do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-709/17: Order of the General Court of 28 September 2018 — M-Sansz v Commission (Action for annulment — State aid — Aid implemented by Hungary in favour of companies employing disabled workers — Preliminary examination procedure — Alleged Commission decisions declaring the aid measure compatible with the internal market — Concept of ‘party concerned’ — No individual concern — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2018-09-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Hungary, State aid, control of State aid, damages, discrimination based on disability, employment aid, integration of people with disabilities, worker with disabilities








C_2018427EN.01007201.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/72






Order of the General Court of 28 September 2018 — M-Sansz v Commission
(Case T-709/17) (1)

(Action for annulment - State aid - Aid implemented by Hungary in favour of companies employing disabled workers - Preliminary examination procedure - Alleged Commission decisions declaring the aid measure compatible with the internal market - Concept of ‘party concerned’ - No individual concern - Inadmissibility)
(2018/C 427/96)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties


Applicant: M-Sansz Kereskedelmi, Termelő és Szolgáltató Kft. (M-Sansz Kft.) (Pécs, Hungary) (represented by: L. Szabó, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Bottka and C. Georgieva-Kecsmar, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decisions that the Commission allegedly adopted concerning the complaints SA.29432 — CP 290/2009 — Hungary — Aid for the employment of disabled workers alleged to be unlawful due to the discriminatory nature of the legislation and SA. 45498 (FC/2016) — Complaint made by OPS Újpest-lift Kft. concerning the State aid granted between 2006 and 2012 to companies employing disabled workers.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


M-Sansz Kereskedelmi, Termelő és Szolgáltató Kft. (M-Sansz Kft.) shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 437, 18.12.2017.
Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/1470 of 28 September 2018 appointing a member, proposed by the Federal Republic of Germany, of the European Economic and Social Committee
Date: 2018-09-28
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Economic and Social Committee, Germany, appointment of members








L_2018246EN.01004501.xml










2.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 246/45








            COUNCIL DECISION (EU, Euratom) 2018/1470
of 28 September 2018
         
appointing a member, proposed by the Federal Republic of Germany, of the European Economic and Social Committee


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 302 thereof,


Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 106a thereof,


Having regard to the proposal of the German Government,


Having regard to the opinion of the European Commission,

Whereas:







(1)


On 18 September 2015 and 1 October 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU, Euratom) 2015/1600 (1) and (EU, Euratom) 2015/1790 (2) appointing the members of the European Economic and Social Committee for the period from 21 September 2015 to 20 September 2020.












(2)


A member's seat on the European Economic and Social Committee has become vacant following the end of the mandate of Mr Stefan KÖRZELL,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Mr Florian MORITZ, Head of Department Economic, Finance and Fiscal Policy, German Confederation of Trade Unions (DGB) Executive Board, is hereby appointed as a member of the European Economic and Social Committee for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 20 September 2020.


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




Done at Brussels, 28 September 2018.


For the Council


The President

M. SCHRAMBÖCK
            





(1)  Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2015/1600 of 18 September 2015 appointing the members of the European Economic and Social Committee for the period from 21 September 2015 to 20 September 2020 (OJ L 248, 24.9.2015, p. 53).

(2)  Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2015/1790 of 1 October 2015 appointing the members of the European Economic and Social Committee for the period from 21 September 2015 to 20 September 2020 (OJ L 260, 7.10.2015, p. 23).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8995 — Magna/Olsa) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2018-09-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, motor vehicle industry, supplier, vehicle parts








C_2018368EN.01000101.xml










11.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 368/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8995 — Magna/Olsa)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 368/01)
On 28 September 2018, 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 32018M8995. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-713/17: Order of the General Court of 28 September 2018 — Motex v Commission (Action for annulment — State Aid — Aid implemented by Hungary in favour of undertakings which have employed persons with disabilities — Preliminary review procedure — Decisions allegedly taken by the Commission declaring the aid to be compatible with the internal market — Concept of party concerned — Lack of individual concern — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2018-09-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Hungary, State aid, control of State aid, damages, discrimination based on disability, employment aid, integration of people with disabilities, worker with disabilities








C_2018427EN.01007302.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/73






Order of the General Court of 28 September 2018 — Motex v Commission
(Case T-713/17) (1)

(Action for annulment - State Aid - Aid implemented by Hungary in favour of undertakings which have employed persons with disabilities - Preliminary review procedure - Decisions allegedly taken by the Commission declaring the aid to be compatible with the internal market - Concept of party concerned - Lack of individual concern - Inadmissibility)
(2018/C 427/98)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties


Applicant: Motex Ipari és Szolgáltató Rehabilitációs Kft. (Motex Kft.) (Esztergom-Kertváros, Hungary) (represented by: L. Szabó, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Bottka and C. Georgieva-Kecsmar, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decisions allegedly adopted by the Commission concerning the complaints SA.29432 — CP 290/2009 — Hungary — Aid for the employment of disabled workers that is alleged to be illegal due to the discriminatory nature of the legislation, and SA.45498 (FC/2016) — Complaint by OPS Újpest-lift Kft concerning State aid provided to undertakings which employed disabled workers between 2006 and 2012.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dimissed.










2.


Motex Ipari és Szolgáltató Rehabilitációs Kft. (Motex Kft.) shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 437, 18.12.2017.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9089 — Hellman &amp; Friedman/Concardis Payment Group) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2018-09-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electronic money, merger control, private equity








C_2018347EN.01001801.xml










28.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/18






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9089 — Hellman & Friedman/Concardis Payment Group)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 347/07)

1.   
On 20 September 2018, 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:






—


Hellman & Friedman LLC (‘Hellman & Friedman’, United States),










—


Concardis Payment Group GmbH (‘Concardis’, Germany).




Hellman & Friedman acquires, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation, sole control of the whole of Concardis. The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Hellman & Friedman: private equity investment through funds controlling several portfolio companies in a variety of economic sectors, including notably Nets, active in the provision of payments, cards, and information services in Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, and Poland,
—   for Concardis: merchant acquiring services in Germany, Austria and Switzerland.


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.9089 — Hellman & Friedman/Concardis Payment Group
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’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Decision No 1/2018 of the ACP-EU Committee of Ambassadors of 28 September 2018 giving a discharge to the Director of the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) in respect of the implementation of its budget for the financial years 2001, 2002 and 2003 [2018/1525]
Date: 2018-09-28
Institutions: ACP–EU Committee of Ambassadors
Subjects: ACP-EU institution, budgetary discharge, cooperation on agriculture, financial year, general budget (EU), rural development








L_2018256EN.01011701.xml










12.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 256/117








            DECISION No 1/2018 OF THE ACP-EU COMMITTEE OF AMBASSADORS
         
of 28 September 2018
         
giving a discharge to the Director of the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) in respect of the implementation of its budget for the financial years 2001, 2002 and 2003 [2018/1525]


THE ACP-EU COMMITTEE OF AMBASSADORS,

Having regard to the Partnership agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part (1), and in particular Article 3(4) of Annex III thereto,


Having regard to Decision No 1/2000 of the ACP-EC Council of Ministers of 27 July 2000 regarding transitional measures valid from 2 August 2000 until the entry into force of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement (2),


Having regard to the balance sheets of the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation for the financial years 2001, 2002 and 2003, adopted on 31 December 2001, 31 December 2002 and 31 December 2003 respectively,


Having regard to the Auditors' reports on the Centre's accounts for the financial years 2001, 2002 and 2003,


Having taken note of the replies given by the Director of the Centre to the comments made by the Auditors,

Whereas:







(1)


The revenue of the Centre for the financial years 2001, 2002 and 2003 consisted principally of contributions from the European Development Fund amounting to EUR 13 151 076, EUR 15 906 102 and EUR 14 880 000 respectively.












(2)


The Director's overall implementation of the Centre's budgets during the financial years 2001, 2002 and 2003 were such that he should be given a discharge in respect of the implementation of those budgets,





HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:



Sole Article
The Committee, on the basis of the Auditors' reports and the balance sheets for the corresponding financial years, hereby gives a discharge to the Director of the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation in respect of the implementation of its budget for the financial years 2001, 2002 and 2003.




Done at Brussels, 28 September 2018.


For the ACP-EU Committee of Ambassadors


The Chairman

Ammo Aziza BAROUD
            





(1)  
            OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 3.

(2)  
            OJ L 195, 1.8.2000, p. 46.
Case C-615/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Kehl (Germany) lodged on 28 September 2018 — Criminal proceedings against UY
Date: 2018-09-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: criminal liability, criminal proceedings, free movement of workers, freedom of movement, freedom to provide services, penalty, residence, right of establishment, ruling








C_2018445EN.01000901.xml










10.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 445/9






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Kehl (Germany) lodged on 28 September 2018 — Criminal proceedings against UY
(Case C-615/18)
(2018/C 445/11)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Kehl

Parties to the main proceedings

Staatsanwaltschaft Offenburg
v
UY

Question referred







1.


Is EU law, in particular Directive 2012/13 (1) and Articles 21, 45, 49 and 56 TFEU, to be interpreted as meaning that it precludes legislation of a Member State which makes it possible, in the course of criminal proceedings, solely because the accused is not resident in that State but in another Member State, to make an order that the accused has to appoint a person authorised to accept service of a penalty order made against him, with the result that the penalty order would acquire the force of res judicata and thus form the legal prerequisite for the criminal liability of any later action taken by the accused (‘Tatbestandswirkung’) even if the accused was not actually aware of the penalty order and the accused actually learning of the penalty order is not guaranteed to the same extent as it would have been if the penalty order been served on the accused had he been resident in that Member State?










2.


In the event that the first question is answered in the negative: is EU law, in particular Directive 2012/13 and Articles 21, 45, 49 and 56 TFEU, to be interpreted as meaning that it precludes legislation of a Member State which makes it possible, in the course of criminal proceedings, solely because the accused is not resident in that State but in another Member State, to make an order that the accused has to appoint a person authorised to accept service of a penalty order made against him, with the result that the penalty order would acquire the force of res judicata and thus form the legal prerequisite for the criminal liability of any later action taken by the accused (‘Tatbestandswirkung’) and, given that he has to make sure that he actually learns of the penalty order, the accused is subject to more stringent subjective obligations in the prosecution of that criminal offence than he would have been had he been resident in that Member State, resulting in a possible prosecution for negligence on the part of the accused?






(1)  Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings (OJ 2012 L 142, p. 1).
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9103 — ORIX Aviation Systems/Bohai/Avolon) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2018-09-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: air transport, economic concentration, hire purchase, investment company, merger control








C_2018347EN.01002101.xml










28.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/21






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9103 — ORIX Aviation Systems/Bohai/Avolon)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 347/10)

1.   
On 24 September 2018, 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:






—


ORIX Aviation Systems Limited (‘OAS’, Ireland), belonging to ORIX Corporation (Japan),










—


Bohai Capital Holding Co., Ltd (‘Bohai’, China), belonging to HNA Group (China).




OAS and Bohai acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of Avolon Holdings Limited, Bohai’s subsidiary active in aircraft leasing services.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for OAS: an investor aircraft and asset manager. ORIX Corporation is a financial services group with a diverse portfolio of financial services,
—   for Bohai: a leasing group. HNA Group is a conglomerate encompassing core divisions of aviation, holdings, capital, tourism and logistics.


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.9103 — ORIX Aviation Systems/Bohai/Avolon
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.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9114 — KKR/TPG Asia/KMK/Square Peg/PropertyGuru) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2018-09-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Internet, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, television








C_2018365EN.01000102.xml










9.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 365/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9114 — KKR/TPG Asia/KMK/Square Peg/PropertyGuru)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 365/02)
On 28 September 2018, 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 32018M9114. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-593/18: Action brought on 28 September 2018 — BS (Information erased or replaced within the framework of protection of personal data and/or confidentiality) v Parliament
Date: 2018-09-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, pension scheme, rights of the defence, staff regulations








C_2018427EN.01009901.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/99






Action brought on 28 September 2018 —  BS (1) v Parliament
(Case T-593/18)
(2018/C 427/130)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: BS (2) (represented by: M. Maes and J.-N. Louis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the notice of amendment No. 15, dated 10 August 2017, concerning the applicant’s pension rights;










—


annul, so far as necessary, the decision to recover the purported overpayment of EUR 1 589,16 in respect of the months of September, October and November 2017 and EUR 4 815,16 as shown on the pension slip for December 2017;










—


order the Parliament to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 2 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union inasmuch as the contested decisions are vitiated by a manifest error of assessment.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to good administration (Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union) in so far as the defendant failed to give adequate reasons for its decision and failed to observe the applicant’s right to be heard and his right to have access to his file.






(1)  Information erased or replaced within the framework of protection of personal data and/or confidentiality

(2)  Information erased or replaced within the framework of protection of personal data and/or confidentiality
Case C-613/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Tributário de Lisboa (Portugal) lodged on 28 September 2018 — State of Canada v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
Date: 2018-09-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: capital movement, corporation tax, establishment, nationality of legal persons








C_2018445EN.01000801.xml










10.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 445/8






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Tributário de Lisboa (Portugal) lodged on 28 September 2018 — State of Canada v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
(Case C-613/18)
(2018/C 445/09)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Tributário de Lisboa

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: State of Canada

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Question referred

In the context of taxation of dividends distributed by a company established in the national territory to a non-resident entity, is it compatible with the principle precluding restrictions on movements of capital between Member States and third countries for there to be an effective rate of corporation tax which is applied more disadvantageously to entities resident in a third country than to a resident in the national territory which is similar in nature?