do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9496 — Ardian France/Staci) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-09-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, logistics, merger control








C_2019299EN.01001401.xml










4.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 299/14






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9496 — Ardian France/Staci)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 299/08)

1.   
On 27 August 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:






—


Ardian France SA (‘Ardian’, France),










—


Staci Group (‘Staci’, France), controlled by Compagnie Benelux Participations SA (‘Cobepa’, Belgique).




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


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Ardian: an independent private investment company which manages and/or advises on assets in Europe, North America and Asia. Ardian does not hold any shares in portfolio companies that are active in the logistics services sector,
—   for Staci: active in the logistics sector, a specialist in retail logistics, and more specifically in the field of (i) logistics for marketing products and (ii) retail logistics for commercial products. Staci provides logistics services in Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States.


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 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.9496 — Ardian France/Staci
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.
Affaire T-603/17: Judgment of the General Court of 4 September 2019 — Lithuania v Commission (EAGF and EAFRD — Expenditure excluded from financing — Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 — Axis 4 ‘Leader’ — Regulation (EU) No 65/2011 — Administrative checks — Obligation to implement a suitable system for evaluating the reasonableness of the costs — Contribution in kind in the form of unpaid voluntary work — Contribution in kind in the form of a contribution of immovable property — On-the-spot checks — Presence of documents supporting payment claims — Implementation of operations financed in accordance with the rules on public procurement)
Date: 2019-09-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture, eligibility criteria, public procurement, real property, voluntary work








C_2019357EN.01002901.xml










21.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 357/29






Judgment of the General Court of 4 September 2019 — Lithuania v Commission
(Affaire T-603/17) (1)

(EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 - Axis 4 ‘Leader’ - Regulation (EU) No 65/2011 - Administrative checks - Obligation to implement a suitable system for evaluating the reasonableness of the costs - Contribution in kind in the form of unpaid voluntary work - Contribution in kind in the form of a contribution of immovable property - On-the-spot checks - Presence of documents supporting payment claims - Implementation of operations financed in accordance with the rules on public procurement)
(2019/C 357/35)
Language of the case: Lithuanian

Parties


Applicant: Republic of Lithuania (represented: initially by D. Kriaučiūnas, R. Krasuckaitė, R. Dzikovič and M. Palionis, then by R. Krasuckaitė, R. Dzikovič, M. Palionis, I. Javičienė and T. Lozoraitis and lastly R. Dzikovič, M. Palionis, I. Javičienė and T. Lozoraitis, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Aquilina and J. Jokubauskaitė, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Pavliš and J. Vláčil, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/1144 of 26 June 2017 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2017 L 165, p. 37), in so far as it excludes certain expenditure incurred by the Republic of Lithuania.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders the Republic of Lithuania to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission;











3.



Orders the Czech Republic to bear its own costs.







(1)  OJ C 357, 23.10.2017.
Case C-347/18: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 4 September 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Milano — Italy) — Avv. Alessandro Salvoni v Anna Maria Fiermonte (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 – Article 53 – Certificate relating to a judgment in civil and commercial matters in Annex I – Powers of the court of origin – Automatic verification whether there have been breaches of the rules on jurisdiction concerning consumer contracts)
Date: 2019-09-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, contract, enforcement of ruling, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction








C_2019383EN.01002602.xml










11.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 383/26






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 4 September 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Milano — Italy) — Avv. Alessandro Salvoni v Anna Maria Fiermonte
(Case C-347/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Article 53 - Certificate relating to a judgment in civil and commercial matters in Annex I - Powers of the court of origin - Automatic verification whether there have been breaches of the rules on jurisdiction concerning consumer contracts)
(2019/C 383/28)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Milano

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Avv. Alessandro Salvoni

Defendant: Anna Maria Fiermonte

Operative part of the judgment

Article 53 of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, as amended by Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/281 of 26 November 2014 read in conjunction with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as precluding the court of origin which has been requested to issue the certificate provided for in Article 53 of that regulation in respect of a judgment which has acquired the force of res judicata from being able to ascertain of its own motion whether there has been a breach of the rules set out in Chapter II, Section 4 of that regulation, so that it may inform the consumer of any breach that is established and enable him to assess, in full knowledge of the facts, the possibility of availing himself of the remedy provided for in Article 45 of that regulation.


(1)  OJ C 285, 13.8.2018.
Case C-664/19 P: Appeal brought on 4 September 2019 by Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol sp. z o. o. against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 26 June 2019 in Case T-117/18 Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v EUIPO
Date: 2019-09-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, serial publication, trade-mark law








C_2020077EN.01001702.xml










9.3.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 77/17






Appeal brought on 4 September 2019 by Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol sp. z o. o. against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 26 June 2019 in Case T-117/18 Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v EUIPO
(Case C-664/19 P)
(2020/C 77/26)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Appellant: Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol sp. z o. o. (represented by: C. Rogula, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office
By order of 5 December 2019, the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) decided that the appeal is not allowed to proceed.