do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
No state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement
Date: 2019-09-26
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: European Economic Area, Norway, State aid, control of State aid, e-Health








C_2019322EN.01000401.xml










26.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 322/4






No state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement
(2019/C 322/04)
The EFTA Surveillance Authority considers that the following measure does not constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement:








Date of adoption of the decision



:


10 July 2019





Case No



:


83590





Decision No



:


057/19/COL





EFTA State



:


Norway





Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)



:


eHealth





Form of aid



:


No aid




The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:
http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/decisions/.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9534 — CKA/Greene King) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-09-26
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: beverage industry, catering industry, economic concentration, hotel industry, investment company, merger control, multinational enterprise, property development, rental business, retail trade








C_2019322EN.01000701.xml










26.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 322/7






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9534 — CKA/Greene King)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 322/07)

1.   
On 19 September 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:






—


CK Asset Holdings Limited (‘CKA’, Cayman Islands),










—


Greene King plc (‘Greene King’, United Kingdom).




CKA acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Greene King.
The concentration is accomplished by way of public bid announced on 19 August 2019, followed by a purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for CKA: a leading multinational corporation with diverse activities encompassing property development and investment, hotel and serviced suite operation, property and project management, investment in infrastructure and utility asset operation and aircraft leasing,
—   for Greene King: leading integrated pub retailer and brewer operating restaurants and hotels across England, Wales and Scotland.


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.9534 — CKA/Greene King
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.9432 — Allianz Holdings/Legal and General Insurance) (Text with EEA relevance) 2019/C 407/01
Date: 2019-09-26
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, financial services, insurance, merger control








C_2019407EN.01000101.xml










3.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 407/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9432 — Allianz Holdings/Legal and General Insurance)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 407/01)
On 26 September 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 32019M9432. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2019-09-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2019322EN.01000201.xml










26.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 322/2






Euro exchange rates (1)

25 September 2019
(2019/C 322/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0982 




JPY


Japanese yen


118,00 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4648 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88668 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,6825 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0841 




ISK


Iceland króna


136,00 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,9310 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,867 




HUF


Hungarian forint


334,95 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3915 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7438 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,2598 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6236 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4580 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,6059 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7435 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5133 




KRW


South Korean won


1 318,39 




ZAR


South African rand


16,5085 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8239 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4060 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 539,53 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6015 




PHP


Philippine peso


57,475 




RUB


Russian rouble


70,6879 




THB


Thai baht


33,577 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,5987 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,5068 




INR


Indian rupee


78,0215 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-663/18: Order of the General Court of 26 September 2019 — Nissin Foods Holdings v EUIPO — The GB Foods (Soba JAPANESE FRIED NOODLES) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU figurative mark Soba JAPANESE FRIED NOODLES — Absolute ground for invalidity — Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Date: 2019-09-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pasta, processed foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019423EN.01005402.xml










16.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 423/54






Order of the General Court of 26 September 2019 — Nissin Foods Holdings v EUIPO — The GB Foods (Soba JAPANESE FRIED NOODLES)
(Case T-663/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark Soba JAPANESE FRIED NOODLES - Absolute ground for invalidity - Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
(2019/C 423/69)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Nissin Foods Holdings Co. Ltd (Osaka, Japan) (represented by S. Malynicz QC, G. Messenger, Barrister, K. Gilbert and G. Lodge, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by G. Sakalaitė-Orlovskienė and J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: The GB Foods, SA (L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain) (represented by E. Torner Lasalle, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 August 2018 (Case R 111/2018-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between The GB Foods and Nissin Foods Holdings.

Operative part of the order







1.



The action is dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law.











2.



Nissin Foods Holdings Co. Ltd shall bear its own costs and pay the costs of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).











3.



The GB Foods, SA shall bear its own costs.







(1)  OJ C 25, 21.1.2019.
Case T-643/19: Action brought on 26 September 2019 – Dermavita v EUIPO – Allergan Holdings France (JUVEDERM ULTRA)
Date: 2019-09-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, medical device, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019383EN.01007601.xml










11.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 383/76






Action brought on 26 September 2019 – Dermavita v EUIPO – Allergan Holdings France (JUVEDERM ULTRA)
(Case T-643/19)
(2019/C 383/84)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Dermavita Co. Ltd (Beirut, Lebanon) (represented by: D. Todorov, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Allergan Holdings France (Courbevoie, France)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark JUVEDERM ULTRA – European Union trade mark No 6 295 638

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 July 2019 in Joined Cases R 1655/2018-4 and R 1723/2018-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


partially annul the contested decision concerning the dismissal of appeal R 1723/2018-4 and the decision of non-revocation of EUTM No 6 295 638 for the goods in class 5 and;










—


order EUIPO and the other party to bear their own costs and pay those of the applicant for annulment at every stage of the action for revocation and appeal proceedings, including the cost of the proceedings before EUIPO and the Court.





Pleas in law







—


Erroneous interpretation of the relevant law concerning the assessment of the nature of the goods the trademark has been used for;










—


Misinterpretation of some of the evidence in the proceedings concerning the use of the trademark by third parties with the consent of the EUTM proprietor;










—


Lack of sufficient proofs of the consent of the EUTM proprietor under the meaning of Article 18(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-518/19 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 26 September 2019 — Sipcam Oxon v Commission (Application for interim measures — Plant protection products — Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 — Active substance chlorothalonil — Conditions of approval for placing on the market — Application for suspension of operation — Lack of urgency)
Date: 2019-09-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: market approval, plant health control, plant health product








C_2020019EN.01005201.xml










20.1.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 19/52






Order of the President of the General Court of 26 September 2019 — Sipcam Oxon v Commission
(Case T-518/19 R)
(Application for interim measures - Plant protection products - Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 - Active substance chlorothalonil - Conditions of approval for placing on the market - Application for suspension of operation - Lack of urgency)
(2020/C 19/63)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sipcam Oxon SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: C. Mereu and P. Sellar, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: I. Naglis and A. Dawes, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Articles 278 and 279 TFEU, seeking suspension of the operation of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/677 of 29 April 2019 concerning the non-renewal of the approval of the active substance chlorothalonil, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (OJ 2019 L 114, p. 15).

Operative part of the order







1.



The application for interim measures is dismissed.











2.



The costs are reserved.
Case T-562/18: Order of the General Court of 26 September 2019 — YP v Commission
Date: 2019-09-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, administrative sanction, disciplinary proceedings, staff regulations (EU)








C_2019423EN.01007202.xml










16.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 423/72






Order of the General Court of 26 September 2019 — YP v Commission
(Case T-562/18) (1)

(2019/C 423/86)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 399, 5.11.2018.
Case C-600/18: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 26 September 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Szombathelyi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság — Hungary) — UTEP 2006. SRL v Vas Megyei Kormányhivatal Hatósági Főosztály, Hatósági, Építésügyi és Oktatási Osztály (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Road transport — Articles 91 and 92 TFEU — Regulation (EU) No 165/2014 — Article 32(3), Article 33(1) and Article 41(1) — Infringement of the rules on the use of tachographs — Duty of Member States to make provision for effective, dissuasive and non-discriminatory penalties — Resident and non-resident small and medium-sized enterprises — Differential treatment)
Date: 2019-09-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative sanction, common transport policy, discrimination on the basis of nationality, driving period, equal treatment, nationality of legal persons, road transport, small and medium-sized enterprises, speed control, transport law








C_2019399EN.01001801.xml










25.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/18






Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 26 September 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Szombathelyi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság — Hungary) — UTEP 2006. SRL v Vas Megyei Kormányhivatal Hatósági Főosztály, Hatósági, Építésügyi és Oktatási Osztály
(Case C-600/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Road transport - Articles 91 and 92 TFEU - Regulation (EU) No 165/2014 - Article 32(3), Article 33(1) and Article 41(1) - Infringement of the rules on the use of tachographs - Duty of Member States to make provision for effective, dissuasive and non-discriminatory penalties - Resident and non-resident small and medium-sized enterprises - Differential treatment)
(2019/C 399/20)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Szombathelyi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: UTEP 2006. SRL

Defendant: Vas Megyei Kormányhivatal Hatósági Főosztály, Hatósági, Építésügyi és Oktatási Osztály

Operative part of the judgment

Article 41(1) of Regulation (EU) No 165/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 February 2014 on tachographs in road transport, repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport and amending Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport, must be interpreted as precluding an administrative practice of a Member State according to which, unlike non-resident small and medium-sized road transport enterprises, those that are established in the territory of that Member State are liable to receive a lesser penalty, in the form of a warning rather than an administrative fine, where such enterprises commit, for the first time, an infringement of Regulation No 165/2014 of the same degree of gravity.


(1)  OJ C 436, 3.12.2018
Case C-556/18: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 26 September 2019 — Commission v Kingdom of Spain (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — European Union water policy — Directive 2000/60/EC — Article 13(1) and (7) and Article 15(1) — Failure to adopt, publish and communicate to the European Commission revised and updated river basin management plans for Lanzarote, Fuerteventura, Gran Canaria, Tenerife, La Gomera, La Palma and El Hierro (Spain) — Article 14 — Failure to inform and consult the public relating to the revision and the updating)
Date: 2019-09-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Canary Islands, infringement of EU law, national implementing measure, territorial waters, water protection, water resources








C_2019399EN.01001701.xml










25.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/17






Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 26 September 2019 — Commission v Kingdom of Spain
(Case C-556/18) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - European Union water policy - Directive 2000/60/EC - Article 13(1) and (7) and Article 15(1) - Failure to adopt, publish and communicate to the European Commission revised and updated river basin management plans for Lanzarote, Fuerteventura, Gran Canaria, Tenerife, La Gomera, La Palma and El Hierro (Spain) - Article 14 - Failure to inform and consult the public relating to the revision and the updating)
(2019/C 399/19)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: Manhaeve and S. Pardo Quintillán, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M. J. García-Valdecasas Dorrego, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Rules that, by not having completed, within the prescribed time-limit, the information and consultation of the public relating to the revision and the updating of the river basin management plans for Lanzarote, Fuerteventura, Gran Canaria, Tenerife, La Gomera, La Palma and El Hierro, and by not having, within the prescribed time-limit, adopted, published and communicated to the European Commission the revision and updating of those management plans, the Kingdom of Spain failed to fulfil the obligations imposed on it in accordance with Article 13(7), read in conjunction with Article 13(1), and Article 14 and 15(1) of Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, as amended by Council Directive 2013/64/EU of 17 December 2013.










2.


Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 381, 22.10.2018.
Case T-651/19: Action brought on 26 September 2019 — Brands Up v EUIPO (Credit24)
Date: 2019-09-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, banking, consultancy, electronic money, financial services, financial transaction, insurance, real estate business, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019399EN.01008302.xml










25.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/83






Action brought on 26 September 2019 — Brands Up v EUIPO (Credit24)
(Case T-651/19)
(2019/C 399/102)
Language of the case: Finnish

Parties


Applicant: Brands Up OÜ (Tallin, Estonia) (represented by: M. Welin, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark containing the word element ‘Credit24’ — Application for registration No 17 941 316

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 July 2019 in Case R 465/2019-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


register the European Union trade mark No 17 941 316;










—


order that the word ‘doubtful’ be deleted from the EUIPO Examiner’s decision of 20 December 2018, p. 1;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 2017/1001;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 2017/1001;










—


Infringement of the principles of equal treatment and consistency of case law.
Council Decision of 26 September 2019 appointing the Deputy Executive Director of the European Union Intellectual Property Office
Date: 2019-09-26
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Union Intellectual Property Office, appointment of members, managing director




C_2019325EN.01000101.xml










30.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 325/1






COUNCIL DECISION
of 26 September 2019
appointing the Deputy Executive Director of the European Union Intellectual Property Office
(2019/C 325/01)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the European Union trade mark (1), and in particular Article 158(6) thereof,
Whereas on 4 June 2019 a list of candidates for the post of Deputy Executive Director of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (‘the Office’) was submitted to the Council by the Management Board of the Office,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

1.   Mr Andrea DI CARLO, born in Rome (Italy) on 9 September 1970, is hereby appointed as Deputy Executive Director of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (‘the Office’) for a term of five years.


2.   The date on which the five-year term referred to in paragraph 1 commences shall be determined by the Management Board of the Office.



Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.


Done at Brussels, 26 September 2019.


For the Council


The President

T. HARAKKA




(1)  OJ L 154, 16.6.2017, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9528 — Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets/Currenta) (Text with EEA relevance) 2019/C 333/01
Date: 2019-09-26
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: banking, chemical industry, consultancy, economic concentration, financial services, investment company, merger control








C_2019333EN.01000101.xml










4.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 333/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9528 — Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets/Currenta)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 333/01)
On 26 September 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 32019M9528. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.