do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9358 — Broadcom/Symantec Enterprise Security Business) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2019/C 333/07
Date: 2019-10-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electronics industry, information security, information technology industry, merger control








C_2019333EN.01001801.xml










4.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 333/18






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9358 — Broadcom/Symantec Enterprise Security Business)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 333/07)

1.   
On 26 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:






—


Broadcom Inc. (‘Broadcom’, U.S.),










—


Symantec Corporation (‘Symantec’, U.S.).




Broadcom acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of parts of Symantec. The proposed concentration only concerns Symantec’s Enterprise Security Business.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of assets.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


Broadcom is a technology company that designs, develops, and supplies a broad range of semiconductors as well as infrastructure software solutions,










—


Symantec designs, manufactures, and provides security software, storage, and systems management solutions to consumers and enterprises. Its Enterprise Security Business comprises a mix of products, services, and solutions to provide enterprises with advanced threat protection and information protection.






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.9358 — Broadcom/Symantec Enterprise Security Business
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.
Notice concerning the anti-dumping measures in force in respect of imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware originating in the People’s Republic of China: name change of one company subject to the duty for cooperating non-sampled companies2019/C 333/05
Date: 2019-10-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security, European Commission
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, ceramics, household article, import (EU), originating product








C_2019333EN.01001501.xml










4.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 333/15






Notice concerning the anti-dumping measures in force in respect of imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware originating in the People’s Republic of China: name change of one company subject to the duty for cooperating non-sampled companies
(2019/C 333/05)
Imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware originating in the People’s Republic of China are subject to definitive anti-dumping duties imposed by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198 (1) (‘Regulation (EU) 2019/1198’).
Fujian Dehua Hiap Huat Koyo Toki Co., Ltd, TARIC (2) additional code B530, a company located in the People’s Republic of China whose exports to the Union of ceramic tableware and kitchenware are subject to the anti-dumping duty of 17,9 %, informed the Commission that it had changed its name as set out below.
The company asked the Commission to confirm that the change of name does not affect the right of the company to benefit from the anti-dumping duty applied to the company under its previous name.
The Commission examined the information supplied and concluded that the change of name in no way affects the findings of Regulation (EU) 2019/1198.
Therefore, the reference in Annex I of Regulation (EU) 2019/1198 to:






Fujian Dehua Hiap Huat Koyo Toki Co., Ltd


B530




should be read as:






Luzerne (Fujian) Group Co., Ltd


B530




The TARIC additional code B530 previously attributed to Fujian Dehua Hiap Huat Koyo Toki Co., Ltd shall apply to Luzerne (Fujian) Group Co., Ltd.


(1)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198 of 12 July 2019 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 (OJ L 189, 15.7.2019, p. 8).

(2)  The integrated Tariff of the European Union.
Case C-732/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción de Ceuta (Spain) lodged on 4 October 2019 — LL, MK v Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA
Date: 2019-10-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer credit, consumer protection, cost of borrowing, legal expenses, real estate credit, unfair terms of contract








C_2020010EN.01002303.xml










13.1.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 10/23






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción de Ceuta (Spain) lodged on 4 October 2019 — LL, MK v Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA
(Case C-732/19)
(2020/C 10/32)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción de Ceuta

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: LL, MK

Defendant: Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA

Questions referred







1.


Whether, under Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, (1) in particular Articles 6(1) and 7(1) of the directive, the following ruling is compliant with EU law in order to ensure protection for consumers and users and compliance with the relevant case-law: the ruling by the Supreme Court in judgments 44 to 49 of 23 January 2019, which establishes the unambiguous criterion that a term in a consumer mortgage loan agreement that has not been negotiated and that stipulates that all the costs of arranging the mortgage are to be borne by the borrower is unfair, and which apportions the various expenses that are involved in the unfair term found to be void between the bank that imposed the term and the borrower, in order to limit repayments of amounts wrongly paid under national legislation.
And whether, under Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, in particular Articles 6(1) and 7(1) of the directive, in order to ensure protection for consumers and users and compliance with the relevant case-law, it is compliant with EU law for the Supreme Court to adopt an inclusive interpretation of a term that is void for unfairness if the term can be severed and its effects abolished without affecting the continued existence of the mortgage loan agreement.










2.


Also, whether, as regards Article 394 of the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil (Law on Civil Procedure), which establishes the principle that the costs of proceedings are to be borne by the unsuccessful party, it can be held that where an unfair expenses clause is declared void but the effects of voiding the term are limited to apportioning the expenses in question, it is contrary to the EU legal principles of effectiveness and the non-binding nature of unfair terms to conclude that a claim has been upheld in part, and whether such a conclusion could be interpreted as producing an inverse deterrent effect, which thus fails to protect the legitimate interests of consumers and users.






(1)  OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29.
Case T-679/19: Action brought on 4 October 2019 — Argyraki v Commission
Date: 2019-10-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, equal treatment, pension scheme, retirement conditions, staff regulations (EU)








C_2019399EN.01010001.xml










25.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/100






Action brought on 4 October 2019 — Argyraki v Commission
(Case T-679/19)
(2019/C 399/118)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Vassilia Argyraki (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of 30 November 2018 taken by the PMO concerning the way in which pension rights are to be calculated, and, in general, the application of the provisions of the Staff Regulations on pension rights in respect of the applicant when she retires;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action challenging the abovementioned decision of the European Commission’s Office for the Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (PMO), the applicant relies on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging failure to comply with the guidance set out in Torné (judgment of 14 December 2018, Torné v Commission, T-128/17, EU:T:2018:969);










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Articles 21 and 22 of Annex XIII of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union;










3.


Third plea in law, alleging unequal treatment.
Case T-678/19: Action brought on 4 October 2019 – Health Product Group v EUIPO – Bioline Pharmaceutical (Enterosgel)
Date: 2019-10-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, gastrointestinal disease, medicinal product, organic chemical, registered trade mark, semi-metal, trade-mark law








C_2019399EN.01009901.xml










25.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/99






Action brought on 4 October 2019 – Health Product Group v EUIPO – Bioline Pharmaceutical (Enterosgel)
(Case T-678/19)
(2019/C 399/117)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Health Product Group sp. z o.o. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: M. Kondrat, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Bioline Pharmaceutical AG (Baar, Switzerland)

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: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the word mark Enterosgel – International registration designating the European Union No 896 788

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 August 2019 in Case R 482/2018-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and cancel the trade mark;










—


award the costs in applicant’s favour.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9426 — 3M Company/Acelity) (Text with EEA relevance) 2019/C 424/01
Date: 2019-10-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, medical device, merger control








C_2019424EN.01000101.xml










17.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 424/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9426 — 3M Company/Acelity)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 424/01)
On 4 October 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 32019M9426. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9575 — Renault/Mobivia/Exadis) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2019/C 333/06
Date: 2019-10-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, motor vehicle industry, vehicle parts








C_2019333EN.01001601.xml










4.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 333/16






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9575 — Renault/Mobivia/Exadis)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 333/06)

1.   
On 25 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:






—


Renault S.A.S (‘Renault’, France),










—


Mobivia S.A. (‘Mobivia’, France),










—


Exadis (France).




Renault and Mobivia acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Exadis.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


The Renault group’s main activities are designing, manufacturing and marketing motor vehicles via its distribution network and manufacturing and distributing spare parts for motor vehicles,










—


The Mobivia group is mainly active in the automotive aftermarket sector, i.e. maintenance, repair and sale of spare parts and tyres, and in the new mobility sector,










—


Exadis specialises in wholesale distribution of spare parts for passenger cars and light commercial vehicles.






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.9575 — Renault/Mobivia/Exadis
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-190/19: Order of the President of the Court of Justice of 4 October 2019 (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Hamburg — Germany) — MG, NH v Germanwings GmbH
Date: 2019-10-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air transport, carriage of passengers, carrier, indemnification, travel agency, traveller








C_2020443EN.01001801.xml










21.12.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 443/18






Order of the President of the Court of Justice of 4 October 2019 (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Hamburg — Germany) — MG, NH v Germanwings GmbH
(Case T-190/19) (1)

(2020/C 443/19)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 213, 24.6.2019.
Euro exchange ratesSource: reference exchange rate published by the ECB. 3 October 20192019/C 333/02
Date: 2019-10-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2019333EN.01000201.xml










4.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 333/2






Euro exchange rates (1)

3 October 2019
(2019/C 333/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0951 




JPY


Japanese yen


117,17 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4656 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88790 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,8330 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0957 




ISK


Iceland króna


135,70 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,0165 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,739 




HUF


Hungarian forint


333,02 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3400 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7470 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,2448 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6294 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4606 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,5882 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7421 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5128 




KRW


South Korean won


1 317,84 




ZAR


South African rand


16,6077 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8282 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4180 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 520,30 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5857 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,738 




RUB


Russian rouble


71,2751 




THB


Thai baht


33,461 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,5094 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,6283 




INR


Indian rupee


77,7155 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 July 2019 to 31 August 2019 (Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC)
Date: 2019-10-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, drug surveillance, market approval, marketing standard, medicinal product








C_2019334EN.01001701.xml










4.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 334/17






Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 July 2019 to 31 August 2019

(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC
 (1) or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC (2))

(2019/C 334/02)






—



Refusal of modification of a national marketing authorisation















Date of the decision


Name(s) of the medicinal product


INN (International Non-Proprietary Name)


Holder(s) of the marketing authorisation


Member State concerned


Date of notification




4.7.2019


Basiron AC and associated names


benzoyl peroxide


Not applicable


Not applicable


5.7.2019






(1)  OJ L 311, 28.11.2001, p. 67.

(2)  OJ L 311, 28.11.2001, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9345 — SEGRO/PSPIB/Panattoni Park) (Text with EEA relevance) 2019/C 352/03
Date: 2019-10-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, light industry, logistics, merger control, storage








C_2019352EN.01000301.xml










18.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 352/3






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9345 — SEGRO/PSPIB/Panattoni Park)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 352/03)
On 4 October 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 32019M9345. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/1671 of 4 October 2019 on the appointment of the Vice-Chair of the Supervisory Board of the European Central Bank
Date: 2019-10-04
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Central Bank, appointment of members, decision-making body (EU)








L_2019256EN.01000801.xml










7.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 256/8








            COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING DECISION (EU) 2019/1671
of 4 October 2019
         
on the appointment of the Vice-Chair of the Supervisory Board of the European Central Bank


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 of 15 October 2013 conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions (1), and in particular Article 26(3) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


On 15 October 2013 the Council adopted Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank (ECB) concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions.












(2)


The planning and execution of the tasks conferred on the ECB should be fully undertaken by its Supervisory Board, which is composed of the Chair, the Vice-Chair and four representatives of the ECB, as well as one representative of the national competent authority in each participating Member State.












(3)


The Supervisory Board is an essential body in the exercise of supervisory tasks by the ECB. Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 therefore conferred upon the Council the power to appoint the Chair and the Vice-Chair of the Supervisory Board.












(4)


On 11 February 2014 the Council appointed the first Vice-Chair of the Supervisory Board by means of Implementing Decision 2014/77/EU (2). The term of office of the first Vice-Chair of the Supervisory Board ended on 11 February 2019.












(5)


In accordance with Article 26(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, the ECB, after hearing the Supervisory Board, is to submit to the European Parliament a proposal for the appointment of the Vice-Chair of the Supervisory Board, who is to be chosen from among the members of the Executive Board of the ECB. The ECB submitted such a proposal on 9 April 2019, and the European Parliament approved it on 17 September 2019,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Mr Yves MERSCH is hereby appointed as Vice-Chair of the Supervisory Board of the European Central Bank from 7 October 2019 until 14 December 2020.


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




Done at Luxembourg, 4 October 2019.


For the Council


The President

K. MIKKONEN
            





(1)  
            OJ L 287, 29.10.2013, p. 63.

(2)  Council Implementing Decision 2014/77/EU of 11 February 2014 implementing Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions (OJ L 41, 12.2.2014, p. 19).