Search

Este capítulo analiza los requisitos y procedimientos para la libre circulación de los documentos públicos y las transacciones judiciales entre los Estados miembros. Primero se centra en las nociones básicas, que incluyen los “documentos públicos”, la “transacciones judiciales, la “autenticidad” y los mecanismos, que son la “aceptación” y el “otorgamiento de la ejecución”. Además, comenta el número de normas procesales unificadas que son aplicables en los procedimientos relacionados con la extensión de los efectos.

Se analiza el sistema de normas de competencia judicial regulado en los Reglamentos gemelos sobre el régimen económico matrimonial o de los efectos patrimoniales de las uniones registradas con repercusiones transfronterizas, que tratan de resolver los problemas a los que se enfrentan las parejas para la administración o división de su patrimonio en situaciones de administración o de ruptura como pareja o cuando uno de ellos fallece. Estas reglas son de gran importancia para dar respuesta a cuestiones que afectan a la competencia judicial.

Crises are not a new phenomenon in the context of European integration. Additional integration steps could often only be achieved under the pressure of crises. At present, however, the EU is characterised by multiple crises, so that the integration process as a whole is sometimes being questioned. In 2015, the crisis in the eurozone had escalated to such an extent that for the first time a member state was threatened to leave the eurozone. Furthermore, the massive influx of refugees into the EU has revealed the shortcomings of the Schengen area and the common asylum policy. Finally, with the majority vote of the British in the referendum of 23 June 2016 in favour of the Brexit, the withdrawal of a member state became a reality for the first time. Even in the words of the European Commission, the EU has reached a crossroads. Against this background, the twelfth Network Europe conference included talks on the numerous challenges and future integration scenarios in Europe.

Provisional, including protective, measures are often of crucial importance in family cases and cross-border situations are no exception. Under the Brussels II bis Regulation, a Member State court may use one of the two possibilities to grant such measure. these are detailed in the chapter which focuses on Article 20 of the Regulation and its interpretation by the CJEU and national courts.

The author is analysing the structure and particular operation of the provisions determining the law applicable to individual employment contracts under the EU legislation. From the restricted party autonomy to the default conflict provisions pointing to the law of the place where the work is habitually carried out and marginalising the connection to the place of business through which the employee is engaged, the protection of the employee as the weaker party seems to be the pursued objective. However, there are other interests that may play an important a role in this context, especially when it comes to public policy and overriding mandatory provisions that by definition are not limited to protection of individual private interests but are focused on the interests of the particular state.

Intel, a US-based company, was fined by the European Commission in 2009 for abusing its dominant position at the computer processor market intended to exclude its competitor AMD from that market. The penalty amounting to €1.06bn was the largest antitrust fine in the Commission’s history at the time. As the EU General Court had rejected Intel’s appeal in 2014, the matter was brought before to EU Court of Justice. The CJEU judgment, rendered in September 2017, is controversial for at least two reasons. First is the territorial reach of the EU competition law outside the EU borders, and second relates to the treatment of exclusivity rebates. With regards to the former, for the first time the CJEU confirmed the position of the Commission and the General Court regarding the extended territorial reach of the EU anti-trust legislation. Quite the opposite, the CJEU quashed the General Court ruling as to the former, arguably rejecting the traditional per se infringement of exclusivity rebates and embracing the effects-based analysis. The doctrine is somewhat divided as to whether this judgment is a much needed clarification of the two issues or it indicates a new direction in EU competition law analysis. This paper is addressing the most important ideas in the doctrinal interpretations and related arguments, and provides critical assessment of the present state of affairs. It also raises certain points relevant to the Intel judgment, which so far have not been given sufficient attention in the case comments and scholarship.

Owing to its particular features, the market of luxury goods is a point of interest to lawyers as much as to other professions such as economists or sociologists. These features play an important role in legal regulation of the market. While the starting point is competition law, the assessment of anticompetitive conduct under Article 101 of the TFEU cannot be complete without resorting to intellectual property law policies and rules. With the rise of the importance of internet sales, novel issues have been put before the competition authorities and reviewing courts, such as legality of various types of online restrictions in the selective distribution systems. Employing a combined IP law and competition law approach to these issues, this paper offers insights and comments on EU case law, with primary focus on the recent CJEU judgment in Coty. The intricacies of the interplay among different competition law rules and exemptions is particularly evidenced in this case. However, limited by its fact-pattern, the Coty judgment may serve as a clarification about the deluxe competition law treatment only of certain online sale prohibitions within the SDSs, while there will certainly be continuing discussions and national case law developments on other internet related competition law restrictions awaiting further elucidations by the CJEU., Zbog svojih posebnih odlika, tržište luksuznih proizvoda područje je zanimanja pravnika kao i drugih stručnjaka poput ekonomista ili sociologa. Te odlike imaju ključnu ulogu u pravnom uređenju toga tržišta. Polazeći od prava tržišnog natjecanja, valja imati na umu da je analiza u okviru članka 101. UFEU-a nepotpuna nedostaje li osvrt na politike i pravila prava intelektualnog vlasništva. S porastom važnosti internetske prodaje, nova pitanja postavljaju se pred tijela nadležna za tržišno natjecanje, poput zakonitosti raznih vrsta online ograničenja u okviru sustava selektivne distribucije. Oslanjajući se na pristup koji kombinira pravo intelektualnog vlasništva i pravo tržišnog natjecanja, ovaj rad nudi uvid i komentar prakse EU-a s prvenstvenim fokusom na noviju presudu Suda EU-a u predmetu Coty. Kompleksnost interakcije među različitim pravilima i izuzetcima u pravu tržišnog natjecanja posebno je očigledna u tom predmetu. S obzirom na ograničenost presude na konkretne okolnosti, presuda u predmetu Coty može poslužiti kao razjašnjenje situacije u odnosu na de luxe inačicu prava tržišnog natjecanja samo za određene zabrane online prodaje unutar sustava selektivne distribucije, dok će se rasprava i razvoj nacionalne prakse nastaviti u očekivanju novih pojašnjenja sa Suda EU-a., Der Markt für Luxusgüter ist aufgrund seiner Besonderheiten interessant sowohl für die Juristen als auch für andere Berufe, wie Wirtschaftler und Soziologen. Die Charakteristiken der Luxusgüter spielen eine wichtige Rolle bei der rechtlichen Regulierung des Marktes. Obwohl man dabei immer vom Wettbewerbsrecht ausgeht, die Bewertung des unter Art.101 AEUV fallenden wettbewerbswidrigen Verhaltens kann nicht vorgenommen werden, ohne auf die Grundsätze und Regeln des Rechts des geistigen Eigentums zurückzugreifen. Mit dem Anstieg des Umsatzes im Online-Handel wurden Wettbewerbsbehörden und Berufungsgerichte mit neuen Fragestellungen konfrontiert, beispielsweise mit der Legalität verschiedener Restriktionen im Internet bezüglich des selektiven Vertriebssystems. Durch den kombinierten Ansatz, der das Recht des geistigen Eigentums und das Wettbewerbsrecht einbezieht, bietet dieser Beitrag eine Einsicht in und einen Kommentar der EU-Rechtsprechung, wobei man auf die Coty-Entscheidung des EuGH besonderen Wert legt. Die Probleme des Zusammenspiels von Regeln und Ausnahmen des Wettbewerbsrechts kommen im Fall Coty besonders in den Vordergrund. Wegen des beschränkten Sachverhalts kann das Coty-Urteil zur Erklärung der Deluxe Wettbewerbsrechtbehandlung nur bei manchen Online-Verkaufsverboten im Rahmen des selektiven Vertriebssystems dienen. Es wird sicherlich weitere Diskussionen und nationale Rechtsprechungen bezüglich anderer wettbewerbsrechtbezogenen Restriktionen im Internet geben, die der EuGH erläutern wird., In ragione delle sue forme particolari, il mercato dei prodotti di lusso è un campo di interesse per i giuristi come per altri esperti, quali gli economisti ed i sociologi. Tali specificità giocano un ruolo centrale nella disciplina di tale mercato. Partendo dal diritto della concorrenza, occorre tenere in conto che l’analisi nell’ambito dell’art. 101 del TFUE è parziale, se manca una riflessione sulle politiche e le regole del diritto della proprietà intellettuale. Con il crescere dell’importanza della vendita in rete nuove questioni si presentano dinanzi agli organi competenti per la concorrenza, come quella della legalità di alcuni tipi di limitazioni online nell’ambito del sistema della distribuzione selettiva. Appoggiandosi all’approccio che combina il diritto della proprietà intellettuale ed il diritto della concorrenza, il presente lavoro offre accesso e commento della prassi dell’UE con primaria attenzione per la recente decisione della Corte di Giustizia dell’UE nel caso Coty. La complessità dell’interazione tra le diverse regole ed eccezioni nel diritto della concorrenza è particolarmente evidente in questo caso. In ragione della limitazione della decisione alle circostanze concrete, la sentenza nel caso Coty può servire a chiarire la situazione rispetto alla versione de luxe del diritto della concorrenza soltanto con riguardo a certi divieti di vendita online all’interno del sistema di distribuzione selettiva; mentre, il dibattito e lo sviluppo della prassi nazionale continueranno rispetto alle altre limitazioni relative agli acquisti in rete, rimanendo in attesa di nuovi chiarimenti della Corte dell’UE.

Neither case law nor legal theory offer a conclusive reply to the question whether an Internet intermediary providing Internet services should be considered liable under Croatian law regarding the acts of its customers which cause damage to a third party. In the absence of a specific provision on secondary liability of Internet intermediaries, the courts struggle to classify the issue as falling under the proper legal norm. The authors of this chapter argue that the right legal bases for judging secondary liability of Internet intermediaries under Croatian law are general provisions on non-contractual obligations regarding liability for one’s own acts or omissions, rather than liability for the acts of another person, and a special provision on liability for defamation. Whatever the basis for liability, a safe harbour is available to those who satisfy the respective statutory conditions. Even in situations where no liability can be established, certain remedies are available against Internet intermediaries to ensure effective protection of third parties’ rights and interests.

Il contributo si concentra su taluni aspetti del diritto di famiglia e del diritto delle successioni belga.

Il contributo si concentra su taluni aspetti del diritto di famiglia e delle successioni in Austria.

Il contributo si concentra su taluni aspetti del diritto delle successioni in Italia.

Il contributo si concentra su taluni aspetti del diritto di famiglia e delle successioni in Germania.

Fighting against sin has recently reached a new dimension: worldwide, policy makers have started to evaluate potential benefits of imposing taxes on specific behaviours and goods thought to be harmful to society, in order to discourage their enacting and consumption. In the last decades the so-called “sin taxes”, usually structured as excise taxes, have flourished in European countries as well as in the Us and have been chiefly designed to address socially undesirable activities: the ever expanding list of taxable sins now includes tobacco, fatty foods, high-sugar-content foods and beverages and many other similar products.