do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10551 – AMALFI INVEST OPPORTUNITIES / LA DORIA) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 505/04
Date: 2021-12-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: agri-foodstuffs, beverage industry, economic concentration, foodstuff, investment company, merger control, non-alcoholic beverage








C_2021505EN.01000501.xml










15.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 505/5






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10551 – AMALFI INVEST OPPORTUNITIES / LA DORIA)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 505/04)

1.   
On 7 December 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:






—


Amalfi Invest Opportunities S.à r.l. (‘AIO’, Luxembourg), ultimately controlled by Investindustrial S.A. (‘Investindustrial’, Luxembourg); and










—


La Doria S.p.A. (‘La Doria’, Italy), ultimately controlled by certain members of the Ferraioli Family.




AIO acquires, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation, control of the whole of La Doria.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Investindustrial (and its subsidiary AIO): investments in medium-sized companies based in Europe, including Italy, Portugal, Spain, and the United Kingdom, focusing on four main investment areas: consumer and leisure, healthcare and services, industrial manufacturing and technology.










—


for La Doria: active worldwide in the production and marketing of food products, particularly in the vegetable and juices processing sector.






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 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.10551 – AMALFI INVEST OPPORTUNITIES / LA DORIA
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.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10557 – CPP INVESTMENTS / VOTORANTIM / VOTENER) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 514/01
Date: 2021-12-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Brazil, building industry, economic concentration, electrical energy, investment company, merger control, metallurgical industry, mining industry, pension scheme, wholesale trade








C_2021514EN.01000101.xml










21.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 514/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10557 – CPP INVESTMENTS / VOTORANTIM / VOTENER)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 514/01)
On 15 December 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 32021M10557. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-775/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 15 December 2021 — Blue Air Aviation SA v UCMR — ADA Asociația pentru Drepturi de Autor a Compozitorilor
Date: 2021-12-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air safety, aircraft, broadcasting, carriage of passengers, copyright, music, radio equipment








C_2022191EN.01000701.xml










10.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 191/7






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 15 December 2021 — Blue Air Aviation SA v UCMR — ADA Asociația pentru Drepturi de Autor a Compozitorilor
(Case C-775/21)
(2022/C 191/09)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel București

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant (defendant at first instance): Blue Air Aviation SA

Respondent (applicant at first instance): UCMR — ADA Asociația pentru Drepturi de Autor a Compozitorilor

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (1) be interpreted as meaning that the broadcasting, inside a commercial aircraft occupied by passengers, of a musical work or a fragment of a musical work on take-off, on landing or at any time during a flight, via the aircraft’s public address system, constitutes a communication to the public within the meaning of that provision, particularly (but not exclusively) in the light of the criterion relating to the profit-making objective of the communication?
If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative:










2.


Does the existence on board the aircraft of an address system required by air traffic safety legislation constitute a sufficient basis for making a rebuttable presumption as to the communication to the public of musical works on board that aircraft?
If the answer to that question is in the negative:










3.


Does the presence on board the aircraft of an address system required by air traffic safety legislation and of software which enables the communication of phonograms (containing protected musical works) via that system constitute a sufficient basis for making a rebuttable presumption as to the communication to the public of musical works on board that aircraft?






(1)  OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10.
Case T-85/21: Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2021 — QF v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Recruitment — Internal competition COM/03/AD/18 (AD 6) — Decision not to include the applicant’s name on the reserve list for the competition — Obligation to state reasons — Secrecy of the selection board’s proceedings — No communication of the intermediate marks or the weighting of the elements of a test specified in the competition notice)
Date: 2021-12-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrator, competition (EU), public administration, recruitment








C_2022073EN.01004002.xml










14.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 73/40






Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2021 — QF v Commission
(Case T-85/21) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Recruitment - Internal competition COM/03/AD/18 (AD 6) - Decision not to include the applicant’s name on the reserve list for the competition - Obligation to state reasons - Secrecy of the selection board’s proceedings - No communication of the intermediate marks or the weighting of the elements of a test specified in the competition notice)
(2022/C 73/49)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: QF (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Milanowska and T. Lilamand, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the decision of the selection board for the internal competition COM/03/AD/18 (AD 6) — Administrators of 15 April 2020 rejecting the applicant’s request for review of the decision of that selection board of 16 December 2019 not to include the applicant’s name on the reserve list for that competition.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the selection board for the internal competition COM/03/AD/18 (AD 6) — Administrators of 15 April 2020 not to include QF on the reserve list for the recruitment of administrators at grade AD 6 in the field of European public administration;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 98, 22.3.2021
Case T-188/21: Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2021 — Lück v EUIPO — R. H. Investment (MALLE) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark MALLE — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Ineffective nature of the single plea in law)
Date: 2021-12-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, audiovisual production, broadcasting, cultural event, recording, registered trade mark, sporting event, television, trade-mark law








C_2022084EN.01004001.xml










21.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 84/40






Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2021 — Lück v EUIPO — R. H. Investment (MALLE)
(Case T-188/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark MALLE - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Ineffective nature of the single plea in law)
(2022/C 84/56)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Jörg Lück (Hilden, Germany) (represented by: L. Becker, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Eberl and E. Markakis, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: R. H. Investment UG (haftungsbeschränkt) (Erlangen, Germany) (represented by: M. Metzner and M. Scheiner, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 December 2020 (Case R 1393/2020-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between R. H. Investment and Mr Lück.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Jörg Lück to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 217, 7.6.2021.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10549 – ARDIAN FRANCE / RG SAFETY) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 519/01
Date: 2021-12-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: consultancy, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, protective equipment, wholesale selling








C_2021519EN.01000101.xml










22.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 519/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10549 – ARDIAN FRANCE / RG SAFETY)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 519/01)
On 15 December 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 French 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 32021M10549. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.