do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-238/12 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 30 April 2014  — FLSmidth & Co. A/S v European Commission (Appeal — Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Plastic industrial bags sector — Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC — Unlimited jurisdiction of the General Court — Duty to state reasons — Attribution to the parent company of the infringement committed by the subsidiary — Liability of the parent company for payment of the fine imposed on the subsidiary — Proportionality — Proceedings before the General Court — Adjudication within a reasonable time)
Date: 2014-04-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: exchange of information, fine, fixing of prices, infringement of EU law, jurisdiction, plastics industry, principle of proportionality, restriction on competition, subsidiary, turnover








C_2014194EN.01000201.xml










24.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/2





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 30 April 2014 — FLSmidth & Co. A/S v European Commission
(Case C-238/12 P) (1)

((Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Plastic industrial bags sector - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Unlimited jurisdiction of the General Court - Duty to state reasons - Attribution to the parent company of the infringement committed by the subsidiary - Liability of the parent company for payment of the fine imposed on the subsidiary - Proportionality - Proceedings before the General Court - Adjudication within a reasonable time))
2014/C 194/02
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: FLSmidth & Co. A/S (represented by: M. Dittmer, advokat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre and V. Bottka, acting as Agents, and M. Gray, Barrister)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 6 March 2012 in Case T-65/06 FLSmidth v Commission by which that court annulled in part Commission Decision C(2005) 4634 of 30 November 2005 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty (Case COMP/F/38.354 — Industrial Bags) concerning a cartel consisting in the fixing of prices and sales quotas by geographic region, the sharing of orders by major customers, the organisation of concerted bidding in response to certain invitations to tender and the implementation of mechanisms for the exchange of information on sales volumes in the market for plastic industrial bags, and reduced the fine imposed on the appellant — Imputability of the unlawful conduct

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Dismisses the appeal;










2)


Orders FLSmidth & Co. A/S to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 303, 6.10.2012.
Case T-637/11: Judgment of the General Court of 30 April 2014  — Euris Consult v Parliament (Public service contracts — Tender procedure — Provision of translation services into Maltese — Rules relating to the procedure for the submission of tenders — Rejection of a tenderer’s bid — Failure to comply with the rules on submission designed to ensure the confidentiality of the contents of tenders before opening — Plea of inapplicability — Proportionality — Equal treatment — Rights of the defence — Obligation to state reasons — Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 98(1) of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 — Article 143 of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002)
Date: 2014-04-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: confidentiality, equal treatment, invitation to tender, principle of proportionality, provision of services, rights of the defence, services contract, translation








C_2014194EN.01002001.xml










24.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/20





Judgment of the General Court of 30 April 2014 — Euris Consult v Parliament
(Case T-637/11) (1)

((Public service contracts - Tender procedure - Provision of translation services into Maltese - Rules relating to the procedure for the submission of tenders - Rejection of a tenderer’s bid - Failure to comply with the rules on submission designed to ensure the confidentiality of the contents of tenders before opening - Plea of inapplicability - Proportionality - Equal treatment - Rights of the defence - Obligation to state reasons - Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 98(1) of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 - Article 143 of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002))
2014/C 194/25
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Euris Consult Ltd (Floriana, Malta) (represented by: F. Moyse, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: L. Darie and F. Poilvache, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal and F. Dintilhac, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision of the Parliament of 18 October 2011 rejecting the tender submitted by the applicant in the context of the interinstitutional call for tenders MT/2011/EU, concerning translation services into Maltese

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Dismisses the action;










2)


Orders Euris Consult Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 32, 4.2.2012.
2014/258/CFSP: Political and Security Committee Decision EUBAM Libya/3/2014 of 30 April 2014 extending the mandate of the Head of Mission of the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM Libya)
Date: 2014-04-30
Institutions: Political and Security Committee
Subjects: EU police mission, Libya, appointment of members, border control, international security








L_2014136EN.01002501.xml










9.5.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 136/25








            POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE DECISION EUBAM LIBYA/3/2014
of 30 April 2014
         
extending the mandate of the Head of Mission of the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM Libya)
(2014/258/CFSP)


THE POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular the third paragraph of Article 38 thereof,


Having regard to Council Decision 2013/233/CFSP of 22 May 2013 on the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM Libya) (1),

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Article 9(1) of Decision 2013/233/CFSP, the Political and Security Committee (PSC) is authorised, in accordance with Article 38 of the Treaty, to take the relevant decisions for the purpose of exercising political control and strategic direction of the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM Libya), including the decision to appoint a Head of Mission upon a proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR).












(2)


On 24 May 2013, the PSC adopted Decision EUBAM Libya/1/2013 (2) appointing Mr Antti Juhani Hartikainen as Head of Mission of EUBAM Libya for the period from 22 May 2013 until 21 May 2014.












(3)


On 14 April 2014, the HR proposed the extension of the mandate of Mr Antti Juhani Hartikainen as Head of Mission of EUBAM Libya until 21 May 2015,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The mandate of Mr Antti Juhani Hartikainen as Head of Mission of EUBAM Libya is hereby extended until 21 May 2015.


Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 30 April 2014.


For the Political and Security Committee


The Chairperson

W. STEVENS
            





(1)  
            OJ L 138, 24.5.2013, p. 15.

(2)  Political and Security Committee Decision EUBAM LIBYA/1/2013 of 24 May 2013 on the appointment of the Head of Mission of the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM Libya) (OJ L 147, 1.6.2013, p. 13).
Case F-40/14: Action brought on 30 April 2014  — ZZ v Commission
Date: 2014-04-30
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: regulations for civil servants, transfer of pension rights








C_2014292EN.01006002.xml










1.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 292/60





Action brought on 30 April 2014 — ZZ v Commission
(Case F-40/14)
2014/C 292/78
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision to increase the applicant’s pension rights in the European Union pension scheme by application of the new General Implementing Provisions of Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations of Officials.

Form of order sought







—


Declare Article 9 of the General Implementing Provisions of 3 March 2011 of Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations of Officials inapplicable;










—


Annul the decisions of 30 September 2013 and 9 December 2013 to increase the pension rights acquired by the applicant before his entry into service, on their transfer into the EU institutions’ pension scheme, by application of the General Implementing Provisions of 3 March 2011 of Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations of Officials;










—


Order the Commission to pay the costs.
Case F-88/08 RENV: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 30 April 2014  — Michel v ETF
Date: 2014-04-30
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Training Foundation, Italy, damages, dismissal, fine








C_2014184EN.01004702.xml










16.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 184/47





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 30 April 2014 — Michel v ETF
(Case F-88/08 RENV)
2014/C 184/80
Language of the case: French
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7237 — TPG Capital/The Warranty Group) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-04-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, vehicle parts








C_2014131EN.01000901.xml










30.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 131/9





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7237 — TPG Capital/The Warranty Group)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2014/C 131/08






1.


On 16 April 2014 the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking TPG Advisors VI-AIV, Inc. (Cayman Islands), affiliated with TPG Capital (USA), acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of The Warranty Group Inc. (USA) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


TPG Capital is a global private investment firm which manages funds that invest in businesses through acquisitions and corporate restructuring,










—


The Warranty Group underwrites and administers extended warranty products and programs that protect motor and power sport vehicles, consumer electronics, and appliances.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the 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 Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (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 e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number M.7237 — TPG Capital/The Warranty Group, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Case T-17/12: Judgment of the General Court of 30 April 2014  — Hagenmeyer and Hahn v Commission (Consumer protection — Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 — Health claims made on foods — Refusal to authorise a reduction of disease risk claim — Designation of a risk factor — Lawfulness of the procedure authorising reduction of disease risk claims — Action for annulment — Legal interest in bringing proceedings — Direct and individual concern — Admissibility — Proportionality — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2014-04-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: consumer protection, food inspection, health risk, principle of proportionality








C_2014194EN.01002101.xml










24.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/21





Judgment of the General Court of 30 April 2014 — Hagenmeyer and Hahn v Commission
(Case T-17/12) (1)

((Consumer protection - Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 - Health claims made on foods - Refusal to authorise a reduction of disease risk claim - Designation of a risk factor - Lawfulness of the procedure authorising reduction of disease risk claims - Action for annulment - Legal interest in bringing proceedings - Direct and individual concern - Admissibility - Proportionality - Obligation to state reasons))
2014/C 194/26
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicants: Moritz Hagenmeyer (Hamburg, Germany) and Andreas Hahn (Hanover, Germany) (represented by: T. Teufer, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Pignataro-Nolin and S. Grünheid, acting as Agents)

Intervening party in support of the defendant: Council of the Euroepan Union (represented by: I. Šulce, Z. Kupčová and M. Simm, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Regulation (EU) No 1170/2011 of 16 November 2011 refusing to authorise certain health claims made on foods and referring to the reduction of disease risk (OJ 2011 L 299, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Moritz Hagenmeyer and Mr Andreas Hahn to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 89, 24.3.2012.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7210 — Groupe Soufflet/Groupe Neuhauser) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-04-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-foodstuffs, bakery, economic concentration, merger control, pastry-making

C_2014131EN.01001001.xml
30.4.2014   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/10
Prior notification of a concentration(Case M.7210 — Groupe Soufflet/Groupe Neuhauser)Candidate case for simplified procedure(Text with EEA relevance)2014/C 131/09
1.

On 23 April 2014 the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the Soufflet group (‘Soufflet’, France) intends to acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of the Neuhauser group (‘Neuhauser’, France) by way of purchase of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:


—
   
for Soufflet
 agriculture, trading, flour-milling, ingredients, rice and dried vegetables, wine-growing and green spaces, biotechnologies and malting,


—
   
for Neuhauser
 industrial bakery and pastry products.

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the 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 Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (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 e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number M.7210 — Groupe Soufflet/Groupe Neuhauser, to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË


(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).
(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Case F-28/13: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (2nd Chamber) of 30 April 2014 — López Cejudo v Commission (Civil service — Investigation of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) — Daily subsistence allowance — Article 10 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations — Recovery of amounts unduly paid — Deductions from remuneration — Article 85 of the Staff Regulations — Intention to mislead the administration — Reasonable time-limit)
Date: 2014-04-30
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Anti-fraud Office, deduction at source, indemnification, redemption








C_2014184EN.01003901.xml










16.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 184/39





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (2nd Chamber) of 30 April 2014 — López Cejudo v Commission
(Case F-28/13) (1)

((Civil service - Investigation of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) - Daily subsistence allowance - Article 10 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations - Recovery of amounts unduly paid - Deductions from remuneration - Article 85 of the Staff Regulations - Intention to mislead the administration - Reasonable time-limit))
2014/C 184/63
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: José López Cejudo (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: É. Boigelot, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and C. Ehrbar, Agents)

Re:

Application to annul the decisions to make several deductions from the applicant’s salary in respect of the months of June, July, August, September and October 2012

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr López Cejudo to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 207, 20.07.2013, p. 57.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7256 — KKR/HIG/Estro) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-04-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Netherlands, child care, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, small and medium-sized enterprises








C_2014131EN.01000801.xml










30.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 131/8





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7256 — KKR/HIG/Estro)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2014/C 131/07






1.


On 15 April 2014, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which KKR & Co, L.P. (‘KKR’, United States of America) and H.I.G. Capital (‘HIG’, United States of America) acquired within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of Estro Groep B.V. (‘Estro’, the Netherlands) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for KKR: provision of a broad range of alternative asset management services to public and private market investors and capital market solutions for the firm, its portfolio companies and clients,
—   for HIG: provision of capital to small and medium-sized companies with attractive growth potential. HIG invests in management-led buyouts and recapitalizations of profitable and well managed manufacturing or service businesses,
—   for Estro: provision of child day care services in the Netherlands.










3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the 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 Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (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 e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number M.7256 — KKR/HIG/Estro, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Case T-319/14: Action brought on 30 April 2014  — Drogenhilfe Köln Projekt v OHIM (Rauschbrille)
Date: 2014-04-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, child protection, drug addiction, medical centre, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014212EN.01003801.xml










7.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 212/38





Action brought on 30 April 2014 — Drogenhilfe Köln Projekt v OHIM (Rauschbrille)
(Case T-319/14)
2014/C 212/49
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Drogenhilfe Köln Projekt gGmbH (Cologne, Germany) (represented by V. Schoene, 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 First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 29 January 2014 in Case R 1356/2013-1 and refer the case back to OHIM for reconsideration

Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘Rauschbrille’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 41 and 44

Decision of the Examiner: the application was rejected

Decision of the Board of Appeal: the appeal was dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7179 — Silver Lake/WME/IMG)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-04-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: culture, economic concentration, film industry, investment, means of communication, merger control, professional sport, technology








C_2014131EN.01000201.xml










30.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 131/2





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7179 — Silver Lake/WME/IMG)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2014/C 131/02
On 23 April 2014, 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 32014M7179. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.