do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2010151EN.01000101.xml










10.6.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/1





Euro exchange rates (1)

9 June 2010
2010/C 151/01

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2010




JPY


Japanese yen


109,99




DKK


Danish krone


7,4388




GBP


Pound sterling


0,82590




SEK


Swedish krona


9,6177




CHF


Swiss franc


1,3762




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,9535




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


25,892




EEK


Estonian kroon


15,6466




HUF


Hungarian forint


281,80




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7075




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1124




RON


Romanian leu


4,2157




TRY


Turkish lira


1,9184




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4476




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,2529




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,3681




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7951




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6967




KRW


South Korean won


1 499,14




ZAR


South African rand


9,2893




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,2005




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,2420




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


11 111,88




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


3,9855




PHP


Philippine peso


55,947




RUB


Russian rouble


38,0615




THB


Thai baht


39,129




BRL


Brazilian real


2,2164




MXN


Mexican peso


15,4208




INR


Indian rupee


56,4723






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5899 — Warburg Pincus/Silver Lake/Interactive Data Corporation) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, exchange of information, financial services, investment company, merger control








C_2010151EN.01002101.xml










10.6.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/21





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.5899 — Warburg Pincus/Silver Lake/Interactive Data Corporation)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2010/C 151/08






1.


On 31 May 2010, 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 Silver Lake Partners III, L.P. controlled by Silver Lake Group L.L.C. (‘Silver Lake’, United States of America) and Warburg Pincus Private Equity X, L.P. and Warburg Pincus X Partners, L.P., together controlled by Warburg Pincus & Co. (‘Warburg Pincus’, United States of America), acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the undertaking Interactive Data Corporation (United States of America) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Silver Lake: global investment funds focused on technology, technology-enabled and related growth industries,










—


for Warburg Pincus: global private equity,










—


for Interactive Data Corporation: provision of financial data, analytics and related solutions.














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.5899 — Warburg Pincus/Silver Lake/Interactive Data Corporation, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




J-70




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’).
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions given at its meeting of 10 June 2010 regarding a draft decision relating to Case COMP/36.212 — Carbonless paper (Bolloré readoption) — Rapporteur: Italy
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions
Subjects: Italy, dominant position, market-sharing agreement, merger control, pulp and paper industry, restriction on competition








C_2011138EN.01001801.xml










7.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/18





Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions given at its meeting of 10 June 2010 regarding a draft decision relating to Case COMP/36.212 — Carbonless paper (Bolloré readoption)
Rapporteur: Italy
2011/C 138/06






1.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission on the applicability of Articles 7(1) and 23(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 as legal basis.










2.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission on the proceedings followed for the readoption decision.










3.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission's assessment of the product and geographic market affected by the cartel in the draft decision.










4.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission’s assessment of the facts as an agreement and/or concerted practice within the meaning of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 EEA Agreement.










5.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's finding of the duration of the cartel.










6.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that Bolloré is liable both as parent company and for direct involvement.










7.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission’s finding that the limitation period has not expired.










8.


The Advisory Committee agrees that the readoption does not infringe basic principles, such as the non bis in idem principle or the principle that decisions are to be adopted in a reasonable time.










9.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission on the basic amount of the fine.










10.


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










11.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission on the final amount of the fine.










12.


The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 501/2010 of 10 June 2010 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit, stone fruit








L_2010145EN.01000201.xml










11.6.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 145/2








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 501/2010
of 10 June 2010
         
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),


Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 of 21 December 2007 laying down implementing rules for Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector (2), and in particular Article 138(1) thereof,

Whereas:

Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XV, Part A thereto,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 138 of Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 are fixed in the Annex hereto.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 11 June 2010.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 10 June 2010.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,

Jean-Luc DEMARTY
            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development






(1)  
            OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ L 350, 31.12.2007, p. 1.




ANNEX
Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables







(EUR/100 kg)




CN code


Third country code (1)



Standard import value




0702 00 00 


MA 


44,4 




MK 


39,5 




TR 


60,4 




ZZ 


48,1 




0707 00 05 


MA 


37,3 




MK 


41,0 




TR 


117,0 




ZZ 


65,1 




0709 90 70 


MA 


68,1 




TR 


106,3 




ZZ 


87,2 




0805 50 10 


AR 


95,9 




BR 


112,1 




TR 


100,4 




US 


83,4 




ZA 


105,7 




ZZ 


99,5 




0808 10 80 


AR 


97,5 




BR 


79,0 




CA 


103,3 




CL 


103,6 




CN 


54,8 




IL 


49,0 




NZ 


107,1 




US 


122,5 




UY 


116,3 




ZA 


95,5 




ZZ 


92,9 




0809 10 00 


TN 


380,0 




TR 


187,8 




ZZ 


283,9 




0809 20 95 


TR 


436,0 




US 


574,5 




ZZ 


505,3 






(1)  Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1833/2006 (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 19). Code ‘
            ZZ
            ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.
Case C-491/08: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 June 2010 — European Commission v Italian Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 92/43/EEC — Conservation of natural habitats — Wild fauna and flora — Sites of Community importance — Tourism complex ‘Is Arenas’ )
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, appeal, ecology, environmental impact, environmental protection, tourism








C_2010209EN.01000701.xml










31.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 209/7





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 June 2010 — European Commission v Italian Republic
(Case C-491/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 92/43/EEC - Conservation of natural habitats - Wild fauna and flora - Sites of Community importance - Tourism complex ‘Is Arenas’)
2010/C 209/09
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: D. Recchia, acting as Agent)

Defendant: Italian Republic (represented by: I. Bruni, Agent, and G. Aiello, lawyer)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ 1992 L 206, p. 7) — Sites of Community importance — Site ‘Is Arenas’ — Development of a golf course.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, having regard to the tourism and property complex ‘Is Arenas’, which affects the site ‘Is Arenas’;






—


by failing to adopt, before 19 July 2006, date when the site ‘Is Arenas’ was included on the list of sites of Community importance, preservation measures which, having regard to the conservation aim of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, are suitable for the purposes of preserving the relevant ecological interest represented at national level by the proposed site of Community importance, and in particular by failing to prevent an activity likely seriously to endanger the ecological characteristics of the site; and










—


by failing to adopt, after 19 July 2006, appropriate measures to prevent the deterioration of natural habitats in respect of which that site of Community importance was designated;
the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Council Directive 92/43 and, more specifically, with regard to the second plea in law, Article 6(2) thereof;














2.


Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 44, 21.02.2009.
Case T-268/10: Action brought on 10 June 2010 — PPG and SNF v ECHA
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Chemicals Agency, action for annulment, chemical product, dangerous substance, disclosure of information, health risk








C_2010274EN.01002303.xml










9.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 274/23





Action brought on 10 June 2010 — PPG and SNF v ECHA
(Case T-268/10)
()
2010/C 274/37
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Polyelectrolyte Producers Group GEIE (PPG) (Brussels, Belgium) and SNF SAS (Andrezieux Boutheon, France) (represented by: K. Van Maldegem, R. Cana, lawyers and P. Sellar, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Chemical Agency (ECHA)

Form of order sought







—


declare the application admissible and well-founded;










—


annul the contested act;










—


order ECHA to pay the costs of these proceedings;










—


take such other or further measure as justice may require.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants seek the partial annulment of the decision of the European Chemicals Agency (“ECHA”) to identify acrylamide (CE no 201-173-7) (CAS Number 79-06-1) as a substance meeting the criteria set out in Article 57 Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1) (“REACH”), in accordance with Article 59 REACH.
The applicants consider that the contested act is unlawful because it is based on an assessment of acrylamide that is scientifically and legally flawed since it relies on the evidence that is not sufficiently reliable and cogent. In the applicant’s opinion, ECHA committed a manifest error of appraisal in adopting the contested act, in breach of Articles 2(8) and 59 REACH and in breach of its duty to carefully and impartially examine the evidence.
Further, the applicants claim that the contested act infringes a series of general principles of EU law such as principle of proportionality and of non-discrimination since it discriminates against acrylamide with regard to other comparable substances without any objective justification.


(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC (OJ 2006 L 396, p. 1).
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5863 — Merck/Millipore)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: biotechnology, chemical product, economic concentration, exchange of information, marketing, merger control, pharmaceutical product








C_2010151EN.01002001.xml










10.6.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/20





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.5863 — Merck/Millipore)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2010/C 151/07






1.


On 2 June 2010, 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 Merck KGaA (‘Merck’, Germany) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the undertaking Millipore Corporation (‘Millipore’, USA), by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Merck: manufacturing and supply of pharmaceuticals and chemicals, including life science products,










—


for Millipore: development, production and sale of life science tools and services.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.










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 e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5863 — Merck/Millipore, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




J-70




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘EC Merger Regulation’).
Case C-37/09: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 10 June 2010 — European Commission v Republic of Portugal (Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Environment — Management of illegally disposed of waste — Directive 2006/12/EC — Directive 80/68/EEC)
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Portugal, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, dangerous substance, environmental protection, groundwater, waste disposal, waste management, water pollution








C_2010221EN.01000902.xml










14.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/9





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 10 June 2010 — European Commission v Republic of Portugal
(Case C-37/09) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Environment - Management of illegally disposed of waste - Directive 2006/12/EC - Directive 80/68/EEC)
2010/C 221/14
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: B. Laignelot, S. Pardo Quintillán and P. Guerra e Andrade, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Portugal (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, M. J. Lois and P. Lopes, acting as Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Infringement of Articles 4 and 5 of Directive 2006/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on waste (OJ 2006 L 114, p. 9), which codified Directive 75/442/EEC on waste and Articles 3 and 5 of Council Directive 80/68/EEC of 17 December 1979 on the protection of groundwater against pollution caused by certain dangerous substances (OJ 1980 L 20, p. 43) — Landfill of waste in disused quarries — ‘dos Limas, dos Linos e dos Barreiras’ quarries (Lourosa) — Lack of scrutiny

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by failing to adopt, all the measures necessary, within the framework of the management of waste illegally placed in the old quarries of Limas and Linos, situated in the commune of Lourosa, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the terms of Articles 4 and 8 respectively of Directive 2006/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on waste, which codified Directive 75/442/EEC on waste and Articles 3 and 5 of Council Directive 80/68/EEC of 17 December 1979 on the protection of groundwater against pollution caused by certain dangerous substances;










2.


Dismisses the remainder of the action;










3.


Orders the Republic of Portugal to bear its own costs and to pay two-thirds of the costs incurred by the Commission. Orders the Commission to bear one-third of its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 82, 4.4.2009
Case C-287/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal administratif (Luxembourg) lodged on 10 June 2010 — Tankreederei I SA v Directeur de l’Administration des Contributions Directes
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Luxembourg, approximation of laws, free movement of capital, interpretation of the law, right of establishment








C_2010221EN.01002801.xml










14.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/28





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal administratif (Luxembourg) lodged on 10 June 2010 — Tankreederei I SA v Directeur de l’Administration des Contributions Directes
(Case C-287/10)
()
2010/C 221/44
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal administratif

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Tankreederei I SA

Defendant: Directeur de l’Administration des Contributions Directes

Question referred

Do Articles 49 EC and 56 EC preclude the provisions of the first paragraph of Article 152 bis of the amended Law of 4 December 1967 on income tax, insofar as, under those provisions, Luxembourg taxpayers are granted a tax credit for investments only if the investments are made in an establishment situated in the Grand-Duchy and are intended to remain there on a permanent basis, and only if they are physically used on Luxembourg territory?
Notice concerning the anti-dumping measures in force in respect of imports into the Union of certain polyethylene teraphthalate originating, inter alia, in Taiwan: change of the name of a company subject to an individual anti-dumping duty rate
Date: 2010-06-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Taiwan, anti-dumping duty, anti-dumping legislation, import, originating product, plastics








C_2010151EN.01001901.xml










10.6.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/19





Notice concerning the anti-dumping measures in force in respect of imports into the Union of certain polyethylene teraphthalate originating, inter alia, in Taiwan: change of the name of a company subject to an individual anti-dumping duty rate
2010/C 151/06
Imports of certain polyethylene teraphthalate originating in Taiwan are subject to a definitive anti-dumping duty, imposed by Council Regulation (EC) No 192/2007 (1).
Far Eastern Textile Ltd, a company located in Taiwan, whose exports to the Union of certain polyethylene teraphthalate are subject to an individual anti-dumping duty of EUR/tonne 36,3 imposed by Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No 192/2007, has informed the Commission that on 13 October 2009, it changed its name to Far Eastern New Century Corporation.
The company has argued that the change of name does not affect the right of the company to benefit from the individual anti-dumping duty rate applied to the company under its previous name of Far Eastern Textile Ltd.
The Commission has examined the information provided and has concluded that the change of name in no way affects the findings of Regulation (EC) No 192/2007. Therefore, the reference in Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No 192/2007 to:
Far Eastern Textile Ltd
should be read as:
Far Eastern New Century Corporation
The TARIC additional code A808 previously attributed to Far Eastern Textile Ltd shall apply to Far Eastern New Century Corporation.


(1)  OJ L 59, 27.2.2007, p. 1.