do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6186 — Advent/Towergate Businesses) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-05-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, exchange of information, insurance company, investment company, merger control








C_2011140EN.01002201.xml










11.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 140/22





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6186 — Advent/Towergate Businesses)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 140/13






1.


On 26 April 2011, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which certain funds controlled by Advent International Corporation (‘Advent’, USA) acquire, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation, control of the whole of the undertakings Towergate Partnership Limited (UK), Cullum Capital Ventures Limited (UK), Countrywide Insurance Management Limited (UK) and Powerplace Insurance Services Limited (together the ‘Towergate Businesses’) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Advent: global private equity investor in various sectors, including financial services, media, communications, information technology, retail, industrial and pharmaceuticals,










—


for the Towergate Businesses: insurance intermediary services in the UK.














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.6186 — Advent/Towergate Businesses, 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 C-32/10: Order of the Court of 11 May 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven kasatsionen sad (Bulgaria)) — Tony Georgiev Semerdzhiev v ET Del-Pi-Krasimira Mancheva (Article 92(1) of the Rules of Procedure — Directive 90/314/EEC — Package travel, package holidays and package tours — Facts preceding the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria to the European Union — Manifest lack of jurisdiction of the Court to answer the questions referred)
Date: 2011-05-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: contract, insurance, interpretation of the law, package travel








C_2011232EN.01001001.xml










6.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 232/10






Order of the Court of 11 May 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven kasatsionen sad (Bulgaria)) — Tony Georgiev Semerdzhiev v ET Del-Pi-Krasimira Mancheva
(Case C-32/10) (1)

(Article 92(1) of the Rules of Procedure - Directive 90/314/EEC - Package travel, package holidays and package tours - Facts preceding the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria to the European Union - Manifest lack of jurisdiction of the Court to answer the questions referred)
(2011/C 232/16)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Varhoven kasatsionen sad (Bulgaria)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Tony Georgiev Semerdzhiev

Defendant: ET Del-Pi-Krasimira Mancheva

Intervening party: ZAD Bulstrad VIG

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Varhoven kasatsionen sad — Interpretation of Articles 2(1)(c), 4(1)(b)(iv) and 5(2)(3) and (4) of Council Directive 90/314/EEC of 13 June 1990 on package travel, package holidays and package tours (OJ 1990 L 158, p. 59) — Concept of ‘other tourist services’ not ancillary to transport or accommodation to be borne by the organiser — Obligation for the organiser to conclude an individual insurance contract for each consumer and to provide the consumer with the original before travel — Obligation for the organiser to conclude an individual insurance contract covering costs of repatriation in case of accident — Concept of ‘damage’ resulting for the consumer from the failure to perform or the improper performance of the contract — Non-material damages included

Operative part of the order

The Court of Justice of the European Union clearly has no jurisdiction to rule on the questions referred by the Varhoven kasatsionen sad (Bulgaria).


(1)  OJ C 100, 17.4.2010.
Denominations and technical specifications of euro coins intended for circulation * European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 May 2011 on the proposal for a Council regulation on denominations and technical specifications of euro coins intended for circulation (codified text) (COM(2010)0691 – C7-0034/2011 – 2010/0338(NLE))
Date: 2011-05-11
Institutions: Committee on Legal Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: Economic and Monetary Union, codification of EU law, euro, money, technical specification








CE2012377EN.01025101.xml










7.12.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 377/251





Wednesday 11 May 2011Denominations and technical specifications of euro coins intended for circulation *
P7_TA(2011)0217
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 May 2011 on the proposal for a Council regulation on denominations and technical specifications of euro coins intended for circulation (codified text) (COM(2010)0691 – C7-0034/2011 – 2010/0338(NLE))
2012/C 377 E/44
(Consultation – codification)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2010)0691),










—


having regard to Article 128(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7-0034/2011),










—


having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 – Accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts (1),










—


having regard to Rules 86 and 55 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A7-0102/2011),










A.


whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the proposal in question contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts without any change in their substance,










1.


Approves the Commission proposal as adapted to the recommendations of the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission;










2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.






(1)  OJ C 102, 4.4.1996, p. 2.
Notice for the attention of the persons to which restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/273/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria apply
Date: 2011-05-11
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Syria, common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, restriction of liberty, trade restriction








C_2011140EN.01002301.xml










11.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 140/23





Notice for the attention of the persons to which restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/273/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria apply
2011/C 140/14
COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
The following information is brought to the attention of the persons that appear in Annex II to Council Decision 2011/273/CFSP (1) and in Annex II to Council Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 (2) concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria.
The Council of the European Union has decided that the persons that appear in the above-mentioned Annexes should be included in the list of persons subject to restrictive measures provided for in Decision 2011/273/CFSP and to Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria.
The attention of the persons concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated in the web-sites in Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 442/2011, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 6 of the Regulation).
The persons concerned may submit a request to the Council, together with supporting documentation, that the decision to include them on the above-mentioned list should be reconsidered, to the following address:





Council of the European Union




General Secretariat




TEFS Coordination




Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175




1048 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË




The attention of the persons concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council's Decision before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 275, 2nd paragraph, and Article 263, 4th and 6th paragraphs, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.


(1)  OJ L 121, 10.5.2011, p. 11.

(2)  OJ L 121, 10.5.2011, p. 1.
Case C-218/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Ítélőtábla (Hungary) lodged on 11 May 2011 — Észak-dunántúli Környezetvédelmi és Vízügyi Igazgatóság (Édukövízig), Hochtief Construction AG Magyarországi Fióktelepe v Közbeszerzések Tanácsa Közbeszerzési Döntőbizottság
Date: 2011-05-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Hungary, award of contract, financial accounting, interpretation of the law








C_2011232EN.01001401.xml










6.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 232/14






Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Ítélőtábla (Hungary) lodged on 11 May 2011 — Észak-dunántúli Környezetvédelmi és Vízügyi Igazgatóság (Édukövízig), Hochtief Construction AG Magyarországi Fióktelepe v Közbeszerzések Tanácsa Közbeszerzési Döntőbizottság
(Case C-218/11)
(2011/C 232/23)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Ítélőtábla

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Észak-dunántúli Környezetvédelmi és Vízügyi Igazgatóság (Édukövízig), Hochtief Construction AG Magyarországi Fióktelepe

Defendant: Közbeszerzések Tanácsa Közbeszerzési Döntőbizottság

Intervener: Vegyépszer Építő és Szerelő Zrt., MÁVÉPCELL Kft.

Questions referred







1.


Is the requirement that the minimum capacity levels stipulated in Article 44(2) of Directive 2004/18/EC (1) (hereinafter Directive) of the Council of the European Union (‘Council’) be in accordance with Article 47(1)(b) of that Directive to be interpreted in such a way that the contracting authority is entitled to link the minimum capacity levels to a single indicator in an accounting document (balance sheet) that it selects to monitor economic and financial standing?










2.


If the answer to the first question is yes, Budapest Court of Appeal further asks whether the consistency requirement laid down by Article 44(2) of the Directive is fulfilled by data selected for assessment of the minimum capacity levels (profit/loss according to the balance sheet), where such data has different content pursuant to the accounting legislation of individual Member States?










3.


Is it sufficient, for the purposes of correcting any discrepancies which doubtless exist between Member States, if the contracting authority ensures that there is an opportunity to employ external resources (Article 47(3)), in addition to the documents selected as proof of economic and financial standing, or must the contracting authority, in order to meet the requirement of consistency as regards all the documents selected by it, ensure that that capacity can be demonstrated in another manner (Article 47(5))?






(1)  Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts (OJ 2004 L 134, p. 114).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6156 — JCDecaux/Bolloré/JV)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-05-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: advertising, carriage of goods, economic concentration, exchange of information, merger control








C_2011140EN.01000301.xml










11.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 140/3





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6156 — JCDecaux/Bolloré/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 140/03
On 26 April 2011, 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 French 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 32011M6156. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case T-74/10: Judgment of the General Court of 11 May 2011 — Flaco Geräte v OHIM — Delgado Sámchez (FLACO) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark FLACO — Earlier national word mark FLACO — Relative ground for refusal — Identical goods — Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Request for proof of genuine use of the earlier mark submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal — Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 and Rule 22 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95)
Date: 2011-05-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), pressure equipment, trade-mark law








C_2011186EN.01002501.xml










25.6.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 186/25





Judgment of the General Court of 11 May 2011 — Flaco Geräte v OHIM — Delgado Sámchez (FLACO)
(Case T-74/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark FLACO - Earlier national word mark FLACO - Relative ground for refusal - Identical goods - Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Request for proof of genuine use of the earlier mark submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 and Rule 22 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95)
2011/C 186/46
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Flaco Geräte GmbH (Gütersloh, Germany) (represented by: M. Wirtz, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Jesús Delgado Sánchez (Socuellamos, Spain)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 November 2009 (Case R 86/2009-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Mr Jesús Delgado Sánchez and Flaco Geräte GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Flaco-Geräte GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 100, 17.4.2010.
Case F-53/09: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (3rd Chamber) of 11 May 2011 — J v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Social security — Accident insurance and occupational disease — Article 73 of the Staff Regulations — Refusal to recognise the cause of an occupational disease — Obligation to conduct the procedure within a reasonable period)
Date: 2011-05-11
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), health costs, occupational disease, working time








C_2011252EN.01005001.xml










27.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/50





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (3rd Chamber) of 11 May 2011 — J v Commission
(Case F-53/09) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Social security - Accident insurance and occupational disease - Article 73 of the Staff Regulations - Refusal to recognise the cause of an occupational disease - Obligation to conduct the procedure within a reasonable period)
2011/C 252/106
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: J (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and É. Marchal, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Martin and J. Baquero Cruz, Agents)

Re:

Annulment of the decision rejecting the applicant’s claim that the disease from which she is suffering should be recognised as an occupational disease, and of the decision to charge her for the fees and costs of the doctor whom she designated and 50 % of the fees and incidental costs of the third doctor on the medical committee

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Orders the European Commission to pay the applicant damages of one euro;










2.


Dismisses the other claims in the action;










3.


Orders the European Commission to pay, as well as its own costs, one quarter of the applicant’s costs;










4.


Orders the applicant to bear three-quarters of her own costs.






(1)  OJ C 180, of 01.08.2009, p. 64.
Case C-221/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberverwaltungsgericht Berlin-Brandenburg (Germany) lodged on 11 May 2011 — Leyla Ecem Demirkan v Federal Republic of Germany
Date: 2011-05-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, Türkiye, association agreement (EU), interpretation of the law, migrant, provision of services








C_2011232EN.01001502.xml










6.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 232/15






Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberverwaltungsgericht Berlin-Brandenburg (Germany) lodged on 11 May 2011 — Leyla Ecem Demirkan v Federal Republic of Germany
(Case C-221/11)
(2011/C 232/25)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberverwaltungsgericht Berlin-Brandenburg

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Leyla Ecem Demirkan

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany

Questions referred







1.


Does the passive freedom to provide services also fall within the scope of the concept of freedom to provide services within the meaning of Article 41(1) of the Additional Protocol to the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey of 23 November 1970 (1) (Additional Protocol)?










2.


In the event that the first question is answered in the affirmative: does the protection of the passive freedom to provide services under the law on the Association Agreement, specifically pursuant to Article 41(1) of the Additional Protocol, also extend to Turkish nationals, who — like the claimant — do not wish to enter the Federal Republic of Germany in order to receive a specific service, but for the purposes of visiting relatives for a stay of up to three months and rely on the mere possibility of receiving services in the Federal territory?






(1)  OJ 1972, L 293, p. 4 (no official translation published in English).
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2011-05-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2011140EN.01001201.xml










11.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 140/12





Euro exchange rates (1)

9 May 2011
2011/C 140/06

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,4397




JPY


Japanese yen


116,28




DKK


Danish krone


7,4570




GBP


Pound sterling


0,87925




SEK


Swedish krona


8,9791




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2617




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,8665




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


24,176




HUF


Hungarian forint


264,40




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7093




PLN


Polish zloty


3,9383




RON


Romanian leu


4,0998




TRY


Turkish lira


2,2202




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3389




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3884




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


11,1901




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,8179




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7752




KRW


South Korean won


1 557,53




ZAR


South African rand


9,6798




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


9,3496




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,3783




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 323,02




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,3047




PHP


Philippine peso


61,892




RUB


Russian rouble


39,9600




THB


Thai baht


43,479




BRL


Brazilian real


2,3167




MXN


Mexican peso


16,7077




INR


Indian rupee


64,3830






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-217/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Gdańsku (Republic of Poland), lodged on 11 May 2011 — Forta Sp. z o.o. v Dyrektor Izby Celnej w Gdyni
Date: 2011-05-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Poland, game of chance, interpretation of the law








C_2011219EN.01000702.xml










23.7.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 219/7





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Gdańsku (Republic of Poland), lodged on 11 May 2011 — Forta Sp. z o.o. v Dyrektor Izby Celnej w Gdyni
(Case C-217/11)
2011/C 219/09
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Gdańsku

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Forta Sp. z o.o.

Defendant: Dyrektor Izby Celnej w Gdyni

Question referred

Must Article 1(11) of Directive 98/34/EC of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations (1) and of rules on Information Society services be interpreted as meaning that the term ‘technical regulation’, the draft of which must be communicated to the Commission pursuant to Article 8(1) of that directive, includes a legislative measure which prohibits the issuing of authorisations to carry on an activity involving gaming on low-value-prize machines?


(1)  Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations (OJ 1998 L 204, p. 37), as amended by Directive 98/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 July 1998 amending Directive 98/34/EC laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations (OJ 1998 L 217, p. 18).