do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-641/16: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 9 November 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — Tünkers France, Tünkers Maschinenbau GmbH v Expert France (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Insolvency proceedings — Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 — Court having jurisdiction — Action for unfair competition brought in the context of insolvency proceedings — Action brought by a company having its registered office in another Member State against the assignee of part of the business of a company subject to insolvency proceedings — Action not part of the proceedings or action deriving directly from those proceedings and closely connected with them)
Date: 2017-11-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: damages, distributor, exclusive distribution agreement, financial solvency, jurisdiction, nationality of legal persons, restriction on competition








C_2018005EN.01001401.xml










8.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 5/14





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 9 November 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — Tünkers France, Tünkers Maschinenbau GmbH v Expert France
(Case C-641/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Insolvency proceedings - Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 - Court having jurisdiction - Action for unfair competition brought in the context of insolvency proceedings - Action brought by a company having its registered office in another Member State against the assignee of part of the business of a company subject to insolvency proceedings - Action not part of the proceedings or action deriving directly from those proceedings and closely connected with them))
(2018/C 005/18)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Tünkers France, Tünkers Maschinenbau GmbH

Defendant: Expert France

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings must be interpreted as meaning that an action for damages for unfair competition by which the assignee of part of the business acquired in the course of insolvency proceedings is accused of misrepresenting itself as being the exclusive distributor of articles manufactured by the debtor does not fall within the jurisdiction of the court which opened the insolvency proceedings.


(1)  OJ C 70, 6.3.2017.
Case C-499/16: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 9 November 2017 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — AZ v Minister Finansów (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 98 — Discretion of the Member States to apply a reduced rate to certain supplies of goods and services — Annexe III, point 1 — Foodstuffs — Pastry goods and cakes — Best-before date or use-by date — Principle of fiscal neutrality)
Date: 2017-11-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, confectionery product, product life, tax relief








C_2018005EN.01001202.xml










8.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 5/12





Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 9 November 2017 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — AZ v Minister Finansów
(Case C-499/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 98 - Discretion of the Member States to apply a reduced rate to certain supplies of goods and services - Annexe III, point 1 - Foodstuffs - Pastry goods and cakes - Best-before date or use-by date - Principle of fiscal neutrality))
(2018/C 005/16)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: AZ

Defendant: Minister Finansów

Operative part of the judgment

Article 98 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude — provided that the principle of fiscal neutrality is complied with, which is for the referring court to ascertain — national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which makes the application of the reduced VAT rate to fresh pastry goods and cakes depend solely on the criterion of their ‘best-before date’ or their ‘use-by date’.


(1)  OJ C 22, 23.1.2017.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8594 — COSCO SHIPPING/OOIL) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-11-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: carriage of goods, economic concentration, logistics, merger control, provision of services








C_2017377EN.01002201.xml










9.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 377/22





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8594 — COSCO SHIPPING/OOIL)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 377/12)






1.


On 27 October 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


COSCO SHIPPING Holdings Co., Ltd (‘COSCO SHIPPING’, China),










—


Orient Overseas (International) Limited (‘OOIL’, Bermuda).




COSCO SHIPPING acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of OOIL.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for COSCO SHIPPING: provides a wide range of container shipping and terminal services through its various subsidiaries,
—   for OOIL: active in the fields of container shipping under the trade name OOCL, logistics services and terminal services.










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. The following reference should always be specified:
M.8594 — COSCO SHIPPING/OOIL
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:





E-mail: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu




Fax +32 22964301




Postal 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’).
Notice of open competition
Date: 2017-11-09
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: assistant, competition (EU), secretarial staff








C_2017377EN.01001001.xml










9.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 377/10





NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITION
(2017/C 377/10)
The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising the following open competition:






 


EPSO/AST-SC/06/17 — SECRETARIES/CLERKS (SC 1 & SC 2)




The competition notice is published in 24 languages in 
Official Journal of the European Union C 377 A of 9 November 2017.
Further information can be found on the EPSO website: https://epso.europa.eu/
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8683 — Apollo Capital Management L.P./Intertoys Holding B.V.) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-11-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, holding company, investment company, merger control, retail trade, toy industry








C_2017377EN.01002301.xml










9.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 377/23





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8683 — Apollo Capital Management L.P./Intertoys Holding B.V.)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 377/13)






1.


On 25 October 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


Apollo Management, L.P. (‘Apollo’ or ‘Apollo Group’),










—


Intertoys Holding B.V. (‘Intertoys Group’).




Investment funds managed by affiliates of Apollo Management, L.P. acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control over Intertoys Holding B.V. (‘Intertoys Group’).
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   Apollo: investment in companies and debt issued by companies active in various businesses throughout the world, by means of investment funds managed by the group. Examples of current investments include, inter alia, companies in the chemical, cruise line, hospital, security, financial services and glass packaging businesses.
—   Intertoys Group: retail sale of a broad range of traditional toys and an up-to-date selection of multimedia items and gifts via physical stores and online websites in the Netherlands, Germany, Luxembourg and Belgium.










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 the 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. The following reference should always be specified:
M.8683 — Apollo Capital Management L.P./Intertoys Holding B.V.
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:





Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu




Fax +32 22964301




Postal 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 C-227/16: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 9 November 2017 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof Arnhem-Leeuwaarden — Netherlands) — Jan Theodorus Arts v Veevoederbedrijf Alpuro BV (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Agriculture — Common agricultural policy — Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 — Single payment scheme — Veal farmer who concluded an integration contract — Contractual term under which the single payment is payable to the integration undertaking — Whether permissible)
Date: 2017-11-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: aid to agriculture, calf, livestock farming, single payment scheme








C_2018005EN.01000901.xml










8.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 5/9





Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 9 November 2017 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof Arnhem-Leeuwaarden — Netherlands) — Jan Theodorus Arts v Veevoederbedrijf Alpuro BV
(Case C-227/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Agriculture - Common agricultural policy - Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 - Single payment scheme - Veal farmer who concluded an integration contract - Contractual term under which the single payment is payable to the integration undertaking - Whether permissible))
(2018/C 005/11)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Gerechtshof Arnhem-Leeuwaarden

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Jan Theodorus Arts

Defendant: Veevoederbedrijf Alpuro BV

Operative part of the judgment

Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 of 19 January 2009 establishing common rules for direct support schemes for farmers under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1290/2005, (EC) No 247/2006, (EC) No 378/2007 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, must be interpreted as not precluding a contractual term under which the amount of aid which a veal farmer is entitled to claim under the single payment scheme is payable to an integration undertaking in the case where the transfer of that aid takes place within the context of reciprocal benefits and obligations negotiated between the parties to the contract.


(1)  OJ C 279, 01.08.2016.
Case C-205/16 P: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 9 November 2017 — SolarWorld AG v Brandoni solare SpA, Solaria Energia y Medio Ambiente, SA, Council of the European Union, European Commission, China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Machinery and Electronic Products (CCCME) (Appeal — Subsidies — Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1239/2013 — Article 2 — Imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) originating in or consigned from China — Definitive countervailing duty — Exemption of imports covered by an accepted undertaking — Severability)
Date: 2017-11-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: China, countervailing charge, exemption from customs duties, import (EU), originating product, photovoltaic cell








C_2018005EN.01000702.xml










8.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 5/7





Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 9 November 2017 — SolarWorld AG v Brandoni solare SpA, Solaria Energia y Medio Ambiente, SA, Council of the European Union, European Commission, China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Machinery and Electronic Products (CCCME)
(Case C-205/16 P) (1)

((Appeal - Subsidies - Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1239/2013 - Article 2 - Imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) originating in or consigned from China - Definitive countervailing duty - Exemption of imports covered by an accepted undertaking - Severability))
(2018/C 005/09)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: SolarWorld AG (represented by: L. Ruessmann, avocat, J. Beck, Solicitor)

Other parties to the proceedings: Brandoni solare SpA, Solaria Energia y Medio Ambiente, SA (represented by: L. Ruessmann, avocat, and M. J. Beck, Solicitor), Council of the European Union (represented by: H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agent, and N. Tuominen, Avocată), European Commission (represented by: A. Demeneix, T. Maxian Rusche and J.-F. Brakeland, acting as Agents), China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Machinery and Electronic Products (CCCME) (represented by: J.-F. Bellis and A. Scalini, avocats, F. Di Gianni, avvocato)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Dismisses the appeal;










2)


Orders SolarWorld AG to pay the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union;










3)


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 232, 27.06.2016.