do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8085 — AEA/Scan Global Logistics) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-06-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: air transport, carriage of goods, carrier, economic concentration, maritime transport, merger control, postal service, road transport, storage








C_2016225EN.01000501.xml










22.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 225/5





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8085 — AEA/Scan Global Logistics)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 225/06)






1.


On 15 June 2016, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which AEA Investors SBF LP (‘AEA’, United States of America) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Scan Global Logistics Holding ApS (‘Scan Global Logistics’, Denmark) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for AEA: private equity fund with investments in various sectors, in particular value-added industrial products, specialty chemicals, consumer/retail and services,
—   for Scan Global Logistics: asset light international freight forwarding 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. 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.8085 — AEA/Scan Global Logistics, 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.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1082 of 22 June 2016 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Oecher Puttes/Aachener Puttes (PGI))
Date: 2016-06-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Germany, North Rhine-Westphalia, designation of origin, fresh product, labelling, meat product, preserved product, product designation, smoked product








L_2016180EN.01000301.xml










6.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 180/3








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2016/1082
of 22 June 2016
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Oecher Puttes/Aachener Puttes (PGI))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Germany's application to register the name ‘Oecher Puttes’/‘Aachener Puttes’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Oecher Puttes’/‘Aachener Puttes’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Oecher Puttes’/‘Aachener Puttes’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.2. — Meat products (cooked, salted, smoked, etc.), as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth 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, 22 June 2016.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Phil HOGAN
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ C 99, 15.3.2016, p. 24.

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).
Case C-557/14: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 22 June 2016 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 91/271/EEC — Urban waste water treatment — Judgment of the Court establishing a failure to fulfil obligations — Non-compliance — Article 260(2) TFEU — Financial penalties — Lump sum payment and penalty payment)
Date: 2016-06-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: enforcement of ruling, pollution control measures, sanction (EU), unauthorised dumping, urban area, wastewater, water treatment








C_2016314EN.01000202.xml










29.8.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 314/2





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 22 June 2016 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
(Case C-557/14) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 91/271/EEC - Urban waste water treatment - Judgment of the Court establishing a failure to fulfil obligations - Non-compliance - Article 260(2) TFEU - Financial penalties - Lump sum payment and penalty payment))
(2016/C 314/03)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braga da Cruz and E. Manhaeve, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, J. Reis Silva and J. Brito e Silva, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by failing to take all the measures necessary to comply with the judgment of 7 May 2009 in Commission v Portugal (C-530/07, EU:C:2009:292), the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 260(1) TFEU;










2.


If the failure to fulfil obligations established in point 1 has continued until the day of delivery of the present judgment, orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the European Commission, into the ‘European Union own resources’ account, a penalty payment of EUR 8 000 for each day of delay in implementing the measures necessary to comply with the judgment of 7 May 2009 in Commission v Portugal (C-530/07, EU:C:2009:292), from the date of delivery of the present judgment until the judgment of 7 May 2009 in Commission v Portugal (C-530/07, EU:C:2009:292) has been complied with in full;










3.


Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the European Commission, into the ‘European Union own resources’ account, a lump sum payment of EUR 3 000 000;










4.


Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 46, 9.6.2015.
Case T-440/15: Order of the General Court of 22 June 2016 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Others v EMA (Action for annulment — Public service contracts — Processing of online transactions — External service provision for software applications — Multiple framework cascade contract EMA/2012/10/ICT — Request for services sent to the applicants — Insertion of new criteria — Subject matter of the action ceasing to exist — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2016-06-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, data processing, invitation to tender, provision of services, services contract, software








C_2016305EN.01003501.xml










22.8.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 305/35





Order of the General Court of 22 June 2016 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Others v EMA
(Case T-440/15) (1)

((Action for annulment - Public service contracts - Processing of online transactions - External service provision for software applications - Multiple framework cascade contract EMA/2012/10/ICT - Request for services sent to the applicants - Insertion of new criteria - Subject matter of the action ceasing to exist - No need to adjudicate))
(2016/C 305/48)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicants: European Dynamics Luxembourg SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg), Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece), and European Dynamics Belgium SA (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: I. Ampazis, M. Sfyri, C.-N. Dede and D. Papadopoulou, and subsequently M. Sfyri, C.-N. Dede and D. Papadopoulou, lawyers)

Defendant: European Medicines Agency (represented by: T. Jablonski, N. Rampal Olmedo, G. Gavriilidou and P.A. Eyckmans, Agents)

Subject matter

Application based on Article 272 TFEU and seeking a declaration concerning the insertion, in EMA’s request S C 002 of 22 May 2015 to provide services, of new criteria which did not feature in the technical specifications for tender EMA/20l1/l7/ICT, Annex I to framework contract EMA/2012/l0/ICT.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


European Dynamics Luxembourg SA, Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE and European Dynamics Belgium SA shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).






(1)  OJ C 337, 12.10.2015.
Case C-173/16: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 22 June 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal — Ireland) — M. H. v M. H. (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — No reasonable doubt — Jurisdiction in matrimonial matters — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 16(1)(a) — Determination of the time when a court is seised — Concept of ‘the time when the document instituting the proceedings or an equivalent document is lodged with the court’)
Date: 2016-06-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: civil proceedings, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, matrimonial law








C_2016343EN.01001801.xml










19.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 343/18





Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 22 June 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal — Ireland) — M. H. v M. H.
(Case C-173/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - No reasonable doubt - Jurisdiction in matrimonial matters - Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 - Article 16(1)(a) - Determination of the time when a court is seised - Concept of ‘the time when the document instituting the proceedings or an equivalent document is lodged with the court’))
(2016/C 343/28)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Court of Appeal

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: M. H.

Defendant: M. H.

Operative part of the order

Article 16(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000, must be interpreted to the effect that the ‘time when the document instituting the proceedings or an equivalent document is lodged with the court’, within the meaning of that provision, is the time when that document is lodged with the court concerned, even if under national law lodging that document does not of itself immediately initiate proceedings.


(1)  OJ C 211, 13.6.2016.