do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-669/16: Action brought on 23 December 2016 — European Commission v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Date: 2016-12-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: biodiversity, biotope, conservation of resources, protected area, protected species, protection of animal life








C_2017063EN.01001802.xml










27.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/18





Action brought on 23 December 2016 — European Commission v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
(Case C-669/16)
(2017/C 063/26)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: J. Norris-Usher, C. Hermes, Agents)

Defendant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

The applicant claims that the Court should:







—


declare that, by failing to designate sites for the protection of the species phocoena phocoena (harbour porpoise) the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1), Annex II and Annex III of Directive 92/43/EEC (1) on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora;










—


declare that by its corresponding failure to contribute to the creation of a Natura 2000 network in proportion to the representation within its territory of the habitats of the species harbour porpoise (phocoena phocoena), the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has also failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 3(2) of the same Directive;










—


order the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The harbour porpoise (phocoena phocoena) is an aquatic cetacean species which is listed in Annex II of the Habitats Directive as a species of community interest requiring the designation of specific areas of conservation. A significant population of the species within the European Union is hosted in marine waters in which the United Kingdom exercises sovereign rights.
Pursuant to Articles 3(2) and 4(1) as well as Annexes II and III of the Habitats Directive, Member States hosting the harbour porpoise in their marine waters shall propose sites for their protection and, by so doing, contribute to the creation of the Natura 2000 network. According to the case-law of the Court of Justice, the proposed list of sites must be exhaustive.
The United Kingdom has not proposed sufficient sites for the harbour porpoise.


(1)  OJ 1992, L 206, p. 7.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2016-12-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2016481EN.01000701.xml










23.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/7





Euro exchange rates (1)

22 December 2016
(2016/C 481/05)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0444 




JPY


Japanese yen


122,86 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4342 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84645 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,6008 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0706 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,0975 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,021 




HUF


Hungarian forint


310,22 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,4096 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5266 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,6682 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4470 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4066 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,1083 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5111 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5136 




KRW


South Korean won


1 257,21 




ZAR


South African rand


14,6811 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,2560 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5350 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 070,92 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6768 




PHP


Philippine peso


52,238 




RUB


Russian rouble


63,7526 




THB


Thai baht


37,622 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,4761 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,6087 




INR


Indian rupee


71,0005 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8159 — AM/Cellino/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance )
Date: 2016-12-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, metallurgical industry, wholesale selling








C_2016481EN.01002001.xml










23.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/20





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8159 — AM/Cellino/JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 481/10)






1.


On 16 December 2016, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 and following a referral pursuant to Article 4(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertakings ArcelorMittal Distribution Services France, (‘AMDSF’, France), belonging to ArcelorMittal Group (‘ArcelorMittal’, France), and Cellino S.r.l. (‘Cellino’, Italy) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the newly created company constituting a joint venture Steelcame S.r.l. (‘Steelcame’, Italy), by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for ArcelorMittal: mining, manufacturing and distribution of various steel products at global level,
—   for Cellino: production of small and medium steel metal components in common steel, stainless steel, high resistance steel, aluminium and metallic alloys and stamping.










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.8159 — AM/Cellino/JV, 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 for the attention of the data subjects to whom the restrictive measures provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2373, apply
Date: 2016-12-23
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person, personal data, terrorism








C_2016481EN.01000601.xml










23.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/6





Notice for the attention of the data subjects to whom the restrictive measures provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2373, apply
(2016/C 481/04)
The attention of data subjects is drawn to the following information in accordance with Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1):
The legal basis for this processing operation is Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 (2), as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2373 (3).
The controller of this processing operation is the Council of the European Union represented by the Director General of DG C (Foreign Affairs, Enlargement, Civil Protection) of the General Secretariat of the Council and the department entrusted with the processing operation is the Unit 1C of DG C that can be contacted at:





Council of the European Union




General Secretariat




DG C 1C




Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175




1048 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË




Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu




The purpose of the processing operation is the establishment and updating of the list of persons subject to restrictive measures in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001, as implemented by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2373.
The data subjects are the natural persons who fulfil listing criteria as laid down in that Regulation.
The personal data collected includes data necessary for the correct identification of the person concerned, the Statement of Reasons and any other data related thereto.
The personal data collected may be shared as necessary with the European External Action Service and the Commission.
Without prejudice to restrictions provided for in Article 20(1)(a) and (d) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, requests for access, as well as requests for rectification or objection will be answered in accordance with section 5 of Council Decision 2004/644/EC (4).
Personal data will be retained for 5 years from the moment the data subject has been removed from the list of persons subject to the asset freeze or the validity of the measure has expired, or for the duration of court proceedings in the event they had been started.
Data subjects may have recourse to the European Data Protection Supervisor in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.


(1)  OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 344, 28.12.2001, p. 70.

(3)  OJ L 352, 23.12.2016, p. 31.

(4)  OJ L 296, 21.9.2004, p. 16.
Case C-667/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands) lodged on 23 December 2016 — M.N.J.P.W. Nooren & J.M.F.D.C. Nooren, heirs of M.N.F.M. Nooren v Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken
Date: 2016-12-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: aid to agriculture, eligibility criteria, farmer, single payment scheme, terms for aid, viticulture








C_2017078EN.01001201.xml










13.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/12





Request for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands) lodged on 23 December 2016 — M.N.J.P.W. Nooren & J.M.F.D.C. Nooren, heirs of M.N.F.M. Nooren v Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken
(Case C-667/16)
(2017/C 078/17)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: M.N.J.P.W. Nooren & J.M.F.D.C. Nooren, heirs of M.N.F.M. Nooren

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken

Questions referred







1.


Has the EU legislature provided for the possibility, in Articles 70, 71 and 72 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1122/2009 (1) of 30 November 2009 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 as regards cross-compliance, modulation and the integrated administration and control system, under the direct support schemes for farmers provided for that regulation, as well as for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards cross-compliance under the support scheme provided for the wine sector, — in situations such as that in the main proceedings, in which there are multiple instances of non-compliance within the same area of cross-compliance — of aggregating the reductions of aid for repeated and unrepeated instances of negligent non-compliance with cross-compliance requirements, on the one hand, and for instances of intentional non-compliance with cross-compliance conditions, on the other?










2.


If so, which article or article section provides the basis for this and what is the calculation rule for such aggregation?










3.


If not, can a basis for this be found elsewhere under EU law?






(1)  OJ 2009 L 316, p. 65.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8243 — Allianz/NN Group/The FIZZ Student Housing) (Text with EEA relevance )
Date: 2016-12-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, student residence








C_2016481EN.01000401.xml










23.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/4





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8243 — Allianz/NN Group/The FIZZ Student Housing)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 481/02)
On 15 December 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 32016M8243. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Networking of organisations operating in the fields within the European Food Safety Authority's (EFSA's) mission
Date: 2016-12-23
Institutions: European Food Safety Authority
Subjects: EU Member State, consumer protection, food inspection, food safety, institutional cooperation








C_2016481EN.01000801.xml










23.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/8





Networking of organisations operating in the fields within the European Food Safety Authority's (EFSA's) mission
(2016/C 481/06)
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 (1), Article 36(2), provides that the European Food Safety Authority's ‘Management Board, acting on a proposal from the Executive Director, shall draw up a list to be made public of competent organisations designated by the Member States which may assist the Authority, either individually or in networks, with its mission.’
The list was first drawn up by EFSA's Managements Board on 19 December 2006, and since then is:






i.


updated regularly, on the basis of proposals from EFSA's Executive Director, taking account of reviews or new designation proposals from the Member States (in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 2230/2004, Article 2(4) (2));










ii.


made public on EFSA's website, where the latest updated list of competent organisations is published; and










iii.


made available through the Article 36 Search Tool to the organisations, providing contact details and the organisations' specific fields of competence.




This respective information is available on the EFSA website, under the following links:






i.


the latest amendment to the list of competent organisations by EFSA's Management Board on [14/12/2016] –
[http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/events/event/161214-0];










ii.


the updated list of competent organisations –
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/assets/art36listg.pdf; and










iii.


Article 36 Search Tool – http://www.efsa.europa.eu/art36/search.




EFSA will keep this notification updated, specifically regarding the provided website links.
For more information please contact Cooperation.Article36@efsa.europa.eu.


(1)  Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1).

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2230/2004 of 23 December 2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 with regard to the network of organisations operating in the fields within the European Food Safety Authority's mission (OJ L 379, 24.12.2004, p. 64).
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8266 — MCHC/Ube/MCIS-CN/AETZ-CN Assets) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance )
Date: 2016-12-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: chemical industry, economic concentration, merger control








C_2016481EN.01001901.xml










23.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/19





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8266 — MCHC/Ube/MCIS-CN/AETZ-CN Assets)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 481/09)






1.


On 14 December 2016 the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Mitsubishi Chemical Holdings Corporation (‘MCHC’, Japan) and Ube Industries, Ltd (‘Ube’, Japan) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control over Changshu MC Ionic Solutions CN Co., Ltd (‘MCIS-CN’ or the ‘JV’) and the assets of AET Electrolyte Technologies (Zhangjiagang) Co., Ltd (‘AETZ-CN’) by way of purchase of shares and assets.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   MCHC: a global holding company engaged in three business domains, namely performance products, health care and industrial materials, this includes the production and marketing of pharmaceutical intermediates and ingredients, recording media and chemicals, including electrolytes for lithium-ion secondary batteries,
—   Ube: a global company active in five main business segments: chemicals, pharmaceuticals, cement and construction materials, machinery and energy and environment,
—   MCIS-CN: currently indirectly controlled by MCHC, active in production and sale of electrolytes for lithium-ion secondary batteries in China,
—   AETZ-CN: assets controlled by Ube, used for the production and sale of electrolytes for lithium-ion secondary batteries in China.










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 M.8266 — MCHC/Ube/MCIS-CN/AETZ-CN Assets, 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-910/16: Action brought on 23 December 2016 — Hesse v EUIPO — Wedl & Hofmann (TESTA ROSSA)
Date: 2016-12-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, household article, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017053EN.01004401.xml










20.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/44





Action brought on 23 December 2016 — Hesse v EUIPO — Wedl & Hofmann (TESTA ROSSA)
(Case T-910/16)
(2017/C 053/53)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Kurt Hesse (Nuremberg, Germany) (represented by: M. Krogmann, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Wedl & Hofmann GmbH (Mils/Hall in Tirol, Austria)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark containing the word elements ‘TESTA ROSSA’ –EU trade mark No 7 070 519

Proceedings before EUIPO: Revocation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 October 2016 in Case R 68/2016-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and also declare EU trade mark No 7 070 519 revoked in respect of the following goods:
Class 21 — Household and kitchen containers; Glassware, Porcelain, in particular tableware; Glass beverage ware;
Class 25 — Clothing, namely aprons, shirts, polo shirts and t-shirts; Headgear;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-911/16: Action brought on 23 December 2016 — Wedl & Hofmann v EUIPO — Hesse (TESTA ROSSA)
Date: 2016-12-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, catering industry, clothing, coffee, furniture industry, household article, household electrical appliance, registered trade mark, telecommunications, trade-mark law








C_2017053EN.01004402.xml










20.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/44





Action brought on 23 December 2016 — Wedl & Hofmann v EUIPO — Hesse (TESTA ROSSA)
(Case T-911/16)
(2017/C 053/54)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Wedl & Hofmann GmbH (Mils/Hall in Tirol, Austria) (represented by: T. Raubal, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Kurt Hesse (Nuremberg, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark containing the word elements ‘TESTA ROSSA’ — EU trade mark No 7 070 519

Proceedings before EUIPO: Revocation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 October 2016 in Case R 68/2016-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul or amend the contested decision in so far as it dismissed the applicant’s appeal and declared the applicant’s mark to be revoked in respect of Classes 7, 11, 20, parts of Classes 21 and 25, Class 28, parts of Class 30, and Classes 34 and 38, and in so far as it confirmed the decision of the Cancellation Division of 17 November 2015 in that regard (however, the part of the contested decision upholding the applicant’s appeal remains unchallenged by the applicant);










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 51(1) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 15(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Rule 40(5) of Regulation No 2868/95, in conjunction with Rule 22(3) and (4) thereof.