do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6458 — Universal Music Group/EMI Music)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2012-02-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, music








C_2012053EN.01001701.xml










23.2.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/17





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6458 — Universal Music Group/EMI Music)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2012/C 53/08






1.


On 17 February 2012, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Universal Music Holdings Limited, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Universal International Music B.V. (‘Universal’, Netherlands), controlled by Vivendi SA (‘Vivendi’, France), acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the recorded music business of EMI Group Global Limited (‘EMI RM’, UK) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Universal: recorded music, music publishing and a number of other activities which are related to the recorded music business, such as merchandising, artist management, online music video services and, to a very limited extent, recorded music online retail, online music events management and events venue services,










—


for Vivendi: Vivendi’s principal activities, apart from its interests in the music sector, include telecommunications in France, pay-TV services in France, games and events ticketing services,










—


for EMI RM: recorded music together with very limited activities in relation to merchandising, artist management and certain e-commerce services for third party vendors.














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.6458 — Universal Music Group/EMI Music, 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’).
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2012-02-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2012053EN.01000801.xml










23.2.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/8





Euro exchange rates (1)

22 February 2012
2012/C 53/04

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3230




JPY


Japanese yen


106,22




DKK


Danish krone


7,4363




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84420




SEK


Swedish krona


8,8080




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2072




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,5000




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


25,172




HUF


Hungarian forint


288,82




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,6982




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1866




RON


Romanian leu


4,3592




TRY


Turkish lira


2,3173




AUD


Australian dollar


1,2441




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3210




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,2609




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5933




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6646




KRW


South Korean won


1 491,21




ZAR


South African rand


10,2085




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,3320




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5865




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


11 976,74




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,0054




PHP


Philippine peso


56,481




RUB


Russian rouble


39,3680




THB


Thai baht


40,431




BRL


Brazilian real


2,2721




MXN


Mexican peso


16,9605




INR


Indian rupee


65,0110






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6393 — Astrium Holding/Vizada Group)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2012-02-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aerospace industry, economic concentration, merger control, satellite communications








C_2012053EN.01000401.xml










23.2.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/4





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6393 — Astrium Holding/Vizada Group)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2012/C 53/02
On 30 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 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 32011M6393. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Corrigenda to Commission Implementing Decision 2011/252/EU of 26 April 2011 allowing Member States to extend provisional authorisations granted for the new active substances ascorbic acid, ipconazole, spiromesifen, topramezone, and Pseudomonas sp. strain DSMZ 13134 ( OJ L 106, 27.4.2011 )
Date: 2012-02-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: acid, herbicide, insecticide, market approval, pesticide, plant health control








L_2012050EN.01005801.xml










23.2.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 50/58







Corrigenda to Commission Implementing Decision 2011/252/EU of 26 April 2011 allowing Member States to extend provisional authorisations granted for the new active substances ascorbic acid, ipconazole, spiromesifen, topramezone, and Pseudomonas sp. strain DSMZ 13134
(
Official Journal of the European Union L 106 of 27 April 2011
)

On page 12, in Article 1,
for:

               ‘
               30 April 2012
               ’,
read:

               ‘
               30 April 2013
               ’;
on page 12, in Article 2,
for:

               ‘
               30 April 2012
               ’,
read:

               ‘
               30 April 2013
               ’.
Case F-26/12: Action brought on 23 February 2012 — ZZ v ECB
Date: 2012-02-23
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, access to information, damages, provision of documents








C_2012184EN.01002202.xml










23.6.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 184/22





Action brought on 23 February 2012 — ZZ v ECB
(Case F-26/12)
2012/C 184/47
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Central Bank

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the ECB decision rejecting the applicant’s requests to document access and the claim for damages.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:






—


annul the ECB decisions rejecting the requests to document access of the applicant, i.e. the decision dated 21 June 2011 by which the application of the applicant for access to documents has been rejected, the decision of the Director General dated 12 August 2011 and the decision of the President of the European Central Bank dated 12 December 2011;










—


order the ECB to pay a compensation, evaluated ex aequo et bono at EUR 10 000, for the moral prejudice suffered;










—


order the ECB to pay the costs.
Case T-87/12: Action brought on 23 February 2012 — Duff Beer v OHIM — Twentieth Century Fox Film (Duff)
Date: 2012-02-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, beer, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012109EN.01003201.xml










14.4.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 109/32





Action brought on 23 February 2012 — Duff Beer v OHIM — Twentieth Century Fox Film (Duff)
(Case T-87/12)
2012/C 109/64
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Duff Beer UG (Eschwege, Germany) (represented by: N. Schindler, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation (Los Angeles, United States of America)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 12 December 2011 (Case R 0456/2011-4) and the decision of the Opposition Division of OHIM of 14 January 2011 (No B 1 603 771);










—


order OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the applicant;










—


in the alternative, stay the proceedings until the delivery of final decisions on the application for revocation pending before OHIM under the reference number 000005227 C and the nullity of Community trade mark No 001341130 declared by the Court of Commerce of Brussels under the reference numbers 2009/6122 and 2009/6129.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant

Community trade mark concerned: the figurative mark ‘Duff’ in the colours black, white and red for goods and services in Classes 32, 35 and 41 (application No 8 351 091).

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the figurative mark ‘Duff BEER’ (Community trade mark No 1 341 130) for goods in Class 32

Decision of the Opposition Division: the opposition was upheld in part for goods and services in Classes 32 and 35

Decision of the Board of Appeal: the appeal was dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(2)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 as there is no likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue and infringement of rule 20(7)(c) in conjunction with rule 50(1) of Regulation No 2868/95 due to the Board of Appeal’s incorrect exercise of its discretion as regards the applicant’s application to suspend the appeal proceedings.