do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7885 — BP Europa/Ruhr Oel) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-01-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, energy industry, merger control, oil industry, pipeline transport, wholesale trade








C_2016010EN.01000701.xml










13.1.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 10/7





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7885 — BP Europa/Ruhr Oel)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 10/06)






1.


On 6 January 2016, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking BP Europa SE (Germany), ultimately controlled by BP plc (‘BP’ of the United Kingdom) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of the undertaking Ruhr Oel GmbH (‘ROG’ of Germany) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


BP is a global energy player active across the entire crude oil and natural gas value chain,










—


ROG is active in the refining and ex-refinery sales of refined oil 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 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.7885 — BP Europa/Ruhr Oel, 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 C-397/15: Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 13 January 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Itzehoe — Germany) — Raffeisen Privatbank Liechtenstein AG v Gerhild Lukath (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations — First Protocol concerning the interpretation by the Court of the Rome Convention — Articles 1 and 2(a) and (b) — National courts entitled to make a reference to the Court for a preliminary ruling — Manifest lack of jurisdiction of the Court)
Date: 2016-01-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consultancy, consumer credit, jurisdiction, private international law, provision of services, residence








C_2016136EN.01000601.xml










18.4.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 136/6





Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 13 January 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Itzehoe — Germany) — Raffeisen Privatbank Liechtenstein AG v Gerhild Lukath
(Case C-397/15) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations - First Protocol concerning the interpretation by the Court of the Rome Convention - Articles 1 and 2(a) and (b) - National courts entitled to make a reference to the Court for a preliminary ruling - Manifest lack of jurisdiction of the Court))
(2016/C 136/09)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Itzehoe

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Raffeisen Privatbank Liechtenstein AG

Defendant: Gerhild Lukath

in the presence of: Rüdiger Boy, Boy Finanzberatung GbhH, Christian Maibaum, Vienna-Life Lebensversicherung AG, Frank Weber

Operative part of the order

The Court of Justice of the European Union manifestly does not have jurisdiction to answer the questions referred by the Landgericht Itzehoe (Regional Court, Itzehoe (Germany)) for a preliminary ruling by decision of 15 June 2015 in Case C-397/15.


(1)  OJ C 320, 28.9.2015.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7851 — USS Nero/OPTrust/PGGM/Global Vía) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-01-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, management, medical institution, merger control, rail transport, road transport, service concession, supplementary pension








C_2016010EN.01000601.xml










13.1.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 10/6





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7851 — USS Nero/OPTrust/PGGM/Global Vía)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 10/05)






1.


On 4 January 2016, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertakings OPTrust Infrastructure Europe I S.à.r.l. (‘OPTrust’, Luxembourg), a subsidiary of the OPSEU Pension Trust (Canada), Stichting Depositary PGGM Infrastructure Funds (‘PGGM’, Netherlands) and USS Nero Limited (‘USS’, United Kingdom) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the whole of the undertaking Global Vía Infraestructuras, S.A. (‘Global Vía’, Spain) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for OPTrust: pension fund administration and management for the Ontario Public Service Employees Union,
—   for PGGM: pension fund management in the Netherlands,
—   for USS: private sector pension funds in the United Kingdom,
—   for Global Vía: management of infrastructure concessions, in particular toll motorway concessions; railway infrastructure concessions and hospital concessions (non-health related services).










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 email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference M.7851 — USS Nero/OPTrust/PGGM/Global Vía 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 C-18/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Den Haag zittingsplaats Haarlem (Netherlands) lodged on 13 January 2016 — K v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie
Date: 2016-01-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: aid to refugees, foreign national, imprisonment, right of asylum, right to justice








C_2016098EN.01002501.xml










14.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/25





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Den Haag zittingsplaats Haarlem (Netherlands) lodged on 13 January 2016 — K v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie
(Case C-18/16)
(2016/C 098/31)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank Den Haag zittingsplaats Haarlem

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: K

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie

Questions referred

Is Article 8(3) (a) and (b) of the Reception Directive (1) valid in the light of Article 6 of the Charter (2):






(1)


in a situation where a third-country national is detained under Article 8(3)(a) and (b) of the Reception Directive and, under Article 9 of the Asylum Procedures Directive, (3) has the right to remain in a Member State until a decision on his asylum application has been made at first instance, and










(2)


given the Explanation (OJ 2007 C 303, p. 17) that the limitations which may legitimately be imposed on the rights in Article 6 of the Charter may not exceed those permitted by the ECHR in the wording of Article 5(1)(f), and the interpretation by the European Court of Human Rights of the latter provision in, inter alia, the judgment of 22 September 2015, Nabil and Others v Hungary, 62116/12, that the detention of an asylum-seeker is contrary to the aforementioned Article 5(1)(f) if such detention was not imposed with a view to deportation?






(1)  Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection (OJ 2013, L 180, p. 96).

(2)  Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (OJ 2007, C 303, p. 1).

(3)  Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ 2013, L 180, p. 60).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7793 — Lone Star Fund IX/MRH) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-01-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, motor fuel, ownership, retail trade








C_2016010EN.01000102.xml










13.1.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 10/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7793 — Lone Star Fund IX/MRH)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 10/02)
On 8 January 2016, 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 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 32016M7793. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2016-01-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2016010EN.01000201.xml










13.1.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 10/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

12 January 2016
(2016/C 10/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0836




JPY


Japanese yen


127,79




DKK


Danish krone


7,4612




GBP


Pound sterling


0,75080




SEK


Swedish krona


9,2483




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0855




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,6388




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,021




HUF


Hungarian forint


317,75




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3568




RON


Romanian leu


4,5333




TRY


Turkish lira


3,2842




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5460




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5370




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,4094




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6547




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5570




KRW


South Korean won


1 308,87




ZAR


South African rand


17,9737




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,1276




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,6672




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 965,60




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7830




PHP


Philippine peso


51,296




RUB


Russian rouble


82,6895




THB


Thai baht


39,368




BRL


Brazilian real


4,3704




MXN


Mexican peso


19,2772




INR


Indian rupee


72,4603






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7760 — Triton/KKR/EM) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-01-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: carriage of goods, carrier, economic concentration, investment company, maritime transport, merger control








C_2016010EN.01000101.xml










13.1.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 10/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7760 — Triton/KKR/EM)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 10/01)
On 6 January 2016, 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 32016M7760. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.