do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-142/19: Action brought on 1 March 2019 — Nosio v EUIPO — Passi (PASSIATA)
Date: 2019-03-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, alcoholic beverage, non-alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019148EN.01006002.xml










29.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/60






Action brought on 1 March 2019 — Nosio v EUIPO — Passi (PASSIATA)
(Case T-142/19)
(2019/C 148/60)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Nosio SpA (Mezzocorona, Italy) (represented by: J. Graffer and A. Ottolini, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Passi AG (Rothrist, Switzerland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark PASSIATA — Application for registration No 14 593 123

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 November 2018 in Case R 927/2018-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order the adverse parties to bear the costs of the present proceedings.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9145 — Kongsberg Gruppen/Rolls-Royce Commercial Marine) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-03-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, general mechanical engineering, holding company, maintenance, merger control, shipbuilding, technology, vessel








C_2019096EN.01000201.xml










13.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 96/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9145 — Kongsberg Gruppen/Rolls-Royce Commercial Marine)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 96/03)
On 1 March 2019, 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 32019M9145. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9083 — Saba Portugal/Egis Portugal/Viseu Car Park Assets) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-03-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, parking area, provision of services








C_2019102EN.01000101.xml










18.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 102/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9083 — Saba Portugal/Egis Portugal/Viseu Car Park Assets)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 102/01)
On 1 March 2019, 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 32019M9083. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9291 — Apollo Management/RPC Group) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-03-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, packaging, plastics industry








C_2019076EN.01001401.xml










1.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 76/14






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9291 — Apollo Management/RPC Group)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 76/06)

1.   
On 21 February 2019, 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’, US),










—


RPC Group plc (‘RPC’, UK).




Apollo acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of RPC.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares, by means of a court-sanctioned scheme of arrangement.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Apollo: a global investment fund,
—   for RPC: manufacturing of plastic products, including packaging and non-packaging.


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.9291 — Apollo Management/RPC Group
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 T-507/16: Order of the General Court of 1 March 2019 — Baradel and Others v EIF
Date: 2019-03-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: damages, pay, servant (EU), wage determination








C_2019148EN.01006401.xml










29.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/64






Order of the General Court of 1 March 2019 — Baradel and Others v EIF
(Case T-507/16) (1)

(2019/C 148/64)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Ninth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 226, 3.8.2013 (case initially registered at the European Union Civil Service Tribunal as Case F-51/13 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9261 — CD&amp;R/FHI) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-03-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: catering industry, company buyout, economic concentration, hotel industry, investment company, merger control








C_2019115EN.01000102.xml










27.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 115/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9261 — CD&R/FHI)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 115/02)
On 1 March 2019, 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 32019M9261. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2019-03-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2019076EN.01000201.xml










1.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 76/2






Euro exchange rates (1)

28 February 2019
(2019/C 76/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1416 




JPY


Japanese yen


126,44 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4611 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85835 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,4844 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1335 




ISK


Iceland króna


135,70 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,7268 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,601 




HUF


Hungarian forint


315,96 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3089 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7434 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,0679 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5988 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5042 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,9613 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6685 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5390 




KRW


South Korean won


1 281,07 




ZAR


South African rand


15,9479 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,6309 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4275 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 069,73 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6446 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,999 




RUB


Russian rouble


75,0888 




THB


Thai baht


35,983 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,2688 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,9073 




INR


Indian rupee


80,8915 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-200/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Trgovački sud u Zagreb (Croatia) made on 1 March 2019 — INA-INDUSTRIJA NAFTE d.d. and Others v LUBJANSKA BANKA d.d.
Date: 2019-03-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: branch, civil liability, commercial contract, contractual liability, damages, joint ownership, jurisdiction








C_2019164EN.01003101.xml










13.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 164/31






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Trgovački sud u Zagreb (Croatia) made on 1 March 2019 — INA-INDUSTRIJA NAFTE d.d. and Others v LUBJANSKA BANKA d.d.
(Case C-200/19)
(2019/C 164/34)
Language of the case: Croatian

Referring court

Trgovački sud u Zagreb

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: INA-INDUSTRIJA NAFTE d.d., CROATIA osiguranje d.d., REPUBLIKA HRVATSKA, Croatia Airlines d.d., GRAD ZAGREB, HRVATSKA ELEKTROPRIVREDA d.d., HRVATSKE ŠUME d.o.o., KAPITAL d.o.o. u stečaju, PETROKEMIJA d.d., Đuro Đaković Holding d.d., ENERGOINVEST d.d., TELENERG d.o.o., ENERGOCONTROL d.o.o., UDRUGA POSLODAVACA U ZDRAVSTVU, HRVATSKI ZAVOD ZA MIROVINSKO OSIGURANJE, ZAGREBPČANKA-POSLOVNI OBJEKTI d.d., BRODOGRADILIŠTE VIKTOR LENAC d.d., INOVINE d.d., MARAT INŽENJERING d.o.o., GOYA — COMPANY d.o.o., METROPOLIS PLAN d.o.o., Dalekovod d.d., INFRATERRA d.o.o., Citat d.o.o., STAROSTA d.o.o., METALKA METALCOM d.o.o., I.Š, B.C., Z.N., D.G., M.R., A.T.

Defendant: LUBJANSKA BANKA d.d.

Questions referred







1.


Bearing in mind that the defendant neither participated in the conclusion of the agreements with the other co-owners nor consented to that which was agreed, must Article 7(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 be interpreted as meaning that the defendant’s obligation — which is established by law but which, as regards the amount, final date for payment and other details, is determined by common agreement by the owners who represent more than half of the shares in the joint ownership of the building — must be regarded as a contractual obligation?










2.


Must Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 be interpreted as meaning that the failure to perform an obligation established by law with regard to the other co-owners of the building, who may seek performance of that obligation by judicial means, should be regarded as a tort, delict or quasi-delict, particularly having regard to the fact that the defendant’s failure to perform a legal obligation can give rise to additional harm (aside from the financial loss from the reserve fund) both for the other co-owners and for third parties?










3.


Taking into consideration that, in the present case, the obligation in question arises from the fact that the defendant is the owner of commercial premises in which it carries out activities, namely, premises in which a branch is situated, must Article 7(5) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 be interpreted as meaning that this is a dispute relating to the operation of branches, agencies or any other establishment?
Corrigendum to Passenger Name Records (PNR) — List of Member States who have decided the application of the PNR Directive to intra-EU flights as referred to in Article 2 of Directive (EU) 2016/681 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the use of passenger name record (PNR) data for the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious crime (If a Member State decides to apply this Directive to intra-EU flights, it shall notify the Commission in writing. A Member State may give or revoke such a notification at any time. The Commission shall publish that notification and any revocation of it in the Official Journal of the European Union) (OJ C 196, 8.6.2018)
Date: 2019-03-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, air safety, air transport, data collection, data protection, data transmission, personal data, protection of privacy, terrorism, traveller








C_2019076EN.01001601.xml










1.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 76/16






Corrigendum to Passenger Name Records (PNR) — List of Member States who have decided the application of the PNR Directive to intra-EU flights as referred to in Article 2 of Directive (EU) 2016/681 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the use of passenger name record (PNR) data for the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious crime

(If a Member State decides to apply this Directive to intra-EU flights, it shall notify the Commission in writing. A Member State may give or revoke such a notification at any time. The Commission shall publish that notification and any revocation of it in the Official Journal of the European Union)

(
Official Journal of the European Union C 196 of 8 June 2018
)
(2019/C 76/08)
On page 29:
The following Member State that has notified the Commission of the application of the PNR Directive in intra-EU flights is added:






—


Estonia
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9312 — JAB/Coty) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-03-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: clothing, cosmetics industry, economic concentration, food industry, investment company, merger control, retail selling








C_2019076EN.01001201.xml










1.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 76/12






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9312 — JAB/Coty)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 76/05)

1.   
On 21 February 2019, 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:






—


JAB Holding Company, SARL (Luxembourg, ‘JAB’),










—


Coty Inc. (USA, ‘Coty’)




JAB acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Coty.
The concentration is accomplished by way of public bid announced on 13 February 2019.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for JAB: JAB is a privately held group focused on long-term investments in companies such as tea brands, coffee brands, bakery, food, non-alcoholic beverages, doughnuts businesses and fashion retail,
—   for Coty: Coty is a global beauty products company.


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.9312 — JAB/Coty
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 T-135/19: Action brought on 1 March 2019 — Corporació Catalana de Mitjans Audiovisuals v EUIPO — Dalmat (LaTV3D)
Date: 2019-03-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, education, interpreting, provision of services, publishing, registered trade mark, sport, telecommunications, trade-mark law, translation








C_2019148EN.01005801.xml










29.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/58






Action brought on 1 March 2019 — Corporació Catalana de Mitjans Audiovisuals v EUIPO — Dalmat (LaTV3D)
(Case T-135/19)
(2019/C 148/56)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Corporació Catalana de Mitjans Audiovisuals, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: J. Erdozain López, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Stéphane Dalmat (Paris, France)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark LaTV3D — Application for registration No 15 630 833

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 December 2018 in Case R 874/2018-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9195 — Lifeco/Hammerson/Swords Pavilions) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-03-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, property development, property leasing, real estate business, shopping centre








C_2019076EN.01001501.xml










1.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 76/15






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9195 — Lifeco/Hammerson/Swords Pavilions)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 76/07)

1.   
On 22 February 2019, 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:






—


Irish Life (Ireland) and Clyde Property Fund (Ireland), both controlled by Great-West Lifeco (Canada),










—


Hammerson (United Kingdom),










—


Swords Pavilions (Ireland), currently controlled by Hammerson.




Great-West Lifeco and Hammerson acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of Swords Pavilions.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Irish Life and Clyde Property Fund: subsidiaries of Great-West Lifeco active in retail real estate services in Ireland. Great-West Lifeco is an international financial services holding company,
—   for Hammerson: commercial real estate development and renting and operating of its own commercial real estate, primarily in the United Kingdom, Ireland and France,
—   Swords Pavilions: shopping centre located close to the airport in Dublin’s northern suburbs.


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.9195 — Lifeco/Hammerson/Swords Pavilions
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’).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9275 — Intermediate Capital Group/Grupo Conectanet/Konecta Activos Inmobiliarios) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-03-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, outsourcing, telecommunications








C_2019094EN.01000101.xml










12.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 94/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9275 — Intermediate Capital Group/Grupo Conectanet/Konecta Activos Inmobiliarios)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 94/01)
On 1 March 2019, 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 32019M9275. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.