do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7611 — IDeA/IP/Hunt/Corin) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-05-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, medical device, merger control








C_2015147EN.01001001.xml










5.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 147/10





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7611 — IDeA/IP/Hunt/Corin)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 147/05)






1.


On 29 April 2015, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which IDeA Capital Funds SGR S.p.A. (‘IDeA’, Italy), IP Investimenti e Partecipazioni S.r.l. (‘IP’, Italy) and Hunt Capital S.A. (‘Hunt’, Luxembourg) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation, joint control of Corin Group PLC (‘Corin’, United Kingdom), by way of contract of management in the form of modified shareholders’ agreement.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for IDeA: managing of private equity funds of funds and direct investments through private equity direct funds; IDeA is indirectly controlled by De Agostini S.p.A., the ultimate parent company of the De Agostini Group (‘De Agostini Group’). De Agostini Group is active in four business areas: publishing, media, games and services, finance,
—   for IP: investment activities, including leveraged buy-outs, management buy-outs, industrial spin-offs and turnarounds, including family businesses and the handing over of businesses to the next generation,
—   for Hunt: investment activities, in any form whatsoever, in any commercial, industrial, financial or other enterprises,
—   for Corin: design, manufacturing, distribution and sale of orthopaedic 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 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 M.7611 — IDeA/IP/Hunt/Corin, 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-221/15: Action brought on 5 May 2015 — Arbuzov v Council
Date: 2015-05-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Russia, Ukraine, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, interpretation of the law, ownership, territorial dispute








C_2015279EN.01003601.xml










24.8.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 279/36






Action brought on 5 May 2015 — Arbuzov v Council
(Case T-221/15)
(2015/C 279/44)
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: Sergej Arbuzov (Kyiv, Ukraine) (represented by: M. Machytková, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought







—


annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/364 of 5 March 2015 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/357 of 5 March 2015 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, in so far as those instruments concern the applicant;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging breach of the right to good administration






—


The applicant submits in this connection that there was a breach of the right to good administration guaranteed by Article 41(1) and (2)(a) and (c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’), since the defendant did not proceed, in his view, with the proper care requiring it rigorously and impartially to examine all the relevant facts of the applicant’s case.














2.


Second plea in law, alleging breach of the right to property






—


The applicant submits on this point that there was a breach of the right to property guaranteed him by Article 17(1) of the Charter and Article 1 of Protocol No 1 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, consisting in the fact that, as a result of the breach of the right to good administration, the contested acts limiting the applicant’s right to property were adopted with no legal grounds and contrary to the conditions set out in Article 52(1) of the Charter.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7605 — Equistone Partners Europe/Groupe Averys) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-05-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: archives, document storage, economic concentration, investment company, merger control








C_2015147EN.01000901.xml










5.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 147/9





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7605 — Equistone Partners Europe/Groupe Averys)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 147/04)






1.


On 27 April 2015, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Equistone Partners Europe SAS (‘Equistone’, France) ultimately owned by Equistone LLP (UK) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control over Averys SAS and all its subsidiaries (‘Averys Group’, France) by way of purchase of securities.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Equistone: management of capital investment funds,
—   for Averys Group: design, manufacturing and installation of storage and archiving solutions.










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 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 M.7605 — Equistone Partners Europe/Groupe Averys, 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-423/12: Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2015 — Skype v OHIM — Sky and Sky IP International (skype) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark skype — Earlier Community word mark SKY — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-05-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, high-definition television, registered trade mark, telecommunications, trade-mark law








C_2015205EN.01002602.xml










22.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 205/26





Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2015 — Skype v OHIM — Sky and Sky IP International (skype)
(Case T-423/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark skype - Earlier Community word mark SKY - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 205/35)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Skype Ultd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented: initially by I. Fowler, Solicitor, J. Schmitt, lawyer, and J. Mellor QC, and subsequently by A. Carboni and M. Browne, Solicitors)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock, acting as Agent)

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Sky plc, formerly British Sky Broadcasting Group plc (Isleworth, United Kingdom); and Sky IP International Ltd (Isleworth) (represented by: D. Rose and V. Baxter, Solicitors, and subsequently by D. Rose, R. Guthrie, Solicitors, T. Moody-Stuart, Barrister, and J. Curry, Solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 July 2012 (Case R 1561/2010-4) concerning opposition proceedings between, on the one hand, British Sky Broadcasting Group plc and Sky IP International Ltd and, on the other hand, Skype Ultd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Dismisses the action;










2)


Orders Skype Ultd to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), Sky plc and Sky IP International Ltd.






(1)  OJ C 355, 17.11.2012.
Case T-183/13: Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2015 — Skype v OHIM — Sky and Sky IP International (SKYPE) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark SKYPE — Earlier Community word mark SKY — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-05-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, telecommunications industry, trade-mark law








C_2015205EN.01002701.xml










22.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 205/27





Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2015 — Skype v OHIM — Sky and Sky IP International (SKYPE)
(Case T-183/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark SKYPE - Earlier Community word mark SKY - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 205/36)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Skype Ultd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented: initially by I. Fowler, Solicitor, J. Schmitt, lawyer, and J. Mellor QC, and subsequently by A. Carboni and M. Browne, Solicitors)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock and N. Bambara, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Sky plc, formerly British Sky Broadcasting Group plc (Isleworth, United Kingdom); and Sky IP International Ltd (Isleworth) (represented by: R. Guthrie, D. Rose, V. Baxter, Solicitors, and T. Moody-Stuart, Barrister, and subsequently by R. Guthrie, D. Rose, Solicitors, T. Moody-Stuart, Barrister, and J. Curry, Solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 January 2013 (Case R 2398/2010-4) concerning opposition proceedings between, on the one side, British Sky Broadcasting Group plc and Sky IP International Ltd and, on the other, Skype Ultd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Dismisses the action;










2)


Orders Skype Ultd to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), Sky plc and Sky IP International Ltd.






(1)  OJ C 171, 15.6.2013.
Case T-184/13: Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2015 — Skype v OHIM — Sky and Sky IP International (SKYPE) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark SKYPE — Earlier Community word mark SKY — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-05-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, telecommunications industry, trade-mark law








C_2015205EN.01002801.xml










22.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 205/28





Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2015 — Skype v OHIM — Sky and Sky IP International (SKYPE)
(Case T-184/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark SKYPE - Earlier Community word mark SKY - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 205/37)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Skype Ultd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented: initially by I. Fowler, Solicitor, J. Schmitt, lawyer, and J. Mellor QC, and subsequently by A. Carboni and M. Browne, Solicitors)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock and N. Bambara, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Sky plc, formerly British Sky Broadcasting Group plc (Isleworth, United Kingdom); and Sky IP International Ltd (Isleworth) (represented by: R. Guthrie, D. Rose, V. Baxter, Solicitors, and T. Moody-Stuart, Barrister, subsequently by R. Guthrie, D. Rose, T. Moody-Stuart and J. Curry, Solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 January 2013 (Case R 121/2011-4) concerning opposition proceedings between, on the one hand, British Sky Broadcasting Group plc and Sky IP International Ltd and, on the other hand, Skype Ultd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Dismisses the action;










2)


Orders Skype Ultd to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), Sky plc and Sky IP International Ltd.






(1)  OJ C 171, 15.6.2013.
Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 0,05 % on 1 May 2015 — Euro exchange rates
Date: 2015-05-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Central Bank, euro, exchange rate, financing, interest, money








C_2015147EN.01000101.xml










5.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 147/1





Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):
0,05 % on 1 May 2015
Euro exchange rates (2)

4 May 2015
(2015/C 147/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1152




JPY


Japanese yen


134,07




DKK


Danish krone


7,4646




GBP


Pound sterling


0,73788




SEK


Swedish krona


9,3340




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0431




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,4630




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,364




HUF


Hungarian forint


303,42




PLN


Polish zloty


4,0480




RON


Romanian leu


4,4275




TRY


Turkish lira


3,0278




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4225




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3512




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,6460




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,4727




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4861




KRW


South Korean won


1 206,68




ZAR


South African rand


13,4390




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


6,9245




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5826




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 521,99




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,0152




PHP


Philippine peso


49,803




RUB


Russian rouble


57,7651




THB


Thai baht


37,158




BRL


Brazilian real


3,4312




MXN


Mexican peso


17,3313




INR


Indian rupee


70,9961






(1)  Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is the marginal rate.

(2)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 908/2014 of 6 August 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to paying agencies and other bodies, financial management, clearance of accounts, rules on checks, securities and transparency (OJ L 255, 28.8.2014)
Date: 2015-05-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, EU agricultural market, audit, financial control, management audit, operational expenditure (EU), validation of expenditure








L_2015114EN.01002501.xml










5.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 114/25







Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 908/2014 of 6 August 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to paying agencies and other bodies, financial management, clearance of accounts, rules on checks, securities and transparency

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 255 of 28 August 2014
)


On page 86, in Article 34(6):
for:

               ‘second subparagraph of paragraph 3’,
read:

               ‘third subparagraph of paragraph 3’;
on page 89, in Article 40(1):
for:

               ‘second subparagraph of Article 34(3)’,
read:

               ‘third subparagraph of Article 34(3)’.
Case T-131/12: Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2015 — Spa Monopole v OHIM — Orly International (SPARITUAL) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for registration of the word mark SPARITUAL — Earlier Benelux figurative and word marks SPA and LES THERMES DE SPA — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-05-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, beverage industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015205EN.01002601.xml










22.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 205/26





Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2015 — Spa Monopole v OHIM — Orly International (SPARITUAL)
(Case T-131/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for registration of the word mark SPARITUAL - Earlier Benelux figurative and word marks SPA and LES THERMES DE SPA - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 205/34)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Spa Monopole compagnie fermière de Spa SA/NV (Spa, Belgium) (represented by: L. De Brouwer, E. Cornu and É. De Gryse, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo and A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Orly International, Inc. (Van Nuys, California, United States) (represented by: P. Kremer and J. Rotsch, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM dated 9 January 2012 (Case R 2396/2010-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Spa Monopole, compagnie fermière de Spa SA/NV and Orly International Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of 9 January 2012 (Case R 2396/2010-1) of the First Board Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM);










2.


Orders OHIM and Orly International, Inc. to each bear their costs and to pay the costs of Spa Monopole, compagnie fermière de Spa SA/NV.






(1)  OJ C 165, 9.6.2012.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/725 of 5 May 2015 fixing the closing date for the submission of applications for private storage aid for pigmeat under Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/360
Date: 2015-05-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aid to agriculture, pigmeat, private stock, storage, storage premium








L_2015115EN.01003201.xml










6.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 115/32








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/725
of 5 May 2015
         
fixing the closing date for the submission of applications for private storage aid for pigmeat under Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/360


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), and in particular point (b) of the first subparagraph and the second subparagraph of Article 18(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Private storage aid granted pursuant to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/360 (2) has had a favourable effect on the pigmeat market. A further stabilisation of prices is expected.












(2)


The granting of private storage aid for pigmeat should therefore be ended and a closing date for the submission of applications should be set.












(3)


For the sake of legal certainty, Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/360 should be repealed.












(4)


In order to avoid speculation, this Regulation should enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.













(5)


The Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The closing date for the submission of applications for private storage aid for pigmeat under Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/360 shall be 8 May 2015.


Article 2
Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/360 is repealed with effect from 8 May 2015.
However, it shall continue to apply in respect of contracts concluded under that Regulation before the date of entry into force of this Regulation.


Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that 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, 5 May 2015.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Phil HOGAN
            

Member of the Commission






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

(2)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/360 of 5 March 2015 opening private storage for pigmeat and fixing in advance the amount of aid (OJ L 62, 6.3.2015, p. 16).