Urfan Khaliq, Ethical Dimensions of the Foreign Policy of the European Union. A Legal Appraisal, Cambridge University Press, 2008 [*]
Urfan Khaliq analyses the theory and practice of the European Union’s ‘ethical foreign policy’, arguing that current practices dilute the impact and efficacy of Union policies but that an effort which is at times effective is being made to protect certain values in the Union’s international relations. Beginning with an investigation of the international rules authorising or obliging the Union/Community or the Member States to promote certain values in third countries or take action to protect them, Khaliq goes on to examine the limits under international law which constrain such policies. The issues are then assessed from a Union/Community law perspective, and the importance attached to ethical values and their relationship with other priorities and objectives is analysed in the context of relations with Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Israel and the Palestinian Authority. The European Community’s humanitarian aid policy is also discussed.
Bruce Abramson, ARE “ONLINE MARKETS” REAL AND RELEVANT? FROM THE MONSTER-HOTJOBS MERGER TO THE GOOGLE-DOUBLECLICK MERGER, Journal of Competition Law and Economics Advance Access published online on September 26, 2008 [*]
This article examines two Internet merger investigations from 2001 and 2007 to answer the question of whether there is such a thing as a distinct “Internet market,” and if so, how an antitrust analysis of such a market should differ from parallel analyses applied to more conventional markets. A quick comparison of two Internet advertising mergers from different stages of the Internet’s existence demonstrates two things. First, as the novelty of the Internet wears off, online merger analysis looks increasingly like offline merger analysis. Second, most of the things that make online mergers interesting have little to do with competition law.
Philip Manow, Holger Döring, Electoral and Mechanical Causes of Divided Government in the European Union, Comparative Political Studies, Beverly Hills, Oct 2008., Vol. 41, Iss. 10; pg. 1349 [*]
Abstract
Voters who participate in elections to the European Parliament (EP) apparently use these elections to punish their domestic governing parties. Many students of the EU therefore claim that the party-political composition of the Parliament should systematically differ from that of the EU Council. This study shows that opposed majorities between council and parliament may have other than simply electoral causes. The logic of domestic government formation works against the representation of more extreme and EU-skeptic parties in the Council, whereas voters in EP elections vote more often for these parties. The different locations of Council and Parliament are therefore caused by two effects: a mechanical effect–relevant for the composition of the Council–when national votes are translated into office and an electoral effect in European elections. The article discusses the implications of this finding for our understanding of the political system of the EU and of its democratic legitimacy.
Christian Wimpissinger, Cross-border transfer of losses, the ECJ does not agree with Advocate General Sharpston, EC Tax Review. Deventer: 2008. Vol. 17, Iss. 4; pg. 173
Abstract [ProQuest]
Modern tax law legislation seems to be made for the winners in the context in question for taxpayers who make profits far in excess of their expenses and, as a consequence, do not even incur losses. Sadly it is the weak market players that keep the economy going or help it kick-start again after a down-turn. It appears to be an irony of fate: legislation reacting to abusive practices, like repealing the loss-capture rule in Germany, is often implemented because of multinational companies, especially in the cross-border context. The consequence is that the competitors of multinationals are wiped out by such legislation and even though the tax situation might be tighter, the actual market position of the big players improves due to less competition. In order to end where it started it might be acknowledged that the game regarding a cross-border loss transfer was lost although the arguments set out by AG Sharpston, by case law of the ECJ, and the literature established a strong offence to score in favor of a cross-border transfer.
Propunere de Directivă …/…/CE a Parlamentului european şi a Consiliului din [...] de coordonare, în vederea echivalării, a garanţiilor impuse societăţilor comerciale în statele membre, în înţelesul articolului 48 al doilea paragraf din tratat, pentru protejarea intereselor asociaţilor sau terţilor, în ceea ce priveşte constituirea societăţilor comerciale pe acţiuni şi menţinerea şi modificarea capitalului acestora (Versiune codificată) /* COM/2008/0544 final – COD 2008/0173 */
REGULAMENTUL (CE) NR. 2157/2001 AL CONSILIULUI din 8 octombrie 2001 privind statutul societătii europene (SE) [RO]
Eric C C M Kemmeren, After Repeal of Article 293 EC Treaty under the Lisbon Treaty: the EU objective of eliminating double taxation can be applied more widely, EC Tax Review, Deventer, 2008, Vol. 17, Iss. 4. [*]
Abstract [Proquest]
On 12 June 2008, Ireland blocked the Lisbon Treaty. The initiative of the European Council of promoting to conclude the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty is welcomed and is expected to revisit the reasons behind the Irish rejection, as well as to consider the way forward at the Council’s meeting on 15 October 2008. It is assumed that the Council will then come to terms with Ireland to carry on with the Lisbon Treaty in the field of direct taxation, more specifically: What will be the consequence of the repeal of the current Article 293 EC under the Lisbon Treaty?
Joanna Faith, European Commission demands UK action on Marks & Spencer, International Tax Review, September 24, 2008. [*]
The European Commission has asked the UK to properly implement an ECJ ruling on cross-border loss compensation following the judgement in the Marks & Spencer case in December 2005.
T 20/03, Kahla/Thüringen Porzellan GmbH, Hotararea din 24 septembrie 2008 [*]
Ajutoare de stat – Ajutor existent sau ajutor nou – Întreprindere aflată în dificultate – Principiul securității juridice – Principiul protectiei încrederii legitime – Criteriul investitorului privat – Compatibilitate cu piața comună – Conditii
Interesanta evolutie. In EUObserver.
Cititi in EUObserver. Sau, altfel spus, despre capitalismul post-modern.
C-76/00P, Petrotub SA and Republica SA / Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities.
cauza T‑261/08 AJ, Dragutan c. Romania, Autoritatea Naţională pentru Restituirea Proprietăţilor.
“Detalii” aici.
O alta decizie, in seria, eroi au fost, eroi sunt inca: aici.
Nicolas Carette, Direct Contractual Claim of the Sub-buyer and International Sale of Goods: Applicable Law and Applicability of the CISG, (2008), 16, European Review of Private Law, pp. 583-605. [*]Summary:
Abstract: The issue explored in this work is which law should be applied to determine the admissibility or possibility of and, if appropriate, the assessment of a direct contractual claim of a sub-buyer against a former seller when a sequence of contracts of sale takes place in an international context and the sequential contracts are governed by different laws. Particular attention is paid to the impact of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) on this question. Although this article focuses mainly on Belgian and French Law where the competence of the Belgian or French judges is presupposed, the theories described herein, and especially the proposed one, can in principle also be applied to other laws and in other jurisdictions.
The admissibility and the assessment of the claim of the sub-buyer will in principle be judged exclusively according to the lex contractus (national law, not CISG) of the contract between the sued seller and his immediate buyer. However, in case the claim of the intermediary seller against the initial seller is automatically transferred to the sub-buyer according to the lex contractus of the sub-contract, the key question is to what extent the transfer can be invoked against the initial seller. Arguably, one must distinguish between two categories of cases: cases within which the law governing the initial contract recognizes the automatic transfer of the claim according to the law governing the sub-contract, on the one hand; and cases where the lex contractus of the initial contract does not recognize such a transfer. In the first category of cases, the sub-buyer can be identified with his predecessor and the assessment of his claim has to be judged as if it was the predecessor who is acting. In the second category of cases it must be verified whether or not the law governing the initial contract recognizes a more or less similar, although not automatic transfer of claims. It is proposed to refer to the regime of assignment where the lex contractus of the initial contract recognizes the (whether or not implied) assignment of the claim(s). This means an analogical application of Article 12 of the Rome Convention, where that Convention has to be applied.
In any case, if the direct contractual claim of the sub-buyer is recognized, the CISG could possibly be applicable to the claim.
Resumé: La question étudiée dans ce travail est celle du droit applicable pour déterminer l’admissibilité ou la possibilité de, et si opportun, l’évaluation d’une créance contractuelle directe d’un acheteur succédant contre un premier vendeur dans le cas d’une succession de contrats de vente ayant lieu dans un contexte international et où les différents contrats sont régis par différents droits. Une attention particulière est portée sur l’impact de la CVIM vis à vis de cette question. Même si cet article se concentre principalement sur les droits belge et français et que la compétence des juges français et belge est présupposée, les théories discutées, et surtout la théorie proposée, peuvent en principe également être appliquées aux autres droits et par d’autres juridictions.
L’adminissibilité et l’évaluation de la créance par l’acheteur succédant seront en principe considérées exclusivement au vu de la lex contractus (droit national et non la CVIM) du contrat entre le vendeur poursuivi et l&apos
La riforma costituzionale dell’Unione europea e il Trattato di Lisbona. Aici.
Actiune în anulare – Articolul 47 UE – Politica externă si de securitate comună – Decizia 2004/833/PESC – Punerea în aplicare a Actiunii comune 2002/589/PESC – Combaterea proliferării armelor usoare si a armelor de calibru mic – Competenta Comunitătii – Politica de cooperare pentru dezvoltare
RO.
Litigiu interesant in privinta conflictului intre pilonii UE (PESC, respectiv comunitar)….
Un articol interesant, al lui Sandro Magister.
Si implicatiile acestei statistici. Cititi aici.
Si da, intr-adevar, e vorba despre Anglia (iar nu Regatul Unit, Marea Britanie) pentru ca Scotia & apoi Tara Galilor au fost incluse in statistici separate…
Bine, bine, vine acum intrebarea: pe cand se va recunoaste, in aceleasi scopuri fiscale (si pentru a nu constitui un obstacol asupra liberei circulatii a persoanelor, daca UE s-ar “largi” (sic), cum se exprima inca unii (adica “extinde”), pana la granite nebanuite…) sa zicem o familie poligama (barbat + pana la 4 femei, ca in dreptul islamic aplicabil, desigur in afara CE, inca in diverse state ale lumii). Ori vreo alta forma de familie post-moderna?
Lasand gluma la o parte, problema este de interes si, probabil, ca mai devreme sau mai tarziu aceasta problema se va generaliza. Pentru ca, in legislatia franceza (precum veti citi in cele ce urmeaza exista asa-numitele “pacte civile de solidaritate” – PAC(S) aplicabile si oamenilor/persoanelor sau indivizilor avand acelasi sex). Si apoi ar trebui facuta trimitere si la hotararea CJCE Tadao Maruko (pentru problema examinarii egalitatii de tratament, dispusa prin dreptul intern al unui stat membru).
In sfarsit, se poate afirma ca a fost creat un precedent.
Asadar, stirea din Le Monde:
Ils s’appellent Peter-Jan et Aad, sont néerlandais et vivent paisiblement dans une maison du Gers, avec une chambre d’hôtes. Les deux hommes se sont mariés à Leyde, en 2002, les Pays-Bas reconnaissant depuis plusieurs années l’union homosexuelle.
En déposant leur première déclaration de revenus française en 2005, ils ont revendiqué une imposition commune. Premier refus de l’administration, invoquant la loi française qui ne reconnaît pas la validité d’un mariage entre personnes du même sexe. Aidés d’un avocat parisien, Me Alain Leclerc, les deux Néerlandais ont alors réclamé l’application de conventions signées par la France et des règles du droit international privé.
L’affaire a, apparemment, été mûrement réfléchie à Bercy et au-delà. Les autorités françaises entendaient respecter les principes juridiques sans donner l’impression que, d’une manière ou d’une autre, elles validaient un mariage entre homosexuels. Parallèlement, deux parlementaires – le député Thierry Mariani (UMP) et le sénateur Jean-Louis Masson (non-inscrit) – s’enquéraient de la position du garde des sceaux. Dominique Perben leur répondit, à l’époque, que le droit français pourrait admettre la réalité d’un mariage homosexuel si le pays où il avait été célébré reconnaissait sa validité.
Le 11 juillet, le service juridique de la fiscalité au ministère des finances a fait savoir aux intéressés que leur mariage devait être considéré comme valable. Pour l’avocat du couple, la décision de Bercy signifie leur alignement complet sur le statut fiscal d’un couple marié et non sur celui, plus restrictif, des couples pacsés. “Une situation tout à fait normale au regard du droit”, souligne Me Leclerc. Peter-Jan et Aad peuvent donc bénéficier d’une imposition commune. A la seule condition de faire traduire leur acte de mariage en français…
Ce précédent ne permettra pas à un couple d’homosexuels français de se marier. Mais ceux venus de Belgique, des Pays-Bas ou d’Espagne – trois pays où le mariage homosexuel est légal – pourront profiter de cette jurisprudence. Ils seraient plusieurs à avoir déjà pris la plume pour s’adresser à leur contrôleur.
Un punct de vedere interesant;
The European Union’s Lisbon Treaty will not enter into force before the European Parliament elections in June 2009, as was initially hoped, and is unlikely to do so before 1 January 2010 either, Luxembourg’s Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker [*] said in Brussels on Wednesday (17 September).
“I don’t think that the treaty will be in place in June [2009], when the next European elections will take place,” Mr Juncker, who is also the president of the eurogroup – gathering the finance ministers of the eurozone – said at a conference organised by the Brussels-based European Policy Centre (EPC).
Restul in EUObserver.
Tony Barber, Juncker sees Lisbon treaty delay, Financial Times, September 18, 2008,
Theodor Baums, Paul Krüger Andersen, The European Model Company Law Act Project, (March 1, 2008). ECGI – Law Working Paper No. 97/2008. Available at SSRN.
The paper describes the European Model Company Law Project. Last year, a commission was formed on the initiative of the authors with the goal of drafting a European Model Company Law Act (EMCLA). This project aims neither to force a mandatory harmonization of national company law nor to create a further, European corporate form. The goal is rather to draft model rules for a corporation that national legislatures would be free to adopt in whole or in part. Thus, the project is thought as an alternative and supplement to the existing EU instruments for the convergence of company law. The present EU instruments, their prerequisites and limits are being discussed in the paper. Furthermore, the paper describes the US experience with such model acts in the area of company law. It concludes by discussing several topics concerning the content of an EMCLA, introducing the members of the EMCLA Working Group, and explaining the Group’s preliminary working plan.
Cauza C-376/98, Republica Federală Germania împotriva Parlamentului European şi Consiliului Uniunii Europene„Directiva 98/43/CE – Publicitatea şi sponsorizarea produselor din tutun – Baza juridică – Articolul 100 A din Tratatul CE (devenit, după modificare, articolul 95 CE)”
Masa rotundă „Temeiul juridic al actelor CE/UE. Pertinenţă şi consecinţe”
Centrul de Studii de Drept European (CSDE) al Institutului de Cercetări Juridice, din cadrul Academiei Române, organizează la sediul său Calea 13 Septembrie, nr.13, la data de 25 septembrie, ora 13, Masa rotundă „Temeiul juridic al actelor CE/UE. Pertinenţă şi consecinţe“.
Masa rotundă îşi propune abordarea concretă şi totodată aprofundată a celor mai importante tendinţe care se pot discerne în dreptul comunitar/european în privinţa modului în care instituţiile comunitare (în special Comisia Europeană în calitatea sa de iniţiator al legislaţiei comunitare) îşi motivează opţiunea pentru un anumit temei al unui act normativ, precum şi a modului în care Curtea de Justiţie a Comunităţilor Europene a abordat, în jurisprudenţa sa, această problematică.
În consecinţă, masa rotundă se va centra, în special, pe următoarele probleme (lista nefiind exhaustivă):
- temeiul juridic al adoptării actelor juridice comunitare (directive, regulamente) în diferite materii: Piaţa internă, drept internaţional privat – Roma I şi Roma II, societăţi comerciale, protecţia consumatorilor etc.;
- acţiunea în anulare – (art. 230 CE) care are ca obiect, printre altele, contestarea temeiului juridic al actului atacat;
- conflictul între pilonii Uniunii Europene, cu referire la promovarea actelor UE/CE (decizii-cadru, directive);
- exemple (studii de caz) din jurisprudenţa CJCE în materie.
Parteneri media: euractiv.ro [*], juridice.ro {*}, infolegal.ro [*], Editura Universitară, Revista Română de Drept Comunitar, Tribuna Economică, Euroconsultanţă, ARDAE (Asociaţia Română de Drept şi Afaceri Europene).
Institutul de Cercetari Juridice [*].
Temeiul juridic al actelor CE/UE. Pertinenţă şi consecinţe
25 septembrie 2008, ora 13
12.30-13 – Înregistrarea participanţilor
Sesiunea I. Moderatori: Prof. univ. dr. Emil Moroianu şi Prof. univ. dr. Simina Elena Tănăsescu
Cuvânt de deschidere: Prof. univ. dr. Emil Moroianu
Prof. univ. dr. Dumitru Mazilu, Impactul respingerii Tratatului de la Lisabona asupra sistemului decizional în Uniunea Europeană
Prof. univ. dr. Simina Elena Tănăsescu, Universitatea din Bucureşti, Metisajul juridic şi limitele controlului jurisdicţional
Nicolae Turcu, Preşedinte al Secţiei de Drept Privat, Consiliul Legislativ, Lex obligationis europeană – preludiul la un drept internaţional privat comunitar [Roma I şi Roma II]
Prof. univ. dr. Augustin Fuerea, Concordanţa dintre temeiul legal intern şi cel comunitar în materia aplicabilităţii prioritare
Prof. univ. dr. Andrei Popescu, Şeful Departamentului pentru armonizarea legislatiei cu reglementările Uniunii Europene, Considerente asupra temeiului juridic al adoptării unor regulamente comunitare atipice şi, respectiv, al adaptării unor regulamente şi directive
14.40 – 15.00 – Pauză de cafea
Sesiunea a II-a. Moderatori: Mihai Banu şi Mihai Şandru
Prof. univ. dr. Emil Moroianu, Directorul Institutului de Cercetări Juridice, Este valid modelul kelsenian în dreptul comunitar?
Lector univ. dr. Anamaria Groza, Motivarea actelor comunitare din perspectiva jurisprudenţei Curţii de Justiţie a Comunităţilor Europene, referitoare la principiile subsidiarităţii şi proporţionalităţii
Mihai Banu, Un exemplu recent privind conflictul între pilonii UE. Hotărârea CJCE în cauza C-91/05, Consiliul/Comisia
Lector dr. Mihai Şandru, Jurisprudenţa CJCE (cauza C-208/00 – Überseering) – temei pentru modificarea reglementărilor în materia societăţilor comerciale
Claudia Cristina Berghezan, Tipologia discriminării
Discuţii 16.00 – 16.30
Închiderea sesiunii de discuţii – 16.30.
