do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10070 — Eurofiber/Proximus/JV) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 248/06
Date: 2021-06-25
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, provision of services, telecommunications








C_2021248EN.01000701.xml










25.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 248/7






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10070 — Eurofiber/Proximus/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 248/06)

1.   
On 18 June 2021, 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:






—


Eurofiber NV (‘Eurofiber’, Belgium),










—


Proximus NV (‘Proximus’, Belgium),










—


the Joint Venture (‘JV’, Belgium).




Eurofiber and Proximus acquire within the meaning of Articles 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the 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:






—


for Eurofiber: operation of electronic communication services and networks in the Netherlands, Belgium, France, and Germany with a specific focus on connectivity services and networks over fiber to business customers and service providers,










—


for Proximus: operation of fixed and mobile electronic communication services and networks for residential and business customers in Belgium, both at the retail and wholesale level,










—


for JV: roll-out and operation of a dense passive open Point-to-Point Fiber-To-The-X network in certain parts of the Walloon Region of Belgium. The JV will only be active at the wholesale level of the 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.



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.10070 – Eurofiber/Proximus/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’).
Case T-728/20: Order of the General Court of 25 June 2021 — OM v Commission (Action for annulment — Civil service — Officials — Social security — JSIS — Reimbursement of medical expenses — Rejection of the application — Rejection of the complaint — Substitution of grounds — Lodging of a second complaint — Time limit for bringing an action — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2021-06-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, admissibility, health expenditure, social security








C_2021338EN.01002202.xml










23.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/22






Order of the General Court of 25 June 2021 — OM v Commission
(Case T-728/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Civil service - Officials - Social security - JSIS - Reimbursement of medical expenses - Rejection of the application - Rejection of the complaint - Substitution of grounds - Lodging of a second complaint - Time limit for bringing an action - Inadmissibility)
(2021/C 338/29)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: OM (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Hohenecker and L. Vernier, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment, first, of the decisions of the Office for Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (PMO) of the Commission of 9 and 17 September 2019 refusing to reimburse the costs of medical analyses incurred by the applicant and, secondly, of the decision of 23 March 2020 rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant against those decisions.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


OM shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 53, 15.2.2021.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10333 — B&C KB/Atlas Flexibles) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 248/04
Date: 2021-06-25
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, packaging








C_2021248EN.01000401.xml










25.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 248/4






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10333 — B&C KB/Atlas Flexibles)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 248/04)

1.   
On 17 June 2021, 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:






—


B&C KB Holding GmbH (‘B&C Group’, Austria),










—


Atlas Flexibles GmbH, (‘Atlas Flexibles’, Germany).




B&C Group acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Atlas Flexibles.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for B&C Group: investment in several companies, in line with long-term strategic considerations,










—


for Atlas Flexibles: production and sale of flexible packaging products and trading of raw materials for its manufacture.






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.10333 — B&C KB/ATLAS FLEXIBLES
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-353/21: Action brought on 25 June 2021 — KTM Fahrrad v EUIPO — KTM (R2R)
Date: 2021-06-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, motor vehicle, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vehicle parts








C_2021320EN.01005201.xml










9.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/52






Action brought on 25 June 2021 — KTM Fahrrad v EUIPO — KTM (R2R)
(Case T-353/21)
(2021/C 320/58)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: KTM Fahrrad GmbH (Mattighofen, Austria) (represented by: V. Hoene, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: KTM AG (Mattighofen, Austria)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark R2R — European Union trade mark No 17 886 364

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 April 2021 in Case R 261/2020-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul cancellation decision No 22964C of the Cancellation Division of 4 December 2019 and the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of 20 April 2021 upholding it, including as regards the costs, and reject the application for cancellation of the respondent [before the Board of Appeal];










—


in the alternative, annul cancellation decision No 22964C of the Cancellation Division of 4 December 2019 and the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of 20 April 2021 upholding it, including as regards the costs, and reject the application for cancellation of the respondent [before the Board of Appeal], so far as concerns vehicles and vehicle parts, included in Class 12 — namely, land vehicles and vehicle parts for them;










—


in the further alternative, annul cancellation decision No 22964C of the Cancellation Division of 4 December 2019 and the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of 20 April 2021 upholding it, including as regards the costs, and reject the application for cancellation of the respondent [before the Board of Appeal], so far as concerns vehicles and vehicle parts, included in Class 12, namely, bicycles and two-wheeled vehicles and vehicle parts for them.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 58 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 95 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 24 June 2021 2021/C 248/02
Date: 2021-06-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021248EN.01000201.xml










25.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 248/2






Euro exchange rates (1)

24 June 2021
(2021/C 248/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1936 




JPY


Japanese yen


132,20 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4362 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85883 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,1133 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0967 




ISK


Iceland króna


146,20 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,1740 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,423 




HUF


Hungarian forint


350,52 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5245 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9245 




TRY


Turkish lira


10,3802 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5756 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4678 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,2675 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6903 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6039 




KRW


South Korean won


1 351,07 




ZAR


South African rand


17,0028 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7193 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4993 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


17 249,38 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9654 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,051 




RUB


Russian rouble


86,2638 




THB


Thai baht


38,016 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,9041 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,9678 




INR


Indian rupee


88,5020 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-358/21: Action brought on 25 June 2021 — Hotel Cipriani v EUIPO — Altunis (CIPRIANI FOOD)
Date: 2021-06-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cereal product, condiment, egg, foodstuff, meat product, milk, prepared foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2021338EN.01002501.xml










23.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/25






Action brought on 25 June 2021 — Hotel Cipriani v EUIPO — Altunis (CIPRIANI FOOD)
(Case T-358/21)
(2021/C 338/32)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Hotel Cipriani (Venice, Italy) (represented by: M. Rieger-Jansen, D. Op de Beeck and W. Pors, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Altunis-Trading, Gestão e Serviços, Lda (Funchal, Portugal)

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 figurative mark CIPRIANI FOOD — European Union trade mark No 683 250

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 April 2021 in Case R 1599/2020-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision in its entirety;










—


uphold the cancellation action in full and revoke the contested European Union trade mark;










—


order EUIPO and any intervener who chooses to intervene to bear their own costs of the proceedings and to pay those of the cancellation applicant.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009;










—


The Board erred by holding that ‘preparations made from cereals’ could not be suitably subdivided.
Case T-362/21: Action brought on 25 June 2021 — Telly v Commission
Date: 2021-06-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Czechia, State aid, control of State aid, high-definition television, waveband








C_2021368EN.01002202.xml










13.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 368/22






Action brought on 25 June 2021 — Telly v Commission
(Case T-362/21)
(2021/C 368/37)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Telly s. r. o. (Prague, Czech Republic) (represented by: R. Kubáč, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


annul the European Commission’s decision of 15 March 2021 on State aid SA.55805 (2020/FC) — Czech Republic — Extension of DTT network operators’ frequency licences;










—


order the Commission to bear the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment;










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission’s decision is not duly reasoned.
Case T-364/21: Action brought on 25 June 2021 — Essity Hygiene and Health v EUIPO (Representation of a leaf)
Date: 2021-06-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, packaging product, paper, paperboard, registered trade mark, toiletries, trade-mark law








C_2021320EN.01005401.xml










9.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/54






Action brought on 25 June 2021 — Essity Hygiene and Health v EUIPO (Representation of a leaf)
(Case T-364/21)
(2021/C 320/60)
Language of the case: Swedish

Parties


Applicant: Essity Hygiene and Health AB (Gothenburg, Sweden) (represented by: U. Wennermark, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: Application for registration of EU figurative mark representing a leaf — Application for registration No 16 709 305

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 March 2021 in Case R 2196/2017-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims, primarily, that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision in so far as it refuses the application;










—


vary the contested decision by granting the appeal against the examiner’s decision not to grant the application in respect of the goods in Class 16; and










—


order EUIPO to pay the applicant’s costs incurred in the proceedings before both the General Court and EUIPO.




The applicant claims, in the alternative, that the Court should:






—


order EUIPO to pay the applicant’s costs incurred before the General Court.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 165(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 and Article 36(1)(g) and 36(2) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625.
Case T-357/21: Action brought on 25 June 2021 — Jose A. Alfonso Arpon v EUIPO — Puma (PLUMAflex by Roal)
Date: 2021-06-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, footwear industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2021329EN.01003802.xml










16.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 329/38






Action brought on 25 June 2021 — Jose A. Alfonso Arpon v EUIPO — Puma (PLUMAflex by Roal)
(Case T-357/21)
(2021/C 329/51)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Jose A. Alfonso Arpon SL (Arnedo, Spain) (represented by: M. Escudero Pérez, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark PLUMAflex by Roal — Application for registration No 17 880 571

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 April 2021 in Case R 2991/2019-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and the other party to bear their own costs and pay those of the applicant.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(5)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10188 — Illumina/GRAIL) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 248/05
Date: 2021-06-25
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, genetics, health care, merger control, pharmaceutical industry








C_2021248EN.01000601.xml










25.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 248/6






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10188 — Illumina/GRAIL)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 248/05)

1.   
On 16 June 2021, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 and following a referral pursuant to Article 22 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


Illumina, Inc. (‘Illumina’, US),










—


GRAIL, Inc. (‘GRAIL’, US)




Illumina acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of GRAIL.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.
The concentration has been referred to the Commission by the French Autorité de la Concurrence pursuant to Article 22 (3) of the Merger Regulation. The referral was subsequently joined by Belgium, Greece, Iceland, the Netherlands and Norway.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Illumina: a global genomics company, which principally develops, manufactures and commercialises next generation sequencing (‘NGS’) systems for genetic and genomic analysis,










—


for GRAIL: a healthcare company, which is focused on developing technologies for cancer detection tests based on NGS. GRAIL has also started initial, limited commercialisation of its Galleri test in the US.






3.   
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.10188 — Illumina/GRAIL
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-345/20: Order of the President of the Court of 25 June 2021 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
Date: 2021-06-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative cooperation, data transmission, directory, disclosure of information, infringement of EU law, road transport, transport company








C_2021382EN.01002301.xml










20.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 382/23






Order of the President of the Court of 25 June 2021 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
(Case C-345/20) (1)

(2021/C 382/29)
Language of the case: Portuguese
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 329, 5.10.2020.