do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10323 — KKR/LGP/CNG) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 290/01
Date: 2021-07-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, packaging product, thin sheet








C_2021290EN.01000101.xml










20.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 290/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10323 — KKR/LGP/CNG)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 290/01)
On 13 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 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 32021M10323. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Withdrawal of notification of a concentration (Case M.10273 — ArcelorMittal/Liberty Steel France) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 279/02
Date: 2021-07-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, holding company, iron and steel industry, merger control, metallurgical industry








C_2021279EN.01000201.xml










13.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 279/2






Withdrawal of notification of a concentration
(Case M.10273 — ArcelorMittal/Liberty Steel France)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 279/02)
On 4 June 2021, the European Commission received notification (1) of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) (‘Merger Regulation’).
On 2 July 2021, the notifying party informed the Commission that it withdrew its notification.


(1)  OJ C 226, 14.6.2021, p. 9.

(2)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-49/21: Order of the General Court of 13 July 2021– PZ v Commission.
Date: 2021-07-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, rights of the defence, staff assessment








C_2021382EN.01003701.xml










20.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 382/37






Order of the General Court of 13 July 2021– PZ v Commission.
(Case T-49/21) (1)

(2021/C 382/50)
Language of the case: French
The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  C 128, 12.4.2021.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10293 — Gilde Fund VI/EDCO) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 279/06
Date: 2021-07-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: consumer goods, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, wholesale trade








C_2021279EN.01001301.xml










13.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 279/13






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10293 — Gilde Fund VI/EDCO)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 279/06)

1.   
On 1 July 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:






—


Gilde Buy-Out Fund VI C.V. and Gilde Buy-Out Fund VI2C.V., jointly referred to as ‘Gilde Fund VI’ (Netherlands),










—


Jadi International S.A., ‘EDCO’ (Luxembourg).




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


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Gilde Fund VI: investing, as a private equity fund, in mid-market companies that are active in various sectors in Europe,










—


for EDCO: wholesale distribution of non-food fast moving consumer goods, both private label and branded, mainly to large retail chains and petrol stations across Europe.






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.10293 — Gilde Fund VI/EDCO
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.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 12 July 2021 2021/C 279/03
Date: 2021-07-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021279EN.01000301.xml










13.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 279/3






Euro exchange rates (1)

12 July 2021
(2021/C 279/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1852 




JPY


Japanese yen


130,55 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4375 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85570 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,2008 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0852 




ISK


Iceland króna


146,30 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,3280 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,723 




HUF


Hungarian forint


355,38 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5542 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9280 




TRY


Turkish lira


10,2372 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5888 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4813 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,2052 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7019 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6027 




KRW


South Korean won


1 361,95 




ZAR


South African rand


17,1471 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,6751 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4948 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


17 199,18 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9678 




PHP


Philippine peso


59,847 




RUB


Russian rouble


88,4389 




THB


Thai baht


38,732 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,2426 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,6064 




INR


Indian rupee


88,4110 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-427/21: Action brought on 13 July 2021 — Trasta Komercbanka v ECB
Date: 2021-07-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Latvia, abuse of power, bank, banking supervision, damage, financial supervision, interest, liquidation, money laundering, trade licence








C_2021452EN.01004102.xml










8.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 452/41






Action brought on 13 July 2021 — Trasta Komercbanka v ECB
(Case T-427/21)
(2021/C 452/52)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Trasta Komercbanka AS (Riga, Latvia) (represented by: O. Behrends, lawyer)

Defendant: European Central Bank

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


order the defendant to pay financial compensation in respect of the harm which the applicant has suffered as a result of the defendant’s decision to revoke the applicant’s license on 11 July 2016 (notified to the applicant on 13 July 2016);










—


determine that the material damage amounts to at least EUR 162 million together with a compensatory interest starting at 11 July 2016 until delivery of the judgment in the present case and with corresponding default interest from the date of delivery of judgment until its payment in full; and










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to properly notify the licence withdrawal decision to the applicant’s authorized representatives.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the procedure leading to the licence withdrawal decision did not involve a proper representation of the applicant.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the licence withdrawal decision is vitiated by a number of other serious procedural irregularities.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the defendant acted outside its area of competence when issuing the licence withdrawal decision, in particular with regard to money laundering matters and the enforcement of national law.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging that the defendant erroneously assumed grounds for a licence withdrawal and provided an insufficient statement of reason in this regard.










6.


Sixth plea in law, alleging that defendant’s illegal conduct caused significant damage to the applicant, including as a result of the applicant’s liquidation.
Council Decision (EU) 2021/1181 of 13 July 2021 on the position to be adopted, on behalf of the European Union, within the Trade Committee established by the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam as regards the adoption of the Rules of Procedure for the Trade Committee
Date: 2021-07-13
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Viet Nam, free-trade agreement, joint body (EU), rules of procedure, trade agreement (EU)








L_2021256EN.01009901.xml










19.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 256/99








            COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2021/1181
of 13 July 2021
         
on the position to be adopted, on behalf of the European Union, within the Trade Committee established by the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam as regards the adoption of the Rules of Procedure for the Trade Committee


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 91(1) and 100(2) and the first subparagraph of Article 207(4), in conjunction with Article 218(9) thereof,


Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

Whereas:







(1)


The Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam (the ‘Agreement’) was concluded by the Union by Council Decision (EU) 2020/753 (1) and entered into force on 1 August 2020.












(2)


Pursuant to point (f) of paragraph 4 of Article 17.1 of the Agreement, the Trade Committee established by the Agreement (the ‘Trade Committee’) may adopt its own Rules of Procedure.












(3)


The Trade Committee, during its first meeting, is to adopt its own Rules of Procedure, as provided for by the Agreement.












(4)


It is therefore appropriate to establish the position to be adopted on the Union’s behalf within the Trade Committee with regard to the adoption of the Rules of Procedure for the Trade Committee in order to ensure the effective implementation of the Agreement.












(5)


The position of the Union within the Trade Committee should be based on the draft decision of the Trade Committee,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The position to be adopted, on the Union’s behalf, in the first meeting of the Trade Committee established by the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, as regards the adoption of the Rules of Procedure for the Trade Committee, shall be based on the draft decision of the Trade Committee (2).


Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 13 July 2021.


For the Council


The President

A. ŠIRCELJ
            





(1)  Council Decision (EU) 2020/753 of 30 March 2020 on the conclusion of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam (OJ L 186, 12.6.2020, p. 1).

(2)  See document ST 10040/21 on http://register.consilium.europa.eu.
Case T-423/21: Action brought on 13 July 2021 — Gioioso v EUIPO — Maxi Di (MARE GIOIOSO di Sebastiano IMPORT EXPORT)
Date: 2021-07-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dried product, fish, frozen product, preserved product, processed food product, registered trade mark, smoked product, trade-mark law








C_2021357EN.01002901.xml










6.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 357/29






Action brought on 13 July 2021 — Gioioso v EUIPO — Maxi Di (MARE GIOIOSO di Sebastiano IMPORT EXPORT)
(Case T-423/21)
(2021/C 357/44)
Language in which the application was lodged: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Sebastiano Gioioso (Fasano, Italy) (represented by: F. Amati, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Maxi Di Srl (Belfiore, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark MARE GIOIOSO di Sebastiano IMPORT EXPORT — Application for registration No 18 024 185

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 May 2021 in Case R 1650/2020-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to pay the costs of the opposition proceedings and the appeal proceedings.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-428/21: Action brought on 13 July 2021 — Fursin and Others v ECB
Date: 2021-07-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: bank, banking supervision, damages, liquidation, money laundering, trade licence








C_2021452EN.01004201.xml










8.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 452/42






Action brought on 13 July 2021 — Fursin and Others v ECB
(Case T-428/21)
(2021/C 452/53)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Ivan Fursin (Kyiv, Ukraine) and 6 other applicants (represented by: O. Behrends, lawyer)

Defendant: European Central Bank

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


order the defendant to pay financial compensation in respect of the harm which the applicants have suffered as a result of the defendant’s decision to revoke the license of Trasta Komercbanka AS on 11 July 2016 (notified on 13 July 2016);










—


determine that the material damage amounts to at least EUR 25 million (1) together with a compensatory interest starting at 11 July 2016 until delivery of the judgment in the present case and with corresponding default interest from the date of delivery of judgment until its payment in full; and










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on six pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to properly notify the licence withdrawal decision to Trasta Komercbanka AS’ authorized representatives.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the procedure leading to the licence withdrawal decision did not involve a proper representation of Trasta Komercbanka AS.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the licence withdrawal decision is vitiated by a number of other serious irregularities.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the defendant acted outside its area of competence when issuing the licence withdrawal decision, in particular with regard to money laundering matters and the enforcement of national law.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging that the defendant erroneously assumed grounds for a licence withdrawal and provided an insufficient statement of reason in this regard.










6.


Sixth plea in law, alleging that the defendant’s illegal conduct caused significant damage to the applicants, including as a result of Trasta Komercbanka AS’ liquidation.






(1)  The amounts are attributable to each of the applicants in the amounts of their shareholding of Trasta Komercbanka AS, as set out in the licence withdrawal decision of 3 March 2016.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10250 — Accor/Keys/Hotel Portfolio) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 288/02
Date: 2021-07-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, hotel industry, merger control, real estate business








C_2021288EN.01000201.xml










19.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10250 — Accor/Keys/Hotel Portfolio)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 288/02)
On 13 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 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 32021M10250. 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.10340 — Goldman Sachs/Adapteo) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 279/05
Date: 2021-07-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: banking, building industry, economic concentration, investment company, merger control








C_2021279EN.01001101.xml










13.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 279/11






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10340 — Goldman Sachs/Adapteo)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 279/05)

1.   
On 2 July 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:






—


Goldman Sachs Group, Inc (‘Goldman Sachs’, USA),










—


Adapteo Plc (‘Adapteo’, Finland).




Goldman Sachs acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Adapteo. The concentration is accomplished by way of public bid announced on 17 May 2021.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Goldman Sachs: global investment banking, securities and investment management. It provides a range of banking, securities and investment services worldwide;










—


for Adapteo: modular space provider in Northern Europe, which builds, rents and sells temporary and permanent pre-fabricated modular building units for schools, day-care centres, elderly care homes, offices, temporary accommodation and events, as well as for customers within the governmental and healthcare sectors.






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.10340 — Goldman Sachs/Adapteo
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 +3222964301
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.