# Official Journal C 130/2019

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 130 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 628 April 2019 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 130

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 628 April 2019

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2019/C 130/01 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| 2019/C 130/02 | Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting of 28 November 2016 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39914(1) — Euro Interest Rate Derivatives — Rapporteur: Portugal | 2 |
| 2019/C 130/03 | Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting of 5 December 2016 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39914(2) Euro interest rate derivatives — Rapporteur: Portugal | 3 |
| 2019/C 130/04 | Final Report of the Hearing Officer — AT.39914 — Euro Interest Rate Derivatives | 4 |
| 2019/C 130/05 | Summary of Commission Decision of 7 December 2016 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39914 — Euro Interest Rate Derivatives) (notified under document C(2016) 8530) | 11 |
| 2019/C 130/06 | New national side of euro coins intended for circulation | 16 |
| | NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES |
| 2019/C 130/07 | List of Member States' bilateral visa waiver agreements with third countries allowing for an extension of the period of stay in accordance with Article 20(2), point (b), of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement | 17 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2019/C 130/01

Euro exchange rates

1

2019/C 130/02

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting of 28 November 2016 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39914(1) — Euro Interest Rate Derivatives — Rapporteur: Portugal

2

2019/C 130/03

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting of 5 December 2016 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39914(2) Euro interest rate derivatives — Rapporteur: Portugal

3

2019/C 130/04

Final Report of the Hearing Officer — AT.39914 — Euro Interest Rate Derivatives

4

2019/C 130/05

Summary of Commission Decision of 7 December 2016 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39914 — Euro Interest Rate Derivatives) (notified under document C(2016) 8530)

(notified under document C(2016) 8530)

11

2019/C 130/06

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

16

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

2019/C 130/07

List of Member States' bilateral visa waiver agreements with third countries allowing for an extension of the period of stay in accordance with Article 20(2), point (b), of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement

17

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2019/C 130/08 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9346 — Investcorp/Aberdeen/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 53 |
| 2019/C 130/09 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9340 — Alliance Automotive Group/PartsPoint Group) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 55 |
| 2019/C 130/10 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9344 — Swiss Life/Montagu/Pondus) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 56 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2019/C 130/08

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9346 — Investcorp/Aberdeen/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

53

2019/C 130/09

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9340 — Alliance Automotive Group/PartsPoint Group) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

55

2019/C 130/10

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9344 — Swiss Life/Montagu/Pondus) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

56

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 8.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 130/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 130/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

5 April 2019

(2019/C 130/01)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1233 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 125,44 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4646 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,85938 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,4260 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1235 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 133,40 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,6610 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,613 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 320,75 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2897 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,7513 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 6,2855 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5787 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5030 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,8173 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6662 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5215 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 277,64 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,8078 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,5457 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4235 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 900,87 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,5985 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 58,537 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 73,3270 |
| THB | Thai baht | 35,833 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,3266 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 21,4975 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 77,7870 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1233

JPY

Japanese yen

125,44

DKK

Danish krone

7,4646

GBP

Pound sterling

0,85938

SEK

Swedish krona

10,4260

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1235

ISK

Iceland króna

133,40

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,6610

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,613

HUF

Hungarian forint

320,75

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2897

RON

Romanian leu

4,7513

TRY

Turkish lira

6,2855

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5787

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5030

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,8173

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6662

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5215

KRW

South Korean won

1 277,64

ZAR

South African rand

15,8078

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,5457

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4235

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 900,87

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,5985

PHP

Philippine peso

58,537

RUB

Russian rouble

73,3270

THB

Thai baht

35,833

BRL

Brazilian real

4,3266

MXN

Mexican peso

21,4975

INR

Indian rupee

77,7870

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---

| 8.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 130/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 130/2

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting of 28 November 2016 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39914(1) — Euro Interest Rate Derivatives

Rapporteur: Portugal

(2019/C 130/02)

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the anticompetitive behaviour covered by the draft decision constitutes an agreement and/or concerted practices between undertakings within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA.

2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment of the product and geographic scope of the agreement and/or concerted practices contained in the draft decision.

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the undertakings concerned by the draft decision have participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA.

4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the object of the agreement and/or concerted practices was to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA.

5.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreement and/or concerted practices have been capable of appreciably affecting trade between the Member States of the EU/contracting parties to the EEA agreement.

6.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment as regards the duration of the infringement.

7.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s draft decision as regards the addressees.

8.

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

---

| 8.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 130/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 130/3

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting of 5 December 2016 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39914(2) Euro interest rate derivatives

Rapporteur: Portugal

(2019/C 130/03)

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that a fine should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision.

2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the application of the 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amounts of the fines.

4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the determination of the duration for the purpose of calculating the fines.

5.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that there are no aggravating circumstances applicable in this case.

6.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the existence and level of reduction for mitigating circumstances in this case.

7.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines.

8.

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

---

| 8.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 130/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 130/4

---

Final Report of the Hearing Officer (1)

AT.39914 — Euro Interest Rate Derivatives

(2019/C 130/04)

Introduction

| 1. | The draft decision to which the present report relates (the Draft Decision) finds that three undertakings infringed Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement by participating in a single and continuous infringement consisting of agreements and/or concerted practices that had as their object the distortion of the normal course of pricing components in the Euro interest rate derivatives (2) (EIRD) sector (3). |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | In relation to four other undertakings (4) and also in the context of Case AT.39914, the Commission adopted, on 4 December 2013, a decision under the settlement procedure available under Article 10a of Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 (5) (the Settlement Decision (6)). Case AT.39914 may thus be termed a ‘staggered hybrid settlement case’: ‘hybrid’ in the sense that it combines the ordinary procedure under that regulation with the settlement procedure set out under that Article 10a; ‘staggered’ in the sense that the Settlement Decision was adopted before the ordinary procedure for the Non-Settling Parties (the Non-Settlement Procedure) had run its course. The present draft final report concerns the Non-Settlement Procedure. |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | The investigation in Case AT.39914 started after an application for immunity by [...] in June 2011. The Commission conducted unannounced inspections at [...] in October 2011. It subsequently received leniency applications from the Settling Parties other than [...]. When initiating proceedings in Case AT.39914 on 5 March 2013, the Commission invited all parties concerned to engage in settlement discussions. The Non-Settling Parties ultimately decided not to pursue the settlement procedure. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Written part of the non-settlement procedure

Statement of objections, letters of fact and periods in which to respond in writing

| 4. | On 19 May 2014, the Commission adopted a statement of objections in the Non-Settlement Procedure (the SO). In essence, the SO expressed the Commission's preliminary view that the undertakings concerned had been involved in collusive activities concerning the EIRD sector that infringed Article 101 TFEU. |
| --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | The Commission initially gave the Non-Settling Parties four weeks in which to reply in writing to the SO. Following extension requests, the Directorate-General for Competition (DG Competition) granted them four more weeks, bringing the deadline for replies to the end of July 2014. Following further requests for extension of this and subsequent deadlines, mainly owing to ongoing document-disclosure issues (see paragraphs 8 to 19 below), I required the Non-Settling Parties to provide their written responses to the objections raised against them by 14 November 2014 but allowed them to provide comments concerning in particular the fining methodology put forward in the SO once the relevant document disclosure issues had been resolved. All three Non-Settling Parties replied in writing by 14 November 2014 to the Commission's objections. They commented on the proposed fining methodology by the subsequently-prescribed deadline of 31 March 2015, incorporating their comments in updated written responses to the SO. |
| --- | --- |

5.

| 6. | On 30 March 2015, DG Competition sent a ‘letter of facts’ (7) to the Non-Settling Parties, enclosing some additional audio recordings and corresponding transcripts that were provided by one of the Settling Parties in February 2015 (the 2015 Letter of Facts). The Non-Settling Parties had three weeks in which to respond. Following the extension of this period until 6 May 2015, Crédit Agricole and HSBC submitted observations on the 2015 Letter of Facts. |
| --- | --- |

6.

| 7. | On 9 September 2016, the Commission addressed a letter of facts to JPMorgan. By decision of 22 September 2016, reconfirmed the following day following remarks from JPMorgan, I extended the period set for responding to this letter of facts so that it expired on 3 October 2016. |
| --- | --- |

7.

Access-to-file and disclosure of documents

| 8. | Numerous issues concerning access-to-file and the disclosure of documents could not be resolved in the first instance between the Non-Settling Parties and DG Competition in accordance with Article 3(7) of Decision 2011/695/EU. Many of these were accordingly referred to me. |
| --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | The Non-Settling Parties were initially granted access to the file by means of three access-to-file DVDs on 28 May 2014 (8). In addition, between June and July 2014, they received access at DG Competition's premises to the transcripts of the oral statements of the Settling Parties and to the audio recordings of certain phone conversations between derivatives traders. |
| --- | --- |

9.

| 10. | Following a request to me, DG Competition provided the Non-Settling Parties with copies of these recordings that they could bring away from DG Competition's premises. On 25 September 2014, I ordered that access be granted under a ‘data room procedure’ to audio recordings of certain conversations between traders obtained from [...], rejecting the request concerned to the extent that it sought other conversations whose content was confidential and unnecessary for the effective exercise of the rights of the defence. Also on 25 September 2014, I directed DG Competition to produce less-redacted versions of responses of the parties concerned in Case AT.39914 to certain questions of the Commission's request for information of 12 April 2012 concerning customer information. The information concerned was still sensitive, despite its age. Yet the right to be heard called for the redacted versions to be more informative. |
| --- | --- |

10.

| 11. | Following my intervention and an unchallenged decision adopted on 4 September 2014 under Article 8(2) of Decision 2011/695/EU overriding the confidentiality claims of one of the Settling Parties, DG Competition provided the Non-Settling Parties with access at its premises to the Settlement Decision, the statement of objections issued as part of the settlement procedure leading to that decision and the responses by the Settling Parties to that statement of objections. In that Article 8(2) decision, it was indicated among other things that, in the circumstances of the Non-Settlement Procedure, the investigation file should not be construed to exclude these documents, which were drawn up in Case AT.39914 before the SO. |
| --- | --- |

11.

| 12. | In rejecting a Non-Settling Party's request for access to the non-confidential versions of the other Non-Settling Parties' responses to the SO and to replies to the 2015 Letter of Facts, I indicated that it follows from the case law that the replies to the Commission's statement of objections from other undertakings alleged to have participated in a cartel are not, in principle, included in the documents of the investigation file that the parties may consult. While in principle no access is granted to other parties' replies to a statement of objections, a party may be granted access to those replies where such documents may constitute new evidence pertaining to the allegations concerning that party in the statement of objections (9). |
| --- | --- |

12.

| 13. | By decision of 24 July 2015, I refused access to correspondence and documents relating to the recognition of [...] as an interested third person in the Non-Settlement Procedure. Such access was required only to the extent that such materials included new evidence pertaining to the allegations set out in the SO. |
| --- | --- |

13.

| 14. | After the 2015 Letter of Facts, a Non-Settling Party sought access to all correspondence, minutes of meetings, notes of telephone calls and all documents that entered on the Commission's file after the Settlement Decision in relation to the Non-Settlement Procedure. I considered that the Commission is not required by law to provide access to documents that were not part of the file at the time of the notification of the SO, except where such documents constitute new evidence. My review of the case file did not reveal any new evidence pertaining to the allegations concerning that party in the SO. On this basis, I rejected the request in July 2015. However, for reasons of transparency, I asked DG Competition to disclose to that Non-Settling Party four exchanges between a certain Settling Party and DG Competition and an internal file-note which provided further context on how DG Competition received the additional audio recordings from that party. |
| --- | --- |

14.

| 15. | Over the course of the Non-Settlement Procedure, I have taken numerous decisions concerning requests for access to documents related to estimates of the ‘value of sales’ of certain parties in Case AT.39914. The SO indicated that, for the purposes of determining any fine, the Commission intended to use the methodology for estimating the value of sales used in the Settlement Decision. Against this backdrop, the Non-Settling Parties requested access to unredacted or less-redacted versions of documents provided by the parties concerned in response to requests for information sent by the Commission with a view to the determination of the respective value-of-sales figures for the parties concerned. |
| --- | --- |

15.

| 16. | My decisions of 2 October 2014 describe the discussions undertaken with the Settling Parties to obtain unredacted or less-redacted versions of certain documents and the reasons for recourse to a data room procedure (the Turnover Data Room Procedure) for certain documents that, despite their age, fell to be considered as confidential. In October and December 2014, the Non-Settling Parties complained to me about the extent and manner of the redactions that DG Competition had applied to their respective reports prepared as part of the Turnover Data Room Procedure. Following further contacts with the Settling Parties, my decisions of 4 March 2015 ordered disclosure to the Non-Settling Parties of less-redacted versions of the data room reports and of certain turnover-related documents that [...] had agreed to disclose fully or partially. These decisions rejected however certain requests for further access to a number of other turnover-related documents. |
| --- | --- |

16.

| 17. | On another occasion, Crédit Agricole sought, among other things, any document, even if not on the case file, containing information concerning bilateral exchanges between DG Competition and the parties concerned relating to value-of-sales information. By decision of 27 March 2015, I rejected this vague and general request. In respect of the only three exchanges specifically identified by Crédit Agricole, I considered in substance that the personal notes of individual case team members concerned did not contain evidence relating to the Commission's objections or significant information relating to the subject-matter of the investigation. They amounted to internal documents that, under the relevant principles, provisions and case law, the Commission was not obliged to disclose. |
| --- | --- |

17.

| 18. | The Amending Decision was prompted by the submission by [...] of revised value-of-sales data following its realisation that it had originally submitted data compiled using an erroneous methodology. After the adoption of the Amending Decision, [...] withdrew its action for annulment directed against the Settlement Decision (10). DG Competition allowed the Non-Settling Parties access to [...] revised data by means of a procedure similar to the Turnover Data Room Procedure. By decision dated 22 July 2016, I rejected a Non-Settling Party's request for access free of such a procedure to those revised data. By separate decisions both dated 16 September 2016, I rejected the same party's requests for, firstly, access free of the Turnover Data Room Procedure to certain value-of-sales information originally submitted by the Settling Parties (11) and, secondly, the pleadings and other materials exchanged in the context of [...] action for annulment. |
| --- | --- |

18.

| 19. | In several of the decisions rejecting in full or in part requests for greater access to documents related to value-of-sales information, it is recalled that while the Commission endeavours, in accordance with point 85 of the Antitrust Best Practices Notice, to provide addressees of statements of objections with the opportunity to comment on the calculation of possible fines, it is well-established case law (12) that the Commission is not under a legal obligation to do so. There is thus a distinction between, on one hand, the right reaffirmed in Article 27 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (13) to be heard on the objections raised by the Commission, of which the right of access-to-file is a corollary (14), and, on the other hand, the possible opportunity to comment on the determination of any fines allowed for by point 85 of the Antitrust Best Practices Notice. |
| --- | --- |

19.

Interested third person in Non-Settlement Procedure: [...]

| 20. | On 2 April 2015, [...] applied to be heard as an interested third person in the Non-Settlement Procedure. I granted this application on 27 April 2015, considering in the light of its submissions and of the particular circumstances of Case AT.39914 that [...] had shown a ‘sufficient interest’. By decision under Article 7(2)(d) of Decision 2011/695/EU of 26 April 2015, I rejected a request by [...] for a redacted version of the SO. [...] was not entitled, in its capacity as an interested third person, to obtain a level of detail going beyond a written description of the nature and subject matter of the Non-Settlement Procedure. In any event, it was open to [...] to seek to protect its interests in the context of making its views known in writing under Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 without a redacted version of the SO being required for this purpose. |
| --- | --- |

20.

Oral hearing

| 21. | Crédit Agricole made a series of comments concerning, broadly speaking, its opportunity to be heard during the oral hearing and afterwards. Specifically in relation to the oral hearing, I responded by letter of 20 April 2015 that the presence of all EU Commissioners was not required by the case law (15). Neither was a standalone hearing on possible sanctions (16). The oral hearing of the Non-Settling Parties took place from 15 to 17 June 2015. [...] did not request to participate. |
| --- | --- |

21.

Procedural issues of note in the non-settlement procedure

Claims that EU competition procedures are inherently flawed

| 22. | Contrary to the suggestions of Crédit Agricole, it follows from the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (17) (CJEU) and rulings of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) (18) that the EU competition law enforcement system is not in itself unlawful. In addition, the specific rules and practices of which Crédit Agricole complained have in many instances been endorsed by EU case law. As I explained in the above-mentioned letter of 20 April 2015, several of the measures sought by Crédit Agricole, such as the opportunity to attend and make submissions during any meetings of the Advisory Committee or the College of Commissioners in connection with the Non-Settlement Procedure, or access to internal Commission documents post-dating the oral hearing, are not foreseen under the applicable provisions. |
| --- | --- |

22.

Presumption of innocence and the duty of impartiality

| 23. | The Non-Settling Parties each claimed that the staggered hybrid approach to Case AT.39914 inevitably prejudiced DG Competition's view of and the Commission's assessment in the Non-Settlement Procedure, thus depriving these parties of the presumption of innocence and infringing the duty of good administration. The Non-Settling Parties pointed in particular, firstly, to the EU Ombudsman's draft recommendation of March 2015, where it was considered that certain public statements in 2012 and 2014 of Mr Almunia, then Vice-President of the Commission responsible for Competition, had created the impression that the Commission had at the time of those statements already reached a conclusion regarding their participation in a cartel (19). Secondly, according to the Non-Settling Parties, the Settlement Decision takes a view of facts and legal qualifications that necessarily concern the Settling Parties and the Non-Settling Parties alike. |
| --- | --- |

23.

| 24. | The presumption of innocence applies to the Non-Settlement Procedure (20). According to the case law of the ECtHR, referred to by the CJEU, this presumption is breached by statements or decisions which reflect the sentiment that the person is guilty, which encourage the public to believe in his guilt, or which prejudge the assessment of the facts by the competent decision-making body (21). Similarly, the CJEU has ruled that this presumption precludes any formal finding and even any allusion to the liability of an accused person for a particular infringement in a final decision unless that person has enjoyed all the usual guarantees accorded for the exercise of the rights of the defence in the normal course of proceedings resulting in a decision on the merits (22). |
| --- | --- |

24.

| 25. | That said, the case law recognises that the presumption of innocence ‘cannot prevent the authorities from informing the public about criminal investigations in progress, but it requires that they do so with all the discretion and circumspection necessary if the presumption of innocence is to be respected’ (23). A distinction is made here between statements that reflect an opinion of guilt (problematic) and statements that merely describe a state of suspicion (generally unobjectionable) (24). The ECtHR has held that what is important is the true meaning of the statements in question, not their literal form (25). While the use of language is important, much depends on the context of the particular circumstances in which the impugned statement was made. Even the use of unfortunate language may not be decisive when regard is had to the nature and the context of the particular proceedings (26). |
| --- | --- |

25.

| 26. | Certain of the statements by the former Vice-President (and others) criticised by the Non-Settling Parties are regrettable in that they could have been interpreted as suggesting publicly that a final finding of infringement was then the only envisaged outcome of the Non-Settlement Procedure. However, even if greater discretion and circumspection could have been shown on the occasions in question, it does not automatically follow that the effective exercise of the procedural rights of the Non-Settling Parties has not been respected. In both her draft recommendation and her final decision, the Ombudsman considered it likely that the maladministration that she had identified would not affect the further handling of the Crédit Agricole's case by the Commission, as the proceedings were still pending, the former Commissioner had left office and a new Commissioner was in charge of the case. Indeed, the facts that the Non-Settling Parties have been heard in the Non-Settlement Procedure and that the Draft Decision will be considered by a different College of Commissioners than that of which Mr Almunia was a member appear to mean that a possible irregularity entailed by certain public statements criticised by the Non-Settling Parties would not in itself affect the regularity of the adoption of the Draft Decision by the current College of Commissioners (27). |
| --- | --- |

26.

| 27. | The Non-Settling Parties' criticisms of the impact of the Settlement Decision on the Non-Settlement Procedure raise novel issues under EU law. The judgment in Timab Industries and CFPR v Commission (28) (Timab) confirms that hybrid cases are permissible. It makes clear that if an undertaking withdraws from settlement discussions, the procedure is governed by the general provisions of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 and the situation is thus one of ‘tabula rasa’, in which possible liabilities are yet to be determined (29). However, Timab does not address allegations of bias in the context of staggered hybrid cases. |
| --- | --- |

27.

| 28. | The ECtHR case of Karaman v. Germany (30) (Karaman) offers however a useful analogy with the Non-Settlement Procedure. There, the applicant claimed that his right to a fair trial had been infringed by a prior conviction of third persons that expressly implicated him in the same fraudulent conspiracy as that alleged against him. The ECtHR ruled in substance that in complex proceedings involving several persons who cannot be tried together, references to the participation of third persons, who may later be tried separately, may be indispensable for the assessment of the guilt of those who are on trial. When establishing the legal responsibility of the accused, a decision-maker may not be able to present factual elements, including those related to third persons, as mere allegations or suspicions. In the circumstances of the case, the ECtHR was satisfied that the German courts properly ‘avoided, as far as possible – in the context of a judgment involving several co-suspects not all of whom were present – giving the impression that they were prejudging the applicant's guilt’. In particular, according to the majority opinion, the trial court had ‘made it sufficiently clear that it was not also implicitly determining the applicant's guilt’ (31). The ECtHR concluded that there was nothing in the judgment against other defendants ‘that ma[de] it impossible for the applicant to have a fair trial’ (32). |
| --- | --- |

28.

| 29. | Since settlement procedures in hybrid cases are separate from corresponding non-settlement procedures (33), the position in Case AT.39914 appears analogous to the position under German law identified in Karaman in that no conclusions can be drawn from the Settlement Decision as to the liability of the Non-Settling Parties. Further, it would have been difficult to avoid any mention of the Non-Settling Parties in the Settlement Decision. Moreover, the Settlement Decision clearly indicates that it ‘does not establish any liability of [the Non-Settling Parties] for any participation in an infringement of EU competition law in this case’. Accordingly, applying the standard of the ECtHR in Karaman, there are reasonable grounds to consider that the Settlement Decision does not infringe the Non-Settling Parties' right to be presumed innocent (34). |
| --- | --- |

29.

| 30. | Moreover, the nature and context of the procedure under the general provisions of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 allowed the Non-Settling Parties to avail of substantial safeguards in the Non-Settlement Procedure, including in particular the opportunity to respond to the Commission's objections in writing and at an oral hearing and to have access to the Commission's investigation file. The Non-Settling Parties have been able to run detailed defences, resulting in respect of Crédit Agricole and JPMorgan in reductions, as compared with the preliminary assessment set out in the SO, in the respective periods of infringement for which they are held liable. The Draft Decision shows that the Commission gave consideration to the arguments of the Non-Settling Parties. |
| --- | --- |

30.

The SO's alleged lack of clarity

| 31. | All the Non-Settling Parties complained that the SO failed to particularise the details of the allegations made against them, making it difficult to understand the Commission's objections. Yet the Non-Settling Parties have been able to mount vigorous defences and were aware of the essential elements used against them. In these circumstances, even if the SO could have been clearer in certain respects, it cannot be said that the Non-Settling Parties were unaware of the essence of the Commission's objections (35). In these circumstances, the SO does not appear so unclear as to amount to the breach of a fundamental procedural requirement (36). |
| --- | --- |

31.

Alleged misuse and abuse of the cartel settlement rules

| 32. | Crédit Agricole and JPMorgan claimed that the Commission has misused the cartel settlement procedure. [...] |
| --- | --- |

32.

| 33. | Timab suggests that, since the situation following withdrawal from a settlement procedure is one of ‘tabula rasa’, the Commission was entitled, on further examination of the evidence, to update its assessment of a suspected infringement. Moreover, the Non-Settling Parties had the benefit of the procedural rights and safeguards available under the general provisions of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 in the Non-Settlement Procedure. The Draft Decision has been drawn up taking account of the Non-Settling Parties' arguments. |
| --- | --- |

33.

The draft decision

| 34. | After having heard the Non-Settling Parties in writing and at the oral hearing, the Commission makes no finding of aggravating circumstances. In respect of two Non-Settling Parties, the duration of the infringement found in the Draft Decision is shorter than that of the infringement alleged in the SO. In addition, the fines imposed in the Draft Decision take account of mitigating circumstances in respect of each Non-Settling Party. |
| --- | --- |

34.

| 35. | In accordance with Article 16 of Decision 2011/695/EU, I have examined whether the Draft Decision deals only with objections in respect of which the Non-Settling Parties have been afforded the opportunity of making known their views. I consider that it does. |
| --- | --- |

35.

Conclusion

| 36. | While the Non-Settlement Procedure has thrown up certain novel and sometimes complex issues, the effective exercise of procedural rights has been respected in this procedure. |
| --- | --- |

36.

Brussels, 5 December 2016.

Joos STRAGIER

---

(1)  Pursuant to Articles 16 and 17 of Decision of the President of the European Commission of 13 October 2011 on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain competition proceedings (OJ L 275, 20.10.2011, p. 29) (Decision 2011/695/EU). The Hearing Officer originally involved with Case AT.39914 was Mr Albers, who retired from the Commission in July 2013. Mr Wils then dealt with the case until I took office on 16 October 2013.

1

(2)  These are financial derivative products linked to certain interbank lending rates, here, in particular, the Euro Interbank Offered Rate (EURIBOR) and/or the Euro Over-Night Index Average (EONIA).

2

(3)  Grouped by undertaking, the legal entities to which the Draft Decision is addressed (the Non-Settling Parties) are: Crédit Agricole SA and Crédit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank (together, Crédit Agricole); HSBC Holdings plc, HSBC Bank plc and HSBC France (together, HSBC); and JPMorgan Chase & Co., JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association and J.P. Morgan Services LLP (together, JPMorgan).

3

(4)  [...] (interchangeably with the legal entities representing these undertakings in Case AT.39914, the Settling Parties).

4

(5)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 of 7 April 2004 (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 18) as amended, in particular by Commission Regulation (EC) No 622/2008 of 30 June 2008 (OJ L 171, 1.7.2008, p. 29).

5

(6)  Decision C(2013) 8512 final, amended in respect of the fine imposed on [...] by Decision C(2016) 1995 final of 6 April 2016 (the Amending Decision).

6

(7)  See points 109 and 111 of Commission notice on best practices for the conduct of proceedings concerning Articles 101 and 102 TFEU (OJ C 308, 20.10.2011, p. 6) (the Antitrust Best Practices Notice).

7

(8)  DG Competition subsequently recalled one of these DVDs, replacing it with another DVD containing fewer documents and making the remainder of the documents concerned available by means of a ‘confidentiality ring’ involving external counsel of the Non-Settling Parties.

8

(9)  See judgment in Shell Petroleum and Others v Commission (T-343/06, EU:T:2012:478, paragraph 85).

9

Shell Petroleum and Others

Commission

(10)  Case T-98/14 (OJ C 142, 12.5.2014, p. 36 and Order EU:T:2016:131).

10

(11)  This information had already been the subject of my decision dated 2 October 2014.

11

(12)  Among others, judgments in Musique Diffusion française and Others v Commission (100/83 à 103/80, EU:C:1983:158, paragraph 21), and Pilkington Group and Others v Commission (T-72/09, EU:T:2014:1094, paragraphs 228 to 244).

12

Musique Diffusion française and Others

Commission

Pilkington Group and Others

Commission

(13)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1).

13

(14)  See, among others, judgment in Aalborg Portland and Others v Commission (C-204/00 P, C-205/00 P, C-211/00 P, C-213/00 P, C-217/00 P and C-219/00 P, EU:C:2004:6, paragraph 68).

14

Aalborg Portland and Others

Commission

(15)  See judgments in Boehringer Mannheim v Commission (45/69, EU:C:1970:73, paragraphs 22 et 23); Bolloré v Commission (T-372/10, EU:T:2012:325, paragraphs 56 to 61); as well as Emesa-Trefilería and Industrias Galycas v Commission (T-406/10, EU:T:2015:499, paragraph 120 and case law cited).

15

Boehringer Mannheim

Commission

Bolloré

Commission

Emesa-Trefilería and Industrias Galycas

Commission

(16)  See judgment in Pilkington Group and Others v Commission (T-72/09, EU:T:2014:1094, paragraphs 234 to 237 and case law cited).

16

Pilkington Group and Others

Commission

(17)  See, for instance, judgments in Chalkor v Commission (C-386/10 P, EU:C:2011:815, paragraphs 45 to 67); Otis and Others (C-199/11, EU:C:2012:684, paragraphs 56 to 63); Telefónica and Telefónica de España v Commission (C-295/12 P, EU:C:2014:2062, paragraphs 39 to 59); Groupement des cartes bancaires (CB) v Commission (C-67/13, EU:C:2014:2204, paragraphs 41 to 46); Sasol and Others v Commission (T-541/08; EU:T:2014:628, paragraphs 206 to 208), as well as Emesa-Trefilería and Industrias Galycas v Commission (T-406/10, EU:T:2015:499, paragraphs 113 to 128).

17

Chalkor

Commission

Otis and Others

Telefónica and Telefónica de España

Commission

Groupement des cartes bancaires (CB)

Commission

Sasol and Others

Commission

Emesa-Trefilería and Industrias Galycas

Commission

(18)  In particular, A. Menarini Diagnostics S.R.L. v. Italy, no 43509/08, 27 September 2011 (CE:ECHR:2011:0927JUD004350908) § 59.

18

A. Menarini Diagnostics S.R.L. v. Italy

(19)  The Ombudsman subsequently closed the inquiry, reiterating a finding of maladministration (see Decision concerning complaint 1021/2014/PD (brought by Crédit Agricole) available at http://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/cases/decision.faces/en/61312/html.bookmark).

19

(20)  See by analogy, among others, judgements in Hüls v Commission (C-199/92 P, EU:C:1999:358, paragraphs 149 and 150) and Ziegler v Commission (C-439/11 P, EU:C:2013:513, paragraph 154).

20

Hüls

Commission

Ziegler

Commission

(21)  See, among others, judgments in Franchet and Byk v Commission (T-48/05, EU:T:2008:257, paragraph 210), as well as Commission v Nanopoulos (T-308/10 P, EU:T:2012:370, paragraph 91).

21

Franchet and Byk

Commission

Commission

Nanopoulos

(22)  Judgments in Sumitomo Chemical and Sumika Fine Chemicals v Commission (T-22/02 and T-23/02, EU:T:2005:349, paragraph 106); Pergan v Commission (T-474/04, EU:T:2007:306, paragraph 76), as well as Versalis and Eni v Commission (T-103/08, EU:T:2012:686, paragraph 75).

22

Sumitomo Chemical and Sumika Fine Chemicals

Commission

Pergan

Commission

Versalis and Eni

Commission

(23)  See judgment in Franchet and Byk v Commission (T-48/05, EU:T:2008:257, paragraph 212).

23

Franchet and Byk

Commission

(24)  See, among others, Garycki v Poland no 14348/02, 6 February 2007, § 67, and Rywin v. Poland no 6091/06, 4047/07 and 4070/07 18 February 2016 (CE:ECHR:2016:0218JUD000609106) § 205.

24

Garycki

Poland

Rywin v. Poland

(25)  Lavents v. Latvia no 58442/00, 28 November 2002 (CE:ECHR:2002:1128JUD005844200) § 126.

25

Lavents v. Latvia

(26)  See Allen v. United Kingdom no 25424/09 12 July 2013 (CE:ECHR:2013:0712JUD002542409) § 126, and Müller v. Germany no 54963/08, 27 March 2014 (CE:ECHR:2014:0327JUD005496308) § 46.

26

Allen v. United Kingdom

Müller v. Germany

(27)  See, by analogy, judgments in ABB v Commission (T-31/99, EU:T:2002:77, paragraph 104) as well as Thyssen Stahl v Commisson (T-141/94, EU:T:1999:48, paragraph 169); Vlaamse Televisie Maatschapij v Commission (T-266/97, EU:T:1999:144, paragraphs 46 to 56) and Atlantic Container Line and Others v Commission (T-191/98, T-212/98 to T-214/98, EU:T:2003:245, paragraph 414).

27

ABB

Commission

Thyssen Stahl

Commisson

Vlaamse Televisie Maatschapij

Commission

Atlantic Container Line and Others

Commission

(28)  T-456/10, EU:T:2015:296.

28

(29)  See Timab (EU:T:2015:296, paragraphs 70, 76, 90, 96 and 104).

29

Timab

(30)  Karaman v. Germany, no 17103/10, 27 February 2014 (CE:ECHR:2014:0227JUD001710310).

30

Karaman v. Germany

(31)  This was in spite of what the minority opinion considered to be clear statements of guilt that went beyond what was necessary for the purposes of trying the other suspects.

31

(32)  Karaman, paragraphs 65 to 70.

32

Karaman

(33)  See Timab (EU:T:2015:296, paragraphs 71 and 72).

33

Timab

(34)  Even if there are certain aspects of the Settlement Decision that the Non-Settling Parties criticise as going beyond what was necessary and arguably at odds with the expression of mere suspicions, it is clear from Karaman (paragraph 63) as well as the case law cited in footnote 26 above that even the use of some unfortunate language may not be decisive when regard is had to the nature and context of proceedings. This is borne out by the divergence between the dissenting opinion in Karaman and the majority's assessment (paragraphs 65 to 71) of the same facts.

34

Karaman

Karaman

(35)  See Timab (paragraphs 135 to 140) and, by way of contrast, judgment in Ballast Nedam v Commission (C-612/12 P, EU:C:2014:193, paragraphs 25 to 29). See also, by analogy, Order in Panasonic v Commission (C-608/15 P, EU:C:2016:538, paragraphs 21 to 24).

35

Timab

Ballast Nedam

Commission

Panasonic

Commission

(36)  JPMorgan complained also that the letter of facts addressed to it in September 2016 was insufficiently clear. An examination of that letter and JPMorgan's response does not bear out that claim however.

36

---

| 8.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 130/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 130/11

---

Summary of Commission Decision

of 7 December 2016

relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement

(Case AT.39914 — Euro Interest Rate Derivatives)

(notified under document C(2016) 8530)

(Only the English and French texts are authentic)

(2019/C 130/05)

On 7 December 2016, the Commission adopted a decision relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (the ‘Treaty’) and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (the ‘EEA Agreement’). In accordance with the provisions of Article 30 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (1), the Commission herewith publishes the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business secrets. A non-confidential version of the decision is available on the Competition Directorate-General website at the following address:

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/

1.   INTRODUCTION

| (1) | The addressees of the Decision participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. The object of the infringement was the restriction and/or distortion of competition in the sector of Euro Interest Rate Derivatives linked to the Euro Interbank Offered Rate (‘Euribor’) and/or the Euro Over-Night Index Average (‘EONIA’) (hereinafter ‘EIRD’ or ‘EIRDs’). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

| (2) | The Euribor is a benchmark interest rate intended to reflect the cost of interbank lending in Euros which is widely used in the international money markets. The Euribor is defined as an index of ‘the rate at which Euro interbank term deposits are offered by one prime bank to another prime bank within the euro zone’ (2) and it is based on the panel banks' individual quotes of the rates at which each of them believes that a hypothetical prime bank would lend funds to another prime bank (3). Indeed, according to the European Banking Federation's Euribor Code of Conduct, ‘panel banks provide daily quotes of the rate (...) that each panel bank believes one prime bank is quoting to another prime bank for interbank term deposits within the euro zone’ (4). |
| --- | --- |

(2)

| (3) | The Euribor is calculated (5) on the basis of submissions by participating ‘panel banks’ (6) sent on every trading day between 10.45 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. Brussels time to Thomson Reuters, which serves as the calculation agent to the European Banking Federation (‘EBF’). Each panel bank has submitters which are responsible for proposing the quote submissions on behalf of the given panel bank. Submitters operate normally within the treasury department of the given panel bank. The Euribor is determined and published at 11.00 a.m. each business day Brussels time (10.00 a.m. London time). Each panel bank provides a contribution for each of the 15 different Euribor interest rates (one for each maturity ranging from one week to 12 months — referred to as ‘tenors’). |
| --- | --- |

(3)

| (4) | The Euribor does not have an overnight tenor. This role is taken by the EONIA which is an overnight interest rate computed with the help of the European Central Bank as a weighted average of all overnight unsecured lending transactions in the interbank market. The banks contributing to EONIA are the same as the panel banks contributing to Euribor. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

| (5) | The different Euribor tenors (such as 1 month, 3, 6 or 12 months) serve as pricing components for Euribor-based EIRDs. For EIRDs, the respective Euribor tenor which is maturing or resetting on a specific date may affect either the cash flow a bank receives from the counterparty to the EIRD, or the cash flow a bank needs to pay to the counterparty on that date. Depending on the trading positions/exposures entered into on its behalf by its traders, a bank may either have an interest in a high Euribor fixing (when it receives an amount calculated on the basis of Euribor), a low fixing (when it needs to pay an amount calculated on the basis of Euribor) or to be ‘flat’ (when it does not have a significant position in either direction). |
| --- | --- |

(5)

| (6) | Euribor rates are, inter alia, reflected in the pricing of EIRDs, which are globally traded financial products used by corporations, financial institutions, hedge funds, and other undertakings to manage their interest rate risk exposure (hedging, for both borrowers and investors) or for speculation purposes (7). The most common basic EIRDs are: (i) forward rate agreements; (ii) interest rate swaps; (iii) interest rate options; and (iv) interest rate futures. EIRDs may be traded over the counter (‘OTC’) or, in the case of interest rate futures, through exchanges. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

| (7) | The Decision is addressed to (hereinafter ‘the addressees’):






  — | Crédit Agricole SA, Crédit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank (together referred to as ‘Crédit Agricole’), |
| --- | --- | --- |

(7)

—

Crédit Agricole SA, Crédit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank (together referred to as ‘Crédit Agricole’),

| — | HSBC Holdings plc, HSBC Bank plc, HSBC France (together referred to as ‘HSBC’), and |
| --- | --- |

—

HSBC Holdings plc, HSBC Bank plc, HSBC France (together referred to as ‘HSBC’), and

| — | JPMorgan Chase & Co., JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, J.P. Morgan Services LLP (together referred to as ‘JPMorgan Chase’). |
| --- | --- |

—

JPMorgan Chase & Co., JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, J.P. Morgan Services LLP (together referred to as ‘JPMorgan Chase’).

| (8) | Crédit Agricole, HSBC and JPMorgan Chase have been Euribor panel banks during the whole period of their respective involvement in the infringement. |
| --- | --- |

(8)

2.   CASE DESCRIPTION

2.1.   Procedure

| (9) | The case was opened on the basis of an immunity application from [...] on 14 June 2011. Following inspections by the European Commission (‘Commission’) at the premises of various banks in October 2011, three other banks [...] cooperated with the Commission investigation. They voluntarily submitted more evidence to the Commission and applied for reduction of fines under the Commission's leniency programme (8). The three banks that are subject to the current decision did not actively cooperate with the Commission investigation under the leniency programme. |
| --- | --- |

(9)

| (10) | The Commission initiated proceedings in March 2013, pursuant to Article 11(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, against seven banks [...] and invited them to settle their case. |
| --- | --- |

(10)

| (11) | [...] submitted settlement submissions, on the basis of which the Commission adopted Commission Decision C(2013) 8512 of 4 December 2013, amended on 6 April 2016 [...], and impose fines for a total amount of EUR 824 583 000 on these four banks. |
| --- | --- |

(11)

| (12) | Crédit Agricole, HSBC and JPMorgan Chase did not submit a settlement submission. The Commission continued the investigation in their regard, and carried out an announced inspection at JPMorgan Chase in February 2014. The Commission issued a Statement of Objections against Crédit Agricole, HSBC and JPMorgan Chase on 19 May 2014. They replied to the Statement of Objections and an Oral Hearing was organised in June 2015. |
| --- | --- |

(12)

| (13) | The Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions was consulted and gave a positive opinion on 28 November and 5 December 2016, the Hearing Officer issued his final report on 5 December 2016, and the Commission adopted the decision on 7 December 2016. |
| --- | --- |

(13)

2.2.   Description of the conduct

| (14) | The infringement in the present case takes the form of a cartel covering Euro interest rate derivatives (‘EIRDs’) which are linked to the Euro Interbank Offered Rate (‘Euribor’) and/or the Euro Over-Night Index Average (‘EONIA’). The most common EIRDs are forward rate agreements, interest rate swaps, interest rate options and interest rate futures. EIRDs are financial derivative products that are used by many undertakings for managing interest rate fluctuation and other financial risks (by hedging) and for speculation purposes. |
| --- | --- |

(14)

| (15) | The Settlement Decision of 4 December 2013 already established that [...], in individually different periods between 29 September 2005 and 30 May 2008, engaged in collusive practices with a view of distorting the normal course of pricing components for the EIRDs. |
| --- | --- |

(15)

| (16) | The current Decision establishes that Crédit Agricole, HSBC and JP Morgan Chase, for individually different periods in that time period, equally engaged in collusive practices with a view of distorting the normal course of pricing components for the EIRDs. Crédit Agricole participated between 16 October 2006 and 19 March 2007, HSBC between 12 February 2007 and 27 March 2007, and JP Morgan Chase between 27 September 2006 and 19 March 2007. |
| --- | --- |

(16)

| (17) | The parties, through the conduct of certain of their employees, have participated in arrangements in the EIRD sector which consisted of the following practices between different parties:






  (a) | On occasions, certain traders employed by different parties communicated and/or received preferences for an unchanged, low or high fixing of certain Euribor tenors. These preferences depended on their trading positions/exposures. |
| --- | --- | --- |

(17)

(a)

On occasions, certain traders employed by different parties communicated and/or received preferences for an unchanged, low or high fixing of certain Euribor tenors. These preferences depended on their trading positions/exposures.

| (b) | On occasions, certain traders of different parties communicated and/or received from each other detailed, not publicly known/available information on the trading positions or on the intentions for future Euribor submissions for certain tenors of at least one of their respective banks. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

On occasions, certain traders of different parties communicated and/or received from each other detailed, not publicly known/available information on the trading positions or on the intentions for future Euribor submissions for certain tenors of at least one of their respective banks.

| (c) | On occasions, certain traders also explored possibilities to align their EIRD trading positions on the basis of such information as described under (a) or (b). |
| --- | --- |

(c)

On occasions, certain traders also explored possibilities to align their EIRD trading positions on the basis of such information as described under (a) or (b).

| (d) | On occasions, certain traders also explored possibilities to align at least one of their banks' future Euribor submissions on the basis of such information as described under (a) or (b). |
| --- | --- |

(d)

On occasions, certain traders also explored possibilities to align at least one of their banks' future Euribor submissions on the basis of such information as described under (a) or (b).

| (e) | On occasions, at least one of the traders involved in such discussions approached the respective bank's Euribor submitters, or stated that such an approach would be made, to request a submission to the EBF's calculation agent towards a certain direction or at a specific level. |
| --- | --- |

(e)

On occasions, at least one of the traders involved in such discussions approached the respective bank's Euribor submitters, or stated that such an approach would be made, to request a submission to the EBF's calculation agent towards a certain direction or at a specific level.

| (f) | On occasions, at least one of the traders involved in such discussions stated that he would report back, or reported back on the submitter's reply before the point in time when the daily Euribor submissions had to be submitted to the calculation agent or, in those instances where that trader had already discussed this with the submitter, passed on such information received from the submitter to the trader of a different party. |
| --- | --- |

(f)

On occasions, at least one of the traders involved in such discussions stated that he would report back, or reported back on the submitter's reply before the point in time when the daily Euribor submissions had to be submitted to the calculation agent or, in those instances where that trader had already discussed this with the submitter, passed on such information received from the submitter to the trader of a different party.

| (g) | On occasions, at least one trader of a party disclosed to a trader of another party other detailed and sensitive information about his bank's trading or pricing strategy regarding EIRDs. |
| --- | --- |

(g)

On occasions, at least one trader of a party disclosed to a trader of another party other detailed and sensitive information about his bank's trading or pricing strategy regarding EIRDs.

| (18) | In addition, on occasions certain traders employed by different parties discussed the outcome of the Euribor rate setting, including specific banks' submissions, after the Euribor rates of a day had been set and published. |
| --- | --- |

(18)

| (19) | Each party has participated in at least several of these forms of conduct. This occurred throughout the period of the parties' respective involvement in the infringement, although not every party participated in all instances of the collusion and the intensity of the collusive contacts varied over the period of the infringement. |
| --- | --- |

(19)

| (20) | The collusive activity occurred through bilateral contacts, mainly through on-line chats, emails and online messages or over the telephone. |
| --- | --- |

(20)

2.3.   Individual involvement in the conduct

| (21) | Between 16 October 2006 and 19 March 2007, Crédit Agricole engaged in bilateral practices falling under at least some of the practices enumerated in point (17). |
| --- | --- |

(21)

| (22) | Between 12 February 2007 to 27 March 2007, HSBC engaged in bilateral practices falling under at least some of the practices enumerated in point (17). |
| --- | --- |

(22)

| (23) | Between 27 September 2006 and 19 March 2007, JPMorgan Chase engaged in bilateral practices falling under at least some of the practices enumerated in point (17). |
| --- | --- |

(23)

| (24) | The Decision establishes that Crédit Agricole, HSBC and JP Morgan Chase participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. The factual circumstances on the file such as the content of the contacts, the methods used and the objective of the various agreements and/or concerted practices in question, show that the bilateral collusive contacts between the parties were linked and complementary in nature and contributed to a single objective. |
| --- | --- |

(24)

2.4.   Geographic scope

| (25) | The geographic scope of the infringement covered at least the whole EEA. |
| --- | --- |

(25)

2.5.   Remedies

| (26) | The Decision applies the 2006 Guidelines on Fines (9). The Decision imposes fines on the entities of Crédit Agricole, HSBC and JPMorgan Chase listed in point (7) above. |
| --- | --- |

(26)

2.5.1.   Basic amount of the fine

| (27) | The basic amount of the fine to be imposed on the undertakings concerned is to be set by reference to the value of sales, the fact that the infringement is by its very nature amongst the most harmful restrictions of competition, the duration and geographic scope of the cartel, the fact that the collusive activities related to financial benchmarks, the paramount importance the affected rates have for the financial services sector within the internal market and the Member States and an additional amount to deter undertakings from entering into such illegal practices. |
| --- | --- |

(27)

| (28) | The Commission normally takes into account the value of the sales made by the undertakings during the last full business year of their participation in the infringement (10). It may however depart from this practice, should another reference period be more appropriate in view of the characteristics of the case. |
| --- | --- |

(28)

| (29) | With respect to this infringement, the Commission calculated the annual value of sales for all the parties on the basis of the cash flows that each bank received from its respective portfolio of EIRDs entered into with EEA-located counterparties during the months corresponding to their respective participation in the infringement, discounted by a uniform factor to take account of the particularities of the EIRD industry, such as the netting inherent in this industry, meaning that banks both sell and buy derivatives so that the incoming payments are netted against outgoing payments, and the scale of price variations. |
| --- | --- |

(29)

2.5.2.   Adjustment to the basic amount: aggravating or mitigating circumstances

| (30) | There are no aggravating circumstances, but the minor role of Crédit Agricole, HSBC and JPMorgan Chase in the infringement is recognised as a mitigating circumstance in the level of their fines. |
| --- | --- |

(30)

2.5.3.   Application of the 10 % turnover limit

| (31) | Article 23(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 provides that the fine imposed on each undertaking for each infringement shall not exceed 10 % of its total turnover relating to the business year preceding the date of the Commission decision. |
| --- | --- |

(31)

| (32) | In this case, none of the fines exceed 10 % of an undertaking's total turnover relating to the business year preceding the date of this Decision |
| --- | --- |

(32)

3.   CONCLUSION

| (33) | The fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 are as follows:






  (a) | Crédit Agricole SA and Crédit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, jointly and severally liable: EUR 114 654 000; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(33)

(a)

Crédit Agricole SA and Crédit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, jointly and severally liable: EUR 114 654 000;

| (b) | HSBC Holdings plc, HSBC Bank plc and HSBC France, jointly and severally liable: EUR 33 606 000; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

HSBC Holdings plc, HSBC Bank plc and HSBC France, jointly and severally liable: EUR 33 606 000;

| (c) | JPMorgan Chase & Co., JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association and J.P. Morgan Service LLP, jointly and severally liable: EUR 337 196 000. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

JPMorgan Chase & Co., JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association and J.P. Morgan Service LLP, jointly and severally liable: EUR 337 196 000.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1).

(2)  http://www.euribor-ebf.eu/euribor-org/about-euribor.html

(3)  The details of the panel composition and submission procedural rules are described in the European Banking Federation's Euribor Code of Conduct (http://www.euribor-ebf.eu/assets/files/Euribor_code_conduct.pdf).

(4)  The European Banking Federation's Euribor Code of Conduct, p. 17.

(5)  The highest and lowest 15 % of all the panel bank submissions collected are eliminated. The remaining rates are averaged and rounded to three decimal places.

(6)  At the time of the infringement, the number of panel banks was 44; currently there are 25.

(7)  According to the Bank of International Settlements, the gross market value of outstanding EIRDs (http://www.bis.org/statistics/derstats.htm) was USD 4 747 billion in December 2015 and represents the largest segment of OTC interest rate derivatives.

(8)  Commission Notice on Immunity from fines and reduction of fines in cartel cases (OJ C 298, 8.12.2006, p. 17).

(9)  Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (OJ C 210, 1.9.2006, p. 2).

(10)  Point 13 of the Guidelines on fines.

---

| 8.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 130/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 130/16

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

(2019/C 130/06)

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Andorra

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

Issuing country
  : Andorra

Subject of commemoration
  : Ski World Cup Finals 2019

Description of the design
  : The 2019 Ski World Cup Finals will be held in the Principality of Andorra from 11 to 17 March 2019. With this event, the Principality of Andorra will host one of the most important alpine skiing competition in the world.

For the Principality of Andorra, it will be the most prestigious winter sport event that has ever been held in the country, and will be a turning point in the country’s trajectory as a sport destination.

The design of the coin shows in the foreground a skier sliding down a slope. In the background, four curved lines, from the official logo of these Ski World Cup Finals, represent the slopes where the competition will take place. Some snowflakes complete the design together with the inscription ‘FINALS DE LA COPA DEL MÓN D’ESQUÍ ANDORRA 2019’ (Andorra 2019 Ski World Cup Finals).

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Estimated number of coins to be issued
  :

Date of issue
  : March 2019

---

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).

---

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

| 8.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 130/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 130/17

---

List of Member States' bilateral visa waiver agreements with third countries allowing for an extension of the period of stay in accordance with Article 20(2), point (b), of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement

(2019/C 130/07)

The present list is published by the European Commission in accordance with Article 20(2d) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985, as amended by Article 60 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) (EES Regulation). It has been compiled on the basis of the notifications submitted by the Member States to the Commission.

Belgium

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Australia | 15.8.1956 | 2 months | All passports |
| Brazil | 1.4.1957 | 3 months | All passports |
| Canada | 1.12.1949 | 2 months | All passports |
| Israel | 8.12.1964 | 3 months in any period of 6 months | All passports |
| Japan | 15.8.1956 | 3 months | All passports |
| Monaco | 14.2.1950 | 2 months | All passports |
| New Zealand | 15.11.1951 | 2 months | All passports |
| San Marino | 12.6.1969 | 3 months in any period of 6 months | All passports |
| South Korea | 1.6.1970 | 3 months | All passports |
| United States of America | 23.6.1962 and 20.4.1971 | 3 months | All passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Australia

15.8.1956

2 months

All passports

Brazil

1.4.1957

3 months

All passports

Canada

1.12.1949

2 months

All passports

Israel

8.12.1964

3 months in any period of 6 months

All passports

Japan

15.8.1956

3 months

All passports

Monaco

14.2.1950

2 months

All passports

New Zealand

15.11.1951

2 months

All passports

San Marino

12.6.1969

3 months in any period of 6 months

All passports

South Korea

1.6.1970

3 months

All passports

United States of America

23.6.1962 and 20.4.1971

3 months

All passports

Bulgaria

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Japan | 1.5.2005 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| South Korea | 13.8.1994 | 90 days | All passports |
| Uruguay | 25.5.2005 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Japan

1.5.2005

90 days

Ordinary passports

South Korea

13.8.1994

90 days

All passports

Uruguay

25.5.2005

90 days

Ordinary passports

Czech Republic

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Argentina | 2.1.2000 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 8.12.1996 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Brazil | 3.10.2005 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 15.8.1991 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Chile | 15.8.1996 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 24.10.1996 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports
  Special passports |
| Colombia | 3.6.1995 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Costa Rica | 11.11.2000 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Guatemala | 17.11.2000 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports
  Consular passports |
| Israel | 19.7.1996 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Israel | 9.3.1996 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Malaysia | 15.8.1991 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Mexico | 24.1.2000 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Nicaragua | 30.12.1999 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Panama | 14.4.2000 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports
  Consular passports |
| Paraguay | 10.9.1999 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Peru | 16.10.1994 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Special passports |
| Singapore | 8.1.1998 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| South Korea | 5.11.1994 | 90 days | All passports |
| Uruguay | 9.11.1999 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 7.7.1994 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Venezuela | 15.8.1991 | 30 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Argentina

2.1.2000

90 days

Ordinary passports

8.12.1996

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Brazil

3.10.2005

90 days

Ordinary passports

15.8.1991

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Chile

15.8.1996

90 days

Ordinary passports

24.10.1996

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Special passports

Colombia

3.6.1995

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Costa Rica

11.11.2000

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Guatemala

17.11.2000

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Consular passports

Israel

19.7.1996

90 days

Ordinary passports

Israel

9.3.1996

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Malaysia

15.8.1991

90 days

Ordinary passports

Mexico

24.1.2000

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Nicaragua

30.12.1999

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Panama

14.4.2000

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Consular passports

Paraguay

10.9.1999

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Peru

16.10.1994

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Special passports

Singapore

8.1.1998

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

South Korea

5.11.1994

90 days

All passports

Uruguay

9.11.1999

90 days

Ordinary passports

7.7.1994

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Venezuela

15.8.1991

30 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Denmark

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Australia | 1.5.1958 | 3 months | All passports |
| Canada | 1.5.1958 | 3 months | All passports |
| Chile | 1950 / 1958 | 90 days | All passports |
| Israel | 1.4.1966 | 3 months | All passports |
| Japan | 15.8.1956 | 3 months | All passports |
| Malaysia | 1.10.1960 | 3 months | All passports |
| New Zeeland | 1.1.1949 | 3 months | All passports |
| Singapore | 1.7.1967 | 3 months | All passports |
| South Korea | 1.10.1969 | 90 days | All passports |
| United States of America | 27.6.1947 | 3 months | All passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Australia

1.5.1958

3 months

All passports

Canada

1.5.1958

3 months

All passports

Chile

1950 / 1958

90 days

All passports

Israel

1.4.1966

3 months

All passports

Japan

15.8.1956

3 months

All passports

Malaysia

1.10.1960

3 months

All passports

New Zeeland

1.1.1949

3 months

All passports

Singapore

1.7.1967

3 months

All passports

South Korea

1.10.1969

90 days

All passports

United States of America

27.6.1947

3 months

All passports

Germany

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Australia | 1.1.1953 | 3 months | All passports |
| Brazil | 28.6.1956 | 3 months | All passports |
| Canada | 1.5.1953 | 3 months | All passports |
| Chile | 1.1.1955 | 90 days | All passports |
| El Salvador | 5.4.1960 | 3 months | All passports |
| Honduras | 1.7.1963 | 3 months | All passports |
| Japan | 1.9.1957 | 3 months | All passports |
| New Zealand | 1.8.1972 | 3 months | All passports |
| Panama | 1.1.1968 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| South Korea | 24.1.1974 | 3 months | All passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Australia

1.1.1953

3 months

All passports

Brazil

28.6.1956

3 months

All passports

Canada

1.5.1953

3 months

All passports

Chile

1.1.1955

90 days

All passports

El Salvador

5.4.1960

3 months

All passports

Honduras

1.7.1963

3 months

All passports

Japan

1.9.1957

3 months

All passports

New Zealand

1.8.1972

3 months

All passports

Panama

1.1.1968

3 months

Ordinary passports

South Korea

24.1.1974

3 months

All passports

Greece

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Antigua and Barbuda | 28.1.1987 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Argentina | 31.1.1975 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Barbados | 1.7.1972 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Canada | 1.9.1959 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Costa Rica | 13.10.1999 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Honduras | 3.10.1998 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Israel | 26.2.1969 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Japan | 10.5.1956 | 90 days | All passports |
| Malaysia | 20.9.1999 | 30 days | Ordinary passports |
| Mexico | 11.5.1972 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Monaco | 22.6.1955 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| New Zealand | 6.12.1961 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Nicaragua | 9.6.1986 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Panama | 20.9.1999 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Paraguay | 25.6.1998 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| San Marino | 1.9.1955 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Singapore | 1.1.1991 | 2 weeks | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| South Korea | 26.2.1979 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Antigua and Barbuda

28.1.1987

90 days

Ordinary passports

Argentina

31.1.1975

90 days

Ordinary passports

Barbados

1.7.1972

90 days

Ordinary passports

Canada

1.9.1959

90 days

Ordinary passports

Costa Rica

13.10.1999

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Honduras

3.10.1998

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Israel

26.2.1969

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Japan

10.5.1956

90 days

All passports

Malaysia

20.9.1999

30 days

Ordinary passports

Mexico

11.5.1972

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Monaco

22.6.1955

90 days

Ordinary passports

New Zealand

6.12.1961

90 days

Ordinary passports

Nicaragua

9.6.1986

90 days

Ordinary passports

Panama

20.9.1999

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Paraguay

25.6.1998

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

San Marino

1.9.1955

90 days

Ordinary passports

Singapore

1.1.1991

2 weeks

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

South Korea

26.2.1979

90 days

Ordinary passports

Spain

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Argentina | 12.10.1965 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 9.7.1960 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Brazil | 11.10.1965 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 1.11.1960 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Special passports |
| Canada | 25.1.1960 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Costa Rica | 30.5.1966 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Chile | 1.5.1959 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| El Salvador | 1.12.1959 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Guatemala | 17.10.1969 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 7.9.1973 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Honduras | 15.7.1961 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Israel | 31.7.1994 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Japan | 15.4.1965 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Mexico | 1.12.1977 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 31.12.1990 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports |
| Nicaragua | 15.3.1962 | 30 days | Ordinary passports |
| New Zealand | 31.10.1989 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Panama | 18.12.1965 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 9.12.1965 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Paraguay | 1.7.1959 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 3.1.1974 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Singapore | 10.2.1971 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| South Korea | 8.4.1972 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| United States of America | 4.2.1993 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 10.6.1992 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Uruguay | 15.1.1962 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Argentina

12.10.1965

90 days

Ordinary passports

9.7.1960

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Brazil

11.10.1965

90 days

Ordinary passports

1.11.1960

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Special passports

Canada

25.1.1960

90 days

Ordinary passports

Costa Rica

30.5.1966

90 days

Ordinary passports

Chile

1.5.1959

90 days

Ordinary passports

El Salvador

1.12.1959

90 days

Ordinary passports

Guatemala

17.10.1969

90 days

Ordinary passports

7.9.1973

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Honduras

15.7.1961

90 days

Ordinary passports

Israel

31.7.1994

90 days

Ordinary passports

Japan

15.4.1965

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Mexico

1.12.1977

90 days

Ordinary passports

31.12.1990

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Nicaragua

15.3.1962

30 days

Ordinary passports

New Zealand

31.10.1989

90 days

Ordinary passports

Panama

18.12.1965

90 days

Ordinary passports

9.12.1965

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Paraguay

1.7.1959

90 days

Ordinary passports

3.1.1974

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Singapore

10.2.1971

90 days

Ordinary passports

South Korea

8.4.1972

90 days

Ordinary passports

United States of America

4.2.1993

90 days

Ordinary passports

10.6.1992

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Uruguay

15.1.1962

90 days

Ordinary passports

France

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Canada | 1.5.1950 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Israel | 26.11.1969 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Japan | 1.12.1955 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Monaco | 18.5.1963 | Not relevant for EES | Ordinary passports |
| New Zealand | 1.12.1947 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| San Marino | 15.1.1954 | Not relevant for EES | Ordinary passports |
| Singapore | 1.6.1985 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| South Korea | 11.2.1967 and 22.9.1989 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| United States of America | 1.4.1949 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Canada

1.5.1950

90 days

Ordinary passports

Israel

26.11.1969

90 days

Ordinary passports

Japan

1.12.1955

90 days

Ordinary passports

Monaco

18.5.1963

Not relevant for EES

Ordinary passports

New Zealand

1.12.1947

90 days

Ordinary passports

San Marino

15.1.1954

Not relevant for EES

Ordinary passports

Singapore

1.6.1985

90 days

Ordinary passports

South Korea

11.2.1967 and 22.9.1989

90 days

Ordinary passports

United States of America

1.4.1949

90 days

Ordinary passports

Italy

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Albania | 1.10.1991 | 30 days | Diplomatic passports |
| Argentina | 1.12.1959 | 180 days | Diplomatic passports |
| 3 months | Service/official passports |
| 21.5.1968 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Australia | 1.8.1951 | 3 months | All passports |
| Brazil | 1.10.1958 | 180 days | Diplomatic passports |
| 3 months | Service/official passports |
| 1.6.1960 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Canada | 9.11.1952 | 3 months | All passports |
| Chile | 1.2.1958 | 90 days | All passports |
| Colombia | 16.7.1962 | 180 days | Diplomatic passports |
| 3 months | Service/official passports |
| Costa Rica | 19.9.1972 | 90 days | All passports |
| El Salvador | 27.1.1969 | 90 days | All passports |
| North Macedonia | 5.3.1997 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Guatemala | 2.7.1972 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 20.12.1990 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Honduras | 1.5.1970 | 90 days | All passports |
| Israel | 1.11.1961 | 180 days | Diplomatic passports |
| 1.5.1964 | 180 days | Service/official passports |
| Japan | 15.1.1956 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| 15.5.1963 | 180 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Malaysia | 29.4.1964 | 90 days | All passports |
| Mexico | 1.7.1967 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Monaco | 15.7.1949 | Not relevant for EES | All passports |
| New Zealand | 1.3.1961 | 3 months | All passports |
| Panama | 6.3.1964 | 180 days | Diplomatic passports |
| 3 months | Service/official passports |
| Paraguay | 9.6.1965 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| 1.3.1961 | 180 days | Diplomatic passports |
| 3 months | Service/official passports |
| Peru | 1.3.1960 | 180 days | Diplomatic passports |
| 3 months | Service/official passports |
| San Marino | 30.9.1939 | Not relevant for EES | All passports |
| South Korea | 5.5.1975 | 60 days | All passports |
| United States of America | 29.9.1948 | 3 months | All passports |
| Uruguay | 1.1.1961 | 90 days | All passports |
| Venezuela | 5.3.1981 | 3 months | Diplomatic passports |
| 7.6.1988 | 30 days | Service/official passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Albania

1.10.1991

30 days

Diplomatic passports

Argentina

1.12.1959

180 days

Diplomatic passports

3 months

Service/official passports

21.5.1968

3 months

Ordinary passports

Australia

1.8.1951

3 months

All passports

Brazil

1.10.1958

180 days

Diplomatic passports

3 months

Service/official passports

1.6.1960

3 months

Ordinary passports

Canada

9.11.1952

3 months

All passports

Chile

1.2.1958

90 days

All passports

Colombia

16.7.1962

180 days

Diplomatic passports

3 months

Service/official passports

Costa Rica

19.9.1972

90 days

All passports

El Salvador

27.1.1969

90 days

All passports

North Macedonia

5.3.1997

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Guatemala

2.7.1972

90 days

Ordinary passports

20.12.1990

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Honduras

1.5.1970

90 days

All passports

Israel

1.11.1961

180 days

Diplomatic passports

1.5.1964

180 days

Service/official passports

Japan

15.1.1956

3 months

Ordinary passports

15.5.1963

180 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Malaysia

29.4.1964

90 days

All passports

Mexico

1.7.1967

3 months

Ordinary passports

Monaco

15.7.1949

Not relevant for EES

All passports

New Zealand

1.3.1961

3 months

All passports

Panama

6.3.1964

180 days

Diplomatic passports

3 months

Service/official passports

Paraguay

9.6.1965

3 months

Ordinary passports

1.3.1961

180 days

Diplomatic passports

3 months

Service/official passports

Peru

1.3.1960

180 days

Diplomatic passports

3 months

Service/official passports

San Marino

30.9.1939

Not relevant for EES

All passports

South Korea

5.5.1975

60 days

All passports

United States of America

29.9.1948

3 months

All passports

Uruguay

1.1.1961

90 days

All passports

Venezuela

5.3.1981

3 months

Diplomatic passports

7.6.1988

30 days

Service/official passports

Latvia

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Andorra | 21.5.1998 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Argentina | 3.2.2004 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 4.3.2004 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Costa Rica | 24.11.2003 | 90 days in any half-year period | All passports |
| North Macedonia | 9.3.2007 | 90 days in the half-year period from the date of ‘first entry’ | Diplomatic passports |
| Israel | 11.5.2001 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Israel | 14.12.1996 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Japan | 1.4.2000 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Mexico | 11.9.2002 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Monaco | 7.10.2001 | 90 days in any half-year period | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Panama | 6.5.2004 | 90 days | All passports |
| Peru | 4.7.2007 | 90 days in any half-year period | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports
  Special passports |
| San Marino | 8.10.2004 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| South Korea | 27.6.2003 | 90 days | All passports |
| Ukraine | 17.5.1998 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| United States of America | 1.1.1996 | 90 days in any half-year period | Ordinary passports |
| Uruguay | 13.11.2003 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Venezuela | 6.11.2003 | 90 days in any six-month period | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Hong Kong Special Administrative Region | 24.9.2002 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Macao Special Administrative Region | 20.6.2004 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Andorra

21.5.1998

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Argentina

3.2.2004

90 days

Ordinary passports

4.3.2004

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Costa Rica

24.11.2003

90 days in any half-year period

All passports

North Macedonia

9.3.2007

90 days in the half-year period from the date of ‘first entry’

Diplomatic passports

Israel

11.5.2001

90 days

Ordinary passports

Israel

14.12.1996

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Japan

1.4.2000

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Mexico

11.9.2002

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Monaco

7.10.2001

90 days in any half-year period

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Panama

6.5.2004

90 days

All passports

Peru

4.7.2007

90 days in any half-year period

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Special passports

San Marino

8.10.2004

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

South Korea

27.6.2003

90 days

All passports

Ukraine

17.5.1998

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

United States of America

1.1.1996

90 days in any half-year period

Ordinary passports

Uruguay

13.11.2003

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Venezuela

6.11.2003

90 days in any six-month period

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

24.9.2002

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Macao Special Administrative Region

20.6.2004

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Lithuania

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Argentina | 31.12.2003 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Brazil | 13.1.2009 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Chile | 18.5.1999 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Israel | 13.5.2001 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Japan | 25.4.2000 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Panama | 24.1.2004 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| South Korea | 9.5.2002 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Uruguay | 29.12.2000 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Hong Kong Special Administrative Region | 4.2.2002 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Macao Special Administrative Region | 6.3.2002 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Argentina

31.12.2003

90 days

Ordinary passports

Brazil

13.1.2009

90 days

Ordinary passports

Chile

18.5.1999

90 days

Ordinary passports

Israel

13.5.2001

90 days

Ordinary passports

Japan

25.4.2000

90 days

Ordinary passports

Panama

24.1.2004

90 days

Ordinary passports

South Korea

9.5.2002

90 days

Ordinary passports

Uruguay

29.12.2000

90 days

Ordinary passports

Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

4.2.2002

90 days

Ordinary passports

Macao Special Administrative Region

6.3.2002

90 days

Ordinary passports

Luxembourg

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Australia | 5.10.1951 | 60 days | All passports |
| Chile | 7.4.1961 | 90 days | All passports |
| Israel | 8.12.1964 | 90 days | All passports |
| New Zealand | 15.11.1951 | 90 days | All passports |
| South Korea | 1.6.1970 | 90 days | All passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Australia

5.10.1951

60 days

All passports

Chile

7.4.1961

90 days

All passports

Israel

8.12.1964

90 days

All passports

New Zealand

15.11.1951

90 days

All passports

South Korea

1.6.1970

90 days

All passports

Hungary

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Andorra | 12.7.2003 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Argentina | 15.12.1990 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Brazil | 19.7.1999 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Canada | 1.2.1991 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Chile | 1.6.1992 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Costa Rica | 12.6.1992 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Israel | 15.3.1994 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Japan | 21.6.1997 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Malaysia | 19.2.1993 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Mexico | 14.5.1997 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| New Zealand | 15.3.2000 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Panama | 22.2.1993 and 30.12.1998 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Paraguay | 18.1.2004 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| San Marino | 7.5.1990 | 30 days | Ordinary passports |
| Singapore | 9.10.1994 | 30 days | Ordinary passports |
| South Korea | 26.4.1991 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Uruguay | 14.8.1991 | 90 days | All passports |
| United States of America | 1.11.1990 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Venezuela | 1.6.2000 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Hong Kong Special Administrative Region | 7.2.2002 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Macao Special Administrative Region | 29.12.2001 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Andorra

12.7.2003

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Argentina

15.12.1990

90 days

Ordinary passports

Brazil

19.7.1999

90 days

Ordinary passports

Canada

1.2.1991

90 days

Ordinary passports

Chile

1.6.1992

90 days

Ordinary passports

Costa Rica

12.6.1992

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Israel

15.3.1994

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Japan

21.6.1997

90 days

Ordinary passports

Malaysia

19.2.1993

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Mexico

14.5.1997

90 days

Ordinary passports

New Zealand

15.3.2000

90 days

Ordinary passports

Panama

22.2.1993 and 30.12.1998

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Paraguay

18.1.2004

90 days

Ordinary passports

San Marino

7.5.1990

30 days

Ordinary passports

Singapore

9.10.1994

30 days

Ordinary passports

South Korea

26.4.1991

90 days

Ordinary passports

Uruguay

14.8.1991

90 days

All passports

United States of America

1.11.1990

90 days

Ordinary passports

Venezuela

1.6.2000

90 days

Ordinary passports

Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

7.2.2002

90 days

Ordinary passports

Macao Special Administrative Region

29.12.2001

90 days

Ordinary passports

The Netherlands

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Australia | 1.4.1951 | 90 days | All passports |
| Canada | 1.1.1950 | 90 days | All passports |
| Chile | 8.4.1961 | 90 days | All passports |
| Israel | 8.12.1964 | 3 months in any period of 6 months | All passports |
| Japan | 28.8.1956 | 90 days | All passports |
| South Korea | 1.6.1970 | 90 days | All passports |
| Malaysia | 20.1.1959 | 90 days | All passports |
| New Zealand | 1.4.1949 | 90 days | All passports |
| Paraguay | 22.11.1960 | 90 days | All passports |
| United States of America | 15.8.1947 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Australia

1.4.1951

90 days

All passports

Canada

1.1.1950

90 days

All passports

Chile

8.4.1961

90 days

All passports

Israel

8.12.1964

3 months in any period of 6 months

All passports

Japan

28.8.1956

90 days

All passports

South Korea

1.6.1970

90 days

All passports

Malaysia

20.1.1959

90 days

All passports

New Zealand

1.4.1949

90 days

All passports

Paraguay

22.11.1960

90 days

All passports

United States of America

15.8.1947

90 days

Ordinary passports

Austria

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Albania | 1.9.1992 | 3 months | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Andorra | 1.6.1957 | 3 months | All passports |
| Argentina | 1.8.1960 | 3 months | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Australia | 1.4.1956 | 3 months | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Bahamas | 1.9.1982 | 3 months | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Barbados | 31.12.1997 | 3 months | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Bosnia and Herzegovina | 1.11.1995 | 3 months | Diplomatic passports |
| Brazil | 25.2.1960 | 6 months | Diplomatic passports |
| 6 months | Service/official passports |
| 5.10.1967 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Canada | 1.7.1956 | 3 months | All passports |
| Chile | 1.12.1954 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Costa Rica | 14.9.1968 | 3 months | All passports |
| El Salvador | 1.12.1963 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Guatemala | 20.9.1977 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| 6 months | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Israel | 22.12.1968 | 3 months | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Japan | 1.4.1958 | 6 months | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Malaysia | 19.5.1983 | 3 months | All passports |
| Mexico | 6.7.1958 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Monaco | 9.9.1983 | 3 months | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| New Zealand | 1.6.1958 | 3 months | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Panama | 3.9.1981 | 3 months | All passports |
| Paraguay | 18.3.1969 | 3 months | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Peru | 1.1.1996 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports
  Special passports |
| San Marino | 29.7.1972 | 3 months | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Singapore | 1.3.1983 | 3 months | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| South Korea | 25.6.1979 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 180 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Uruguay | 1.9.1963 | 3 months | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Venezuela | 1.4.1990 | 3 months | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Albania

1.9.1992

3 months

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Andorra

1.6.1957

3 months

All passports

Argentina

1.8.1960

3 months

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Australia

1.4.1956

3 months

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Bahamas

1.9.1982

3 months

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Barbados

31.12.1997

3 months

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Bosnia and Herzegovina

1.11.1995

3 months

Diplomatic passports

Brazil

25.2.1960

6 months

Diplomatic passports

6 months

Service/official passports

5.10.1967

3 months

Ordinary passports

Canada

1.7.1956

3 months

All passports

Chile

1.12.1954

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Costa Rica

14.9.1968

3 months

All passports

El Salvador

1.12.1963

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Guatemala

20.9.1977

3 months

Ordinary passports

6 months

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Israel

22.12.1968

3 months

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Japan

1.4.1958

6 months

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Malaysia

19.5.1983

3 months

All passports

Mexico

6.7.1958

3 months

Ordinary passports

Monaco

9.9.1983

3 months

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

New Zealand

1.6.1958

3 months

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Panama

3.9.1981

3 months

All passports

Paraguay

18.3.1969

3 months

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Peru

1.1.1996

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Special passports

San Marino

29.7.1972

3 months

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Singapore

1.3.1983

3 months

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

South Korea

25.6.1979

90 days

Ordinary passports

180 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Uruguay

1.9.1963

3 months

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Venezuela

1.4.1990

3 months

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Poland

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Argentina | 22.11.1990 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Brazil | 23.4.2000 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports
  Emergency passports
  Seaman's book |
| Chile | 24.2.1995 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Costa Rica | 8.7.1992 | 90 days | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Honduras | 11.1.1994 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Nicaragua | 10.2.1995 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Singapore | 2.9.1999 | 30 days | Ordinary passports |
| Uruguay | 2.9.1991 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Argentina

22.11.1990

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Brazil

23.4.2000

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Emergency passports

Seaman's book

Chile

24.2.1995

90 days

Ordinary passports

Costa Rica

8.7.1992

90 days

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Honduras

11.1.1994

90 days

Ordinary passports

Nicaragua

10.2.1995

90 days

Ordinary passports

Singapore

2.9.1999

30 days

Ordinary passports

Uruguay

2.9.1991

90 days

Ordinary passports

Portugal

| Contracting party/parties | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Length of stay | Category of passports |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Argentina | 15.11.1979 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Australia | 1.5.1963 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Canada | 15.2.1958 | 60 days | Ordinary passports |
| Chile | July 1970 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Costa Rica | June 1969 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Mexico | 2.4.1979 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Monaco | 16.2.1959 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| New Zealand | 1.1.1988 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| San Marino | 1.9.1981 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| South Korea | September 1979 | 60 days | Ordinary passports |
| Uruguay | December 1985 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| United States of America | July 1983 | 60 days | Ordinary passports |

Contracting party/parties

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Length of stay

Category of passports

Argentina

15.11.1979

90 days

Ordinary passports

Australia

1.5.1963

90 days

Ordinary passports

Canada

15.2.1958

60 days

Ordinary passports

Chile

July 1970

90 days

Ordinary passports

Costa Rica

June 1969

90 days

Ordinary passports

Mexico

2.4.1979

90 days

Ordinary passports

Monaco

16.2.1959

90 days

Ordinary passports

New Zealand

1.1.1988

90 days

Ordinary passports

San Marino

1.9.1981

90 days

Ordinary passports

South Korea

September 1979

60 days

Ordinary passports

Uruguay

December 1985

90 days

Ordinary passports

United States of America

July 1983

60 days

Ordinary passports

Slovakia

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Argentina | 15.10.2001 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| 14.11.2001 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Brazil | 15.8.1991 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Chile | 22.5.2000 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports
  Special passports |
| 28.10.2000 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Israel | 2.9.1997 | 3 months | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| 2.9.1997 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Japan | 22.3.2002 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| South Korea | 15.7.1995 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Malaysia | 15.8.1991 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Panama | 12.8.1999 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports
  Special passports |
| Paraguay | 23.12.1996 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Uruguay | 28.9.1995 | 3 months | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Venezuela | 15.8.1991 | 30 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Argentina

15.10.2001

90 days

Ordinary passports

14.11.2001

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Brazil

15.8.1991

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Chile

22.5.2000

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Special passports

28.10.2000

90 days

Ordinary passports

Israel

2.9.1997

3 months

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

2.9.1997

90 days

Ordinary passports

Japan

22.3.2002

90 days

Ordinary passports

South Korea

15.7.1995

90 days

Ordinary passports

Malaysia

15.8.1991

3 months

Ordinary passports

Panama

12.8.1999

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Special passports

Paraguay

23.12.1996

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Uruguay

28.9.1995

3 months

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Venezuela

15.8.1991

30 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Finland

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Australia | 1961 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| New Zealand | 1973 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Australia

1961

90 days

Ordinary passports

New Zealand

1973

90 days

Ordinary passports

Sweden

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Argentina | 6.9.1961 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Australia | 1.11.1951 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Barbados | 1.1.1969 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Brazil | 1.5.1956 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Canada | 30.6.1949 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Chile | 1.1.1991 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Costa Rica | 1.1.1968 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Honduras | 1.2.1960 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Israel | 1.4.1966 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Japan | 8.8.1956 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Malaysia | 1.10.1960 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Mauritius | 18.12.1968 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Mexico | 1.5.1954 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| New Zealand | 1.7.1948 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Nicaragua | 24.5.1968 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Paraguay | 1.7.1963 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Singapore | 1.8.1968 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| South Korea | 1.9.1969 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |
| Trinidad and Tobago | 1.10.1968 | 3 months | Ordinary passports |
| Uruguay | 1.4.1960 | 90 days | Ordinary passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Argentina

6.9.1961

3 months

Ordinary passports

Australia

1.11.1951

3 months

Ordinary passports

Barbados

1.1.1969

3 months

Ordinary passports

Brazil

1.5.1956

3 months

Ordinary passports

Canada

30.6.1949

3 months

Ordinary passports

Chile

1.1.1991

3 months

Ordinary passports

Costa Rica

1.1.1968

3 months

Ordinary passports

Honduras

1.2.1960

3 months

Ordinary passports

Israel

1.4.1966

3 months

Ordinary passports

Japan

8.8.1956

3 months

Ordinary passports

Malaysia

1.10.1960

3 months

Ordinary passports

Mauritius

18.12.1968

3 months

Ordinary passports

Mexico

1.5.1954

3 months

Ordinary passports

New Zealand

1.7.1948

3 months

Ordinary passports

Nicaragua

24.5.1968

3 months

Ordinary passports

Paraguay

1.7.1963

3 months

Ordinary passports

Singapore

1.8.1968

3 months

Ordinary passports

South Korea

1.9.1969

90 days

Ordinary passports

Trinidad and Tobago

1.10.1968

3 months

Ordinary passports

Uruguay

1.4.1960

90 days

Ordinary passports

SCHENGEN ASSOCIATED COUNTRIES

Iceland

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Australia | 29.4.1969 | 3 months | All passports |
| Brazil | 28.8.1969 | 3 months | All passports |
| Chile | 1.6.1967 | 3 months | All passports |
| Israel | 1.4.1966 | 3 months | Ordinary passports
  Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Japan | 20.11.1966 | 3 months | All passports |
| Canada | 1.11.1962 | 3 months | All passports |
| Malaysia | 1.7.1959 | 90 days | All passports |
| Mexico | 1.3.1966 | 3 months | All passports |
| New Zealand | 1.2.1974 | 3 months | All passports |
| South Korea | 1.4.1970 | 90 days | All passports |
| Uruguay | 8.8.1991 | 3 months | All passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Australia

29.4.1969

3 months

All passports

Brazil

28.8.1969

3 months

All passports

Chile

1.6.1967

3 months

All passports

Israel

1.4.1966

3 months

Ordinary passports

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Japan

20.11.1966

3 months

All passports

Canada

1.11.1962

3 months

All passports

Malaysia

1.7.1959

90 days

All passports

Mexico

1.3.1966

3 months

All passports

New Zealand

1.2.1974

3 months

All passports

South Korea

1.4.1970

90 days

All passports

Uruguay

8.8.1991

3 months

All passports

Liechtenstein

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Albania | 1.2.1969 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports |
| Antigua and Barbuda | 1.10.1963 | 90 days | All passports |
| Bahamas | 1.10.1963 | 90 days | All passports |
| Barbados | 6.1.1971 | 90 days | All passports |
| Brunei | 1.10.1963 | 90 days | All passports |
| Costa Rica | 24.11.1966 | 90 days | All passports |
| North Macedonia | 22.7.1998 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports
  Special passports |
| Honduras | 24.11.1966 | 90 days | All passports |
| Israel | 1.6.1967 | 90 days | All passports |
| Japan | 15.4.1957 | 90 days | All passports |
| Malaysia | 1.9.1960 | 90 days | All passports |
| Moldova | 7.2.2004 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| New Zealand | 1.8.1948 | 90 days | All passports |
| Panama | 18.2.1967 | 90 days | All passports |
| Paraguay | 10.2.1964 | 90 days | All passports |
| Singapore | 1.9.1960 | 90 days | All passports |
| Saint Kitts and Nevis | 1.10.1963 | 90 days | All passports |
| South Korea | 28.6.1979 | 90 days | All passports |
| Ukraine | 1.1.2004 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports
  Special passports |
| Venezuela | 14.10.1988 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports
  Special passports |
| Hong Kong Special Administrative Region | 1.5.2000 | 90 days | All passports |
| Macao Special Administrative Region | 1.12.2005 | 90 days | All passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Albania

1.2.1969

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Antigua and Barbuda

1.10.1963

90 days

All passports

Bahamas

1.10.1963

90 days

All passports

Barbados

6.1.1971

90 days

All passports

Brunei

1.10.1963

90 days

All passports

Costa Rica

24.11.1966

90 days

All passports

North Macedonia

22.7.1998

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Special passports

Honduras

24.11.1966

90 days

All passports

Israel

1.6.1967

90 days

All passports

Japan

15.4.1957

90 days

All passports

Malaysia

1.9.1960

90 days

All passports

Moldova

7.2.2004

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

New Zealand

1.8.1948

90 days

All passports

Panama

18.2.1967

90 days

All passports

Paraguay

10.2.1964

90 days

All passports

Singapore

1.9.1960

90 days

All passports

Saint Kitts and Nevis

1.10.1963

90 days

All passports

South Korea

28.6.1979

90 days

All passports

Ukraine

1.1.2004

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Special passports

Venezuela

14.10.1988

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Special passports

Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

1.5.2000

90 days

All passports

Macao Special Administrative Region

1.12.2005

90 days

All passports

Norway

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Argentina | 1.1.1962 | 90 days | All passports |
| Australia | 19.11.1951 | 90 days | All passports |
| Brazil | 1.3.1959 | 90 days | All passports |
| Brunei | 1.7.1990 | 90 days | All passports |
| Canada | 1.1.1950 | 90 days | All passports |
| Chile | 1.12.1991 | 90 days | All passports |
| Costa Rica | 20.4.1969 | 90 days | All passports |
| El Salvador | 1.11.1959 | 90 days | All passports |
| Guatemala | 1.1.1963 | 90 days | All passports |
| Honduras | 1.1.1960 | 90 days | All passports |
| Israel | 1.4.1966 | 90 days | All passports |
| Japan | 1.9.1956 | 90 days | All passports |
| Malaysia | 1.10.1960 | 90 days | All passports |
| Mexico | 1.2.1960 | 90 days | All passports |
| New Zealand | 1.1.1950 | 90 days | All passports |
| Nicaragua | 1.11.1960 | 90 days | All passports |
| Panama | 1.1.1963 | 90 days | All passports |
| Paraguay | 1.7.1963 | 90 days | All passports |
| Singapore | 1.11.1968 | 90 days | All passports |
| South Korea | 1.10.1969 | 90 days | All passports |
| United States of America | 1.8.1947 | 90 days | All passports |
| Uruguay | 1.3.1961 | 90 days | All passports |
| Venezuela | 15.12.1959 | 90 days | All passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Argentina

1.1.1962

90 days

All passports

Australia

19.11.1951

90 days

All passports

Brazil

1.3.1959

90 days

All passports

Brunei

1.7.1990

90 days

All passports

Canada

1.1.1950

90 days

All passports

Chile

1.12.1991

90 days

All passports

Costa Rica

20.4.1969

90 days

All passports

El Salvador

1.11.1959

90 days

All passports

Guatemala

1.1.1963

90 days

All passports

Honduras

1.1.1960

90 days

All passports

Israel

1.4.1966

90 days

All passports

Japan

1.9.1956

90 days

All passports

Malaysia

1.10.1960

90 days

All passports

Mexico

1.2.1960

90 days

All passports

New Zealand

1.1.1950

90 days

All passports

Nicaragua

1.11.1960

90 days

All passports

Panama

1.1.1963

90 days

All passports

Paraguay

1.7.1963

90 days

All passports

Singapore

1.11.1968

90 days

All passports

South Korea

1.10.1969

90 days

All passports

United States of America

1.8.1947

90 days

All passports

Uruguay

1.3.1961

90 days

All passports

Venezuela

15.12.1959

90 days

All passports

Switzerland

| Third country concerned | Entry into force of bilateral agreement | Authorised length of stay | Categories of passports covered |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Albania | 1.7.2004 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports |
| Antigua and Barbuda | 1.10.1963 | 90 days | All passports |
| Bahamas | 1.10.1963 | 90 days | All passports |
| Barbados | 6.1.1971 | 90 days | All passports |
| Brunei | 1.10.1963 | 90 days | All passports |
| Chile | 1.1.1949 | 90 days | All passports |
| Costa Rica | 24.11.1966 | 90 days | All passports |
| North Macedonia | 22.7.1998 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports
  Special passports |
| Honduras | 24.11.1966 | 90 days | All passports |
| Israel | 1.6.1967 | 90 days | All passports |
| Japan | 15.4.1957 | 90 days | All passports |
| Malaysia | 1.9.1960 | 90 days | All passports |
| Mexico | 1.2.1994 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| Moldova | 7.2.2004 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports |
| New Zealand | 1.8.1948 | 90 days | All passports |
| Panama | 18.2.1967 | 90 days | All passports |
| Paraguay | 10.2.1964 | 90 days | All passports |
| Singapore | 1.9.1960 | 90 days | All passports |
| Saint Kitts and Nevis | 1.10.1963 | 90 days | All passports |
| South Korea | 28.6.1979 | 90 days | All passports |
| Ukraine | 1.1.2004 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports
  Special passports |
| Venezuela | 14.10.1988 | 90 days | Diplomatic passports
  Service/official passports
  Special passports |
| Hong Kong Special Administrative Region | 1.5.2000 | 90 days | All passports |
| Macao Special Administrative Region | 1.12.2005 | 90 days | All passports |

Third country concerned

Entry into force of bilateral agreement

Authorised length of stay

Categories of passports covered

Albania

1.7.2004

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Antigua and Barbuda

1.10.1963

90 days

All passports

Bahamas

1.10.1963

90 days

All passports

Barbados

6.1.1971

90 days

All passports

Brunei

1.10.1963

90 days

All passports

Chile

1.1.1949

90 days

All passports

Costa Rica

24.11.1966

90 days

All passports

North Macedonia

22.7.1998

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Special passports

Honduras

24.11.1966

90 days

All passports

Israel

1.6.1967

90 days

All passports

Japan

15.4.1957

90 days

All passports

Malaysia

1.9.1960

90 days

All passports

Mexico

1.2.1994

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Moldova

7.2.2004

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

New Zealand

1.8.1948

90 days

All passports

Panama

18.2.1967

90 days

All passports

Paraguay

10.2.1964

90 days

All passports

Singapore

1.9.1960

90 days

All passports

Saint Kitts and Nevis

1.10.1963

90 days

All passports

South Korea

28.6.1979

90 days

All passports

Ukraine

1.1.2004

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Special passports

Venezuela

14.10.1988

90 days

Diplomatic passports

Service/official passports

Special passports

Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

1.5.2000

90 days

All passports

Macao Special Administrative Region

1.12.2005

90 days

All passports

---

(1)  OJ L 327, 9.12.2017, p. 20. In accordance with Article 73 of the EES Regulation, Article 60 will only become applicable with the start of operations of the EES.

---

V Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

| 8.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 130/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 130/53

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9346 — Investcorp/Aberdeen/JV)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 130/08)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Investcorp Investment Holdings Limited (‘Investcorp’, Cayman Islands), ultimately controlled by SIPCO Holdings Limited, |
| --- | --- |

—

Investcorp Investment Holdings Limited (‘Investcorp’, Cayman Islands), ultimately controlled by SIPCO Holdings Limited,

| — | Aberdeen Asset Management plc (‘Aberdeen’, United-Kingdom), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Standard Life Aberdeen plc, |
| --- | --- |

—

Aberdeen Asset Management plc (‘Aberdeen’, United-Kingdom), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Standard Life Aberdeen plc,

| — | Concession Infrastructure Investments Manager Limited, a newly created entity (‘JV’, Cayman Islands). |
| --- | --- |

—

Concession Infrastructure Investments Manager Limited, a newly created entity (‘JV’, Cayman Islands).

Investcorp and Aberdeen acquire, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation, joint control over the JV.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.

2.

| — | Investcorp is an international financial institution acting as a principal and as an intermediary in international investment transactions, |
| --- | --- |

—

Investcorp is an international financial institution acting as a principal and as an intermediary in international investment transactions,

| — | Aberdeen is a global investment company, |
| --- | --- |

—

Aberdeen is a global investment company,

| — | Concession Infrastructure Investments Manager Limited will provide investment advisory services to investment funds with respect to social and economic infrastructure projects in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries, Middle East and North Africa region and Turkey. |
| --- | --- |

—

Concession Infrastructure Investments Manager Limited will provide investment advisory services to investment funds with respect to social and economic infrastructure projects in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries, Middle East and North Africa region and Turkey.

3.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.9346 — Investcorp/Aberdeen/JV

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

| E-mail: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| --- |
| Fax +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

E-mail: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

2

---

| 8.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 130/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 130/55

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9340 — Alliance Automotive Group/PartsPoint Group)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 130/09)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Alliance Automotive Holding Limited (‘AAG’, United Kingdom), |
| --- | --- |

—

Alliance Automotive Holding Limited (‘AAG’, United Kingdom),

| — | PartsPoint Group B.V. (‘PPG’, the Netherlands). |
| --- | --- |

—

PartsPoint Group B.V. (‘PPG’, the Netherlands).

AAG acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of PPG. The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

—   for AAG: wholesale distribution of light vehicle and heavy commercial vehicle parts to the automotive aftermarket in France, Germany, the United Kingdom and Poland. In France, AAG is also to active at the retail level,

—   for PPG: wholesale distribution of spare parts and accessories for light vehicles in Belgium and the Netherlands.

3.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.9340 — Alliance Automotive Group/PartsPoint Group

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

| Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| --- |
| Fax +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

2

---

| 8.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 130/56 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 130/56

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9344 — Swiss Life/Montagu/Pondus)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 130/10)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Swiss Life Holding AG (‘Swiss Life’, Switzerland), |
| --- | --- |

—

Swiss Life Holding AG (‘Swiss Life’, Switzerland),

| — | Montagu Private Equity LLP (‘Montagu’, United Kingdom), |
| --- | --- |

—

Montagu Private Equity LLP (‘Montagu’, United Kingdom),

| — | Pondus GmbH & Co. KG (‘Pondus’, Germany). |
| --- | --- |

—

Pondus GmbH & Co. KG (‘Pondus’, Germany).

Swiss Life and Montagu acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the whole of Pondus.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

—   for Swiss Life: an insurance company,

—   for Montagu: a private equity firm,

—   for Pondus: a real estate company that leases out a retail and office building in Berlin, Germany.

3.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.9344 — Swiss Life/Montagu/Pondus

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

| Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| --- |
| Fax +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

2

---