Analysis of the Legal Rules for Exploitation Windows and Commercial Practices in EU Member States and of the Importance of Exploitation Windows for New Business Practices

Author(s):  
Heritiana Ranaivoson ◽  
Sophie De Vinck ◽  
Ben Van Rompuy ◽  
Katharina Hoelck
Author(s):  
Ekkehart Reimer

In course of the financial crisis, States have proven to be strong actors. However, they have paid a high price for the demonstration of their power-skyrocketing budgetary deficits as well as an alarming increase of overall public debts. With regard to EU Member States, it is true that EU law has mitigated tendencies towards deficit-spending to a considerable degree and that these merits are due to State Aid rules (Arts. 87 et seq. EC Treaty, now Arts. 107 et seq. TFEU) rather than to the Stability and Growth Pact. Many Member States, however, regard an autonomous reduction of deficits as indispensable and take constitutional measures to restrict their annual deficits and/or overall debts. The article analyses the amendments to the German Grundgesetz as well as accompagnying legislation which have been enacted by the Bundestag and Bundesrat in July 2009 as a „Föderalismusreform II“, a major reconfiguration of the legal rules on public deficits on both the federal level and the level of the 16 Länder (states), and provides an outlook on further steps to be taken in the future.En la crisis financiera los Estados se han mostrado como agentes poderosos. Ahora bien, han pagado un precio muy elevado por esta demostración de su capacidad de acción: un aumento vertiginoso de su nuevo endeudamiento neto y un incremento preocupante de la deuda acumulada. Dentro de la Unión Europea, si bien el Derecho de la Unión ha suavizado en considerable medida la tendencia de los Estados a financiarse mediante déficit, esto se ha debido más a una inteligente aplicación de las normas en materia de ayudas estatales [arts. 87 y 88 del Tratado de la Comunidad Europea (antigua versión), actualmente arts. 107 y 108 del Tratado de Funcionamiento de la Unión Europea] y menos al Pacto de Estabilidad y Crecimiento. No obstante, muchos Estados miembros consideran a la vez indispensable una reducción autónoma del déficit, y están adoptando medidas constitucionales para limitar su nuevo endeudamiento anual y/o su deuda acumulada. El presente trabajo analiza la reforma de la Ley Fundamental alemana y la legislación de acompañamiento que aprobaron el Bundestag y el Bundesrat en julio de 2009 en el marco de la segunda reforma del federalismo (Föderalismusreform II), una reordenación fundamental de la normativa en materia de déficit público, tanto en el ámbito federal como de los dieciséis Estados Federados (Länder), y aporta una visión prospectiva de qué reformas adicionales son necesarias.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 604-629 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolf-Georg RINGE ◽  
Christopher RUOF

New financial technology holds the promise of innovation and competition, challenging established products and services and frequently improving market processes. However, regulation of these new services faces a double challenge: to keep pace with innovation and facilitate new market entries while at the same time understanding and managing the regulatory risks that are involved.At this stage, the existing EU regulatory framework is of little help: the bulk of the present body of financial regulation stems from a different time, with different regulatory problems in mind. EU regulation is also very slow to change and to adapt. Therefore, this paper proposes a regulatory “sandbox” – an experimentation space – as a step towards a regulatory environment where such new business models can thrive. A sandbox would allow market participants to test fintech services in the real market, with real consumers, but under the close scrutiny of the supervisor. The benefit of such an approach is that it fuels the development of new business practices and reduces the “time to market” cycle of financial innovation, while simultaneously safeguarding consumer protection. At the same time, a sandbox allows for mutual learning in a technical field which is sometimes poorly understood, both for firms and for the regulator. This would help to reduce the prevalent regulatory uncertainty for all market participants.In the particular EU legal framework with various layers of legal instruments, the implementation of such a sandbox is not straightforward. In this paper, we propose a “guided sandbox”, operated by the EU Member States, but with endorsement, support, and monitoring by EU institutions. This innovative approach would be somewhat uncharted territory for the EU, and thereby also contribute to the future development of EU financial market governance as a whole.


2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-500 ◽  
Author(s):  
Macario Rodríguez-Entrena ◽  
Melania Salazar-Ordóñez

European Union (EU) coexistence policy is based on the principle of subsidiarity, which implies a multilevel governance framework. Different legislative approaches have been developed in EU Member States. These legal rules are oriented to both preventing on-farm adventitious admixture (ex-ante regulations) and reducing potential economic consequences (ex-post liability). So coexistence deals with a subject of negative externalities involving an issue of property-right allocation between farmers. Considering the impacts that coexistence policy has on GM (genetically modified) crop adoption rates and the generation of trade distortions, potential effects of the EU coexistence framework are reviewed from a theoretical property-right allocation view. Derived from the analysis, property-right allocation is focused on non-GM farmers according to EU regulation enforcement, which tends to rigid coexistence measures. Nonetheless, the multilevel EU framework has led Member States to pursue their aims: trade interests and social legitimation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Andrew Betlehn

<p>Technological advancement has created new business practices such as utilizing electronic contracts. Utilization of electronic contracts, especially in international transactions, has pushed countries around the world to impose new regulations defining the legalities of electronic instruments. Challenges arise considering the global and borderless nature of electronic transactions faced with regulations of different countries that are not in sync with each other. This is especially apparent in Member States of the ASEAN Economic Community. This paper attempts to discover the ideal legal framework for electronic contracts in the ASEAN Economic Community. Based on the research and analysis, it has been found that there is a need for a harmonized legal framework regarding electronic commerce that can be adopted unaltered by Member States of the ASEAN Economic Community, which could be drafted by the ASEAN as an inter-governmental organization.</p>


Author(s):  
Deirdre Ahern

AbstractWith transformative evolution involving crypto-assets, machine learning applications and data-driven finance models, complex regulatory and policy issues are emerging. Inadequate frameworks in FinTech markets create regulatory friction and regulatory fragmentation. These limitations continue to feature when piecemeal regulatory transition occurs. The danger of EU Member States being left behind in the FinTech innovation race if the regulatory landscape is cumbersome or incomplete for new business models is real. Regulatory lag and regulatory friction also act as a ‘disenabler’ for ease of cross-border FinTech trade in the EU. This article critically engages with the manner in which the regulatory sandbox has rapidly gained critical mass in Member States as a valuable adaptive measure supporting a route to market for FinTech entrepreneurs. Against the backdrop of the European Commission’s Digital Finance Strategy, the article further advances scholarship on FinTech in the EU by probing the EU’s resulting regulatory dilemma, undertaking a systematic evaluation of the continuum of complex policy options available to the European Union in response to the spreading regulatory sandbox phenomenon.


2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (7) ◽  
pp. 27-44
Author(s):  
Ewa Kulesza

The right to the protection of personal data, which is part of the right to privacy, is a fundamental human right. Thus, its guarantees were included in the high-level regulations of the European Union as well as the legal norms of the EU Member States. The first Polish law regulating the protection of personal data was adopted in 1997 as the implementation of EU Directive 95/46. The law imposed a number of obligations on public and private entities which process personal data in order to protect the rights of data subjects and, in particular, to guarantee them the ability to control the correctness of processing of their personal data. Therefore, the law obliged data controllers to process data only on the basis of the premises indicated in the legislation, to adequately secure data, and to comply with the disclosure obligation concerning data subjects, including their right to correct false or outdated data or to request removal of data processed in violation of the law. However, as complaints directed by citizens to the supervisory body—the Inspector General for Personal Data Protection—showed, personal data controllers, especially those operating in the private sector, did not comply with the law, acting in a manner that violated their customers’ rights. In the hitherto existing unfair business practices of entrepreneurs, the violations of the data protection provisions that were the most burdensome for customers were related to preventing them from exercising their rights, including the right to control the processing of data, as well as the failure to provide the controller’s business address, which made it impossible for subjects whose data were used in violation of the law or for the inspecting authorities to contact the company, a lack of data security and a failure to follow the procedures required by law, the failure to secure documents containing personal data or their abandonment, a lack of updating customer data, the use of unverified data sets and sending marketing offers to deceased people or incorrect target recipients, and excessive amounts of data requested by controllers. The violations of the rights of data subjects recorded in Poland and other EU Member States—among other arguments—provided inspiration for the preparation of a new legal act in the form of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (which entered into force on 25 May 2018). The extension of the rights of people whose data are processed was combined in the GDPR with the introduction of new legal instruments disciplining data controllers. Instruments in the form of administrative fines and the strongly emphasised possibility to demand compensation for a violation of the right to data protection were directed in particular against economic entities violating the law.


Author(s):  
T. S. Zaplatina

This article is devouted to the analises of legal approaches to the regulation of artifi cial intelligence in the European Union and its member states. The European Union, Austria, France and Germany legal regulation analysis shows that at that moment there is no single approach regarding the legal regulation of artifi cial intelligence and robots. So, current legal rules are not fully applicable in the scope of contractual liability, that creates need for the adoption of new eff ective standards meeting modern technological achievements and innovations. There is important role of ethical and legal issues associating with risks in the fi eld of human rights and fundamental freedoms, issues developing ethical principles in artifi cial intelligence algorithms. The single legal European approach will help to avoid fragmentation of the EU Member States legislation and will expand the possibilities of mutual recognition in the cross-border use of robots and robotic systems.


2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-87
Author(s):  
Beti Godnič ◽  
Robert Vodopivec

Abstract In the article the authors analyse the integration processes in the European Union and consequences of this processes, after the new EU Member States joined the EU in the year 2004 and 2007. The authors analyse the European market of logistics services and focus on the issue of the irregular effects that occur in the year 2004 and 2007. The authors wanted to examine if there are differences in the old EU-15 Member States and the new EU Member States in changed micro and macro environment in the European market of logistics services. The authors wanted to determine how the old EU-15 Member States and the new EU Member States adapt to the new business environment and other changes in the micro and macro environment in the European market of logistics services. The authors found that the development after the new EU Member States joined the EU in the year 2004 and 2007 in the EU-15 member states and in the new EU Member States is different. The EU has to adopt the harmonised economic policy which will solve the North-South problem and cross-state cultural consensus and find a way to operate systemically in global environment.


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Franca Angela Buelow

To arrive at a good status of all European water bodies is the main objective of the European Union (EU) Water Framework Directive (WFD). Since its adoption in 2000, the policy has fundamentally changed the institutional, procedural and organizational structures of Member States' water management, leading to an Europeanization of national legislation and decision-making structures. The case of WFD implementation in Schleswig-Holstein is an example of the policy's highly innovative governance architecture that unfortunately is not (yet) able to take that one last hurdle: to improve water quality and establish a good water status across EU Member States by 2015 or 2027.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document