do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-555/10: Action brought on 26 November 2010 — European Commission v Republic of Austria
Date: 2010-11-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Austria, Community certification, European Commission, charges for use of infrastructure, common transport policy, rail transport, transport capacity, transport safety








C_2011030EN.01002702.xml










29.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 30/27





Action brought on 26 November 2010 — European Commission v Republic of Austria
(Case C-555/10)
()
2011/C 30/45
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braun and H. Støvlbæk, Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Austria

Form of order sought







—


Hold that the Republic of Austria, when implementing the first railway package, failed to comply with its obligations under Article 6(3) of and Annex II to Directive 91/440/EEC in its amended version and Article 4(2) and Article 14(2) of Directive 2001/14/EC;










—


Order the Republic of Austria to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission is of the opinion that the required independence of the operator of railway infrastructure in Austria has not been properly implemented in national law.
Admittedly the organisation in a common holding of an undertaking which is to carry out essential functions in relation to the operation of railway infrastructure and an undertaking which provides rail transport services, as it exists in Austria, is in principle permissible. It must however be ensured that the undertakings are ascertainably economically independent of each other.
The parent company may in particular not exercise any control over the subsidiary which carries out essential railway infrastructure functions. That is not guaranteed in Austria. The independence of the infrastructure operator is not supervised by any independent agency and there is no effective means of redress for competitors where a particular undertaking receives advantages.
There are also insufficient legislative or contractual rules governing the relationship between the holding company and its subsidiary which carries out essential railway infrastructure functions.
According to the Commission, the manifold entanglements of staff between parent and subsidiary undertakings, for example dual roles in the respective company boards, give rise to doubts as to economic independence. Management personnel of one undertaking should be precluded for several years from taking up management positions in the other undertaking. Moreover, appointments of managers to the body entrusted with essential functions should be made only subject to supervision by an independent agency.
In addition, there should be a physical and personal separation of respective computer systems, in order to ensure the required independence of the undertaking entrusted with essential functions of railway infrastructure operations.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6015 — Banco Santander/Bank Zachodni WBK/BZWBK AIB Asset Management) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2010-11-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: banking, economic concentration, exchange of information, merger control








C_2010321EN.01000801.xml










26.11.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 321/8





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6015 — Banco Santander/Bank Zachodni WBK/BZWBK AIB Asset Management)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2010/C 321/04






1.


On 17 November 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 Banco Santander SA (‘Santander’, Spain) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Bank Zachodni WBK SA (‘BZWBK’, Poland) by way of public bid announced on 10 September 2010 and of BZWBK AIB Asset Management SA (‘BZWBK Asset Management’, Poland), by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Santander: international group of banking and financial companies, active in retail banking, asset management, corporate and investment banking, treasury and insurance, operating internationally,










—


for BZWBK: bank which provides a full range of services for households, SMEs and large companies, in banking, brokerage services, mutual funds, insurance, leasing and factoring products in Poland,










—


for BZWBK Asset Management : Subsidiary of BZWBK, offering asset management services in Poland.














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.6015 — Banco Santander/Bank Zachodni WBK/BZWBK AIB Asset Management, 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’).
2010/753/CFSP: Political and Security Committee Decision Atalanta/5/2010 of 26 November 2010 on the appointment of an EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast (Atalanta)
Date: 2010-11-26
Institutions: Political and Security Committee
Subjects: Somalia, appointment of staff, military intervention, military personnel, piracy, the EU's international role, theft








L_2010320EN.01000801.xml










7.12.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 320/8








            POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE DECISION ATALANTA/5/2010
of 26 November 2010
         
on the appointment of an EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast (Atalanta)
(2010/753/CFSP)


THE POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 38 thereof,


Having regard to Council Joint Action 2008/851/CFSP of 10 November 2008 on a European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast (1) (Atalanta), and in particular Article 6 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Article 6 of Joint Action 2008/851/CFSP, the Council authorised the Political and Security Committee (PSC) to take decisions on the appointment of the EU Force Commander.












(2)


On 19 July 2010, the PSC adopted Decision Atalanta/4/2010 (2) appointing Rear Admiral Philippe COINDREAU as EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast.












(3)


The EU Operation Commander has recommended the appointment of Rear Admiral Juan RODRÍGUEZ GARAT as the new EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast.












(4)


The EU Military Committee supports that recommendation.












(5)


In accordance with Article 5 of the Protocol (No 22) on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark does not participate in the elaboration and the implementation of decisions and actions of the Union which have defence implications,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Rear Admiral Juan RODRÍGUEZ GARAT is hereby appointed EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast.


Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on 14 December 2010.




Done at Brussels, 26 November 2010.


For the Political and Security Committee


The Chairman

W. STEVENS
            





(1)  
            OJ L 301, 12.11.2008, p. 33.

(2)  
            OJ L 199, 31.7.2010, p. 28.
Case T-537/10: Action brought on 26 November 2010 — Adamowski v OHIM — Fagumit (FAGUMIT)
Date: 2010-11-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2011030EN.01004602.xml










29.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 30/46





Action brought on 26 November 2010 — Adamowski v OHIM — Fagumit (FAGUMIT)
(Case T-537/10)
()
2011/C 30/84
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Ursula Adamowski (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: D. von Schultz, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Fabryka Węży Gumowych i Tworzyw Sztucznych Fagumit Sp. z o.o. (Wolbrom, Poland)

Form of order sought







—


annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 3 September 2010 in Case R 1002/2009-1;










—


dismiss the application for a declaration of invalidity of Community trade mark No 3 005 980;










—


order OHIM to pay the costs incurred in removing the mark from the register, in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal, and in the present proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: Figurative mark containing the word element ‘FAGUMIT’ for goods in Classes 12 and 17.

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: Ursula Adamowski

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity: Fabryka Węży Gumowych i Tworzyw Sztucznych Fagumit Sp. z o.o.

Trade mark right of applicant for the declaration: National figurative mark containing the word element ‘FAGUMIT’ for goods in Class 17.

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Dismissal of the application for annulment.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal upheld and the mark was declared invalid.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 53(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, (1) in conjunction with Article 8(4) thereof, since the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal failed to provide legally valid evidence that the company name ‘FAGUMIT’ is actually used; infringement of Article 53(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, in conjunction with Article 8(3) thereof, since the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal effectively agreed to the registration of the trade mark rights associated with the name ‘FAGUMIT’, and infringement of Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, since the applicant cannot be accused of acting in bad faith at the time when she filed her application for the contested Community trade mark.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Case C-560/10 P: Appeal brought on 26 November 2010 by Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 9 September 2010 in Case T-300/07: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE v European Commission
Date: 2010-11-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Greece, Internet, action for annulment (EU), appeal, award of contract, information technology industry








C_2011072EN.01000301.xml










5.3.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 72/3





Appeal brought on 26 November 2010 by Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 9 September 2010 in Case T-300/07: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE v European Commission
(Case C-560/10 P)
2011/C 72/04
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (represented by: N. Korogiannakis, M. Dermitzakis, Attorneys at Law)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the decision of the General Court;










—


annul the decision of the Commission (DG ENTR) to reject the bid of the Appellant in Lot 1, filed in response to the Call for Tender ENTR/05/078 — YOUR EUROPE Lot 1 (Editorial Work and Translations) for ‘Your Europe Portal Management and Maintenance’ (OJ 2006/S 143-153057) and to award the same Call for Tender to another bidder;










—


refer the case to the General Court in order that the latter examines the remaining issues in both Lots, including the request for Damages, not examined yet by the General Court;










—


order the Commission to pay the Appellant's legal and other costs including those incurred in connection with the initial procedure, even if the current Appeal is rejected as well as those of the current Appeal, in case it is accepted.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The Appellant submits that in the contested Judgment the General Court erred in law and wrongly interpreted article 100 (2) of the Financial Regulation (1) and Article 149 of the Implementing Rules by accepting that, since the Appellant's tender did not reach the 70 % threshold, the Commission rightfully did not communicate to the Appellant the relative merits of the winning tenderer. Furthermore the Appellant maintains that the Judgment is insufficiently motivated since the General Court failed to examine thoroughly and individually the plea concerning the infringement of the principle of transparency and equal treatment.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities
OJ L 248, p. 1
Case C-554/10 P: Appeal brought on 26 November 2010 by Lagardère SCA against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 13 September 2010 in Case T-452/04 Editions Jacob v European Commission
Date: 2010-11-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: action for annulment, appeal, communications industry, competition law, economic concentration, exchange of information, merger control, publishing








C_2011046EN.01000502.xml










12.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 46/5





Appeal brought on 26 November 2010 by Lagardère SCA against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 13 September 2010 in Case T-452/04 Editions Jacob v European Commission

(Case C-554/10 P)
2011/C 46/08
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Lagardère SCA (represented by: A. Winckler, F. de Bure et J.-B. Pinçon, avocats)

Other parties to the proceedings: Éditions Odile Jacob SAS, European Commission, Wendel Investissement SA

Form of order sought







—


set aside the judgment of 13 September 2010 in Case T-452/04 in so far as that judgement annulled the European Commission's Decision of 30 July 2004 approving Wendel Investissement as purchaser of the assets sold in merger control procedure No COMP/M.2978 — Lagardère/Natexis/VUP;










—


dismiss Odile Jacob's action brought before the General Court against that decision;










—


order Odile Jacob to pay all the costs of these proceedings, both at first instance and in this appeal.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellant puts forward two grounds in support of its appeal.
By its first ground of appeal, Lagardère alleges that the General Court erred in law by relying on the unlawfulness of the decision approving the trustee as a basis for annulling the approval decision.
By its second ground of appeal, which contains four parts, the appellant submits that the General Court erred in law in holding that the presence of the trustee's representative on the executive board of Editis as an independent third party could justify the annulment of the approval decision. That flows from the misinterpretation of certain facts, manifest failures to state reasons and several errors of law: the General Court thus erred in law by interpreting incorrectly the concept of independence (first part); the General Court failed to show in its statement of reasons how the links between the trustee's representative and Editis could have vitiated the content of the report submitted by the trustee to the Commission (second part); the General Court misinterpreted the facts and vitiated the judgment under appeal by a manifest failure to state reasons in finding that the trustee's report had exercised a ‘decisive influence’ on the approval decision (third part) and, lastly, the General Court erred in annulling the approval decision without showing how that decision would have differed in content in the absence of the alleged irregularities (fourth part).
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1098/2010 of 26 November 2010 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Dresdner Christstollen/Dresdner Stollen/Dresdner Weihnachtsstollen (PGI))
Date: 2010-11-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Germany, designation of origin, labelling, location of production, pastry-making, preparation for market, product designation, product quality








L_2010312EN.01000701.xml










27.11.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 312/7








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 1098/2010
of 26 November 2010
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Dresdner Christstollen/Dresdner Stollen/Dresdner Weihnachtsstollen (PGI))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Germany’s application to register the name ‘Dresdner Christstollen/Dresdner Stollen/Dresdner Weihnachtsstollen’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 26 November 2010.


For the Commission


The President

José Manuel BARROSO
            





(1)  
            OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

(2)  
            OJ C 46, 24.2.2010, p. 17.




ANNEX
Foodstuffs listed in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 510/2006:

Class 2.4.   Bread, pastry, cakes, confectionery, biscuits and other baker’s wares

GERMANY
Dresdner Christstollen/Dresdner Stollen/Dresdner Weihnachtsstollen (PGI)
Case T-538/10: Action brought on 26 November 2010 — Adamowski v OHIM — Fagumit (Fagumit)
Date: 2010-11-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2011030EN.01004701.xml










29.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 30/47





Action brought on 26 November 2010 — Adamowski v OHIM — Fagumit (Fagumit)
(Case T-538/10)
()
2011/C 30/85
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Ursula Adamowski (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: D. von Schultz, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Fabryka Węży Gumowych i Tworzyw Sztucznych Fagumit Sp. z o.o. (Wolbrom, Poland)

Form of order sought







—


annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 3 September 2010 in Case R 1003/2009-1;










—


dismiss the application for a declaration of invalidity of Community trade mark No 3 093 226;










—


order OHIM to pay the costs incurred in removing the mark from the register, in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal, and in the present proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: Word mark ‘Fagumit’ for goods in Classes 12 and 17.

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: Ursula Adamowski

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity: Fabryka Węży Gumowych i Tworzyw Sztucznych Fagumit Sp. z o.o.

Trade mark right of applicant for the declaration: National figurative mark containing the word element ‘FAGUMIT’ for goods in Class 17.

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Dismissal of the application for annulment.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal upheld and the mark was declared invalid.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 53(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, (1) in conjunction with Article 8(4) thereof, since the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal failed to provide legally valid evidence that the company name ‘FAGUMIT’ is actually used; infringement of Article 53(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, in conjunction with Article 8(3) thereof, since the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal effectively agreed to the registration of the trade mark rights associated with the name ‘FAGUMIT’, and infringement of Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, since the applicant cannot be accused of acting in bad faith at the time when she filed her application for the contested Community trade mark.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).