do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10883 – BLACKSTONE / RIVEAN / ESDEC SOLAR GROUP) (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 344/05
Date: 2022-10-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: distributor, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, solar architecture, solar collector, solar energy end-use applications, supplier








C_2023344EN.01011601.xml










29.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 344/116







Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10883 – BLACKSTONE / RIVEAN / ESDEC SOLAR GROUP)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 344/05)

On 10 October 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 32022M10883. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  
            OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10893 – QUATTROR / IMTC / MTD) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 388/08
Date: 2022-10-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Italy, Switzerland, economic concentration, investment company, medical device, merger control, subsidiary








C_2022388EN.01000901.xml










10.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 388/9






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10893 – QUATTROR / IMTC / MTD)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 388/08)

1.   
On 3 October 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:






—


QuattroR SGR S.p.A. (‘QuattroR’, Italy),










—


International Medical Technology Collective S.C.A. (‘IMTC’, Luxembourg), controlled by Investindustrial S.A. (‘Investindustrial’, Luxembourg),










—


Medical Technology and Devices SA (‘MTD’, Switzerland).




QuattroR and IMTC will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of MTD.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


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






—


QuattroR manages an Italian private equity fund and currently controls five portfolio companies in the area of engineering, logistics and manufacturing,










—


IMTC is an investment subsidiary of Investindustrial, an investment group focusing on consumer and leisure, healthcare and services, industrial manufacturing and technology,










—


MTD, a Swiss-based med-tech group that designs, develops, and provides globally medical devices, particularly diabetes management devices, standard and safety sharp devices, electro-medical devices and wound-care products.






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.10893 – QUATTROR / IMTC / MTD
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.10878 – CVC / LGP / GREEN VERACITY ACQUISITION HOLDINGS) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 397/01
Date: 2022-10-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Canada, United States, economic concentration, holding company, investment company, legal profession, merger control, provision of services








C_2022397EN.01000101.xml










17.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 397/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10878 – CVC / LGP / GREEN VERACITY ACQUISITION HOLDINGS)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 397/01)
On 10 October 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 32022M10878. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
NOTICE OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK WITHDRAWING THE NOTICE ON THE IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS FOR INFRINGEMENTS OF BALANCE SHEET STATISTICAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 2022/C 388/04
Date: 2022-10-10
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: EU statistics, European Central Bank, administrative sanction, balance sheet, data collection, disclosure of information, economic statistics, exchange of information, financial statistics, sanction (EU)








C_2022388EN.01000401.xml










10.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 388/4






NOTICE OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK WITHDRAWING THE NOTICE ON THE IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS FOR INFRINGEMENTS OF BALANCE SHEET STATISTICAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
(2022/C 388/04)
Article 7(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2533/98 of 23 November 1998 concerning the collection of statistical information by the European Central Bank (1) (ECB) provides that, where a reporting agent subject to reporting requirements and residing in a participating Member State fails to comply with the obligations resulting from that Regulation and ECB regulations or decisions defining and imposing the ECB’s statistical reporting requirements, sanctions may be imposed by the ECB. Certain elements of the sanctions policy were published in the Notice of the European Central Bank on the imposition of sanctions for infringements of balance sheet statistical reporting requirements (2). Those elements were subsequently addressed in Decision ECB/2010/10 of the European Central Bank of 19 August 2010 on non-compliance with statistical reporting requirements (3) and are now addressed in Regulation (EU) 2022/1917 of the European Central Bank of 29 September 2022 on infringement procedures in cases of non-compliance with statistical reporting requirements (ECB/2022/31) (4) and Decision (EU) 2022/1921 of the European Central Bank of 29 September 2022 on the methodology for the calculation of sanctions for alleged infringements of statistical reporting requirements (ECB/2022/32) (5).
Notice 2004/C 195/10 is hereby withdrawn with effect on the twentieth day following that of the publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union.


(1)  OJ L 318, 27.11.1998, p. 8.

(2)  OJ C 195, 31.7.2004, p. 8.

(3)  OJ L 226, 28.8.2010, p. 8.

(4)  OJ L 263, 10.10.2022, p. 6.

(5)  OJ L 263, 10.10.2022, p. 59.
Case C-630/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesarbeitsgericht (Germany) lodged on 10 October 2022 — JK v Kirchliches Krankenhaus
Date: 2022-10-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: equal treatment, freedom of religious beliefs, job access, medical institution, religious discrimination, termination of employment, work contract








C_2023015EN.01002801.xml










16.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 15/28






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesarbeitsgericht (Germany) lodged on 10 October 2022 — JK v Kirchliches Krankenhaus
(Case C-630/22)
(2023/C 15/30)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesarbeitsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant, respondent and appellant on a point of law: JK

Defendant, appellant and respondent on a point of law: Kirchliches Krankenhaus

Questions referred







1.


Is it compatible with EU law, in particular Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (‘Directive 2000/78/EC’) (1) in light of Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’), if a national provision provides
that a private organisation whose ethos is based on religious principles






(a)


may deem unsuitable for employment in its establishment persons who have left a particular religious community prior to the establishment of the employment relationship, or










(b)


may require of its staff that they have not left a particular religious community prior to the establishment of the employment relationship, or










(c)


may make it a condition of employment that a member of staff who has left a particular religious community prior to the establishment of the employment relationship rejoin said community,
if it does not also require its staff to belong to that religious community?














2.


If the first question is answered in the affirmative: What, if any, further requirements apply under Directive 2000/78/EC in light of Article 21 of the Charter in order to justify such a difference of treatment on grounds of religion?






(1)  OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16.
Case C-634/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski gradski sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 10 October 2022 — Criminal proceedings against OT, PG, CR, VT, MD
Date: 2022-10-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Bulgaria, courts and tribunals, independence of the judiciary, judge, judicial proceedings, judicial reform








C_2023024EN.01002701.xml










23.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/27






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski gradski sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 10 October 2022 — Criminal proceedings against OT, PG, CR, VT, MD
(Case C-634/22)
(2023/C 24/35)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Sofiyski gradski sad

Defendants in the criminal proceedings

OT, PG, CR, VT, MD

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 2, Article 6(1) and (3) and the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU, in conjunction with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, be interpreted as meaning that, where a court has been abolished by the adopted amendment to the Zakon za sadebnata vlast (Law on the judiciary) (DV No 32/26 April 2022, with effect from 27 July 2022), but the judges are to continue up to and after that date to deal with those cases before that court in which preliminary hearings have been held, the independence of that court is impaired, given that the abolition of the court is justified on the ground that the constitutional principle of the independence of the judiciary and the protection of the constitutional rights of citizens are thereby safeguarded, and the facts leading to the conclusion that those principles have been infringed are not duly set out[?]










2.


Must the abovementioned provisions of EU law be interpreted as precluding national provisions such as those of the Law amending and supplementing the Law on the judiciary (DV No 32/26 April 2022), which result in the complete abolition of an autonomous judicial body in Bulgaria (the Specialised Criminal Court) on the ground referred to above and in the transfer of judges (including the judge of the panel hearing the criminal case at hand) from that court to various other courts, but which require those judges to continue to deal with those cases which are pending before the abolished court and which they have already commenced?










3.


If so, what procedural acts should be undertaken — also in the light of the primacy of EU law — by the members of the national legal service attached to the recently abolished courts in the cases of the abolished court (which, by law, they must complete), having regard also to their obligation to examine closely whether they must recuse themselves from those cases? What consequences would that have for the procedural decisions of the recently abolished court in the cases which must be completed and for the legal acts terminating the proceedings in those cases?
Case C-632/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) lodged on 10 October 2022 — AB Volvo v Transsaqui S.L.
Date: 2022-10-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: cartel, case-law, civil liability proceedings, commercial vehicle, judicial proceedings, parent company, right to justice, subsidiary








C_2023024EN.01002502.xml










23.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/25






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) lodged on 10 October 2022 — AB Volvo v Transsaqui S.L.
(Case C-632/22)
(2023/C 24/33)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: AB Volvo

Respondent: Transsaqui S.L.

Questions referred







1.-


In the circumstances surrounding the litigation relating to the trucks cartel, described in this order, is it possible to interpret Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in conjunction with Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in such a way that service of process on a parent company against which an action for damages for the harm caused by a restrictive trade practice has been brought is considered to have been properly effected when such service was effected (or attempted) at the place of business of the subsidiary company established in the State in which the legal proceedings were brought, while the parent company, which is established in another Member State, has not entered an appearance in the proceedings and has remained in default?










2.-


If the previous question is answered in the affirmative, is that interpretation of Article 47 of the Charter compatible with Article 53 of the Charter, in the light of the case-law of the Spanish Tribunal Constitucional (Constitutional Court) on the service of process on parent companies established in another Member State in disputes relating to the trucks cartel?
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.)) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 388/06
Date: 2022-10-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: chemical compound, chemical product, health control, health risk, industrial production, market approval, marketing standard, textile product








C_2022388EN.01000601.xml










10.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 388/6






Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)


(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1)
)


(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 388/06)

Decisions granting an authorisation













Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holder of the authorisation


Authorisation number


Authorised use


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2022) 6874


3 October 2022


trichloroethylene (TCE)
EC No 201-167-4; CAS No 79-01-6


SAFECHEM Europe GmbH, Tersteegenstr. 25, 40474 Düsseldorf, Germany


REACH/22/31/0/R1


Industrial use as process chemical (enclosed systems) in Alcantara Material production


31 December 2030


In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socio-economic benefits outweigh the risk to human health from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies.






(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/chemicals/reach/about/index_en.htm.
Case T-627/22: Action brought on 10 October 2022 — Vi.ni.ca.v EUIPO — Venica & Venica (agricolavinica. Le Colline di Ripa)
Date: 2022-10-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wine








C_2022451EN.01001901.xml










28.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 451/19






Action brought on 10 October 2022 — Vi.ni.ca.v EUIPO — Venica & Venica (agricolavinica. Le Colline di Ripa)
(Case T-627/22)
(2022/C 451/23)
Language in which the application was lodged: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Vi.ni.ca. Srl — soc. agr. (Ripalimosani, Italy) (represented by: S. Di Pardo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Venica & Venica di Gianni e Giorgio Venica Ss soc. agr. (Dolegna del Collio, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark ‘agricolavinica. Le Colline di Ripa’ in white, black, red and green colours — EU trade mark No 18 196 079

Proceedings before EUIPO: Invalidity proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 July 2022 in Case R 90/2022-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul or in any case amend the contested decision, declaring that the contested mark ‘agricolavinica. Le Colline di Ripa’ is valid since it has no similarity, visually, phonetically, or conceptually, to the earlier mark VENICA and since no risk of confusion between such marks exists;










—


order the defendant and the other party to the proceedings to pay the costs.





Plea in law

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1931 of 10 October 2022 approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Scalogno di Romagna’ (PGI))
Date: 2022-10-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Emilia-Romagna, Italy, bulb vegetable, designation of origin, dried product, fresh vegetable, labelling, preserved product, product designation








L_2022266EN.01001601.xml










13.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 266/16








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/1931
of 10 October 2022
         
approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Scalogno di Romagna’ (PGI))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined Italy’s application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected geographical indication ‘Scalogno di Romagna’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 2325/97 (2).












(2)


Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (3) as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation.












(3)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the amendments to the specification should be approved,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Scalogno di Romagna’ (PGI) are hereby approved.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 10 October 2022.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2325/97 of 24 November 1997 supplementing the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 on the registration of geographical indications and designations of origin under the procedure laid down in Article 17 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 (OJ L 322, 25.11.1997, p. 33).

(3)  
            OJ C 233, 16.6.2022, p. 38.