do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9392 — EQT/Parques Reunidos) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-05-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment, investment company, leisure park, merger control








C_2019185EN.01002301.xml










29.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 185/23






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9392 — EQT/Parques Reunidos)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 185/13)

1.   
On 23 May 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:






—


EQT Fund Management SARL (‘EQT’, Luxembourg),










—


Parques Reunidos Servicios Centrales SA (‘Parques Reunidos’, Spain).




EQT acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Parques Reunidos.
The concentration is accomplished by way of public bid announced on 26 April 2019.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for EQT: investments in infrastructure and infrastructure-related assets and businesses primarily in Europe and North America,
—   for Parques Reunidos: leisure park operator (theme parks, zoos, marine parks, water parks, indoor entertainment centres and other attractions).


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.9392 — EQT/Parques Reunidos
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-420/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Riigikohus (Estonia) lodged on 29 May 2019 — Maksu- ja Tolliamet v Heavyinstall OÜ
Date: 2019-05-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative cooperation, claim, redemption, tax system








C_2019263EN.01003202.xml










5.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 263/32






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Riigikohus (Estonia) lodged on 29 May 2019 — Maksu- ja Tolliamet v Heavyinstall OÜ
(Case C-420/19)
(2019/C 263/38)
Language of the case: Estonian

Referring court

Riigikohus

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Maksu- ja Tolliamet

Defendant: Heavyinstall OÜ

Question referred

Is Article 16 of Council Directive 2010/24/EU of 16 March 2010 concerning mutual assistance for the recovery of claims relating to taxes, duties and other measures (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the court of the Member State which has received the request for precautionary measures, when ruling on that request on the basis of national law (which is possible for the requested court under the first sentence of Article 16), is bound to the view taken by the court of the State of establishment of the applicant in relation to the necessity and possibility of the precautionary measure when a document containing that view has been submitted to the court (last sentence of the second subparagraph of Article 16[(1)], according to which this document shall not be subject to any recognition, supplementing or replacement in the requested Member State)?


(1)  OJ 2010 L 84, p. 1.
Case C-424/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 29 May 2019 — Cabinet de avocat UR v Administrația Sector 3 a Finanțelor Publice prin Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice București and Others
Date: 2019-05-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, lawyer, legal aid, primacy of EU law, provision of services, taxpayer








C_2019288EN.01002901.xml










26.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/29






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 29 May 2019 — Cabinet de avocat UR v Administrația Sector 3 a Finanțelor Publice prin Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice București and Others
(Case C-424/19)
(2019/C 288/36)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel București

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant and appellant: Cabinet de avocat UR

Defendants and respondents: Administrația Sector 3 a Finanțelor Publice prin Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice București, Administrația Sector 3 a Finanțelor Publice, MJ, NK

Questions referred







1.


In the context of the application of Article 9(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (on the common system of value added tax), (1) does the concept of ‘taxable person’ include persons who practice the profession of lawyer?










2.


Does the principle of the primacy of EU law permit an exception to be made, in subsequent proceedings, to the authority of res judicata attaching to a final judicial decision in which it has been established, in essence, that, in accordance with national value added tax legislation, as it is interpreted and applied, lawyers do not supply goods, do not carry out an economic activity and do not conclude contracts for the supply of services, but instead conclude contracts for legal assistance?






(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).