Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 12

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  EU Law
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The internal market of the European Union was established twenty years ago on 1 January 1993. One of the key elements of the internal market is the free movement of goods. The basic provisions concerning free trade between the Member States were introduced by the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community. After the elimination of customs duties and quotas and the creation of the customs union in 1968, some remaining barriers had to be removed to implement free movement of goods within the internal market of the EU. One of them customs and police control at border points was eliminated on the day of establishment of the internal market of the EU. Although reduction of that obstacle was treated as a fundamental step towards an integrated European market, it is worth noting that contrary to what had been expected earlier, it had no substantial impact on the intra Community trade. This was caused by the fact that parallel to the elimination of customs control, new rules concerning VAT and yield taxes had to be implemented not only by public authorities, but mainly by entrepreneurs, what made the movement of goods much harder for them in a short-time perspective. Thanks to the application of new approach to technical harmonization and more flexible provisions concerning the trade between the Member States, the volume of trade within the internal market gradually increased. According to the research, the three enlargements of the EU in 1995, 2004 and 2007 had a substantial impact on the value of intra-Community trade and its relations to the extra-Community trade, the GDP and the position in the world. It seems that the internal market of the EU is much more important to EU entrepreneurs and the common regulations applied in all Member States created a proper, safe and friendly environment for them. However, there is a negative phenomenon concerning the lowering of the share of the intra Community trade in the global world trade. This can be the result of running out of potential of the free movement of goods in the EU market. On the one hand, the detailed legislation concerning the free movement of goods led to the achievement of a high level of integration of common requirements to trade, but on the other hand, it reduced the interest of EU companies to sell within the EU due to an overregulated market.
EN
Free movement of services is one of the most important freedoms of the internal market of the European Union. The primary provisions concerning that freedom were included in the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, but unfortunately this sphere of economy was not fully liberalized by the end of the 1980s. The implementation of three other freedoms creating the internal market of the EU pushed the regulatory and liberalisation process in the service industry. Freedom to provide services is linked with other freedoms: especially free movement of persons and capital. Elimination of border control in the EU is one of the most substantial steps towards an integrated European market in terms of not only labour market, but services as well. It helped service providers to cross the border within the EU without any additional administrative or legal obstacles, what makes their services available EU wide. On the other hand, due to the elimination of passport control many customers can go to other Member States and buy services from service providers form other Member States. It increases the value of intra-trade in services within the internal market of the EU. Moreover, creation of the economic and monetary union forced EU politicians and decision-makers to implement free movement of capital, what was a basis for the introduction of free movement of financial services. According to the research outcomes one may state that the freedom to provide services is extremely important to EU entrepreneurs. In terms of value, the flow of services within the EU is bigger in comparison to external service trade of the EU, Japan or the US. It means that EU entrepreneurs are much more interested in offering their services within the EU internal market. It is worth underlining that the three subsequent enlargements in 1995, 2004 and 2007 had the biggest, the most substantial and positive impact on intra-EU services trade. It seems that the services directive, implemented partially and with many derogations and the directive on posted workers limiting the economic activities of service-providers had a much smaller effect on the internal market of services within the European Union, as it was foreseen.s
EN
The article intends to analyze the closely correlated concepts of trademark exhaustion and parallel imports. The growing importance of these concepts in the current world, especially in the European Union, makes it an interesting research topic, even though the concepts are complicated due to their nature and different actors involved. The authors use comparative approach, concentrating on two world leaders in the field, in order to discover what is the approach of the EU as well as the approach of the USA to the concepts of trademark exhaustion and parallel imports, what are the benefits and weaknesses of these approaches, and analyze why these markets have arrived at certain conclusions.
EN
The special VAT margin scheme for travel agents has its genesis in Art. 26 of the Sixth VAT Directive and now it is set out in Art. 306 to 310 of the Directive 2006/112. Where a travel agent, acting in his own name, uses the supplies and services of other taxable persons in the provision of travel facilities, all the transactions are to be treated as a single supply, subject to VAT in the travel agent’s Member State. The taxable amount is deemed to be the travel agent’s margin – the difference between the VAT‑inclusive cost to him of the supplies and services which he includes in the package which he sells and the price, exclusive of VAT, which he charges for that package. Some Member States, including Poland, apply the special VAT margin scheme regardless of whether the customer is actually the traveller or not (the customer approach). The remaining Member States, first of all Germany, apply the margin scheme only where the customer is the traveller (the traveller approach). That is why, it is necessary to analyse the German provisions on the VAT margin scheme.
FR
La doctrine a déjà beaucoup écrit sur les implications pratiques de l’entrée en vigueur du Digital Markets Act, c’est pourquoi le présent article vise à ramener la discussion au niveau théorique, en essayant d’identifier les racines de cette proposition de règlement, a travers une analyse du contexte dans lequel il s’inscrit, des principes et valeurs de l’UE sur lesquels il repose, des objectifs qu’il entend poursuivre et des théories juridico-économiques qui le sous-tendent.
EN
Given that a lot has already been written by legal scholars on the practical implications that the entry into force of the Digital Markets Act will have, the present article intends to bring the discussion back to the theoretical level, trying to find out where the roots of this proposed regulation lie, with an analysis of the context in which it falls, the EU principles and values upon which it is based, the objectives it intends to pursue, and the legal-economic theories behind it.
Prawo
|
2019
|
issue 329
287 - 297
PL
Wpływ na handel między państwami członkowskimi UE jest jednym z elementów definicyjnych pojęcia pomocy państwa w rozumieniu art. 107 ust. 1 TFUE. W toku rozwoju judykatury TSUE wykładnia tego warunku ewoluowała. Orzecznictwo stopniowo poświęca jej ocenie więcej uwagi, doprecyzowując znaczenie oraz (nieznacznie) zawężając jej zakres. Ocena spełnienia warunku wpływu na handel wewnątrzunijny stosowana przez TSUE opiera się na analizie podażowej strony rynku — otoczenia konkurencyjnego beneficjenta pomocy. W innym kierunku rozwija się praktyka decyzyjna Komisji. W licznych decyzjach uznawała ona, że środek wsparcia nie stanowi pomocy państwa, ponieważ nie wpływa na handel między państwami członkowskimi UE. Komisja kierowała się tu przede wszystkim argumentem lokalnego zakresu działalności beneficjenta pomocy. Takie podejście, odnoszące się do oceny popytowej strony rynku, choć wprost niesprzeczne z orzecznictwem TSUE, nie znajduje w nim oparcia.
EN
The effect on trade between Member States is considered as one of the elements of the notion of State Aid within the meaning of art. 107 (1) TFEU. In the course of the development of the caselaw of the CJEU, the interpretation of this condition has evolved. The EU courts gradually devote more attention to its analysis, clarifying its meaning and even (slightly) narrowing its scope. Assessment of the condition on the effect on intra-EU trade, as applied by the CJEU, focuses on the supply side of the market — the competitive environment of the beneficiary of aid. The Commission’s decision-making practice develops in a different direction. In numerous cases the Commission held that a measure does not constitute State Aid due to lack of effect on intra-European trade. The Commission has based this approach on the argument of the local scope of the activity of a beneficiary. This approach, based on the assessment of the demand side of the market, though not directly contradictory to the case-law of the CJEU, finds no support in it.
PL
In September 2015, the European Commission announced the first actions of its plan to build a Capital Markets Union in Europe. The undertaken restructuring of the financing model is designed to make a shift in the main channel through which enterprises raise investment funds, from loans to capital, and – as a result – contribute to more dynamic growth in the EU Member States. I describe the key features of the Commission’s plan and discuss the economic rationale behind it. The plan has many strengths but also some weaknesses, such as limited ambition in the supervision and enforcement of securities regulations. Other challenges to the development of European capital markets include the financial transactions tax, the low-interest-rate environment, cultural reasons, and potential political opposition. My paper deals first of all with highlighting the structure of the financial sector in the European Union. It provides a overview of the role of the different financial and no financial sectors in offering capital funds to accomplish the needs of households, companies, governments, etc.. I also describe the history of capital market integration in the EU. The paper also analyses some important aspects of the implementation of the Capital Markets Union, which will be a key step in completing the EU Single Market. I concluded that the integration of the capital markets will be a strong step in supporting economic growth and competitiveness in the EU in the long run.
PL
Sytuacja konkurencyjna w sektorze towarowego transportu towarowego jest szczególna, gdyż rozpoczęty proces liberalizacji nie został jeszcze zakończony. W związku z tym istnieje duża dysproporcja skali aktywnych uczestników rynku, gdzie dominacja publicznych operatorów stanowi pozostałość ich statusu monopolisty sprzed liberalizacji. Wyzwanie, przed jakim stoi Komisja Europejska, nie polega więc na ochronie procesu konkurowania, tylko a na zapewnieniu, żeby w przyszłości rynek osiągnął pożądany poziom konkurencyjności, realizując tym samym cele liberalizacji. Niniejszy artykuł przedstawia w tym kontekście szczegółowe uwarunkowania stosowania przepisów kontroli koncentracji w prawie Unii Europejskiej.
EN
The competitive situation in rail transport is peculiar because the liberalisation process is still ongoing. As a result, there is a significant difference in scale between various undertakings active on the market, where existing dominance is inherited from the pre-liberalisation monopolist status. The challenge faced by the European Commission is thus not the safeguarding of the competitive process, but rather creating a level playing field to foster future competition and thus making it possible to achieve the goals of liberalisation. In this context, this paper presents a detailed analysis of the application of merger control rules in EU Law.
PL
Celem badania jest analiza, czy zasady przekazywania kompetencji i subsydiarności w kontekście rozwiązań prawnych wprowadzonych Dyrektywą Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady (UE) 2018/957 zmieniającą Dyrektywę 96/71 dotyczącą delegowania pracowników należy uznać za uzasadnione i proporcjonalne. Przedstawione argumenty wykazują, że zasada subsydiarności jest jedną z podstawowych zasad prowadzenia polityki gospodarczej w Unii Europejskiej. Na tej podstawie zbadano, czy uprawnienia polityczne powinny być delegowane na najniższy możliwy szczebel władzy zbliżony do obywateli, których dotyczy polityka - chyba że istnieją niezaprzeczalne korzyści z prowadzenia jej na wyższym szczeblu przy ściślejszej koordynacji. Należy rozważyć, czy propozycja Komisji Europejskiej ma inny cel niż deklarowany, a tym samym, czy narusza ona zasadę proporcjonalności. Udowodniono, że potrzebne są inteligentne i jasne przepisy dostosowane do szybko rosnącej mobilności przedsiębiorstw i obywateli UE, które zapobiegną postępującej utracie konkurencyjności rynku UE, przyśpieszą konwergencję społeczną i uniemożliwią nielegalną działalność szarej strefy wpływającej na sytuację pracowników migrujących wewnątrz UE. Powyższe kwestie i wnioski mogą, zdaniem autora, skłaniać do refleksji nad wagą tego, że podział kompetencji między państwami członkowskimi a instytucjami unijnymi jest ostatecznie decyzją polityczną, która pojawia się w kontekście konfliktu interesów, i wskazują, że analizy ekonomiczne mogą jedynie dostarczyć argumentów za lub przeciw centralizacji polityki. Ponadto należy podkreślić, że integracja jest procesem dynamicznym, dlatego wyniki analiz dotyczących uzasadnienia stosowania zasady subsydiarności mogą prowadzić do rozbieżnych ocen przez zainteresowane Państwa Członkowskie w czasie, w którym dynamicznie zmieniają się warunki funkcjonowania gospodarek.
EN
The aim of the study is to analyze if the subsidiarity principle in the context of the legal solutions introduced by the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council 2018/957 amending Directive 96/71 concerning the posting of employees in the framework of the provision of services should be considered justified and proportionate. The arguments presented will show the opinion that the subsidiarity principle is one of the basic rules for conducting economic policy in the European Union. On this basis, it will be investigated whether policy powers should be delegated to the lowest possible level of government, close to the citizens concerned by the policy, unless there are undeniable benefits to running it at a higher level in closer policy coordination. It should be considered if the European Commission proposal pursues a purpose other than the declared one and thus, violates the principle of proportionality. It will be proved that smart and clear rules are needed that are adapted to the rapidly growing mobility of EU businesses and citizens, which will prevent the progressive loss of competitiveness of the EU market, while accelerating social convergence and preventing illegal activities affecting intra-EU migrant workers. The issues mentioned above and the conclusions may lead, according to the author, to the reflection on the importance of the fact that the division of competences between the Member States and the EU institutions is ultimately a political decision that arises in the context of a conflict of interest and indicates that economic analyses can only provide arguments for or against policy centralization. Furthermore, it should be noted that the integration is a dynamic process, and therefore, the results of the analysis regarding the justification for the application of the subsidiarity principle may lead to divergent assessments by the Member States, as the conditions of the functioning of economies are rapidly changing.
PL
Za pośrednictwem Internetu świadczone są, pełniące ważną rolę w społeczeństwie, usługi cyfrowe, od których mogą być zależni niektórzy przedsiębiorcy. Cyberbezpieczeństwo dostawców usług cyfrowych jest istotne, nie tylko jeżeli chodzi o takie aspekty jak techniczne czy organizacyjne, ale również aspekty prawne – z uwagi na to, że niektórych dostawców usług cyfrowych mogą jeszcze dotyczyć dodatkowe obowiązki prawne. W niniejszym artykule przedstawiono analizę porównawczą przepisów dotyczących dostarczania usług cyfrowych i cyberbezpieczeństwa na gruncie Dyrektywy NIS i aktów ją wdrażających w Republice Malty oraz w Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. Dyrektywa NIS odnosi się do dostarczania jedynie trzech rodzajów usług cyfrowych – tj. internetowej platformy handlowej, wyszukiwarki internetowej i usługi przetwarzania w chmurze. Dostawcą usług cyfrowych jest osoba prawna, która podlega pod przepisy danego krajowego aktu prawnego wdrażającego Dyrektywę NIS po spełnieniu pewnych warunków. W analizowanych w niniejszym artykule aktach prawnych występują pewne różnice, w szczególności w zakresie obowiązków prawnych lub kar pieniężnych.
EN
The Internet provides digital services that play an important role in society and on which some entrepreneurs may depend. Cybersecurity is important for digital service providers, not only in terms of technical or organisational aspects, but also legal aspects, because some digital service providers may still be affected by additional legal obligations. This article presents a comparative analysis of the provisions concerning digital services and cybersecurity under the NIS Directive and its implementing acts in the Republic of Malta and the Republic of Poland. The NIS Directive addresses the provisions of only three types of digital services - i.e. the online marketplace, internet search engine and cloud computing services. A digital service provider is a legal entity that is subject to the provisions of a given national legal act implementing the NIS Directive under certain conditions. There are some differences in the acts analysed in this article, particularly in terms of legal obligations or financial penalties.
PL
W warunkach globalnej konkurencji na rynku transportu lotniczego kontrola subsydiowania sektora jest zagadnieniem kontrowersyjnym. Warunkiem koniecznym jest z jednej strony istnienie politycznej woli uregulowania kwestii, a z drugiej – stworzenie praktycznie efektywnego mechanizmu kontroli i egzekucji. Można argumentować, że sama istota prawa międzynarodowego uniemożliwia wprowadzenie rozwiązań wystarczająco efektywnych, rozwiązujących problem zaburzenia konkurencji w wyniku subsydiowania niektórych przedsiębiorstw branży. Publiczne finansowanie portów lotniczych, które bywa uznawane za nienależne wsparcie dla przewoźników operujących z danego obiektu stanowi szczególnie referencyjny przykład powyższych trudności. Niniejszy artykuł zawiera analizę możliwości wprowadzenia prawnomiędzynarodowej kontroli pomocy pośredniej, gdzie realnym beneficjentem jest nie tylko adresat środka. Rozważania prowadzone są z perspektywy Unii Europejskiej w kontekście umów bilateralnych zawieranych między UE a państwami trzecimi, dotyczącymi kontroli subsydiów.
EN
The issue of subsidies control in the global air transport market is a controversial one. In order to regulate this sphere, both political consensus of the States involved as well as an effective enforcement mechanism is required. One may even say that the very nature of public international law precludes the introduction of sufficiently effective measures that would prevent competition distortion as a result of subsidization. Public financing of airport infrastructure, which could be considered as granting undue advantage to airlines operating from that hub, serves as a prime example of the above challenges. This paper provides a feasibility analysis of the introduction of a system of international control of indirect subsidies – measures where the recipient is not the sole beneficiary of the aid. The analysis is conducted through the lens of the European concept of State Aid, as introduced in the international agreements between the EU and non-member States.
PL
Artykuł stanowi głos w dyskusji toczącej się w związku z opublikowaniem przez Komisję Europejską w grudniu 2015 roku dokumentu „Europejska strategia w dziedzinie lotnictwa” będącą w założeniu próbą wprowadzenia kompleksowej wizji rozwoju branży. Praca przedstawia zagadnienia związane z postrzeganiem interesu konsumentów jako jednej z determinant rozstrzygnięć postepowań z zakresu prawa konkurencji dotyczących koncentracji linii lotniczych i współpracy między przewoźnikami. Prezentowane jest stanowisko uznające potrzebę istnienia spójnego standardu oceny tytułowego kryterium dla wspomnianych rodzajów postepowań i postulujące uzupełnienie strategii dla lotnictwa o ten element.
EN
This article seeks to contribute to the discussion that surrounds the European Commission’s Aviation Strategy for Europe issued in 2015. The Strategy was heralded as an attempt to create a comprehensive regulatory framework for the air transport sector. The paper focuses on the “consumer interest” criterion, as one of the factors taken into account in antitrust and merger cases. The presented line of inquiry postulates the creation of a cohesive interpretation standard of “consumer welfare” for both antitrust and merger control proceedings and advocates its inclusion into the newly-created aviation strategy.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.