title: 2011/580/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 10 May 2011 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2009

text:
               27.9.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 250/162

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2011
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2009
   (2011/580/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
   having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2009,
   having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2009, together with the Authority’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 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) establishing a European Food Safety Authority, and in particular Article 44 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 (4), 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 (A7-0146/2011),

               1.

               Grants the Executive Director of the European Food Safety Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the Authority’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 Food Safety Authority, 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. 108.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.

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

               27.9.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 250/163

         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 Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2009
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
   having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2009,
   having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2009, together with the Authority’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 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) establishing a European Food Safety Authority, and in particular Article 44 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 (4), 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 (A7-0146/2011),

               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 Food Safety Authority discharge for implementation of the Authority’s budget for the financial year 2008 (5), and in its resolution accompanying the discharge decision, inter alia:

                           —

                           observed that for the third successive year the Court of Auditors has flagged up carry-overs of appropriations to the following year (23 % of the 2008 budget was carried over to 2009, 16 % of the 2007 budget was carried over to 2008, 20 % of the 2006 budget was carried over to 2007),

                           —

                           noted that 20 out of the 25 recommendations (80 %) made by the Internal Audit Service (IAS) and the Internal Audit Capability (IAC) have been implemented,

                           —

                           noted that the second staff survey was launched in October 2008 with a view to assessing the Authority’s working environment,

               C.

               whereas the budget of the Authority for 2009 was EUR 71 400 000, which is an increase of 7,5 % on the financial year 2008,

      Performance

               1.

               Takes note that the Authority’s 2009 budget amounted to EUR 71 400 000 compared to EUR 66 400 000 in the previous year;

               2.

               Underlines that, in the course of the budgetary procedure 2009, an overall reserve of EUR 4 546 000 was introduced by the budgetary authority to the Authority’s budget; welcomes the fact that EUR 2 000 000 of the reserve was released in November 2009 to implement the IT development and infrastructure projects of the Authority, as it provided the respective committee with the results of the staff opinion survey, which was the condition for lifting the reserve;

               3.

               Notes, further, that the other part of the reserve has been allocated to the same policy area in order to contribute to effective response measures against the H1N1 pandemic; is aware that the Authority has not requested these funds for recruitment procedures as they were postponed to 2010;

               4.

               Congratulates the Authority for having set out, in the table annexed to the Court of Auditors’ 2009 report, a comparison of the operations that were carried out during 2008 and 2009 so as to enable the discharge authority to assess more effectively its performance from one year to the next; welcomes the fact that the Authority has increased its number of thematic papers and policy briefings;

               5.

               Observes that the Authority introduced differentiated appropriations for science grants and scientific cooperation projects in 2009 which led to the cancellation of EUR 6 000 000 in payment appropriations; advises the Authority to strengthen the planning and monitoring of budget processes related to differentiated appropriations;

               6.

               Underlines the need for the Authority to ensure its advice is of a high quality and is independent, in order to guarantee compliance with Union safety standards, scientific excellence and independence on all matters with a direct or indirect impact on food and feed safety, and plant protection; recommends, particularly in the interests of transparency, measures to further foster and monitor internal rules on declarations of interest of staff of the Authority and of experts working for the Authority;

               7.

               Requests that the Court of Auditors undertake performance audits on the Authority;

      Budgetary and financial management

               8.

               Calls on the Authority to strengthen the budget processes related to its differentiated appropriations and the planning and monitoring of its multiannual implementation; notes, in fact, that the Court of Auditors reported that EUR 6 000 000 (75 %) of the differentiated appropriations for science grants and scientific cooperation projects had to be cancelled, of which EUR 3 100 000 were funds allocated in excess of the needs identified by the Authority; welcomes, nevertheless, the Authority’s intention to take measures based on its experience for the year 2009, the first year in which the concept of differentiated appropriations for scientific cooperation projects was introduced;

               9.

               Urges, in addition, the Authority to improve its budget management in order to reduce its high carry-over amounts; stresses, in fact, that for the fourth successive year the Court of Auditors has flagged up carry-overs of appropriations to the following year (13 % of the 2009 budget was carried over to 2010, 23 % of the 2008 budget was carried over to 2009, 16 % of the 2007 budget was carried over to 2008 and 20 % of the 2006 budget was carried over to 2007); notes, in particular, that this situation demonstrates weaknesses in the Authority’s contract management and monitoring of the remittance of reports and cost statements;

               10.

               Regrets that, for the third successive year, the Court of Auditors pointed out that commitments for operational activities carried over from the previous year had to be cancelled (19 % of commitments for operational activities carried over from 2008, 37 % of commitments for operational activities carried over from 2007 and 26 % of commitments for operational activities carried over from 2006); urges the Authority to change this situation and to notify the Court of Auditors of the measures taken;

               11.

               Notes, in addition, that the Court of Auditors reported difficulties in the implementation of the 2009 work programme; calls, accordingly, on the Authority to take the necessary measures to remedy these deficiencies;

      Internal audit

               12.

               Acknowledges that the Authority has sent to the authority responsible for discharge a report drawn up by its Executive Director summarising the content of the IAS recommendation as provided for in Article 72(5) of the framework Financial Regulation; nevertheless is concerned, in particular, that out of the 48 recommendations, one is considered ‘critical’ (on grant management), 27 ‘very important’ and 20 ‘important’ but no information has been given to the discharge authority on the content of these recommendations; urges, accordingly, the Executive Director of the Authority to provide this information;

               13.

               Acknowledges from the Authority that the IAS conducted an in-depth audit risk assessment in the last quarter of 2009 to determine the audit priorities and the IAS audit plan for the next 3 years, an audit on declarations of interest and an audit on recruitment in 2009;

               14.

               Considers that the audit committee, created by the Authority in 2006, plays an important role in assisting the Management Board by ensuring that the work of the IAS and the IAC is properly carried out and duly taken into consideration by the Management Board and the Executive Director; believes, therefore, that this audit committee within the Authority might serve as an example to other agencies;

               15.

               Reiterates its demand on the Authority to take appropriate measures in case of conflicts of interest; invites the Authority to initiate a survey on potential conflicts of interest of its leading scientists, board and panel members, so that possible omissions in the declarations of interest can be detected and followed by action in a timely manner;

               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 (6) on the performance, financial management and control of the agencies.

      (1)  OJ C 338, 14.12.2010, p. 108.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.

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

      (5)  OJ L 252, 25.9.2010, p. 155.

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


Avis juridique important

|

31986D0464

86/464/EEC: Commission Decision of 17 September 1986 accepting undertakings given in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of artificial corundum originating in Hungary, Poland and the USSR, and terminating the investigation

Official Journal L 271 , 23/09/1986 P. 0026

*****COMMISSION  DECISION  of 17 September 1986  accepting undertakings given in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of artificial corundum originating in Hungary, Poland and the USSR, and terminating the investigation  (86/464/EEC)  THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,  Having regard to Council Regulations (EEC) No 2176/84 of 23 July 1984 on protection against dumped or subsidized imports from countries not members of the European Economic Community (1), and in particular Article 10 thereof,  After consultation within the Advisory Committee as provided for under the above Regulation,  Whereas:  A. Procedure  (1) In June 1983 the Commission received a complaint from the European Council of Chemical Manufacturers' Federations (CEFIC) on behalf of producers representing all Community production of artificial corundum, on the basis of which an anti-dumping proceeding was initiated (2) concerning imports of this products originating in the People's Republic of China, Czechoslovakia, Spain and Yugoslavia.  Dumping, on the part of certain exporters, and injury were found in the course of this investigation, which was finally terminated (3) in December 1984 with the acceptance of price undertakings offered by those exporters for whom dumping had been determined.  (2) In May 1984 the Commission received a supplementary complaint from the European Council of Chemical Manufacturers' Federations on behalf of producers representing all Community production of artificial corundum in which it was requested to extend the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of artificial corundum originating in the People's Republic of China, Czechoslovakia, Spain and Yugoslavia to include imports of this product originating in Hungary, Poland and the USSR.  The complaint contained evidence of dumping and material injury resulting therefrom, which was considered sufficient to justify the extension of the anti-dumping proceeding already pending.  The Commission accordingly announced by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Communities (4) the extension of the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports into the Community of artificial corundum falling within subheading 28.20 B of the Common Customs Tariff, corresponding to NIMEXE code 28.20-30, to include imports originating in Hungary, Poland and the USSR.  (3) The Commission officially so advised the exporters and importers known to be concerned, and the complainants, and gave the parties directly concerned the opportunity to make known their views in writing and to request a hearing.  (4) All the known exporters made their views known in writing and have been granted a hearing.  (5) Furthermore, submissions were made on behalf of users' associations and users themselves.  (6) The Commission sought and verified all information it deemed to be necessary for the purposes of a preliminary determination from the following companies, where necessary carrying out investigations at their premises:  EEC producers:  - Dynamit Nobel AG, Troisdorf, Federal Republic of Germany,  - Herman C. Starck Berlin GmbH, Duesseldorf, Federal Republic of Germany,  - Lonza-Werke GmbH, Waldshut-Tiengen, Federal Republic of Germany,  - Pechiney Electrometallurgie (ex SOFREM), Paris, France,  - Samim Abrasivi SpA San Michele all'Adige, Italy;  Non-EEC exporters:  Hungalox Handelsgesellschaft mbH, Vienna, Austria;  EEC importers:  - Fa Alfred Hempel GmbH & Co. KG Duesseldorf, Federal Republic of Germany,  - Mineralienwerke Kuppenheim GmbH, Kuppenheim, Federal Republic of Germany,  - Wilfried Post, Gut Junkerswald, Saar, Federal Republic of Germany,  - Naxos Union, Frankfurt/Main, Federal Republic of Germany.  (7) The investigation of dumping covered the period from 1 July 1983 to 30 June 1984.  (8) At a late stage during the proceeding, it was learnt that Hungarian exports to the Community were not supplied on a direct basis, but were handled by an intermediary trading company, in which the Hungarian exporter has a minority shareholding, situated in Austria. At the request of the exporter, this company was approached and agreed to collaborate in the investigation, allowing a verification at its premises of the information it supplied.  B. Normal value  (9) In order to establish whether the imports from Hungary, Poland and the USSR were dumped, the Commission had to take account of the fact that these countries do not have market economies and the Commission therefore had to base its determinations on the normal value in a market economy country. In this connection, the complainants had suggested Yugoslav domestic prices. No objection was made to this suggestion.  The producer of artificial corundum in Yugoslavia was found to apply normal profitability criteria. Of the two basic grades of corundum taken into consideration for the purposes of the procedure, the white variety was found to be sold at a loss on the Yugoslav market. In this case, normal value was constructed by adding to the full production costs of the product a reasonable profit margin. This margin was based on the profitability of other grades of this material, and on that of similar materials, manufactured by the company. Domestic prices were taken as the basis of normal value for the other (brown) grade of artificial corundum. The approach followed was the same as that used in the original procedure.  C. Export prices  (10) Export prices were determined on the basis of the prices actually paid or payable for the product by independent importers within the Community.  D. Comparison  (11) In comparing normal value with export prices, the Commission took account, where appropriate, of differences affecting price comparability resulting from differences in conditions and terms of sale, such as transport, credit terms, ancillary costs and agents' commission. Also, where applicable, allowances were made for differences in physical characteristics.  All comparisons were made at ex works level.  E. Dumping margins  (12) The preliminary examination of the facts revealed the existence of dumping in respect of exports from Hungary, Poland and the USSR, the margins of dumping in each case being equal to the amount by which the normal value as established exceeds the price for export to the Community.  (13) These margins vary according to the importing Member State and the variety of artificial corundum concerned. The margins are as follows, expressed as percentages of the Community cif frontier prices of the product grades concerned:  1.2.3 //  //  //  //  // Brown corundum   // White corundum  //    //   //   // Hungary   // No exports   // 26,4 %  // Poland   // 0,1 % (1)   // 12,4 %   // USSR   // 33,5 %  // No exports   //    //   //  (1) Considered as de minimis.  F. Injury  Import penetration  (14) With regard to injury caused by the dumped imports of artificial corundum, the evidence available to the Commission shows that such imports into the Community from Hungary, Poland and the USSR increased from 8 665 tonnes in 1981 to 12 295 tonnes in 1984, which represents an increase of 41,9 %.  The market share in the Community held by artificial corundum originating in Hungary, Poland and the USSR progressed from 5,1 % in 1981 to 7,0 % in 1984. This increase was attained despite an overall growth in consumption of only 4,9 %. These market share statistics must be evaluated in the light of two main considerations.  (15) Firstly, the market share held by the four exporting countries concerned by the original proceeding was 7,9 % in 1981 and 8,1 % in 1984, so that conside ration of these market shares together with those of the exporters concerned by the extension permits a more realistic appreciation of their combined importance in relation to consumption in the Community.  (16) Second close attention must be paid to the special situation of Hungarian exports within the above figures.  These decreased in a marked fashion between 1981 and 1984, according to the official trade statistics for this NIMEXE heading, which group together all types and qualities of corundum. Imports were 7 190 tonnes in 1981 and 2 820 tonnes in 1984. These statistics should be viewed in the light of the circumstances underlying them. During the 10 years up to 31 March 1983, the Hungarian exporter was bound by a cooperation agreement with a Community producer. Under this agreement, the Community producer supplied technological assistance and normal corundum to the Hungarian exporter, while purchasing white corundum from him. The major proportion of the white corundum imports from Hungary were in the form of semi-finished material, which was then processed by the Community producer. For example, in the last full year of the cooperation agreement, the calendar year 1982, 5 000 tonnes of semi-finished material were imported, together with some 1 750 tonnes of finished, classified material in grains. All sales to Community and third-country customers (outside the non-market-economy countries) were channelled through the commercial services of the Community producer.  With the ending of this agreement, the quantities imported into the Community were more than halved, the most important change in the composition of these imports being the absence of the large quantities of semi-finished material previously used to supplement the production of the Community producer. Significant imports of finished material continued, their commercialization now being handled by the Austrian company related to the exporter. According to the evidence available to the Commission, the quantities of such imports reached 2 820 tonnes in the reference period 1 July 1983 to 30 June 1984, which immediately followed the end of the cooperation agreement, and the same quantity in the calendar year 1984. These quantities represented a market share of some 1,6 % of total Community consumption during the periods concerned.  (17) It has been argued by the Hungarian exporter that an examination of the official trading statistics is sufficient to refute any charges relating to injury. This argumentation has centred on the large overall fall in Hungarian exports to the Community under the artificial corundum customs heading between 1981 and 1984. Such arguments cannot be accepted for the following reasons.  First, it is not possible to compare the imports of artificial corundum from Hungary prior to 31 March 1983 with those effected after that date on any but the most superficial basis - that of the NIMEXE code involved. As has been seen from points 15 and 16 above, imports before that date were essentially a supplement to the productive capacity of a Community producer, whose electric furnace capacity was inferior to that of his finishing plant. Nearly three-quarters of these imports were in fact semi-finished material requiring further processing, and all imports were in any case under the complete commercial control of the Community producer, who was able if he wished to export this material and not necessarily place it all on the Community market.  Second, it should be noted that, if comparison between quantities imported prior to 31 March 1983 and those after is to be attempted at all, then it should be restricted to what is genuinely comparable - i. e. the finished, classified material. On this basis a considerable progression can be observed, from 1 750 tonnes in the last full calendar year before 31 March 1983 to 2 820 tonnes in the period 1 July 1983 to 30 June 1984 inclusive, an increase of some 61 %.  (18) Third, further factors are present to suggest the threat of a significant increase of quantities exported in the future. The most important of these factors are: a large production capacity with only a restricted domestic market to serve; a high quality material, produced to FEPA (Fédération européenne des fabricants de produits abrasifs) standards in installations built with Community technological assistance; a body of potential customers, originally built up and supplied by the Community producer whose commercial services previously handled this material.  Price undercutting  (19) With regard to price undercutting, the investigation found a range of undercutting from 13 to 20 % on both grades of Polish artificial corundum. On brown artificial corundum from the USSR, undercutting was established in a range from 28 to 55 %. In the case of Hungarian white artificial corundum, the range of undercutting was between 10 and 27 %. In all cases, the basis of comparison used was the weighted average prices of Community producers on the Community market concerned by the imports under consideration.  Impact on Community industry  (20) One impact of the combined increase in market share by exporters concerned in the two proceedings - against the background of increased Community consumption - has been a loss of sales by Community producers. Their market share fell from 74,4 % in 1981 to 69,0 % in 1984, corresponding to a fall of nearly 5 000 tonnes.  (21) Community production had not recovered to its 1981 level in 1984, after having fallen to its lowest level in 1982/83. Capacity utilization in 1984 had also not recovered to its level of 1981, despite the rise in Community consumption over the same period. The recovery in production in 1983/84, also, was largely related to increased exports outside the Community, and this improvement can be expected to be short-lived, in so far as the additional export volume has been due to to temporary exchange-rate advantages.  (22) The effect of the imports at low prices from the countries concerned in the proceeding has been to contribute to the seriously depressed profitability of the Community industry which had already been investigated at the time of the original proceeding. At that time (1983) it was found that Community producers were not earning profits or even covering, on average, more than 73 % of their total costs (1). Although Community producers' profitability improved slightly in 1984 compared with 1983, it nevertheless remained negative or, at best, marginal. The reduction of employement continued in the Community industry, whose total workforce was some 1 300 people in 1984 compared with 1 500 in 1981.  (23) In establishing the impact of the dumped imports on the Community industry, the Commission has considered the effect of all dumped imports from all exporting countries and producers concerned. There were wide variations in the market shares of Community consumption held by exporters found to be dumping. Certain of the exporters argued that the impact of their own exports on the Community should be considered in isolation and judged not to have caused material injury in view of the low or decreasing level of their share in this market. The market share of Hungary, in fact, went down from 4,3 % of Community consumption in 1981 to 1,6 % in 1984, but the special factors concerned in this exporter's case have already been discussed in points 16 and 17. The Polish market share increased from 0,4 to 2,4 %, and the market share of the USSR from 0,4 to 3,0 %, over the same period. In analysing whether aggregation was appropriate in such cases, the Commission took into account the comparability in terms of physical characteristics of the imported products with those produced in the Community, the volumes imported and the level of prices of the imported products compared with that of the competing grades produced in the Community. Account was also taken of the market shares held by exporters concerned in the original artificial corundum proceeding, which were mentioned in point 15. On the basis of this examination, it concluded that dumped imports from the exporters concerned should be considered as contributing to the material injury suffered by Community industry, and that these imports have been made under such conditiions that, should the Commission treat any one exporter in isolation, it would be acting in a discriminatory manner against the rest. Therefore, it was decided that dumped imports from all exporters should be aggregated in establishing the injury sustained.  (24) The Commission examined the possibility of other factors, such as imports from different sources or the trend of demand, causing the injury suffered by Community industry. Imports from other sources outside the Community, although considerable, do not possess the characteristics in terms of price and continuously developing market penetration which would permit the injury described above to be attributed to them. The quantities fluctuated widely in the years between 1980 and 1984, but the increased penetration was negligible since, at the end of that period, these imports stood at 41 600 tonnes, or 1 000 tonnes more than at the beginning of the period - a growth of 2,4 %. This contrasts with the rate of growth for imports covered by the proceeding, as shown by the figures already given in point 14. As for the trend of demand, it has already been mentioned that Community consumption expanded during this period, but that Community producers continued to lose market share.  (25) On the basis of the preceding analysis, dumped imports from Hungary, Poland and the USSR must be regarded as a significant cause of the material injury suffered by Community producers.  G. Community interest  (26) The representatives of Community processing industries have argued that the introduction of protective measures would not be in the Community interest as it would make them less competitive with imports of final products originating in third countries. It would also render them less competitive on third-country markets to which many of the companies concerned exported. These arguments were strongly related to particular market sectors, especially that of the lower-priced range of abrasive grinding tools.  (27) While price increases on imports of artificial corundum can be expected to have an incidence on the costs of these consumers, the Commission has not received any detailed evidence permitting a satisfactory evaluation of either the extent of this incidence on costs or the degree to which the increased costs of the processing industries, when passed on in higher selling prices, would lead to harmful effects in terms of turnover and profitability. Measuring the impact of such price increases with any degree of certainty is not possible, therefore, and these hypothetical difficulties cannot be compared with the serious problems for Community producers which can be directly attributed to dumped imports, on account of which the Commission has concluded that action sould be taken.  H. Undertakings  (28) The Hungarian, Polish and USSR exporters were informed of the main findings of the preliminary investigation and commented on them. Subsequently, they offered price undertakings the effects of which are that the revised import prices to the Community of artificial corundum originating in these countries will eliminate the lower of the margins of dumping and of injury provisionally found, in respect of each exporter, during the investigation.  In these circumstances, the undertakings offered by the exporters are considered acceptable and the investigation may, therefore, be terminated without imposition of anti-dumping duties.  (29) No objection to this course of action was raised in the Advisory Committee.  (30) It should be recalled that Czechoslovakia and the People's Republic of China, found to be dumping in the original artificial corundum anti-dumping procedure, also offered price undertakings. These undertakings were found to be acceptable and the case was closed on that basis.  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Article 1  The undertakings given by:  - Hungarian Aluminium Corporation, Budapest, Hungary, jointly with Hungalox Handelsgesellschaft, Vienna, Austria,  - Inter-Vis, Warsaw, Poland,  - v/o Stankoimport, Moscow, USSR,  in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of artificial corundum originating in Hungary, Poland and the Soviet Union, and falling within subheading 28.20 B of the Common Customs Tariff, corresponding to NIMEXE code 28.20-30, are hereby accepted.  Article 2  The investigation in connection with anti-dumping proceeding referred to in Article 1 is hereby terminated.  Done at Brussels, 17 September 1986.  For the Commission  Willy DE CLERCQ  Member of the Commission  (1) OJ No L 201, 30. 7. 1984, p. 1.  (2) OJ No C 261, 30. 9. 1983, p. 2.  (3) OJ No L 340, 28. 12. 1984, p. 82.  (4) OJ No C 201, 31. 7. 1984, p. 4.  (1) OJ No L 255, 25. 9. 1984, p. 11.


Avis juridique important

|

31999D0734

1999/734/EC: Council Decision of 8 November 1999 appointing Swedish members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions

Official Journal L 296 , 17/11/1999 P. 0021 - 0021

COUNCIL DECISIONof 8 November 1999appointing Swedish members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions(1999/734/EC)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 263 thereof,Having regard to the Council Decision of 26 January 1998(1) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions,Whereas seats as members of the Committee of the Regions have become vacant following the resignation of Ms Eva-Lisa Birath-Lindvall, Ms Christina Tallberg, Ms Margot Wikström, Mr Göran Färm and Mr Bernth Johnson and the seats as alternate members of the Committee of the Regions have become vacant following the resignation of Ms Ann Beskow, Ms Ulla Olander, Ms Ulla Norgren, Mr Åke Bengtsson, Mr Lars Bjurström, Mr Arne Jonsson and Mr Siwert Nordwall, notified to the Council on 8 July 1999, 5, 14 and 15 October 1999 respectively;Having regard to the proposal from the Swedish Government,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:Sole Article1. Ms Ann Beskow, Ms Anneli Stark, Mr Uno Aldegren, Mr Rune Hjälm and Mr Aldo Iskra are hereby appointed full members of the Committee of the Regions in place of Ms Eva-Lisa Birath-Lindvall, Ms Christina Tallberg, Ms Margot Wikström, Mr Göran Färm and Mr Bernth Johnson respectively for the remainder of the latter's term of office, which runs until 25 January 2002.2. Ms Lena Celion, Ms Lisbeth Rydefjärd, Ms Christina Tallberg, Mr Bernth Johnson, Mr Hans Klintbom, Mr Jens Nilsson and Mr Malin Risberg are hereby appointed alternate members of the Committee of the Regions in place of Ms Ann Beskow, Ms Ulla Olander, Ms Ulla Norgren, Mr Åke Bengtsson, Mr Lars Bjurström, Mr Arne Jonsson and Mr Siwert Nordwall respectively for the remainder of the latter's term of office, which runs until 25 January 2002.Done at Brussels, 8 November 1999.For the CouncilThe PresidentS. NIINISTÖ(1) OJ L 28, 4.2.1998, p. 19.


Avis juridique important

|

31982D0460

82/460/EEC: Council Decision of 24 June 1982 on a supplement to Annex IV to the Convention on the protection of the Rhine against chemical pollution

Official Journal L 210 , 19/07/1982 P. 0008 - 0009 Finnish special edition: Chapter 11 Volume 10 P. 0116  Spanish special edition: Chapter 15 Volume 3 P. 0213  Swedish special edition: Chapter 11 Volume 10 P. 0116  Portuguese special edition Chapter 15 Volume 3 P. 0213

COUNCIL DECISION of 24 June 1982 on a supplement to Annex IV to the Convention on the protection of the Rhine against chemical pollution (82/460/EEC)  THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 235 thereof,  Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),  Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2),  Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (3),  Whereas, by Council Decision 77/586/EEC of 25 July 1977 (4), the European Economic Community concluded the Convention for the Protection of the Rhine against Chemical Pollution (hereinafter called "the Chemical Convention") and the Additional Agreement to the Agreement signed at Berne on 29 April 1963 concerning the International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine against Pollution (hereinafter called "the International Commission");  Whereas, under Article 5 of the Chemical Convention, the International Commission is to propose, by means of amendments to Annex IV to the Convention, limit values for the discharge of certain substances into the surface waters of the Rhine basin ; whereas under Article 14 of the Chemical Convention unanimous adoption by the Contracting Parties is required for the entry into force of such amendments;  Whereas the International Commission has drawn up limit values for mercury in the form of a recommendation intended to supplement Annex IV to the Chemical Convention;  Whereas it is desirable that the Community, as a Contracting Party to the Chemical Convention, adopt the abovementioned recommendation,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:    Article 1 The recommendation from the International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine against Pollution intended to supplement Annex IV to the Convention for the Protection of the Rhine against Chemical Pollution, signed in Bonn on 3 December 1976, is hereby adopted on behalf of the European Economic Community.  The text of the recommendation is attached.   Article 2 The President of the Council will notify the Government of the Swiss Confederation, in accordance with the procedures laid down by the Chemical Convention, of the adoption of the recommendation referred to in Article 1.     Done at Luxembourg, 24 June 1982.  For the Council  The President  F. AERTS  (1) OJ No C 180, 18.7.1980, p. 10. (2) OJ No C 291, 10.11.1980, p. 57. (3) OJ No C 348, 31.12.1980, p. 1. (4) OJ No L 240, 19.9.1977, p. 35.      Recommendation from the International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine against Pollution to supplement Annex IV to the Convention on the Protection of the Rhine against Chemical Pollution, signed in Bonn on 3 December 1976  The International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine against Pollution,  Having regard to the Convention on the Protection of the Rhine against Chemical Pollution, signed in Bonn on 3 December 1976,  Having regard in particular to Articles 3, 4, 5 and 14 thereof,  Proposes to the Contracting Parties to the Convention that Annex IV to the Convention of 3 December 1976 be supplemented as follows in respect of mercury:  LIMIT VALUES (Article 5) >PIC FILE= "T0021829">   Pursuant to Articles 14 and 19 of the Convention, the measures set out in the above table will enter into force after their unanimous adoption by the Contracting Parties to the Convention. The Contracting Parties will notify their adoption to the Government of the Swiss Confederation, which will acknowledge reception of notification.


title: Council Decision of 19 February 1973 giving a discharge to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the budget and the supplementary budgets of the European Communities for the financial year 1970

text:
 2 . 6 . 73                                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                   No L 145 / 23
                                                             COUNCIL DECISION
                                                               of 19 February 1973
                giving a discharge to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the budget
                and the supplementary budgets of the European Communities for the financial year 1970
                                                        (73 / 114/ECSC, EEC, Euratom )
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ,                                    the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee
                                                                             Fund ; whereas similar rules for the European Social
                                                                             Fund were laid down in the Financial Regulation (3 )
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the                                 on the methods and procedure for making available
European Coal and Steel Community, and in                                    to the Commission the financial contributions of
particular Article 78 (d) thereof;                                           Member States referred to in Article 200 ( 1 ) and (2)
                                                                             of the Treaty establishing the European Economic
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the                                 Community and on the technical conditions for
European Economic Community, and in particular                               carrying out the financial operations relating to the
Article 206 thereof ;                                                        European Social Fund ( Article 209 (b )) of the Treaty ;
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the                                 Whereas the Council has adopted the budget (4 ) and
European Atomic Energy Community, and in                                     the additional budget for the financial year 1970 ;
particular Article 180 thereof;
                                                                             Whereas certain appropriations available at the
Having regard to the accounts of revenue and                                 close of the abovementioned financial year have been
expenditure and the financial statements relating to                         carried forward to the following financial year ;
the implementation of the budget for the financial
year 1970 ;                                                                  Whereas the observations and comments in the report
                                                                             of the Audit Board on the accounts for the financial
Having regard to the Report (*) of the Audit Board on                        year 1970 include the noting of certain irregularities
the accounts for the financial year 1970, to which                           and certain mistakes ; whereas suitable action must be
report are annexed the replies of the institutions to                        taken on this matter;
the comments concerning them ;
                                                                             Whereas, however, the general implementation by the
Whereas Regulation No 25 (2 ) on the financing of                            Commission of the budgets for the financial year
the common agricultural policy lays down certain                             1970 was such as to entitle it to be given a discharge
rules of financial and budgetary policy concerning                           in respect of the implementation of these budgets ;
                HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS :
                                                                     Article 1
                The views of the Council on the observations and comments of the Audit Board are as
                set out in the Annex.
                                                                             (") OJ No 22, JO. 3 . 1961 , p . 509/61 .
(') This Report is available from the institutions of the                    (4 ) OJ No L 60, 16. 3 . 1970, p. 1 .
      European Communities.                                                       OJ No L 218 , 3 . 10. 1970, p. 39 .
      OT No 30 . 20 . 4 . 1962 . d . 991 /62 .                                    OJ No L 8 , 11 . 1 . 1971 , pp . 1 and 20 .
 ---pagebreak--- No L 145/24                           Official Journal of the European Communities                                 2. 6. 73
                                                            Article 2
            The Council closes at the sum of                                            116 774 857-52 u.a . ( a )
            the total administrative expenditure (x ) of the Communities
            paid out during the financial year 1970 , that sum being
            made up as follows :
                                                    Payment from appropriations       Payment from appropriations
                                                      carried forward from the
                                                                                for the financial year
                                                             financial year                       1970
                                                                  1 969
                                                                  u.a .                           u.a .
            — European Parliament                              265 944-68                     9 010 723-96
            — Council                                          305 484-26                    10 139 208-86
            — Commission                                    7 202 004-30                     87 686 221-68
            — Court of Justice                                  24 796-80                     2 140 472-98
                                                            7 798 230-04                   108 976 627-48
            Since a sum of                                                             11 023 933-62 u.a . (b )
             was carried forward from the financial year 1970 to the
            financial year 1971 , under the heading of administrative
            expenditure, that sum being made up as follows :
                                                                             u.a .
            — European Parliament                                         330 641-64
            — Council                                                     944 152-08
            — Commission                                                9 703 054-90
            — Court of Justice                                              46 085-00
            while a sum of                                                             10 332 237-25 u.a. (c)
            had been carried forward from the financial year 1969 to
             the financial year 1970, that sum being financed from
            revenue for the financial year 1969,
             the Council closes at the sum of                                         117 466 553-89 u.a .
                                                                                (a + b—c)
             the total revenue to cover administrative expenditure ( x ) for
             the financial year 1970 accruing as follows :
             11 189 580-52 u.a . from own revenue
             18 000 000-00 u.a. from ECSC levies
             88 276 973-37 u.a . from contributions from the Member
                                   States
                                                             Article 3
             The Council closes at the sum of                                          37 041 700-72 u.a .
             the total expenditure paid out during the financial year
             1970 in respect of the European Social Fund .
             ( ! ) Expenditure relating to the European Social Fund and the EAGGF is not included in this
                   total .
 ---pagebreak--- 2 . 6 . 73                         Official Journal of the European Communities                             No L 145 /25
                                                        Article 4
            The Council closes at the sum of                                  2 366 766 775-00 u.a .
            the total expenditure paid out during the financial year
            1970 in respect of the European Agricultural Guidance and
            Guarantee Fund .
                                                        Article S
            The Council gives a discharge to the Commission in respect of the implementation of
            the budget and the supplementary budgets of the European Communities for the
           financial year 1970.
           Done at Brussels, 19 February 1973 .
                                                                                For the Council
                                                                                The President
                                                                                A. LAVENS
                                                        ANNEX
                A. MATTERS CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE
                                             FINANCIAL REGULATIONS
           COMMISSION
           Need for more careful accounting administration
            (No 68 — point (b) in the Report)
           The Council acknowledges the temporary confidential nature of the study of the rational
           invites the Commission to take all necessary measures to prevent such irregularities in the
           future.
           Refusal to communicate to the Audit Board a study on the administrative procedures for
           implementing the budgets
           (No 70 — point (a) in the Report)
           The Council acknowledges the temporary confidential nature of the study of the rational
           ization of budgetary procedures carried out for the Commission by a team of management
           consultants. The Council would however like the Audit Board to see this study during the
           next financial year in order to ascertain how the Commission plans to improve the administration
           of its services .
           Need for more extensive documentation on the use of appropriations
           ( No 193 in the Report)
           The Council draws the Commission's attention to the need for each Commission service to
           draw up regularly the documents which should make it possible to obtain an overall view
           of the administration of the service.
 ---pagebreak--- No L 145 / 26                         Official Journal of the European Communities                           2 . 6 . 73
             B. MATTERS RELATING TO THE INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF THE
                                           PROVISIONS CONCERNING STAFF
                                  GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS
              COMMISSION
              Need to draw up a complete organigramme of the services
              (No 196 in the Report)
              The Council invites the Commission to provide the Audit Board in future with an organi
             gramme giving comprehensive information on the number, functions and composition of the
              services .
              Absence of an implementing Regulation for the provisions relating to cover against the risks
              from accident and occupational diseases
              (No 200 in the Report)
              The Council urges that the implementing Regulations to Article 73 of the Staff Regulations be
              adopted.
              In the meantime it invites the Commission to take action against third parties responsible for
              accidents to its staff, in order to obtain reimbursements of the sums paid to its staff during
              periods of unfitness for work.
                         C. MATTERS RELATING TO EFFICIENT FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION
              COMMISSION
              Need for better administration of the computing centre
              (No 75 in the Report)
              The Council considers, like the Audit Board, that the administration of the computing centre
              should be based on a work survey and a breakdown of the time and cost involved in each
              large-scale programme. It notes the measures adopted by the Commission in the interim in
              order to make these surveys.


title: Council Decision 2013/355/CFSP of 3 July 2013 amending and extending Joint Action 2005/889/CFSP on establishing a European Union Border Assistance Mission for the Rafah Crossing Point (EU BAM Rafah)

text:
               4.7.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 185/16

         COUNCIL DECISION 2013/355/CFSP
   of 3 July 2013
   amending and extending Joint Action 2005/889/CFSP on establishing a European Union Border Assistance Mission for the Rafah Crossing Point (EU BAM Rafah)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 28, Article 42(4) and Article 43(2) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 25 November 2005, the Council adopted Joint Action 2005/889/CFSP (1).

               (2)

               On 25 June 2012, the Council adopted Decision 2012/332/CFSP (2) amending Joint Action 2005/889/CFSP and extending it until 30 June 2013.

               (3)

               On 7 June 2013, the Political and Security Committee recommended to extend the European Union Border Assistance Mission for the Rafah Crossing Point (EU BAM Rafah) for an additional period of 12 months until 30 June 2014.

               (4)

               EU BAM Rafah should be further extended from 1 July 2013 until 30 June 2014 on the basis of the current mandate.

               (5)

               EU BAM Rafah will be conducted in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union’s external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Joint Action 2005/889/CFSP is hereby amended as follows:

               (1)

               Article 5 is amended as follows:

                           (a)

                           the following paragraph is inserted:
                           ‘1a.   The Head of Mission shall be the representative of the Mission. The Head of Mission may delegate management tasks in staff and financial matters to staff members of the Mission, under his/her overall responsibility.’;

                           (b)

                           paragraph 4 is deleted;

               (2)

               Article 8(3) is replaced by the following:
               ‘3.   The conditions of employment and the rights and obligations of international and local staff shall be laid down in the contracts to be concluded between EU BAM Rafah and the staff member concerned.’;

               (3)

               the following Article is inserted:
               ‘Article 12a
               Legal arrangements
               EU BAM Rafah shall have the capacity to procure services and supplies, to enter into contracts and administrative arrangements, to employ staff, to hold bank accounts, to acquire and dispose of assets and to discharge its liabilities, and to be a party to legal proceedings, as required in order to implement this Joint Action.’;

               (4)

               Article 13 is replaced by the following:
               ‘Article 13
               Financial arrangements
               1.   The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EU BAM Rafah for the period from 25 November 2005 to 31 December 2011 shall be EUR 21 570 000.
               The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EU BAM Rafah for the period from 1 January 2012 to 30 June 2012 shall be EUR 970 000.
               The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EU BAM Rafah for the period from 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2013 shall be EUR 980 000.
               The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EU BAM Rafah for the period from 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014 shall be EUR 940 000.
               2.   All expenditure shall be managed in accordance with the procedures and rules applicable to the general budget of the Union. Nationals of third States contributing financially to the Mission, host parties and, if required for the operational needs of the Mission, of neighbouring countries shall be allowed to tender for contracts.
               3.   EU BAM Rafah shall be responsible for the implementation of the Mission’s budget. For that purpose, the Mission shall sign an agreement with the Commission.
               4.   EU BAM Rafah shall be responsible for any claims and obligations arising from the implementation of the mandate starting from 1 July 2013, with the exception of any claims relating to serious misconduct by the Head of Mission, for which he/she shall bear the responsibility.
               5.   The financial arrangements shall respect the chain of command as provided for in Articles 4, 4a and 5 and the operational requirements of EU BAM Rafah, including compatibility of equipment and interoperability of its teams.
               6.   Expenditure shall be eligible as of the date of entry into force of this Joint Action.’;

               (5)

               in Article 16, the second paragraph is replaced by the following:
               ‘It shall expire on 30 June 2014.’;

               (6)

               Article 17 is deleted.

         Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day of adoption.
   It shall apply from 1 July 2013.

      Done at Brussels, 3 July 2013.

            For the Council

            The President

         L. LINKEVIČIUS

      (1)  OJ L 327, 14.12.2005, p. 28.

      (2)  OJ L 165, 26.6.2012, p. 71.


Important legal notice

|

E2002C0177

2002/177/: EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No 177/02/COL of 30 October 2002 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition proceedings

Official Journal L 080 , 27/03/2003 P. 0027 - 0031

EFTA Surveillance Authority DecisionNo 177/02/COLof 30 October 2002on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition proceedingsTHE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY,Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area(1), in particular Article 55 thereto,Having regard to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice(2), in particular Articles 13 and 14 thereof,Having consulted the EFTA States,Having consulted the Commission of the European Communities,Whereas the right of the parties concerned in competition matters, and of third parties, to be heard before a final decision affecting their interests is taken, is a fundamental principle of EEA law;Whereas that right is set out in Chapters IV, XIII and XIV of Protocol 4 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement;Whereas the EFTA Surveillance Authority must ensure that that right is guaranteed in its competition proceedings;Whereas conduct of administrative proceedings should therefore be entrusted to an independent person experienced in competition matters who has the integrity necessary to contribute to the objectivity, transparency and efficiency of those proceedings;Whereas in order to ensure the independence of the Hearing Officers, that person should be attached, for administrative purposes, to the College Member responsible for Competition;Whereas the terms of reference of the Hearing Officers in competition proceedings should be framed in such a way as to safeguard the right of persons to be heard throughout the whole procedure;Whereas this Decision should be without prejudice to the general rules granting or excluding access to documents in the possession of the EFTA Surveillance Authority,HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:IArticle 1The EFTA Surveillance Authority shall, when necessary for the conduct of its proceedings in competition cases, appoint one or more Hearing Officers (hereinafter "the Hearing Officers"), who shall ensure that the effective exercise of the right to be heard is respected in competition proceedings before the Authority under Articles 53, 54 and 57 of the EEA Agreement(3).Article 21. Any interruption, termination of appointment or transfer of a Hearing Officer by whatever procedure, shall be the subject of a reasoned decision of the College.2. In the performance of their duties, Hearing Officers shall act independently and shall be attached, for administrative purposes to the College Member responsible for Competition (hereinafter "the responsible College Member").3. Where a Hearing Officer is unable to act, the responsible College Member, where appropriate after consultation of the Hearing Officer, shall designate another official, who is not involved in the case in question, to carry out the Hearing Officer's duties.Article 31. In performing their duties, Hearing Officers shall take account of the need for effective application of the competition rules in accordance with the EEA legislation in force and the principles laid down by the EFTA Court(4) and the Court of Justice and Court of First Instance of the European Communities.2. The Hearing Officers shall be kept informed by the Director responsible for Competition about the development of the procedure up to the stage of the draft decision to be submitted to the responsible College Member.3. The Hearing Officers may present observations on any matter arising out of any competition proceedings initiated by the EFTA Surveillance Authority to the responsible College Member.Article 41. The Hearing Officers shall organise and conduct the hearings provided for in the provisions implementing Articles 53, 54 and 57 of the EEA Agreement, in accordance with Articles 5 to 13 of this Decision.2. The provisions referred to in paragraph 1 are:(a) Chapter IV of Protocol 4 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement;(b) Chapter XIV of Protocol 4 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement.Article 5The Hearing Officers shall ensure that the hearing is properly conducted and contributes to the objectivity of the hearing itself and of any decision taken subsequently. The Hearing Officers shall seek to ensure, in particular that, in the preparation of draft decisions by the EFTA Surveillance Authority, due account is taken of all the relevant facts, whether favourable or unfavourable to the parties concerned, including the factual elements related to the gravity of any infringement.Article 61. Applications to be heard from third parties, be they persons, undertakings or associations of persons or undertakings, shall be submitted in writing, together with a written statement explaining the applicant's interest in the outcome of the procedure.2. Decisions as to whether third parties are to be heard shall be taken after consulting the Director responsible for Competition.3. Where it is found that an applicant has not shown a sufficient interest to be heard, that person shall be informed in writing of the reasons for such a finding. A time limit shall be fixed within which that person may submit any further written comments.Article 71. Applications to be heard orally shall be made in the applicant's written comments on letters which the EFTA Surveillance Authority has addressed to that person.2. The letters referred to in paragraph 1 are those:(a) communicating a statement of objections;(b) inviting the written comments of a third party having shown sufficient interest to be heard;(c) informing a complainant that, in the EFTA Surveillance Authority's view, there are insufficient grounds for finding an infringement and inviting that complainant to submit any further written comments.3. Decisions as to whether applicants are to be heard orally shall be taken after consulting the Director responsible for Competition.Article 81. Where a person, an undertaking or an association of persons or undertakings has received one or more of the letters listed in Article 7(2) of this Decision and has reason to believe that the EFTA Surveillance Authority has in its possession documents which have not been disclosed to it and that those documents are necessary for the proper exercise of the right to be heard, access to those documents may be sought by means of a reasoned request.2. The reasoned decision on any such request shall be communicated to the person, undertaking or association that made the request and to any other person, undertaking or association concerned by the procedure.Article 9Where it is intended to disclose information which may constitute a business secret of an undertaking, that undertaking shall be informed in writing of this intention and the reasons for it. A time limit shall be fixed within which the undertaking concerned may submit any written comments.Where the undertaking concerned objects to the disclosure of the information, but it is found that the information is not protected and may therefore be disclosed, that finding shall be stated in a reasoned decision which shall be notified to the undertaking concerned. The decision shall specify the date after which the information will be disclosed. This date shall not be less than one week from the date of notification.The first and second paragraphs shall apply mutatis mutandis to the disclosure of information by publication in the EEA section of the Official Journal of the European Union and the EEA supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union.Article 10Where a person, undertaking or association of persons or undertakings considers that the time limit imposed for its reply to a letter referred to in Article 7(2) of this Decision is too short, it may, within the original time limit, seek an extension of that time limit by means of a reasoned request. The applicant shall be informed in writing whether the request has been granted.Article 11Where appropriate, in view of the need to ensure that the hearing is properly prepared, and particularly that questions of fact are clarified as far as possible, the Hearing Officers may, after consulting the Director responsible for Competition, supply to the parties invited to the hearing a list of the questions on which the Hearing Officers wish them to make known their views in advance.For this purpose, after consulting the Director responsible for Competition, the Hearing Officers may hold a meeting with the parties invited to the hearing and, where appropriate, the staff of the EFTA Surveillance Authority, in order to prepare for the hearing itself.The Hearing Officers may also ask for prior written notification of the essential contents of the intended statement of persons whom the parties invited to the hearing have proposed for hearing.Article 121. After consulting the Director responsible for Competition, the Hearing Officers shall determine the date, the duration and the place of the hearing. Where a postponement is requested, the Hearing Officers shall decide whether or not to allow it.2. The Hearing Officers shall be fully responsible for the conduct of the hearing.3. The Hearing Officers shall decide whether fresh documents should be admitted during the hearing, what persons should be heard on behalf of a party and whether the persons concerned should be heard separately or in the presence of other persons attending the hearing.4. Where appropriate, in view of the need to ensure the right to be heard, the Hearing Officers may, after consulting the Director responsible for Competition, afford persons, undertakings, and associations of persons or undertakings the opportunity of submitting further written comments after the oral hearing. The Hearing Officers shall fix a date by which such submissions may be made. The EFTA Surveillance Authority shall not be obliged to take into account written comments received after that date.Article 131. The Hearing Officers shall report to the responsible College Member on the hearing and the conclusions the Hearing Officers have drawn from it, with regard to the respect of the right to be heard. The observations in this report shall concern procedural issues, including disclosure of documents and access to the file, time limits for replying to the statement of objections and the proper conduct of the oral hearing.A copy of the report shall be given to the Director responsible for Competition.2. In addition to the report referred to in paragraph 1, the Hearing Officers may make observations on the further progress of the proceedings. Such observations may relate, among other things, to the need for further information, the withdrawal of certain objections, or the formulation of further objections.Article 14Where appropriate, the Hearing Officers may report on the objectivity of any enquiry conducted in order to assess the competition impact of commitments proposed in relation to any proceeding initiated by the EFTA Surveillance Authority in application of the provisions referred to in Article 1 of this Decision. This shall cover in particular the selection of respondents and the methodology used.Article 15The Hearing Officers shall, on the basis of the draft decision to be submitted to the Advisory Committee established in furtherance to Articles 53, 54 and 57 of the EEA Agreement, in the case in question prepare a final report in writing on the respect of the right to be heard, as referred to in Article 13(1) of this Decision. This report will also consider whether the draft decision deals only with objections in respect of which the parties have been afforded the opportunity of making known their views, and, where appropriate, the objectivity of any enquiry within the meaning of Article 14 of this Decision.The final report shall be submitted to the responsible College Member and the Director responsible for Competition. It shall be communicated to the competent authorities of the EFTA States and, in accordance with the provisions on cooperation laid down in Protocol 23 and Protocol 24 of the EEA Agreement, to the Commission of the European Communities.Article 161. The Hearing Officers' final report shall be attached to the draft decision submitted to the College, in order to ensure that, when it reaches a decision on an individual case, the College is fully appraised of all relevant information as regards the course of the procedure and respect of the right to be heard.2. The final report may be modified by the Hearing Officers in the light of any amendments to the draft decision up to the time the decision is adopted by the College.3. The EFTA Surveillance Authority shall communicate the Hearing Officers' final report, together with the decision, to the addressees of the decision. It shall publish the Hearing Officers' final report in the EEA Section of the Official Journal of the European Union and the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, together with the decision, having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business secrets.IIThis decision shall be authentic in the English language and shall be published in the EEA Section of the Official Journal of the European Union and the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union.IIIThe EFTA States shall be informed by means of a copy of the Decision.IVThe Commission of the European Communities shall be informed by means of a copy of the Decision.Done at Brussels, 30 October 2002.For the EFTA Surveillance AuthorityThe PresidentEinar M. Bull(1) Hereinafter referred to as the EEA Agreement.(2) Hereinafter referred to as the Surveillance and Court Agreement.(3) The competence to handle individual cases falling under Articles 53 and 54 of the EEA Agreement is divided between the EFTA Surveillance Authority and the Commission of the European Communities according to the rules laid down in Article 56 of the EEA Agreement. Only one authority is competent to handle any given case.(4) Article 6 of the EEA Agreement provides that, "without prejudice to future developments of case law, the provisions of this Agreement, in so far as they are identical in substance to corresponding rules of the Treaty establishing the European Community and the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community and to acts adopted in application of these two treaties, shall in their implementation and application, be interpreted in conformity with the relevant rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Communities given prior to the date of signature of this Agreement". As regards relevant rulings given after the date of signature of the EEA Agreement, it follows from Article 3(2) of the Surveillance and Court Agreement that the EFTA Surveillance Authority and the EFTA Court shall pay due account to the principles laid down by these.


title: Council Decision (EU) 2016/838 of 23 May 2016 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part

text:
               28.5.2016

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 141/26

         COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2016/838
   of 23 May 2016
   on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 217, in conjunction with Article 218(6)(a) and the second subparagraph of Article 218(8) thereof, as well as Article 218(7) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Having regard to the consent of the European Parliament (1),
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 10 May 2010 the Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations with Georgia for the conclusion of a new Agreement between the Union and Georgia to replace the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (2).

               (2)

               Those negotiations were successfully finalised, and the Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part (‘the Agreement’) was initialled on 29 November 2013.

               (3)

               In accordance with Council Decision 2014/494/EU (3), the Agreement was signed on 27 June 2014, subject to its conclusion at a later date.

               (4)

               Pursuant to Article 218(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, it is appropriate for the Council to authorise the Commission to approve modifications to the Agreement to be adopted by the Association Committee in Trade configuration, as set out in Article 408(4) of the Agreement, as proposed by the Geographical Indications Sub-Committee pursuant to Article 179 of the Agreement.

               (5)

               It is appropriate to set out the relevant procedures for the protection of geographical indications which are given protection pursuant to the Agreement.

               (6)

               The Agreement should not be construed as conferring rights or imposing obligations which can be directly invoked before Union or Member State courts and tribunals.

               (7)

               The Agreement should be approved,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part (‘the Agreement’), is hereby approved on behalf of the Union (4).
   Article 2
   The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the Union, give the notification provided for in Article 431(1) of the Agreement (5).
   Article 3
   For the purposes of Article 179 of the Agreement, modifications to the Agreement through decisions of the Geographical Indications Sub-Committee shall be approved by the Commission on behalf of the Union. Where interested parties cannot reach agreement following objections relating to a geographical indication, the Commission shall adopt a position on the basis of the procedure laid down in Article 57(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (6).
   Article 4
   1.   A name protected under Sub-Section 3 ‘Geographical Indications’ of Chapter 9 of Title IV of the Agreement may be used by any operator marketing agricultural products, foodstuffs, wines, aromatised wines or spirits conforming to the corresponding specification.
   2.   In accordance with Article 175 of the Agreement, the Member States and the institutions of the Union shall enforce the protection provided for in Articles 170 to 174 of the Agreement, including at the request of an interested party.
   Article 5
   The Agreement shall not be construed as conferring rights or imposing obligations which can be directly invoked before Union or Member State courts and tribunals.
   Article 6
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 23 May 2016.

            For the Council

            The President

         F. MOGHERINI

      (1)  Consent given on the 18 December 2014 (not yet published in the Official Journal).

      (2)  Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part (OJ L 205, 4.8.1999, p. 3).

      (3)  Council Decision 2014/494/EU of 16 June 2014 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, and provisional application of the Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part (OJ L 261, 30.8.2014, p. 1).

      (4)  The Agreement has been published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJ L 261, 30.8.2014, p. 4) together with the decision on its signature.

      (5)  The date of the entry into force of the Agreement will be published in the Official Journal of the European Union by the General Secretariat of the Council.

      (6)  Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1).


title: 2012/125/EU: Council Decision of 28 February 2012 appointing a Member of the Court of Auditors

text:
               29.2.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 55/18

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 28 February 2012
   appointing a Member of the Court of Auditors
   (2012/125/EU)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 286(2) thereof,
   Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The term of office of Mr Juan RAMALLO MASSANET is due to expire on 29 February 2012.

               (2)

               Therefore, a new appointment should be made,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Mr Baudilio TOMÉ MUGURUZA is hereby appointed Member of the Court of Auditors for the period from 1 March 2012 to 28 February 2018.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 28 February 2012.

            For the Council

            The President

         N. WAMMEN

      (1)  Opinion of 14 February 2012 (not yet published in the Official Journal).


Avis juridique important

|

31978D0528

78/528/EEC: Council Decision of 6 June 1978 accepting on behalf of the Community three Annexes to the International Convention on the simplification and harmonization of customs procedures

Official Journal L 160 , 17/06/1978 P. 0013 - 0024 Finnish special edition: Chapter 2 Volume 2 P. 0114  Greek special edition: Chapter 02 Volume 6 P. 0162  Swedish special edition: Chapter 2 Volume 2 P. 0114  Spanish special edition: Chapter 02 Volume 4 P. 0266  Portuguese special edition Chapter 02 Volume 4 P. 0266

COUNCIL DECISION  of 6 June 1978  accepting on behalf of the Community three Annexes to the International Convention on the simplification and harmonization of customs procedures  (78/528/EEC)  THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,  Having regard to the recommendation from the Commission,  Whereas, by Decision 75/199/EEC (1), the Community concluded the International Convention on the simplification and harmonization of customs procedures and accepted the Annex thereto concerning customs warehouses;  Whereas the Annexes to the said Convention concerning customs formalities prior to the lodgement of the goods declaration, the temporary storage of goods and free zones can be accepted by the Community;  Whereas it is nevertheless advisable to make the acceptance of these Annexes subject to certain reservations in order to take account of the special requirements of the customs union,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:    Article 1 The following Annexes to the International Convention on the simplification and harmonization of customs procedures are hereby accepted on behalf of the Community:    - Annex A.1 concerning customs formalities prior to the lodgement of the goods declaration, with reservations regarding standards 11 and 21;       - Annex A.2 concerning the temporary storage of goods, with reservations regarding recommended practices 10, 13 and 21;       - Annex F.1 concerning free zones, with a reservation regarding standard 21.         The texts of the abovementioned Annexes are annexed to this Decision.   Article 2 The Commission shall inform the General Secretariat of the Customs Cooperation Council of the acceptance of the Annexes referred to in Article 1 subject to the reservations mentioned in that Article.     Done at Luxembourg, 6 June 1978.  For the Council  The President  K.B. ANDERSEN  (1)OJ No L 100, 21.4.1975, p. 1.


Avis juridique important

|

31984D0383

84/383/EEC: Council Decision of 23 July 1984 implementing Decision 83/200/EEC empowering the Commission to contract loans under the new Community instrument for the purpose of promoting investment within the Community

Official Journal L 208 , 03/08/1984 P. 0053 - 0054 Finnish special edition: Chapter 10 Volume 1 P. 0034  Spanish special edition: Chapter 10 Volume 1 P. 0106  Swedish special edition: Chapter 10 Volume 1 P. 0034  Portuguese special edition Chapter 10 Volume 1 P. 0106

*****COUNCIL  DECISION  of 23 July 1984  implementing Decision 83/200/EEC empowering the Commission to contract loans under the new Community instrument for the purpose of promoting investment within the Community  (84/383/EEC)  THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN  COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,  Having regard to Council Decision 83/200/EEC of 19 April 1983 empowering the Commission to contract loans under the new Community instrument for the purpose of promoting investment within the Community (1), and in particular Article 2 thereof,  Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (2),  Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (3),  Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (4),  Whereas applications for loans approved by the Commission represent over two-thirds of the initial tranche of borrowings authorized by the Council in its Decision 83/308/EEC (5);  Whereas it is essential to ensure continuity of action for the new Community instrument in favour of investment projects in the fields of energy and infrastructure, and the financing of investment, principally that of small and medium-sized undertakings, in industry and other productive sectors;  Whereas a further tranche of borrowing and lending in accordance with Decision 83/200/EEC should therefore be authorized, for the same fields of application as those specified in Decision 83/308/EEC;  Whereas Community action in those fields will make a special contribution to the achievement of the Community's objectives of reducing regional disparities, raising growth rates, adjusting production structures and permanently solving the employment problem;  Whereas borrowings of an amount equivalent to 1 400 million ECU, by way of principal, should be authorized,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Article 1  A tranche of borrowings is hereby authorized for an amount which shall not exceed the equivalent of 1 400 million ECU, by way of principal.  Article 2  The proceeds of the borrowings referred to in Article 1 shall be lent to finance investment projects carried out on Community territory which help attain the Community's priority objectives in the energy and infrastructure sectors, and in the financing of investment, principally that of small and medium-sized undertakings, in industry and the other productive sectors.  Article 3  The Commission shall decide whether or not projects are eligible in accordance with the following priorities and guidelines:  - investment projects, mainly those of small and medium-sized undertakings, in industry and directly allied services, which are designed in particular to promote the dissemination of innovation and new technology and the implementation of which contributes directly or indirectly to job creation,  - the rational use of energy, the replacement of oil by other sources of energy in all sectors and infrastructure projects facilitating such replacement,  - infrastructure projects which are associated with the development of productive activities, which contribute to regional development or which are of Community interest, such as telecommunications, including information technology, and transport, including the transmission of energy,  - the projects and their execution must comply with the provisions of the Treaty and of secondary legislation, in particular with those relating to competition, and Community rules and policies applicable in the fields in question.  Done at Brussels, 23 July 1984.  For the Council  The President  J. O'KEEFFE  (1) OJ No L 112, 28. 4. 1983, p. 26.  (2) OJ No C 48, 21. 2. 1984, p. 3.  (3) OJ No C 117, 30. 4. 1984, p. 64.  (4) OJ No C 140, 28. 5. 1984, p. 16.  (5) OJ No L 164, 23. 6. 1983, p. 31.


title: Council Decision (EU) 2015/900 of 8 June 2015 on the position to be adopted, on behalf of the European Union, within the EEA Joint Committee concerning an amendment to Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, on cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms (EaSI)

text:
                  12.6.2015

                  EN

                  Official Journal of the European Union

                  L 147/19

            COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2015/900
      of 8 June 2015
      on the position to be adopted, on behalf of the European Union, within the EEA Joint Committee concerning an amendment to Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, on cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms (EaSI)
      THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
      Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 46(d), Article 149, Article 153(2)(a), third paragraph of Article 175 and Article 218(9) thereof,
      Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2894/94 of 28 November 1994 concerning arrangements for implementing the Agreement on the European Economic Area (1), and in particular Article 1(3) thereof,
      Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
      Whereas:

                  (1)

                  The Agreement on the European Economic Area (2) (‘the EEA Agreement’) entered into force on 1 January 1994.

                  (2)

                  Pursuant to Article 98 of the EEA Agreement, the EEA Joint Committee may decide to amend, inter alia, Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement.

                  (3)

                  Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement contains provisions and arrangements concerning cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms.

                  (4)

                  Regulation (EU) No 1296/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) was incorporated into the EEA Agreement by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 151/2014 of 27 June 2014 (4).

                  (5)

                  The limited participation of Norway in the Programme should be extended to the Progress axis.

                  (6)

                  Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended in order to allow for this extended cooperation to take place from 1 January 2015.

                  (7)

                  The position of the Union within the EEA Joint Committee should therefore be based on the attached draft Decision,

            HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
      Article 1
      The position to be adopted, on behalf of the Union, within the EEA Joint Committee on the proposed amendment to Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, on cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms, shall be based on the draft Decision of the EEA Joint Committee attached to this Decision.
      Article 2
      This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

         Done at Luxembourg, 8 June 2015.

               For the Council

               The President

            D. REIZNIECE-OZOLA

         (1)  OJ L 305, 30.11.1994, p. 6.

         (2)  OJ L 1, 3.1.1994, p. 3.

         (3)  Regulation (EU) No 1296/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on a European Union Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (‘EaSI’) and amending Decision No 283/2010/EU establishing a European Progress Microfinance Facility for employment and social inclusion (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 238).

         (4)  OJ L 342, 27.11.2014, p. 61.

         DRAFT
         DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No …/2015
         of
         amending Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, on cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms
         THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,
         Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Articles 86 and 98 thereof,
         Whereas:

                     (1)

                     Regulation (EU) No 1296/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on a European Union Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (‘EaSI’) and amending Decision No 283/2010/EU establishing a European Progress Microfinance Facility for employment and social inclusion (1) was incorporated into the EEA Agreement by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 151/2014 of 27 June 2014 (2).

                     (2)

                     The limited participation of Norway in the Programme should be extended to the Progress axis.

                     (3)

                     Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended in order to allow for that extended cooperation to take place from 1 January 2015,

               HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
         Article 1
         In paragraph 8 of Article 15 of Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, the words ‘EURES axis’ are replaced by the words ‘Progress and EURES axes’:
         Article 2
         This Decision shall enter into force on the day following the last notification under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement (*).
         It shall apply from 1 January 2015.
         Article 3
         This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

            Done at Brussels,.

                  For the EEA Joint Committee

                  The President

                  The Secretaries

                  to the EEA Joint Committee

            (1)  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 238.

            (2)  OJ L 342, 27.11.2014, p. 61.

            (*)  [No constitutional requirements indicated.] [Constitutional requirements indicated.]