Search results (210 cards)

Advanced search

Translated Summaries

In The Journal of Regulation the summaries’ translation are done by the Editors and not by the authors

ENGLISH

On December 20, 2011, the European Commission adopted a decision based on the Almark ruling that expounds upon the four conditions necessary so that compensation paid by a State to any state-owned or private company entrusted with the operation of a public service not require prior notification of the European Commission, despite the general prohibition on State Aids. Each state has a wide margin of discretion in the definition of services that could be classified as being services of general economic interest. A communication and de minimis regulation will complete this decision.

 

FRENCH

Par une décision du 20 décembre 2011, la Commission Européenne, s’appuyant sur l’arrêt Almark , développe les 4 conditions pour que les compensations versées par un Etat à une entreprise, qu’elle soit publique ou privée, pour qu’elle assure un service public, ne donne pourtant pas lieu à notification à la Commission européenne, malgré la prohibition des aides d’Etat. Les Etats sont légitimes à définir les activités qui relèvent de l’intérêt économique général. Une communication et un règlement de minimis  complèteront cette décision.

SPANISH

El 20 de diciembre del 2010, la Comisión Europea adoptó una decisión basada en la decisión Almark que trata de las cuatro condiciones necesarias para que una compensación pagada por el Estado a cualquier empresa pública o privada no requiera de una notificación previa a la Comisión Europea, a pesar de la prohibición general sobre Asistencias Estatales. Cada estado tiene un gran margen de discreción en la definición de servicios que podrían ser clasificados como servicios de interés económico general. Una comunicación y regulación de minimis completará la decisión.

ITALIAN

Il 20 dicembre 2011, la Commissione europea, sulla base della decisione Almark, ha identificato le quattro condizioni in presenza delle quali gli aiuti dati dallo Stato ad un’azienda, pubblica o privata, per far assicurare un servizio pubblico, non sarà necessario fare una notifica alla Commissione, nonostante il divieto di procedere con degli aiuti di Stato. Ogni Stato avrà un ampio margine di manovra nella definizione dei servizi che possono essere qualificati come servizi di interesse generale. Una comunicazione ed un regolamento de minimis completeranno questa decisione.

ARABIC

في قرار مؤرّخ يوم 20 ديسمبر2011’ اللّجنة الأوروبية* تعتمد على قرار الحكم ألمارك* لوضع أربع شروط للتّعويضات التّي تدفعها الدّولة للشركة سواء كانت عامة أو خاصة’ لأنّه يوفّر خدمة عمومية’ ومع ذلك’ لا يؤدّي في الإخطار إلى اللّجنة الأوروبية على الرّغم من حظر المعاونة الدّولية. الدّول غير المشروعة يحدّدون الأنشطة الّتي تندرج في إطار الاقتصادية العامة. اتصال و تنظيم سوف يستكملني الحد الأدنى للقرار.  
  
*La Commission Européenne
*arrêt Almark

..................

Other translations forthcoming.

 

Translated summaries

ENGLISH

The FCC’s 2010 “open Internet” (net neutrality) order went into effect on November 20, 2011. Verizon Communications and Metro PCS have challenged the FCC Order in court, alleging that the FCC lacked statutory power to impose net neutrality rules in connection with Internet access services.

FRENCH

L’ordonnace 2010 de la FFC (le régulateur nord-américain des communications) "open Internet" est entrée en vigueur le 20 novembre 2011. Les sociétés Verizon Communications et Metro PCS ont contesté devant le juge cette ordonnance, alléguant que la FCC n’avait pas le pouvoir légal d’imposer des règles sur la neutralité du net concernant  l'accès aux services d'Internet.

Translated Summaries

In The Journal of Regulation the summaries’ translation are done by the Editors and not by the authors

ENGLISH

Interchange fees set by the main credit/debit card associations play an important role in the retail banking sector, however they remain largely invisible to consumers.

 

FRENCH

Les frais d’interchange fixés par les principales associations de cartes de crédit jouent un rôle important dans le secteur des services bancaires de détail, mais ils restent largement invisibles pour les consommateurs.

SPANISH

Tasas de intercambio establecidas por las asociaciones principales de tarjetas de crédito/débito juegan un rol importante en el sector de negocio de bancario minorista. No obstante, permanecen por la mayor parte invisibles a los consumidores.

ITALIAN

Le commissioni interscambio su carte di credito/debito fissate dalle principali associazioni giocano un ruolo importante nel settore dell’attività bancaria al dettaglio, tuttavia sono ancora poco visibili ai consumatori.

ARABIC

 رُسوم التبادُل التي وُضِعت مِن طرفِ جمعيات بطاقة الائتمان لها دورُ أساسي في مَجال المصرفية للخدمات الافرادية, لكِنَّ بقِيت هذِهِ الرُّسُوم غيرُ ظاهِرة لِكثِير المُستهلِكين. 

..................

Other translations forthcoming.

 

Translated Summaries

ENGLISH

The Tribunal des Conflits ruled in a May 2, 2011 decision that administrative courts have jurisdiction over examining the Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF­—French Financial Markets Authority)’s liability when the facts involved are unrelated to an individual decision against a corporate plaintiff, but rather pertain to the conditions under which applications for the approval of documents relating to public issuance of shares are examined: the AMF is a legal person incorporated according to public law, and this is not a case in where jurisdiction had specifically been transferred to civil courts of law.

Administrative jurisdiction Administrative law - Block of competence - Civil court - Complexity - delay - Efficiency - Financial market authority - Financial regulator -Individual decision - Legal personality - Liability - Liberal market - Natural judge - Operation - Procedural reasoning - Public law - Procedure - Regulator - Statutory provision - Strict competence *

* In The Journal of Regulation, these keywords are done by the Editor and not by the Author.

 

 

FRENCH

Le Tribunal des conflits pose, dans un arrêt du 2 mai 2011, que le juge administratif est compétent pour connaître de la responsabilité de l’Autorité des marchés financiers, lorsque les faits reprochés ne tiennent pas à une décision individuelle visant la société demanderesse, mais aux conditions d’instructions de demande de visa de documents d’appel public à l’épargne : l’AMF est une personne morale de droit public et nous ne sommes plus dans un cas précis de transfert de compétence au bénéfice du juge judiciaire.

 

SPANISH

Informe Temático (Finanza): La responsabilidad del Regulador Financiero debe ser examinada por una jurisdicción administrativa cuando los hechos involucrados no conciernen estrictamente una decisión individual, el único hipótesis cuando una jurisdicción civil es legalmente competente.

El Tribunal des Conflits decidió el 2 de mayo del 2011 que las cortes administrativas tienen jurisdicción sobre la revisión de la responsabilidad de la Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF – la Autoridad francesa de los mercados financieros) cuando los hechos a mano son independientes de una decisión individual contra un demandante corporativo, sino pertenecen a las condiciones bajo las cuales la solicitud para la aprobación de documentos relacionados de acuerdo con derecho público, y esto no es un caso donde la jurisdicción haya sido específicamente transferido a cortes civiles de justicia.

.....................

Other translations forthcoming.

In Estonia, State owns the company Levira Ltd., which operates telecommunications. Meanwhile, the Minister for Economic Affairs which assigns and manages the radio frequencies, numberings and ensures the functioning of the universal service. But a principle of regulation prohibits the cumulation by the state of the quality of regulator and the quality of operator. This is why the European Commission opened an infringement procedure to the right of the European Union against the Estonia 1 July 2012 and asked by a reasoned opinion, to separate clearly its two activities, to ensure the required impartiality attached to the exercise of the powers of regulation.

Translated Summaries

In The Journal of Regulation the summaries’ translation are done by the Editors and not by the authors

ENGLISH

The current worldwide economic downturn has strongly impacted nearly every countries all over the world. Thus, in order to avoid any further global financial crisis, governments have to restructure their financial supervisory mechanisms. While many states in the western world started to reform their supervisory frameworks, a small post-communist country developed a very interesting and uncommon model. Indeed, Georgia decided to simplify its financial supervisory architecture by transfering all regulatory and supervisory powers to its central bank.

 

FRENCH

L’actuel ralentissement économique mondial a fortement impacté presque tous les pays du monde entier. Ainsi, afin d’éviter toute autre crise financière mondiale, les gouvernements ont à restructurer leurs mécanismes de supervision financière. Alors que de nombreux Etats dans le monde occidental ont commencé à réformer leurs systèmes de surveillance, un petit pays post-communiste a développé un modèle très intéressant et rare. En effet, la Géorgie a décidé de simplifier son architecture de supervision financière en transférant tous les pouvoirs de réglementation et de surveillance de sa banque centrale.

SPANISH

El sector financiero georgiano emergió de la crisis global financiera y el declive económico doméstico en una condición sustancialmente positiva, y por lo tanto, en el contexto económico actual, merece atraer un interés mundial.

ITALIAN

L’attuale rallentamento dell’economia mondiale ha avuto un impatto su quasi tutti gli stati del mondo. Così, per evitare una nuova crisi finanziaria globale, i governi devono modificare i propri meccanismi di supervisione finanziaria. Mentre molti stati occidentali hanno iniziato le riforme delle loro strutture di supervisione, un piccolo paese ex-comunista ha sviluppato un modello interessante e poco diffuso. In effetti, la Georgia ha deciso di semplificare la sua struttura di supervisione finanziaria trasferendo tutti i poteri di regolazione e supervisione finanziaria alla sua banca centrale.

.............................

Other translations forthcoming.

 

 It is often observed, even theorized, even advised and touted, that Compliance is a mechanism by which public authorities internalize political (eg environmental) concerns in big companies, which accept them, in Ex Ante, because they are rather in agreement with these "monumental goals" (eg saving the planet) and that this shared virtue is beneficial to their reputation. It is observed that this could be the most successful way in new configurations, such as digital.

But, and the Compliance Mechanism has often been brought closer to the contractual mechanism, this is only relevant if both parties are willing to do so. This is technically true, for example for the Deferred Prosecution, which requires explicit consent. This is true in a more general sense that the company wants to choose itself how to structure its organization to achieve the goals politically pursued by the State. Conversely, the compliance mechanisms work if the State is willing to admit the economic logic of the global private players and / or, if there are possible breaches, not to pursue its investigations and close the file it has opened, at a price more or less high.

But just say No.

As in contractual matters, the first freedom is negative and depends on the ability to say No.

The State can do it. But the company can do it too.

And Daimler just said No.

___

 

Publicly, including through an article in the Wall Street Journal of June 28, 2019.

The company sets out in a warning to the market that it is the object of a requirement on the part of the German Motor Authority (Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt)  of an allegation of fraud, by the installation of a software, aimed at misleading instruments for measuring emissions of greenhouse gases on cars using diesel.

It is therefore an environmental compliance mechanism that would have been intentionally countered.

On this allegation, the Regulator both warns the company of what it considers to be a fact, ie compliance fraud, and attaches it to an immediate measure, namely the removal of the circulation of 42,000 vehicles sold or proposed by Daimler with such a device.

And the firm answers : "No".

_____

 

Which is probably only beginning, since a No ends the dialogue of Ex Ante to project in the Ex Post sanction procedures, calls 6 observations:

 

• 1. No doubt Daimler, a German car manufacturing company, has it in mind in this allegation of fraud calculating pollution of its diesel cars what happened to his competitor Volkswagen: namely a multi-billion dollar fine, for lack of compliance in a similar hypothesis (so-called dieselgate). The strategic choice that is then made depends on education through the experience of the company, which benefits as such from a previous case that has had a very significant cost. Thus educated, the question is to measure the risk taken to refuse any cooperation, when the company can anticipate that it will still result in such an amount ....

 

• 2. In addition, we find the difficulty of the distinction of Ex Ante and Ex Post. Indeed, saying No will involve for the company a cost of confrontation with the Regulator, then the peripheral jurisdictions or review courts. But in Germany, the Government itself, concerning a bank threatened with compliance proceedings and almost summoned by the US regulator to pay "of its own free will" a transactional fine, felt that this was not normal, because it must be the judges who punish, after a contradictory procedure with due process and after established facts. 

 

• 3.  However, this is only an allegation, of probable assertions, of what legally allows to continue, but which does not allow to condemn. The confusion between the burden of proof, which presupposes the obligation to prove the facts before being able to sanction, and the burden of the allegation, which only supposes to articulate plausibility before being able to prosecute, is very damaging, particularly if we are committed to the principles of Repressive Law, such as the presumption of innocence and the due process. This distinction between these two probationary charges is at the heart of the probatory system in the Compliance Law. Because Compliance Law always looks for more efficiency, tends to go from the first to the second, to give the Regulator more power, since businesses are so powerful ....

 

• 4. But the first question then arises: what is the nature no so much of the future measure to be feared, namely a sanction that could be taken later, against Daimler, if the breach is proven, or which will not be applied to the firm if the breach is not established; but what is the nature of the measure immediately taken, namely the return of 42,000 vehicles?

 

• This may seem like an Ex Ante measurement. Indeed, the Compliance assumes non-polluting cars. The Regulator may have indications that these cars are polluting and that the manufacturer has not made the necessary arrangements for them to be less polluting (Compliance) or even organized so that this failure is not detected ( Compliance fraud).

 

• This allegation suggests that there is a risk that thiese cars will polluting. They must immediately be removed from circulation for the quality of the environment. Here and now. The question of sanctions will arise after that, having its procedural apparatus of guarantees for the company that will be pursued. But see the situation on the side of the company: having to withdraw 42,000 vehicles from the market is a great damage and what is often called in Repressive Law a "security measure" taken while the evidence is not yet met could deserve a requalification in sanction. Jurisprudence is both abundant and nuanced on this issue of qualification.

 

• 5. So to withdraw these cars, it is for the company to admit that it is guilty, to increase itself the punishment. And if at this game, taken from the "cost-benefit", as much for the company immediately assert to the market that this requirement of Regulation is unfounded in Law, that the alleged facts are not exacts, and that all this the judges will decide. It is sure at all whether these statements by the company are true or false, but before a Tribunal no one thinks they are true prima facie, they are only allegations.
•  And before a Court, a Regulator appears to have to bear a burden of proof in so far as he has to defend the order he has issued, to prove the breach which he asserts exists, which justifies the exercise he made of his powers. The fact that he exercises his power for the general interest and impartially does not diminish this burden of proof.

 

• 6. By saying "No", Daimler wants to recover this classic Law, often set aside by Compliance Law, classic Law based on burden of proof, means of proof, and prohibition of punitive measures - except imminent and future imminente and very serious damages  - before 'behavior could be sanctioned following a sanction procedure.
• Admittedly, one would be tempted to make an analogy with the current situation of Boeing whose aircraft are grounded by the Regulator in that he considers that they do not meet the conditions of safety, which the aircraft manufacturer denies , Ex Ante measurement that resembles the retraction measure of the market that constitutes the recall request of cars here operated.
• But the analogy does not work on two points. Firstly, flight activity is a regulated activity that can only be exercised with the Ex Ante authorization of several Regulators, which is not the case for offering to sell cars or to drive with. This is where Regulatory Law and Compliance Law, which often come together, here stand out.Secundly, the very possibility that planes of which it is not excluded that they are not sure is enough, as a precaution, to prohibit their shift. Here (about the cars and the measure of the pollution by them), it is not the safety of the person that is at stake, and probably not even the overall goal of the environment, but the fraud with respect to the obligation to obey Compliance. Why force the withdrawal of 42,000 vehicles? If not to punish? In an exemplary way, to remind in advance and all that it costs not to obey the Compliance? And there, the company says: "I want a judge".

 

​______

 

This Recommendation is an international instrument to address regulatory policy, management and governance as a whole-of-government activity that can and should be addressed by sectoral ministries, regulatory and competition agencies. A copy of the Recommendation can be obtained here.

The implementation of a joint consumer information service on Insurance, Banking, and Insurance within the ‘Autorité de Contrôle prudential – ACP’ (French Prudential Control Authority), raises questions as to the way in which the service will be coordinated with the ACP’s other activities. The signature of the agreement creating the new joint service was the occasion for Christian Noyer, Governor of the Banque de France (Central Bank of France) and President of the ACP, to clarify that this joint service, whose principal goal is consumer protection, complements the ACP’s other missions.