text:
 Avis juridique important
 |
 21994A0517(17)
 Overeenkomst tussen de Europese Economische Gemeenschap en de Republiek of Slovenië betreffende de handel in textielprodukten - Protocol A - Protocol B - Protocol C - Proces-verbaal van Overeenstemming - Uitwisseling van nota's Niet-officiële vertaling
 Publicatieblad Nr. L 123 van 17/05/1994 blz. 0608 - 0662 Bijzondere uitgave in het Fins: Hoofdstuk 11 Deel 31 blz. 0610 Bijzondere uitgave in het Zweeds: Hoofdstuk 11 Deel 31 blz. 0610
 AGREEMENT between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia on trade in textile productsTHE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,of the one part, andTHE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA,of the other part,DESIRING to promote, with a view to permanent cooperation and in conditions providing every security for trade, the orderly and equitable development of trade in textile products between the European Economic Community (hereinafter referred to as 'the Community') and the Republic of Slovenia (hereinafter referred to as 'Slovenia'),RESOLVED to take the fullest possible account of the serious economic and social problems at present affecting the textile industry in both importing and exporting countries, and in particular, to eliminate real risks of market disruption on the market of the Community and real risks of disruption to the textile trade of Slovenia,HAVING regard to the Cooperation Agreement between the Community and Slovenia, signed on 5 April 1993, and in particular Article 16 thereof,HAVE DECIDED to conclude this Agreement and to this end have designated as their plenipotentiaries:THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA,WHO HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS:Article 1The present Agreement established the regime applicable to trade of textile products originating in Slovenia listed in Annex I.TITLE I QUANTITATIVE REGIME Article 21. The classification of the products covered by this Agreement is based on the tariff and statistical nomenclature of the Community (hereinafter called the 'combined nomenclature', or in abbreviated form 'CN') and any amendments thereof.Where any decision on classification results in a change of classification practice or a change of category of any product subject to this Agreement the affected products shall follow the trade regime applicable to the practice or category they fall into after such changes.Any amendment to the combined nomenclature (CN) made in accordance with the procedures in force in the Community concerning categories of products covered by this Agreement or any decision relating to the classification of goods shall not have the effect of reducing quantitative limits introduced pursuant to this Agreement.2. The origin of the products covered by this Agreement shall be determined in accordance with the rules in force in the Community.Any amendment to these rules of origin shall be communicated to Slovenia and shall not have the effect of reducing any quantitative limit established pursuant to this Agreement.The procedures for control of the origin of the products referred to above are laid down in Protocol A.Article 31. Subject to the provisions of this Agreement, exports from Slovenia to the Community of products listed in Annex I and originating in Slovenia shall, at the time of entry into force of this Agreement, be free from quantitative limits and measures of equivalent effect. Quantitative limits may subsequently be introduced under conditions specified in Article 8.2. Should quantitative limits be introduced, exports of the textile products made subject to quantitative limits shall be subject to a double-checking system as specified in Protocol A.3. At the time of entry into force of this Agreement, exports of products listed in Annex II, not subject to quantitative limits, shall be subject to the double-checking system referred to in paragraph 2.4. Following consultations in accordance with the procedures set out in Article 14, exports of products in Annex I not subject to quantitative limits, other than those listed in Annex II, may be subject, subsequently to the entry into force of the Agreement, to the double-checking system referred to in paragraph 2 or to a prior surveillance system introduced by the Community.Article 4The Community and Slovenia recognize the special and differential character of re-imports of textile products into the Community after processing in Slovenia as a specific form of industrial and trade cooperation.Should quantitative limits be established under Article 8, provided that they are effected in accordance with the regulations on economic outward processing in force in the Community, these re-imports shall not be subject to these quantitative limits if they are subject to the specific arrangements laid down in Annex III.Article 5Slovenian exports of cottage-industry fabrics woven on hand- or foot-operated looms, garments or other made-up articles obtained manually from such fabrics and of traditional folklore handicraft products shall not be subject to the quantitative limits established under this Agreement, provided that these products originating in Slovenia meet the conditions laid down in Protocol B.Article 61. Imports into the Community of textile products covered by this Agreement shall not be subject to the quantitative limits established under this Agreement, provided that they are declared to be for re-export outside the Community in the same state or after processing, within the framework of the administrative system of control which exists within the Community.However, the release for home use of products imported into the Community under the conditions referred to above shall be subject to the production of an export licence issued by the authorities of Slovenia, and to proof of origin in accordance with the provisions of Protocol A.2. Where the Community authorities ascertain that imports of textile products have been set off against a quantitative limit established under this Agreement, but that the products have subsequently been re-exported outside the Community, the authorities shall inform the Slovenian authorities within four weeks of the quantities involved and authorize imports of identical quantities of the same products, which shall not be set off against the quantitative limit established under this Agreement for the current or the following year, as appropriate.Article 7Should quantitative limits be introduced under Article 8, the following provisions shall apply:1. In any Agreement year advance use of a portion of the quantitative limit established for the following Agreement year is authorized for each category of products up to 5 % of the quantitative limit for the current Agreement year.Amounts delivered in advance shall be deducted from the corresponding quantitative limits established for the following Agreement year.2. Carry-over to the corresponding quantitative limit for the following Agreement year of the amounts not used during any Agreement year is authorized for each category of products up to 9 % of the quantitative limit for the current Agreement year.3. Transfers in respect of categories in Group I shall not be made from any category except as follows:- transfers between categories 1, 2 and 3 may be made up to 7 % of the quantitative limits for the category to which the transfer is made,- transfers between categories 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 may be made up to 7 % of the quantitative limit for the category to which the transfer is made.Transfers into any category in Groups II and III may be made from any category or categories in Groups I, II and III up to 10 % of the quantitative limit for the category to which the transfer is made.4. The table of equivalence applicable to the transfers referred to above is given in Annex I to this Agreement.5. The increase in any category of products resulting from the cumulative application of the provisions in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 above during an Agreement year shall not exceed 17 %.6. Prior notification shall be given by the Slovenian authorities in the event of recourse to the provisions of paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 above, at last 15 days in advance.Article 81. Exports of textile products listed in Annex I to this Agreement may be made subject to quantitative limits on the conditions laid down in the following paragraphs.2. Where the Community finds, under the system of administrative control set up, that the level of imports of products in a given category listed in Annex I originating in Slovenia exceeds, in relation to the preceding year's total imports into the Community from all sources of products in that category, the following rates:- 1 % for categories of products in Group I,- 5 % for categories of products in Group II,- 10 % for categories of products in Groups III,it may request the opening of consultations in accordance with the procedure described in Article 14 of this Agreement, with a view to reaching agreement on an appropriate restraint level for the products in such category.3. Pending a mutually satisfactory solution, Slovenia undertakes to limit exports of the products concerned to the Community or to the region or regions of the Community market specified by the Community for a provisional period of three months from the date on which the request for consultations is made.Such provisional limit shall be established at 25 % of the level of imports reached during the calendar year preceding that in which imports exceeded the level resulting from the application of the formula set out in paragraph 2, and gave rise to the request for consultation, or 25 % of the level resulting from the application of the formula set out in paragraph 2, whichever is the higher.4. Should the Contracting Parties be unable in the course of consultations to reach a satisfactory solution within the period specified in Article 14, the Community shall have the right to introduce a definitive quantitative limit at an annual level not lower than the level resulting from the application of the formula set out in paragraph 2, or 106 % of the level of imports reached during the calendar year preceding that in which imports exceeded the level resulting from the application of the formula set out in paragraph 2 and gave rise to the request for consultations, whichever is the higher.The annual level so fixed shall be revised upwards after consultations in accordance with the procedure refferred to in Article 14, with a view to fulfilling the conditions set out in paragraph 2, should the trend of total imports into the Community of the product in question make this necessary.5. The annual growth rate for the quantitative limits introduced under this Article shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of Protocol C.6. The provisions of this Article shall not apply where the percentages specified in paragraph 2 have been reached as a result of a fall in total imports into the Community, and not as a result of an increase in exports of products originating in Slovenia.7. In the event the provisions of paragraphs 2, 3 and 4, the Community shall authorize the imports of products of the category concerned shipped from Slovenia before the request for consultation was submitted.Should the provisions of paragraph 2 or 4 be applied, Slovenia undertakes to issue export licences for products covered by contracts concluded before the introduction of the quantitative limit, up to the volume of the quantitative limit fixed.8. Up to the date of communication of the statistics referred to in Article 9 (6), the provisions of paragraph 2 of this Article shall apply on the basis of the annual statistics previously communicated by the Community.Article 91. Slovenia shall supply the Commission with precise statistical information on all export licences issued for categories of textile products subject to quantitative limits established under this Agreement or to a double-checking system, expressed in quantities and in terms of value and broken down by Member States of the Community, as well as on all certificates issued by the competent Slovenian authorities for products referred to in Article 5 and subject to the provisions of Protocol B.2. The Community shall likewise transmit to the Slovenian authorities precise statistical information on import authorizations issued by the Community authorities and import statistics for products covered by the system referred to in Article 8 (2).3. The information referred to above shall, for all categories of products, be forwarded before the end of the month following the month to which the statistics relate.4. Upon request by the Community, Slovenia shall supply import statistics for all products covered by Annex I.5. Should it be found on analysis of the information exchanged that there are significant discrepancies between the returns for exports and those for imports, consultations may be initiated in accordance with the procedure specified in Article 14 of this Agreement.6. For the purpose of applying the provisions of Article 8, the Community undertakes to provide the Slovenian authorities before 15 April of each year with the preceding year's statistics on imports of all textile products covered by this Agreement, broken down by supplying country and Community Member State.Article 101. In view of ensuring the effective functioning of this Agreement, the Community and Slovenia agree to cooperate fully in order to prevent, to investigate and to take any necessary legal and/or administrative action against circumvention by transhipment, re-routing, false declaration concerning the country or place of origin, falsification of documents, false declaration concerning fibre content, quantities, description or classification of merchandise and by whatever other means. Accordingly, Slovenia and the Community agree to establish the necessary legal provisions and administrative procedures permitting effective action to be taken against such circumvention, which shall include the adoption of legally binding corrective measures against exporters and/or importers involved.2. Should the Community believe on the basis of information available that the present Agreement is being circumvented, the Community will consult with Slovenia with a view to reaching a mutually satisfactory solution. These consultations will be held as early as possible and at the latest within 30 days from the date of request.3. Pending the results of the consultations referred to in paragraph 2, Slovenia shall, as a precautionary measure, if so requested by the Community, take all necessary measures to ensure that, where sufficient evidence of circumvention is provided, adjustments of quantitative limits established under Article 8 liable to be agreed following the consultations referred to in paragraph 2 may be carried out for the quota year in which the request to open consultations in accordance with paragraph 2 was made, or for the following year if the quota for the current year is exhausted.4. Should the Parties be unable, in the course of the consultation referred to in paragraph 2, to reach a mutually satisfactory solution, the Community shall have the right:(a) where there is sufficient evidence that products originating in Slovenia have been imported in circumvention of the present Agreement, to set off the relevant quantities against the quantitative limits established under Article 8;(b) where sufficient evidence shows that false declaration concerning fibre content, quantities, description or classification of products originating in Slovenia has occured, to refuse to import the products in question;(c) Should it appear that the territory of Slovenia is involved in transhipment or re-routing of products not originating in Slovenia, to introduce quantitative limits against the same products originating in Slovenia if they are not already subject to quantitative limits, or to take any other appropriate measures.5. The Parties agree to establish a system of administrative cooperation to prevent and to address effectively all problems arising from circumvention in accordance with the provisions of Protocol A to this Agreement.Article 111. The quantitative limits established under this Agreement on imports into the Community of textile products of Slovenian origin will not be broken down by the Community into regional shares.2. The Parties shall cooperate in order to prevent sudden and prejudicial changes in traditional trade flows resulting in regional concentration of direct imports into the Community.3. Slovenia shall monitor its exports of products under restraint or surveillance into the Community. Should a sudden and prejudicial change in traditional trade flows arise, the Community will be entitled to request consultations in order to find a satisfactory solution to those problems. Such consultations must be held within 15 working days of their being requested by the Community.4. Slovenia shall endeavour to ensure that exports of textile products subject to quantitative limits into the Community are spaced out as evenly as possible over the year due account being taken in particular of seasonal factors.Article 12In the event of denunciation of this Agreement as provided for in Article 17 (4), the quantitative limits established pursuant to this Agreement shall be reduced on a pro rata temporis basis unless the Contracting Parties decide otherwise by common agreement.Article 13Slovenia and the Community undertake to refrain from discrimination in the allocation of export licences and import authorizations or documents referred to in Protocols A and B.Article 141. Save where it is otherwise provided for in this Agreement, the consultation procedures referred to in this Agreement shall be governed by the following provisions:- any request for consultations shall be notified in writing to the other Contracting Party,- the request for consultations shall be followed, within a reasonable period and in any case not later than 15 days following the notification, by a report setting out the circumstances which, in the opinion of the requesting Party, justify the submission of such a request,- the Contracting Parties shall enter into consultations within one month of notification of the request at the latest, with a view to reaching agreement or a mutually acceptable conclusion within one further month at the latest,- the period of one month referred to above for the purpose of reaching agreement or a mutually acceptable conclusion may be extended by common accord.2. The Community may request consultations in accordance with paragraph 1 when it ascertains that during a particular year of application of the Agreement difficulties arise in the Community or one of its regions due to a sharp and substantial increase, by comparison to the preceding year, in imports of a given category of Group I.3. At the request of either of the Contracting Parties, consultations shall be held on any problems arising from the application of this Agreement. Any consultations held under this Article shall take place in a spirit of cooperation and with a desire to reconcile the differences between the Contracting Parties.TITLE II TARIFF REGIME Article 151. The import into the Community of products listed in Annex V and originating in Slovenia according to the provisions set out in Protocol 1 to the Cooperation Agreement shall be subject to the annual ceilings indicated in that Annex.2. As soon as a ceiling for the import of a category of products has been reached, the Community may reintroduce until the end of the concerned calendar year the levying of the customs duties actually applied in respect of imports of products originating in third countries.TITLE III FINAL PROVISIONS Article 16This Agreement shall apply, on the one hand, to the territories in which the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community is applied and under the conditions laid down in that Treaty and, on the other hand, to the territory of the Republic of Slovenia.Article 171. This Agreement shall enter into force on the first day of the month following the date on which the Parties notify each other of the completion of the procedures necessary for that purpose. It shall be applicable until 31 December 1994. Thereafter, the application of all the provisions of this Agreement shall be extended automatically for a period of one more year up to 31 December 1995, unless either Party notifies the other at least six months before 31 December 1994 that is does not agree with this extension.2. This Agreement shall apply with effect from the date of entry into force of the Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia, signed on 5 April 1993.3. Either Contracting Party may at any time propose modifications to this Agreement.4. Either Contracting Party may at any time denounce the Agreement provided that at least 60 days' notice is given. In that event, the Agreement shall come to an end on the expiry of the period of notice.5. The Contracting Parties agree to enter into consultations not later than six months before the expiration of the present agreement with a view to possibly concluding a new Agreement.6. The Annexes, Protocols, Agreed Minutes and letters exchanged or attached to this Agreement, shall form an integral part thereof.Article 18This Agreement shall be drawn up in two copies in the Danish, Dutch, English, French, German, Greek, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish and Slovenian languages, each of these texts being equally authentic.For the Government of the Republic of SloveniaFor the Council of the European CommunitiesANNEX I PRODUCTS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 1 1. When the constitutive material of the products of categories 1 to 114 is not specifically mentioned, these products are to be taken to be made exclusively of wool or of fine hair, of cotton or of man-made fibres.2. Garments which are not recognizable as being garments for men or boys or as being garments for women or girls are classified with the latter.3. Where the expression 'babies' garments' is used, this is meant to cover garments up to and including commercial size 86.>RUIMTE VOOR DE TABEL>>RUIMTE VOOR DE TABEL>>RUIMTE VOOR DE TABEL>>RUIMTE VOOR DE TABEL>>RUIMTE VOOR DE TABEL>>RUIMTE VOOR DE TABEL>ANNEX II Products without quantitative limits subject to the double-checking system referred to in Article 3 (3) of the Agreement.(The full products descriptions of the categories listed in this Annex are to be found in Annex I to the Agreement.)Category:56789ANNEX III Reimports into the Community, within the meaning of Article 4 of this Agreement, of products listed in the Annex IV shall be subject to the provisions of this Agreement, unless the special provisions below provide otherwise:1. Subject to paragraph 2, only reimports into the Community of products affected by the specific quantitative limits laid down in Annex IV shall be considered reimports within the meaning of Article 4 of the Agreement.2. Reimports of products not covered by Annex IV may be made subject to specific quantitative limits following consultations in accordance with the procedures set out in Article 14 of the Agreement, provided the products concerned are subject to quantitative limits pursuant to the Agreement, to a double-checking system or to surveillance measures.3. Having regard to the interests of both Parties, the Community may at its discretion, or in response to a request under Article 14 of the Agreement:(a) examine the possibility of transferring from one category to another, using in advance or carrying over from one year to the next, portions of specific quantitative limits;(b) consider the possibility of increasing specific quantitative limits.4. However, the Community may apply automatically the flexibility rules set out in paragraph 3 above within the following limits:(a) transfers between categories may not exceed 25 % of the quantity for the category to which the transfer is made;(b) carry-over of a specific quantitative limit from one year to the next may not exceed 13,5 % of the quantity set for the year of actual utilization;(c) advance use of specific quantitative limits from one year to another may not exceed 7,5 % of the quantity set for the year of actual utilization.5. The Community shall inform Slovenia of any measure taken pursuant to the preceding paragraphs.6. The competent authorities in the Community shall debit the specific quantitative limits referred to in paragraph 1 at the time of issue of the prior authorization required by Council Regulation (EEC) No 636/82 which governs economic outward processing arrangements. A specific quantitative limit shall be debited for the year in which a prior authorization is issued.7. A certificate of origin made out by the organizations authorized to do so under Slovenian law shall be issued, in accordance with Protocol A to the Agreement, for all products covered by this Annex. This certificate shall bear a reference to the prior authorization mentioned in paragraph 6 above as evidence that the processing operation it describes has been carried out in Slovenia.8. For the purpose of applying the provisions of Annex V the certificate of circulation EUR1 issued according to the provisions of Protocol 1 of the Cooperation Agreement replaces the certificate of origin mentioned in paragraph 7, bearing the same reference to the prior authorization.9. The Community shall provide Slovenia with the names and addresses of, and specimens of the stamps used by, the competent authorities of the Community which issue the prior authorizations referred to in paragraph 6 above.ANNEX IV (The product descriptions of the categories listed in this Annex are to be found in Annex I to the Agreement) OPT QUOTAS >RUIMTE VOOR DE TABEL>ANNEX V (The product descriptions of the categories listed in this Annex are to be found in Annex I to the Agreement) DIRECT IMPORTS >RUIMTE VOOR DE TABEL>OPT QUOTAS >RUIMTE VOOR DE TABEL>PROTOCOL A TITLE I CLASSIFICATION Article 11. The competent authorities of the Community undertake to inform Slovenia of any changes in the combined nomenclature (CN) before the date of their entry into force in the Community.2. The competent authorities of the Community undertake to inform the competent authorities of Slovenia of any decisions relating to the classification of products subject to the present Agreement, within one month of their adoption at the latest. Such communication shall include:(a) a description of the products concerned;(b) the relevant category and the related CN codes;(c) the reasons which have led to the decision.3. Where a decision on classification results in a change of classification practice or a change of category of any product subject to the Agreement, the competent authorities of the Community shall provide 30 days' notice, from the date of the Community's communication, before the decision is put into effect. Products shipped before the date of entry into effect of the decision shall remain subject to the earlier classification practice, provided that the goods in the question are presented for importation into the Community within 60 days of that date.4. Where a Community decision on classification resulting in a change of classification practice or a change of categorization of any product subject to the Agreement affects a category subject to quantitative limits, the Contracting Parties agree to enter into consultation in accordance with the procedures described in Article 14 of the Agreement with a view to honouring the obligation under the second subparagraph of Article 2 (1) of the Agreement.5. In case of divergent opinions between Slovenia and the competent Community authorities at the point of entry into the Community on the classification of products covered by the present Agreement, classification shall provisionally be based on indications provided by the Community, pending consultations in accordance with Article 14 with a view to reaching agreement on definitive classification of the product concerned.TITLE II ORIGIN Article 21. Products originating in Slovenia for export to the Community in accordance with the arrangements set out in Title I of this Agreement shall be accompanied by a certificate of Slovenian origin conforming to the model annexed to this Protocol.2. The certificate of origin shall be certified by the competent Slovenian authorities if the products in question can be considered products originating in that country within the meaning of the relevant rules in force in the Community.3. However, the products in Group III may be imported into the Community in accordance with the arrangements established by this Agreement on production of a declaration by the exporter on the invoice or other commercial document relating to the products to the effect that the products in question originate in Slovenia within the meaning of the relevant rules in force in the Community.4. The certificate of origin referred to in paragraph 1 shall not be required for import of goods covered by a certificate of circulation EUR 1 or a form EUR 2 issued in accordance with the provisions of Protocol 1 of the Cooperation Agreement.Article 3The certificate of origin shall be issued only on application having been made in writing by the exporter or, under the exporter's responsibility, by his authorized representative. The competent Slovenian authorities shall ensure that the certificate of origin is properly completed and for this purpose they shall call for any necessary documentary evidence or carry out any check which they consider appropriate.Article 4Where different criteria for determining origin are laid down for products falling within the same category, the certificates or declarations of origin must contain a sufficiently detailed description of the goods on the basis of which the certificate was issued or the declaration drawn up.Article 5The discovery of slight discrepancies between the statements made in the certificate of origin and those made in the documents produced to the customs office for the purpose of carrying out the formalities for importing the products shall not ipso facto cast doubt upon the statements in the certificate.TITLE III DOUBLE-CHECKING SYSTEM Section I Exportation Article 61. The competent authorities of Slovenia shall issue an export licence in respect of all consignments from Slovenia of textile products subject to any definitive or provisional quantitative limits established under Article 8 of the Agreement, up to the relevant quantitative limits as may be modified by Articles 7, 10 and 12 of the Agreement, as well as of all consignments of textile products subject to a double-checking system without quantitative limits as provided for in Article 3 (3) and (4) of the Agreement.Article 71. For products subject to quantitative limits under this Agreement the export licence shall conform to Model 1 annexed to this Protocol and it shall be valid for exports throughout the customs territory to which the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community applies. However, where the Community has made recourse to the provisions of Articles 8 and 11 of the Agreement in accordance with the provisions of the Agreed Minute No 1, or to the Agreed Minute No 2, the textile products covered by the export licences can only be put into free circulation in the region(s) of the Community indicated in those licences.2. Where quantitative limits have been introduced pursuant to this Agreement, each export licence must certify inter alia that the quantity of the product in question has been set off against the quantitative limit established for the category of the products concerned and shall only cover one category of products subject to quantitative limits. It may be used for one or more consignments of the products in question.3. For products subject to a double-checking system without quantitative limits the export licence shall conform to Model 2 annexed to this Protocol. It shall only cover one category of products and may be used for one or more consignments of the products in question.Article 8The competent authorities of the Community must be informed immediately of the withdrawal or modification of any export licence already issued.Article 91. Exports of textile products subject to quantitative limits pursuant to this Agreement shall be set off against the quantitative limits established for the year in which the shipment of the goods has been effected even if the export licence is issued after such shipment.2. For the purpose of applying paragraph 1, shipment of the goods is considered to have taken place on the date of their loading onto the exporting aircraft, vehicule or vessel.Article 10The presentation of an export licence, in application of Article 12 hereafter, shall be effected not later than 31 March of the year following that in which the goods covered by the licence have been shipped.Section II Importation Article 11Importation into the Community of textile products subject to quantitative limits or to a double-checking system pursuant to this Agreement shall be subject to the presentation of an import authorization.Article 121. The competent authorities of the Community shall issue the import authorization referred to in Article 11 above, within five working days of the presentation by the importer of the original of the corresponding export licence.2. The import authorizations concerning products subject to quantitative limits under this Agreement shall be valid for six months from the date of their issue for imports throughout the customs territory to which the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community is applied. However, where the Community has recourse to the provisions of Articles 8 and 11 of the Agreement in accordance with the provisions of the Agreed Minute No 1, or to the Agreed Minute No 2, the products covered by the import licences can only be put into free circulation in the region(s) of the Community indicated in those licences.3. The import authorizations for products subject to a double-checking system without quantitative limits shall be valid for six months from the date of their issue for imports throughout the customs territory to which the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community is applicable.4. The competent authorities of the Community shall cancel the import authorization already issued whenever the corresponding export licence has been withdrawn.However, if the competent authorities of the Community are notified of the withdrawal or the cancellation of the export licence only after the importation of the products into the Community, the relevant quantities shall be set off against the quantitative limits established for the category and the quota year concerned.Article 131. If the competent authorities of the Community find that the total quantities covered by export licences issued by the competent authorities of Slovenia for a particular category in any year exceed the quantitative limit established in accordance with Article 8 of the Agreement for that category, as may be modified by Articles 7, 10 and 12 of the Agreement, the said authorities may suspend the further issue of import authorizations. In this event, the competent authorities of the Community shall immediately inform the authorities of Slovenia and the special consultation procedure set out in Article 14 of the Agreement shall be initiated forthwith.2. Exports of products of Slovenian origin subject to quantitative limits or a double-checking system and not covered by Slovenian export licences issued in accordance with the provisions of this Protocol may be refused an import authorization by the competent Community authorities.However, without prejudice to Article 10 of the Agreement if the import of such products is allowed into the Community by the competent authorities of the Community, the quantities involved shall not be set off against the appropriate quantitative limits established pursuant to this Agreement, without the express agreement of the competent authorities of Slovenia.TITLE IV FORM AND PRODUCTION OF EXPORT CERTIFICATES AND CERTIFICATES OF ORIGIN, AND COMMON PROVISIONS CONCERNING EXPORTS TO THE COMMUNITY Article 141. The export licence and the certificate of origin may comprise additional copies duly indicated as such. They shall be made out in English or French. If they are completed by hand, entries must be in ink and in printed script.These documents shall measure 210 × 297 mm. The paper used shall be white writing paper, sized, not containing mechanical pulp, and weighing not less than 25 g/m2. If the documents have several copies only the top copy, which is the original, shall be printed with the guilloche pattern background. This copy shall be clearly marked as 'original' and the other copies as 'copies'. Only the original shall be accepted by the competent authorities of the Community as being valid for the purpose of export to the Community in accordance with the provision of the Agreement.2. Each document shall bear a standardized serial number, whether or not printed, by which it can be identified.This number shall be composed of the following elements:- two letters identifying the exporting country as follows: SI,- two letters identifying the intended Member State of customs clearance as follows:BL = Benelux,DE = Federal Republic of Germany,DK = Denmark,EL = Greece,ES = Spain,FR = France,GB = United Kingdom,IE = Ireland,IT = Italy,PT = Portugal,- a one-digit number identifying quota year, corresponding to the last figure in the respective year, e.g. 3 for 1993,- a two-digit number from 01 to 99, identifying the particular issuing office concerned in the exporting country,- a five-digit number running consecutively from 00001 to 99999 allocated to the intended Member State of customs clearance.Article 15The export licence and the certificate of origin may be issued after the shipment of the products to which they relate. In such cases they must bear the endorsement 'délivré a posteriori' or the endorsement 'issued retrospectively'.Article 161. In the event of a theft, loss or destruction of an export licence or a certificate of origin, the exporter may apply to the competent Slovenian authorities which issued the document for a duplicate to be made out on the basis of the export documents in his possession. The duplicate of any such certificate or licence so issued shall bear the endorsement 'duplicata' or 'duplicate'.2. The duplicate shall bear the date of the original export licence or certificate of origin.TITLE V ADMINISTRATIVE COOPERATION Article 17The Community and Slovenia shall cooperate closely in the implementation of the provisions of this Protocol. To this end, contacts and exchanges or views, including on technical matters, shall be facilitated by both Parties.Article 18In order to ensure the correct application of this Protocol, the Community and Slovenia offer mutual assistance for the checking of the authenticity and the accuracy of export licences and certificates of origin issued or of any declarations made within the terms of this Protocol.Article 19Slovenia shall transmit to the Commission of the European Communities the names and addresses of the authorities competent to issue and verify the export licences and the certificates of origin, together with specimens of the stamps used by these authorities and specimen signatures of officials responsible for signing the export licences and the certificates of origin. Slovenia shall also notify the Community of any change in this information.Article 201. Subsequent verification of certificates of origin or export licences shall be carried out at random, or whenever the competent Community authorities have reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of the certificate or licence or as to the accuracy of the information regarding the true origin of the products in question.2. In such cases, the competent authorities in the Community shall return the certificate of origin or the export licence or a copy thereof to the competent Slovenian authorities, giving, where appropriate, the reasons of form or substance which justify an enquiry. If the invoice has been submitted, such invoice or a copy thereof shall be attached to the certificate or to the licence or their copies. The authorities shall also forward any information that has been obtained suggesting that the particulars given on the said certificate or licence are inaccurate.3. The provisions of paragraph 1 above shall also apply to subsequent verifications of the declarations of origin provided for in Article 2 of this Protocol.4. The results of the subsequent verifications carried out in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2 above shall be communicated to the competent authorities of the Community within three months at the latest. The information communicated shall indicate whether the disputed certificate, licence or declaration, applies to the goods actually exported and whether these goods are eligible for export under the arrangements established by the Agreement. The information shall also include, at the request of the Community, copies of all the documentation necessary to fully determine the facts, and in particular the true origin of the goods.Should such verifications reveal systematic irregularities in the use of declarations of origin, the Community may subject imports of the products in question to the provisions of Article 2 (1) of this Protocol.5. For the purpose of subsequent verification of certificates of origin, copies of the certificates as well as any export documents referring to them shall be kept for at least two years by the competent Slovenian authorities.6. Recourse to the random verification procedure specified in this Article must not constitute an obstacle to the release for home use of the products in question.Article 211. Where the verification procedure referred to in Article 20 or where information available to the competent authorities of the Community or of Slovenia indicates or appears to indicate that the provisions of this Agreement are being circumvented or infringed, the two Contracting Parties shall cooperate closely and with the appropriate urgency in order to prevent any such circumvention or infringement.2. To this end, the competent authorities of Slovenia shall, on their own initiative or at the request of the Community, carry out appropriate inquiries, or arrange for such inquiries to be carried out, concerning operations which are, or appear to the Community to be, in circumvention or infringement of this Protocol. Slovenia shall communicate the results, of these inquiries to the Community, including any other pertinent information enabling the cause of the circumvention or infringement, including the true origin of the goods to be determined.3. By agreement between the Community and Slovenia, officials designated by the Community may be present at the inquiries referred to in paragraph 2 above.4. Pursuant to the cooperation referred to in paragraph 1 above, the competent authorities of the Community and Slovenia shall exchange any information considered by either Contracting Party to be of use in preventing circumvention or infringement of the provisions of this Agreement. These exchanges may include information on the production of textile, products in Slovenia and on the trade in the type of products covered by this Agreement between Slovenia and third countries, particularly where the Community has reasonable grounds to consider that the products in question may be in transit across the territory of Slovenia prior to their importation into the Community. This information may include at the request of the Community copies of all available relevant documentation.5. Where sufficient evidence shows that the provisions of this Protocol have been circumvented or infringed, the competent authorities of Slovenia and the Community may agree to take the measures set out in Article 10 (4) of the Agreement, and any other measures as are necessary to prevent a recurrence of such circumvention or infringement.Annex to Protocol A, Article 2 (1) CERTIFICATE OF ORIGIN >REFERENTIE NAAR EEN FILM>Annex to Protocol A, Article 7 (1): Model 1 EXPORT LICENCE FOR PRODUCTS SUBJECT TO QUANTITATIVE LIMITS >REFERENTIE NAAR EEN FILM>Annex to Protocol A, Article 7 (3): Model 2 EXPORT LICENCE FOR PRODUCTS SUBJECT NOT TO QUANTITATIVE LIMITS BUT DOUBLE-CHECKING >REFERENTIE NAAR EEN FILM>PROTOCOL B referred to in Article 5 Cottage industry and folklore products originating in Slovenia1. The exemption provided for in Article 5 in respect of cottage industry products shall apply to the following types of product only:(a) fabrics woven on looms operated solely by hand or foot, being fabrics of a kind traditionally made in the cottage industry of Slovenia;(b) garments or other textile articles of a kind traditionally made in the cottage industry of Slovenia obtained manually from the fabrics referred to above and sewn exclusively by hand without the aid of any machine;(c) traditional folklore products of Slovenia made by hand, in a list to be agreed between the Community and Slovenia.Exemption shall be granted in respect only of products covered by a certificate conforming to the specimen attached to this Protocol and issued by the competent authorities in Slovenia. These certificates must indicate the reasons justifying their issuance. The competent authorities of the Community will accept them after having checked that the products concerned have fulfilled the conditions established in this Protocol. The certificates concerning the products envisaged in (c) above must bear a stamp 'FOLKLORE' marked clearly. In the case of a difference of opinion between the Parties concerning the nature of these products, consultations shall be held within one month in order to resolve these differences.Should imports of any product covered by this Protocol reach proportions liable to cause problems within the Community, consultations with Slovenia shall be initiated as soon as possible, with a view to resolving the situation by the adoption if necessary of a quantitative limit, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 14 of this Agreement.2. The provisions of Titles IV and V of Protocol A shall apply mutatis mutandis to the products covered by paragraph 1 of this Protocol.Annex to Protocol B CERTIFICATE OF COTTAGE INDUSTRY AND FOLKLORE PRODUCTS >REFERENTIE NAAR EEN FILM>PROTOCOL C The annual growth rate for the quantitative limits which may be introduced under Article 8 of the Agreement for the products covered by the Agreement shall be fixed by Agreement between the Parties in accordance with the consultation procedures established in Article 14 of the Agreement.Agreed Minute No 1 In the context of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia on trade in textile and clothing products, initialled at Brussels on 23 July 1993, the Parties agreed that Article 8 of the Agreement does not preclude the Community, if the conditions are fulfilled, from applying the safeguard measures for one or more of its regions in conformity with the principles of the internal market.In such an event, Slovenia shall be informed in advance of the relevant provisions of Protocol A to the Agreement to be applied, as appropriate.For the Government of the Republic of SloveniaFor the Council of the European CommunitiesAgreed Minute No 2 Notwithstanding Article 11 (1) of this Agreement, for imperative technical or administrative reasons or to find a solution to economic problems resulting from regional concentration of imports, or in order to combat circumvention and fraud of the provisions of this Agreement, the Community will establish for a limited period of time a specific management system in conformity with the principles of the internal market.However, if the Parties are unable to reach a satisfactory solution during the consultations provided for in Article 11 (3), Slovenia undertakes, if so requested by the Community, to respect temporary export limits for one or more regions of the Community. In such a case, these limits shall not preclude the importation into the region(s) concerned of products which were shipped from Slovenia on the basis of export licences obtained before the date of formal notification to Slovenia by the Community about the introduction of the above limits.The Community shall inform Slovenia of the technical and administrative measures, such as defined in the attached note verbale, that need to be introduced by both Parties in order to implement the above paragraphs in conformity with the principles of the internal market.For the Government of the Republic of SloveniaFor the Council of the European CommunitiesAgreed Minute No 3 In the context of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia on trade in textile and clothing products, initialled at Brussels on 23 July 1993, the Parties agreed that Slovenia shall endeavour not to deprive certain regions of the Community which have traditionally had relatively small shares of Community quotas of imports of products serving as inputs for their processing industry.The Community and Slovenia further agreed to hold consultations, should the need arise, in order to avert any problems which might occur in this respect.For the Government of the Republic of SloveniaFor the Council of the European CommunitiesAgreed Minute No 4 In the context of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia on trade in textile and clothing products, initialled at Brussels on 23 July 1993, Slovenia agreed that, from the date of request for and pending the consultations referred to in Article 11 (3), it shall cooperate by not issuing export licences that would further aggravate the problems resulting from the regional concentration of direct imports into the Community.For the Government of the Republic of SloveniaFor the Council of the European CommunitiesExchange of notes The Directorate-General for External Economic Relations of the Commission of the European Communities presents its compliments to the Ministry of Economic Relations and Development of the Republic of Slovenia and has the honour to refer to the Agreement on textile products between Slovenia and the Community initialled at Brussels on 23 July 1993.The Directorate-General wishes to inform the Ministry that whilst awaiting the completion of the necessary procedures for the conclusion and the coming into force of the Agreement, the Community is prepared to allow the provisions of the Agreement to apply de facto from the date of entry into force of the Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia, signed on 5 April 1993. This is on the understanding that either Party may at any time terminate this de facto application of the Agreement provided that 120 days' notice is given.The Directorate-General for External Economic Relations would be grateful if the Ministry would confirm its agreement to the foregoing.The Directorate-General for External Economic Relations avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the Ministry of Economic Relations and Development of the Republic of Slovenia the assurance of its highest consideration.Exchange of notes The Ministry of Economic Relations and Development of the Republic of Slovenia presents its compliments to the Directorate-General for External Economic Relations of the Commission of the European Communities and has the honour to refer to the Agreement on textile products between Slovenia and the Community initialled at Brussels on 23 July 1993.The Ministry of Economic Relations and Development of the Republic of Slovenia wishes to confirm to the Directorate-General that whilst awaiting the completion of the necessary procedures for the conclusion and the coming into force of the Agreement, the Government of the Republic of Slovenia is prepared to allow the provisions of the Agreement to apply de facto from the date of entry into force of the Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia signed on 5 April 1993. This is on the understanding that either Party may at any time terminate this de facto application of the Agreement provided that 120 days' notice is given.The Ministry of Economic Relations and Development of the Republic of Slovenia avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the Directorate-General for External Economic Relations of the Commission of the European Communities the assurance of its highest consideration.Agreed Minute No 5 In the course of the negotiations for the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia on trade in textile and clothing products held in Brussels on 14 and 15 July 1993, the two Parties agreed to hold consultations during the last quarter of 1993 in order to assess, on the ground of available import statistics, the opportunity to extend the double-checking provisions and the tariff regime provided for by Annexes II and V of the Agreement to categories 1, 2, 3, 15, 16 and 67.For the Government of the Republic of SloveniaFor the Council of the European CommunitiesAgreed Minute No 6 In the context of the negotiations of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia on trade in textile and clothing products held in Brussels on 14 and 15 July 1993, it was agreed that, should a cumulation of origin be introduced by the Community for the territories and Republics of the former Yugoslavia, the Parties will hold consultations to review the relevant provisions of the Agreement.For the Government of the Republic of SloveniaFor the Council of the European Communities


type: wikipedia

text:
Niiluse akaatsia (ka araabia akaatsia; teaduslik ladinakeelne nimetus Acacia nilotica, sünonüüm Acacia arabica) on liblikõieliste sugukonda akaatsia perekonda kuuluv puu või põõsas.
 Levik
 On levinud troopilises Aafrikas, Egiptuses, Siinai poolsaarel, Iisraelis, Ees-Aasias, Afganistanis, Tseilonil, kultiveeritakse ka Indias, Kesk-Sahara oaasides ja Brasiilias. Indias kasvab ka looduslikult niiluse akaatsia alamliik Acacia nilotica indica.
 Kirjeldus
 Tihe, laiuv, tavaliselt kuni 12, harva kuni 25 meetrit kõrge põõsas või puu. Koor sile, maapinna juures ka pikilõhedega. Lehed väikesed ja suhteliselt ümarad. Õied väikesed, kollased, kaunad hallikad ja seemnete vahelt kitsenenud.
 Ökoloogia
 Hea kuivataluvusega, kuid ei karda ka üleujutusi.Vajab valgusrikast kasvukohta. Aafrikas ja Austraalias kohati väga arvukas, võib moodustada tihedaid okastihnikuid. Mullastiku suhtes vähenõudlik, mäestikes kasvab kuni 1300 meetri kõrgusel. Temperatuuri suhtes subtroopilise taime kohta samuti vähenõudlik. Seenhaigustest on olulisemad Ctyospora acaciae, Diatryphe acaciae, Diplodia acaciae, Fomes badius, F. endotheius, F. fastuosus, F. rimosus, Fusicoccum indicum, Phyllactinia acaciae, Ravenelia acaciae-arabicae, Septogloeum acaciae, Septoria mortolensis ja Sphaerostilbe acaciae. Kindlaks on tehtud umbes 20 putukaliiki, mis toituvad ainult niiluse akaatsial.
 Majanduslik tähtsus
 Niiluse akaatsia tüvest saadavat vaiku tarvitatakse värvi- ja trükitööstuses. Noored kaunad ja koor sisaldavad kuni 20% parkainet tanniini. Seda kasutatakse tindi valmistamiseks ja hevea lateksi kiiremaks koaguleerimiseks. Koorest saadakse ka kiudu. Puit väga kõva, sellest valmistatakse vastupidavaid õlipresse, riisipuhastamise veskeid jms, puitu kasutatakse ka kütteks. Oluline funktsioon on niiluse akaatsial ka lakitäi peremeestaimena. Lõuna-Aafrikas on ta ka sageli soovimatu võsastumise põhjustaja ja umbrohi.
 Suulud tarvitavad koort köharavimina, chipid arvavad juurtel olevat tuberkuloosivastase toime. Masaide arvates omab ka teatud psühhofarmakoloogilist mõju (annab julgust).
 Kultuuriline tähtsus
 Mõnede teadlaste arvates oli põlev põõsas Vanas Testamendis, milles jumal end Moosesele ilmutas, niiluse akaatsia, ning leegid akaatsia parasiit Loranthus acaciae.
 Akaatsiad


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 8.1.2005
 SL
 Uradni list Evropske unije
 C 6/2
 SODBA SODIŠČA
 (drugi senat)
 z dne 11. november 2004
 v združenih zadevah C-183/02 P in C-187/02 P: Daewoo Electronics Manufacturing España SA (Demesa) (C-183/02 P) in Territorio Histórico de Álava-Diputación Foral de Álava (C-187/02 P) proti Komisiji Evropskih skupnosti (1)
 (Pritožba - Državne pomoči - Davčni ukrepi - Zaupanje v pravo - Novi razlogi)
 (2005/C 6/03)
 Jezik postopka: španščina
 V združenih zadevah C-183/02 P in C-187/02 P, Daewoo Electronics Manufacturing España SA (Demesa), s sedežem v Vitorii (Španija) (odvetnika: A. Creus Carreras in B. Uriarte Valiente) (C-183/02 P), Territorio Histórico de Álava-Diputación Foral de Álava (odvetniki: A. Creus Carreras, B. Uriarte Valiente in M. Bravo-Ferrer Delgado)(C-187/02 P), ob intervenciji Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco (odvetnik: E. Garayar Gutiérrez), druge stranke v postopku so bile: Komisija Evropskih skupnosti (zastopniki: F. Santaolalla Gadea in J.L.Buendía Sierra), Asociación Nacional de Fabricantes de Electrodomésticos de Línea Blanca (ANFEL), s sedežem v Madridu (Španija), in Conseil européen de la construction d'appareils domestiques (CECED), s sedežem v Bruslju (Belgija), zaradi dveh pritožb na podlagi člena 49 Statuta ES Sodišča, vloženih 15. in 16. maja 2002, je Sodišče (drugi senat) v sestavi C.W.A. Timmermans, predsednik senata, C. Gulmann (poročevalec), sodnik, in N. Colneric, sodnica, generalna pravobranilka: J. Kokott, sodni tajnik: Múgica Arzamendi, glavna administratorka, dne 11. novembra 2004 razglasilo sodbo, katere izrek se glasi, kot sledi:
 1.
 Zadevi C-183/02 P in C-187/02 P se združita zaradi izdaje skupne sodbe.
 2.
 Pritožbi se zavrneta.
 3.
 Tožeče stranke nosijo lastne stroške in stroške, ki jih je priglasila Komisija Evropskih skupnosti.
 4.
 La Comunidad del País Vasco nosi lastne stroške.
 (1) UL C 180, 27.7.2002.


type: other

text:
Avocatul Neacșu: Pentru cei condamnați definitiv, în momentul de față, decizia CCR nu va produce niciun efect - Gândul
 Publicat: 2019.07.03 17:51
 Avocatul Neacșu: Pentru cei condamnați definitiv, în momentul de față, decizia CCR nu va produce niciun efect
 „Din punctul meu de vedere, așa cum am spus de mai multe ori, pentru cei care au fost condamnați definitiv, în momentul de față, decizia nu va produce absolut niciun efect. Deci pentru cei care au fost judecați în apel de completele de 5 și în momentul de față au o decizie definitivă pe care, eventual, și o execută această decizie a CCR e mult prea tardivă și nu va produce niciun efect”, a declarat, pentru MEDIAFAX, Adrian Toni Neacșu.
 „Un dosar, este vorba de Liviu Dragnea. Până la urmă, problema aceasta a completelor de 3, a lipsei de specialitate a judecătorilor a fost invocată ca motiv de apel chiar în dosarul în care Liviu Dragnea a fost condamnat. Acolo nouă ni s-a respins acest motiv de apel și exact pe aceleași argumente a fost admis de CCR ca un conflict juridic de natură constituțională. Asta înseamnă, pe de o parte, că noi am avut dreptate și c, în mod normal acel motiv de apel trebuia admis de completul de 5, iar, pe de altă parte, mai înseamnă că pentru toți cei care executa în baza deciziei definitive a completului de 5, decizia CCR este mult prea tardivă și nu va produce niciun efect. Nu au la dispozitie niciun remediu procedural, nicio cale extraordinară de atac prin care să se poata anula hotărârea”, a completat, pentru MEDIAFAX, avocatul.
 Adrian Toni Neacșu a precizat că nu poate fi luată în considerare nici varianta unei contestații în anulare, așa cum au fost depuse după decizia CCR privind completurile de 5. „Nu, contestația în anulare vizează întotdeauna numai decizia instanței de apel, neregulile de la instanța de apel, ori noi am invocat nereguli în ceea ce privește compunerea instanței de fond, deci nu pot face contestație în anulare, iar revizuirea vizează doar situația în care se admite o excepție de neconstituționalitate, în propriul meu dosar, ceea ce iarăși nu e cazul pentru că vorbim de un conflict jurdic de natură constituțională. Acestea sunt singurele căi extraordinare pe care le poate face cineva care are decizie definitivă. Concluzia este că nu se aplică”, a declarat apărătorul.
 Întrebat care sunt dosarele importante care pot fi vizate de decizia CCR, Adrian Toni Neacșu a precizat: „Sunt vizate sau o să se aplice tuturor dosarelor care, în momentul de față, dosarele judecate la primă instanță de completele de 3 ale ÎCCJ. Deci toate dosarele în care nu s-a formulat apel, deci s-a dat o hotărâre, dar nu s-a formulat apel, toate dosarele care se află încă în judecata apelului, precum și toate dosarele care se află în momentul de față în judecata de fond la completurile de 3. Dacă se află în apel, se va admite apelul și se va trimite dosarul spre rejudecare unui complet legal constituit”.
 Tags: adrian toni neac uccr


text:
 13.2.2010
 PL
 Dziennik Urzędowy Unii Europejskiej
 C 37/44
 Skarga wniesiona w dniu 7 grudnia 2009 r. — MEDA Pharma przeciwko OHIM — Nycomed (ALLERNIL)
 (Sprawa T-492/09)
 2010/C 37/63
 Język skargi: niemiecki
 Strony
 Strona skarżąca: MEDA Pharma GmbH & Co. KG (Bad Homburg, Niemcy) (przedstawiciele: adwokaci G. Würtenberger i R. Kunze)
 Strona pozwana: Urząd Harmonizacji w ramach Rynku Wewnętrznego (znaki towarowe i wzory)
 Stroną postępowania przed Izbą Odwoławczą była również: Nycomed GmbH (Konstancja, Niemcy)
 Żądania strony skarżącej
 —
 stwierdzenie nieważności decyzji Czwartej Izby Odwoławczej z dnia 29 września 2009 r. w postępowaniu R 1386/2007-4 dotyczącym sprzeciwu opartego na zarejestrowanym w Niemczech znaku towarowym nr 1 042 583„ALLERGODIL” wniesionego wobec europejskiej części rejestracji międzynarodowej nr 845 934„ALLERNIL”;
 —
 obciążenie OHIM kosztami postępowania.
 Zarzuty i główne argumenty
 Wnoszący o rozszerzenie ochrony: Nycomed GmbH
 Znak towarowy będący przedmiotem wniosku o rozszerzenie ochrony:„ALLERNIL” dla towarów z klasy 5 (rejestracja międzynarodowa wskazująca Wspólnotę Europejską nr 845 934)
 Właściciel znaku towarowego lub oznaczenia, na które powołano się w sprzeciwie: strona skarżąca
 Znak towarowy lub oznaczenie, na które powołano się w sprzeciwie: zarejestrowany w Niemczech słowny znak towarowy nr 1 042 583„ALLERGODIL” dla towarów z klasy 5
 Decyzja Wydziału Sprzeciwów: oddalenie sprzeciwu
 Decyzja Izby Odwoławczej: oddalenie odwołania
 Podniesione zarzuty:
 —
 naruszenie art. 8 ust. 1 lit. b) rozporządzenia (WE) nr 207/2009 (1) ze względu na nieodpowiednie zastosowanie przepisów prawa znaków towarowych w zakresie prawdopodobieństwa wprowadzenia w błąd;
 —
 naruszenie art. 75 rozporządzenia nr 207/2009 ze względu na brak uzasadnienia zaskarżonej decyzji.
 (1) Rozporządzenie Rady (WE) nr 207/2009 z dnia 26 lutego 2009 r. w sprawie wspólnotowego znaku towarowego (Dz.U. L 78, s. 1)


text:
A bíróságon a sor, hogy tegyen a rasszizmus ellen - A TASZ jelenti
 2013. augusztus 2. péntek, 9:24
 Miszori bíró tanácsának nincs könnyű dolga. Augusztus 6-án elsőfokon ítéletet fog hirdetni a magyar romák ellen 2008-2009-ben elkövetett rasszista bűncselekmény-sorozat vádlottjai ellen zajló eljárásban. A dolga nem az akta terjedelme miatt annyira nehéz, hanem azért, mert a nyomozó hatóságok az eljárás során visszatérően siralmas munkát végeztek. Eleve, nyolc helyszínen történt hasonló támadás és négy halálos áldozat kellett ahhoz, hogy a cselekmények közötti összefüggést és az ebből logikusan következő rasszista jelleget a rendőrség elkezdje kapizsgálni. A tatárszentgyörgyi helyszínelés során történt rendőri mulasztásokat még az Országos Rendőr-főkapitány is elismerte. A gyanúsítottak elfogásának és a gyilkosságokhoz használt fegyverek tárolásának helyszínén végzett házkutatást és szemlét a bírósági tanácselnök döbbenetesnek nevezte. És még sorolhatnánk.
 A nyomozás anyagainak hiányosságait kell – a büntető tárgyalás szigorú eljárási keretei között – megpróbálni valahogy korrigálni. Többek között ez az oka annak, hogy 28 hónapig tartott az elsőfokú tárgyalás.
 Persze még egy nagyon alapos és jogilag tökéletesen alátámasztott ítélettel sem lehet minden elmulasztott hatósági cselekményt – az állam felelőssége szempontjából - korrigálni. A Budapest Környéki Törvényszéknek nem dolga például választ adni arra a kérdésre, hogy vannak-e más személyek, és kik azok, akiknek a vádlottak padján kellene ülniük. Minden bizonnyal nem fogja ítéletében azt sem kimondani a törvény őre, hogy több áldozat életét nagy valószínűséggel meg lehetett volna menteni, ha a Nemzetbiztonsági Hivatal a tőle elvárható alapossággal és szakmaisággal kezeli a bűncselekmény-sorozatot. Neki nem ez a feladata, hanem az, hogy a vádhatóság által elé állított személyek bűnösségéről vagy ártatlanságáról döntsön.
 A bűnösség megállapítása esetén arról azonban a bíróság tud és kell is állást foglaljon, hogy az embertelen elkövetőknek mi volt az indítéka. A bíróság válaszút előtt áll. Ha világosan fogalmaz, sokat tehet a jövőbeli hasonló gyilkosságok ellen; ha maszatol, azzal hozzájárul a hazai rasszizmus további elkendőzéséhez.
 A rasszista bűncselekmények társadalmi hatásáról
 A tét nagy. A romákkal szembeni előítéletesség és az ebből fakadó erőszak ugyanis továbbra is az egyik legsúlyosabb emberi jogi probléma Magyarországon. A társadalom és következésképpen a jogalkalmazók hozzáállása hazánk legnagyobb lélekszámú, hátrányos helyzetű kisebbsége vonatkozásában szégyenletes módon finoman szólva nem javult a 2008-2009-ben zajlott rasszista bűncselekménysorozat óta. Pedig mi más lehetne intőbb jel, mint egy hat ember halálát és számos sérültet okozó gyilkosságsorozat, amelyben az elkövetőknek semmi más vezérlőelvük nem volt a konkrét áldozatok kiválasztásában, mint az, hogy utóbbiak milyen bőrszínnel születtek?
 Az előítéletes indítékkal elkövetett bűncselekmények (vagyis a gyűlölet-bűncselekmények) elkövetői az áldozatot a személyiségének valamely lényegi vonása (kisebbséghez tartozása, bőrszíne, szexuális orientációja, stb) miatt támadják. Így az ilyen cselekmények a konkrét sértetten túl egy egész csoportban erősíthetik a kirekesztettség és a félelem érzését. Ezáltal a teljes társadalomra is hatással vannak a rasszista bűncselekmények: növelik a feszültséget a társadalmi csoportok között - azt üzenik, hogy a kisebbséghez tartózóknak jó okuk van rettegni.
 A romák elleni sorozatgyilkosság hatása iskolapéldája ennek: tovább fokozta a magyarországi romák kirekesztettségét és a romák között a kirekesztettség érzését. Elég, ha a Miskolcon és Sajóbábonyban 2009-ben, félelemből illetve védekezésből elkövetett erőszakos cselekményekre gondolunk, amelyek nagy valószínűséggel nem következtek volna be, ha a hazai roma közösségek nincsenek abban az időben a sorozatgyilkosságok miatt traumatizált állapotban. Az pedig az ország szégyene, hogy ezekben a szélsőségesek ellen elkövetett erőszakos cselekmények miatti ügyekben a roma elkövetők ellen magyarellenes gyűlölet-bűncselekmény miatt folyik eljárás.
 A Budapest Környéki Bíróság most tehet a kirekesztés ellen, ha kellő súlyt ad ítéletének indokolásában a rasszista indíték kifejtésének és elítélésének. Ha ezt elmulsztja, még rátesz egy lapáttal, egyben szembemegy a európai emberi jogi felfogással. Strasbourg-ban már nyilvánvalóak a hazai állapotok, a rasszizmus kirívó társadalmi jelenléte. Erre legutóbb a Magyar Gárdát feloszlató helyes bírói döntés is példa, ahol a bíróság értékelte a nemzetközi szervezetek lesújtó megállapításait a romák hazai kirekesztéséről. (Vona v. Hungary, §§26-28)
 Mit vár el a strasbourgi bíróság?
 A gyűlölet-bűncselekmények az emberi méltóságot és az egyenlőség elvét a legszélsőségesebb módon támadó cselekmények. A strasbourgi székhelyű Emberi Jogok Európai Bírósága (EJEB) a 2000-es évek közepétől fejlesztette ki a gyűlölet-bűncselekményekre adott állami válaszokkal kapcsolatos esetjogát. A Nachova v. Bulgária ügyben (2005) egy bolgár rendőr letartóztatás közben lelőtt két roma férfit. A bíróság nem hagyott semmi kétséget afelől, hogy a tagállamoknak jogi kötelessége egy bűncselkmény rasszista motivációjának felderítése és kimondása.
 “Erőszakos cselekmények nyomozása során a tagállami hatóságokra az a többlet kötelezettség hárul, hogy minden ésszerű lépést megtegyenek a rasszista indíték feltárására illetve annak megállapítására, hogy az eseményekben etnikai gyűlölet vagy előítélet játszott-e bármilyen szerepet. Ennek elmulasztása, továbbá a rasszista gyűlöletből elkövetett erőszak és az ilyen motivációt nélkülöző cselekmények azonosként kezelése azzal ér fel, mintha a tagállam szemet hunyna az alapvető jogokat különösen romboló esetek felett. A hatóságok részéről különböző esetek különbözőként kezelésének elmulasztása a 14. cikk igazolhatatlan megsértésével járhat.” (Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria, Grand Chamber, §§160)
 A 2007-es Secic v. Horvátország ítéletében az EJEB kiterjesztette ezt a hatóságokat terhelő kötelezettséget olyan esetekre is, amikor nem állam nevében eljáró személy, hanem magánszemély követi el az előítélet által motivált bűncselekményt.
 A Fedorchenko és Lozenko v. Ukrajna ügyben a 2012. szeptemberében született strasbourgi ítélet a bírósági szakra is kiterjeszti a fenti pozitív állami kötelezettséget. Ukrajnában 2001 őszén három ember, közöttük vélhetően egy rendőr, felgyújtott egy romák lakta házat. A támadásban öt személy, közöttük három gyerek vesztette életét. A hatósági és bírósági eljárás az európai bírósági döntés megszületésekor, 11 év után sem vezetett az elkövetők felelősségre vonásához. Az EJEB ítéletében ismételten és részletesen kifejtette, hogy mit vár el a hatóságoktól halált okozó bűncselekmény esetén. A nyomozásnak hatékonynak kell lennie olyan értelemben, hogy az alkalmas legyen a releváns tények megállapítására és a felelősök azonosítására és megbüntetésére. A hatóságoknak minden rendelkezésükre álló, ésszerű lépést meg kell tenniük a bizonyítékok, nyomok biztosítására. A nyomozásban feltárt tényekből levont következtetéseknek (a vádiratnak) a releváns tények alapos, objektív és pártatlan elemzésén kell alapulniuk. Minden olyan hiányosság, ami aláássa a nyomozati eljárás arra való alkalmasságát, hogy a tényállást feltárja és az elkövetőket beazonosítsa, valószínűsíti, hogy a nyomozás nem felel meg a hatékonyság követelményének. A bírósági szakra is vonatkoznak a fentiek: bár természetesen nincs abszolút állami kötelezettség arra vonatkozóan, hogy minden vádemelésnek elítéléssel kell végződnie, a strasbourgi standardok alapján a nemzeti bíróságoknak mindent meg kell tenniük azért, hogy életet fenyegető cselekmények elkövetői ne maradjanak büntetlenül. Az ügyben a bíróság megerősítette azt is, hogy amennyiben valamely sértett vagy tanú rasszista indítékra utaló bizonyítékot szolgáltat, akkor a hatóságoknak ezt a lehetséges motivációt vizsgálniuk kell. Figyelembe vette továbbá az EJEB az Európa Tanács Rasszizmus Elleni Bizottsága (ECRI) jelentését is, amely megállapította, hogy Ukrajnában széleskörű a diszkrimináció és a rasszista erőszak a romákkal szemben.
 Mi következik mindebből a romák elleni sorozatgyilkosság ügyében?
 Az írásom elején példákkal illusztrált hanyag nyomozati eljárás nyilvánvalóan nem felelt meg az élethez való jog kapcsán támasztott európai emberi jogi standardoknak, a rasszista indíték késői felismerése pedig aggályos a diszkrimináció-tilalom szempontjából.
 Kérdés, hogy a bírósági szakban sikerült-e a tényállást a nyomozás hézagainak betömésével olyan mértékben feltárni, hogy a majdan jogerős ítélettel a magyar állam – szemben például a fenti ügy miatt Ukrajnával - mentesüljön az áldozatok élethez való alapjogának megsértése miatt felmerülő felelőssége alól.
 Ha ez sikerül is, még tenni kell azért, hogy a diszkrimiáció-tilalom megsértésének „vádja” se merülhessen fel. Az ügyész más bűncselekmények (rablás, lőfegyverrel és lőszerrel visszaélés) és egyéb minősítő körülmények mellett aljas indokból elkövetett emberölés bűntettének elkövetésével vádolja a vádlottakat. Az aljas indok minősített esete emberölés esetében lefedi a rasszista motivációt, az ügyész ezt azonban a vádiratban nem tette elég nyilvánvalóvá, nem nevezte nevén az elkövetők indítékát.
 Miszori bíró tanácsának azonban – eleget téve a starsbourgi bíróság és egy magát jogállaminak tartó társadalom elvárásainak - nyilvánvalóvá kell tennie azt, amit a vádirat csak sugall: az elkövetők cselekményének indítéka a romákkal szembeni előítéletesség volt, ez vezetett ahhoz, hogy célul tűzzék ki a roma lakosság megfélemlítését. Egyszerűbben szólva: gyűlölet-bűncselekményt, rasszista bűntett-sorozatot követtek el. Mivel az államoknak az EJEB szerint is minden lehetséges eszközzel küzdeniük kell a rasszizmus ellen, a rasszista indíték néven nevezésének nemcsak szimbolikus, hanem jogi jelentősége is van, ennek elmulasztása a diszkrimináció-tilalmat kimondó cikk megsértéséhez vezethet.
 TASZ 2013. 08. 02. Tovább >
 https://ataszjelenti.blog.hu/api/trackback/id/tr25439489