do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7217 — Facebook / WhatsApp)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-09-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Internet site, economic concentration, merger control, mobile phone, software








C_2014297EN.01001301.xml










4.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 297/13





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7217 — Facebook / WhatsApp)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2014/C 297/04)






1.


On 29 August 2014, the European Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 and following a referral pursuant to Article 4(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Facebook, Inc. (‘Facebook’, USA) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of WhatsApp Inc. (‘WhatsApp’, USA) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Facebook: provision of websites and mobile applications offering social networking, consumer communication and photo/video sharing functionalities, provision of online advertising space,
—   for WhatsApp: provision of mobile application offering consumer communication functionalities.










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.










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.7217 — Facebook / WhatsApp, 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’).
Review of ‘Competition’ C A Official Journals
Date: 2014-09-04
Institutions: Provisional data
Subjects: EU Official Journal, competition (EU)








CA2014297EN.01000501.xml










4.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CA 297/5





REVIEW OF COMPETITION C A OFFICIAL JOURNALS
2014/C 297 A/05
Please find below the list of C A Official Journals published during the present year.
Unless otherwise indicated, the Official Journals are published in all language versions.






5


 




6


 




11


 




19


 




21


 




26


 




27


 




30


(PL)




35


 




41


(DE/EN/FR)




42


 




43


 




46


 




47


 




48


 




55


 




56


 




60


 




62


 




65


 




73


(DE/EN/FR)




74


 




81


 




88


 




92


(DE/EN/FR)




97


 




98


 




99


 




108


 




109


 




116


 




119


 




133


 




134


 




136


 




137


(DE/EN/FR)




140


 




145


 




152


 




160


 




163


 




164


 




176


 




178


 




180


 




182


 




185


 




186


 




188


 




195


 




207


 




209


(DE/EN/FR)




211


 




217


 




219


 




242


 




254


 




255


 




256


(LV)




258


(RO)




262


(EN)




267


(SL)




270


(FR)




272


(DA)




274


(IT)




277


 




283


 




289


(DE/EN/FR)




293


(NL)




295


(MT)




297
Case C-290/13 P: Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 4 September 2014  — Rütgers Germany GmbH, Rütgers Belgium NV, Deza a.s., Koppers Denmark A/S, Koppers UK Ltd v European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (Appeals — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH Regulation) — Article 59 and Annex XIII — Identification of anthracene oil (anthracene paste) as a substance of very high concern, to be made subject to the authorisation procedure — Equal treatment)
Date: 2014-09-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: chemical product, equal treatment, health risk, market approval, product safety








C_2014409EN.01002202.xml










17.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 409/22





Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 4 September 2014 — Rütgers Germany GmbH, Rütgers Belgium NV, Deza a.s., Koppers Denmark A/S, Koppers UK Ltd v European Chemicals Agency (ECHA)
(Case C-290/13 P) (1)

((Appeals - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH Regulation) - Article 59 and Annex XIII - Identification of anthracene oil (anthracene paste) as a substance of very high concern, to be made subject to the authorisation procedure - Equal treatment))
2014/C 409/31
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: Rütgers Germany GmbH, Rütgers Belgium NV, Deza a.s., Koppers Denmark A/S, Koppers UK Ltd (represented by: K. Van Maldegem, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented by: M. Heikkilä, W. Broere and T. Zbihlej, acting as Agents, and by J. Stuyck and A.-M. Vandromme, advocaten)

Operative part of the order

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Rütgers Germany GmbH, Rütgers Belgium NV, Deza a.s., Koppers Denmark A/S and Koppers UK Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 252, 31.8.2013.
Case C-211/13: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 4 September 2014 — European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Article 63 TFEU — Free movement of capital — Taxation of inheritances and gifts — National legislation providing for a higher tax-free allowance where the deceased, at the time of death, the donor or beneficiary resided on the territory of the Member State — Subject-matter of the action for annulment — Restriction — Justification)
Date: 2014-09-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, capital transfer tax, free movement of capital, infringement of EU law, real property, residence








C_2014395EN.01001502.xml










10.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/15






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 4 September 2014 — European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany
(Case C-211/13) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 63 TFEU - Free movement of capital - Taxation of inheritances and gifts - National legislation providing for a higher tax-free allowance where the deceased, at the time of death, the donor or beneficiary resided on the territory of the Member State - Subject-matter of the action for annulment - Restriction - Justification))
(2014/C 395/18)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: W. Mölls and W. Roels, acting as Agents)

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

Intervener in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: A. Rubio González, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


declares that, by adopting and maintaining in force provisions under which only a low tax-free allowance is granted when inheritance and gift tax are applied to immoveable property situated in Germany where the deceased, at the time of death, the donor, at the time of the gift, or the beneficiary, at the time of the taxable event, resided on the territory of another Member State, whereas a considerably higher tax-free allowance is granted where at least one of the two parties concerned resided in Germany at the relevant time, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 63 TFEU;










2)


orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs;










3)


orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 171, 15.6.2013.
Corrigendum to Single Resolution Board — Vacancy Notice — Member of the Board (Director of Resolution Planning and Decisions) — COM/2014/10362 — (Official Journal of the European Union C 217 A of 10 July 2014 )
Date: 2014-09-04
Institutions: Provisional data
Subjects: aid for restructuring, appointment of members, bank, bankruptcy, job vacancy








CA2014297EN.01000401.xml










4.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CA 297/4





Corrigendum to Single Resolution Board — Vacancy Notice — Member of the Board (Director of Resolution Planning and Decisions) — COM/2014/10362
(Official Journal of the European Union 
C 217 A of 10 July 2014
)
2014/C 297 A/04
On page 20, ‘Deadline’, ‘Deadline for applications’:







for:



‘3 September 2014’,











read:



‘15 September 2014’.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7304 — Danone/ID Logistics/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-09-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, mineral water, transport company








C_2014297EN.01001401.xml










4.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 297/14





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7304 — Danone/ID Logistics/JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2014/C 297/05)






1.


On 28 August 2014, the European Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertakings Société Anonyme des Eaux Minérales d’Evian (‘S.A.E.M.E.’, France), a subsidiary of the Danone group (France), and ID Logistics SAS, a subsidiary of ID Logistics Group (France), acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of a full-function joint venture by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting the joint venture.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are as follows:






—


S.A.E.M.E. is a subsidiary of the Danone group (which specialises in the agri-food industry). It is a French company engaged in the production and marketing of table water.










—


ID Logistics is a pure player providing logistics services in France and internationally. The group offers integrated logistics including transport, warehousing and value-added services mainly for high-end customers.










—


The purpose of the full-function joint venture (within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004) will be to provide logistics services primarily in the area of table waters.














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 this Notice.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit to it their observations on the proposed operation.
Observations must reach the Commission no later than 10 days following the date on which this notification is published. They can be sent to the Commission under reference number M.7304 — Danone/ID Logistics/JV by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post 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-90/14: Action brought on 4 September 2014  — ZZ v European Commission
Date: 2014-09-04
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: education grant, health service, parental allowance








C_2014448EN.01003901.xml










15.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 448/39





Action brought on 4 September 2014 — ZZ v European Commission
(Case F-90/14)
(2014/C 448/49)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: Hans-Robert Ilting, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application, first, to set aside the decision not to grant the applicant the child allowance from 1 September 2013 because his child is no longer receives ‘educational or vocational training’ within the meaning of Article 2 of Annex VII of the Staff Regulations of officials and, second, to oblige his employer to continue to grant him that allowance and to reimburse him all medical expenses for his daughter retroactively from 1 September 2013.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the Commission’s decision, reference HR.D.2/AS/ac/Ares(2014) of 5 June 2014 relating to his complaint, registered on 12 February 2014 with HR.D.2, ‘Appeals and case monitoring’, under reference no R/227/14;










—


oblige the appointing authority to recognise his daughter, continuously and retroactively from 1 September 2013, as being a dependent child in education and for this reason to continue to grant the child allowance for his daughter continuously and retroactively from 1 September 2013 and to continue to provide, continuously and retroactively from 1 September 2013, his daughter’s medical expenses.
Case C-532/13: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 4 September 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi közigazgatási és munkaügyi bíróság — Hungary) — Sofia Zoo v Országos Környezetvédelmi, Természetvédelmi és Vízügyi Főfelügyelőség (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Protection of species of wild fauna and flora — Regulation (EC) No 338/97 — Article 11 — Invalidity of an import permit restricted to the specimens of animals actually affected by the ground of invalidity)
Date: 2014-09-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: import restriction, protected species, protection of animal life, protection of plant life








C_2014395EN.01002002.xml










10.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/20






Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 4 September 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi közigazgatási és munkaügyi bíróság — Hungary) — Sofia Zoo v Országos Környezetvédelmi, Természetvédelmi és Vízügyi Főfelügyelőség
(Case C-532/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Protection of species of wild fauna and flora - Regulation (EC) No 338/97 - Article 11 - Invalidity of an import permit restricted to the specimens of animals actually affected by the ground of invalidity))
(2014/C 395/25)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi közigazgatási és munkaügyi bíróság

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Sofia Zoo

Defendant: Országos Környezetvédelmi, Természetvédelmi és Vízügyi Főfelügyelőség

Operative part of the judgment

Article 11(2)(a) and (b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein must be interpreted as meaning that an import permit which does not comply with the conditions laid down in that regulation must be considered void only in respect of the specimens actually affected by the ground of invalidity of that import permit, those specimens then being the only ones which may be seized and possibly confiscated by the competent authority of the Member State where they are situated.


(1)  OJ C 15, 18.1.2014.
Corrigendum to the Notice of initiation of an anti-subsidy proceeding concerning imports of certain rainbow trout originating in Turkey ( OJ C 44, 15.2.2014 )
Date: 2014-09-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Türkiye, anti-subsidy proceeding, complaint to the Commission, fishery product, import (EU), originating product








C_2014297EN.01002301.xml










4.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 297/23





Corrigendum to the Notice of initiation of an anti-subsidy proceeding concerning imports of certain rainbow trout originating in Turkey
(
Official Journal of the European Union C44 of 15 February 2014
)
(2014/C 297/07)
On page 9, point 2. Product under investigation:

for:

‘The product subject to this investigation is rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) live, fresh, chilled, frozen or smoked whether in the form of whole fish (with heads and gills on, gutted, weighing 1,2 kg or less each), or with heads off, gilled or gutted (weighing 1 kg or less each), or in the form of fillets (weighing 400 g or less each).’


read:
‘The product subject to this investigation is rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss):






—


live weighing 1,2 kg or less each, or










—


fresh, chilled, frozen and/or smoked:






—


in the form of whole fish (with heads on), whether or not gilled, whether or not gutted, weighing 1,2 kg or less each, or










—


with heads off, whether or not gilled, whether or not gutted, weighing 1 kg or less each, or










—


in the form of fillets weighing 400 g or less each.’
Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Héraðsdómur Reykjavíkur dated 4 September 2014 in the case of Wow air ehf. v Samkeppniseftirlitið (Icelandic Competition Authority), Isavia ohf. and Icelandair ehf. (Case E-18/14)
Date: 2014-09-04
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: Iceland, administrative powers, airport, restriction on competition








C_2015011EN.01001601.xml










15.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 11/16





Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Héraðsdómur Reykjavíkur dated 4 September 2014 in the case of Wow air ehf. v Samkeppniseftirlitið (Icelandic Competition Authority), Isavia ohf. and Icelandair ehf.
(Case E-18/14)
(2015/C 11/06)
A request has been made to the EFTA Court by a letter dated 4 September 2014 from Héraðsdómur Reykjavíkur (Reykjavik District Court, Iceland), which was received at the Court Registry on 4 September 2014, for an Advisory Opinion in the case of Wow air ehf. v Samkeppniseftirlitið (Icelandic Competition Authority), Isavia ohf. and Icelandair ehf., on the following questions:






1.


Does Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93, of 18 January 1993, on common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports, oblige the Member States to ensure that a coordinator appointed under the provisions of the Regulation is, as regards the execution of his tasks, granted independent administrative power under domestic legislation as part of the executive of the Member State, or does the Member State have discretion to decide the status of the coordinator under domestic legislation?










2.


Is it assumed, in the instructions on the handling of complaints concerning the allocation of slots in Article 8(7) and (8) of Regulation (EEC) No 95/93, that all complaints, including complaints based on competition considerations, will be subject to the procedure prescribed therein, or is recital 15 of the preamble to the Regulation to be understood as meaning that the Regulation is to be applied without prejudice to the competition rules of the Treaty, in particular Articles 85 and 86, in such a way that complaints based on competition considerations shall be subject exclusively to the jurisdiction of the competition authorities in the relevant Member State and are therefore to be submitted directly to them?










3.


If the competition authority of a Member State issues instructions on the basis of domestic competition legislation, and with reference to Regulation (EEC) No 95/93, with the intention of encouraging competition, is it assumed in the Regulation that these instructions will be issued to the managing body of an airport/competent authority or should these instructions be issued to the coordinator?
Case T-300/14 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 4 September 2014 — Fricopan Back v Commission (Application for interim measures — State aid — National support for the generation of renewable electricity — Commission decision to open the State aid formal investigation procedure — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — Prima facie case)
Date: 2014-09-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Germany, State aid, control of State aid, countertrade, electrical energy, electricity supply, energy consumption, renewable energy, terms for aid








C_2014431EN.01002702.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/27





Order of the President of the General Court of 4 September 2014 — Fricopan Back v Commission
(Case T-300/14 R)
((Application for interim measures - State aid - National support for the generation of renewable electricity - Commission decision to open the State aid formal investigation procedure - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - Prima facie case))
(2014/C 431/48)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Fricopan Back GmbH Immekath (Klötze, Germany) (represented by: T. Volz and B. Wißmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche and R. Sauer, Agents)

Re:

Application to suspend the legal effects of the decision by which the Commission opened the State aid formal investigation procedure concerning the German law on renewable energy.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


The costs are reserved.
Case T-298/14 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 4 September 2014 — Erbslöh Aluminium v Commission (Application for interim measures — State aid — National support for the generation of renewable electricity — Commission decision to open the State aid formal investigation procedure — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — Prima facie case)
Date: 2014-09-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Germany, State aid, control of State aid, countertrade, electrical energy, electricity supply, energy consumption, renewable energy, terms for aid








C_2014431EN.01002701.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/27





Order of the President of the General Court of 4 September 2014 — Erbslöh Aluminium v Commission
(Case T-298/14 R)
((Application for interim measures - State aid - National support for the generation of renewable electricity - Commission decision to open the State aid formal investigation procedure - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - Prima facie case))
(2014/C 431/47)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Erbslöh Aluminium GmbH (Velbert, Germany) (represented by: T. Volz and B. Wißmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche and R. Sauer, Agents)

Re:

Application to suspend the legal effects of the decision by which the Commission opened the State aid formal investigation procedure concerning the German law on renewable energy.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


The costs are reserved.