do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6517 — The Klesch Group/Arkema's Vinyl Products Business)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2012-06-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aluminium, chlorine, economic concentration, merger control, oil refining, plastics








C_2012187EN.01000102.xml










27.6.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 187/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6517 — The Klesch Group/Arkema's Vinyl Products Business)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2012/C 187/02
On 20 June 2012, 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 32012M6517. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case C-491/11 P: Order of the Court of 27 June 2012 — Fuchshuber Agrarhandel GmbH v European Commission (Appeals — Common Agricultural Policy — Purchase of maize from the Hungarian intervention agency — Insufficient stocks — Alleged failure by the Commission in its obligation to conduct checks — Non-contractual liability)
Date: 2012-06-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU agricultural market, Hungary, indemnification, invitation to tender, maize, market supervision, supervisory body








C_2012366EN.01002002.xml










24.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 366/20





Order of the Court of 27 June 2012 — Fuchshuber Agrarhandel GmbH v European Commission
(Case C-491/11 P) (1)

(Appeals - Common Agricultural Policy - Purchase of maize from the Hungarian intervention agency - Insufficient stocks - Alleged failure by the Commission in its obligation to conduct checks - Non-contractual liability)
2012/C 366/34
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Fuchshuber Agrarhandel GmbH (represented by: G. Lehner, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: G. von Rintelen and D. Triantafyllou, Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the order of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 21 July 2011 in Case T-451/10 Fuchshuber Agrarhandel v Commission, by which that Court dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law the action for damages seeking to obtain compensation for the loss allegedly suffered by reason of the Commission’s failure to check the conditions governing the implementation of standing invitations to tender for the resale on the Community market of cereals, in this case maize held by the Hungarian intervention agency.

Operative part of the order

The Court hereby orders:






1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Fuchshuber Agrarhandel GmbH is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 13, 14.01.2012.
Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union
Date: 2012-06-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, common customs tariff








C_2012187EN.01000501.xml










27.6.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 187/5





Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union
2012/C 187/06
Pursuant to Article 9(1)(a), second indent, of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (1), the Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union (2) are amended as follows:

On page 374, the following text is inserted:


‘8714 99 50   Derailleur gears

Derailleur gears of this subheading are mechanisms that enable the chain of a bicycle to be moved on the front sprockets or on the rear sprockets. A complete derailleur gear set usually consists of at least one derailleur (front or rear, see images) and a shift lever attached to the derailleur by a cable. When a rider operates the lever while pedalling, the change in cable tension moves the derailleur from side to side, “derailing” the chain onto different sprockets.
This subheading also covers front or rear derailleurs presented separately as well as sets consisting of these derailleurs with cables or shift levers unassembled. However, presented separately, shift levers and cables are to be classified in subheading 8714 99 90 as parts.









(1)  OJ L 256, 7.9.1987, p. 1.

(2)  OJ C 137, 6.5.2011, p. 1.
Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union
Date: 2012-06-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, common customs tariff, toy industry








C_2012187EN.01000401.xml










27.6.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 187/4





Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union
2012/C 187/05
Pursuant to Article 9(1)(a), second indent, of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (1), the Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union (2) are amended as follows:

On page 390, the following text is inserted:


‘Note 4 to Chapter 95

Combinations to be classified under heading 9503 by virtue of this note consist of one or more articles of heading 9503 combined with one or more items of other headings put up together for retail sale and the combinations have the essential character of toys.
Such combinations derive the essential character of toys not only from the packaging but also from the importance, value and use of their components.
The classification of such combinations in the relevant subheading is determined by the items of heading 9503 contained in the combination; the other components are not taken into account.
For example:






—


a plastic doll filled with sweets is to be classified under subheading 9503 00 21,










—


a figurine representing a clown, a circus tent, toy animals and a key ring is to be classified under subheading 9503 00 70 as a set of toys comprising a figurine, tent and toy animals.’







(1)  OJ L 256, 7.9.1987, p. 1.

(2)  OJ C 137, 6.5.2011, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6612 — Vitol/Atlasinvest/Petroplus Marketing)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2012-06-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, financial instrument, gas, investment company, merger control, oil industry, raw material








C_2012187EN.01000101.xml










27.6.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 187/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6612 — Vitol/Atlasinvest/Petroplus Marketing)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2012/C 187/01
On 18 June 2012, 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 32012M6612. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case T-523/10: Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2012 — Interkobo v OHIM — XXXLutz Marken (my baby) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark my baby — Earlier national and international word marks MYBABY and earlier national figurative mark mybaby — Relative ground for refusal — Failure to produce evidence in the language of the opposition proceedings — Legitimate expectation — Rules 19(3), 20(1) and 98(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95)
Date: 2012-06-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electronic commerce, registered trade mark, toy industry, trade-mark law








C_2012243EN.01001703.xml










11.8.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 243/17





Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2012 — Interkobo v OHIM — XXXLutz Marken (my baby)
(Case T-523/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark my baby - Earlier national and international word marks MYBABY and earlier national figurative mark mybaby - Relative ground for refusal - Failure to produce evidence in the language of the opposition proceedings - Legitimate expectation - Rules 19(3), 20(1) and 98(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95)
2012/C 243/33
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Interkobo sp. z o.o. (Łódź (Poland)) (represented by: R. Skubisz and K. Ziemski, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: XXXLutz Marken GmbH (Wels (Austria)) (represented by: H. Pannen, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 September 2010 (Case R 88/2009-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Interkobo sp. Z o.o. and XXXLutz Marken GmbH

Operative part of the order

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Interkobo sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 13, 15.1.2011.
Case T-646/11: Action brought on 27 June 2012 — CD v Council of the European Union
Date: 2012-06-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Belarus, civil servant, international sanctions, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence








C_2012258EN.01002103.xml










25.8.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 258/21





Action brought on 27 June 2012 — CD v Council of the European Union
(Case T-646/11)
2012/C 258/40
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: CD (Minsk, Belarus) (represented by: M. Michalauskas, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought







—


annul Council Decision 2011/666/CFSP of 10 October 2011 amending Decision 2010/639/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against certain officials of Belarus, in so far as it concerns the applicant;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1000/2011 of 10 October 2011 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus, in so far as it concerns the applicant;










—


annul the Council’s decision of 11 November 2011 by which it refused to remove the applicant’s name from Annex III A to Council Decision 2011/639/CFSP of 25 October 2010 concerning restrictive measures against certain officials of Belarus, as amended by Council Decision 2011/69/CFSP of 31 January 2011;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging an insufficient statement of reasons and infringement of the rights of defence, on the ground that the contested measures do not allow the applicant to challenge their validity before the Court and the Court to exercise its power of review of their lawfulness.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of personal liability, on the ground that the contested measures provide for liability and sanctions without establishing the applicant’s personal liability in the facts justifying the sanctions.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging lack of legal basis, on the ground that the contested measures do not establish the existence of a positive legal rule which was infringed by the applicant.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging error of assessment, on the ground that the contested measures lack any justification based on the facts.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging lack of compliance with the principle of proportionality, on the ground that the applicant’s personal involvement in the collective decision for which sanctions were imposed is not proportionate to that sanction.
Case T-372/10: Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2012 — Bolloré v Commission (Competition — Cartels — Carbonless paper market — Price-fixing — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU — Decision taken following the annulment of a first decision — Imputation of the infringement to the parent company, as directly responsible — Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege — Legal certainty — Individual nature of penalties — Fair hearing — Equal treatment — Reasonable time — Rights of the defence — Fines — Limitation period — Mitigating circumstances — Cooperation)
Date: 2012-06-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: fine, parent company, pulp and paper industry, restriction on competition








C_2012235EN.01001302.xml










4.8.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 235/13





Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2012 — Bolloré v Commission
(Case T-372/10) (1)

(Competition - Cartels - Carbonless paper market - Price-fixing - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Decision taken following the annulment of a first decision - Imputation of the infringement to the parent company, as directly responsible - Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege - Legal certainty - Individual nature of penalties - Fair hearing - Equal treatment - Reasonable time - Rights of the defence - Fines - Limitation period - Mitigating circumstances - Cooperation)
2012/C 235/32
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Bolloré (Ergué-Gabéric, France) (represented by: P. Gassenbach, C. Lemaire and O. de Juvigny, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: W. Mölls, F. Castillo de la Torre and R. Sauer, Agents, assisted by N. Coutrelis, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment or alteration of Commission Decision C(2010) 4160 final of 23 June 2010, relating to proceedings under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/36.212 — Carbonless paper).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Bolloré to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 301, 6.11.2010.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 635/2012 of 27 June 2012 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Vadehavsstude (PGI)]
Date: 2012-06-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Denmark, designation of origin, fresh meat, product designation








L_2012186EN.01001701.xml










14.7.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 186/17








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 635/2012
of 27 June 2012
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Vadehavsstude (PGI)]


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Denmark's application to register the name ‧Vadehavsstude‧ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 June 2012.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
Dacian CIOLOȘ
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

(2)  
            OJ C 289, 1.10.2011, p. 15.




ANNEX
Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.1.   Fresh meat (and offal)

DENMARK
Vadehavsstude (PGI)
Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union
Date: 2012-06-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, common customs tariff, electronic component, telecommunications equipment








C_2012187EN.01000601.xml










27.6.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 187/6





Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union
2012/C 187/07
Pursuant to Article 9(1)(a), second indent, of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (1), the Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union (2) are amended as follows:

On page 349:


8534 00   Printed circuits

The existing text is replaced by the following:
‘This heading includes:






1.


paper tags in the form of a printed circuit to prevent theft, for example, of library books;










2.


flexible electric conductors in the form of printed circuits.’





On page 361:


8544   Insulated (including enamelled or anodised) wire, cable (including coaxial cable) and other insulated electric conductors, whether or not fitted with connectors; optical-fibre cables, made up of individually sheathed fibres, whether or not assembled with electric conductors or fitted with connectors

The existing text is replaced by the following:
‘This heading does not include:






(a)


flexible electric conductors in the form of printed circuits (heading 8534 00);










(b)


separately presented connectors and adapters for cables or other electric conductors (heading 8535 or 8536);










(c)


connectors for optical-fibre cables (subheading 8536 70 00).’




Insert the following text:

‘8544 42 10   Of a kind used for telecommunications

See the HS Explanatory Notes to heading 8544.
For the purpose of this subheading, the expression “of a kind used for telecommunication” also includes electric conductors fitted with connectors used in telecommunication networks, for example, to connect an automatic data-processing (ADP) machine with a modem.
However, this subheading does not include:






(a)


electric conductors fitted with connectors to be used for connecting different apparatus (for example, a DVD player with a monitor or an ADP machine with a monitor, a printer, a keyboard, a projector, etc.);










(b)


electric conductors designed to be inserted into machines, for example, an ADP machine or a unit thereof, to connect different internal parts of the machine;










(c)


electric conductors which only serve to supply power, for example, power cables.





8544 49 20   Of a kind used for telecommunications, for a voltage not exceeding 80 V

The Explanatory Note to subheading 8544 42 10 applies, mutatis mutandis.’



(1)  OJ L 256, 7.9.1987, p. 1.

(2)  OJ C 137, 6.5.2011, p. 1.
Case T-439/07: Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2012 — Coats Holdings v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Markets for zip fasteners and ‘other fasteners’ — Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC — Coordinated price increases, fixing of minimum prices, customer-sharing, market-sharing and exchange of other commercial information — Evidence — Single and continuous infringement — Limitation period — Rights of the defence — Fines — Guidelines)
Date: 2012-06-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: fine, haberdashery, non-competition clause, price agreement








C_2012243EN.01001201.xml










11.8.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 243/12





Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2012 — Coats Holdings v Commission
(Case T-439/07) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Markets for zip fasteners and ‘other fasteners’ - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Coordinated price increases, fixing of minimum prices, customer-sharing, market-sharing and exchange of other commercial information - Evidence - Single and continuous infringement - Limitation period - Rights of the defence - Fines - Guidelines)
2012/C 243/20
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Coats Holdings Ltd (Uxbridge, Middlesex (United Kingdom)) (represented by: W. Sibree, C. Jeffs, K. O’Connell, and J. Boyce, Solicitors, and D. Anderson QC)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre and K. Mojzesowicz, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for, primarily, annulment of Commission Decision C(2007) 4257 final of 19 September 2007 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/39.168 — PO/Hard Haberdashery: Fasteners) in so far as it concerns the applicant and, in the alternative, annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Coats Holdings Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 37, 9.2.2008.