do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10801 – INFRAFIBRE / DG FIBRE / DGN) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 314/01
Date: 2022-08-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: carrier, economic concentration, financial services, holding company, insurance, investment company, merger control, provision of services, telecommunications








C_2022314EN.01000101.xml










18.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 314/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10801 – INFRAFIBRE / DG FIBRE / DGN)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 314/01)
On 10 August 2022, 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 32022M10801. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-536/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Ravensburg (Germany) lodged on 10 August 2022 — MW, CY v VR Bank Ravensburg-Weingarten eG
Date: 2022-08-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer credit, consumer protection, interest, real estate credit, redemption, termination of a contract








C_2022432EN.01000801.xml










14.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/8






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Ravensburg (Germany) lodged on 10 August 2022 — MW, CY v VR Bank Ravensburg-Weingarten eG
(Case C-536/22)
(2022/C 432/10)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Ravensburg

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: MW, CY

Defendant: VR Bank Ravensburg-Weingarten eG

Questions referred







1.


Must the concept of ‘fair and objective compensation … for possible costs directly linked to the early repayment’ in Article 25(3) of Directive 2014/17/EU (1) be interpreted as meaning that the compensation also covers the creditor’s loss of profit, in particular the future interest payments lost as a result of the early repayment?










2.


If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative:
Does EU law, specifically Article 25(3) of Directive 2014/17/EU, contain guidelines for the calculation of the income which the creditor receives from its reinvestment of a consumer loan relating to immovable property which has been repaid early — income to be taken into account in the context of loss of profit — and if so, what are those guidelines?
In particular:






(a)


Must the national rules for that calculation be linked to the manner in which the creditor actually uses the amount which was repaid early?










(b)


May a national rule allow the creditor to calculate the compensation for early repayment on the basis of a notional reinvestment in safe capital market securities with maturities corresponding to the term of the credit agreement (‘asset/liability method’)?














3.


Does the scope of Article 25 of Directive 2014/17/EU also cover the case where the consumer first terminates a consumer credit agreement relating to immovable property on the basis of a right of termination provided for by the national legislature before repaying the loan to the creditor early?






(1)  Directive 2014/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 February 2014 on credit agreements for consumers relating to residential immovable property and amending Directives 2008/48/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ 2014 L 60, p. 34).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10835 – ALLIANZ / DALMORE / AMBER / TIDEWAY) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 312/01
Date: 2022-08-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: United Kingdom, economic concentration, financial services, insurance, investment company, merger control, tunnel, wastewater, water treatment








C_2022312EN.01000101.xml










17.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 312/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10835 – ALLIANZ / DALMORE / AMBER / TIDEWAY)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 312/01)
On 10 August 2022, 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 32022M10835. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 9 August 2022 2022/C 305/04
Date: 2022-08-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022305EN.01000801.xml










10.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 305/8







Euro exchange rates (1)


            9 August 2022
         
(2022/C 305/04)


1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0234 




JPY


Japanese yen


138,26 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4407 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84520 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,3875 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9763 




ISK


Iceland króna


140,10 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,9365 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,532 




HUF


Hungarian forint


397,35 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,7085 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9038 




TRY


Turkish lira


18,3342 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4687 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3163 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,0334 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6304 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4110 




KRW


South Korean won


1 336,74 




ZAR


South African rand


17,0500 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


6,9106 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5140 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 197,09 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5592 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,939 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


36,264 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,2478 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,7145 




INR


Indian rupee


81,4060 






(1)  
            Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-534/22 P: Appeal brought on 10 August 2022 by Roberto Aquino against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 1 June 2022 in Case T-253/21, Aquino v Parliament
Date: 2022-08-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EP Committee, administrator, election, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, invalidity of an election, rights of the defence








C_2022408EN.01003302.xml










24.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 408/33






Appeal brought on 10 August 2022 by Roberto Aquino against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 1 June 2022 in Case T-253/21, Aquino v Parliament
(Case C-534/22 P)
(2022/C 408/44)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Roberto Aquino (represented by: L. Levi, S. Rodrigues, avocats)

Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the judgment under appeal;










—


take a decision itself on the case, resulting in a ruling that the action at first instance is well founded;










—


order the defendant to pay all the costs of both sets of proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments







1.


Error of law due to an erroneous interpretation of the criterion of doubt entitling the administration to intervene in the electoral process to elect the Bureau of the Staff Committee — Contradictory reasoning — Infringement of the right to freedom of association and assembly (Article 12 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union) as reflected in the prohibition of any unjustified interference by the administration in that electoral process.










2.


Incorrect classification of certain documents drawn up at the request of the defendant for the purposes of reviewing the electoral process — Breach by the Court of its obligation to state reasons.










3.


Distortion of the file and erroneous interpretation of the rules applicable to the constituent meeting of the Staff Committee — Infringement of the rights of the defence.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10861 – HG / TEAM.BLUE) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 305/05
Date: 2022-08-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Internet site, data processing, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, service, software








C_2022305EN.01000901.xml










10.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 305/9







Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10861 – HG / TEAM.BLUE)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 305/05)


1.   
On 3 August 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:






—


HGCapital LLP (‘Hg’, United Kingdom), through its subsidiary, Hg Pooled Management Limited (United Kingdom),










—


team.blue Topco SARL (‘team.blue’, Luxembourg), currently jointly controlled by Hg and a private investor, Jonas Dhaenens.




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


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are the following:






—


Hg is a software and services investor that manages investment funds mainly in Europe and North America;










—


team.blue offers a variety of digital presence and enablement tools, such as website infrastructure and web hosting services, mainly in 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 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.10861 – HG / TEAM.BLUE
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.10797 – PCG / PERSTORP) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 305/06
Date: 2022-08-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: chemical industry, economic concentration, holding company, merger control, petrochemicals








C_2022305EN.01001101.xml










10.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 305/11







Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10797 – PCG / PERSTORP)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 305/06)


1.   
On 3 August 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:






—


PETRONAS Chemicals Group Berhad (‘PCG’, Malaysia);










—


PERSTORP HOLDING AB (publ.) (‘Perstorp’ or ‘Target’, Sweden).




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


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are the following:






—


PCG is a publicly listed company duly incorporated and existing under the laws of Malaysia. PCG is active primarily in manufacturing and selling a diversified range of petrochemical products such as olefins, polymers, fertilizers, methanol, and other basic chemicals and derivative products. PCG is solely controlled by Petroliam Nasional Berhad (‘Petronas’), which is PCG’s major shareholder.










—


Perstorp is a company headquartered in Malmö (Sweden), which serves as the top holding company for the Perstorp group of companies. Perstorp is a chemical provider, with a focus on providing sustainable solutions for customers in the resins and coatings, engineered fluids and animal nutrition industries. Perstorp is globally present with seven production plants in Europe, North America and Asia.






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.10797 – PCG / PERSTORP
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’).