do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7901 — COFRA Holding/Binder Group) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-01-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, holding company, investment company, merger control, motor vehicle industry, vehicle parts








C_2016011EN.01000401.xml










14.1.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 11/4





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7901 — COFRA Holding/Binder Group)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 11/04)






1.


On 8 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 COFRA Holding AG (‘COFRA’, Channel Islands) will indirectly acquire sole control within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation of Hans und Ottmar Binder Group (‘Binder Group’, Germany) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


COFRA is an investment holding company of companies active in the retail, real estate and investment business in Europe, the Americas, and Asia.










—


Binder Group is a group of companies offering aluminium exterior trim parts for light vehicles (roof rails, window shaft rails, window guide rails, roof-trim stripes, pillar panels, gas caps and cross beams).














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 M.7901 — COFRA Holding/Binder Group, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussels




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-297/15 P: Judgment of the General Court of 14 January 2016 — Coedo Suárez v Council (Appeal — Civil Service — Officials — Disciplinary measures — Removal from post and reduction of the invalidity allowance — Dismissal of the action at first instance — Error of law — Duty to state reasons)
Date: 2016-01-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, disability insurance, disciplinary proceedings








C_2016078EN.01001802.xml










29.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/18





Judgment of the General Court of 14 January 2016 — Coedo Suárez v Council
(Case T-297/15 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil Service - Officials - Disciplinary measures - Removal from post and reduction of the invalidity allowance - Dismissal of the action at first instance - Error of law - Duty to state reasons))
(2016/C 078/28)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Ángel Coedo Suárez (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Rodrigues and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and M. Veiga, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal lodged against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 26 March 2015 in Coedo Suárez v Council (F-38/14, ECR-SC, EU:F:2015:25), seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 26 March 2015 in Coedo Suárez v Council (F-38/14) in so far as it rejects the second complaint of the first plea in law raised at first instance, concerning the assessment of the mitigating circumstances;










2.


Dismisses the action brought by Mr Ángel Coedo Suárez before the Civil Service Tribunal in Case F-38/14;










3.


Orders Mr Coedo Suárez to pay the costs of the proceedings before the Civil Service Tribunal and, in addition to bearing his own costs, to pay half of the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union in the present proceedings;










4.


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






(1)  OJ C 245, 27.7.2015.
Case T-94/13: Judgment of the General Court of 14 January 2016 — Ntouvas v ECDC (Appeal — Civil service — Contract staff — Reports procedure — Career development report — 2010 appraisal procedure — Dismissal of the action at first instance — Time-limit for submission of the defence — Extension — Exceptional circumstances — Article 39(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal — Lawfulness of the appraisal procedure)
Date: 2016-01-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: promotion, servant (EU), staff assessment, staff regulations (EU)








C_2016078EN.01001401.xml










29.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/14





Judgment of the General Court of 14 January 2016 — Ntouvas v ECDC
(Case T-94/13) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - Contract staff - Reports procedure - Career development report - 2010 appraisal procedure - Dismissal of the action at first instance - Time-limit for submission of the defence - Extension - Exceptional circumstances - Article 39(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal - Lawfulness of the appraisal procedure))
(2016/C 078/22)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Ioannis Ntouvas (Agios Stefanos, Greece) (represented by: V. Kolias, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Center for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) (represented initially by R. Trott, and subsequently by J. Mannheim and A. Daume, acting as Agents, assisted by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 11 December 2012 in Ntouvas v ECDC (F-107/11, ECR-SC, EU:F:2012:182), and seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Mr Ioannis Ntouvas to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 114, 20.4.2013.
Case T-36/15: Order of the General Court of 14 January 2016 — Hispasat v Commission (State aid — Digital television — Aid for the deployment of digital terrestrial television in remote and less-urbanised areas of Castilla-La Mancha — Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market — Correction of that decision after the action had been brought — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2016-01-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: State aid, control of State aid, restriction on competition, satellite communications, terms for aid








C_2016111EN.01002501.xml










29.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 111/25





Order of the General Court of 14 January 2016 — Hispasat v Commission
(Case T-36/15) (1)

((State aid - Digital television - Aid for the deployment of digital terrestrial television in remote and less-urbanised areas of Castilla-La Mancha - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market - Correction of that decision after the action had been brought - No need to adjudicate))
(2016/C 111/30)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Hispasat, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: initially J. Buendía Sierra, A. Lamadrid de Pablo and A. Balcells Cartagena, and, subsequently, J. Buendía Sierra and A. Lamadrid de Pablo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: É. Gippini Fournier, P. Němečková and B. Stromsky, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for partial annulment of Commission Decision C (2014) 6846 final of 1 October 2014 concerning State aid SA.27408 (C 24/2010) (ex NN 37/2010, ex CP 19/2009) granted by the authorities of Castilla-La Mancha for the deployment of digital terrestrial television in remote and less urbanised areas of Castilla-La Mancha.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action.










2.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on SES Astra’s application for leave to intervene.










3.


The European Commission shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Hispasat, SA.






(1)  OJ C 89, 16.3.2015.
Case T-440/14: Order of the General Court of 14 January 2016 — Premo v OHIM — Prema Semiconductor (PREMO)
Date: 2016-01-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, superconducting alloy, trade-mark law








C_2016098EN.01006002.xml










14.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/60





Order of the General Court of 14 January 2016 — Premo v OHIM — Prema Semiconductor (PREMO)
(Case T-440/14) (1)

(2016/C 098/77)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 315, 15.9.2014.
Case C-163/14: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 14 January 2016 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Article 343 TFEU — Protocol on the privileges and immunities of the European Union — Article 3 — Tax exemptions — Brussels-Capital Region — Contributions in respect of the supply of electricity and gas)
Date: 2016-01-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Brussels region, EU institution, Protocol (EU), electricity supply, gas supply, indirect tax, infringement of EU law, market organisation, tax exemption








C_2016098EN.01000501.xml










14.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/5





Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 14 January 2016 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium
(Case C-163/14) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 343 TFEU - Protocol on the privileges and immunities of the European Union - Article 3 - Tax exemptions - Brussels-Capital Region - Contributions in respect of the supply of electricity and gas))
(2016/C 098/05)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: F. Clotuche-Duvieusart and I. Martínez del Peral, Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: J.-C Halleux, S. Vanrie and T. Materne, Agents, assisted by G. Block, D. Remy and H. Delahaije, avocats)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that by not exempting the EU institutions from the contributions laid down by Article 26 of the Order concerning the organisation of the electricity market in the Brussels-Capital Region and by Article 20 of the Order concerning the organisation of the gas market in the Brussels-Capital Region, as amended, and by objecting to the refund of the contributions thereby collected by the Brussels-Capital Region, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under the second paragraph of Article 3 of the Protocol of 8 April 1965 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union, originally annexed to the Treaty establishing a Single Council and a Single Commission of the European Communities, and subsequently under the Treaty of Lisbon, as Protocol No 7, annexed to the TEU, the TFEU and the Euratom Treaty;










2.


Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 184, 16.6.2014.
Case C-234/14: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 January 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās tiesa — Latvia) — ‘Ostas celtnieks’ SIA v Talsu novada pašvaldība, Iepirkumu uzraudzības birojs (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Public procurement contracts — Directive 2004/18/EC — Economic and financial standing — Technical and/or professional ability — Articles 47(2) and 48(3) — Tender specifications laying down the obligation for a tenderer to conclude a cooperation agreement or to set up a partnership with the entities on whose capacities it relies)
Date: 2016-01-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: award of contract, invitation to tender, partnership, professional qualifications, services contract, supplies contract, tendering, works contract








C_2016098EN.01000601.xml










14.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/6





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 January 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās tiesa — Latvia) — ‘Ostas celtnieks’ SIA v Talsu novada pašvaldība, Iepirkumu uzraudzības birojs
(Case C-234/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Public procurement contracts - Directive 2004/18/EC - Economic and financial standing - Technical and/or professional ability - Articles 47(2) and 48(3) - Tender specifications laying down the obligation for a tenderer to conclude a cooperation agreement or to set up a partnership with the entities on whose capacities it relies))
(2016/C 098/06)
Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākās tiesa

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant:‘Ostas celtnieks’ SIA

Defendant: Talsu novada pašvaldība, Iepirkumu uzraudzības birojs

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 47(2) and 48(3) of Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts must be interpreted as meaning that they preclude a contracting authority, in the tender specifications relating to the award of a public contract, from imposing on a tenderer which relies on the capacities of other entities the obligation, before the contract is awarded, to conclude a cooperation agreement with those entities or to form a partnership with them.


(1)  OJ C 212, 7.7.2014.
Case T-400/14: Order of the General Court of 14 January 2016 — Premo v OHIM — Prema Semiconductor (PREMO)
Date: 2016-01-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, technology, trade-mark law








C_2016098EN.01006001.xml










14.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/60





Order of the General Court of 14 January 2016 — Premo v OHIM — Prema Semiconductor (PREMO)
(Case T-400/14) (1)

(2016/C 098/76)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.
Case C-66/15: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 14 January 2016 — European Commission v Hellenic Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Freedom to provide services — Motor vehicles — Hiring or leasing of a motor vehicle by a resident of a Member State from a supplier established in another Member State — Taxation of that vehicle at the time it is registered in the first Member State — Levy of the full amount of vehicle registration tax)
Date: 2016-01-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: freedom to provide services, hire purchase, motor vehicle, registration tax, vehicle registration, vehicle rental








C_2016098EN.01001502.xml










14.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/15





Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 14 January 2016 — European Commission v Hellenic Republic
(Case C-66/15) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Freedom to provide services - Motor vehicles - Hiring or leasing of a motor vehicle by a resident of a Member State from a supplier established in another Member State - Taxation of that vehicle at the time it is registered in the first Member State - Levy of the full amount of vehicle registration tax))
(2016/C 098/19)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: Wasmeier and D. Triantafyllou, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: K. Boskovits and V. Karrá, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Declares that, by levying the full amount of registration tax provided for under its national legislation at the time of registration of a vehicle hired or leased by a customer resident in its territory from a supplier established in another Member State, without taking into consideration the duration of the hire or lease contract and the duration of use of that vehicle in the national territory of Greece, the Hellenic Republic failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 56 to 62 TFEU;










2.


Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 138, 27.4.2015.
Case C-395/14: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 14 January 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Federal Administrative Court — Germany)) — Vodafone GmbH v Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services — Directive 2002/21/EC — Article 7(3) — Procedure for consolidating the internal market for electronic communications — Directive 2002/19/EC — Articles 8 and 13 — Operator designated as having significant market power on a market — Obligations imposed by national regulatory authorities — Price control and cost accounting obligations — Authorisation of mobile call termination fees)
Date: 2016-01-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: mobile phone, price control, provision of services, regulation of telecommunications, single market, telephone charges








C_2016098EN.01000902.xml










14.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/9





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 14 January 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Federal Administrative Court — Germany)) — Vodafone GmbH v Bundesrepublik Deutschland
(Case C-395/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services - Directive 2002/21/EC - Article 7(3) - Procedure for consolidating the internal market for electronic communications - Directive 2002/19/EC - Articles 8 and 13 - Operator designated as having significant market power on a market - Obligations imposed by national regulatory authorities - Price control and cost accounting obligations - Authorisation of mobile call termination fees))
(2016/C 098/11)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Vodafone GmbH

Defendant: Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Operative part of the judgment

Article 7(3) of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive) must be interpreted as meaning that, when an national regulatory authority has required an operator which has been designated as having significant market power to provide mobile call termination services and has made the fees charged for this subject to authorisation following the procedure laid down in that provision, that national regulatory authority is required to carry out the procedure again before each authorisation of those fees to that operator, where that authorisation is likely to affect trade between the Member States within the meaning of that provision.


(1)  OJ C 372, 20.10.2014.
Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/36 of 14 January 2016 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran
Date: 2016-01-14
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Iran, economic sanctions, international sanctions, petroleum product, trade restriction




L_2016010EN.01001701.xml










15.1.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 10/17








            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2016/36
of 14 January 2016
         
amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,


Having regard to the proposal of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:







(1)


On 26 July 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/413/CFSP (1) concerning restrictive measures against Iran.












(2)


Decision 2010/413/CFSP allows for, inter alia, the execution of obligations provided for in contracts concluded before 23 January 2012 or in ancillary contracts necessary for the execution of such obligations where the supply of Iranian crude oil and petroleum products or the proceeds derived from their supply are for the reimbursement of outstanding amounts with respect to contracts concluded before 23 January 2012 to persons or entities within the territories of Member States or under their jurisdiction, where those contracts specifically provide for such reimbursements.












(3)


Decision 2010/413/CFSP also provides that the asset freeze measures set out in that Decision do not apply to acts and transactions carried out with regard to entities listed in Annex II to that Decision insofar as necessary for the execution, until 14 January 2016, of the relevant obligations.












(4)


The Council considers that that exemption should be extended until 28 January 2016.












(5)


Further action by the Union is needed in order to implement measures provided for in this Decision.












(6)


Decision 2010/413/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Article 20(14) of Decision 2010/413/CFSP is replaced by the following:


‘14.   Paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply to acts and transactions carried out with regard to entities listed in Annex II insofar as necessary for the execution, until 28 January 2016, of the obligations as referred to in Article 3c(2) provided that those acts and transactions have been authorised in advance, on a case-by-case basis, by the relevant Member State. The relevant Member State shall inform the other Member States and the Commission of its intention to grant an authorisation.’.




Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 14 January 2016.


For the Council


The President

A.G. KOENDERS
            





(1)  Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP of 26 July 2010 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Common Position 2007/140/CFSP (OJ L 195, 27.7.2010, p. 39).