do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6860 — Volvo/Dongfeng Motor Group Company/JV)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, motor vehicle industry








C_2013137EN.01000201.xml










16.5.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 137/2





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6860 — Volvo/Dongfeng Motor Group Company/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2013/C 137/02
On 8 May 2013, 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 32013M6860. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case T-392/11: Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Iran Transfo v Council (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation — Freezing of funds — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest error of assessment)
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Iran, common foreign and security policy, international sanctions, nuclear non-proliferation








C_2013189EN.01002002.xml










29.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/20





Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Iran Transfo v Council
(Case T-392/11) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation - Freezing of funds - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment)
2013/C 189/40
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Iran Transfo (Tehran, Iran) (represented by: K. Kleinschmidt, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bishop and J.-P. Hix, agents)
Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Erlbacher and T. Scharf, agents)

Re:

Annulment of Council Decision 2011/299/CFSP of 23 May 2011 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2011 L 136, p. 65), in so far as that decision concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Council Decision 2011/299/CFSP of 23 May 2011 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran, in so far as it concerns Iran Transfo;










2.


Orders the effects of Decision 2011/299, in so far as it concerns Iran Transfo, to be maintained for a period which may not exceed two months and ten days from the date of delivery of this judgment;










3.


Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Iran Transfo;










4.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 290, 1.10.2011.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2013137EN.01000301.xml










16.5.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 137/3





Euro exchange rates (1)

15 May 2013
2013/C 137/03

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2864




JPY


Japanese yen


132,04




DKK


Danish krone


7,4539




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84640




SEK


Swedish krona


8,5960




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2499




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,5415




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


26,003




HUF


Hungarian forint


292,27




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,6994




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1827




RON


Romanian leu


4,3355




TRY


Turkish lira


2,3464




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3015




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3133




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,9849




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5662




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6045




KRW


South Korean won


1 436,74




ZAR


South African rand


11,9820




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,9050




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5615




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 549,23




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


3,8612




PHP


Philippine peso


53,086




RUB


Russian rouble


40,4920




THB


Thai baht


38,270




BRL


Brazilian real


2,5997




MXN


Mexican peso


15,6385




INR


Indian rupee


70,4527






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-281/11 P: Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Canga Fano v Council (Appeal — Civil service — Officials — Promotion — 2009 promotion procedure — Decision not to promote the applicant to grade AD 13 — Comparison of merits — Review by the court of the manifest error of assessment)
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, regulations for civil servants, staff assessment








C_2013189EN.01001901.xml










29.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/19





Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Canga Fano v Council
(Case T-281/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Promotion - 2009 promotion procedure - Decision not to promote the applicant to grade AD 13 - Comparison of merits - Review by the court of the manifest error of assessment)
2013/C 189/36
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Diego Canga Fano (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Rodrigues and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and J. Herrmann, Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 24 March 2011 in Case F-104/09 Canga Fano v Council, not yet published in the ECR, and seeking that that judgment be set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Mr Diego Canga Fano to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union in these proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 238, 13.8.2011.
Case T-437/10: Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Gap granen & producten v Commission (Non-contractual liability — Import of high-quality durum wheat — Import duties — Regulation (EC) No 919/2009 — Regulation (EC) No 1249/96 — Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals — Material loss — Causal link)
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: CCT duties, durum wheat, import (EU), indemnification








C_2013189EN.01001702.xml










29.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/17





Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Gap granen & producten v Commission
(Case T-437/10) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Import of high-quality durum wheat - Import duties - Regulation (EC) No 919/2009 - Regulation (EC) No 1249/96 - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals - Material loss - Causal link)
2013/C 189/32
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicant: Gap granen & producten (Zoersel, Belgium) (represented by: C. Ronse, A. Hansebout, K. Claeyé and J, Muyldermans, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Triantafyllou and B. Burggraaf, Agents)

Re:

Action for compensation under Article 340 TFEU for compensation in respect of the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the fixing of import duties on high-quality durum wheat by Commission Regulation (EC) No 919/2009 of 1 October 2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 915/2009 fixing the import duties in the cereals sector applicable from 1 October 2009 (OJ 2009 L 259, p. 5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


The European Commission is ordered to compensate Gap SA granen & producten NV for the loss suffered by it as a result of the application of Commission Regulation (EC) No 919/2009 of 1 October 2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 915/2009 fixing the import duties in the cereals sector applicable from 1 October 2009, in so far as that regulation did not take account of the fob quotation or use a calculation method which was representative of actual freight costs for the fixing of import duties for high-quality durum wheat.










2.


Gap granen & producten and the Commission are ordered to provide the General Court with the amounts to be paid, established by common agreement, within six months of the date of judgment;










3.


If the parties fail to reach an agreement, Gap granen & producten and the Commission are to provide the General Court with their forms of order sought, including figures, within the same period;










4.


Costs are reserved.






(1)  OJ C 317, 20.11.2010.
Case T-559/11: Order of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — BybyOKD v Commission (Action for annulment — State aid — Sale by the Czech Republic of its minority shareholding in the company OKD as part of a privatisation — Decision finding no State aid — Professional association — No individual concern — Concept of party concerned — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Czechia, State aid, control of State aid, housing, privatisation








C_2013189EN.01002203.xml










29.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/22





Order of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — BybyOKD v Commission
(Case T-559/11) (1)

(Action for annulment - State aid - Sale by the Czech Republic of its minority shareholding in the company OKD as part of a privatisation - Decision finding no State aid - Professional association - No individual concern - Concept of party concerned - Inadmissibility)
2013/C 189/46
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: Sdružení nájemníků BybyOKD.cz (Ostrava, Czech Republic) (represented by: R. Pelikán, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2011) 4927 final of 13 July 2011 concerning the sale to Karbon Invest a.s. of the minority shareholding of the Czech State in OKD a.s. and declaring that that sale did not constitute State aid (State aid No SA.25076 (2011/NN) (OJ 2011 C 225, p. 1).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


Sdružení nájemníků BybyOKD.cz shall pay the costs.










3.


There is no need to adjudicate on the application for leave to intervene of RPG Industries Limited.






(1)  OJ C 13, 14.1.2012.
Case F-104/10: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 16 May 2013 — de Pretis Cagnodo and Trampuz de Pretis Cagnodo v Commission (Civil service — Social security — Serious illness — Concept — Hospitalisation — Reimbursement — Direct payment by the claims settlement office — No upper limit in the general implementing provisions for costs of stay — Obligation to inform the insured beforehand in the event of excessive billing)
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, hospital expenses, hospitalisation








C_2013189EN.01003001.xml










29.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/30





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 16 May 2013 — de Pretis Cagnodo and Trampuz de Pretis Cagnodo v Commission
(Case F-104/10) (1)

(Civil service - Social security - Serious illness - Concept - Hospitalisation - Reimbursement - Direct payment by the claims settlement office - No upper limit in the general implementing provisions for costs of stay - Obligation to inform the insured beforehand in the event of excessive billing)
2013/C 189/62
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicants: Mario Alberto de Pretis Cagnodo and Serena Trampuz (Trieste, Italy) (represented by: C. Falagiani, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and D. Martin, acting as Agents, A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision refusing to reimburse 100 % of certain medical expenses in connection with the hospitalisation of the applicant’s wife.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the claims settlement office, Ispra (Italy), as evidenced by payment note No 10 of 1 October 2009, charging Mr de Pretis Cagnodo the amount of EUR 28 800 for costs of stay for Mrs Trampuz de Pretis Cagnodo, considered excessive;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear all its own costs and to pay all costs incurred by Mr de Pretis Cagnodo and Mrs Trampuz de Pretis Cagnodo.






(1)  OJ C 13, 15.1.2011, p. 42.
Case T-80/11: Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Nath Kalsi v OHIM — American Clothing Associates (RIDGE WOOD) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark RIDGE WOOD — Earlier Community figurative mark River Woods North-Eastern Suppliers — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, textile industry, trade-mark law








C_2013189EN.01001803.xml










29.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/18





Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Nath Kalsi v OHIM — American Clothing Associates (RIDGE WOOD)
(Case T-80/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark RIDGE WOOD - Earlier Community figurative mark River Woods North-Eastern Suppliers - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2013/C 189/35
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicants: Dwarka Nath Kalsi and Ajit Nath Kalsi (Agra, India) (represented by: J. Schmidt, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: American Clothing Associates (Evergem, Belgium) (represented by: C. De Keersmaeker, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 November 2010 in Case R 599/2010-1, relating to opposition proceedings between, on the one hand, American Clothing Associates and, on the other hand, Dwarka Nath Kalsi and Ajit Nath Kalsi

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 19 November 2010 (Case R 1073/2010-2) in so far as it concerns goods in Class 24 covered by the mark applied for and the services ‘processing and finishing of skins, leather, furs and textiles’ in Class 40 and covered by the earlier mark No 2785459;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders Dwarka Nath Kalsi and Ajit Nath Kalsi, and OHIM to each pay their own costs;










4.


Orders American Clothing Associates to pay its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 103, 2.4.2011.
Case C-242/11 P: Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 16 May 2013 — Caixa Geral de Depósitos, SA v European Commission, Portuguese Republic (Appeal — Articles 149 and 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) — Global grant for local development in Portugal — Reduction of financial assistance — No need to adjudicate — Manifest inadmissibility)
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Regional Development Fund, Portugal, financial aid, investment aid








C_2013225EN.01003902.xml










3.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 225/39





Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 16 May 2013 — Caixa Geral de Depósitos, SA v European Commission, Portuguese Republic
(Case C-242/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Articles 149 and 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) - Global grant for local development in Portugal - Reduction of financial assistance - No need to adjudicate - Manifest inadmissibility)
2013/C 225/67
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Appellant: Caixa Geral de Depósitos, SA (represented by: N. Ruiz, advogado)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Steiblytė, L. Flynn and P. Guerra e Andrade, Agents), Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, Agent)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 3 March 2011 in Case T-401/07 Caixa Geral de Depósitos v Commission by which that court dismissed as inadmissible an action for partial annulment of Decision C(2007) 3772 reducing the financial assistance granted by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) to the global grant for local development in Portugal by Commission Decision C(95) 1769 of 28 July 1995, and a claim for an order against the Commission to pay the final balance of the financial assistance under Article 238 EC

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Caixa Geral de Depósitos SA and the European Commission shall each bear their own costs relating to the present appeal proceedings.










3.


The Portuguese Republic shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 219, 23.7.2011
Notice regarding the application of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures in force in the Union following enlargement to include the Republic of Croatia and the possibility of review
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Croatia, accession to the European Union, anti-dumping measure, anti-subsidy proceeding, common commercial policy, import (EU)








C_2013137EN.01000901.xml










16.5.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 137/9





Notice regarding the application of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures in force in the Union following enlargement to include the Republic of Croatia and the possibility of review
2013/C 137/06
When enlargement takes place on 1 July 2013, all anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures in force will automatically apply to imports into the enlarged 28 Member State Union. Accordingly, these measures will also apply to imports into the Republic of Croatia. On enlargement, there will be a number of pending investigations initiated before 1 July 2013. Should such investigations lead to measures, these will equally apply to imports into the 28 Member State Union.
The Commission gives notice that it is prepared to review anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 (1) and Article 19 of Regulation (EC) No 597/2009 (2) where any interested party so requests and submits evidence that the measures would have been significantly different if they were based on information including the Republic of Croatia. In this regard, it should be noted that enlargement per se, in the absence of such evidence, is not a sufficient basis for a review to be initiated. Interested parties are invited to visit the Directorate-General for Trade’s trade defence enlargement website:
(under http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=880) for further information and for details of a help desk facility.


(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.

(2)  OJ L 188, 18.7.2009, p. 93.
Case C-228/11: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 May 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Melzer v MF Global UK Ltd (Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Special jurisdiction in matters of tort, delict and quasi-delict — Cross-border participation by several persons in the same unlawful act — Possibility of establishing territorial jurisdiction according to the place where the act was committed by one of the perpetrators of the damage other than the defendant ( ‘wechselseitige Handlungsortzurechnung’ ))
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: interpretation of the law, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, offence, territorial jurisdiction








C_2013225EN.01000501.xml










3.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 225/5





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 May 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Melzer v MF Global UK Ltd
(Case C-228/11) (1)

(Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Special jurisdiction in matters of tort, delict and quasi-delict - Cross-border participation by several persons in the same unlawful act - Possibility of establishing territorial jurisdiction according to the place where the act was committed by one of the perpetrators of the damage other than the defendant (‘wechselseitige Handlungsortzurechnung’))
2013/C 225/07
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Melzer

Defendant: MF Global UK Ltd

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Landgericht Düsseldorf — Interpretation of Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001, L 12, p. 1) — Special jurisdiction relating to matters in tort or delict or quaisi-delict — Determination of territorial jurisdiction to hear an action for damages in the case of cross-border participation of several people in a single unlawful act — Possibility of establishing that jurisdiction according to the place where the harmful act was committed by a perpetrator other than the defendant

Operative part of the judgment

Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters 2001 must be interpreted as meaning that it does not allow the courts of the place where a harmful event occurred which is imputed to one of the presumed perpetrators of damage, who is not a party to the dispute, to take jurisdiction over another presumed perpetrator of that damage who has not acted within the jurisdiction of the court seised.


(1)  OJ C 211, 16.7.2011.