The paper has three sections. First of all, the legal bases of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession are discussed, because this regulation shall be directly applicable in the Member States of European Union in accordance with the Treaties. There are several issues that fall outside the scope of the regulation, for example questions governed by the law of companies, such as clauses in the memorandum of association of companies, which determine what will happen to the shares upon the death of the members. From the point of view of Hungarian law, it is a matter of company law to talk about the inheritability of business shares in each type of companies. The second part of the paper is about general rules in company law regarding inheritance of business shares and in the third part family firms are discussed. Writing about these is common in Austrian legal literature; in connection with these, succession in family firms is a significant topic. In Hungarian legal literature the term family firm is rarely found, but the usage and content of term “family firm” cannot be neglected because of their role in economy.
论文分为三个部分。首先，讨论了2012年7月4日欧洲议会和理事会条例(EU) No 650/2012的法律依据，该条例涉及管辖权、适用法律、承认和执行决定、接受和执行有关继承事宜的真实文书以及创建欧洲继承证书，因为该条例应根据条约直接适用于欧盟成员国。有几个问题不属于该条例的范围，例如由公司法管辖的问题，例如公司组织大纲中的条款，这些条款决定了成员去世后股份的处置。从匈牙利法律的角度来看，谈论每种类型公司的商业股份的可继承性是公司法的问题。第二部分是公司法中关于企业股权继承的一般规定，第三部分是对家族企业股权继承的讨论。这在奥地利法律文献中很常见;与此相关，家族企业的继任是一个重要的话题。在匈牙利法律文献中，家族企业一词很少出现，但由于其在经济中的作用，“家族企业”一词的用法和内容不容忽视。
{"title":"CERTAIN ASPECTS OF EU, AUSTRIAN AND HUNGARIAN LAW IN CONNECTION WITH INHERITANCE OF BUSINESS SHARES","authors":"J. Dul","doi":"10.25234/ECLIC/9037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25234/ECLIC/9037","url":null,"abstract":"The paper has three sections. First of all, the legal bases of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession are discussed, because this regulation shall be directly applicable in the Member States of European Union in accordance with the Treaties. There are several issues that fall outside the scope of the regulation, for example questions governed by the law of companies, such as clauses in the memorandum of association of companies, which determine what will happen to the shares upon the death of the members. From the point of view of Hungarian law, it is a matter of company law to talk about the inheritability of business shares in each type of companies. The second part of the paper is about general rules in company law regarding inheritance of business shares and in the third part family firms are discussed. Writing about these is common in Austrian legal literature; in connection with these, succession in family firms is a significant topic. In Hungarian legal literature the term family firm is rarely found, but the usage and content of term “family firm” cannot be neglected because of their role in economy.","PeriodicalId":246552,"journal":{"name":"EU AND MEMBER STATES – LEGAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130735987","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Accession of the Republic of Croatia to the EU has prompted numerous legal reforms and amendments. One of them was a major administrative court reform the main result of which was the new Administrative Disputes Act adopted in 2010 and coming into force 2012. One of the issues it regulates is the judicial control in general, and together with Foreigners Act from 2011 defines control of administrative acts and measures regarding unlawful residence of foreigners in Croatia, which is the subject of the analysis in this paper. The paper is divided in three main parts. Basic features of migrations and its consequences on European and domestic regulation are explained in the first part of the paper. Second part of the paper is focused on the procedural aspect of migrations, namely on the unlawful residence of foreigners from the perspective of the administrative courts. The final part of the paper draws certain conclusions based on the preceding analysis. The main focus of the paper is an analysis of the specificities of administrative courts’ control, such as the shortness of deadlines, oral hearings as an exception, particularities of the engagement of the parties before the court, etc. Paper elaborates in detail the normative arrangement of unlawful residence in Croatia and differences between Foreigners Act and Administrative Disputes Act through analysis of the relevant domestic and European regulative framework and case law. With this, the paper hopes to contribute in solving at least some of the numerous legal problems associated with the current migrant and refugee crisis from the perspective of the European and Croatian administrative law.
{"title":"JUDICIAL CONTROL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTS AND MEASURES REGARDING UNLAWFUL RESIDENCE OF FOREIGNERS IN CROATIA IN THE EUROPEAN CONTEXT","authors":"Ana Đanić Čeko, Mateja Held","doi":"10.25234/ECLIC/8998","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25234/ECLIC/8998","url":null,"abstract":"Accession of the Republic of Croatia to the EU has prompted numerous legal reforms and amendments. One of them was a major administrative court reform the main result of which was the new Administrative Disputes Act adopted in 2010 and coming into force 2012. One of the issues it regulates is the judicial control in general, and together with Foreigners Act from 2011 defines control of administrative acts and measures regarding unlawful residence of foreigners in Croatia, which is the subject of the analysis in this paper. The paper is divided in three main parts. Basic features of migrations and its consequences on European and domestic regulation are explained in the first part of the paper. Second part of the paper is focused on the procedural aspect of migrations, namely on the unlawful residence of foreigners from the perspective of the administrative courts. The final part of the paper draws certain conclusions based on the preceding analysis. The main focus of the paper is an analysis of the specificities of administrative courts’ control, such as the shortness of deadlines, oral hearings as an exception, particularities of the engagement of the parties before the court, etc. Paper elaborates in detail the normative arrangement of unlawful residence in Croatia and differences between Foreigners Act and Administrative Disputes Act through analysis of the relevant domestic and European regulative framework and case law. With this, the paper hopes to contribute in solving at least some of the numerous legal problems associated with the current migrant and refugee crisis from the perspective of the European and Croatian administrative law.","PeriodicalId":246552,"journal":{"name":"EU AND MEMBER STATES – LEGAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125811890","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
On 19 June 2018, the Bulgarian Presidency of the Council, the European Parliament, and the European Commission agreed on the new Eurojust Regulation. The EU ambassadors confirmed the agreement on 20 June 2018 followed by final adoption of the Regulation in November 2018. This paper refers to the novelties introduced by the new Regulation as well as to the projection of relations between agencies after the finalization of OLAF and EPPO competencies. The authors are analysing current modalities for their cooperation on institutional, operational and administrative levels. Will Eurojust become obsolete and possibly a department in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office or two differentiated bodies that have a future with separated competencies, independent of each other? What role will OLAF play in relation to both agencies, and what impacts will this have on national criminal justice systems? The authors analyse possible scenarios and point to perceived overlapping in competencies.
{"title":"EUROJUST AND EPPO ON THE CROSSROADS OF THEIR FUTURE COOPERATION","authors":"Ante Novokmet, Z. Vinkovic","doi":"10.25234/ECLIC/9018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25234/ECLIC/9018","url":null,"abstract":"On 19 June 2018, the Bulgarian Presidency of the Council, the European Parliament, and the European Commission agreed on the new Eurojust Regulation. The EU ambassadors confirmed the agreement on 20 June 2018 followed by final adoption of the Regulation in November 2018. This paper refers to the novelties introduced by the new Regulation as well as to the projection of relations between agencies after the finalization of OLAF and EPPO competencies. The authors are analysing current modalities for their cooperation on institutional, operational and administrative levels. Will Eurojust become obsolete and possibly a department in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office or two differentiated bodies that have a future with separated competencies, independent of each other? What role will OLAF play in relation to both agencies, and what impacts will this have on national criminal justice systems? The authors analyse possible scenarios and point to perceived overlapping in competencies.","PeriodicalId":246552,"journal":{"name":"EU AND MEMBER STATES – LEGAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132877942","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Starting from the very name of the Scientific Conference “The European Union and the Member States - Legal and Economic Issues”, the authors consider that the legislative division of competences between the European Union and the Member States is a key issue for their actions and their mutual relations. Therefore, the aim of the work is to establish a vertical distribution of powers in the European Union and to analyse comparatively the constitutional division of competences between different territorial levels of government in selected European states with federal regulation. The vertical division of competences within the Union is a question of constitutional importance as one of the principles of the structure of authority within its territory. The importance of a vertical division of competences is reflected in particular in the fact that it involves the adoption of very complex decisions on whether a matter should be regulated at a central (European) or at national (state) level. It is important to point out that the process of transferring competence from the higher level (European Union) to the lower forms of territorial organization (Member States) presupposes the instrument and the premise of democratization. At the same time, the range of competences is a form of limitation of the powers of the European Union, within the limits of the competences assigned to it by a primary act. The division of the jurisdiction, apart from legal regulation, has an economic effect. The better the division is, the more effective are the Union and the member states in providing faster and better public services to citizens, without spending much of the state resources, leading to better balance and the prevention of abuse of power. Work is divided into several interrelated chapters. After the introduction, it is primarily concerned with clarifying general questions about the vertical division of competences between different territorial levels of government. Within this chapter, it starts from the consideration of conceptual definitions, through the analysis of the way of determining competence between territorial levels of authority, the competence to allocate affairs between territorial levels of authority to the vertical division of jurisdiction as a constraint of power. The central part of the paper deals with the analysis of the delimitation of competences between the European Union and the Member States as defined in the Lisbon Treaty, which includes: a) exclusive competence of the European Union, b) shared competences between the European Union and the Member States and c) competence to support, coordinate and complement Member States’ actions. Particular emphasis is placed on the following principles: the conferred powers and subsidiarity and proportionality. They are based on the implementation of competences between the Union and the Member States. These principles represent the basic principles for the functioning of the European Union and the c
{"title":"DIVISION OF COMPETENCES BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE MEMBER STATE","authors":"Antun Marinac, Mirela Mezak Matijević, Jasmina Mlađenović","doi":"10.25234/ECLIC/8993","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25234/ECLIC/8993","url":null,"abstract":"Starting from the very name of the Scientific Conference “The European Union and the Member States - Legal and Economic Issues”, the authors consider that the legislative division of competences between the European Union and the Member States is a key issue for their actions and their mutual relations. Therefore, the aim of the work is to establish a vertical distribution of powers in the European Union and to analyse comparatively the constitutional division of competences between different territorial levels of government in selected European states with federal regulation. The vertical division of competences within the Union is a question of constitutional importance as one of the principles of the structure of authority within its territory. The importance of a vertical division of competences is reflected in particular in the fact that it involves the adoption of very complex decisions on whether a matter should be regulated at a central (European) or at national (state) level. It is important to point out that the process of transferring competence from the higher level (European Union) to the lower forms of territorial organization (Member States) presupposes the instrument and the premise of democratization. At the same time, the range of competences is a form of limitation of the powers of the European Union, within the limits of the competences assigned to it by a primary act. The division of the jurisdiction, apart from legal regulation, has an economic effect. The better the division is, the more effective are the Union and the member states in providing faster and better public services to citizens, without spending much of the state resources, leading to better balance and the prevention of abuse of power. Work is divided into several interrelated chapters. After the introduction, it is primarily concerned with clarifying general questions about the vertical division of competences between different territorial levels of government. Within this chapter, it starts from the consideration of conceptual definitions, through the analysis of the way of determining competence between territorial levels of authority, the competence to allocate affairs between territorial levels of authority to the vertical division of jurisdiction as a constraint of power. The central part of the paper deals with the analysis of the delimitation of competences between the European Union and the Member States as defined in the Lisbon Treaty, which includes: a) exclusive competence of the European Union, b) shared competences between the European Union and the Member States and c) competence to support, coordinate and complement Member States’ actions. Particular emphasis is placed on the following principles: the conferred powers and subsidiarity and proportionality. They are based on the implementation of competences between the Union and the Member States. These principles represent the basic principles for the functioning of the European Union and the c","PeriodicalId":246552,"journal":{"name":"EU AND MEMBER STATES – LEGAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122343591","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Factor of labour has major role in the functioning of the economy. When it comes to employees, the remuneration they receive for their work, usually called pay or income, is in principle their main source of income and therefore has a great impact on their ability to spend and / or save. The paper analyzes the effect of changes in tax rates in the system of mandatory social contributions and personal income tax on tax burden on labour in Croatia. When it comes to the tax burden on labour, it is about taxation of the gross income of natural persons. The gross income of natural persons in Croatia is taxed with several tax forms: employer and employee mandatory social contributions, personal income tax and surtax to personal income tax. Changes in tax rates and other tax elements (eg personal deduction, tax brackets) are subject to frequent changes in order to achieve certain goals of economic and fiscal policy. EUROSTAT data show that Croatia is in the top five EU countries when it comes to tax burden on labour. Measures of tax policy and numerous tax reforms have tried to correct this fact. The main objective of this paper is to review the effects of such changes on the overall tax burden, the tax burden distribution and progressiveness and the level of tax revenues (fiscal impact). We consider it important to note that the framework of this paper does not allow a detailed analysis and that we are forced to limit ourselves exclusively to some aspects of the issue at hand.
{"title":"LEGAL CHALLENGES OF REDUCTION OF THE TAX BURDEN ON LABOUR IN THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA","authors":"Emina Jerković","doi":"10.25234/ECLIC/9041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25234/ECLIC/9041","url":null,"abstract":"Factor of labour has major role in the functioning of the economy. When it comes to employees, the remuneration they receive for their work, usually called pay or income, is in principle their main source of income and therefore has a great impact on their ability to spend and / or save. The paper analyzes the effect of changes in tax rates in the system of mandatory social contributions and personal income tax on tax burden on labour in Croatia. When it comes to the tax burden on labour, it is about taxation of the gross income of natural persons. The gross income of natural persons in Croatia is taxed with several tax forms: employer and employee mandatory social contributions, personal income tax and surtax to personal income tax. Changes in tax rates and other tax elements (eg personal deduction, tax brackets) are subject to frequent changes in order to achieve certain goals of economic and fiscal policy. EUROSTAT data show that Croatia is in the top five EU countries when it comes to tax burden on labour. Measures of tax policy and numerous tax reforms have tried to correct this fact. The main objective of this paper is to review the effects of such changes on the overall tax burden, the tax burden distribution and progressiveness and the level of tax revenues (fiscal impact). We consider it important to note that the framework of this paper does not allow a detailed analysis and that we are forced to limit ourselves exclusively to some aspects of the issue at hand.","PeriodicalId":246552,"journal":{"name":"EU AND MEMBER STATES – LEGAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES","volume":"137 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122813305","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
When Eurosystem founded TARGET2, its initial purpose was execution of payments. In that sense TARGET2 did not substantially differ from any other Real-Time Gross-Settlement system (RTGS) operated by a central bank. Hence, the service initially offered in TARGET 2 represented (and still represents) a typical central bank task. However, the number of services offered within the remit of TARGET2 increased over time. With the establishment of TARGET2- Securities (T2S) began the Eurosystem’s involvment in enhancing securities settlement. The legal basis for provision of T2S service stated in relevant legal acts remained the same as for the first service (RTGS). The said legal basis is to be found in the TFEU and in the Statute of the ESCB and of the ECB as “promoting the smooth operation of payment systems”. However, the 2015. ruling of CJEU in Case T-496/11 United Kingdom v ECB interpreted the said legal basis narrowly, and it contested the ECB’s competence to make regulations for legal entities engaged in securities clearing. This paper aims to explore if the said ruling could have further repercussions i.e. could it be understood as denying the ECB any competence over securities, including their settlement, which might make Eurosystem’s competence to establish and operate T2S open for discussion. Finally, this paper briefly explains the TIPS service which is also offered within the remit of TARGET2 and whose purpose is execution of payments. Albeit TIPS differs from T2S in that it is clearly a payment service and, as such, can easily be connected with the Eurosystem’s role in promoting smooth operation of payment systems, one must note that the same service is also offered on a commercial basis by private entities. This paper explores how does provision of instant payments correspond with central bank tasks.
{"title":"NEW SERVICES OFFERED WITHIN THE REMIT OF TARGET2 – HOW DO THEY CORRESPOND WITH TFEU AND CENTRAL BANK TASKS?","authors":"Ivana Parać Vukomanović","doi":"10.25234/ECLIC/9044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25234/ECLIC/9044","url":null,"abstract":"When Eurosystem founded TARGET2, its initial purpose was execution of payments. In that sense TARGET2 did not substantially differ from any other Real-Time Gross-Settlement system (RTGS) operated by a central bank. Hence, the service initially offered in TARGET 2 represented (and still represents) a typical central bank task. However, the number of services offered within the remit of TARGET2 increased over time. With the establishment of TARGET2- Securities (T2S) began the Eurosystem’s involvment in enhancing securities settlement. The legal basis for provision of T2S service stated in relevant legal acts remained the same as for the first service (RTGS). The said legal basis is to be found in the TFEU and in the Statute of the ESCB and of the ECB as “promoting the smooth operation of payment systems”. However, the 2015. ruling of CJEU in Case T-496/11 United Kingdom v ECB interpreted the said legal basis narrowly, and it contested the ECB’s competence to make regulations for legal entities engaged in securities clearing. This paper aims to explore if the said ruling could have further repercussions i.e. could it be understood as denying the ECB any competence over securities, including their settlement, which might make Eurosystem’s competence to establish and operate T2S open for discussion. Finally, this paper briefly explains the TIPS service which is also offered within the remit of TARGET2 and whose purpose is execution of payments. Albeit TIPS differs from T2S in that it is clearly a payment service and, as such, can easily be connected with the Eurosystem’s role in promoting smooth operation of payment systems, one must note that the same service is also offered on a commercial basis by private entities. This paper explores how does provision of instant payments correspond with central bank tasks.","PeriodicalId":246552,"journal":{"name":"EU AND MEMBER STATES – LEGAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114195371","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Having in mind that this is the first time that a Member State decided to withdraw from the EU pursuant to Article 50 TEU there are many aspects of this process that attract the attention of scholars studying EU related issues. Regardless of the outcome of the ongoing political debate and the course of action that will be taken eventually, after the CJEU decision in Wightman, we deem the need to further explore the extent of Article 50 and its implications on a number of stakeholders self- evident. In this paper we will deal with the capacity of non-EU countries to negotiate and conclude bilateral agreements with the UK i.e. a country withdrawing from the EU. The analysis is based on the proposed framework under the Draft Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the EU and the Euratom and the possible interpretation and understanding of terms “the principle of sincere cooperation” and “the Union’s interest” in this context, the principles of international law including the provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and the general principles of Union law. The primary focus is on the legal uncertainty the lack of a more thorough approach creates to non- EU countries, especially to third countries aspiring to join the EU. Considering that they do not participate in the withdrawal negotiations, it is a challenge for them to take part in prospect bilateral negotiations with the UK, while, at the same time, making sure they stay on their EU path. We argue in favor of the deal, as a universally accepted approach in case of future withdrawals, not only for the purpose of establishing a reference for any future application of Article 50, but also for providing legal certainty to those parties that are not prima facie affected by the withdrawal, but that do have to act in accordance with all deals made without the right to be heard.
{"title":"THE CAPACITY OF THIRD COUNTRIES TO NEGOTIATE BILATERAL AGREEMENTS WITH THE UK UNDER WITHDRAWAL ARRANGEMENTS","authors":"M. Vlajković, Jelisaveta Tasev","doi":"10.25234/ECLIC/8992","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25234/ECLIC/8992","url":null,"abstract":"Having in mind that this is the first time that a Member State decided to withdraw from the EU pursuant to Article 50 TEU there are many aspects of this process that attract the attention of scholars studying EU related issues. Regardless of the outcome of the ongoing political debate and the course of action that will be taken eventually, after the CJEU decision in Wightman, we deem the need to further explore the extent of Article 50 and its implications on a number of stakeholders self- evident. In this paper we will deal with the capacity of non-EU countries to negotiate and conclude bilateral agreements with the UK i.e. a country withdrawing from the EU. The analysis is based on the proposed framework under the Draft Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the EU and the Euratom and the possible interpretation and understanding of terms “the principle of sincere cooperation” and “the Union’s interest” in this context, the principles of international law including the provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and the general principles of Union law. The primary focus is on the legal uncertainty the lack of a more thorough approach creates to non- EU countries, especially to third countries aspiring to join the EU. Considering that they do not participate in the withdrawal negotiations, it is a challenge for them to take part in prospect bilateral negotiations with the UK, while, at the same time, making sure they stay on their EU path. We argue in favor of the deal, as a universally accepted approach in case of future withdrawals, not only for the purpose of establishing a reference for any future application of Article 50, but also for providing legal certainty to those parties that are not prima facie affected by the withdrawal, but that do have to act in accordance with all deals made without the right to be heard.","PeriodicalId":246552,"journal":{"name":"EU AND MEMBER STATES – LEGAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES","volume":"112 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124830297","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The European Charter for Equality of Women and Men in Local Life (2006) was first presented at the 6th Council of Europe’s European Ministerial Conference and at the meeting of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality of the European Parliament in 2006 as an extension of the “Cities for Equality” initiative of the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR). Adoption and active application of the principles and rules of the above-mentioned European Charter are the foundation of the political and social life at a local level. Furthermore, they are of utmost importance for promoting equality of women and encouraging their stronger political engagement in order to achieve true gender equality. By the end of 2018, only 27 local and regional self-government units signed the European Charter in the Republic of Croatia, three of which were municipalities, twelve cities and twelve counties. The representation of women in representative bodies of local and regional government is extremely low in the Republic of Croatia, and the society’s lack of interest in any changes aimed at greater participation of women in the political life of the state is evident. This serious state of affairs first and foremost necessitates local and regional self-governments adopting the European Charter, which provides clear guidelines for the implementation of the principles of equality of women and men at the local level, and strengthens the participation of women in the political life of the local community and beyond. Although little has been written about the European Charter in scholarly and professional papers, it is a platform which can be upgraded with a number of positive actions for raising the awareness of the local public, with a view to a more effective implementation of the principle of gender
{"title":"THE EUROPEAN CHARTER FOR EQUALITY OF WOMEN AND MEN IN LOCAL LIFE AS A TOOL FOR INCREASING THE REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN IN THE REPRESENTATIVE BODIES OF LOCAL AND REGIONAL SELF-GOVERNMENT","authors":"Sanda Pašuld","doi":"10.25234/ECLIC/9010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25234/ECLIC/9010","url":null,"abstract":"The European Charter for Equality of Women and Men in Local Life (2006) was first presented at the 6th Council of Europe’s European Ministerial Conference and at the meeting of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality of the European Parliament in 2006 as an extension of the “Cities for Equality” initiative of the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR). Adoption and active application of the principles and rules of the above-mentioned European Charter are the foundation of the political and social life at a local level. Furthermore, they are of utmost importance for promoting equality of women and encouraging their stronger political engagement in order to achieve true gender equality. By the end of 2018, only 27 local and regional self-government units signed the European Charter in the Republic of Croatia, three of which were municipalities, twelve cities and twelve counties. The representation of women in representative bodies of local and regional government is extremely low in the Republic of Croatia, and the society’s lack of interest in any changes aimed at greater participation of women in the political life of the state is evident. This serious state of affairs first and foremost necessitates local and regional self-governments adopting the European Charter, which provides clear guidelines for the implementation of the principles of equality of women and men at the local level, and strengthens the participation of women in the political life of the local community and beyond. Although little has been written about the European Charter in scholarly and professional papers, it is a platform which can be upgraded with a number of positive actions for raising the awareness of the local public, with a view to a more effective implementation of the principle of gender","PeriodicalId":246552,"journal":{"name":"EU AND MEMBER STATES – LEGAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128378279","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Contracts on support for life and contracts on support until death are two very similar contracts that are concluded between a provider of support and a recipient of support. Its purpose is to procure support to a person that needs it, until his/her death. The provider of support will, according to the contract that was concluded, receive his/her payment either right after the drafting of a contract or after the receiver of support dies. The payment will be comprised of a part or of whole of recipient’s property. The first part of this paper will deal with these contracts in general. Since contracts on support for life and support until death are somewhat controversial due to certain problems that are related to them, the second part of that paper will outline these issues. First, it will deal with the fact that the heirs of recipient of support will not inherit the property that will be received by the provider of support, since that property is not inheritable. Therefore, this contract is sometimes concluded with the sole purpose of bypassing forced heirs and transferring recipient’s property to those he/she wants to inherit it. For that reason, forced heirs will often try to annul these contracts, even if contractual parties did not try to bypass them unlawfully. The second problem is connected to the fact that senior citizens, usually due to their lack of legal knowledge, are not aware of all of the rights they have according to these contracts. Because of that, they will sometimes end up without the support they expected but also without the property that was meant to be a remuneration for that support. Even if some of them had the right to seek legal help, due to their advancing age, they might not have enough time to wait for a court to reach its decision. This paper will also explore whether these types of contracts exist in other countries in the EU and how are they different from contracts on support for life and support until death in Croatia.
{"title":"CERTAIN ISSUES CONCERNING CONTRACTS ON SUPPORT FOR LIFE AND CONTRACTS ON SUPPORT UNTIL DEATH","authors":"Dubravka Klasiček, Sanja Šimleša Vučemilović","doi":"10.25234/ECLIC/9030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25234/ECLIC/9030","url":null,"abstract":"Contracts on support for life and contracts on support until death are two very similar contracts that are concluded between a provider of support and a recipient of support. Its purpose is to procure support to a person that needs it, until his/her death. The provider of support will, according to the contract that was concluded, receive his/her payment either right after the drafting of a contract or after the receiver of support dies. The payment will be comprised of a part or of whole of recipient’s property. The first part of this paper will deal with these contracts in general. Since contracts on support for life and support until death are somewhat controversial due to certain problems that are related to them, the second part of that paper will outline these issues. First, it will deal with the fact that the heirs of recipient of support will not inherit the property that will be received by the provider of support, since that property is not inheritable. Therefore, this contract is sometimes concluded with the sole purpose of bypassing forced heirs and transferring recipient’s property to those he/she wants to inherit it. For that reason, forced heirs will often try to annul these contracts, even if contractual parties did not try to bypass them unlawfully. The second problem is connected to the fact that senior citizens, usually due to their lack of legal knowledge, are not aware of all of the rights they have according to these contracts. Because of that, they will sometimes end up without the support they expected but also without the property that was meant to be a remuneration for that support. Even if some of them had the right to seek legal help, due to their advancing age, they might not have enough time to wait for a court to reach its decision. This paper will also explore whether these types of contracts exist in other countries in the EU and how are they different from contracts on support for life and support until death in Croatia.","PeriodicalId":246552,"journal":{"name":"EU AND MEMBER STATES – LEGAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132203389","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The recent initiative of the European Commission (hereinafter: EC) to empower consumer organisations to seek compensation on behalf of a group of consumers that have been harmed by an illegal commercial practice by way of introducing a Proposal of a Directive on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers and repealing the Injunctions Directive 2009/22/EC (hereinafter: the Directive Proposal), if successful, should mark a new era of collective redress at EU level. In the light of these developments, the paper will first present the background of the Proposal, the present state of EU collective redress mechanisms. It will focus on current issues, such as cross-border collective redress litigation in the context of Brussels I (Recast) Regulation. Namely, after the ‘Dieselgate’ scandal providing for efficient cross-border collective redress mechanisms at EU level has been recognized as one of the main regulatory challenges. Although at this point the outcome of the EC’s initiative is uncertain, the central part of the paper will evaluate the crucial aspects of the Proposal. The conclusion will address key findings and emphasize possible effects of the proposed changes on the future redress opportunities for EU consumers.
{"title":"COLLECTIVE REDRESS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION","authors":"P. Poretti","doi":"10.25234/ECLIC/9006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25234/ECLIC/9006","url":null,"abstract":"The recent initiative of the European Commission (hereinafter: EC) to empower consumer organisations to seek compensation on behalf of a group of consumers that have been harmed by an illegal commercial practice by way of introducing a Proposal of a Directive on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers and repealing the Injunctions Directive 2009/22/EC (hereinafter: the Directive Proposal), if successful, should mark a new era of collective redress at EU level. In the light of these developments, the paper will first present the background of the Proposal, the present state of EU collective redress mechanisms. It will focus on current issues, such as cross-border collective redress litigation in the context of Brussels I (Recast) Regulation. Namely, after the ‘Dieselgate’ scandal providing for efficient cross-border collective redress mechanisms at EU level has been recognized as one of the main regulatory challenges. Although at this point the outcome of the EC’s initiative is uncertain, the central part of the paper will evaluate the crucial aspects of the Proposal. The conclusion will address key findings and emphasize possible effects of the proposed changes on the future redress opportunities for EU consumers.","PeriodicalId":246552,"journal":{"name":"EU AND MEMBER STATES – LEGAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134177902","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：