do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6910 — Gazprom/Wintershall/Target Companies)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-04-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, gas pipeline, merger control, natural gas








C_2014121EN.01000101.xml










24.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 121/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6910 — Gazprom/Wintershall/Target Companies)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2014/C 121/01)
On 3 December 2013, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in the English language 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 32013M6910. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-206/14: Action brought on 24 April 2014  — European Commission v Republic of Estonia
Date: 2014-04-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: access to EU information, dissemination of information, environmental policy, infringement of EU law, provision of documents








C_2014212EN.01001901.xml










7.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 212/19





Action brought on 24 April 2014 — European Commission v Republic of Estonia
(Case C-206/14)
2014/C 212/21
Language of the case: Estonian

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: L. Pignataro-Nolin and E. Randvere, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Estonia

Form of order sought







—


declare that, by failing to transpose Article 4(1)(e), the second subparagraph of Article 4(1) and the second sentence of the second subparagraph of Article 4(2) of Directive 2003/4/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information and repealing Council Directive 90/313/EEC, (2) the Republic of Estonia has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;










—


order the Republic of Estonia to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The application seeks a declaration that the Republic of Estonia has failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information and repealing Council Directive 90/313/EEC, by failing altogether and/or properly to adopt the legal provisions necessary for transposing the directive.


(1)  OJ 2003 L 41, p. 26.

(2)  OJ 1990 L 158, p. 56.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2014-04-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2014121EN.01000201.xml










24.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 121/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

23 April 2014
(2014/C 121/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3834




JPY


Japanese yen


141,46




DKK


Danish krone


7,4665




GBP


Pound sterling


0,82390




SEK


Swedish krona


9,0829




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2198




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,2715




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,459




HUF


Hungarian forint


307,78




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1926




RON


Romanian leu


4,4678




TRY


Turkish lira


2,9739




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4905




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5249




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,7252




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6125




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7391




KRW


South Korean won


1 441,29




ZAR


South African rand


14,6724




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,6270




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,6199




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 090,61




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5197




PHP


Philippine peso


61,870




RUB


Russian rouble


49,4120




THB


Thai baht


44,738




BRL


Brazilian real


3,1039




MXN


Mexican peso


18,0810




INR


Indian rupee


84,5742






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-257/14: Action brought on 24 April 2014  — Novomatic v OHIM — Berentzen Mally Marketing plus Services (BLACK JACK TM)
Date: 2014-04-24
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, gaming, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014194EN.01003201.xml










24.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/32





Action brought on 24 April 2014 — Novomatic v OHIM — Berentzen Mally Marketing plus Services (BLACK JACK TM)
(Case T-257/14)
2014/C 194/41
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Novomatic AG (Gumpoldskirchen, Austria) (represented by: W. Mosing, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Berentzen Mally Marketing plus Services GmbH (Meerbusch, Germany)

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) of 18 February 2014 in Case R 329/2012-4 with the consequence that OHIM will have to reject the opposition in its entirety due to lack of similarity of the goods and/or signs and lack of a likelihood of confusion and allow Community trade mark application No 9 4 56  278 to proceed to registration in accordance with the application;










—


Order OHIM and — in the case of written intervention — the opposing party to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the appeal proceedings before the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) and in these proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant

Community trade mark concerned: the figurative mark including the word elements ‘BLACK JACK TM’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 28 and 41 — Community trade mark application No 9 4 56  278

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Berentzen Mally Marketing plus Services GmbH

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the word and figurative mark ‘BLACK TRACK’ for goods in Classes 18, 25 and 28

Decision of the Opposition Division: the opposition was rejected

Decision of the Board of Appeal: the Opposition Division’s decision was annulled and the trade mark application was rejected in part

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) and 75 of Regulation No 207/2009
Case T-262/14: Action brought on 24 April 2014 — Bionecs/OHMI — Fidia Farmaceutici (BIONECS)
Date: 2014-04-24
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, medical device, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014235EN.01002502.xml










21.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 235/25





Action brought on 24 April 2014 — Bionecs/OHMI — Fidia Farmaceutici (BIONECS)
(Case T-262/14)
2014/C 235/35
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Bionecs GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: M. Knitter, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Fidia Farmaceutici SpA (Abano Terme, Italy)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 6 February 2014 given in Case R 1179/2013-1;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs of proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘BIONECS’ for goods and services in classes 5, 29 and 35 — Community trade mark application No 1 0 6 50  638

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited in opposition: The word mark ‘BIONECT’ for goods in class 5 registered as international trade mark under the number 7 15  915

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition in part

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) CTMR
Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Commission Regulation (EU) No 932/2012 implementing Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to ecodesign requirements for household tumble driers (Publication of transitional uniform symbol for the implementation of Commission Regulation (EU) No 932/2012)
Date: 2014-04-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: consumer information, eco-label, energy consumption, energy saving, environmental impact, household electrical appliance, technical standard




C_2014121EN.01000301.xml










24.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 121/3





Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Commission Regulation (EU) No 932/2012 implementing Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to ecodesign requirements for household tumble driers

(Publication of transitional uniform symbol for the implementation of Commission Regulation (EU) No 932/2012)

(2014/C 121/03)
According to Annex I.1(1) to Commission Regulation (EU) No 932/2012 (1) implementing Directive 2009/125/EC (2), the cycle which dries cotton laundry (with an initial moisture content of the load of 60 %) up to a remaining moisture content of the load of 0 % (hereinafter the ‘standard cotton programme’) shall be used for the calculation of the energy consumption and other parameters for household tumble driers.
That cycle shall be clearly identifiable on the programme selection device(s) of the household tumble drier or the household tumble drier display, if any, or both, and indicated as ‘standard cotton programme’ or by a uniform symbol or an appropriate combination thereof.
To facilitate the clear identification of the ‘standard cotton programme’ cycle on the programme selection device of the household tumble drier or the household tumble drier display, only the following uniform symbol should be used as an alternative to ‘standard cotton programme’:



Where more than one selection device or option in the display of the household tumble drier is needed, the same symbol applies.
The booklet of instructions provided by the manufacturer shall indicate that the ‘standard cotton programme’ can be identified by this symbol, by 1 August 2015 at the latest.
This transitional symbol will ultimately be replaced by a symbol provided in harmonised standard(s), for the purposes of compliance and verification of compliance with the requirements of Commission Regulation (EU) No 932/2012, the reference numbers of which have to be published in the Official Journal of the European Union in accordance with Articles 9 and 10 of Directive 2009/125/EC.


(1)  OJ L 278, 12.10.2012, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 285, 31.10.2009, p. 10.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 420/2014 of 24 April 2014 withdrawing the suspension of submission of applications for import licences for sugar products under certain tariff quotas
Date: 2014-04-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: common organisation of markets, import (EU), import licence, sugar product, tariff quota








L_2014124EN.01002401.xml










25.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 124/24








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 420/2014
of 24 April 2014
         
withdrawing the suspension of submission of applications for import licences for sugar products under certain tariff quotas


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1),


Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 891/2009 of 25 September 2009 opening and providing for the administration of certain Community tariff quotas in the sugar sector (2), and in particular Article 5(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


The submission of applications for import licences concerning order number 09.4317 was suspended as from 27 September 2013 by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 931/2013 (3), in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 891/2009.












(2)


Following notifications on unused and/or partly used licences, quantities became available again for this order number. The suspension of applications should therefore be withdrawn,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The suspension of submission of applications for import licences for order number 09.4317 as from 27 September 2013 laid down by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 931/2013 is withdrawn.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day 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, 24 April 2014.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,
Jerzy PLEWA
            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development






(1)  
            OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

(2)  
            OJ L 254, 26.9.2009, p. 82.

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 931/2013 of 26 September 2013 fixing the allocation coefficient for the issuing of import licences applied for from 8 to 14 September 2013 for sugar products under certain tariff quotas and suspending submission of applications for such licences (OJ L 255, 27.9.2013, p. 11).
Case C-205/14: Action brought on 24 April 2014  — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
Date: 2014-04-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air traffic, airport, infringement of EU law, transport capacity, transport planning








C_2014212EN.01001801.xml










7.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 212/18





Action brought on 24 April 2014 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
(Case C-205/14)
2014/C 212/20
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: P. Guerra Andrade and F. Wilman, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Form of order sought







—


Declare that, by failing to ensure the operational and financial independence of the body responsible for coordinating the allocation of slots, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(2)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 95/93; (1)











—


order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In Portugal, the body responsible for coordinating the allocation of slots is the ANA, a private commercial company which manages airports, and therefore does not satisfy the requirements relating to independence laid down in Regulation No 95/93.
Since the Divisão de Coordenação Nacional de Slots forms an integral part of the ANA and is entirely dependant on the ANA, there is neither a situation of operational independence nor one of financial independence, contrary to what is required under EU law.


(1)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 of 18 January 1993 on common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports (OJ 1993 L 14, p. 1).
Corrigendum to Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1369/2013 of 13 December 2013 on Union support for the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme in Lithuania, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1990/2006 ( OJ L 346, 20.12.2013 )
Date: 2014-04-24
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Lithuania, decommissioning of power stations, economic support








L_2014121EN.01005901.xml










24.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 121/59







Corrigendum to Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1369/2013 of 13 December 2013 on Union support for the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme in Lithuania, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1990/2006

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 346 of 20 December 2013
)


In the contents and on page 7, in the title:
for:


                  ‘Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1369/2013 of 13 December 2013 on Union support for the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme in Lithuania, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1990/2006’,

read:


                  ‘Council Regulation (EU) No 1369/2013 of 13 December 2013 on Union support for the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme in Lithuania, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1990/2006’.
Case T-259/14: Action brought on 24 April 2014  — Luxembourg v Commission
Date: 2014-04-24
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to information, branch of activity, exchange of information, financial control, intellectual property








C_2014223EN.01002002.xml










14.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 223/20





Action brought on 24 April 2014 — Luxembourg v Commission
(Case T-259/14)
2014/C 223/25
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (represented by: L. Delvaux, Agent, and P.-E. Partsch, A. Steichen, D. Waelbroeck, lawyers, and D. Slater, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the present action admissible and well founded;










—


annul the Commission decision of 24 March 2014 requiring Luxembourg to provide information relating to the taxation scheme for revenue from intellectual property;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

By the present action, the applicant seeks annulment of Commission Decision C (2014) 1987 final by which the Commission directed the applicant, pursuant to Article 10(3) of Regulation No 659/1999, (1) to provide information relating to the taxation scheme for revenue from intellectual property.
In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law which are essentially identical or similar to those raised in the context of Case T-258/14 Luxembourg v Commission.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ 1999 L 83, p. 1).