do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6261 — North Sea Group/Argos Groep/JV) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-11-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, oil industry








C_2011324EN.01000102.xml










9.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 324/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6261 — North Sea Group/Argos Groep/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 324/02
On 27 September 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 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 32011M6261. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2011-11-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2011324EN.01000201.xml










9.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 324/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

8 November 2011
2011/C 324/03

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3788




JPY


Japanese yen


107,51




DKK


Danish krone


7,4445




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85805




SEK


Swedish krona


9,0355




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2382




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,7250




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


25,172




HUF


Hungarian forint


307,36




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7028




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3545




RON


Romanian leu


4,3565




TRY


Turkish lira


2,4494




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3339




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3974




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,7134




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7351




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7523




KRW


South Korean won


1 539,12




ZAR


South African rand


10,8856




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,7506




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4913




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 306,11




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,3068




PHP


Philippine peso


59,435




RUB


Russian rouble


41,6468




THB


Thai baht


42,315




BRL


Brazilian real


2,4048




MXN


Mexican peso


18,4477




INR


Indian rupee


68,2230






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Withdrawal of notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6397 — G4S/ISS) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-11-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, multinational enterprise, security services








C_2011324EN.01001101.xml










9.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 324/11





Withdrawal of notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6397 — G4S/ISS)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 324/08
(Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004)
On 27 October 2011, the European Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration between G4S and ISS. On 2 November 2011, the notifying party informed the Commission that it withdrew its notification.
Case C-562/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 9 November 2011 — Société d’Exportation de Produits Agricoles SA (SEPA) v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas
Date: 2011-11-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative sanction, customs fraud, export refund








C_2012039EN.01000801.xml










11.2.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 39/8






Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 9 November 2011 — Société d’Exportation de Produits Agricoles SA (SEPA) v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas
(Case C-562/11)
(2012/C 39/12)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Société d’Exportation de Produits Agricoles SA (SEPA)

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas

Question referred

Must a penalty be imposed on an exporter who makes a request for a refund, providing a correct explanation of the facts relevant to the grant of the export refund, although no right to a refund actually exists in relation to the relevant exportation? (1)



(1)  Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products (OJ 1987 L 351, p. 1) as amended by Commission Regulation No 495/97 of 18 March (OJ 1997 L 77, p. 12)
Case T-120/10: Order of the General Court of 9 November 2011 — ClientEarth and Others v Commission (Access to documents of the institutions — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Implied refusal of access — Interest in bringing proceedings — Express decision adopted after the action was brought — Refusal to amend the form of order sought — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2011-11-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, biofuel, provision of documents








C_2012006EN.01001603.xml










7.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 6/16





Order of the General Court of 9 November 2011 — ClientEarth and Others v Commission
(Case T-120/10) (1)

(Access to documents of the institutions - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Implied refusal of access - Interest in bringing proceedings - Express decision adopted after the action was brought - Refusal to amend the form of order sought - No need to adjudicate)
2012/C 6/30
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: ClientEarth (London, United Kingdom); European Federation for Transport and Environment (T&E) (Brussels, Belgium); European Environmental Bureau (EEB) (Brussels); BirdLife International (Brussels) (represented by: S. Hockman QC, and by P. Kirch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann and C. ten Dam, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission decision of 9 February 2010 refusing access to certain documents relating to biofuels modelling

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


The European Commission shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by ClientEarth, the European Federation for Transport and Environment (T&E), the European Environmental Bureau (EEB) and BirdLife International.






(1)  OJ C 134, 22.5.2010.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6243 — CE Gas Marketing & Trading/Verbundnetz Gas Aktiengesellschaft/VNG Austria) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-11-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, gas industry, merger control








C_2011324EN.01000101.xml










9.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 324/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6243 — CE Gas Marketing & Trading/Verbundnetz Gas Aktiengesellschaft/VNG Austria)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 324/01
On 4 November 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 German 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 32011M6243. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case C-563/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Latvijas Republikas Augstākās tiesas Senāta Administratīvo lietu departaments (Republic of Latvia) lodged on 9 November 2011 — SIA Forvards V v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests
Date: 2011-11-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, delivery, tax relief








C_2012013EN.01000901.xml










14.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 13/9





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Latvijas Republikas Augstākās tiesas Senāta Administratīvo lietu departaments (Republic of Latvia) lodged on 9 November 2011 — SIA Forvards V v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests
(Case C-563/11)
2012/C 13/17
Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākās tiesas Senāta

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: SIA Forvards V

Defendant: Valsts ieņēmumu dienests

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 17(2)(a) of the Sixth Directive (1) be interpreted as meaning that the right to deduct value added tax paid when goods are purchased can be denied to a taxable person who fulfils all the essential requirements for deduction of value added tax, without any abusive conduct on his part having been demonstrated, when the other party to the transactions was not able to effect the supply of the goods for factual or legal reasons (the other party to the transaction is fictitious or the person responsible for it denies the existence of any economic activity or of a specific transaction and that person has no capacity to fulfil the contract)?










2.


May a refusal to recognise the right to deduct value added tax be based as such on the circumstance that the other party to the transaction (the person indicated on the invoice) is considered fictitious (that is to say, his transaction does not relate to an economic activity)? Can the right to deduct input tax also be denied where no abusive practice on the part of the applicant for deduction of the input tax has been ascertained?






(1)  Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1)
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6405 — Banco Santander/Certain assets of RBS (Rainbow)) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-11-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: bank, economic concentration, financial services, merger control








C_2011324EN.01001301.xml










9.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 324/13





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6405 — Banco Santander/Certain assets of RBS (Rainbow))
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 324/10






1.


On 21 October 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 Banco Santander SA (‘Banco Santander’, Spain) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of parts of the undertaking The Royal Bank of Scotland Group (‘Rainbow’, UK) by way of purchase of assets.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Banco Santander: parent company of an international group of banking and, financial companies operating in the UK, Spain and some other European countries, as well as in Latin America,










—


for Rainbow: retail banking and banking services to SMEs and other corporate customers in the UK.














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.6405 — Banco Santander/Certain assets of RBS (Rainbow), 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’).
Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EU) No 1006/2011 of 27 September 2011 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff ( OJ L 282, 28.10.2011 )
Date: 2011-11-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: common customs tariff, export (EU), import (EU), tariff nomenclature, trade statistics








L_2011290EN.01000601.xml










9.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 290/6







Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EU) No 1006/2011 of 27 September 2011 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff
(
Official Journal of the European Union L 282 of 28 October 2011
)

On the cover page and on page 1, the title is replaced with the following:


                        ‘Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1006/2011 of 27 September 2011 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff’.
Case T-581/11: Action brought on 9 November 2011 — Dimian v OHIM — Bayer Design Fritz Bayer (BABY BAMBOLINA)
Date: 2011-11-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, toy industry, trade-mark law








C_2012025EN.01005802.xml










28.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 25/58






Action brought on 9 November 2011 — Dimian v OHIM — Bayer Design Fritz Bayer (BABY BAMBOLINA)
(Case T-581/11)
(2012/C 25/112)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Dimian AG (Nürnberg, Germany) (represented by: P. Pozzi and G. Ghisletti, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Bayer Design Fritz Bayer GmbH & Co. KG (Michelau, Germany)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 3 August 2011 in case R 1822/2010-2; and










—


Order the defendant to bear the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: The figurative mark ‘BABY BAMBOLINA’, for goods in class 28 — Community trade mark registration No 6403927

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: The applicant

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: The party requesting the declaration of invalidity grounded its request pursuant to Article 53(1)(c) in conjunction with Article 8(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, and in Article 53(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) and Article 8(2)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Rejected the request for invalidity

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 53(1)(c) and Article 8(4) and in conjunction of Council Regulation No 207/2009, to the extent that the Board of Appeal has excluded the relevance of the mentioned catalogues referring to the period 2008-2009.
2011/737/,Euratom: Commission Decision of 9 November 2011 amending its Rules of Procedure
Date: 2011-11-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Commission, budget policy, economic policy, rules of procedure




L_2011296EN.01005801.xml










15.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 296/58








            COMMISSION DECISION
         
of 9 November 2011
         
amending its Rules of Procedure
(2011/737/EU, Euratom)


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union,


Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 249 thereof,


Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 106a thereof,


Having regard to Commission Decision 2010/138/EU, Euratom, of 24 February 2010 amending its Rules of Procedure (1),


Having regard to the Decision of the President of the Commission C(2011)8000 of 27 October 2011,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
In Article 12 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission, a new point 5 shall be added, worded as follows:

“5.   Any Member of the Commission wishing to suspend a written procedure in the field of coordination and surveillance of the economic and budgetary policies of the Member States, in particular of the euro area, shall send a reasoned request to that effect to the President, explicitly indicating the aspects of the draft decision to which it relates, based on an impartial and objective assessment of the timing, structure, reasoning or result of the proposed decision.
If the President considers that the reasons given are not well-founded, and if the request for suspension is maintained, he or she may refuse to allow the suspension and may decide that the written procedure shall continue; in that case, the Secretary-General shall ask the other Members of the Commission for their position to ensure that the quorum laid down in Article 250 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union has been met. The President may also include the item on the agenda of the next Commission meeting with a view to its adoption.”



Article 2
In Article 23 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission, a new point 5a shall be added, worded as follows:

“5a.   The Directorate-General responsible for economic and financial affairs must be consulted on all initiatives relating to or having a potential impact on growth, competitiveness or economic stability in the European Union or in the euro area.”



Article 3
This Decision shall take effect on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 9 November 2011.


For the Commission


The President

José Manuel BARROSO
            





(1)  
            OJ L 55, 5.3.2010, p. 60.
Case T-243/11: Order of the General Court of 9 November 2011 — Glaxo Group v OHIM — Farmodiética (ADVANCE) (Community trade mark — Applicant represented by a lawyer who is a not a third person — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2011-11-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, interest in bringing an action, lawyer, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012006EN.01001702.xml










7.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 6/17





Order of the General Court of 9 November 2011 — Glaxo Group v OHIM — Farmodiética (ADVANCE)
(Case T-243/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Applicant represented by a lawyer who is a not a third person - Inadmissibility)
2012/C 6/32
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Glaxo Group Ltd (Greenford, United Kingdom) (represented by: O. Benito and C. Mansell, Solicitors)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Farmodiética — Cosmética, Dietética e Produtos Farmacêuticos, Lda (Estarda de S. Marcos, Portugal)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 February 2011 (Case R 665/2010-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Farmodiética — Cosmética, Dietética e Produtos Farmacêuticos, Lda and Glaxo Group Ltd.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


Glaxo Group Ltd shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 194, 2.7.2011.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6408 — EAH/Mitsubishi Electric/Mitsubishi/ETAM) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-11-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electronics industry, investment company, lift, merger control








C_2011324EN.01001201.xml










9.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 324/12





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6408 — EAH/Mitsubishi Electric/Mitsubishi/ETAM)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 324/09






1.


On 31 October 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 undertakings ETA Ascon Holding LLC (‘EAH’, United Arab Emirates), Mitsubishi Electric Corporation (‘Mitsubishi Electric’, Japan) and Mitsubishi Corporation (‘Mitsubishi’, Japan) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of ETA Melco Elevator Company LLC (‘ETAM’, United Arab Emirates) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for EAH: investment and holding company active in numerous divisions in the construction industry,










—


for Mitsubishi Electric: manufacture and sale of electric and electronic equipment used in energy and energy systems, industrial automation, information and communication systems, electronic devices and home appliances,










—


for Mitsubishi: general trading company active in various industries including energy, metals, machinery, chemicals, food and general merchandise,










—


for ETAM: the supply, installation and maintenance of elevators and escalators in Asia and the Middle East.














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.6408 — EAH/Mitsubishi Electric/Mitsubishi/ETAM, 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’).