do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-15/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 12 January 2011 — Leopold Sommer v Landesgeschäftsstelle des Arbeitsmarktservice Wien
Date: 2011-01-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Austria, EU migration policy, foreign national, foreign student, interpretation of the law, residence permit








C_2011113EN.01000301.xml










9.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 113/3





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 12 January 2011 — Leopold Sommer v Landesgeschäftsstelle des Arbeitsmarktservice Wien
(Case C-15/11)
2011/C 113/04
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Leopold Sommer

Defendant: Landesgeschäftsstelle des Arbeitsmarktservice Wien

Questions referred







1.


Is Council Directive 2004/114/EC (1) of 13 December 2004 on the conditions of admission of third-country nationals for the purposes of studies, pupil exchange, unremunerated training or voluntary service (‘the Student Directive’) applicable in Austria to a Bulgarian student having regard to the first or third paragraphs of point 14 of section 1 (Freedom of movement for persons) of Annex VI to the Accession Treaty for Bulgaria, List referred to in Article 20 of the Protocol (2): transitional measures, Bulgaria?










2.


If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative: Does Union law, in particular Article 17 of the Student Directive, preclude a national rule which, like the provisions of the Ausländerbeschäftigungsgesetz which are relevant in the main proceedings, provides in all cases for an examination of the situation of the labour market prior to the grant of a work permit for an employer to employ a student who has already resided in Austria for more than one year (Article 17(3) of the Student Directive) and additionally makes the grant of a work permit subject to further conditions if the fixed maximum number of foreign nationals employed has been exceeded.






(1)  OJ 2004 L 375, p. 12.

(2)  Protocol concerning the conditions and arrangements for admission of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union — Annex VI: List referred to in Article 20 of the Protocol: transitional measures, Bulgaria — 2. Freedom of movement for persons; (OJ 2005 L 157, p. 104).
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2011-01-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2011007EN.01000601.xml










12.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/6





Euro exchange rates (1)

11 January 2011
2011/C 7/04

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2948




JPY


Japanese yen


107,61




DKK


Danish krone


7,4500




GBP


Pound sterling


0,83190




SEK


Swedish krona


8,8740




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2538




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,7260




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


24,553




HUF


Hungarian forint


279,24




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7011




PLN


Polish zloty


3,8882




RON


Romanian leu


4,2580




TRY


Turkish lira


2,0465




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3134




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,2839




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,0702




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7064




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6768




KRW


South Korean won


1 455,86




ZAR


South African rand


8,8723




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,5716




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4055




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


11 756,42




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


3,9744




PHP


Philippine peso


57,190




RUB


Russian rouble


39,5927




THB


Thai baht


39,504




BRL


Brazilian real


2,1866




MXN


Mexican peso


15,8001




INR


Indian rupee


58,4800






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6055 — STRABAG SE/EW4E Group/BMG JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-01-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: building industry, economic concentration, energy industry, exchange of information, merger control, waste management








C_2011007EN.01000701.xml










12.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/7





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6055 — STRABAG SE/EW4E Group/BMG JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 7/05






1.


On 4 January 2011, 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 STRABAG AG (Austria) controlled by STRABAG SE (Austria) and EW4E GmbH (Germany) belonging to the group GDF Suez SA (France) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the undertaking BMG GmbH (Austria) by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for STRABAG AG: active in the construction industry in Austria, in particular in civil engineering as well as in road engineering, tunnel construction and project management,










—


for EW4E GmbH: energy management, energy efficiency, renewable energies, energy trading as well as consultancy services for the construction and operation of the energy facilities,










—


for BMG GmbH: burning of non-hazardous sewage sludge.














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.6055 — STRABAG SE/EW4E Group/BMG JV, 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’).
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6059 — Norbert Dentressangle/Laxey Logistics) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-01-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: carriage of goods, economic concentration, exchange of information, logistics, merger control








C_2011007EN.01000901.xml










12.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/9





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6059 — Norbert Dentressangle/Laxey Logistics)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 7/07






1.


On 3 January 2011, 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 Norbert Dentressangle SA (‘Norbert Dentressangle’, France) controlled by Financière Norbert Dentressangle (‘FND’, France) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Laxey Logistics Limited (‘Laxey Logistics’, United Kingdom) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


Norbert Dentressangle is a logistics and transport services provider operating primarily in Continental Europe,










—


Laxey Logistics is the holding company of TDG Limited (‘TDG’, United Kingdom). TDG is a provider of outsourced logistics services with operations in the UK, Belgium, the Netherlands, Ireland, Hungary, Germany and Spain.














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.6059 — Norbert Dentressangle/Laxey Logistics, 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’).
Case T-198/10: Order of the General Court of 12 January 2011 — Maximuscle v OHIM — Foreign Supplement Trademark (GAKIC)
Date: 2011-01-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, processed food product, trade-mark law








C_2011072EN.01003302.xml










5.3.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 72/33





Order of the General Court of 12 January 2011 — Maximuscle v OHIM — Foreign Supplement Trademark (GAKIC)
(Case T-198/10) (1)

2011/C 72/52
Language of the case: English
The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 179, 3.7.2010.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6075 — DHC/VUE Entertainment Investment)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-01-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, exchange of information, film industry, investment company, merger control








C_2011007EN.01000502.xml










12.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/5





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6075 — DHC/VUE Entertainment Investment)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 7/03
On 14 December 2010, 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 Regulation (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:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/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 (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M6075. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case T-411/09: Order of the General Court of 12 January 2011 — Terezakis v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Partial refusal of access — Contested act replaced in the course of the proceedings — Refusal to amend the claims — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2011-01-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, Greece, access to information, action for annulment (EU), provision of documents








C_2011063EN.01002603.xml










26.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/26





Order of the General Court of 12 January 2011 — Terezakis v Commission
(Case T-411/09) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Partial refusal of access - Contested act replaced in the course of the proceedings - Refusal to amend the claims - No need to adjudicate)
2011/C 63/51
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Ioannis Terezakis (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: initially B. Lombart, then P. Synoikis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn and C. ten Dam, Agents)

Re:

APPLICATION for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 3 August 2009 refusing the applicant access to some parts of, and the annexes to, certain letters exchanged between the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and the Greek Ministry of Finance regarding tax irregularities in connection with the construction of Spata airport at Athens (Greece)

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


The parties shall bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 312, 19.12.2009.
Corrigendum to the update of the list of border crossing points referred to in Article 2(8) of Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Community Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) ( OJ C 316, 28.12.2007, p. 1 ; OJ C 134, 31.5.2008, p. 16 ; OJ C 177, 12.7.2008, p. 9 ; OJ C 200, 6.8.2008, p. 10 ; OJ C 331, 31.12.2008, p. 13 ; OJ C 3, 8.1.2009, p. 10 ; OJ C 37, 14.2.2009, p. 10 ; OJ C 64, 19.3.2009, p. 20 ; OJ C 99, 30.4.2009, p. 7 ; OJ C 229, 23.9.2009, p. 28 ; OJ C 263, 5.11.2009, p. 22 ; OJ C 298, 8.12.2009, p. 17 ; OJ C 74, 24.3.2010, p. 13 ; OJ C 326, 3.12.2010, p. 17 ) ( OJ C 355, 29.12.2010 )
Date: 2011-01-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Schengen Agreement, border control, directory, external border of the EU, foreign national, identity document








C_2011007EN.01003001.xml










12.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/30





Corrigendum to the update of the list of border crossing points referred to in Article 2(8) of Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Community Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (
OJ C 316, 28.12.2007, p. 1
; 
OJ C 134, 31.5.2008, p. 16
; 
OJ C 177, 12.7.2008, p. 9
; 
OJ C 200, 6.8.2008, p. 10
; 
OJ C 331, 31.12.2008, p. 13
; 
OJ C 3, 8.1.2009, p. 10
; 
OJ C 37, 14.2.2009, p. 10
; 
OJ C 64, 19.3.2009, p. 20
; 
OJ C 99, 30.4.2009, p. 7
; 
OJ C 229, 23.9.2009, p. 28
; 
OJ C 263, 5.11.2009, p. 22
; 
OJ C 298, 8.12.2009, p. 17
; 
OJ C 74, 24.3.2010, p. 13
; 
OJ C 326, 3.12.2010, p. 17
)
(
Official Journal of the European Union C 355 of 29 December 2010
)
2011/C 7/10
On page 34, under ‘Latvia’, ‘Air borders’:
for:

‘New border crossing point: Takuma lidosta (upon request)’,

read:

‘New border crossing point: Tukuma lidosta (upon request)’.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5865 — Teva/Ratiopharm)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-01-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, exchange of information, marketing, merger control, pharmaceutical product








C_2011007EN.01000501.xml










12.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/5





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.5865 — Teva/Ratiopharm)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 7/02
On 3 August 2010, 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 Regulation (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:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/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 (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M5865. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6092 — Prysmian/Draka Holding)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-01-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, exchange of information, industrial manufacturing, merger control, telecommunications equipment








C_2011007EN.01000801.xml










12.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/8





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6092 — Prysmian/Draka Holding)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 7/06






1.


On 5 January 2011, 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 Prysmian SpA (‘Prysmian’, Italy) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Draka Holding NV (‘Draka’, The Netherlands) by way of public bid announced on 6 January 2011.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Prysmian: development, design, production, supply and installation of cables for applications in the energy and telecommunications industry,










—


for Draka: development, design, production and sale of cable and cable systems in the energy cable sector and in the telecoms cables sector.














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.6092 — Prysmian/Draka Holding, 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’).
Joined Cases C-205/10 P, C-217/10 P and C-222/10 P: Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 January 2011 — Heinz Helmuth Eriksen (C-205/10 P), Bent Hansen (C-217/10 P), Brigit Lind (C-222/10 P) v European Commission (Appeal — Actions for damages — Public health implications of the nuclear accident that occurred near Thule (Greenland, Denmark) — Directive 96/29/Euratom — Commission’s failure to adopt measures against a Member State)
Date: 2011-01-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Greenland, action for annulment (EU), adoption of a law by vote, damages, liability of the State, public health, transport accident








C_2011120EN.01000301.xml










16.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 120/3





Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 January 2011 — Heinz Helmuth Eriksen (C-205/10 P), Bent Hansen (C-217/10 P), Brigit Lind (C-222/10 P) v European Commission
(Joined Cases C-205/10 P, C-217/10 P and C-222/10 P) (1)

(Appeal - Actions for damages - Public health implications of the nuclear accident that occurred near Thule (Greenland, Denmark) - Directive 96/29/Euratom - Commission’s failure to adopt measures against a Member State)
2011/C 120/04
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: Heinz Helmuth Eriksen (C-205/10 P), Bent Hansen (C-217/10 P), Brigit Lind (C-222/10 P) (represented by: I. Anderson, Advocate)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: M. Patakia and E. White, Agents)

Re:

Appeals brought against the orders of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 24 March 2010 in Case T-516/08 Erikson v Commission, Case T-6/09 Hansen v Commission and Case T-5/09 Lind v Commission whereby the General Court dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law actions for damages seeking compensation for harm allegedly suffered by the applicants following a failure by the Commission to take the measures necessary to oblige Denmark to comply with Directive 96/29 laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation (OJ 1996 L 159, p. 1) and to apply those provisions to workers involved in the nuclear accident at Thule (Greenland), disregarding the resolution of the European Parliament of 10 May 2007 on the consequences of that accident on public health (Petition 720/2002, 2006/2012 (INI))

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeals are dismissed.










2.


Mr Eriksen, Mr Hansen and Ms Lind shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 195, 17.7.2010.