do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9709 — ENI/CDP Equity /GreenIT) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2020/C 31/05
Date: 2020-01-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electrical energy, electricity supply, energy production, investment company, merger control, natural gas, oil industry, renewable energy, wholesale trade








C_2020031EN.01000601.xml










30.1.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 31/6






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9709 — ENI/CDP Equity /GreenIT)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2020/C 31/05)

1.   
On 22 January 2020, 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:






—


Eni S.p.A. (‘ENI’), Italy;










—


CDP Equity S.p.A. (‘CDP Equity’), Italy.




ENI and CDP Equity acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of a newly created JV.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


ENI is a company active in the oil and natural gas sector;










—


CDP Equity is a holding company of Cassa Depositi e Prestiti Group, investing in Italian companies of major national interest with long-term perspective;










—


The JV, GreenIT, is intended to be active in the production and wholesale supply of electricity from renewable sources on the Italian market.






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.9709 — ENI/CDP Equity/GreenIT
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.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9587 — ENGIE/EDP Renovaveis/EDPR Offshore España) (Text with EEA relevance) 2020/C 31/06
Date: 2020-01-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electrical energy, energy industry, merger control, natural gas, renewable energy, solar energy, subsidiary, wind energy








C_2020031EN.01000701.xml










30.1.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 31/7






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9587 — ENGIE/EDP Renovaveis/EDPR Offshore España)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2020/C 31/06)

1.   
On 23 January 2020, 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:






—


ENGIE S.A. (‘ENGIE’, France),










—


EDP Renovaveis S.A. (‘EDPR’, Spain), belonging to the EDP group,










—


EDPR Offshore España S.L.U. (‘EDPR Offshore España’, Spain), belonging to the EDP group.




ENGIE and EDPR acquire within the meaning of Articles 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of EDPR Offshore España.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares and a contribution of assets.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for ENGIE: An industrial company active in the fields of gas, electricity and energy services,










—


for EDPR: A renewable energy subsidiary of EDP Group active in developing, building and operating wind farms and solar plants worldwide,










—


for EDPR Offshore España: A subsidiary of EDPR active in offshore windfarm activities worldwide.






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.9587 — ENGIE/EDP Renovaveis/EDPR Offshore España
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’).
Case C-54/20 P: Appeal brought on 30 January 2020 by the European Commission against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 20 November 2019 in Case T-502/16, Stefano Missir Mamachi di Lusignano and Others v Commission
Date: 2020-01-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European official, family relationship, homicide, indemnification, occupational mortality, staff regulations (EU)








C_2020209EN.01000302.xml










22.6.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 209/3






Appeal brought on 30 January 2020 by the European Commission against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 20 November 2019 in Case T-502/16, Stefano Missir Mamachi di Lusignano and Others v Commission
(Case C-54/20 P)
(2020/C 209/05)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Appellant: European Commission (represented by: B. Schima, T.S. Bohr and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Stefano Missir Mamachi di Lusignano, as heir of Livio Missir Mamachi di Lusignano, Anne Jeanne Cécile Magdalena Maria Sintobin, as heir of Livio Missir Mamachi di Lusignano, Maria Letizia Missir Mamachi di Lusignano, as heir of Livio Missir Mamachi di Lusignano, Carlo Amedeo Missir Mamachi di Lusignano, Giustina Missir Mamachi di Lusignano, Tommaso Missir Mamachi di Lusignano and Filiberto Missir Mamachi di Lusignano

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the judgment under appeal in so far as the General Court ordered the Commission to pay compensation for the non-material harm suffered by Ms Maria Letizia Missir and Mr Stefano Missir following the death of Mr Alessandro Missir;










—


dispose of the case itself and dismiss the action at first instance as inadmissible;










—


order Mr Stefano Missir and Ms Maria Letizia Missir to pay the costs of the present proceedings and those at first instance.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its appeal, the Commission relies on two grounds of appeal.
The first ground of appeal is divided into two parts. By the first part, the appellant claims that the General Court erred in law in its interpretation of the concept of the person ‘to whom the Staff Regulations apply’. That part is directed against paragraphs 48 to 64 of the judgment under appeal. By the second part, the appellant claims, in the alternative, that the General Court erred in law by recognising the brother and sister of a deceased official as being entitled to receive compensation for non-material damage on the basis of the Staff Regulations. That part is directed against paragraphs 134 and 135 of the judgment under appeal.
By the second ground of appeal, the appellant alleges that the General Court failed to have regard for the obligation to state reasons when ordering the Commission to pay compensation for the non-material harm suffered by the brother and sister of a deceased official as a result of the latter’s death. The second ground of appeal is directed against paragraphs 154 to 168, 171 to 172 and 181 of the judgment under appeal.