do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2011-11-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2011335EN.01001401.xml










16.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 335/14





Euro exchange rates (1)

15 November 2011
2011/C 335/08

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3532




JPY


Japanese yen


104,16




DKK


Danish krone


7,4427




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85345




SEK


Swedish krona


9,1238




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2405




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,8000




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


25,768




HUF


Hungarian forint


314,77




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7002




PLN


Polish zloty


4,4145




RON


Romanian leu


4,3495




TRY


Turkish lira


2,4299




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3351




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3866




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,5313




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7591




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7487




KRW


South Korean won


1 527,99




ZAR


South African rand


11,0087




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,5842




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4815




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 170,68




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,2714




PHP


Philippine peso


58,909




RUB


Russian rouble


41,5550




THB


Thai baht


41,746




BRL


Brazilian real


2,3904




MXN


Mexican peso


18,3765




INR


Indian rupee


68,5800






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-51/06: Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2011 — Fardem Packaging v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Plastic industrial bags sector — Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC — Fines — Gravity of the infringement — Attenuating circumstances — Cooperation during the administrative procedure)
Date: 2011-11-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: cartel, fine, industrial product, infringement procedure (EU), packaging product, restrictive-practice notification








C_2012006EN.01000901.xml










7.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 6/9





Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2011 — Fardem Packaging v Commission
(Case T-51/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Plastic industrial bags sector - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Fines - Gravity of the infringement - Attenuating circumstances - Cooperation during the administrative procedure)
2012/C 6/10
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicant: Fardem Packaging BV (Edam, Netherlands) (represented initially by: F.J. Leeflang and W. Geelhoed, then by F. Leeflang and S. de Boer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, A. Nijenhuis and S. Noë, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2005) 4634 final of 30 November 2005 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/F/38.354 — Industrial bags), concerning a cartel on the market for plastic industrial bags, and for annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant by that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Fardem Packaging BV to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 96, 22.4.2006.
Case T-500/10: Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2011 — Dorma v OHIM — Puertas Doorsa (doorsa FÁBRICA DE PUERTAS AUTOMÁTICAS) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark ‘doorsa FÁBRICA DE PUERTAS AUTOMÁTICAS’ — Earlier national and international word and figurative marks ‘DORMA’ — Lodging of additional documents on the reputation of the earlier marks in the procedure before the Board of Appeal — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2011-11-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, building industry, trade-mark law








C_2012006EN.01001501.xml










7.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 6/15





Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2011 — Dorma v OHIM — Puertas Doorsa (doorsa FÁBRICA DE PUERTAS AUTOMÁTICAS)
(Case T-500/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark ‘doorsa FÁBRICA DE PUERTAS AUTOMÁTICAS’ - Earlier national and international word and figurative marks ‘DORMA’ - Lodging of additional documents on the reputation of the earlier marks in the procedure before the Board of Appeal - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2012/C 6/26
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Dorma GmbH & Co. KG (Ennepetal, Germany) (represented by: P. Koch Moreno, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Puertas Doorsa, SL (Petrel, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 August 2010 (Case R 542/2009-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Dorma GmbH & Co. KG and Puertas Doorsa, SL.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Dorma GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 346, 18.12.2010.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6409 — Gazprom Schweiz/Promgas) — Candidate case for simplified procedure Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-11-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, natural gas, petrochemicals








C_2011335EN.01002301.xml










16.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 335/23





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6409 — Gazprom Schweiz/Promgas)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 335/13






1.


On 7 November 2011, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Gazprom Schweiz AG (‘Gazprom Schweiz’, Switzerland) controlled by Gazprom export LLC (‘Gazprom export’, Russian Federation), itself controlled by Open Joint Stock Company Gazprom (‘Gazprom’, Russian Federation), acquires from ENI SpA (‘ENI’, Italy) within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation a 50 % stake in Promgas SpA (‘Promgas’, Italy), currently jointly controlled by ENI and Gazprom export, by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


Gazprom: the exploration, production, transportation, refining and marketing of natural gas and petrochemical products,










—


Gazprom export: export of natural gas, oil, petroleum derivatives and other products of the petroleum and petrochemical industries to Europe and participation in energy investment projects,










—


Gazprom Schweiz: exploration, production and sale of hydrocarbons,










—


Promgas: wholesale supply of natural gas through mains in Italy.














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.6409 — Gazprom Schweiz/Promgas, 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-548/09 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 16 November 2011 — Bank Melli Iran v Council of the European Union; French Republic; United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; European Commission (Appeals — Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran to prevent nuclear proliferation — Freezing of the funds of a bank — Failure to notify the decision — Legal basis — Rights of the defence)
Date: 2011-11-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Iran, economic resources, economic sanctions, nuclear policy, rights of the defence








C_2012025EN.01000601.xml










28.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 25/6






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 16 November 2011 — Bank Melli Iran v Council of the European Union; French Republic; United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; European Commission
(Case C-548/09 P) (1)

(Appeals - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran to prevent nuclear proliferation - Freezing of the funds of a bank - Failure to notify the decision - Legal basis - Rights of the defence)
(2012/C 25/09)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Bank Melli Iran (represented by: L. Defalque, avocate)

Other parties to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bishop and R. Szostak, acting as Agents); French Republic (represented by: E. Belliard, G. de Bergues, L. Butel and E. Ranaivoson, acting as Agents); United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: S. Hathaway, acting as Agent, and D. Beard, Barrister); European Commission (represented by: S. Boelaert and M. Konstantinidis, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment delivered by the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) on 14 October 2009 in Case T-390/08 Bank Melli Iran v Council by which the Court dismissed the appellant’s action for annulment of paragraph 4 of Table B in the annex to Council Decision 2008/475/EC of 23 June 2008 implementing Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2008 L 163, p. 29) in so far as it relates to Bank Melli Iran and its branches — No individual notification of that decision — Breach of essential procedural requirements — No legal basis for the decision to freeze the appellant’s funds — Failure to respect the rights of the defence and the principle of effective judicial protection — Infringement of the principle of proportionality and of the right to property

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Bank Melli Iran to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 80, 27.3.2010.
Case T-308/06: Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2011 — Buffalo Milke Automotive Polishing Products v OHIM — Werner & Mertz (BUFFALO MILKE Automotive Polishing Products) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark BUFFALO MILKE Automotive Polishing Products — Earlier national figurative mark BÚFALO — Production of evidence for the first time before the Board of Appeal — Discretion granted by Article 74(2) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 76(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009))
Date: 2011-11-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, motor car, polishing and scouring preparations, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012006EN.01001202.xml










7.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 6/12





Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2011 — Buffalo Milke Automotive Polishing Products v OHIM — Werner & Mertz (BUFFALO MILKE Automotive Polishing Products)
(Case T-308/06) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark BUFFALO MILKE Automotive Polishing Products - Earlier national figurative mark BÚFALO - Production of evidence for the first time before the Board of Appeal - Discretion granted by Article 74(2) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 76(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009))
2012/C 6/19
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Buffalo Milke Automotive Polishing Products, Inc. (Pleasanton, California, United States) (represented by: F. de Visscher, E. Cornu and D. Moreau, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: Werner & Mertz GmbH (Mainz, Germany) (represented initially by M. Thewes and V. Wiot, and subsequently by M. Thewes and P. Reuter, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 September 2006 (Case R 1094/2005-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Werner & Mertz GmbH and Buffalo Milke Automotive Polishing Products, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Buffalo Milke Automotive Polishing Products, Inc. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 326, 30.12.2006.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6212 — LVMH/Bulgari) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-11-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, luxury products industry, merger control








C_2011335EN.01000201.xml










16.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 335/2





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6212 — LVMH/Bulgari)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 335/02
On 29 June 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 32011M6212. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6263 — Aelia/Aéroports de Paris/JV) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-11-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: France, airport, duty-free sale, economic concentration, merger control, travel agency








C_2011335EN.01000301.xml










16.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 335/3





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6263 — Aelia/Aéroports de Paris/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 335/04
On 20 October 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 32011M6263. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case T-68/06: Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2011 — Stempher and Koninklijke Verpakkingsindustrie Stempher v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Plastic industrial bags sector — Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC — Fines — Limitation period — Proof of the infringement)
Date: 2011-11-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: cartel, fine, industrial product, infringement procedure (EU), packaging product, restrictive-practice notification








C_2012006EN.01001002.xml










7.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 6/10





Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2011 — Stempher and Koninklijke Verpakkingsindustrie Stempher v Commission
(Case T-68/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Plastic industrial bags sector - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Fines - Limitation period - Proof of the infringement)
2012/C 6/14
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicants: Stempher BV (Rijssen, Netherlands) and Koninklijke Verpakkingsindustrie Stempher CV (Rijssen) (represented by: J. de Pree and E. Pijnacker Hordijk, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, A. Nijenhuis and S. Noë, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment in part and for amendment of Commission Decision C(2005) 4634 final of 30 November 2005 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/F/38.354 — Industrial bags).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Commission Decision C(2005) 4634 final of 30 November 2005 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/F/38.354 — Industrial bags) in so far as it concerns Stempher BV and Koninklijke Verpakkingsindustrie Stempher CV;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 96, 22.4.2006.
Case T-76/06: Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2011 — ASPLA v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Plastic industrial bags sector — Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC — Exchange of individualised information — Fixing of prices and sales quotas by geographic area — Allocation of customers — Concerted bidding in response to invitations to tender — Single and continuous infringement — Extent of the infringement — Definition of the product market and the geographic market — Guidelines for the calculation of fines — Principles of equal treatment and proportionality — Aggravating and attenuating circumstances — Ceiling of 10 % of turnover)
Date: 2011-11-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: cartel, fine, industrial product, infringement procedure (EU), packaging product, restrictive-practice notification








C_2012006EN.01001102.xml










7.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 6/11





Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2011 — ASPLA v Commission
(Case T-76/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Plastic industrial bags sector - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Exchange of individualised information - Fixing of prices and sales quotas by geographic area - Allocation of customers - Concerted bidding in response to invitations to tender - Single and continuous infringement - Extent of the infringement - Definition of the product market and the geographic market - Guidelines for the calculation of fines - Principles of equal treatment and proportionality - Aggravating and attenuating circumstances - Ceiling of 10 % of turnover)
2012/C 6/16
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Plasticos Españoles, SA (ASPLA) (Torrelavega, Spain) (represented initially by: E. Garayar Gutiérrez and A. García Castillo, then by E. Garayar Gutiérrez, M. Troncoso Ferrer and C. Ruixó Claramunt, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, acting as Agent)

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2005) 4634 final of 30 November 2005 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/F/38.354 — Industrial bags), concerning a cartel on the market for plastic industrial bags, and, in the alternative, for reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Plasticos Españoles, SA (ASPLA) to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 108, 6.5.2006.
Case C-574/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Düsseldorf (Germany), lodged on 16 November 2011 — Novartis AG v Actavis Deutschland GmbH & Co KG, Actavis Ltd.
Date: 2011-11-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Community certification, European patent, medicinal product








C_2012032EN.01001303.xml










4.2.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 32/13





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Düsseldorf (Germany), lodged on 16 November 2011 — Novartis AG v Actavis Deutschland GmbH & Co KG, Actavis Ltd.
(Case C-574/11)
2012/C 32/24
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Novartis AG

Defendants: Actavis Deutschland GmbH & Co KG, Actavis Ltd.

Question referred

Are Articles 4 and 5 of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the protection conferred by a supplementary protection certificate, which has been granted for a single active ingredient (in this case, Valsartan), extends to a form which contains a combination of active ingredients featuring that single active ingredient (in this case, Valsartan + Hydrochlorothiazide)?


(1)  Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (Codified version), OJ 2009 L 152, p. 1.