do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting of 18 September 2017 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39824 – Trucks Rapporteur: Ireland 2020/C 216/04
Date: 2017-09-18
Institutions: Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions
Subjects: EU competition policy, European Economic Area, cartel, commercial vehicle, control of restrictive practices, large vehicle, price agreement, price increase, sale, sanction (EU)








C_2020216EN.01000501.xml










30.6.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 216/5






Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting of 18 September 2017 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39824 – Trucks
Rapporteur: Ireland
(2020/C 216/04)

1.   

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the anticompetitive behaviour covered by the draft decision constitutes agreements and/or concerted practices between relevant undertakings within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA.



2.   

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment of the product and geographic scope of the agreements and/or concerted practices contained in the draft decision.



3.   

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the undertaking concerned by the draft decision has, together with the addressees of the Commission’s settlement decision of 19 July 2016 in Case AT.39824, participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA.



4.   

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the object of the agreements and/or concerted practices for the infringement described in the draft decision was to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA.



5.   

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreements and/or concerted practices described in the draft decision have been capable of appreciably affecting trade between the Member States of the EU.



6.   

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment as regards the duration for the infringement described in the draft decision.



7.   

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the addressees of the draft decision.



8.   

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Political and Security Committee Decision (CFSP) 2017/1780 of 18 September 2017 on the appointment of the Head of Mission of the European Union CSDP mission in Mali (EUCAP Sahel Mali) (EUCAP Sahel Mali/1/2017)
Date: 2017-09-18
Institutions: Political and Security Committee
Subjects: EU police mission, Mali, Sahel, appointment of members, peacekeeping








L_2017253EN.01003701.xml










30.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 253/37








            POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE DECISION (CFSP) 2017/1780
of 18 September 2017
         
on the appointment of the Head of Mission of the European Union CSDP mission in Mali (EUCAP Sahel Mali) (EUCAP Sahel Mali/1/2017)


THE POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular the third paragraph of Article 38 thereof,


Having regard to Council Decision 2014/219/CFSP of 15 April 2014 on the European Union CSDP mission in Mali (EUCAP Sahel Mali) (1), and in particular Article 7(1) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Decision 2014/219/CFSP, the Political and Security Committee (PSC) is authorised, in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 38 of the Treaty, to take the relevant decisions for the purpose of exercising the political control and strategic direction of the EUCAP Sahel Mali mission, including the decision to appoint a Head of Mission.












(2)


On 26 May 2014, the PSC adopted Decision EUCAP Sahel Mali/1/2014 (2), appointing Mr Albrecht CONZE as Head of Mission of EUCAP Sahel Mali from 26 May 2014 to 14 January 2015.












(3)


The mandate of Mr Albrecht CONZE as Head of Mission of EUCAP Sahel Mali has been extended several times, most recently by PSC Decision EUCAP Sahel Mali/2/2016 (3), which extended his mandate as Head of Mission of EUCAP Sahel Mali until 14 July 2017.












(4)


On 15 September 2017, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy proposed the appointment of Mr Philippe RIO as Head of Mission of EUCAP Sahel Mali from 1 October 2017 to 14 January 2018,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Mr Philippe RIO is hereby appointed as Head of Mission of the European Union CSDP mission in Mali (EUCAP Sahel Mali) from 1 October 2017 to 14 January 2018.


Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 18 September 2017.


For the Political and Security Committee


The Chairperson

W. STEVENS
            





(1)  
            OJ L 113, 16.4.2014, p. 21.

(2)  Political and Security Committee Decision 2014/310/CFSP of 26 May 2014 on the appointment of the Head of Mission of the European Union CSDP mission in Mali (EUCAP Sahel Mali) (EUCAP Sahel Mali/1/2014) (OJ L 164, 3.6.2014, p. 43).

(3)  Political and Security Committee Decision (CFSP) 2016/2381 of 14 December 2016 extending the mandate of the Head of Mission of the European Union CSDP mission in Mali (EUCAP Sahel Mali) (EUCAP Sahel Mali/2/2016) (OJ L 352, 23.12.2016, p. 59).
Case T-700/15: Order of the General Court of 18 September 2017 — Volfas Engelman v EUIPO — Rauch Fruchstäfte (BRAVORO PINTA)
Date: 2017-09-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, beer, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017392EN.01004001.xml










20.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 392/40





Order of the General Court of 18 September 2017 — Volfas Engelman v EUIPO — Rauch Fruchstäfte (BRAVORO PINTA)
(Case T-700/15) (1)

(2017/C 392/49)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 38, 1.2.2016.
Case C-544/17 P: Appeal brought on 18 September 2017 by BPC Lux 2 Sàrl, and Others against the order of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 19 July 2017 in Case T-812/14: BPC Lux 2 Sàrl and Others v European Commission
Date: 2017-09-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Portugal, State aid, aid for restructuring, aid to undertakings, bank, control of State aid, proof








C_2017402EN.01001501.xml










27.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/15





Appeal brought on 18 September 2017 by BPC Lux 2 Sàrl, and Others against the order of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 19 July 2017 in Case T-812/14: BPC Lux 2 Sàrl and Others v European Commission
(Case C-544/17 P)
(2017/C 402/17)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: BPC Lux 2 Sàrl and Others (represented by: K. Bacon QC, B. Woogar, Barristers, J. Webber, M. Steenson, Solicitors)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Portuguese Republic

Form of order sought

The appellants claim that the Court should:






—


set aside the order of the General Court;










—


remit the case to the General Court for a further hearing on the merits; and










—


order the Commission to pay the appellants’ costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

This is an appeal against the order of the General Court dated 19 July 2017 in Case T-812/14 BPC Lux 2 Sàrl v European Commission EU:T:2017:560 (‘the order under appeal’), by which the General Court dismissed as inadmissible the appellants’ action seeking annulment of the Commission’s Decision C(2014) 5682 on State Aid SA.39250 Resolution of Banco Espírito Santo (‘the contested decision’).
In the order under appeal, the General Court held of its own motion that the appellants do not have an interest in annulment, and as such that their application is inadmissible. The appellants now appeal to the Court of Justice, on the single ground that the General Court erred in law and/or manifestly distorted the evidence before it.
Specifically, the General Court erred in finding that the annulment of the contested decision could not have any effect in the domestic proceedings because they concerned questions of national law while these proceedings concern issues of EU law. In fact, as set out further below, the appellants had provided evidence from their Portuguese lawyer, uncontradicted by the Commission or the Portuguese Republic, that the annulment of the contested decision would substantially increase the likelihood of success in their domestic judicial review application, entitling them either to annulment of the resolution of BES or to claim damages. In reaching the contrary conclusion, and thereby denying the Portuguese courts the opportunity to consider the point for themselves, the General Court impermissibly substituted its own assessment of the interpretation of national law for that of the Portuguese courts, and/or manifestly distorted the evidence before it.
Case T-629/17: Action brought on 18 September 2017 — Czech Republic v Commission
Date: 2017-09-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU aid, European Regional Development Fund, European Social Fund, award of contract, competitiveness, education, operational programme








C_2017369EN.01003901.xml










30.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 369/39





Action brought on 18 September 2017 — Czech Republic v Commission
(Case T-629/17)
(2017/C 369/53)
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Vláčil and T. Müller, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


annul Commission Implementing Decision C(2017) 4682 final of 6 July 2017 cancelling part of the European Social Fund assistance for the operational programme Education for Competitiveness under the ‘Convergence’ and ‘Regional Competitiveness and Employment’ objectives in the Czech Republic and part of the European Regional Development Fund assistance for the operational programmes Research and Development for Innovations under the ‘Convergence’ objective in the Czech Republic and Technical Assistance under the ‘Convergence’ and ‘Regional Competitiveness and Employment’ objectives in the Czech Republic;










—


order the European Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on one plea in law, alleging an infringement of Article 99(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 (1) laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999, in conjunction with Article 16(b) of Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 (2) on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts. The Commission imposed financial corrections for alleged irregularities in awards of public contracts which, however, constitute a procedure permitted by Article 16(b) of Directive 2004/18. The Commission wrongly takes the view that the exception to the rules for the award of public contracts under Article 16(b) of Directive 2004/18 concerning programme content applies only to contracting authorities which are broadcasters.


(1)  OJ 2006 L 210, p. 25.

(2)  OJ 2004 L 134, p. 114.
Case T-628/17: Action brought on 18 September 2017 — Aeris Invest v Commission and SRB
Date: 2017-09-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, abuse of power, aid for restructuring, company in difficulties, credit institution, damages, financial solvency, ownership, right to justice








C_2017374EN.01004801.xml










6.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 374/48





Action brought on 18 September 2017 — Aeris Invest v Commission and SRB
(Case T-628/17)
(2017/C 374/71)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Aeris Invest Sàrl (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: M. Roca Junyent, J. Calvo Costa, R. Vallina Hoset and A. Sellés Marco, 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 of 7 June 2017 concerning the adoption of a resolution scheme in respect of Banco Popular Español, S.A.;










—


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










—


Where appropriate, declare Articles 15, 18, 20, 21, 22 and/or 24 of Regulation No 806/2014 inapplicable, in accordance with Article 277 TFEU;










—


Order SRB and the European Commission to pay the costs.





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 T-86/16: Judgment of the General Court of 18 September 2017 — Codorniú SA v EUIPO (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark ANA DE ALTUN — Earlier national figurative mark ANNA — Relative grounds for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2017-09-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, white wine








C_2017369EN.01001101.xml










30.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 369/11





Judgment of the General Court of 18 September 2017 — Codorniú SA v EUIPO
(Case T-86/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark ANA DE ALTUN - Earlier national figurative mark ANNA - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons))
(2017/C 369/14)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Codorniú SA (Esplugues de Llobregat, Spain) (represented by: M. Ceballos Rodríguez and J. Güell Serra, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Zaera Cuadrado, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Bodegas Altun, SL (Baños de Ebro, Spain) (represented by: M. Escribano Uzcudun, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 December 2015 (Case R 199/2015-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Codorníu and Bodegas Altun.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 9 December 2015 (Case R 199/2015-2);










2.


Orders EUIPO and Bodegas Altun, SL to bear their own costs and each to pay half of those incurred by Codorníu SA.






(1)  OJ C 136, 18.4.2016.