do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-448/18: Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — Ryanair and Others v Commission (State aid — Agreements concluded by Kärntner Flughafen Betriebsgesellschaft with Ryanair and its subsidiaries Airport Marketing Services and Leading Verge.com — Airport services — Marketing services — Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery — Concept of State aid — Whether imputable to the State — Advantage — Private investor test — Recovery — Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights — Right of access to the file — Right to be heard)
Date: 2021-09-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Austria, Carinthia, State aid, aid to undertakings, air transport, carriage of passengers, control of State aid, provision of services, reimbursement of aid, rights of the defence








C_2021471EN.01003801.xml










22.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 471/38






Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — Ryanair and Others v Commission
(Case T-448/18) (1)

(State aid - Agreements concluded by Kärntner Flughafen Betriebsgesellschaft with Ryanair and its subsidiaries Airport Marketing Services and Leading Verge.com - Airport services - Marketing services - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - Concept of State aid - Whether imputable to the State - Advantage - Private investor test - Recovery - Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Right of access to the file - Right to be heard)
(2021/C 471/52)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Ryanair DAC (Swords, Ireland), Airport Marketing Services Ltd (Dublin, Ireland), FR Financing (Malta) Ltd (Douglas, Isle of Man) (represented by: E. Vahida and I.-G. Metaxas-Maranghidis, lawyers, and by B. Byrne, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Blanck, A. Bouchagiar and S. Noë, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the partial annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2018/628 of 11 November 2016 on State aid SA.24221(2011/C) (ex 2011/NN) implemented by Austria for the Klagenfurt airport, Ryanair and other airlines using the airport (OJ 2018 L 107, p. 1), in so far as it concerns the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Ryanair DAC, Airport Marketing Services Ltd and FR Financing (Malta) Ltd to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 319, 10.9.2018.
Case T-341/18: Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — Nec v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for aluminium electrolytic capacitors and tantalum electrolytic capacitors — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement — Price coordination throughout the EEA — Attribution to the parent company of the infringement committed by its subsidiary — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines — Gravity of the infringement — Increase in the amount of the fine for repeated infringement — Proportionality — Unlimited jurisdiction)
Date: 2021-09-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Economic Area, aluminium, cartel, control of restrictive practices, electronic component, parent company, price agreement, sanction (EU), subsidiary, tantalum








C_2021471EN.01003401.xml










22.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 471/34






Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — Nec v Commission
(Case T-341/18) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for aluminium electrolytic capacitors and tantalum electrolytic capacitors - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Price coordination throughout the EEA - Attribution to the parent company of the infringement committed by its subsidiary - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Gravity of the infringement - Increase in the amount of the fine for repeated infringement - Proportionality - Unlimited jurisdiction)
(2021/C 471/46)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Nec Corp. (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: O. Brouwer and A. Pliego Selie, lawyers, and by R. Bachour, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Cleenewerck de Crayencour, L. Wildpanner and F. van Schaik, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for, primarily, annulment of Commission Decision C(2018) 1768 final of 21 March 2018 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.40136 — Capacitors), in so far as that decision finds that the applicant personally participated in the infringement, and, in the alternative, annulment of the fines imposed on the applicant or a reduction in the amount of those fines.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Nec Corp. to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 294, 20.8.2018.
Case T-447/18: Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — TUIfly v Commission (State aid — Agreements concluded by Kärntner Flughafen Betriebsgesellschaft with airlines Hapag Lloyd Express and TUIfly — Airport services — Marketing services — Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery — Advantage — Private investor test — Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights — Right of access to the file — Right to be heard)
Date: 2021-09-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Austria, Carinthia, State aid, aid to undertakings, air transport, carriage of passengers, control of State aid, provision of services, reimbursement of aid, rights of the defence








C_2021471EN.01003701.xml










22.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 471/37






Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — TUIfly v Commission
(Case T-447/18) (1)

(State aid - Agreements concluded by Kärntner Flughafen Betriebsgesellschaft with airlines Hapag Lloyd Express and TUIfly - Airport services - Marketing services - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - Advantage - Private investor test - Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Right of access to the file - Right to be heard)
(2021/C 471/51)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: TUIfly GmbH (Langenhagen, Germany) (represented by: L. Giesberts and M. Gayger, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Blanck, A. Bouchagiar and S. Noë, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking partial annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2018/628 of 11 November 2016 on State aid SA.24221(2011/C) (ex 2011/NN) implemented by Austria for the Klagenfurt airport, Ryanair and other airlines using the airport (OJ 2018 L 107, p. 1), in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders TUIfly GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 301, 27.8.2018.
Case T-569/19: Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — AlzChem Group v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Documents relating to a procedure for the recovery of State aid following a decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery — Refusal to grant access — Exception relating to the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits — Overriding public interest — Principle of non-discrimination — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2021-09-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: State aid, access to EU information, control of State aid, equal treatment, reimbursement of aid








C_2021471EN.01004302.xml










22.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 471/43






Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — AlzChem Group v Commission
(Case T-569/19) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to a procedure for the recovery of State aid following a decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - Refusal to grant access - Exception relating to the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits - Overriding public interest - Principle of non-discrimination - Obligation to state reasons)
(2021/C 471/60)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: AlzChem Group AG (Trostberg, Germany) (represented by: A. Borsos and J. Guerrero Pérez, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Ehrbar and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 5602 final of 22 July 2019 refusing to grant the applicant access to documents relating to the procedure for the recovery of State aid following a decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders AlzChem Group AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 363, 28.10.2019.
Case T-60/20: Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — Enosi Mastichoparagogon Chiou v EUIPO (MASTIHACARE) (EU trade mark — International Registration designating the European Union — Word mark MASTIHACARE — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Obligation to state reasons — Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2021-09-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, dental medicine, hairdressing and beauty care, polishing and scouring preparations, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2021471EN.01004501.xml










22.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 471/45






Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — Enosi Mastichoparagogon Chiou v EUIPO (MASTIHACARE)
(Case T-60/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - International Registration designating the European Union - Word mark MASTIHACARE - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Obligation to state reasons - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2021/C 471/62)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Enosi Mastichoparagogon Chiou (Chios, Greece) (represented by: A.-E. Malami, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 November 2019 (Case R 692/2019-1), relating to the international registration of the word mark MASTIHACARE designating the European Union.

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Enosi Mastichoparagogon Chiou to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 103, 30.3.2020.
Recommendation of the European Central Bank of 29 September 2021 to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of the Central Bank of Ireland (ECB/2021/44) 2021/C 403/01
Date: 2021-09-29
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: European System of Central Banks, Ireland, accountant, auditing, central bank, euro area








C_2021403EN.01000101.xml










6.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 403/1






RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
of 29 September 2021
to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of the Central Bank of Ireland
(ECB/2021/44)
(2021/C 403/01)
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 27.1 thereof,
Whereas:






(1)


The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are audited by independent external auditors recommended by the ECB’s Governing Council and approved by the Council of the European Union.










(2)


In 2016, the Central Bank of Ireland selected Mazars as its external auditors for the financial years 2016 to 2020.










(3)


The mandate of the Central Bank of Ireland’s current external auditors, Mazars, ended after the audit for the financial year 2020. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors for the financial years 2021 and 2022.










(4)


The Central Bank of Ireland intends to extend the mandate of Mazars for the financial years 2021 and 2022,




HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Mazars should be appointed as the external auditors of the Central Bank of Ireland for the financial years 2021 and 2022.

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 29 September 2021.


The President of the ECB

Christine LAGARDE
Case T-622/21: Action brought on 29 September 2021 — Puma v EUIPO — SMB Swisspour (PUMA)
Date: 2021-09-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, computer equipment, iron and steel industry, measuring equipment, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2021471EN.01005601.xml










22.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 471/56






Action brought on 29 September 2021 — Puma v EUIPO — SMB Swisspour (PUMA)
(Case T-622/21)
(2021/C 471/80)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: M. Schunke and P. Trieb, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: SMB Swisspour GmbH (Wildau, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU word mark PUMA — Application for registration No 15 740 079

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 July 2021 in Case R 2493/2019-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and refuse the application for the contested mark;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings, including those incurred in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10416 — Stellantis/FIH/JV) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 393/11
Date: 2021-09-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: advanced technology industry, economic concentration, holding company, investment company, merger control, motor vehicle industry








C_2021393EN.01001201.xml










29.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 393/12






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10416 — Stellantis/FIH/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 393/11)

1.   
On 20 September 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:






—


Stellantis N.V. (‘Stellantis’, the Netherlands),










—


FIH Mobile Limited (‘FIH’, Cayman Islands), controlled by Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. Ltd. (Taiwan),










—


Mobile Drive Netherlands B.V. (the ‘JV’, the Netherlands), a newly created joint venture.




Stellantis and FIH acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the 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 Stellantis: a global automotive group active in designing, engineering, manufacturing, distributing and selling automotive vehicles, components and production systems worldwide,










—


for FIH: an investment holding company principally active globally in design, development, manufacturing, assembly and after-sales services for computer, communications and consumers electronics companies,










—


for the JV: it will develop digital cockpits and personalised connected services and aims to accelerate go-to-market timelines for advanced in-car and connected-car technologies.






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.10416 — Stellantis/FIH/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’).