do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-01-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Finland, State aid, control of State aid, employment aid, processing industry, regional development, small and medium-sized enterprises








C_2014017EN.01001101.xml










21.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 17/11





Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU
Cases where the Commission raises no objections
(Text with EEA relevance)
2014/C 17/08







Date of adoption of the decision


12.12.2013




Reference number of State Aid


SA.37745 (13/N)




Member State


Finland




Region


—


—




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


Hyväksytyn valtiontukiohjelman N 88/08 ”Muutokset alueelliseen kuljetustukijärjestelmään” voimassaolon pidentäminen 30. kesäkuuta 2014 saakka
Förlängning av den godkända statliga stödordningen N 88/08 (ändringar av regional transportstödordning) t.o.m. den 30 juni 2014




Legal basis


Valtioneuvoston asetus alueellisesta kuljetustuesta
Statsrådets förordning om regionalt transportstöd




Type of measure


Scheme


—




Objective


Regional development, Employment, SMEs




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


—




Intensity


—




Duration (period)


1.1.2014-30.6.2014




Economic sectors


Manufacturing




Name and address of the granting authority







Kari Alanko




Työ- ja elinkeinoministeriö




PL 32




FI-00023 Valtioneuvosto




SUOMI/FINLAND









Kari Alanko




Arbets- och näringsministeriet




PB 32




FI-00023 Statsrådet




FINLAND








Other information


—




The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:
http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm
2014/37/EU: European Council Decision of 21 January 2014 appointing a member of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank
Date: 2014-01-21
Institutions: European Council
Subjects: European Central Bank, appointment of members, decision-making body (EU)








L_2014022EN.01004101.xml










25.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 22/41








            EUROPEAN COUNCIL DECISION
         
of 21 January 2014
         
appointing a member of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank
(2014/37/EU)


THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 283(2) thereof,


Having regard to the Protocol on the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular Article 11.2 thereof,


Having regard to the recommendation of the Council of the European Union (1),


Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2),


Having regard to the opinion of the Governing Council of the European Central Bank (3),

Whereas:







(1)


By letter dated 17 December 2013, the President of the European Central Bank, Mr Mario DRAGHI, announced the decision of Mr Jörg ASMUSSEN to resign from his position on the Executive Board prior to the end of his term of office on 31 December 2019. His resignation took effect on 7 January 2014. It is therefore necessary to appoint a new member of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank.












(2)


The European Council wishes to appoint Ms Sabine LAUTENSCHLÄGER who, in its view, fulfils all the requirements set out in Article 283(2) of the Treaty,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Ms Sabine LAUTENSCHLÄGER is hereby appointed a member of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank for a term of office of eight years as from 27 January 2014.


Article 2
This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.


Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 21 January 2014.


For the European Council


The President

H. VAN ROMPUY
            





(1)  
            OJ C 8, 11.1.2014, p. 1.

(2)  Opinion delivered on 16 January 2014 (not yet published in the Official Journal).

(3)  Opinion delivered on 8 January 2014 (not yet published in the Official Journal).
Case T-55/14: Action brought on 21 January 2014 — Genossenschaftskellerei Rosswag- Mühlhausen v OHIM (Lembergerland)
Date: 2014-01-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wine








C_2014078EN.01001601.xml










15.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/16





Action brought on 21 January 2014 — Genossenschaftskellerei Rosswag- Mühlhausen v OHIM (Lembergerland)
(Case T-55/14)
2014/C 78/32
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Genossenschaftskellerei Rosswag- Mühlhausen eG (Vaihingen an der Enz, Germany) (represented by H. Steffan, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the Board of Appeal of 14 November 2013 in Case R 566/2013-1 relating to Community trade mark application No 11 134 947;










—


as regards the decision of the Board of Appeal of 14 November 2013 in Case R 566/2013-1, oblige the defendant to register the mark applied for;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘Lembergerland’ for goods in Class 33 — Community trade mark application No 11 134 947

Decision of the Examiner: Registration refused

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(j) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.
Case T-48/14: Action brought on 21 January 2014 — Pfizer v Commission and EMA
Date: 2014-01-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: drug surveillance, marketing standard, medicinal product








C_2014078EN.01001501.xml










15.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/15





Action brought on 21 January 2014 — Pfizer v Commission and EMA
(Case T-48/14)
2014/C 78/30
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Pfizer Ltd (Sandwich, United Kingdom) (represented by: K. Bacon and M. Schaefer, Barristers, I. Dodds-Smith, C. Stothers and J. Mulryne, Solicitors)

Defendants: European Commission and European Medicines Agency

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the Commission and of EMA contained in the letters of 11 November 2013 and of 15 November 2013 not to issue the compliance statement; and










—


Order the Commission and EMA to bear the costs of the application.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on one plea in law, alleging that in contending that the compliance statement, for the applicant’s marketing authorisation of medicinal product Vfend, cannot be issued until the studies set out in the paediatric investigation plan (‘PIP’) have been assessed for the purposes of the new prophylaxis indication, the EMA has misinterpreted Article 28(3) of the Paediatric Regulation (1).


(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on medicinal products for paediatric use and amending Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92, Directive 2001/20/EC, Directive 2001/83/EC and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 (OJ L 378, p.1).
Case T-596/11: Order of the General Court of 21 January 2014 — Bricmate v Council (Action for annulment — Dumping — Imports of ceramic tiles originating in China — Definitive anti-dumping duty — Absence of individual concern — Regulatory act entailing implementing measures — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2014-01-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, ceramics, floor coverings, import (EU), originating product








C_2014078EN.01001101.xml










15.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/11





Order of the General Court of 21 January 2014 — Bricmate v Council
(Case T-596/11) (1)

(Action for annulment - Dumping - Imports of ceramic tiles originating in China - Definitive anti-dumping duty - Absence of individual concern - Regulatory act entailing implementing measures - Inadmissibility)
2014/C 78/21
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Bricmate AB (Stockholm, Sweden) (represented by: C. Dackö, A. Willems and S. De Knop, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix and B. Driessen, acting as Agents, assisted initially by G. Berrisch and A. Polcyn, and subsequently by A. Polcyn, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. França and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents); Cerame-Unie AISBL (Brussels, Belgium); Asociación Española de Fabricantes de Azulejos y Pavimentos Cerámicos (ASCER) (Castellón de la Plana, Spain); Confindustria Ceramica (Sassuolo, Italy); Casalgrande Padana SpA (Casalgrande, Italy); Etruria Design Srl (Modena, Italy) (represented by: V. Akritidis and Y. Melin, lawyers)

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 917/2011 of 12 September 2011 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of ceramic tiles originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2011 L 238, p. 1).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as being inadmissible.










2.


Bricmate AB shall bear its own costs and shall pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.










3.


The European Commission shall bear its own costs.










4.


Cerame-Unie AISBL, Asociación Española de Fabricantes de Azulejos y Pavimentos Cerámicos (ASCER), Confindustria Ceramica, Casalgrande Padana SpA and Etruria Design Srl shall bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 25, 28.1.2012.
Case T-168/13: Order of the General Court of 21 January 2014 — EPAW v Commission (Action for annulment — Legal person governed by private law — Absence of proof of existence in law — Article 44(5)(a) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court — Manifest inadmissibility)
Date: 2014-01-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: amendment of a law, public consultation, renewable energy








C_2014078EN.01001201.xml










15.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/12





Order of the General Court of 21 January 2014 — EPAW v Commission
(Case T-168/13) (1)

(Action for annulment - Legal person governed by private law - Absence of proof of existence in law - Article 44(5)(a) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court - Manifest inadmissibility)
2014/C 78/24
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Platform Against Windfarms (EPAW) (represented by: C. Kiss, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by K. Herrmann and P. Oliver, and subsequently by L. Pignatoro Nolin, K. Herrmann and J. Tomkin, Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of the Communication of 6 June 2012 from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, entitled ‘Renewable Energy: a major player in the European energy market’, and of the Commission’s decision of 21 January 2013 rejecting as inadmissible the request made by the applicant for review by the Commission of that communication.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


In addition to bearing its own costs, the European Platform Against Windfarms (EPAW) shall pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.
Case T-232/12: Judgment of the General Court of 21 January 2014 — Wilmar Trading v OHIM — Agroekola (ULTRA CHOCO) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark ULTRA CHOCO — Earlier national word mark ultra choco — Unregistered earlier mark ULTRA CHOCO used in the course of trade in the European Union and in Bulgaria — Article 60 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Failure to comply with the obligation to pay appeal fee within the time-limit — Decision of the Board of Appeal declaring the appeal deemed not to have been filed)
Date: 2014-01-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, agri-foodstuffs, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014061EN.01000901.xml










1.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 61/9





Judgment of the General Court of 21 January 2014 — Wilmar Trading v OHIM — Agroekola (ULTRA CHOCO)
(Case T-232/12) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark ULTRA CHOCO - Earlier national word mark ultra choco - Unregistered earlier mark ULTRA CHOCO used in the course of trade in the European Union and in Bulgaria - Article 60 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Failure to comply with the obligation to pay appeal fee within the time-limit - Decision of the Board of Appeal declaring the appeal deemed not to have been filed)
2014/C 61/14
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Wilmar Trading Pte Ltd (Singapore, Singapore) (represented by: E. Miller, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: C. Negro and D. Botis, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Agroekola EOOD (Sofia, Bulgaria)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 March 2012 (Case R 87/2012-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Wilmar Trading Pte Ltd and Agroekola EOOD.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders Wilmar Trading Pte Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 243, 11.8.2012.
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 as regards the migration to Union-wide credit transfers and direct debits COM(2013) 937 final 2013/0449 (COD)
Date: 2014-01-21
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: capital transfer, electronic money, financial legislation, financial services, intra-EU payment








C_2014177EN.01004101.xml










11.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 177/41





Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 as regards the migration to Union-wide credit transfers and direct debits
COM(2013) 937 final 2013/0449 (COD)
(2014/C 177/07)
On 14 January 2014, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 as regards the migration to Union-wide credit transfers and direct debits

COM(2013) 937 final — 2013/0449 (COD).
Since the Committee endorses the content of the proposal and has already set out its views on the subject in its earlier opinion CESE 794/2011 — 2010/0373 (COD), adopted on 5 May 2011 (1), it decided, at its 495th plenary session of 21 and 22 January 2014 (meeting of 21 January), by 159 votes to 1 with 4 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text and to refer to the position it had taken in the above-mentioned document.

Brussels, 21 January 2014.


The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Henri MALOSSE




(1)  EESC Opinion on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing technical requirements for credit transfers and direct debits in euros and amending Regulation (EC) No 924/2009, OJ C 218, 23 July 2011, p. 74.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.7079 — Bulgaria Airways Group/Swissport International/Swissport Bulgaria)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-01-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: airport, economic concentration, merger control








C_2014017EN.01000701.xml










21.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 17/7





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.7079 — Bulgaria Airways Group/Swissport International/Swissport Bulgaria)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2014/C 17/03
On 19 December 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 32013M7079. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 41/2014 of 17 January 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables ( OJ L 14, 18.1.2014 )
Date: 2014-01-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: citrus fruit, common organisation of markets, fruit vegetable, import (EU), import price, perennial vegetable, pip fruit








L_2014016EN.01006901.xml










21.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 16/69







Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 41/2014 of 17 January 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
(
Official Journal of the European Union L 14 of 18 January 2014
)

On page 12, table of the Annex:
for:








‘0805 20 30 , 0805 20 50 , 0805 20 70 , 0805 20 90 


CL 


63,3 ’





read:








‘0805 20 30 , 0805 20 50 , 0805 20 70 , 0805 20 90 


CN 


63,3 ’
Case T-415/12: Order of the General Court of 21 January 2014 — Xeda International and Others v Commission
Date: 2014-01-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: food safety, health risk, pip fruit, processed foodstuff, rights of the defence, storage of food








C_2014078EN.01001804.xml










15.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/18





Order of the General Court of 21 January 2014 — Xeda International and Others v Commission
(Case T-415/12) (1)

2014/C 78/38
Language of the case: English
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 355, 17.11.2012.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.7159 — NEC/Mitsubishi/INFOSEC) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-01-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, information technology, merger control, multinational enterprise, provision of services








C_2014017EN.01001501.xml










21.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 17/15





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.7159 — NEC/Mitsubishi/INFOSEC)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2014/C 17/11






1.


On 15 January 2014, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which NEC Corporation (‘NEC’, Japan) and Mitsubishi Corporation (‘Mitsubishi’, Japan) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of INFOSEC Corporation (Japan) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for NEC: multinational provider of information technology services and products,










—


for Mitsubishi: multinational company with operations in Global Environmental & Infrastructure; Industrial Finance, Logistics & Development; Energy; Metals; Machinery; Chemicals; and Living Essentials,










—


for INFOSEC: provision of IT services specialized in information security, risk management solutions and services.














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.7159 — NEC/Mitsubishi/INFOSEC, 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 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5 (‘Notice on a simplified procedure’).