do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6651 — Goldman Sachs/William C. Young/Plastipak Holdings) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: bank, building industry, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, packaging








C_2012204EN.01004301.xml










12.7.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 204/43





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6651 — Goldman Sachs/William C. Young/Plastipak Holdings)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2012/C 204/07






1.


On 5 July 2012, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which funds advised and managed by The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (‘Goldman Sachs’, USA), and Mr William C. Young acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the undertaking Plastipak Holdings, Inc. (‘Plastipak’, USA) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Goldman Sachs: global investment banking, securities and investment management firm,










—


for Mr William C. Young: a natural person controlling a number of undertakings,










—


for Plastipak: manufacturer of plastic resins, plastic packaging containers and preforms, also engaged in recycling operations for the production of post-consumer recycled plastic raw materials.














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.6651 — Goldman Sachs/William C. Young/Plastipak Holdings, 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-562/10: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 12 July 2012 — European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany (Action for failure to fulfil obligations — Article 56 TFEU — German legislation regarding care insurance — Benefits in kind for assistance at home are unavailable where the person reliant on care is temporarily staying in another Member State — Lower level of exportable cash benefits — Failure to reimburse hire costs of care equipment in other Member States)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, dependence of elderly persons, infringement of EU law, redemption, social assistance








C_2012287EN.01000502.xml










22.9.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 287/5





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 12 July 2012 — European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany
(Case C-562/10) (1)

(Action for failure to fulfil obligations - Article 56 TFEU - German legislation regarding care insurance - Benefits in kind for assistance at home are unavailable where the person reliant on care is temporarily staying in another Member State - Lower level of exportable cash benefits - Failure to reimburse hire costs of care equipment in other Member States)
2012/C 287/08
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: F.W. Bulst and I. Rogalski, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and J. Möller, acting as Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 56 TFEU — National legislation regarding care insurance limiting entitlement to a care allowance to six weeks where an insured person stays temporarily in another Member State, excluding reimbursement of hire costs of care equipment and providing that care-related benefits in kind supplied in the Member State of stay are not reimbursed at the same rate as those supplied in Germany

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Commission to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 63, 26.2.2011.
Case T-170/11: Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Rivella International v OHIM — Baskaya di Baskaya Alim (BASKAYA) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community figurative mark BASKAYA — Earlier international figurative mark Passaia — Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark — Relevant territory — Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, beverage industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012258EN.01001901.xml










25.8.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 258/19





Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Rivella International v OHIM — Baskaya di Baskaya Alim (BASKAYA)
(Case T-170/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark BASKAYA - Earlier international figurative mark Passaia - Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark - Relevant territory - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2012/C 258/33
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Rivella International AG (Rothrist, Switzerland) (represented initially by: C. Spintig, U. Sander and H. Förster, and subsequently by C. Spintig, S. Pietzcker and R. Jacobs, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: R. Manea and G. Schneider, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Baskaya di Baskaya Alim e C. Sas (Grosseto, Italy) (represented by: H. Vogler, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 January 2011 (Case R 534/2010-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Rivella International AG and Baskaya di Baskaya Alim e C. Sas

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Rivella International AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 145, 14.5.2011.
Case T-663/11: Order of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Spa Monopole v OHIM — Royal Mediterranea (THAI SPA)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, catering industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012273EN.01002304.xml










8.9.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 273/23





Order of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Spa Monopole v OHIM — Royal Mediterranea (THAI SPA)
(Case T-663/11) (1)

2012/C 273/42
Language of the case: French
The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 65, 3.3.2012.
Case T-308/10: Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Commission v Nanopoulos (Appeal — Civil service — Officials — Duty to provide assistance — Article 24 of the Staff Regulations — Non-contractual liability — Articles 90 and 91 of the Staff Regulations — Damages claim to be submitted within a reasonable time — Time-limit for reply — Institution of disciplinary proceedings — Criterion requiring a ‘sufficiently serious breach’ — Personal data leaked to the press — Failure to assign tasks corresponding to an official’s grade — Amount of damages)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, contractual liability, disciplinary proceedings, dissemination of information, indemnification, means of communication, personal data








C_2012258EN.01001702.xml










25.8.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 258/17





Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Commission v Nanopoulos
(Case T-308/10) (1)

(Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Duty to provide assistance - Article 24 of the Staff Regulations - Non-contractual liability - Articles 90 and 91 of the Staff Regulations - Damages claim to be submitted within a reasonable time - Time-limit for reply - Institution of disciplinary proceedings - Criterion requiring a ‘sufficiently serious breach’ - Personal data leaked to the press - Failure to assign tasks corresponding to an official’s grade - Amount of damages)
2012/C 258/29
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Appellant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall, Agent, E. Bourtzalas and E. Antypas, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: Fotios Nanopoulos (Itzig, Luxembourg) (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (First Chamber) of 11 May 2010 in Case F-30/08 Nanopoulos v Commission, not yet published in the ECR, seeking, first, to have that judgment set aside and, second, if the judgment is to be upheld, to have the exact amount of damages set.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Mr Nanopoulos in the appeal proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 274, 9.10.2010.
Case C-171/11: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 12 July 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Fra.bo SpA v Deutsche Vereinigung des Gas- und Wasserfaches eV (DVGW) — Technisch-Wissenschaftlicher Verein (Free movement of goods — Measures having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction — National certification procedure — Presumption of compliance with national law — Applicability of Article 28 EC to a private-law certification body)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Community certification, free movement of goods, interpretation of the law, marketing








C_2012287EN.01001202.xml










22.9.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 287/12





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 12 July 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Fra.bo SpA v Deutsche Vereinigung des Gas- und Wasserfaches eV (DVGW) — Technisch-Wissenschaftlicher Verein
(Case C-171/11) (1)

(Free movement of goods - Measures having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction - National certification procedure - Presumption of compliance with national law - Applicability of Article 28 EC to a private-law certification body)
2012/C 287/20
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Fra.bo SpA

Defendant: Deutsche Vereinigung des Gas- und Wasserfaches eV (DVGW) — Technisch-Wissenschaftlicher Verein

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf — Interpretation of Articles 34, 101 and 106(2) TFEU — Application of those provisions to the activity of a private-law association (Technisch-Wissenschaftlicher Verein), approved by a Member State as a certification body for certain products — Horizontal direct effect of Article 34 TFEU

Operative part of the judgment

Article 28 EC must be interpreted as meaning that it applies to standardisation and certification activities of a private-law body, where the national legislation considers the products certified by that body to be compliant with national law and that has the effect of restricting the marketing of products which are not certified by that body.


(1)  OJ C 226, 30.7.2011.