type: other

text:
Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali ta’ l-Unjoni Ewropea, C 63, 27 ta' Frar 2017
 27 ta' Frar 2017
 Kawża C-128/15: Sentenza tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (Il-Ħames Awla) tal-11 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Ir-Renju ta’ Spanja vs Il-Kunsill tal-Unjoni Ewropea (Rikors għal annullament — Sajd — Regolament (UE) Nru 1380/2013 — Regolament (UE) Nru 1367/2014 — Validità — Opportunitajiet ta’ sajd — Approċċ ta’ prekawzjoni — Prinċipju ta’ stabbiltà relattiva tal-attivitajiet tas-sajd — Prinċipju ta’ proporzjonalità — Prinċipju ta’ ugwaljanza fit-trattament — Roundnose grenadier u roughhead grenadier)
 Kawża C-289/15: Sentenza tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (Il-Ħames Awla) tal-11 ta’ Jannar 2017 (talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari ta’ Krajský súd v Prešove – is-Slovakkja) – proċeduri kriminali kontra Jozef Grundza (Rinviju għal deċiżjoni preliminari — Kooperazzjoni ġudizzjarja f’materji kriminali — Deċiżjoni Qafas 2008/909/ĠAI — Artikolu 7 — Kundizzjoni ta’ kriminalità doppja — Artikolu 9 — Raġuni għal nuqqas ta’ rikonoxximent u għal nuqqas ta’ eżekuzzjoni bbażata fuq l-assenza ta’ kriminalità doppja — Ċittadin tal-Istat ta’ eżekuzzjoni kkundannat fl-Istat emittenti għal nuqqas ta’ osservanza ta’ deċiżjoni ta’ awtorità pubblika)
 Kawża C-411/15 P: Sentenza tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (L-Għaxar Awla) tat-12 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Timab Industries, Cie financière et de participations Roullier (CFPR) vs Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea (Appell — Akkordji — Suq Ewropew tal-fosfati għall-għalf tal-annimali — Attribuzzjoni ta’ kwoti ta’ bejgħ, il-koordinazzjoni tal-prezzijiet u tal-kundizzjonijiet ta’ bejgħ u l-iskambju ta’ informazzjoni kummerċjali sensittiva — Irtirar tar-rikorrenti mill-proċedimenti ta’ riżolviment tat-tilwim — Ġurisdizzjoni sħiħa — Protezzjoni tal-aspettattivi leġittimi u ta’ trattament ugwali — Tul raġonevoli tal-proċedura)
 Kawża C-491/15 P: Sentenza tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (L-Ewwel Awla) tal-11 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Rainer Typke vs Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea (Appell — Aċċess għad-dokumenti tal-istituzzjonijiet — Regolament (KE) Nru 1049/2001 — Artikolu 3 — Kunċett ta’ dokument — Artikolu 2(3) — Dokumenti miżmuma minn istituzzjoni — Klassifikazzjoni ta’ informazzjoni miżmuma f’database — Obbligu li jiġi stabbilit dokument ineżistenti — Assenza — Dokumenti eżistenti li jistgħu jiġu estratti minn database)
 Kawżi Magħquda C-568/14 sa C-570/14: Digriet tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (Il-Ħames Awla) tas-26 ta’ Ottubru 2016 (talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari tal-Juzgado de lo Mercantil no 3 de Barcelona – Spanja – Ismael Fernández Oliva vs Caixabank SA (C-568/14), Jordi Carné Hidalgo, Anna Aracil Gracia vs Catalunya Banc SA (C-569/14), Nuria Robirosa Carrera, César Romera Navales vs Banco Popular Español SA (C-570/14) (Rinviju għal deċiżjoni preliminari — Direttiva 93/13/KEE — Artikolu 99 tar-Regoli tal-Proċedura tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja — Kuntratti konklużi bejn bejjiegħa jew fornituri u konsumaturi — Kuntratti ipotekarji — Klawżola ta’ rata minima — Proċedura kollettiva — Proċedura individwali bl-istess suġġett — Miżuri provviżorji)
 Kawża C-446/15: Digriet tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (Id-Disa’ Awla) tal-10 ta’ Novembru 2016 (talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari tal-Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság – l-Ungerija – Signum Alfa Sped Kft. vs Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Kiemelt Adó- és Vám Főigazgatóság (Rinviju għal deċiżjoni preliminari — Artikolu 99 tar-Regoli tal-Proċedura tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja — Tassazzjoni — Taxxa fuq il-valur miżjud — Direttiva 2006/112/KE — Dritt għal tnaqqis — Rifjut — Persuna li toħroġ il-fattura meqjusa li ma kinitx il-fornitur reali tas-servizzi ffatturati — Obbligi ta’ verifika li jaqgħu fuq il-persuna taxxabbli)
 Kawża C-526/15: Digriet tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (It-Tmien Awla) tas-27 ta’ Ottubru 2016 (talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari ta’ Nederlandstalige rechtbank van koophandel Brussel – Il-Belġju) – Uber Belgium BVBA vs Taxi Radio Bruxellois NV (Rinviju għal deċiżjoni preliminari — Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regoli tal-Proċedura tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja — Inammissibbiltà — Trasport ta’ persuni permezz ta’ vetturi bil-mutur — Xufiera privati li jużaw applikazzjoni għal smartphone li tippermetti li jitqegħdu f’kuntatt ma’ persuni li jixtiequ jwettqu traġitti urbani — Obbligu li jkollhom awtorizzazzjoni ta’ operat)
 Kawża C-575/15 P: Digriet tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (Is-Sitt Awla) tas-26 ta’ Ottubru 2016 – Industria de Diseño Textil, SA (Inditex) vs L-Uffiċċju tal-Proprjetà Intellettwali tal-Unjoni Ewropea (EUIPO) (Appell — Trade mark tal-Unjoni Ewropea — Trade mark verbali ZARA — Servizzi ta’ trasport — Użu ġenwin — Proċedimenti ta’ revoka — Regolament (KE) Nru 207/2009 — Artikolu 51(1)(a) — Żnaturament tal-provi — Drittijiet tad-difiża)
 Kawża C-590/15 P: Digriet tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (Id-Disa’ Awla) tal-10 ta’ Novembru 2016 – Alain Laurent Brouillard vs Il-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja tal-Unjoni Ewropea (Appell — Artikolu 181 tar-Regoli tal-Proċedura tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja — Kuntratti pubbliċi għal servizzi — Proċedura nnegozjata ta’ sejħa għal offerti intiża għall-konklużjoni ta’ kuntratti qafas għat-traduzzjoni ta’ testi ġuridiċi — Esklużjoni ta’ subappaltatur propost — Kapaċità professjonali — Rekwiżit ta’ taħriġ ġuridiku komplet — Rikonoxximent ta’ diplomi)
 Kawża C-637/15 P: Digriet tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (It-Tmien Awla) tal-25 ta’ Ottubru 2016 – VSM Geneesmiddelen BV vs Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea (Appell — Artikolu 181 tar-Regoli tal-Proċedura tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja — Saħħa pubblika — Protezzjoni tal-konsumaturi — Regolament (KE) Nru 1924/2006 — Indikazzjonijiet dwar is-saħħa li jirrigwardaw il-prodotti tal-ikel — Artikolu 13(3) — Lista komunitarja tal-indikazzjonijiet dwar is-saħħa awtorizzati li jirrigwardaw il-prodotti tal-ikel — Sustanzi botaniċi — Indikazzjonijiet sospiżi — Rikors għal nuqqas li tittieħed azzjoni — Teħid ta’ pożizzjoni mill-Kummissjoni — Att kontestabbli)
 Kawża C-697/15: Digriet tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (Is-Sitt Awla) tal-10 ta’ Novembru 2016 (talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari tat-Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Piemonte – l-Italja) – MB Srl vs Società Metropolitana Acque Torino (SMAT) SpA (Rinviju għal deċiżjoni preliminari — Artikolu 99 tar-Regoli tal-Proċedura tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja — Kuntratti pubbliċi — Direttiva 2004/18/KE — Direttiva 2014/24/UE — Parteċipazzjoni f’sejħa għal offerti — Offerent li naqas milli fl-offerta jsemmi l-ispejjeż tal-impriża li jikkonċernaw is-sigurtà fuq il-post tax-xogħol — Obbligu ġurisprudenzjali li tiġi pprovduta tali indikazzjoni — Esklużjoni mill-kuntratt mingħajr il-possibbiltà li din l-ommissjoni tiġi rettifikata)
 Kawżi Magħquda C-10/16 sa C-12/16: Digriet tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (Id-Disa’ Awla) tas-26 ta’ Ottubru 2016 (talbiet għal deċiżjoni preliminari tal-Commissione tributaria provinciale di Genova – l-Italja – Ignazio Messina & C. SpA vs Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti – Capitaneria di porto di Genova (C-10/16), Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli – Ufficio di Genova (C-11/16), Autorità portuale di Genova (C-12/16) (Rinviju għal deċiżjoni preliminari — Artikolu 94 tar-Regoli tal-Proċedura tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja — Deċiżjoni tar-rinviju — Assenza ta’ biżżejjed preċiżazzjonijiet dwar il-kuntest fattwali u leġiżlattiv — Assenza ta’ preċiżazzjonijiet dwar ir-raġunijiet li jiġġustifikaw il-bżonn ta’ risposta għad-domandi preliminari għall-finijiet tas-soluzzjoni ta’ tilwima pendenti fil-kawża prinċipali — Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regoli tal-Proċedura tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja — Inammissibbiltà manifesta)
 Kawża C-140/16: Digriet tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (Is-Sitt Awla) tal-10 ta’ Novembru 2016 (talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari tat-Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per le Marche – l-Italja) – Edra Costruzioni Soc. coop., Edilfac Srl vs Comune di Maiolati Spontini (Talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari — Artikolu 99 tar-Regoli tal-Proċedura tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja — Kuntratti pubbliċi — Direttiva 2004/18/KE — Direttiva 2014/24/UE — Parteċipazzjoni f’sejħa għal offerti — Offerent li naqas milli jsemmi fl-offerta n-nefqa tal-impriża fir-rigward tas-sigurtà fuq ix-xogħol — Obbligu mill-qrati li tissemma din in-nefqa — Esklużjoni mill-kuntratt mingħajr il-possibbiltà li jiġi rrettifikat dan in-nuqqas)
 Kawża C-162/16: Digriet tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (Is-Sitt Awla) tal-10 ta’ Novembru 2016 (talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari tat- Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Molise – L-Italja) – Spinosa Costruzioni Generali SpA, Melfi Srl vs Comune di Monteroduni (Talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari — Artikolu 99 tar-Regoli tal-Proċedura tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja — Kuntratti pubbliċi — Direttiva 2004/18/KE — Direttiva 2014/24/UE — Parteċipazzjoni f’sejħa għal offerti — Offerent li naqas milli jsemmi fl-offerta n-nefqa tal-impriża fir-rigward tas-sigurtà fuq ix-xogħol — Obbligu mill-qrati li tissemma din in-nefqa — Esklużjoni mill-kuntratt mingħajr il-possibbiltà li jiġi rrettifikat dan in-nuqqas)
 Kawża C-222/16: Digriet tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (Id-Disa’ Awla) tal-15 ta’ Novembru 2016 (talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari tal-Administrativen sad – Varna) – il-Bulgarija – “MIP-TS” OOD vs Nachalnik na Mitnitsa Varna (Rinviju għal deċiżjoni preliminari — Politika kummerċjali — Regolament (KE) Nruo1225/2009 — Artikolu 13 — Evitar — Regolament ta’ Implimentazzjoni (UE) Nru 791/2011 — Drappijiet b’malja miftuħa tal-fibri tal-ħġieġ li joriġinaw mir-Repubblika Popolari taċ-Ċina — Dazji antidumping — Regolament ta’ Implimentazzjoni (UE) Nru 437/2012 u (UE) Nru 21/2013 — Spedizzjoni mit-Tajlandja — Estensjoni tad-dazju antidumping — Kamp ta’ applikazzjoni ratione temporis — Kodiċi Doganali tal-Komunità — Irkupru a posteriori ta’ dazji fuq l-importazzjoni)
 Kawża C-321/16: Digriet tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (It-Tmien Awla) tal-10 ta’ Novembru 2016 (talba għal deċizjoni preliminari tad-Dublin District Court – l-Irlanda) – proċeduri kriminali kontra Owen Pardue (Rinviju għal deċiżjoni preliminari — Karta tad-Drittijiet Fundamentali tal-Unjoni Ewropea — Preambolu u Artikoli 6, 20, 41, 47 u 48 — Setgħat tal-awtorità nazzjonali responsabbli għat-tressiq ta’ proċeduri kriminali — Nuqqas ta’ implementazzjoni tad-dritt tal-Unjoni — Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regoli tal-Proċedura tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja — Nuqqas ta’ ġurisdizzjoni manifesta tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja)
 Kawża C-577/16: Talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari mressqa mill-Verwaltungsgericht Berlin (il-Ġermanja) fis-16 ta’ Novembru 2016 – Trinseo Deutschland Anlagengesellschaft mbH vs Bundesrepublik Deutschland
 Kawża C-594/16: Talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari mressqa mill-Consiglio di Stato (l-Italja) fit-23 ta’ Novembru 2016 – Enzo Buccioni vs Banca d’Italia
 Kawża C-596/16: Talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari mressqa mill-Corte suprema di cassazione (l-Italja) fit-23 ta’ Novembru 2016 – Enzo Di Puma vs Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (Consob)
 Kawża C-597/16: Talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari mressqa mill-Corte suprema di cassazione (l-Italja) fit-23 ta’ Novembru 2016 – Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (Consob) vs Antonio Zecca
 Kawża C-616/16: Talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari mressqa mill-Corte suprema di cassazione (l-Italja) fit-28 ta’ Novembru 2016 – Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri et vs Nello Grassi et
 Kawża C-617/16: Talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari mressqa mill-Corte suprema di cassazione (l-Italja) fit-28 ta’ Novembru 2016 – Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri vs Giovanna Castellano et
 Kawża C-630/16: Talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari mressqa mill-Helsingin hallinto-oikeus (Il-Finlandja) fis-7 ta’ Diċembru 2016 – Anstar Oy vs Turvallisuus- ja kemikaalivirasto (Tukes)
 Kawża C-650/16: Talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari mressqa mill-Østre Landsret (Id-Danimarka) fid-19 ta’ Diċembru 2016 – A/S Bevola u Jens W. Trock ApS vs Skatteministeriet
 Kawża C-4/17 P: Appell ippreżentat fl-4 ta’ Jannar 2017 mir-Repubblika Ċeka mis-sentenza mogħtija mill-Qorti Ġenerali (Il-Ħames Awla) fl-20 ta’ Ottubru 2016 fil-Kawża T-141/15, Ir-Repubblika Ċeka vs Il-Kummissjoni
 Kawża C-6/17 P: Appell ippreżentat fil-5 ta’ Jannar 2017 minn ANKO A.E. Antiprosopeion, Emporiou kai Viomichanias mis-sentenza mogħtija mill-Qorti Ġenerali (It-Tielet Awla) fis-27 ta’ April 2017 fil-Kawża T-154/14, ANKO vs Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea
 Kawża C-7/17 P: Appell ippreżentat fil-5 ta’ Jannar 2017 minn ANKO A.E. Antiprosopeion, Emporiou kai Viomichanias mis-sentenza mogħtija mill-Qorti Ġenerali (It-Tielet Awla) fis-27 ta’ April 2016 fil-Kawża T-155/14, ANKO vs Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea
 Kawża C-495/15 P: Digriet tal-President tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja tal-10 ta’ Novembru 2016 – Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea vs Ir-Repubblika Portugiża: sostnuta minn: Ir-Renju ta’ Spanja, Ir-Renju tal-Pajjiżi l-Baxxi
 Kawża T-250/15: Sentenza tal-Qorti Ġenerali tal-24 ta’ Novembru 2016 – Speciality Drinks vs EUIPO – William Grant (CLAN) (“Trade mark tal-Unjoni Ewropea — Proċedimenti ta’ oppożizzjoni — Applikazzjoni għat-trade mark verbali tal-Unjoni Ewropea CLAN — Trade mark verbali tal-Unjoni Ewropea preċedenti CLAN MACGREGOR — Raġuni relattiva għal rifjut — Artikolu 8(1)(b) tar-Regolament (KE) Nru 207/2009 — Probabbiltà ta’ konfużjoni — Xebh tal-prodotti kkonċernati mis-sinjali kunfliġġenti — Pubbliku rilevanti — Interdipendenza tal-kriterji — Setgħa ta’ bidla — Artikolu 65(3) tar-Regolament Nru 207/2009”)
 Kawża T-399/15: Sentenza tal-Qorti Ġenerali tad-19 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Morgan & Morgan vs EUIPO – Grupo Morgan & Morgan (Morgan & Morgan) [“Trade mark tal-Unjoni Ewropea — Proċedimenti ta’ oppożizzjoni — Applikazzjoni għat-trade mark tal-Unjoni Ewropea figurattiva Morgan & Morgan — Trade mark tal-Unjoni Ewropea figurattiva preċedenti MMG TRUST MIEMBRO DEL GRUPO MORGAN & MORGAN — Raġuni relattiva għal rifjut — Probabbiltà ta’ konfużjoni — Artikolu 8(1)(b) tar-Regolament (KE) Nru 207/2009”]
 Kawża T-419/15: Sentenza tal-Qorti Ġenerali tas-17 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Cofely Solelec et vs Il-Parlament (“Kuntratti pubbliċi għal xogħlijiet — Proċedura ta’ sejħa għal offerti — Estensjoni u mmodernizzar tal-bini Konrad Adenauer fil-Lussemburgu — Annullament tal-proċedura ta’ sejħa għal offerti — Obbligu ta’ motivazzjoni — Valur tas-suq — Żball manifest ta’ evalwazzjoni”)
 Kawża T-701/15: Sentenza tal-Qorti Ġenerali tad-19 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Stock Polska vs EUIPO – Lass & Steffen (LUBELSKA) [“Trade mark tal-Unjoni Ewropea — Proċedimenti ta’ oppożizzjoni — Applikazzjoni għal trade mark figurattiva tal-Unjoni Ewropea LUBELSKA — Trade mark nazzjonali verbali preċedenti Lubeca — Raġuni relattiva għal rifjut — Probabbiltà ta’ konfużjoni — Livell ta’ attenzjoni tal-pubbliku — Xebh tas-sinjali — Artikolu 8(1)(b) tar-Regolament (KE) Nru 207/2009”]
 Kawża T-54/16: Sentenza tal-Qorti Ġenerali tas-17 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Netguru vs EUIPO (NETGURU) [“Trade mark tal-Unjoni Ewropea — Applikazzjoni għal trade mark verbali tal-Unjoni Ewropea NETGURU — Raġuni assoluta għal rifjut — Assenza ta’ karattru distintiv — Artikolu 7(1)(b) tar-Regolament (KE) Nru 207/2009 — Obbligu ta’ motivazzjoni — Artikolu 41 tal-Karta tad-Drittijiet Fundamentali — Artikolu 75 tar-Regolament Nru 207/2009 — Artikolu 76(2) tar-Regolament Nru 207/2009”]
 Kawża T-64/16: Sentenza tal-Qorti Ġenerali tat-18 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Wieromiejczyk vs EUIPO (Tasty Puff) [“Trade mark tal-Unjoni Ewropea — Applikazzjoni għat-trade mark figurattiva tal-Unjoni Ewropea Tasty Puff — Raġunijiet assoluti għal rifjut — Karattru deskrittiv — Artikolu 7(1)(c) tar-Regolament (KE) Nru 207/2009 — Assenza ta’ karattru distintiv — Artikolu 7(1)(b) tar-Regolament Nru 207/2009”]
 Kawża T-232/16 P: Sentenza tal-Qorti Ġenerali tad-19 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Il-Kummissjoni vs Frieberger u Vallin (“Appell — Servizz pubbliku — Uffiċjali — Pensjonijiet — Riforma tar-Regolamenti tal-Persunal — Żieda fl-età tal-irtirar — Deċiżjoni li tirrifjuta li tiġi kkalkolata mill-ġdid l-akkreditazzjoni tad-drittijiet għall-pensjoni — Prinċipju ta’ ne ultra petita — Żball ta’ liġi — Obbligu ta’ motivazzjoni”)
 Kawża T-886/16: Rikors ippreżentat fil-15 ta’ Diċembru 2016 – Nf Nails In Vogue vs EUIPO – Nails & Beauty (NAILS FACTORY)
 Kawża T-891/16: Rikors ippreżentat fit-12 ta’ Diċembru 2016 – Scandlines Danmark u Scandlines Deutschland vs Il-Kummissjoni
 Kawża T-904/16: Rikors ippreżentat fil-21 ta’ Diċembru 2016 – Labiri vs KESE u Il-Kumitat tar-Reġjuni
 Kawża T-907/16: Rikors ippreżentat fit-22 ta’ Diċembru 2016 – Schwenk Zement vs Il-Kummissjoni
 Kawża T-912/16: Rikors ippreżentat fit-22 ta’ Diċembru 2016 – RRTec vs EUIPO – Mobotec (RROFA)
 Kawża T-913/16: Rikors ippreżentat fit-23 ta’ Diċembru 2016 – Fininvest u Berlusconi vs BĊE
 Kawża T-2/17: Rikors ippreżentat fit-3 ta’ Jannar 2017 – J.M. E.V. e hijos vs EUIPO – Masi (MASSI)
 Kawża T-6/17: Rikors ippreżentat fl-4 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Equivalenza Manufactory vs EUIPO – ITM Entreprises (BLACK LABEL BY EQUIVALENZA)
 Kawża T-7/17: Rikors ippreżentat fil-5 ta’ Jannar 2017 – John Mills vs EUIPO – Jerome Alexander Consulting (MINERAL MAGIC)
 Kawża T-8/17: Rikors ippreżentat fil-5 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Golden Balls vsEUIPO – Intra- Presse (GOLDEN BALLS)
 Kawża T-12/17: Rikors ippreżentat fil-11 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Mellifera vs Il-Kummissjoni
 Kawża T-13/17: Rikors ippreżentat fit-12 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Europa Terra Nostra vs Il-Parlament
 Kawża T-14/17: Rikors ippreżentat fit-12 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Landesbank Baden-Württemberg vs SRB
 Kawża T-15/17: Rikors ippreżentat fis-6 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Mitrakos vs EUIPO – Belasco Baquedano (YAMAS)
 Kawża T-16/17: Rikors ippreżentat fit-13 ta’ Jannar 2017 – APF vs Il-Parlament
 Kawża T-25/17: Rikors ippreżentat fis-17 ta’ Jannar 2017 – Rintisch vs EUIPO – Compagnie laitière européenne (PROTICURD)


type: legislation

jurisdiction: US

text:
 I
 111th CONGRESS
 2d Session
 H. R. 4487
 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 January 21, 2010
 Mr. Grayson
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
 Committee on Financial
 Services
 A BILL
 To require the approval of a majority of a public
 company’s shareholders for any expenditure by that company to influence public
 opinion on matters not related to the company’s products or
 services.
 1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the End the
 Hijacking of Shareholder Funds Act.
 2.Shareholder
 approval for certain expendituresAny expenditure by a public company to
 influence public opinion on matters not related to the company’s products or
 services that has not been approved by a majority of the votes cast by
 shareholders to approve or disapprove such expenditure shall be considered a
 breach of a fiduciary duty of the officers and directors who authorized such an
 expenditure. The officers and directors who authorize such an expenditure
 without first obtaining such approval of shareholders shall be jointly and
 severally liable in any action brought in any court of competent jurisdiction
 to any shareholder or class of shareholders for the amount of such
 expenditure.
 3.DefinitionsAs used in this Act—
 (1)the term
 public company means any issuer that is required to submit
 periodical or other reports under section 13 of the Securities Exchange Act of
 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and
 (2)the term
 shareholder means any person who owns or holds a share of stock in
 a public company.


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 1.6.2013
 EL
 Επίσημη Εφημερίδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης
 C 156/37
 Απόφαση του Γενικού Δικαστηρίου της 12ης Απριλίου 2013 — CISAC κατά Επιτροπής
 (Υπόθεση T-442/08) (1)
 (Ανταγωνισμός - Συμπράξεις - Δικαιώματα του δημιουργού σχετικά με τη δημόσια εκτέλεση μουσικών έργων μέσω διαδικτύου, δορυφόρου ή καλωδιακής αναμεταδόσεως - Απόφαση με την οποία διαπιστώνεται παράβαση του άρθρου 81 ΕΚ - Κατανομή της γεωγραφικής αγοράς - Διμερείς συμβάσεις μεταξύ εθνικών εταιριών συλλογικής διαχειρίσεως - Εναρμονισμένη πρακτική που αποκλείει τη δυνατότητα χορηγήσεως αδειών πολλαπλής εδαφικής ισχύος και πολλαπλών ρεπερτορίων - Απόδειξη - Τεκμήριο αθωότητας)
 2013/C 156/64
 Γλώσσα διαδικασίας: η αγγλική
 Διάδικοι
 Προσφεύγουσα: International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC) (Neuilly-sur-Seine, Γαλλία) (εκπρόσωποι: J.-F. Bellis και K. Van Hove, δικηγόροι)
 Καθής: Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή (εκπρόσωποι: F. Castillo de la Torre και A. Biolan)
 Παρεμβαίνουσα υπέρ της προσφεύγουσας: European Broadcasting Union (EBU) (Grand-Saconnex, Ελβετία) (εκπρόσωποι: D. Waelbroeck, δικηγόρος, και D. Slater, solicitor)
 Αντικείμενο
 Αίτημα μερικής ακυρώσεως της αποφάσεως C(2008) 3435 τελικό της Επιτροπής, της 16ης Ιουλίου 2008, σχετικά με διαδικασία εφαρμογής του άρθρου 81 [ΕΚ] και του άρθρου 53 της Συμφωνίας για τον ΕΟΧ (Υπόθεση COMP/C2/38.698 — CISAC).
 Διατακτικό
 Το Γενικό Δικαστήριο αποφασίζει:
 1)
 Ακυρώνει το άρθρο 3 της αποφάσεως C(2008) 3435 τελικό της Επιτροπής, της 16ης Ιουλίου 2008, σχετικά με διαδικασία εφαρμογής του άρθρου 81 [ΕΚ] και του άρθρου 53 της Συμφωνίας για τον ΕΟΧ (Υπόθεση COMP/C2/38.698 — CISAC), κατά το μέτρο που αφορά την International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC).
 2)
 Καταδικάζει την Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή στα δικαστικά έξοδα.
 (1) EE C 82 της 4.4.2009.


text: b' OFFICE OF\n THE INSPECTOR GENERAL\n\n SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION\n\n\n SINGLE AUDIT OF THE\n STATE OF MONTANA\n FOR THE 2-YEAR PERIOD\n ENDED JUNE 30, 2001\n\n December 2002 A-77-03-00006\n\n\n\n\n MANAGEMENT\nADVISORY REPORT\n\x0c Mission\nWe improve SSA programs and operations and protect them against fraud, waste,\nand abuse by conducting independent and objective audits, evaluations, and\ninvestigations. We provide timely, useful, and reliable information and advice to\nAdministration officials, the Congress, and the public.\n\n Authority\nThe Inspector General Act created independent audit and investigative units,\ncalled the Office of Inspector General (OIG). The mission of the OIG, as spelled\nout in the Act, is to:\n\n m Conduct and supervise independent and objective audits and\n investigations relating to agency programs and operations.\n m Promote economy, effectiveness, and efficiency within the agency.\n m Prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse in agency programs and\n operations.\n m Review and make recommendations regarding existing and proposed\n legislation and regulations relating to agency programs and operations.\n m Keep the agency head and the Congress fully and currently informed of\n problems in agency programs and operations.\n\n To ensure objectivity, the IG Act empowers the IG with:\n\n m Independence to determine what reviews to perform.\n m Access to all information necessary for the reviews.\n m Authority to publish findings and recommendations based on the reviews.\n\n Vision\nBy conducting independent and objective audits, investigations, and evaluations,\nwe are agents of positive change striving for continuous improvement in the\nSocial Security Administration\'s programs, operations, and management and in\nour own office.\n\x0c SOCIAL SECURITY\nMEMORANDUM\n\nDate: December 16, 2002 Refer To:\n\nTo: Candace Skurnik\n Acting Director\n Management Analysis and Audit Program Support Staff\n\nFrom: Assistant Inspector General\n for Audit\n\nSubject: Management Advisory Report: Single Audit of the State of Montana for the\n 2-Year Period Ended June 30, 2002 (A-77-03-00006)\n\n\n This report presents the Social Security Administration\xe2\x80\x99s (SSA) portion of the single\n audit of the State of Montana for the 2-year period ended June 30, 2002. Our objective\n was to report internal control weaknesses, noncompliance issues, and unallowable\n costs identified in the single audit to SSA for resolution action.\n\n The Montana Legislative Auditor performed the audit. The Department of Health and\n Human Services\xe2\x80\x99 (HHS) desk review concluded that the audit met Federal\n requirements. In reporting the results of the single audit, we relied entirely on the\n internal control and compliance work performed by the Legislative Auditor and the\n reviews performed by HHS.\n\n For single audit purposes, the Office of Management and Budget assigns Federal\n programs a Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number. SSA\xe2\x80\x99s Disability\n Insurance (DI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) programs are identified by\n CFDA number 96. SSA is responsible for resolving single audit findings reported under\n this CFDA number.\n\n The Montana Disability Determination Services (DDS) performs disability\n determinations under SSA\xe2\x80\x99s DI and SSI programs in accordance with Federal\n regulations. The DDS is reimbursed for 100 percent of allowable costs. The Montana\n Department of Public Health and Human Services (DPHHS) is the Montana DDS parent\n agency.\n\x0cPage 2 - Candace Skurnik\n\nDPHHS did not:\n\n1. Control its financial management structure. Specifically, DPHHS did not support\n Federal reporting, allocate costs between State and Federal programs, or prevent\n discrepancies between the State\xe2\x80\x99s primary accounting system and the Department\xe2\x80\x99s\n subsystems.\n\n2. Reconcile its automated data processing subsystems to the State\xe2\x80\x99s primary\n accounting system, resulting in financial records possibly being misstated (see\n Attachment A).\n\nImplementation of the corrective action plan is in process to improve financial controls.\nWork groups have been established to review reconciliation activities and establish\nadditional procedures to improve the automated data processing subsystems.\n\nWe recommend SSA ensure DPHHS implement:\n\n1. Financial management controls to ensure accountability and compliance with State\n and Federal laws and regulations.\n\n2. Policies and procedures to ensure timely completion and resolution of reconciliations\n between the State\xe2\x80\x99s accounting system and DPHHS\xe2\x80\x99 various subsystems.\n\nThe single audit also disclosed the following findings that may impact DDS operations\nalthough they were not specifically identified to SSA. We bring these matters to your\nattention as they represent potentially serious service delivery and financial control\nproblems for the Agency (see Attachment B).\n\n\xc2\xb7 The Department of Administration was unable to reconcile bank account records to\n the State\xe2\x80\x99s accounting records.\n\n\xc2\xb7 Controls were not in place to ensure that interest calculation spreadsheets were\n accurate and reconciled with the accounting records.\n\n\xc2\xb7 DPHHS drew cash earlier than the clearance patterns established in the Cash\n Management Improvement Act agreement.\n\n\xc2\xb7 DPHHS did not adhere to Federal regulations for the review and analysis of data\n processing and system security issues.\n\n\xc2\xb7 Procedures were not followed to verify that contractors were not suspended or\n debarred.\n\n\xc2\xb7 Expenditure and cash draw records did not identify that expenditures occurred in the\n period for which the Federal award was available.\n\x0cPage 3 - Candace Skurnik\n\n\xc2\xb7 Procedures were not in place to ensure accounting records supported Federal\n reports.\n\nPlease send copies of the final Audit Clearance Document to Mark Bailey in\nKansas City and Paul Wood in Baltimore. If you have questions contact Mark Bailey\nat (816) 936-5591.\n\n\n\n\n Steven L. Schaeffer\n\nAttachments\n\x0c Attachment A\n Page 1 of 7\n\n\n State of Montana\n Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs\n For the Two Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2001\n\nSection II - Financial Statement Findings\n\nFinding #1-1\n\nCriteria: Internal Control Structure\nThe National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting (the Treadway Commission) was created in\n1985 by the joint sponsorship of five organizations, which composed the Committee of Sponsoring\nOrganizations (COSO):\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The American Accounting Association\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The Institute of Management Accountants (formerly the National Association of Accountants)\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The Financial Executives Institute\nIn 1987, the Treadway Commission recommended COSO develop a common definition of internal control\nand provide guidance to assist management to better control its organization. COSO issued a document titled\nInternal Control - An Integrated Framework. The definition of internal control includes five elements: control\nenvironment, risk assessment, control activities, information and communication, and monitoring.\n\nCondition: The Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services\' (department) audit report\ndiscusses issues related to fiscal and legal accountability within the department. The department could have\nprevented, or detected in a timely manner, many of these errors if it developed and implemented a sound\ninternal control structure as we recommended in our two prior audit reports. Management has not\nimplemented a control structure adequate to prevent, or timely detect and correct, errors in its financial\nrecords and fails to comply with program requirements.\n\nQuestioned Costs: No questions costs were identified.\n\nContext: The department spends in excess of $974 million per year for program benefits and administration.\nOf that total, more than $675.7 million per year was provided by federal agencies. The department has offices\nand facilities located geographically throughout the state of Montana and employs 2,702 budgeted full-time\nequivalent employees working in nine divisions.\n\nEffect: The department\'s financial management control structure is not able to prevent or detect many\nerrors. Because of this weakness, the department cannot ensure payments are made to eligible individuals or\nto others for allowable purposes. The department\'s inefficient transaction processing does not accurately\nsupport federal reporting, does not demonstrate accurate allocation of costs between state and federal\nprograms, and does not prevent discrepancies from existing between the state\'s primary accounting system\nand the department\'s subsystems. The department is not meeting its fiscal and legal responsibilities.\n\nCause: According to department management, implementation of this recommendation has been hampered\nby continuing turnover within the Fiscal Bureau; including turnover in supervisory positions, and unforeseen\nresource demands for implementing the state\'s new accounting system. Since the issuance of the prior audit\nreport, the department has reorganized certain functions within the Operations and\n\x0c Attachment A\n Page 2 of 7\n\n\nTechnology Division in order to improve operational efficiency and communications. The department has\nalso created a separate Fiscal Policy Office, which provides oversight and assistance in establishing internal\ncontrol and fiscal policy for the department. In addition, the department hired a deputy director in August\n2001 who will be responsible for oversight of department operations, including financial matters, and an\ninternal auditor in October 2001.\n\nRecommendation: We recommend the department implement a financial management control structure to\nassure financial accountability and compliance with state and federal laws and regulations.\n\x0c Attachment A\n Page 3 of 7\n\n\n State of Montana\n Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs\n For the Two Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2001\n\nSection II - Financial Statement Findings\n\nFinding #1-2\n\nCriteria: Montana state law, section 17-1-102(4), MCA, states in part, that all state agencies shall input all\nnecessary transactions to the accounting system before the accounts are closed at the end of the fiscal year in\norder to present the receipt, use, and disposition of all money and property for which the agency is\naccountable in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.\n\nCondition: The Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services (department) does not\ncompletely reconcile its automated data processing subsystems to the state\'s primary accounting system\n(SABHRS).\n\nQuestioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified.\n\nContext: Department personnel use the Agency Wide Accounting and Client Systems (AWACS) to generate\nvendor and provider payments. It is also used to prepare financial reports for federal grants. The department\nuses the Child and Adult Protective Services (CAPS) system to record several types of activity.. One of the\nmodules in the CAPS system is used to account for foster care trust accounts. Foster Care IV-E expenditures\nfor fiscal years 1999-00 and 2000-01 were approximately $11 million. The department uses its Advanced\nRevelation (AREV) system to establish accounts receivable for its laboratory operations. The Public Health\nLaboratory utilizes the AREV system and had an accounts receivable amount of $231,666 as of June 30,\n2001.\n\nEffect: The department\'s financial records may be misstated and thus misleading to users and, federal reports\ncould be misstated.\n\nCause: AWACS - Department personnel noted that AWACS and SABHRS coding are not consistent in\nsome cases, which makes reconciling difficult. During the prior audit, the department had not completely\nreconciled AWACS to the accounting records during fiscal year 1997-98 and 1998-99. Personnel said certain\nadjustments to data made directly to the SABHRS are not made on AWACS.\n\n CAPS - The department did make some adjustment to SABHRS in fiscal year 1999-00, so that totals\nin CAPS matched totals in SABHRS. However, the adjustments were not done based on reconciliation\nbetween the two systems. Department personnel said that they were having problems with SABHRS\naccepting journals so they made the decision to not track the errors and to adjust SABHRS using CAPS totals\nas support.\n\n AREV - A monthly comparison between SABHRS and AREV is done to determine differences,\nSABHRS is adjusted but the two systems do not necessarily reflect true balances. By adjusting SABHRS so it\nreflects AREV amounts, the department is not considering transactions that are only recorded on SABHRS\nand not AREV.\n\x0c Attachment A\n Page 4 of 7\n\n\nRecommendation: We recommend the department implement policies and procedures to ensure timely\ncompletion and resolution of reconciliations between the state\'s accounting system and the department\'s\nvarious subsystems.\n\x0c Attachment A\n Page 5 of 7\n\n\n State of Montana\n Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs\n For the Two Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2001\n\nSection III - Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs\n\nFinding #2-47 U.S. Department of Agriculture\n CFDA #10.551 & 10.561 Food Stamp Cluster\n CFDA #10.557 Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and\n Children (WIC)\n CFDA #10.555 National School Lunch Program\n CFDA #10.567 Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations\n\n U.S. Department of Education\n CFDA #84.126 Rehabilitation Services - Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States\n\n U.S. Department of Health and Human Services\n CFDA #93.044 & 93.045 Aging Cluster\n CFDA #93.558 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program\n CFDA #93.563 Child Support Enforcement\n CFDA #93.568 Low Income Home Energy Assistance\n CFDA #93.575 & 93.596 Child Care Cluster\n CFDA #93.658 Foster Care - Title IV-E\n CFDA #93.667 Social Service Block Grant\n CFDA #93.775, 93.777, & 93.778 Medicaid Cluster\n CFDA #93.959 Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse\n CFDA #93.767 State Children\'s Insurance Program\n\n U.S. Department of Social Security Administration\n CFDA #96.001 Social Security - Disability Insurance\n\nSee the Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs, Section II - Financial Statement Findings, Finding# 1-1\nfor details.\n\x0c Attachment A\n Page 6 of 7\n\n\n State of Montana\n Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs\n For the Two Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2001\n\nSection 111 - Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs\n\nFinding #2-48 U.S. Department of Agriculture\n CFDA #10.551 & 10.561 Food Stamp Cluster\n CFDA #10.557 Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and\n Children (WIC)\n CFDA #10.555 National School Lunch Program\n CFDA #10.567 Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations\n\n U.S. Department of Education\n CFDA #84.126 Rehabilitation Services - Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States\n\n U.S. Department of Health and Human Services\n CFDA #93.044 & 93.045 Aging Cluster\n CFDA #93.558 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program\n CFDA #93.563 Child Support Enforcement\n CFDA #93.568 Low Income Home Energy Assistance\n CFDA #93.575 & 93.596 Child Care Cluster\n CFDA #93.658 Foster Care - Title IV-E\n CFDA #93.667 Social Service Block Grant\n CFDA #93.775, 93.777, & 93.778 Medicaid Cluster\n CFDA #93.959 Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse\n CFDA #93.767 State Children\'s Insurance Program\n\n U.S. Department of Social Security Administration\n CFDA #96.001 Social Security - Disability Insurance\n\nSee the Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs, Section II - Financial Statement Findings, Finding #1-2\nfor details.\n\x0c Attachment A\n Page 7 of 7\n\n STATE OF MONTANA\n CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN\n FOR THE TWO FISCAL YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2001\n Finding # CFDA # CAP - Corrective Action Plan Person Target Date\n Responsible for\n CAP\nFinding #2-43 10.551, A new process is in place and staff has been cross-trained. Marie Matthews, Completed\n 10.561 Fiscal Policy\n Advisor\nFinding #2-44 Various The department is reviewing both the TEAMS and CAPS reports to identify and Marie Matthews, June 30, 2002\n remove unnecessary reports. Fiscal Policy\n Advisor\nFinding #2-45 10.555, The Office of Public Instruction contacted the four counties that were, at the time Julia Dilly, FSB July 1, 2002\n 81.010, of the audit, still receiving their funds by warrant rather than electronic funds Administrator\n 84.027, transfer (EFT). Three of those counties now accept EFT payments; Gallatin\n 84.078 county is our only hold out. We continue to call and write the Gallatin County\n Treasurer, asking that she reconsider.\nFinding #2-46 17.225 The Department of Revenue will modify the department\xe2\x80\x99s computer system to Jeff Miller, Implemented March\n transfer the Unemployment Insurance experience rating from previous employers Administrator, 2002\n to successor employers, thereby ensuring rates are calculated properly. Policy Management\nFinding #2-47 Various A workplan is in process to improve all areas of financial control. Marie Matthews, December 31, 2002\n Fiscal Policy\n Advisor\nFinding #2-48 Various The department has established work groups to review reconciliation activities and Marie Matthews, June 30, 2002\n establish additional procedures as necessary per system. Systems have been Fiscal Policy\n prioritized according to risk and are being addressed in that order. Advisor\nFinding #2-49 Various The Department of Environmental Quality developed and adopted a written Centralized Services April 2000\n Financial Management Control Plan. Agency provides training on policies and Division\n procedures and has improved its new employee orientation process to promote the Administration\n policies and procedures and the information available on the department\xe2\x80\x99s Intranet.\n Fiscal Management Bureau staff have established desk manuals.\nFinding #2-50 Various The Department of Environmental Quality developed and implemented written Centralized Services April 2000\n policy and procedures on cash management. In April 2001 the electronic cash Division\n receipting log and chain of custody record were implemented and staff was trained Administration\n on the system.\nFinding #2-51 84.243 The Office of Commissioner of Higher Education\xe2\x80\x99s Director of Accounting and Jackie Grenfell, March 1, 2002\n Budgeting will approve all fiscal yearend-adjusting entries. Tech-Prep Consortium OCHE Federal\n will pay all presenter fees, as required by federal regulations. Accountant\n\x0c Attachment B\n Page 1 of 10\n\n\n State of Montana\n Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs\n For the Two Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2001\n\nSection II - Financial Statement Findings\n\nFinding #1-6 Various Federal Agencies\n CFDA # Various\n\nCriteria: State law, Section 17-1-102(4), MCA requires that before the accounts are closed at fiscal yearend,\nagencies shall input all transactions to present the receipt, use, and disposition of all money and property in\naccordance with generally accepted accounting principles. State law, Section 17-1-111, MCA, also provides\nthe general fiscal duties of the state treasurer include receiving and accounting for all money belonging to the\nstate and keeping an account of all money received and disbursed.\n\nCondition: The Department of Administration (department) is responsible for reconciling activity within all\nbank accounts for the State of Montana. Since the implementation of Statewide Accounting, Budgeting, and\nHuman Resource System (SABHRS) beginning in fiscal year 2000, the department has been unable to\nreconcile its bank account activity to the accounting records.\n\nQuestioned Costs: No questioned costs identified.\n\nContext: The State\'s General Purpose Financial Statements reported approximately $156 million and $164\nmillion in cash deposits at June 30, 2000 and June 30, 2001, respectively. In March 2001, the department\nmade adjustments exceeding $20 million to the financial statements. As of January 2002, the department\nrecorded a final adjustment of approximately $755,000 in the General Fund.\n\nEffect: The ability to promptly reconcile bank records to the accounting records is a key control Which\nmanagement needs to ensure the accounting records accurately reflect the cash balances. The unreconciled\ndifference between the accounting records and the bank records on October 10, 2001 was $323,229.\n\nCause: The conversion to SABHRS created unforeseen problems which caused delays in agencies processing\ntheir accounting information. In addition, the department has not implemented procedures to facilitate timely\nreconciliation between bank records and accounting records.\n\nRecommendation: We recommend the department implement procedures to promptly reconcile cash\nbalances on the accounting records to the bank records as required by state law.\n\x0c Attachment B\n Page 2 of 10\n\n\n State of Montana\n Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs\n For the Two Fiscal Years Ended .June 30, 2001\n\nSection III - Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs\n\nFinding #2-2 U.S. Department of Agriculture\n CFDA #10.557 Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and\n Children (WIC)\n CFDA #10.555 National School Lunch Program\n\n U.S. Department of Education\n CFDA #84.126 Rehabilitation Services-Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States\n\n U.S. Department of Health and Human Services\n CFDA #93.468 Low Income Home Energy Assistance\n CFDA #93.558 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program\n CFDA #93.596 Child Care Mandatory and Matching Funds of the Child Care and\n Development\n CFDA #93.658 Foster Care - Title IV-E\n CF DA #93.667 Social Services Block Grant\n CFDA #93.778 Medicaid Assistance Program\n\nCriteria: The Cash Management Improvement Act (CMIA) agreement between Montana and the U.S.\nTreasury Department requires the state to calculate interest owed to the federal government as a result of not\nfollowing the specifications outlined in the agreement.\n\nCondition: The Department of Public Health and Human Services (department) personnel did not calculate\nthe beginning cash balances consistently among the different programs. . The total disbursements reported on\nthe spreadsheets did not agree to the total expenditures recorded on the accounting system. The ending cash\nbalances calculated through the spreadsheets did not agree to the balances in the cash accounting at June 30,\n2000, and the difference could not be attributed to non-federal sources of cash. In addition to systematic\ninconsistencies involving beginning cash balances and recorded expenditures, we found a keying error for a\nMedicaid draw. The interest calculation spreadsheet for. Medicaid reported a cash draw of $12,805,120 when\nthe actual cash draw was $12,925. The error occurred when the employee who prepared the spreadsheet,\nintending to enter a formula, $12,805 + $120, did not enter the + sign.\n\nQuestioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified.\n\nContext: We reviewed the interest calculation spreadsheets for eight of the department\'s nine major federal\nprograms covered by the CMIA agreement in fiscal year 1999-00.\n\nEffect: Misstating balances, cash disbursement, or collection activity could result in erroneous CMIA interest\ncalculations.\n\nCause: Due to a lack of internal controls, errors were made on the spreadsheets and not detected.\n\x0c Attachment B\n Page 3 of 10\n\n\nRecommendation: We recommend the department implement controls to ensure the cash management\ninterest obligation calculation spreadsheets submitted to the Department of Administration reconcile with the\naccounting records and are accurate.\n\x0c Attachment B\n Page 4 of 10\n\n\n State of Montana\n Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs\n For the Two Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2001\n\nSchedule III - Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs\n\nFinding #2-3 U.S. Department of Agriculture\n CFDA #10.551 & 10.561 Food Stamp Cluster\n CFDA #10.557 Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and\n Children (WIC)\n CFDA #10.555 National School Lunch Program\n\n U.S. Department of Education\n CFDA #84.126 Rehabilitation Services - Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States\n\n U.S. Department of Health and Human Services\n CFDA #93.468 Low Income Home Energy Assistance\n CFDA #93.558 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program\n CFDA #93.596 Child Care Mandatory and Matching Funds of the Child Care and\n Development\n CFDA #93.658 Foster Care - Title IV-E\n CFDA #93.667 Social Services Block Grant\n CFDA #93.778 Medicaid Assistance Program\n CFDA #93.959 Block Grants for Prevention & Treatment of Substance Abuse\n (SAPT)\n\nCriteria: Under the terms of the Cash Management Improvement Act (CMIA) agreement (section 7.9), the\nMontana Department of Public Health and Human Services (department) must draw funds for each program\nbased on a warrant clearance pattern established by the Montana Department of Administration. OMB\nCircular A-102, Paragraph 2a states "Agency methods and procedures for transferring funds shall minimize\nthe time elapsing between transfer to recipients of grants and cooperative agreements and the recipient\'s need\nfor the funds."\n\nCondition: For the major federal programs covered by the CMIA agreement, we observed instances where\nthe department\'s fiscal personnel drew cash earlier than the clearance pattern established in the agreement\nand significantly more instances where they drew cash later than. the clearance pattern established in the\nagreement. We also noted cash draws which were consistently calculated in a manner contrary to that in the\nCMIA agreement and expenditures which were not considered in the cash draw calculations for any program.\nThe following paragraphs summarize the cash management problems we found.\n\n \xc2\xb7 The Social Services Block Grant made 172 draws. Of these, only 17 were made in accordance with\n the CMIA agreement. The remaining 155 cash draws were late by as much as 14 days.\n\n \xc2\xb7 We reviewed the department\'s spreadsheet of daily cash receipts and disbursements during fiscal year\n 1999-00 for administrative costs of the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants,\n and Children (WIC). We identified a seven-month period where no cash draws were made. The\n department should have made 25 draws under the CMIA clearance\n\x0c Attachment B\n Page 5 of 10\n\n\n pattern in effect during that period. When the department made a draw to cover administrative\n costs of the WIC program, it was for $2,099,520.\n\n \xc2\xb7 Medicaid matching rates vary based on the date the service was provided. Department personnel\n calculate Medicaid draws based on service center reports of total warrant and electronic funds\n transfer amounts, which they multiply times the current matching rate to estimate the federal\n share. Once a month, the service center provides the actual matching amounts-based on the\n dates of the services paid. Department personnel reconcile the estimated amounts based on the\n current rate to the actual amount based on service data. The reconciliation for June 2001 resulted\n in an accounting adjustment that increased the federal share and reduced the state share of match\n by $899,143. The CMIA agreement requires the draws to be based on actual, not estimated\n disbursements.\n\n \xc2\xb7 Cash draws for TANF benefits and administrative costs were made based on estimated\n disbursements. The CMIA agreement required draws be based on actual disbursements. In one\n instance, department personnel drew $1,785,564 instead of actual benefit expenditures of\n $1,808,073 one day late.\n\n \xc2\xb7 Department personnel calculate cash draws based on their calculations on cash disbursement\n transactions, without considering transactions that should offset these draws, such as a\n correction of matching rates or a return of benefit payments for which an individual was found\n to be ineligible after payment was disbursed. Because cash was drawn for these disbursements,\n then returned, the return funds should be used to reduce the next draw.\n\nFor the major federal programs not covered by the CMIA agreement (Food Stamps and the Block Grant for\nthe Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse),. we observed no routine draw pattern and they\nconsistently had negative cash balances during the audit period. We also found the department\'s fiscal\npersonnel did not consider the cash balance created through inter-entity loans in calculating the amount of\ncash to draw for these programs. The existence of the inter-entity loans for these programs often made the\ncash balance for the programs positive when the balance of federal cash was negative. In other situations, the\nexistence of inter-entity loans did not prevent negative cash balances from occurring.\n\nQuestioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified.\n\nContext: The department\'s expenditures exceeded $888 million in fiscal year 1999-00 and $974 million in\nfiscal year 2000-01, or an average of over $3.4 million and $3.7 million, respectively, per working day. The\nfederal government funded 69 percent of these expenditures. In fiscal year 2000-01, the department recorded\nover $631 million in federal revenue, a major component of the state\'s revenue.\n\nEffect: The department is not in compliance with CMIA agreement requirements or OMB Circular A-133,\ncash management requirements. In a state agency this size, it is important to manage cash flow to ensure cash\nis available to pay warrants and to maximize investment earnings to the various financing sources.\n\nCause: The department\'s controls during the audit period were not adequate to ensure compliance with the\nfederal cash management requirements and ensure timely recording of financial activity used as a basis for\ncash draws.\n\nRecommendation: We recommend the department:\n\x0c Attachment B\n Page 6 of 10\n\n\nA. Implement effective controls to ensure compliance with federal cash management requirements.\nB. Draw federal funds in accordance with federal regulations.\n\x0c Attachment B\n Page 7 of 10\n\n\n State of Montana\n Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs\n For the Two Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2001\n\nSection III - Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs\n\nFinding #2-27 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services\n CFDA #93.775, 93.777, 93.778 Medicaid Cluster\n CFDA #93.658 Foster Care - Title IV-E\n CFDA #93.563 Child Support Enforcement\n\nCriteria: 45 CFR 95.621(f) require the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services\n(department) establish procedures for review and analysis of data processing and system security issues for\nsystems used to administer Medicaid, Child Support Enforcement and Title IV-E Foster Care. These\nregulations include directives regarding risk analyses to ensure both new and existing systems include\nappropriate, cost effective controls. The department is required to perform risk analysis whenever significant\nsystem changes occur and to review system security installations on a biennial basis. At a minimum, the\nreviews are to address evaluation of physical and data security operating procedures, and personnel practices.\nThe department is to maintain reports on the biennial reviews, together with pertinent supporting\ndocumentation, for U.S. Department of Health and Human Services onsite reviews.\n\nCondition: The automated data processing system, which impact the above programs, are Montana Medicaid\nManagement Information System, The Economic Assistance Management System, System for the\nEnforcement and Recovery of Child Support, Child and Protective Services, Agency Wide Accounting and\nClient System and the state\'s accounting system. The department has just started to gather information on all\nsystems and their related security. The department has not completed the required risk analysis.\n\nQuestioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified.\n\nContext: OMB Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement identifies this regulation as a special test and\nprovision for the Medicaid Cluster. Total expenditures for the Medicaid Cluster in the fiscal years 1999-00\nand 2000-01 were approximately $347.6 million and $385.9 million, respectively.\n\nEffect: The department is not in compliance with federal regulations for review and analysis of data\nprocessing and system security issues for systems.\n\nCause: Department management was made aware of these requirements during the prior audit but has not\nestablished a system of review and risk analysis.\n\nRecommendation: We recommend the department develop a system security and risk review plan and\ndocument the results of the review in order to comply with federal regulations.\n\x0c Attachment B\n Page 8 of 10\n\n\n State of Montana\n Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs\n For the Two Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2001\n\nSection III - Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs\n\nFinding #2-28 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services\n CFDA # Various\n\nCriteria: OMB Circular A-102 Section 1, Part d requires agencies to establish procedures for the effective use\nof the federal List of Parties Excluded from Federal Procurement or Nonprocurement programs to ensure\nthey do not award assistance to listed parties.\n\nCondition: The Department of Public Health and Human Services (department) makes payments to medical\nservice providers through the Medicaid Management Information System (MMIS) and payments to certain\nother sub grantees and vendors through Agency Wide Accounting and Client System (AWACS). When the\ndepartment renews certain service contracts by extending the date of the original contract, the department\ndoes not check suspension and debarment status of the contractor and does not update suspension and\ndebarment contract language.\n\nQuestioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified.\n\nContext: Contracts for service organization, data processing enhancements, and renewals of such service\ncontracts are not reviewed for updated language required by department\'s legal counsel. These constitute a\nsmall number of higher dollar contracts.\n\nEffect: The department is not in compliance with federal regulations regarding certification that vendors\nhave not been suspended or debarred.\n\nCause: The department\'s legal department set contract requirements, but program staff have responsibility to\ninclude required language in the contracts executed by the department.\n\nRecommendation: We recommend the department develop an approval process to ensure the department is\nnot contracting with suspended or debarred parties.\n\x0c Attachment B\n Page 9 of 10\n\n\n State of Montana\n Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs\n For the Two Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2001\n\nSection III - Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs\n\nFinding #2-29 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)\n CFDA #93.959 Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse (SAPT)\n\nCriteria: 45 CFR 96.124(a)(1) and (2) requires states to earmark a portion of the Block Grants for prevention\nand treatment of alcohol and other drugs. The OMB Circular A-133 compliance supplement for SAPT states\nthat a state is required to obligate all of the funds awarded during the fiscal year of the award. Amounts\nobligated by the state which remain unexpended at the end of the fiscal year for which the amounts were\nawarded shall remain available until the end of the succeeding fiscal year.\n\nCondition: When we reviewed the Department of Public Health and Human Services (department) contract,\nexpenditure, and cash draw records, we were unable to verify that expenditures occurred in the period for\nwhich the grant award was available and that limitations on expenditures by earmarked category were\nsatisfied. The department did not record SAPT grant expenditures by grant award year and earmarked\ncategory on the state\'s accounting records.\n\nQuestioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified.\n\nContext: The department made SAPT expenditures of $4,632,762 and $4,890,430 in fiscal years 1999-00 and\n2000-01, respectively.\n\nEffect: Department controls do not provide a means for agency personnel to monitor and ensure compliance\nwith SAPT earmarking provisions and period of availability requirements.\n\nCause: Department personnel set up accounts on the state\'s accounting records in January 2001, to track\nexpenditure by grant award year. Prior to that time, the accounting records did not accumulate expenditures\nby award year.\n\nRecommendation: We recommend the department implement procedures to track earmarked expenditure\ncategories by grant year for the SAPT grant and monitor expenditures to ensure each charge is properly\nobligated or paid within the period of availability of the grant.\n\x0c Attachment B\n Page 10 of 10\n\n\n State of Montana\n Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs\n For the Two Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2001\n\nSection III - Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs\n\nFinding#2-34 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)\n CFDA #93.667 Social Services Block Grant (SSBG)\n\nCriteria: 45 CFR 92.20, Part b2 requires grantees to maintain records which adequately identify the source\nand application of funds provided for financial assisted activities including awards and authorizations,\nobligations, unobligated balances, assets, liabilities, outlays or expenditures, and income.\n\nCondition: The financial data reported to HHS by the Department of Public Health and Human Services\n(department) was not supported by the accounting records. This includes a carryforward on its SSBG\nprogram report and an expenditure report for June 30, 2000, which did not include Temporary Assistance for\nNeedy Family Program (TANF) funds transferred to SSBG and spent under SSBG regulations.\n\nQuestioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified.\n\nContext: The department spent SSBG assistance of $9,378,243 and $9,750,380 in fiscal years 1999-00 and\n2000-01, respectively.\n\nEffect: The department submitted unsubstantiated reports to the federal government.\n\nCause: Department personnel indicated the error occurred because three divisions now use SSBG funds\ninstead of one as in previous years.\n\nRecommendation: We recommend the department establish procedures to ensure federal Social Services\nBlock Grant reports are supported by the accounting records.\n\x0c Overview of the Office of the Inspector General\n\n\n Office of Audit\nThe Office of Audit (OA) conducts comprehensive financial and performance audits of\nthe Social Security Administration\xe2\x80\x99s (SSA) programs and makes recommendations to\nensure that program objectives are achieved effectively and efficiently. Financial audits,\nrequired by the Chief Financial Officers\' Act of 1990, assess whether SSA\xe2\x80\x99s financial\nstatements fairly present the Agency\xe2\x80\x99s financial position, results of operations and cash\nflow. Performance audits review the economy, efficiency and effectiveness of SSA\xe2\x80\x99s\nprograms. OA also conducts short-term management and program evaluations focused\non issues of concern to SSA, Congress and the general public. Evaluations often focus\non identifying and recommending ways to prevent and minimize program fraud and\ninefficiency, rather than detecting problems after they occur.\n\n Office of Executive Operations\nThe Office of Executive Operations (OEO) supports the Office of the Inspector General\n(OIG) by providing information resource management; systems security; and the\ncoordination of budget, procurement, telecommunications, facilities and equipment, and\nhuman resources. In addition, this office is the focal point for the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s strategic\nplanning function and the development and implementation of performance measures\nrequired by the Government Performance and Results Act. OEO is also responsible for\nperforming internal reviews to ensure that OIG offices nationwide hold themselves to\nthe same rigorous standards that we expect from SSA, as well as conducting\ninvestigations of OIG employees, when necessary. Finally, OEO administers OIG\xe2\x80\x99s\npublic affairs, media, and interagency activities, coordinates responses to\nCongressional requests for information, and also communicates OIG\xe2\x80\x99s planned and\ncurrent activities and their results to the Commissioner and Congress.\n\n\n Office of Investigations\nThe Office of Investigations (OI) conducts and coordinates investigative activity related\nto fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement of SSA programs and operations. This\nincludes wrongdoing by applicants, beneficiaries, contractors, physicians, interpreters,\nrepresentative payees, third parties, and by SSA employees in the performance of their\nduties. OI also conducts joint investigations with other Federal, State, and local law\nenforcement agencies.\n\n Counsel to the Inspector General\nThe Counsel to the Inspector General provides legal advice and counsel to the\nInspector General on various matters, including: 1) statutes, regulations, legislation,\nand policy directives governing the administration of SSA\xe2\x80\x99s programs; 2) investigative\nprocedures and techniques; and 3) legal implications and conclusions to be drawn from\naudit and investigative material produced by the OIG. The Counsel\xe2\x80\x99s office also\nadministers the civil monetary penalty program.\n\x0c'


text:
 26.4.2017
 HU
 Az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja
 L 108/29
 A BIZOTTSÁG (EU) 2017/732 VÉGREHAJTÁSI RENDELETE
 (2017. április 25.)
 az egyes gyümölcs- és zöldségfélék behozatali árának meghatározására szolgáló behozatali átalányértékek megállapításáról
 AZ EURÓPAI BIZOTTSÁG,
 tekintettel az Európai Unió működéséről szóló szerződésre,
 tekintettel a mezőgazdasági termékpiacok közös szervezésének létrehozásáról és a 922/72/EGK, a 234/79/EGK, az 1037/2001/EK és az 1234/2007/EK tanácsi rendelet hatályon kívül helyezéséről szóló, 2013. december 17-i 1308/2013/EU európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendeletre (1),
 tekintettel az 1234/2007/EK tanácsi rendeletnek a gyümölcs- és zöldség-, valamint a feldolgozottgyümölcs- és feldolgozottzöldség-ágazatra alkalmazandó részletes szabályainak a megállapításáról szóló, 2011. június 7-i 543/2011/EU bizottsági végrehajtási rendeletre (2) és különösen annak 136. cikke (1) bekezdésére,
 mivel:
 (1)
 Az Uruguayi Forduló többoldalú kereskedelmi tárgyalásai eredményeinek megfelelően az 543/2011/EU végrehajtási rendelet a XVI. mellékletének A. részében szereplő termékek és időszakok tekintetében meghatározza azokat a szempontokat, amelyek alapján a Bizottság rögzíti a harmadik országokból történő behozatalra vonatkozó átalányértékeket.
 (2)
 Az 543/2011/EU végrehajtási rendelet 136. cikke (1) bekezdése alapján a behozatali átalányérték számítására munkanaponként, változó napi adatok figyelembevételével kerül sor. Ezért helyénvaló előírni, hogy e rendelet az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapjában való kihirdetésének napján lépjen hatályba,
 ELFOGADTA EZT A RENDELETET:
 1. cikk
 Az 543/2011/EU végrehajtási rendelet 136. cikkében említett behozatali átalányértékeket e rendelet melléklete határozza meg.
 2. cikk
 Ez a rendelet az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapjában való kihirdetésének napján lép hatályba.
 Ez a rendelet teljes egészében kötelező és közvetlenül alkalmazandó valamennyi tagállamban.
 Kelt Brüsszelben, 2017. április 25-én.
 a Bizottság részéről,
 az elnök nevében,
 Jerzy PLEWA
 főigazgató
 Mezőgazdasági és Vidékfejlesztési Főigazgatóság
 (1) HL L 347., 2013.12.20., 671. o.
 (2) HL L 157., 2011.6.15., 1. o.
 MELLÉKLET
 Az egyes gyümölcs- és zöldségfélék behozatali árának meghatározására szolgáló behozatali átalányértékek
 (EUR/100 kg)
 KN-kód
 Országkód (1)
 Behozatali átalányérték
 0702 00 00
 EG
 288,4
 MA
 98,4
 TR
 122,6
 ZZ
 169,8
 0707 00 05
 MA
 79,4
 TR
 152,9
 ZZ
 116,2
 0709 93 10
 MA
 78,6
 TR
 141,3
 ZZ
 110,0
 0805 10 22 , 0805 10 24 , 0805 10 28
 EG
 51,7
 IL
 80,7
 MA
 50,0
 TR
 71,4
 ZZ
 63,5
 0805 50 10
 AR
 68,9
 TR
 67,0
 ZZ
 68,0
 0808 10 80
 AR
 89,5
 BR
 108,0
 CL
 131,3
 CN
 147,6
 NZ
 152,0
 US
 116,7
 ZA
 80,7
 ZZ
 118,0
 0808 30 90
 AR
 155,6
 CL
 132,6
 CN
 81,4
 ZA
 123,6
 ZZ
 123,3
 (1) Az országoknak a Közösség harmadik országokkal folytatott külkereskedelmére vonatkozó statisztikáról szóló 471/2009/EK európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendeletnek az országok és területek nómenklatúrájának frissítése tekintetében történő végrehajtásáról szóló, 2012. november 27-i 1106/2012/EU bizottsági rendeletben (HL L 328., 2012.11.28., 7. o.) meghatározott nómenklatúrája szerint. A „ZZ” jelentése „egyéb származás”.