3. Subject matter

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Bently ◽  
B. Sherman ◽  
D. Gangjee ◽  
P. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Dramatic Works ◽  
The Third ◽  
European Court ◽  
Musical Works ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Exhaustive List

This chapter is concerned with the subject matter, or types of creation, protected by copyright law as stipulated by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Eight categories of work are examined: literary works, dramatic works, musical works, artistic works, films, sound recordings, broadcasts, and published editions (or typographical works). The chapter considers the definitions of these categories of work in the case law and through the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice. It also discusses three important issues. First, that legal categories do not necessarily correspond to the objects usually associated with copyright law. Second, that all types of subject matter that are protected by copyright are referred to as ‘works’. The third issue, and the most problematic, is whether the list of works must be treated as an exhaustive list.

scholarly journals Vidaus pirkimai kaip viešojo pirkimo sutarties išimtis

Teisė ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 71 ◽  
pp. 53-69
Author(s):  
Deividas Soloveičikas
Keyword(s):  
European Community ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Substantive Law

Ši publikacija skiriama pozityviosios viešųjų pirkimų teisės nereguliuojamai temai – vidaus sandorių iš­imčiai. Straipsnyje siekiama pateikti vidaus sandorių išimties koncepcijos analizę, Europos Teisingumo Teismo jurisprudenciją šioje srityje, taip pat ištirti, kokios yra praktinės vidaus sandorių sudarymo Lietu­voje ir Europos Sąjungoje galimybės ir prielaidos. This article is dedicated to the analysis of the subject that is not regulated by the substantive law – in-house procurement. The author seeks to examine the whole concept of the in-house procurement as well as the case-law of the European Court of Justice related to the mentioned field. Besides, it is the aim of this publication to investigate the pragmatic possibilities of the in-house procurement in Lithuanian jurisdiction as well as within the European Community dimension.

La confianza legítima en la recuperación de ayudas de Estado en el caso de las «vacaciones fiscales vascas»

2014 ◽  
pp. 2761-2795
Author(s):  
Susana SERRANO GAZTELUURRUTIA
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Substantive Issue ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Regulatory Capacity ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Tax Holidays ◽  
Over Time

LABURPENA: Lanak zergen arloko foru pizgarriak jorratzen ditu, «opor fiskalak» izenez (oker) izendatzen ditugunak, alegia. Zergen arloko gaitasun arautzailea erabiliz, Arabako, Bizkaiko eta Gipuzkoako lurralde historikoek hainbat neurri fiskal hartu izan dituzte lurraldeetan enpresen sarea babesteko. Baina arazo bat eragin zuten, Estatuak «baimendu ditzakeen» diru-laguntzen kategorian sartzen direlako (Europar Batasunaren Funtzionamendu Tratatuaren 107.3 artikulua, Europako Erkidegoa Eratzeko Tratatuaren 87.3 artikuluaren arabera), hau da, Kontseiluak baimendu ditzake Batzordeak proposatuta. Baimena eskatu ez zenez, automatikoki legez kontrako laguntzatzat jo ziren (baimenik ez zegoelako; hau da, arazo formal batengatik, ez funtsaren arazo batengatik. Izan ere, Batzordeak emanak zituen baimenak antzeko neurrietarako). Horrenbestez, Estatuaren eta/edo Batzordearen errekurtsoa duten zerga arloko foruarauak, foru-arau horien aurkako Batzordearen erabakiak eta Batzordearen erabaki horiek bete ez direla egiaztatzen duten Europako epaiak izan ditugu denboran zehar, antzeko erreklamazio eta argudioekin. Europar Batasuneko Justizia Auzitegiaren 2014ko maiatzaren 13ko epaiak ad extra erabaki zuen gaiaz, eta EAEko administrazioak zigortu zituen, araua ez betetzeagatik. Auzitegi Gorenaren 2014ko ekainaren 20ko epaiak gaia ad intra ebatzi zuen, eta zalantzan jarritako neurrien onuradunek lortutako onurak itzultzea onartu zuen. RESUMEN: El tema en cuestión se sitúa en el ámbito de los incentivos forales en materia fiscal, las (mal) llamadas «vacaciones fiscales vascas». Haciendo uso de su capacidad normativa en materia tributaria, los Territorios Históricos de Álava, Bizkaia y Gipuzkoa han ido adoptando a los largo del tiempo una serie de medidas fiscales para apoyar el entramado empresarial en sus respectivos Territorios. La cuestión de fondo es que entraban en la categoría de ayudas de Estado «autorizable» (art. 107.3 TFUE, ex. 87.3 TCE), podían ser autorizadas por el Consejo a propuesta de la Comisión. Y no se solicitó esa autorización, por lo que automáticamente pasaron a ser consideradas ayudas ilegales (por falta de autorización, una cuestión meramente formal, no de fondo. De hecho, medidas aparecidas estaban siendo autorizadas por la Comisión). Por tanto, en el tiempo se han venido cruzando normas forales fiscales recurridas por el propio Estado y/o por la Comisión, Decisiones de la Comisión contra esas normas forales y sentencias europeas constatando el incumplimiento de lo señalado en esas Decisiones de la Comisión, con similares reclamaciones y argumentos. La STJUE de 13 de mayo de 2014 zanjaba la cuestión ad extra, condenando a las administraciones vascas por el incumplimiento. Y la STS de 20 de junio de 2014 parece que cierra también la cuestión ad intra, haciendo que los beneficiados con las medidas cuestionadas devuelvan los beneficios obtenidos. ABSTRACT: The subject matter is placed on the field of the foral incentives in fiscal matters, the so (badly) called “basque tax holidays”. Using their regulatory capacity in taxation, Historical Territories of Álava, Bizkaia and Gipuzkoa adopted tax measures over time in order to support the entrepreneurial fabric of their respective Territories. The substantive issue is that they were considered under the category of “allowable” aids of State (Art. 107.3 TFEU, ex 87.3 TEC), they could have been allowed by the Council on a proposal of the Commision. That authorization was not applied so they were automatically considered illegal aids (because of lacking of authorisation, a merely formal question, not substantive). Indeed, similar measures were being taken by the Commission). Thus, tax foral norms contested by the State and/or the Commission, Decisions of the Commission against those foral norms and european judgments stating the failure to comply with what was stated in those Decisions of the Commission, with similar claims and reasons have intertwined over time,. The judgment of the European Court of Justice form May 13th of 2014 settled the ad extra matter, condemning Basque administrations for the breach. And the judgment of the Supreme Court of 20th June of 2014 seems to close the ad intra issue making the beneficiaries with contested measures to return the obtained benefits.

scholarly journals Monitoring of the employee’s Internet use in the workplace in the light of selected case law of the European Court of Human Rights and Polish case law

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 63-77
Author(s):  
Karolina Mania
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Content Analysis ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Internet Use ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Research Subject ◽  
Online Activity ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Legal Methodology

This article analyses selected case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) as well as Polish case law in the subject matter specified in the title, i.e. the monitoring of Internet use by employees in the workplace. The author has selected the research subject based on the own observations on the existence of nuances and divergences in the ECHR’s case law in this field, as well as a growing importance of this matter in the context of increasing employees’ online activity at work. The study is based on such research methods as content analysis, comparative legal methodology and the formal-dogmatic approach.

Does the Injunction Gap Violate Implementers’ Fair Trial Rights Under the ECHR?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Léon E Dijkman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Past ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Federal Supreme ◽  
Validity Of A Patent

Abstract Germany is one of few jurisdictions with a bifurcated patent system, under which infringement and validity of a patent are established in separate proceedings. Because validity proceedings normally take longer to conclude, it can occur that remedies for infringement are imposed before a decision on the patent’s validity is available. This phenomenon is colloquially known as the ‘injunction gap’ and has been the subject of increasing criticism over the past years. In this article, I examine the injunction gap from the perspective of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. I find that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights interpreting this provision supports criticism of the injunction gap, because imposing infringement remedies with potentially far-reaching consequences before the validity of a patent has been established by a court of law arguably violates defendants’ right to be heard. Such reliance on the patent office’s grant decision is no longer warranted in the light of contemporary invalidation rates. I conclude that the proliferation of the injunction gap should be curbed by an approach to a stay of proceedings which is in line with the test for stays as formulated by Germany’s Federal Supreme Court. Under this test, courts should stay infringement proceedings until the Federal Patent Court or the EPO’s Board of Appeal have ruled on the validity of a patent whenever it is more likely than not that it will be invalidated.

Property and Expropriation: Two Concepts Revisited in the Light of the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 172-191
Author(s):  
Sabrina Praduroux
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
Domestic Law

Abstract In the late 1950 s René Savatier foretold that the qualification of economic value itself as property (bien) would have been the ultimate evolution of the theory of property rights. This prediction has come true with regard to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the European Court of Justice (CJEU). This paper investigates the implications of the understanding of property developed by the two European Courts on the concept of expropriation itself as well as for the principles governing expropriation law. Hence, the paper illustrates the role played by both the ECtHR and the CJEU in laying down the parameters of legitimacy for national law, including property law. Within this context, the focus falls on cases in which the Courts characterize the facts as deprivation of property requiring for compensation, even though the relevant property could not be the object of expropriation under the domestic law of the defendant State. My contribution brings new insights into the current transformation of the traditional property categories and suggests the reinterpretation of some key concepts of expropriation law.

scholarly journals Cyber Attacks, Information Attacks, and Postmodern Warfare

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jozef Valuch ◽  
Tomáš Gábriš ◽  
Ondrej Hamuľák
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Cyber Attacks ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Information Warfare ◽  
Law Of War ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract The aim of this paper is to evaluate and differentiate between the phenomena of cyberwarfare and information warfare, as manifestations of what we perceive as postmodern warfare. We describe and analyse the current examples of the use the postmodern warfare and the reactions of states and international bodies to these phenomena. The subject matter of this paper is the relationship between new types of postmodern conflicts and the law of armed conflicts (law of war). Based on ICJ case law, it is clear that under current legal rules of international law of war, cyber attacks as well as information attacks (often performed in the cyberspace as well) can only be perceived as “war” if executed in addition to classical kinetic warfare, which is often not the case. In most cases perceived “only” as a non-linear warfare (postmodern conflict), this practice nevertheless must be condemned as conduct contrary to the principles of international law and (possibly) a crime under national laws, unless this type of conduct will be recognized by the international community as a “war” proper, in its new, postmodern sense.

EL JUEZ COMPETENTE PARA CONOCER DEL PROCEDIMIENTO MONITORIO: CUESTIONES PRÁCTICAS

2010 ◽  
pp. 493-519
Author(s):  
AINHOA GUTIÉRREZ BARRENENGOA
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Critical Review ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Given

El procedimiento monitorio se concibe en la Ley 1/2000, de Enjuiciamiento Civil como un procedimiento de tutela privilegiada de determinados créditos. Sin embargo, estos postulados se contradicen con los problemas que, en la práctica forense, se han suscitado, en muchos casos, por la determinación de la competencia del órgano que debe conocer del procedimiento. En el presente estudio, se analizan las principales cuestiones que se han suscitado en relación con la determinación de la competencia objetiva y territorial en el procedimiento monitorio, con un repaso crítico de las distintas soluciones doctrinales aportadas, y una revisión de la última doctrina jurisprudencial en la materia. Prozedura monitorioa Prozedura Zibilaren 1/2000 Legeak taxutu zuen, zenbait kredituren tutoretza pribilejiatua izateko prozedura moduan. Hala eta guztiz ere, postulatu horiek ez datoz bat praktika forentsean sortu diren arazoekin; izan ere, maiz, prozedura ezagutu behar duen organoaren eskumena nork duen jakitea ez da gauza argia. Lan honetan, prozedura monitorioaren inguruan eskumen objektiboa eta lurraldekoa zehaztu beharraz sortu diren eztabaida nagusiak aztertzen dira, horri buruz agertu izan diren konponbide doktrinalen azterketa kritikoa eginez, eta gaiari buruzko azken jurisprudentzia-doktrina ere lantzen da. The payment procedure is envisaged by Act 1/2000 on the Civil Procedural Code as a procedure for a privileged guarantee of some debts. However, theses propositions conflict with the problems which arose in practice when deciding the subject-matter and territorial jurisdiction in payments procedures. By this study, main questions regarding the subject-matter and territorial jurisdiction within the payment procedure are analyzed with a critical review of the given different doctrinal solutions and a revision of the last case law doctrine on the topic.

Die Nacherfüllung aus Verkäufersicht

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Constantin Jungclaus
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Focal Points ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Specific Performance ◽  
Damage Claims ◽  
High Level

The thesis examines the question of which of the compared sales law systems is most likely to realize the (economic) interests of the seller in connection with the consumer’s claim for specific performance, which is characterized by a high level of consumer protection. In this respect, the thesis examines 7 different complexes - from the position of specific performance in the system of purchase warranty rights to the scope of specific performance owed and the objection of disproportionality. Dogmatic focal points are, for example, the problem of self-execution in the light of European Union law and the allocation of certain damage items to specific performance or to damage claims in the light of the case law of the European Court of Justice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document