# Official Journal C 167/2013

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.167.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 167 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5613 June 2013 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.167.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 167

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5613 June 2013

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 167/01 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| 2013/C 167/02 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  2
  ) | 6 |
| 2013/C 167/03 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6930 — KKR/SMCP) (
  1
  ) | 7 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2013/C 167/01

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  )

1

1

2013/C 167/02

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  2
  )

2

6

2013/C 167/03

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6930 — KKR/SMCP) (
  1
  )

1

7

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 167/04 | Euro exchange rates | 8 |
| | NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES |
| 2013/C 167/05 | Update of the list of border crossing points referred to in Article 2(8) of Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Community Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (OJ C 316, 28.12.2007, p. 1; OJ C 134, 31.5.2008, p. 16; OJ C 177, 12.7.2008, p. 9; OJ C 200, 6.8.2008, p. 10; OJ C 331, 31.12.2008, p. 13; OJ C 3, 8.1.2009, p. 10; OJ C 37, 14.2.2009, p. 10; OJ C 64, 19.3.2009, p. 20; OJ C 99, 30.4.2009, p. 7; OJ C 229, 23.9.2009, p. 28; OJ C 263, 5.11.2009, p. 22; OJ C 298, 8.12.2009, p. 17; OJ C 74, 24.3.2010, p. 13; OJ C 326, 3.12.2010, p. 17; OJ C 355, 29.12.2010, p. 34; OJ C 22, 22.1.2011, p. 22; OJ C 37, 5.2.2011, p. 12; OJ C 149, 20.5.2011, p. 8; OJ C 190, 30.6.2011, p. 17; OJ C 203, 9.7.2011, p. 14; OJ C 210, 16.7.2011, p. 30; OJ C 271, 14.9.2011, p. 18; OJ C 356, 6.12.2011, p. 12; OJ C 111, 18.4.2012, p. 3; OJ C 183, 23.6.2012, p. 7; OJ C 313, 17.10.2012, p. 11; OJ C 394, 20.12.2012, p. 22; OJ C 51, 22.2.2013, p. 9) | 9 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2013/C 167/04

Euro exchange rates

8

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

2013/C 167/05

Update of the list of border crossing points referred to in Article 2(8) of Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Community Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (OJ C 316, 28.12.2007, p. 1; OJ C 134, 31.5.2008, p. 16; OJ C 177, 12.7.2008, p. 9; OJ C 200, 6.8.2008, p. 10; OJ C 331, 31.12.2008, p. 13; OJ C 3, 8.1.2009, p. 10; OJ C 37, 14.2.2009, p. 10; OJ C 64, 19.3.2009, p. 20; OJ C 99, 30.4.2009, p. 7; OJ C 229, 23.9.2009, p. 28; OJ C 263, 5.11.2009, p. 22; OJ C 298, 8.12.2009, p. 17; OJ C 74, 24.3.2010, p. 13; OJ C 326, 3.12.2010, p. 17; OJ C 355, 29.12.2010, p. 34; OJ C 22, 22.1.2011, p. 22; OJ C 37, 5.2.2011, p. 12; OJ C 149, 20.5.2011, p. 8; OJ C 190, 30.6.2011, p. 17; OJ C 203, 9.7.2011, p. 14; OJ C 210, 16.7.2011, p. 30; OJ C 271, 14.9.2011, p. 18; OJ C 356, 6.12.2011, p. 12; OJ C 111, 18.4.2012, p. 3; OJ C 183, 23.6.2012, p. 7; OJ C 313, 17.10.2012, p. 11; OJ C 394, 20.12.2012, p. 22; OJ C 51, 22.2.2013, p. 9)

9

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 167/06 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6906 — KKR/Gardner Denver) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 18 |
| 2013/C 167/07 | Communication from the Commission on quantifying harm in actions for damages based on breaches of Article 101 or 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (
  1
  ) | 19 |
| | OTHER ACTS |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 167/08 | Publication of an application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs | 22 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2013/C 167/06

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6906 — KKR/Gardner Denver) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

18

2013/C 167/07

Communication from the Commission on quantifying harm in actions for damages based on breaches of Article 101 or 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (
  1
  )

1

19

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

2013/C 167/08

Publication of an application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

22

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |
| | (2)   Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

(2)   Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty

2

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

EN

---

II Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 13.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 167/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 167/1

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance)

2013/C 167/01

| Date of adoption of the decision | 2.5.2013 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of State Aid | SA.25745 (13/NN) |
| Member State | Germany |
| Region | — | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Mutmaßliche staatliche Beihilfe zugunsten des Internetportals http://www.zvg-portal.de |
| Legal basis | Zwangsversteigerungsgesetz |
| Type of measure | Individual aid | Land Nordrhein-Westfalen |
| Objective | Other |
| Form of aid | Direct grant |
| Budget | Annual budget: EUR 0,12 million |
| Intensity | Measure does not constitute aid |
| Duration (period) | From 11.11.2005 |
| Economic sectors | Publishing activities |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Bundesländer |
| Other information | — |

Date of adoption of the decision

2.5.2013

Reference number of State Aid

SA.25745 (13/NN)

Member State

Germany

Region

—

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Mutmaßliche staatliche Beihilfe zugunsten des Internetportals http://www.zvg-portal.de

Legal basis

Zwangsversteigerungsgesetz

Type of measure

Individual aid

Land Nordrhein-Westfalen

Objective

Other

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Annual budget: EUR 0,12 million

Intensity

Measure does not constitute aid

Duration (period)

From 11.11.2005

Economic sectors

Publishing activities

Name and address of the granting authority

Bundesländer

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

| Date of adoption of the decision | 26.9.2012 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of State Aid | SA.34208 (12/NN) |
| Member State | Lithuania |
| Region | — | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Lithuanian Central Credit Union |
| Legal basis | — |
| Type of measure | Ad hoc aid | Lithuanian Central Credit Union (Cooperative credit institution) |
| Objective | Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy |
| Form of aid | Other forms of equity intervention |
| Budget | Overall budget: LTL 6 million |
| Intensity | 32 % |
| Duration (period) | 19.12.2011-31.12.2016 |
| Economic sectors | Other monetary intermediation |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Lithuania |
| Lukiškių g. 2 |
| LT-01512 Vilnius |
| LIETUVA/LITHUANIA |

Date of adoption of the decision

26.9.2012

Reference number of State Aid

SA.34208 (12/NN)

Member State

Lithuania

Region

—

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Lithuanian Central Credit Union

Legal basis

—

Type of measure

Ad hoc aid

Lithuanian Central Credit Union (Cooperative credit institution)

Objective

Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy

Form of aid

Other forms of equity intervention

Budget

Overall budget: LTL 6 million

Intensity

32 %

Duration (period)

19.12.2011-31.12.2016

Economic sectors

Other monetary intermediation

Name and address of the granting authority

Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Lithuania

Lukiškių g. 2

LT-01512 Vilnius

LIETUVA/LITHUANIA

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

| Date of adoption of the decision | 2.4.2013 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of State Aid | SA.35565 (13/N) |
| Member State | United Kingdom |
| Region | — | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Amendments to the Renewables Obligation (RO) scheme |
| Legal basis | Section 32 of the Electricity Act 1989 (1989 Chapter 29), as amended by Sections 37-40 of the Energy Act 2008 (2008 Chapter 32)
  Implemented by the Renewables Obligation Order 2009 (No 785), the Renewables Obligation (Amendment) Order 2010 (No 1107) and the Renewables Obligation (Amendment) Order 2011 (No 984)
  A further Renewables Obligation (Amendment) Order will give effect to the proposed changes |
| Type of measure | Scheme | — |
| Objective | Environmental protection, Sectoral development |
| Form of aid | Other — Monies levied from licensed suppliers who do not provide Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs) in fulfilment of all or part of their obligation are redistributed to those suppliers who do provide ROCs in fulfilment of all or part of their obligation |
| Budget | Overall budget: GBP 1 158 million |
| Intensity | — |
| Duration (period) | Until 31.3.2037 |
| Economic sectors | Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Department of Energy and Climate Change |
| 3 Whitehall Place |
| London |
| SW1A 2AW |
| UNITED KINGDOM |

Date of adoption of the decision

2.4.2013

Reference number of State Aid

SA.35565 (13/N)

Member State

United Kingdom

Region

—

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Amendments to the Renewables Obligation (RO) scheme

Legal basis

Section 32 of the Electricity Act 1989 (1989 Chapter 29), as amended by Sections 37-40 of the Energy Act 2008 (2008 Chapter 32)

Implemented by the Renewables Obligation Order 2009 (No 785), the Renewables Obligation (Amendment) Order 2010 (No 1107) and the Renewables Obligation (Amendment) Order 2011 (No 984)

A further Renewables Obligation (Amendment) Order will give effect to the proposed changes

Type of measure

Scheme

—

Objective

Environmental protection, Sectoral development

Form of aid

Other — Monies levied from licensed suppliers who do not provide Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs) in fulfilment of all or part of their obligation are redistributed to those suppliers who do provide ROCs in fulfilment of all or part of their obligation

Budget

Overall budget: GBP 1 158 million

Intensity

—

Duration (period)

Until 31.3.2037

Economic sectors

Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply

Name and address of the granting authority

Department of Energy and Climate Change

3 Whitehall Place

London

SW1A 2AW

UNITED KINGDOM

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

| Date of adoption of the decision | 29.4.2013 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of State Aid | SA.36084 (13/N) |
| Member State | United Kingdom |
| Region | Northern Ireland | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Renewables Obligation in Northern Ireland |
| Legal basis | Section 32 of the Electricity Act 1989, as amended by Energy Act 2004 currently subject to amendment by the Energy Bill 2008
  Implemented by Renewables Obligation Order 2006 (No 1004), amended by Renewables Obligation Order 2006 (Amendment) Order 2007 (No 1078) |
| Type of measure | Scheme | — |
| Objective | Environmental protection |
| Form of aid | Other — Monies levied from licensed suppliers who do not provide Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs) in fulfilment of all or part of their obligation are redistributed to those suppliers who do provide ROCs in fulfilment of all or part of their obligation |
| Budget | — |
| Intensity | — |
| Duration (period) | Until 31.3.2037 |
| Economic sectors | All economic sectors eligible to receive aid |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment |
| Netherleigh |
| Massey Avenue |
| Belfast |
| Northern Ireland |
| BT4 2JP |
| UNITED KINGDOM |

Date of adoption of the decision

29.4.2013

Reference number of State Aid

SA.36084 (13/N)

Member State

United Kingdom

Region

Northern Ireland

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Renewables Obligation in Northern Ireland

Legal basis

Section 32 of the Electricity Act 1989, as amended by Energy Act 2004 currently subject to amendment by the Energy Bill 2008

Implemented by Renewables Obligation Order 2006 (No 1004), amended by Renewables Obligation Order 2006 (Amendment) Order 2007 (No 1078)

Type of measure

Scheme

—

Objective

Environmental protection

Form of aid

Other — Monies levied from licensed suppliers who do not provide Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs) in fulfilment of all or part of their obligation are redistributed to those suppliers who do provide ROCs in fulfilment of all or part of their obligation

Budget

—

Intensity

—

Duration (period)

Until 31.3.2037

Economic sectors

All economic sectors eligible to receive aid

Name and address of the granting authority

Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment

Netherleigh

Massey Avenue

Belfast

Northern Ireland

BT4 2JP

UNITED KINGDOM

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

| Date of adoption of the decision | 6.5.2013 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of State Aid | SA.36519 (13/N) |
| Member State | Lithuania |
| Region | — | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Valstybės pagalba mažoms ir vidutinėms įmonėms restruktūrizuoti (schema) (pratęsimas) |
| Legal basis | Lietuvos Respublikos įmonių restruktūrizavimo įstatymas (Žin., 2001, Nr. 31–1012; 2010, Nr. 86–4529);
  Lietuvos Respublikos mokesčių administravimo įstatymas (Žin., 2004, Nr. 63–2243).
  Žiūrėti informaciją Priede. |
| Type of measure | Scheme | — |
| Objective | Restructuring firms in difficulty |
| Form of aid | Debt write-off |
| Budget | Overall budget: LTL 258 million |
| Intensity | 100 % |
| Duration (period) | 2.7.2013-31.12.2015 |
| Economic sectors | All economic sectors eligible to receive aid |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Modestas Kaseliauskas |
| Antanas Šipavičius |
| Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos |
| Vasario 16-osios g. 15 |
| LT-01514 Vilnius |
| LIETUVA/LITHUANIA |

Date of adoption of the decision

6.5.2013

Reference number of State Aid

SA.36519 (13/N)

Member State

Lithuania

Region

—

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Valstybės pagalba mažoms ir vidutinėms įmonėms restruktūrizuoti (schema) (pratęsimas)

Legal basis

Lietuvos Respublikos įmonių restruktūrizavimo įstatymas (Žin., 2001, Nr. 31–1012; 2010, Nr. 86–4529);

Lietuvos Respublikos mokesčių administravimo įstatymas (Žin., 2004, Nr. 63–2243).

Žiūrėti informaciją Priede.

Type of measure

Scheme

—

Objective

Restructuring firms in difficulty

Form of aid

Debt write-off

Budget

Overall budget: LTL 258 million

Intensity

100 %

Duration (period)

2.7.2013-31.12.2015

Economic sectors

All economic sectors eligible to receive aid

Name and address of the granting authority

Modestas Kaseliauskas

Antanas Šipavičius

Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos

Vasario 16-osios g. 15

LT-01514 Vilnius

LIETUVA/LITHUANIA

| Valstybinio socialinio draudimo fondo valdyba prie Socialinės apsaugos ir darbo ministerijos |
| --- |
| Konstitucijos pr. 12 |
| LT-09308 Vilnius |
| LIETUVA/LITHUANIA |

Valstybinio socialinio draudimo fondo valdyba prie Socialinės apsaugos ir darbo ministerijos

Konstitucijos pr. 12

LT-09308 Vilnius

LIETUVA/LITHUANIA

| Mindaugas Sinkevičius |
| --- |
| Muitinės departamentas prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos |
| A. Jakšto g. 1/25 |
| LT-01105 Vilnius |
| LIETUVA/LITHUANIA |

Mindaugas Sinkevičius

Muitinės departamentas prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos

A. Jakšto g. 1/25

LT-01105 Vilnius

LIETUVA/LITHUANIA

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

---

| 13.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 167/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 167/6

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty)

2013/C 167/02

| Date of adoption of the decision | 15.5.2013 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of State Aid | SA.36009 (13/N) |
| Member State | France |
| Region | — | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Aide à la cessation d'activité laitière |
| Legal basis | — | articles D. 654-88-1 à D. 654-88-8 du code rural et de la pêche maritime |

Date of adoption of the decision

15.5.2013

Reference number of State Aid

SA.36009 (13/N)

Member State

France

Region

—

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Aide à la cessation d'activité laitière

Legal basis

—

articles D. 654-88-1 à D. 654-88-8 du code rural et de la pêche maritime

| — | arrêté du 26 août 2010 relatif à l’octroi d’une indemnité à l’abandon total ou partiel de la production laitière et à la mise en œuvre d’un dispositif spécifique de transfert de quotas laitiers pour les campagnes 2010-2011 à 2013-2014 |
| --- | --- |

—

arrêté du 26 août 2010 relatif à l’octroi d’une indemnité à l’abandon total ou partiel de la production laitière et à la mise en œuvre d’un dispositif spécifique de transfert de quotas laitiers pour les campagnes 2010-2011 à 2013-2014

| — | arrêté du 30 mars 2011 modifiant l'arrêté du 26 août 2010 relatif à l’octroi d’une indemnité à l’abandon total ou partiel de la production laitière et à la mise en œuvre d’un dispositif spécifique de transfert de quotas laitiers pour les campagnes 2010-2011 à 2013-2014 |
| --- | --- |

—

arrêté du 30 mars 2011 modifiant l'arrêté du 26 août 2010 relatif à l’octroi d’une indemnité à l’abandon total ou partiel de la production laitière et à la mise en œuvre d’un dispositif spécifique de transfert de quotas laitiers pour les campagnes 2010-2011 à 2013-2014

Type of measure

Scheme

—

Objective

Closing capacity

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

| | Overall budget: EUR 40 million |
| --- | --- |

Overall budget: EUR 40 million

| | Annual budget: EUR 40 million |
| --- | --- |

Annual budget: EUR 40 million

Intensity

Measure does not constitute aid

Duration (period)

Until 31.3.2014

Economic sectors

Agriculture, forestry and fishing

Name and address of the granting authority

| Ministère de l'agriculture, de l'agroalimentaire et de la forêt |
| --- |
| 3 rue Barbet de Jouy |
| 75349 Paris 07 SP |
| FRANCE |

Ministère de l'agriculture, de l'agroalimentaire et de la forêt

3 rue Barbet de Jouy

75349 Paris 07 SP

FRANCE

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

---

| 13.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 167/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 167/7

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6930 — KKR/SMCP)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2013/C 167/03

On 7 June 2013, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M6930. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M6930. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 13.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 167/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 167/8

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

12 June 2013

2013/C 167/04

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3277 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 128,30 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4571 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,84825 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,6808 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2323 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,6650 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,660 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 296,40 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7019 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2532 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4910 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,4906 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,3927 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3489 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,3095 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6604 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6672 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 498,19 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 13,2994 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,1434 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4705 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 13 090,63 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,1577 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 57,140 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 42,8380 |
| THB | Thai baht | 41,106 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,8243 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,9295 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 76,7610 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3277

JPY

Japanese yen

128,30

DKK

Danish krone

7,4571

GBP

Pound sterling

0,84825

SEK

Swedish krona

8,6808

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2323

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,6650

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,660

HUF

Hungarian forint

296,40

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7019

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2532

RON

Romanian leu

4,4910

TRY

Turkish lira

2,4906

AUD

Australian dollar

1,3927

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3489

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,3095

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6604

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6672

KRW

South Korean won

1 498,19

ZAR

South African rand

13,2994

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,1434

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4705

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

13 090,63

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,1577

PHP

Philippine peso

57,140

RUB

Russian rouble

42,8380

THB

Thai baht

41,106

BRL

Brazilian real

2,8243

MXN

Mexican peso

16,9295

INR

Indian rupee

76,7610

---

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

---

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

| 13.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 167/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 167/9

---

Update of the list of border crossing points referred to in Article 2(8) of Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Community Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (OJ C 316, 28.12.2007, p. 1; OJ C 134, 31.5.2008, p. 16; OJ C 177, 12.7.2008, p. 9; OJ C 200, 6.8.2008, p. 10; OJ C 331, 31.12.2008, p. 13; OJ C 3, 8.1.2009, p. 10; OJ C 37, 14.2.2009, p. 10; OJ C 64, 19.3.2009, p. 20; OJ C 99, 30.4.2009, p. 7; OJ C 229, 23.9.2009, p. 28; OJ C 263, 5.11.2009, p. 22; OJ C 298, 8.12.2009, p. 17; OJ C 74, 24.3.2010, p. 13; OJ C 326, 3.12.2010, p. 17; OJ C 355, 29.12.2010, p. 34; OJ C 22, 22.1.2011, p. 22; OJ C 37, 5.2.2011, p. 12; OJ C 149, 20.5.2011, p. 8; OJ C 190, 30.6.2011, p. 17; OJ C 203, 9.7.2011, p. 14; OJ C 210, 16.7.2011, p. 30; OJ C 271, 14.9.2011, p. 18; OJ C 356, 6.12.2011, p. 12; OJ C 111, 18.4.2012, p. 3; OJ C 183, 23.6.2012, p. 7; OJ C 313, 17.10.2012, p. 11; OJ C 394, 20.12.2012, p. 22; OJ C 51, 22.2.2013, p. 9)

2013/C 167/05

The publication of the list of border crossing points referred to in Article 2(8) of Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 establishing a Community Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) is based on the information communicated by the Member States to the Commission in conformity with Article 34 of the Schengen Borders Code.

In addition to the publication in the Official Journal, a regular update is available on the website of the Directorate-General for Home Affairs.

FRANCE

Replacement of the information published in OJ C 316, 28.12.2007

LIST OF BORDER CROSSING POINTS

Air borders

| 1. | Abbeville |
| --- | --- |

1.

Abbeville

| 2. | Agen-la Garenne |
| --- | --- |

2.

Agen-la Garenne

| 3. | Ajaccio-Campo dell'Oro |
| --- | --- |

3.

Ajaccio-Campo dell'Oro

| 4. | Albert-Bray |
| --- | --- |

4.

Albert-Bray

| 5. | Amiens-Glisy |
| --- | --- |

5.

Amiens-Glisy

| 6. | Angers-Marcé |
| --- | --- |

6.

Angers-Marcé

| 7. | Angoulême-Brie-Champniers |
| --- | --- |

7.

Angoulême-Brie-Champniers

| 8. | Annecy-Methet |
| --- | --- |

8.

Annecy-Methet

| 9. | Annemasse |
| --- | --- |

9.

Annemasse

| 10. | Auxerre-Branches |
| --- | --- |

10.

Auxerre-Branches

| 11. | Avignon-Caumont |
| --- | --- |

11.

Avignon-Caumont

| 12. | Bâle-Mulhouse |
| --- | --- |

12.

Bâle-Mulhouse

| 13. | Bastia-Poretta |
| --- | --- |

13.

Bastia-Poretta

| 14. | Beauvais-Tillé |
| --- | --- |

14.

Beauvais-Tillé

| 15. | Bergerac-Roumanière |
| --- | --- |

15.

Bergerac-Roumanière

| 16. | Besançon-la Vèze |
| --- | --- |

16.

Besançon-la Vèze

| 17. | Béziers-Vias |
| --- | --- |

17.

Béziers-Vias

| 18. | Biarritz-Bayonne-Anglet |
| --- | --- |

18.

Biarritz-Bayonne-Anglet

| 19. | Bordeaux-Mérignac |
| --- | --- |

19.

Bordeaux-Mérignac

| 20. | Brest-Guipavas |
| --- | --- |

20.

Brest-Guipavas

| 21. | Brive-Souillac |
| --- | --- |

21.

Brive-Souillac

| 22. | Caen-Carpiquet |
| --- | --- |

22.

Caen-Carpiquet

| 23. | Calais-Dunkerque |
| --- | --- |

23.

Calais-Dunkerque

| 24. | Calvi-Sainte-Catherine |
| --- | --- |

24.

Calvi-Sainte-Catherine

| 25. | Cannes-Mandelieu |
| --- | --- |

25.

Cannes-Mandelieu

| 26. | Carcassonne-Salvaza |
| --- | --- |

26.

Carcassonne-Salvaza

| 27. | Châlons-Vatry |
| --- | --- |

27.

Châlons-Vatry

| 28. | Chambéry-Aix-les-Bains |
| --- | --- |

28.

Chambéry-Aix-les-Bains

| 29. | Châteauroux-Déols |
| --- | --- |

29.

Châteauroux-Déols

| 30. | Cherbourg-Mauperthus |
| --- | --- |

30.

Cherbourg-Mauperthus

| 31. | Clermont-Ferrand-Aulnat |
| --- | --- |

31.

Clermont-Ferrand-Aulnat

| 32. | Colmar-Houssen |
| --- | --- |

32.

Colmar-Houssen

| 33. | Deauville-Saint-Gatien |
| --- | --- |

33.

Deauville-Saint-Gatien

| 34. | Dijon-Longvic |
| --- | --- |

34.

Dijon-Longvic

| 35. | Dinard-Pleurtuit |
| --- | --- |

35.

Dinard-Pleurtuit

| 36. | Dôle-Tavaux |
| --- | --- |

36.

Dôle-Tavaux

| 37. | Epinal-Mirecourt |
| --- | --- |

37.

Epinal-Mirecourt

| 38. | Figari-Sud Corse |
| --- | --- |

38.

Figari-Sud Corse

| 39. | Grenoble-Saint-Geoirs |
| --- | --- |

39.

Grenoble-Saint-Geoirs

| 40. | Hyères-le Palivestre |
| --- | --- |

40.

Hyères-le Palivestre

| 41. | Issy-les-Moulineaux |
| --- | --- |

41.

Issy-les-Moulineaux

| 42. | La Môle |
| --- | --- |

42.

La Môle

| 43. | Lannion |
| --- | --- |

43.

Lannion

| 44. | La Rochelle-Laleu |
| --- | --- |

44.

La Rochelle-Laleu

| 45. | Laval-Entrammes |
| --- | --- |

45.

Laval-Entrammes

| 46. | Le Castelet |
| --- | --- |

46.

Le Castelet

| 47. | Le Havre-Octeville |
| --- | --- |

47.

Le Havre-Octeville

| 48. | Le Mans-Arnage |
| --- | --- |

48.

Le Mans-Arnage

| 49. | Le Touquet-Paris-Plage |
| --- | --- |

49.

Le Touquet-Paris-Plage

| 50. | Lille-Lesquin |
| --- | --- |

50.

Lille-Lesquin

| 51. | Limoges-Bellegarde |
| --- | --- |

51.

Limoges-Bellegarde

| 52. | Lognes-Emerainville |
| --- | --- |

52.

Lognes-Emerainville

| 53. | Lorient-Lann-Bihoué |
| --- | --- |

53.

Lorient-Lann-Bihoué

| 54. | Lyon-Bron |
| --- | --- |

54.

Lyon-Bron

| 55. | Lyon-Saint-Exupéry |
| --- | --- |

55.

Lyon-Saint-Exupéry

| 56. | Marseille-Provence |
| --- | --- |

56.

Marseille-Provence

| 57. | Metz-Nancy-Lorraine |
| --- | --- |

57.

Metz-Nancy-Lorraine

| 58. | Monaco-Héliport |
| --- | --- |

58.

Monaco-Héliport

| 59. | Montbéliard-Courcelles |
| --- | --- |

59.

Montbéliard-Courcelles

| 60. | Montpellier-Méditérranée |
| --- | --- |

60.

Montpellier-Méditérranée

| 61. | Nantes-Atlantique |
| --- | --- |

61.

Nantes-Atlantique

| 62. | Nevers-Fourchambault |
| --- | --- |

62.

Nevers-Fourchambault

| 63. | Nice-Côte d'Azur |
| --- | --- |

63.

Nice-Côte d'Azur

| 64. | Nîmes-Garons |
| --- | --- |

64.

Nîmes-Garons

| 65. | Orléans-Bricy |
| --- | --- |

65.

Orléans-Bricy

| 66. | Orléans-Saint-Denis-de-l'Hôtel |
| --- | --- |

66.

Orléans-Saint-Denis-de-l'Hôtel

| 67. | Paris-Charles de Gaulle |
| --- | --- |

67.

Paris-Charles de Gaulle

| 68. | Paris-le Bourget |
| --- | --- |

68.

Paris-le Bourget

| 69. | Paris-Orly |
| --- | --- |

69.

Paris-Orly

| 70. | Pau-Pyrénées |
| --- | --- |

70.

Pau-Pyrénées

| 71. | Perpignan-Rivesaltes |
| --- | --- |

71.

Perpignan-Rivesaltes

| 72. | Poitiers-Biard |
| --- | --- |

72.

Poitiers-Biard

| 73. | Pontoise-Cormeilles-en-Vexin, on a temporary basis:






  — | from 12 to 16 June 2013 from 12.00 to 16.00, |
| --- | --- | --- |

73.

Pontoise-Cormeilles-en-Vexin, on a temporary basis:

—

from 12 to 16 June 2013 from 12.00 to 16.00,

| — | from 17 to 20 June 2013 from 12.00 to 18.00, |
| --- | --- |

—

from 17 to 20 June 2013 from 12.00 to 18.00,

| — | from 21 to 23 June 2013 from 11.00 to 19.00 |
| --- | --- |

—

from 21 to 23 June 2013 from 11.00 to 19.00

| 74. | Quimper-Cornouailles, on a temporary basis from 30 May to 8 September 2013 |
| --- | --- |

74.

Quimper-Cornouailles, on a temporary basis from 30 May to 8 September 2013

| 75. | Rennes Saint-Jacques |
| --- | --- |

75.

Rennes Saint-Jacques

| 76. | Rodez-Marcillac |
| --- | --- |

76.

Rodez-Marcillac

| 77. | Rouen-Vallée de Seine |
| --- | --- |

77.

Rouen-Vallée de Seine

| 78. | Saint-Brieuc-Armor |
| --- | --- |

78.

Saint-Brieuc-Armor

| 79. | Saint-Étienne-Bouthéon |
| --- | --- |

79.

Saint-Étienne-Bouthéon

| 80. | Saint-Nazaire-Montoir |
| --- | --- |

80.

Saint-Nazaire-Montoir

| 81. | Strasbourg-Entzheim |
| --- | --- |

81.

Strasbourg-Entzheim

| 82. | Tarbes-Ossun-Lourdes |
| --- | --- |

82.

Tarbes-Ossun-Lourdes

| 83. | Toulouse-Blagnac |
| --- | --- |

83.

Toulouse-Blagnac

| 84. | Tours-Saint-Symphorien |
| --- | --- |

84.

Tours-Saint-Symphorien

| 85. | Troyes-Barberey |
| --- | --- |

85.

Troyes-Barberey

| 86. | Vichy-Charmeil |
| --- | --- |

86.

Vichy-Charmeil

Sea borders

| 1. | Ajaccio |
| --- | --- |

1.

Ajaccio

| 2. | Bastia |
| --- | --- |

2.

Bastia

| 3. | Bayonne |
| --- | --- |

3.

Bayonne

| 4. | Bonifacio |
| --- | --- |

4.

Bonifacio

| 5. | Bordeaux |
| --- | --- |

5.

Bordeaux

| 6. | Boulogne |
| --- | --- |

6.

Boulogne

| 7. | Brest |
| --- | --- |

7.

Brest

| 8. | Caen-Ouistreham |
| --- | --- |

8.

Caen-Ouistreham

| 9. | Calais |
| --- | --- |

9.

Calais

| 10. | Calvi |
| --- | --- |

10.

Calvi

| 11. | Cannes-Vieux Port |
| --- | --- |

11.

Cannes-Vieux Port

| 12. | Carteret |
| --- | --- |

12.

Carteret

| 13. | Cherbourg |
| --- | --- |

13.

Cherbourg

| 14. | Dieppe |
| --- | --- |

14.

Dieppe

| 15. | Douvres |
| --- | --- |

15.

Douvres

| 16. | Dunkerque |
| --- | --- |

16.

Dunkerque

| 17. | Granville |
| --- | --- |

17.

Granville

| 18. | Honfleur |
| --- | --- |

18.

Honfleur

| 19. | La Rochelle-La Pallice |
| --- | --- |

19.

La Rochelle-La Pallice

| 20. | Le Havre |
| --- | --- |

20.

Le Havre

| 21. | Les Sables-d'Olonne-Port |
| --- | --- |

21.

Les Sables-d'Olonne-Port

| 22. | L'Ile-Rousse |
| --- | --- |

22.

L'Ile-Rousse

| 23. | Lorient |
| --- | --- |

23.

Lorient

| 24. | Marseille |
| --- | --- |

24.

Marseille

| 25. | Monaco-Port de la Condamine |
| --- | --- |

25.

Monaco-Port de la Condamine

| 26. | Nantes-Saint-Nazaire |
| --- | --- |

26.

Nantes-Saint-Nazaire

| 27. | Nice |
| --- | --- |

27.

Nice

| 28. | Port-de-Bouc-Fos/Port-Saint-Louis |
| --- | --- |

28.

Port-de-Bouc-Fos/Port-Saint-Louis

| 29. | Port-la-Nouvelle |
| --- | --- |

29.

Port-la-Nouvelle

| 30. | Porto-Vecchio |
| --- | --- |

30.

Porto-Vecchio

| 31. | Port-Vendres |
| --- | --- |

31.

Port-Vendres

| 32. | Roscoff |
| --- | --- |

32.

Roscoff

| 33. | Rouen |
| --- | --- |

33.

Rouen

| 34. | Saint-Brieuc (maritime) |
| --- | --- |

34.

Saint-Brieuc (maritime)

| 35. | Saint-Malo |
| --- | --- |

35.

Saint-Malo

| 36. | Sète |
| --- | --- |

36.

Sète

| 37. | Toulon |
| --- | --- |

37.

Toulon

Land borders

With the United Kingdom

(cross-Channel fixed link)

| 1. | Gare d’Ashford International |
| --- | --- |

1.

Gare d’Ashford International

| 2. | Gare d'Avignon-Centre |
| --- | --- |

2.

Gare d'Avignon-Centre

| 3. | Cheriton/Coquelles |
| --- | --- |

3.

Cheriton/Coquelles

| 4. | Gare de Chessy-Marne-la-Vallée |
| --- | --- |

4.

Gare de Chessy-Marne-la-Vallée

| 5. | Gare de Fréthun |
| --- | --- |

5.

Gare de Fréthun

| 6. | Gare de Lille-Europe |
| --- | --- |

6.

Gare de Lille-Europe

| 7. | Gare de Paris-Nord |
| --- | --- |

7.

Gare de Paris-Nord

| 8. | Gare de St-Pancras International |
| --- | --- |

8.

Gare de St-Pancras International

| 9. | Gare d'Ebbsfleet International |
| --- | --- |

9.

Gare d'Ebbsfleet International

With Andorra

| 1. | Pas de la Case-Porta |
| --- | --- |

1.

Pas de la Case-Porta

ITALY

Replacement of the information published in OJ C 316, 28.12.2007

LIST OF BORDER CROSSING POINTS

Air borders

| 1. | Alghero (SS) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Alghero (SS)

Polizia di Stato

| 2. | Ancona |
| --- | --- |

2.

Ancona

Polizia di Stato

| 3. | Aosta |
| --- | --- |

3.

Aosta

Polizia di Stato

| 4. | Bari |
| --- | --- |

4.

Bari

Polizia di Stato

| 5. | Bergamo |
| --- | --- |

5.

Bergamo

Polizia di Stato

| 6. | Biella |
| --- | --- |

6.

Biella

Polizia di Stato

| 7. | Bologna |
| --- | --- |

7.

Bologna

Polizia di Stato

| 8. | Bolzano |
| --- | --- |

8.

Bolzano

Polizia di Stato

| 9. | Brescia |
| --- | --- |

9.

Brescia

Polizia di Stato

| 10. | Brindisi |
| --- | --- |

10.

Brindisi

Polizia di Stato

| 11. | Cagliari |
| --- | --- |

11.

Cagliari

Polizia di Stato

| 12. | Catania |
| --- | --- |

12.

Catania

Polizia di Stato

| 13. | Comiso (RG) |
| --- | --- |

13.

Comiso (RG)

Polizia di Stato

| 14. | Crotone |
| --- | --- |

14.

Crotone

Polizia di Stato

| 15. | Cuneo Levaldigi (CN) |
| --- | --- |

15.

Cuneo Levaldigi (CN)

Polizia di Stato

| 16. | Fano (PU) |
| --- | --- |

16.

Fano (PU)

Polizia di Stato

| 17. | Firenze |
| --- | --- |

17.

Firenze

Polizia di Stato

| 18. | Foggia |
| --- | --- |

18.

Foggia

Polizia di Stato

| 19. | Forlì |
| --- | --- |

19.

Forlì

Polizia di Stato

| 20. | Genova |
| --- | --- |

20.

Genova

Polizia di Stato

| 21. | Grosseto |
| --- | --- |

21.

Grosseto

Polizia di Stato

| 22. | Lamezia Terme (CZ) |
| --- | --- |

22.

Lamezia Terme (CZ)

Polizia di Stato

| 23. | Lampedusa (AG) |
| --- | --- |

23.

Lampedusa (AG)

Carabinieri

| 24. | Lecce |
| --- | --- |

24.

Lecce

Polizia di Stato

| 25. | Marina di Campo (LI) |
| --- | --- |

25.

Marina di Campo (LI)

Carabinieri

| 26. | Milano Linate |
| --- | --- |

26.

Milano Linate

Polizia di Stato

| 27. | Napoli |
| --- | --- |

27.

Napoli

Polizia di Stato

| 28. | Novi Ligure |
| --- | --- |

28.

Novi Ligure

Carabinieri

| 29. | Olbia (SS) |
| --- | --- |

29.

Olbia (SS)

Polizia di Stato

| 30. | Oristano |
| --- | --- |

30.

Oristano

Polizia di Stato

| 31. | Palermo |
| --- | --- |

31.

Palermo

Polizia di Stato

| 32. | Pantelleria (TP) |
| --- | --- |

32.

Pantelleria (TP)

Carabinieri

| 33. | Parma |
| --- | --- |

33.

Parma

Polizia di Stato

| 34. | Perugia |
| --- | --- |

34.

Perugia

Polizia di Stato

| 35. | Pescara |
| --- | --- |

35.

Pescara

Polizia di Stato

| 36. | Pisa |
| --- | --- |

36.

Pisa

Polizia di Stato

| 37. | Pontecagnano (SA) |
| --- | --- |

37.

Pontecagnano (SA)

Polizia di Stato

| 38. | Reggio di Calabria |
| --- | --- |

38.

Reggio di Calabria

Polizia di Stato

| 39. | Rimini |
| --- | --- |

39.

Rimini

Polizia di Stato

| 40. | Roma Ciampino |
| --- | --- |

40.

Roma Ciampino

Polizia di Stato

| 41. | Roma Fiumicino |
| --- | --- |

41.

Roma Fiumicino

Polizia di Stato

| 42. | Roma Urbe |
| --- | --- |

42.

Roma Urbe

Polizia di Stato

| 43. | Ronchi dei Legionari (GO) |
| --- | --- |

43.

Ronchi dei Legionari (GO)

Polizia di Stato

| 44. | Siena |
| --- | --- |

44.

Siena

Polizia di Stato

| 45. | Taranto-Grottaglie |
| --- | --- |

45.

Taranto-Grottaglie

Polizia di Stato

| 46. | Torino |
| --- | --- |

46.

Torino

Polizia di Stato

| 47. | Trapani |
| --- | --- |

47.

Trapani

Polizia di Stato

| 48. | Tortoli (NU) |
| --- | --- |

48.

Tortoli (NU)

Polizia di Stato

| 49. | Treviso |
| --- | --- |

49.

Treviso

Polizia di Stato

| 50. | Varese Malpensa |
| --- | --- |

50.

Varese Malpensa

Polizia di Stato

| 51. | Venezia |
| --- | --- |

51.

Venezia

Polizia di Stato

| 52. | Verona |
| --- | --- |

52.

Verona

Polizia di Stato

| 53. | Villanova d'Albenga (SV) |
| --- | --- |

53.

Villanova d'Albenga (SV)

Carabinieri

Sea borders

| 1. | Alassio (SV) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Alassio (SV)

Polizia di Stato

| 2. | Alghero (SS) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Alghero (SS)

Polizia di Stato

| 3. | Ancona |
| --- | --- |

3.

Ancona

Polizia di Stato

| 4. | Anzio — Nettuno (RM) |
| --- | --- |

4.

Anzio — Nettuno (RM)

Polizia di Stato

| 5. | Augusta (SR) |
| --- | --- |

5.

Augusta (SR)

Polizia di Stato

| 6. | Bacoli (NA) |
| --- | --- |

6.

Bacoli (NA)

Carabinieri

| 7. | Bari |
| --- | --- |

7.

Bari

Polizia di Stato

| 8. | Barletta (BA) |
| --- | --- |

8.

Barletta (BA)

Polizia di Stato

| 9. | Brindisi |
| --- | --- |

9.

Brindisi

Polizia di Stato

| 10. | Cagliari |
| --- | --- |

10.

Cagliari

Polizia di Stato

| 11. | Campo nell'Elba (LI) |
| --- | --- |

11.

Campo nell'Elba (LI)

Carabinieri

| 12. | Caorle (VE) |
| --- | --- |

12.

Caorle (VE)

Carabinieri

| 13. | Capraia Isola (LI) |
| --- | --- |

13.

Capraia Isola (LI)

Carabinieri

| 14. | Capri (NA) |
| --- | --- |

14.

Capri (NA)

Polizia di Stato

| 15. | Carbonia (CA) |
| --- | --- |

15.

Carbonia (CA)

Polizia di Stato

| 16. | Castellammare di Stabia (NA) |
| --- | --- |

16.

Castellammare di Stabia (NA)

Polizia di Stato

| 17. | Castellammare del Golfo (TP) |
| --- | --- |

17.

Castellammare del Golfo (TP)

Polizia di Stato

| 18. | Catania |
| --- | --- |

18.

Catania

Polizia di Stato

| 19. | Cesenatico |
| --- | --- |

19.

Cesenatico

Polizia di Stato

| 20. | Chioggia (VE) |
| --- | --- |

20.

Chioggia (VE)

Polizia di Stato

| 21. | Civitanova Marche (MC) |
| --- | --- |

21.

Civitanova Marche (MC)

Polizia di Stato

| 22. | Civitavecchia (RM) |
| --- | --- |

22.

Civitavecchia (RM)

Polizia di Stato

| 23. | Corigliano Calabro (CS) |
| --- | --- |

23.

Corigliano Calabro (CS)

Polizia di Stato

| 24. | Crotone |
| --- | --- |

24.

Crotone

Polizia di Stato

| 25. | Duino Aurisina (TS) |
| --- | --- |

25.

Duino Aurisina (TS)

Polizia di Stato

| 26. | Finale Ligure (SV) |
| --- | --- |

26.

Finale Ligure (SV)

Carabinieri

| 27. | Fiumicino (RM) |
| --- | --- |

27.

Fiumicino (RM)

Polizia di Stato

| 28. | Formia (LT) |
| --- | --- |

28.

Formia (LT)

Polizia di Stato

| 29. | Gaeta (LT) |
| --- | --- |

29.

Gaeta (LT)

Polizia di Stato

| 30. | Gallipoli (LE) |
| --- | --- |

30.

Gallipoli (LE)

Polizia di Stato

| 31. | Gela (CL) |
| --- | --- |

31.

Gela (CL)

Polizia di Stato

| 32. | Genova |
| --- | --- |

32.

Genova

Polizia di Stato

| 33. | Gioia Tauro (RC) |
| --- | --- |

33.

Gioia Tauro (RC)

Polizia di Stato

| 34. | Giulianova (TE) |
| --- | --- |

34.

Giulianova (TE)

Polizia di Stato

| 35. | Grado (GO) |
| --- | --- |

35.

Grado (GO)

Carabinieri

| 36. | Ischia (NA) |
| --- | --- |

36.

Ischia (NA)

Polizia di Stato

| 37. | La Maddalena (SS) |
| --- | --- |

37.

La Maddalena (SS)

Carabinieri

| 38. | La Spezia |
| --- | --- |

38.

La Spezia

Polizia di Stato

| 39. | Lampedusa (AG) |
| --- | --- |

39.

Lampedusa (AG)

Carabinieri

| 40. | Lerici (SP) |
| --- | --- |

40.

Lerici (SP)

Carabinieri

| 41. | Levanto (SP) |
| --- | --- |

41.

Levanto (SP)

Carabinieri

| 42. | Licata (AG) |
| --- | --- |

42.

Licata (AG)

Polizia di Stato

| 43. | Lignano Sabbiadoro (VE) |
| --- | --- |

43.

Lignano Sabbiadoro (VE)

Carabinieri

| 44. | Lipari (ME) |
| --- | --- |

44.

Lipari (ME)

Carabinieri

| 45. | Livorno |
| --- | --- |

45.

Livorno

Polizia di Stato

| 46. | Loano (SV) |
| --- | --- |

46.

Loano (SV)

Carabinieri

| 47. | Manfredonia (FG) |
| --- | --- |

47.

Manfredonia (FG)

Polizia di Stato

| 48. | Marciana Marina (LI) |
| --- | --- |

48.

Marciana Marina (LI)

Carabinieri

| 49. | Marina di Carrara (MS) |
| --- | --- |

49.

Marina di Carrara (MS)

Polizia di Stato

| 50. | Marsala (TP) |
| --- | --- |

50.

Marsala (TP)

Polizia di Stato

| 51. | Mazara del Vallo (TP) |
| --- | --- |

51.

Mazara del Vallo (TP)

Polizia di Stato

| 52. | Messina |
| --- | --- |

52.

Messina

Polizia di Stato

| 53. | Milazzo (ME) |
| --- | --- |

53.

Milazzo (ME)

Polizia di Stato

| 54. | Molfetta (BA) |
| --- | --- |

54.

Molfetta (BA)

Carabinieri

| 55. | Monopoli (BA) |
| --- | --- |

55.

Monopoli (BA)

Polizia di Stato

| 56. | Muggia (TS) |
| --- | --- |

56.

Muggia (TS)

Polizia di Stato

| 57. | Napoli |
| --- | --- |

57.

Napoli

Polizia di Stato

| 58. | Olbia (SS) |
| --- | --- |

58.

Olbia (SS)

Polizia di Stato

| 59. | Oneglia (IM) |
| --- | --- |

59.

Oneglia (IM)

Polizia di Stato

| 60. | Oristano |
| --- | --- |

60.

Oristano

Polizia di Stato

| 61. | Ortona (CH) |
| --- | --- |

61.

Ortona (CH)

Carabinieri

| 62. | Ostia (RM) |
| --- | --- |

62.

Ostia (RM)

Polizia di Stato

| 63. | Otranto (LE) |
| --- | --- |

63.

Otranto (LE)

Polizia di Stato

| 64. | Palau (SS) |
| --- | --- |

64.

Palau (SS)

Polizia di Stato

| 65. | Palermo |
| --- | --- |

65.

Palermo

Polizia di Stato

| 66. | Pantelleria (TP) |
| --- | --- |

66.

Pantelleria (TP)

Carabinieri

| 67. | Pesaro |
| --- | --- |

67.

Pesaro

Polizia di Stato

| 68. | Pescara |
| --- | --- |

68.

Pescara

Polizia di Stato

| 69. | Piombino (LI) |
| --- | --- |

69.

Piombino (LI)

Polizia di Stato

| 70. | Porto Azzurro (LI) |
| --- | --- |

70.

Porto Azzurro (LI)

Carabinieri

| 71. | Porto Cervo (SS) |
| --- | --- |

71.

Porto Cervo (SS)

Polizia di Stato

| 72. | Porto Empedocle (AG) |
| --- | --- |

72.

Porto Empedocle (AG)

Polizia di Stato

| 73. | Porto Ferraio (LI) |
| --- | --- |

73.

Porto Ferraio (LI)

Polizia di Stato

| 74. | Porto Nogaro (UD) |
| --- | --- |

74.

Porto Nogaro (UD)

Carabinieri

| 75. | Porto Tolle (RO) |
| --- | --- |

75.

Porto Tolle (RO)

Polizia di Stato

| 76. | Porto Torres (SS) |
| --- | --- |

76.

Porto Torres (SS)

Polizia di Stato

| 77. | Porto Venere (SV) |
| --- | --- |

77.

Porto Venere (SV)

Carabinieri

| 78. | Portofino (GE) |
| --- | --- |

78.

Portofino (GE)

Carabinieri

| 79. | Pozzallo (RG) |
| --- | --- |

79.

Pozzallo (RG)

Carabinieri

| 80. | Pozzuoli (NA) |
| --- | --- |

80.

Pozzuoli (NA)

Polizia di Stato

| 81. | Rapallo (GE) |
| --- | --- |

81.

Rapallo (GE)

Polizia di Stato

| 82. | Ravenna |
| --- | --- |

82.

Ravenna

Polizia di Stato

| 83. | Reggio di Calabria |
| --- | --- |

83.

Reggio di Calabria

Polizia di Stato

| 84. | Rimini |
| --- | --- |

84.

Rimini

Polizia di Stato

| 85. | Rio Marina (LI) |
| --- | --- |

85.

Rio Marina (LI)

Carabinieri

| 86. | Riposto (CT) |
| --- | --- |

86.

Riposto (CT)

Carabinieri

| 87. | Ronchi dei Legionari — Monfalcone (GO) |
| --- | --- |

87.

Ronchi dei Legionari — Monfalcone (GO)

Polizia di Stato

| 88. | Santa Margherita Ligure (GE) |
| --- | --- |

88.

Santa Margherita Ligure (GE)

Carabinieri

| 89. | Sanremo (IM) |
| --- | --- |

89.

Sanremo (IM)

Polizia di Stato

| 90. | Santa Maria di Leuca (LE) |
| --- | --- |

90.

Santa Maria di Leuca (LE)

Polizia di Stato

| 91. | Santa Teresa di Gallura (SS) |
| --- | --- |

91.

Santa Teresa di Gallura (SS)

Polizia di Stato

| 92. | San Benedetto del Tronto (AP) |
| --- | --- |

92.

San Benedetto del Tronto (AP)

Polizia di Stato

| 93. | Salerno |
| --- | --- |

93.

Salerno

Polizia di Stato

| 94. | Savona |
| --- | --- |

94.

Savona

Polizia di Stato

| 95. | Siracusa |
| --- | --- |

95.

Siracusa

Polizia di Stato

| 96. | Sorrento (NA) |
| --- | --- |

96.

Sorrento (NA)

Polizia di Stato

| 97. | Taormina (ME) |
| --- | --- |

97.

Taormina (ME)

Polizia di Stato

| 98. | Taranto |
| --- | --- |

98.

Taranto

Polizia di Stato

| 99. | Termini Imerese (PA) |
| --- | --- |

99.

Termini Imerese (PA)

Polizia di Stato

| 100. | Termoli (CB) |
| --- | --- |

100.

Termoli (CB)

Polizia di Stato

| 101. | Terracina (LT) |
| --- | --- |

101.

Terracina (LT)

Polizia di Stato

| 102. | Torre Annunziata (NA) |
| --- | --- |

102.

Torre Annunziata (NA)

Polizia di Stato

| 103. | Tortolì (NU) |
| --- | --- |

103.

Tortolì (NU)

Polizia di Stato

| 104. | Torviscosa (UD) |
| --- | --- |

104.

Torviscosa (UD)

Carabinieri

| 105. | Trani (BA) |
| --- | --- |

105.

Trani (BA)

Polizia di Stato

| 106. | Trapani |
| --- | --- |

106.

Trapani

Polizia di Stato

| 107. | Trieste |
| --- | --- |

107.

Trieste

Polizia di Stato

| 108. | Varazze (SV) |
| --- | --- |

108.

Varazze (SV)

Carabinieri

| 109. | Vasto (CH) |
| --- | --- |

109.

Vasto (CH)

Polizia di Stato

| 110. | Venezia |
| --- | --- |

110.

Venezia

Polizia di Stato

| 111. | Viareggio (LU) |
| --- | --- |

111.

Viareggio (LU)

Polizia di Stato

| 112. | Vibo Valentia Marina (VV) |
| --- | --- |

112.

Vibo Valentia Marina (VV)

Polizia di Stato

---

V Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

| 13.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 167/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 167/18

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.6906 — KKR/Gardner Denver)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

2013/C 167/06

| 1. | On 4 June 2013, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking KKR & Co. LP (‘KKR’, USA) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the undertaking Gardner Denver, Inc. (‘GDI’, USA) by way of purchase of securities. |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 4 June 2013, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking KKR & Co. LP (‘KKR’, USA) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the undertaking Gardner Denver, Inc. (‘GDI’, USA) by way of purchase of securities.

| 2. | The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






  — | for KKR: the provision of a broad range of alternative asset management services to public and private market investors and capital markets solutions for the firm, its portfolio companies and clients, |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—

for KKR: the provision of a broad range of alternative asset management services to public and private market investors and capital markets solutions for the firm, its portfolio companies and clients,

| — | for GDI: manufacture and sale of industrial compressors, blowers, pumps, loading arms and fuel systems. |
| --- | --- |

—

for GDI: manufacture and sale of industrial compressors, blowers, pumps, loading arms and fuel systems.

| 3. | On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the EC Merger Regulation (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice. |
| --- | --- |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the EC Merger Regulation (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

| 4. | The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
  Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.6906 — KKR/Gardner Denver, to the following address:





  European Commission |
| --- | --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.6906 — KKR/Gardner Denver, to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

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

(2)  OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32 (‘Notice on a simplified procedure’).

---

| 13.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 167/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 167/19

---

Communication from the Commission on quantifying harm in actions for damages based on breaches of Article 101 or 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

(Text with EEA relevance)

2013/C 167/07

1.   COMPENSATION FOR VICTIMS OF COMPETITION LAW INFRINGEMENTS: THE CHALLENGE OF QUANTIFYING THE HARM SUFFERED

| 1. | Infringements of Article 101 or 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’), hereafter the ‘EU competition rules’, cause great harm to the economy as a whole and hamper the proper functioning of the internal market. In order to prevent such harm, the Commission has the power to impose fines on undertakings and associations of undertakings for infringing EU competition rules (1). The objective of the fines imposed by the Commission is deterrence, i.e. sanctioning the undertakings concerned (specific deterrence) and deterring other undertakings from engaging in, or continuing, behaviour that is contrary to Articles 101 and 102 TFEU (general deterrence) (2). |
| --- | --- |

1.

Infringements of Article 101 or 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’), hereafter the ‘EU competition rules’, cause great harm to the economy as a whole and hamper the proper functioning of the internal market. In order to prevent such harm, the Commission has the power to impose fines on undertakings and associations of undertakings for infringing EU competition rules (1). The objective of the fines imposed by the Commission is deterrence, i.e. sanctioning the undertakings concerned (specific deterrence) and deterring other undertakings from engaging in, or continuing, behaviour that is contrary to Articles 101 and 102 TFEU (general deterrence) (2).

| 2. | Moreover, infringements of Article 101 or 102 TFEU cause great harm to consumers and undertakings. Anyone who has suffered harm through an infringement of EU competition rules has a right to compensation. This is guaranteed by EU law, as the Court of Justice has repeatedly emphasised (3). While the objective of the fines is deterrence, the point of damages claims is to repair the harm suffered because of an infringement. More effective remedies for consumers and undertakings to obtain damages would, inherently, also produce beneficial effects in terms of deterring future infringements and ensuring greater compliance with those rules (4). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Moreover, infringements of Article 101 or 102 TFEU cause great harm to consumers and undertakings. Anyone who has suffered harm through an infringement of EU competition rules has a right to compensation. This is guaranteed by EU law, as the Court of Justice has repeatedly emphasised (3). While the objective of the fines is deterrence, the point of damages claims is to repair the harm suffered because of an infringement. More effective remedies for consumers and undertakings to obtain damages would, inherently, also produce beneficial effects in terms of deterring future infringements and ensuring greater compliance with those rules (4).

| 3. | A major difficulty encountered by courts, tribunals and parties in damages actions is how to quantify the harm suffered. Quantification is based on comparing the actual position of claimants with the position they would find themselves in had the infringement not occurred. In any hypothetical assessment of how market conditions and the interactions of market participants would have evolved without the infringement, complex and specific economic and competition law issues often arise. Courts and parties are increasingly confronted with these matters and with considering the methods and techniques available to address them. |
| --- | --- |

3.

A major difficulty encountered by courts, tribunals and parties in damages actions is how to quantify the harm suffered. Quantification is based on comparing the actual position of claimants with the position they would find themselves in had the infringement not occurred. In any hypothetical assessment of how market conditions and the interactions of market participants would have evolved without the infringement, complex and specific economic and competition law issues often arise. Courts and parties are increasingly confronted with these matters and with considering the methods and techniques available to address them.

2.   INTERPLAY OF RULES AND PRINCIPLES OF EU LAW AND NATIONAL LAW

2.1.   
  Acquis communautaire

| 4. | Articles 101 and 102 TFEU are a matter of public policy (5) and are central to the functioning of the internal market, which includes a system to ensure that competition is not distorted (6). These Treaty provisions create rights and obligations for individuals, be they undertakings or consumers. Such rights become part of the legal assets of these individuals (7) and are protected under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (8). National courts have a duty under EU law to enforce such rights and obligations fully and effectively in any proceedings brought before them. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Articles 101 and 102 TFEU are a matter of public policy (5) and are central to the functioning of the internal market, which includes a system to ensure that competition is not distorted (6). These Treaty provisions create rights and obligations for individuals, be they undertakings or consumers. Such rights become part of the legal assets of these individuals (7) and are protected under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (8). National courts have a duty under EU law to enforce such rights and obligations fully and effectively in any proceedings brought before them.

| 5. | Amongst the rights guaranteed by EU law is the right to compensation for harm suffered because of an infringement of Article 101 or 102 TFEU: the full effectiveness of EU competition rules would be put at risk if injured parties were not able to claim damages for losses caused to them by an infringement of these rules. Anyone can claim compensation for the harm suffered where there is a causal relationship between that harm and an agreement or practice prohibited by the EU competition rules (9). |
| --- | --- |

5.

Amongst the rights guaranteed by EU law is the right to compensation for harm suffered because of an infringement of Article 101 or 102 TFEU: the full effectiveness of EU competition rules would be put at risk if injured parties were not able to claim damages for losses caused to them by an infringement of these rules. Anyone can claim compensation for the harm suffered where there is a causal relationship between that harm and an agreement or practice prohibited by the EU competition rules (9).

| 6. | Compensation for harm suffered means placing the injured parties in the position they would have been in had there been no infringement of Article 101 or 102 TFEU. Parties injured by an infringement of directly effective EU rules should therefore have the full real value of their losses restored: the entitlement to full compensation covers the actual loss (damnum emergens), as well as compensation for loss of profit (lucrum cessans) suffered as a result of the infringement (10); and entitlement to interest from the time the damage occurred (11). |
| --- | --- |

6.

Compensation for harm suffered means placing the injured parties in the position they would have been in had there been no infringement of Article 101 or 102 TFEU. Parties injured by an infringement of directly effective EU rules should therefore have the full real value of their losses restored: the entitlement to full compensation covers the actual loss (damnum emergens), as well as compensation for loss of profit (lucrum cessans) suffered as a result of the infringement (10); and entitlement to interest from the time the damage occurred (11).

| 7. | In so far as there are no EU rules governing damages actions for breaches of Article 101 or 102 TFEU, it is for the domestic legal system of each Member State to lay down the detailed rules governing the exercise of the right to compensation guaranteed by EU law. Such rules must not, however, render the exercise of rights conferred by EU law excessively difficult or practically impossible (principle of effectiveness). Nor may they be less favourable than those governing damages actions for breaches of similar rights conferred by domestic law (principle of equivalence) (12). |
| --- | --- |

7.

In so far as there are no EU rules governing damages actions for breaches of Article 101 or 102 TFEU, it is for the domestic legal system of each Member State to lay down the detailed rules governing the exercise of the right to compensation guaranteed by EU law. Such rules must not, however, render the exercise of rights conferred by EU law excessively difficult or practically impossible (principle of effectiveness). Nor may they be less favourable than those governing damages actions for breaches of similar rights conferred by domestic law (principle of equivalence) (12).

2.2.   National law and its interaction with the principles of EU law

| 8. | On the question of quantifying harm, to the extent that such exercise is not governed by EU law, the legal rules of the Member States determine the appropriate standard of proof and the required degree of precision in showing the amount of harm suffered. National rules will also assign the burden of proof and of the respective responsibilities of the parties to make factual submissions to the court. National law may provide for the burden of proof to shift once the claimant has proved a certain set of factors, and may provide for simplified rules of calculation and presumptions of a rebuttable or irrefutable nature. National law further determines to what extent and how courts are empowered to quantify the harm suffered on the basis of approximate best estimates or to make use of equitable considerations. All these national rules and procedures governing the quantification of harm should be laid down and applied in individual cases in a way that allows parties injured by EU competition law infringements to obtain full compensation for the harm suffered without any disproportionate difficulties; in no circumstances may they be less effective than in similar actions based on domestic law. |
| --- | --- |

8.

On the question of quantifying harm, to the extent that such exercise is not governed by EU law, the legal rules of the Member States determine the appropriate standard of proof and the required degree of precision in showing the amount of harm suffered. National rules will also assign the burden of proof and of the respective responsibilities of the parties to make factual submissions to the court. National law may provide for the burden of proof to shift once the claimant has proved a certain set of factors, and may provide for simplified rules of calculation and presumptions of a rebuttable or irrefutable nature. National law further determines to what extent and how courts are empowered to quantify the harm suffered on the basis of approximate best estimates or to make use of equitable considerations. All these national rules and procedures governing the quantification of harm should be laid down and applied in individual cases in a way that allows parties injured by EU competition law infringements to obtain full compensation for the harm suffered without any disproportionate difficulties; in no circumstances may they be less effective than in similar actions based on domestic law.

| 9. | One consequence of the principle of effectiveness is that applicable national legal rules and their interpretation should reflect the difficulties and limits inherent to quantifying harm in competition cases. The quantification of such harm requires comparing the actual position of the injured party with the position this party would have been in without the infringement. This is something that cannot be observed in reality; it is impossible to know with certainty how market conditions and the interactions between market participants would have evolved in the absence of the infringement. All that is possible is an estimate of the scenario likely to have existed without the infringement. Quantification of harm in competition cases has always, by its very nature, been characterised by considerable limits to the degree of certainty and precision that can be expected. Sometimes only approximate estimates are possible (13). |
| --- | --- |

9.

One consequence of the principle of effectiveness is that applicable national legal rules and their interpretation should reflect the difficulties and limits inherent to quantifying harm in competition cases. The quantification of such harm requires comparing the actual position of the injured party with the position this party would have been in without the infringement. This is something that cannot be observed in reality; it is impossible to know with certainty how market conditions and the interactions between market participants would have evolved in the absence of the infringement. All that is possible is an estimate of the scenario likely to have existed without the infringement. Quantification of harm in competition cases has always, by its very nature, been characterised by considerable limits to the degree of certainty and precision that can be expected. Sometimes only approximate estimates are possible (13).

3.   GUIDANCE ON THE QUANTIFICATION OF HARM

| 10. | Against this background, the Commission's services have drawn up a practical guide on the quantification of harm in actions for damages based on breaches of Article 101 or 102 TFEU (the ‘practical guide’). |
| --- | --- |

10.

Against this background, the Commission's services have drawn up a practical guide on the quantification of harm in actions for damages based on breaches of Article 101 or 102 TFEU (the ‘practical guide’).

| 11. | The aim of the practical guide is to offer assistance to national courts and parties involved in actions for damages by making information on quantifying harm caused by infringements of the EU competition rules more widely available. It therefore provides insights into various forms of harm typically caused by anticompetitive practices and, in particular, sets out information on the methods and techniques available to quantify such harm. Giving such information wider circulation will enhance the effectiveness of actions for damages. It should also make such actions more foreseeable, thereby increasing legal certainty for all parties involved. The practical guide can also help parties find a consensual resolution of their disputes, be it within or outside the context of judicial or alternative dispute resolution proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

11.

The aim of the practical guide is to offer assistance to national courts and parties involved in actions for damages by making information on quantifying harm caused by infringements of the EU competition rules more widely available. It therefore provides insights into various forms of harm typically caused by anticompetitive practices and, in particular, sets out information on the methods and techniques available to quantify such harm. Giving such information wider circulation will enhance the effectiveness of actions for damages. It should also make such actions more foreseeable, thereby increasing legal certainty for all parties involved. The practical guide can also help parties find a consensual resolution of their disputes, be it within or outside the context of judicial or alternative dispute resolution proceedings.

| 12. | This practical guide is purely informative and does not bind national courts or parties. It does not therefore alter the legal rules of the Member States governing actions for damages and does not affect the rights and obligations of Member States or of natural or legal persons under EU law. |
| --- | --- |

12.

This practical guide is purely informative and does not bind national courts or parties. It does not therefore alter the legal rules of the Member States governing actions for damages and does not affect the rights and obligations of Member States or of natural or legal persons under EU law.

| 13. | In particular, the practical guide should not be seen as raising or lowering the standard of proof or the level of detail of the factual submissions required from the parties in the legal systems of the Member States. Nor should it be seen as affecting the rules and practices in the Member States regarding the burden of proof. National courts have often adopted, within their legal systems, pragmatic approaches to determining the amount of damages to be awarded, including the use of presumptions, shifts in the burden of proof, or the power of courts to make approximate best estimate assessments. The practical guide is intended to provide information that can be used within the framework of national legal rules and practices, not instead of them. Depending on the legal rules applicable and on the specific features of each case, it may therefore well be sufficient for the parties to provide facts and evidence on the damages quantum which are less detailed than those required by some of the methods and techniques mentioned in the practical guide. |
| --- | --- |

13.

In particular, the practical guide should not be seen as raising or lowering the standard of proof or the level of detail of the factual submissions required from the parties in the legal systems of the Member States. Nor should it be seen as affecting the rules and practices in the Member States regarding the burden of proof. National courts have often adopted, within their legal systems, pragmatic approaches to determining the amount of damages to be awarded, including the use of presumptions, shifts in the burden of proof, or the power of courts to make approximate best estimate assessments. The practical guide is intended to provide information that can be used within the framework of national legal rules and practices, not instead of them. Depending on the legal rules applicable and on the specific features of each case, it may therefore well be sufficient for the parties to provide facts and evidence on the damages quantum which are less detailed than those required by some of the methods and techniques mentioned in the practical guide.

| 14. | The practical guide explains the particular features, including the strengths and weaknesses, of various methods and techniques available to quantify antitrust harm. It is up to the applicable law to determine which approach to quantification can be considered appropriate in the specific circumstances of a given case. Relevant considerations include — alongside the standard and burden of proof under applicable law — the availability of data, the costs and time involved and their proportionality in relation to the value of the damages claim. |
| --- | --- |

14.

The practical guide explains the particular features, including the strengths and weaknesses, of various methods and techniques available to quantify antitrust harm. It is up to the applicable law to determine which approach to quantification can be considered appropriate in the specific circumstances of a given case. Relevant considerations include — alongside the standard and burden of proof under applicable law — the availability of data, the costs and time involved and their proportionality in relation to the value of the damages claim.

| 15. | The practical guide also presents and discusses a range of practical examples. These illustrate the typical effects that infringements of EU competition rules tend to have, and how the abovementioned methods and techniques for quantifying harm can be applied in practice. |
| --- | --- |

15.

The practical guide also presents and discusses a range of practical examples. These illustrate the typical effects that infringements of EU competition rules tend to have, and how the abovementioned methods and techniques for quantifying harm can be applied in practice.

| 16. | Economic insights into the harm caused by antitrust infringements and methods and techniques for quantifying it can evolve over time in line with the theoretical and empirical economic research and judicial practice in this area. The practical guide should therefore not be seen as a comprehensive or definitive account of the insights, methods and techniques available. |
| --- | --- |

16.

Economic insights into the harm caused by antitrust infringements and methods and techniques for quantifying it can evolve over time in line with the theoretical and empirical economic research and judicial practice in this area. The practical guide should therefore not be seen as a comprehensive or definitive account of the insights, methods and techniques available.

---

(1)  See Article 23(2) of 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. With effect from 1 December 2009, Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty have become Articles 101 and 102 TFEU. Their substance has not been changed.

(2)  Commission Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, OJ C 210, 1.9.2006, p. 2, at paragraph 4.

(3)  Case C-453/99, Courage and Crehan [2001] ECR I-6297; Joined Cases C-295-298/04, Manfredi [2006] ECR I-6619; Case C-360/09, Pfleiderer [2011] ECR I-5161 and Case C-199/11, European Community v Otis NV and others [2012], not yet reported.

(4)  Case C-453/99, Courage and Crehan [2001] ECR I-6297, 27; Joined Cases C-295-298/04, Manfredi [2006] ECR I-6619, 91.

(5)  Joined Cases C-295-298/04, Manfredi [2006] ECR I-6619, 31.

(6)  Protocol (No 27) to the Treaty on European Union, on the internal market and competition.

(7)  Case C-453/99, Courage and Crehan [2001] ECR I-6297, 19 and 23; Joined Cases C-295-298/04, Manfredi [2006] ECR I-6619, 39.

(8)  See Article 17 of the Charter for the protection of an individual’s assets; the right to an effective remedy for breaches of rights guaranteed by the law of the Union is set out in Article 47 of the Charter.

(9)  Case C-360/09, Pfleiderer [2011] ECR I-5161, 28; Case C-199/11, European Community v Otis NV and others [2012], not yet reported, 43.

(10)  Joined Cases C-295-298/04, Manfredi [2006] ECR I-6619, 95-96 and Joined Cases C-46/93 and C-48/93, Brasserie du Pêcheur and Factortame [1996] ECR I-1029, 87.

(11)  Joined Cases C-295-298/04, Manfredi [2006] ECR I-6619, 97, referring to Case C-271/91, Marshall [1993] ECR I-4367, 31.

(12)  Case C-453/99, Courage and Crehan [2001] ECR I-6297, 29; Joined Cases C-295-298/04, Manfredi [2006] ECR I-6619, 62.

(13)  The limits of such assessments of a hypothetical situation have been recognised by the Court of Justice in the context of quantifying the loss of earnings in an action for damages against the European Community, see Joined Cases C-104/89 and C-37/90, Mulder and others v Council [2000] ECR I-203, 79.

---

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

| 13.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 167/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 167/22

---

Publication of an application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

2013/C 167/08

This publication confers the right to oppose the application, pursuant to Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1).

SINGLE DOCUMENT

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 510/2006

on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs
   (2)

‘ΤΟΜΑΤΑΚΙ ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ’ (TOMATAKI SANTORINIS)

EC No: EL-PDO-0005-0888-26.08.2011

PGI ( ) PDO ( X )

1.   Name

‘Τοματάκι Σαντορίνης’ (Tomataki Santorinis)

2.   Member State or third country

Greece

3.   Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff

3.1.   Type of product

| Class 1.6 — | Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed |
| --- | --- |

Class 1.6 —

Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed

3.2.   Description of product to which the name in point 1 applies

‘Tomataki Santorinis’ is defined as the fresh fruit of a local ecotype of Lycopersicon esculentum Mill., of the Solanaceae family, which is classified as small tomato variety, with a development cycle of an average of 80 to 90 days. ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ has a round, slightly flattened shape (polar diameter divided by equatorial diameter between 0,65 and 0,85) and a weight (in grams) ranging from 15 (minimum) to 27 (maximum). The fruit has slight to pronounced flutes, which are particularly marked in the fruit at the base of the plant (close to the roots). ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ has a deep red colour and firm, not particularly moist flesh with a high seed content. The percentage of soluble solids ranges from 7 to 10 °Βrix, while the concentration of soluble solids is lower in relation to total solids and ranges from 73 % to 87 % (13-27 % solid residue). In addition, it has higher levels of ascorbic acid (ranging from 14 mg to 18 mg per 100 g fresh weight), total soluble phenols (54-57 mg/100 g f.w.) and lycopene (3,8-7,5 mg/100 g f.w.). At the same time, the fresh ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ is characterised by high acidity (pΗ = 4-4,5) which, in combination with the high concentration of carbohydrates, gives it a sweet, strongly acidic taste.

3.3.   Raw materials (for processed products only)

—

3.4.   Feed (for products of animal origin only)

—

3.5.   Specific steps in production that must take place in the defined geographical area

All steps in the production, treatment and processing of products marketed under the name ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ must be carried out within the defined geographical production area.

3.6.   Specific rules concerning slicing, grating, packaging, etc.

Restricting packaging operations to the defined geographical area is considered necessary to ensure the quality of the product marketed under the name ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ and to ensure effective control of the origin of the final product.

More specifically, packaging operations need to be restricted to the production area because of the particularly high risk of a deterioration in the quality of such a fragile product during the necessary bulk transport by sea, with the serious possibility of the tomatoes absorbing moisture and becoming contaminated with post-harvest pests and diseases. The aim is also to reduce fraud. The small yield per stremma (1 000 m2) (around 500 kilos per stremma compared with around 10 tonnes per stremma for outdoor tomatoes grown inland) means that ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ fetches a substantially higher price, which is a major incentive to fraud. This will protect the outstanding reputation of the product marketed under the protected name.

3.7.   Specific rules concerning labelling

The packaging bears the product code in accordance with the traceability system.

4.   Concise definition of the geographical area

The geographical area where ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ is produced comprises the islands of Thira (Santorini), Thirasia, Palea Kameni, Nea Kameni, Aspro (Aspronisi), Christiani and Askania in the Prefecture of the Cyclades in the South Aegean Region of the Hellenic Republic.

5.   Link with the geographical area

5.1.   Specificity of the geographical area

These islands all have volcanic soil and a very specific microclimate, with particularly strong winds, long hours of sunshine throughout the year and very dry conditions (low annual rainfall). More specifically:

| (a) | climate: the following specific climatic factors are considered crucial to the quality of the product:






  1. | annual average relative humidity of 71 %; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(a)

climate: the following specific climatic factors are considered crucial to the quality of the product:

1.

annual average relative humidity of 71 %;

| 2. | maximum annual rainfall of 370 mm; |
| --- | --- |

2.

maximum annual rainfall of 370 mm;

| 3. | northerly winds that prevail throughout the year; |
| --- | --- |

3.

northerly winds that prevail throughout the year;

| 4. | an annual average temperature of 17,5 °C; |
| --- | --- |

4.

an annual average temperature of 17,5 °C;

| 5. | 202 days of sunshine a year; and |
| --- | --- |

5.

202 days of sunshine a year; and

| 6. | virtually no frost; |
| --- | --- |

6.

virtually no frost;

| (b) | soil: the parent material of the volcanic soil which makes up nearly all of Santorini consists of tertiary deposits of Thira soil, pumice and lava. This soil is classified as deep, with moderate to no erosion gullies and slight gradients. Generally speaking, this soil has a fine structure, does not contain nitrogen (N), the basic inorganic nutrient, and is particularly poor in organic matter. In addition, the soil contains sodium (Na), which creates conditions of water stress, and has the ability to absorb moisture from the atmosphere and transfer it gradually to the plants during the day (pumice is well known for its water-retention capacity). Thus, the plants are under conditions of water stress, and this, together with the alkaline soil, gives the product special characteristics. Lastly, land water resources are minimal to non-existent; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

soil: the parent material of the volcanic soil which makes up nearly all of Santorini consists of tertiary deposits of Thira soil, pumice and lava. This soil is classified as deep, with moderate to no erosion gullies and slight gradients. Generally speaking, this soil has a fine structure, does not contain nitrogen (N), the basic inorganic nutrient, and is particularly poor in organic matter. In addition, the soil contains sodium (Na), which creates conditions of water stress, and has the ability to absorb moisture from the atmosphere and transfer it gradually to the plants during the day (pumice is well known for its water-retention capacity). Thus, the plants are under conditions of water stress, and this, together with the alkaline soil, gives the product special characteristics. Lastly, land water resources are minimal to non-existent;

| (c) | human factors: there are three specific and very important procedures in the production process which illustrate the human contribution to the traditional cultivation method:






  1. | the collection/selection of the seed to be used for the following crop (seed produced on the holding); |
| --- | --- | --- |

(c)

human factors: there are three specific and very important procedures in the production process which illustrate the human contribution to the traditional cultivation method:

1.

the collection/selection of the seed to be used for the following crop (seed produced on the holding);

| 2. | cultivation methods have been adapted to the area's particular soil and climate conditions (dry conditions, long hours of sunshine and very strong winds). More specifically, over the years growers have selected an early landrace for dry farming, which, to a great extent, overcomes the problem of the strong northerly winds and the lack of water resources, allowing the plant to develop fully, particularly on soils at sea level, during March, April and May. During these months, Santorini is most sheltered from the wind and receives a little rainfall, which provides a valuable source of water; |
| --- | --- |

2.

cultivation methods have been adapted to the area's particular soil and climate conditions (dry conditions, long hours of sunshine and very strong winds). More specifically, over the years growers have selected an early landrace for dry farming, which, to a great extent, overcomes the problem of the strong northerly winds and the lack of water resources, allowing the plant to develop fully, particularly on soils at sea level, during March, April and May. During these months, Santorini is most sheltered from the wind and receives a little rainfall, which provides a valuable source of water;

| 3. | a specific technical adaptation in the cultivation method is the direct sowing of the seed into Thiran soil. This procedure ensures the preservation of the deep taproot, unlike with conventional tomato cultivation, which involves transplanting the plants and cutting the root. |
| --- | --- |

3.

a specific technical adaptation in the cultivation method is the direct sowing of the seed into Thiran soil. This procedure ensures the preservation of the deep taproot, unlike with conventional tomato cultivation, which involves transplanting the plants and cutting the root.

5.2.   Specificity of the product

The specific characteristics of the product are the result of the plant material, together with the particular soil and climate conditions on Santorini and the surrounding islands and the traditional cultivation methods used by the growers.

| (a) | ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ is a local landrace of the species Lycopersicon esculentum Mill., with a historical origin, a distinct identity and genetic variation and is specifically adapted to the dry conditions and the limey, alkaline soils of Santorini. It is produced on a commercial scale in the defined geographical area only. It is a local crop grown by the producers themselves on Santorini, which is the product of the traditional low-input cultivation system. These characteristics have been forged and spread over time by the procedure of collecting-selecting seed for the next crop. The seed is therefore very resistant to both biotic and abiotic stress, with the result that it maintains a highly reliable satisfactory yield under the dry farming system used on Santorini. |
| --- | --- |

(a)

‘Tomataki Santorinis’ is a local landrace of the species Lycopersicon esculentum Mill., with a historical origin, a distinct identity and genetic variation and is specifically adapted to the dry conditions and the limey, alkaline soils of Santorini. It is produced on a commercial scale in the defined geographical area only. It is a local crop grown by the producers themselves on Santorini, which is the product of the traditional low-input cultivation system. These characteristics have been forged and spread over time by the procedure of collecting-selecting seed for the next crop. The seed is therefore very resistant to both biotic and abiotic stress, with the result that it maintains a highly reliable satisfactory yield under the dry farming system used on Santorini.

| (b) | As stated in the product description, one of the specific characteristics of ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ is the composition of soluble solids, which contribute positively to both its nutritional qualities and its taste. It has a lower concentration of soluble solids in relation to total solids, ranging from 73 % to 87 % (13-27 % solid residue), whereas classic tomato varieties have 95-98 % (2-5 % solid residue). This means that it has more solid residue. Experiments comparing these parameters and those of the large ‘Gs 67’ variety of tomato, carried out under equivalent conventional growing conditions, showed that ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ also has higher values for ascorbic acid content, total soluble phenols and lycopene, which are part of the soluble solids. Specifically, per 100 g fresh weight the values for the above constituents in ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ are 14-18 mg, 54-57 mg and 3,8-7,5 mg respectively, whereas in the classic ‘Gs 67’ tomato variety they are 8-12 mg, 30-35 mg and 1,8-7 mg respectively. Similar studies on its taste characteristics showed that ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ has a higher percentage of soluble solids and higher values for titratable acidity. These differences are due to the ability of this particular ecotype of the plant to recycle ascorbic acid within the fruit. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

As stated in the product description, one of the specific characteristics of ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ is the composition of soluble solids, which contribute positively to both its nutritional qualities and its taste. It has a lower concentration of soluble solids in relation to total solids, ranging from 73 % to 87 % (13-27 % solid residue), whereas classic tomato varieties have 95-98 % (2-5 % solid residue). This means that it has more solid residue. Experiments comparing these parameters and those of the large ‘Gs 67’ variety of tomato, carried out under equivalent conventional growing conditions, showed that ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ also has higher values for ascorbic acid content, total soluble phenols and lycopene, which are part of the soluble solids. Specifically, per 100 g fresh weight the values for the above constituents in ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ are 14-18 mg, 54-57 mg and 3,8-7,5 mg respectively, whereas in the classic ‘Gs 67’ tomato variety they are 8-12 mg, 30-35 mg and 1,8-7 mg respectively. Similar studies on its taste characteristics showed that ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ has a higher percentage of soluble solids and higher values for titratable acidity. These differences are due to the ability of this particular ecotype of the plant to recycle ascorbic acid within the fruit.

5.3.   Causal link between the geographical area and the quality or characteristics of the product (for PDO) or a specific quality, the reputation or other characteristic of the product (for PGI)

The particular physical, chemical and organoleptic characteristics of tomatoes marketed under the name ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ are the result of the combined effects of the environment, local know-how and the potential of the genetic resources.

Thus, the principal quality characteristics that link ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ with the area are:

| (a) | the particular genetic material used, which has now taken on the characteristics of a local variety, as a result of a long period of adaptation to the particular conditions pertaining in the area and to the traditional method of collecting-selecting seed for sowing the following year. The adaptation of the plant to the environment of Santorini resulted in the formation of certain specific characteristics that have made ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ highly prized on the market, as a high-quality product. These characteristics are its distinct identity, genetic variation and specific adaptation to the dry conditions and the limey, alkaline soil of Santorini and are linked to the traditional cultivation system. Recent studies have shown that: (a) research into the phylogenetic links between two picks of ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ and seven domestic varieties of tomato, studying 38 properties of the plant, showed a clear genetic difference (genetic distance) between authentic ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ and all the other varieties, something that gives the tomato a distinctive identity (uniqueness); and (b) the parallel evaluation of selected genotypes on Santorini (using the traditional low-input system) and on holdings belonging to the National Agricultural Research Foundation in Thessaloniki (using a conventional high-input cultivation system) showed a strong environmental influence on the production characteristics, and a comparison of the categories of products produced showed the product and its constituents only developed fully in the environment of Santorini, proof that selection in situ is more reliable.
  In addition, it should be noted that the strongly alkaline soil produces higher levels of sugar in the ripe tomato.
  It can therefore be concluded that this local ecotype has acquired a high agricultural value, since it shows outstanding resistance to aridity and a range of diseases such as black mould, powdery mildew, fusariosis and verticillium, while it has also adapted well to the island's volcanic soils and their limey, alkaline composition. Average yields on Santorini's dry soils hover around 500 kg per stremma and only in exceptional cases do they reach 1 000 kg; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the particular genetic material used, which has now taken on the characteristics of a local variety, as a result of a long period of adaptation to the particular conditions pertaining in the area and to the traditional method of collecting-selecting seed for sowing the following year. The adaptation of the plant to the environment of Santorini resulted in the formation of certain specific characteristics that have made ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ highly prized on the market, as a high-quality product. These characteristics are its distinct identity, genetic variation and specific adaptation to the dry conditions and the limey, alkaline soil of Santorini and are linked to the traditional cultivation system. Recent studies have shown that: (a) research into the phylogenetic links between two picks of ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ and seven domestic varieties of tomato, studying 38 properties of the plant, showed a clear genetic difference (genetic distance) between authentic ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ and all the other varieties, something that gives the tomato a distinctive identity (uniqueness); and (b) the parallel evaluation of selected genotypes on Santorini (using the traditional low-input system) and on holdings belonging to the National Agricultural Research Foundation in Thessaloniki (using a conventional high-input cultivation system) showed a strong environmental influence on the production characteristics, and a comparison of the categories of products produced showed the product and its constituents only developed fully in the environment of Santorini, proof that selection in situ is more reliable.

In addition, it should be noted that the strongly alkaline soil produces higher levels of sugar in the ripe tomato.

It can therefore be concluded that this local ecotype has acquired a high agricultural value, since it shows outstanding resistance to aridity and a range of diseases such as black mould, powdery mildew, fusariosis and verticillium, while it has also adapted well to the island's volcanic soils and their limey, alkaline composition. Average yields on Santorini's dry soils hover around 500 kg per stremma and only in exceptional cases do they reach 1 000 kg;

| (b) | the physical and chemical properties of the fruit, which include a particularly high proportion of sugars and total solids, which is reflected in the product's organoleptic characteristics. This is the result of, on the one hand, the presence of sodium, which creates conditions of water stress and, on the other, the fact that the particular soils of Santorini absorb moisture from the atmosphere (because of the caldera during the night) and transfer it gradually to the plants during the day (pumice is well known for its water-retention capacity). In addition, fertiliser is not applied, that is to say the plant is under conditions of water stress, and this, together with the highly alkaline soil, is the major reason for the increased proportion of sugars and total solids and more generally the constituents that provide taste and nutritional value; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the physical and chemical properties of the fruit, which include a particularly high proportion of sugars and total solids, which is reflected in the product's organoleptic characteristics. This is the result of, on the one hand, the presence of sodium, which creates conditions of water stress and, on the other, the fact that the particular soils of Santorini absorb moisture from the atmosphere (because of the caldera during the night) and transfer it gradually to the plants during the day (pumice is well known for its water-retention capacity). In addition, fertiliser is not applied, that is to say the plant is under conditions of water stress, and this, together with the highly alkaline soil, is the major reason for the increased proportion of sugars and total solids and more generally the constituents that provide taste and nutritional value;

| (c) | reputation — historical data. The earliest reliable evidence of tomato cultivation in Santorini dates from the end of the 19th century and records it as starting in the 1870s. The first official record of tomato growing in Santorini is contained in the first systematic report on the flora and agricultural production of Santorini drawn up shortly afterwards (1899). However, the report gives no economic data about the crop, proof that it made only a small contribution to the economy and that the product was mainly used to cover the nutritional needs of the local population. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

reputation — historical data. The earliest reliable evidence of tomato cultivation in Santorini dates from the end of the 19th century and records it as starting in the 1870s. The first official record of tomato growing in Santorini is contained in the first systematic report on the flora and agricultural production of Santorini drawn up shortly afterwards (1899). However, the report gives no economic data about the crop, proof that it made only a small contribution to the economy and that the product was mainly used to cover the nutritional needs of the local population.

Tomato growing was introduced systematically into Santorini when sales of Santorini's wines in Russia collapsed following the October Revolution, with the result that income from wine-growing shrank and there arose the need to develop new, more profitable crops. Thus, during 1919 and 1920, the local newspaper, Santorini, carried reports that tomato-growing was spreading at the expense of wine-growing, while in 1922, the income from tomato-growing was five times that from wine-growing. Papamanolis describes how tomatoes were grown in all the areas where there was pumice, reporting that total production of tomato purée was around 1 300 tonnes in 1928. Around that same period (1928-29), Santorini was visited by Professor Durazzo-Morosini, who recorded tomato-growing in the districts of Pirgos and Thirasia and a tomato cannery in Mesa Gonia in Messaria. In 1933, Danezis wrote that the tomato industry was one of the two main sources of income in Santorini's agricultural sector. By then, tomatoes had been grown on Santorini for 50 years, sufficient time for the crop to adapt to the soil and climate conditions, for traditional, local know-how to develop and for the comparative advantages of the end-product to become known.

Today, the product has become established in the mind of the consumer as a product of exceptional quality, something that is confirmed by the huge number of references to it on the Internet, the conventions held and the range of recipes using ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ as the principal ingredient.

In conclusion, it should be noted that the principal advantages of the tomatoes grown on Santorini are their higher sugar content and their higher level of total soluble solids. This specific quality characteristic is the result of the combined influence of the genetic material of the local variety, the cultivation method used and, naturally, Santorini's soil and climate conditions. ‘Tomataki Santorinis’ is a striking example of a highly-prized local product of excellent quality whose production involves the sustainable use of unique natural resources.

Publication reference of the specification

(Article 5(7) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 (3))

http://www.minagric.gr/images/stories/docs/agrotis/POP-PGE/tomataki_santorinis_221012.pdf

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12. Replaced by Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

(3)  See footnote 2.

---