do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8292 — Sumitomo Rubber Industries/Micheldever Group) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-01-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, pneumatic tyre, retail trade, wholesale trade








C_2017016EN.01000901.xml










18.1.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 16/9





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8292 — Sumitomo Rubber Industries/Micheldever Group)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 16/07)






1.


On 5 January 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Sumitomo Rubber Industries Limited (‘Sumitomo’, Japan) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Micheldever Group Ltd (‘Micheldever’, UK) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Sumitomo: the manufacture and production of tyres and the sale of tyres to OEMs and to wholesale outlets. Sumitomo also manufactures certain sports and industrial goods,
—   for Micheldever: the wholesale and retail sale of tyres. Micheldever also offers automotive repair and services at the retail level.










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.8292 — Sumitomo Rubber Industries/Micheldever 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.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8344 — Sumitomo Corporation/Fyffes plc) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-01-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, fruit, merger control, vegetable, wholesale trade








C_2017016EN.01000701.xml










18.1.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 16/7





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8344 — Sumitomo Corporation/Fyffes plc)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 16/05)






1.


On 10 January 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Sumitomo Corporation (‘Sumitomo’, Japan) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Fyffes plc (‘Fyffes’, Ireland) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Sumitomo: trading of metal products, transportation and construction of systems, environment and infrastructure, chemicals and electronics, media, networks and lifestyle related goods, mineral resources and energy. Sumitomo is also active in the distribution of fresh fruits, through its subsidiary Sumifru,
—   for Fyffes: procurement, import and wholesale of fresh fruits and mushrooms. Fyffes also provides ripening services to third parties.










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.8344 — Sumitomo Corporation/Fyffes plc, 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.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8275 — Sompo/Endurance) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-01-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, insurance company, merger control, reinsurance








C_2017016EN.01000101.xml










18.1.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 16/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8275 — Sompo/Endurance)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 16/01)
On 12 January 2017, 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 32017M8275. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-21/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud České republiky (Czech Republic) lodged on 18 January 2017 — Catlin Europe SE v O.K. Trans Praha spol. s.r.o.
Date: 2017-01-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: claim, enforcement of ruling, injunction, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, judicial review, provision of documents








C_2017112EN.01001902.xml










10.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/19





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud České republiky (Czech Republic) lodged on 18 January 2017 — Catlin Europe SE v O.K. Trans Praha spol. s.r.o.
(Case C-21/17)
(2017/C 112/28)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší soud České republiky

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Catlin Europe SE

Applicant in the original proceedings: O.K. Trans Praha spol. s.r.o.

Question referred

Is Article 20(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 creating a European order for payment procedure to be interpreted to the effect that a failure to notify the addressee of the possibility of refusing to accept the documents to be served, as provided for under Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 (2) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (service of documents), and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000 (3) (‘the Service of documents Regulation’), gives grounds for a right on the part of the defendant (the addressee) to apply for review of the European order for payment under Article 20(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 creating a European order for payment procedure (‘the European order for payment Regulation’)?


(1)  OJ 2006 L 399, p. 1.

(2)  OJ 2007 L 324, p. 79.

(3)  OJ 2000 L 160, p. 37.
Case C-189/15: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 18 January 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) — Fondazione Santa Lucia v Cassa conguaglio per il settore elettrico and Others (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2003/96/EC — Taxation of energy products and electricity — Tax reductions — Substantive scope — Incentives in respect of the amounts covering general electricity charges — Article 17 — Energy-intensive businesses — Incentives granted to such businesses in the manufacturing sector alone — Lawfulness)
Date: 2017-01-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: electrical energy, energy consumption, environmental tax, industrial manufacturing, tax relief








C_2017070EN.01000201.xml










6.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 70/2





Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 18 January 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) — Fondazione Santa Lucia v Cassa conguaglio per il settore elettrico and Others
(Case C-189/15) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2003/96/EC - Taxation of energy products and electricity - Tax reductions - Substantive scope - Incentives in respect of the amounts covering general electricity charges - Article 17 - Energy-intensive businesses - Incentives granted to such businesses in the manufacturing sector alone - Lawfulness))
(2017/C 070/02)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) — Fondazione Santa Lucia

Defendant: Cassa conguaglio per il settore elettrico, Ministero dello Sviluppo economico, Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Autorità per l’energia elettrica e il gas

Intervening party: 2M SpA

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 17(1) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of ‘tax reductions’ covers the incentives granted, under national law, to energy-intensive businesses, as defined in that provision, in respect of amounts, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, covering general electricity charges, subject to verification by the referring court of the facts and the rules of national law on which this answer from the Court is based.










2.


Article 17(1) of Directive 2003/96 must be interpreted as not precluding national rules which provide for tax reductions on the consumption of electricity in favour of energy-intensive businesses, within the meaning of that provision, in the manufacturing sector alone.






(1)  OJ C 228, 13.7.2015.
Case T-64/16: Judgment of the General Court of 18 January 2017 — Wieromiejczyk v EUIPO (Tasty Puff) (EU trade mark — Application for EU figurative trade mark Tasty Puff — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2017-01-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, tobacco, tobacco industry, trade-mark law








C_2017063EN.01002801.xml










27.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/28





Judgment of the General Court of 18 January 2017 — Wieromiejczyk v EUIPO (Tasty Puff)
(Case T-64/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative trade mark Tasty Puff - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009))
(2017/C 063/38)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicants: Michał Wieromiejczyk (Pabianice, Poland) (represented by: R. Rumpel, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Śliwińska and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 November 2015 (Case R 3058/2014-5), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign Tasty Puff as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Michał Wieromiejczyk to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 111, 29.3.2016.
Case C-471/15: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 January 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret — Denmark) — Sjelle Autogenbrug I/S v Skatteministeriet (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Value added tax — Directive 2006/112/EC — Special scheme for taxing the profit margin — Concept of ‘second-hand goods’ — Sales of parts removed from end-of-life vehicles)
Date: 2017-01-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, motor vehicle industry, product life, spare part, trading margin, used goods, vehicle parts








C_2017070EN.01000602.xml










6.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 70/6





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 January 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret — Denmark) — Sjelle Autogenbrug I/S v Skatteministeriet
(Case C-471/15) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax - Directive 2006/112/EC - Special scheme for taxing the profit margin - Concept of ‘second-hand goods’ - Sales of parts removed from end-of-life vehicles))
(2017/C 070/09)
Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Vestre Landsret

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Sjelle Autogenbrug I/S

Defendant: Skatteministeriet

Operative part of the judgment

Article 311(1)(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that used parts, from end-of-life motor vehicles purchased by a vehicle reuse undertaking from a private individual, intended to be sold as spare parts, constitute ‘second-hand goods’ within the meaning of that provision, with the result that the supplies of such parts, effected by a taxable dealer, are subject to the application of the profit margin scheme.


(1)  OJ C 363, 3.11.2015.
Case C-309/16: Order of the President of the Court of 18 January 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht — Austria) — Kärntner Ausgleichszahlungs-Fonds v Österreichische Finanzmarktaufsichtsbehörde (FMA)
Date: 2017-01-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: claim, company in difficulties, credit institution, financial solvency, investment company








C_2017129EN.01001401.xml










24.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/14





Order of the President of the Court of 18 January 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht — Austria) — Kärntner Ausgleichszahlungs-Fonds v Österreichische Finanzmarktaufsichtsbehörde (FMA)
(Case C-309/16) (1)

(2017/C 129/21)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 335, 12.9.2016.
Case C-23/17 P: Appeal brought on 18 January 2017 by For Tune sp. z o.o. against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 8 November 2016 in Case T-579/15: For Tune sp. z o.o. v European Union Intellectual Property Office
Date: 2017-01-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, audiovisual industry, electronic publishing, recording, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017249EN.01001602.xml










31.7.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 249/16






Appeal brought on 18 January 2017 by For Tune sp. z o.o. against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 8 November 2016 in Case T-579/15: For Tune sp. z o.o. v European Union Intellectual Property Office
(Case C-23/17 P)
(2017/C 249/24)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: For Tune sp. z o.o. (represented by: K. Popławska, adwokat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office
By order of 15 June 2017 the Court of Justice (Sixth Chamber) held that the appeal was inadmissible.