Sotto altro versante, il provvedimento interviene sulla disciplina dei f ondi paritetici interprofessionali nazionali per la formazione continua e detta specifiche norme in materia di tirocini formativi e di orientamento. Viene, infine, introdotta nel codice penale la nuova fattispecie di intermediazione illecita e sfruttamento del lavoro. La delega è stata successivamente attuata con i decreti legislativi n.

Camera dei deputati Vai al contenuto Sezione di navigazione Menu di ausilio alla navigazione Vai al menu di navigazione principale. Cerca nel sito. Strumento di esplorazione della sezione Documenti Digitando almeno un carattere nel campo si ottengono uno o più risultati con relativo collegamento, il tempo di risposta dipende dal numero dei risultati trovati e dal processore e navigatore in uso.

Temi dell'attività Parlamentare. Dossier pubblicati Disposizioni urgenti per la stabilizzazione finanziaria - Legge 15 luglion.

Augmentation mammaire marseille ldc 95

The basic questions to ask are: What, actually, is EU law? Who makes food law? What, actually, is EU law? A fair question if one thinks of the level of regulation, its authors and its influencers. Converging notions of procedural public order. Developments in notions of substantive public order. Conflicting decisions. Conflict with local decision. Conflicts between local provisional remedy and EU judgment. Conflicts between local appealable judgment and foreign res iudicata. Conflicts between local res iudicata and foreign res iudicata.

Conflicts between foreign non-EU decisions. Conflicts between foreign EU decisions. Conflicts between foreign EU and non-EU decisions.

Final remarks. Albeit Member States provide for different procedural devices when it comes to recognition and enforcement of non-EU foreign judgments [automatic recognition e. This convergence is determined mainly by the general clause of public order, and the growing consensus over the idea that such clause includes violation of fundamental procedural rules: hence, de- spite several variations in the wording of the rules concerning specific pro- cedural violations, such as lack of jurisdiction, violation of the rights of the defense, or fraud, it is quite unlikely that a judgment whose recognition is refused in a Member State for this kind of procedural considerations would nevertheless be recognized and enforced in a different Member State6.

Cuniberti, C. Normand, F. Cape Industries plc [] Ch. English antisuit injunctions were held incompatible with the system of reciprocal trust between Member States8, but after Brexit U. However, antisuit injunctions are not only a form of unfair jurisdictional competition within the system of reciprocal trust: they also infringe the fundamental principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz9, and, most importantly, the fundamental right of action of their addressee10; hence the public order clause contemplated in every Member State should preclude their recognition even as non-EU foreign judgments.

Traditional European hostility to U. West Tankers Inc, supra, n. Conflicting decisions The most complex difficulties in this field, hence, come from the problem of recognition of conflicting judgments: case law specifically on the topic is limited, but the issue is very often intensely litigated in the context of the is- sues of lis pendens and parallel litigation, both with respect to cases pending in a different Member State and to cases pending outside the EU albeit in such circumstances there is not yet an actual conflict, but only a prediction of risk of conflict: hence, lis pendens precludes also decisions that in the end might have turned out coherent, and not conflicting, if the case was not stayed.

A realistic evaluation of the dynamics of the resolution of conflicts of decisions, however, should warn from the start that rules governing preclu- sive effects are actually applied with a much less analytical approach than what the supporting opinions would directly tell.

In fact, especially when it comes to the determination of the scope of the preclusive effects of a judg- ment with respect to issues explicitly or implicitly resolved, or with respect to third parties, governing principles are riddled with incoherencies that al- low courts to exercise hidden discretionary powers, in order to take account of the possible errors of the judgment they should conform to: res iudicata is enforced according to several balancing factors, including symptoms of the reliability of the holdings whose implementation is asked, allowing the a general preclusion to recognition was denied by judgments of the Cour de Cassation, 1 Decemberin Bull.

Giussani, Resistenze al riconoscimento delle condanne al pagamento di punitive damages: an- tichi dogmi e nuove realtà, in Giurisprudenza italiana,p. Public interest in transparency of the administration of justice, indicates that courts should be more candid in their exercise of such inevi- table discretionary powers, albeit such transparency may be more discom- forting for civil law judges than for common law ones since their legitimacy is more based on technical rather than political grounds, due to differences in the respective recruiting systems In fact, several other factors, depending from the relative timing and force of conflicting deci- sions, concur with them, according to the following analysis.

Conflict with local decision The first set of problems to consider concerns conflicts with local deci- sions. De Cristofaro, N. Trocker eds. With respect to the latter, albeit lis pendens might preclude recognition only if the proceedings in the State of destination begun before the foreign ones, local res iudicata can be preclusive even if both the action and the judgment came after the foreign ones, albeit there might have been a viola- tion of the lis pendens rule in the local proceedings: in fact, such violation cannot be pleaded any more after res iudicata This reflects also the idea, prevailing in the Member States, that a subsequent res iudicata prevails over a preceding one, because the effects of the latter one could have been raised in the proceedings that led to the former one, and therefore were at least implicitly conclusively denied: the second res iudicata might be illegal, but its violation of the law cannot be challenged any more with the exception of some Member States, providing for a special extraordinary remedy for violation of res iudicata Civinini, Il riconoscimento delle sentenze straniere, Milanoesp.

Merlin, Il conflitto internazionale di giudicati. Profili sistematici, Milanoesp. Merlin, op. However, since EU de- cisions are recognized regardless of res iudicata, and even if they are merely provisional remedies, and preclusive effects are also granted, correspond- first-in-time, by contrast, seems to be the rule, e.

Consolo, La revocazione delle decisioni della Cassazione e la formazione del giudicato, Padovaesp. Consolo, La sentenza Lucchini della Corte di Giustizia: quale possibile adattamento degli ordinamenti processuali interni e in specie del nostro?

Caponi, Corti europee e giudicati nazionali, in Associazione italiana fra gli studiosi del processo civile ed. Conflicts between local provisional remedy and EU judgment On this regard, it is worth remembering from the start that whenever different Member States have concurring jurisdiction on a case, pendency of proceedings for provisional remedies in one of them does not prevent the action on the merits in the other one This necessarily implies that a sub- sequent judgment on the merits conflicting with a prior provisional remedy in a different Member State is not even in violation of the lis pendens rule: hence, such judgment must prevail over the provisional remedy not only in the Member State that issued it where a conflicting decision prevails even if it was issued in violation of the lis pendens rule or of the foreign res iudicatabut also in the Member State that issued the provisional remedy.

Grounds for refusal of recognition of foreign judgment provisional remedy might be precluded altogether by lis pendens on the merits in a different Member State. Hence, the correspondence between conflicts relevant for lis pendens and related actions and conflicts relevant for recognition within Reg.

The inevitable conclusion is that local decisions prevent recognition of foreign ones only if they have the same force: a provisional remedy precludes recognition of a conflicting EU provisional remedy, regardless of the violation of the lis pendens rule by the former or by the latter, and regardless of the vi- olation of the first-in-time decision by the second one, but not of a conflicting EU judgment on the merits Likewise, a local judgment on the merits pre- cludes recognition of a conflicting EU judgment on the merits, but does not necessarily preclude recognition of EU, and non-EU, conflicting res iudicata.

Gaudemet-Tal- lon, Compétence et exécution des jugements en Europe4, Parisesp. Conflicts between local res iudicata and foreign res iudicata A preclusion of recognition of a conflicting EU foreign res iudicata, therefore, operates only when the local judgment is also res iudicata: in such case the judicial determination is final and conclusive within the local juris- diction, and conflicting foreign res iudicata cannot overcome it, regardless of the relative timing of the judgment or of the start of the litigation.

How- ever, even this holds only unless the later foreign res iudicata deals with the effects of a wider set of facts, including subsequent ones producing effects overcoming the effects previously ascertained: in fact, in such circumstanc- es the second judgment is not actually conflicting, because res iudicata op- erates always, as it were, rebus sic stantibus Berendsen [] ECR I Adelheid Krieg [] ECR compare supra, n. In fact, the relationship between rule and exception in the field of rec- ognition is totally the other way round: a strict interpretation is required for the grounds of refusal25; hence, if extension of effects is the rule, the superseding effects of later res iudicata should be recognized as well, unless the procedural public order exception may apply, but no procedural public order can preclude recognition of such effects if violation of previous res iudicata is not subject to extraordinary remedy.

Since such extraordinary remedy is contemplated only in some Member States, there seems to be no ground for refusal at least in Member States that do not have it. Hence, the purpose of granting a judgment the same effects within the whole European judicial space should not be generally frustrated when lo- cal res iudicata precedes the foreign one: since later res iudicata has a greater force, rules on refusal of recognition should generally not apply.

Grounds for refusal of recognition of foreign judgment operate for the resolution of conflicts between decisions both coming from different jurisdictions, which will be dealt with in the following paragraphs: it is only with respect to non-EU foreign judgments that a local res iudicata might determine a full preclusion. Hence, reversed claims, and third parties subject to the effects of the judgment, might well be involved in conflicts to be solved pursuant to Art.

However, this rule refers to conflicting decisions: hence, just like Art. Since recognition of EU decisions is automatic under the theory of extension of effects, this means, e. Conflicts between foreign EU and non-EU decisions Some further observations may be devoted to the conflict between a EU decision and a non-EU recognizable one, also governed by the priority rule pursuant to Art.

In this field it is obvious- ly dispositive the choice of the State of destination between automatic or constitutive recognition of non-EU judgments: in fact, in the latter case only prior recognition of the non-EU judgment might preclude recognition of a conflicting subsequent EU decision of the same, or even of a lesser, force. However, Member States may provide for automatic recognition of non-EU decisions only when they are res iudicata29; in such States, the wording of Art.

Hence, they may be deemed compatible with the reciprocal trust between Member States in the field of recognition of foreign judgments. A more comprehensive fulfillment of the task of granting a decision identical effects within the whole European judicial space, in fact, probably requires a European federal judiciary to provide it.

I ricorsi giurisdizionali nei confronti del titolare e del responsabile del trattamento. Non potendo dare conto che di alcuni commenti al Regolamento nel vasto panorama dottrinale, ci si limita a segnalare L. Bistolfi, E. Bolognini, C. Pelino a cura diIl Regolamento Pri- vacy europeo. Commentario alla nuova disciplina sulla protezione dei dati personali, Milano ; S.

Sica, V. Riccio a cura diLa nuova disciplina europea della pri- vacy, Padova ; F. Pizzetti, Privacy e il diritto europeo alla protezione dei dati personali. Fumagalli Meraviglia, Le nuove normative europee sulla protezione dei dati personali, in Diritto comunitario e degli scambi internazionali,p.

Finocchiaro dir. Califano, C. Colapietro a cura diInnovazione tecnologica e valore della persona. In tema v. Colapietro, A.

Colapietro a cura diInnovazione tecnologica e valore della persona, cit. Lucchini Guastal- la, Il nuovo regolamento europeo sul trattamento dei dati personali: i principi ispiratori, in Contratto e Impresa. Europa,p. Greco, I ruoli: titolare e responsabile, in G. Pelino, I soggetti del trattamento, in L. Pelino a cura diIl Regolamento Privacy europeo, cit. Stanzione, Il regolamento europeo sulla privacy: origini e ambito di applicazione, in Europa e diritto pri- vato,p.

Giurgiu, T. Lehmann, D. Whitehouse, S. Fischer-Hübner, L. Fritsch, C. Raab eds. Facing up to Next Steps, New York,p. Leenes, R. Gutwirth, Paul De Hert eds.

Scaffidi Runchella, La competenza del giudice civile e delle autorità di controllo in materia di tutela dei dati personali, con particolare riguardo ai servizi di cloud computing, in M. A European Perspective, Cheltenham ; E. Guardigli, Le Autorità di controllo, in G. Tuttavia, qualora vengano commesse violazioni del Regolamento il cui oggetto riguardi unicamente uno stabilimento — che non è il principale — in uno Stato membro o incida in modo sostanziale unicamente sugli interessati che si trovano in uno Stato membro, è competente, anche per la gestione del reclamo ex art.

Al riguardo v. Candini, Gli strumenti di tutela, in G. Esposito, Il trattamento transfrontaliero e la cooperazione tra Autorità Garanti, in G. Bistolfi, I soggetti di controllo e verifica, in L. Barletta, La tutela effettiva della privacy, cit. Infatti, secondo il par. Cannada-Bartoli, Considerazioni su alcune norme in materia di giurisdizione contenute nel regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati n.

Pocar, I. Viarengo, F. Villata, Recasting Brussels I, Padovap. Villata, Recasting Brussels I, cit. Carbone, E. Tuo, Il nuovo spazio giudiziario europeo in materia civile e commerciale. Il regolamento UE n. Pocar, Brevi riflessioni in tema di revisione del regolamento Bruxelles I e clausole di scelta del foro, in Diritto del commercio internazionale,p.

Guinchard dir. Salerno, Giurisdizione ed efficacia delle decisioni straniere nel Regolamento UE n. Magnus, Art. Magnus, P. Mankowski eds. Brussels Ibis Regulation, Köln ; A. Malatesta, Gli accordi di scelta del foro, in A.

Mala- testa a cura diLa riforma del regolamento Bruxelles I. Guzzi, La proroga di giurisdizione per volontà delle parti nel Regolamento Ue n. Salerno, Giurisdizione ed efficacia delle decisioni straniere, cit. Calvo Caravaca, J. Carbone, I fori esclusivi, in S. Tuo, Il nuovo spazio giudiziario europeo, cit. Vitellino, La c. Malatesta a cura diLa riforma del regolamento Bruxelles I, cit. De Franceschi ed. The Implications of the Digital Revolution, Cambridgep.

Marongiu Buonaiuti, La disciplina della giurisdizione nel regolamento UE n. Rossi, Data protection nei rapporti transnazionali tra imprese. Aspetti problematici della Convenzione n. Sul punto cfr. Peers, T. Hervey, J. Kenner, A. Ward eds. A Commentary, Oxfordp. Caggiano, La Corte di giustizia consolida il ruolo costituzionale nella materia dei dati personali, cit.

La propriété des avoirs déposés en banque. En général. La dématérialisation des biens patrimoniaux et ses conséquences législatives. Les contrats de la banque avec ses clients. Les intérêts en jeux. Le contrat de mandat comme contrat-cadre des activités bancaires hors- bilan.

Les divers types de contrat de mandat proposés par les banques à leurs clients. La migration du droit public au secours du droit privé. Arlequin serviteur de deux maîtres. La créance en restitution des rétrocessions bancaires. Les pertes dues aux obligations de la Kaupting Bank. Alors que les situations financières actuelles sont inédites, les problèmes sous-jacents sont souvent anciens et connus.

Aussi, il ne faut pas se méprendre devant le mur terminologique. La finance internationale utilise une terminologie spécifique, le plus souvent de dérivation anglo-saxonne. Ce sont finalement les intérêts en jeu et les rapports de force contrac- tuels qui nous permettent de décrypter les formules contractuelles les plus exotiques.

La colonne des actifs du bilan montre entre autres tous les crédits que la banque a octroyé à ses clients à une date déter- minée1. Dans les opérations passives la banque attire les fonds dans ses caisses3. Emch, H. Renz, R. Arpagaus, op. Palvi, P. La banque exécute un service par exemple: activités de gestion, en- caissement des dividendes des coupons etc.

Avec le développement de ces activités, on a assisté à une bancarisation de la vie économique. La propriété des avoirs déposés en banque 3. Depuis les années soixante-dix du siècle dernier, on assiste toutefois à une dématérialisation progressive des biens patrimoniaux. A son art. Les titres intermédiés présentent à la fois certaines caractéristiques des créances et des choses. Leibenson, Les actes de disposition sur les titres intermédiés, Thèse de doctorat, Univ.

Genève,no. Leibenson, op. Sie sind Vermögensobjekte sui generis […] Das an ihnen bestehende Eigentum ist nicht im engen sachenrechtlichen Sinn zu verstehen […] Die sachenrechtliche Beziehung des Hinterlegers zu den Urkunden wird indessen nicht aufgehoben, sondern lediglich sistiert […]. Sie lebt wieder auf, wenn die Wertpapiere von der Verwahrungsstelle herausgegeben werden vgl.

Diesen Grundsätzen entsprechend ist eine Vindikation von Buchef- fekten und die Restituierung nach den Regeln des Besitzesschutzes ausgeschlossen […]. Les titres distraits et les prétentions à la remise de titres sont: a. Ici, la banque encaisse des intérêts. Les contrats qui caractérisent cette activité relèvent donc du contrat de mandat. En stipulant un contrat de dépôt, la banque assure au client de lui conserver ses actifs en sécurité.

Le mandataire doit notamment informer le mandant sur les risques des opérations financières envisagées. Dans le cadre du Portfolio Management, elle leur vend des produits financiers contre le paiement de commissions. Relations financières et investissements boursiers entre banque et client 4.

Celui-ci est seul responsable des résultats atteints ou pas at- teints. La pondération entre augmentation des chances de gain et risques de perte est au centre du raisonnement de tout investisseur.

Faut-il aussi considérer le degré de connaissances financières du client, avant de lui fournir une réponse? La jurisprudence ayant trop longtemps hésité à affronter ces questions, voilà-que le droit public a dû intervenir. De par sa position monopolistique, la banque se trouve en position de force et peut obliger le client à souscrire des formules contractuelles exces- sivement protectrices à son égard.

Pour protéger les clients, la jurisprudence a donc puisé dans les règles de droit public qui avaient été édictées pour protéger le renom de la place financière suisse et non pour gérer des rapports de droit privé. Chappuis, F. Elles ne déploient aucun effet direct sur la relation contractuelle qui lie le client à la banque.

La banque exerce le mandat avec diligence en tenant compte de la situation personnelle du client dans la mesure où celle-ci peut lui être connue.

A cet effet, elle établit un profil de risque qui définit la propension au risque et la tolérance au risque du client. Dans un arrêt successif de 4C. Ces directives sont révisées régulièrement et sont publiés sur internet, cf. Ceci mine la sécurité du droit qui devient de moins en moins justiciable. Le 15 juinle Parlement suisse a adopté la loi sur les services finan- ciers LSFin et la loi sur les établissements financiers LEFin.

La LEFin introduit des règles de surveillance cohérentes pour les établissements financiers gestionnaires de fortune, gestionnaires de fortune collective, directions de fonds et maisons de titres.

Ces deux lois entreront en vigueur le 1er janvier Bensahel, S. Micotti, Nouveautés en matière de conseil en placements, in Jusletter, 15 décembre Dans un arrêt 7B. Arlequin serviteur de deux maîtres Le conseiller à la clientèle tout comme le gérant de fortune est en même temps un employé lié à sa banque par un contrat de travail. Son salaire est le plus souvent divisé en une partie fixe et une variable bonustributaire des résultats financiers atteints… pour la rentabilité de la banque non pour le client.

Relations financières et investissements boursiers entre banque et client De plus, certaines banques émettent elles-mêmes des titres qui peuvent avoir une rentabilité majeure produits structurés. Des pratiques comme le churning sont clairement interdites. La solution trouvée consistait à façonner des produits structurés adap- tés aux petits portefeuilles des clients retails, qui ensemble atteignaient tout de même la somme de plusieurs milliards de francs.

Le mandataire est en droit de garder les rétrocessions perçues par la banque dépositaire du patrimoine du client, que si celui-ci donne son ac- cord par un consentement éclairé ATF III ; cf aussi ATF II Ces obligations ont été sous- crites par quatre banques, agissant comme dealer ou distributor. The Single Judicial Space. Mutual recognition and its background. Mutual trust as the necessary basis for the mechanism of mutual recognition — and the repercussions of the EU crisis?

European Arrest Warrant as a litmus test for the concept of mutual recognition in times of crisis. Mutual recognition as realised by the EAW.

Recent Jurisprudence on mutual recognition and potential exceptions. Introduction If you read the newspapers or surf the Internet perdre 4 kilos deux semaines bihebdomadaire days, you will find countless quotations from politicians, lawyers, economists and mem- bers of all social strata on the subject of Brexit. Even if the contents differ, they show that this is a historical event that is of immense importance not only for the United Kingdom, but for the whole of Europe, and indeed for the entire world.

This has little in common with the aims and objectives of the original European Economic Community and the EU, which — to a big extent — have been realised successfully.

Among these are not only the internal market, the free movement of goods and persons, the Schengen area, — even more importantly — the peaceful decades within Europe but also — last but at no means least — the invention and fostering of programmes like Eras- mus, which makes it possible for young students, lecturers and professors to go abroad, to get into contact, to make friends with co-Europeans but also to talk about the value and objectives of the European integration and the European Union as such.

But, as usual, people get accustomed to lib- erties and freedoms quickly — and then take them for granted. The nega- tive feeling about the European Union and — what is perhaps worse — in relation to other Members States and their policies — prevails. The general climate, the feelings among those who deal with Europe, European law and its problems have a direct influence on how reality is shaped.

Current Developments and Problems of European Criminal Law difficult basis for cooperation — also and especially in relation to criminal law cooperation. The crisis — whether objectively existing or subjectively felt — is the start- ing point of my further observations.

I will focus on the judicial cooperation between the Member States in order to bring about effective transnational prosecution. As we will see, the whole system today relies on mutual recog- nition of foreign judicial decisions which — by itself — presupposes mutual trust.

And if not, what is the consequence? The territory of the Member States shall constitute one single judicial space. Judicial cooperation must be possible, although different substantive and procedural national laws do persist. Because: an end to this form of legal pluralism is neither foreseeable nor intended, as is clearly demonstrated by the second half-sentence of the same Art. Now, this is where the concept of mutual recognition comes into play.

In relation to cooperation in criminal matters we usually point to Art. The three main features of mutual recognition are therefore: — mutual trust in the adequacy of the rules applied in other Member States, even though they might — and normally will — differ from the own norms and regulations which are applied to a comparable case in the home legal order; — mutual trust in the correct application of these rules in the other Mem- ber States by the courts and other law-executing bodies and — as a con- sequence —; — acceptance of the results achieved in the other Member State on the ba- sis of its laws and regulations as applied by its courts and other law-ex- ecuting bodies without the result being checked against domestic laws and regulations.

Current Developments and Problems of European Criminal Law At first glance it becomes apparent that this is a big step in foster- ing European integration. Of course, this method of mutual recognition is nothing radically new to the EU. Accordingly, through the Un- ion-wide recognition of national judicial decisions, the time-consuming im- pediments, especially in the area of mutual judicial assistance, are supposed to be removed in order to facilitate effective cross-border enforcement of criminal law without extensive harmonising efforts.

It corresponds to the predom- inant view that the successful application of the principle of mutual rec- ognition in the context of creating a single market has been transferred to judicial cooperation in criminal matters8.

Similar predecessors can be found in the law on asylum — originally laid down in the Dublin Conventionnow in the Dublin Regulation9. Fletcher, R. Lööf, B. Schwarze eds. However, it was not until the Treaty of Lisbon entered into force that this principle was incorporated into primary European law Art. Now Art. By now a considerable number of framework decisions and directives is based on the idea of mutual recognition, the first and most important being the Framework Decision on the Arrest Warrant of 13th June As depicted in the introduction, the European Union is suffering se- vere and manifold crisis.

The interesting question is: if mutual trust it the precondition of mutual recognition — what happens to the whole system of judicial cooperation in criminal matters if due to tendencies of mistrust among national courts and Member States the principle of mutual recogni- tion tends to lose its necessary basis?

Or is the system so best botox doctor vancouver bc that it can cope with these kinds of changes without any modifications — and if so, to what limits? Mutual recognition as realised by the EAW The Framework Decision of 13th June on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States12, which was mainly based on art.

Its main purpose is to abolish between EU Member States the traditional procedure of extradition which is widely considered to be time-consuming, cumbersome and complex. On the one hand, the traditional extradition procedure is characterised by two stages: the legal examination of the admissibility of extradition is necessarily followed by a political decision, the so-called grant of extradition. This grant is subject to a discretionary decision made on a case-by-case basis with regard to foreign policy considerations by government officials.

This influence of political considerations has often been blamed for the inefficiencies of the ex- tradition procedure On the other hand, double criminality is traditionally a fundamental principle of extradition. The conduct in respect of which the re- quest for extradition is made has to be a criminal offence under the law of the requesting State as well as the State addressed with the request.

The latter can thus refuse its cooperation if a foreign offence is unknown to its own law The accused person therefore has the possibility of raising various objections with respect to substantive law against his or her extradition which serves the purpose of protecting the individual but at the same time, of course, dimin- ishes the effectiveness of the extradition procedure Mitsilegas, EU Criminal Law,p.

Rohlff, Europäischer Haftbe- fehl,p. Rohlff, op. Klimek, European Arrest Warrant,p. Klip, European Criminal Law,p. Asp, A. Hackner, in H. Wabnitz, T. Janovsky, Handbuch des Wirtschafts- und Steuerstrafrechts, ch. Instead, the procedure is to be con- trolled exclusively by the judiciary, a unified form strictly regulated by the Framework Decision must be used.

The principle of double criminality has only been maintained insofar as the extradition can in general be made con- ditional on the relevant conduct being a criminal offence under the law of the Member State of execution as well. However, if the arrest warrant is issued in respect of one of the 32 criminal offences explicitly listed in art. Since the determination of whether a cat- alogue offence is given is to be made under the national law of the issuing Member State19, in some cases it is difficult to determine whether an offence falls within one of the headings In art.

Besides the absence of double criminality in case of non-catalogue offences, Frände, op. Lagodny et al. Vogel, Juristenzeitungp.

Pohl, Vorbehalt und Anerkennung: der Europäische Haftbefehl zwischen Grundgesetz und europäischem Primärrecht,p. Klimek, op. Roxin, B. Schünemann, GA, ss. The deficient harmonisation of national offences contained in the catalogue of art.

For decisions of a non-EU Member State, only an optional ground for non-execution is in place, cf art.

Current Developments and Problems of European Criminal Law grounds for optional non-execution are, e. Finally, art. Moreover, Art. In the modern discus- sion — as we will see — this provision has become more and more the centre of the core question whether the grounds of refusal listed in Art. Recent Jurisprudence on mutual recognition and potential exceptions The recent jurisprudence of the CJEU reflects in a very clear manner the interaction between mutual recognition on the basis of mutual trust on the one hand and the situation of the EU in crisis on the other hand.

Peers, EU Justice,p. Blekxtoon et al. Momsen et al. Rohlff, GAp. De Groot, op. Interestingly, GA Sharpston27 took quite a different view in her opinion on Radu when she correctly summed up the problem of the meaning and scope of application of Art.

This conclusion could also be sup- ported taking into account the high level of mutual confidence and the aim to reduce delays inherent in the traditional extradition procedure. Referring to Art. To interpret Article 1 3 otherwise would risk its having no meaning — otherwise, possibly, than as an elegant plati- tude.

Thus it did not make use of her — as we will see in a second — very useful and forward-thinking concept. It is submitted that the court did not have in mind a real and new limitation to the principle of mutual recognition. This can actually clearly be seen by the judgment it cites in brackets as an authority — it is Mello- ni, and the marginal numbers Melloni 37, 63 of the judgment, where the court only refers to the obligation to mutually recognise, but — obviously — not to any limitation thereto.

Thus, we may summarise that the jurisprudence of the court — up to — assumed an unconditional obligation to surrender a person if no explicit reason of non-execution was given. This includes respect for Article 4 of the Charter on the absolute prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment, which is closely linked to human dignity. The Court of Justice thus held that, where the executing judicial author- ity finds that there exists, for the individual who is the subject of a European arrest warrant, a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the execution of that warrant must be postponed which means that it does not have to be denied in total.

However, such postponement always presupposes a two-stage test. First, the executing judicial authority must find that there is a real risk of in- human or degrading treatment in the issuing Member State on account, i. Second, that authority must ascertain that there are substantial grounds for believing that the individual concerned by the European arrest warrant will be exposed to such a risk, which means no less than a concrete and individualized danger to that person.

Thus, the existence of systemic deficiencies does not necessarily imply that, in a specific case, the individual concerned will be subject to inhuman or degrading treatment in the event that he is surrendered.

This is the first time the Court recognises a limitation of the mutual rec- ognition principle on grounds of a European ordre public, even if it is only regarded as being a reason for postponing the surrender.

Rather similar, but endowed with a much higher political explosiveness, is the most recent reference for a preliminary ruling from the Republic of Ireland32 in respect of a European Arrest Warrant from a Polish court. A Polish national was the subject of three European arrest warrants issued by Polish courts for the purpose of prosecuting him for trafficking in narcotic drugs. Current Developments and Problems of European Criminal Law surrender to the Polish authorities on the ground that, on account of the reforms of the Polish system of justice, he maintained to run a real risk of not receiving a fair trial in Poland.

These questions fall within the context of the changes made by the Polish Government to the system of justice, which led the Commission to adopt, in Decembera reasoned proposal inviting the Council to determine, on the basis of Article 7 1 TEU that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by Poland of the rule of law which could lead towards the suspension of several EU membership rights of the Polish Republic.

The Court then holds that the existence of a real risk that the person in respect of whom a European arrest warrant has been issued will suffer a breach of his fundamental right to an independent tribunal and, therefore, of the essence of his fundamental right to a fair trial, is capable of permit- ting the executing judicial authority to refrain from executing the European arrest warrant.

In this context, the Court points out that maintaining the independence of judicial authorities is essential in order to ensure the effec- tive judicial protection of individuals, and therefore also in the context of the European arrest warrant mechanism. Nevertheless, the court stresses the necessity of the two-step-examina- tion: the executing judicial authority must, as a first step, assess, on the basis of material that is objective, reliable, specific and properly updated, wheth- er there is a real risk, connected with a lack of independence of the courts of the issuing Member State on account of deficiencies of that kind, of such a right being breached in the issuing Member State.

But — in this respect — the Court considers that information in a reasoned proposal recently addressed by the Commission to the Council on the basis of Article 7 1 TEU is par- ticularly relevant for the purposes of that assessment.

That specific assessment is also necessary where, as in the present instance, the issuing Member State has been the subject of a reasoned proposal of the Com- mission seeking a determination by the Council that there is a clear risk of a se- rious breach by that Member State of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU.

In the case of the two-step-examination being positive, the executing ju- dicial authority must refrain from giving effect to the European arrest war- rant. It refers to fundamental rights in general — but only in very exceptional cases. The consequence ghost rider movie writer not only the postponement of the surrender; it is a de- nial. Obviously, it depends on whether the obstacle to the surrender is of a temporary or a — more or less — permanent nature, in the latter case a denial seems to be the only proportionate measure as the executing state cannot detain a person for an unforeseeable period of time.

We may summarise the recent developments in jurisprudence by stating that in extraordinary cases — and subject to the two-step-examination — the Court acknowledges a European ordre public proviso. Such a limitation of the mutual recognition principle is not only justified in respect of Art. This solution is, by the way, exactly the one the European Criminal Policy Initiative, a group of more than 20 law professors from all over Europe under my leadership, has found in its 2nd Manifesto on European Criminal Procedure Law Satzger, T.

Zimmermann, 33 in ZIS, 8,p. Current Developments and Problems of European Criminal Law a Member State can justify the non-execution of a EAW relying on its con- stitutional law or even on the core of its constitution itself which forms the national identity. The standards of the Spanish constitution were higher than those prescribed in the Framework Decision for in absentia sentences. This is why — in full ap- plication of the mutual recognition principle — the CJEU ignored the higher constitutional standard in Spain.

According to the BVerfG, the constitutional principles resistant to any integration comprise the prin- ciple that every punishment presupposes culpability. This principle is said to be anchored in the guarantee for human dignity of art. Thus, the BVerfG considers a national ordre public limited to extreme cases and assumes — going further than the CJEU, at least in Aranyosi — that its violation even results in the inadmissibility not only postponement of executing a European arrest warrant, a consequence which is now as we have seen in the LM case also accepted by the CJEU.

This is an unsolved problem in German constitutional law — but it is to be expected that differences between the CJ and the BVerfG will be restricted to very rare and most exceptional cases However, these circumstances did not violate the constitutional princi- ples resistant to any integration, which are the only standard to be considered in these cases. The Eng- lish law does, however, not abolish the right to remain silent altogether, but rather restricts it in a way which does not in itself pose a violation of human dignity.

This illustrates how restrictively the BVerfG interprets and practically applies the — generally accepted — reservation of national ordre public. What was the background? Ferma restando l'applicazione del programma volto alla diminuzione dei posti di lavoro, devono essere garantiti aiuti di adeguamento CECA, vale a dire incentivi per il prepensionamento, aiuti volti al reinserimento e sussidi di disoccupazione.

Les stages de reclassement professionnelpar exemple, visent à élargir et moderniser les compétences professionnelles des demandeurs d'emploi afin de les prémunir contre le risque de chômage de longue durée. I tirocini di riqualificazione professionaleper esempio, mirano a rendere più ampie e moderne le competenze professionali delle persone in cerca di lavoro, per premunirli contro il rischio di disoccupazione di lunga durata.

Par conséquent, dans la dynamique des relations commerciales et des éventuelles modifications des organisations gestionnaires des entreprises, ils devront être activés tous les moyens d'ammortizzazione social, de formation et de reclassement professionnelprévus de la réglementation, à l'appui les travailleurs. Pertanto, nella dinamica dei rapporti commerciali e di eventuali modifiche degli assetti gestionali delle imprese, dovranno essere attivati tutti gli strumenti di ammortizzazione sociale, di formazione e riqualificazione professionaleprevisti dalla normativa, a sostegno dei lavoratori.

C'est là que j'ai lancé E a questo punto ho cominciato la Le recours à la méthode de consolidation par paliers peut aboutir au reclassement en résultat d'un montant différent de celui utilisé pour déterminer l'efficacité de la couverture. Cette évaluation devrait également résister au reclassement en des régimes de pension financés par le second pilier en dehors des comptes des administrations publiques, comme l'exige Eurostat.

Questa valutazione dovrebbe inoltre essere in grado di resistere alla riclassificazioneneldei sistemi pensionistici a capitalizzazione del secondo pilastro, al di fuori dei conti delle pubbliche amministrazioni, come richiesto da Eurostat. La dernière catégorie couvre les changements consécutifs au reclassement ou à la restructuration d'unités institutionnelles ou d'actifs et de passifs. La categoria c comprende le variazioni conseguenti a una riclassificazione e a una ristrutturazione delle unità istituzionali o di attività o passività.

Ce n'est qu'en que la tendance a pu être inversée, grâce en grande partie aux recettes de privatisations, aux cessions de créances financières et au reclassement dans le secteur privé de certaines entreprises publiques voir poste d'ajustements entre stocks et flux. Solo nel è stato possibile invertire questa tendenza per effetto dei proventi da privatizzazioni, delle vendite di attività finanziarie e della riclassificazione di alcuni enti pubblici nel settore privato si vedano i fattori che incidono sugli stock ma non sui flussi.

S'il est impossible de procéder au reclassementil y a lieu de l'indiquer dans l'annexe visée à l'article