----

----

I Information

Commission

----

Euro exchange rates (1)

31 May 2005

(2005/C 134/01)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

----

----

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(2005/C 134/02)

Date of adoption of the decision: 

Member State: Spain

Aid No: N 79/2005

Title: Aid to update the national tractor fleet

Objective: To invest in farms and farming groups by replacing old tractors with new tractors.

Legal basis: Proyecto de Real Decreto por el que se regula la concesión de ayudas para la renovación del parque nacional de tractores.

Budget: EUR 6 million per year

Aid intensity or amount: Up to 40 % (50 % in less-favoured areas) (45 and 55 % respectively for young farmers) of the cost of the eligible investment.

Duration: Indefinite.

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

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

Date of adoption of the decision: 

Member State: Greece.

Aid No: N 123/04.

Title: Regulation on State aid to ELGA.

Objective: To compensate losses resulting from natural disasters, exceptional occurrences, adverse weather conditions and diseases.

Legal basis: Σχέδιο κοινής υπουργικής απόφασης περί εγκρίσεως του κανονισμού σχετικά με τις κρατικές ενισχύσεις προς τον ΕΛΓΑ.

Budget: To be determined (framework scheme under which budgets will be allocated on a case by case basis).

Aid intensity or amount: From 50 to 100 % of losses.

Duration: Indefinite.

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

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

Date of adoption of the decision: 

Member State: Italy (Marche)

No of the aid: N 462/2004

Title: Regional Law 56/97: subsidized loans for land reparcelling.

Objective: Aid is granted for the purchase of land and buildings necessary for farmers' needs.

Legal basis: Schema di delibera della Giunta regionale della Regione Marche 'Indirizzi e criteri per gli interventi di credito agevolato per la ristrutturazione fondiaria delle aziende agricole' concernente la Legge Regionale 56/97.

Budget: EUR 1 351 984,77 per year, up to a maximum of EUR 700 000 per company and EUR 1 400 000 per cooperative.

Aid intensity or amount: 40 % (or 50 % in the less-favoured areas) increased by 5 % in case of young farmers within five years from the setting up. For investments related to the processing of agricultural products the aid rate will not exceed 40 % of eligible investments in non Objective 1 regions and 50 % in objective 1 regions.

Duration: 10 years

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

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

Date of adoption of the decision: 

Member State: Italy (Sicily).

Aid No: N 483/04.

Title: Assistance in agricultural areas hit by natural disasters.

Objective: The aid is intended to compensate farmers for losses resulting from adverse weather conditions.

Legal basis: 

Budget: EUR 101 074 434.83.

Aid intensity or amount: Intensities approved under file C 12/b/95.

Duration: Time necessary for payment of the aid.

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

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

----

----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.3789 — Johnson Controls/Robert Bosch/Delphi SLI)

(2005/C 134/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

(1)OJ L 24, 29.1.2004 p. 1

----

----

Information procedure — Technical rules

(2005/C 134/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules on Information Society services. (OJ L 204, 21.7.1998, p. 37; OJ L 217, 5.8.1998, p. 18).

Notifications of draft national technical rules received by the Commission

The Commission draws attention to the judgement delivered on 30 April 1996 in the ‘CIA Security’ case (C-194/94 — ECR I, p. 2201), in which the Court of Justice ruled that Articles 8 and 9 of Directive 98/34/EC (formerly 83/189/EEC) are to be interpreted as meaning that individuals may rely on them before national courts which must decline to apply a national technical regulation which has not been notified in accordance with the Directive.

This judgement confirms the Commission's communication of 1 October 1986 (OJ C 245, 1.10.1986, p. 4).

Accordingly, breach of the obligation to notify renders the technical regulations concerned inapplicable, and consequently unenforceable against individuals.

For more information on the notification procedure, please write to:

Also consult the website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/tris/

If you require any further information on these notifications, please contact the national departments listed below:

LIST OF NATIONAL DEPARTMENTS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF DIRECTIVE 98/34/EC

BELGIUM

CZECH REPUBLIC

DENMARK

GERMANY

ESTONIA

GREECE

SPAIN

FRANCE

IRELAND

ITALY

CYPRUS

LATVIA

LITHUANIA

LUXEMBOURG

HUNGARY

MALTA

NETHERLANDS

AUSTRIA

POLAND

PORTUGAL

SLOVENIA

SLOVAKIA

FINLAND

SWEDEN

UNITED KINGDOM

EFTA - ESA

TURKEY

----

(1)  Year - registration number - Member State of origin.

(2)  Period during which the draft may not be adopted.

(3)  No standstill period since the Commission accepts the grounds of urgent adoption invoked by the notifying Member State.

(4)  No standstill period since the measure concerns technical specifications or other requirements or rules on services linked to fiscal or financial measures, pursuant to the third indent of the second paragraph of Article 1(11) of Directive 98/34/EC.

(5)  Information procedure closed.

----

----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.3809 — Siemens/Flender)

(2005/C 134/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

(1)OJ L 24, 29.1.2004 p. 1

----

----

Final report of the Hearing Officer in Case COMP/M.2621 — SEB/Moulinex

(pursuant to Article 15 of Commission decision 2001/462/3C, ECSC of 23 may 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition proceedings — OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21)

(2005/C 134/06)

On 13 November 2001 the Commission received notification, under Article 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (‘the Merger Regulation’), of a transaction whereby a part of the assets of the French company Moulinex was to be acquired by another French company, SEB. On 8 January 2002 the Commission decided not to oppose to the transaction notified and to declare it compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement, subject to compliance with certain commitments which formed an integral part of the decision. This decision, adopted under Article 6(1)(b) and Article 6(2) of the Merger Regulation, authorised the transaction with respect to its effects outside France. The French authorities had requested that part of the case be referred to them, and by a decision likewise adopted on 8 January 2002, under Article 9 of the Merger Regulation, the Commission referred the French aspects of the case to the French authorities.

On 3 April 2003 the Court of First Instance annulled the Commission's authorising decision with respect to five countries where no remedies had been required (Spain, Finland, Italy, the United Kingdom and Ireland). The Commission then reopened the first phase of investigation.

In accordance with Article 10(5) of the Merger Regulation, the date on which the notification and the time limits which depend on it now took effect was 3 April 2003.

On 23 May 2003 the Commission concluded that the commitments offered by SEB did not overcome the serious doubts as to the compatibility of the transaction with the common market, and decided to initiate formal proceedings under Article 6(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation.

Those proceedings were suspended on 19 June 2003 by a decision under Article 11 of the Merger Regulation. SEB supplied a full reply, and the proceedings resumed on 1 August 2003. The time limit for a decision under Article 8 of the Merger Regulation is consequently 25 November 2003. The conclusion from the detailed market surveys now carried out is that no commitments other than those entered into in the earlier proceedings were needed in order to prevent the creation or strengthening of a dominant position. For this reason no statement of objections has been sent to the parties.

I consider that the undertakings' right to be heard has been respected in this case.

Brussels, 4 November 2003

Serge DURANDE

----

----

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on concentrations given at its 120th meeting held on 3 november 2003 concerning a preliminary draft Decision relating to Case COMP/M.2621 — SEB/Moulinex (II)

(2005/C 134/07)

----

III Notices

Commission

----

2005 Call for proposals

in the field of the Community mechanism to facilitate reinforced cooperation in civil protection assistance interventions

Major emergency simulation exercises

(2005/C 134/08)

----