do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9827 — International Flavors & Fragrances/Nutrition & Biosciences) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 80/04
Date: 2020-12-07
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: adjuvant, consumer goods, dietary product, economic concentration, food additive, food industry, merger control, supply








C_2021080EN.01001501.xml










9.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 80/15






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9827 — International Flavors & Fragrances/Nutrition & Biosciences)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 80/04)
On 7 December 2020, 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 32020M9827. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Corrigendum to Council Decision (EU) 2020/1532 of 12 October 2020 on the position to be taken, on behalf of the European Union, in the 66th session of the Harmonized System Committee of the World Customs Organization in relation to the envisaged adoption of Classification Opinions, classification decisions, amendments to the Harmonized System Explanatory Notes or other advice on the interpretation of the Harmonized System, and of recommendations to secure uniformity in the interpretation of the Harmonized System under the Harmonized System Convention (Official Journal of the European Union L 406 of 3 December 2020)
Date: 2020-12-07
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: World Customs Organisation, customs cooperation, customs harmonisation, customs tariff, international convention, revision of an agreement








L_2020410EN.01010601.xml










7.12.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 410/106







Corrigendum to Council Decision (EU) 2020/1532 of 12 October 2020 on the position to be taken, on behalf of the European Union, in the 66th session of the Harmonized System Committee of the World Customs Organization in relation to the envisaged adoption of Classification Opinions, classification decisions, amendments to the Harmonized System Explanatory Notes or other advice on the interpretation of the Harmonized System, and of recommendations to secure uniformity in the interpretation of the Harmonized System under the Harmonized System Convention

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 406 of 3 December 2020
)


This corrigendum should be considered null and void.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 4 December 2020 2020/C 422/09
Date: 2020-12-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2020422EN.01001601.xml










7.12.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 422/16






Euro exchange rates (1)

4 December 2020
(2020/C 422/09)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2159 




JPY


Japanese yen


126,44 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4429 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,90282 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,2578 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0822 




ISK


Iceland króna


152,10 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,6598 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


26,518 




HUF


Hungarian forint


358,57 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,4769 




RON


Romanian leu


4,8725 




TRY


Turkish lira


9,4636 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6387 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5633 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,4240 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7254 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6206 




KRW


South Korean won


1 320,60 




ZAR


South African rand


18,4674 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,9421 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5415 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


17 222,37 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9366 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,430 




RUB


Russian rouble


90,0679 




THB


Thai baht


36,672 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,2759 




MXN


Mexican peso


24,1091 




INR


Indian rupee


89,6755 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Corrigendum to Council Decision (EU) 2020/1410 of 25 September 2020 on the position to be taken, on behalf of the European Union, in the 66th session of the Harmonized System Committee of the World Customs Organization in relation to the envisaged adoption of Classification opinions, classification decisions, amendments to the Harmonized System Explanatory Notes or other advice on the interpretation of the Harmonized System, and of recommendations to secure uniformity in the interpretation of the Harmonized System under the Harmonized System Convention (Official Journal of the European Union L 406 of 3 December 2020)
Date: 2020-12-07
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: World Customs Organisation, customs cooperation, customs harmonisation, customs tariff, international convention, revision of an agreement








L_2020410EN.01011001.xml










7.12.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 410/110







Corrigendum to Council Decision (EU) 2020/1410 of 25 September 2020 on the position to be taken, on behalf of the European Union, in the 66th session of the Harmonized System Committee of the World Customs Organization in relation to the envisaged adoption of Classification opinions, classification decisions, amendments to the Harmonized System Explanatory Notes or other advice on the interpretation of the Harmonized System, and of recommendations to secure uniformity in the interpretation of the Harmonized System under the Harmonized System Convention

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 406 of 3 December 2020
)


This corrigendum should be considered null and void.
Case C-665/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam (Netherlands) lodged on 7 December 2020 — European arrest warrant issued against X; other Party to the proceedings: Openbaar Ministerie
Date: 2020-12-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European arrest warrant, carrying out of sentence, discretionary power, enforcement of ruling, offence








C_2021128EN.01000802.xml










12.4.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 128/8






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam (Netherlands) lodged on 7 December 2020 — European arrest warrant issued against X; other Party to the proceedings: Openbaar Ministerie
(Case C-665/20)
(2021/C 128/11)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank Amsterdam

Parties to the main proceedings


European arrest warrant issued against: X

Other Party to the proceedings: Openbaar Ministerie

Questions referred







1.


Should Article 4(5) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA (1) be interpreted as meaning that, where a Member State chooses to transpose that provision into domestic law, the executing judicial authority must have a certain discretion as to whether or not it is appropriate to refuse to execute the EAW?










2.


Should the concept of ‘the same acts’ in Article 4(5) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA be interpreted in the same way as in Article 3(2) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA and, if not, how should that concept be interpreted in the former provision?










3.


Should the condition laid down in Article 4(5) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA that the ‘sentence has been served … or may no longer be executed under the law of the sentencing country’ be interpreted as covering a situation in which the requested person has been finally sentenced, for the same acts, to a custodial sentence that he or she has served in part in the sentencing country and the remainder of which has been remitted by a non-judicial authority of that country, as part of a general leniency measure that also applies to convicted persons who have committed serious acts, such as the requested person, and is not based on rational criminal policy considerations?






(1)  Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (OJ 2002 L 190, p. 1).
Case C-678/20 P: Appeal brought on 7 December 2020 by Laboratorios Ern, S.A. against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 5 October 2020 in Case T-53/19, SBS Bilimsel Bio Çözümler Sanayi Ve Ticaret AŞ v EUIPO — Laboratorios Ern (apiheal)
Date: 2020-12-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, chemical product, cosmetic product, foodstuff, pharmaceutical product, polishing and scouring preparations, processed foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, veterinary medicinal product








C_2021217EN.01001801.xml










7.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 217/18






Appeal brought on 7 December 2020 by Laboratorios Ern, S.A. against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 5 October 2020 in Case T-53/19, SBS Bilimsel Bio Çözümler Sanayi Ve Ticaret AŞ v EUIPO — Laboratorios Ern (apiheal)
(Case C-678/20 P)
(2021/C 217/27)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellant: Laboratorios Ern, S.A. (represented by: T. González Martínez and R. Guerras Mazón, abogados)

Other parties to the proceedings: SBS Bilimsel Bio Çözümler Sanayi Ve Ticaret AŞ and the European Union Intellectual Property Office
By order of 18 March 2021, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) ruled that the appeal should not be allowed to proceed and ordered Laboratorios Ern bear its own costs.
Case T-727/20: Action brought on 7 December 2020 — Kirimova v EUIPO
Date: 2020-12-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, discretionary power, equal treatment, lawyer, nationality, principle of legal certainty, registered trade mark, rights of the defence, trade-mark law








C_2021163EN.01003601.xml










3.5.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 163/36






Action brought on 7 December 2020 — Kirimova v EUIPO
(Case T-727/20)
(2021/C 163/49)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Nigar Kirimova (Munich, Germany) (represented by: A. Parassina, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision of 30 September 2020 of the Executive Director of EUIPO;










—


order EUIPO to exempt the applicant from the nationality requirement pursuant to Article 120 (4) (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the European Union trade mark (1) (thereafter ‘EUTMR’);










—


order EUIPO to enter the applicant to the list of Professional Representatives pursuant to Article 120 EUTMR;










—


order EUIPO to pay all costs and expenses.





Pleas in law and main arguments

By its application, the applicant seeks annulment of Decision No ER 93419-2020 of the Executive Director of the EUIPO of 30 September 2020, concerning the request of the applicant for entry on the list of professional representatives pursuant to Article 120 EUTMR and for an exemption pursuant to Article 120 (4) (b) EUTMR
In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging a violation of the principle of legal certainty.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging the infringement of Article 120 (4) EUTMR due to the failure to interpret and implement it in the light of basic principles of the EU and the fundamental prohibition of discrimination.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging a violation of the principle of sound administration by abuse of discretional power.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging a violation of Articles 94 and 97 EUTMR by infringement of the right to be heard.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging incorrect assessment of the evidence supporting the case.






(1)  OJ 2017 L 154, p. 1.
Case C-667/20 P: Appeal brought on 7 December 2020 by Laboratorios Ern, S.A. against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 5 October 2020 in Case T-51/19 Laboratorios Ern v EUIPO — SBS Bilimsel Bio Çözümler (apiheal)
Date: 2020-12-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, plant health product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2021217EN.01001703.xml










7.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 217/17






Appeal brought on 7 December 2020 by Laboratorios Ern, S.A. against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 5 October 2020 in Case T-51/19 Laboratorios Ern v EUIPO — SBS Bilimsel Bio Çözümler (apiheal)
(Case C-667/20 P)
(2021/C 217/26)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellant: Laboratorios Ern, S.A. (represented by: T. González Martínez and R. Guerras Mazón, abogados)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office and SBS Bilimsel Bio Çözümler Sanayi Ve Ticaret AŞ
By order of 18 March 2021, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) ruled that the appeal should not be allowed to proceed and ordered Laboratorios Ern bear its own costs.
Corrigendum to Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9684 — Parks Bottom/Omers/Accor/Fairmont Hotels) (Official Journal of the European Union C 419 of 4 December 2020) 2020/C 422/12
Date: 2020-12-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, hotel industry, merger control, real estate business








C_2020422EN.01002001.xml










7.12.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 422/20






Corrigendum to Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9684 — Parks Bottom/Omers/Accor/Fairmont Hotels)

(
Official Journal of the European Union C 419 of 4 December 2020
)

(2020/C 422/12)
Publication (2020/C 419/06) on page 16 is to be considered null and void.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10027 — Lone Star/McCarthy & Stone) (Text with EEA relevance) 2020/C 428/05
Date: 2020-12-07
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, property development, real estate business, social facilities








C_2020428EN.01000501.xml










11.12.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 428/5






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10027 — Lone Star/McCarthy & Stone)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2020/C 428/05)
On 7 December 2020, 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 32020M10027. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9964 — Eurofiber Nederland/Vattenfall Wärme Berlin/Vattenfall Bitstream Infrastructure) (Text with EEA relevance) 2020/C 432/05
Date: 2020-12-07
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Berlin, Germany, air conditioning, economic concentration, electrical energy, energy production, heating, merger control, transmission network








C_2020432EN.01000501.xml










14.12.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/5






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9964 — Eurofiber Nederland/Vattenfall Wärme Berlin/Vattenfall Bitstream Infrastructure)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2020/C 432/05)
On 7 December 2020, 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 German language 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 32020M9964. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-536/19: Order of the General Court of 7 December 2020 — Militos Symvouleftiki v Commission (Action for annulment — Public service contracts — Tender procedure — Provision of services in the field of the organisation of communication activities on behalf of the Commission’s Representation in Greece — Annulment of the call for tenders — No interest in bringing proceedings — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2020-12-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, Greece, award of contract, communications industry, invitation to tender, public procurement, services contract, tendering








C_2021035EN.01005001.xml










1.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 35/50






Order of the General Court of 7 December 2020 — Militos Symvouleftiki v Commission
(Case T-536/19) (1)

(Action for annulment - Public service contracts - Tender procedure - Provision of services in the field of the organisation of communication activities on behalf of the Commission’s Representation in Greece - Annulment of the call for tenders - No interest in bringing proceedings - Inadmissibility)
(2021/C 35/65)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Militos Symvouleftiki AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: K. Farmakidis-Markou, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Estrada de Solà and A. Katsimerou, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the Commission’s decision of 29 May 2019 to annul call for tenders PR/2018-16/ATH concerning the provision of services in the field of the organisation of communication activities on behalf of its Representation in Greece.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


Militos Symvouleftiki AE shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 357, 21.10.2019.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9677 — DIC/BASF Colors & Effects) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 245/07
Date: 2020-12-07
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: dyestuffs industry, economic concentration, merger control, office supplies, printer








C_2021245EN.01000701.xml










24.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 245/7






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9677 — DIC/BASF Colors & Effects)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 245/07)
On 7 December 2020, 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) in conjunction with Article 6(2) 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 32020M9677. 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.10063 – Mitsubishi UFJ Lease & Finance/Hitachi Capital) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2020/C 422/10
Date: 2020-12-07
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, financial services, loan, merger control, property leasing, real estate business, vehicle rental








C_2020422EN.01001701.xml










7.12.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 422/17






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10063 – Mitsubishi UFJ Lease & Finance/Hitachi Capital)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2020/C 422/10)

1.   
On 27 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:






—


Mitsubishi UFJ Lease & Finance Company, Limited (‘MUL’, Japan), and










—


Hitachi Capital Corporation (‘HC’, Japan).




MUL and HC enter into a full merger within the meaning of Article 3(1)(a) of the Merger Regulation.
The concentration is accomplished by absorption between MUL and HC.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for MUL: leasing, as well as financing services in the sectors of real estate healthcare, environment and energy, infrastructure and investment, and aviation and logistics. In the EEA, MUL is primarily active in the provision of operational leases of aircraft, aircraft engines, and marine shipping containers, and of commercial loans.










—


for HC: leasing and financial services. In the EEA, HC is primarily active in the provision of asset-backed financial solutions to businesses (including asset financing, franchise financing, vendor solutions and factoring), personal loans to UK consumers, and automotive leasing to corporations and individuals.






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.10063 – Mitsubishi UFJ Lease & Finance / Hitachi Capital
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.