title: Council Decision of 9 July 2013 adopting the Council's position on draft amending budget No 3 of the European Union for the financial year 2013

text:
               13.7.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 201/4

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 9 July 2013
   adopting the Council's position on draft amending budget No 3 of the European Union for the financial year 2013
   2013/C 201/05
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 314 thereof, in conjunction with the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 106a thereof,
   Having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (1) and in particular Article 41 thereof,
   Whereas:

               —

               the Union's budget for the financial year 2013 was definitively adopted on 12 December 2012 (2),

               —

               on 15 April 2013, the Commission submitted a proposal containing draft amending budget No 3 to the general budget for the financial year 2013.

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Sole Article
   The Council's position on draft amending budget No 3 of the European Union for the financial year 2013 was adopted on 9 July 2013.
   The full text can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the Council's website (http://www.consilium.europa.eu/).

      Done at Brussels, 9 July 2013.

            For the Council

            The President

         R. ŠADŽIUS

      (1)  OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 66, 8.3.2013, p. 1, with corrigendum in OJ L 134, 18.5.2013, p. 21.


title: 77/342/EEC: Council Decision of 25 April 1977 appointing an alternate member of the Advisory Committee on Medical Training

text:
No L 120 / 20                      Official Journal of the European Communities                       13 . 5 . 77
                                                    COUNCIL DECISION
                                                       of 25 April 1977
                appointing an alternate member of the Advisory Committee on Medical
                                                           Training
                                                         (77/342/ EEC)
            THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
            Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
            Having regard to Council Decision 75/ 364/ EEC of 16 June 1975 setting up an Advisory
            Committee on Medical Training (>),
            Having regard to Council Decision 76/385/ EEC of 6 April 1976 appointing the members
            and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Medical Training (2),
            Whereas Mr Hastert has resigned as an alternate member of the Advisory Committee on
            Medical Training ;
            Whereas the Luxembourg Government nominated Mr Kasel as a new alternate member
            of that Committee by letter dated 23 March 1977,
            HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS :
                                                          Sole Article
            Mr Kasel is hereby appointed an alternate member of the Advisory Committee on
            Medical Training in place of Mr Hastert for the remainder of the latter's term of office,
            which runs until 5 April 1979 .
            Done at Luxembourg, 25 April 1977 .
                                                                        For the Council
                                                                         The President
                                                                           J. SILKIN
           (>) O ) No L 167 , }(). 6 . I'm , p . 1 7,
           (') OJ No 1. 101 , I S. 4 . 1976 , p . SI .


title: 2010/779/EU: Council Decision of 14 December 2010 concerning the request of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis relating to the establishment of a European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice

text:
               17.12.2010

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 333/58

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 14 December 2010
   concerning the request of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis relating to the establishment of a European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice
   (2010/779/EU)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to Article 4 of Protocol (No 19) on the Schengen acquis integrated into the framework of the European Union, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (hereinafter ‘the Schengen Protocol’),
   Having regard to the request by the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, by its letter to the President of the Council of 5 October 2010, to participate in certain provisions of the Schengen acquis, as specified in that letter,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               By Decision 2000/365/EC (1) the Council authorised the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis, in accordance with the conditions set out in that Decision.

               (2)

               On 24 June 2009 the European Commission presented a proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom security and justice (hereinafter ‘the proposed Regulation’).

               (3)

               According to the proposed Regulation, the European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom security and justice (hereinafter ‘the Agency’) is to be made responsible for the operational management of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II), the Visa Information System (VIS) and Eurodac and it may be made responsible for the preparation, development and operational management of other large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice, on the basis of a relevant legislative instrument, based on Title V of Part three of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

               (4)

               SIS II is part of the Schengen acquis. Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) and Council Decision 2007/533/JHA (3) govern the establishment, operation and use of SIS II. However, the United Kingdom has only taken part in the adoption of Decision 2007/533/JHA which develops the provisions of the Schengen acquis referred to in Article 1(a)(ii) of Decision 2000/365/EC.

               (5)

               VIS is also part of the Schengen acquis. The United Kingdom did not take part in the adoption of, and is not bound by Decision 2004/512/EC (4), Regulation (EC) No 767/2008 (5) and Decision 2008/633/JHA (6) which govern the establishment, operation or use of VIS.

               (6)

               Eurodac is not part of the Schengen acquis. The United Kingdom has taken part in the adoption of, and is bound by Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000 (7) which governs the establishment, operation and use of Eurodac.

               (7)

               Given its participation in Eurodac and its partial participation in SIS II, the United Kingdom has the right to participate in the activities of the Agency, to the extent that the Agency will be responsible for the operational management of SIS II as governed by Decision 2007/533/JHA, and Eurodac.

               (8)

               The proposed Agency should have a single legal personality and be characterised by the unity of its organisational and financial structure. To this end, the Agency should be established by means of a single legislative instrument which must be voted on within the Council in its entirety. Moreover, once adopted, the proposed Regulation should become applicable in its entirety in the Member States bound by it. This excludes the possibility of partial applicability for the United Kingdom.

               (9)

               In order to ensure compliance with the Treaties and the applicable Protocols, and at the same time to safeguard the unity and consistency of the proposed Regulation, the United Kingdom has requested to take part in the proposed Regulation under Article 4 of the Schengen Protocol to the extent that the Agency will be responsible for the operational management of SIS II as governed by Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and of VIS.

               (10)

               The Council recognizes the right of the United Kingdom to make, in accordance with Article 4 of the Schengen Protocol, a request for participation in the proposed Regulation, to the extent that the United Kingdom will not participate in the proposed Regulation on other grounds.

               (11)

               Participation of the United Kingdom in the proposed Regulation would be without prejudice to the fact that at present the United Kingdom does not and cannot participate in the provisions of the Schengen acquis relating to the free movement of third country nationals, visa policy and the crossing by persons of the external borders of the Member States. This would justify the inclusion of specific provisions in the proposed Regulation reflecting this special position of the United Kingdom, in particular as regards limited voting rights in the Management Board of the Agency.

               (12)

               The Mixed Committee, established pursuant to Article 3 of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the latters’ association with the implementation, application, and development of the Schengen acquis
                   (8), has been informed about the preparation of this Decision in accordance with Article 5 of that Agreement.

               (13)

               The Mixed Committee, established pursuant to Article 3 of the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis
                   (9), has been informed about the preparation of this Decision in accordance with Article 5 of that Agreement,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Further to Council Decision 2000/365/EC, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland shall take part in the Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice to the extent that it relates to the operational management of the Visa Information System (VIS) and the parts of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II), in which the United Kingdom does not participate.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

      Done at Brussels, 14 December 2010.

            For the Council

            The President

         S. VANACKERE

      (1)  OJ L 131, 1.6.2000, p. 43.

      (2)  OJ L 381, 28.12.2006, p. 4.

      (3)  OJ L 205, 7.8.2007, p. 63.

      (4)  Council Decision 2004/512/EC of 8 June 2004 establishing the Visa Information System (VIS) (OJ L 213, 15.6.2004, p. 5).

      (5)  Regulation (EC) No 767/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008 concerning the Visa Information System (VIS) and the exchange of data between Member States on short-stay visas (VIS Regulation) (OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p. 60).

      (6)  Council Decision 2008/633/JHA of 23 June 2008 concerning access for consultation of the Visa Information System (VIS) by designated authorities of Member States and by Europol for the purposes of the prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist offences and of other serious criminal offences (OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p. 129).

      (7)  Council Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000 of 11 December 2000 concerning the establishment of ‘Eurodac’ for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of the Dublin Convention (OJ L 316, 15.12.2000, p. 1).

      (8)  OJ L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 36.

      (9)  OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 52.


title: 2013/777/CFSP: Political and Security Committee Decision EUTM Somalia/1/2013 of 17 December 2013 on the appointment of an EU Mission Commander for the European Union military mission to contribute to the training of Somali security forces (EUTM Somalia)

text:
               20.12.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 346/53

         POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE DECISION EUTM SOMALIA/1/2013
   of 17 December 2013
   on the appointment of an EU Mission Commander for the European Union military mission to contribute to the training of Somali security forces (EUTM Somalia)
   (2013/777/CFSP)
   THE POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 38 thereof,
   Having regard to Council Decision 2010/96/CFSP of 15 February 2010 on a European Union military mission to contribute to the training of Somali security forces (1), and in particular Article 5 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Pursuant to Article 5(1) of Decision 2010/96/CFSP, the Council authorised the Political and Security Committee (PSC) to take decisions on the appointment of the EU Mission Commander for the European Union military mission to contribute to the training of Somali security forces (EUTM Somalia).

               (2)

               On 22 January 2013, the Council adopted Decision 2013/44/CFSP (2) amending and extending Decision 2010/96/CFSP and appointing Brigadier General Gerald AHERNE as EU Mission Commander.

               (3)

               The Italian Republic has proposed the appointment of Brigadier General Massimo MINGIARDI as the new EU Mission Commander to succeed Brigadier General Gerald AHERNE.

               (4)

               The EU Military Committee supports that proposal.

               (5)

               In accordance with Article 5 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark does not participate in the elaboration and the implementation of decisions and actions of the Union which have defence implications. Consequently, Denmark is not participating in the adoption of this Decision and is neither bound by it nor subject to its application,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Brigadier General Massimo MINGIARDI is hereby appointed EU Mission Commander for the European Union military mission to contribute to the training of Somali security forces (EUTM Somalia) as from 15 February 2014.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on 15 February 2014.

      Done at Brussels, 17 December 2013.

            For the Political and Security Committee

            The Chairperson

         W. STEVENS

      (1)  OJ L 44, 19.2.2010, p. 16.

      (2)  Council Decision 2013/44/CFSP of 22 January 2013 amending and extending Decision 2010/96/CFSP on a European Union military mission to contribute to the training of Somali security forces (OJ L 20, 23.1.2013, p. 57).


Avis juridique important

|

31989D0432

89/432/EEC: Council Decision of 3 May 1989 on the conclusion of the Third Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Finland consequent on the accession of the Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese Republic to the Community

Official Journal L 206 , 18/07/1989 P. 0004

COUNCIL DECISION of 3 May 1989 on the conclusion of the Third Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Finland consequent on the accession of the Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese Republic  to the Community (89/432/EEC) 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 the proposal from the Commission,  Whereas a total suspension by the Republic of Finland of duties on imports from Spain would facilitate trade between the two countries;  Whereas the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Finland (1) consequent on the accession of the Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese Republic to the Community, signed in Brussels on 5 October  1973 does not make provision for the Republic of Finland to suspend customs duties on goods imported from Spain;  Whereas it is therefore necessary to approve a Third Additional Protocol to the abovementioned Agreement in order to provide for the total suspension of duties on products covered by that Agreement imported into Finland from Spain,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:    Article 1 The Third Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Finland consequent on the accession of the Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese Republic to the Community is hereby approved on behalf of the Community.  The text of the Protocol is attached to this Decision.  Article 2 The President of the Council shall give the notification provided for in Article 3 of the Protocol (2).  Article 3 This Decision shall take effect on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.   Done at Brussels, 3 May 1989.  For the Council The President P. SOLBES   (1) OJ No L 328, 28. 11. 1973, p. 2. (2) The date of entry into force of the Protocol will be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities by the General Secretariat of the Council.


title: Commission Decision of 28 September 2010 appointing the members of the group for technical advice on organic production and drawing up the pool list

text:
               29.9.2010

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 262/3

         COMMISSION DECISION
   of 28 September 2010
   appointing the members of the group for technical advice on organic production and drawing up the pool list
   2010/C 262/03
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Commission Decision 2009/427/EC of 3 June 2009 setting up the expert group for technical advice on organic production (1), and in particular Article 4(2) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               By Decision 2009/427/EC the Commission set up the expert group for technical advice on organic production.

               (2)

               In accordance with Article 4(2) of Decision 2009/427/EC the Commission has published the call for applications 2009/C 308/10 (2). This call also set the selection criteria and the selection procedure, which led to the drawing up of a list of suitable candidates.

               (3)

               To complete the selection procedure the Commission now has to appoint the members of the group and draw up the list of members of the pool,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Article 1
   The lists in the Annexes to this Decision set out the names of the members of the group and of the pool list. In particular:

               (a)

               the 13 experts listed in Annex I to this Decision are appointed as permanent members of the group;

               (b)

               the list of members of the pool is also drawn up and consists of 62 experts listed in Annex II to this Decision.

         Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day of adoption and it will apply until 31 December 2013. The Commission shall decide whether to amend it and/or extend it before that date.

      Done at Brussels, 28 September 2010.

            For the Commission

         Dacian CIOLOŞ

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 139, 5.6.2009, p. 29.

      (2)  OJ C 308, 18.12.2009, p. 22.

      ANNEX I

         List in alphabetical order of the experts appointed as permanent members of the group

                  —

                  Alexander Beck

                  —

                  Jacques Cabaret

                  —

                  Niels Halberg

                  —

                  Sonya Ivanova-Peneva

                  —

                  Lizzie Melby Jespersen

                  —

                  Ursula Kretzschmar

                  —

                  Nicolas Lampkin

                  —

                  Giuseppe Lembo

                  —

                  Mariane Monod

                  —

                  Robin Frederik Alexander Moritz

                  —

                  José Luis de la Plaza Pérez

                  —

                  Bernhard Speiser

                  —

                  Fabio Tittarelli

      ANNEX II

         List in alphabetical order of the experts included in the pool list

                  —

                  Simó Alegre Castellví

                  —

                  David Arney

                  —

                  Keith Ball

                  —

                  Stéphane Bellon

                  —

                  Francis Blake

                  —

                  Michel Bouilhol

                  —

                  Stefano Canali

                  —

                  Philippe Darriet

                  —

                  Jans Didier

                  —

                  Karl-Jan Erstad

                  —

                  Alicia Estevez

                  —

                  Juan Fernando Gallardo Lancho

                  —

                  Roberto García Ruiz

                  —

                  Elisabetta Giuffra

                  —

                  Aase Solvej Hansen

                  —

                  Roger Michael Hitchings

                  —

                  Uwe Hofmann

                  —

                  Jiri Harazim

                  —

                  Henning Høgh Jensen

                  —

                  Niels Finn Johansen

                  —

                  Monique Jonis

                  —

                  Maria Concepción Jorda Gutiérrez

                  —

                  Herve Juin

                  —

                  Emmanouil Kampourakis

                  —

                  Géza Kovács

                  —

                  Michael Kügler

                  —

                  Markus Kelderer

                  —

                  Sybille Kyed

                  —

                  Jascha Iri Leenhouwers

                  —

                  Carlo Leifert

                  —

                  Margareta Lennartsson Turner

                  —

                  Mariusz Maciejczak

                  —

                  Giovanna Martelli

                  —

                  Juan Rodriguez Martin

                  —

                  Avraam Mavridis

                  —

                  Cristina Micheloni

                  —

                  Bent Egberg Mikkelsen

                  —

                  Diego Omar Minnicelli

                  —

                  Susanne Padel

                  —

                  Leonidas Panomitros

                  —

                  Bruce Denholm Pearce

                  —

                  Mariana Petkova

                  —

                  Carlo Ponzio

                  —

                  Katia Radeva

                  —

                  Gerold Rahmann

                  —

                  Eckhard Reiners

                  —

                  José Raul Alves Ribeiro

                  —

                  Carlos Palacios Riocerezo

                  —

                  Denis Rusjan

                  —

                  Bernhard Schulz

                  —

                  Pentti Seuri

                  —

                  Snezhka Simeonova Delcheva

                  —

                  Evangelia Nikolaos Sossidou

                  —

                  Jens Soth

                  —

                  Christopher George Starrett

                  —

                  Wijnand Sukkel

                  —

                  Juan José Triana Marrero

                  —

                  Rob van den Broek

                  —

                  Boudewijn van Elzakker

                  —

                  Vivian Vilich

                  —

                  François Warlop

                  —

                  Simon Wright


Avis juridique important

|

31984D0334

84/334/EEC: Commission Decision of 26 June 1984 terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of certain ceramic tiles originating in Spain

Official Journal L 168 , 28/06/1984 P. 0035 - 0036

*****COMMISSION  DECISION  of 26 June 1984  terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of certain ceramic tiles originating in Spain  (84/334/EEC)  THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN  COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,  Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3017/79 of 20 December 1979 on protection against dumped or subsidized imports from countries not members of the European Economic Community (1), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1580/82 (2), and in particular Article 9 thereof,  After consultations within the Advisory Committee as provided for under the above Regulation,  Whereas:  A. Procedure  (1) In August 1983 the Commission received a complaint lodged by the Groupement des Producteurs de Carreaux Céramiques du Marché Commun on behalf of producers of glazed ceramic wall tiles whose collective output constitutes substantially all Community production of the product in question. The complaint contained evidence of dumping and of material injury resulting therefrom, which was considered sufficient to justify the initiation of a proceeding.  The Commission accordingly announced, by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Communities (3), the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of glazed ceramic wall tiles into the Community falling within Common Customs Tariff subheading ex 69.08 B II and corresponding to NIMEXE codes 69.08-85 and 69.08-99 originating in Spain and commenced an investigation.  (2) The Commission officially so advised the exporters and importers known to be concerned, the representatives of the exporting country and the complainants and gave the parties directly concerned the opportunity to make known their views in writing and to request a hearing.  The majority of the known exporters, some importers and some producers made their views known in writing.  (3) The Commission sought and verified all information it deemed to be necessary for the purposes of a determination regarding dumping and injury and carried out investigations at the premises of the following:  (a) EEC producers  Mosa BV, Maastricht, Netherlands,  NV Koninklijke Sphinx, Maastricht, Netherlands,  Marazzi Ceramiche SPA, Sassuolo, Italy,  Pilkington's Tiles Ltd, Manchester, United Kingdom,  H & R Johnson Tiles Ltd, Stoke on Trent, United Kingdom,  Eliki Ceramic Tiles SA, Athens, Greece,  Philkerham Johnson SA, Thessaloniki, Greece,  Villeroy & Boch, Mettlach, Federal Republic of Germany,  Agrob Wessel Servais, Alfter Witterschlik, Federal Republic of Germany.  (b) Exporters  Fabresa, Lucena Del Cid, Castellon,  Symfa SA, Onda, Castellon,  Azulejera la Plana SA, Villarreal, Castellon,  Ceramica Azuleu, Juan Domingo SA, Onda, Castellon.  The Commission requested and received detailed written submissions from the majority of exporters, some importers and some complainant Community producers and verified the information therein to the extent considered necessary. The investigation relating to Spanish exporters covered approximately 65 % of exports of the product concerned to the Community during the reference period. The investigation of dumping covered 1983.  B. Normal value  (4) The complaint alleged dumping on the basis of a comparison of export prices of the Spanish producers and a constructed normal value. This normal value was based on Italian producers' costs, which were considered, particularly as regards raw material and labour costs, to be similar to those in Spain.  The investigation revealed, however, that all the Spanish producers concerned had significant sales of the product on the domestic market. These sales were considered in every case to be representative enough to be the basis for establishing normal value.  (5) Normal value was accordingly determined for all but two of the exporting companies concerned on the basis of domestic prices of these companies. For the remaining exporting companies, both of which had been selling the products concerned throughout the reference period at a loss on the domestic market, normal value was determined by computing a constructed value on the basis of the companies' total cost of materials and manufacture, including overheads, and adding a profit margin of 5 % considered to be reasonable in the light of the information available on the Spanish industry's performance.  C. Export price  (6) Export prices were determined on the basis of the prices actually paid for the products sold for export to the Community.  D. Comparison  (7) In comparing normal values with export prices the Commission took account, where appropriate, of differences affecting price comparability. In the two cases where domestic sales were made at a loss the comparison was made between the constructed normal value and their export prices. Where a difference in the physical characteristics of the product was established due account was taken. These differences were in size, colour or pattern. Allowance was also made, where appropriate, for differences in conditions and terms of sale and for the incidence of cumulative indirect taxes.  All comparisons were made at ex-works level.  E. Margins  (8) The above examination of the facts shows the existence of dumping in respect of four Spanish exporters, the margin of dumping being equal to the amount by which the normal value as established exceeds the price for export to the Community.  These margins vary according to the exporter, the importing market and the type of product concerned. The weighted average margin for each of these exporters is, however, less than 0,5 % and is accordingly considered to be de minimis.  For the remaining Spanish exporters the investigation established that the prices for export to the Community were not less than the normal values.  F. Termination  (9) In these circumstances the procedure concerning imports of glazed ceramic wall tiles originating in Spain should be terminated,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Sole Article  The anti-dumping procedure in respect of glazed ceramic wall tiles originating in Spain is hereby terminated.  Done at Brussels, 26 June 1984.  For the Commission  Wilhelm HAFERKAMP  Vice-President  (1) OJ No L 339, 31. 12. 1979, p. 1.  (2) OJ No L 178, 22. 6. 1982, p. 9.  (3) OJ No C 282, 19. 10. 1983, p. 4.


Avis juridique important

|

31990D0190

90/190/EEC: Council Decision of 29 March 1990 concerning the conclusion of an Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Austria establishing cooperation in the field of training in the context of the implementation of COMETT II (1990-1994)

Official Journal L 102 , 21/04/1990 P. 0001

COUNCIL DECISION of 29 March 1990 concerning the conclusion of an Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Austria establishing cooperation in the field of training in the context of the implementation of Comett II  (1990-1994) (90/190/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 (1),  Having regard to the oppinion of the European Parliament (2),  Whereas, by Decision 89/27/EEC (3), the Council adopted the second phase of the programme for cooperation between universities and industry regarding training in the field of technology (Comett II) (1990-1994);  Whereas, by Decision of 22 May 1989, the Council adopted the opening of the Comett II programme to the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries and Article 1 of that Decision authorizes the Commission to negotiate - with those EFTA countries  which so wish - cooperation agreements in the field of training in technology in the context of the implementation of Comett II;  Whereas a cooperation Agreement with Austria enriches, by its very nature, the impact of Comett II actions throughout the Community and will strengthen the skill levels of human resources in Europe,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:    Article 1 The Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Austria establishing cooperation in the field of training in the context of the implementation of Comett II (1990-1994) is hereby approved on behalf of the Community.  The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision.  Article 2 The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the Community, give the notification as provided for in Article 15 of the Agreement.   Done at Brussels, 29 March 1990.  For the Council The President J. P. WILSON   (1) OJ No C 239, 14. 9. 1988, p. 3. (2) OJ No C 96, 17. 4. 1990. (3) OJ No L 13, 17. 1. 1989, p. 28.


title: Council Decision of 7 November 2006 regarding the position to be taken by the Community within the International Tropical Timber Council on the extension of the International Agreement on Tropical Timber, 1994

text:
               8.12.2006

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 298/1

      COUNCIL DECISION

   of 7 November 2006
   regarding the position to be taken by the Community within the International Tropical Timber Council on the extension of the International Agreement on Tropical Timber, 1994
   (2006/C 298/01)
   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) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The International Agreement on Tropical Timber of 1994 has been signed and provisionally applied by the Community by Council Decision 96/493/EC (2).

               (2)

               The successor Agreement to the International Tropical Timber Agreement of 1994 was successfully concluded within UNCTAD in January 2006.

               (3)

               The International Tropical Timber Agreement of 1994 remains in force until 31 December 2006 unless, in accordance with the provisions of Article 46(3), it is extended beyond that date by decision of the International Tropical Timber Council until such time as the successor Agreement enters into force.

               (4)

               The extension of that Agreement is in the interest of the Community.

               (5)

               The European Community's position in the International Tropical Timber Council should be established,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Article 1
   The European Community's position within the International Tropical Timber Council shall be to vote in favour of extending of the International Agreement on Tropical Timber, 1994, until the provisional or definitive entry into force of the successor Agreement of 2006.
   Article 2
   The European Community will seek for an International Tropical Timber Council decision aiming at limiting the duration of the extension of the International Agreement on Tropical Timber, 1994 or establishing a review clause.

      Done at Brussels, 7 November 2006.

            For the Council

            The President

         E. HEINÄLUOMA

      (1)  Doc. 12953/06 — COM(2006)469 final

      (2)  OJ L 208, 17.8.1996, p. 1.


title: 2012/483/EU: Commission Decision of 20 August 2012 setting a new deadline for the submission of dossiers for certain substances to be examined under the 14-year work programme referred to in Article 16(2) of Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (notified under document C(2012) 5787)  Text with EEA relevance

text:
               22.8.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 226/6

         COMMISSION DECISION
   of 20 August 2012
   setting a new deadline for the submission of dossiers for certain substances to be examined under the 14-year work programme referred to in Article 16(2) of Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
   (notified under document C(2012) 5787)
   (Text with EEA relevance)
   (2012/483/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 concerning the placing of biocidal products on the market (1), and in particular Article 16(2) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Commission Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007 of 4 December 2007 on the second phase of the 10-year work programme referred to in Article 16(2) of Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of biocidal products on the market (2) establishes a list of active substances to be assessed, with a view to their possible inclusion in Annex I, IA or IB to Directive 98/8/EC.

               (2)

               For a number of substance/product-type combinations included in that list, either all participants have discontinued their participation from the review programme, or no complete dossier was received within the time period specified in Article 9 and Article 12(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007 by the Member State designated as rapporteur for the evaluation.

               (3)

               Consequently, and pursuant to Articles 11(2), 12(1) and 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007, the Commission informed the Member States accordingly. That information was also made public by electronic means on 17 January 2011.

               (4)

               Within three months of the electronic publication of that information, several companies indicated an interest in taking over the role of participant for some of the substances and product-types concerned, in accordance with Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007.

               (5)

               A new deadline should therefore be established for the submission of dossiers for those substances and product-types in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 12(3) of that Regulation.

               (6)

               The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Biocidal Products,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   For the substances and product-types set out in the Annex, the new deadline for the submission of dossiers is 30 September 2013.
   Article 2
   This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

      Done at Brussels, 20 August 2012.

            For the Commission

         Janez POTOČNIK

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 123, 24.4.1998, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 325, 11.12.2007, p. 3.

      ANNEX

         Substances and product-types for which the new deadline for the submission of dossiers is 30 September 2013

                  Name

                  EC number

                  CAS number

                  Product-type

                  RMS

                  Triclosan

                  222-182-2

                  3380-34-5

                  2

                  DK

                  Triclosan

                  222-182-2

                  3380-34-5

                  7

                  DK

                  Triclosan

                  222-182-2

                  3380-34-5

                  9

                  DK

                  2-phenoxyethanol

                  204-589-7

                  122-99-6

                  3

                  UK


title: Decision (EU) 2016/253 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument for immediate budgetary measures to address the refugee crisis

text:
               24.2.2016

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 47/6

         DECISION (EU) 2016/253 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
   of 25 November 2015
   on the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument for immediate budgetary measures to address the refugee crisis
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (1), and in particular point 12 thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Article 11 of Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 (2) allows for the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument within the annual ceiling of EUR 471 million (2011 prices) to allow the financing of clearly identified expenditure which could not be financed within the limits of the ceilings available for one or more other headings.

               (2)

               Due to the urgent needs, it is necessary to mobilise an important additional amount to finance measures to alleviate the migration and refugee crisis.

               (3)

               After having examined all possibilities for re-allocating appropriations under the expenditure ceilings for heading 3 (Security and Citizenship) and heading 4 (Global Europe), it appears necessary to mobilise the Flexibility Instrument to complement the financing in the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2016, beyond the ceilings of heading 3 by EUR 1 506 million and heading 4 by EUR 24 million to finance measures in the field of migration and refugees. The unused annual amounts available for the Flexibility Instruments of the financial years 2014 and 2015 should be used for this mobilisation.

               (4)

               On the basis of the expected payment profile, the payment appropriations corresponding to the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument should be distributed over several financial years and are estimated to EUR 734,2 million in 2016, EUR 654,2 million in 2017, EUR 83,0 million in 2018, and EUR 58,6 million in 2019,

         HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   1.   For the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2016, the Flexibility Instrument shall be mobilised to provide the sum of EUR 1 506 million in commitment appropriations in heading 3 (Security and citizenship) and EUR 24 million in commitment appropriations in heading 4 (Global Europe).
   Those amounts shall be used to finance measures for managing the refugee crisis.
   2.   On the basis of the expected payment profile, the payment appropriations corresponding to the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument will be as follows:

               (a)

               EUR 734,2 million in 2016;

               (b)

               EUR 654,2 million in 2017;

               (c)

               EUR 83,0 million in 2018;

               (d)

               EUR 58,6 million in 2019.

         The specific amounts for each financial year shall be authorised in accordance with the annual budgetary procedure.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

      Done at Strasbourg, 25 November 2015.

            For the European Parliament

            The President

         M. SCHULZ

            For the Council

            The President

         N. SCHMIT

      (1)  OJ C 373, 20.12.2013, p. 1.

      (2)  Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884).


title: 2008/144/EC: Council Decision of 28 January 2008 concerning the conclusion of the Protocol amending the Agreement on maritime transport between the European Community and its Member States, on the one hand, and the People’s Republic of China, on the other hand, 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

text:
               21.2.2008

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 46/37

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 28 January 2008
   concerning the conclusion of the Protocol amending the Agreement on maritime transport between the European Community and its Member States, on the one hand, and the People’s Republic of China, on the other hand, 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
   (2008/144/EC)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 80(2) thereof in conjunction with the first sentence of the first subparagraph of Article 300(2) and the first subparagraph of Article 300(3) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
   Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The Agreement on maritime transport between the European Community and its Member States, on the one hand, and the People’s Republic of China, on the other hand (hereinafter the Agreement), was signed in Brussels on 6 December 2002.

               (2)

               A Protocol amending the Agreement 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 was signed in Beijing on 5 September 2005.

               (3)

               In accordance with Article 6(2) of the 2005 Act of Accession Bulgaria and Romania are to accede to the Agreement by way of a protocol between the Council and the People’s Republic of China.

               (4)

               The necessary constitutional and institutional procedures have been completed and the Protocol should therefore be approved,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Sole Article
   1.   The Protocol amending the Agreement on maritime transport between the European Community and its Member States, on the one hand, and the People’s Republic of China, on the other hand, 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 Community.
   The text of the Protocol (2) is attached to this Decision.
   2.   The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the European Community and its Member States, give the notification provided for in Article 3 of the Protocol.

      Done at Brussels, 28 January 2008.

            For the Council

            The President

         D. RUPEL

      (1)  Opinion delivered on 5 July 2005 (OJ C 157 E, 6.7.2006, p. 53).

      (2)  See page 38 of this Official Journal.
    ---documentbreak---

               21.2.2008

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 46/38

         PROTOCOL
   amending the Agreement on maritime transport between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Government of the People’s Republic of China, of the other part
   THE KINGDOM OF BELGIUM,
   THE CZECH REPUBLIC,
   THE KINGDOM OF DENMARK,
   THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY,
   THE REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA,
   THE HELLENIC REPUBLIC,
   THE KINGDOM OF SPAIN,
   THE FRENCH REPUBLIC,
   IRELAND,
   THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC,
   THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS,
   THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA,
   THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA,
   THE GRAND DUCHY OF LUXEMBOURG,
   THE REPUBLIC OF HUNGARY,
   THE REPUBLIC OF MALTA,
   THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS,
   THE REPUBLIC OF AUSTRIA,
   THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND,
   THE PORTUGUESE REPUBLIC,
   THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA,
   THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC,
   THE REPUBLIC OF FINLAND,
   THE KINGDOM OF SWEDEN,
   THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND,
   hereinafter referred to as the ‘Member States’, represented by the Council of the European Union, and
   THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Community’, represented by the Council of the European Union,
   of the one part, and
   THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA,
   of the other part,
   HAVING REGARD TO 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 thereby to the Community on 1 May 2004,
   HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
   Article 1
   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 shall be Parties to the Agreement on Maritime Transport between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Government of the People’s Republic of China, of the other part, signed in Brussels on 6 December 2002 (hereinafter called the Agreement).
   Article 2
   The texts of the Agreement in the Czech, Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Hungarian, Maltese, Polish, Slovenian and Slovak languages, which are attached to this Protocol shall become authentic under the same conditions as the other language versions drawn up in accordance with Article 14 of the Agreement.
   Article 3
   This Protocol shall be approved by the Contracting Parties in accordance with their own procedures. It shall enter into force on the same day the Agreement enters into force. Should however this Protocol be approved by the Contracting Parties on a later date than the entry into force of the Agreement, then the Protocol shall enter into force on the date on which the Parties have notified each other on the accomplishment of the internal procedures for approval.
   Article 4
   This Protocol is drawn up at Beijing, on this fifth day of September in the year two thousand and five, in duplicate, in the Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese, Polish, Portuguese, Slovenian, Slovak, Spanish, Swedish and Chinese languages, each of these texts being equally authentic.

         Por los Estados miembros
         Za členské státy
         For medlemsstaterne
         Für die Mitgliedstaaten
         Liikmesriikide nimel
         Για τα κράτη μέλη
         For the Member States
         Pour les États membres
         Per gli Stati membri
         Dalībvalstu vārdā
         Valstybių narių vardu
         A tagállamok részéről
         Għall-Istati Membri
         Voor de lidstaten
         W imieniu państw członkowskich
         Pelos Estados-Membros
         Za členské štáty
         Za države članice
         Jäsenvaltioiden puolesta
         På medlemsstaternas vägnar

         Por la Comunidad Europea
         Za Evropské společenství
         For Det Europæiske Fællesskab
         Für die Europäische Gemeinschaft
         Euroopa Ühenduse nimel
         Για την Ευρωπαϊκή Κοινότητα
         For the European Community
         Pour la Communauté européenne
         Per la Comunità europea
         Eiropas Kopienas vārdā
         Europos bendrijos vardu
         az Európai Közösség részéről
         Għall-Komunità Ewropea
         Voor de Europese Gemeenschap
         W imieniu Wspólnoty Europejskiej
         Pela Communidade Europeia
         Za Európske spoločenstvo
         za Evropsko skupnost
         Euroopan yhteisön puolesta
         På Europeiska gemenskapens vägnar

         Por el Gobierno de la República Popular China
         Za vládu Čínské lidové republiky
         For Folkerepublikken Kinas regering
         Im Namen der Regierung der Volksrepublik China
         Hiina Rahvavabariigi valitsuse nimel
         Για την κυβέρνηση της Λαϊκής Δημοκρατίας της Κίνας
         For the Government of the People's Republic of China
         Pour le gouvernement de la République populaire de Chine
         Per il Governo della Repubblica popolare cinese
         Kīnas Tautas Republikas vārdā
         Kinijos Liaudies Respublikos Vyriausybės vardu
         A Kínai Népköztársaság kormánya részéről
         Għall-Gvern tar-Repubblika tal-Poplu taċ-Ċina
         Voor de regering van de Volksrepubliek China
         W imieniu rządu Chińskiej Republiki Ludowej
         Pelo Governo da República Popular da China
         Za vládu Čínskej l'udovej republiky
         Za Vlado Ljudske republike Kitajske
         Kiinan kansantasavallan hallituksen puolesta
         På Folkrepubliken Kinas regerings vägnar


Avis juridique important

|

31982D0755

82/755/Euratom: Commission Decision of 2 June 1982 amending Decision 71/57/Euratom on the reorganization of the Joint Research Centre (JRC)

Official Journal L 319 , 16/11/1982 P. 0010 - 0011 Finnish special edition: Chapter 12 Volume 2 P. 0058  Spanish special edition: Chapter 12 Volume 4 P. 0084  Swedish special edition: Chapter 12 Volume 2 P. 0058  Portuguese special edition Chapter 12 Volume 4 P. 0084

*****COMMISSION  DECISION  of 2 June 1982  amending Decision 71/57/Euratom on the reorganization of the Joint Research Centre (JRC)  (82/755/Euratom)  THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN  COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 8 thereof,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing a single Council and a single Commission of the European Communities, and in particular Article 16 thereof,  Whereas on 13 January 1971 the Commission adopted Decision 71/57/Euratom (1), as last amended by Decision 75/241/Euratom (2);  Whereas on 15 July 1981 the Commission created a Directorate-General for Science, Research and Development, incorporating the Joint Research Centre, with the aim of launching a new research and development strategy;  Whereas the new structure of Commission departments responsible for science, research and development affects neither the operational budget of the JRC nor the flexibility which is essential if research work is to progress smoothly,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Article 1  Decision 71/57/Euratom is hereby amended as follows:  (a) Article 1 is replaced by the following:  'Article 1  Within the Directorate-General for Science, Research and Development, the Joint Research Centre (JRC) shall consist of the Research establishments set up by the Commission to carry out the Community's research and training programmes, and of the necessary ancillary services.'  (b) Article 2 is replaced by the following:  'Article 2  The administrative organs of the JRC shall be:  - the Director-General, who shall also serve as Deputy Director-General of the Directorate-General for Science, Research and Development,  - the Governing Board,  - the Scientific Committee.'  (c) The first indent of the third paragraph of Article 3 is replaced by the following:  '- he shall prepare - in agreement with the Director-General for Science, Research and Development - and submit to the Commission the JRC's draft programmes, indicating the financial aspects thereof.'  (d) Article 4 is replaced by the following:  'Article 4  A Governing Board of the JRC is hereby set up to assist the members of the Commission responsible for research in the management of the JRC.  The Board shall consist of leading experts from Members States who are specialized in the management of major research laboratories and their scientific and technical programmes. It shall consist of a chairman and seven members, appointed by the Commission. They shall be appointed for a three-year term, renewable once for the same period.  The Governing Board of the JRC shall normally be convened six times a year. It shall advise the Director-General of the JRC on the following matters:  1. implementation of current research and development programmes and allocation of available resources;  2. formulation of proposals relating to new programmes and their funding;  3. the JRC's establishment plan and the recruitment of senior staff (A 1, A 2 and appointments of comparable importance);  4. major investments.  The Director-General of the JRC shall provide the secretariat of the Governing Board. He shall furnish the Board with all the information it requires for the performance of its task.  The chairman shall draw up the agenda for each meeting.'  (e) Article 6 is replaced by the following:  'Article 6  1. The Director-General of the JRC, having due regard to the general policy adopted by the Council and to the general guidelines issued by the Commission and the Directorate-General for Science, Research and Development, shall prepare the JRC's draft programmes on his own responsibility and in close consultation with the Directorate for Scientific and Technical Coordination, cooperation with non-member countries and COST.  2. The Governing Board of the JRC shall be consulted on these draft programmes.  3. The Commission shall examine the draft programme in the light of the general policy and budgetary situation of the Community. It shall adopt the proposals in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty and lay them before the Council.'  (f) In Article 7 (2), the following text is inserted after the word 'Commission':  '. . . , in agreement with the Director-General for Science, Research and Development,. . .'.  (g) In Article 8, the words 'General Advisory Committee' are replaced by the words 'Governing Board of the JRC'.  (h) Article 11 is repealed.  Article 2  This Decision shall take effect on 1 June 1982.  Done at Brussels, 2 June 1982.  For the Commission  The President  Gaston THORN  (1) OJ No L 16, 20. 1. 1971, p. 14.  (2) OJ No L 98, 19. 4. 1975, p. 40.


title: Commission Decision (EU) 2015/810 of 23 January 2015 on State aid scheme SA.20326 (2013/C) (ex 2012/NN) implemented by Belgium (notified under document C(2015) 130) (Text with EEA relevance)

text:
               23.5.2015

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 128/21

         COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2015/810
   of 23 January 2015
   on State aid scheme SA.20326 (2013/C) (ex 2012/NN) implemented by Belgium

         (notified under document C(2015) 130)

   (Only the Dutch and French texts are authentic)
   (Text with EEA relevance)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 108(2) thereof (1),
   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 those articles (2), and having regard to their comments,
   Whereas:
   1.   PROCEDURE

               (1)

               By letter dated 7 October 2011, the European Commission informed the Belgian authorities that it was launching a monitoring exercise to look into scheme N 649/2005 ‘Payroll tax partial exemption measures for R&D’ (hereinafter ‘the scheme’).

               (2)

               By letters dated 7 October 2011, 2 February 2012 and 6 January 2013, the Commission requested information on the implementation of the scheme. Specifically, it asked the Belgian authorities to send it a list of the companies which had benefited from aid of more than EUR 200 000 in 2009 and 2010. The Belgian authorities replied by letters dated 17 November 2011, 2 May and 4 June 2012 and 23 May 2013.

               (3)

               A meeting was also held between the Commission's services and the Belgian authorities on 13 June 2013.

               (4)

               By letter dated 4 December 2013, the Commission informed Belgium of its decision (hereinafter ‘the opening decision’) (3) to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) TFEU (hereinafter 'the formal investigation procedure').

               (5)

               The Belgian authorities submitted their comments and their replies to the questions raised in the opening decision by letters dated 3 March, 1 April and 4 and 27 July 2014. They provided supplementary information by e-mail on 17 September, 17 October and 21 November 2014. By 21 November 2014, the Commission had all the information it needed to examine the scheme's compatibility with the internal market.

               (6)

               The firm D39S SPRL submitted comments on 9 April 2014. By letter dated 16 May 2014, the Commission forwarded these comments to the Belgian authorities. They did not submit any comments in response.

         2.   DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE

   2.1.   Objective of the measure

               (7)

               The scheme was approved by Commission Decision C(2006) 2941 final of 4 July 2006 (4) (hereinafter ‘the Decision’).

               (8)

               The scheme provided for the following three measures:

                           (a)

                           an exemption for the employment of researchers assigned to research projects carried out in partnership with universities or higher education colleges (hereinafter ‘measure 1’): 50 % exemption from payroll tax for companies paying salaries to researchers assigned to research projects carried out under partnership agreements with universities or higher education colleges based in the European Economic Area (5). The budget allocated to measure 1 was estimated at EUR 34 000 000;

                           (b)

                           an exemption for the employment of researchers holding certain qualifications (hereinafter ‘measure 2’): 25 % exemption from payroll tax for companies paying salaries to researchers holding certain scientific qualifications (6). The budget allocated to measure 2 was estimated at EUR 62 000 000;

                           (c)

                           an exemption for young innovative companies (hereinafter ‘measure 3’): 50 % exemption from payroll tax for companies qualifying as ‘young innovative companies’ (7) and paying the salaries of their scientific staff. The budget allocated to measure 3 was estimated at EUR 20 000 000.

               (9)

               Payroll tax is withheld at source on employees' salaries by all employers and paid to the State. The three measures referred to in recital 8 exempt the companies concerned from paying part of the payroll tax withheld on the salaries of the researchers identified in recital 8 points (a) and (b) and the scientific staff identified in recital 8 point (c).

               (10)

               In the Decision the Commission took the view that measures 1 and 2 were general measures that did not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.

               (11)

               Measure 3 did count as State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU but on investigation was found to be compatible with the internal market in accordance with the criteria set out in Commission Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 (8).

               (12)

               Article 5a of Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 sets out the rules on aid for research and development. Measure 3 was qualified as aid for R&D projects whose eligible costs were personnel costs in respect of staff employed on a research project (9). The aid intensity ceiling of 35 % is the ceiling applicable to pre-competitive development projects (10).

         2.2.   Grounds for initiating the formal investigation procedure

               (13)

               The monitoring exercise identified some irregularities in respect of both the provisions of Belgian law establishing measure 3 and its implementation. The Commission therefore initiated the formal investigation procedure in the light of the following factors:

                           (a)

                           Belgium had failed to adopt the necessary measures to bring its legislation into line with Union law. The relevant provisions of national law did not contain any reference to the categories of research laid down in the EU legislation. They were not brought into line until June 2013 (11);

                           (b)

                           Belgium had failed to amend the scheme to bring it into line before 1 January 2008 with the appropriate measures proposed by the Commission and accepted by Belgium (12);

                           (c)

                           Belgium had failed to notify the Commission of either the amendment or the extension of the scheme and had therefore implemented unlawful aid (13); and

                           (d)

                           during the monitoring exercise, Belgium failed to produce sufficient information on the individual aid paid out.

               (14)

               The Commission also examined in the opening decision the question of the applicable legal basis for analysing the compatibility with the internal market of the aid granted unlawfully under the scheme. In recital 40, it concluded that the aid should be analysed in the light of the Community framework for State aid for research and development and innovation (hereinafter ‘the R&D&I Framework’) (14).

         3.   COMMENTS BY THE BELGIAN AUTHORITIES

               (15)

               During the screening exercise, the Belgian authorities acknowledged that they had failed to amend the national legislation to include a reference to the categories of research as referred to in recital 13(a), to notify the amendments to the scheme (believing that they had been made in the spirit of the Decision) and to notify the Commission that the scheme had been extended beyond 4 July 2011.

               (16)

               By letters dated 3 March and 1 April 2014, the Belgian authorities sent the list of companies that had benefited from the exemption from payroll tax between 2006 and 2013 (most recent tax data available). A total of 231 companies had benefited from the scheme over the period as a whole.

               (17)

               The Belgian authorities also stated in their letter dated 3 March 2014 that they were looking into the compatibility of the scheme with Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 (15) and in particular Article 25 thereof on aid to research and development projects. The Belgian authorities have not informed the Commission of the outcome of this exercise.

         4.   COMMENTS BY THIRD PARTIES

               (18)

               The firm D39S, a research and development centre in the electronics and telecommunications sector, stated that the exemption from payroll tax provided significant support to young innovative companies enabling them to hire additional staff. The exemption had allowed it to increase its research and development activity while still responding quickly to market demands.

         5.   ASSESSMENT OF THE AID

   5.1.   Existence of State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU

               (19)

               According to Article 107(1) TFEU ‘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, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market’.

               (20)

               For a national measure to be qualified as State aid, the following cumulative criteria therefore have to be met: (i) the measure must confer an economic advantage on its recipient; (ii) the advantage must be imputable to the State; (iii) the advantage must be selective; and (iv) the measure must distort or threaten to distort competition and be likely to affect trade between Member States.

               (21)

               In the case at hand, the exemption from payroll tax granted to young innovative companies is a tax measure financed by state resources. The measure is available only to companies that fall under the definition of young innovative company and, as such, it is selective. By helping to finance their research and development costs, the measure confers an economic advantage on them. Lastly, as the beneficiaries operate in markets that are open to intra-EU trade, the measure is likely to affect competition and trade between Member States.

               (22)

               The scheme was classed as State aid in the Decision (16). The Belgian authorities did not dispute this classification during the monitoring exercise.

         5.2.   Lawfulness of the aid

               (23)

               In the opening decision, the Commission found that, by failing to notify that the rate of exemption from payroll tax had been increased (from 50 % to 75 % by the Economic Recovery Act of 27 March 2009, and from 75 % to 80 % by the Act of 17 June 2013 laying down tax and financial provisions and provisions on sustainable development) and that the scheme had been extended beyond 4 July 2011 (the Decision provided for an initial duration of 5 years), Belgium had implemented unlawful aid. Belgium did not contest this finding and during the formal investigation procedure provided the data on the aid received by the beneficiaries under the scheme that the Commission needed in order to assess the compatibility of the aid.

         5.3.   Assessment of the compatibility of the aid with the internal market

               (24)

               In recital 40 of the opening decision, the Commission concluded that the compatibility of the scheme should be examined in the light of the R&D&I Framework, while leaving open the question of which section of the framework was applicable: the rules on aid for R&D projects (point 5.1 of the R&D&I Framework) or the rules on aid for young innovative enterprises (point 5.4 of the R&D&I Framework), given that the scheme appeared to target this specific category of undertaking.

         5.3.1.   Methodology

               (25)

               As indicated in recital 16 above, the Belgian authorities stated that 231 companies had benefited from the scheme during the reference period. An analysis of the data revealed that:

                           (a)

                           183 companies received aid of less than EUR 200 000 per period of 3 years over the whole reference period. This aid is covered by the de minimis Commission Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006 (17) and was therefore excluded from the scope of the analysis;

                           (b)

                           the remaining 48 companies received aid in excess of EUR 200 000 and were therefore subject to an in-depth analysis. In respect of these companies, the Belgian authorities provided information on:

                                       —

                                       the research categories to which the projects carried out by the beneficiaries belonged (for the purposes of verifying compliance with the conditions set out in point 5.1 of the R&D&I Framework),

                                       —

                                       the method for calculating the aid intensity, together with examples (for the purposes of verifying compliance with the conditions set out in point 5.1 of the R&D&I Framework),

                                       —

                                       the date on which each company was set up (for the purposes of verifying compliance with the first condition set out in point 5.4 of the R&D&I Framework),

                                       —

                                       the percentage of company expenditure allocated to research and development (for the purposes of verifying compliance with the second condition set out in point 5.4 of the R&D&I Framework),

                                       —

                                       of the total amount received by each company, the proportion falling under measure 3 (and thus constituting State aid) and the proportion falling under measures 1 and 2 (for the purposes of verifying compliance with the third condition set out in point 5.4 of the R&D&I Framework).

               (26)

               Analysis of the last item (proportion of aid falling under measure 3) reduced the scope of the assessment as the amount of aid received under measure 3 was less than the total amount communicated by the Belgian authorities (for the scheme as a whole). Of the 48 companies referred to in recital 25(b), 14 received aid under measure 3 of more than EUR 200 000 over the reference period as a whole.

         5.3.2.   Analysis in the light of the rules on aid for R&D projects (point 5.1 of the R&D&I Framework)

               (27)

               Point 5.1 of the R&D&I Framework sets out the criteria that have to be met for aid for R&D projects to be found compatible with the internal market.

                           (a)

                           According to point 5.1.1, ‘the aided part of the research project must completely fall within one or more of the following research categories: fundamental research, industrial research, experimental development.’
                           The royal decree of 23 March 2014 (18) now provides that the Federal Scientific Policy Programming Department (Service public fédéral de Programmation Politique scientifique) is responsible, when examining the file, for checking the ‘description of research or development projects or programmes in respect of which an opinion is requested’ and thus for establishing whether the projects fall into one of the research categories provided for by the R&D&I Framework and the law. For each of the 48 companies subject to an in-depth review, the Belgian authorities provided a description of the research and development activities carried out and indicated which research category the projects fell into. The Commission was able to establish that the projects fell into one of the three categories laid down in the R&D&I Framework and concluded that the condition laid down in point 5.1.1 of the Framework had been met.

                           (b)

                           Point 5.1.2 of the R&D&I Framework gives the basic aid intensities (25 % for experimental development), which may be increased in certain cases, such as where the aid is to be given to SMEs (point 5.1.3(a) of the R&D&I Framework).
                           In their letter dated 3 March 2014, the Belgian authorities provided additional information on the two withholding rate increases that brought the applicable tax reduction to 80 %, in particular as regards compliance with the aid intensities laid down by the Decision. Applying the calculation method chosen by the Commission in the Decision, the Belgian authorities were able to show that an increase to an 80 % exemption from payroll tax resulted in a maximum intensity of 28,28 %. They also provided details of the intensities for the companies subject to an in-depth review. The Commission found that they were in line with point 5.1.3 of the R&D&I Framework, which lays down a ceiling of 35 % for medium-sized enterprises and 45 % for small enterprises for experimental development projects. The ceilings are higher for fundamental and industrial research.

                           (c)

                           Point 5.1.4 of the R&D&I Framework sets out the eligible costs. In recital 16 of the opening decision, the Commission noted that the relevant provisions of national law gave the categories of personnel for whom the exemption could be granted but did not specify how the tax authorities were to verify whether the staff concerned were assigned to a research and development project.
                           The Royal Decree of 23 March 2014 now provides that the Federal Scientific Policy Programming Department is responsible, when examining the file, for checking ‘the elements that demonstrate that the staff member will be employed on research and development projects or programmes’ using data provided by the applicant firms. The Commission finds that the relevant national legislation and its application by the Belgian authorities complies with point 5.1.4 of the R&D&I Framework.
                           For the 48 companies subject to an in-depth review, the Belgian authorities described the projects carried out by them and indicated the number and type of staff in respect of whom the exemption had been granted.

               (28)

               In the light of the above, the Commission concludes that the aid paid out under measure 3 meets the requirements of point 5.1 of the R&D&I Framework.

         5.3.3.   Analysis in the light of the rules on aid for young innovative enterprises (point 5.4 of the R&D&I Framework)

               (29)

               In the opening decision, the Commission indicated that, because the scheme implemented aid in favour of young innovative companies, its compatibility was also to be examined on the basis of point 5.4 of the R&D&I Framework on aid to young innovative enterprises (recital 46). However, the Commission had doubts about whether the beneficiaries of the scheme met all the conditions set out in point 5.4 (definition of small enterprise, age, percentage of expenditure allocated to R&D, amount of aid).

               (30)

               An analysis of the data provided by the Belgian authorities showed that at the end of 2013 only two companies met all the conditions laid down in point 5.4 of the R&D&I Framework (while also meeting the requirements of point 5.1).

               (31)

               The Commission therefore concluded that point 5.1 of the R&D&I Framework on aid for research and development projects was the appropriate legal basis.

         5.3.4.   Compatibility of the scheme after 1 July 2014

               (32)

               The R&D&I Framework, on the basis of which the scheme's compatibility was assessed, expired on 30 June 2014.

               (33)

               After 1 July 2014, if the conditions of Chapter 1 are met and if the requirements of Article 25 (aid for research, development and innovation) are complied with, the scheme could be covered by the exemption available under the GBER. The Belgian authorities are invited to inform the Commission of the outcome of their analysis and, if needed, to notify the prolongation of the scheme.

         6.   CONCLUSION

               (34)

               The Commission finds that Belgium has unlawfully implemented the scheme in breach of Article 108(3) TFEU. However, in the light of the above, the Commission considers that the continued application of the scheme by the Belgian authorities after 4 July 2011 and the amendments made to it are compatible with the internal market under Article 107(3)(c) TFEU until 30 June 2014,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The partial exemption from payroll tax in favour of young innovative companies implemented by Belgium is compatible with the internal market under Article 107(3)(c) TFEU until 30 June 2014.
   Article 2
   This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Belgium.

      Done at Brussels, 23 January 2015.

            For the Commission

         Margrethe VESTAGER

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  With effect from 1 December 2009, Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty have become Articles 107 and 108, respectively, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’). The two sets of provisions are, in substance, identical. For the purposes of this Decision, references to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU should be understood as references to Articles 87 and 88, respectively, of the EC Treaty, where appropriate. The TFEU also introduced certain changes in terminology, such as the replacement of ‘Community’ by ‘Union’, ‘common market’ by ‘internal market’ and ‘Court of First Instance’ by ‘General Court’. The terminology used in this Decision is that of the TFEU.

      (2)  OJ C 69, 7.3.2014, p. 122.

      (3)  See footnote 2.

      (4)  OJ C 209, 31.8.2006, p. 10.

      (5)  See recital 5 of the Decision of 4 July 2006.

      (6)  See recital 8 of the Decision of 4 July 2006.

      (7)  See recital 12 of the Decision of 4 July 2006.

      (8)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 10, 13.1.2001, p. 33).

      (9)  See recital 26 of the Decision.

      (10)  See Article 5a(3)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 70/2001, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 364/2004 of 25 February 2004 amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 as regards the extension of its scope to include aid for research and development (OJ L 63, 28.2.2004, p. 22).

      (11)  See recitals 17 et seq. of the opening decision.

      (12)  Letter from the Government of the Brussels Capital Region dated 22 February 2008, letter from the Government of the Walloon Region dated 17 March 2008 and letter from the Government of the Flemish Region dated 3 July 2007.

      (13)  See recitals 22 to 27 of the opening decision.

      (14)  OJ C 323, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

      (15)  Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 of 17 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty (OJ L 187, 26.6.2014, p. 1).

      (16)  See recital 21 of the Decision of 4 July 2006.

      (17)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006 of 15 December 2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to de minimis aid (OJ L 379, 28.12.2006, p. 5).

      (18)  Royal Decree of 23 March 2014 amending, in respect of the exemption from the payment of payroll tax to the State, AR/CIR 92, pursuant to Article 275(2) and (3) of the Income Tax Code 1992. Belgisch Staatsblad/Moniteur Belge, 31.3.2014.


title: 2014/811/EU: Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, in accordance with point 13 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (application EGF/2013/002 BE/Carsid from Belgium)

text:
               20.11.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 333/9

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
   of 22 October 2014
   on the mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, in accordance with point 13 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (application EGF/2013/002 BE/Carsid from Belgium)

      (2014/811/EU)

   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 establishing the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (1), and in particular Article 12(3) thereof,
   Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1309/2013 of the European Parliament and the Council of 17 December 2013 on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014-2020) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 (2), and in particular Article 23, second paragraph, thereof,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (3), and in particular Article 12 thereof,
   Having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (4), and in particular point 13 thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) was established to provide additional support for workers made redundant as a result of major structural changes in world trade patterns due to globalisation and to assist them with their reintegration into the labour market.

               (2)

               The EGF shall not exceed a maximum annual amount of EUR 150 million (2011 prices), as laid down in Article 12 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013.

               (3)

               Belgium submitted an application to mobilise the EGF, in respect of redundancies in the enterprise Carsid SA, on 2 April 2013 and supplemented it by additional information up to 4 July 2014. This application complies with the requirements for determining the financial contributions as laid down in Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006. The Commission, therefore, proposes to mobilise an amount of EUR 911 934.

               (4)

               The EGF should, therefore, be mobilised in order to provide a financial contribution for the application submitted by Belgium,

         HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   For the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2014, the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund shall be mobilised to provide the sum of EUR 911 934 in commitment and payment appropriations.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

      Done at Strasbourg, 22 October 2014

            For the European Parliament

            The President

         M. SCHULZ

            For the Council

            The President

         B. DELLA VEDOVA

      (1)  OJ L 406, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 855.

      (3)  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884.

      (4)  OJ C 373, 20.12.2013, p. 1.