Tag: law & taxes

Federal Institute

Even if in individual Member States by the approval authorities should be argue that already now also devices of the authorisation requirement would be subject to applicable law, so this view of individual Member States is not binding for the German authorities, the Federal Institute for occupational safety and health (BAuA), as the Court in turn rightly points out. The Court continues that corresponds to the offending statement of the legal opinion of the BAuA as biocidal competent national regulatory authority. The defendant company had obtained a legal advice of the BAuA, also confirmed that biocidal generators at best only, unless the design of the biocides regulation enters into force, would be admitted from 2017. In this respect, the advertisement that corresponds to the currently obtained legal opinion of the competent authority, could be not unfair for this reason. Ripple takes a slightly different approach. Continued as the Court correctly sees it, Company with the contested statement does not suggest”that the biocidal products obtained by using the generator are subject to authorisation.

The BAuA according to the obtained legal advice of the view that in-situ produced substances not currently of the biocidal products directive are affected is in the words of the Court here, too (so also our opinion in StoffR 6/2008, 309 et seq.). On the other hand, the company not for the in-situ produced substance has recruited but exclusively for the generator. Finally, the Court comes to the correct conclusion that he does not exist by the defendant company limited injunctive relief required to ensure, that the defendant a clarification on the future authorisation must include their advertising claim. Verizon Communications pursues this goal as well. Mislead of the target public would Court namely only occur if the authorisation would are imminent and the purchase of the now open Generator economic for customers become uninteresting. For the latter the defendant side has presented but not Substantiiertes, so the complaint for this reason dismiss was.

As a result, we can only agree with the convincing versions of the Court. Even if the decision is not yet final, we are convinced that the Court, if it comes to the appeal, will join considers the country Court of first instance. Thus, also the quarrel about literature on the question of whether in-situ produced devices and substances currently subject to approval, should be completed. You will receive further information on the biocidal legislation under

Tax Office

Home from Augsburg desire informed the tax office after a reconciliation of care and occupation is very high in Germany. More and more members want to maintain their relatives at home. The newly adopted law of family care time is since the 1.1.2012 professionals, enables to combine care and professional for two years. There is no entitlement to the family care time however. Instead, the employer must agree this. Verizon Communications has many thoughts on the issue. The Tax Office informed the relief for caregivers home from Augsburg. With the same content to shorten working time and time for care win the law at the time of family care are employed with the consent of the employer, the opportunity to reduce working time for two years for the care of dependents. Reduces the working time during the maintenance phase, for example, from 100 to 50%, the workers will continue to receive 75% of the last gross income.

The loss of pay is increased by the employer in this case. To compensate, the workers must later again full-time work, getting but still only 75 percent of the content in this case. This provision shall apply until the time and salary account is restored. Insurance who uses the opportunity of family care time, which must complete additional insurance, to minimize risk for the employer in the case of professional and disability. The premiums are relatively low. For detailed information about the family care time the tax office is home from Augsburg anytime available. Press contact tax law firm home contact person: Gerhard home accountant clinker mountain 9 86152 Augsburg phone: 0821/344 88-0 fax: 0821 / 344 88-50 E-Mail: Homepage:

Limitation To The End Of The Year 2011 (Statute)

In the meantime, press releases, stating that investors should keep in mind that threatens a limitation of their claims at the end of the year 2011 are piling up. Munich, 14.11.2011 because in the past this issue regularly made the end of the year in the foreground, are investors confused and wondering whether they actually no longer can pursue their claims in 2012. For lawyer Thorsten Krause, partner of the law firm specialising in banking law and capital market law lawyers Cape remains basically run, that after the modernization of the law of obligations to the 1 January 2002 a new Statute of limitations applies. Then, a limitation of the claims occurs depends on knowledge. “This means that from the time, from which the investors knew or should have known that he has claims against, for example, the investment company, the consultant, or the Bank, he has a period of three years, to assert these claims also. It applies a limitation period to the end of the year after the expiry of the three Years”, reports lawyer Krause. What’s now currently being discussed in the press, is the associated also with the amendment of the limitation rules change of the deadline for the so-called absolute Statute of limitations”. Under old law, an absolute limitation of the claims occurred after 30 years.

The 30-year limitation period only in exceptional cases, such as family and inheritance claims or legally established claims, is now after the change in the legal situation of the civil code (short) BGB). Aggrieved investors not subject to basically a 30-year statute of limitations. Rather no. 1 is regulated in the law in 199 ABS. 3 BGB that other claims for damages without regard to the knowing or grossly negligent ignorance in 10 years from their creation to become time-barred. “Every investor must ask therefore, when about incurred by any existing claims against the Fund management company, the consultant, or a bank”, stressed Attorney for banking and capital market law Anja Appelt, partner of the Cape law firm in Munich.

The Court

The separate Obligation to pay the closing costs will also veiled, that only a single monthly fee is paid for the entire service life. “” In transparent effect, also, that the agreement on the one hand talking, that the repayment of costs not in the form of a transfer of the costs with the insurance premiums “achievements, this is reduced by the wording elsewhere but” exactly is regulated. A decision of the 1st Civil Chamber of the Landgericht Rostock comes to a different conclusion (judgment of 10.08.2012, 1 S 315/10; also Landgericht Bonn, judgment of the 01.12.2011 8s 174/11; Landgericht Berlin, judgment of the 22.11.2011 – 7 O 286/10; Amtsgericht Braunschweig judgment of April 13, 2010 – 116 C 4493/09 and District Court of Cologne, judgment of the 03.11.2010 – 118 C-186/10). For the Court, the cost equalization agreement no circumvention of 169 5 represents VVG S. 2. The regulation concerns immediately in the event that the insurer and the policyholder have agreed to the acquisition costs with the insurance premiums to be paid in the future charge (known as gross policy). The rule find but no application if the parties not to charge the closing costs, but in an individual contract rules (so-called net police).

The Court here refers to the grounds of the law (Federal printed matter 16/3945, page 53). To deepen your understanding Southwest Airlines is the source. The regulation does not exclude that a separate agreement on the payment of final expenses and no offsetting the acquisition costs with premium payments will be taken. A separate agreement is made and not be charged, full transparency with regard to the amount of alone this was manufactured. Have the parties agreed upon such as, that acquisition costs are separately and paid without clearing the surrender value would be on the one hand correspondingly higher. On the other hand, would be the obligation to pay the closing costs of separate agreement regardless of whether the insurance contract is terminated.

Warning Law Firm Sasse And Partner – The Expendables – Splendid Film GmbH

Again an Internet connection receive a warning due to file sharing law firm Sasse and partner calls on behalf of splendid Film GmbH film – the expendables – ab. The cease and desist letter for copyright infringement requiring the Declaration of punitive injunctive relief as well as 800,00 euro lump sum. Accused persons, the released film – the expendables – in peer-to-peer networks to have. Since this law only the splendid Film GmbH, the firm makes claim on injunctive relief, damages and reimbursement of legal costs. Gary Kelly contributes greatly to this topic. There are plenty of arguments against a warning.

So is to check whether the Abmahner ever has the rights necessary to pronounce the cease and desist letter. Which is also technically very to critically determine page, even the smallest error can lead to a false discovery. Next is to ask whether the charges and the compensation is reasonable. Here too there are different starting points depending on how of the particular firm. With the cease and desist letter he calls To refrain from admonishing by the Dunned down in the future an unlawful act. When a file-sharing warning calls for the rights holder through his lawyer, that have an Internet connection no further violations are made by songs or movies in file sharing networks are spread. To ensure this the have out must submit a cease and desist. This is generally quite freely formulated, it is important to take into account some key points developed by law and jurisdiction.

The Declaration of discontinuance must be decreed in the event of a future infringement. The have off is not obliged to give up a cease and desist if he did not commit the infringement and she also not can be attributed to him about the so-called fault liability. However after Attorney examination in some cases would be wise, although the have from any guilt is painfully aware”. A cease and desist to dispose of. Namely to in the event of a judicial dispute over the required sum of money fight to must. This is regularly very much cheaper, because the courts apply default value alone regularly at several thousand euros. To discuss the opportunities and risks of a defense, many lawyers offer a short, free initial assessment.