scholarly journals The Effects of Institutional Measures: Geographical Indication in Mercosur and the EU

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 3476
Author(s):  
Guilherme Silva Fracarolli
Keyword(s):  
Demographic Data ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Geographical Indication ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Analysis Framework ◽  
Food Markets ◽  
Uniform System ◽  
Institutional Participation ◽  
The Eu

As agri-food markets become increasingly specialized, governments are provoked to provide these products legal support to protect their supply and trade sources. After several treaties, the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement was signed in 1995 as the broadest ever reached. The agreement allowed Geographical Indication (GI) of agri-food products to be targeted. The GIs of Mercosur and the European Union are very different in absolute and relative numbers, showing evidence of significant institutional participation difference. Thus, this work aims to compare the effects of institutional mechanisms promoted by Mercosur and the EU on this market by establishing an analysis framework based on the respective laws and agreements against demographic data. The results show that adherence to TRIPS is a necessary condition but not sufficient for its development. Adherence to the Lisbon Agreement also strengthens the capacity to sustain a substantial GI market. Additionally, the standardization of regulatory treatment and interventionist action helps stabilize and promote institutions in the GI market. Finally, this study concludes from the EU and Mercosur cases that a more robust, promotive and uniform system through its legal basis and dedicated structures results in more trustable institutions and potentially a more abundant market for GI products.

Geographical Indications for agricultural products and foodstuffs in the EU: to what extent does the protection level match the scope of the subject matter?

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 270-294
Author(s):  
Kim Van der Borght ◽  
Jianmei Gao ◽  
Xiaoting Song
Keyword(s):  
Human Factors ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Agricultural Products ◽  
Production Model ◽  
Geographical Indication ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Protection Level ◽  
Protected Designation Of Origin ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Eu

To recognize an origin-linked production model and the typicity of the products, the European Union (EU) has introduced the Geographical Indication (GI) protection regime. By requiring that relevant production steps must take place in the defined locale, the regime confers exclusive production rights on the local producers. There are two GI categories in the EU. The first is Protected Designation of Origin (PDO), covering products with a qualitative link to both natural and human factors in the designated region. The second is Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), the scope of which overlaps with PDO and covers products that have a qualitative or reputational link with their regional origin. This article examines whether exclusive rights are necessary and appropriate to fulfil their objectives and argues that these rights, when extended to human factors and reputation, cannot always be justified. It is argued that the overlapping scope of the subject matter undermines the ability of these two GI protection categories to provide transparent and trustworthy information for consumers. Finally, this article proposes to redefine the scope of the subject matter and the protection level for PDO and PGI by approaching the product/origin link from a resource utilization, integration and sustainability perspective. *Corresponding author: [email protected]. The research for this article was partially funded by Vrije Universiteit Brussel/China Scholarship Council Joint Scholarship and the National Social Science Fund of China (Grant No. 16 ZDA236).

EUNAVFOR OPERATION ATALANTA OFF SOMALIA: THE EU IN UNCHARTERED LEGAL WATERS?

2015 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 533-568 ◽  
Author(s):  
Efthymios Papastavridis
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Careful Analysis ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Extensive Discussion ◽  
Operation Atalanta ◽  
Somali Coast ◽  
The Eu

AbstractEUNAVFOR Operation Atalanta has been the first maritime operation of the European Union and it has certainly been successful given the significant decrease of pirate attacks off the Somali coast. However, various issues have been raised concerning its legal basis under international law and its legal framework, including questions of responsibility. These issues are particularly interesting since the EU has a more integrated legal order than other organizations involved in such operations (eg UN, NATO). The present article attempts to address these issues against the background of international and European law. Even though the legal basis of the Operation is clear from a European law perspective, there have been certain misconceptions concerning the legal basis of the Operation under international law. The delineation of the Operation's legal framework requires a careful analysis of the rules applicable to each of its phases and of its addressees, since each phase is subject to different rules which are binding on different actors. Finally, there is an extensive discussion of questions of responsibility, which were heavily influenced by the applicable Rules of Engagement and of the actual conduct of the Operation. The conclusion is that, at least on the high seas, responsibility should primarily rest with the flag States rather than with the EU. However, in most cases the EU is indirectly responsible for violations of international law, except in cases where suspected pirates are transferred to third States pursuant to EU agreements with such States, in which case it bears primarily responsibility.

scholarly journals Regulation of the food waste measuring in the EU in the light of the need of counteracting the food wastage

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Sylwia Łaba ◽  
Mikołaj Niedek ◽  
Krystian Szczepański ◽  
Robert Łaba ◽  
Anna Kamińska-Dwórznicka
Keyword(s):  
Food Waste ◽  
Current Data ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Uniform System ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Common ◽  
Different Characteristics ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The paper presents the analysis of the guidelines of the European Union, adopted in May, 2019, on the common methodology and quality requirements for the uniform system of measuring the food waste levels in the EU Member States. The Waste Framework Directive obliges the Member States to monitor the generation of food waste and to take measures to limit their production; however, a lack of uniform, reliable method for measuring the food waste levels in the EU causes that it is difficult to evaluate the scale of the problem, its sources and the related tendencies in time. The food waste is generated across the whole food supply chain; so, it is especially troublesome to determine the level of the discussed waste. The food waste with different characteristics, different source and different reasons for its generation is produced in each stage of the chain. The current data on the food wastes do not specify their quantities. In connection with this fact, a separate legal act was developed, that is, the Commission Delegated Decision (EU) dated 3 May 2019, focusing on the measuring of food waste, which is harmonized with the existing systems of data collection and provides a framework for further measures of the Member States in respect of the quantitative determination of the food waste that is generated.

scholarly journals СONFUSING SIMILARITY BETWEEN THE TRADEMARK AND GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION AS GROUND FOR REFUSAL OF REGISTRATION OF THE MARK: UKRAINE AND THE EU

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Badora
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Geographical Indications ◽  
Geographical Indication ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Legislation ◽  
Trademark Protection ◽  
Legal Structures ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
The Eu

The criterion of confusing similarity between the trademark and geographical indication as ground for refusal of registration of the mark in accordance with the legislation of Ukraine and the European Union has been studied. The degree of implementation of the norms of legislative acts in the field of trademark protection and protection of geographical indications in the Ukrainian legislation in the framework of cooperation of Ukraine with the European Union has been determined. The conclusions about the peculiarities of legal structures, similarities and differences between Ukrainian and European legislation in the context of defining the criterion of confusing similarity as ground for refusal of registration of a trademark have been made. The directions of a possible further study of the problematic of the article, taking into account the Ukrainian and European normative acts, aimed at protection of both trademarks and geographical indications as means of individualization, have been determined.

3 The Regulatory and Institutional Framework of EU Cartel Law

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Argenton Cédric ◽  
Geradin Damien ◽  
Stephan Andreas
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Consumer Welfare ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Regulatory Framework ◽  
Institutional Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Eu

This chapter deals with the institutional and regulatory framework that applies to cartels in the European Union (EU), going over both the substantive and procedural rules. The key legal basis for the prosecution of cartels resides under Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), as interpreted by the case law of the EU courts. Article 101 TFEU is a three-pronged provision. First, the chapter shows how Article 101(1) TFEU establishes a prohibition rule providing that any agreement between undertakings which may affect trade between Member States and which restricts competition is to be deemed incompatible with the internal market. Next, the chapter takes a look at how Article 101(2) TFEU declares that agreements deemed incompatible pursuant to Article 101(1) TFEU are null and void. The ways in which Article 101(3) TFEU embodies an exception to the default prohibition rule, which defuses the application of Article 101(1) for agreements that bring a positive net contribution to consumer welfare, is also discussed.

scholarly journals LEGAL PROTECTION OF GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS: NOVELTIES UNDER THE LEGISLATION OF UKRAINE

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Анатолій Кодинець ◽  
Анастасія Сідоренко
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Geographical Indications ◽  
Geographical Indication ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Industrial Property ◽  
Association Agreement ◽  
The Law ◽  
Indication Of Origin ◽  
The Eu

The article deals with the features of legal protection of geographical indications in Ukraine. The basic international acts protecting geographical indications in Ukraine are outlined, including the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property of 1883, the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights in 1994. (TRIPS Agreement), which operates within the framework of the World Trade Organization and extends to goods originating in the Parties to the Agreement, Madrid Agreement 1891. and the Lisbon Agreement on the Protection of Designations of Origin and their  International Registration in 1958, (Ukraine is not a party to the last two agreements). It also outlines the main national legal acts that protect this object of intellectual property, including the Civil Code of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine «On the Legal Protection of GeographicalIndications», the Law of Ukraine «On Protection against Unfair Competition» and others. The purpose of the study is to analyze changes in the legislation on the legal protection of geographical indications, which came into force on January 1, 2020 andbecame one of the ways to adapt the acts of national legislation to the law of the European Union in accordance with the commitments made by Ukraine after signing theAssociation Agreement with EU. These include changing the name of a special law that protects geographical indications. In addition, the change in terminology, the replacement of the term «indication of origin of goods» and its components by the term «geographical indication». The new also provides legal protection with homonymousgeographical indications; submitting an application for a geographical indication in electronic form, and at the same time providing a product specification and a description of its basic provisions. The article also addresses issues that remain unresolved, a large number of European geographical indications protected under the EU Association  Agreement and a very small number of registered geographical indications originating from the territory of Ukraine and the prospects of protecting national geographical indications in Ukraine and beyond.

scholarly journals The Roots of Legal Problems Arising in the Course of Automatic Exchange of Information in Tax Matters Between the EU and Russia

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 99-127
Author(s):  
Gennadi Tolstopyatenko ◽  
Stanislav Ageev
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
International Standards ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Exchange Of Information ◽  
Legal Problems ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

This article is devoted to the roots of material and procedural legal problems arising in the course of the automatic exchange of information between the European Union (EU) and Russia. This matter is topical since automatic exchange of information is a method of cooperation between tax authorities from different countries that is new and rapidly developing. From our point of view, it is high time to discuss some of the legal problems that are inherent in automatic exchange of information. As far as we can see, the fundamental problems are: (1) th problem of choosing an appropriate legal basis for automatic exchange of information and (2) the problem of the international standards for automatic exchange of information developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) being implemented to differing extents in the national legislation of different countries. In this article we suggest ways of solving the aforementioned problems in order to make automatic exchange of information between the EU and Russia more comfortable at the intergovernmental level. The solution of these problems will help to concentrate on another issue – the problem of protecting taxpayers’ rights, primarily the right to confidentiality, which is beyond the scope of this article but still very important in the light of the enhancement of global tax transparency.

scholarly journals Normative Power Europe and in Field of Human Rights: is the EU a Force for Good in the World?"

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Raja Noureddine
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Ethical Values ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Member States ◽  
Normative Power ◽  
The World ◽  
Normative Power Europe ◽  
The Eu

Ian Manners (2002) famously argued that the European Union (EU) is a ‘normative’ power. According to this description, ethical values are fundamental both to the legal basis, and to the day- to-day policies of the EU. This essay evaluates the claim that the EU is a Normative Power, focusing on the field of human rights. Certainly, the EU strongly promotes its human rights policies as being a force for good in the world. The EU’s has traditionally been supportive of international legal regimes, and its human rights values have conditioned its relations with other actors. Despite this, the EU’s policies have often failed to change the behaviour of other actors. The main cause of this gap between rhetoric and reality is the conflict between the traditional realist interests of member states, and the ideals of the EU. The EU must be more conscious of this clash, if its human rights policies are to be successful.

21. Institutions of the European Union

Public Law ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 756-794
Author(s):  
Andrew Le Sueur ◽  
Maurice Sunkin ◽  
Jo Eric Khushal Murkens
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Law Making ◽  
The Eu

This chapter introduces the project of European integration and discusses the legal basis of the EU, which consists of treaties that authorize law-making. It will identify the principal executive institutions of the European Union and their functions. They will be classified under the headings of supranationalism and intergovernmentalism. The chapter will also examine the process of enacting legislation and the role of the European Parliament. Drawing on an understanding of similar institutions and processes in the UK, the discussion is particularly concerned with an assessment of the institutions in terms of public law values, such as legitimacy, accountability, and transparency.

Surrender vs. Extradition: A Comparison Focused on Innovations of European Arrest Warrant

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Libor Klimek
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Unwanted Side Effect ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The European Union was aware of unwanted side-effect of the free movement of persons which has been the equally free movement criminals. With regards to Tampere European Council conclusions the traditional extradition procedures were replaced by the surrender procedure within Member States of the European Union. Th e article answers the question how the surrender procedure differs from classic extradition. It deals with the comparison of the surrender procedure and the extradition mechanism focused on innovations of the European arrest warrant. It points out at necessity of simpler and faster procedure in the EU. Further, it focuses on the comparison of the legal basis of both procedures and on procedural issues.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document