do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8538 — IFM/OHL/OHL Mexico) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-08-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: building industry, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, transport infrastructure








C_2017253EN.01000102.xml










4.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 253/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8538 — IFM/OHL/OHL Mexico)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 253/02)
On 11 July 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 32017M8538. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-504/17: Action brought on 4 August 2017 — Estévez Puerto and Others v Commission and SRB
Date: 2017-08-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, abuse of power, aid for restructuring, company in difficulties, credit institution, damages, financial solvency, ownership, right to justice








C_2017347EN.01003701.xml










16.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/37





Action brought on 4 August 2017 — Estévez Puerto and Others v Commission and SRB
(Case T-504/17)
(2017/C 347/47)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicants: José Ramón Estévez Puerto (Jeréz de la Frontera, Spain) and 14 other applicants (represented by: B. Gutiérrez de la Roza Pérez, P. Rubio Escobar, R. Ruiz de la Torre Esporrín and B. Fernández García, lawyers)

Defendants: European Commission and Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should annul:






—


Decision SRB/EES/2017/08 of the Single Resolution Board taken at its executive session of 7 June 2017 by which the resolution scheme regarding the institution Banco Popular Español S.A was adopted;










—


Commission Decision (EU) 2017/1246 of 7 June 2017 endorsing the resolution scheme for Banco Popular Español, S.A.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those put forward in Cases T-478/17, Mutualidad de la Abogacía and Hermandad Nacional de Arquitectos Superiores y Químicos v Single Resolution Board, T-481/17, Fundación Tatiana Pérez de Guzmán el Bueno y SFL v Single Resolution Board, T-482/17, Comercial Vascongada Recalde v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-483/17, García Suárez and Others v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-484/17, Fidesban and Others v Single Resolution Board, T-497/17, Sáchez del Valle and Calatrava Real State 2015 v Commission andSingle Resolution Board, and T-498/17, Pablo Álvarez de Linera Granda v Commission and Single Resolution Board.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8521 — Segro/PSPIB/SELP/CAT Site) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-08-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, parking area, property leasing, real estate business








C_2017253EN.01000201.xml










4.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 253/2





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8521 — Segro/PSPIB/SELP/CAT Site)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 253/03)
On 11 July 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 32017M8521. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-613/17: Action brought on 4 August 2017 — La Guirigaña and Others v ECB and SRB
Date: 2017-08-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, abuse of power, aid for restructuring, company in difficulties, credit institution, damages, financial solvency, ownership, right to justice








C_2017424EN.01004001.xml










11.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 424/40





Action brought on 4 August 2017 — La Guirigaña and Others v ECB and SRB
(Case T-613/17)
(2017/C 424/58)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicants: La Guirigaña, S.L. (Madrid, Spain) and seven other applicants (represented by: J. Díaz-Patón Porras, lawyer)

Defendants: European Central Bank and Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the General Court should take note that an application has been lodged alleging that the European Union has incurred financial liability in respect of acts and omissions attributable to the European Central Bank and take note of the joint lodging of an action against the Decision of the Single Resolution Board of 7 June 2017 and, following the appropriate legal procedure, should:






—


Declare that the European Union has incurred financial liability towards the applicants;










—


Annul the Single Resolution Board’s decision of 7 June 2017, depriving it of effect,










—


In the alternative, should the Court not uphold the aforementioned claims, order that the Single Resolution Board compensate the applicants.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those put forward in Cases T-478/17, Mutualidad de la Abogacía and Hermandad Nacional de Arquitectos Superiores y Químicos v Single Resolution Board, T-481/17, Fundación Tatiana Pérez de Guzmán el Bueno and SFL v Single Resolution Board, T-482/17, Comercial Vascongada Recalde v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-483/17, García Suárez and Others v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-484/17, Fidesban and Others v Single Resolution Board, T-497/17, Sáchez del Valle and Calatrava Real State 2015 v Commission and Single Resolution Board, and T-498/17, Pablo Álvarez de Linera Granda v Commission and Single Resolution Board.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2017-08-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2017253EN.01000301.xml










4.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 253/3





Euro exchange rates (1)

3 August 2017
(2017/C 253/04)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1860 




JPY


Japanese yen


130,91 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4381 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,90318 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,6093 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1501 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,3768 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,965 




HUF


Hungarian forint


303,74 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2526 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5655 




TRY


Turkish lira


4,1992 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4943 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4951 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,2724 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5986 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6130 




KRW


South Korean won


1 336,54 




ZAR


South African rand


15,7628 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,9726 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4063 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 804,04 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


5,0780 




PHP


Philippine peso


59,625 




RUB


Russian rouble


71,6789 




THB


Thai baht


39,429 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,7017 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,1435 




INR


Indian rupee


75,5210 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-507/17: Action brought on 4 August 2017 — Fundación Pedro Barrié de la Maza, Conde de Fenosa v Commission and SRB
Date: 2017-08-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, abuse of power, aid for restructuring, company in difficulties, credit institution, damages, financial solvency, ownership, right to justice








C_2017347EN.01003901.xml










16.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/39





Action brought on 4 August 2017 — Fundación Pedro Barrié de la Maza, Conde de Fenosa v Commission and SRB
(Case T-507/17)
(2017/C 347/50)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicants: Fundación Pedro Barrié de la Maza, Conde de Fenosa (La Coruña, Spain) (represented by: B. Gutiérrez de la Roza Pérez, P. Rubio Escobar, R. Ruiz de la Torre Esporrín y B. Fernández García, lawyers)

Defendants: European Commission and Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should annul:






—


Decision SRB/EES/2017/08 of the Single Resolution Board taken at its executive session of 7 June 2017 adopting the resolution scheme regarding the institution Banco Popular Español S.A.;










—


Commission Decision (EU) 2017/1246 of 7 June 2017 endorsing the resolution scheme for Banco Popular Español.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those put forward in Cases T-478/17, Mutualidad de la Abogacía and Hermandad Nacional de Arquitectos Superiores y Químicos v Single Resolution Board, T-481/17, Fundación Tatiana Pérez de Guzmán el Bueno and SFL v Single Resolution Board, T-482/17, Comercial Vascongada Recalde v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-483/17, García Suárez and Others v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-484/17, Fidesban and Others v Single Resolution Board, T-497/17, Sáchez del Valle and Calatrava Real State 2015 v Commission and Single Resolution Board, and T-498/17, Pablo Álvarez de Linera Granda v Commission and Single Resolution Board.
Case C-469/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 4 August 2017 — Funke Medien NRW GmbH v Federal Republic of Germany
Date: 2017-08-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: copyright, freedom of the press, literary and artistic property, right to information








C_2017382EN.01003001.xml










13.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 382/30





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 4 August 2017 — Funke Medien NRW GmbH v Federal Republic of Germany
(Case C-469/17)
(2017/C 382/36)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Defendant and appellant: Funke Medien NRW GmbH

Applicant and respondent: Federal Republic of Germany

Questions referred







1.


Do the provisions of Union law on the exclusive right of authors to reproduce (Article 2(a) of Directive 2001/29/EC (1)) and publicly communicate their works, including the right to make works available to the public (Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC), and the exceptions or limitations to these rights (Article 5(2) and (3) of Directive 2001/29/EC) allow any latitude in terms of implementation in national law?










2.


In which way are the fundamental rights of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union to be taken into account when ascertaining the scope of the exceptions or limitations provided for in Article 5(2) and (3) of Directive 2001/29/EC to the exclusive right of authors to reproduce (Article 2(a) of Directive 2001/29/EC) and publicly communicate their works, including the right to make works available to the public (Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC)?










3.


Can the fundamental rights of freedom of information (second sentence of Article 11(1) of the Charter) or freedom of the media (Article 11(2) of the Charter) justify exceptions or limitations to the exclusive rights of authors to reproduce (Article 2(a) of Directive 2001/29/EC) and publicly communicate their works, including the right to make works available to the public (Article 3(1) Directive 2001/29/EC), beyond the exceptions or limitations provided for in Article 5(2) and (3) of Directive 2001/29/EC?






(1)  Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8537 — Moody’s/Bureau Van Dijk Electronic Publishing) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-08-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: data collection, economic concentration, financial market, financial services, market research, merger control, trade information








C_2017253EN.01000101.xml










4.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 253/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8537 — Moody’s/Bureau Van Dijk Electronic Publishing)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 253/01)
On 28 July 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 32017M8537. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Reorganisation measures — Decision on a reorganisation measure in respect of Insurance company ‘Nadejda’ (Publication made in accordance with Article 271 of Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II))
Date: 2017-08-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Bulgaria, EU control, insurance company, liquidation








C_2017253EN.01000902.xml










4.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 253/9





Reorganisation measures — Decision on a reorganisation measure in respect of Insurance company ‘Nadejda’

(Publication made in accordance with Article 271 of Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II))

(2017/C 253/07)






Insurance undertaking


Insurance company ‘Nadejda’




Date, entry into force and nature of decision


Decision on the restriction of the free disposal of assets
Date: 16.6.2017




Competent authorities


Financial Supervision Commission
Address: 16 Uzundzhovska Str., floor 3, Sofia 1000, Bulgaria




Supervisory authority


Financial Supervision Commission
Address: 16, Budapeshta str., Sofia 1000, Bulgaria




Administrator appointed


Rozalina Gradinarova-Stoyanova
Address: 999 VETs Simeonovo, Zh.k. Vitosha, Lozenets district, Sofia 1700, Bulgaria




Applicable law


Republic of Bulgaria, Article 633, para 2 with regard to Article 587, para 3, point 3 of the Bulgarian Code on Insurance