Choice of law in b2b contracts: Survival of the fittest Exploratory interviews with Dutch lawyers This paper addresses the question if and to what extent lawyers consider the quality and the content of a legal system to be chosen to govern an international contract between two businesses a b2b contract in the pre-contractual phase They were asked why, by whom and when any legal system is chosen in exploratory qualitative interviews. These question are relevant in the light of different theoretical discussions, for instance concerning regulatory competition and the legal origin debate.
Within the political and legislative cycle of the European Union, promises to be an eventful year, given that it is the last full year before the EU elections when a new European Commission will be appointed and the European Parliament will hold new elections.
This Regulatory competition, in practice, that there will be pressure in on the current European Commission and European Parliament to act on all their initiatives and to complete their legislative agenda. Our team of EU lawyers will continue to report on noteworthy developments including for instance, Brexit and its implications for competition and regulatory policies, the surge in foreign direct investment controls, the opening of new competition enforcement fronts, the practical implementation of the EU damages directive, as well as the development of alternative means Regulatory competition resolution in competition investigations and their impact on rights of defence.
We invite you to contact us directly should you have an interest in discussing any topic further or in obtaining additional information. We hope you will enjoy the read! Screening of Foreign Direct Investment in the EU The European Commission has proposed a new framework to review foreign direct investment FDI in the EU in order to protect critical European assets against investment that would be detrimental to legitimate interests of the Union or its Member States in light of security concerns or public order of the EU or the Member States.
The proposed Regulation provides legal certainty for Member States that maintain a screening mechanism for FDI or that wish to adopt such mechanism. The tightening of national security reviews in other jurisdictions, notably the US, has led to increased interest by countries with ambitious FDI programs, such as China, to target the high technology sector in the EU.
In light of these trends, one can expect the EU proposal to advance and influence the prospects and legal steps required for FDI in the EU. The prospects for a TTIP that would open up freer transatlantic trade are now remote, and the WTO itself is plagued by depopulation of its Appellate Body as a result of US refusal to approve new appointments.
These developments have prompted the European Commission to accelerate trade agreement negotiations with Mexico, Japan and other trading partners, creating new opportunities for EU importers and exporters to compete more effectively.
At the same time, the US threat to abandon the Iran nuclear deal and reinstitute strict sanctions poses a threat not only to the EU policy of constructive engagement with Iran, but also an eventual threat of secondary US sanctions that could restrict US business opportunities for EU companies that continue trading with Iran.
These currents and cross-currents affecting international trade are playing out at a remarkably rapid pace that will require constant reassessment and responses from EU companies and policy makers. Competition in the digital world Competition enforcement is set to continue to focus on the digital world to ensure that European consumers enjoy the full benefits of innovation.
The European Commission is currently collecting data on the power of large digital companies focusing on concentration trends, margins, firm entry and exit.
The findings will feed into an ongoing debate on whether a more interventionist competition approach is needed for online markets.
Key areas of focus will be i how Big Data should be treated in the context of merger control and to what extent they can confer market power, ii the follow-up from the e-commerce sector enquiry and continued enforcement against pricing restrictions and geo-blocking in online distribution channels and finally, iii algorithms or decision-making software which is at the core of the functioning of many digital products.
In parallel to a number of EU legislative initiatives against tax evasion, the European Commission is testing 1, tax rulings of companies communicated by the Member States in the light of EU State aid rules.
All multinationals with operations in Europe and benefitting from tax rulings or other favorable tax provisions are targeted. The response to this question will require companies to thoroughly scrutinise their tax affairs and apply the difficult and evolutive concept of State aid under EU law.
This term refers to misinformation, often spread through online platforms, to deliberately mislead and damage an institution, a business or a person. It is now widely seen as a real threat to democracy.
Beyond its political ramifications, fake news can also cause damage to markets and affects a wide range of public policies and sectors, including health, the environment, the economy and finance.
The European Commission has recently launched a public consultation to collect views from all parties concerned by fake news across the EU. The purpose is to understand the scope of the problem and the effectiveness of measures already put in place by industry to prevent the spread of disinformation online.
The consultation, which ends on 23 Februaryis an opportunity to influence the directions for future action in the EU and to shape new measures to improve the reliability of information. Competition authorities are also following this issue closely since content and quality are significant competition parameters in the online platform market.
Bid rigging generally raises prices and lowers quality, at the expense of taxpayers. Eradication of bid rigging has become a priority in the EU. National competition authorities actively investigate and impose significant fines for bid-rigging violations.
They tend to focus on key sectors such as, inter alia, construction and public health, but smaller industries are also facing risk of investigations.Regulatory competition can be between states, regions, or countries, depending on the scope of a company’s operations.
Law is often the most common way a nation creates regulatory competition. Courts and elected lawmakers are the two major groups that create or enforce a nation’s laws. Regulatory competition may be defined as a process involving the se-lection and deselection of laws in a context where jurisdictions com-pete to attract and retain scarce economic resources.
The earliest, and still influential, theoretical models (in particular Tiebout, ) envis-.
Mar 29, · Celebration event for winning students in America’s Got Regulatory Science Talent Competition conducted at University of Maryland CERSI and University of . Debunking the 'Race to the Bottom' Theory of Regulatory Competition. William Yeatman. January 19, Trump Administration Nominates Holly Greaves to Most Important EPA Post You've Never Heard of.
William Yeatman. January 3, With the Stroke of a Pen, Trump Claims Victory in the Decades-Long Battle Over ANWR. The main regulation applying to this type of token issuance is the Anti-Money Laundering (AML) regulation.
Utility tokens are tokens intended to provide access to an application or service by. The results further support the view that regulatory competition promotes regulatory diversity by allowing heterogeneous firms to self-select into different corporate governance regimes.
While the average firm favors market-oriented laws that give relatively strong protection to shareholders, a segment of small firms have stronger preferences.