ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 303/8

Final report of the Hearing Officer in Case COMP/M.3436 — Continental/Phoenix

(pursuant to Article 15 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition proceedings — OJ L 162, 19.6.2001)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 303/07)

On 12 May 2004 the Commission received notification, pursuant to Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation, of a proposed merger by which Continental AG wished to acquire sole control over Phoenix AG, both undertakings being leaders on the rubber products manufacturing market.

Having examined the information submitted by the parties to the proposed merger and conducted a market survey, the Commission concluded that the merger raised serious doubts as to compatibility with the common market and the EEA Agreement.

Market participants were consulted about the effectiveness of the commitments proposed by the parties with a view to amending the original proposal, but these were considered to be not sufficient to prevent serious doubts. On 29 June 2004, therefore, the Commission initiated the procedure provided for by Article 6(1)(c) of the Merger Regulation.

On 3 September the Commission sent the parties a statement of objections. A CD-Rom was also sent to them, giving them access to the file. They replied to the statement of objections on 17 September 2004. They waived a formal hearing.

Following the replies to the statement of objections, the Commission continued to have doubts about the following markets: air springs for cars and utility vehicles and heavy steel cord conveyor belts. It dropped the objection concerning the market for rail vehicle air springs.

On 1 October 2004 the parties proposed further commitments amending the original merger proposal, about which market participants were also consulted.

In view of these commitments, and of the replies from market participants, it was considered that the merger could be authorised.

No questions have been addressed to me by the parties or third parties. The case calls for no special comment concerning the right to be heard.
(4)

The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission on the amounts of reduction of the fine based on the 2002 Commission Notice on the non-imposition or reduction of fines in cartel cases. A minority disagrees.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 59/4

Communication from the French Government concerning Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons (1)

(Notice regarding an application for an exclusive licence to prospect for oil and gas, designated the ‘Permis du Pays de Saulnois’)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 59/04)

On 26 September 2006, Lundin International, with registered offices at MacLaunay, F-51210 Montmirail, applied for an exclusive three-year licence, designated the ‘Permis du Pays de Saulnois’, to prospect for oil and gas in an area of approximately 264 km2 covering part of the department of Moselle.

The perimeter of the area covered by this licence consists of the meridian and parallel arcs connecting in turn the points defined below by their geographical coordinates, the original meridian being that of Paris.

Points Latitude Longitude A 54,40° N 4,60° E B 54,40° N 4,80° E C 54,30° N 4,80° E D 54,30° N 4,70° E E 54,20° N 4,70° E F 54,20° N 4,50° E G 54,30° N 4,50° E H 54,30° N 4,60° E

Submission of applications

The initial applicant and competing applicants must prove that they comply with the requirements for obtaining the licence, as specified in Articles 4, 5 and 6 of Decree No 2006-648 of 2 June 2006 concerning mining rights and underground storage rights (Journal officiel de la République française, 3 June 2006).

Interested companies may, within 90 days of the publication of this notice, submit a competing application in accordance with the procedure summarised in the ‘Notice regarding the granting of mining rights for hydrocarbons in France ’published in Official Journal of the European Communities C 374 of 30 December 1994, p. 11, and established by Decree No 2006-648 of 2 June 2006 concerning mining rights and underground storage rights.

Competing applications must be sent to the Minister responsible for mines at the address below. Decisions on the initial application and competing applications will be taken within two years of the date on which the French authorities received the initial application, i.e. by 26 September 2008 at the latest.

Conditions and requirements regarding performance of the activity and cessation thereof

Applicants are referred to Articles 79 and 79(1) of the Mining Code and to Decree No 2006-649 of 2 June 2006 on mining operations, underground storage and the regulations governing them (Journal officiel de la République française, 3 June 2006).

Further information can be obtained from the Ministry of Economic Affairs, Finance and Industry (Directorate-General for Energy and Raw Materials, Directorate for Energy and Mineral Resources, Bureau of Mining Legislation), 61, boulevard Vincent Auriol, Télédoc 133, F-75703 Paris Cedex 13 (telephone: (33) 144 97 23 02, fax: (33) 144 97 05 70).

The abovementioned laws and regulations can be consulted at:

http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr

(1) OJ L 164, 30.6.1994, p. 3.
4.

Interested Romanian and foreign legal persons should submit in writing their bids for the exploration areas listed in Table 1 in Romanian to: Agenţia Naţională pentru Resurse Minerale În atenţia Bogdan Gabudeanu, Preşedinte Str. Mendeleev nr. 36-38, cod 010366, sector 1 Bucureşti Romania by 15.00 on the final day of the period of 100 working days starting from the first day after the publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union. Bids for the operation areas listed in Table 2 should be submitted by 15.00 on the final day of the period of 120 working days starting from the first day after the publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union. Bids submitted after the deadline will not be considered. The bids will be opened at a public meeting at 10.00 on the first working day after the deadline mentioned above.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 275/28

Communication from the Minister for Economic Affairs of the Kingdom of the Netherlands on the basis of Article 3(2) of Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons

(2007/C 275/12)

The Minister for Economic Affairs hereby gives notice that an application has been received for authorisation to prospect for hydrocarbons in block G10 as indicated on the map appended as Annex 3 to the Mining Regulation (Mijnbouwregeling) (Government Gazette (Staatscourant) 2002, No 245).

With reference to the Directive 94/22/EC mentioned in the introduction and Article 15 of the Mining Act (Mijnbouwwet) (Bulletin of Acts and Decrees (Staatsblad) 2002, No 542), the Minister for Economic Affairs hereby invites interested parties to submit a competing application for authorisation to prospect for hydrocarbons in block G10 of the Dutch continental shelf.

The Minister for Economic Affairs is the competent authority for the granting of authorisations. The criteria, conditions and requirements referred to in Articles 5(1), 5(2) and 6(2) of the above-mentioned Directive are set out in the Mining Act (Bulletin of Acts and Decrees 2002, No 542).

Applications may be submitted during the 13 weeks following the publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union and should be sent to: De Minister van Economische Zaken, ter attentie van J.C. De Groot, Directeur Energiemarkt, ALP/562, Postbus 20101, 2500 EC Den Haag, Nederland.

Applications submitted after the expiry of this period will not be considered.

A decision on the applications will be taken not later than twelve months after this period has expired.

Further information can be obtained from the following telephone number: (31-70) 379 77 62 (contact person: E.J. Hoppel).
4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the amounts of reduction of the fine based on the 1996 Commission Notice on the non-imposition or reduction of fines in cartel cases.
6.

The majority of the Advisory Committee agrees that Siemens, Alstom and Areva, within the group of suppliers played the role of leader and that this justifies an increase in the basic amount of the fine to be imposed on these undertakings for leadership. A minority of the Advisory Committee abstains.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 291/11

Final report of the Hearing Officer in Case COMP/E-2/39.140 — DaimlerChrysler

(Pursuant to Articles 15 and 16 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, 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)

(2007/C 291/05)

The draft Decision presented to the Commission under Article 9 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (1) relates to the supply of technical information for the repair of DaimlerChrysler AG's Mercedes-Benz and Smart brand vehicles.

The Commission opened an investigation into DaimlerChrysler AG's provision of its technical information to independent repairers on 22 December 2004, following the publication of a study by the German research institute IKA. On 1 December 2006, the Commission opened proceedings under Chapter III of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 and adopted a preliminary assessment as referred to in Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003. This assessment set out the Commission's competition concerns, which were that DaimlerChrysler AG seemed to have excluded all but its authorised repairers from full access to its technical information. The Commission's preliminary assessment was sent to DaimlerChrysler AG on 1 December 2006.

In response to this, DaimlerChrysler AG submitted commitments on 14 February 2007.

On 22 March 2007, the Commission published a notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, pursuant to Article 27(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, inviting interested companies to transmit observations on this notification within one month of its publication. The comments received in response to this invitation mainly confirmed the effectiveness of the commitments proposed by DaimlerChrysler AG.

The Commission has now come to the conclusion that, in view of the commitments proposed by DaimlerChrysler AG, and without prejudice to Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, there are no longer grounds for action.

In a Decision under Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, a breach of the competition rules is not established, but the Parties accept to remedy the concerns expressed by the Commission in a preliminary assessment. There is in this process a willingness on both sides to simplify the administrative and legal requirements which are inherent in a full investigation of a suspected infringement. This is the reason why in several Decisions taken already by the College (2), it has been accepted that due process is satisfied when the Parties inform the Commission that they have received sufficient access to the information they considered necessary to propose commitments in order to meet the concerns expressed by the Commission.

This case has also been dealt with in the same manner, DaimlerChrysler AG having submitted a Declaration to the Commission to this effect on 22 May 2007.

In the light of the above, I consider that the rights to be heard have been respected in this case.

Brussels, 11 July 2007. Karen WILLIAMS

(1) OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1.

(2) Cf. Decision of 22 June 2005 in Case COMP/39.116 — Coca-Cola and Decision of 19 January 2005 in Case COMP/37.214 — DFB.
3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's proposal to reduce the fine under mitigating circumstances to take account of some of Telefónica's charges being subject to sector specific regulation by the Spanish CMT.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 161/5

Final report of the Hearing Officer in Case COMP/M.4781 — Norddeutsche Affinerie/Cumerio

(Pursuant to Articles 15 and 16 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, 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)

(2008/C 161/06)

On 30 July 2007, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (‘EC Merger Regulation’) by which the undertaking Norddeutsche Affinerie AG (‘NA’, Germany) would acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the EC Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Cumerio SA (‘Cumerio’, Belgium) by way of a public bid announced on 27 June 2007.

After a preliminary examination of the notification, the Commission concluded that the proposed transaction consists of the acquisition of sole control over Cumerio by NA via a public takeover offer for all outstanding shares, options and warrants and therefore constituted a concentration within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the EC Merger Regulation.

In order for the Commission to be able to dismiss any possible serious doubts in Phase I, the parties submitted a remedy proposal on 28 August 2007.

The Commission concluded that, after examination of the notification and market testing of the remedy proposal and based on the information available in Phase I, its doubts could not be dismissed and decided on 18 September 2007 to initiate proceedings pursuant to Article 6(1)(c) of the EC Merger Regulation.

NA did not request to be given access to key documents in the file in accordance with the Best Practices rules for merger cases.

Following an in-depth market investigation, the Commission services concluded that the proposed transaction would not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part thereof and was therefore compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement. Accordingly, no Statement of Objections was sent to the notifying party.

No queries or submissions have been made to me by the parties or any third party. The case does not call for any particular comments as regards the right to be heard.
3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's definition of the relevant geographic market as stated in the draft decision. (a) The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's definition that the relevant geographic market for S-PVC is wider than national and does not correspond to UK and the Nordic Region, namely Norway and Sweden. (b) The Advisory Committee agrees with the analysis done and the elements considered by the Commission to conclude that the geographic market definition for S-PVC corresponds at least to North-Western Europe.
1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the factors that were taken into account when calculating the level of the fine for E.ON Energie AG pursuant to Article 23(1)(e) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 13/7

Final Report (1) of the Hearing Officer in Case COMP/M.4942 — Nokia/Navteq

(2009/C 13/05)

On 19 February 2008, the Commission received a formal notification pursuant to Article 4 of the Merger Regulation by which Nokia Corporation (‘Nokia’), would acquire control of the whole of Navteq Corporation by way of purchase of shares, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation.

Upon examination of the notification, the Commission concluded that the notified operation raised serious doubts as to its compatibility with the common market and the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘EEA Agreement’). Therefore, on 28 March 2008, the Commission initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 6(1)(c) of the Merger Regulation.

On 21 April 2008 and 2 May 2008, the Commission provided Nokia with access to key documents, including non-confidential versions of third-party submissions, in accordance with paragraph 45 of DG Competition's Best Practices on the conduct of EC merger control proceedings.

On the basis of the additional evidence gathered during the in-depth phase of the investigation, the Commission services concluded that the proposed transaction would not significantly impede effective competition in the common market, and is therefore compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement. Accordingly, no Statement of Objections was sent to the notifying party.

No queries or submissions have been made to me by the merging parties or any third-party. The case does not call for any particular comments as regards the right to be heard.

Brussels, 25 June 2008. Karen WILLIAMS

(1) Pursuant to Articles 15 and 16 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, 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).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 54/75

Notice by the Ministry of the Economy of the Republic of Latvia

(2009/C 54/07)

Pursuant to Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 1994 and Cabinet Regulation No 597 of 4 September 2007 on hydrocarbon prospection, exploration and production and the amounts of and procedures for paying Government duties, the Ministry of the Economy of the Republic of Latvia is preparing a call for tenders for hydrocarbon exploration and production within the exclusive economic zone of the Republic of Latvia.

Pursuant to Article 5 of Directive 94/22/EC, the criteria by which the tender appraisal committee will evaluate tenders for hydrocarbon exploration and production within the exclusive economic zone of the Republic of Latvia have been published by the Ministry of the Economy on page 43 of the Latvian official gazette Latvijas Vēstnesis No 14 (4000) of 27 January 2009.
2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission, as regards the infringement on the beer market in the Netherlands, on the amount of reduction of the fines based on the 1996 Commission Notice on the non-imposition or reduction of fines in cartel cases.
3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the amounts of reduction of the fine based on the 2006 Commission Notice on the non-imposition or reduction of fines in cartel cases.
2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that there are no mitigating or aggravating circumstances to be taken into account.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 241/11

Final Report of the Hearing Officer in Case COMP/M.4381 — JCI/VB/FIAMM

(Pursuant to Articles 15 and 16 of Commission Decision (2001/462/EC, 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)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2009/C 241/05

On 26 October 2006, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration by which VB Autobatterie GmbH (‘VB’, Germany), an undertaking jointly controlled by Johnson Controls Inc. (USA) and Robert Bosch GmbH (Germany), acquires sole control of the automotive starter battery business of FIAMM SpA. (‘FIAMM SBB’, Italy).

Upon examination of the notification, the Commission concluded that the notified operation raised serious concerns as to its compatibility with the common market, and decided to initiate proceedings pursuant to Article 6(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 on 4 December 2006.

Access to key documents was provided to the notifying party on 6 December 2006 and 12 December 2006, in accordance with paragraph 45 of DG Competition's Best Practices on the conduct of EC merger control proceedings.

The Commission sent a Statement of Objections to VB on 12 February 2007, to which VB and FIAMM each replied on 26 February 2007. The parties did not request a formal oral hearing.

VB was granted access to file upon issuance of the Statement of Objections. Further access to the results of the market investigation was granted throughout the procedure.

On 8 March 2007, the notifying party offered commitments designed to meet the competition concerns identified by the Commission in the Statement of Objections, and subsequently submitted a revised proposal for commitments on 29 March 2007.

In the light of the Commitments offered by the notifying party, the Commission has concluded that the proposed concentration does not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it, in particular as a result of the creation or strengthening of a dominant position, subject to the conditions set out in the Annex to the draft Decision.

In the light of the above, I consider that the rights to be heard of all participants to the present proceeding have been respected.
2.

The members of the Advisory Committee agree with the Commission on the increase of the basic amount to ensure a sufficient deterrent effect.
4.

The majority of the Advisory Committee agree with the European Commission that there are exceptional circumstances present in this case that justify granting a reduction of fines for effective cooperation outside the 2002 Leniency notice, as set out in the draft decision.
1.

The Advisory Committee shares the Commission's concerns as to the compatibility with Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement of IACS' decisions as expressed in the draft decision communicated to the Advisory Committee on 11 September 2009.
4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that, in light of the commitments offered by GDF Suez, there are no longer grounds for action by the Commission, without prejudice to Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.
4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that, in light of the commitments offered by Svenska Kraftnät, there are no longer grounds for action by the Commission, without prejudice to Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 157/9

Communication from the Kingdom of Belgium concerning Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons

(Text with EEA relevance)

2010/C 157/05

Pursuant to Article 10 of Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 1994 on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons (1), the Kingdom of Belgium hereby notifies to the European Commission the list of competent authorities responsible for dealing with applications relating to areas located within the Walloon Region.

— Pursuant to the Walloon Government Decree of 19 March 2009 laying down the procedure and detailed rules for examining applications for licences to explore for and produce oil and gas, and amending the Walloon Government Decree of 4 July 2002 establishing the list of projects subject to an impact assessment and of classified installations and activities, all applications for licences to explore for and extract oil and gas must be submitted to the following authority: Région Wallonne Service public de Wallonie — Direction générale opérationnelle agriculture, ressources naturelles et environnement Département des permis et des autorisations Avenue Prince de Liège, 15 5100 Jambes BELGIQUE

— The Walloon Government will take a decision on any such licence applications.

(1) OJ L 164, 30.6.1994, p. 3.