Official Journal C 258

Transcription

1 Official Journal C 258 of the European Union Volume 61 English edition Information and Notices 23 July 2018 Contents II Information INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES European Commission 2018/C 258/01 Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8936 Cinven/Partner in Pet Foods Holdings) ( 1 ) /C 258/02 Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8997 Whirlpool/Elica/Elica PB India Private Limited) ( 1 ) /C 258/03 Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8946 Lindsay Goldberg/Coveris Rigid) ( 1 )... 2 IV Notices NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES European Commission 2018/C 258/04 Euro exchange rates /C 258/05 Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions at its meeting on 2 May 2018 concerning a draft decision in Case AT Upstream gas supplies in Central and Eastern Europe Rapporteur: Portugal... 4 EN ( 1 ) Text with EEA relevance.

2 2018/C 258/06 Final Report of the Hearing Officer Upstream gas supplies in Central and Eastern Europe (AT.39816) /C 258/07 Summary of Commission Decision of 24 May 2018 relating to a proceeding under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT Upstream gas supplies in Central and Eastern Europe) (notified under document C(2018) 3106)... 6 V Announcements PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMON COMMERCIAL POLICY European Commission 2018/C 258/08 Notice concerning the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2179 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of ceramic tiles originating in the People s Republic of China: name change of one company subject to the anti-dumping duty rate for cooperating non-sampled companies 9 PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY European Commission 2018/C 258/09 Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8908 AXA/XL Group) Candidate case for simplified procedure ( 1 ) ( 1 ) Text with EEA relevance.

3 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 258/1 II (Information) INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES EUROPEAN COMMISSION Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8936 Cinven/Partner in Pet Foods Holdings) (Text with EEA relevance) (2018/C 258/01) On 13 July 2018, 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 website of the Commission ( 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 ( under document number 32018M8936. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. ( 1 ) OJ L 24, , p. 1. Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8997 Whirlpool/Elica/Elica PB India Private Limited) (Text with EEA relevance) (2018/C 258/02) On 17 July 2018, 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 website of the Commission ( 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 ( under document number 32018M8997. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. ( 1 ) OJ L 24, , p. 1.

4 C 258/2 EN Official Journal of the European Union Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8946 Lindsay Goldberg/Coveris Rigid) (Text with EEA relevance) (2018/C 258/03) On 17 July 2018, 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 website of the Commission ( 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 ( under document number 32018M8946. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. ( 1 ) OJ L 24, , p. 1.

5 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 258/3 IV (Notices) NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES EUROPEAN COMMISSION Euro exchange rates ( 1 ) 20 July 2018 (2018/C 258/04) 1 euro = Currency Exchange rate USD US dollar 1,1670 JPY Japanese yen 130,94 DKK Danish krone 7,4520 GBP Pound sterling 0,89445 SEK Swedish krona 10,3908 CHF Swiss franc 1,1633 ISK Iceland króna 124,00 NOK Norwegian krone 9,5905 BGN Bulgarian lev 1,9558 CZK Czech koruna 25,875 HUF Hungarian forint 325,63 PLN Polish zloty 4,3229 RON Romanian leu 4,6523 TRY Turkish lira 5,5879 AUD Australian dollar 1,5818 Currency Exchange rate CAD Canadian dollar 1,5443 HKD Hong Kong dollar 9,1597 NZD New Zealand dollar 1,7251 SGD Singapore dollar 1,5960 KRW South Korean won 1 322,71 ZAR South African rand 15,7066 CNY Chinese yuan renminbi 7,9210 HRK Croatian kuna 7,3956 IDR Indonesian rupiah ,92 MYR Malaysian ringgit 4,7453 PHP Philippine peso 62,292 RUB Russian rouble 74,0532 THB Thai baht 39,013 BRL Brazilian real 4,4364 MXN Mexican peso 22,1573 INR Indian rupee 80,3210 ( 1 ) Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

6 C 258/4 EN Official Journal of the European Union Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions at its meeting on 2 May 2018 concerning a draft decision in Case AT Upstream gas supplies in Central and Eastern Europe Rapporteur: Portugal (2018/C 258/05) 1. The Advisory Committee shares the Commission s concerns expressed in its draft Decision as communicated to the Advisory Committee on 18 April 2018 under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ( TFEU ) and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement. A majority of Member States agree. A minority of Member States disagree. 2. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the proceedings concerning PJSC Gazprom and Gazprom export LLC (together Gazprom ) can be concluded by means of a decision pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003. A majority of Member States agree. A minority of Member States disagree. 3. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the commitments offered by Gazprom are suitable, necessary and proportionate and should be made legally binding on Gazprom. A majority of Member States agree. A minority of Member States disagree. 4. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that, in light of the commitments offered by Gazprom, there are no longer grounds for action by the Commission against Gazprom, without prejudice to Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003. A majority of Member States agree. A minority of Member States disagree. 5. The Advisory Committee asks the Commission to take into account any other points raised during the discussion. A majority of Member States agree. A minority of Member States disagree. 6. The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. A majority of Member States agree. A minority of Member States disagree. I hereby confirm that Finland, Latvia, The Netherlands, and Sweden participated in this Advisory Committee meeting via videoconferencing link and asked me to sign the Opinion of the Advisory Committee on their behalf. Marieke SCHOLZ Chair of the Advisory Committee meeting

7 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 258/5 Final Report of the Hearing Officer ( 1 ) Upstream gas supplies in Central and Eastern Europe (AT.39816) (2018/C 258/06) (1) The draft Commitments Decision under Article 9(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 ( 2 ) is addressed to PJSC Gazprom and its wholly-owned subsidiary Gazprom export LLC (together Gazprom ). (2) Following an ex officio investigation started on 27 September 2011, the Commission initiated proceedings against Gazprom on 31 August 2012 in respect of suspected anti-competitive practices relating to upstream gas supplies in eight Central and Eastern European countries. (3) In the Statement of Objections dated 22 April 2015 ( the SO ) the Commission came to the provisional conclusion that Gazprom had infringed Article 102 TFEU and Article 54 EEA by abusing its dominant position on the Bulgarian, Czech, Estonian, Hungarian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Polish and Slovak markets for the upstream wholesale supply of natural gas by producers and exporters to importers and wholesalers. (4) Gazprom received access to the Commission file on 8 May and 17 June 2015 and submitted its response to the SO on 28 September 2015, disputing the Commission s preliminary assessment and requesting an oral hearing. (5) The oral hearing took place on 15 December (6) On 14 February 2017, Gazprom submitted commitments ( the Initial Commitments ), while continuing to dispute the Commission s preliminary assessment as set out in the SO. (7) On 16 March 2017, the Commission published a communication pursuant to Article 27(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, summarising the case and the Initial Commitments and inviting third parties to give their observations within seven weeks of its publication. (8) The Commission received 44 sets of observations. The Commission informed Gazprom of the observations received and, in light of them, Gazprom submitted revised commitments ( the Commitments ) on 15 March (9) The Commission has now come to the conclusion that, in view of the Commitments, the proceedings in this case should be brought to an end. (10) I have not received any request or complaint with respect to the proposed Commitments ( 3 ). (11) Pursuant to Article 16 of Decision 2011/695/EU, I have examined whether the draft decision deals only with objections in respect of which Gazprom has been afforded the opportunity of making known its views, and I have come to a positive conclusion. (12) In conclusion, I consider that the effective exercise of Gazprom s procedural rights has been respected. Brussels, 2 May Wouter WILS ( 1 ) Pursuant to Articles 16 and 17 of Decision 2011/695/EU of the President of the European Commission of 13 October 2011 on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain competition proceedings (OJ L 275, , p. 29) ( Decision 2011/695/EU ). ( 2 ) Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ L 1, , p. 1) ( Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 ). ( 3 ) According to Article 15(1) of Decision 2011/695/EU, parties to the proceedings offering commitments pursuant to Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 may call upon the Hearing Officer at any stage of the procedure in order to ensure the effective exercise of their procedural rights.

8 C 258/6 EN Official Journal of the European Union Summary of Commission Decision of 24 May 2018 relating to a proceeding under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT Upstream gas supplies in Central and Eastern Europe) (notified under document C(2018) 3106) (Only the English text is authentic) (2018/C 258/07) On 24 May 2018, the Commission adopted a decision relating to a proceeding under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 54 of the EEA agreement. In accordance with the provisions of Article 30 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 ( 1 ), the Commission herewith publishes the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business secrets. 1. Introduction (1) The Decision makes legally binding upon Public Joint Stock Company Gazprom and Gazprom export LLC (jointly referred to as Gazprom ), the commitments which Gazprom has offered. These commitments aim to address the Commission s preliminary concerns that Gazprom abused its market position by pursuing an anticompetitive strategy of fragmenting and isolating the Central and Eastern European gas markets (the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Slovakia) and restricting the free flow of gas between those Member States with a view to be able to maintain higher prices in some of them (Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland). It also concerns instances of Gazprom leveraging its dominance by making gas supplies conditional on obtaining certain non-related infrastructure commitments (Bulgaria). (2) The Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions issued a favourable opinion on 2 May The Concerns in the Statement of Objections (3) In its Statement of Objections of 22 April 2015, the Commission came to a preliminary conclusion that Gazprom holds a dominant position on each of the relevant markets in Central and Eastern Europe, namely in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and Bulgaria (jointly referred to as CEE ). (4) The Commission was concerned that Gazprom engaged in an anticompetitive strategy to prevent the free flow of gas across CEE and thereby fragmented and isolated the investigated CEE gas markets. This strategy was implemented by explicit contractual export bans and destination clauses as well as by other contractual and noncontractual means with an equivalent effect to contractual territorial restrictions. Such an overall market segmentation strategy enabled Gazprom to charge unfair prices in Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland compared with its cost and competitive price benchmarks, in particular with prices quoted at liquid competitive Western European gas hubs. Furthermore, by the alleged prevention of the free flow of gas across CEE borders, Gazprom remained the key supplier of gas to CEE and conditioned its gas supplies on it obtaining infrastructure-related advantages from its customers. (5) The Commission s preliminary conclusion was that Gazprom s behaviour infringed Article 102 of the Treaty. 3. Effectiveness of the commitments (1) To address the Commission s competition concerns, as expressed in the Statement of Objections, and to meet the Commission s overall objective of the free flow of gas at competitive prices across the CEE, Gazprom offered a set of initial commitments, which were put to a market test on 16 March ( 1 ) OJ L 1, , p. 1.

9 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 258/7 (2) To the extent that the suggested changes related to the competition objections put to Gazprom by the Commission and made the commitments more effective, they were presented to Gazprom and the necessary changes were requested. In response to the comments received pursuant to the Article 27(4) Notice, Gazprom modified its Initial Commitments with a revised proposal on 15 March 2018 ( Commitments ). (3) The Commission considers that the Commitments offered by Gazprom following the observations submitted by interested third parties are effective and necessary in order to address the concerns expressed by the Commission in its Statement of Objections without being disproportionate. The Commitments offer tailor-made and forwardlooking solutions to the competition problems identified by the Commission and ensure the free flow of gas at competitive prices across the CEE. (6) First, to address the Commission s market segmentation concerns, Gazprom commits to removing all provisions in its CEE gas supply contracts that directly or indirectly prohibit or impede the free flow of gas across the CEE. (7) Furthermore, to open the Bulgarian gas market to competition, Gazprom will take a positive action to amend its relevant gas contracts to enable the conclusion of interconnection agreement at the interconnection points between Bulgaria and other EU Member States, especially Greece, and to adjust the allocated-as-measured gas allocation method to the modern method of allocated-as-nominated. Following the Market Test, Gazprom clarified that it will remain liable for gas quality at the entry point to the Bulgarian gas system. (8) Besides, to allow gas flows between on the one hand the still infrastructure-isolated Baltic States and Bulgaria and on the other hand the rest of CEE, Gazprom commits to take a positive step whereby it will offer its relevant customers in these countries the possibility to request that all or parts of their contractual gas volumes delivered at certain delivery points in Hungary, Poland and Slovakia be delivered instead at another delivery point used by Gazprom for supplies to Bulgaria and the Baltic States (from Poland or Slovakia to the Baltics and from Slovakia or Hungary to Bulgaria). (9) Following the market test, Gazprom improved its Commitments by making the swaps possible in both directions. Gazprom also extended the scope of the change of delivery point mechanism to enable a number of customers from the Baltic States to become also eligible under the change of delivery point mechanism if they were to sign new long-term contracts with Gazprom. Furthermore, Gazprom reduced the minimum requirements attached to the change of delivery point mechanism, committed to remain liable for delivery of gas to a new delivery point and added new delivery points in the Baltics and Poland. Finally, Gazprom significantly reduced the fixed and transparent service fees it can charge for these swaps, to ensure the mechanism is financially attractive. (10) The change of delivery point mechanism will further integrate CEE gas markets, as if gas connecting infrastructure already existed. (11) Second, to address the Commission s pricing concern and to ensure that gas prices do not become again unfair in the future, Gazprom commits to offer a price revision clause to its relevant customers. This price revision clause ensures that if prices deviate from competitive Western benchmarks (including prices at liquid hubs) a price review can be requested. Customers can exercise this option every two years, with an additional joker every five years. Following the market test, Gazprom committed to offer the clause also to its new customers and clarified that this right can be exercised immediately after the introduction of the new price review clause in their contracts and that the new price will apply retroactively. (12) Following the market test, the benchmarks that will drive the new price were significantly improved. The price revision clause makes clear that the new price will have to be set in line with the price level in competitive Continental Western European gas markets, including at liquid gas hubs in Germany and the Netherlands. If the parties do not agree on a new price within 120 days, they will have the right to refer the dispute to an arbitrator, which will also be guided by the same Western European benchmarks. Arbitration will have to take place in the EU. This obliges the arbitral tribunals to respect and apply EU competition law, and ensures that the Commission can intervene as amicus curiae. (13) This structured process will ensure competitive gas prices in these regions and avoid that gas prices under the oilindexed long-term contracts significantly diverge from competitive price benchmarks in the future.

10 C 258/8 EN Official Journal of the European Union (14) Third, Gazprom commits not to claim any damages on the basis of the cancellation of the South Stream project from the Bulgarian counterparts. In this way Gazprom will not benefit from advantages that it has obtained and will provide its Bulgarian partners with business and legal certainty. 4. Conclusion (15) The decision finds that, in view of the commitments offered, there are no longer grounds for action by the Commission. The decision shall be binding on Gazprom for a period of eight years, except for the Commitments regarding the cancellation of the South Stream project (see paragraph 21) for which the period shall be 15 years, as from 28 May 2018.

11 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 258/9 V (Announcements) PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMON COMMERCIAL POLICY EUROPEAN COMMISSION Notice concerning the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2179 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of ceramic tiles originating in the People s Republic of China: name change of one company subject to the anti-dumping duty rate for cooperating non-sampled companies (2018/C 258/08) Guangdong Monalisa Ceramics Co. Ltd, TARIC ( 1 ) additional code B179, a company subject to an anti-dumping duty rate of 30,6 % informed the Commission that it had changed its name into Monalisa Group Co., Ltd The company asked the Commission to confirm that the change of name does not affect the right of the company to benefit from the individual duty rate applied to the company under its previous name. The Commission has examined the information supplied and concluded that the change of name in no way affects the findings of the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2179 ( 2 ). Therefore, the reference in the Annex I to the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2179 to: Guangdong Monalisa Ceramics Co. Ltd B179 Should be read as Monalisa Group Co., Ltd B179 The TARIC additional code B179 previously attributed to Guangdong Monalisa Ceramics Co. Ltd applies to Monalisa Group Co., Ltd ( 1 ) The integrated Tariff of the European Union. ( 2 ) OJ L 307, , p. 25.

12 C 258/10 EN Official Journal of the European Union PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY EUROPEAN COMMISSION Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8908 AXA/XL Group) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) (2018/C 258/09) 1. On 12 July 2018, 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: AXA SA ( AXA ) (France), XL Group Ltd. ( XL Group ) (Bermuda). AXA acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of XL Group. The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares. 2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are: AXA is the holding company of the AXA Group, a worldwide player in insurance and asset management, XL Group is a global insurance and reinsurance company providing property, casualty and specialty 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 the 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.8908 AXA/XL Group Observations can be sent to the Commission by , by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu Fax Postal address: European Commission Directorate-General for Competition Merger Registry 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel BELGIQUE/BELGIË ( 1 ) OJ L 24, , p. 1 (the Merger Regulation ). ( 2 ) OJ C 366, , p. 5.

13

14

15

16 ISSN X (electronic edition) ISSN (paper edition) EN