do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8106 — Jones Lang LaSalle/Integral UK Holding) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-07-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, real estate business








C_2016239EN.01001601.xml










1.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 239/16





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8106 — Jones Lang LaSalle/Integral UK Holding)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 239/05)






1.


On 23 June 2016, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which subsidiaries of the Jones Lang LaSalle Group (‘JLL’, United States) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Integral UK Holdings Limited (‘Integral’, United Kingdom), by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   JLL: active worldwide in the provision of real estate services for investor and occupier clients,
—   Integral: predominantly active in the provision of facilities management services, mainly within the United Kingdom.










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.8106 — Jones Lang LaSalle/Integral UK Holding, 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-351/16: Action brought on 1 July 2016 — Belgacom International Carrier Services/Commission
Date: 2016-07-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Belgium, State aid, abuse of power, control of State aid, corporation tax, equal treatment, fiscal policy, principle of legal certainty, profit, reimbursement of aid








C_2016305EN.01004901.xml










22.8.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 305/49





Action brought on 1 July 2016 — Belgacom International Carrier Services/Commission
(Case T-351/16)
(2016/C 305/66)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Belgacom International Carrier Services (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: H. Vanhulle, B. van de Walle de Ghelcke, C. Borgers and N. Baeten, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the Commission decision of 11 January 2016 on the excess profit exemption state aid scheme SA.37667 (2015/C) (ex 2015/NN) implemented by the Kingdom of Belgium;










—


in the alternative, annul Articles 2-4 of the Decision;










—


in any event, order the European Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the Commission has committed an error of law and a manifest error of assessment in the identification of the alleged aid measure and in its qualification as an aid scheme within the meaning of Article 1(d) of Council Regulation No 2015/1589 (1) and Article 107 TFUE.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission infringed Article 107 TFUE, failed to state reasons and committed a manifest error of assessment in considering that the Belgian excess profit ruling system constitutes a State aid measure.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the Commission infringed Article 16(1) of Council Regulation No 2015/1589 and the general principles of legal certainty and legitimate expectations in ordering the recovery of the alleged aid.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the Commission infringed Article 2(6) TFUE and the principle of equal treatment, and misuses its powers, by using State aid rules to prohibit the Belgian excess profit ruling system.






(1)  Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ 2015, L 248, p. 9).
Case T-350/16: Action brought on 1 July 2016 — Kinepolis Group v Commission
Date: 2016-07-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Belgium, State aid, cinema, control of State aid, corporation tax, film industry, profit, reimbursement of aid, tax exemption








C_2016296EN.01003902.xml










16.8.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 296/39





Action brought on 1 July 2016 — Kinepolis Group v Commission
(Case T-350/16)
(2016/C 296/50)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Kinepolis Group (Brussel, Belgium) (represented by: H. Gilliams and J. Bocken, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the Commission decision of 11 January 2016 on the excess profit exemption state aid scheme SA.37667 (2015/C) (ex 2015/NN) implemented by the Kingdom of Belgium;










—


in the alternative, annul Articles 2-4 of the Decision;










—


in any event, annul Articles 2-4 of that Decision in so far as these Articles (a) require recovery from entities other than the entities that have been issued an ‘excess profit ruling’ as defined in the Decision and (b) require the recovery of an amount equal to the beneficiary’s tax savings, without allowing Belgium to take into account an actual upwards adjustment by another tax administration;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment, excess of power and failure to provide adequate reasons in so far as the Commission decision of 11 January 2016 on the excess profit exemption state aid scheme SA.37667 (2015/C) (ex 2015/NN) implemented by the Kingdom of Belgium alleges the existence of an aid scheme.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging a violation of Article 107 TFUE and of the duty to state reasons and manifest error of assessment in so far as the contested decision qualifies the purported scheme as a selective measure.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging a violation of Article 107 TFUE and manifest error of assessment in so far as the contested decision asserts that the purported scheme gives rise to an advantage.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging a violation of Article 107 TFUE, infringement of legitimate expectations, manifest error of assessment, excess of power and failure to provide adequate reasons in so far as the contested decision order Belgium to recover aid.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7932 — Dow/DuPont) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-07-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agricultural production, animal production, chemical industry, crop production, economic concentration, electrical engineering, hunting, merger control








C_2016239EN.01001501.xml










1.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 239/15





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7932 — Dow/DuPont)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 239/04)






1.


On 22 June 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 The Dow Chemical Company (‘Dow’, United States) ultimate parent company of the Dow group and E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company (‘DuPont’, United States) ultimate parent company of the DuPont group enter into a full merger within the meaning of Article 3(1)(a) of the Merger Regulation by way of an Agreement and Plan of Merger.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   Dow: diversified chemicals company active in plastics and chemicals, agricultural sciences and crop protection, as well as hydrocarbon and energy products and services,
—   DuPont: manufacturer of a variety of chemical products, polymers, also active in agricultural sciences and crop protection, seeds, food ingredients, and other materials.










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.7932 — Dow/DuPont, 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’).
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2016-07-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2016239EN.01000301.xml










1.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 239/3





Euro exchange rates (1)

30 June 2016
(2016/C 239/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1102 




JPY


Japanese yen


114,05 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4393 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,82650 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,4242 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0867 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,3008 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,131 




HUF


Hungarian forint


317,06 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,4362 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5234 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,2060 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4929 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4384 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,6135 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5616 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4957 




KRW


South Korean won


1 278,48 




ZAR


South African rand


16,4461 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,3755 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5281 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 601,70 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,4301 




PHP


Philippine peso


52,241 




RUB


Russian rouble


71,5200 




THB


Thai baht


39,007 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,5898 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,6347 




INR


Indian rupee


74,9603 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/1071 of 1 July 2016 amending Decision 2014/512/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia's actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine
Date: 2016-07-01
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Russia, Ukraine, economic sanctions, international sanctions, territorial dispute, trade restriction




L_2016178EN.01002101.xml










2.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 178/21








            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2016/1071
of 1 July 2016
         
amending Decision 2014/512/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia's actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine


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 from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:







(1)


On 31 July 2014, the Council adopted Decision 2014/512/CFSP (1).












(2)


On 19 March 2015, the European Council agreed that the necessary measures would be taken to clearly link the duration of the restrictive measures to the complete implementation of the Minsk agreements, bearing in mind that the complete implementation was foreseen for 31 December 2015.












(3)


On 21 December 2015, the Council renewed Decision 2014/512/CFSP until 31 July 2016 in order to enable it to further assess the implementation of the Minsk agreements.












(4)


Having assessed the implementation of the Minsk agreements, Decision 2014/512/CFSP should be renewed for a further six months in order to enable the Council to further assess their implementation.












(5)


Decision 2014/512/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The first subparagraph of Article 9(1) of Decision 2014/512/CFSP is replaced by the following:


‘1.   This Decision shall apply until 31 January 2017.’.




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




Done at Brussels, 1 July 2016.


For the Council


The President

M. LAJČÁK
            





(1)  Council Decision 2014/512/CFSP of 31 July 2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia's actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine (OJ L 229, 31.7.2014, p. 13).
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8113 — Thoma Bravo/Qlik Technologies) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-07-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, information technology industry, merger control








C_2016239EN.01002001.xml










1.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 239/20





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8113 — Thoma Bravo/Qlik Technologies)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 239/09)






1.


On 24 June 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 Thoma Bravo, LLC (‘Thoma Bravo’, United States) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Qlik Technologies Inc. (‘Qlik Technologies’, United States) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Thoma Bravo: private equity firm which invests with a particular focus on application and infrastructure software and technology-enabled services.
—   for Qlik Technologies: provider of business intelligence and analytics software. Qlik’s software products are data visualisation and discovery applications which intelligently process vast amounts of data.










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.8113 — Thoma Bravo/Qlik Technologies, 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.
Notice concerning a request pursuant to Article 35 of Directive 2014/25/EU — Request made by a contracting entity — extension of deadline
Date: 2016-07-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Germany, award of contract, electrical energy, natural gas, retail trade








C_2016239EN.01002101.xml










1.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 239/21





Notice concerning a request pursuant to Article 35 of Directive 2014/25/EU
Request made by a contracting entity — extension of deadline
(2016/C 239/10)
On 21 March 2016 the Commission received a request in accordance with Article 35 of Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement procedures by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC (1).
This request, from the Federal Association of the Energy and Water Industry (BDEW Bundesverband der Energie- und Wasserwirtschaft e.V.) on behalf of the contracting entities in that sector, concerns certain activities in the market for retail of electricity and gas in Germany. The relevant notice was published on page 22 of OJ C 205 on 9 June 2016. The initial deadline was 4 August 2016.
Pursuant to the fourth subparagraph of point 1 of Annex IV of Directive 2014/25/EU, the deadline may be extended by the Commission with the agreement of those having made the request for exemption concerned. Given that the need to obtain and analyse additional information, and with the agreement of the applicant, the period available to the Commission for deciding on this request is hereby extended by 29 working days. The final deadline is therefore 15 September 2016.


(1)  OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 243.
Case T-355/16: Action brought on 1 July 2016 — adp Gauselmann v EUIPO (MULTI FRUITS)
Date: 2016-07-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, gaming, registered trade mark, software, toy industry, trade-mark law








C_2016296EN.01004001.xml










16.8.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 296/40





Action brought on 1 July 2016 — adp Gauselmann v EUIPO (MULTI FRUITS)
(Case T-355/16)
(2016/C 296/51)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: adp Gauselmann GmbH (Espelkamp, Germany) (represented by: P. Koch Moreno, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark ‘MULTI FRUITS’ — Application for registration No 13 646 542

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 April 2016 in Case R 1043/2015-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


uphold the ground of appeal and annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8051 — CVC/Tipico Group) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-07-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, gaming, merger control, provision of services








C_2016239EN.01001901.xml










1.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 239/19





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8051 — CVC/Tipico Group)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 239/08)






1.


On 22 June 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 CVC Capital Partners, together with its subsidiaries and CVC Capital Partners Advisory Group Holding Foundation and its subsidiaries (the ‘CVC Group’, Luxembourg), acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control over Tipico Group of Germany, by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for CVC Group: advice to and management of investments funds, which hold interests in a number of companies, including Sky Bet. Sky Bet is active in the provision of online gaming and betting services to customers in the United Kingdom, Ireland, Finland, Gibraltar, Isle of Man, and the Channel Islands,
—   for Tipico Group: provision of online, mobile and retail betting and gambling services in Germany, Belgium, Denmark and Austria (retail and online), and online and mobile betting and gambling services in Italy, Sweden and the Netherlands.










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.8051 — CVC/Tipico 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.