Some Reflections on Freedom of Establishment of Non-Profit Entities in the EU

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Lombardo
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Establishment ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
The Eu

Biopesticide Summit – Regulatory Reform of Biopesticides, Virtual Conference, 6th July 2021

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 168-170
Author(s):  
Robin Blake
Keyword(s):  
Market Share ◽  
Regulatory System ◽  
Regulatory Reform ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Media ◽  
Virtual Conference ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Chemical Pesticides ◽  
The Eu

This virtual event was held as a follow-up to the inaugural Biopesticide Summit and Exhibition at Swansea University in July 2019, and postponed in 2020 due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Sarah Harding, Communication Director at The World BioProtection Forum (WBF) & Biopesticide Summit opened the event with a few brief words of introduction before handing over to Dr Minshad Ansari, Chairman of the WBF.<br/> Dr Ansari was delighted with the more than 150 attendees already logged into the event with over 300 registered. The WBF was created in 2019 as a non-profit organization to bring together industry and academia for innovation. Dr Ansari thanked the event's supporters – AgBio, Agri Life, Bayer, Bionema, Ecolibrium Biologicals, Koppert Biological Systems, Harry Butler Institute and Sri BioAesthetics, as well as the media partners including Outlooks on Pest Management. He reiterated the need for regulatory reform due to removal of chemical pesticides, demands for organic food, limited biopesticide products registered and a lengthy and costly biopesticide registration process (5 years in EU where there are just 60 products available vs. 2.1 years in USA and where over 200 products are already available on market). The US is clearly in a much better place; in Europe, it is too expensive for SMEs and little progress has been made despite the work of the IBMA (International Biocontrol Manufacturers Association) and others. With respect to the biopesticides market share (value) by region, Europe has 27.7% market share (21.3% CAGR) and yet within UK, the CAGR is limited (unlike other European countries) – there are few products available in the market compared to chemical pesticides. The current biopesticide regulation is complex and not fit for purpose (compare 60 vs 200). Industry is facing a serious problem with pest control following the removal of some chemical pesticides, e.g.European cranefly which has caused many problems to the turf industry and has been impacted by the removal of chlorpyrifos. However, Brexit provides opportunities in the UK through government plans to "Build Back Better" by supporting Green Tech. At the EU level, the EU has committed to reducing use of pesticides by 50% (equating to 505 products) by 2030 so there are opportunities here for biopesticides to fill the market.<br/> Dr Ansari finished his introduction by restating the objectives for the meeting: for the speakers to present and debate the need for reform, their visions for a successful regulatory system, and how the WBF is working towards process reform in UK biopesticide regulation.

scholarly journals Ocena zgodności z prawem Unii Europejskiej poselskiego projektu nowelizacji ustawy o ochronie zwierząt oraz niektórych innych ustaw

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (68) ◽  
pp. 110-121
Author(s):  
Bartosz Pawłowski
Keyword(s):  
Well Being ◽  
General Interest ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Freedom Of Establishment ◽  
Member States ◽  
Animal Protection ◽  
Intended Purpose ◽  
Freedom Of Services ◽  
The Eu

In the author’s opinion, the Bill concerns issues partially regulated by the EU law and interferes with the freedom of establishment and the freedom of services guaranteed by the treaties. This does not constitute a breach of the EU law, but the introduced restrictions do not have a proper justification in terms of their proportionality to the intended purpose of the regulation. An argument that similar legal solutions are in force in other Member States was not recognized to be such a justification. According to the author, although the changes contained in the Bill may serve the overriding general interest, that is animal well-being, the compliance of the provisions with the EU law may be challenged. In the remaining scope, the Bill is compliant with the EU law, with an exception of the amendments to the Act on Animal Protection that ban slaughter without stunning in an abattoir or a slaughterhouse.

scholarly journals The European system between franciscan vocation and lutheran capitalism

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-131
Author(s):  
Catia Eliana Gentilucci
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Third Sector ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Economic Systems ◽  
Third Order ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
The Third ◽  
European System ◽  
German Model ◽  
The Eu

This paper argues that: a) economic systems are an expression of their own cultures and histories and they cannot therefore be exported to places where the local culture does not support their implementation; b) the indiscriminate  application of the German (Lutheran) model to all European countries (mainly to Mediterranean Catholic countries) has fostered economic growth in the EU at different speeds; c) Italy, the cradle of Catholic capitalism, is currently attempting to react against austerity measures —imposed by the economic constrictions of the German model— by focusing on the third sector and non-profit companies, which are an expression of Catholic capitalism originating in the Franciscan Third Order.

scholarly journals Cross-border company migration in the EU: Transfer of registered office (conversion) – the last piece of the puzzle? Case C-106/16 Polbud, EU:C:2017:804

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-107
Author(s):  
Stephan Rammeloo
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Freedom Of Establishment ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Registered Office ◽  
Legislative Measures ◽  
Proper Balance ◽  
The Eu

On 25 October 2017 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) provided for a preliminary ruling in its Polbud judgment concerning a cross-border company conversion. This conversion had to be accomplished by transferring the company’s registered office from one EU Member State to another. The Court’s ruling – first, that such a transfer, whether or not involving at the same time the company’s headquarters or economic conduct, falls within the ambit of Articles 49 and 54 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) on freedom of establishment, and, second, that legislative measures imposed on the migrating company by the Member State of origin entailing the winding-up of the company on the conclusion of a liquidation procedure are precluded – deserves approval. The Polbud judgment not only provides for clarity but also further completes the options of cross-border migration operations for companies and firms. At the same time, however, the Court’s ruling demonstrates the need to establish uniform legislative standards at the EU level, safeguarding the interests of all company stakeholders under the reign of Article 52 subsection 2 litera (g) TFEU. Both the experience with Directive 2005/56/EC on cross-border mergers and, from the late eighties of last century onwards, various initiatives having resulted in consecutive ‘pre-drafts’ for a Cross-border Company Migration Directive, may serve as guideline for further harmonisation in the field related. It is now for the Commission to take action, seeking a proper balance between the potentially diverging interests of all company stakeholders.

7. The Free Movement of Persons

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Freedom Of Establishment ◽  
Combination Problem ◽  
Union Citizenship ◽  
Questions And Answers ◽  
Free Movement Of Workers ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
Type Question ◽  
The Eu

The Concentrate Questions and Answers series offer the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each book includes typical questions, bullet-pointed answer plans and suggested answers, author commentary and illustrative diagrams and flowcharts. This chapter presents sample exam questions along with examiner’s tips, answer plans, and suggested answers about the free movement of persons in the EU. The area of law straddles three main subdivisions, comprising the free movement of workers, involving most of the secondary legislation and case law; secondly the freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services; and additionally now, Union citizenship. The chapter includes all types of questions, such as combination essay-type questions, combination problem-type questions, problem questions concerned only with the free movement of workers, an essay-type question concentrating on the free movement of professionals and questions which involve citizenship and wider free movement issues.

EU Agreements with the Ceec — Achievements and Problems with Special Refference to the Free Movement of Persons and Services and to Freedom of Establishment

2003 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-54
Author(s):  
Klaus Sieveking
Keyword(s):  
Present Status ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
Freedom Of Establishment ◽  
Free Movement Of Workers ◽  
Eastern European Countries ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
The Eu

This article focuses on two questions that have proved particularly difficult to settle in the accession negotiations between the EU and ten Central and Eastern European Countries. The article begins with a survey of the present status of EU associations and then seeks to identify the distinctive characteristics of the proposed association relations, as distinct from the existing association relations. It then analyses the two questions: the first of these involves the free movement of workers and related aspects of social legislation while the second deals with the implementation of freedom of establishment which is already possible under the EU Agreements.

scholarly journals The “Place of Effective Management” as a Connecting Factor for Companies' Tax Residence Within the EU vs. the Freedom of Establishment: The Need for a Rethinking?

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 1095-1130
Author(s):  
Luca Cerioni
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Control Test ◽  
Effective Management ◽  
Freedom Of Establishment ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Uk ◽  
And Control ◽  
Central Management ◽  
The Eu

The determination of the tax residence of companies – as a fundamental issue of (international) tax law – emerged between the end of the 19thcentury and the start of the 20thcentury. This emerged as an issue in cases where companies which were found to have their place of management, in the sense of a decision-making centre, in the United Kingdom (UK), carried out all their business activity, in terms of production and commercialization, in another country. At a time when the UK was establishing its tax system earlier than other countries, the tax courts of this country began to develop the “central management and control test” as a test for establishing companies' tax residence in these situations and to consider the companies at stake as tax residents in the UK on the ground that their decision-making centre was located there. Such decisions appeared to have been driven by an interest to prevent companies carrying out their business abroad from escaping UK taxation on their worldwide income, and thus to have been motivated by a specific anti-avoidance purpose. Nonetheless, the “central management and control” test formed the basis of the “place of effective management” test which, under the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Model for bilateral conventions against double taxation, is currently adopted as a tiebreaker rule,i.e.as a criteria for allocating the tax residence of companies in cases where both contracting

Mapping Cannabis Social Clubs in Europe

2020 ◽  
pp. 147737082094139
Author(s):  
Mafalda Pardal ◽  
Tom Decorte ◽  
Melissa Bone ◽  
Òscar Parés ◽  
Julia Johansson
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
Social Clubs ◽  
The Past ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
Item Questionnaire ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
The Eu

Cannabis Social Clubs (CSCs) are typically non-profit associations of adult cannabis users who collectively produce and distribute cannabis among themselves. Since the emergence of the model in Spain during the 1990s, other countries may have seen the appearance of CSCs (or CSC-like associations) but there is a dearth of knowledge about the phenomenon in Europe. The goals of this analysis are to: (1) map the presence of CSCs across the European Union; and (2) examine how CSCs are operating in such settings. The data included in our analysis derive from a 2018–19 survey. The 30-item questionnaire comprised questions about CSCs’ origins and relations with other stakeholders and organizations, the types of activities the CSCs developed and their views on cannabis regulation. The questionnaire was translated into all the official languages of the EU zone and sent via email to the participants. In total, 81 CSCs completed the questionnaire. Beyond Spain and Belgium, where the CSC presence has already been documented, we were able to identify CSCs in 11 other countries. The longest-running CSC in our sample was established in 1999, but most emerged in the past decade. The smallest CSC in our sample reported 6 registered members, whereas the largest counted a total of 5000 members. Most CSCs were cultivating or distributing cannabis to their members at the time of the survey, but engaged in other informative, entertainment and activist activities as well. The CSC model remains prohibited across the EU. CSC activists have thus by and large shaped the way CSCs operate, often adapting to domestic law particularities or law enforcement activities. In this article, we present and discuss the range of CSC practices from 13 different European countries, and what these represent for the consideration of the CSC model in current policy debates.

Impact of the EU Structural Funds on Financial Capacities of Non-profit Organizations

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 2200-2223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oto Potluka ◽  
Martin Spacek ◽  
Georg von Schnurbein
Keyword(s):  
Non Profit ◽  
Structural Funds ◽  
Eu Structural Funds ◽  
Non Profit Organizations ◽  
The Eu
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document