do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4895 — Mol/Italiana Energia e Servizi) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2007-11-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: disclosure of information, economic concentration, merger control, oil industry, restrictive-practice authorisation

24.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/9

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4895 — Mol/Italiana Energia e Servizi)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 282/07)

On 30 October 2007, 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 Regu-
lation (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:

— from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/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 under document number 32007M4895. EUR-Lex is the

on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4766 — Flextronics/Solectron)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 282/08)

On 28 August 2007, 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 Regu-
lation (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:

— from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/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 under document number 32007M4766. EUR-Lex is the

on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4863 — Bain Capital/American Standard) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2007-11-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: building services, disclosure of information, economic concentration, investment transaction, merger control, restrictive-practice authorisation

C 282/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.11.2007

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4847 — Ineos/Champagne Céréales/Thywissen/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 282/05)

On 17 September 2007, 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 Regu-
lation (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:

— from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/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 under document number 32007M4847. EUR-Lex is the

on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4863 — Bain Capital/American Standard)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 282/06)

On 28 September 2007, 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 Regu-
lation (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:

— from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/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 under document number 32007M4863. EUR-Lex is the

on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).
Case C-403/07: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 31 August 2007 — Metherma GmbH & Co. KG v Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf
Date: 2007-11-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, bar, interpretation of the law, molybdenum, tungsten

24.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 283/13

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfi-
lodged on 31 August 2007 —
nanzhof

(Germany)

Metherma GmbH & Co. KG v Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf

(Case C-403/07)

(2007/C 283/22)

Language of the case: German

Question referred

Must Articles 2 and 3 of Council Framework Decision
2001/220 of 15 March 2001 on the standing of victims in
criminal proceedings be interpreted as meaning that the national
court must also safeguard the possibility for the victim to be
heard as a witness in criminal proceedings in which he has
initiated a supplementary private prosecution?

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Metherma GmbH & Co. KG

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf

Question referred

Interpretation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of
23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on
the Common Customs Tariff (1).

tungsten or molybdenum which have been
Can bars of
‘obtained simply by sintering’ and which fall respectively under
subheadings 8101 94 00 and 8102 94 00 of the Combined
Nomenclature be processed into scrap falling respectively under
subheadings 8101 97 00 and 8102 97 00 of the Combined
Nomenclature by being broken up or shattered?

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der
Nederlanden,
lodged on 5 September 2007 — Stichting
Centraal Begeleidingsorgaan voor de Intercollegiale Toetsing v
Staatssecretaris van Financiën

(Case C-407/07)

(2007/C 283/24)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

(1) OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1.

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant:
Intercollegiale Toetsing

Stichting Centraal Begeleidingsorgaan voor

de

Respondent: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi
Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 7 August 2007 — Criminal
proceedings against István Roland Sós

Question referred

(Case C-404/07)

(2007/C 283/23)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Bíróság

Party to the main proceedings

István Roland Sós

Must Article 13.A(1)(f) of the Sixth Directive (1) be construed as
covering also services supplied by groups coming within the
scope of that provision to their members which are directly
necessary for the exercise of those members' exempted activities
or activities for which they are not subject to tax and by way of
payment for which no more is invoiced than represents the
costs incurred in respect of those services, if those services are
supplied only to one or more members?

(1) Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmo-
nisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes
— Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment
(OJ L 145, p. 1).
Case T-460/05: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 10 October 2007 — Bang & Olufsen v OHIM (Shape of a loudspeaker) (Community trade mark — Application for a three-dimensional Community trade mark — Shape of a loudspeaker — Absolute ground for refusal — Distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
Date: 2007-11-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law

C 283/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.11.2007

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 10 October
2007 — Bang & Olufsen v OHIM (Shape of a loudspeaker)

Order of the Court of First Instance of 11 September 2007
— Lancôme v OHIM — Baudon (AROMACOSMETIQUE)

(Case T-460/05) (1)

(Case T-185/04) (1)

(Community trade mark — Application for a three-dimen-
sional Community trade mark — Shape of a loudspeaker —
refusal — Distinctive character —
Absolute ground for

Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

trade mark — Invalidity proceedings —
(Community
Community word mark AROMACOSMETIQUE — Earlier
national word mark AROMACOSMETIQUE — Invalidity of
the earlier national word mark — No need to adjudicate)

(2007/C 283/46)

(2007/C 283/47)

Language of the case: English

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Bang & Olufsen A/S (Struer, Denmark) (represented
by: K. Wallberg, lawyer)

Applicant: Lancôme parfums et beauté & Cie SNC (Paris, France)
(represented by: M. Antoine-Lalance, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock, Agent)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
A.
Designs)
(Trade Marks
Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

(represented

and

by:

Re:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Jacqueline Baudon (Paris, France)

Action against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of
OHIM of 22 September 2005 (Case R 497/2005-1) concerning
an application for registration as a Community trade mark of a
three-dimensional sign formed by the shape of a loudspeaker.

Re:

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of
Appeal of OHIM of 11 March 2004 (Case R 39/2002-4)
concerning the invalidity proceedings 155 C 000866335/1
between Ms Jacqueline Baudon and Lancôme parfums et beauté
& Cie SNC

1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for
Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(OHIM) of 22 September 2005 (Case R 497/2005-1);

Operative part of the judgment

1. There is no need to adjudicate on the action.

2. Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those of Bang &

Olufsen A/S.

2. Each party shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 74, 25.3.2006.

(1) OJ C 217, 28.8.2004.
Case T-35/06: Order of the Court of First Instance of 11 September 2007 — Honig-Verband v Commission (Action for annulment — Regulation (EC) No 1854/2005 — Protected geographical indication — Miel de Provence — Measure of general application — Lack of individual concern — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2007-11-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EC Regulation, France, action for annulment (EU), designation of origin, honey, location of production, originating product, product designation

24.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 283/27

Order of the Court of First Instance of 11 September 2007
— Honig-Verband v Commission

Order of the Court of First Instance of 11 September 2007
— Fels-Werke and Others v Commission

(Case T-35/06) (1)

(Case T-28/07) (1)

(Action for annulment — Regulation (EC) No 1854/2005 —
Protected geographical
indication — ‘Miel de Provence’ —
Measure of general application — Lack of individual concern
— Inadmissibility)

(Application for annulment — Directive 2003/87/EC —
Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading —
National plan for Germany's allocation of greenhouse gas
emission allowances for the period from 2008 to 2012 —
Commission rejection decision — Not individually concerned
— Inadmissibility)

(2007/C 283/48)

Language of the case: German

(2007/C 283/49)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Honig-Verband eV (Hamburg, Germany) (represented
by: M. Hagenmeyer and T. Teufer, lawyers)

Applicants: Fels-Werke GmbH (Goslar, Germany); Saint-Gobain
Glass Deutschland GmbH (Aix-la-Chapelle, Germany); and
Spenner Zement GmbH & Co KG (Erwitte, Germany) (repre-
sented by: H. Posser and S. Altenschmidt, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: F. Erlbacher and B. Doherty, Agents)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: U. Wölker, Agent)

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Regulation (EC)
No 1854/2005 of 14 November 2005 supplementing the
Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2400/96 as regards the entry of a
name in the ‘Register of protected designations of origin and
(PGI)
protected geographical
(OJ 2005 L 297, p. 3)

(Miel de Provence)

indications’

Application for annulment in part of the Commission's Decision
of 29 November 2006 on the national plan for the allocation
of greenhouse gas emission allowances notified by the Federal
Republic of Germany for
the period from 2008 to 2012
pursuant to Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme
for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Com-
munity and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC (OJ 2003
L 275, p. 32).

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

Operative part of the order

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissibile;

2. The applicant is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those

incurred by the Commission.

2. Fels-Werke GmbH, Saint-Gobain Glass Deutschland GmbH and
Spenner Zement GmbH & Co KG are ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 86, 8.4.2006.

(1) OJ C 69, 24.3.2007.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4696 — KKR/Harman) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2007-11-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: audiovisual equipment, disclosure of information, economic concentration, electronic component, merger control, private investment, restrictive-practice authorisation

24.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/7

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4696 — KKR/Harman)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 282/03)

On 18 September 2007, 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 Regu-
lation (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:

— from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/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 under document number 32007M4696. EUR-Lex is the

on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4772 — Carlyle/Zodiac Marine)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 282/04)

On 17 September 2007, 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 Regu-
lation (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:

— from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/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 under document number 32007M4772. EUR-Lex is the

on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).
Case C-404/07: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 7 August 2007 — Criminal proceedings against István Roland Sós
Date: 2007-11-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: criminal procedure, interpretation of the law, victim

24.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 283/13

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfi-
lodged on 31 August 2007 —
nanzhof

(Germany)

Metherma GmbH & Co. KG v Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf

(Case C-403/07)

(2007/C 283/22)

Language of the case: German

Question referred

Must Articles 2 and 3 of Council Framework Decision
2001/220 of 15 March 2001 on the standing of victims in
criminal proceedings be interpreted as meaning that the national
court must also safeguard the possibility for the victim to be
heard as a witness in criminal proceedings in which he has
initiated a supplementary private prosecution?

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Metherma GmbH & Co. KG

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf

Question referred

Interpretation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of
23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on
the Common Customs Tariff (1).

tungsten or molybdenum which have been
Can bars of
‘obtained simply by sintering’ and which fall respectively under
subheadings 8101 94 00 and 8102 94 00 of the Combined
Nomenclature be processed into scrap falling respectively under
subheadings 8101 97 00 and 8102 97 00 of the Combined
Nomenclature by being broken up or shattered?

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der
Nederlanden,
lodged on 5 September 2007 — Stichting
Centraal Begeleidingsorgaan voor de Intercollegiale Toetsing v
Staatssecretaris van Financiën

(Case C-407/07)

(2007/C 283/24)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

(1) OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1.

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant:
Intercollegiale Toetsing

Stichting Centraal Begeleidingsorgaan voor

de

Respondent: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi
Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 7 August 2007 — Criminal
proceedings against István Roland Sós

Question referred

(Case C-404/07)

(2007/C 283/23)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Bíróság

Party to the main proceedings

István Roland Sós

Must Article 13.A(1)(f) of the Sixth Directive (1) be construed as
covering also services supplied by groups coming within the
scope of that provision to their members which are directly
necessary for the exercise of those members' exempted activities
or activities for which they are not subject to tax and by way of
payment for which no more is invoiced than represents the
costs incurred in respect of those services, if those services are
supplied only to one or more members?

(1) Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmo-
nisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes
— Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment
(OJ L 145, p. 1).
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2007-11-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate

C 282/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.11.2007

COMMISSION

Euro exchange rates (1)

23 November 2007

(2007/C 282/13)

1 euro =

Currency

Exchange rate

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

JPY

DKK

GBP

SEK

CHF

ISK

NOK

BGN

CYP

CZK

EEK

HUF

LTL

LVL

MTL

PLN

US dollar

Japanese yen

Danish krone

Pound sterling

Swedish krona

Swiss franc

Iceland króna

Norwegian krone

Bulgarian lev

Cyprus pound

Czech koruna

Estonian kroon

Hungarian forint

Lithuanian litas

Latvian lats

Maltese lira

Polish zloty

1,4809

RON

Romanian leu

159,87

7,4551

SKK

TRY

Slovak koruna

Turkish lira

0,72025

AUD Australian dollar

CAD

HKD

NZD

SGD

Canadian dollar

Hong Kong dollar

New Zealand dollar

Singapore dollar

3,5977

33,569

1,7815

1,6968

1,4616

11,5195

1,9691

2,1354

KRW South Korean won

1 378,42

ZAR

CNY

HRK

IDR

South African rand

Chinese yuan renminbi

Croatian kuna

Indonesian rupiah

MYR Malaysian ringgit

PHP

RUB

THB

Philippine peso

Russian rouble

Thai baht

10,1065

10,9675

7,3223

13 870,11

4,9773

63,457

36,0540

46,229

9,3188

1,6322

92,94

8,0485

1,9558

0,5842

26,759

15,6466

257,31

3,4528

0,6987

0,4293

3,6915

(1) Source:

reference exchange rate published by the ECB.