunnel, nor that of Directive 91/440/EEC.
(124) This Decision makes Article 85 (1) of the EC Treaty, Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68 and Article 53 (1) of the EEA Agreement inapplicable to the usage contract of 29 July 1987 between BR, SNCF and Eurotunnel, and it is without prejudice to the Commission's position should the parties to that contract, or the content thereof, be changed, or in the event of any major change in market conditions,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
In accordance with Article 85 (3) of the EC Treaty, Article 5 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68 and Article 53 (3) of the Agreement on the European Economic Area, Article 85 (1) of the EC Treaty, Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68 and Article 53 (1) of the Agreement on the European Economic Area are hereby declared inapplicable for a period of 30 years beginning on 16 November 1991 to the usage contract dated 29 July 1987 made between the Channel Tunnel Group Ltd, France Manche SA, the British Railways Board and the Société nationale des chemins de fer français.
Article 2
The following conditions and obligations are attached to the exemption provided for in Article 1:
A. Conditions
(a) In accordance with Clause 6.2 of the usage contract, BR and SNCF must not withhold their agreement to the sale by the managers of the infrastructure to other railway undertakings of the hourly paths necessary to operate international passenger and freight services.
(b) However, BR and SNCF must have available the hourly paths necessary to provide an appropriate level of services during the period up to 31 December 2006, that is up to 75 % of the hourly capacity of the Tunnel in each direction which is reserved for international passenger and freight trains, in order to operate their own services and those of their subsidiaires.
(c) Over the same period the other railway undertakings and groupings of undertakings shall have available at least 25 % of the hourly capacity of the Tunnel in each direction in order to run international passenger and freight trains.
(d) The conditions set out in (b) and (c) shall not prevent BR and SNCF, during that period, from using more than 75 % of the hourly capacity if the other railway undertakings do not use the 25 % of capacity remaining.
(e) The conditions set out in (b) and (c) shall similarly not prevent railway undertakings other than BR and SNCF from using, during that period, more than 25 % of the hourly capacity if BR and SNCF do not use the 75 % of capacity which is reserved to them.
(f) Such adjustments shall in no way restrict the right of BR to use up to 75 % of the hourly paths reserved for international trains during that period if the need arises, nor the right of the other railway undertakings to use up to 25 % of that capacity.
(g) The proportion of paths reserved to BR and SNCF will be re-examined by the Commission before 31 December 2006.
B. Obligations
(h) BR and SNCF must inform the Commission every year from 1 January 1995 onwards of the number of hourly paths used, by hour and in each direction, calculated on a monthly basis.
(i) The Channel Tunnel Group Ltd and France Manche SA must inform the Commission every year from 1 January 1995 of the average number of applications for hourly paths submitted by railway undertakings or groupings of railway undertakings other than BR and SNCF which could not be met because none were available.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to:
1. British Railways Board,
Euston House,
24, Eversholt Street,
UK-London NW1 1DZ;
2. SNCF,
88, rue St Lazare,
F-75009 Paris;
3. The Channel Tunnel Group Limited,
The Adelphi,
John Adam Street,
UK-London WC2N 6JT;
4. France-Manche S.A.,
112, avenue Kléber,
BP 166, Trocadéro,
F-76770 Paris Cedex 16.
Done at Brussels, 13 December 1994
F | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 426/92 of 21 February 1992 fixing, for the eighth 12-month period, amounts for the levy referred to in Article 5c of Council Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 in the milk and milk products sector
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 857/84 of 31 March 1984 adopting general rules for the application of the levy referred to in Article 5c of Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 in the milk and milk products sector (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1639/91 (2), and in particular Article 11 (a) thereof,
Whereas Article 5c of Council Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1630/91 (4), instituted a levy payable by every producer or purchaser of milk or other milk products on quantities exceeding an annual reference quantity; whereas rates for this levy are set in Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 857/84;
Whereas, pursuant to Article 11 of Regulation (EEC) No 857/84, the Commission must state amounts for the levy,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1
The amount of the levy referred to in Article 1 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 857/84 is fixed for the eighth 12-month period at:
- ECU 30,83 per 100 kilograms of milk and/or milk equivalent where formula A or formula B is applied,
- ECU 20,11 per 100 kilograms of milk and/or milk equivalent where there is direct sale for consumption. Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 21 February 1992. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1747/2002
of 30 September 2002
introducing, in the context of the modernisation of the institution, special measures to terminate the service of officials of the European Communities appointed to an established post in the Council of the European Union
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 283 thereof,
Having regard to the Commission proposal submitted after receiving the opinion of the Staff Regulations Committee,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament(1),
Having regard to the opinion of the Court of Justice(2),
Having regard to the opinion of the Court of Auditors(3),
Whereas:
(1) The Treaty on European Union has extended the scope of the Council's activities and has in consequence increased the role and tasks of its General Secretariat.
(2) The General Secretariat of the Council meets a significant part of its needs through internal rationalisation and redeployment.
(3) The General Secretariat of the Council is taking the necessary steps, mainly through training, to help redeployed staff to adjust in the most satisfactory and effective way possible.
(4) However, the skills of a section of officials, who have reached the age of 55 and who have completed at least 15 years of service, are deemed to be too far removed from the duties to be performed.
(5) The General Secretariat of the Council needs new skill profiles and a rebalancing of its establishment plan, but the number of officials retiring in the normal way will not be sufficient to allow the necessary skills to be acquired through recruiting new officials within a satisfactory timescale.
(6) Special measures should accordingly be adopted with regard to termination of service together with internal administrative arrangements for effective monitoring of the implementation of this Regulation.
(7) These measures must be applied as far as possible with due regard for geographical balance, in compliance with the provisions of this Regulation.
(8) These measures must be budget-neutral. To this end a monitoring mechanism should be set up by the budgetary authority,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The General Secretariat of the Council is hereby authorised, in the interests of the service and in order to take account of the need to renew skills arising from the refocusing of the use of its resources on priority activities, to adopt measures up to 31 December 2004 for terminating the service, within the meaning of Article 47 of the Staff Regulations, of officials who have reached the age of 55 and have completed at least 15 years service, with the exception of those in Grades A 1 and A 2, under the conditions specified in this Regulation.
Article 2
The total number of officials to be covered by the measures referred to in Article 1 shall be 94 (12 As, 22 LAs, 8 Bs, 44 Cs, and 8 Ds).
Respect for budgetary neutrality shall be monitored during the annual budget procedure. To this end, the Appointing Authority shall, taking into account the link between the number of officials whose service was terminated and the number of officials recruited, report to the budgetary authority at the appropriate time, certifying that the condition of budgetary neutrality is met.
Article 3
Within the ceilings laid down in Article 2, and with due regard to the interests of the service, the General Secretariat of the Council, after having consulted its Joint Committee, shall select, from among the officials applying for termination of their service under Article 1, those to whom it wishes to apply this measure.
It shall consider as a priority officials affected by the reorganisation measures and measures for refocusing the use of its resources on priority activities, in particular redeployment, whose skills are deemed to be too far removed from the duties to be performed. It shall take account of the amount of training necessary for them to undertake new tasks, their age, ability, performance, conduct in the service, family circumstances and length of service.
Article 4
1. Former officials whose service is terminated under Article 1 shall be entitled to a monthly allowance set as a percentage of the last basic salary received according to age and length of service at the time of departure as shown in the table in the Annex to this Regulation. The last basic salary shall be that for the grade and step held by the official concerned at the time of departure, determined by reference to the table in Article 66 of the Staff Regulations in force on the first day of the month for which the allowance is payable.
2. Such former officials may at any time, at their own request, receive a retirement pension on the terms and conditions laid down in the Staff Regulations. Entitlement to the allowance shall then cease. It shall cease in any event not later than the last day of the month in which the former official concerned reaches the age of 65 years or as soon as he or she is eligible before that age for the maximum retirement pension of 70 % (Article 77 of the Staff Regulations).
At that point the former official shall automatically receive a retirement pension, which shall take effect on the first day of the calendar month following the month in which the allowance was paid for the last time.
3. The allowance provided for in paragraph 1 shall be adjusted by the weighting fixed, in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 82(1) of the Staff Regulations, for the country situated inside the Community in which the recipient proves that he is resident. Recipients shall provide evidence each year of their place of residence.
If the recipient resides in a country situated outside the Community, the weighting to be applied to the allowance shall be 100.
The allowance shall be expressed in euro. It shall be paid in the currency of the country of residence of the recipient. However, if it is subject to the weighting of 100 under the second subparagraph, it shall be paid in euro.
An allowance paid in a currency other than euro shall be calculated on the basis of the exchange rates referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 63 of the Staff Regulations.
4. Where gross income accruing to the former official from any new employment, when combined with the allowance provided for in paragraph 1, exceeds the total gross remuneration last received by the official or member of the temporary staff concerned, determined by reference to the salary scales in force on the first day of the month for which the allowance is payable, the amount of the excess shall be deducted from that allowance. That remuneration shall be weighted as provided for in paragraph 3.
Gross income and total gross remuneration last received, as referred to in the first subparagraph, mean sums paid after deduction of social security contributions but before deduction of tax.
The former official shall give a formal undertaking to provide any written proof which may be required, including an annual statement of income in the form of a salary statement or audited accounts, as appropriate, and a sworn or authenticated declaration that he or she is not in receipt of any other income from any new employment, and shall notify the institution of any other factor which may affect his or her right to the allowance, failing which he or she shall be liable to disciplinary action as provided for in Article 86 of the Staff Regulations.
5. As set out in Article 67 of the Staff Regulations and Articles 1, 2 and 3 of Annex VII thereto, the household allowance, dependent child allowance and education allowance shall be paid either to the recipient of the allowance provided for in paragraph 1 or to the person or persons to whom custody of the child or children has been entrusted by law or by an order of court or of the competent administrative authority; the household allowance shall be calculated by reference to the allowance provided for in paragraph 1.
6. Provided that they are not receiving income from any gainful employment, recipients of the allowance shall be entitled, in respect of themselves and persons covered by their insurance, to benefits under the sickness insurance scheme provided for in Article 72 of the Staff Regulations provided they pay the relevant contribution, calculated on the basis of the allowance provided for in paragraph 1.
7. During the period for which they are entitled to receive the allowance, but for not more than 65 months, former officials shall continue to acquire further rights to retirement pension based on the salary carried by their grade and step, provided that the contribution provided for in the Staff Regulations by reference to that salary is paid during that period and provided that the total pension does not exceed the maximum specified in the second subparagraph of Article 77 of the Staff Regulations. For the purposes of Article 5 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations, such period shall be considered to be a period of service.
8. Subject to Articles 1(1) and 22 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations, the surviving spouse of a former official who dies while in receipt of the allowance provided for in paragraph 1 shall be entitled, provided that the marriage was contracted at least one year before the former official left the service of the institution, to a survivor's pension equal to 60 % of the retirement pension which, would have been payable, in the absence of any reduction under Article 9 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations being made, to the former official if he or she had qualified for it at the time of death.
The survivor's pension referred to in the previous subparagraph shall not be less than the amounts specified in the second subparagraph of Article 79 of the Staff Regulations. However, in no case may it exceed the amount of the retirement pension to which the former official would have been entitled had he or she survived and been granted a retirement pension when ceasing to be eligible for the allowance referred to above.
The minimum duration of the marriage as referred to in the first subparagraph shall not be taken into account if there are one or more children of a marriage contracted by the official before he or she left the service provided that the surviving spouse maintains or has maintained those children.
Nor shall the duration of the marriage be taken into account if the death of the former official resulted from one of the circumstances referred to at the end of the second subparagraph of Article 17 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations.
9. On the death of a former official in receipt of the allowance provided for paragraph 1, dependent children within the meaning of Article 2 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations shall be entitled to an orphan's pension on the conditions set out in the first, second and third subparagraphs of Article 80 of the Staff Regulations and in Article 21 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations.
Article 5
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 September 2002. | [
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1240/2001
of 25 June 2001
initiating a "new exporter" review of Council Regulation (EC) No 2604/2000 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate originating, inter alia, in India, repealing the duty with regard to imports from one exporting producer and making these imports subject to registration
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community(1) ("the basic Regulation"), as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 2338/2000(2), and in particular Article 11(4) thereof,
After consulting the Advisory Committee,
Whereas:
A. REQUEST FOR A REVIEW
(1) The Commission has received an application for a "new exporter" review pursuant to Article 11(4) of the basic Regulation. The application was lodged by Futura Polymers Ltd ("the applicant"), an exporting producer in India ("the country concerned").
B. PRODUCT
(2) The product under investigation is polyethylene terephthalate ("PET") with a coefficient of viscosity of 78 ml/g or higher, according to DIN (Deutsche Industrienorm) 53728, as described in Article 1 of the Council Regulation imposing the existing measures, originating in India ("the product concerned"). It is currently classifiable within CN codes 3907 60 20 and ex 3907 60 80 (TARIC code 3907 60 80 10.) These CN codes are given for information only.
C. EXISTING MEASURES
(3) The measures currently in force are a definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Council Regulation (EC) No 2604/2000(3) ("the Regulation") under which imports into the Community of the product concerned are subject to a definitive duty in the form of a specific amount per tonne of EUR 181,7/t, with the exception of imports from several companies specifically mentioned, which are subject to individual duties. The imports of the product concerned produced by the applicant are subject to a definitive individual duty of EUR 223,0/t.
D. GROUNDS FOR THE REVIEW
(4) The applicant had co-operated in an anti-subsidy proceeding run in parallel with the investigation that led to the existing measures, but not in the anti-dumping proceeding leading to the existing measures, since it did not export the product concerned to the Community during the period of investigation on which the existing measures were based, i.e. 1 October 1998 to 30 September 1999 ("the original investigation period"). Therefore no individual margin could be established at that time and he was attributed the residual duty. The Regulation stated explicitly that the applicant was entitled to request a new exporter review, when they had exported to the Community or when they could demonstrate that they had entered into irrevocable contractual obligations to export significant quantities to the Community.
(5) The applicant alleges that, while it did not export the product concerned to the Community during the original investigation period, it has begun to do so thereafter, and that it is not related to any of the exporting producers of the product concerned which are subject to the above-mentioned anti-dumping measures.
E. PROCEDURE
(6) Having examined the evidence available, the Commission concludes that there is sufficient evidence to justify the initiation of a review pursuant to Article 11(4) of the basic Regulation with a view to determining the applicant's individual margin of dumping and, should dumping be found, the level of duty to which its imports of the product concerned into the Community should be subject.
(7) Community producers known to be concerned have been informed of the above application and have been given an opportunity to comment. No comments have been received.
(a) Questionnaires
In order to obtain the information it deems necessary for its investigation, the Commission will send a questionnaire to the applicant.
(b) Collection of information and holding of hearings.
All interested parties are hereby invited to make their views known in writing and to provide supporting evidence. Furthermore, the Commission may hear interested parties, provided that they make a request in writing and show that there are particular reasons why they should be heard.
F. REPEAL OF THE DUTY IN FORCE AND REGISTRATION OF IMPORTS
(8) Pursuant to Article 11(4) of the basic Regulation, the anti-dumping duty in force should be repealed with regard to imports of the product concerned originating in India, which are produced and sold for export to the Community by the applicant. At the same time, such imports should be made subject to registration in accordance with Article 14(5) of the basic Regulation, in order to ensure that, should the review result in a finding of dumping in respect of the applicant, anti-dumping duties can be levied retroactively from the date of the initiation of this review. The amount of the applicants' possible future liabilities cannot be estimated at this stage of the proceeding.
G. TIME LIMIT
(9) In the interest of sound administration, time limits should be stated within which:
- interested parties may make themselves known to the Commission, present their views in writing and submit the reply to the questionnaire mentioned in recital 7(a) of this Regulation or any other information to be taken into account during the investigation,
- interested parties may make a written request to be heard by the Commission.
H. NON-COOPERATION
(10) In cases in which any interested party refuses access to, or otherwise does not provide, necessary information within the relevant time limits, or significantly impedes the investigation, findings, affirmative or negative, may be made in accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation, on the basis of the facts available.
(11) Where it is found that any interested party has supplied false or misleading information, the information shall be disregarded and use may be made of the facts available,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
A review of Regulation (EC) No 2604/2000 is hereby initiated pursuant to Article 11(4) of the basic Regulation in order to determine if and to what extent imports of polyethylene terephthalate with a coefficient of viscosity of 78 ml/g or higher, according to DIN (Deutsche Industrienorm) 53728, falling within 3907 60 20 and ex 3907 60 80 (TARIC code 3907 60 80 10 ) originating in India, produced and sold for export to the Community by Futura Polymers Ltd, should be subject to the anti-dumping duty imposed by Regulation (EC) No 2604/2000.
Article 2
The anti-dumping duty imposed by Regulation (EC) No 2604/2000 is hereby repealed with regard to imports of the product identified in Article 1 of this Regulation (TARIC additional code: A184).
Article 3
The customs authorities are hereby directed, pursuant to Article 14(5) of the Regulation (EC) No 384/96, to take the appropriate steps to register the imports identified in Article 1 of this Regulation. Registration shall expire nine months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Article 4
Interested parties, if their representations are to be taken into account during the investigation, must make themselves known by contacting the Commission, present their views in writing and submit information, unless otherwise specified, within 40 days of the date of entry into force of this Regulation. Interested parties may also apply to be heard by the Commission within the same 40-day time limit. This time limit applies to all interested parties, including parties not named in the application, and it is consequently in the interest of these parties to contact the Commission without delay.
All submissions and requests made by interested parties must be made in writing (not in electronic format, unless otherwise specified), and must indicate the name, address, e-mail address, telephone and fax, and/or telex numbers of the interested party.
Any information relating to the matter and any request for a hearing should be sent to the following address: European Commission Directorate General for Trade
TERV-0/13
Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 200 B - 1049 Brussels Fax (32-2) 295 65 05 Telex COMEU B 21877.
Article 5
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 25 June 2001. | [
0,
1,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 3049/93 of 4 November 1993 amending Regulation (EEC) No 570/88 on the sale of butter at reduced prices and the granting of aid for butter and concentrated butter for use in the manufacture of pastry products, ice cream and other foodstuffs
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organization of the market in milk and milk products (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2071/92 (2), and in particular Articles 6 (7), 12 (3) and 28 thereof,
Whereas, following the amendments made by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1813/93 (3) to Regulation (EEC) No 570/88 (4), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2443/93 (5), divergences have been found in certain Member States in the interpretation of the term 'intermediate products'; whereas in order to remedy this situation and to avoid any discrimination between Community operators, criteria should be laid down to permit objectively and transparency in the identification of those products; whereas, furthermore, for technical and commercial reasons, products other than products falling within codes 0401 to 0406 of the Combined Nomenclature, with the exception of CN codes 0402 21 19 and 0402 21 99, should be considered to be 'intermediate products' and Annex IX to Regulation (EEC) No 570/88 should be amended to include as intermediate products products falling within CN code 1704 90 30;
Whereas, notwithstanding the general rules, Article 21 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 570/88, for imperative and duly justified commercial reasons, provides for the possibility of a change in the intended use between formula A/C/D and formula B; whereas that derogation must be strictly interpreted and applied where the minimum selling prices or where appropriate, the maximum levels of aid are different for formula A/C/D and formula B; whereas such a strict application is unnecessary where the minimum selling prices or, where appropriate, the maximum levels of aid are identical for the two formulae; whereas, therefore, a change in the intended use may be authorized at the request of the operator;
Whereas, pursuant to Article 9 of Regulation (EEC) No 570/88, intermediate products and processing establishments must receive prior approval from 1 August 1993; whereas, for administrative reasons and for reasons of judicial security, approval given before 1 August should be considered valid until the approval procedure is completed and at the latest until 30 November 1993;
Whereas the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products has not issued an opinion in the time limit laid down by its Chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EEC) No 570/88 is hereby amended as follows:
1. The following sentence is added to Article 9 (1) (a):
'However, approval for intermediate products approved before 1 August 1993 shall be valid until the competent authority has completed its examination of the application and at the latest until 30 November 1993.'
2. In Article 9a, the terms 'falling within CN codes 0401 and 0405' are replaced by the terms 'falling within CN codes 0401, 0402 (with the exception of CN codes 0402 21 19 and 0402 21 99), 0403, 0404, 0405 and 0406'.
3. The following subparagraph is added to Article 21 (4):
'However, where the minimum selling price or, where appropriate, the maximum level of aid referred to in Article 18 (1) are identical for formula A/C/D and formula B, the competent authority may authorize, under its supervision and in compliance with the provisions of this Regulation, a change in the intended use between the two formulae at the request of the tenderer.'
4. In point 1 of Annex IX, the terms 'falling within CN code 1806' are replaced by the terms 'falling within CN codes 1704 90 30 and 1806'.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 4 November 1993. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1313/89
of 12 May 1989
applying a special intervention measure for maize at the end of the 1988/89 marketing year
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2727/75 of 29 October 1975 on the common organization of the market in cereals (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 166/89 (2), and in particular Article 8 (3) thereof,
Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 1582/86 of 23 May 1986 on particular intervention measures for cereals (3) lays down the general rules applicable to such measures;
Whereas the intervention period for maize ends on 31 May; whereas this time limit, in particular in view of the agreement with the United States on imports of maize and grain sorghum into Spain at a reduced levy, is likely to encourage operators to offer substantial quantities of maize for intervention at the end of May, although certain market outlets may still be found after that date; whereas this situation may be remedied by opening a possibility for the buying-in of that cereal in June 1989 for which the production is limited to certain regions of the Community;
Whereas the conditions for the buying-in of cereals are laid down in Council Regulation (EEC) No 1581/86 of 23 May 1986 laying down general rules for intervention on the market in cereals (4), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 195/89 (5), Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1569/77 of 11 July 1977 fixing the procedure and conditions for the taking over of cereals by intervention agencies (6), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3495/88 (7), and Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1570/77 of 11 July 1977 on price increases and reductions applicable to intervention in cereals (8), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2258/87 (9);
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. In accordance with Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1582/86, the intervention agencies shall buy in quantities of maize offered to them between 1 and 30 June 1989.
2. The price to be paid shall be the intervention price provided for in Article 7 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 2727/75, as fixed for the 1988/89 marketing year, plus seven monthly increases, expressed in national currency using the representative rate applicable on 31 May 1989.
3. The quantities offered must be delivered by 15 August 1989 at the latest.
4. Subject to paragraph 2, buying-in shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 1581/86 and Regulations (EEC) No 1569/77 and (EEC) No 1570/77.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 12 May 1989. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 3485/87
of 17 November 1987
amending Regulation (EEC) No 355/79 laying down general rules for the description and presentation of wines and grape musts
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 of 16 March 1987 on the common organization of the market in wine (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1972/87 (2), and in particular Article 72 (1),
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas Regulation (EEC) No 355/79 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 537/87 (4), laid down general rules for the description and presentation of wines and grape musts; whereas it has proved necessary to make the presentation of certain matters covered by this Regulation more systematic and thus to facilitate its comprehension;
Whereas it is important to harmonize as far as possible the various Community texts on the description and presentation of foodstuffs and particularly those on the wine sector;
Whereas, in order to monitor the market, national authorities should know the country in which a wine has been bottled, in particular when the country in which the bottling took place is different to that where the bottler's head office is situated; whereas the indication of the country where the bottler has his head office is of particular interest in the case of table wines made up of a blend of wines from different Community countries, since the labelling of these wines only shows the head office of the bottler or of the consignor by means of a code; whereas the required information concerning the bottler or the consignor should be supplemented by an indication of the State in which they have their headquarters;
Whereas it is important to specify the cases in which indication of the bottler and of the consignor on the label is required by means of a code, in order to avoid confusion in the consumer's mind as to the real origin of the wine; whereas it is furthermore appropriate to regulate the cases in which, in order to facilitate commercial transactions, codes may be used on a voluntary basis to indicate information on bottling and on the consignor;
Whereas it is important that the description of wines and grape musts may be made in each of the official Community languages so as to ensure compliance with the principle of the free movement of goods over all its territory; whereas it is, however, necessary that the required information be provided in such a manner that the end user can understand them even if they appear on the label in a language other than the official language of his country; whereas the names of geographical units should be indicated solely in the official language of the Member State where the production of the wine or of the grape must has taken place, so that the product thus described is put on the market under its traditional name; whereas taking into account the particular difficulties of understanding information in Greek which stem from the fact that it is not written in the Roman alphabet, authorization shall be given for such information to be repeated in one or more official Community languages;
Whereas, with a view to satisfying consumer interest in learning what vine varieties go to make up the wine in question and to take account of the demand for sweetened wine, the rules regulating the indication of varieties on wine labelling should be made more flexible; whereas Member States should in particular be authorized to permit the indication of the names of two vine varieties, without the product used for possible sweetening coming from the varieties indicated and, for a limited period, the indication of varieties which have been classified as a temporarily authorized variety or which are still subject to an examination as to their suitability for cultivation;
Whereas information indicating the bottling of a quality wine psr in its region of production is likely to enhance the prestige of the wine and thus facilitate its marketing; whereas extension of the use of such information implies a risk of encouraging bottling in the region of production, without providing any specific guarantee of the authenticity of the quality wine psr in question, and may bring about distortions in the conditions of competition; whereas authorization of the indication of such information should therefore only be given if it is traditional and customary in the region in question;
Whereas past experience has shown the necessity of laying down that the specific information required by the provisions of the Member States on quantity and quality control of products do not form part of labelling;
Whereas, with a view to establishing fair conditions of competition between the different wines and grape musts, elements which are liable to create confusion or false opinions in the minds of persons should be prohibited in the description and presentation of those wines addressed to such persons; whereas provision should be made in particular for similar prohibitions on trade marks used for the description of wines and grape musts; whereas, with a view to providing effective protection to geographical names used for the description of wine products, trade marks should be abolished which contain wording that is identical to a geographical name used to describe a table wine, a quality wine psr or an imported wine, the description of which is regulated by Community provisions, without the product described by the trade mark in question being entitled to such a description;
Whereas, however, in order to avoid excessive severity, it is appropriate to tolerate, in certain cases, for a transitional period, the use of trade marks registered before 31 December 1985 which are identical to the name of a geographical unit smaller than a specific region used to describe a quality wine psr or a geographical unit used to describe a table wine referred to in Article 72 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87;
Whereas, for the sake of harmonization, provisions concerning the role of control authorities in the wine sector should be better coordinated in the cases of breach of Community provisions on the description and presentation of products in that sector,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EEC) No 355/79 is hereby amended as follows:
1. In Article 2:
(a) paragraph 1 (c) shall be replaced by the following:
'(c) in the case of:
- containers with a nominal volume of not more than 60 litres: the name or business name of the bottler and the local administrative area or part thereof and the Member State in which his head office is situated;
- other containers, the name or business name of the consignor and the local administrative area (or part thereof) and the Member State in which his head office is situated.
Where wine is bottled in or consigned from a local administrative area or part thereof other than that mentioned above or a neighbouring local administrative area, the information referred to in the first and second indents of (c) shall include an indication of the local administrative area (or part thereof) where the operation took place and, if it took place in another Member State, an indication of that State';
(b) the first subparagraph of paragraph 3 (i) shall be replaced by the following:
'(i) the term:
- "Landwein" for table wines originating in the Federal Republic of Germany,
- "vin de pays" for table wines originating in France or Luxembourg,
- "vino tipico" for table wines originating in Italy or, either as an addition to or in place of this term, the words:
- "Landwein" for table wines originating in the province of Bolzano,
- "Vin de pays" for table wines originating in the Val d'Aosta region,
- "onomasía katá parádosi", "oínos topikós" for table wines originating in Greece,
- "vino de la tierra" for table wines originating in Spain,
- "vinho regional" for table wines originating in Portugal, from the beginning of the second stage of transition laid down for Portugal,
where the producer Member States concerned have laid down rules for use in accordance with the conditions specified in Article 4 (2a): where such rules also provide for a control number, that number must be indicated.';
(c) the second and third subparagraphs of paragraph 3 shall be deleted; 2. In Article 3:
(a) Paragraph 4 shall be replaced by the following:
'4. In accordance with detailed rules to be laid down a code:
(a) shall be used in labelling the table wines referred to in Article 2 (1) (d) (ii) and (iii) to give information concerning the head office of the bottler or the consignor and, where appropriate, information concerning the place of bottling or consignment;
(b) shall be used in labelling a table wine to give full or partial information concerning the name of a specified region as defined in Article 3 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 823/87 of 16 March 1987 laying down special provisions relating to quality wines produced in specified regions (1); however, Member States may stipulate other appropriate measures for their own territory in order to avoid confusion with the specified region in question;
(c) may, without prejudice to the provisions in (a) and (b) and provided the Member State within whose territory the table wine is bottled has so authorized, be used to give the information referred to in Article 2 (1) (c). Such use shall be subject to the condition that the label gives in full the name or business name of a person or group of persons other than the bottler involved in the commercial distribution of the table wine and the name of the local administrative area or part thereof in which the head office of the person or group of persons is situated.
(1) OJ No L 84, 27. 3. 1987, p. 59.'
(b) paragraph 5 shall be deleted;
(c) paragraph 6 shall be replaced by the following:
'6. The information specified:
- in Article 2 (1) shall be given in one or more of the official languages of the Community so that the final consumer can easily understand each of these items of information;
- in Article 2 (2) and (3) shall be given in one or more of the official languages of the Community.
By way of derogation from the first subparagraph:
(a) an official language of the Member State of origin shall be used:
- for the name of a geographical unit which is smaller than the Member State, as referred to in Article 2 (3) (a),
- for the information in respect of bottling, as referred to in Article 2 (3) (f), and
- for the name of the vineyard or group of vineyards referred to in Article 2 (3) (g).
Such information may:
- be repeated in one or more official languages of the Community for table wines originating in Greece, or
- be given solely in another official language of the Community, where the latter is equated with the official language in that part of the territory of the Member State of origin in which the geographical unit referred to is situated, where these practices are traditional and customary in the Member State concerned;
(b) one of the terms mentioned in Article 2 (3) (i) shall be indicated in the official language used in accordance with the provisions laid down therein.
Such an indication may be repeated in one or more official languages of the Community for table wines originating in Greece;
(c) it may be decided that the information as to:
- the type of product or a particular colour, as referred to in Article 2 (2) (h),
- the method of production of the table wine, as referred to in Article 2 (3) (d), and
- the natural or technical conditions governing the production or the ageing of the table wine, as referred to in Article 2 (3) (h)
shall be provided solely in one official language of the Member State of origin.
(d) Member States may permit:
- the information referred to in the first indent of (a) or in the first sentence of (b), in the case of table wines produced and put on the market in their territory and
- the other information referred to in the first subparagraph, in the case of table wines put on the market in their territory,
to be given also in a language other than an official language of the Community where the use of such language is traditional and customary in the Member State concerned or in a part of its territory.
For the description of table wines intended for export, provision may be made under the implementing rules for other languages to be used.'
(1) OJ No L 84, 27. 3. 1987, p. 1.
(2) OJ No L 184, 3. 7. 1987, p. 26.
(3) OJ No L 54, 5. 3. 1979, p. 99.
(4) OJ No L 55, 25. 2. 1987, p. 3.
3. in Article 4:
(a) the following paragraph shall be added after paragraph 2:
'2a. The rules on use referred to in Article 2 (3) (i) shall provide that these terms be used in conjunction with a specific geographical reference and reserved for table wines meeting certain production requirements, particularly as regards vine varieties, minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume and organoleptic characteristics.
However, the above rules on use may provide for exemption from the requirement to use the term "onomasía katá paradosi", in conjunction with a specific geographical reference when it supplements the word "Retsina";'
(b) paragraph 3, first indent, shall be replaced by the following:
'- either with the name of a production area of another table wine to which the Member State concerned has ascribed one of the terms "Landwein", "vin de pays", "vino tipico", "onomasía katá parádosi", "oínos topichós", "vino de la tierra", or from the beginning of the second stage of transition for Portugal, "vinho regional".'
4. in Article 5:
(a) paragraph 1 (a) shall be replaced by the following:
'(a) that variety is listed as a recommended or authorized variety in the classification of vine varieties drawn up in accordance with Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 for the administrative unit in which the grapes used to produce the table wine in question were harvested;'
(b) paragraph 2 shall be replaced by the following:
'2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1 and subject to Article 7, producer Member States may allow the indication of:
- the names of two vine varieties for one and the same table wine, provided that it is obtained entirely from the varieties named, with the exception of the products used for possible sweetening,
- the names of one vine variety, if at least 85 % of the product concerned is obtained, after deduction of the quantity of the products used for possible sweetening, from grapes of the variety named, and provided that the variety determines the nature of the product in question, or
- the name of one variety classified as a temporarily authorized variety in accordance with Article 11 (2) (b) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 347/79 of 5 February 1979 on general rules for the classification of vine varieties (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3805/85 (2), for a period of 15 years or less from the date of such classification, where it was traditional in the Member State concerned to indicate the name of that variety, or
- the name of one variety referred to in the first indent of Article 13 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 347/79 for a period to be determined by the Member State concerned but not exceeding five years, subject to this period being extended on the basis of the Community provisions concerning examination of vine varieties suitability for cultivation, provided that:
- cultivation of this variety is authorized for a limited area,
- the competent authorities of the Member State which authorized cultivation of this variety carry out the inspection referred to in Article 13 (3) of the abovementioned Regulation,
- indication on the label of the name of this variety is accompanied by a reference to the experimental nature of the cultivation of the variety concerned';
(1) OJ No L 54, 5. 3. 1979, p. 75.
(2) OJ No L 367, 31. 12. 1985, p. 39.
5. Article 9 (2) (e) shall be replaced by the following:
'(e) as appropriate, the terms ''Landwein", "vin de pays", "vino tipico", "onomasía katá parádosi", "oínos topikós", "vino de la tierra", and from the beginning of the second stage of transition for Portugal, "vinho regional", or corresponding terms in an official language of the Community;'
6. in Article 12:
(a) paragraph 1 (d) shall be replaced by the following:
'(d) in the case of:
- containers with a nominal volume of not more than 60 litres: the name or business name of the bottler and the local administrative area (or part thereof) and the Member State in which his head office is situated; - other containers: the name or business name of the consignor and the local administrative area (or part thereof) and the Member State in which his head office is situated.
Where wine is bottled in or consigned from a local administrative area or part thereof other than that mentioned above or a neighbouring local administrative area, the information referred to in the first and second indents of (d) shall include an indication of the local administrative area (or part thereof) where the operation took place and, if it took place in another Member State, an indication of that State';
(b) paragraph 2 (r) shall be replaced by the following:
'(r) information in respect of bottling in a specific region, provided that the indication is traditional and customary in the specific region in question;'
7. in Article 13:
(a) paragraph 4 shall be replaced by the following:
'4. In accordance with the detailed rules to be laid down, a code
(a) shall be used in labelling a quality wine psr, to give full or partial information concerning the name of a specified region as defined in Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 823/87 other than the indication which may be used for the quality wine psr in question; however, Member States may stipulate other appropriate measures for their own territory in order to avoid confusion with the specified region in question;
(b) may, without prejudice to (a) and provided the Member State within whose territory the quality wine psr is bottled has so authorized, be used to give the information referred to in Article 12 (1) (d); such use of a code shall be subject to the condition that the label gives in full the name or business name of a person or group of persons other than the bottler involved in the commercial distribution of the quality wine psr and the local administrative area or part thereof in which the head office of the person or group is situated.';
(b) paragraph 5 shall be deleted;
(c) paragraph 6 shall be replaced by the following:
'6. The information specified:
- in Article 12 (1) shall be given in one or more of the official languages of the Community so that the final consumer can easily understand each of these items of information;
- in Article 12 (2) shall be given in one or more of the official languages of the Community.
By way of derogation from the first subparagraph:
(a) an official language of the Member State of origin shall be used for;
- the name of the specified region in which the quality wine psr concerned originates,
- the name of a geographical unit which is smaller than the specified region as referred to in Article 12 (2) (1),
- the name of the vineyard or group of vineyards as referred to in Article 12 (2) (m), and
- information in respect of bottling as referred to in Article 12 (2) (q).
Such information may:
- be repeated in one or more official languages of the Community for quality wines psr originating in Greece;
- be given solely in another official language of the Community, where the latter is equated with the official language in that part of the territory of the Member State of origin in which the specified region referred to is situated, where these practices are traditional and customary in the Member State concerned;
(b) indication of one of the specific traditional expressions referred to in Article 15 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 823/87 may be given solely in the official language used in accordance with the provisions laid down in this Article.
Such information may be repeated in one or more official languages of the Community for quality wines psr originating in Greece;
(c) it may be decided that the information as to:
- the method of production, the type of product or a particular colour as referred to in Article 12 (2) (k),
and
- the natural or technical conditions governing the production or the ageing of the quality wine psr, as referred to in Article 12 (2) (t),
shall be provided solely in one official language of the Member State of origin:
(d) Member States may permit:
- the information referred to in the first and second indents of (a) or in the first sentence of (b), in the case of quality wines psr produced and put on the market in their territory,
and
- the other information referred to in the first subparagraph, in the case of quality wines psr put on the market in their territory, to be given also in a language other than an official language of the Community where the use of that language is traditional and customary in the Member State concerned or in a part of its territory.
For the description of quality wines psr intended for export, provision may be made under the implementing rules for other languages to be used.'
8. Article 14 (3) (c) shall be replaced by the following:
'(c) the name of a geographical unit as referred to in paragraph 1, together with the name of the local administrative area (or part thereof) or of one of the local administrative areas into which that geographical unit extends, provided that:
- such a provision has been usual and customary and was provided for in the rules of the Member States concerned before 1 September 1976, and
- a name of a local administrative area (or part thereof) or one of a number of names appearing in a register is used as being representative of all the local administrative areas over whose area that geographical unit extends.'
9. In Article 15:
(a) paragraph 1 (b) shall be replaced by the following:
'(b) the name of the variety appears:
- as one of the recommended or authorized varieties in the classification of vine varieties for the administrative unit concerned;
- where appropriate, on a list of synonyms to be drawn up: this list may provide that a given synonym may be used only to describe a quality wine psr produced in the areas of production in which such use is traditional and customary';
(b) paragraph 2 shall be replaced by the following:
'2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1 and subject to Article 17, producer Member States may allow the indication of:
- the names of two vine varieties for one and the same quality wine psr provided that it is obtained entirely from the varieties named, with the exception of the products used for possible sweetening, or
- the name of one vine variety, if at least 85 % of the product concerned is obtained, after deduction of the quantity of the products used for possible sweetening, from grapes of the variety named, and provided that the variety determines the nature of the product in question, or
- the name of one vine variety classified as a temporarily authorized variety in accordance with Article 11 (2) (b) of Regulation (EEC) No 347/79 for a period of 15 years or less, from the date of such classification, where it was traditional in the Member State concerned to indicate the name of that variety, or
- the name of one variety referred to in the first indent of Article 13 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 347/79 for a period to be determined by the Member State concerned but not exceeding five years, subject to this period being extended on the basis of the Community provisions concerning examination of vine varieties, suitability for cultivation, provided that:
- it is a variety of the species vitis vinifera.
- cultivation of this variety is authorized for a limited area,
- the competent authorities of the Member State which authorized cultivation of this variety carry out the inspection referred to in Article 13 (3) of the abovementioned Regulation,
- indication on the label of the name of this variety is accompanied by a reference to the experimental nature of the cultivation of the variety concerned.'
10. Article 22 (1) (d) shall be replaced by the following:
'(d) in the case of:
- containers with a nominal volume of not more than 60 litres: the name or business name of the bottler and the local administrative area (or part thereof) and the Member State in which his head office is situated;
- other containers: the name or business name of the consignor and the local administrative area (or part thereof) and the Member State in which his head office is situated;'
11. Article 23 (4) shall be replaced by the following:
'4. In the derogation of products other than table wines and quality wines psr on the labelling the information specified:
- in Article 22 (1) shall be given in one or more of the official languages of the Community so that the final consumer can easily understand each of these items of information;
- in Article 22 (2) shall be given in one or more of the official languages of the Community.
For such products put on the market in their territory Member States may permit this information to be given also in a language other than an official language of the Community where the use of such language is traditional and customary in the Member State concerned or in part of its territory.
For the description of products other than table wines and quality wines psr intended for export, provision may be made under the implementing rules for other languages to be used.'
12. Article 27 (1) (c) shall be replaced by the following:
'(c) where these wines:
- have been placed, in the Community, in containers with a nominal volume of not more than 60 litres; the name or business name of the bottler and the local administrative area (or part thereof) and the Member State in which his head office is situated; however, where bottling was carried out in a local administrative area or part thereof other than that mentioned above or a neighbouring local administrative area, the mention of the bottler's head office shall specify the local administrative area (or part thereof) where bottling was carried out and, if the wine was bottled in another Member State, the indication of that State,
- have been placed, outside the Community, in containers with a nominal volume of not more than 60 litres: the name or business name of the importer and the local administrative area or part thereof in which his head office is situated, or
- are put up in other containers:
- the name or business name of the importer and of the local administrative area or part thereof where his head offices are situated, or
- if the importer and consignor are not the same, the name or business made of the consignor and the local administrative area (or part thereof) and the Member State where his head offices are situated;'.
13. Article 28 (1) (c) shall be replaced by the following:
'(c) where these wines:
- have been placed, in the Community, in containers with a nominal volume of not more than 60 litres: the name or business name of the bottler and the local administrative area (or part thereof) and the Member State in which his head office is situated; however, where bottling was carried out in a local administrative area or part thereof other than that mentioned above or a neighbouring local administrative area, the mention of the bottler's head office shall specify the local administrative area (or part thereof) where bottling was carried out, and, if the wine was bottled in another Member State, the indication of that State,
- have been placed, outside the Community, in containers with a nominal volume of not more than 60 litres: the name or business name of the importer and the local administrative area or part thereof in which his head office is situated, or
- are put up in other containers:
- the name or business name of the importer and of the local administrative area or part thereof where his head offices are situated, or
- if the importer and consignor are not the same, the name or business name of the consignor and the local administrative area (or part thereof) and the Member State where his head offices are situated;
14. Article 29 (1) (d) shall be replaced by the following:
'(d) the name or business name of the importer and the local administrative area or part thereof in which his head offices are situated, or, where the imported product is put up in containers with a nominal volume of more than 60 litres and where the importer and consignor are not the same, the name or business name of the consignor and the local administrative area (or part thereof) and the Member State where his head offices are situated;'
15. in Article 30:
(a) Paragraph 6 shall be replaced by the following:
'6. In accordance with detailed rules to be laid down and provided that the Member State within whose territory the imported wine is bottled has so authorized, a code may be used for the information referred to in Article 27 (1) (c) first indent and Article 28 (1) (c), first indent. Such use shall be subject to the condition that the label gives in full the name or business name of a person or group of persons other than the bottler involved in the commercial distribution of the imported wine and the name of the local administrative area or part thereof in which the head office of the person or group of persons is situated.';
(b) the first subparagraph of paragraph 7 shall be replaced by the following:
'7. In the description of imported products on the labelling, the information specified:
- in Article 27 (1), Article 28 (1) and Article 29 (1) shall be given in one or more of the official languages of the Community, so that the final consumer can easily understand each of these items of information; - in Article 27 (2), Article 28 (2) and Article 29 (2) shall be given in one or more of the official languages of the Community.
For imported products put on the market in their territory, Member States may permit this information to be given also in a language other than an official language of the Community where use of such language is traditional and customary in the Member State concerned or in part of its territory.';
16. Article 41 (1) shall be replaced by the following:
1. For the purpose of Titles I and II of this Regulation, "labelling" shall be understood to mean all descriptions and other references, signs, designs or brand names which distinguish the product and which appear on the same container, including its sealing device, or the tag attached to the container.
Particulars, signs and other references shall not constitute part of the labelling if they:
- are required under the tax provisions of the Member States,
- refer to the manufacturer or to the volume of the container and are inscribed directly and indelibly thereon,
- are used for the purpose of bottling checks and are indicated in detailed rules to be laid down,
- are used to identify the product by means of a figure code and/or of a mechanical scanning symbol,
- refer to the price of the product concerned,
- are laid down by the legislation of the Member States on quantity and quality control of products subject to systematic official examination.'
17. Article 43 shall be replaced by the following:
'Article 43
1. The description and presentation of the products referred to in this Regulation, and any form of advertising for such products, must not be incorrect or likely to cause confusion or to mislead the persons to whom they are addressed, particularly as regards:
- the information provided for in Articles 2, 12, 22, 27, 28 and 29; this shall apply even if the information is used in translation or with a reference to the actual provenance or with additions such as "type", "style", "method", "imitation", "brand" or similar;
- the characteristics of the products, and in particular their nature, composition, alcoholic strength by volume, colour, origin or provenance, quality, the vine variety, vintage year or nominal volume of the containers;
- the identity and status of the natural or legal persons or group of persons who have been or are involved in the production or distribution of the product in question.
2. Where the description, presentation and advertising of the products referred to in this Regulation are supplemented by brand names, such brand names may not contain any words, syllables, signs or illustrations which:
(a) are likely to cause confusion or mislead the persons to whom they are addressed within the meaning of paragraph 1, or
(b) are liable to be confused by the persons to whom they are addressed with all or part of the description of a table wine, of a quality wine produced in a specified region, or of an imported wine whose description is governed by Community provisions or with the description of any other product referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 1 (1) and the first subparagraph of Article 39 (1), or are identical to the description of any such product unless the products used for making the final products referred to above are entitled to such description or presentation.
3. By way of derogation from paragraph 2 (b), the holder of a registered trade mark for a wine or a grape must which is identical:
- to the name of a geographical unit smaller than a specified region used to describe a quality wine psr, or
- to the name of a geographical unit used to describe a table wine referred to in Article 72 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87, or
- the name of an imported wine described by means of a geographical indication referred to in Article 28 (1),
may, even if he is not entitled to use such a name pursuant to paragraph 2, continue to use that trade mark until 31 December 1996, provided that the trade mark in question:
(a) was registered not later than 31 December 1985 by the competent authority of a Member State in accordance with the legislation in force at the time of registration, and
(b) has actually been used without interruption since its registration until 31 December 1986 or, if registration took place before 1 January 1984, at least since the latter date. Trade marks complying with the conditions of the first subparagraph may not be invoked against the use of the names of geographical units used to describe a quality wine psr or a table wine.
The Council, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission by 31 December 2002, shall decide whether to extend the time limit referred to in the first subparagraph.
4. The Member States shall communicate to the Commission the trade marks referred to in paragraph 3 as and when they are informed thereof.
The Commisson shall forward that information to the competent authorities of the Member States designated to verify compliance with Community provisions in the wine sector.'
18. Article 44 shall be replaced by the following:
'Article 44
If necessary, rules may be adopted to govern the use of the control numbers referred to in Article 12 (2).'
19. the following Article shall be inserted:
'Article 44a
For the purposes of the monitoring and control of products to which this Regulations applies, the competent authorities may, with due regard to the general rules of procedure adopted by each Member State, require the bottler or a person who has been involved in distribution and who is indicated either in the description or on the presentation of those products to furnish proof of the accuracy of the information used in the description or the presentation concerning the nature, identity, quality, composition, origin or provenance of the product concerned or of the products used in its production.
Where such a request is made by:
- the competent authority of the Member State of establishment of the bottler or the person who is involved in distribution and who is indicated either in the description or the presentation of the products, proof shall be required directly of such persons by that authority;
- the competent authority of another Member State, that authority shall, within the framework of direct cooperation between them, provide the competent authority of the country of establishment of the bottler or the person who is involved in distribution and who is indicated either in the description or the presentation of the products with all the information necessary to enable the latter authority to require such proof; the requesting authority shall be informed of the action taken as a result of its request.
If the competent authorities find that such proof is not provided, the information in question shall be regarded as not complying with this Regulation.'
20. Article 46 shall be replaced by the following:
'Article 46
1. Where the description or presentation of the products does not conform to the provisions of this Regulation or to the detailed rules adopted for its implementation, the products concerned may not be held for sale or put on the market in the Community or exported.
However, in the case of products intended for export, derogations from this Regulation may:
- be authorized by the Member States where the legislation of the importing third country so requires;
- be provided for in the implementing provisions in cases not covered by the first indent.
2. The Member State in whose territory the product whose description or presentation does not conform to the provisions referred to in paragraph 1 is located shall take the necessary steps to impose penalties in respect of infringements committed, according to their gravity.
The Member State may, however, grant an authorization for the product to be held for sale, put on the market in the Community or exported, provided that its description or presentation is changed to conform to the provisions referred to in paragraph 1.'
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply from 1 January 1988, with the exception of Article 1 (6) (b) which shall apply from 1 September 1986.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 17 November 1987. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 1 July 1997 concerning a request for exemption submitted by Germany pursuant to Article 8 (2) (c) of Council Directive 70/156/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers (Only the German text is authentic) (97/455/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 70/156/EEC of 6 February 1970 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers (1), as last amended by European Parliament and Council Directive 96/79/EC (2), and in particular Article 8 (2) (c) thereof,
Whereas the request submitted by Germany on 5 August 1996, which was received by the Commission on 14 August 1996, was accompanied by a report containing the information required by Article 8 (2) (c); whereas the request concerns two types of gas discharge lamp for two types of headlamp for one type of motor vehicle;
Whereas the information provided by Germany shows that the technology and principle embodied in these new types of gas discharge lamp and headlamp do not meet the requirements of Community regulations; whereas, however, the descriptions of the tests, the results thereof and the action taken in order to ensure road safety are satisfactory and ensure a level of safety equivalent to that of the lamps and headlamps covered by the requirements of the Directives in force and, in particular, of Council Directive 76/761/EEC of 27 July 1976 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to motor-vehicle headlamps which function as main-beam and/or dipped-beam and to incandescent electric filament lamps for such headlamps (3), as last amended by Commission Directive 89/517/EEC (4);
Whereas these new types of gas discharge lamp and these new types of headlamp meet the requirements of UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) Regulations Nos 98 and 99; whereas it is therefore justified to allow the three items covered by the request for exemption, i.e. the types of gas discharge lamp, the types of headlamp fitted with these types of lamp and the type of motor vehicle, to benefit from the granting of EC type-approval on condition that the type of vehicle concerned is equipped with an automatic headlamp levelling system, a headlamp cleaning device and a system guaranteeing that dipped-beam headlamps are lit even if the main-beam headlamps are lit;
Whereas the Community Directives concerned will be amended in order to enable gas discharge lamps embodying this new technology, headlamps fitted with such lamps and motor vehicles equipped with such headlamps to be placed on the market;
Whereas the measure provided for in this Decision is in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Adaptation to Technical Progress set up by Directive 70/156/EEC,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The request submitted by Germany for an exemption concerning two types of gas discharge lamp for two types of headlamp for one type of motor vehicle is hereby approved on condition that the vehicle type concerned is equipped with an automatic headlamp levelling system, a headlamp cleaning device and a system guaranteeing that dipped-beam headlamps are lit even if the main-beam headlamps are lit.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany.
Done at Brussels, 1 July 1997. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1480/2001
of 18 July 2001
laying down to what extent applications for issue of export licences submitted during July 2001 for beef products which may benefit from special import treatment in a third country may be accepted
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 of 26 June 1995 on rules of application for import and export licences in the beef sector and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 2377/80(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 24/2001(2), and in particular Article 12(8) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 lays down, in Article 12, detailed rules for export licence applications for the products referred to in Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2973/79(3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3434/87(4).
(2) Regulation (EEC) No 2973/79 fixed the quantities of meat which might be exported on special terms for the third quarter of 2001. No applications were submitted for export licences for beef,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
No applications for export licences were lodged for the beef referred to in Regulation (EEC) No 2973/79 for the third quarter of 2001.
Article 2
Applications for licences in respect of the meat referred to in Article 1 may be lodged in accordance with Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 during the first 10 days of the fourth quarter of 2001 the total quantity available being 5000 t.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on 19 July 2001.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 July 2001. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 249/2009
of 23 March 2009
amending Council Regulation (EC) No 297/95 as regards the adjustment of the fees of the European Medicines Agency to the inflation rate
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 297/95 of 10 February 1995 on fees payable to the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (1), and in particular Article 12 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Article 67(3) of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency (2), stipulates that the revenue of the European Medicines Agency (hereinafter the Agency) shall consist of a contribution from the Community and fees paid by undertakings to the Agency. Regulation (EC) No 297/95 lays down the categories and levels of such fees.
(2)
Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 297/95 lays down that the Commission shall review the fees of the Agency by reference to the inflation rate and update them, with effect from 1 April of each year.
(3)
Those fees should therefore be updated by reference to the inflation rate of 2008. The inflation rate in the Community, as published by the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat), was 3,7 % in 2008.
(4)
For the sake of simplicity, the adjusted levels of the fees should be rounded to the nearest EUR 100.
(5)
Regulation (EC) No 297/95 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(6)
For reasons for legal certainty this Regulation should not apply to valid applications which are pending on 1 April 2009.
(7)
Pursuant to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 297/95 the update has to be made with effect from 1 April 2009. It is therefore appropriate that this Regulation enters into force as a matter of urgency and applies from that date,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EC) No 297/95 is amended as follows:
1.
Article 3 is amended as follows:
(a)
paragraph 1 is amended as follows:
(i)
point (a) is amended as follows:
-
in the first subparagraph, ‘EUR 242 600’ is replaced by ‘EUR 251 600’,
-
in the second subparagraph, ‘EUR 24 300’ is replaced by ‘EUR 25 200’,
-
in the third subparagraph, ‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’;
(ii)
point (b) is amended as follows:
-
in the first subparagraph, ‘EUR 94 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 97 600’,
-
in the second subparagraph, ‘EUR 156 800’ is replaced by ‘EUR 162 600’,
-
in the third subparagraph, ‘EUR 9 400’ is replaced by ‘EUR 9 700’,
-
in the fourth subparagraph, ‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’;
(iii)
point (c) is amended as follows:
-
in the first subparagraph, ‘EUR 72 800’ is replaced by ‘EUR 75 500’,
-
in the second subparagraph, ‘EUR 18 200 to EUR 54 600’ is replaced by ‘EUR 18 900 to EUR 56 600’,
-
in the third subparagraph, ‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’;
(b)
paragraph 2 is amended as follows:
(i)
the first subparagraph of point (a) is amended as follows:
-
‘EUR 2 600’ is replaced by ‘EUR 2 700’,
-
‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’;
(ii)
point (b) is amended as follows:
-
in the first subparagraph, ‘EUR 72 800’ is replaced by ‘EUR 75 500’,
-
in the second subparagraph, ‘EUR 18 200 to EUR 54 600’ is replaced by ‘EUR 18 900 to EUR 56 600’;
(c)
in paragraph 3, ‘EUR 12 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 12 500’;
(d)
in paragraph 4, ‘EUR 18 200’ is replaced by ‘EUR 18 900’;
(e)
in paragraph 5, ‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’;
(f)
paragraph 6 is amended as follows:
(i)
in the first subparagraph, ‘EUR 87 000’ is replaced by ‘EUR 90 200’;
(ii)
in the second subparagraph, ‘EUR 21 700 to EUR 65 200’ is replaced by ‘EUR 22 500 to EUR 67 600’.
2.
in Article 4, ‘EUR 60 600’ is replaced by ‘EUR 62 800’.
3.
Article 5 is amended as follows:
(a)
paragraph 1 is amended as follows:
(i)
point (a) is amended as follows:
-
in the first subparagraph, ‘EUR 121 300’ is replaced by ‘EUR 125 800’,
-
in the second subparagraph, ‘EUR 12 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 12 500’,
-
in the third subparagraph, ‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’,
-
the fourth subparagraph is amended as follows:
-
‘EUR 60 600’ is replaced by ‘EUR 62 800’
-
‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’;
(ii)
point (b) is amended as follows:
-
in the first subparagraph, ‘EUR 60 600’ is replaced by ‘EUR 62 800’,
-
in the second subparagraph, ‘EUR 102 500’ is replaced by ‘EUR 106 300’,
-
in the third subparagraph, ‘EUR 12 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 12 500’,
-
in the fourth subparagraph, ‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’,
-
the fifth subparagraph is amended as follows:
-
‘EUR 30 300’ is replaced by ‘EUR 31 400’
-
‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’;
(iii)
point (c) is amended as follows:
-
in the first subparagraph, ‘EUR 30 300’ is replaced by ‘EUR 31 400’,
-
in the second subparagraph ‘EUR 7 500 to EUR 22 700’ is replaced by ‘EUR 7 800 to EUR 23 500’,
-
in the third subparagraph, ‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’,
(b)
Paragraph 2 is amended as follows:
(i)
in point (a) ‘EUR 2 600’ is replaced by ‘EUR 2 700’ and ‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’;
(ii)
point (b) is amended as follows:
-
in the first subparagraph, ‘EUR 36 400’ is replaced by ‘EUR 37 700’,
-
in the second subparagraph, ‘EUR 9 100 to EUR 27 300’ is replaced by ‘EUR 9 400 to EUR 28 300’,
-
in the third subparagraph, ‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’;
(c)
in paragraph 3, ‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’;
(d)
in paragraph 4, ‘EUR 18 200’ is replaced by ‘EUR 18 900’;
(e)
in paragraph 5, ‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’;
(f)
paragraph 6 is amended as follows:
(i)
in the first subparagraph, ‘EUR 29 000’ is replaced by ‘EUR 30 100’;
(ii)
in the second subparagraph ‘EUR 7 200 to EUR 21 700’ is replaced by ‘EUR 7 500 to EUR 22 500’;
4.
in Article 6, ‘EUR 36 400’ is replaced by ‘EUR 37 700’;
5.
Article 7 is amended as follows:
(a)
in the first paragraph, ‘EUR 60 600’ is replaced by ‘EUR 62 800’;
(b)
in the second paragraph, ‘EUR 18 200’ is replaced by ‘EUR 18 900’;
6.
Article 8 is amended as follows:
(a)
paragraph 1 is amended as follows:
(i)
in the second subparagraph, ‘EUR 72 800’ is replaced by ‘EUR 75 500’;
(ii)
in the third subparagraph, ‘EUR 36 400’ is replaced by ‘EUR 37 700’;
(iii)
in the fourth subparagraph, ‘EUR 18 200 to EUR 54 600’ is replaced by ‘EUR 18 900 to EUR 56 600’;
(iv)
in the fifth subparagraph, ‘EUR 9 100 to EUR 27 300’ is replaced by ‘EUR 9 400 to EUR 28 300’;
(b)
paragraph 2 is amended as follows:
(i)
in the second subparagraph, ‘EUR 242 600’ is replaced by ‘EUR 251 600’;
(ii)
in the third subparagraph, ‘EUR 121 300’ is replaced by ‘EUR 125 800’;
(iii)
in the fifth subparagraph, ‘EUR 2 600 to EUR 209 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 2 700 to EUR 216 800’;
(iv)
in the sixth subparagraph, ‘EUR 104 600’ is replaced by ‘EUR 108 500’;
(c)
in paragraph 3, ‘EUR 6 100’ is replaced by ‘EUR 6 300’.
Article 2
This Regulation shall not apply to valid applications pending on 1 April 2009.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 1 April 2009.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 March 2009. | [
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1751/91 of 19 June 1991 amending the list annexed to Regulation (EEC) No 55/87 establishing the list of vessels exceeding eight metres length overall permitted to use beam trawls within certain areas of the Community
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3094/86 of 7 October 1986 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 4056/89 (2),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 55/87 of 30 December 1986 establishing the list of vessels exceeding eight metres length overall permitted to use beam trawls within certain areas of the Community (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1613/91 (4), and in particular Article 3 thereof,
Whereas the German authorities have requested withdrawal from the list annexed to Regulation (EEC) No 55/87 of one vessel that no longer meets the requirements laid down in Article 1 (2) of that Regulation; whereas the national authorities have provided all the information in support of the request required pursuant to Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 55/87; whereas scrutiny of this information shows that the requirements of the Regulation are met; whereas the vessel in question should be withdrawn from the list,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1
The Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 55/87 is amended as indicated in the Annex to this Regulation. Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 19 June 1991. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 46/98 of 19 December 1997 laying down, for 1998, certain measures for the conservation and management of fishery resources applicable to vessels flying the flag of Norway
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3760/92 of 20 December 1992 establishing a Community system for fisheries and aquaculture (1) and in particular Article 8(4) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas, in accordance with the procedure provided for in Articles 2 and 7 of the Fisheries Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway (2), the Community and Norway have held consultations concerning their mutual fishing rights for 1998 and the management of common biological resources;
Whereas, in the course of these consultations, the delegations agreed to recommend to their respective authorities that certain catch quotas for 1998 should be fixed for the vessels of the other party;
Whereas the Agreement of 19 December 1966 between Denmark, Norway and Sweden on reciprocal access to fishing in the Skagerrak and Kattegat provides that each party shall grant vessels of the other parties access to its fishing zone in the Skagerrak and part of the Kattegat up to four nautical miles from the baselines;
Whereas, in a setting comprising the Community, the Faroe Islands, Iceland, Norway and the Russian Federation, consultations were also held on the management and sharing of Norwegian spring-spawning herring (Atlanto-Scandian herring) in 1998;
Whereas these consultations led, inter alia, to subsequent arrangements on reciprocal access, under which Norway may fish 9 000 tonnes of its share in Community fishing waters north of 62°N;
Whereas it is for the Council to lay down the specific conditions under which such catches must be taken;
Whereas the fishing activities covered by this Regulation are subject to the control measures provided for in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy (3);
Whereas Article 3(2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1381/87 of 20 May 1987, establishing detailed rules concerning the marking and documentation of fishing vessels (4), provides that all vessels with chilled or refrigerated sea-water tanks are to keep on board a document certified by a competent authority and specifying the calibration of the tanks in cubic metres at 10-centimetre intervals;
Whereas, for imperative reasons of common interest, this Regulation will apply from 1 January 1998,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. Vessels flying the flag of Norway are hereby authorized until 31 December 1998 to fish for the species listed in Annexes I and IA, within the geographical and quantitative limits laid down therein and in accordance with this Regulation, in the 200-nautical-mile fishing zone of the Member States in the North Sea, Skagerrak, Kattegat, Baltic Sea and Atlantic Ocean north of 43°00'N.
2. Fishing authorized pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be limited to those parts of the 200-nautical-mile fishing zone lying seawards of twelve nautical miles from the baselines from which the fishing zones of Member States are measured; however, fishing in the Skagerrak will be allowed seawards of four nautical miles from the Danish baselines.
3. Fishing in the parts of ICES division IIIa bounded in the west by a line drawn from the Hanstholm lighthouse to the Lindesnes lighthouse and in the south by a line drawn from the Skagen lighthouse to the Tistlarna lighthouse and from there to the nearest point on the Swedish coast shall not be subject to quantitative limitations, with the exception of fishing for mackerel and saithe.
4. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, unavoidable by-catches of species for which no quota has been fixed in a given zone shall be permitted within the limits laid down by the conservation measures in force in the zone concerned.
5. By-catches, in a given zone, of a species for which a quota is established in that zone shall be counted against the quota concerned.
Article 2
1. Vessels fishing within the quotas fixed in Article 1 shall comply with the conservation and control measures and all other provisions governing fishing in the zones referred to in that Article.
2. The vessels referred to in paragraph 1 shall keep a log-book in which the information set out in Annex II shall be entered.
3. The vessels referred to in paragraph 1, except for those fishing in ICES division IIIa, shall transmit to the Commission, in accordance with the rules laid down in Annex III, the information set out in that Annex.
4. Those vessels referred to in paragraph 1 which have chilled or refrigerated sea-water tanks shall keep on board a document certified by a competent authority and indicating the calibration of the tanks in cubic metres at 10-centimetre intervals.
5. The registration letters and numbers of the vessels referred to in paragraph 1 must be clearly marked on the bow of each vessel on both sides.
Article 3
1. When fishing in any ICES division under the quotas fixed in Article 1, vessels exceeding 200 GRT must hold a licence and special fishing permit issued by the Commission on behalf of the Community and must observe the conditions as established by that licence and special fishing permit.
By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, ten licences and special fishing permits valid on any one day shall be issued by the Commission on behalf of the Community for vessels fishing herring in ICES division IIa (north of 62°N).
Norway shall notify to the Commission the name and characteristics of the vessels for which licences and special fishing permits may be issued.
2. The Commission shall issue the fishing licences and special fishing permits referred to in paragraph 1 to all vessels for which a licence and special fishing permit is required by the Norwegian authorities.
Requests for amendments to the list of vessels licensed may be made at any time and shall be processed expeditiously.
3. When an application for a licence and special fishing permit is submitted to the Commission, the following information must be supplied:
(a) name of the vessel;
(b) registration number;
(c) external identification letters and numbers;
(d) port of registration;
(e) name and address of the owner or charterer;
(f) gross tonnage and overall length;
(g) engine power;
(h) call sign and radio frequency;
(i) intended method of fishing;
(j) intended area of fishing;
(k) species for which it is intended to fish;
(l) period for which a licence is required.
4. Each licence and special fishing permit shall be valid for one vessel only. Where two or more vessels are taking part in the same fishing operation, each vessel must be in possession of a licence and special fishing permit.
5. Licences and special fishing permits may be cancelled with a view to the issue of new licences and special fishing permits. Such cancellations shall take effect on the day before the date of issue of the new licences and special fishing permits by the Commission. New licences and special fishing permits shall take effect from their date of issue.
6. Licences and special fishing permits shall be wholly or partially withdrawn before the date of expiry if the respective quotas fixed in Article 1 have been exhausted.
7. Licences and special fishing permits shall be withdrawn in the event of any failure to meet the obligations laid down in this Regulation.
8. For a period not exceeding 12 months, no licence and special fishing permit shall be issued for any vessel in respect of which the obligations laid down in this Regulation have not been met.
9. The Commission shall submit on behalf of the Community, to Norway, the name and the characteristics of the Norwegian vessels which will not be authorized to fish in the Community's fishing zone for the next month(s), as a consequence of an infringement of Community rules.
Article 4
Fishing within the quotas fixed in Article 1 for blue ling, ling and tusk, shall be permitted provided that use is made of the method commonly known as 'long-lining` in ICES division Vb and sub-areas VI and VII.
Article 5
The use of trawls and purse seines for the capture of pelagic species shall be prohibited in the Skagerrak from Saturday midnight to Sunday midnight.
Article 6
Vessels authorized to fish on 31 December may continue their fishing activities as from the beginning of the following year, on the basis of this authorization, until the new lists of vessels for the year in question have been approved by the Commission on behalf of the Community.
Article 7
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply from 1 January 1998.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 19 December 1997. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 334/91 of 12 February 1991 amending Regulation (EEC) No 606/86 laying down detailed rules for applying the supplementary trade mechanism to milk products imported into Spain from the Community of Ten and Portugal
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 569/86 of 25 February 1986 laying down general rules for the application of the supplementary mechanism applicable to trade (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3296/88 (2), and in particular Article 7 (1) thereof,
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 606/86 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3881/90 (4), lays down quarterly indicative ceilings for exports of milk products to Spain; whereas, in the light of experience, provision should be made for the possibility of adding to the quantity for one quarter the quantity outstanding for the preceding quarter in respect of each product or, in the case of cheese, each category;
Whereas the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products failed to deliver an opinion within the period specified by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1
The following is added to the first subparagraph of Article 3 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 606/86:
'If, in the course of one calendar year, the total quantity in respect of which applications have been lodged during one quarter is less than the ceiling laid down for that quarter, the quantity outstanding may be added to the ceiling for the following quarter.' Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 12 February 1991. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2801/98 of 14 December 1998 amending Regulation (EC) No 45/98 fixing, for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, the total allowable catches for 1998 and certain conditions under which they may be fished
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3760/92 of 20 December 1992 establishing a Community system for fisheries and aquaculture (1), and in particular Article 8(4) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas Regulation (EC) No 45/98 (2) fixes, for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, the TACs for 1998 and certain conditions under which they may be fished;
Whereas, in accordance with the provisions laid down in Regulation (EC) No 847/96 (3), precautionary TACs may be reviewed under conditions stipulated in Article 3(1) therein; whereas those conditions are satisfied for the stocks of nephrops in the Skagerrak, the Kattegat and ICES area IIIbcd;
Whereas, within the framework of the bilateral consultations on the reciprocal fishing rights between the Community and Poland for 1998, the Community shares for Baltic sprat and cod have been modified;
Whereas Regulation (EC) No 45/98 should therefore be amended accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The Annex to this Regulation replaces the corresponding elements of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 45/98.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 14 December 1998. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 349/2002
of 25 February 2002
amending Regulation (EC) No 896/2001 laying down detailed rules for applying Council Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 as regards the arrangements for importing bananas into the Community
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 of 13 February 1993 on the common organisation of the market in bananas(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2587/2001(2), and in particular Article 20 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 896/2001(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2351/2001(4), lays down detailed rules for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 404/93, to apply from 1 July 2001, with a view to the management of the tariff import quotas provided for in Article 18(1) of the latter Regulation.
(2) Article 18(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 404/93, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2587/2001, amends the tariff import quotas from 1 January 2002. In particular it reduces tariff quota C by 100000 tonnes and reserves access to it for products originating in the ACP countries. As a result of those amendments, it should be borne in mind that the structures of the trade in products originating in the ACP countries feature greater integration of the various commercial operations, which are carried out to a large extent by traditional operators as defined in Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 896/2001. In order to ensure the continuity of import flows and at the same time to allocate non-traditional operators a share of tariff quota C that enables them to continue their activities in this trade and in order to foster sound competition, the allocation of tariff quota C among traditional and non-traditional operators should be adjusted and Article 2 of the abovementioned Regulation should be amended accordingly. The new allocation should correspond more closely to the operations actually carried out by each of the two categories of operators over the last three years.
(3) The Annex to Regulation (EC) No 896/2001 lists the authorities competent in the Member States to issue licences for importing bananas from third countries. Following notifications from several Member States, that Annex should be amended.
(4) This Regulation must enter into force immediately in view of the time limits laid down in Regulation (EC) No 896/2001.
(5) The Management Committee for Bananas has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EC) No 896/2001 is hereby amended as follows:
1. Article 2 is replaced by the following: "Article 2
1. Tariff quotas A and B as provided for in Article 18(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 shall be made available as follows:
(a) 83 % to traditional operators A/B as defined in Article 3(2) of this Regulation;
(b) 17 % to non-traditional operators A/B as defined in Article 6 of this Regulation.
2. Tariff quota C as provided for in Article 18(1)(c) of Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 shall be made available as follows:
(a) 89 % to traditional operators C as defined in Article 3(3) of this Regulation;
(b) 11 % to non-traditional operators C as defined in Article 6 of this Regulation."
2. The Annex is replaced by the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 25 February 2002. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 510/95 of 7 March 1995 on the exceptional allocation of a quantity additional to the tariff quota for imports of bananas during the first quarter of 1995 as a result of tropical storm Debbie (Text with EEA relevance)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 of 13 February 1993 on the common organization of the market in bananas (1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 3290/94 (2), and in particular Articles 16 (3), 20 and 30 thereof,
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1442/93 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 478/95 (4), lays down the detailed rules for applying the arrangements for importing bananas into the Community;
Whereas on 10 September 1994 tropical storm Debbie caused severe damage to the banana plantations in the Community regions of Martinique and Guadeloupe and in the ACP States of Saint Lucia and Dominica; whereas the effects of these exceptional circumstances on production in the regions affected will be felt until July 1995 and will greatly affect imports and supplies to the Community markets during the first quarter of 1995; whereas this is likely to cause an appreciable increase in market prices in certain regions of the Community;
Whereas Article 16 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 stipulates that where necessary, in particular to take account of the effects of exceptional circumstances affecting production or import conditions, the forecast supply balance may be adjusted and, in such a case, the tariff quota is adapted;
Whereas the adaptation of the tariff quota must permit adequate supplies to the Community market during the first quarter of 1995 and provide compensation to operators who include or directly represent banana producers who suffered damage and who, in addition, in the absence of appropriate measures, risk losing their traditional outlets on the Community market on a long-term basis;
Whereas the measures to be taken should have a specific transitional nature, within the meaning of Article 30 of Regulation (EEC) No 404/93; whereas, prior to the entry into force of the new common market organization on 1 July 1993, existing national market organizations, in order to cope with urgent cases or exceptional circumstances such as tropical storm Debbie, included provisions ensuring supplies to the market from other suppliers while safeguarding the interests of operators who are victims of such exceptional events;
Whereas also, under the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations, the Community negotiated an agreement which provides for the implementation of a provision for the reallocation of supplies which is intended to overcome such exceptional circumstances and which will safeguard the interests of operators in the supplier countries which have suffered such damage; whereas this agreement applies from 1 January 1995;
Whereas, the Community producer regions and the ACP States which suffer such exceptional circumstances should be able to benefit from comparable measures; whereas the measures should include the granting of the right to import in compensation third-country bananas and non-traditional ACP bananas for the benefit of the operators who directly suffered damage as a result of the impossibility of supplying the Community market with bananas originating in affected producer regions; whereas, in addition, provision should be made for the quantities marketed on the Community market pursuant to this measure to be taken into consideration, in due course, for determining the reference quantities for the operators concerned for the tariff quotas for future years; whereas these measures should be to the benefit of the operators who have directly suffered actual damage, without the possibility of compensation, and as a function of the extent of the damage;
Whereas the competent authorities in the Member States where the operators concerned are established are the only authorities capable of determining those who should benefit from the measure in view of their experience and their knowledge of the actual characteristics of the trade in question and to assess the damage on the basis of the supporting documentation provided by the operators;
Whereas, in view of their objectives, the provisions of this Regulation must enter into force immediately;
Whereas the Management Committee for Bananas has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. The tariff quota of 2 200 000 tonnes (net weight) fixed for 1995 is hereby increased to 2 245 000 tonnes (net weight).
2. The additional quantity of 45 500 tonnes (net weight) shall be allocated to the operators determined in accordance with Article 2 below as follows:
(a) 28 000 tonnes for operators supplying the Community with bananas produced in Martinique;
(b) 3 600 tonnes for operators supplying the Community with bananas produced in Guadeloupe;
(c) 13 900 tonnes for operators supplying the Community with bananas produced in the two Windward Islands (Saint Lucia and Dominica).
Article 2
1. The quantities referred to in Article 1 (2) shall be allocated to the operators who:
- include or directly represent banana producers affected by tropical storm Debbie,
- and who, during the first quarter of 1995, are unable to supply, on their own account, the Community market with bananas originating in the regions or countries referred to in Article 1 (2) on account of the damage caused by tropical storm Debbie.
2. The competent authorities in the Member States concerned shall determine the beneficiary operators who meet the requirements of paragraph 1 and shall make an allocation to each of them pursuant to this Regulation on the basis of:
- the quantities allocated to the producer regions or countries referred to in Article 1 (2), and of
- the damage sustained as a result of tropical storm Debbie.
3. The competent authorities shall assess the damage sustained on the basis of all supporting documents and information collected from the operators concerned.
Article 3
1. The Member States concerned shall inform the Commission by 15 March 1995 at the latest of the quantities of bananas for which a proposal for an allocation pursuant to this Regulation has been made.
2. If the overall quantity for which proposals for allocations in connection with tropical storm Debbie are made exceeds the quantity additional to the tariff quota fixed in Article 1 (1), the Commission shall fix a uniform percentage reduction to be applied to all allocations.
3. Tropical storm Debbie import licences shall be issued not later than 22 March 1995 and shall be valid until 9 May 1995.
The words 'Tropical storm Debbie licence' shall be entered in box 20 of the licence.
Article 4
The quantities of bananas released for free circulation issued in accordance with this Regulation on the basis of tropical storm Debbie import licences shall be taken into consideration for the purpose of determining the reference quantity of each operator concerned, as regards 1995, for the application of Articles 3 to 6 of Regulation (EEC) No 1442/93.
Article 5
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 7 March 1995. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1366/2004
of 29 July 2004
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables (1), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.
(2)
In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 30 July 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 29 July 2004. | [
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 5 February 2010
concerning a financial contribution from the Union towards a coordinated monitoring programme on the prevalence of Listeria monocytogenes in certain ready-to-eat foods to be carried out in the Member States
(notified under document C(2010) 592)
(2010/75/EU)
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules (1), and in particular Article 66 thereof,
Having regard to Directive 2003/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 2003 on the monitoring of zoonoses and zoonotic agents (2), and in particular Article 5 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 lays down, among others, procedures governing a financial support from the Union to conduct measures necessary to ensure the application of the Regulation (EC) No 882/2004.
(2)
Reports on trends and sources of zoonoses, zoonotic agents and antimicrobial resistance in the Union were issued by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control in 2006 (3) and 2007 (4) (EFSA-ECDC reports). According to those reports, a total of 1 588 cases of listeriosis (Listeria monocytogenes) in humans were registered in 25 Member States in 2006. In addition, 1 558 such cases were registered in 26 Member States in 2007. The reports further demonstrated a significant increase in the incidence of such cases in humans over the period 2001-2006. Illness is often severe and mortality is high.
(3)
The fact that Listeria monocytogenes is able to multiply in various foods at temperatures as low as 2 to 4 °C makes the occurrence of Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat (RTE) foods with a relatively long shelf-life of particular concern.
(4)
Pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs (5), food business operators are to comply with Listeria monocytogenes food safety criteria for ready-to-eat foods within the framework of good hygiene practises and hazard analysis of critical control point (HACCP) programmes.
(5)
The EFSA-ECDC reports showed that the highest proportions of non-compliance with the Listeria monocytogenes criteria were registered in ready-to-eat cheese and in ready-to-eat fishery and heat treated meat products.
(6)
The exposure of humans to Listeria monocytogenes is mainly food-borne. Therefore the prevalence and level of Listeria monocytogenes contamination in ready-to-eat fishery products, cheeses and heat treated meat products should be estimated in a harmonised and comparable way by means of a coordinated monitoring programme at retail level in all Member States.
(7)
The growth of Listeria monocytogenes in a ready-to-eat product is influenced significantly by the pH, water activity and storage temperature of the product. A modelling can be used for the estimation of the growth of Listeria monocytogenes in a ready-to-eat product under various temperature conditions.
(8)
Where there are no relevant definitions in the Union legislation, the definitions in the Codex General Standard for Cheese (CODEX STAN 283-1978, amendment 2008) and in the Codex Group Standard for Unripened Cheese including Fresh Cheese (CODEX STAN 221-2001, amendment 2008) issued by the Codex Alimentarius Commission should be used to guarantee the harmonized approach in defining ready-to-eat cheeses.
(9)
Directive 2003/99/EC provides that coordinated monitoring programmes may be established, especially when specific needs are identified, to assess risks and to establish baseline values related to zoonoses and zoonotic agents.
(10)
In May 2009, the Task Force on Monitoring of Zoonoses Data Collection of EFSA adopted a Report on proposed technical specifications for a co-ordinated monitoring programme for Listeria monocytogenes in certain categories of RTE foods at retail in the EU (6).
(11)
Given the importance of collecting comparable data on the prevalence of Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat foods, a financial contribution from the Union for carrying out such coordinated monitoring programme should be granted.
(12)
It is appropriate to reimburse costs incurred on the laboratory testing, subject to a ceiling. All other costs incurred, such as costs for sampling, travel and administration should not be eligible for any financial contribution from the Union.
(13)
A financial contribution from the Union should be granted insofar as the coordinated monitoring programme is carried out in accordance with this Decision and provided that the competent authorities furnish all the necessary information within the time limits provided for therein.
(14)
For reasons of administrative efficiency all expenditure presented for a financial contribution from the Union should be expressed in euro. In accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 of 21 June 2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (7), the conversion rate for expenditure in a currency other than euro should be the rate most recently set by the European Central Bank prior to the first day of the month in which the application for reimbursement is submitted by the Member State concerned.
(15)
The present Decision constitutes a financing Decision within the meaning of Article 75 of the Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (Financial Regulation) (8), Article 90 of the detailed rules for the implementation of the Financial Regulation, and Article 15 of the Internal Rules on the Implementation of the general budget of the European Communities.
(16)
The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Subject matter
This Decision establishes a coordinated monitoring programme on the prevalence of Listeria monocytogenes in certain ready-to-eat food categories provided for in Article 2 at retail level, and lays down rules on a financial contribution from the Union to the Member States for its implementation.
Article 2
Scope and duration of the coordinated monitoring programme
1. The Member States shall carry out a coordinated monitoring programme to assess the prevalence of Listeria monocytogenes in the following ready-to-eat food categories in samples selected at random at retail level:
(a)
packaged (not frozen) hot or cold smoked or gravad fish;
(b)
soft or semi-soft cheeses, excluding fresh cheeses;
(c)
packaged heat treated meat products.
2. The sampling for the coordinated monitoring programme provided for in paragraph 1 shall be carried out from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2010 at the latest.
Article 3
Definitions
For the purposes of this Decision, the following definitions shall apply:
1.
‘ready-to-eat food’ means ready-to-eat food as defined in Article 2(g) of Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005.
2.
‘shelf-life’ means shelf-life as defined in Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005.
3.
‘batch’ means batch as defined in Article 2(e) of Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005.
4.
‘retail’ means retail as defined in Article 3(7) of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (9); however, for the purposes of this Decision, retail covers only shops, supermarkets and other similar outlets that sell directly to the final consumer; it does not include distribution terminals or centres, catering operations, institutional catering, factory canteens, restaurants and other similar food service operations and wholesale outlets.
5.
‘processing’ means processing as defined in Article 2(1)(m) of Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs (10).
6.
‘meat products’ means meat products as defined in point 7.1 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin (11).
7.
‘country of production’ means the country indicated on the identification mark as provided for in point 6 of part B of Section I of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004.
8.
‘packaged food’ means food that has its entire surface covered in order to prevent direct contact of the food with the environment, either by permeable or impermeable wrapping.
9.
‘modified atmosphere packaged food’ means food that was packaged and hermetically sealed after the removal of air from the package and the replacement of that air with a strictly controlled gaseous mixture of carbon dioxide, oxygen, and/or nitrogen.
10.
‘vacuum packaged food’ means food that was packaged and hermetically sealed after the removal of the air from the package.
11.
‘smoked fish’ means fish cured by smoking.
12.
‘gravad fish’ means fish that has been cured in salt and sugar without thermal treatment.
13.
‘ripened cheeses’ means cheeses which are not ready for consumption shortly after manufacture but which must be held for such time, at such temperature, and under such other conditions as will result in the necessary biochemical and physical changes characterizing the cheese in question.
14.
‘soft cheeses’ means cheeses that have a percentage moisture, on a fat-free basis, higher than 67 %.
15.
‘semi-soft cheeses’ means cheeses that have a texture which is only slighter harder than the soft cheese category. These cheeses have a percentage moisture, on a fat-free basis, ranging from 62 to 67 %. Semi-soft cheeses are characterized by their firm but elastic feel.
16.
‘mould ripened cheeses’ means cheeses in which the ripening has been accomplished primarily by the development of characteristic mould growth throughout the interior and/or on the surface of the cheese.
17.
‘smear-ripened cheeses’ means cheeses in which during or after ripening, the cheese rind is treated or naturally colonized with desired cultures of microorganisms, for instance Penicillium candidum or Brevibacterium linens. The resulting layer or smear forms a part of the rind.
18.
‘brine matured cheeses’ means cheeses matured and stored in brine until they are sold or packed.
19.
‘fresh cheeses’ means curd-style cheeses which do not undergo any ripening, for example cottage cheese, mozzarella, ricotta and quark. Fresh cheeses are not included in this coordinated monitoring programme.
Article 4
Sampling, analyses and recording of data by the Member States
1. Sampling shall be performed by the competent authority or under its supervision.
2. National reference laboratories for Listeria monocytogenes shall perform the Listeria monocytogenes, pH and water activity analyses.
3. The competent authority may designate other laboratories than the national reference laboratories which are accredited for and involved in official controls of Listeria monocytogenes to perform the Listeria monocytogenes, pH and water activity analyses.
4. The sampling and analyses provided for in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, as well as recording of all relevant data, shall be performed in accordance with the technical specifications set out in Annex I.
5. The number of samples to be taken per ready-to-eat food category in each Member State is set out in Annex II.
Article 5
Collection, assessment, reporting and use of data at Union level
1. Member State shall collect and assess the results of the sampling and Listeria monocytogenes, pH and water activity analyses provided for in Article 4(1), (2) and (3) of this Decision.
Those results and their assessment, together with all relevant data, shall be included in a final report on the completion of the coordinated monitoring programme that shall be transmitted to the Commission before 31 May 2011.
2. The Commission shall establish by the 31 December 2009 the format of the Data Dictionary and data collection forms to be used in the drawing up of the report referred to in paragraph 1 by the competent authorities.
3. The Commission shall forward the final reports provided for in paragraph 1 to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which shall examine them, develop predictive models for the compliance with the Listeria monocytogenes food safety criteria and for the microbial growth under various storage conditions and issue a Summary Report within six months.
4. Any use of the data submitted by the Member States for purposes other than the coordinated monitoring programme shall be subject to prior agreement of the Member States.
5. Data and results shall be made publicly available in a form that ensures confidentiality of the individual results.
Article 6
Conditions for granting a Union financial contribution
1. A financial contribution from the Union of a total amount of 1 555 300 euros from budget line 17 04 02 towards the costs of the analyses provided for in Article 4(2) shall be granted to the Member States up to the maximum total amount for co-financing set out in Annex III.
2. The financial contribution from the Union provided for in paragraph 1 shall be paid to the Member States provided that the coordinated monitoring programme is carried out in accordance with the relevant provisions of Union law, including rules on competition and on the award of public contracts, and subject to compliance with the following conditions:
The final report on the completion of the coordinated monitoring programme must be submitted to the Commission before 31 May 2011; the report must contain:
(i)
all the information set out in Part D of Annex I;
(ii)
supporting evidence for the costs incurred by the Member States for the analyses; that evidence must comprise at least the information set out in Annex IV.
3. In the case of late submission of the final report referred to in paragraph 2 the financial contribution from the Union shall be reduced by 25 % on 1 July 2011, 50 % on 1 August 2011 and 100 % on 1 September 2011.
Article 7
Maximum amounts to be reimbursed
The maximum amounts of the financial contribution from the Union towards the costs to be reimbursed to the Member States for each analysis shall not exceed the following:
(a)
EUR 60 for each analysis for the detection of Listeria monocytogenes;
(b)
EUR 60 for each analysis for the enumeration of Listeria monocytogenes;
(c)
EUR 15 for each pH analysis;
(d)
EUR 20 for each water activity (aw) analysis.
Article 8
Conversion rate for expenditure
Where a Member State’s expenditure is in a currency other than euro, the Member State concerned shall convert it into euro by applying the most recent exchange rate set by the European Central Bank prior to the first day of the month in which the application is submitted by the Member State.
Article 9
Addressees
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 5 February 2010. | [
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE of 20 June 1990 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to active implantable medical devices (90/385/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 100a thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
In cooperation with the European Parliament (2),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (3),
Whereas in each Member State active implantable medical devices must give patients, users and other persons a high level of protection and achieve the intended level of performance when implanted in human beings;
Whereas several Member States have sought to ensure that level of safety by mandatory specifications relating both to the technical safety features and the inspection procedures for such devices; whereas those specifications differ from one Member State to another;
Whereas national provisions ensuring that safety level should be harmonized in order to guarantee the free movement of active implantable medical devices without lowering existing and justified levels of safety in the Member States;
Whereas harmonized measures must be distinguished from measures taken by Member States to manage the financing of public health and sickness insurance schemes directly or indirectly concerning such devices; whereas, therefore, such provisions do not affect the right of Member States to implement the abovementioned measures in compliance with Community law;
Whereas maintaining or improving the level of protection achieved in Member States constitutes one of this Directive's essential objectives as defined by the essential requirements;
Whereas rules governing active implantable medical devices can be confined to those provisions needed to satisfy the
OJ No C 149, 18. 6. 1990.
essential requirements; whereas, because they are essential, these requirements must replace corresponding national provisions;
Whereas, in order to facilitate proof of conformity with these essential requirements and to permit monitoring of that conformity, it is desirable to have Europe-wide harmonized standards in respect of the prevention of risks in connection with the design, manufacture and packaging of active implantable medical devices; whereas such standards harmonized at European level are drawn up by private-law bodies and must retain their status as non-mandatory texts; whereas, to that end, the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) and the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization (Cenelec) are recognized as being the competent bodies to adopt harmonized standards in accordance with the general guidelines for cooperation between the Commission and these two bodies, signed on 13 November 1984; whereas, for the purposes of this Directive, a harmonized standard is a technical specification (European standard or harmonization document) adopted by either or both of these bodies, as instructed by the Commission pursuant to the provisions of Council Directive 83/189/EEC of 28 March 1983 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations (4), as last amended by Directive 88/182/EEC (5), and under the abovementioned general guidelines;
Whereas evaluation procedures have to be established and accepted by common accord between the Member States in accordance with Community criteria;
Whereas the specific nature of the medical sector makes it advisable to make provision for the notified body and the manufacturer or his agent established in the Community to fix, by common accord, the time limits for completion of the evaluation and verification operations for the conformity of devices,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
1. This Directive shall apply to active implantable medical devices.
2. For the purposes of this Directive, the following definitions shall apply:
(a) 'medical device' means any instrument, apparatus, appliance, material or other article, whether used alone or in combination, together with any accessories or software for its proper functioning, intended by the manufacturer to be used for human beings in the:
- diagnosis, prevention, monitoring, treatment or alleviation of disease or injury,
- investigation, replacement or modification of the anatomy or of a physiological process,
- control of conception,
and which does not achieve its principal intended action by pharmacological, chemical, immunological or metabolic means, but which may be assisted in its function by such means;
(b)
'active medical device' means any medical device relying for its functioning on a source of electrical energy or any source of power other than that directly generated by the human body or gravity;
(c)
'active implantable medical device' means any active medical device which is intended to be totally or partially introduced, surgically or medically, into the human body or by medical intervention into a natural orifice, and which is intended to remain after the procedure;
(d)
'custom-made device' means any active implantable medical device specifically made in accordance with a medical specialist's written prescription which gives, under his responsibility, specific design characteristics and is intended to be used only for an individual named patient;
(e)
'device intended for clinical investigation' means any active implantable medical device intended for use by a specialist doctor when conducting investigations in an adequate human clinical environment;
(f)
'intended purpose' means the use for which the medical device is intended and for which it is suited according
to the data supplied by the manufacturer in the instructions;
(g)
'putting into service' means making available to the medical profession for implantation.
3. Where an active implantable medical device is intended to administer a substance defined as a medicinal product within the meaning of Council Directive 65/65/EEC of 26 January 1965 on the approximation of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action relating to proprietary medicinal products (6), as last amended by Directive 87/21/EEC (7), that substance shall be subject to
the system of marketing authorization provided for in that Directive.
4. Where an active implantable medical device incorporates, as an integral part, a substance which, if used separately, may be considered to be a medicinal product within the meaning of Article 1 of Directive 65/65/EEC, that device must be evaluated and authorized in accordance with the provisions of this Directive.
5. This Directive constitutes a specific Directive within the meaning of Article 2 (2) of Council Directive 89/336/EEC of 3 May 1989 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility (8).
Article 2
Member States shall take all necessary steps to ensure that the devices referred to in Article 1 (2) (c) and (d) may be placed on the market and put into service only if they do not compromise the safety and health of patients, users and, where applicable, other persons when properly implanted, maintained and used in accordance with their intended purposes.
Article 3
The active implantable medical devices referred to in Article 1 (2) (c), (d) and (e), hereinafter referred to as 'devices', must satisfy the essential requirements set out in Annex 1, which shall apply to them account being taken of the intended purpose of the devices concerned.
Article 4
1. Member States shall not impede the placing on the market or the putting into service within their territory of devices bearing the CE mark.
2. Member States shall not create any obstacles to:
- devices intended for clinical investigations being made available to specialist doctors for that purpose if they satisfy the conditions laid down in Article 10 and in Annex 6,
- custom-made devices being placed on the market and put into service if they satisfy the conditions laid down in Annex 6 and are accompanied by the statement referred to in that Annex.
These devices shall not bear the CE mark.
3. At trade fairs, exhibitions, demonstrations, etc., Member States shall not prevent the showing of devices which do not conform to this Directive, provided that a visible sign clearly indicates that such devices do not conform
and cannot be put into service until they have been made to comply by the manufacturer or his authorized representative established within the Community.
4. When a device is put into service, Member States may require the information described in sections 13, 14 and 15 of Annex 1 to be in their national language(s).
Article 5
Member States shall presume compliance with the essential requirements referred to in Article 3 in respect of devices which are in conformity with the relevant national standards adopted pursuant to the harmonized standards the references of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Communities; Member States shall publish the references of such national standards.
Article 6
1. Where a Member State or the Commission considers that the harmonized standards referred to in Article 5 do
not entirely meet the essential requirements referred to in Article 3, the Commission or the Member State concerned shall bring the matter before the Standing Committee set up under Directive 83/189/EEC, giving the reasons therefor. The Committee shall deliver an opinion without delay.
In the light of the opinion of the Committee, the Commission shall inform Member States of the measures to be taken with regard to the standards and the publication referred to in Article 5.
2. A Standing Committee, hereinafter referred to as the 'Committee', shall be set up, composed of the representatives of the Member States and chaired by the representative of the Commission.
The Committee shall draw up its rules of procedure.
Any matter relating to the implementation and practical application of this Directive may be brought before the Committee, in accordance with the procedure set out below.
The representative of the Commission shall submit to the Committee a draft of the measures to be taken. The Committee shall deliver its opinion according to the urgency of the matter, if necessary by taking a vote.
The opinion shall be recorded in the minutes; in addition, each Member State shall have the right to ask to have its position recorded in the minutes.
The Commission shall take the utmost account of the opinion delivered by the Committee. It shall inform the Committee of the manner in which its opinion has been taken into account.
Article 7
1. Where a Member State finds that the devices referred to in Article 1 (2) (c) and (d), correctly put into service and used in accordance with their intended purpose, may compromise the health and/or safety of patients, users or, where applicable, other persons, it shall take all appropriate measures to withdraw such devices from the market or prohibit or restrict their being placed on the market or their being put into service.
The Member State shall immediately inform the Commission of any such measure, indicating the reasons for its decision and, in particular, whether non-compliance with this Directive is due to:
(a) failure to meet the essential requirements referred to in Article 3, where the device does not meet in full or in part the standards referred to in Article 5;
(b)
incorrect application of those standards;
(c)
shortcomings in the standards themselves.
2. The Commission shall enter into consultation with the parties concerned as soon as possible. Where, after such consultation, the Commission finds that:
- the measures are justified, it shall immediately so inform the Member State which took the initiative and the
other Member States; where the decision referred to
in paragraph 1 is attributed to shortcomings in the standards, the Commission shall, after consulting the parties concerned, bring the matter before the Committee referred to in Article 6 (1) within two months if the Member State which has taken the decision intends to maintain it and shall initiate the procedures referred to in Article 6 (1),
- the measures are unjustified, it shall immediately so inform the Member State which took the initiative and the manufacturer or his authorized representative established within the Community.
3. Where a device which does not comply bears the CE mark, the competent Member State shall take appropriate action against whomsoever has affixed the mark and shall inform the Commission and the other Member States thereof.
4. The Commission shall ensure that the Member States are kept informed of the progress and outcome of this procedure.
Article 8
1. Member States shall take the necessary steps to ensure that information brought to their knowledge regarding the incidents mentioned below involving a device is recorded and evaluated in a centralized manner:
(a) any deterioration in the characteristics and performances of a device, as well as any inaccuracies in the instruction leaflet which might lead to or might have led to the death of a patient or to a deterioration in his state of health;
(b) any technical or medical reason resulting in withdrawal of a device from the market by the manufacturer.
2. Member States shall, without prejudice to Article 7, forthwith inform the Commission and the other Member States of the incidents referred to in paragraph 1 and of the relevant measures taken or contemplated.
Article 9
1. In the case of devices other than those which are custom-made or intended for clinical investigations, the manufacturer must, in order to affix the CE mark, at his own choice:
(a) follow the procedure relating to the EC declaration of conformity set out in Annex 2; or
(b)
follow the procedure relating to EC type-examination set out in Annex 3, coupled with:
i(i) the procedure relating to EC verification set out in Annex 4, or
(ii)
the procedure relating to the EC declaration of conformity to type set out in Annex 5.
2. In the case of custom-made devices, the manufacturer must draw up the declaration provided for in Annex 6 before placing each device on the market.
3. Where appropriate, the procedures provided for in Annexes 3, 4 and 6 may be discharged by the manufacturer's authorized representative established in the Community.
4. The records and correspondence relating to the procedures referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall be in an official language of the Member State in which the said procedures will be carried out and/or in a language acceptable to the notified body defined in Article 11.
Article 10
1. In the case of devices intended for clinical investigations, the manufacturer or his authorized representative established in the Community shall, at least 60 days before the commencement of the investigations, submit the statement referred to in Annex 6 to the competent authorities of the Member State in which the investigations are to be conducted.
2. The manufacturer may commence the relevant clinical investigations at the end of a period of 60 days after notification, unless the competent authorities have notified
him within that period of a decision to the contrary, based on considerations of public health or public order.
3. The Member States shall, if necessary, take the appropriate steps to ensure public health and order.
Article 11
1. Each Member State shall notify the other Member States and the Commission of the bodies which they have designated for carrying out the tasks pertaining to the procedures referred to in Articles 9 and 13, the specific tasks for which each body has been designated and the identifying logo of these bodies, hereinafter referred to as 'notified bodies'.
The Commission shall publish a list of these notified bodies, together with the tasks for which they have been notified, in the Official Journal of the European Communities and shall ensure that the list is kept up to date.
2. Member States shall apply the minimum criteria, set out in Annex 8, for the designation of bodies. Bodies that satisfy the criteria fixed by the relevant harmonized standards shall be presumed to satisfy the relevant minimum criteria.
3. A Member State that has notified a body shall withdraw that notification if it finds that the body no longer meets the criteria referred to in paragraph 2. It shall immediately inform the other Member States and the Commission thereof.
4. The notified body and the manufacturer or his agent established in the Community shall fix, by common accord, the time limits for completion of the evaluation and verification operations referred to in Annexes 2 to 5.
Article 12
1. Devices other than those which are custom made or intended for clinical investigations considered to meet the essential requirements referred to in Article 3 must bear the EC mark of conformity.
2. The EC mark of conformity, as shown in Annex 9, must appear in a visible, legible and indelible form on the sterile pack and, where appropriate, on the sales packaging, if any, and on the instruction leaflet.
It must be accompanied by the logo of the notified body responsible for implementation of the procedures set out in Annexes 2, 4 and 5.
3. The affixing of marks likely to be confused with the EC mark of conformity shall be prohibited.
Article 13
Where it is established that the EC mark has been wrongly affixed, in particular, in respect of devices:
- that do not conform to the relevant standards referred to in Article 5, should the manufacturer have opted for conformity therewith,
- that do not conform to an approved type,
- that conform to an approved type which does not meet the relevant essential requirements,
- regarding which the manufacturer has failed to fulfil
his obligations under the relevant EC declaration of conformity,
the notified body shall take appropriate measures and forthwith inform the competent Member State thereof.
Article 14
Any decision taken pursuant to this Directive and resulting in the refusal of or restrictions on the placing on the market and/or putting into service of a device shall state the exact grounds on which it is based. Such decision shall be notified without delay to the party concerned, who shall at the same time be informed of the remedies available to him under the laws in force in the Member State in question and of the time limits to which such remedies are subject.
Article 15
Member States shall ensure that all the parties involved in the application of this Directive are bound to observe confidentiality with regard to all information obtained in
carrying out their tasks. This does not affect the obligations of Member States and notified bodies with regard to mutual information and the dissemination of warnings.
Article 16
1. Before 1 July 1992, Member States shall adopt and publish the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary in order to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.
They shall apply such provisions from 1 January 1993.
2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the texts of the provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.
3. Member States shall, for the period up to 31 December 1994, permit the placing on the market and putting into service of devices complying with national rules in force in their territory on 31 December 1992.
Article 17
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Luxembourg, 20 June 1990. | [
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
Council Decision
of 14 April 2003
on the conclusion of a Protocol adjusting the trade aspects of the Europe Agreement establishing an Association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Slovak Republic, of the other part, to take account of the outcome of negotiations between the parties on new mutual agricultural concessions
(2003/299/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 133, in conjunction with Article 300(2), first subparagraph, first sentence thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas:
(1) The Europe Agreement establishing an Association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Slovak Republic, of the other part(1) (hereinafter referred to as "the Europe Agreement"), provides for certain reciprocal trade concessions for certain agricultural products.
(2) Article 21(5) of the Europe Agreement provides that the Community and the Slovak Republic are to examine product by product and on an orderly and reciprocal basis the possibilities of granting each other further concessions.
(3) The first improvements to the preferential arrangements of the Europe Agreement were provided for in the Protocol adjusting trade aspects of the Europe Agreement to take account of the accession of the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden to the European Union and the outcome of the Uruguay Round negotiations on agriculture, including improvements to the existing preferential arrangements, approved by Decision 98/638/EC(2).
(4) Improvements to the preferential arrangements were also provided for as a result of negotiations to liberalise agricultural trade concluded in 2000. On the Community side, these were implemented from 1 July 2000 by Regulation (EC) No 2434/2000 of 17 October 2000 establishing certain concessions in the form of Community tariff quotas for certain agricultural products and providing for an adjustment, as an autonomous and transitional measure, of certain agricultural concessions provided for in the Europe Agreement with the Slovak Republic(3). This second adjustment of the preferential arrangements has not yet been incorporated in the Europe Agreement in the form of an Additional Protocol.
(5) Negotiations for further improvements to the preferential arrangements of the Europe Agreement were concluded on 3 May 2000 and on 25 June 2002.
(6) The new Additional Protocol to the Europe Agreement adjusting the trade aspects of the Europe Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Slovak Republic, of the other part (hereinafter referred to as "the Protocol") should be approved with a view to consolidating all concessions in agricultural trade between the two sides, including the results of the negotiations concluded in 2000 and 2002.
(7) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code(4) has codified the management rules for tariff quotas designed to be used following the chronological order of dates of customs declarations. Certain tariff quotas under this Decision should therefore be administered in accordance with those rules.
(8) The measures necessary for the implementation of this Decision should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission(5).
(9) As a result of the aforementioned negotiations, Regulation (EC) No 2434/2000 has effectively lost its substance and should therefore be repealed,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The Protocol adjusting the trade aspects of the Europe Agreement establishing an Association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Slovak Republic, of the other part, to take account of the outcome of negotiations between the parties on new mutual agricultural concessions, is hereby approved on behalf of the Community.
Article 2
The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person empowered to sign the Protocol on behalf of the Community and give the notification of approval provided for in Article 3 of the Protocol.
Article 3
1. Upon this Decision taking effect, the arrangements provided for in the Annexes of the Protocol attached to this Decision shall replace those referred to in Annexes XI and XII as referred to in Article 21(2) and (4), as amended, of the Europe Agreement establishing an Association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Slovak Republic, of the other part.
2. The Commission shall adopt rules for the application of the Protocol in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 6(2).
Article 4
1. The order numbers as attributed to the tariff quotas in the Annex to this Decision may be changed by the Commission in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 6(2). Tariff quotas with an order number above 09.5100 shall be administered by the Commission in accordance with Articles 308a, 308b and 308c of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93.
2. Quantities of goods subject to tariff quotas and released for free circulation as from 1 July 2002 under the concessions provided for in Annex A(b) to Regulation (EC) No 2434/2000 shall be fully counted against the quantities provided for in the fourth column in Annex A(b) to the attached Protocol, except for quantities for which import licences were issued before 1 July 2002.
Article 5
Entitlement to the benefits from the Community tariff quota for wine referred to in Annex to this Decision and in Annex C of the protocol shall be subject to the presentation of a VI 1 document or a V I 2 extract in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 883/2001 of 24 April 2001 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 as regards trade with third countries in products in the wine sector(6).
Article 6
1. The Commission shall be assisted by the Committee for Cereals instituted by Article 23 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in cereals(7) or, where appropriate, by the committee instituted by the relevant provisions of the other regulations on the common organisation of agricultural markets.
2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Articles 4 and 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply.
The period provided for in Article 4(3) of Decision 1999/468/EC shall be one month.
3. The Committee shall adopt its Rules of Procedure.
Article 7
Regulation (EC) No 2434/2000 shall be repealed from the entry into force of the Protocol.
Done at Brussels, 14 April 2003. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 590/2000
of 17 March 2000
fixing the maximum aid for concentrated butter for the 221st special invitation to tender opened under the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EEC) No 429/90
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products [1], and in particular Article 10 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) In accordance with Commission Regulation (EEC) No 429/90 of 20 February 1990 on the granting by invitation to tender of an aid for concentrated butter intended for direct consumption in the Community [2], as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 124/1999 [3], the intervention agencies are opening a standing invitation to tender for the granting of aid for concentrated butter; Article 6 of that Regulation provides that in the light of the tenders received in response to each special invitation to tender, a maximum amount of aid is to be fixed for concentrated butter with a minimum fat content of 96 % or a decision is to be taken to make no award; whereas the end-use security must be fixed accordingly.
(2) In the light of the tenders received, the maximum aid should be fixed at the level specified below and the end-use security determined accordingly.
(3) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For the 221st special invitation to tender under the standing invitation to tender opened by Regulation (EEC) No 429/90, the maximum aid and the amount of the end-use security shall be as follows:
- maximum aid: | 117 EUR/100 kg |
- end-use security: | 129 EUR/100 kg. |
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 18 March 2000.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 17 March 2000. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1587/2005
of 29 September 2005
fixing the export refunds on milk and milk products
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), and in particular Article 31(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Article 31 of Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 provides that the difference between prices in international trade for the products listed in Article 1 of that Regulation and prices for those products within the Community may be covered by an export refund within the limits resulting from agreements concluded in accordance with Article 300 of the Treaty.
(2)
Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 provides that when the refunds on the products listed in Article 1 of the abovementioned Regulation, exported in the natural state, are being fixed, account must be taken of:
-
the existing situation and the future trend with regard to prices and availabilities of milk and milk products on the Community market and prices for milk and milk products in international trade,
-
marketing costs and the most favourable transport charges from Community markets to ports or other points of export in the Community, as well as costs incurred in placing the goods on the market of the country of destination,
-
the aims of the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products which are to ensure equilibrium and the natural development of prices and trade on this market,
-
the limits resulting from agreements concluded in accordance with Article 300 of the Treaty, and
-
the need to avoid disturbances on the Community market, and
-
the economic aspect of the proposed exports.
(3)
Article 31(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 provides that when prices within the Community are being determined account should be taken of the ruling prices which are most favourable for exportation, and that when prices in international trade are being determined particular account should be taken of:
(a)
prices ruling on third-country markets;
(b)
the most favourable prices in third countries of destination for third-country imports;
(c)
producer prices recorded in exporting third countries, account being taken, where appropriate, of subsidies granted by those countries; and
(d)
free-at-Community-frontier offer prices.
(4)
Article 31(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 provides that the world market situation or the specific requirements of certain markets may make it necessary to vary the refund on the products listed in Article 1 of the abovementioned Regulation according to destination.
(5)
Article 31(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 provides that the list of products on which export refunds are granted and the amount of such refunds should be fixed at least once every four weeks; the amount of the refund may, however, remain at the same level for more than four weeks.
(6)
In accordance with Article 16 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 174/1999 of 26 January 1999 on specific detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 as regards export licences and export refunds on milk and milk products (2), the refund granted for milk products containing added sugar is equal to the sum of the two components; one is intended to take account of the quantity of milk products and is calculated by multiplying the basic amount by the milk products content in the product concerned; the other is intended to take account of the quantity of added sucrose and is calculated by multiplying the sucrose content of the entire product by the basic amount of the refund valid on the day of exportation for the products listed in Article 1(1)(d) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (3), however, this second component is applied only if the added sucrose has been produced using sugar beet or cane harvested in the Community.
(7)
Commission Regulation (EEC) No 896/84 (4) laid down additional provisions concerning the granting of refunds on the change from one milk year to another; those provisions provide for the possibility of varying refunds according to the date of manufacture of the products.
(8)
For the calculation of the refund for processed cheese provision must be made where casein or caseinates are added for that quantity not to be taken into account.
(9)
In determining the products and destinations eligible for refunds, it is appropriate to take into account that the competitive position of certain Community products does not justify encouragement of exports and that the geographical proximity of certain territories risks facilitating diversion of trade and abuses.
(10)
It follows from applying the rules set out above to the present situation on the market in milk and in particular to quotations or prices for milk products within the Community and on the world market that the refund should be as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.
(11)
The Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The export refunds referred to in Article 31 of Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 on products exported in the natural state shall be as set out in the Annex.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 30 September 2005.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 29 September 2005. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 3 July 1997 concerning a request for exemption submitted by the United Kingdom pursuant to Article 8 (2) (c) of Council Directive 70/156/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers (Only the English text is authentic) (97/501/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 70/156/EEC of 6 February 1970 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers (1), as last amended by European Parliament and Council Directive 96/79/EC (2), and in particular Article 8 (2) (c) thereof,
Whereas the request submitted by the United Kingdom on 30 October 1996, which reached the Commission on 8 November 1996, contains the information required by Article 8 (2) (c); whereas the request concerns the fitting of one type of vehicle with one type of third stop lamp falling within category ECE S3 by virtue of ECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) Regulation No 7 carried out in accordance with ECE Regulation No 48;
Whereas the reasons given in the request, according to which the fitting of the stop lamps and the stop lamps themselves do not meet the requirements of Council Directive 76/758/EEC of 27 July 1976 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to end-outline marker lamps, front position (side) lamps, rear position (side) lamps and stop lamps for motor vehicles and their trailers (3), as last amended by Commission Directive 89/516/EEC (4), and of Council Directive 76/756/EEC of 27 July 1976 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the installation of lighting and light-signalling devices on motor vehicles and their trailers (5), as last amended by Commission Directive 91/663/EEC (6), are well founded; whereas the descriptions of the tests, the results thereof and their compliance with ECE Regulations No 7 and No 48 ensure a satisfactory level of safety;
Whereas the Community Directives concerned will be amended in order to permit the production and fitting of such stop lamps;
Whereas the measure provided for by this Decision is in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Adaptation to Technical Progress set up by Directive 70/156/EEC,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The request submitted by the United Kingdom for an exemption concerning the production of one type of third stop lamp falling within category ECE S3 by virtue of ECE Regulation No 7 and the fitting thereof in accordance with ECE Regulation No 48 on the type of vehicle for which it is intended is hereby approved.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Done at Brussels, 3 July 1997. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2090/2002
of 26 November 2002
laying down detailed rules for applying Council Regulation (EEC) No 386/90 as regards physical checks carried out when agricultural products qualifying for refunds are exported
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 386/90 of 12 February 1990 on the monitoring carried out at the time of export of agricultural products receiving refunds or other amounts(1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 163/94(2), and in particular Article 6 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2221/95 of 20 September 1995 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 386/90 as regards physical checks carried out at the time of export of agricultural products qualifying for refunds(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2655/1999(4), has been substantially amended. In the interests of clarity and administrative efficiency, therefore, that Regulation should be recast, at the same time making certain amendments which experience has shown to be desirable.
(2) Account should be taken of existing inspection measures, in particular those introduced by Commission Regulations (EC) No 2298/2001 of 26 November 2001 laying down detailed rules for the export of products supplied as food aid(5) and (EC) No 800/1999 of 15 April 1999 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products(6), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1253/2002(7).
(3) In its supplementary report to the Council on the application of Regulation (EEC) No 386/90(8), the Commission stated its intention to define precisely the term "physical check" as used in Article 2(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 386/90, in order to achieve uniform application of the Community rules in the Member States.
(4) To make better use of the inspection possibilities, export declarations involving small quantities of products or a low amount of refund should be disregarded when calculating the minimum rates of checks.
(5) A verification of laboratory tests has shown that the obligation to carry out a laboratory test should be simplified where satisfactory results, obtained repeatedly, concern the same product from the same exporter.
(6) A measure should be introduced to take account of cases where the number of exports dealt with by a customs office is minimal.
(7) Compared to the total amount of the refunds, the share of refunds granted to goods not listed in Annex I to the Treaty is small, while the share of physical checks carried out on these products is large. To make better use of the inspection resources, this discrepancy should be reduced, in particular by lowering the inspection rate for non-Annex I products.
(8) There is a substantial difference between the customs treatment of goods intended for export in the large ports, where there is a great diversity of products coming from a wide range of exporters, and the customs treatment of goods at customs offices which handle only a limited range of products from a few exporters. In the latter case, the goods are subjected to a much higher level of checks. For these customs offices, the selection of goods with a view to carrying out physical checks should take account of the fact that the check is being carried out on the basis of a smaller representative sample.
(9) In order to reduce the risk of substitution, all means of transport or packages should be sealed, save in cases where the products may be identified by some other means.
(10) Measures should be taken to allow verification at any time of whether the check rate of 5 % has been reached.
(11) Article 912c of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code(9), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 444/2002(10), specifies the office of destination where the T5 control copy should be presented for the check on the use and/or destination of the goods. It should therefore be stipulated that, if the customs office of exit and the office of destination are not the same, the substitution check must be carried out by the office to which the T5 control copy is sent.
(12) To tackle the risk of substitution in the case of export declarations accepted by an internal customs office within a Member State, a minimum number of "substitution checks" to be carried out by the customs office of exit from the Community should be laid down. Having regard to the place where such "substitution checks" are carried out, they must take the form of simplified checks.
(13) For the purpose of evaluating the application of Regulation (EEC) No 386/90, the Member States are required to submit annual evaluations on the implementation and effectiveness of the checks carried out under this Regulation and of the procedures applied to selecting the goods subject to physical checks.
(14) In the light of experience gained, appropriate and commensurate measures are required, which must be uniformly applied.
(15) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of all the Management Committees concerned,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. This Regulation lays down the detailed rules for applying the physical check and the substitution check referred to in Article 2(a) and (b) of Regulation (EEC) No 386/90.
2. This Regulation shall not apply to exports involving Community or national food aid covered by Regulation (EC) No 2298/2001.
3. For the purposes of this Regulation:
- "customs office of export" means the custom office as referred to in Article 5(7)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 800/1999,
- "customs office of exit" means the customs office referred to in Article 793(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93,
- "office to which the T5 control copy is sent" means the office of destination as referred to in Article 912c of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93.
Article 2
1. Without prejudice to the inspection measures referred to in Article 36(4), Article 37(4) and Article 44(4) of Regulation (EC) No 800/1999, Member States may opt to waive the physical and substitution checks provided for in this Regulation on deliveries as referred to in Articles 36 and 44 of Regulation (EC) No 800/1999.
2. When calculating the minimum rates of checks to be carried out in accordance with Article 3(2) and Article 3a of Regulation (EEC) No 386/90, Member States shall disregard export declarations involving:
(a) either quantities not exceeding:
(i) 5000 kg in the case of cereals and rice,
(ii) 1000 kg in the case of fruit and vegetables and products not listed in Annex I to the Treaty,
(iii) 500 kg in the case of other products;
(b) or refund amounts of less than EUR 200.
3. When implementing paragraphs 1 and 2, Member States shall adopt appropriate provisions to prevent fraud and abuses. Any checks made to that end may be counted for the purposes of calculating compliance with the minimum rates of checks referred to in paragraph 2.
Article 3
With a view to determining the basis for calculating the percentage for the physical checks referred to in Article 2(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 386/90, for the purposes of the first indent of the first subparagraph of Article 3(2) of that Regulation, "customs office" shall mean all offices competent to complete the export formalities for the products concerned.
Article 4
For the purposes of the third indent of the first subparagraph of Article 3(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 386/90, products covered by the same agricultural market organisation shall be regarded as coming under one product sector.
However, products covered by the common organisations of the markets in cereals and rice, on the one hand, and goods not listed in Annex I to the Treaty, on the other hand, shall each be treated as a single product sector.
Article 5
1. For the purposes of Article 2(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 386/90, "physical check" shall mean verification that the export declaration, including documents submitted in support thereof, corresponds with the goods as regards quantity, nature and characteristics.
In the cases referred to in Annex I, the methods indicated therein shall be applied.
The customs office of export shall ensure compliance with Article 21 of Regulation (EC) No 800/1999. Where there are specific grounds for suspecting the sound, fair and merchantable quality of a product, the customs office shall verify compliance with the applicable Community provisions, in particular those relating to animal and plant health. Where the customs office deems it necessary, it shall perform laboratory tests, or have them performed, stating the grounds for such tests.
2. Physical checks concerning which the exporter has received express or tacit prior warning shall not count as checks.
The first subparagraph shall not apply where the accounts of an undertaking are audited in accordance with point 3(a) of Annex I.
3. Where a customs office of export accepts fewer than 20 export declarations per sector per year, at least one export declaration per sector per year must be subjected to a physical check.
This requirement shall not apply where the customs office of export, having carried out a risk analysis in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 3(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 386/90, has not checked the first two declarations and no further exports are carried out thereafter in that sector.
4. Where the refund rate depends on the level of a particular component, as part of the physical check the customs office of export shall take representative samples with a view to having the composition analysed by a competent laboratory.
Article 6
Where the Member States apply a selection system based on risk analysis as referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 3(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 386/90, the following rules shall apply:
(a) The percentage of physical checks carried out on products not listed in Annex I to the Treaty shall not be taken into account when calculating the overall rate of 5 % for all sectors. In this case, a minimum rate of 0,5 % shall be compulsory for non-Annex I goods.
(b) As an exception to Article 5(4), where the refund rate depends on the level of a particular component and the same exporter regularly exports a product with the same refund code or CN code, and where laboratory tests during the past six months have revealed no non-conformities having financial consequences greater than EUR 200 on the gross amount of the refund, then representative samples need be taken in only 50 % of physical checks. If laboratory testing detects a non-conformity having financial consequences greater than EUR 200 on the gross amount of the refund, samples must be taken for all physical checks in the following six months.
(c) For customs offices of export where a range of products from no more than two sectors is presented for export by no more than five exporters, physical checks may be reduced to a minimum rate of 2 % per product sector. Sectors with fewer than 20 export declarations per year per customs office shall not be taken into account when determining the number of sectors. Customs offices may apply these rules for a full calendar year, based on the statistics for the previous calendar year, even where export declarations are made by additional exporters or for additional product sectors during the course of the year.
Article 7
In order to ensure that the goods passing through the customs office of exit from the Community's customs territory or the office to which the T5 control copy is sent, where this is not the customs office of exit, are the same goods that passed through the customs office of export, the means of transport or packaging shall be sealed in accordance with Article 357 of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93.
Article 8
1. Each customs office of export shall make the necessary arrangements to ensure that compliance with the inspection rate of 5 % can be verified at any time.
These arrangements must show, for each sector:
(a) the number of export declarations taken into account for the physical checks;
(b) the number of physical checks carried out.
2. The competent customs officer shall produce a detailed inspection report on each physical check carried out.
Inspection reports shall bear the date and the name of the competent officer. They shall be kept accessible for consultation at the customs office of export or at another office for three years from the year of export.
3. On the control copy T5 accompanying the goods, the following shall be noted in box D:
(a) "Regulation (EEC) No 386/90", if the customs office of export has carried out a physical check;
(b) "Regulation (EC) No 2298/2001", in the case of food aid exports.
Where the customs office of exit from the Community's customs territory is located in the same Member State as the customs office of export, this information shall appear on the national document accompanying the goods.
Article 9
1. Where refunds are paid in advance in accordance with Articles 26 to 31 of Regulation (EC) No 800/1999, the following physical checks may be taken into account to calculate the minimum rate of checks to be carried out in accordance with Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 386/90:
(a) checks on entry into or during storage as referred to in Article 29 of Regulation (EC) No 800/1999;
(b) checks on processing as referred to in Article 28 of Regulation (EC) No 800/1999:
(i) from the time of acceptance of the payment declaration, where the refund is granted for one or more basic products,
(ii) after processing, where the refund is granted for the processed product.
For the purposes of the first paragraph, the following requirements must also be met:
(a) the physical checks carried out prior to completion of the customs export formalities must meet the same intensity criteria as those to be carried out under Article 5 of this Regulation;
(b) the products, goods or basic products used to manufacture the goods subjected to previous physical checks must be identical to those covered by the export declaration.
2. Where analyses and other physical checks are carried out prior to the completion of customs export formalities under Community or national rules governing either the customs arrangements concerned or the manufacturing processes which the products and goods have undergone, paragraph 1 shall apply mutatis mutandis.
Article 10
1. Where the export declaration has been accepted at a customs office of export which is not the customs office of exit or the office to which the T5 control copy is sent, the customs office of exit from the Community's customs territory shall perform a substitution check in accordance with this Article. If the customs office of exit is not the customs office to which the T5 control copy is sent, the substitution check must be carried out by the latter.
2. If the customs office of export has not sealed the means of transport or the packaging, then substitution checks shall be carried out, wherever possible in the light of a risk analysis, without prejudice to checks carried out under other provisions.
The number of substitution checks carried out each calendar year shall not be less than the number of days on which export refund products leave the Community's customs territory through the customs office of exit concerned.
Where only one exporter is subject to the substitution check, that number may not be less than half the number of days on which export refund products leave the Community's customs territory through the customs office of exit concerned.
3. Where, in addition to a customs seal, a veterinary seal has been applied in compliance with the requirements of the third country of destination, the substitution check is required only if there is a suspicion of fraud.
4. The substitution check shall be carried out by checking, visually, whether the goods tally with the document which has accompanied them from the customs office of export to the customs office of exit.
A sample for testing shall be taken only in cases where the customs office of exit cannot check, visually and using the information on the packaging and in the documentation, whether the goods tally with the accompanying document. In such cases, Article 5(4) shall not apply.
5. Each customs office of exit or office to which the T5 control copy is sent shall apply measures to allow verification at any time of:
(a) the number of export declarations taken into account for the substitution checks;
(b) the number of substitution checks carried out.
If the customs office of exit or the office to which the T5 control copy is sent has taken a sample, one of the following shall be noted on the T5 control copy or, where applicable, on the national document to be returned to the competent authorities:
- muestra recogida
- udtaget prøve
- Probe gezogen
- ελήφθη δείγμα
- Sample taken
- échantillon prélevé
- campione prelevato
- monster genomen
- Amostra colhida
- näyte otettu
- varuprov.
A duplicate or a copy of the document shall remain at the customs office of exit or the office to which the T5 control copy is sent, as the case may be.
6. The customs office of exit or the office to which the T5 control copy is sent shall inform the competent authorities referred to in paragraph 5 in writing, using a copy of the original document, of the result of the tests, reporting:
(a) either one of the following:
- resultado del análisis conforme
- analyseresultat i orden
- konformes Analyseergebnis
- αποτέλεσμα της ανάλυσης σύμφωνο
- Results of tests conform
- résultat d'analyse conforme
- risultato di analisi conforme
- analyseresultaat conform
- Resultado da análise conforme
- analyysin tulos yhtäpitävä
- Analysresultatet överensstämmer med exportdeklarationen
(b) or the results of the tests if there is a discrepancy between the results and the product declared.
7. Where the substitution check reveals that the refund rules have not been complied with, the paying agency shall inform the customs office referred to in paragraph 5, at the latter's request, of the action taken as a result of the findings.
In such cases, the customs office of exit or the office to which the T5 control copy is sent shall indicate one of the following on the T5 control copy or, where applicable, on the national document to be returned to the competent authorities:
- Solicitud de aplicación del apartado 7 del artículo 10 del Reglamento (CE) n° 2090/2002
Oficina de aduana de salida o de destino del T5: ...
- Anmodning om anvendelse af artikel 10, stk. 7, i forordning (EF) nr. 2090/2002
Identifikation af udgangstoldstedet eller bestemmelsestoldstedet for T5: ...
- Antrag auf Anwendung von Artikel 10 Absatz 7 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 2090/2002
Identifizierung der Ausgangszollstelle oder der Bestimmungsstelle des Kontrollexemplars T5: ...
- Αίτηση εφαρμογής του άρθρου 10 παράγραφος 7 του κανονισμού (ΕΚ) αριθ. 2090/2002
Εξακρίβωση του τελωνείου εξόδου ή του τελωνείου προορισμού του T5: ...
- Request for application of Article 10(7) of Regulation (EC) No 2090/2002
Identity of the customs office of exit or customs office receiving the control copy T5: ...
- Demande d'application de l'article 10, paragraphe 7, du règlement (CE) n° 2090/2002
Identification du bureau de douane de sortie ou de destination du T5: ...
- Domanda di applicazione dell'articolo 10, paragrafo 7, del regolamento (CE) n. 2090/2002
Identificazione dell'ufficio doganale di uscita o di destinazione del T5: ...
- Verzoek om toepassing van artikel 10, lid 7, van Verordening (EG) nr. 2090/2002
Identificatie van het kantoor van uitgang of van bestemming van de T5: ...
- Pedido de aplicação do n.o 7 do artigo 10.o do Regulamento (CE) n.o 2090/2002
Identificação da estância aduaneira de saída ou de destino do T5: ...
- Asetuksen (EY) N:o 2090/2002 10 artiklan 7 kohdan soveltamista koskeva pyyntö
Poistumistullitoimipaikan tai toimipaikan, johon T5-valvontakappale toimitetaan, tunnistustiedot: ...
- Begäran om tillämpning av artikel 10.7 i förordning (EG) nr 2090/2002
Uppgift om utfartstullkontor eller bestämmelsetullkontor enligt kontrollexemplaret T5: ...
Article 11
Before 1 May each year, the Member States shall send the Commission a report evaluating the implementation and effectiveness of the checks carried out under this Regulation and the procedures applied to selecting the goods subject to physical checks.
The report to be submitted on 1 May 2003 shall cover export declarations accepted between 1 January and 31 December 2002.
Article 12
1. Regulation (EC) No 2221/95 is hereby repealed with effect from 1 January 2003.
2. References to the repealed Regulation shall be construed as references to this Regulation and are to be read in accordance with the correlation table in Annex II hereto.
Article 13
This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply from 1 January 2003 for export declarations accepted from that date.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 26 November 2002. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1522/2006
of 12 October 2006
fixing the maximum export refund for butter in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 581/2004
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 31(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 581/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds concerning certain types of butter (2) provides for a permanent tender.
(2)
Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 10 October 2006.
(3)
The Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For the permanent tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 581/2004, for the tendering period ending on 10 October 2006, the maximum amount of refund for the products referred to in Article 1(1) of that Regulation shall be as shown in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 13 October 2006.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 12 October 2006. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 882/2006
of 15 June 2006
concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat to certain third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005 (2).
(2)
Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,
(3)
On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not be fixed.
(4)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 9 to 15 June 2006 in response to the invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 16 June 2006.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 15 June 2006. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EURATOM, EC) No 1279/96 of 25 June 1996 concerning the provision of assistance to economic reform and recovery in the New Independent States and Mongolia
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 235 thereof,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 203 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
Whereas, pursuant to the European Council in Dublin and in Rome in 1990, the Community introduced a technical assistance programme in favour of economic reform and recovery in the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics;
Whereas Council Regulation (Euratom, EEC) No 2053/93 of 19 July 1993 concerning the provision of technical assistance to economic reform and recovery in the independent States of the former Soviet Union and Mongolia (2) laid down the conditions for the provision of this technical assistance and envisaged such an operation from 1 January 1993 to 31 December 1995;
Whereas such assistance will be fully effective only in the context of progress towards free and open democratic systems that respect human rights, and towards market-oriented economic systems;
Whereas such assistance has already generated significant impact on reform in the New Independent States and Mongolia and further assistance is still required to ensure that this reform becomes sustainable, it is necessary to continue this effort;
Whereas a financial reference amount, within the meaning of point 2 of the declaration by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission of 6 March 1995, is included in this Regulation for the entire duration of the programme, without thereby affecting the powers of the budgetary authority as they are defined by the Treaty;
Whereas the implementation of the said assistance should enable conditions favourable to private investment to be established;
Whereas it is appropriate to establish priorities for this assistance;
Whereas Community assistance will be all the more effective where it can be implemented on a decentralized basis within each partner country;
Whereas the development of inter-State economic links and trade flows conducive to economic reform and restructuring should be encouraged;
Whereas, in order properly to meet the most acute needs of the New Independent States and Mongolia at the present stage of their economic transformation, it is necessary to permit a limited amount of the financial allocation to be used for small-scale infrastructure projects in the context of cross-border cooperation;
Whereas the development of small and medium-sized enterprises is a priority in all the New Independent States and Mongolia, and it is therefore appropriate to provide equity funding for such companies;
Whereas the dialogue between the social partners should be encouraged;
Whereas the integration of environmental aspects into the programme would guarantee the long-term sustainability of the economic reforms;
Whereas the European Council at its meeting in Rome also stressed the importance of effective coordination by the Commission of the efforts made in the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics by the Community and its Member States acting individually;
Whereas it is appropriate that the Commission be assisted in the implementation of Community aid by a committee made up of Member States' representatives;
Whereas the requirements of economic reform and restructuring now in progress, and the effective management of this programme, require a multiannual approach;
Whereas assistance for economic reform and recovery may require specific types of expertise particularly available in the Phare partner countries and in certain other States;
Whereas procedures for tenders shall fully respect the provisions of the Financial Regulation of 21 December 1977 applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (3) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Financial Regulation`);
Whereas the widest possible participation under equal conditions in tenders for supplies, works and services shall be ensured;
Whereas the Commission shall ensure the necessary transparency and rigour when the selection criteria are applied;
Whereas effective competition amongst firms, organizations and institutions interested in participating in the initiatives financed by the programme shall be ensured;
Whereas, to this end, all relevant information on projects shall be provided, using, when appropriate, the most modern means of communication so as to ensure that any firm, organization or institution which may be interested can express its interest in being considered for an invitation to tender;
Whereas, in the selection process, the Commission shall try to diversify between firms, organizations and institutions;
Whereas the continued provision of assistance will contribute to the attainment of the Community's objectives, notably in the context of the partnership and cooperation agreements;
Whereas the Treaties have not provided, for the adoption of this Regulation, powers other than those of Article 235 of the EC Treaty and Article 203 of the EAEC Treaty,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. A programme to assist economic reform and recovery in the partner States listed in Annex I (hereinafter called 'the partner States`) shall be implemented by the Community from 1 January 1996 to 31 December 1999 in accordance with the criteria laid down in this Regulation.
2. Assistance shall be concentrated on sectors and, where appropriate, on geographical areas in which the partner States have already taken concrete measures to promote reform and/or for which they can present a time-schedule. Criteria for implementation of this Regulation are set out in Annex IV which, if appropriate, may be modified according to the procedure laid down in Article 8 (2) and (3).
Article 2
The financial reference amount for the implementation of this programme for the period 1996 to 1999 shall be ECU 2 224 million.
The annual appropriations shall be authorized by the budgetary authority within the limits of the financial perspective.
Article 3
1. The programme referred to in Article 1 shall mainly take the form of technical assistance in support of the economic reform in progress in the partner States for measures aimed at bringing about the transition to a market economy and reinforcing democracy.
It shall also, case by case and in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 8 (2) and (3), cover reasonable costs of supplies required in support of the implementation of the technical assistance. In particular cases, such as nuclear safety programmes, a significant supply element may be included.
The cost of the project in local currency shall be covered by the Community only to the extent strictly necessary.
2. On a case-by-case basis and subject to the procedure referred to in Article 8 (2), assistance may cover costs related to small-scale infrastructure projects in the context of border-crossing facilities referred to in paragraph 10.
3. The programme shall promote industrial cooperation and support the establishment of joint ventures through the funding of equity investment in small and medium-sized companies.
4. The allocation to activities mentioned under paragraphs 2 and 3 shall not exceed 10 % of the annual Technical Assistance for the Commonwealth of Independent States (Tacis) budget.
5. The assistance shall also cover costs related to the preparation, implementation, monitoring, audit and evaluation of the execution of these operations, as well as costs concerning information.
6. The assistance shall be concentrated in particular in the indicative areas referred to in Annex II taking into account the evolving needs of the beneficiaries. Particular emphasis shall be laid on nuclear safety issues.
7. When designing and implementing programmes, due regard shall be taken of:
- the promotion of equal opportunities for women in the recipient countries,
- environmental considerations.
8. Operations to be financed pursuant to this Regulation shall be selected taking account, inter alia, of the recipients' preferences and on the basis of an assessment of their effectiveness in achieving the objectives aimed at by the Community assistance.
9. The assistance shall be implemented on a decentralized basis as far as possible. To this end, the final recipients of Community assistance shall be closely involved in the preparation and execution of the projects, and once the national authorities of the partner States have agreed on sectoral policies and strategies, as well as the geographical concentration areas, the identification and preparation of the measures to be supported shall be carried out directly at regional level wherever possible.
Regular coordination shall be established between the Commission and the Member States, including on-the-spot coordination in their contracts with the partner States, both in the programme-definition and the programme-implementation stage.
10. Assistance may be provided to support measures aimed at promoting inter-State, inter-regional and cross-border cooperation. Particular attention will be paid to border-crossing facilities on borders between the New Independent States and the Union, and the New Independent States and central Europe, as well as to measures on the Finnish-Russian border comparable to those undertaken in this field between the Union and the Phare countries. Moreover, particular attention will be paid to cooperation on the level of large geographical regions between the New Independent States and the Union and the New Independent States and central Europe.
11. When an essential element for the continuation of cooperation through assistance is missing, in particular in cases of violation of democratic principles and human rights, the Council may, on a proposal from the Commission, acting by a qualified majority, decide upon appropriate measures concerning assistance to a partner State.
Article 4
1. Community assistance shall take the form of grants which shall be released in tranches as projects materialize.
2. Financing decisions and may contracts resulting therefore shall expressly provide for supervision by the Commission and the Court of Auditors to be carried out on the spot, if necessary.
Article 5
1. Indicative programmes covering four-year periods shall be established for each of the partner States in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 8. These programmes shall define the principal objectives of, and guidelines for, Community assistance in the indicative areas referred to in Article 3 (6) and could include financial estimates. The programmes may be amended in accordance with the same procedure during the period of their application. Before the establishment of indicative programmes, the Commission shall discuss with the Committee referred to in Article 8 the priorities identified with the partner States.
2. Action programmes based on the indicative programmes referred to in paragraph 1 shall be adopted on an annual basis in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 8 (2) and (3). These action programmes shall include a list of the main projects to be financed within the indicative areas referred to in Article 3 (6). The content of the programmes shall be determined in detail, so as to provide Member States with the relevant information to enable the Committee referred to in Article 8 to deliver its opinion.
Article 6
1. The Commission shall implement operations in accordance with the action programmes referred to in Article 5 (2) and in accordance with Title IX of the Financial Regulation as well as Article 7 of this Regulation.
2. Supply and works contracts shall be awarded by means of open invitations to tender except in the cases provided for in Article 116 of the Financial Regulation.
Open invitations to tender for the award of supply contracts in accordance with Article 114 of the Financial Regulation shall allow for a time limit to submit an offer of not less than 52 days from the date of dispatch of the notice to the Official Journal of the European Communities.
Service contracts shall, as a general rule, be awarded by restricted invitations to tender and by private treaty for operations up to ECU 200 000.
Participation in invitations to tender and contracts shall be open on equal terms to all natural and legal persons in the Member States and in the partner States.
Participation by natural and legal persons from the countries benefiting from Phare as well as in specific cases from Mediterranean countries with traditional economic, trade or geographical links may be authorized by the Commission on a case-by-case basis if the programmes or projects concerned require specific forms of assistance specifically available in such countries.
3. Taxes, duties and the purchase of immovable property shall not be funded by the Community.
4. In the case of cofinancing, the participation of third countries concerned in invitations to tender and contracts may be authorized by the Commission, but on a case-by-case basis. In these cases the participation of undertakings from third countries shall be acceptable only if reciprocity is granted.
Article 7
The principles governing the award of contracts by means of tendering, in particular restricted tendering, are contained in the Annex III, which may be modified by the Council, acting by qualified majority on a proposal by the Commission.
The Commission shall present to the Council a report on the implementation of these principles by 31 December 1997.
Article 8
1. The Commission shall be assisted by a committee composed of the representatives of the Member States and chaired by the representative of the Commission, to be known as the 'committee for assistance to the New Independent States and Mongolia` and hereinafter referred to as the 'committee`.
2. The representative of the Commission shall submit to the committee a draft of the measures to be taken. The committee shall deliver its opinion on the draft within a time limit which the chairman may lay down according to the urgency of the matter. The opinion shall be delivered by the majority laid down in Article 148 (2) of the EC Treaty in the case of decisions which the Council is required to adopt on a proposal from the Commission. The votes of the representatives of the Member States within the committee shall be weighted in the manner set out in that Article. The chairman shall not vote.
3. The Commission shall adopt the measures envisaged if they are in accordance with the opinion of the committee.
If the measures envisaged are not in accordance with the opinion of the committee, or if no opinion is delivered, the Commission shall without delay submit to the Council a proposal relating to the measures to be taken. The Council shall act by a qualified majority.
If, on the expiry of a period of three months from the date of referral to the Council, the Council has not acted, the proposed measures shall be adopted by the Commission.
4. The committee may examine any other question relating to the implementation of this Regulation which may be put to it by its chairman, including at the request of the representative of a Member State, and, in particular, any question relating to general implementation, the administration of the programme, cofinancing and the coordination referred to in Article 9.
5. The committee shall adopt its rules of procedure by qualified majority.
6. The Commission shall keep the committee regularly informed, supplying specific, detailed information on the contracts awarded for the implementation of the projects and programmes. Moreover, for projects expected to be put out for restricted invitations to tender in accordance with Article 6 (2), the Commission shall, before drawing up short-lists, provide in good time advance information which shall include selection and evaluation criteria so as to facilitate participation by economic operators.
7. The European Parliament shall be kept regularly informed of the implementation of the Tacis programmes.
Article 9
The Commission shall, together with the Member States, ensure the effective coordination of the assistance efforts undertaken in the partner States by the Community and individual Member States on the basis of the information supplied by the Member States.
In addition, coordination and cooperation with the international financial institutions and other donors shall be encouraged.
In the framework of the assistance provided pursuant to this Regulation, the Commission shall promote cofinancing with public or private bodies in the Member States.
Article 10
Each year the Commission shall present a progress report on the implementation of the assistance programme. This report shall include an evaluation of the assistance already provided. The report shall be addressed to the Member States, the European Parliament, the Council and the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.
Article 11
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Luxembourg, 25 June 1996. | [
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2853/95 of 11 December 1995 amending Regulation (EEC) No 1068/93 on detailed rules for determining and applying the agricultural conversion rates
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3813/92 of 28 December 1992 on value of the unit of account and the conversion rates to be applied for the purposes of the common agricultural policy (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 150/95 (2), and in particular Article 12 thereof,
Whereas Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1527/95 of 29 June 1995 regulating compensation for reductions in the agricultural conversion rates of certain national currencies (3) establishes a special rule for the agricultural conversion rates applicable to the amounts referred to in Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 3813/92; whereas, in order to implement that rule, it is necessary to specify the amounts of a structural or environmental nature which are concerned by the measure where they do not meet the criteria laid down in the first two indents of the first paragraph of Article 7; whereas those details may be added by means of a new provision in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1068/93 (4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1053/95 (5);
Whereas the amounts of a structural or environmental nature which are thus concerned are eligible for financing by the EAGGF, Guidance Section, or by the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance, those referred to in Council Regulation (EEC) No 1992/93 of 19 July 1993 transferring the financing of certain aids provided for in Regulations (EEC) No 1096/88 and (EEC) No 2328/91 from the EAGGF Guidance Section to the EAGGF Guarantee Section and amending Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91 as regards part-financing of the system to encourage the set-aside of arable land (6), or, in other cases, must contribute to an agricultural or environmental investment; whereas amounts in the latter category are fixed by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2078/92 of 30 June 1992 on agricultural methods compatible with the requirements of the protection of the environment and the maintenance of the countryside (7), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2772/95 (8), or by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2079/92 of 30 June 1992 instituting a Community aid scheme for early retirement from farming (9), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2773/95 (10) or by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2080/92 of 30 June 1992 instituting a Community aid scheme for forestry measures in agriculture (11), as amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the relevant Management Committees,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The following Article 18a is hereby added to Regulation (EEC) No 1068/93:
'Article 18a
For the purposes of applying Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 3813/92, amounts of a structural or environmental nature which are not:
- lump-sum aid per hectare or per sheep or cattle livestock unit, or
- a compensatory premium per ewe or goat,
shall be those eligible for financing by the EAGGF Guidance Section, or by the FIFG, those referred to in Council Regulation (EEC) No 1992/93 (*), or also those fixed by one of Council Regulations (EEC) No 2078/92 (**), (EEC) No 2079/92 (***) or (EEC) No 2080/92 (****).
(*) OJ No L 182, 24. 7. 1993, p. 12.
(**) OJ No L 215, 30. 7. 1992, p. 85.
(***) OJ No L 215, 30. 7. 1992, p. 91.
(****) OJ No L 215, 30. 7. 1992, p. 96.`
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 11 December 1995. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DIRECTIVE 93/49/EEC of 23 June 1993 setting out the schedule indicating the conditions to be met by ornamental plant propagating material and ornamental plants pursuant to Council Directive 91/682/EEC
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 91/682/EEC of 19 december 1991 on the marketing of ornamental plant propagating material and ornamental plants(1) , and in particular Article 4 thereof,
Whereas, in applying the provisions of this Directive, it is appropriate to take into account the production cycles of the various materials;
Whereas, the conditions laid down in this Directive must be regarded as the minimum standard acceptable at this stage taking into account the current production conditions in the Community; whereas they will progressively be developed and refined, in order ultimately to achieve high standards of improved quality;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee for propagating Materials and Ornamental Plants,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
1. This Directive establishes the schedules referred to in Article 4 of Directive 91/682/EEC including the requirements as to labelling referred to in the third paragraph of Article 11 of that Directive.
2. The schedule applies to the growing crop and ornamental propagating material (including rootstocks), and ornamental plants derived therefrom, of all the genera and species referred to in Annex to Directive 91/682/EEC, and to rootstocks of other genera and species referred to in Article 4 (2), irrespective of the propagation system applied, those items being hereinafter referred to as 'the material'.
3. The provisions of this Directive shall apply progressively, account being taken of the production cycles of the material referred to in paragraph 2.
Article 2
The material shall, where applicable, comply with the relevant plant health conditions laid down in Council Directive 77/93/EEC(2) .
Article 3
1. Without prejudice to the provisions of Article 2, the material must, at least on visual inspection, be substantially free from any harmful organisms and diseases impairing quality, or any signs or symptoms thereof, which reduce the usefulness of the propagating material or ornamental plants and in particular be free from those organisms and diseases listed in the Annex hereto in respect of the genus or species concerned.
2. Any material showing visible signs or symptoms of the harmful organisms or diseases referred to in paragraph 1 at the stage of the growing crop shall be properly treated immediately upon appearance or, where appropriate, shall be removed.
3. In the case of citrus material the following requirements shall also be met:
(i) it shall be derived from initial material which has been checked and found to show no symptoms of the relevant viruses, virus-like organisms or diseases listed in the Annex hereto;
(ii) it shall have been checked and found to be substantially free of such viruses, virus-like organisms or diseases since the beginning of the last cycle of vegetation; and
(iii) in the case of grafting, it shall have been grafted onto rootstocks other than those susceptible to viroids.
4. In the case of flower bulbs the following requirement shall also be met:
- the propagating material shall be derived directly from material which, at the stage of the growing crop, has been checked and found to be substantially free from any harmful organisms and diseases, signs or symptoms thereof referred to in paragraph 1 and in particular from those listed in the Annex hereto.
Article 4
1. The material shall have adequate identity and purity relative to the genus or species in question, or where appropriate, group of plants, and, where marketed or intended to be marketed with a reference to the variety pursuant to Article 9 (1) of Directive 91/682/EEC, shall also have identity and purity as to variety.
2. In the case of commonly known varieties referred to in the first indent of Article 9 (2) of Directive 91/682/EEC the official denomination of the variety shall be used by the supplier.
3. In the case of varieties which are already the subject of an application for plant breeders' rights or an official registration referred to in the first indent of Article 9 (2) of Directive 91/682/EEC, the breeders' reference or proposed name must be used until the authorization is granted.
4. In the case of varieties entered on lists kept by suppliers pursuant to the second indent of Article 9 (2) of Directive 91/682/EEC, the requirement referred to in paragraph 1 in respect of variety shall be based on the detailed descriptions given in the lists kept by suppliers.
Article 5
1. The material shall be substantially free from any defects likely to impair their quality as propagating or as planting material.
2. The vigour and dimensions of the material shall be satisfactory in respect of its usefulness as propagating material and ornamental plants. Furthermore, an appropriate balance shall be assured between the roots, stems and leaves.
3. In the case of seeds, in addition to the requirements in paragraph 1, the germination capacity shall be satisfactory.
Article 6
1. The supplier's document referred to in Article 11 of Directive 91/682/EEC shall be of suitable material which has not previously been used and shall be printed in at least one of the official languages of the Community. It shall contain the following information headings:
(i) indication 'EEC quality';
(ii) indication of EEC Member State code;
(iii) indication of responsible official body or its distinguishing code;
(iv) registration or accreditation number;
(v) name of supplier;
(vi) individual serial, week or batch number;
(vii) date of issue of the supplier's documents;
(viii) botanical name;
(ix) denomination of the variety, where appropriate. In the case of rootstock, denomination of the variety of its designation;
(x) denomination of the group of plants, where appropriate;
(xi) quantity;
(xii) in the case of imports from third countries pursuant to Article 16 (2) of Directive 91/682/EEC, the name of the country of harvesting.
2. In the case where the material is accompanied by a plant passport in accordance with Commission Directive 92/105/EEC(3) the plant passport may, if the supplier so wishes, constitute the supplier's document referred to in paragraph 1. Nonetheless, the indication 'EEC quality' and an indication as to the responsible official body under Directive 91/682/EEC must be given and a reference to the denomination of the variety, rootstock or group of plants. In the case of imports from third countries pursuant to Article 16 (2) of Directive 91/682/EEC, the name of the country of harvesting must also be given. This information may be on the same document as the plant passport but clearly separated.
Article 7
This Directive is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Council Regulation (EEC) No 315/68(4) .
Article 8
1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations or administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive not later than 31 December 1993. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.
When Member States adopt these provisions, these shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such reference at the time of their official publication. The procedure for such reference shall be adopted by Member States.
2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of domestic law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.
Article 9
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 June 1993. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE of 19 December 1977 concerning mutual assistance by the competent authorities of the Member States in the field of direct taxation (77/799/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 100 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (2),
Whereas practices of tax evasion and tax avoidance extending across the frontiers of Member States lead to budget losses and violations of the principle of fair taxation and are liable to bring about distortions of capital movements and of conditions of competition ; whereas they therefore affect the operation of the common market;
Whereas, for these reasons the Council adopted on 10 February 1975 a resolution on the measures to be taken by the Community in order to combat international tax evasion and avoidance (3);
Whereas the international nature of the problem means that national measures, whose effect does not extend beyond national frontiers, are insufficient ; whereas collaboration between administrations on the basis of bilateral agreements is also unable to counter new forms of tax evasion and avoidance, which are increasingly assuming a multinational character;
Whereas collaboration between tax administrations within the Community should therefore be strengthened in accordance with common principles and rules;
Whereas the Member States should, on request, exchange information concerning particular cases ; whereas the State so requested should make the necessary enquiries to obtain such information;
Whereas the Member States should exchange, even without any request, any information which appears relevant for the correct assessment of taxes on income and on capital, in particular where there appears to be an artificial transfer of profits between enterprises in different Member States or where such transactions are carried out between enterprises in two Member States through a third country in order to obtain tax advantages, or where tax has been or may be evaded or avoided for any reason whatever;
Whereas it is important that officials of the tax administration of one Member State be allowed to be present in the territory of another Member State if both the States concerned consider it desirable; (1)OJ No C 293, 13.12.1976, p. 34. (2)OJ No C 56, 7.3.1977, p. 66. (3)OJ No C 35, 14.2.1975, p. 1.
Whereas care must be taken to ensure that information provided in the course of such collaboration is not disclosed to unauthorized persons, so that the basic rights of citizens and enterprises are safeguarded ; whereas it is therefore necessary that the Member States receiving such information should not use it, without the authorization of the Member State supplying it, other than for the purposes of taxation or to facilitate legal proceedings for failure to observe the tax laws of the receiving State ; whereas it is also necessary that the receiving States afford the information the same degree of confidentiality which it enjoyed in the State which provided it, if the latter so requires;
Whereas a Member State which is called upon to carry out enquiries or to provide information shall have the right to refuse to do so where its laws or administrative practices prevent its tax administration from carrying out these enquiries or from collecting or using this information for its own purposes, or where the provision of such information would be contrary to public policy or would lead to the disclosure of a commercial, industrial or professional secret or of a commercial process, or where the Member State for which the information is intended is unable for practical or legal reasons to provide similar information;
Whereas collaboration between the Member States and the Commission is necessary for the permanent study of cooperation procedures and the pooling of experience in the fields considered, and in particular in the field of the artificial transfer of profits within groups of enterprises, with the aim of improving those procedures and of preparing appropriate Community rules,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
General provisions
1. In accordance with the provisions of this Directive the competent authorities of the Member States shall exchange any information that may enable them to effect a correct assessment of taxes on income and on capital.
2. There shall be regarded as taxes on income and on capital, irrespective of the manner in which they are levied, all taxes imposed on total income, on total capital, or on elements of income or of capital, including taxes on gains from the disposal of movable or immovable property, taxes on the amounts of wages or salaries paid by enterprises, as well as taxes on capital appreciation.
3. The taxes referred to in paragraph 2 are at present, in particular:
in Belgium:
Impôt des personnes physiques/Personenbelasting
Impôt des sociétés/Vennootschapsbelasting
Impôt des personnes morales/Rechtspersonenbelasting
Impôt des non-résidents/Belasting der niet-verblijfhouders
in Denmark:
Indkomstskaten til staten
Selsskabsskat
Den kommunale indkomstskat
Den amtskommunale indkomstskat
Folkepensionsbidragene
Sømandsskatten
Den særlige indkomstskat
Kirkeskatten
Formueskatten til staten
Bidrag til dagpengefonden
in Germany:
Einkommensteuer
Körperschaftsteuer
Vermögensteuer
Gewerbesteuer
Grundsteuer
in France:
Impôt sur le revenu
Impôt sur les sociétés
Taxe professionnelle
Taxe foncière sur les propriétés bâties
Taxe foncière sur les propriétés non bâties
in Ireland:
Income tax
Corporation tax
Capital gains tax
Wealth tax in Italy:
Imposta sul reddito delle persone fisiche
Imposta sul reddito delle persone giuridiche
Imposta locale sui redditi
in Luxembourg:
Impôt sur le revenu des personnes physiques
Impôt sur le revenu des collectivités
Impôt commercial communal
Impôt sur la fortune
Impôt foncier
in the Netherlands:
Inkomstenbelasting
Vennootschapsbelasting
Vermogensbelasting
in the United Kingdom:
Income tax
Corporation tax
Capital gains tax
Petroleum revenue tax
Development land tax
4. Paragraph 1 shall also apply to any identical or similar taxes imposed subsequently, whether in addition to or in place of the taxes listed in paragraph 3. The competent authorities of the Member States shall inform one another and the Commission of the date of entry into force of such taxes.
5. The expression "competent authority" means:
in Belgium:
De minister van financiën or an authorized representative
Le ministre des finances or an authorized representative
in Denmark:
Ministeren for skatter og afgifter or an authorized representative
in Germany:
Der Bundesminister der Finanzen or an authorized representative
in France:
Le ministre de l'économie or an authorized representative
in Ireland:
The Revenue Commissioners or their authorized representative
in Italy:
Il Ministro per le finanze or an authorized representative
in Luxembourg:
Le ministre des finances or an authorized representative
in the Netherlands:
De minister van financiën or an authorized representative
in the United Kingdom:
The Commissioners of Inland Revenue or their authorized representative
Article 2
Exchange on request
1. The competent authority of a Member State may request the competent authority of another Member State to forward the information referred to in Article 1 (1) in a particular case. The competent authority of the requested State need not comply with the request if it appears that the competent authority of the State making the request has not exhausted its own usual sources of information, which it could have utilized, according to the circumstances, to obtain the information requested without running the risk of endangering the attainment of the sought after result.
2. For the purpose of forwarding the information referred to in paragraph 1, the competent authority of the requested Member State shall arrange for the conduct of any enquiries necessary to obtain such information.
Article 3
Automatic exchange of information
For categories of cases which they shall determine under the consultation procedure laid down in Article 9, the competent authorities of the Member States shall regularly exchange the information referred to in Article 1 (1) without prior request.
Article 4
Spontaneous exchange of information
1. The competent authority of a Member State shall without prior request forward the information referred to in Article 1 (1), of which it has knowledge, to the competent authority of any other Member State concerned, in the following circumstances: (a) the competent authority of the one Member State has grounds for supposing that there may be a loss of tax in the other Member State;
(b) a person liable to tax obtains a reduction in or an exemption from tax in the one Member State which would give rise to an increase in tax or to liability to tax in the other Member State;
(c) business dealings between a person liable to tax in a Member State and a person liable to tax in another Member State are conducted through one or more countries in such a way that a saving in tax may result in one or the other Member State or in both;
(d) the competent authority of a Member State has grounds for supposing that a saving of tax may result from artificial transfers of profits within groups of enterprises;
(e) information forwarded to the one Member State by the competent authority of the other Member State has enabled information to be obtained which may be relevant in assessing liability to tax in the latter Member State.
2. The competent authorities of the Member States may, under the consultation procedure laid down in Article 9, extend the exchange of information provided for in paragraph 1 to cases other than those specified therein.
3. The competent authorities of the Member States may forward to each other in any other case, without prior request, the information referred to in Article 1 (1) of which they have knowledge.
Article 5
Time limit for forwarding information
The competent authority of a Member State which, under the preceding Articles, is called upon to furnish information, shall forward it as swiftly as possible. If it encounters obstacles in furnishing the information or if it refuses to furnish the information, it shall forthwith inform the requesting authority to this effect, indicating the nature of the obstacles or the reasons for its refusal.
Article 6
Collaboration by officials of the State concerned
For the purpose of applying the preceding provisions, the competent authority of the Member State providing the information and the competent authority of the Member State for which the information is intended may agree, under the consultation procedure laid down in Article 9, to authorize the presence in the first Member State of officials of the tax administration of the other Member State. The details for applying this provision shall be determined under the same procedure.
Article 7
Provisions relating to secrecy
1. All information made known to a Member State under this Directive shall be kept secret in that State in the same manner as information received under its domestic legislation.
In any case, such information: - may be made available only to the persons directly involved in the assessment of the tax or in the administrative control of this assessment,
- may in addition be made known only in connection with judicial proceedings or administrative proceedings involving sanctions undertaken with a view to, or relating to, the making or reviewing the tax assessment and only to persons who are directly involved in such proceedings ; such information may, however, be disclosed during public hearings or in judgements if the competent authority of the Member State supplying the information raises no objection,
- shall in no circumstances be used other than for taxation purposes or in connection with judicial proceedings or administrative proceedings involving sanctions undertaken with a view to, or in relation to, the making or reviewing the tax assessment.
2. Paragraph 1 shall not oblige a Member State whose legislation or administrative practice lays down, for domestic purposes, narrower limits than those contained in the provisions of that paragraph, to provide information if the State concerned does not undertake to respect those narrower limits.
3. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, the competent authorities of the Member State providing the information may permit it to be used for other purposes in the requesting State, if, under the legislation of the informing State, the information could, in similar circumstances, be used in the informing State for similar purposes.
4. Where a competent authority of a Member State considers that information which it has received from the competent authority of another Member State is likely to be useful to the competent authority of a third Member State, it may transmit it to the latter competent authority with the agreement of the competent authority which supplied the information.
Article 8
Limits to exchange of information
1. This Directive shall impose no obligation to have enquiries carried out or to provide information if the Member State, which should furnish the information, would be prevented by its laws or administrative practices from carrying out these enquiries or from collecting or using this information for its own purposes.
2. The provision of information may be refused where it would lead to the disclosure of a commercial, industrial or professional secret or of a commercial process, or of information whose disclosure would be contrary to public policy.
3. The competent authority of a Member State may refuse to provide information where the State concerned is unable, for practical or legal reasons, to provide similar information.
Article 9
Consultations
1. For the purposes of the implementation of this Directive, consultations shall be held, if necessary in a Committee, between: - the competent authorities of the Member States concerned at the request of either, in respect of bilateral questions,
- the competent authorities of all the Member States and the Commission, at the request of one of those authorities or the Commission, in so far as the matters involved are not solely of bilateral interest.
2. The competent authorities of the Member States may communicate directly with each other. The competent authorities of the Member States may by mutual agreement permit authorities designated by them to communicate directly with each other in specified cases or in certain categories of cases.
3. Where the competent authorities make arrangements on bilateral matters covered by this Directive other than as regards individual cases, they shall as soon as possible inform the Commission thereof. The Commission shall in turn notify the competent authorities of the other Member States.
Article 10
Pooling of experience
The Member States shall, together with the Commission, constantly monitor the cooperation procedure provided for in this Directive and shall pool their experience, especially in the field of transfer pricing within groups of enterprises, with a view to improving such cooperation and, where appropriate, drawing up a body of rules in the fields concerned.
Article 11
Applicability of wider-ranging provisions of assistance
The foregoing provisions shall not impede the fulfilment of any wider obligations to exchange information which might flow from other legal acts.
Article 12
Final provisions
1. Member States shall bring into force the necessary laws, regulations and administrative provisions in order to comply with this Directive not later than 1 January 1979 and shall forthwith communicate them to the Commission.
2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the texts of any important provisions of national law which they subsequently adopt in the field covered by this Directive.
Article 13
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 19 December 1977. | [
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2040/86
of 30 June 1986
laying down detailed rules for the application of the co-responsibility levy in the cereals sector
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2727/75 of 29 October 1975 on the common organization of the market in cereals (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1579/86 (2), and in particular Article 4 (7) thereof,
Whereas Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 2727/75 provides for the introduction of a co-responsibility levy system applicable to cereals produced in the Community; whereas detailed rules of application should be adopted to implement that system;
Whereas cereals that undergo first-stage processing or are taken over by the intervention agency or exported as grain are to be subject to the co-responsibility levy; whereas a definition of first-stage processing should be given;
Whereas, in the case of first-stage processing, the persons liable for that levy and the intervals at which payments are to be transferred by the latter should be identified; whereas, in the other cases where the levy is payable, the deadline for collection should be fixed;
Whereas, in the case of resale of intervention stocks, provision must be made to ensure that the levy is not collected a second time;
Whereas only cereals produced in the Community are to be subject to the co-responsibility levy; whereas provision should therefore be made to exempt imported cereals which are re-exported or processed, subject to the presentation of certain evidence;
Whereas one of the objectives of the co-responsibility levy system is to make producers more aware of the realities of the market; whereas, to that end, the burden of the levy should be passed on to them; whereas an invoicing system which takes account of that requirement should accordingly be introduced; whereas the principle whereby the levy is to be passed on is to apply notwithstanding any contractual clause to the contrary;
Whereas the processors must keep accounts at the disposal of the national authorities in order to enable the latter to carry out effective controls;
Whereas, to ensure sound application of the levy system, further national measures appear to be necessary; whereas the Commission must be in a position to assess such measures at the earliest opportunity;
Whereas the Management Committee for Cereals has not given an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. The co-responsibility levy referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 2727/75 shall be payable on cereals where they:
- enter into first-stage processing, or
- are taken over by intervention agencies, or
- are exported as grain to Portugal during the first stage or to third countries; 'export' shall mean the completion of customs export formalities.
When determining the quantities subject to the levy by virtue of first-stage processing, account shall be taken of the quantities of cereals entering the undertaking with a view to such processing.
2. For the purposes of this Regulation, 'first-stage processing' shall mean any treatment of grain such that the product obtained may no longer be classified under Chapter 10 of the Common Customs Tariff. Processing of cereals delivered or placed at the disposal of an undertaking by a producer with a view to subsequent utilization on his holding shall be considered first-stage processing.
First-stage processing operations carried out by a producer on his agricultural holding shall be exempt from the co-responsibility levy where the product obtained is used on that holding for animal feed.
Article 2
1. The levy shall be paid by operators who undertake processing within the meaning of Article 1 (2). The levy shall be paid to the competent body appointed for the purpose by each Member State, in respect of processing operations carried out in one month. Payment must be made by the end of the month following the said period at the latest. On each payment, a declaration in writing in accordance with the model set out in the Annex shall be forwarded to the competent authority.
2. In the case of intervention, the co-responsibility levy shall be collected at the time of payment of the buying-in price by the intervention agency.
3. In the case of export as grain, the co-responsibility levy shall be collected by the competent authorities by the end of the month following that in which export formalities are completed at the latest.
4. Before the 15th of each month, Member States shall notify the Commission of sums collected during the previous month, indicating the corresponding quantities of cereals subject to the co-responsibility levy.
Article 3
The co-responsibility levy may be collected once only in respect of one and the same quantity of cereals.
In the case of resale of intervention stocks, the intervention agency shall issue a certificate of eligibility for exemption from the co-responsibility levy for given quantities. Extracts of that certificate may be issued.
Article 4
Cereals imported from third countries or from Portugal and processed or re-exported to third countries or to Portugal shall be exempt from the co-responsibility levy. That exemption shall be depending upon submission of evidence that the product processed or re-exported is the same as the product previously imported.
Article 5
1. Operators who carry out the operations referred to in Article 1 (1) shall pass on the co-responsibility levy to their suppliers. The levy shall also be passed on at each transaction prior thereto, as far as supply by the producer.
Supporting documents for each of the transactions referred to in the first subparagraph shall indicate separately the amount of the levy deducted.
2. The levy shall also be passed on, as provided for in paragraph 1, in contracts concluded or executed prior to the marketing year during which the co-responsibility levy is collected.
Article 6
The operators referred to in Article 2 (1) shall keep accounts at the disposal of the competent national authority, indicating in particular:
(a) the names and addresses of the producers or operators who delivered cereal to them as grain;
(b) the quantities involved in the abovementioned deliveries;
(c) the amount of the co-responsibility levy deducted;
(d) the quantities of cereals processed, subject to and exempt from the levy.
Article 7
1. Member States shall take any additional measures required to ensure that the co-responsibility levy is collected in accordance with this Regulation, and in particular measures concerning controls. To that end Member States may draw up a list giving the names of the operators referred to in Article 2 (1).
2. Member States shall notify the Commission before 1 October 1986 of the measures referred to in paragraph 1.
Article 8
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply with effect from 1 July 1986.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 June 1986. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2448/96 of 18 December 1996 adapting the Annexes to Council Regulation (EC) No 1256/96 applying a multiannual scheme of generalized tariff preferences from 1 July 1996 to 30 June 1999 in respect of certain agricultural products originating in developing countries
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1256/96 of 20 June 1996 applying a multiannual scheme of generalized tariff preferences from 1 July 1996 to 30 June 1999 in respect of certain agricultural products originating in developing countries (1), and in particular Articles 15 (3) and 18 thereof,
Whereas Article 15 (3) of Regulation (EC) No 1256/96 lays down the procedure for enacting changes to Annexes I, II and VI thereof made necessary by amendments to the combined nomenclature, whereas the combined nomenclature for 1997 annexed to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1734/96 (2) embodies new elements which affect the lists appearing in Annexes I and VI of Regulation (EC) No 1256/96, and it is therefore appropriate to adapt those Annexes accordingly;
Whereas the provisions of this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee of Generalized Preferences,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Annexes I and VI of Regulation (EC) No 1256/96 shall be adapted as indicated in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 1997.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 December 1996. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1376/84
of 17 May 1984
re-establishing the levying of customs duties on certain artificial flowers, foliage or fruit and parts thereof, falling within heading No 67.02 and originating in Hong Kong, to which the preferential tariff arrangements set out in Council Regulation (EEC) No 3569/83 apply
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3569/83 of 16 December 1983 applying generalized tariff preferences for 1984 in respect of certain industrial products originating in developing countries (1), and in particular Article 13 thereof,
Whereas, pursuant to Article 1 of that Regulation, duties on the products listed in Annex B originating in each of the countries or territories listed in Annex C shall be totally suspended and the products as such shall, as a general rule, be subject to statistical surveillance every three months on the reference base referred to in Article 12; whereas, as provided for in Article 12, where the increase of preferential imports of these products, originating in one or more beneficiary countries, causes, or threatens to cause, economic difficulties in the Community or in a region of the Community, the levying of customs duties may be re-established once the Commission has had an appropriate exchange of information with the Member States; whereas for this purpose the reference base to be considered shall be, as a general rule, 150 % of the highest maximum amount valid for 1980;
Whereas, in the case of certain artificial flowers, foliage or fruit and parts thereof falling within heading No 67.02, the reference base is fixed at 3 526 200 ECU; whereas, on 16 May 1984, imports of these products into the Community, originating in Hong Kong, reached the reference base in question after being charged thereagainst; whereas the exchange of information organized by the Commission has demonstrated that continuance of the preference threatens to cause economic difficulties in a region of the Community; whereas, therefore, customs duties in respect of the products in question must be re-established against Hong Kong,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
As from 21 May 1984, the levying of customs duties, suspended pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3569/83, shall be re-established on imports into the Community of the following products originating in Hong Kong:
// // // CCT
heading
No
// Description
// // // 67.02
(NIMEXE codes
67.02-11, 19, 20) // Artificial flowers, foliage or fruit and parts thereof; articles made of artificial flowers, foliage or fruit:
A. Artificial flowers, foliage or fruit and parts thereof:
I. Parts
II. Other
B. Articles made of artificial flowers, foliage or fruit // // Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 17 May 1984. | [
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 29 July 1996 establishing the list of milk-based products in respect of which Member States are authorized to grant individual or general derogations pursuant to Article 8 (2) of Directive 92/46/EEC and the nature of the derogations applicable to the manufacture of such products (Text with EEA relevance) (96/536/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 92/46/EEC of 16 June 1992 laying down the health rules for the production and placing on the market of raw milk, heat-treated milk and milk-based products (1), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden, and in particular Article 8 (2) thereof,
Whereas Member States have transmitted to the Commission the list of products in respect of which they are requesting application of the first subparagraph of Article 8 (2) of the above Directive, and the nature of the derogations requested;
Whereas for the purposes of this Decision it is necessary to define the term milk-based products with traditional characteristics as used in Article 8 (2) of Directive 92/46/EEC;
Whereas certain requirements of that Directive are likely to affect the production of such milk-based products with traditional characteristics;
Whereas, given the diverse nature of the derogations provided for in Article 8 (2) of that Directive, it is necessary to set general or specific conditions applicable to each product with due regard to public health risks;
Whereas the derogations requested by Member States are from rules relating to raw milk, materials coming into contact with products, ripening cellars and finished products;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
For the purposes of Article 8 (2) of Directive 92/46/EEC and of this Decision, milk-based products with traditional characteristics shall mean milk-based products which are:
- recognized historically,
or
- manufactured according to technical references or production methods codified or registered in the Member State in which the product is traditionally manufactured,
or
- protected by a national, regional or local law in the Member State in which the product is traditionally manufactured.
Article 2
Member States are hereby authorized to grant to establishments manufacturing certain milk-based products with traditional characteristics individual or general derogations to the requirements set out in Annex B, Chapter I, point 6 and Annex C, Chapter III, point 2 to Directive 92/46/EEC as regards the nature of the materials composing the instruments and equipment specific to the preparation, packaging and wrapping of these products.
Such instruments and equipment must, however, be constantly maintained in a satisfactory state of cleanness and be regularly cleaned and disinfected.
The list of products covered by this Article is set out in the Annex to this Decision.
Article 3
Member States are hereby authorized to grant to establishments manufacturing cheeses with traditional characteristics, as defined in Article 1, individual or general derogations to the requirements set out in Annex B, Chapter I, point 2 (a), (b), (c) and (d) to Directive 92/46/EEC as regards ripening cellars or rooms for such products.
Such ripening cellars or rooms may comprise natural geological walls and walls, floors, ceilings and doors that are not smooth, impermeable, durable, covered with a light-coloured coating or of non-corrodible materials. The frequency and nature of cleaning and disinfecting measures in such cellars and rooms will be adjusted to this type of activity in order to take account of their specific ambient flora.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 29 July 1996. | [
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 2 April 1982
on the implementation of the reform of agricultural structures in the United Kingdom pursuant to Title II of Council Directive 75/268/EEC
(Only the English text is authentic)
(82/257/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 72/159/EEC of 17 April 1972 on the modernization of farms (1), as last amended by Directive 81/528/EEC (2), and in particular Article 18 (3) thereof,
Having regard to Council Directive 75/268/EEC of 28 April 1975 on mountain and hill farming and farming in certain less-favoured areas (3), as last amended by Directive 80/666/EEC (4), and in particular Article 13 thereof,
Whereas on 2 October 1981 the Government of the United Kingdom notified, pursuant to Article 17 (4) of Directive 72/159/EEC and Article 13 of Directive 75/268/EEC, Statutory Instrument 1979 No 941: The Hill Livestock (Compensatory Allowances) (Amendment) Regulation 1979;
Whereas under Article 18 (3) of Directive 72/159/EEC the Commission has to decide whether, having regard to the Regulation notified, the existing provisions in the United Kingdom for the implementation of Directive 75/268/EEC continue to satisfy the conditions for financial contribution by the Community to common measure within the meaning of Article 13 of Directive 75/268/EEC;
Whereas the increase in the compensatory allowance for one year under Statutory Instrument 1979 No 941 has been modified to a permanent increase by Statutory Instrument 1979 No 1748 (5);
Whereas the abovementioned provisions satisfy the conditions and objectives of Directive 75/268/EEC;
Whereas the EAGGF Committee has been consulted on the financial aspects;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Agricultural Structure,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Statutory Instrument 1979 No 941: The Hill Livestock (Compensatory Allowances) (Amendment) Regulations 1979, notified on 2 October 1981 by the United Kingdom, satisfies the conditions for financial contribution by the Community to common measure within the meaning of Article 13 of Directive 75/268/EEC.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the United Kingdom.
Done at Brussels, 2 April 1982. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 4 October 2006
relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement
(Case COMP/C2/38.681 - The Cannes Extension Agreement)
(notified under document number C(2006) 4350)
(Only the English, French and German texts are authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2007/735/EC)
On 4 October 2006 the Commission adopted a Decision relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. In accordance with the provisions of Article 30 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (1), the Commission herewith publishes the names of the parties and the main content of the Decision, having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business interests. A non-confidential version of the full text of the Decision can be found in the authentic languages of the case, which are in this case the same as the Commission’s working languages, at Directorate-General for Competition’s website at the following address: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/antitrust/cases/index/by_nr_77.html#i38_681
(1)
This Decision is addressed to Elliniki Etairia Prostasias tis Pneymatikis Idioktisias A.E. (AEPI), Gesellschaft zur Wahrnehmung mechanisch-musikalischer Urheberrechte m.b.H. (AustroMechana), BMG Music Publishing International Ltd, Gesellschaft für musikalische Aufführungs- und mechanische Vervielfältigungsrechte (GEMA), Mechanical-Copyright Protection Society Limited (MCPS), Mechanical-Copyright Protection Society Ireland (MCPSI), Nordic Copyright Bureau (NCB), Société Belge des Auteurs Compositeurs et Editeurs (SABAM), Société pour l’Administration du Droit de Reproduction Mécanique des Auteurs, Compositeurs et Editeurs (SDRM), Sociedad General Autores y Editores (SGAE), Società Italiana degli Autori ed Editori (SIAE), Sony/ATV Music Publishing Europe, Sociedade Portuguesa de Autores (SPA), Stichting Stemra (STEMRA), Schweizerische Gesellschaft für die Rechte der Urheber musikalischer Werke (SUISA), Universal Music Publishing Group and Warner Chappell Music Ltd, hereafter referred to as ‘the parties to the Cannes Extension Agreement’.
(2)
The subject matter of the procedure was the Cannes Extension Agreement, an agreement among the 18 companies (13 of which are copyright collecting societies managing mechanical copyright in music and five major music publishers, members of these collecting societies) concerning the relations between them in the management of mechanical copyright of music licensed to record companies for the reproduction of sound recordings on physical carriers. In its preliminary assessment, the Commission expressed concerns under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and 53 of the EEA Agreement about two clauses of the Cannes Extension Agreement. The first was a clause that provided that before granting a rebate to a record company in the context of a Central Licensing Agreement, a collecting society needed the written consent of ‘the relevant member’. The second was a clause that provided that collecting societies may never enter either the music publishing or the record production markets. The Commission’s competition concerns were that the first clause could have the effect of making it very difficult or even impossible for collecting societies to grant rebates to record companies and that the second clause could prevent potential competition by collecting societies in the music publishing and record production markets.
(3)
The Commission considers that the commitments offered by the parties to the Cannes Extension Agreement are sufficient to address the identified competition concerns. In particular the parties have reformulated the clause referring to rebates to the effect that a collecting society may decide to offer a rebate paid out of the administrative expenses that it retains from royalties due to its members by a simple decision of its competent body with no need to obtain the written consent of the ‘relevant member’. The parties have deleted the clause preventing collecting societies from entering the music publishing and the record production markets and have undertaken not to enter into a similar agreement in the future.
(4)
The decision finds, in view of the commitments made binding on the parties to the Cannes Extension Agreement, that there are no longer grounds for action by the Commission.
(5)
The Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions issued a favourable opinion on 18 September 2006. | [
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 288/2009
of 7 April 2009
laying down detailed rules for applying Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards Community aid for supplying fruit and vegetables, processed fruit and vegetables and banana products to children in educational establishments, in the framework of a School Fruit Scheme
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1), and in particular Article 103h(f) in conjunction with Article 4 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Council Regulation (EC) No 13/2009 (2) has amended Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, in order to provide for Community aid under a School Fruit Scheme to supply fruit and vegetables, processed fruit and vegetables and banana products to children in regular attendance at one of the educational establishments administered or recognised by the competent authorities of a Member State.
(2)
In order to ensure the orderly implementation of their School Fruit Scheme, Member States wishing to participate in the Scheme, at national or regional level, should draw up a prior strategy for its implementation. So as to ensure the added value of School Fruit Schemes set up under this Regulation, Member States should explain in their strategy how they will guarantee the added value of their scheme, especially where regular school meals are consumed at the same time as products financed under their School Fruit Scheme. Where Member States choose to implement more than one Scheme, they should draw up a strategy for each such Scheme.
(3)
A Member State's strategy should contain the key elements referred to in Article 103ga(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, namely the budget of its scheme, including the Community and national contribution, its duration, target group, eligible products and the involvement of relevant stakeholders, such as educational and health authorities, the private sector or the children's parents. A Member State's strategy should also describe the accompanying measures that should be adopted so as to ensure the Scheme's effectiveness.
(4)
Pursuant to Article 152(1) of the Treaty, a high level of health should be ensured in the definition and implementation of all Community policies. So as to ensure that the products eligible for aid offer a high level of health protection to children and to promote healthy eating habits, the Member States should exclude products with added sugar, fat, salt or sweeteners from their strategy, except where, in duly justified cases, Member States provide in their strategy that such products may be eligible under their scheme. In all cases, a Member State's list of eligible products should be endorsed by the competent national health authority.
(5)
School Fruit Schemes require accompanying measures in order to be effective. Accompanying measures should not be limited to certain geographical areas or educational establishments, excluding certain children from their scope. Therefore, Member States should aim to give most children of their scheme's target group access to accompanying measures.
(6)
In the interest of sound administration and budget management, Member States implementing a School Fruit Scheme should apply for Community aid on an annual basis.
(7)
For the sake of transparency, an indicative allocation of Community aid per Member State, calculated on the basis of the allocation key referred to in Article 103ga(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, should be provided for. In order to take demographic developments into account, the Commission should assess at least every three years whether that allocation is still up to date.
(8)
In order to maximise the full potential of available funds, Community aid that was indicatively attributed to Member States which did not notify their strategy to the Commission in time should be reallocated between the participating Member States that notified the Commission their willingness to use more than their initial allocation of Community aid.
(9)
Not only costs incurred for purchasing fruit and vegetables, processed fruits and vegetables and banana products, but also some related costs that are directly linked to the implementation of a School Fruit Scheme, should be eligible for Community aid, if provided for in a Member State's strategy. However, in order to preserve the effectiveness of the Scheme, only a small percentage of aid should be allocated to these related costs. For financial management and control purposes, these costs should represent fixed amounts, calculated on a pro rata basis.
(10)
In the interest of sound administration, budget management and supervision, the conditions for granting aid, the approval of aid applicants and the conditions for a valid aid application should be specified. As regards the payment of the aid, the requirements to be met by applicants should be specified and rules on the lodging of applications, on the checks and sanctions to be applied by the competent authorities and on the payment procedure should be laid down.
(11)
To protect the Community's financial interests, adequate control measures should be adopted to combat irregularities and fraud. These control measures should involve full administrative checking supplemented by on-the-spot checks. The scope, content, timing and reporting of such control measures should be specified so as to ensure an equitable and uniform approach between Member States, taking account of their different implementation of the scheme.
(12)
Amounts unduly paid should be recovered and sanctions should be determined in order to deter applicants from fraudulent behaviour and serious negligence.
(13)
In order to assess the effectiveness of the School Fruit Scheme, and to allow peer review and the exchange of best practices, Member States should monitor and evaluate the implementation of their School Fruit Scheme on a regular basis and send their results and findings to the Commission. Where fruit and vegetables, processed fruit and vegetables and banana products are not distributed free of charge to the target group of their scheme, Member States should assess the impact of a parental contribution on the effectiveness of their Scheme.
(14)
Experience has shown that the beneficiaries of projects co-financed with Community aid are not always sufficiently aware of the role played by the Community in the relevant project. The role of the Community in the School Fruit Scheme should therefore be clearly indicated in each participating educational establishment.
(15)
In order to allow the Member States sufficient time to set up their School Fruit Scheme, or to align their existing scheme with the new provisions, Member States may elaborate a strategy which contains only the main key element for the initial period from 1 August 2009 to 31 July 2010. They should also be able to postpone the adoption of accompanying measures during that transitional period.
(16)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Scope and use of terms
1. This Regulation lays down rules for implementing for Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards Community aid for supplying fruit and vegetables, processed fruit and vegetables and banana products and for certain related costs to children in educational establishments, in the framework of a School Fruit Scheme.
2. Terms used in this Regulation shall have the same meaning as when used in Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, unless this Regulation provides otherwise.
Article 2
Target group
The aid referred to in Article 103ga of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 shall be targeted at children in regular attendance at any of the educational establishments administered or recognised by the competent authorities of a Member State.
Article 3
Strategy
1. Member States wishing to set up a School Fruit Scheme shall draw up the strategy referred to in Article 103ga(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007.
2. A Member State's strategy shall not cover products that are listed in Annex I to this Regulation. However, in duly justified cases, such as where a Member State wants to ensure a broad assortment of products under its scheme or wants to make its scheme more attractive, a strategy may provide that such products may become eligible, if only limited amounts of the substances referred to in that Annex are added.
Member States shall ensure that their competent health authorities endorse the list of products that shall be eligible under their School Fruit Scheme.
3. Member States shall explain in their strategy how they will guarantee the added value of their School Fruit Scheme, especially where their strategy allows the consumption of regular school meals at the same time as products financed under their School Fruit Scheme. They shall describe their control measures in their strategy.
4. Member States shall describe in their strategy which accompanying measures they will adopt to ensure the successful implementation of their scheme. Those measures may focus on improving the target group's knowledge on the fruit and vegetable sector or healthy eating habits, such as the development of websites or the organisation of farm visits or gardening sessions.
5. Member States may choose the appropriate geographical and administrative level at which they wish to implement a ‘School Fruit Scheme’. If they choose to implement more than one scheme, they shall provide a strategy for each scheme. A Member State which implements multiple schemes may establish a coordination framework.
Article 4
Aid for the supply of fruit and vegetables, processed fruit and vegetables and banana products to children
1. Member States setting up a School Fruit Scheme may apply for the aid referred to in Article 103ga of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 for a period running from 1 August to 31 July of one or more years, by notifying their strategy to the Commission by 31 January of the year in which that period starts.
2. Member States that already have a school fruit scheme, or other school distribution schemes that include fruit, prior to the entry into force of this Regulation shall qualify for Community aid subject to the conditions set out in Article 103ga(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007. They shall notify their strategy to the Commission by the deadline provided for in paragraph 1.
3. Annex II to this Regulation provides for an indicative allocation of Community aid per Member State, calculated on the basis of the allocation key referred to in Article 103ga(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007. The Commission shall assess at least every three years whether Annex II is still consistent with that allocation key.
4. The allocations of Community aid reserved for Member States that did not notify the Commission by 31 January of the year in which the period referred to in paragraph 1 starts, or that requested only part of their initial allocation, shall be reallocated among the participating Member States which notified the Commission, by the deadline referred to in paragraph 1, of their willingness to use more than their initial allocation of Community aid.
The reallocation of Community aid referred to in the first subparagraph shall be implemented in proportion to the initial allocation of the Member State, calculated on the basis of the allocation key referred to in Article 103ga(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007.
The Commission shall decide on the definitive allocation of Community aid to the Member States by 31 March of the year in which the period referred to in paragraph 1 starts.
Article 5
Eligible costs
1. The following costs are eligible for the Community aid referred to in Article 103ga of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007:
(a)
costs for fruits and vegetables, processed fruit and vegetables and banana products covered by the School Fruit Scheme referred to in Article 3(1) and delivered to the educational establishment.
(b)
related costs, which are costs that are directly linked to the implementation of a School Fruit Scheme and shall only include:
(i)
costs for purchasing, renting, hiring and leasing of equipment, if provided for in the strategy;
(ii)
costs for monitoring and evaluation referred to in Article 12, which shall be directly linked to the School Fruit Scheme;
(iii)
costs for communication, which shall include costs for the poster referred to in Article 14(1).
Where costs for transport and distribution of the products covered by a School Fruit Scheme are invoiced separately, such costs shall not exceed 3 % of the costs for the products.
Where products are supplied free of charge to educational establishments, Member States may accept invoices for transport and distribution, subject to a ceiling set in the strategy of the Member State.
The costs for communication referred to in point (b)(iii) of the first subparagraph may not be financed under other Community aid schemes.
2. The total amount for costs under points (b)(i) and (iii) of the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 shall represent a fixed amount and be subject to a ceiling not exceeding 5 % of the Member State's envelope of Community aid, following the definitive allocation of Community aid referred to in Article 4(4).
For the year in which the evaluation exercise pursuant to Article 12 takes place, the total amount for costs under points (b)(i) and (ii) of the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 shall not exceed 10 % of the Member State's envelope of Community aid for the year in which the evaluation takes place, following the definitive allocation of Community aid referred to in Article 4(4).
Article 6
General conditions for granting the aid
1. Member States shall ensure that the aid provided for under their strategy shall be distributed to the aid applicants where these applicants have made a valid aid application to their competent authorities. An aid application shall only be valid if lodged by an applicant which has been approved for that purpose by the competent authorities of the Member State in which the educational establishment to which the products are supplied is located.
2. Member State may select aid applicants from among the following bodies:
(a)
educational establishments;
(b)
educational authorities in respect of the products distributed to the children within their area;
(c)
suppliers and/or distributors of the products;
(d)
organisations acting on behalf of one or more educational establishments or educational authorities and specifically established for that purpose;
(e)
any other public or private body to manage:
(i)
the distribution of fruit and vegetables, processed fruit and vegetables and banana products to educational establishments in the framework of a School Fruit Scheme set up under, or aligned with, this Regulation;
(ii)
the evaluation and/or communication.
Article 7
General conditions for approval of aid applicants
Approval shall be conditional on the following written commitments by the applicant to the competent authority:
(a)
to use products financed under a School Fruit Scheme set up under, or aligned with, this Regulation for consumption by the children of its educational establishment or of the establishments in respect of which it will apply for aid;
(b)
to repay any aid unduly paid for the quantities concerned, if it has been found that these products have not been distributed to the children referred to in Article 2 or have been paid for products that are not eligible under this Regulation;
(c)
in case of fraud or serious negligence, to pay an amount equal to the difference between the amount initially paid and the amount to which the applicant is entitled;
(d)
to make supporting documents available to the competent authorities at their request;
(e)
to submit to any check decided on by the competent authority of the Member State, in particular the scrutiny of records and physical inspection.
Member States may make approval conditional on additional written commitments by the applicant to the competent authority.
Article 8
Specific conditions for the approval of certain applicants
If the aid is applied for by an applicant referred to in points (c) to (e) of Article 6(2), the applicant shall make a written commitment, in addition to those referred to in Article 7, to keep records of the names and addresses of the educational establishments or, where appropriate, educational authorities and the products and quantities sold or supplied to these establishments or authorities.
Article 9
Suspension and withdrawal of approval
If it is found that an applicant for aid no longer meets the conditions laid down in Articles 6, 7 and 8, or any other obligation under this Regulation, approval shall be suspended for a period of between one and twelve months or be withdrawn, depending on the seriousness of the irregularity. Such action shall not be taken in cases of force majeure or if the Member State finds that the irregularity was not committed deliberately or by negligence or was of minor importance. Approval, once withdrawn, may be restored at the applicant's request after a minimum period of 12 months.
Article 10
Aid applications
1. Aid applications shall be made in a manner which shall be specified by the competent authority of the Member State and shall include at least the following information:
(a)
the quantities distributed;
(b)
the name and address or identification number of the educational establishment or educational authority to which the information referred to in point (a) relates; and
(c)
the number of children in the respective educational establishment of the target group as identified in the strategy of the Member State.
2. Member States shall specify the frequency of applications in line with their strategy, but aid application periods shall not cover more than 5 months. If the scheme runs during more than 6 months of the period referred to in Article 4(1), the total number of aid applications per period shall be at least three.
3. Except in cases of force majeure, aid applications shall, in order to be valid, be correctly filled in and be lodged by the last day of the third month following the end of the period to which they relate.
4. The amounts shown in the application shall be supported by documentary evidence held available for the competent authorities. This evidence shall show the price of the delivered products and shall be receipted or accompanied by proof of payment.
Article 11
Payment of the aid
1. As regards suppliers, organisations or bodies referred to in points (c) to (e) of Article 6(2), aid shall only be paid:
(a)
on presentation of a receipt for the quantities actually delivered; or
(b)
on the basis of the report of an inspection made by the competent authority before final payment of the aid, establishing that the payment requirements have been met; or
(c)
if the Member State so authorises, on presentation of alternative proof that the quantities delivered for the purposes of this Regulation have been paid for.
2. The aid shall be paid by the competent authority within three months of the day of lodging of the correctly filled and valid aid application. The Member States shall determine the form and content of a valid aid application.
3. If the time limit referred to in Article 10(3) is overrun by less than two months the aid shall still be paid but reduced:
(a)
by 5 % if the overrun is one month or less;
(b)
by 10 % if the overrun is more than a month but less than two months.
Once the time limit referred to in Article 10(3) is overrun by two months, the aid shall be reduced by 1 % per additional day.
Article 12
Monitoring and evaluation
1. Member States shall monitor the implementation of their School Fruit Scheme on an annual basis. Monitoring shall draw upon the data originating from management and control obligations, including those set out in Articles 10 and 11. Member States shall provide for adequate structures and forms to ensure regular monitoring of programme implementation.
2. Member States shall evaluate the implementation of their School Fruit Scheme and assess its effectiveness. For the period running from 1 August 2010 to 31 July 2011, Member States shall notify the results of their evaluation exercise to the Commission by 29 February 2012. For subsequent periods, Member States shall evaluate the implementation of their scheme at least every five years and notify their results every five years following that date.
3. Where a Member State does not notify the results of its evaluation exercise by the date referred to in paragraph 2, or every five years following that date, the amount of the next allocation will be reduced as follows:
(a)
by 5 % if the delay is one month or less;
(b)
by 10 % if the delay is more than one month but less than two months.
Once the time limit referred to in subparagraph 1 is delayed by two months, the aid shall be reduced by 1 % per additional day.
Article 13
Controls and sanctions
1. Member States shall take all necessary measures to ensure compliance with this Regulation. These measures shall include full administrative checking of aid applications, which shall be supplemented by on-the-spot checks as specified in paragraphs 2 to 8.
2. Administrative checks shall be conducted on all aid applications and shall include checking of supporting documents as defined by the Member States, relating to product delivery. The administrative checks shall be supplemented by on-the-spot checks carried out in particular on:
(a)
the records referred to in Article 8, including financial records such as purchase and sales invoices and bank extracts;
(b)
use of the subsidised products in accordance with this Regulation, particularly if there are grounds for suspecting any irregularity.
3. The total number of on-the-spot checks carried out in respect of each period running from 1 August to 31 July shall cover at least 5 % of the aid distributed at national level and at least 5 % of all the applicants referred to in Article 6.
When the number of applicants in a Member State is less than hundred, the on-the-spot checks shall be carried out on the premises of five applicants.
When the number of applicants in a Member State is less than five, 100 % of the applicants shall be controlled.
4. On-the-spot checks shall be conducted throughout the period from 1 August to 31 July and shall cover a period of at least the previous twelve months.
5. The applicants subjected to on-the-spot checks shall be selected by the competent control authority taking due account of the different geographical areas, and on the basis of a risk analysis taking into consideration in particular the recurrent nature of errors and the findings of checks carried out in past years. The risk analysis shall also take account of the different amount of aid involved and type of applicants referred to in Article 6(2).
6. In cases where the applicant referred to in points (b) to (e) of Article 6(2) applies for the aid, the on-the-spot check carried out on the premises of the applicant shall be supplemented by on-the-spot checks on the premises of at least two educational establishments or at least of 1 % of the educational establishments stated on the applicant's roll, whichever is the greater.
7. Provided that the purpose of the control is not jeopardised, advance notice, strictly limited to the minimum time period necessary, may be given.
8. The competent control authority shall draw up a control report on each on-the-spot check. The report shall describe precisely the different items controlled.
The control report shall be divided into the following parts:
(a)
a general part containing, in particular, the following information:
(i)
the scheme, the period covered, the controlled aid applications, the quantities of products covered under the School Fruit Scheme, the participating educational establishments an estimate based on the available data of the number of children for which the aid was paid and the financial amount involved;
(ii)
the responsible persons present;
(b)
a part describing separately the checks carried out and containing, in particular, the following information:
(i)
the documents checked;
(ii)
the nature and extent of checks carried out;
(iii)
remarks and findings.
9. For recovery of unduly paid amounts, Article 73(1), (3), (4) and (8) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 (3) shall apply mutatis mutandis.
10. Without prejudice to Article 9, in case of fraud or serious negligence for which he/she is responsible, the applicant shall, in addition to the recovery of unduly paid amounts in accordance with paragraph 9 of this Article, pay an amount equal to the difference between the amount initially paid and the amount the applicant is entitled to.
Article 14
European ‘School Fruit Scheme’ poster
1. Member States participating in the European ‘School Fruit Scheme’ shall communicate to the public that the scheme has received financial support from the European Community. In this respect, Member States may make use of a poster produced in accordance with the minimum requirements laid down in Annex III, which shall be permanently situated at a clearly visible and legible place at the main entrance of the participating educational establishment.
2. Where Member States decide not to make use of the poster referred to in paragraph 1, they shall clearly explain in their strategy how they will inform the public about the European Community's financial contribution to their scheme. Posters, websites or any other instrument of information or publicity on a Member State's School Fruit Scheme shall in any event exhibit the European flag and the following sentence: ‘Our (type of educational establishment) participates in the European “School Fruit Scheme” with the financial support of the European Community.’
3. References to the financial contribution made available by the European Community shall receive at least the same visibility as contributions from other private or public entities supporting a Member State's scheme.
Article 15
Notifications
1. Member States shall make the notifications referred to in Article 4(1) and (2) to the Commission, by 31 January of the year in which the period mentioned in Article 4(1) starts. These notifications shall be sent by e-mail to [email protected], in a format to be decided by the Commission.
Starting from 2010, Member States shall notify the Commission each year, following the end of the period referred to in Article 4(1) by 30 November of the year in which the period mentioned in Article 4(1) ends:
(a)
the results of the monitoring exercise, where provided for under Article 12;
(b)
the on-the-spot checks carried out pursuant to Articles 13 and 16 and the related findings.
2. The form and content of the notifications mentioned in paragraph 1 shall be defined on the basis of guidance made available by the Commission to the Member States. Those models shall not apply until the Management Committee for Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has been informed.
3. The Commission shall publish the Member States' strategies and the results of their monitoring and evaluation exercise on a regular basis.
4. Where a Member State changes the strategy referred to in Article 3, it shall notify the Commission without delay of its new strategy, by e-mail to the address referred to in the first subparagraph of paragraph 1.
Article 16
Transitional provisions
1. For the period running from 1 August 2009 to 31 July 2010, Member States may draw up a strategy which contains only the following key elements: budget, target group and eligible products and, by derogation from Article 3(2), abstain from having their list of eligible products endorsed by their competent health authorities. They may also postpone the implementation of accompanying measures until the end of that period.
2. For the period referred to in paragraph 1, and by way of derogation from Article 4(1) and (2), Member States may notify their strategy by 31 May 2009, whereas the Commission shall only decide on the definitive allocation of Community aid by 31 July 2009.
3. For the period referred to in paragraph 1, and by way of derogation from Article 11(2), aid shall be paid by the competent authority within four months of the day of lodging of the correctly filled and valid application referred to in Article 6(1), while the percentage of the on-the-spot checks referred to in Article 13(3) shall cover at least 10 % of the aid and 10 % of the aid applicants.
Article 17
Entry into force
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 15 April 2009.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 7 April 2009. | [
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 21 December 1992 approving the programme concerning bonamiosis and marteiliosis submitted by the United Kingdom for Guernsey (Only the English text is authentic)
(93/58/EEC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 91/67/EEC concerning the animal health conditions governing the placing on the market of aquaculture animals and products (1), and in particular Article 10 thereof,
Whereas Regulation (EEC) No 706/73 of the Council of 12 March 1973 concerning the Community arrangements applicable to the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man for trade in agricultural products (2), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1174/86 (3) lays down that the veterinary legislation shall apply to these Islands under the same conditions as in the United Kingdom for the products imported into the islands or exported from the islands to the Community;
Whereas Member States may submit to the Commission a programme designed to enable them, with regard to certain diseases affecting molluscs, to obtain the status of approved zone;
Whereas the United Kingdom, by letter dated 9 October 1992, has submitted a programme concerning bonamiosis and marteiliosis for Guernsey;
Whereas these programmes specify the geographical zones concerned, the measures to be taken by the official services, the procedures to be followed by the approved laboratories, the prevalence of the disease concerned and the measures to combat these diseases where detected; whereas, the measures to be taken by the official services relate mainly to detailed investigations which must show that the zones concerned do not contain any molluscs belonging to susceptible vector or carrier species;
Whereas this programme, after scrutiny, appears to be in conformity with the requirements laid down in Article 10 of Council Directive 91/67/EEC;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The programme concerning bonamiosis and marteiliosis for Guernsey, submitted by the United Kingdom, is hereby approved.
Article 2
The United Kingdom shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the programme referred to in Article 1 by 1 January 1993.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the United Kingdom.
Done at Brussels, 21 December 1992. | [
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1220/86
of 24 April 1986
concerning the stopping of fishing for salmon by vessels flying the flag of Denmark
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2057/82 of 29 June 1982 establishing certain control measures for fishing activities by vessels of the Member States (1), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3723/85 (2), and in particular Article 10 (3) thereof,
Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 3725/85 of 20 December 1985, allocating quotas between Member States for vessels fishing in Swedish waters (3), provides for salmon quotas for 1986;
Whereas, in order to ensure compliance with the provisions relating to the quantitative limitations on catches of stocks subject to quotas, it is necessary for the Commission to fix the date by which catches made by vessels flying the flag of a Member State are deemed to have exhausted the quota allocated;
Whereas, according to the information communicated to the Commission, catches of salmon in the waters of ICES division IIId (Swedish waters) by vessels flying the flag of Denmark or registered in Denmark have reached the quota allocated for 1986;
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Catches of salmon in the waters of ICES division IIId (Swedish waters) by vessels flying the flag of Denmark or registered in Denmark are deemed to have exhausted the quota allocated to Denmark for 1986.
Fishing for salmon in the waters of ICES division IIId (Swedish waters) by vessels flying the flag of Denmark or registered in Denmark is prohibited, as well as the retention on board, the transhipment and the landing of such stock captured by the above mentioned vessels after the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 24 April 1986. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1479/2007
of 13 December 2007
fixing the rates of the refunds applicable to eggs and egg yolks exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2771/75 of 29 October 1975 on the common organisation of the market in eggs (1), and in particular Article 8(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Article 8(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2771/75 provides that the difference between prices in international trade for the products listed in Article 1(1) of that Regulation and prices within the Community may be covered by an export refund where these goods are exported in the form of goods listed in the Annex to that Regulation.
(2)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1043/2005 of 30 June 2005 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 3448/93 as regards the system of granting export refunds on certain agricultural products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty, and the criteria for fixing the amount of such refunds (2), specifies the products for which a rate of refund is to be fixed, to be applied where these products are exported in the form of goods listed in Annex I to Regulation (EEC) No 2771/75.
(3)
In accordance with the second paragraph of Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 1043/2005, the rate of the refund per 100 kilograms for each of the basic products in question is to be fixed for a period of the same duration as that for which refunds are fixed for the same products exported unprocessed.
(4)
Article 11 of the Agreement on Agriculture concluded under the Uruguay Round lays down that the export refund for a product contained in a good may not exceed the refund applicable to that product when exported without further processing.
(5)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Poultrymeat and Eggs,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The rates of the refunds applicable to the basic products listed in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1043/2005 and in Article 1(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2771/75, and exported in the form of goods listed in Annex I to Regulation (EEC) No 2771/75, shall be fixed as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 14 December 2007.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 13 December 2007. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2351/91
of 30 July 1991
laying down detailed rules applicable on the purchase of rice held by an intervention agency for the supply of food aid
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Regulation (EEC) No 1418/76 of the Council of 21 June 1976 on the common organization of the market in rice (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1806/89 (2), and in particular Article 5 (5) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1424/76 of 21 June 1976 laying down general rules for intervention on the market in rice (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 794/91 (4) and in particular the second paragraph of Article 4 thereof,
Whereas where rice is purchased from intervention agencies for the purposes of fulfilling obligations arising from the award of food-aid supply contracts in connection with international conventions on food aid or other supplementary programmes, the conditions applicable with regard to prices and the detailed rules of application are to be determined in advance;
Whereas, in order to enable interested parties to take part under optimum conditions in the procedure for the award of food-aid supply contracts, they should be given the possibility of examining at their expense the quality and the characteristics of the product before the expiry of the closing date for the submission of tenders;
Whereas, in order to facilitate transactions, purchase applications must contain all information required to identify the product;
Whereas, in order to avoid disruption of the Community market and any distortion of competition between Community operators, the purchase price for the goods from public storage must be determined according to clear-cut criteria and be known to all tenderers in advance; whereas, in view of these requirements, provision should be made for goods purchased by the person awarded a food-aid supply contract to be paid for at the buying-in price determined pursuant to Article 5 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1418/76;
Whereas, in order that the conditions of competition existing when tenders are submitted for the award of the food-aid supply contract are not altered subsequent to the award of the contract, a derogation from the application of certain procedures for adjusting the prices on the basis of the date of conclusion of the purchase contract or the date of removal of the goods should be introduced;
Whereas Article 4 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2200/87 of 8 July 1987 laying down general rules for the mobilization in the Community of products to be supplied as Community food aid (5) makes provision for the successful tenderer to deliver, with a view to a food-aid supply contract, rather than goods from public stocks or, where appropriate, manufactured therefrom, goods mobilized on the market or manufactured therefrom provided that he purchases the goods mentioned in the notice of invitation to tender; whereas compliance with this latter obligation is essential on the one hand to meet the objective of contributing towards reducing public stocks and on the other hand to ensure the equality of operators in the award of the supply contract; whereas provision should therefore be made for the lodging by the successful tenderer of a specific security to ensure compliance with the obligation to pay the purchase price to the intervention agency concerned within a short time; whereas, consequently, with a view to that objective, provision should be made for failure to lodge a purchase application with the intervention agency under the conditions laid down to result in the loss of the security relating to the supply of the food aid, lodged pursuant to Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 2200/87; whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2220/85 of 22 July 1985 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of securities for agricultural products (6), as mended by Regulation (EEC) No 3745/89 (7), should be applied for the lodging and the release of that specific security;
Whereas the execution of Community food-aid supply contracts is the subject of specific surveillance arrangements; whereas the provisions of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 569/88 of 16 February 1988 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of securities for agricultural products (8), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2322/91 (9), should accordingly not apply;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
With a view to a given food-aid supply contract within the meaning of Article 4 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1424/76, rice held by an intervention agency shall be purchased in accordance with this Regulation.
The provisions of Articles 2 to 7, adopted for the purpose of the supply of Community food aid pursuant to Article 5 and 6 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3972/86 (10) shall apply mutatis mutandis for the supply of the national food aid referred to in the first subparagraph subject to specific national measures on the organization and allocation of the latter.
Article 2
With a view to the supply contract referred to in Article 1, the intervention agency shall make available goods meeting the characteristics laid down in the notice of open or restricted invitation to tender.
The intervention agency shall take the necessary steps so that all operators interested in submitting a tender for the supply contract may, on publication of the notice of invitation to tender or on receipt of the latter, examine at his own expense samples collected from the product to be mobilized. Applications to examine the goods may be submitted and samples may be collected only before the expiry of the closing date laid down for the submission of tenders.
Article 3
1. Within six working days following the award of the food-aid supply contract, the operator concerned shall lodge with the intervention agency a purchase application by any means of written communication, relating to the quantity of the lot or lots for the supply of which he has been awarded the contract. Applications shall indicate:
(a)
the name and address of the applicant;
(b)
the reference to the food-aid operation, with the number of the specific lot or lots for the supply of which the operator has been awarded the contract.
2. Applications shall be accompanied by proof that the party concerned has been awarded the supply contract in question. Such proof shall be provided by a copy of the notification of award of the contract forwarded to him.
3. The application for purchase shall be valid only if it conforms to the provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 and is accompanied by proof:
-
that the applicant has lodged, in accordance with the provisions of Title III of Regulation (EEC) No 2220/85, a security equal to the purchase price of the lot(s) of rice in question, determined in accordance with Article 5;
-
that an export licence has been applied for in respect of the product and the quantity to be supplied as food aid, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 6 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 891/89 (11).
4. Except in cases of force majeure, failure to submit a purchase application within the time limit mentioned in paragraph 1 shall result in the loss of the security lodged pursuant to Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 2200/87 under the conditions laid down in the notice of open or restricted invitation to tender.
Article 4
Within three working days following the day of submission of the purchase application, the intervention agency shall inform the applicant by written telecommunication that his application has been accepted where it meets the conditions laid down in Article 3.
Article 5
1. The purchase price to be paid for the rice in question shall be the intervention rice referred to in Article 5 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1418/76 valid on the final day for the submission of tenders for the award of contracts for the supply of food aid, without any adjustment based on the quality of the product. Equally, the price shall not be adjusted on the basis of the actual date of collection from the intervention agency. The price shall be for the bulk product loaded onto a means of transport, ex-store.
2. The conversion rate to be applied to the purchase price shall be the agricultural conversion rate valid on the final date for the submission of tenders.
Article 6
1. The purchaser shall pay the intervention agency the purchase price for the rice, before the goods are removed, within 30 days from the notification of acceptance of the application referred to in Article 4.
Within the period referred to in the first subparagraph, the goods may be split up for removal with the agreement of the intervention agency; in that case, payment shall be made in instalments to take account of the actual timetable for the removal of the goods.
Payent of the purchase price shall constitute a primary requirement within the meaning of Article 20 of Regulation (EEC) No 2220/85.
2. Risks and storage costs for rice not removed within the time limit referred to in paragraph 1 shall be borne by the purchaser.
Article 7
The security referred to in Article 3 (3) shall be released in accordance with Title V of Regulation (EEC) No 2220/85.
Article 8
The Commission shall forward to the intervention agency concerned, within three working days from the award of the supply contract, all information necessary for the purchase operation, and in particular the name of the person or persons awarded the lots to be mobilized for the execution of a Community food-aid supply contract.
Article 9
For the supply of national food aid from stocks held by the intervention agency, the competent national authority shall communicate immediately to the Commission, at least eight working days before any action is taken, the essential details of the planned mobilization, in particular the characteristics of the product, the quantity, the planned period of mobilization and the destination of the supplies.
Article 10
The provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 569/88 shall not apply to purchases from an intervention agency pursuant to this Regulation.
Article 11
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 July 1991. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 19 January 1984
amending Decision 83/296/EEC authorizing Member States to permit temporarily the marketing of forestry reproductive material not satisfying the requirements of Council Directive 66/404/EEC
(84/50/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 66/404/EEC of 14 June 1966 on the marketing of forest reproductive material (1), as last amended by Directive 79/410/EEC (2), and in particular Article 15 (1) thereof,
Having regard to the request submitted by the Federal Republic of Germany and the Kingdom of Denmark,
Whereas production of reproductive material of forestry species is at present insufficient in all Member States so that their requirements for reproductive material conforming to the provisions of Directive 66/404/EEC cannot be met;
Whereas non-member countries are not in a position to supply sufficient reproductive material of the relevant species which can afford the same guarantees as Community reproductive material and which conforms to the provisions of the abovementioned Directive;
Whereas by Decision 83/296/EEC (3), the Commission authorized the Member States to permit temporarily the marketing of forest reproductive material which satisfies less stringent requirements;
Whereas it has become apparent that what is indicated in respect of the species 'Quercus borealis Michx' in the case of Denmark should in fact apply to the species 'Quercus sessiliflora Sal.';
Whereas, in order to be able to cover completely the requirements of the two abovementioned Member States, it is appropriate to increase the authorized quantities for the species 'Quercus pendunculata Ehrh.' and 'Quercus sessiliflora Sal.' respectively;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Seed and Propagating Material for Agriculture, Horticulture and Forestry,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The Annex to Decision 83/296/EEC is hereby amended as follows:
- in the column 'Quercus pendunculata Ehrh.', '15 000 kg' in line 'D' is replaced by '25 000 kg',
- the entries in the column 'Quercus borealis Michx' for line 'DK' are deleted,
- in the column 'Quercus sessiliflora Sal.', '22 000 kg' and 'N (zone F-O)' are inserted in line 'DK'.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 19 January 1984. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1552/2006
of 17 October 2006
amending the representative prices and additional duties for the import of certain products in the sugar sector fixed by Regulation (EC) No 1002/2006 for the 2006/2007 marketing year
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 of 20 February 2006 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (1),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 951/2006 of 30 June 2006 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 as regards trade with third countries in the sugar sector (2), and in particular of the Article 36,
Whereas:
(1)
The representative prices and additional duties applicable to imports of white sugar, raw sugar and certain syrups for the 2006/2007 marketing year are fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1002/2006 (3). These prices and duties have been last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1520/2006 (4).
(2)
The data currently available to the Commission indicate that the said amounts should be changed in accordance with the rules and procedures laid down in Regulation (EC) No 951/2006,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The representative prices and additional duties on imports of the products referred to in Article 36 of Regulation (EC) No 951/2006, as fixed by Regulation (EC) No 1002/2006 for the 2006/2007 marketing year are hereby amended as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 18 October 2006.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 17 October 2006. | [
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 22 December 2006
approving monitoring plans for the detection of residues or substances in live animals and animal products pursuant to Council Directive 96/23/EC as submitted by Bulgaria and Romania
(notified under document number C(2006) 6815)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2007/15/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 96/23/EC of 29 April 1996 on measures to monitor certain substances and residues thereof in live animals and animal products and repealing Directives 85/358/EEC and 86/469/EEC and Decisions 89/187/EEC and 91/664/EEC (1), and in particular the second subparagraph of Article 8(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Directive 96/23/EC lays down the measures to monitor certain substances and residues thereof in live animals and animal products and provides that Member States are to submit their monitoring plans for the detection of residues or substances) to the Commission for approval (‘monitoring plans’).
(2)
As Bulgaria and Romania are due to accede to the Community on 1 January 2007, they have submitted monitoring plans to the Commission for approval.
(3)
Those monitoring plans comply with the requirements of Directive 96/23/EC and should therefore be approved.
(4)
The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The monitoring plan for the detection of residues or substances, as provided for in Article 5(1) of Directive 96/23/EC, submitted by Bulgaria to the Commission on 25 April 2006 is approved.
Article 2
The monitoring plan for the detection of residues or substances, as provided for in Article 5(1) of Directive 96/23/EC, submitted by Romania to the Commission on 20 March 2006 is approved.
Article 3
The Decision shall apply subject to and as from the date of entry into force of the Treaty of Accession of Bulgaria and Romania.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 22 December 2006. | [
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 262/2005
of 16 February 2005
fixing the export refunds on olive oil
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation No 136/66/EEC of 22 September 1966 on the establishment of a common organisation of the market in oils and fats (1), and in particular Article 3(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Article 3 of Regulation No 136/66/EEC provides that, where prices within the Community are higher than world market prices, the difference between these prices may be covered by a refund when olive oil is exported to third countries.
(2)
The detailed rules for fixing and granting export refunds on olive oil are contained in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 616/72 (2).
(3)
Article 3(3) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC provides that the refund must be the same for the whole Community.
(4)
In accordance with Article 3(4) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC, the refund for olive oil must be fixed in the light of the existing situation and outlook in relation to olive oil prices and availability on the Community market and olive oil prices on the world market. However, where the world market situation is such that the most favourable olive oil prices cannot be determined, account may be taken of the price of the main competing vegetable oils on the world market and the difference recorded between that price and the price of olive oil during a representative period. The amount of the refund may not exceed the difference between the price of olive oil in the Community and that on the world market, adjusted, where appropriate, to take account of export costs for the products on the world market.
(5)
In accordance with Article 3(3) third indent, point (b) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC, it may be decided that the refund shall be fixed by tender. The tendering procedure should cover the amount of the refund and may be limited to certain countries of destination, quantities, qualities and presentations.
(6)
The second indent of Article 3(3) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC provides that the refund on olive oil may be varied according to destination where the world market situation or the specific requirements of certain markets make this necessary.
(7)
The refund must be fixed at least once every month. It may, if necessary, be altered in the intervening period.
(8)
It follows from applying these detailed rules to the present situation on the market in olive oil and in particular to olive oil prices within the Community and on the markets of third countries that the refund should be as set out in the Annex hereto.
(9)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Oils and Fats,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The export refunds on the products listed in Article 1(2)(c) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC shall be as set out in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 17 February 2005.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 16 February 2005. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 24 April 2001
concerning restrictions to the movement of animals of susceptible species with regard to foot-and-mouth disease and repealing Decision 2001/263/EC
(notified under document number C(2001) 1149)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2001/327/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June 1990 concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable in intra-Community trade in certain live animals and products with a view to the completion of the internal market(1), as last amended by Directive 92/118/EEC(2), and in particular Article 10 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) The animal health conditions for trade in bovine animals and swine are laid down in Council Directive 64/432/EEC on animal health problems affecting intra-Community trade in bovine animals and swine(3), as last amended by Directive 2000/20/EC(4).
(2) The animal health conditions for trade in ovine and caprine animals are laid down in Council Directive 91/68/EEC of 28 January 1991 on animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in ovine and caprine animals(5), as last amended by Commission Decision 94/953/EC(6).
(3) The animal health conditions for trade in biungulates other than those referred to in Directive 64/432/EEC and 91/68/EEC are laid down in Council Directive 92/65/EEC of 13 July 1992 laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of animals, semen, ova and embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A(I) to Directive 90/425/EEC(7), as last amended by Commission Decision 95/176/EC(8).
(4) The welfare conditions for transport of animals within the Community are laid down in Council Directive 91/628/EEC of 19 November 1991 on the protection of animals during transport and amending Directives 90/425/EEC and 91/496/EEC(9), as last amended by Directive 95/29/EC(10).
(5) Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/97 of 25 June 1997 concerns Community criteria for staging points and amends the route plan referred to in the Annex to Directive 91/628/EEC(11).
(6) Following the reports of outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease in the United Kingdom, France, the Netherlands and Ireland, the Commission adopted Decisions 2001/172/EC(12), 2001/208/EC(13), 2001/223/EC(14) and 2001/234/EC(15) concerning certain protection measures with regard to foot-and-mouth disease in the respective Member State.
(7) The foot-and-mouth disease situation in certain parts of the Community is liable to endanger the herds in other parts of the Community in view of the placing on the market and trade in live biungulate animals.
(8) All Member States have implemented the restrictions to the movement of animals of susceptible species laid down in Decision 2001/263/EC(16), as last amended by Decision 2001/317/EC(17).
(9) In the light of the disease evolution and the findings of the epidemiological investigations carried out in the affected Member States in close cooperation with the other Member States, it appears appropriate to further prohibit the movement of animals through staging points and to maintain for an additional period of time the restrictions to the movement of susceptible animals within the Community.
(10) At the same time the provisions on movement of animals of susceptible species included in Decision 2001/263/EC should be repealed.
(11) The situation shall be reviewed at the meeting of the Standing Veterinary Committee scheduled for 25 April 2001 and the measures adapted where necessary.
(12) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
1. Member States other than the United Kingdom shall ensure that transport of animals of species susceptible to foot-and-mouth disease is prohibited.
This prohibition shall not apply to transports of animals of species susceptible to foot-and-mouth disease from the holding of dispatch
- directly or through an approved assembly centre to a slaughterhouse for immediate slaughter, subject to authorisation by the competent authorities of the place of departure and destination, or
- through an approved assembly centre to one holding of destination, except in the case of bovine and porcine animals which may be dispatched from the assembly centre to a maximum of six holdings of destination, subject to authorisation by the competent authorities of the place of departure and destination, or
- to an assembly point to group herds or flocks for transhumance to designated pastures, subject to authorisation by the competent authorities of the place of departure and destination, or
- to another holding, subject to authorisation by the competent authorities of the place of departure and destination
under the condition that:
(a) during transport such animals do not come into contact with animals not of the same holding of dispatch, unless
- either such animals are consigned for slaughter, or
- originate in and come from holdings situated in areas of a Member State as defined in Article 2(p) of Directive 64/432/EEC in which no restrictions in accordance with Article 9 of Directive 85/511/EEC have been in place during the residence period referred to in paragraph 2 first indent;
(b) vehicles which have been used for the transport of live animals are cleaned and disinfected after each operation, and shall furnish proof of such disinfection, and
(c) transports to other Member States of such animals shall only be allowed following 24 hours advance notification dispatched by the local veterinary authority to the central and local veterinary authorities in the Member State of destination and to the central veterinary authorities in the Member State of transit.
2. Member States other than the United Kingdom shall ensure that the competent authorities at the place of departure authorise the movement of animals of species susceptible to foot-and-mouth disease only under the following conditions:
- either the animals have remained on the holding of dispatch for at least 20 days prior to authorisation, or since birth in the holding of origin where the animals are less than 20 days old, and no animal of susceptible species was introduced into that holding during this period, or during the past 10 days in the case of pigs, or
- these animals are transported directly and without passing through an approved assembly centre to a slaughterhouse for immediate slaughter.
3. Without prejudice to Article 3(1)(aa) second indent of Directive 91/628/EEC, Member States shall ensure that animals of species susceptible to foot-and-mouth disease are not moved through staging points established and approved in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1255/97.
Article 2
Commission Decision 2001/263/EC is repealed.
Article 3
This Decision shall apply until midnight on 18 May 2001.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 24 April 2001. | [
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2212/2001
of 15 November 2001
fixing a percentage for acceptance of contracts concluded for the optional distillation of table wine and suspending the notification of new contracts for the optional distillation of table wine
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1623/2000 of 25 July 2000 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 on the common organisation of the market in wine with regard to market mechanisms(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2047/2001(2), and in particular Article 63(6) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Article 63 of Regulation (EC) No 1623/2000 lays down the conditions for the application of the distillation arrangements for wines referred to in Article 29 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2826/2000(4). Those arrangements provide for subsidised, voluntary distillation in order to support the wine market and help ensure continued supplies to the potable alcohol sector, which traditionally uses this type of alcohol. To that end, wine producers and distillers conclude contracts, which the Member States notify to the Commission twice a month.
(2) Article 63(6) lays down the conditions under which the Commission must intervene in the contract-approval procedure, setting a single percentage for acceptance of contracts concluded for distillation and/or suspending the notification of new contracts, notably where the available budgetary resources or the absorption capacity of the potable alcohol sector are exceeded or may be exceeded.
(3) For the 2001/02 wine year the Commission has, for budgetary reasons and bearing in mind the absorption capacity of the potable alcohol sector, set a limit of 7 million hl of table wine for the first tranche of contracts. On the basis of the quantities of wine for which the Member States notified new distillation contracts to the Commission on 5 November 2001, the Commission notes that that limit has been exceeded. The Commission should therefore set a single percentage for acceptance of the quantities notified for distillation and suspend the notification of new contracts until a second distillation period is opened, the starting date for which will depend on the evolution of the alcohol market and available budget resources,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. Contracts concluded and notified to the Commission under Article 63(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1623/2000 on 5 November 2001 shall be accepted for 49,2 % of the wine covered.
2. Notification to the Commission of new contracts under Article 63(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1623/2000 is suspended until a second distillation period is opened.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 15 November 2001. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2397/1999
of 11 November 1999
on the authorisation of transfers between the quantitative limits of textiles and clothing products originating in Taiwan
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 47/1999(1) of 22 December 1998 on the arrangements for imports of certain textile products originating in Taiwan, as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1556/1999(2), and in particular Article 4 thereof,
(1) Whereas Taiwan has made a request on 20 September 1999;
(2) Whereas the transfers requested by Taiwan fall within the limits of the flexibility provisions referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 47/1999, as amended;
(3) Whereas it is appropriate to grant the request;
(4) Whereas it is desirable that this Regulation enters into force the day after its publication in order to allow operators to benefit from it as soon as possible;
(5) Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Textile Committee provided for in Article 17 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3030/93(3), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1072/1999(4),
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Transfers between the quantitative limits for textile goods originating in Taiwan are authorised for the quota year 1999 as detailed in 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 Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 11 November 1999. | [
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1740/94 of 15 July 1994 amending Regulations (EEC) No 1727/92 and (EEC) No 1728/92 laying down detailed rules for implementation of the specific arrangements for the supply of cereal products to the Azores and Madeira, and to the Canary Islands respectively, and establishing the forecast supply balance
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 of 15 June 1992 concerning specific measures for the Azores and Madeira relating to certain agricultural products (1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1974/93 (2), and in particular
Article 10
thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1601/92 of 15 June 1992 concerning specific measures for the Canary Islands with regard to certain agricultural products (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1974/93, and in particular Article 3 (4) thereof,
Whereas, pursuant to Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92, Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1727/92 (4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1549/94 (5), establishes the forecast supply balance for cereal products for the Azores and Madeira for the 1993/94 marketing year; whereas, pending additional information to be provided by the competent authorities and in order to ensure the continuity of the specific supply arrangements, the balance provided for in Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 should be adopted for a limited period of three months, on the basis of the quantities determined for the 1993/94 marketing year; whereas, as a result, the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 1727/92 should be amended;
Whereas, pursuant to Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1601/92, Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1728/92 (6), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1549/94, establishes the forecast supply balance for cereal products for the Canary Islands for the 1993/94 marketing year; whereas, pending additional information to be provided by the competent authorities and in order to ensure the continuity of the specific supply arrangements, the balance provided for in Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1601/92 should be adopted for a limited period of three months, on the basis of the quantities determined for the 1993/94 marketing year; whereas, as a result, the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 1728/92 should be amended;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 1727/92 is hereby replaced by Annex I to this Regulation.
Article 2
The Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 1728/92 is hereby replaced by Annex II to this Regulation.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 15 July 1994. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 299/81
of 29 January 1981
classifying certain products under subheading 15.01 A of the Common Customs Tariff
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 97/69 of 16 January 1969 on measures to be taken for uniform application of the nomenclature of the Common Customs Tariff (1), as last amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 280/77 (2), and in particular Article 3 thereof,
Whereas, in order to ensure uniform application of the nomenclature of the Common Customs Tariff, provision must be made for the classification of the following types of pig fat:
(a) obtained by the rendering of pig carcases from which most of the meat, edible offals and fat have been removed ('choice white American hog grease'); and
(b) obtained by the mixing of lard, the product described at (a) and rendered pork fat ('rendered pig fat');
the analysis of which gives:
- a Boemer index of 72 or more when tested by the diethyl ether method (ISO/DIS 3577); and
- the following results:
1.2 // total C14 + total C15 C16 // × 100 µ 10, and 1.2 // C18 : 3 C16 // × 100 µ 8;
where:
total C14 represents the total content of acids with 14 carbon atoms,
total C15 represents the total content of acids with 15 carbon atoms,
C16 represents the palmitic acid content, and
C18 : 3 represents the linolenic acid content,
the fatty acids being determined by gas chromatography;
- free fatty acids 2;5 % (expressed as oleic acid); and
- cholesterol 400 mg/100 g;
Whereas the Common Customs Tariff annexed to Council Regulation (EEC) No 950/68 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3000/80 (4), includes lard and other pig fat under subheading 15.01 A;
Whereas these products have the same analytical characteristics as the goods of subheading 15.01 A of the Common Customs Tariff;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Common Customs Tariff Nomenclature,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The following types of pig fat:
(a) obtained by the rendering of pig carcases from which most of the meat, edible offals and fat have been removed ('choice white American hog grease'); and
(b) obtained by the mixing of lard, the product described at (a) and rendered pork fat ('rendered pig fat');
the analysis of which gives:
- a Boemer index of 72 or more when tested by the diethyl ether method (ISO/DIS 3577); and
- the following results:
1.2 // total C14 + total C15 C16 // × 100 µ 10, and 1.2 // C18 : 3 C16 // × 100 µ 8;
where:
total C14 represents the total content of acids with 14 carbon atoms,
total C15 represents the total content of acids with 15 carbon atoms,
C16 represents the palmitic acid content, and
C18 : 3 represents the linolenic acid content,
the fatty acids being determined by gas chromatography;
- free fatty acids 2;5 % (expressed as oleic acid); and
- cholesterol 400 mg/100 g;
shall be classified within Common Customs Tariff subheading:
15.01 Lard, other pig fat and poultry fat, rendered or solvent-extracted:
A. Lard and other pig fat.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 21st day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 29 January 1981. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1047/2004
of 28 May 2004
fixing the maximum aid for cream, butter and concentrated butter for the 142nd individual invitation to tender under the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 2571/97
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), and in particular Article 10 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
The intervention agencies are, pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2571/97 of 15 December 1997 on the sale of butter at reduced prices and the granting of aid for cream, butter and concentrated butter for use in the manufacture of pastry products, ice cream and other foodstuffs (2), to sell by invitation to tender certain quantities of butter of intervention stocks that they hold and to grant aid for cream, butter and concentrated butter. Article 18 of that Regulation stipulates that in the light of the tenders received in response to each individual invitation to tender a minimum selling price shall be fixed for butter and maximum aid shall be fixed for cream, butter and concentrated butter. It is further stipulated that the price or aid may vary according to the intended use of the butter, its fat content and the incorporation procedure, and that a decision may also be taken to make no award in response to the tenders submitted. The amount(s) of the processing securities must be fixed accordingly.
(2)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The maximum aid and processing securities applying for the 142nd individual invitation to tender, under the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 2571/97, shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 29 May 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 May 2004. | [
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 26 February 1992 relating to a procedure pursuant to Articles 85 and 86 of the EEC Treaty (IV/33.544, British Midland v. Aer Lingus) (Only the English text is authentic) (92/213/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3975/87 of 14 December 1987 laying down the procedure for the application of the rules on competition to undertakings in the air transport sector (1),
Having regard to the complaint lodged by British Midland Airways Limited on 26 April 1990 against Aer Lingus plc,
Having regard to Commission Decision of 4 June 1991 to initiate proceedings in this case,
Having given the undertakings concerned the opportunity to make known their views on the objections raised by the Commission, pursuant to Article 16 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 3975/87, read in conjunction with Commission Regulation (EEC) No 4261/88 of 16 December 1988 on the complaints, applications and hearings provided for in Council Regulation (EEC) No 3975/87 (2),
After consulting the Advisory Committee on Agreements and Dominant Positions in Air Transport,
Whereas:
I. FACTS
A. The parties
(1) Aer Lingus is the national airline of Ireland. It operates a fleet of 31 jet (all but three of which are used for short- and medium-haul services) and turboprop aircraft. In 1990, it carried over 4 million scheduled revenue passengers (over 3 million on European services) and performed in excess of 4 billion revenue passenger kilometers (more than 1,7 billion on European services). It employs over 7 000 workers. Total revenues from air transport over 1990 amounted to almost US$ 700 million, out of a total turnover in excess of US$ 1,2 billion, and net profits were over US$ 8 million (as compared with US$ 52 million during 1989).
(2) British Midland is the main operating company of the Airlines of Britain Holdings plc which for 25 % belongs to SAS. It operates a fleet of 23 jet aircraft, all for services within the United Kingdom and to the neighbouring Member States. It employs about 2 000 workers. In 1990 it carried over 3 million passengers. Total revenues over 1990 exceeded US$ 300 million but the company lost several million US$. British Midland is among the fastest-growing European airlines.
B. The refusal to interline
(3) Interlining is hailed as one of IATA's major achievements. It essentially consists of an agreement (Multilateral Interline Traffic Agreement - MITA, defined in IATA Resolution 780), pursuant to which airlines are authorized to sell each other's services. As a result a single ticket can be issued which comprises segments to be performed by different airlines. Applicable tariffs and conditions are those of the party over whose route the passenger is to be carried. The airline which issues the ticket collects the price for all segments from the passenger. The issuing airline then pays the fare due to the carrying airline (less a 9 % interline service charge as compensation for expenses incurred in selling, handling, servicing and processing interline traffic) through the IATA clearing house.
In order to become a party to the MITA an interested airline (which must not necessarily be an IATA member) makes an application to IATA which is circulated to all participating airlines. Traditionally agreement or 'concurrence' to an application is hardly ever refused, the exception being where currency convertibility or the financial stability of the applicant are not assured. In the latter case airlines may conclude specific agreements, providing e.g. for unilateral interlining (i.e. that the applicant accepts the flag carriers' authority to issue tickets on its behalf but not vice versa).
The interlining system benefits from the participation of the vast majority of the world's airlines, accounting for approximately 95 % of all scheduled traffic.
(4) In addition airlines accept to change tickets at passengers' request. This technically relates to 'voluntary changes' rather than 'interlining' (it is governed by IATA Resolution 736 on voluntary changes to tickets) but normally operates in conjunction with interlining. Where the carrier making the change is not the issuing carrier or the carrier designated as carrier for the segment concerned, an endorsement is required from the issuing or designated carrier. However, many airlines have agreed to waive the requirement of endorsement between each other.
(5) The main advantages of the multilateral interline and voluntary change system (jointly referred to hereafter, for the purpose of this Decision, as 'interline system') are that passengers can buy a single ticket providing for transportation by different carriers (e.g. leaving on the issuing airline and returning on another airline serving the same route, or leaving on the issuing airline and continuing to destinations not served by that airline), and that passengers can easily change the reservations, routings or airlines mentioned on the ticket.
Airlines value that the interlining system enables them to complement their networks and frequencies. Even though they would lose some passengers to other airlines as the result of interlining, they would also expect to win some from other airlines.
The interline system is a very significant part of worldwide air transport. It is estimated that approximately 20 % of passengers on intra-Community flights in one way or another use interline facilities and that depending on the airline issuing the ticket, about half of passengers hold tickets enabling them to change onto flights operated by other airlines.
(6) In practice airlines and their personnel do not always insist on compliance with the interline and waiver of endorsement agreements. If a travel agent issues a ticket for travel of an airline without proper authority arising out of an interline agreement, the carrying airline's personnel may accept the ticket and will bill the issuing airline. Where billing would be complicated or uneconomical, the carrying airline may renounce billing on the assumption that the issuing airline probably has similar claims on the carrying airline. Likewise an airline's employees at an airport may accept voluntary changes made to a ticket without insisting on endorsement by the issuing or designated carrier. However, any flexibility which may exist in practice is marginal and of limited usefulness; it is likely to inconvenience personnel and passengers and is no satisfactory substitute for an actual agreement to interline.
The absence of an agreement to interline may be a serious handicap for the airlines suffering from it. In particular business travellers (normally travelling at the more expensive unrestricted C and Y fares and typically generating about 60 % of an airline's revenue from passenger services) often make trips combining several destinations and airlines, and they need to be able to change travel plans with minimal constraints. They highly value the convenience and flexibility offered by a single interlinable ticket, rather than having to purchase separate tickets for each flight and having to return some of these unused, if they have had to change their plans. In addition, travel agents cannot issue a ticket on an airline's paper if certain flights on that ticket are operated by another airline which refused to interline with the first airline; this would prevent a travel agent e.g. from issuing a ticket with an outward journey on British Midland and a return journey on Aer Lingus. Agents prefer to avoid the loss of time and the extra work involved in issuing separate tickets. In addition a passenger holding a non-interlinable ticket is more likely to return it unused (because he may have had to change his plans and to buy another ticket), in which case the travel agent would lose his commission.
(7) Since 1964, Aer Lingus concurred with British Midland's participation in the MITA.
After having been awarded the right to operate a London (Heathrow) - Dublin service, British Midland announced on 22 February 1989 its intention to commence services on that route from 28 April 1989. On 7 April 1989 Aer Lingus gave notice that it terminated its concurrence with British Midland's participation in MITA, effective 7 May. Furthermore Aer Lingus did not accept interchangeability of its and British Midland's tickets on the London (Heathrow)-Dublin route. British Midland was able to interline with British Airways until the latter's withdrawal from the route at the end of March 1991.
Aer Lingus did not cancel its interline agreement with the other airline operating on the route, British Airways.
In statements to the press issued at that time, Aer Lingus declared:
'We have established ourselves as the dominant carrier on the routes between the two capitals, and intend to remain so . . . British Midland does not have the resources to offer a similar frequency or service, so they want us to provide product for them via an interline agreement.' (Airline World, 24 April 1989).
C. Tariff consultations
(8) On 7 and 8 February 1991 Aer Lingus attended the Special Composite Meeting of Cargo and Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conferences, organized by IATA in Geneva.
At the opening of the Conference, the Aer Lingus representative stated that the company would not participate in consultations concerning the routes from Dublin to Amsterdam, London and Paris. The Conference proceeded to discuss the continuation of the exceptional fare increases (IATA Resolutions 003 w and 003 ww, 003 m and 003 mm) which had been discussed at the IATA Special Conferences on 29 August and 31 October 1990. These discussions covered all transport worldwide, including intra-Community transport. The conclusion of the conference was to file for an extension of the existing resolutions.
Notwithstanding Aer Lingus' statement, it took part in the conference discussions and the final vote.
D. The markets concerned
(i) Provision of air transport
(9) When British Midland in March 1989 announced its intention to start a London (Heathrow) - Dublin service, only Aer Lingus and British Airways were present on the route. At that time Aer Lingus accounted for approximately 75 % of passengers carried (3), Biritsh Airways for 25 %.
In the year following British Midland's entry on the route, it obtained an average 15 % market share; Aer Lingus and British Airways both lost about one-seventh of their market share and averaged 64 and 21 %. In the second year following its entry British Midland's market share grew to 21 %, Aer Lingus' remained fairly stable and British Airways' decreased to 17 %.
British Airways terminated its London (Heathrow) - Dublin service in March 1991. At that time British Airways concluded a marketing agreement with Aer Lingus which Aer Lingus expected to enable it to capture 160 000 passengers annually (i.e. about 10 % of market volume). In the period from April to June 1991, Aer Lingus recovered its initial 75 % share of passengers carried.
Between 1989 and the middle of 1991, the UK and Irish authorities did not allow airlines other than Aer Lingus, British Airways and British Midland to operate scheduled services between London (Heathrow) and Dublin.
(10) There are a number of services operated between Dublin and London airports other than Heathrow:
- at the time of the refusal to interline, both Aer Lingus and Dan Air operated Dublin-London (Gatwick) services. Aer Lingus had an 80 % share of that traffic and maintained an interline agreement with Dan Air. Dan Air withdrew in April 1990, and now Aer Lingus is the sole airline on that route,
- at the time of the refusal to interline, Aer Lingus operated a service from Dublin to London (Stansted). Since that time the service has been transferred to Ryan Air which is the sole airline on that route,
- a service between Dublin and Luton was operated for a few months by Capital and, until the middle of 1991, by Ryan Air. At the present time that service is not provided.
The total annual number of passengers travelling by air between the four London airports, on one hand, and Dublin, on the other hand, is in the 2 to 2,5 million range and in recent years often grew by over 20 % annually. In 1990 about 75 % passed through Heathrow, 13 % through Luton, 10 % through Gatwick and 2 % through Stansted. Aer Lingus' share of all London - Dublin traffic, at the time of the refusal to interline, amounted to 66 %, has decreased in 1990 and now is estimated to be back to 66 %.
(11) In 1989, both Aer Lingus and British Airways operated on relatively high load factors on the route of around 75 % (as compared to an average for the European network of 66 % for these airlines and of 62 % for the industry). Their load factors in early 1990 decreased to a still high 70 %. British Midland was in the 45 to 50 % range. At the busiest times in 1991, Aer Lingus operated 18 daily return services between London (Heathrow) and Dublin and British Midland 8. By its own admission Aer Lingus is incurring heavy losses on the service.
(ii) Sale of air transport
(12) The airlines' share of passengers carried on the London (Heathrow) - Dublin route corresponds closely to their share of ticket sales in the United Kingdom and Ireland. The airlines tend to have a stronger position in their home market than in the other market.
About 15 to 20 % of sales are made to business travellers having bought tickets at the higher unrestricted fares (mainly C or Y).
(13) Tariffs applied by British Airways and by Aer Lingus and, with a significant number of exceptions, by British Midland on the Dublin - London (Heathrow) and (Gatwick) services are essentially identical. Ryan Air applied significantly lower tariffs on the Dublin - London (Stansted) and Luton routes.
II. LEGAL ASSESSMENT
A. Article 86
(a) Dominant position
(i) Relevant markets
(14) Aer Lingus' conduct has effects on the markets for the provision and sale of air transport between Dublin and London (Heathrow).
The characteristics of surface transport (speed, convenience, several changes of transport means) on this route are sufficiently different to preclude substitutability of demand by most travellers. Some travellers - in particular some price-conscious leisure travellers - may consider that surface transport and air transport at the lowest, very restricted faces are interchangeable. However, the supply of air transport at those fares is limited. Furthermore, many travellers - and not only those that cannot afford to spend a day travelling between Dublin and London - are not interested in slow surface transport or in air travel at very restrictive conditions, and they do not take the view that both modes of transport are substitutable. There is considerable specific demand for fast, flexible and convenient travel between the two cities which can only be met by air transport. These travellers pay prices which are significantly higher than the price of surface transport, and there is no evidence that the availability of surface transport at lower prices acts as a constraint on the marketing of air travel at those higher fares. It is precisely for the same travellers that the possibility to interline is most important.
Even though air travel between Dublin and other London airports than Heathrow could sometimes be substituted to travel to Heathrow, that is not so for a large number of travellers. In particular business travellers traditionally prefer Heathrow, among other reasons because other London airports are not served as frequently as Heathrow, and because they do not offer a similar range of connections and therefore will be less suited to onward travel beyond London. In addition, it must be considered that at the time the sale is made, some passengers will be able to select other airports in the area than London (Heathrow). However, the refusal by Aer Lingus to accept changes from or to British Midland bookings affects passengers already holding a ticket for transport between London (Heathrow) and Dublin, and for those a change of airport may be impossible (e.g. if their car is parked at Heathrow) and will usually be very inconvenient (because they have to change arrangements or because it will take more time to reach their final destination). In any event, including other London airports than Heathrow in the relevant product market would not reduce Aer Lingus' market share to a point where dominance can be excluded.
Supply substitutability is also limited. From 1989 to the middle of 1991, no other airlines were authorized to operate scheduled services between London (Heathrow) and Dublin. In addition, Heathrow airport is notoriously congested; if slots can be obtained at all to operate a service to Dublin, their opportunity cost would be very high.
(15) For the purpose of assessing the effect of the refusal to interline on sales of airline tickets, the UK and Ireland are two separate geographic markets. The distribution of air transport services is still very much organized on a national level: travel agents operate under essentially the same conditions at national level; airlines organize their marketing departments on a national level; fares are quoted in local currencies; promotional fares and discount conditions may be restricted to certain countries; crossborder sales are rare and where they do occur, airlines tend to resist them; tickets are processed through the IATA bank settlement plans which are organized on a national basis; and the distribution of market shares for route groups very much tends to be determined on a country-by-country basis, with flag carriers having a very high share in their home countries but a much lower share in other countries.
In the present case, there are significant price differences between the fares ex Ireland and ex UK, varying from 90 to 130 % of the level applied in the other Member State. The distribution of market shares also varies considerably: Aer Lingus' share of sales of the London (Heathrow) - Dublin service in the UK is only three-quarters of its share of its home market. The market share achieved by the UK airlines in Ireland is less than two-thirds of their share in their home market.
(16) Consequently, the Commission assesses the abuse on the markets for the provision of London (Heathrow) - Dublin air transport and for the sale of London (Heathrow) - Dublin air transport in both Ireland and in the UK.
(ii) Substantial part of the common market
(17) The London (Heathrow) - Dublin service is one of the busiest in the Community. The number of passengers on the route amounts to approximately 1,7 million annually. Consequently there is a significant volume of travel affected by the refusal to interline.
Both the UK and Ireland are substantial parts of the common market. The volume of sales of the Dublin - London (Heathrow) service in each country is significant (in the ECU 50 to 100 million range annually).
(iii) Dominance
(18) Aer Lingus enjoys market shares which are unusually high, even in an oligopolistic industry such as air transport:
- its share of passengers carried on the London (Heathrow) - Dublin service at the time of the refusal to interline amounted to 75 %, subsequently decreased to the 60 to 65 % range, and following British Airways' exit from the route in March 1991 recovered to exceed 75 %. Most of British Airways' market share at that point was captured by Aer Lingus. Including other London airports will not have a material impact on Aer Lingus' market share,
- its share of ticket sales corresponds closely to its share of passengers carried and in both geographic markets exceeded 50 %. Even though the Commission does not possess data on market shares following British Airways' exit from the route, the fact that Aer Lingus' share of traffic between London (Heathrow) and Dublin increased significantly implies that its share of sales increased in a similar proportion.
(19) In addition, under the UK and Irish policies in effect between 1989 and the middle of 1991 no other airlines besides Aer Lingus, British Midland and British Airways were authorized to operate third- and fourth-freedom services between London (Heathrow) and Dublin. There were no fifth-freedom services. Furthermore Heathrow is a notoriously congested airport and demand for slots considerably exceeds supply. Therefore airlines operating out of Heathrow will tend to use slots for the services which make the largest contribution to profits. Using Heathrow slots for additional services to Dublin, a route which is already relatively well served and which at present is not profitable, would in most cases imply a high opportunity cost.
While there are services to other London airports, the importance of Heathrow is such, particularly for business travellers and for connecting passengers, that competition arising from these services has only a limited impact on the service to Heathrow. In any event, including these other airports would leave Aer Lingus with a still high two-thirds of the market.
(20) The very high share of the relevant market enjoyed by Aer Lingus, and the presence of barriers to entry on the route concerned are indicative of dominance. Furthermore Aer Lingus is the national Irish airline and would be the preferred choice of most passengers on the route, who are Irish nationals. Aer Lingus has the most extensive network out of Ireland and accounts for a very large share of air transport out of the country. This position gives it commercial power in the local market which smaller, foreign-based airlines do not possess.
(21) The mere fact that Aer Lingus was able to disregard the complaints of travel agents and business travellers suffering from the refusal to interline suggests that Aer Lingus enjoys considerable freedom of action.
When British Midland announced its intention to commence operations on the London (Heathrow) - Dublin route, Aer Lingus took certain measures such as improving its service and aligning certain fare categories on British Midland's. However, this action has been quite limited: Aer Lingus confined its reaction essentially to matching certain British Midland leisure-type fares. More importantly, Aer Lingus' action was essentially in anticipation of British Midland's arrival; after an initial period of preparing for that event, Aer Lingus' reaction was much attenuated.
(22) Even though British Midland has been able to obtain a significant market share in the years following entry on the route, its presence does not negate the evidence of dominance by Aer Lingus.
Aer Lingus maintained and even increased the absolute number of passengers carried on the route. Its share of passengers carried and of sales relative to that of other airlines on the route decreased following British Midland's entry, but only by a fairly small margin and recovered again after British Airways' exit. British Midland's success appears to be due to a large extent to its ability to benefit from the significant growth of the number of passengers on the route between 1989 and 1990 by providing extra capacity at a time when there was demand for it.
(23) All of this indicates that Aer Lingus has an appreciable freedom of action. While Aer Lingus has been exposed to a certain amount of competition, it has been able to contain that competition successfully at relatively low cost to itself.
(b) Abuse
(24) Abusive conduct is defined as 'practices which are likely to affect the structure of a market where, as a result of the presence of the undertaking in question, competition has already been weakened and which, through recourse to methods differing from those governing normal competition in goods or services based on traders' performance, have the effect of hindering the maintenance or development of the level of competition existing on the market' (Judgment of the Court of Justice of 13 February 1979 in Case 85/76, Hoffmann-La Roche v. Commission, [1979] ECR 541).
(25) Refusing to interline is not normal competition on the merits. Interlining has for many years been accepted industry practice, with widely acknowledged benefits for both airlines and passengers. A refusal to interline for other reasons than problems with currency convertibility or doubts about the creditworthiness of the beneficiary airline is a highly unusual step and has up to now not been considered by the European airline industry as a normal competitive strategy. Aer Lingus itself has maintained interline agreements with the other airlines competing with it on London Dublin services, British Airways and Dan Air.
Aer Lingus has argued that, whereas interlining in most circumstances is beneficial to all participating airlines, it would suffer from interlining with British Midland by losing several points of market share to the new entrant. Even if this could be demonstrated, the argument that interlining would result in a loss of revenue would not in itself make the refusal legitimate. Aer Lingus has not argued that interlining with British Midland would have a significant effect on its own costs, whereas there is evidence that a refusal to interline would impose a significant handicap on British Midland.
(26) Both a refusal to grant new interline facilities and the withdrawal of existing interline facilities may, depending on the circumstances, hinder the maintenance or development of competition. Whether a duty to interline arises depends on the effects on competition of the refusal to interline; it would exist in particular when the refusal or withdrawal of interline facilities by a dominant airline is objectively likely to have a significant impact on the other airline's ability to start a new service or sustain an existing service on account of its effects on the other airline's costs and revenue in respect of the service in question, and when the dominant airline cannot give any objective commercial reason for its refusal (such as concerns about creditworthiness) other than its wish to avoid helping this particular competitor. It is unlikely that there is such justification when the dominant airline singles out an airline with which it previously interlined, after that airline starts competing on an important route, but continues to interline with other competitors.
(27) When an airline commences a new service, it will normally expect to incur some losses during an initial period, during which it will have to organize economic operation of its service and to attract sufficient interest from the travel trade and from travellers. It cannot expet to attain the load factors and the revenue necessary to ensure profitable operations from the beginning of the service. Therefore new entry will always be difficult.
Denying interline facilities is likely to increase that difficulty. A new entrant without interlining facilities is likely to be considered in this respect as a second-rate airline by travel agents and by travellers alike, which will make it more difficult to attain the commercial standing required to operate profitably. Travel agents wish to avoid the loss of time, the extra work and the potential loss of revenue caused by issuing tickets for transort on an airline without interline facilities. Furthermore a significant number of passengers consider the possibility to change tickets and to organize complex journeys on a single ticket as necessary; a refusal to interline will have the effect of diverting many of these passengers away from the new entrant airline. In this respect, a refusal to interline affects in particular the well-informed business travellers who require fully flexible tickets and who make a disproportionately large contribution to the revenue of the new entrant; significantly reducing this revenue will have a serious effect on the economics of the new entrant's operations.
A review of British Midland's performance on the Dublin - London (Heathrow) route confirms that these effects in this case are significant. British Midland's load factors are appreciably lower than Aer Lingus' on the same route. The difference to a large extent reflects British Midland's handicap in carrying interline passengers. This implies that passengers wishing to make use of interline facilities on the London (Heathrow) - Dublin service and unable to do so because of Aer Lingus' refusal to interline with British Midland, prefer to play safe and use the service of the airline with the highest frequency, i.e. Aer Lingus. The resulting loss of revenue to British Midland may be estimated at several million ECU per year.
(28) A refusal to interline also hinders the maintenance or development of competition when it imposes a significant cost on competitors. If an incumbent airline operates at high frequency on a route accounts for a very large share of capacity and refuses to interline with a new entrant on that route, the latter will have a choice. It can either start a low frequency service in order to minimize initial losses, but will then face a long unprofitable start-up period. Alternatively a new entrant can operate a high frequency from the beginning, even though this may not be warranted by its initial market share, so as to attract (in particular business) travellers who require high frequencies in order to be able to organize their journey with maximum flexibility. In both situations a new entrant will face higher start-up costs.
In the present case British Midland could not reasonable confront Aer Lingus by operating at low frequency: it would then relegate itself to the role of an airline of minor importance and could not hope to attract many business travellers which it needs to improve the revenue of the service. As a result British Midland would be unlikely to develop into a strong competitor and might not even be interested in continuing its service to Dublin because it could make better use of its Heathrow slots.
(29) It is true that Aer Lingus' strategy in the event has not resulted in British Midland's departure from the route, and that British Midland has succeeded in building up a reasonable schedule and in obtaining a significant market share. It is also true that the refusal to interline does not entirely preclude British Midland from attracting business travellers: notwithstanding the refusal to interline by Aer Lingus, British Midland passengers on the Dublin - London (Heathrow) service can still change their tickets to a reasonable number of flights operated by British Midland itself (and by British Airways until that airline withdrew from the route); in addition British Midland carries some passengers who travel on tickets issued by other airlines than Aer Lingus (by British Airways, until that airline withdrew from the route, and by others - e.g. third country airlines carrying passengers to London from where they continue to Dublin on British Midland). However, if Aer Lingus had continued to accept interlining, British Midland would have incurred lower costs, it would have earned higher revenues, its services would have been more attractive to its passengers and it would have been a stronger and more successful competitor than it now is.
The fact that British Midland has been able to continue operations notwithstanding the handicap imposed on it by Aer Lingus, is due in the first place to British Midland's determination to succeed in the face of unusual difficulties; it does not mean that the refusal had no effect on competition. There is no doubt that at the time the practice was implemented, the refusal to interline was intended and was likely to hinder the development of competition. The lawfulness of the refusal at the time when it occurred cannot depend on whether the competitor was later willing and able to remain on the route in spite of the disadvantages imposed on it.
(30) Consequently, Aer Lingus has pursued a strategy which (even if not wholly effective) is both selective and exclusionary and restricts the development of competition on the London (Heathrow) - Dublin route.
The refusal to interline in this case essentially consists in the imposition, contrary to normal industry practice, of a significant handicap on a competitor by raising its costs and depriving it of revenue. Aer Lingus has not been able to point to efficiencies created by a refusal to interline nor to advance any other persuasive and legitimate business justification for its conduct. Its desire to avoid loss of market share, the circumstance that this is a route of vital importance to the company and that its operating margin is under pressure do not make this a legitimate response to new entry.
(c) Effect on trade between Member States
(31) The refusal to interline concerns airlines from two Member States and relates to an air transport service of considerable importance between those States. It affects the possibility for travellers throughout the Community to benefit from interlining, and it prevents travel agents throughout from issuing interlining tickets. Therefore the effects of the refusal to interline are not confined to a single Member State, but affect trade between Member States.
(d) Conclusion
(32) The Commission considers that the withdrawal by Aer Lingus of British Midland's authority to:
(i) issue or complete transportation documents for carriage between London (Heathrow) and Dublin in accordance with Aer Lingus' tariffs and other applicable provisions as laid down in IATA Resolution 780,
and
(ii) effect changes to its transportations documents in accordance with generally applicable procedures as laid down in IATA Resolution 736,
constitutes an infringement of Article 86.
B. Article 85
(33) The Special Composite Meeting of Cargo and Passengers Tariffs Coordinating Conference organized by IATA on 7 and 8 February 1991, was attached by about 50 airlilnes from all over the world, including Aer Lingus and the flag carriers from 10 other Member States. The agenda for the meeting was to review the latest developments in operating costs. The object of the meeting was to resubmit an agreement to governments (in respect of new passenger fares and cargo rates) based on the most recent situation.
This exchange of information on airline costs and tariff objectives with a view to preparing a common position on passengers' fares and cargo rates, constitutes and agreement, or at least a concerted practice between undertakings, by which they coordinate their pricing decisions. Tariff consultations are therefore a restriction of competition as contemplated by Article 85 (1). Since they cover air transport between Member States, they also affect trade between Member States. Therefore the tariff consultations are caught by Article 85 (1).
(34) Air carriers have nevertheless been authorized to hold tariff consultations under the conditions set forth in Article 3 of the group exemption laid down in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 84/91 (4) which entered into force on 1 February 1991. In that Regulation, the Commission took the view that consultations on passenger and cargo tariffs may contribute to the generalized acceptance of interlinable fares and rates to the benefit of air carriers as well as air transport users.
However, consultations must not exceed the lawful purpose of facilitating interlining. In particular, air carriers participating in the consultation mechanism are obliged to interline with all other carriers concerned, as specified in Article 3 (1) (b) and (d) of the Regulation.
These provisions oblige participants in passenger and cargo consultations to interline in respect of their Community networks with other carriers which operate or have applied to operate direct or indirect services on the routes concerned by the consultations.
(35) Even though Aer Lingus was present at the consultation in early February 1991, it stated at the beginning of the meeting that it would not participate in the consultations concerning the routes from Dublin to Amsterdam, London and Paris (5). Presumably this statement was intended to protect Aer Lingus from having to interline on those routes by excluding them from the discussion. However, other carriers operating those services (in particular Air France, British Airways and British Midland) did not make this reservation and Aer Lingus did not physically withdraw from the meeting. In the event, there was no specific discussion of those routes but there was a general discussion on tariffs which concerned those routes in the same way as all other routes. Even if Aer Lingus did not express any views about these routes specifically, it learned about its competitors' intentions in general and therefore also in respect of these routes, Aer Lingus would have heard them. Aer Lingus contributed to the general discussion and participated in the vote on whether to apply a two or three per cent increase on European routes. Therefore the conclusions of the conference apply to the routes referred to by Aer Lingus; its statement has not had any impact on the identity of those attending or voting, or on the contents or on the outcome of the consultations. The routes 'excluded' by Aer Lingus were therefore covered by the consultations.
(36) In addition, even if it were accepted that the routes from Dublin to Amsterdam, London and Paris were outside the consultations at which Aer Lingus was present, this would not have been sufficient to avoid a duty to interline with British Midland. The tariff consultation concerned routes between Dublin and certain destinations served directly by Aer Lingus and indirectly by British Midland, either with a change of aircraft at London (Heathrow) (e.g. Birmingham, East Midland) or with a change of aircraft and airport in London (e.g. Channel Islands, Brussels). Furthermore, British Midland has applied to operate to certain destinations in respect of which Aer Lingus has not made a reservation. e.g. London (Heathrow) to Brussels, Copenhagen, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Malaga, Milan, Palma and Rome. Its Dublin - London (Heathrow) service would enable the company to offer indirect service from Dublin to these destinations.
(37) Consequently, Aer Lingus has not respected the conditions specified in Article 3 (1) (b) and (d) of Regulation (EEC) No 84/91.
The Commission considers that Aer Lingus' participation in the tariff consultation of 7 and 8 February 1991 without granting British Midland the authority to:
(i) issue or complete transportation documents for carriage over its Community network in accordance with Aer Lingus' tariffs and other applicable provisions as laid down in IATA Resolution 780;
and
(ii) effect changes to its transportation documents for carriage over its Community network in accordance with generally applicable procedures as laid down in IATA Resolution 736
constitutes an infringement of Article 85 (1).
Aer Lingus did not attend the next tariff consultations on 2 to 11 September 1991 which discussed tariffs for effect from 1 April 1992.
C. Article 12 (2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3975/87 (6)
(38) In the light of the considerations set out above, the Commission considers that there are grounds for finding that Aer Lingus has infringed Articles 85 (1) and 86.
(39) Pursuant to Article 12 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 3975/87, the Commission may impose fines of from ECU 1 000 to 1 000 000, or a sum in excess thereof but not exceeding 10 % of the turnover in the preceding business year of the undertakings participating in the infringement, where either intentionally or negligently they infringe Article 85 (1) or Article 86 of the Treaty. In fixing the amount of the fine, regard must be had both to the gravity and to the duration of the infringement.
(40) The Commission considers that Aer Lingus has infringed Article 85 (1) by participating in a tariff consultation without respecting the conditions set forth in Regulation (EEC) No 84/91.
This infringement has taken place on 7 and 8 February 1991 and its effects continued at least until the fares discussed at the next tariff consulations take effect, i.e. until 1 April 1992.
(41) The Commission considers that Aer Lingus has infringed Article 86 by withdrawing British Midland's authority to:
(i) issue or complete transportation documents for carriage between Dublin and London (Heathrow) in accordance with Aer Lingus' tariffs and other applicable provisions as laid down in IATA Resolution 780; and
(ii) effect changes to its transportation documents in accordance with generally applicable procedures as laid down in IATA Resolution 736.
This infringement has lasted from 7 April 1989 to the present date.
(42) The Commission considers that the imposition of a fine on Aer Lingus is justified in so far as the infringement relates to Article 86. In view of the fact that Regulation (EEC) No 84/91 had only just entered into force when the infringement relating to Article 85 was committed, the Commission does not consider it appropriate to impose a fine on account of the parallel violation of Article 85.
In fixing the amount of the fine, it takes into account the fact that Aer Lingus' conduct is intended to affect the structure of competition by penalizing a competitor entering an important market and therefore is particularly serious. The Commission also considered that Aer Lingus' conduct has not succeeded in eliminating British Midland as a competitor on the London (Heathrow) - Dublin route, although there is not doubt that British Midland enjoys a considerably less successful operation than if Aer Lingus had continued to interline.
D. Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 3975/87
(43) The refusal to interline by Aer Lingus up to the present time has deprived British Midland of the opportunity to compete with Aer Lingus on equal footing, without suffering from a significant handicap. Therefore the Commission requires Aer Lingus to bring the refusal to interline to an end and orders Aer Lingus to grant British Midland the authority to interline within two months from the date when this Decision is notified.
This order does not merely require Aer Lingus to enter into an arrangement giving British Midland the possibility to interline in respect of the London (Heathrow) - Dublin route, but also to refrain from any conduct (such as refusing reservations or confirmations which it would accept from other interline partners) which would be an obstacle to the normal implementation of that arrangement.
(44) However, the Commission accepts that Aer Lingus is not obliged to interline permanently with British Midland on this route. If a dominant airline has been able to develop a high frequency, that is a legitimate competitive advantage which it need not necessarily share with rivals. Furthermore, new entrants should not be able to rely forever on their competitors' frequencies and networks, but they must be encouraged to build up extensive networks and high frequencies by themselves and to gain commercial standing in order to attract sufficient interest from travel agents and passengers. Therefore the Commission considers that the duty to interline may be limited in time to a duration which is necessary for British Midland to develop its service without suffering from an undue handicap imposed by its dominant competitor contrary to the industry's and that competitor's normal practice.
In the present case there are a number of obstacles which make it difficult for British Midland to establish itself on the route. Aer Lingus enjoys considerable commercial strength in its home country and it accounts for a very high share of passengers and frequencies as compared to British Midland's. Because of the scarcity of available slots at Heathrow, British Midland could not increase the frequency of its Dublin service rapidly without lowering the frequency of some of its other services. If British Midland wants to obtain a comparable position to Aer Lingus and also operate a very high-frequency service between London (Heathrow) and Dublin, it would need sufficient time to build up commercial strength and an adequate schedule. Therefore the Commission considers that the duty to which Aer Lingus was subjected in 1989 makes it reasonable now, in the light of the circumstances which have occurred, that a duty to interline should be imposed for a two-year period.
If the circumstances on the market change substantially during this period, the Commission will reconsider its order. In the light of the market conditions which will prevail at the expiry of this period, of British Midland's efforts to establish itself and of the obstacles it will have encountered, the Commission will consider whether this duty needs to be extended,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
1. Aer Lingus plc has infringed Article 86 of the EEC Treaty by withdrawing, on 7 May 1989, British Midland's authority to:
(i) issue or complete transportation documents for carriage between Dublin and London (Heathrow) in accordance with Aer Lingus' tariffs and other applicable provisions as laid down in IATA Resolution 780;
and
(ii) effect changes to its transportation documents in accordance with generally applicable procedures as laid down in IATA Resolution 736;
2. Aer Lingus plc has infringed Article 85 of the EEC Treaty by participating in a tariff consultation on 7 and 8 February 1991 without granting British Midland Airways Limited the authority to:
(i) issue or complete transportation documents for carriage over its Community network in accordance with Aer Lingus' tariffs and other applicable provisions as laid down in IATA Resolution 780;
and
(ii) effect changes to its transportation documents for carriage over its Community network in accordance with generally applicable procedures as laid down in IATA Resolution 736.
Article 2
Aer Lingus plc shall within two months from the date when this Decision is notified, put an end to the infringement established in Article 1 (1) and shall, for two years from that date, grant British Midland Airways Limited the authority to:
(i) issue or complete transportation documents for carriage between Dublin and London (Heathrow) in accordance with its own tariffs and other applicable provisions as laid down in IATA Resolution 780;
and
(ii) effect changes to its transportation documents in accordance with generally applicable procedures as laid down in IATA Resolution 736.
Aer Lingus shall notify the Commission of all measures it takes in order to comply with this order.
Article 3
For the infringements established in Article 1 (1), a fine of ECU 750 000 is hereby imposed on Aer Lingus plc.
The fine shall be paid within three months of the date of notification of this Decision to account No 310-0933000-43 with Banque Bruxelles Lambert, agence européenne, rond-point Schuman 5, B-1040 Bruxelles.
On expiry of that period, interest shall automatically be payable at the rate charged by the European Monetary Cooperation Fund on its ecu operations on the first working day of the month in which this Decision was adopted, plus 3,5 percentage points, i.e. 13,75 %.
Should payment be made in the national currency of the Member State where the bank nominated for payment is situated, the exchange rate applicable shall be that prevailing on the day preceding payment.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to Aer Lingus plc, Dublin Airport, Dublin, Ireland.
This Decision is enforceable pursuant to Article 192 of the EEC Treaty. Done at Brussels, 26 February 1992. | [
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
Subsets and Splits