Suchergebnisse

The chapter is dedicated to the analysis of the political, economic and social situation in Croatia before and after the accession to the European Union. Opportunities both used and missed are distressed along with the continuing challenges such as the reform of judiciary and administration, economic crisis exacerbated by the ongoing epidemic and earthquakes, and joining the Schengen area and Eurozone.

As a process of raising monetary contributions from a large number of persons, crowdfunding may take many forms: from traditional benefit events and television fundraising campaigns to increasingly popular internet platform fundraising. The online environment in which the newest forms of CF emerge facilitates its unprecedented ability to cross borders and attract persons from various countries. This having been said, the same environment complicates legal assessment. The issues that inevitably arise in cross-border dealing are particularly intricate: which court decides and which law applies? At the outset, one must differentiate between various types of CF models. Furthermore, the tripartite structure of the CF model involving the specialised internet platforms adds another layer of complexity because the conflict of laws analysis demands the preliminary identification of legal relationships and their legal characterisation. Finally, there is a constant debate about whether investors may be legally characterised as consumers or not, which may significantly affect conclusions on jurisdiction and applicable law. In answering these questions, the author considers national and supranational legal instruments containing provisions on international jurisdiction and applicable law, with the focus on the EU ones. In the course of legal analysis, the interpretational principles set by the Court of Justice of the European Union will be taken into account. Since no such principle is directly related to the internet-based CF, they need to be assessed in terms of their relevancy and potential to be used as starting points in analogical reasoning. Besides drawing a clearer image about the conflict of laws issues for participants in CF, the aim of this article is also to assess the validity of some of the legal terms under which these participants join the CF process.

The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the case C-131/12 Google v AEPD and Gonzalez of May 2014 is important for several reasons. Not only because it prompts the right to be forgotten and liability of Internet search engine operators for content published by third parties, but also because it subjects Internet search engine operators to data protection legislation. These operators are characterised as data controllers, their activities as data processing activities, within the meaning of the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC, while a number of issues related to applicability of Article 7(f) thereof remain unsettled. Besides departing from the Advocate General's opinion in this case, these aspects of the judgment provoked controversy in scientific and professional circles. In this paper, authors examine reasons offered by the CJEU, in particular related to the abovementioned features of the ruling. Besides, authors focus on some other issues which seem to be insufficiently addressed in the judgment, such as the liability of Internet search engine operators and the implications on the legal scheme for Internet service providers under the E-Commerce Directive 200/31/EC. The proposition is put forward that the CJEU judgment errors in finding legal ground for Internet search engine operators' activities in Article 7(f), due to inherent lack of possibility of Internet search engine operators to conduct ex ante balancing test. As a result, the CJEU's finding about Internet search engine operators as data controllers is called into question. Inconsistencies may also be found in attempting to establish their liability, which is equally tied to the awareness of and control over the data. Therefore, more convergence is recommended with the scheme under the E- Commerce Directive.

The purpose of this paper is the analysis of the impact that the environmental law principles, proclaimed in the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union and integrated in the secondary EU law, have on the conflict of law provisions in the Rome II Regulation. This entails examination of the provisions on parties' choice of applicable law, special provision for environmental damages, and certain provisions which specifically address the public interest concerns, such as the one on taking account of rules of safety and conduct and the one on applying the forum overriding mandatory rules. The scrutiny focuses on the issue of the extent to which the conflict of law provisions presently in force serve as a mechanism additional to the substantive and procedural rules in implementing the EU environmental policy.

Internationally Mandatory Rules represent a private international law method that has acquired a certain degree of recognition in case law, legal codifications and scholarship. Yet, there seems to be insufficient clarity regarding their conceptual features. This article looks into the two basic conditions under which a rule may be characterised as being internationally mandatory, particularly within the framework of the European Union private international law: the interest criterion and the overriding criterion. It discusses the development and analysis the wording of the provisions contained in the Rome Convention and the proposal for its conversion into the Rome I Regulation. It propounds that not only the "interventionist" rules, but also the combined "interventionist- protective" rules may be classified as internationally mandatory.

Being an emerging alternative financing model which relies upon raising money from a large number of sources, crowdfunding may take many forms. They range from crowd sponsoring, based on collecting funds from donators in return for either gratification of a project owner, or a symbolic reward such as the possibility of appearing in a crowdfunded movie, to crowd investing and crowd lending which enable investors and lenders to gain financial profit. An important role in crowdfunding is played by various internet platforms which enable the project owners to advertise their project and allow potential contributors to inform themselves on the project and contribute money. While the advantage of this financing model is unquestionable due to the fact that a number of projects in Europe would not have a necessary source of financing without it, there are a number of issues connected to it. As a consequence of the various existing financing models which are further evolving and different parties who take part in crowdfunding, the legal framework for crowdfunding in the European Union and its Member States is not clear at this stage. One of the distinct concerns is the applicability of the EU consumer protection acquis, particularly to contracts concluded at a distance, unfair contract terms, unfair commercial practices and consumer credit. The aim of this paper is to identify the crowdfunding models which may be subject to mentioned consumer protection legislation. While assumption that some contributors could be characterised as consumers appears to be rather straightforward, such characterisation in regard to project owners is unexpected. Additional controversy is related to whether in crowd investing model, investors may enjoy protection as consumers. The analysis of legal sources will include relevant EU directives and where necessary comparative outline of Member States laws through which the directives were implemented into national legislation.

The Brussels I bis Regulation (1215/2012), sequel to the Brussels I Regulation (44/2000), contains rules on international jurisdiction of the EU Member States' courts in cross-border cases. Although the EU provision on jurisdiction for non-contractual cases follows the same principle as the respective Croatian national provision, its interpretation goes much beyond its actual wording. There is a growing number of cases related to violation of rights over the Internet, and in particular with the manner in which the jurisdictional provision based on a traditional territorial connection might be adjusted to the online environment. In its rulings, the CJEU regularly applies the purposive interpretation rather than strictly literal one, thus allowing flexibility in reading the existing provisions. In doing so, the CJEU necessarily takes account of the underlying economic and social as well as private interests. The purpose of this paper is to scrutinize the operation of the special jurisdictional provision for torts in Internet defamation cases and assess its socio-economic implications over the stakeholders. Application of those provisions poses challenges not only to legal practitioners, but also to media industry and individuals in Croatia.

In situations in which human rights abuses are related to corporate activities abroad the issue of international jurisdiction arises whenever the victim contemplates the judicial redress. The problem lays in the means to bring the corporation to justice where human rights abuses were committed in the context of business activity by a company established abroad, usually in a less developed country, and belonging to a transnational corporation originating from a developed country. While, for variety of reasons, the redress in the victim's home country may be ineffective, the access the justice in a developed country might not be as easy as desirable. The authors explore the options for establishing jurisdiction over such cases before Croatian courts focusing primarily on domestic provisions regarding jurisdiction by attraction and adhesive jurisdiction related to criminal proceedings.

This paper is written as the Croatian National Report for the Intermediary Conference of the International Academy of Comparative Law on the topic of the conflict of laws conventions and their reception in national legal systems. It is beyond doubt that international unification efforts often inspire national legislators and vice versa. The same is true for the field of private international law. One of the certainly most influential set of international instruments is the body of conventions concluded under the auspices of the Hague Conference on Private International Law. Hence, the analysis here focuses on the Hague conventions, in particular those to which the Republic of Croatia is a party. On the other hand, the CIDIP conventions, also at the attention of the General Report, are per se not relevant to Croatia ; therefore they are not addressed in this Report. At the outset, this Report offers information on the status of the individual Hague conventions in the Republic of Croatia, as well as discusses the Croatian participation at the sessions organised by the Hague Conference. The next chapter deals with the interrelation at the substantive level between the conflicts conventions and domestic conflicts law, and attempts to identify the patterns in which the Hague conventions influence Croatian domestic conflicts rules. Further scrutinized is the issue of potential divergences between conflicts conventions and domestic law which, if they arise, are ordinarily resolved by virtue of the hierarchical order of legal instruments in the legal system in question. The final chapter is dedicated to a detailed analysis of the ways in which the Hague conventions are implemented in Croatia, as well as the ways in which they are applied in Croatian case law, with specific emphasis put on the child abduction cases.

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.

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 antitrust 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.

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 ...

The reality of the administration of justice has changed over the last few decades through massive intervention of international and supranational actors within national judicial systems. Though state-centrism has progressively been eroded, the national State remains the "master of the game" in adjudication. A proper application of European private international law is the cornerstone of civil justice. It goes without saying that judicial training (in a wider sense, including the training of judges, practitioners, and other stakeholders) is important in order to achieve an adequate and unified application of European private international family and succession law. The EUFams II findings further highlight that education and training of professionals in this area of law are of paramount importance when it comes to fostering predictability and legal certainty. This contribution commences by explaining EU policy on judicial training and presenting the main training facilities and their features. The contribution then turns to methodological aspects of the transfer of knowledge in legal discourse. The second part of the contribution presents the EUFams II project results relevant to judicial training. It seeks to establish a direct link with EU justice policy objectives, methodologies, performance of judicial training at European training centers and national training academies that serve the system of justice in European family and succession law. Quantitative and qualitative analyses lead to conclusions and proposals in respect of future training policy and its desired performance in cross-border family and succession matters. Several methodological approaches are combined and presented in the contribution. The attempt to conceptualize pro futuro the judicial and legal professionals' training in European family and succession law relies on all case law and legal instruments researched within the EUFams II Project, different questionnaires, published studies, evaluations and communications, and various scholarly ...

This Handbook is elaborated within the project "Improving the knowledge on new EU regulations of the members of the national Judicial networks in civil and commercial matters in the MS of the EU", Civil Justice Programme 2010. The Handbook is divided into two parts: Part I The Law Applicable to Contractual and Non-Contractual Obligations and Obtaining the Information on Foreign Law 1. Introduction 2. Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Regulation Rome I) 3. Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the law applicable to noncontractual obligations (Regulation Rome II) 4. Obtaining the content of foreign law Part II Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters 5. The Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Regulation Brussel I) and aspects related to the Brussel Convention on 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters and the Court of Justice of the EU 6. The Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters 7. The Regulation (EC) No. 805/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 creating a European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims, including cases 8. The Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 creating a European order for payment procedure and the jurisprudence of the EU Court of Justice, including cases 9. Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (service of ...