do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10661 – Bain Capital / Inetum) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 166/08
Date: 2022-04-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: digital technology, economic concentration, information technology industry, investment company, merger control, provision of services








C_2022166EN.01001001.xml










20.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 166/10






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10661 – Bain Capital / Inetum)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 166/08)

1.   
On 8 April 2022, 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:






—


Bain Capital Investors, LLC (‘Bain Capital’, United States of America),










—


Inetum S.A. (‘Inetum’, France).




Bain Capital will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Inetum.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned:






—


Bain Capital: a private equity investment firm that invests in companies across a number of industries, including information technology, healthcare, retail and consumer products, communications, financial services and industrial/manufacturing,










—


Inetum: a provider of digital services and solutions to customers active in a variety of 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 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.10661 – Bain Capital / Inetum
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.
Notice to importers Imports of open mesh fabrics of glass fibres into the European Union from GSP beneficiary countries belonging to the regional cumulation group I and group III 2022/C 166/05
Date: 2022-04-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: certificate of origin, customs debt, customs fraud, fraud against the EU, free circulation, generalised preferences, glass fibre, import (EU), least-developed country, metal product, tariff exemption








C_2022166EN.01000701.xml










20.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 166/7






Notice to importers
Imports of open mesh fabrics of glass fibres into the European Union from GSP beneficiary countries belonging to the regional cumulation group I and group III
(2022/C 166/05)
By a notice to importers published in the Official Journal C 314 of 23 September 2015, p. 11, the Commission advised European Union operators declaring origin / presenting documentary evidence of origin in order to benefit from preferential treatment for open mesh fabrics of glass fibres of HS subheadings 7019 40, 7019 51 and 7019 59 imported from EU Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) beneficiary countries belonging to the regional cumulation group I and group III (1) to take all necessary precautions, as there were reasonable doubts concerning the proper application of the preferential treatment and the applicability of proofs of origin presented in the Union for those products. The release of those products for free circulation could thus give rise to a customs debt, and lead to fraud against the European Union’s financial interests.
Based on the information available, the reasonable doubts mentioned above are no longer supported by any evidence that would show that the underlying risks continue to persist.
In addition, since 1 January 2021 all exporters from the GSP beneficiary countries exporting under GSP have been applying the REX self-certification system (2) and hence issuing statements on origin as the only documentary evidence to claim preferential origin. Form A certificates of origin may no longer be issued by the governmental authorities of the GSP beneficiary countries.
The notice to importers published in the Official Journal C 314 of 23 September 2015 has therefore become devoid of purpose as regards consignments of the products concerned declared for release for free circulation on or after the date of the publication of this notice, and is hereby withdrawn.


(1)  At the time of the publication of this notice, the following beneficiary countries belonged to the groups:






—


Group I – Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Philippines, Vietnam, Myanmar/Burma










—


Group III – Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka





(2)  Articles 80 and 81 of the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2447 of 24 November 2015 laying down detailed rules for implementing certain provisions of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the Union Customs Code (OJ L 343, 29.12.2015, p. 558).
Case C-263/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal de Justiça (Portugal) lodged on 20 April 2022 — Ocidental — Companhia Portuguesa de Seguros de Vida, S.A. v LP
Date: 2022-04-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer information, insurance contract, judicial review, unfair terms of contract








C_2022276EN.01000501.xml










18.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 276/5






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal de Justiça (Portugal) lodged on 20 April 2022 — Ocidental — Companhia Portuguesa de Seguros de Vida, S.A. v LP
(Case C-263/22)
(2022/C 276/07)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Supremo Tribunal de Justiça

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Ocidental — Companhia Portuguesa de Seguros de Vida, S.A.

Defendant: LP

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 5 of Directive 93/13/EEC, (1) which provides that the ‘terms offered to the consumer … must always be drafted in plain, intelligible language’, in the light of the twentieth recital of that directive, be interpreted as meaning that consumers must always have an opportunity to become acquainted with all the terms?










2.


Must Article 4(2) of Directive 93/13/EEC, according to which terms relating to the main subject matter of the contract are subject to assessment unless ‘these terms are in plain intelligible language’, be interpreted as meaning that it requires consumers always to have an opportunity to become acquainted with those terms?










3.


In the context of national legislation which allows the courts to review the unfairness of terms that have not been individually negotiated relating to the definition of the main subject matter of the contract: (i) in relation to a contributory group insurance contract, does Article 3(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC, in conjunction with point (i) in the indicative list referred to in Article 3(3), preclude the insurer from relying against the insured on a term excluding or limiting the insured risk, where that term has not been notified to the insured and with which, as a result, the insured has not had an opportunity to become acquainted; (ii) does the foregoing apply even where, at the same time, if the duties to notify and provide information about the terms have not been discharged, under the national legislation the policy holder is liable to pay compensation for damage caused to the insured where that compensation does not, however, restore the insured to the position in which he or she would have been had the insurance cover been effective?






(1)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).
Case T-148/21: Order of the General Court of 20 April 2022 — Paccor Packaging and Others v Commission
Date: 2022-04-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: abuse of power, beverage, environmental impact, packaging product, plastic waste, plastics, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, waste management








C_2022276EN.01002501.xml










18.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 276/25






Order of the General Court of 20 April 2022 — Paccor Packaging and Others v Commission
(Case T-148/21) (1)

(2022/C 276/35)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Tenth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 206, 31.5.2021.
Case C-266/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 20 April 2022 — CRRC Qingdao Sifang CO LTD and Astra Vagoane Călători SA v Autoritatea pentru Reformă Feroviară and Alstom Ferroviaria SpA
Date: 2022-04-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative transparency, amendment of a law, award of contract, equal treatment, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, public procurement, tendering








C_2022303EN.01001201.xml










8.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/12






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 20 April 2022 — CRRC Qingdao Sifang CO LTD and Astra Vagoane Călători SA v Autoritatea pentru Reformă Feroviară and Alstom Ferroviaria SpA
(Case C-266/22)
(2022/C 303/16)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel București

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: CRRC Qingdao Sifang CO LTD and Astra Vagoane Călători SA

Defendants: Autoritatea pentru Reformă Feroviară and Alstom Ferroviaria SpA

Questions referred







1.


Do the principles of certainty in legal relations and the protection of legitimate expectations preclude a piece of national legislation which transposed Article 25 of Directive 2014/24/EU on public procurement (1) as from 5 April 2021, and which provided that economic operators who do not fall within the scope of those provisions of EU law may continue to participate in public procurement procedures only if they have submitted tenders before the date on which that legislative amendment entered into force?










2.


Do the principles of equal treatment, transparency and proportionality laid down in Article 18(1) of Directive 2014/24/EU on public procurement, in conjunction with Article 2(1)(13) and Article 49 thereof, preclude the exclusion of a tenderer on the basis of a legislative act having the force of law adopted by the government of a Member State which lays down a new rule amending the definition of ‘economic operator’ after publication of the contract notice relating to a contract award procedure in which that person is participating?






(1)  Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (OJ 2014 L 94, p. 65).
Case T-217/22: Action brought on 20 April 2022 — Lifestyle Equities v EUIPO — Greenwich Polo Club (GREENWICH POLO CLUB)
Date: 2022-04-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022237EN.01006301.xml










20.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 237/63






Action brought on 20 April 2022 — Lifestyle Equities v EUIPO — Greenwich Polo Club (GREENWICH POLO CLUB)
(Case T-217/22)
(2022/C 237/82)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Lifestyle Equities CV (Amstelveen, Netherlands) (represented by: S. Terpstra, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Greenwich Polo Club, Inc. (Greenwich, Connecticut, United States)

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 GREENWICH POLO CLUB — European Union trade mark No 2 919 256

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 February 2022 in Case R 1063/2021-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-264/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação de Lisboa (Portugal) lodged on 20 April 2022 — Fonds de Garantie des Victimes des Actes de Terrorisme et d’Autres Infractions (FGTI) v Victoria Seguros S.A.
Date: 2022-04-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: damages, jurisdiction, law of obligations, transport accident








C_2022284EN.01001801.xml










25.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 284/18






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação de Lisboa (Portugal) lodged on 20 April 2022 — Fonds de Garantie des Victimes des Actes de Terrorisme et d’Autres Infractions (FGTI) v Victoria Seguros S.A.
(Case C-264/22)
(2022/C 284/20)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal da Relação de Lisboa

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Fonds de Garantie des Victimes des Actes de Terrorisme et d’Autres Infractions (FGTI)

Respondent: Victoria Seguros S.A.

Question referred

Is the law applicable to the limitation rules for the right to claim compensation that of the place of the accident (Portuguese law), in accordance with Articles 4(l) and 15(h) of Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 (Rome II) or, if the injured party’s place is taken by subrogation, is the ‘law of the third person’ subrogee (French law) applicable in accordance with Article 19 of that Regulation?


(1)  Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II) (OJ 2007 L 199, p. 40).
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 19 April 2022 2022/C 166/04
Date: 2022-04-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022166EN.01000601.xml










20.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 166/6






Euro exchange rates (1)

19 April 2022
(2022/C 166/04)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0803 




JPY


Japanese yen


138,40 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4391 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,82955 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,3408 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0208 




ISK


Iceland króna


139,80 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,5228 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,424 




HUF


Hungarian forint


374,12 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,6553 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9411 




TRY


Turkish lira


15,8416 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4663 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3631 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,4698 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6016 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4763 




KRW


South Korean won


1 339,46 




ZAR


South African rand


16,0401 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


6,9008 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5620 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 498,35 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5961 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,683 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


36,466 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,0261 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,4725 




INR


Indian rupee


82,6038 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Notice to importers Imports of textile products from Bangladesh into the Community 2022/C 166/06
Date: 2022-04-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: Bangladesh, certificate of origin, customs debt, customs fraud, fraud against the EU, free circulation, generalised preferences, import (EU), tariff exemption, textile product








C_2022166EN.01000801.xml










20.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 166/8






Notice to importers
Imports of textile products from Bangladesh into the Community
(2022/C 166/06)
By a notice to importers published in the Official Journal C 41 of 15 February 2008, p. 8, the Commission advised European Union operators declaring origin / presenting documentary evidence of origin in order to benefit from preferential treatment for textile products of HS chapters 61 and 62 imported from Bangladesh to take all necessary precautions, as there was reasonable doubt as to the origin of those products for which the benefit of the EU Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) preferential origin was claimed. The release of those products for free circulation could thus give rise to a customs debt, and lead to fraud against the European Union’s financial interests.
Based on the information available, the reasonable doubts mentioned above are no longer supported by any evidence that would show that the underlying risks continue to persist.
In addition, since 1 January 2021, all exporters from the GSP beneficiary countries exporting under GSP have been applying the REX self-certification system (1) and hence issuing statements on origin as the only documentary evidence to claim preferential origin. Form A certificates of origin may no longer be issued by the governmental authorities of the GSP beneficiary countries.
The notice to importers published in the Official Journal C 41 of 15 February 2008 has therefore become devoid of purpose as regards consignments of the products concerned declared for release for free circulation on or after the date of the publication of this notice, and is hereby withdrawn.


(1)  Articles 80 and 81 of the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2447 of 24 November 2015 laying down detailed rules for implementing certain provisions of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the Union Customs Code (OJ L 343, 29.12.2015, p. 558).
Case C-267/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) (Portugal) lodged on 20 April 2022 — Global Roads Investimentos SGPS, Lda v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
Date: 2022-04-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Portugal, establishment, financial institution, financial supervision, holding company, shareholding








C_2022318EN.01002002.xml










22.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 318/20






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) (Portugal) lodged on 20 April 2022 — Global Roads Investimentos SGPS, Lda v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
(Case C-267/22)
(2022/C 318/29)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Global Roads Investimentos SGPS, Lda

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Question referred

Is a holding company established in Portugal and governed by the provisions of Decree-law No 495/88 of 30 December 1988, which has as its sole object the management of shareholdings in other companies, as an indirect means of pursuing economic activities, and which, in that context, acquires and holds on a long-term basis such shareholdings, which, in general, amount to at least 10 % of the share capital of the companies in which it has a shareholding, where those companies do not operate in the insurance or financial sectors, covered by the definition of ‘financial institution’ within the meaning of point 22 of Article 3(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU (1) and point 26 of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013? (2)



(1)  Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms, amending Directive 2002/87/EC and repealing Directives 2006/48/EC and 2006/49/EC (OJ 2013 L 176, p. 338).

(2)  Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (OJ 2013 L 176, p. 1).
Notice to importers Imports of garlic into the Community 2022/C 166/07
Date: 2022-04-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: bulb vegetable, customs debt, customs fraud, fraud against the EU, free circulation, generalised preferences, import (EU), originating product, surveillance concerning imports, third country








C_2022166EN.01000901.xml










20.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 166/9






Notice to importers
Imports of garlic into the Community
(2022/C 166/07)
By a notice to importers published in the Official Journal C 197 of 12 August 2005, p. 8, the Commission advised European Union operators declaring / presenting documentary evidence of origin for garlic imported under the tariff heading CN 0703 20 00, declared either under the GATT tariff quota open by Council Decision 2001/404/EC (1), or under preferences contained in Community agreements or under unilateral preferences arrangements, to take all necessary precautions due to reasonable doubt concerning the origin of that product. The release of those products for free circulation could thus give rise to a customs debt, and lead to fraud against the Community’s financial interests.
Following the publication of the notice, the number of fraudulent EU imports decreased. Moreover, no substantial information on new manipulations has been submitted in the recent years.
The notice to importers published in the Official Journal C 197 of 12 August 2005 has therefore become devoid of purpose as regards consignments of the product concerned declared for release for free circulation on or after the date of the publication of this notice, and is hereby withdrawn.


(1)  Decision 2001/404/EC of 28 May 2001 on the conclusion of an Agreement in the form of an exchange of letters between the European Community and Argentina pursuant to Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 for the modification of concessions with respect to garlic provided for in Schedule CXL annexed to GATT (OJ L 142, 29.5.2001, p. 7) and Commission Regulation (EC) No 565/2002 of 2 April 2002 establishing the method for managing tariff quotas and introducing a system of certificates of origin for garlic imported from third countries (OJ L 86, 3.4.2002, p. 11).