do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M. 10007 — Telefónica/Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria/Movistar Money Colombia JV) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2020/C 381/14
Date: 2020-11-12
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: banking, economic concentration, merger control, telecommunications








C_2020381EN.01003301.xml










12.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/33






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M. 10007 — Telefónica/Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria/Movistar Money Colombia JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2020/C 381/14)






1.


On 6 November 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:






—


Telefónica, S.A. (‘Telefónica ’, Spain),










—


Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, S.A. (‘BBVA’, Spain),










—


Movistar Money Colombia ( ‘MMC’ Colombia).




Telefónica and BBVA acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of MMC.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Telefónica: international telecommunications group active offering communication, information and entertainment solutions, with a presence in several EU Member States (Spain, Germany and the United Kingdom), as well as in several countries in Latin America,










—


for BBVA: a global banking group, with predominant activity in Spain, Mexico, the United States, Turkey, as well as in several countries in South America,










—


for MMC: granting of consumer loans in Colombia.














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. 10007 — Telefónica/Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria/Movistar Money Colombia JV
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-675/20: Action brought on 12 November 2020 — Leonardo v Frontex
Date: 2020-11-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, award of contract, drone, maritime surveillance, tendering








C_2021019EN.01006202.xml










18.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 19/62






Action brought on 12 November 2020 — Leonardo v Frontex
(Case T-675/20)
(2021/C 19/67)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Leonardo SpA (Rome, Italy) (represented by: M. Esposito, F. Caccioppoli and G. Calamo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Border and Coast Guard Agency

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should, as regards the substance:






—


order the examination of the documents concerned by the access request and make a related order for exhibition or filing;










—


annul the contested decision;










—


consequently, order FRONTEX to exhibit, without further delay, the documents concerned by that access request;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The present action has been brought against the rejection of the request for access to the documents relating to Tendering Procedure No FRONTEX/OP/888/2019/JL/CG, which is the subject of the proceedings currently before the General Court of the European Union in Case T-849/19 (including the award decision, the minutes of the award committee, the documents presented by the successful bidder and all the other documents in the administrative file).
In support of its action, the applicant alleges infringement of: Article 4(1)(b), the first indent of Article 4(2), and Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43); of Directives 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts (OJ 2014 L 94, p. 1) and 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (OJ 2014 L 94, p. 65), more specifically, Articles 28 and 21 thereof, respectively; of Article 161 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ 2018 L 193, p. 1); of Management Board Decision No 19 of 23 July 2019; and of Article 89 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/715 of 18 December 2018 on the framework financial regulation for the bodies set up under the TFEU and Euratom Treaty and referred to in Article 70 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2019 L 122, p. 1).
In the alternative, the applicant criticises FRONTEX for failing to grant it even partial access to the documents.
Case C-85/20 P: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 12 November 2020 — Lazarus Szolgáltató és Kereskedelmi Kft. v European Commission (Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — State aid — Aid implemented by Hungary in favour of undertakings employing disabled workers — Alleged decisions of the European Commission declaring the measure compatible with the internal market — Action for annulment — Deadline for lodging an appeal — Starting point — Awareness of the existence of the contested measure — Reasonable time in which to request the full text thereof — Definition of ‘actionable measure’ within the meaning of Article 263 TFEU — Inadmissibility of the application at first instance — Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)
Date: 2020-11-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Hungary, State aid, aid to undertakings, control of State aid, employment aid, limitation of legal proceedings, worker with disabilities








C_2021044EN.01001301.xml










8.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 44/13






Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 12 November 2020 — Lazarus Szolgáltató és Kereskedelmi Kft. v European Commission
(Case C-85/20 P) (1)

(Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - State aid - Aid implemented by Hungary in favour of undertakings employing disabled workers - Alleged decisions of the European Commission declaring the measure compatible with the internal market - Action for annulment - Deadline for lodging an appeal - Starting point - Awareness of the existence of the contested measure - Reasonable time in which to request the full text thereof - Definition of ‘actionable measure’ within the meaning of Article 263 TFEU - Inadmissibility of the application at first instance - Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)
(2021/C 44/18)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties


Appellant: Lazarus Szolgáltató és Kereskedelmi Kft. (represented by: L. Szabó, ügyvéd)

Other party: European Commission

Operative part of the order

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal as, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly unfounded;










2.


Orders Lazarus Szolgáltató és Kereskedelmi Kft. to pay its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.
State aid – Decision to raise no objections 2020/C 381/12
Date: 2020-11-12
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: European Economic Area, Norway, State aid, aid to undertakings, company in difficulties, control of State aid, coronavirus disease, epidemic, small and medium-sized enterprises, tourism








C_2020381EN.01003001.xml










12.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/30






State aid – Decision to raise no objections
(2020/C 381/12)
The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:






Date of adoption of the decision


31 July 2020




Case No


85513




Decision No


100/20/COL




EFTA State


Norway




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


Amendment to the COVID-19 liquidity support grant scheme for undertakings in the tourism sector (aid to micro or small enterprises in difficulty on 31 December 2019)




Legal basis


The letter of additional assignment to the budget 2020 from the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries and the Guidelines for grants to improve liquidity and enable the restructuring and reopening of the tourism industry (MNOK 250) dated 3 July 2020




Type of measure


Scheme




Objective


Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


NOK 250 million




Duration


6 July 2020 – 31 December 2020




Economic sectors


Tourism sector (NACE 49, 50, 51, 55, 56, 77, 79, 90, 91 and 93)




Name and address of the granting authority


Innovation Norway
Akersgata 13
0104 Oslo
NORWAY




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/
Joined Cases C-792/18 P and C-793/18 P: Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 12 November 2020 — Jean-François Jalkh v European Parliament (Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Law governing the institutions — Protocol on the privileges and immunities of the European Union — Articles 8 and 9 — Scope — Decision to lift parliamentary immunity — Conditions)
Date: 2020-11-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Member of the European Parliament, Protocol (EU), criminal procedure, parliamentary immunity








C_2021044EN.01000802.xml










8.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 44/8






Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 12 November 2020 — Jean-François Jalkh v European Parliament
(Joined Cases C-792/18 P and C-793/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Law governing the institutions - Protocol on the privileges and immunities of the European Union - Articles 8 and 9 - Scope - Decision to lift parliamentary immunity - Conditions)
(2021/C 44/11)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Jean-François Jalkh (represented by: F. Wagner, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament (represented by: S. Alonso de León and C. Burgos, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the order

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeals as, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly unfounded;










2.


Orders Mr Jean-François Jalkh to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 65, 18.2.2019.
Report on the performance of the EU budget – Status at the end of 2019 2020/C 381/04
Date: 2020-11-12
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU financing, financial management, general budget (EU), implementation of the budget, performance audit, publication of accounts








C_2020381EN.01000401.xml










12.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/4






Report on the performance of the EU budget – Status at the end of 2019
(2020/C 381/04)
The European Court of Auditors will publish its ‘Report on the performance of the EU budget – Status at the end of 2019’, together with the institutions’ replies, on 13 November 2020.
The report can be consulted directly or downloaded at the European Court of Auditors’ website on 13 November 2020: https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/annualreport-Performance-2019/annualreport-Performance-2019_EN.pdf
The following link to an overview of this report and related documents will become active at the same time: http://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=53900
Case C-796/19: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 12 November 2020 — European Commission v Republic of Austria (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 2007/59/EC — Certification of train drivers — Article 3(a) — Competent national authority — Directive 2004/49/EC — Article 16(1) — Safety authority — Designation of several authorities)
Date: 2020-11-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: drivers, infringement procedure (EU), professional qualifications, rail safety, rail transport, transport licence, updating of skills








C_2021019EN.01001002.xml










18.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 19/10






Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 12 November 2020 — European Commission v Republic of Austria
(Case C-796/19) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2007/59/EC - Certification of train drivers - Article 3(a) - Competent national authority - Directive 2004/49/EC - Article 16(1) - Safety authority - Designation of several authorities)
(2021/C 19/13)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: W. Mölls and C. Vrignon, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Austria (represented by: J. Schmoll and A. Posch, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by designating as ‘competent authority’, for the purposes of Directive 2007/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on the certification of train drivers operating locomotives and trains on the railway system in the Community, an authority other than the safety authority referred to in Article 16 of Directive 2004/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on safety on the Community’s railways and amending Council Directive 95/18/EC on the licensing of railway undertakings and Directive 2001/14/EC on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification (Railway Safety Directive), the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 3(a) of Directive 2007/59;










2.


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






(1)  OJ C 432, 23.12.2019.
Case C-622/20 P: Appeal brought on 12 November 2020 by Validity Foundation — Mental Disability Advocacy Centre and Center for Independent Living Association against the order of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) delivered on 2 September 2020 in Case T-613/19, ENIL Brussels Office e.a. v Commission
Date: 2020-11-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Regional Development Fund, care for the elderly, care of people with disabilities, disabled person, eligibility criteria, operational programme, regional development








C_2021217EN.01001702.xml










7.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 217/17






Appeal brought on 12 November 2020 by Validity Foundation — Mental Disability Advocacy Centre and Center for Independent Living Association against the order of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) delivered on 2 September 2020 in Case T-613/19, ENIL Brussels Office e.a. v Commission
(Case C-622/20 P)
(2021/C 217/25)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: Validity Foundation — Mental Disability Advocacy Centre and Center for Independent Living Association (represented by: B. Van Vooren, advocaat, P. Bogaert, advocaat, L. Gorywoda, adwokat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission and European Network on Independent Living Brussels Office (ENIL Brussels Office)
By order of 15 April 2021, the Court of Justice (Ninth Chamber) decided that the appeal is dismissed as manifestly unfounded and ordered appellants to bear their own costs.
Decision (EU) 2020/1736 of the European Central Bank of 12 November 2020 amending Decision (EU) 2015/298 on the interim distribution of the income of the European Central Bank (ECB/2020/56)
Date: 2020-11-12
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: central bank, euro, financial legislation, paper money, purchase, revenue, securities




L_2020390EN.01006301.xml










20.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 390/63








            DECISION (EU) 2020/1736 OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
         
of 12 November 2020
         
amending Decision (EU) 2015/298 on the interim distribution of the income of the European Central Bank (ECB/2020/56)


THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,

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


Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular Article 33 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Decision (EU) 2020/440 of the European Central Bank (ECB/2020/17) (1) establishes a temporary pandemic emergency purchase programme (PEPP) for monetary policy purposes. Provision needs to be made for the interim distribution of the European Central Bank’s income from the PEPP in Decision (EU) 2015/298 of the European Central Bank (ECB/2014/57) (2).












(2)


Therefore, Decision (EU) 2015/298 (ECB/2014/57) should be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1

Amendment

Point (d) of Article 1 of Decision (EU) 2015/298 (ECB/2014/57) is replaced by the following:






‘(d)


“ECB’s income arising from securities” means the net income arising from purchases by the ECB of securities: (i) under the SMP in accordance with Decision ECB/2010/5 of the European Central Bank (*1); (ii) under the CBPP3 in accordance with Decision (EU) 2020/187 of the European Central Bank (ECB/2020/8) (*2); (iii) under the ABSPP in accordance with Decision ECB/2014/45; (iv) under the secondary markets public sector asset purchase programme (PSPP) in accordance with Decision (EU) 2020/188 of the European Central Bank (ECB/2020/9) (*3); and (v) under the pandemic emergency purchase programme (PEPP) in accordance with Decision (EU) 2020/440 of the European Central Bank (ECB/2020/17) (*4).






Article 2

Entry into force

This Decision shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 31 December 2020.




Done at Frankfurt am Main, 12 November 2020.


The President of the ECB

Christine LAGARDE
            





(1)  Decision (EU) 2020/440 of the European Central Bank of 24 March 2020 on a temporary pandemic emergency purchase programme (ECB/2020/17) (OJ L 91, 25.3.2020, p. 1).

(2)  Decision (EU) 2015/298 of the European Central Bank of 15 December 2014 on the interim distribution of the income of the European Central Bank (ECB/2014/57) (OJ L 53, 25.2.2015, p. 24).
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10013 — Vestas/MHI Vestas JV) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2020/C 381/15
Date: 2020-11-12
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, maintenance, merger control, turbine, wind energy








C_2020381EN.01003401.xml










12.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/34






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10013 — Vestas/MHI Vestas JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2020/C 381/15)

1.   
On 5 November 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:






—


Vestas Wind Systems A/S (‘Vestas’, Denmark),










—


MHI Vestas Offshore Wind A/S (‘MHI Vestas JV’, Denmark), jointly controlled by Vestas and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd (Japan).




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


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Vestas: manufacture, supply and the provision of operation and maintenance services of onshore wind turbines;










—


for MHI Vestas JV: manufacture, supply and the provision of operation and maintenance services of offshore wind turbines.






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.10013 — Vestas/MHI Vestas JV
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.