do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-390/21: Action brought on 5 July 2021 — DZ Bank v SRB
Date: 2021-07-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU banking union, admissibility, aid to undertakings, bank, bank resolution, company in difficulties, financing method, financing plan, fund (EU), official language








C_2021349EN.01004101.xml










30.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 349/41






Action brought on 5 July 2021 — DZ Bank v SRB
(Case T-390/21)
(2021/C 349/56)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: DZ Bank AG Deutsche Zentral-Genossenschaftsbank, Frankfurt am Main (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: H. Berger and M. Weber, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (SRB)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the Single Resolution Board of 14 April 2021 on the calculation of the 2021 ex ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2021/22), including the annexes thereto, in so far as the contested decision, including Annex I, Annex II and Annex III thereto, concerns the applicant’s contribution;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.




In the alternative, in the event that the Court takes the view that the contested decision is legally non-existent as a result of the use of the incorrect official language by the defendant and the action for annulment would therefore be inadmissible on the ground that it would be devoid of purpose, the applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare that the contested decision is legally non-existent in so far as it concerns the applicant;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on 10 pleas in law, which are in essence identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-389/21, Landesbank Baden-Württemberg v SRB.
Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries 2021/C 262 I/01
Date: 2021-07-05
Institutions: Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, European Commission
Subjects: Atlantic Ocean, EU waters, France, catch by species, catch quota, fishing area, fishing rights, sea fish, sea fishing








CI2021262EN.01000101.xml










5.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CI 262/1






Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
(2021/C 262 I/01)
In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Union control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:






Date and time of closure


3.6.2021




Duration


3.6.2021 - 31.12.2021




Member State


France




Stock or Group of stocks


ANF/8C3411




Species


Anglerfish (Lophiidae)




Zone


8c, 9 and 10; Union waters of CECAF 34.1.1




Type(s) of fishing vessels


---




Reference number


08/TQ92






(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.
Special report No 14/2021 Interreg cooperation: The potential of the European Union’s cross-border regions has not yet been fully unlocked 2021/C 262/04
Date: 2021-07-05
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU Member State, EU programme, European territorial cooperation, cross-border cooperation, economic and social cohesion, frontier region, internal border of the EU, regional cooperation, regional development, regional disparity








C_2021262EN.01001301.xml










5.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 262/13






Special report No 14/2021
Interreg cooperation: The potential of the European Union’s cross-border regions has not yet been fully unlocked
(2021/C 262/04)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that special report No 14/2021 ‘Interreg cooperation: The potential of the European Union’s cross-border regions has not yet been fully unlocked’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 2 July 2021 2021/C 262/03
Date: 2021-07-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021262EN.01001201.xml










5.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 262/12






Euro exchange rates (1)

2 July 2021
(2021/C 262/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1823 




JPY


Japanese yen


131,74 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4360 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86003 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,1583 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0945 




ISK


Iceland króna


147,30 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,2375 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,606 




HUF


Hungarian forint


352,10 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5264 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9283 




TRY


Turkish lira


10,2780 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5836 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4677 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,1838 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6988 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5969 




KRW


South Korean won


1 343,49 




ZAR


South African rand


17,0787 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,6594 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4887 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


17 191,94 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9225 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,423 




RUB


Russian rouble


87,1200 




THB


Thai baht


38,052 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,9421 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,5936 




INR


Indian rupee


88,3055 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10165 – ASTRAZENECA / ALEXION PHARMACEUTICALS) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 435/01
Date: 2021-07-05
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, pharmaceutical industry








C_2022435EN.01000101.xml










16.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 435/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10165 – ASTRAZENECA / ALEXION PHARMACEUTICALS)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 435/01)
On 5 July 2021, 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 policy’ 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 32021M10165. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-392/21: Action brought on 5 July 2021 — Landesbank Hessen-Thüringen Girozentrale v SRB
Date: 2021-07-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU banking union, admissibility, aid to undertakings, bank, bank resolution, company in difficulties, financing method, financing plan, fund (EU), official language








C_2021349EN.01004301.xml










30.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 349/43






Action brought on 5 July 2021 — Landesbank Hessen-Thüringen Girozentrale v SRB
(Case T-392/21)
(2021/C 349/58)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Landesbank Hessen-Thüringen Girozentrale (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: H. Berger and M. Weber, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (SRB)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the Single Resolution Board of 14 April 2021 on the calculation of the 2021 ex ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2021/22), including the annexes thereto, in so far as the contested decision, including Annex I, Annex II and Annex III thereto, concerns the applicant’s contribution;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.




In the alternative, in the event that the Court takes the view that the contested decision is legally non-existent as a result of the use of the incorrect official language by the defendant and the action for annulment would therefore be inadmissible on the ground that it would be devoid of purpose, the applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare that the contested decision is legally non-existent in so far as it concerns the applicant;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on 10 pleas in law, which are in essence identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-389/21, Landesbank Baden-Württemberg v SRB.
Case C-411/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Portugal) lodged on 5 July 2021 — Instituto do Cinema e do Audiovisual, I.P. v NOWO Communications, S.A.
Date: 2021-07-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Portugal, audiovisual production, equal treatment, film production, freedom to provide services, provision of services








C_2021452EN.01000401.xml










8.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 452/4






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Portugal) lodged on 5 July 2021 — Instituto do Cinema e do Audiovisual, I.P. v NOWO Communications, S.A.
(Case C-411/21)
(2021/C 452/03)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Supremo Tribunal Administrativo

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Instituto do Cinema e do Audiovisual, I.P.

Respondent: NOWO Communications, S.A.

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 10(2) of Lei n.o 55/2012, de 6 de setembro (Law No 55/2012 of 6 September 2012), if interpreted as meaning that the fee for which it provides is to be used exclusively to finance the promotion and dissemination of Portuguese film and audiovisual works, liable to give rise to indirect discrimination against the provision of services between Member States as compared with the corresponding national provision of services, inasmuch as it makes the provision of services between Member States more difficult than the purely domestic provision of services within a Member State, thus infringing Article 56 TFEU?










2.


Might the answer to be given to the first question referred be altered by the fact that other Member States of the European Union operate schemes which are identical or similar to that provided for in Law No 55/2012?
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10373 — Primonial/Samsung/ Target) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 262/06
Date: 2021-07-05
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electronics industry, insurance, investment company, merger control, property market, real estate business, real property, shipbuilding








C_2021262EN.01001601.xml










5.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 262/16






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10373 — Primonial/Samsung/ Target)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 262/06)

1.   
On 23 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:






—


Primonial Real Estate Investment Management, belonging to the Primonial Group (‘Primonial’, France),










—


Samsung SRA Asset Management, belonging to the Samsung Group, (‘Samsung’, Korea),










—


SCI TS Influence (‘Target’, France).




Primonial and Samsung acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the whole of the Target.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Primonial: real estate investment group mainly active in France, co-controlled by Bridgepoint Group (UK) and Latour Capital Management SAS (France), both independent private equity groups,










—


for Samsung: conglomerate active globally in a wide array of industries, including electronics, shipbuilding, engineering and insurance,










—


for Target: real estate company currently controlled by the Tishman Speyer Group (USA) and owner of a single building (called ‘Influence’) located in Saint-Ouen, France.






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.10373 — Primonial/Samsung/Target
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.10255 — Triton/Bergman Clinics) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 262/09
Date: 2021-07-05
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, health care, investment company, medical institution, merger control








C_2021262EN.01002101.xml










5.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 262/21






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10255 — Triton/Bergman Clinics)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 262/09)

1.   
On 28 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:






—


Triton group (‘Triton’, Jersey),










—


Bergman Healthcare Clinics B.V. (‘Bergman Clinics’, the Netherlands),




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


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Triton: private equity fund investing primarily in medium-sized businesses headquartered in Central and Northern Europe, with a particular focus on businesses in four core sector, namely Business Services, Industrials, Consumer and Health. One of Triton’s portfolio companies, Aleris Group AB, is active in the provision of ophthalmological services in both Sweden and Norway,










—


for Bergman Clinics: focus clinics operating throughout the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Germany offering plannable medical care in the fields of orthopaedics, ophthalmology, gynaecology, aesthetic medicine, cardiology, gastroenterology, dermatology and vascular medicine. One of Bergman Clinics’ portfolio companies, Memira AB, is active in the provision of ophthalmological services across the Nordic countries.






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.10255 — Triton/Bergman Clinics
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’).
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions at its meeting on 5 July 2021 concerning a Draft Decision in Case AT.40178 - Car Emissions Meeting by Audio Conference – via ‘Skype for Business’ Rapporteur: Sweden (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 458/09
Date: 2021-07-05
Institutions: Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions
Subjects: EU competition policy, control of restrictive practices, diesel engine, exchange of information, motor car, motor vehicle industry, motor vehicle pollution, restriction on competition, sanction (EU), trade information, vehicle parts








C_2021458EN.01001301.xml










12.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 458/13






Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions at its meeting on 5 July 2021 concerning a Draft Decision in Case AT.40178 - Car Emissions
Meeting by Audio Conference – via ‘Skype for Business’
Rapporteur: Sweden
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 458/09)






1.


The Advisory Committee (10 Member States) agrees with the Commission that the anti-competitive conduct covered by the draft decision constitutes an agreement and/or concerted practice between undertakings within the meaning of Article 101 of the Treaty and Article 53 EEA Agreement.










2.


The Advisory Committee (10 Member States) agrees with the Commission that the object of the agreement and/or concerted practices was to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101(1)(b) of the TFEU and Article 53(1)(b) EEA Agreement.










3.


The Advisory Committee (10 Member States) agrees with the Commission’s assessment as regards the duration of the infringement.










4.


The Advisory Committee (10 Member States) agrees with the Commission that fines should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision, with the exception of the immunity applicant.










5.


The Advisory Committee (10 Member States) agrees with the Commission on the application of the 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation No 1/2003.










6.


The Advisory Committee (10 Member States) agrees with the Commission as regards the reduction of the fines based on the 2006 Leniency Notice and the 2008 Settlement Notice.










7.


The Advisory Committee (10 Member States) agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines.










8.


The Advisory Committee (10 Member States) recommends the publication of its Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10232 — Brose/Sitech) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 262/08
Date: 2021-07-05
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, motor vehicle industry, vehicle parts








C_2021262EN.01002001.xml










5.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 262/20






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10232 — Brose/Sitech)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 262/08)

1.   
On 23 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:






—


Brose Fahrzeugteile SE & Co. Kommanditgesellschaft (Germany), (together with its affiliated companies ‘BROSE’),










—


SITECH Sp. z o. o. (Poland) (together with its affiliated companies ‘SITECH’), belonging to the group of Volkswagen AG (‘VW’, Germany).




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


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for BROSE: producer of automotive components and mechatronic systems for vehicle doors, seat structures (including integrated seat components), electric motors and electronics, including steering, braking, gearbox and motor cooling,










—


for SITECH: producer of complete vehicle seats, metal seat structures and seat structure components.






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.10232 — Brose/Sitech
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’).