The impact of securities regulation in the European Union on M&A: Does it compensate to go beyond borders?

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of the transposition of the EU directive that regulates M&As on cross-border deals. Acquirers of targets located in the European Union (EU) must comply not only with takeover rules set individually by member states but also with European Council Directives. The most significant of these Directives in the context of mergers and acquisitions (M&As) is the Takeover Bids Directive (TBD). The intent of the Directive is to ensure equal treatment for all companies launching takeover bids or that are subject to a change in control, providing minimum harmonization rules in view of creating a transparent environment for cross-border takeovers. Design/methodology/approach This study uses the event-study and difference-in-differences approaches. Findings Using a sample of 2,129 M&As conducted between 2000 and 2015, this paper finds positive acquisition synergy for acquirers targeting firms from countries with stronger investor protection rules compared to the average of the EU, but no evidence regarding cross-border deals. The results support the prediction that regulation makes countries diverge more depending on their ex ante level of investor protection. Originality/value This study examines the impact of the enactment of the TBD on announcement returns of M&As in the EU.

Welfare Mediators as Game Changers? Deconstructing Power Asymmetries Between EU Migrants and Welfare Administrators

Under EU law, EU citizens constitute a particular group of immigrants, as they can, mostly without restrictions, move to, and reside in, another EU country, enjoying equal treatment with nationals in terms of accessing employment and social rights. However, as this article demonstrates, the settlement of EU citizens in another member state does not happen without hurdles. Through a careful in‐depth study of access to transnational welfare rights in practice, we analyse knowledge and resulting power asymmetries impacting interactions between certain EU migrant claimants and street‐level bureaucrats in Austrian and German social administrations. Following an inductive approach, based on an extensive data set of 144 qualitative interviews, this article first unpacks the different types of knowledge asymmetries relating to administrative procedures, formal social entitlements and the German language. We then analyse how such knowledge asymmetries may open space for welfare mediation in order to compensate for a lack of German language skills and to clarify misunderstandings about legal entitlements and obligations embedded in the claims system. Finally, our contribution offers a typology of welfare mediators and their characteristics, as not all types can be regarded as equally effective in reshaping power asymmetries. Overall, this article allows for insights into how welfare mediators, as more or less institutionalised opportunity structures, can shift policy outcomes in unexpected ways, enabling access to social benefits and services for otherwise excluded EU migrant citizens working, or seeking to work, in another EU member state.

Fissures in EU Citizenship

This book argues that core concepts in EU citizenship law are riddled with latent fissures traceable back to the earliest case law on free movement of persons, and that later developments simply compounded such defects. By looking at these defects, not only could Brexit have been predicted, but it could also have been foreseen that unchecked problems with EU citizenship would potentially lead to its eventual dismantling during an era of widespread populism and considerable challenges to further integration. Using a critical constructivist approach, the author painstakingly outlines the 'temple' of citizenship from its foundations upwards, and offers a deconstruction of concepts such as 'worker', the role of non-economic actors, the principle of equal treatment, and utterances of citizenship. In identifying inherent fissures in the concept of solidarity and post national identification, this book poses critical questions and argues that we need to reconstruct EU citizenship from the bottom up.

EQUAL RIGHTS OF WORKING SPOUSES AND OTHER PERSONS WHO FULFIL FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES AND THE MAINTENANCE OF THE BALANCE BETWEEN WORK AND FAMILY LIFE

The improvement in the quality of life of an employed person and his/her sustainable development are the basis of the concept of work-life balance. In this concept, the professional and private spheres are of equal importance and should complement and strengthen each other. The objective of ILO Convention 156 and ILO recommendation 165 related to it, is to ensure equal treatment and equal opportunities in the scope of employment and professional activity of working women and men who fulfill family responsibilities. Art. 33 section 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European pillar of social rights provides accordingly. The permanence of marriage and equal rights of spouses are among the basic principles of Polish family law. Equal rights of women and men in the context of equal rights of persons carrying out parental and care responsibilities are a fundamental constitutional principle in our country. Therefore, new legal regulations at the EU and national level concerning the balance between the professional and private life of parents and guardians are necessary. It should be de lege ferenda called for the inclusion of the concept of balance between professional and private life of working people who perform parental and guardian functions in labor law and family and guardianship law in a wider scope. It seems that nowadays the most important problem is the introduction of legal solutions in the field of work exemptions, employee holidays and more flexible working hours for employees who have care responsibilities towards the elderly or chronically ill (parents, parents-in-law, siblings) to the Labor Code

Institutional and Legal Mechanisms for Protection of the Rights of Ukrainian Minority in the Warmia and Mazury Region

The research aims at presenting and exploring the mechanisms for protection of the rights of national minorities (based on the example of Ukrainian minority) in the Warmia and Mazury Region of the Republic of Poland. The research hypothesis is based on the statement that in fact the protection of rights of national minorities at the level of the Warmia and Mazury Region could be treated as a model, and thus implemented in other regions in Poland, or even in other countries facing the problems related to the protection of national and ethnic minorities. The main research problems are addressed within the questions: how is Ukrainian minority distributed in the studied region?; What are the state and local government institutions working for national minorities in the studied region of Poland?; What activities do these institutions undertake to ensure equal treatment of national minorities and provision for their rights?; How are these activities assessed by organizations/representatives of the Ukrainian national minority? The leading research method was the institutional and legal one. The research also contained the interviewing method as well as the focus group interview. Obtained results of the study confirmed the research hypothesis. It turned out that the Warmia and Mazury Region has created an effective institutional environment for the development of national minorities, including the Ukrainian one. It was possible thanks to the activity of the only Polish Plenipotentiary of the Marshal for national minorities and also the only National and Ethnic Minorities Committee of the Regional Council in Poland.

Arbitration Hearing with Remote Participation: Necessary Innovations that Irreversibly Change Traditions

The COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic forced most arbitration centers in countries with a wide variety of legal traditions to switch to mass arbitration hearings in video conferencing mode in the spring of 2020. It turned out that hearings with remote participation of representatives of the parties, and sometimes arbitrators, have a number of advantages compared to regular hearings. A number of new possibilities arises and thus compensates the loss of certain possibilities adherent in physical presence of arbitration participants at hearings. The authors argue that most of the obstacles and shortcomings of the new format as a whole can be overcome with modern regulatory development, law enforcement, software, and hardware tools. The paper examines, among other things, the experience of the Arbitration Center at the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, whose software and hardware complex and previously modernized arbitration rules made it possible to safely switch to a new mode of operation. New documents of international origin in this area are also being considered, indicating the need to ensure a balance between the effectiveness of arbitration proceedings on the one hand and the right of the parties to due process and fair treatment on the other.The authors conclude that there will not be a complete return to the previous practice with the end of the pandemic. However, a certain part of the meetings, taking into account the circumstances of the disputes, will return offline, the popularity of various mixed (hybrid) options will increase, which will not be difficult to put into practice due to the flexibility of the arbitration procedure. The flexibility of arbitration and the delegation to arbitrators of a number of issues related to the organization and conduct of arbitration proceedings, which require that opinions of the parties should be requested and considered in order to solve the dispute, makes it possible to ensure the optimal “format” of the arbitration procedure given the specific circumstances of the dispute. This procedure provides its participants, among other things, a reasonable and sufficient opportunity to present their positions, ensuring equal treatment of the parties and adversarial while ensuring the real effectiveness of the arbitration procedure, which allows in modern conditions to properly implement the principles on which arbitration is based.

Economic Dependence and Parental Protection: A Comparative Analysis of Austrian and Slovenian Labour and Social Security Rights of Economically Dependent Self-Employed Parents

Taking parental protection rights as a clear-cut field of study, this article argues that there are significant protection gaps in the social rights and employment protection of the economically dependent self-employed. Their exclusion from employment protection can be justified as far as the protective purpose is tied to the personal subordination of the employee relationship. However, certain vulnerabilities arise not from personal, but from economic dependency, whereas the changing labour market and the growing area of precarious self-employment must be considered. Comparing the rights of working parents in Slovenia and Austria, we distinguish between employees and economically dependent self-employed persons in this specific area and point to challenges for the wider field of labour and social rights. The purposes of parental protection rights are diverse; they include health protection, guarantee social security and serve equal treatment purposes. Therefore, they represent an ideal field to discuss arguments regarding the inclusion or exclusion of the economically dependent self-employed into different protective frameworks.

People's Sovereignty in the System Presidential Threshold in the Perspective Siyasah Al-Syar’iyyah

ABSTRACTUU no. 7/2017 concerning General Elections, is the legal protection for the implementation of the 2019 General Election using the system presidential threshold. The problem is, this is seen as castration of individual rights where power is in the hands of the people. Equal treatment before the law and politics in the context of nominating the President and Vice President is limited to parties that are part of and meet the threshold in the 2014 general election. This research found that the implementation of the system Presidential Threshold in Indonesia was an embodiment of the people's sovereignty itself. Where the individual directly determines the leader, and in making the requirements to become a leader, and the DPR is a representation of the people. This eliminates concerns in the community when the system will be ratified Presidential Threshold in Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning Elections so that the people's sovereignty in the threshold system is by siyasah syar’iyyah where ahlul halli wa al-‘aqdi can determine candidate leaders and Bai’ah is a form of the general election in determining the leader.Keywords: People’s Sovereignty, Presidential Threshold, Siyasah al-Syar’iyyah.\ABSTRAKUU No. 7 /2017 tentang Pemilihan Umum dasar hukum dilaksanakannya Pilkada Umum Tahun 2019 dengan menggunakan system presidential threshold. Persoalannya adalah, hal ini dipandang sebagai pengebirian hak-hak individu dimana kekuasaan berada di tangan rakyat. Perlakuan yang setara di depan hukum dan politik dalam rangka mencalonkan Presiden dan Wakil Presiden menjadi terbatas hanya pada partai yang menjadi bagian dan mencukupi -threshold di pemilihan umum 2014. Riset ini menjumpai bahwa pelaksanaan sistem Presidential Threshold di Indonesia merupakan perwujudan dari kedaulatan rakyat itu sendiri. Di mana individu secara langsung menentukan pemimpin, dan dalam pembuatan persyaratan untuk menjadi pemimpin, yang mana DPR adalah representasi dari rakyat. Hal ini menghapuskan kekhawatiran di masyarakat ketika akan disahkannya sistem Presidential Threshold dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 2017 tentang Pemilu, sehingga kedaulatan rakyat dalam sistem ambang batas sudah sesuai dengan siyasah syar’iyyah dimana ahlul halli wa al-‘aqdi memiliki kapasitas untuk menentukan calon permimpin dan Bai’ah adalah bentuk dari pemilihan umum dalam menentukan pemimpin.Kata Kunci: Kedaulatan Rakyat, Presidential Threshold, Siyasah Syar’iyyah.

Discounting and Intergenerational Ethics

The question of social discounting is central in intertemporal cost-benefit analysis that often shapes economists’ recommendations regarding climate policy. The practice of discounting has been the object of heated debates among economists and philosophers, revolving around the issue of intergenerational ethics. In this chapter, we review the different arguments for and against specific values of social discounting. We show that there are actually two different ethical issues at stake: 1) the question of impartiality (or equal treatment of all generations); 2) the question of priority to the worse-off (aversion to inequality in resources, capabilities or welfare). These questions have emerged in the utilitarian approach and can be neatly separated in that case. They also have very different consequences for climate policy. We then argue that the question of social discounting is not confined to the utilitarian framework as it more generally describes the social value of income (or capability or welfare) transfers to future generations. Lastly, we discuss the many limitations of social discounting as a tool for policy analysis.