title: Council Decision (EU) 2015/1024 of 15 June 2015 authorising certain Member States to accept, in the interest of the European Union, the accession of Singapore to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction

text:
               30.6.2015

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 163/32

         COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2015/1024
   of 15 June 2015
   authorising certain Member States to accept, in the interest of the European Union, the accession of Singapore to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 81(3) in conjunction with Article 218 thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The European Union has set as one of its aims the promotion of the protection of the rights of the child, as stated in Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union. Measures for the protection of children against wrongful removal or retention are an essential part of that policy.

               (2)

               The Union has adopted Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (2) (‘Brussels IIa Regulation’), which aims to protect children from the harmful effects of their wrongful removal or retention and to establish procedures to ensure their prompt return to the State of their habitual residence, as well as to secure the protection of rights of access and rights of custody.

               (3)

               Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 complements and reinforces the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (‘the 1980 Hague Convention’) which establishes, at international level, a system of obligations and cooperation among contracting states and between central authorities and aims to ensure the prompt return of wrongfully removed or retained children.

               (4)

               All Member States of the Union are party to the 1980 Hague Convention.

               (5)

               The Union encourages third states to accede to the 1980 Hague Convention and supports the correct implementation of the 1980 Hague Convention by participating, along with the Member States, inter alia, in the special commissions organised on a regular basis by the Hague Conference on private international law.

               (6)

               A common legal framework applicable between Member States of the Union and third states may be considered to offer the best solution to sensitive cases of international child abduction.

               (7)

               The 1980 Hague Convention stipulates that it applies between the acceding state and such contracting states as have declared their acceptance of the accession.

               (8)

               The 1980 Hague Convention does not allow regional economic integration organisations such as the Union to become party to it. Therefore, the Union cannot accede to the Convention, nor can it deposit a declaration of acceptance of an acceding state.

               (9)

               Pursuant to Opinion 1/13 of the Court of Justice of the European Union declarations of acceptance under the 1980 Hague Convention fall within the exclusive external competence of the Union.

               (10)

               Singapore has deposited its instrument of accession to the 1980 Hague Convention on 28 December 2010. That Convention entered into force for Singapore on 1 March 2011.

               (11)

               Several Member States have already accepted the accession of Singapore to the 1980 Hague Convention. An assessment of the situation in Singapore has led to the conclusion that those Member States that have not yet accepted the accession of Singapore, are in a position to accept, in the interest of the Union, the accession of Singapore under the terms of the 1980 Hague Convention.

               (12)

               The Member States that have not yet accepted the accession of Singapore should therefore be authorised to deposit their declarations of acceptance of accession of Singapore in the interest of the Union in accordance with the terms set out in this Decision. The Kingdom of Belgium, the Czech Republic, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Republic of Estonia, Ireland, the Hellenic Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, the Italian Republic, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Malta, the Slovak Republic and the Kingdom of Sweden which have already accepted the accession of Singapore to the 1980 Hague Convention should not deposit new declarations of acceptance as the existing declarations remain valid under public international law.

               (13)

               The United Kingdom and Ireland are bound by Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 and are taking part in the adoption and application of this Decision.

               (14)

               In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 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 is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   1.   The Member States that have not yet done so are hereby authorised to accept the accession of Singapore to the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (‘the 1980 Hague Convention’) in the interest of the Union.
   2.   Those Member States shall, no later than 16 June 2016, deposit a declaration of acceptance the accession of Singapore to the 1980 Hague Convention in the interest of the Union worded as follows:

         ‘[Full name of MEMBER STATE] declares that it accepts the accession of Singapore to the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, in accordance with Council Decision (EU) 2015/1024’.

   3.   Each Member State shall inform the Council and the Commission of the deposit of its declaration of acceptance of the accession of Singapore and communicate to the Commission the text of the declaration within two months of its deposit.
   Article 2
   Those Member States which deposited their declarations of acceptance of the accession of Singapore to the 1980 Hague Convention prior to the date of adoption of this Decision, shall make no new declarations.
   Article 3
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
   Article 4
   This Decision is addressed to all Member States, with the exception of the Kingdom of Belgium, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Republic of Estonia, Ireland, the Hellenic Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, the Italian Republic, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Malta, the Slovak Republic and the Kingdom of Sweden.

      Done at Luxembourg, 15 June 2015.

            For the Council

            The President

         Dz. RASNAČS

      (1)  Opinion of 11 February 2015 (not yet published in the Official Journal).

      (2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 (OJ L 338, 23.12.2003, p. 1).


title: Political and Security Committee Decision Atalanta/8/2009 of 4 December 2009 on the appointment of an EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somalia coast (Atalanta)

text:
               12.12.2009

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 327/40

      POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE DECISION Atalanta/8/2009
   of 4 December 2009
   on the appointment of an EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somalia coast (Atalanta)
   (2009/946/CFSP)
   THE POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 38 thereof,
   Having regard to Council Joint Action 2008/851/CFSP of 10 November 2008 on a European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somalia coast (1) (Atalanta), and in particular Article 6 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Pursuant to Article 6 of Joint Action 2008/851/CFSP the Council authorised the Political and Security Committee (PSC) to take decisions on the appointment of the EU Force Commander.

               (2)

               On 22 July 2009, the PSC adopted Decision Atalanta/6/2009 (2) appointing Commodore Peter BINDT as EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somalia coast.

               (3)

               The EU Operation Commander has recommended the appointment of Rear Admiral Giovanni GUMIERO as the new EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somalia coast.

               (4)

               The EU Military Committee has supported that recommendation.

               (5)

               In accordance with Article 5 of the Protocol 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 implementation of decisions and actions of the European Union which have defence implications,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Rear Admiral Giovanni GUMIERO is hereby appointed EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somalia coast.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on 13 December 2009.

      Done at Brussels, 4 December 2009.

            For the Political and Security Committee

            The Chairman

         O. SKOOG

      (1)  OJ L 301, 12.11.2008, p. 33.

      (2)  OJ L 192, 24.7.2009, p. 68.


Avis juridique important

|

32000D0683

2000/683/EC, ECSC, Euratom: Council and Commission Decision of 12 October 2000 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 Ukraine, of the other part

Official Journal L 283 , 09/11/2000 P. 0027 - 0027

Council and Commission Decisionof 12 October 2000on 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 Ukraine, of the other part(2000/683/EC, ECSC, Euratom)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 44(1), the last sentence of Article 47(2), Article 55, Article 57(2), Article 71, Article 80(2), Articles 93, 94, 133 and 308, in conjunction with the second sentence of Article 300(2) and the second subparagraph of Article 300(3) thereof,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, and in particular Article 95 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 proposal from the Commission,Having regard to the assent 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,After consulting the Consultative Committee of the ECSC and with the assent of the Council,Whereas:(1) The Partnership and Cooperation Agreement establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and Ukraine, of the other part(2), which entered into force on 1 March 1998, contributes to achieving the objectives of the European Communities in so far as it is an essential part of the strategy of the European Communities and their Member States with regard to Ukraine.(2) Since the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement was signed before the enlargement of the European Union to include Austria, Finland and Sweden, a Protocol was signed on 10 April 1997 to include the three new Member States in the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement.(3) The parties agreed to the provisional application of the Protocol by the European Communities, Ukraine and all Member States except Austria, Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Portugal.(4) All the signatories to the Protocol have now ratified it,HAVE DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:Article 1The Protocol to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and Ukraine, of the other part, shall be approved on behalf of the European Community, the European Coal and Steel Community and the European Atomic Energy Community.The text of the Protocol is annexed to this Decision.Article 2The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the European Community, give the notification provided for in Article 4 of the Protocol. The President of the Commission shall give the same notification on behalf of the European Coal and Steel Community and the European Atomic Energy Community.Done at Brussels, 12 October 2000.For the CouncilThe PresidentH. VédrineFor the CommissionThe PresidentR. Prodi(1) OJ C 286, 22.9.1997, p. 82.(2) OJ L 49, 19.2.1998, p. 3.


Avis juridique important

|

E1995C0124

EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY DECISION No 124/95/COL of 6 December 1995 on the sixth amendment of the procedural and substantive rules in the field of State aid

Official Journal L 124 , 23/05/1996 P. 0041 - 0052

EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY DECISION No 124/95/COL of 6 December 1995 on the sixth amendment of the procedural and substantive rules in the field of State aid THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY,has amended the procedural and substantive rules in the field of State aid (1), adopted on 19 January 1994 (2), as last amended on 9 June 1995 (3), as follows:1. Chapter 6 of the State aid guidelines shall be replaced by the following:'6. SPECIFICITIES REGARDING AID UNLAWFUL ON PROCEDURAL GROUNDS1. Apart from special features which are indicated below, the procedure with regard to aid unlawful on procedural grounds follows the same pattern as with notifications.6.1. Notion of aid unlawful on procedural grounds1. As the term "unnotified aid" would be too narrow to cover all aid put into effect in a way which infringes the last sentence of Article 1 (3) of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement, the EFTA Surveillance Authority decided to use the notion of "aid unlawful on procedural grounds" (referred to hereinafter as "unlawful aid").The term covers:(a) aid provided without notification;(b) aid granted by incorrect application of an approved aid scheme (aid "being misused" in the meaning of Article 1 (2) of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement);(c) aid that is notified late, i.e. notified after being "put into effect"; and(d) aid notified beforehand but "put into effect" before the EFTA Surveillance Authority has taken a decision (1).6.2. Request for information1. When the EFTA Surveillance Authority becomes aware of a possibly unlawful aid case, it requests the EFTA State concerned to supply full details on the matter normally within 20 working days. This is the same as the usual period allowed for supplying additional information on notified aid cases (see 3.2.4. (2)). A reminder will be sent if necessary.2. It is recalled that the EFTA Surveillance Authority is empowered to proceed and to take a decision on the basis of the information available (see 5.4.(3)), even in the absence of any submission to it from the EFTA State concerned.6.2.1. Injunction ("interim measures")1. The EFTA Surveillance Authority may request by an interim decision the EFTA State to suspend payment of the aid pending the outcome of the investigation (2). The procedure is as follows:2. Once it has concluded that aid has been granted unlawfully, the EFTA Surveillance Authority must give the EFTA State concerned an opportunity to submit its comments before taking a decision requiring it to suspend immediately the payment of the aid pending the outcome of the investigation (3).3. (4) The EFTA Surveillance Authority considers that in some cases an order requiring the suspension of aid which has been unlawfully granted will not go far enough: such an order will not always counteract the infringements of the procedural rules which may have been committed, particularly where all or part of the aid has already been paid out. The Authority would therefore inform the EFTA States that in appropriate cases it may - after giving the EFTA State concerned the opportunity to comment and to consider alternatively the granting of rescue aid, as defined in Chapter 16 of these guidelines - adopt a provisional decision ordering the EFTA State to recover any moneys which have been disbursed in infringement of the procedural requirements. The aid would then have to be recovered in accordance with paragraphs 6.2.3 (2) and 6.2.3 (3) of these guidelines.4. If the EFTA State fails to suspend payment of the aid or to recover the aid, the EFTA Surveillance Authority is entitled, while carrying out the examination on the substance of the matter, to bring the matter directly before the EFTA Court and apply for a declaration that such payment amounts to an infringement of the Agreement (5).6.2.2. Conduct of proceedings1. In cases of unlawful aid, the EFTA Surveillance Authority endeavours to take a decision within two months after receiving complete information.2. If, in unlawful aid cases, the EFTA Surveillance Authority finds that the aid is compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement, it must take a positive decision on the merits of the case.6.2.3. Recovery orders1. In negative decisions on cases of unlawful aid the EFTA Surveillance Authority orders, as a rule, the EFTA State to reclaim the aid from the recipient (6).2. The recovery is to be effected in accordance with national law including the provisions concerning interest due for late payment of amounts owing to the government, interest which should normally run from the date of the award of the unlawful aid in question. The relevant provisions of national law must be applied in such a way that recovery is not rendered practically impossible (7).3. (8) The EFTA Surveillance Authority takes the view that for the purpose of restoring the status quo commercial interest rates provide a relevant measure of the advantage improperly conferred on the aid recipient. The Authority accordingly informs the EFTA States that in any decisions it may adopt ordering the recovery of aid unlawfully granted it will apply the reference rate of interest used in the calculation of the net grant equivalent of regional aid measures (9) as the basis for the commercial rate.(1) See 3.3. for the interpretation of "put into effect".(2) ECJ, 14. 2. 1990, Case C-301/87: France v. Commission (1990) ECR I-307 (paragraphs 19-20).(3) Ibid., 356 (paragraph 19).(4) This paragraph corresponds to the Commission's letter to the Member States of 30 April 1995 (OJ No C 156, 22. 6. 1995, p. 5).(5) Ibid., 357 (paragraph 23).(6) First stated in ECJ, 12. 7. 1973, Case 70/72, Commission v. Germany (1973) ECR 813, 828-829 (paragraphs 10-13); see also ECJ 21. 3. 1990, Case C-142/87, Belgium v. Commission (1990) ECR I-959, 1020 (paragraphs 65-66) and ECJ, 24. 2. 1987, Case 310/85, Deufil v. Commission (1987) ECR 901, 927 (paragraph 24).(7) See ECJ, 21. 3. 1990, Case C-142/87, Belgium v. Commission (1990) ECR I-959, 1018-1020 (paragraphs 58-63); see also ECJ, 20. 9. 1990, Case 5/89, Commission v. Germany (1990) ECR I-3437, 3456 (paragraph 12); ECJ, 21. 2. 1990, Case C-74/89, Commission v. Belgium (1990) ECR I-491; and ECJ, 2. 2. 1989, Case 94/87, Commission v. Germany (1989) ECR 175, 192 (paragraph 12).(8) This paragraph corresponds to the Commission's letter to the Member States of 22 February 1995 (SG(95) D/1983).(9) See paragraph 27 (3) (f) of the present guidelines.`2. Chapter 18 of the State Aid Guidelines shall be replaced by the following;'18. AID TO EMPLOYMENT (1)18.1. Introduction1. Continued unemployment at unacceptably high levels is still amongst the chief economic and social problems facing most European countries. In the 1980s the EFTA countries enjoyed very low rates of unemployment compared with the rest of Europe (between approximately 1 % and 3 % of the labour force). However, the latest recession brought about sharp increases in unemployment rates in Norway and Iceland, to levels unprecedented for decades, 6 % in Norway in 1993 and 4,7 % in Iceland in 1994. Liechtenstein on the other hand has maintained a very low rate of unemployment throughout.2. The EFTA States are now in common with much of Europe experiencing economic recovery, after the recession of recent years, and the overall employment situation has somewhat improved, especially in Norway. The unfavourable employment conditions in recent years have nevertheless been characterized by very significant increases in youth and long-term unemployment as well as employment problems of older people. This structural unemployment, although less severe than in most other European countries, is a persistent problem showing little signs of improvement.3. Experience in the EFTA States and EC Member States generally shows that, once people become unemployed, they can expect to spend a relatively long period looking for a new job because they will have become less employable. This phenomenon is responsible for an unduly high proportion of the long-term unemployed in Europe (over 40 % of total unemployed), the upshot being increasingly widespread social exclusion.4. With the upturn in economic activity, it is expected that the coming years will see a positive trend in job creation. However, this trend may not be strong enough to reduce the unemployment rate to socially acceptable levels. It is now accepted that structural reasons lie behind the persistently high rates of unemployment in Europe, and this situation calls for specific policies to improve labour-market adaptability.5. The EC Member States and the EFTA States have drawn up a package of recommendations covering the following five priority areas (2):- boosting investment in education and training,- improving internal and external flexibility mechanisms in order to enhance the employment content of growth,- reducing indirect labour costs, in particular by reducing direct taxation of labour,- improving the effectiveness of active policies, notably by redirecting public expenditure on passive income support for the unemployed,- stepping up measures to promote the employment of underprivileged groups in the labour market, such as the long-term unemployed, young people and older workers.6. Against this background, tax and financial measures can be expected to play an important role in encouraging firms to hire workers experiencing utmost difficulty in entering the labour market. Although they might be less effective because of substitution or windfall effects, grants per job created for the long-term unemployed, for example, and targeted exemptions from social security contributions reduce labour costs at the bottom end and thus offset the difference associated with lower-than-average productivity.7. The same type of measures may also give firms an incentive to invest more in vocational training. In such cases, the grant or tax concession must reflect the externalities associated with the worker exploiting the newly acquired knowledge on the labour market.8. Although the objective of such measures is to improve the situation of workers on the labour market, it must be recognized that firms also benefit in that they are able to reduce their labour costs because of the intermediary role they play in implementing tax and financial measures. That is why steps must be taken to ensure that proliferation of measures to promote employment does not adversely affect the EFTA Surveillance Authority's parallel efforts to reduce artificial distortions of competition under Articles 61 and 62 of the EEA Agreement.9. These guidelines pursue a number of objectives:- to clarify the interpretation of Article 61 of the EEA Agreement and Article 1 of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement with regard to State aid in the field of employment in order to ensure greater transparency of notification decisions under Article 1 of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement,- to ensure consistency between the rules of competition and the implementation of the policies used to combat unemployment,- to make explicit, by defining the different types of aid and their objectives, the approach normally taken by the EFTA Surveillance Authority, namely to give sympathetic consideration to State aid designed to improve the employment situation.18.2. Scope of Article 61 (1) of the EEA Agreement1. The guidelines presented here cover only those measures falling within the scope of Article 61 (1) of the EEA Agreement, which stipulates that "any aid granted by EC Member States, EFTA States 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 Contracting Parties, be incompatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement". Such State aid measures must be notified in advance to the EFTA Surveillance Authority pursuant to Article 1 (3) of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement, unless they are within the limits of the de minimis rule. The notification obligation applies to aid schemes as well as to all cases of ad hoc employment aid outside authorized schemes.2. A number of employment-policy measures are not caught by Article 61 (1) of the EEA Agreement because:- they constitute aid to individuals that does not favour certain undertakings or the production of certain goods, or- they do not affect trade between the Contracting Parties, or- they are "general" measures.This is clearly the case, in particular, with measures to provide guidance and counselling, general assistance and training for the unemployed (aid to individuals that does not favour certain undertakings or the production of certain goods) and aid designed to improve labour law or to adapt the education system (general measures).18.2.1. Aid to individuals that does not favour certain undertakings or the production of certain goods1. Measures to assist individuals the purpose or effect of which is not to favour certain undertakings or the production of certain goods do not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 61 (1) of the EEA Agreement.2. In so far as such measures apply automatically to individuals on the basis of objective criteria and without favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods, they do not constitute state aid if they are designed:- to improve the personal situation of workers on the labour market or to make it possible for them to find work or become socially integrated, in particular by way of vocational training or apprenticeships,- to supplement the income of certain workers,- to encourage the employment of women in occupations traditionally carried on by men or the employment of individuals from ethnic minorities,- to foster mobility of workers, the creation of self-employed activities or the recruitment of certain categories of workers having to contend with temporary socio-vocational disadvantages,- to promote the employment of persons suffering from permanent physical or mental disabilities.18.2.2. Effect on trade between the Contracting Parties1. Aid is caught by Article 61 (1) of the EEA Agreement only if it affects trade between the Contracting Parties. Thus, employment aid in respect of activities that do not involve trade between the Contracting Parties (e.g. neighbourhood care services, certain local employment initiatives) does not fall within the scope of Article 61 (1). The EFTA Surveillance Authority considers that this is also the case with "de minimis" aid (3), which encompasses most forms of aid for promoting self-employed activities.18.2.3. General measure or State aid1. The distinction between general measures and State aid lies outside the scope of these guidelines.2. It should be noted that a number of general measures may affect competitive conditions and trade between the Contracting Parties as much as State aid but, since these measures do not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 61 (1) of the EEA Agreement, the elimination of any distortions of competition that they might cause is not covered by the monitoring of State aid provided for in Articles 61, 62 and 63 of the EEA Agreement.3. Employment is also promoted by other measures such as those to promote training and the acquisition of new skills. In this respect, it may be useful to point out that in many cases the subsidies for vocational training/retraining do not constitute State aid caught by Article 61 of the EEA Agreement and Article 1 of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement and that, where such measures fall within the scope of Article 61 (1) of the Agreement, the EFTA Surveillance Authority usually gives them sympathetic consideration.4. The same is true of measures to improve working conditions.18.3. State aid to employment1. One point needs to be made clear concerning the scope of these guidelines; aid to employment, as covered by these guidelines, is aid not linked to investment.2. Even where investment aid is calculated per job created or includes premiums for job creation, it does not constitute employment aid as such since it is not directly intended to create or maintain jobs. Its effects in combating unemployment are indirect, through the realization of productive investment to bring about a structural change in the firm. The reference to jobs created is only one criterion for assessing aid to the investment for which the aid is intended. In view of its purpose and its permanent effects on the industrial structure, such aid should be treated just like any other investment aid and should be subject to the normal assessment criteria.18.3.1. General comments1. By granting employment aid to certain firms or to the production of certain goods, the authorities are taking over part of those firms' labour costs, which are normal expenditure incurred in their own interest, and conferring a financial advantage that improves their competitive position. In so far as the products or services concerned are in competition with those of firms from other States parties to the EEA Agreement, such aid is likely to distort competition and affect trade between the Contracting Parties; consequently, it is, in principle, incompatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. Within the single market, aid granted to reduce labour costs can lead to distortions of intra-EEA competition and deflections in the allocation of resources and mobile investment, to the shifting of unemployment from one country to another, and to relocation.2. The EFTA Surveillance Authority considers that, without rigorous controls and strict limits, employment aid can have harmful macro-economic effects which cancel out it immediate effects on job creation. If the aid is used to protect firms exposed to intra-EEA competition, it could have the effect of delaying adjustments needed to ensure the competitiveness of European industry. Care must also be taken to ensure that the granting of state aid does not lead to escalating subsidization, making the aid ineffective and wasting public money on all sides. Lastly, the danger is that, if granted in an uncontrolled fashion, this type of aid will simply shift unemployment elsewhere without helping to resolve the employment problem in the territory covered by the EEA Agreement and will therefore distort competition to an extent contrary to the functioning of the EEA Agreement.3. The EFTA Surveillance Authority has been sympathetic to employment aid, particularly where it is intended to encourage firms to create jobs or to hire individuals who face particular difficulties in finding work. This attitude is justified by the fact that the lower productivity of these workers reduces the financial advantage accruing to the firm and by the fact that the workers also benefit from the measure and are likely to be excluded from the labour market unless employers are offered such incentives. These rules confirm that position.18.3.2. Forms of aid1. Employment aid introduced by EC Member States and EFTA States usually takes the form of grants (single or monthly payments) and exemptions for certain firms from employer's social security contributions or from certain taxes. In some cases the different types of aid are combined.18.3.3. Types of employment aid1. The concepts of aid to maintain jobs and aid to create jobs need clarification because they are of major relevance to whether the aid is compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement.2. Aid to maintain jobs means support given to a firm to persuade it not to lay off its workers, with the subsidy usually being calculated on the basis of the number of employees at the time the aid is granted.3. Aid to create jobs, on the other hand, provides employment for workers who have never had a job or who have lost their previous job, and is calculated on the basis of the number of jobs created. It should be made clear that job creation refers to net job creation, i.e. the creation of an additional job in relation to the (average) work force (over a period of time) of the firm concerned. Simply replacing a worker without actually increasing the work force, and hence without creating new jobs, does not constitute genuine job creation.4. One form of job creation, unusual because there is no increase in the number of hours worked in the firm, is job sharing, i.e. apportionment of the overall amount of available work between a larger number of jobs with a proportionally lower number of hours worked.18.4. Application of the derogations in Article 61 (2) and (3) of the EEA Agreement1. Where aid to promote employment is caught by the ban laid down in Article 61 (1) of the EEA Agreement, an examination must be made of whether it qualifies for one of the derogations in Article 61 (2) and (3). Here a distinction must be made between aid that creates new jobs and aid that maintains existing jobs.2. The EFTA Surveillance Authority is generally sympathetic to aid intended to create jobs. Despite the risks involved for intra-EEA competition, such aid improves the employment content of growth. Consequently, taking due account of the application of the specific sets of rules governing certain branches of industry, and in so far as the amount of aid per worker is justified and does not represent too high a proportion of the firm's production costs, it may be concluded that, when a firm makes this type of effort, the aid it receives for the purpose generally qualifies for the derogation in Article 61 (3) (c) in that it is intended to facilitate the development of certain activities, provided that it does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the functioning of the EEA Agreement.3. In assessing employment aid, the EFTA Surveillance Authority will apply the following criteria:- it will be favourably disposed towards aid to create new jobs in SMEs (4) and in regions eligible for regional aid (5). Outside these two categories, it will also look favourably upon aid to encourage firms to take on certain groups of workers experiencing particular difficulties entering or re-entering the labour market. In the latter case, there is no need for net job creation, provided that the post falls vacant following voluntary departure and not redundancy,- it will also be sympathetic towards aid to promote job sharing, which allows the overall amount of work available to be distributed among a larger number of posts with shorter working hours, thereby offering the possibility of (part-time) work to a greater number of people,- for aid in the preceding categories to be viewed favourably, the EFTA Surveillance Authority will also scrutinize the terms of the employment contract, in particular compliance with the obligation to hire workers for an indefinite period and to maintain newly created jobs for a minimum period, conditions which ensure that the job created is a stable one. Any other guarantee of the permanence of new jobs, particularly the arrangements for payment of the aid, will also be taken into account,- the EFTA Surveillance Authority will make sure that the level of aid does not exceed that which is necessary to provide an incentive to create jobs, taking account, where appropriate, of any difficulties facing SMEs and/or disadvantages affecting the region concerned. The aid must be temporary,- if the creation of jobs for which aid is granted is combined with the training or retraining of the workers concerned, this will make a particularly positive contribution to a favourable assessment by the EFTA Surveillance Authority.4. Aid to maintain jobs, which is similar to operating aid, will be authorized only under the following conditions:- such aid may be authorized where, in accordance with Article 61 (2) (b) of the EEA Agreement, it is intended to make good the damage caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences. Under certain conditions, aid to maintain jobs may also be authorized in regions eligible for the derogation under Article 61 (3) (a) the EEA Agreement concerning the economic development of areas where the standard of living is abnormally low or where there is serious underemployment (6),- where aid to maintain jobs is granted as part of a rescue, restructuring or conversion plan for an ailing firm, it will have to be notified and will be assessed applying the relevant EFTA Surveillance Authority guidelines (7).Naturally, these considerations concern solely aid to maintain jobs and the EFTA States are free to take any appropriate measures to ensure that employment is maintained by general measures, such as a general reduction in taxes and social security contributions paid by firms.5. Aid to create jobs that is limited to one or more sensitive sectors experiencing overcapacity or in crisis is also generally viewed less favourably than aid to create new jobs that is available to the economy as a whole.6. Such sectoral aid constitutes an advantage for the sector(s) concerned which improves their competitive position in relation to firms from other EFTA States and EC Member States. Aid that reduces wage costs throughout one or more productive sectors reduces production costs in those sectors, and this enables them to improve their market share to the detriment of their EEA competitors both within the EFTA State or EC Member State concerned and for exports inside and outside the territory covered by the EEA Agreement, with all the attendant implications in terms of a worsening of the employment situation in those sectors in other EFTA States or EC Member States. Consequently, the protective effect of such aid for the sector(s) in question, in particular those in crisis, and its adverse effects on employment in competing sectors in other EFTA States or EC Member States generally outweigh the common interest involved in active measures to reduce unemployment; the EFTA Surveillance Authority will usually consider such aid to be incompatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. However, where such aid is granted in a region affected by serious underemployment, the EFTA Surveillance Authority will take this fact into account.7. The EFTA Surveillance Authority will, however, be more favourably disposed towards aid to create new jobs where the jobs are in growth niche markets or sub-sectors that hold out the prospect of considerable job creation.18.5. Conclusion1. If the EFTA Surveillance Authority concludes, after examining employment aid schemes planned by the EFTA States and subject to notification, that the arrangements and conditions conform to these guidelines, it may regard them as compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement by virtue of the derogation in Article 61 (3) (c), which applies to aid to facilitate the development of certain activities without adversely affecting trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest.2. However, where aid to employment concerns certain sectors, firms or categories of aid which are governed by specific rules, it may be regarded as compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement only if it complies with the conditions laid down in those rules applicable in the context of the EEA Agreement.3. A report on the application of these guidelines will be submitted and, if necessary, the guidelines will be reviewed five years after they enter into force.(1) This chapter corresponds to the Guidelines on aid to employment adopted by the Commission on 19 July 1995 (OJ No C 334, 12. 12. 1995).(2) See the guidelines and recommendations relating to the white paper on growth, competitiveness and employment adopted at the European Council meeting in Essen in 1994 as well as the joint communiqué of the presidencies of the joint meeting of EU and EFTA Ministers of Finance and Economy on 18 September 1995.(3) See Chapter 12 of these guidelines, the application and implementation of the "de minimis" rule.(4) For definition of SMEs see Chapter 10 of these guidelines on state aid to small and mediumsized enterprises.(5) See Part VI of these guidelines.(6) See Part VI, in particular Chapter 28, of these guidelines.(7) See Chapter 15 of these guidelines.'3. The following text shall be inserted in the State Aid Guidelines as Chapter 30:'30. AID TO THE AVIATION SECTORIn the autumn of 1994 the EC Commission adopted guidelines concerning application of the State aid provisions of the EC Treaty and the EEA Agreement in the aviation sector (1).The EFTA Surveillance Authority has not been notified of any aid by the EFTA States to enterprises in the aviation sector. However, should the occasion arise to assess such aid, the Authority will apply criteria corresponding to those found in the Commission guidelines referred to above.(1) Application of Articles 92 and 93 of the EC Treaty and Article 61 of the EEA Agreement to State aids in the aviation sector (OJ No C 350, 10. 12. 1994).`4. The following text shall be inserted in the State Aid Guidelines as Chapter 31:'31. AID TO SHIPBUILDING GRANTED AS DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE TO A DEVELOPING COUNTRY (1)1. Article 4 (7) of the Act referred to in point 1b of Annex XV to the EEA Agreement on aid to shipbuilding (2) establishes that aid to shipbuilding and ship conversion granted as development assistance to a developing country shall not be subject to the prevailing maximum production aid ceiling, set by the EFTA Surveillance Authority in accordance with Article 4 (2) of the Directive.2. Such aid may be deemed compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement provided that it complies with the terms laid down for that purpose by OECD Working Party No 6 in its agreement concerning the interpretation of Articles 6 to 8 of the OECD Council resolution of 3 August 1981 (Understanding on export credits for ships).3. Any such individual proposal is subject to prior notification to the EFTA Surveillance Authority. On the basis of the notification, the Authority shall verify the particular development content of the proposed aid and satisfy itself that it falls within the scope of the Understanding.4. As regards the latter point, the EFTA Surveillance Authority ensures that the proposed aid complies with the criteria laid down in OECD document C/WP6(84)3 of 18 January 1984 concerning the interpretation of Article 6 of the Understanding on export credits for ships (3).5. Accordingly, the following criteria must be adhered to by the EFTA States granting development aid:1. The aid may not be granted for construction of ships which will be operated under a flag of convenience.2. In the event that the aid cannot be classified as public development aid in the framework of OECD the donor must confirm that the aid is part of an inter-governmental agreement.3. The donor must give appropriate assurances that the real owner is resident in the beneficiary country and that the beneficiary company is not a non-operational subsidiary of a foreign company.4. The beneficiary must give undertakings not to sell the ship without prior government approval.Furthermore the aid granted must contain a grant element of a least 25 % in accordance with the OECD method of calculation, see OECD document C/WP6(85)62 of 21 October 1985.6. The Understanding does not, on the other hand, provide for any criteria applicable to the classification of countries eligible for development aid. The EFTA Surveillance Authority has decided, taking into account the practice of the EC Commission, to consider compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement the granting of development aid to the following countries under the terms of Article 4 (7) of the Directive:(a) ACP States (4)(b) Overseas countries and territories of EC Member States (5)(c) All countries not included in (a) or (b) above which are classified on the OECD DAC-list as least-developed countries (LLDC), low-income countries (LIC) or lower middle-income countries (LMIC). These countries are the following:- Afghanistan (LLDC),- Bangladesh (LLDC),- Bhutan (LLDC),- Bolivia (LIC),- Burma (LLDC),- China (LIC),- Cook Island (LMIC),- Costa Rica (LMIC),- Cuba (LMIC),- Dominican Republic (LMIC),- Ecuador (LMIC),- Egypt (LIC),- El Salvador (LMIC),- Guatemala (LMIC),- Haiti (LLDC),- Honduras (LIC,)- India (LIC),- Indonesia (LIC),- Kampuchea, Democratic (LIC),- Korea, Democratic People's Republic of (LMIC),- Laos (LLDC),- Lebanon (LMIC),- Maldives (LLDC),- Mongolia (LIC),- Morocco (LMIC),- Nepal (LLDC),- Nicaragua (LIC),- Pakistan (LIC),- Paraguay (LMIC),- Peru (LMIC),- Philippines (LMIC),- Sri Lanka (LIC),- Thailand (LMIC),- Tunisia (LMIC),- Turkey (LMIC),- Vietnam (LIC),- Yemen (LLDC),- Yemen, Democratic (LLDC).7. Countries appearing in the upper middle-income countries (UMIC) classification will not be considered eligible.8. In order to safeguard the EFTA States' shipbuilding interests the EFTA Surveillance Authority would, however, allow the EFTA States to grant development aid to countries not falling under the above categories provided it can be substantiated by the EFTA States that a third country participant to the OECD Understanding is planning to grant development aid for a particular contract. In this event the EFTA Surveillance Authority may deem compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement development aid to be granted for this contract up to the same level as that planned by a third country participant to the OECD Understanding in terms of OECD grant element.9. In order to tighten up the application of Article 4 (7) of the Directive and ensure compliance with the criteria referred to in paragraph (5) above, the EFTA States are required to formally engage in each individual notification of development projects under Article 4 (7) of the Directive that these criteria are adhered to. They will also be expected to give the relevant details of the contract in order to determine how the contract price relates to market prices of comparable vessels.10. The EFTA States are advised that as regards the criterion of flag of convenience (point 1 in paragraph 5. above) the EFTA Surveillance Authority will consider the following countries as having a flag of convenience:- Antigua,- Bahamas,- Bermuda,- Cayman Isles,- Cyprus,- Gibraltar,- Lebanon,- Liberia,- Malta,- Panama,- St Vincent,- Vanuatu.11. The provisions of this chapter will be valid until the expiry of the Act referred to in point 1b of Annex XV to the EEA Agreement.(1) This chapter corresponds to the Commission letter to Member States SG(89) D/311 dated 3 January 1989.(2) Council Directive No 90/684/EEC as amended by Council Directive No 93/115/EC and Directive No 94/73/EC. These Council Directives, as adapted for the purpose of the EEA Agreement by the EEA Joint Committee Decision No 21 of 5 April 1995, will hereinafter be referred to as the Shipbuilding Directive.(3) Working Party No 6 of the Council: revision of the definitions and administrative procedures concerning the understanding on export credits for ships.(4) See Decision of the Council and the Commission of 24 March 1986 on the conclusion of the third ACP-EEC Convention (OJ No L 86, 31. 3. 1986).(5) See Council Decision 86/283/EEC of 30 June 1986 on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Economic Community (OJ No L 175, 1. 7. 1986, p. 46).`5. The present Chapter 30 of the State Aid Guidelines 'Standardized annual reporting`, and Chapter 31, 'Other specific provisions`, shall accordingly be renumbered as Chapter 32 and 33, respectively.Done at Brussels, 6 December 1995.For the EFTA Surveillance AuthorityKnut ALMESTADThe President(1) Hereinafter referred to as the State aid guidelines.(2) OJ No L 231, 3. 9. 1994, p. 1.(3) OJ No L 175, 27. 7. 1995, p. 59.


title: 2011/729/CFSP: Council Decision 2011/729/CFSP of 10 November 2011 amending Decision 2011/137/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya

text:
               11.11.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 293/35

         COUNCIL DECISION 2011/729/CFSP
   of 10 November 2011
   amending Decision 2011/137/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 28 February 2011, the Council adopted Decision 2011/137/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya (1), implementing United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1970 (2011).

               (2)

               On 23 March 2011, the Council adopted Decision 2011/178/CFSP (2) amending Decision 2011/137/CFSP and implementing UNSCR 1973 (2011).

               (3)

               On 22 September 2011, the Council adopted Decision 2011/625/CFSP (3) amending Decision 2011/137/CFSP and implementing UNSCR 2009 (2011).

               (4)

               On 27 October 2011, the United Nations Security Council adopted UNSCR 2016 (2011) which decided that the provisions of paragraphs 6 to 12 of UNSCR 1973 (2011) should be terminated on 31 October 2011.

               (5)

               Decision 2011/137/CFSP should be amended accordingly,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Article 3a of Decision 2011/137/CFSP is hereby deleted.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 10 November 2011.

            For the Council

            The President

         M. DOWGIELEWICZ

      (1)  OJ L 58, 3.3.2011, p. 53.

      (2)  OJ L 78, 24.3.2011, p. 24.

      (3)  OJ L 246, 23.9.2011, p. 30.


Avis juridique important

|

31995D0811(01)

Council Decision of 24 July 1995 appointing the Italian, Austrian, Finnish and Swedish members of the Advisory Committee on Nursing Training

Official Journal C 206 , 11/08/1995 P. 0002 - 0003

COUNCIL DECISION of 24 July 1995 appointing the Italian, Austrian, Finnish and Swedish members of the Advisory Committee on Nursing Training (95/C 206/02)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to the 1994 Act of Accession, and in particular Article 165 (1) thereof,Having regard to Council Decision 77/454/EEC of 27 June 1977 setting up an Advisory Committee on Nursing Training (1), and in particular Articles 3 and 4 thereof,Having regard to the candidates submitted to the Council by the Italian, Austrian, Finnish and Swedish Governments,Whereas, by its Decision of 25 July 1994 (2), the Council appointed the members and alternates of the Advisory Committee on Nursing Training for the period up to 24 July 1997, on the understanding that the Belgian and Italian Governments' lists would be submitted in due course;Whereas it is necessary to appoint the Italian, Austrian, Finnish and Swedish members and alternates for the said period,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:Sole Article The following are hereby appointed members and alternates of the Advisory Committee on Nursing Training for the period ending on 24 July 1997:>TABLE>>TABLE>>TABLE>Done at Brussels, 24 July 1995.For the CouncilThe PresidentP. SOLBES MIRA(1) OJ No L 176, 15. 7. 1977, p. 11.(2) OJ No C 221, 9. 8. 1994, p. 3.


Avis juridique important

|

31994D0023

94/23/EC: Commission Decision of 17 January 1994 on common procedural rules for European technical approval

Official Journal L 017 , 20/01/1994 P. 0034 - 0040 Finnish special edition: Chapter 13 Volume 25 P. 0235  Swedish special edition: Chapter 13 Volume 25 P. 0235

COMMISSION DECISION of 17 January 1994 on common procedural rules for European technical approval (94/23/EC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,  Having regard to the Council Directive 89/106/EEC of 21 December 1988 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to construction products (1), and in particular Annex II thereto,  Whereas Article 8 of the abovementioned Directive provides that European technical approval may be granted to certain products, particularly to products for which there is neither a harmonized standard nor a national standard and to products which  differ significantly from the harmonized or recognized national standards;  Whereas provision has been made for the introduction of common procedural rules for requesting, preparing and granting such approval; whereas Annex II to the abovementioned Directive also stipulates that these common procedural rules are to be adopted  by the Commission on the basis of the opinion of the committee in accordance with Article 20 of the Directive;  Whereas these common procedural rules were endorsed by the committee provided for by the Directive at its meeting on 22 April 1993, in accordance with the procedures laid down by the Directive,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:   Sole Article  Pursuant to Directive 89/106/EEC, requests for European technical approval shall be made and such approval shall be prepared and granted in accordance with the common procedural rules provided for in the Annex to this Decision.  Done at Brussels, 17 January 1994.  For the Commission Martin BANGEMANN Member of the Commission  (1) OJ No L 40, 11. 2. 1989, p. 12.      ANNEX   COMMON PROCEDURAL RULES FOR REQUESTING, PREPARING AND THE GRANTING OF EUROPEAN TECHNICAL APPROVALS  0. Introduction 0.1. These common rules define the procedures to be adopted for the requesting, preparing and the granting of European technical approvals as expressed in Annex II.3 of the Council Directive 89/106/EEC (1) of 21 December 1988 on the approximation of  laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to construction products, hereafter referred to as the Directive (CPD).  0.2. EOTA is an organization established under the provisions of the Directive bringing together the bodies nominated by the Member States of the European Community for the granting of the European technical approvals (ETA) as provided for within its  scope.  1. General rules 1.1. The Secretariat of EOTA holds the updated list of the issued ETAs. A list is published at least once a year.  1.2. The Technical Board of EOTA is responsible for creating such committees as are required to arrange and coordinate the production of ETAs.  1.3. The approval bodies publish the ETAs issued by them in their respective official language(s).  1.4. Difficulties arising in relation to the Directive which cannot be resolved by the Executive Commission of EOTA will be sent to the Commission of the European Communities (hereinafter called 'the Commission of the EC') for resolution.  2. Rules relating to the application for an ETA 2.1. An application for a European technical approval may be made by a manufacturer, or an agent established in the Community, hereafter referred to as the applicant. The agent must be specifically nominated by the manufacturer to act on his behalf.  2.2. The application must be made to anyone of the EOTA bodies, which are responsible for the relevant area; however, it is not allowed to direct an application for the same construction product to more than one body.  2.3. By his application according to this rule the applicant authorizes the approval body to whom he has directed his application to inform the EC Commission, the other EOTA bodies and the Secretariat of EOTA of the content of the application.  2.4. Before submitting his application the applicant shall - on his request - receive, after supplying such information as is required by the approval body, information concerning:   - the approval procedure,   - the estimate of the time schedule necessary for the approval body to complete the approval procedure for the specific product,   - an estimate of the cost for the handling of the approval procedure and the payment modalities.   In the event that the subject area has not already been approved as suitable for ETAs, or in the case of a product which differs significantly from harmonized standards or recognized national standards, the above information will only be given to the  applicant after a decision on the possibility of issuing an ETA taken according to the procedure described in 3.2.   The applicant will be informed of the decision.  2.5. The application must be submitted in a standard format (see Appendix 1) in the language of the Member State where the approval body is located unless agreed otherwise by the approval body.  2.6. The application shall be accompanied by a description of the construction product, specifications, drawings and test reports, explaining in detail the subject under application and its intended use.  2.7. In the application from the applicant shall announce all the places of manufacture. He has to ensure that these places can be visited by the approval body or its representative during working hours, in view of the issuing of the ETA.  2.8. The approval body has to, within two months, acknowledge receipt of the application and confirm that it will initiate the procedures (see standard format Appendix 2).   If the application is not accepted, the approval body must give the reasons. The applicant may then apply to another approval body.  2.9. The approval body has to inform the applicant which documents, test results, calculations, etc he has to deliver to enable the approval body to assess the fitness for use of the product for the intended use.   It is the duty of the applicant to supply the approval body with the necessary documents and to support the approval body in its assessment task.  2.10. The EOTA bodies shall take the necessary measures to ensure confidentiality of all critical information which, in the course of their activities, comes to their knowledge.  2.11. The applicant has to declare, in a legally binding way, that he will pay all the costs arising from the approval procedure and the establishment of the supporting documents in accordance with national rules.  2.12. If the applicant does not meet his obligations as defined in this document, the approval body may, after a reasonable period of time, cancel the application.  3. Rules relating to the granting of an ETA 3.0. The ETA only concerns aspects of the product which relate to the essential requirements as defined in Annex I of the CPD and in the Interpretative Documents according to Article 3.3 of the CPD. Only these aspects are related to the CE marking.   Should other aspects be taken into account, the relevant assessment shall be clearly differentiated from those related to the essential requirements, after an agreement between the members of EOTA. Such assessments would be voluntary.   The format of the ETA must correspond to the 'general format' as agreed by the Commission of the EC.  3.1. Granting of an ETA on the basis of ETA guideline (according to the Directive - Article 9.1) 3.1.1. The content and format of the ETA must correspond to the relevant ETA guideline.  3.1.2. The approval body which issues the ETA sends it to:   - all other EOTA bodies,   - the General Secretariat who will send a copy to the Commission of the EC.  3.1.3. During a transitional period determined individually for each ETA guideline by EOTA, in order to ensure the comparability of the ETAs issued by the approval bodies, the draft ETA with the accompanying documents (test results) are submitted for  prior consultation to the relevant EOTA bodies (1) and the General Secretariat asking for their comments within two months.  3.1.4. Should the Commission of the EC establish, under provisions of Article 5. 1 of the CPD and after the advice of the Standing Committee, a shortcoming in a given ETA due to a shortcoming of an ETA guideline, the approval bodies shall not issue any  more ETAs on the basis of the above ETA guideline.  3.2. Granting of an ETA without an ETA guideline (according to the Directive, Article 9.2) 3.2.1. The content and format of the ETA must correspond to the 'general format' agreed by the Commission of the EC.  3.2.2. The approval body receiving a request according to point 2.4 or an application for an ETA introduced for the first time for a product of the family concerned must have preliminary consultation with the Technical Board in order that it can agree  in principle on the granting of an ETA to that product and on the principle of the proposed attestation of conformity procedure.   If consensus is achieved in the Technical Board on applications according to Article 8.2a of the CPD, then the appropriate information as asked by the EC Commission is sent with the approval of the President of EOTA to the Commission of the EC to  obtain authority to issue ETAs. If consensus cannot be achieved in the Technical Board it will be passed to the Executive Commission for decision, as to whether it should be submitted to the Commission of the EC.   In the case of applications for ETAs according to Article 8.2 b of the Directive, the Commission of the EC will confirm on the basis of the EOTA assessment and of the relevant information, whether a product of a family covered by harmonized standards  or recognized national standards differs significantly from them and therefore if a European technical approval can be granted.  3.2.3. If agreement is achieved under 3.2.2 the approval body to whom an application is directed must have a preliminary discussion with the other relevant EOTA bodies in which is explained the manner it is intended to use to progress the application  including the test programme, the performance requirements and the manner of fulfillment of the attestation of conformity foreseen.   The approval body takes into account the remarks formulated by the other EOTA bodies.  3.2.4. When the application for an ETA is for a product of a family for which the procedure laid down in 3.2.3 has already been established the ETA must be based on that established procedure.  3.2.5. Before issuing the ETA, the approval body sends the ETA draft to the relevant EOTA bodies and to the General Secretariat with the justifications provided by the applicant asking for their comments within two months.   The ETA is issued by the approval body when all the relevant EOTA bodies have given consent in writing taking account of the Directive, Annex II, paragraph 2, sentence 3.   Circulation of the ETA is in accordance with 3.1.2.   If there are objections which cannot be solved then the question is put on the Agenda of the Technical Board.   If in the Technical Board consensus is achieved the ETA is issued by the approval body.   If consensus cannot be achieved the subject is put on the Agenda of the Executive Commission who decides on any subsequent action.   If the Executive Commission cannot reach consensus, the matter shall be referred to the Standing Committee on Construction (the Directive, Article 9.2) via the Commission of the EC.  4. Withdrawal of an ETA 4.1. The approval body shall withdraw the ETA if the Commission of the EC has informed the Member States according to Article 5 paragraph 1 of the Directive.  4.2. The approval body has to inform the other EOTA bodies and the General Secretariat of the withdrawal. The General Secretariat will inform the Commission of the EC.  5. Modification of an ETA 5.1. For modification of an ETA the procedure of a new application applies accordingly. The application must be addressed to the approval body having issued the approval being subject to modification.  5.2. The provisions stated under 3.1 and 3.2 have to be applied accordingly: the approval procedure shall only relate to the items directly concerned by the modification.  5.3. A new ETA is issued replacing the previous ETA.  6. Extension of validity 6.1. In accordance with Article 8 (4) of the Directive, the period of validity of an ETA can be extended for a further period of (in general) five years provided that the EC Commission has not notified the concerned approval bodies and/or EOTA that  conditions on which the original ETA were issued have changed. Applications shall be submitted in writing and should be received by the approval body at least six months before the expiry date.   As far as the procedure is concerned, the provisions stated under 3.1 and 3.2 apply accordingly.  6.2. The application for extension must be accompanied by the relevant technical documents required in the ETA guidelines for the extension of an ETA. If such ETA guidelines do not exist, the approval body after consultation with the EOTA bodies, will  inform the applicant which technical documents have to be presented.  6.3. Such extensions become the responsibility of the body issuing them and should be as complete as the original assessment.   Appendix 1  APPLICATION FOR A EUROPEAN TECHNICAL APPROVAL REFERRED TO IN CHAPTER III OF THE COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 89/106/EEC  1. The application is made to:  (Name of the designated approval body according to Chapter III Article 10 of the Directive 89/106/EEC) 2. Applicant:  (Manufacturer or his authorized agent established in the Community; where the application is made by the agent established in the Community, it has to be accompanied by the authorization given by the manufacturer).  3. Generic type of the construction product:  4. Trade name(s) of the product, as will be given in the approval:  5. Definition of the construction product and its intended use:  (Additional documents are to be forwarded with the application, see item 2.6 of the common procedural rules for requesting, preparing and the granting of European technical approvals).  6. Manufacturing plants, where the construction product is to be produced:  7. Declaration of the applicant:  Herewith I declare (*) - that I have not made another application for a European technical approval for the construction product referred to in items 3 and 4 to any other EOTA body,  (*) - that I have made an application for a European technical approval for the construction product referred to in items 3 and 4 to  (name of the other EOTA body).  That application was not accepted,  - that I agree to other EOTA bodies and the Commission of the EC being notified of the application,  - that I will pay the costs arising from the approval procedure in accordance with the national rules of the approval body referred to in item 1 (cf. Directive 89/106/EEC, Annex II paragraph 6),  - that I will support the approval procedure as required,  - that I will ensure that the places of manufacture can be visited at any time by the approval body or its representative during working hours in view of the issuing of the ETA.   (Place and date)    (Authorized signature)  Appendix 2 (Name and address of the designated approval body)  CONFIRMATION OF THE RECEIPT OF THE APPLICATION FOR GRANTING A EUROPEAN TECHNICAL APPROVAL REFERRED TO IN THE COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 89/106/EEC  1. The application made by,     dated  (date of application for approval) for a European technical approval for the construction product,   according to items 3 and 4 of the above application is herewith accepted and the procedure has been initiated.  2. The approval procedure is given the following reference number:   3. The approval procedure is based on:  - the following legal provisions:   (legal provisions, by means of which the Council Directive 89/106/EEC has been implemented in national law),  - the common procedural rules for requesting, preparing and the granting of European technical approvals,  - (provisions, statutes, contract texts, or the like, of the approval body concerned, where required) 4. The costs for the approval procedure are determined on the basis of:      [schedule of fees, legal provisions, or any other provisions in force for the approval body (with reference)].   (Place and date)    (Authorized signature)   (1) OJ No L 40, 11. 2. 1989, p. 12.  (2) Relevant EOTA bodies: bodies nominated by the Member States to operate in the subject area.  (3)() Tick appropriate box.


title: Council Decision 2013/497/CFSP of 10 October 2013 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran

text:
               12.10.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 272/46

         COUNCIL DECISION 2013/497/CFSP
   of 10 October 2013
   amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 26 July 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/413/CFSP (1).

               (2)

               The criteria for designation with regard to restrictions on admission into the Union and to the freezing of funds, which cover persons and entities that have assisted designated persons or entities in evading or violating the provisions of the relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions or of Decision 2010/413/CFSP, should be adjusted in order to include persons and entities that have themselves evaded or violated those provisions.

               (3)

               Decision 2010/413/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Decision 2010/413/CFSP is hereby amended as follows:

               (1)

               In Article 19(1), point (b) is replaced by the following:

                           "(b)

                           other persons not covered by Annex I that are engaged in, directly associated with, or providing support for Iran's proliferation-sensitive nuclear activities or for the development of nuclear weapon delivery systems, including through the involvement in procurement of the prohibited items, goods, equipment, materials and technology, or persons acting on their behalf or at their direction, or persons that have evaded or violated, or assisted designated persons or entities in evading or violating, the provisions of UNSCR 1737 (2006), UNSCR 1747 (2007), UNSCR 1803 (2008) and UNSCR 1929 (2010) or of this Decision, as well as other members of the IRGC and persons acting on behalf of IRGC or IRISL, and persons providing insurance or other essential services to IRGC and IRISL, or to entities owned or controlled by them or acting on their behalf, as listed in Annex II;".

               (2)

               In Article 20(1), point (b) is replaced by the following:

                           "(b)

                           persons and entities not covered by Annex I that are engaged in, directly associated with, or providing support for, Iran's proliferation-sensitive nuclear activities or for the development of nuclear weapon delivery systems, including through the involvement in procurement of the prohibited items, goods, equipment, materials and technology, or persons or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, or entities owned or controlled by them, including through illicit means, or persons and entities that have evaded or violated, or assisted designated persons or entities in evading or violating, the provisions of UNSCR 1737 (2006), UNSCR 1747 (2007), UNSCR 1803 (2008) and UNSCR 1929 (2010) or of this Decision, as well as other members and entities of IRGC and IRISL and entities owned or controlled by them or persons and entities acting on their behalf or persons and entities providing insurance or other essential services to IRGC and IRISL, or to entities owned or controlled by them or acting on their behalf, as listed in Annex II;".

         Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

      Done at Luxembourg, 10 October 2013.

            For the Council

            The President

         R. SINKEVIČIUS

      (1)  Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP of 26 July 2010 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Common Position 2007/140/CFSP (OJ L 195, 27.7.2010, p. 39).


title: 2011/578/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 10 May 2011 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2009

text:
               27.9.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 250/155

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2011
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2009
   (2011/578/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
   having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2009,
   having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2009, together with the Agency’s replies (1),
   having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 15 February 2011 (05892/2011 — C7-0052/2011),
   having regard to Article 276 of the EC Treaty and Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,
   having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1210/90 of 7 May 1990 on the establishment of the European Environment Agency and the European Environment Information and Observation Network (3), and in particular Article 13 thereof,
   having regard to Regulation (EC) No 401/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the European Environment Agency and the European Environment Information and Observation Network (4), and in particular Article 13 thereof,
   having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,
   having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,
   having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0122/2011),

               1.

               Grants the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2009;

               2.

               Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this Decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Jerzy BUZEK

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ C 338, 14.12.2010, p. 58.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 120, 11.5.1990, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 126, 21.5.2009, p. 13.

      (5)  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.
    ---documentbreak---

               27.9.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 250/157

         RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2011
   with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2009
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
   having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2009,
   having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2009, together with the Agency’s replies (1),
   having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 15 February 2011 (05892/2011 — C7-0052/2011),
   having regard to Article 276 of the EC Treaty and Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,
   having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1210/90 of 7 May 1990 on the establishment of the European Environment Agency and the European Environment Information and Observation Network (3), and in particular Article 13 thereof,
   having regard to Regulation (EC) No 401/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the European Environment Agency and the European Environment Information and Observation Network (4), and in particular Article 13 thereof,
   having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,
   having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,
   having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0122/2011),

               A.

               whereas the Court of Auditors stated that it has obtained reasonable assurances that the annual accounts for the financial year 2009 are reliable and that the underlying transactions are legal and regular,

               B.

               whereas on 5 May 2010 Parliament granted the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency discharge for implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2008 (6), and in its resolution accompanying the discharge decision, inter alia:

                           —

                           called on the Agency to continue providing on a regular basis (i.e. every 5 years) an independent external evaluation on the basis of its founding Regulation (EEC) No 1210/90 and the work programmes adopted by the Management Board,

                           —

                           noted the Court of Auditors’ observation that a tendering procedure should have been issued for the contract for refitting the premises rented by the Agency, instead of paying a firm chosen by the building’s owners,

                           —

                           acknowledged that the Agency has implemented 9 out of the 27 recommendations made by the Internal Audit Service (IAS) since 2006,

               C.

               whereas the budget of the Agency for 2009 was EUR 39 900 000, which is an increase of 7,1 % on the financial year 2008,

               1.

               Notes that the total financial resources available in 2009 for the Agency amount to EUR 39 900 000, of which EUR 34 560 000 stem from Union subsidies;

               2.

               Notes that the increase of EUR 2 800 000 compared to the Agency’s budget in 2008 was dedicated to develop four key areas namely climate change adaptation, ecosystem assessment, sustainable consumption and production, and disaster prevention and management as identified in the multiannual strategy for 2009-2013;

      Performance

               3.

               Welcomes the Agency’s initiative to continue providing on a regular basis an independent external evaluation on the basis of its founding Regulation (EEC) No 1210/90 and the work programmes adopted by the Management Board; notes in particular that the next evaluation will be undertaken in 2012-2013;

               4.

               Calls once more on the Agency to set out, in a table to be annexed to the Court of Auditors’ next report, a comparison of the operations that were carried out during the year for which discharge is to be granted and during the previous financial year so as to enable the discharge authority to assess more effectively the Agency’s performance from one year to the next;

               5.

               Calls on the Agency to deal with the four key areas as a matter of priority and to do more to advance their further development;

               6.

               Welcomes specifically the Agency as reliable provider of independent and assured environmental information for all Union institutions, the Member States and policy-making bodies;

               7.

               Encourages the Agency, once again, to continue its efforts to further develop its communication methods in order to attract more media coverage for its findings and thus feed public debate on important environmental issues, such as climate change, biodiversity and the management of natural resources; considers that such measures may lead to a more transparent working method and greater public interest in the Agency’s work;

               8.

               Requests the Court of Auditors to undertake performance audits on the Agency;

      Budgetary procedures

               9.

               Encourages the Agency to strengthen the link between the budget and the work programme; acknowledges, in fact, that the Court of Auditors reported insufficiently rigorous procedures for drawing up the budget leading to a considerable number of budgetary transfers affecting most of the budget lines (equivalent to 8 % of the Agency’s budget); notes, in particular, that some of these transfers led to successive increases and decreases in the same budget headings whereas some appropriations were not used and were transferred to other lines during the year;

               10.

               Is concerned about the Agency’s practice of making transfers to increase a budget line in order to pay (on 30 December 2009) the rent for the Agency’s premises for the first quarter of 2010 and charge it to the 2009 budget; stresses that this practice by the Agency is at odds with the principle of annuality and that it reduced the amount to be repaid to the Commission;

               11.

               Calls on the Agency to improve, by the end of the year, the accuracy of the information provided by the operational departments on the estimation of accrued operational expenditure;

      Human resources

               12.

               Calls on the Agency to redress its deficiencies in the recruitment procedures which put at risk the transparency of these procedures; notes, in particular, that the Court of Auditors reported the following weaknesses: the vacancy notices did not specify a maximum number of candidates to be put on the reserve lists, questions used during written tests and interviews were not decided on before the examination of the applications, the decisions of the selection boards were insufficiently documented, thresholds for being invited to interview or put on the reserve list were not set in advance, and minutes were not complete;

               13.

               Notes that 10 additional posts had been necessary in 2009 to reinforce capacities in the areas of ecosystem assessment, sustainable consumption and production, development of a Shared Environmental Information System as well as to establish capacities to develop new areas of work in climate change adaptation and disaster prevention and management; encourages, in this regard, further improvements in the recruitment procedure in terms of transparency, as indicated by the Court of Auditors;

      Internal audit

               14.

               Acknowledges from the Agency that three recommendations from the Internal Audit Service (IAS) follow up of past audit recommendations still need to be implemented; notes, in particular, that these mainly concern sensitive posts, on-the-spot controls/verifications of grants and financial circuits and are considered ‘very important’;

               15.

               Welcomes the fact that the Agency included in its Annual Activity Report the IAS general assessment of the Agency; considers this as a best practice to be followed by other agencies;

               16.

               Refers, in respect of the other observations accompanying its Decision on discharge, which are of a horizontal nature, to its resolution of 10 May 2011 (7) on the performance, financial management and control of the agencies.

      (1)  OJ C 338, 14.12.2010, p. 58.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 120, 11.5.1990, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 126, 21.5.2009, p. 13.

      (5)  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.

      (6)  OJ L 252, 25.9.2010, p. 151.

      (7)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2011)0163 (See page 269 of this Official Journal).


Avis juridique important

|

31994D0974

94/974/EC: Council Decision of 19 December 1994 on the conclusion by the European Community of the Agreement on free trade and trade-related matters between the European Community, the European Atomic Energy Community and European Coal and Steel Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Estonia, of the other

Official Journal L 373 , 31/12/1994 P. 0001 - 0001

COUNCIL DECISION of 19 December 1994 on the conclusion by the European Community of the Agreement on free trade and trade-related matters between the European Community, the European Atomic Energy Community and European Coal and Steel Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Estonia, of the other (94/974/EC)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 113 in conjunction with Article 228, paragraph 2, first sentence thereof,Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1)HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:Article 1The Agreement on free trade and trade-related matters between the European Community, the European Atomic Energy Community and the European Coal and Steel Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Estonia, of the other part, together with the Protocols, the exchanges of letters and the declarations, are hereby approved on behalf of the Community.These texts are attached to this Decision. (2)Article 2The President of the Council, shall on behalf of the Community, give the notification provided for in Article 49 of the Agreement.Done at Brussels, 19 December 1994.For the CouncilThe PresidentK. KINKEL(1) OJ No C 341, 5. 12. 1994.


Avis juridique important

|

32002D0902

2002/902/EC: Commission Decision of 13 November 2002 on postponing the decision on the request of the Russian Federation for the special incentive arrangements for the protection of labour rights

Official Journal L 312 , 15/11/2002 P. 0027 - 0027

Commission Decisionof 13 November 2002on postponing the decision on the request of the Russian Federation for the special incentive arrangements for the protection of labour rights(2002/902/EC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2501/2001 of 10 December 2001 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences for the period from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2004(1), and in particular Article 16(4) thereof,Whereas:(1) The Russian Federation submitted a request for the special incentive arrangements for the protection of labour rights in June 1999.(2) Article 16(4) of Regulation (EC) No 2501/2001 lays down that where the requesting country needs an additional period of time before it fulfils the conditions laid down in Article 14(2), it may ask the Commission to postpone the decision referred to in Article 18(1) on whether to grant the above arrangements. Article 16(5) lays down that the examination of a request shall be completed within a year of the date of publication of the notice referred to in paragraph 1. The Commission may extend this period, after informing the Committee.(3) The Russian Federation has made a request for the postponement of that decision.(4) The period for examination of the request shall be extended.(5) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Generalised Preferences Committee,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:Sole ArticleThe decision referred to in Article 18(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2501/2001 on the request of the Russian Federation for the special incentive arrangements for the protection of labour rights shall be postponed until the time that the results of an additional assessment of this request are available. The examination of the request shall be completed by July 2003.Done at Brussels, 13 November 2002.For the CommissionPascal LamyMember of the Commission(1) OJ L 346, 31.12.2001, p. 1.


title: Council Decision (EU) 2017/1138 of 19 June 2017 on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union at the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties of the Minamata Convention on Mercury as regards the adoption of the required content of the certification referred to in Article 3(12) of the Convention and of the guidance referred to in Article 8(8) and (9) of the Convention

text:
               27.6.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 164/56

         COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2017/1138
   of 19 June 2017
   on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union at the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties of the Minamata Convention on Mercury as regards the adoption of the required content of the certification referred to in Article 3(12) of the Convention and of the guidance referred to in Article 8(8) and (9) of the Convention
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 192(1) in conjunction with Article 218(9) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 11 May 2017, the Minamata Convention on Mercury (1) (the ‘Convention’) was approved, on behalf of the European Union, by way of Council Decision (EU) 2017/939 (2).

               (2)

               The Convention will enter into force on 16 August 2017. The first meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention (the ‘COP 1’) will be held on 24-29 September 2017 in Geneva. In these circumstances, the Union should determine the position to be taken at the COP 1.

               (3)

               Article 3(8) of the Convention requires Parties that intend to import mercury from a non-Party to only allow such import on the condition that they are provided with certification from the exporting non-Party that the imported mercury is neither from primary mercury mining nor from excess mercury from the decommissioning of chlor-alkali facilities (the ‘certification’).

               (4)

               Article 3(12) of the Convention provides for the adoption of the required content of the certification by the COP 1. Such required content of the certification will therefore have legal effects.

               (5)

               Regulation (EU) 2017/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) complies with the provisions of Article 3(8) of the Convention, as complemented by the proposed required content of the certification.

               (6)

               Article 8(4) of the Convention requires Parties to ensure that new point sources falling within the source categories listed in Annex D make use of best available techniques and best environmental practices to control and, where feasible, to reduce emissions of mercury and mercury compounds into the atmosphere.

               (7)

               Article 8(5) of the Convention provides that Parties shall control and, where feasible, reduce emissions to air of mercury and mercury compounds from the existing point sources falling within the source categories listed in Annex D by implementing one or more of the following measures: using best available techniques and best environmental practices; establishing quantified goals or emission limit values; establishing a multi-pollutant control strategy; or alternative measures.

               (8)

               Article 8(7) of the Convention requires Parties to establish and maintain an inventory of emissions of mercury and mercury compound to the atmosphere.

               (9)

               Article 8(8) of the Convention stipulates that the COP 1 shall adopt guidance on best available techniques and best environmental practices, taking into account any differences between new and existing sources and taking into account the need to minimise cross-media effects, and shall also adopt guidance aimed at supporting Parties in the implementation of their obligations under Article 8(5), in particular in determining goals and setting emission limit values.

               (10)

               Article 8(9) of the Convention provides for the adoption by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention, as soon as practicable, of guidance on criteria that Parties may develop pursuant to Article 8(2)(b), when choosing to apply control measures on emissions of mercury and mercury compounds to air only to the point sources falling within a given source category listed in Annex D, provided that at least 75 per cent of the emissions of the concerned source category are covered, and of guidance on the methodology to be used for preparing inventory of emissions to air of mercury and mercury compounds.

               (11)

               The second sentence of Article 8(10) of the Convention specifies that Parties shall take the guidance into account in implementing the relevant provisions of that Article. Such guidance will therefore have legal effects.

               (12)

               The Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee of the Convention, at its seventh session held on 10-15 March 2016 in Jordan, adopted, on a provisional basis, pending formal adoption by the COP 1, the four guidance documents referred to in Article 8(8) and (9) of the Convention.

               (13)

               Union legislation, including Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (4) and Regulation (EC) No 166/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council (5) complies with the provisions of Article 8 of the Convention, as complemented by the proposed guidance.

               (14)

               The proposed required content of the certification and the proposed four guidance documents should therefore be supported,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The position to be taken on behalf of the European Union at the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Minamata Convention on Mercury (the ‘Convention’), shall be to support the adoption of the required content of the certification referred to in Article 3(12) and of the guidance referred to in Article 8(8) and (9) of the Convention.
   Minor changes to the documents referred to in the first paragraph may be agreed to by the representatives of the Union, in consultation with Member States during coordination meetings, without further decision of the Council.
   Article 2
   The Decision(s) of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention adopting the documents referred to in Article 1 shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
   Article 3
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

      Done at Luxembourg, 19 June 2017.

            For the Council

            The President

         J. HERRERA

      (1)  OJ L 142, 2.6.2017, p. 6.

      (2)  Council Decision (EU) 2017/939 of 11 May 2017 on the conclusion on behalf of the European Union of the Minamata Convention on Mercury (OJ L 142, 2.6.2017, p. 4).

      (3)  Regulation (EU) 2017/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 on mercury, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1102/2008 (OJ L 137, 24.5.2017, p. 1).

      (4)  Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) (OJ L 334, 17.12.2010, p. 17).

      (5)  Regulation (EC) No 166/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 January 2006 concerning the establishment of a European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register and amending Council Directives 91/689/EEC and 96/61/EC (OJ L 33, 4.2.2006, p. 1).