do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7363 — Areva Énergies Renouvelables/Gamesa Energía/JV)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-10-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electrical energy, energy industry, maintenance, merger control, nuclear energy, renewable energy, turbine








C_2014347EN.01000401.xml










3.10.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/4





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7363 — Areva Énergies Renouvelables/Gamesa Energía/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2014/C 347/03)
On 29 September 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/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7363. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-483/13: Order of the President of the First Chamber of the Court of 3 October 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción No 2 de Marchena — Spain) — Unicaja Banco, SA v Steluta Grigore
Date: 2014-10-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, real estate credit, unfair terms of contract








C_2015016EN.01002301.xml










19.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 16/23






Order of the President of the First Chamber of the Court of 3 October 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción No 2 de Marchena — Spain) — Unicaja Banco, SA v Steluta Grigore
(Case C-483/13) (1)

(2015/C 016/33)
Language of the case: Spanish
The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 352, 30.11.2013.
Case C-458/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia (Italy) lodged on 3 October 2014  — Promoimpresa srl v Consorzio dei Comuni della Sponda Bresciana del Lago di Garda e del Lago di Idro, Regione Lombardia
Date: 2014-10-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: equal treatment, public contract, public property, restriction on competition, right of establishment, water








C_2014448EN.01001101.xml










15.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 448/11





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia (Italy) lodged on 3 October 2014 — Promoimpresa srl v Consorzio dei Comuni della Sponda Bresciana del Lago di Garda e del Lago di Idro, Regione Lombardia
(Case C-458/14)
(2014/C 448/14)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Promoimpresa srl

Defendants: Consorzio dei Comuni della Sponda Bresciana del Lago di Garda e del Lago di Idro, Regione Lombardia

Question referred

Do the principles of freedom of establishment, non-discrimination and safeguarding competition, respectively laid down in Articles 49, 56 and 106 TFEU, and the precept of reasonableness implicit therein, preclude national legislation under which the validity of concessions of economically significant publicly-owned maritime, lakeside and waterway assets is to be repeatedly extended through a succession of legislative acts, the duration of that validity being statutorily increased for at least 11 years, with the effect that the same concessionaire retains the exclusive right to exploit the asset economically, even though the period of validity under the concession awarded to that concessionaire has meanwhile expired, whereby interested economic operators are deprived of any opportunity of obtaining a concession for the asset on the basis of a public tendering procedure?
Judgment of the Court of 3 October 2014 in Case E-21/13 — The Fédération Internationale de Football Association v EFTA Surveillance Authority (Action for annulment — Television broadcasting — Article 14 of Directive 2010/13/EU — Measures concerning events of major importance for an EEA State — FIFA World Cup — Freedom to provide services — Right to property — Statement of reasons)
Date: 2014-10-03
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: Norway, audiovisual production, broadcasting, infringement of EU law, sporting event, sports body








C_2015150EN.01000901.xml










7.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 150/9





JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
of 3 October 2014
in Case E-21/13
The Fédération Internationale de Football Association v EFTA Surveillance Authority
(Action for annulment — Television broadcasting — Article 14 of Directive 2010/13/EU — Measures concerning events of major importance for an EEA State — FIFA World Cup — Freedom to provide services — Right to property — Statement of reasons)
(2015/C 150/09)
In Case E-21/13, The Fédération Internationale de Football Association v EFTA Surveillance Authority – APPLICATION for the partial annulment of EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No 309/13/COL of 16 July 2013 on the compatibility with EEA law of measures to be taken by Norway pursuant to Article 14 of Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1), the Court, composed of Per Christiansen (acting President), Páll Hreinsson (Judge-Rapporteur), and Martin Ospelt (ad hoc judge), gave judgment on 3 October 2014, the operative part of which is as follows:
The Court hereby:






1.


Dismisses the application.










2.


Orders the Fédération Internationale de Football Association to pay the costs of the proceedings.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7340 — Ferrero International/Oltan Group)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-10-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: confectionery product, economic concentration, food industry, merger control, nut








C_2014347EN.01000402.xml










3.10.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/4





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7340 — Ferrero International/Oltan Group)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2014/C 347/04)
On 12 September 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 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/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7340. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-709/14: Action brought on 3 October 2014 — Tri-Ocean Trading v Council
Date: 2014-10-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Syria, economic sanctions, international sanctions, ownership, principle of proportionality, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2014448EN.01003201.xml










15.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 448/32





Action brought on 3 October 2014 — Tri-Ocean Trading v Council
(Case T-709/14)
(2014/C 448/41)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Tri-Ocean Trading (George Town, Cayman Islands) (represented by: P. Saini, QC, B. Kennelly, Barrister, and N. Sheikh, Solicitor)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Council Implementing Decision 2014/488/CFSP of 22 July 2014 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 793/2014 of 22 July 2014 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria insofar as they apply to the Applicant; and










—


order the Defendant to pay the Applicant’s costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the Council failed to fulfil the criterion for listing, namely that the person concerned was ‘responsible for the violent repression against the civilian population in Syria’, or a person ‘benefiting from or supporting the regime’, or a person associated with any such person. The Council failed to establish that the reasons relied on against the entity concerned were well founded.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the Council violated the applicant’s rights of defence and the right to effective judicial protection. The applicant has at no stage been given ‘serious and credible evidence’ or ‘concrete evidence and information’ in support of a case which would justify restrictive measures against it, as required by the case law of the Court.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the Council failed to give the applicant sufficient reasons for his inclusion.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the Council severely infringed the applicant’s fundamental rights to property and reputation. The restrictive measures were imposed without proper safeguards enabling the applicant to put his case effectively to the Council. The Council has not demonstrated that the very significant interference with the applicant’s property rights is justified and proportionate. The interference with the applicant extends beyond a financial impact, and has also resulted in damage to its reputation.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging that the Council made a manifest error of assessment. Contrary to the sole reason for his inclusion, there is no information or evidence available that the applicant has in fact provided ‘support to the Syrian regime’ and to have benefited from the regime.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7297 — Dolby/Doremi/Highlands)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-10-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, technology








C_2014347EN.01001601.xml










3.10.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/16





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7297 — Dolby/Doremi/Highlands)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2014/C 347/07)






1.


On 25 September 2014, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 and following a referral pursuant to Article 22 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Dolby Laboratories, Inc. (‘Dolby’, United States) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertakings Doremi Technologies LLC and Doremi Labs, Inc. (together ‘Doremi’, United States) and Highlands Technologies Solutions S.A.S. (‘Highlands’, France) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Dolby: manufacture of audio, video and voice technologies,
—   for Doremi: manufacture of digital cinema servers,
—   for Highlands: marketing and resale of digital cinema servers.










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.7297 — Dolby/Doremi/Highlands, 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’).
Case T-39/13: Judgment of the General Court of 3 October 2014  — Cezar v OHIM — Poli-Eco (Insert) (Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing an insert — Earlier design — Novelty — Individual character — Visible features of a component part of a complex product — Assessment of the earlier design — Articles 3, 4, 5, 6 and 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)
Date: 2014-10-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, building materials, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014409EN.01003501.xml










17.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 409/35





Judgment of the General Court of 3 October 2014 — Cezar v OHIM — Poli-Eco (Insert)
(Case T-39/13) (1)

((Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing an insert - Earlier design - Novelty - Individual character - Visible features of a component part of a complex product - Assessment of the earlier design - Articles 3, 4, 5, 6 and 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002))
2014/C 409/50
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Cezar Przedsiębiorstwo Produkcyjne Dariusz Bogdan Niewiński (Ełk, Poland) (represented initially by M. Nentwig and G. Becker, and subsequently by M. Nentwig, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented initially by F. Mattina, and subsequently by P. Bullock, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Poli-Eco Tworzywa Sztuczne sp. z o.o. (Szprotawa, Poland) (represented initially by B. Rokicki, and subsequently by D. Rzazewska, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 November 2012 (Case R 1512/2010-3), concerning invalidity proceedings between Poli-Eco Tworzywa Sztuczne sp. z o.o. and Cezar Przedsiębiorstwo Produkcyjne Dariusz Bogdan Niewiński.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Annuls the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 8 November 2012 (Case R 1512/2010-3);










2)


Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Cezar Przedsiębiorstwo Produkcyjne Dariusz Bogdan Niewiński;










3)


Orders Poli-Eco Tworzywa Sztuczne sp. z o.o. to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 101, 6.4.2013.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2014-10-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2014347EN.01000501.xml










3.10.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/5





Euro exchange rates (1)

2 October 2014
(2014/C 347/05)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2631




JPY


Japanese yen


137,47




DKK


Danish krone


7,4439




GBP


Pound sterling


0,78240




SEK


Swedish krona


9,0894




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2085




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,1475




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,495




HUF


Hungarian forint


309,71




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1761




RON


Romanian leu


4,4109




TRY


Turkish lira


2,8749




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4393




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4067




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,8052




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6051




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6081




KRW


South Korean won


1 341,70




ZAR


South African rand


14,1616




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7557




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,6396




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 347,27




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,1080




PHP


Philippine peso


56,654




RUB


Russian rouble


50,0340




THB


Thai baht


40,976




BRL


Brazilian real


3,1273




MXN


Mexican peso


16,9540




INR


Indian rupee


78,0804






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7397 — CD&R/CHC Group) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-10-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, helicopter, investment company, merger control








C_2014347EN.01001701.xml










3.10.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/17





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7397 — CD&R/CHC Group)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2014/C 347/08)






1.


On 26 September 2014, the European Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Clayton, Dubilier & Rice Fund IX, L.P. a fund managed by an affiliate of Clayton, Dubilier & Rice (‘CD&R’, USA), acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the undertaking CHC Group Ltd., (‘CHC’, Cayman Islands) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


CD&R is a private equity investment group;










—


CHC is a commercial operator of helicopters.














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 this 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.7397 — CD&R/CHC 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-706/14: Action brought on 3 October 2014  — Holistic Innovation Institute v REA
Date: 2014-10-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU programme, Framework Programme for Research and Development, damages, indemnification








C_2014421EN.01004401.xml










24.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 421/44





Action brought on 3 October 2014 — Holistic Innovation Institute v REA
(Case T-706/14)
2014/C 421/62
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Holistic Innovation Institute, SLU (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: R. Muñiz García, lawyer)

Defendant: Research Executive Agency (REA)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul the contested decision excluding the applicant from the INACHUS and ZONeSEC projects;










—


compensate the applicant and order the defendant to pay the amount of EUR 7 81  250, corresponding to the two projects from which it has been excluded, together with interest at the statutory rate from when the payments were to accrue; and










—


compensate the applicant and order the defendant to pay the amount determined by the expert appointed by the General Court, for the additional harm that exclusion from the projects caused to the applicant.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The present action is directed against the decision of the Research Executive Agency of the European Commission of 24 July 2014, reference ARES (2014) 2461172, terminating negotiations and rejecting the participation of the applicant in the European projects INACHUS (607522) and ZONeSEC (607292) of the Call for Proposals FP7-SEC-2013-1 of the Seventh Framework Programme.
In support of its action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.






1.


The decision is manifestly unfounded, containing a mere ostensible statement of reasons.










2.


The independent evaluators reported favourably on projects in which the applicant company participated.










3.


After those reports, the defendant changed the criteria as a retaliatory measure against the director of the applicant, who had previously brought proceedings against the European Commission in connection with a dispute relating to the company Rose Visión S.L.










4.


The agents of the defendant put pressure on the other participants in the projects to exclude the applicant before the decision, in an attempt thereby to avoid having to take the contested decision.










5.


The defendant’s conduct caused the applicant damage and prejudicial consequences.