- Published on
Legal Terms - Unified Patent Court (European Patent Court)
A proposed court that will possess specialized jurisdiction over patent issues within the EU, hence eliminating the necessity for separate litigation in various member states. In 2013, an agreement to establish such a court was signed by 25 EU states, excluding Poland, Spain, and Croatia. Croatia subsequently opted to join, while the UK withdrew following Brexit. The commencement date of the UPC remains uncertain.
A proposed court that will possess specialized jurisdiction over patent issues within the EU, hence eliminating the necessity for separate litigation in various member states. In 2013, an agreement to establish such a court was signed by 25 EU states, excluding Poland, Spain, and Croatia. Croatia subsequently opted to join, while the UK withdrew following Brexit. The commencement date of the UPC remains uncertain.
- Published on
Legal Terms – European Arrest Warrant (EAW)
An arrest warrant that forgoes the use of *extradition in order to improve collaboration across the national jurisdictions of the EU's member states. These warrants have been in effect since January 2004 and are based on a Framework Decision that was established in June 2002.
The UK departed the EAW framework with its exit from the EU and the conclusion of the Brexit implementation period. A new emphasis on proportionality and the removal of the European Court of Justice as the court of last resort are the primary differences between the EU and UK's provisions for the surrender of citizens, which were included in the *European Union (Future Relationship) Act 2020. All 27 EU members were included as "trusted countries" in the government's Extradition (Provisional Arrest) Act 2020 (Schedule A1), which stipulates that requests for extradition would typically be granted without a UK arrest warrant.
An arrest warrant that forgoes the use of *extradition in order to improve collaboration across the national jurisdictions of the EU's member states. These warrants have been in effect since January 2004 and are based on a Framework Decision that was established in June 2002.
The UK departed the EAW framework with its exit from the EU and the conclusion of the Brexit implementation period. A new emphasis on proportionality and the removal of the European Court of Justice as the court of last resort are the primary differences between the EU and UK's provisions for the surrender of citizens, which were included in the *European Union (Future Relationship) Act 2020. All 27 EU members were included as "trusted countries" in the government's Extradition (Provisional Arrest) Act 2020 (Schedule A1), which stipulates that requests for extradition would typically be granted without a UK arrest warrant.
- Published on
Legal Terms - European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom)
The six members of the *European Coal and Steel Community established the organization in accordance with the 1957 Treaty of Rome, and it went into operation on January 1, 1958. In order to build the nuclear industries and guide them toward peaceful use in order to achieve a single energy market, Euratom was established to provide the industrial and technological conditions required.
The six members of the *European Coal and Steel Community established the organization in accordance with the 1957 Treaty of Rome, and it went into operation on January 1, 1958. In order to build the nuclear industries and guide them toward peaceful use in order to achieve a single energy market, Euratom was established to provide the industrial and technological conditions required.
- Published on
Legal Term - The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD)
It isestablished in 1990 as an intergovernmental bank to lend money for business and industrial initiatives in central and eastern European nations. All of the nations that make up the European Union, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and the nations of central and eastern Europe are considered members. 51 percent of the initial funding came from the EU. London is home to the bank's headquarters.
It isestablished in 1990 as an intergovernmental bank to lend money for business and industrial initiatives in central and eastern European nations. All of the nations that make up the European Union, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and the nations of central and eastern Europe are considered members. 51 percent of the initial funding came from the EU. London is home to the bank's headquarters.
- Published on
Legal Terms – European Central Bank
The European Central Bank (ECB) is the central bank of the European Union, to which the Maastricht Treaty binds member states that have ratified the European Monetary Union (EMU). Established in 1998, the European Central Bank (ECB) assumed its role as the Union's monetary and economic policy regulator in 1999. It collaborates closely with the central banks of the EMU member states.
The European Central Bank (ECB) is the central bank of the European Union, to which the Maastricht Treaty binds member states that have ratified the European Monetary Union (EMU). Established in 1998, the European Central Bank (ECB) assumed its role as the Union's monetary and economic policy regulator in 1999. It collaborates closely with the central banks of the EMU member states.
- Published on
Legal Terms - European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC)
The inaugural European Community, founded by the Paris Treaty in 1951 and operational from 1952. The ECSC established a unified market for coal, steel, iron ore, and scrap among member nations and coordinated their policies in these sectors. The Treaty lapsed in July 2002 after 50 years of enforcement. The founding members included Belgium, France, West Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands. In 1957, these six nations signed the Treaty of Rome, establishing the European Economic Community.
The inaugural European Community, founded by the Paris Treaty in 1951 and operational from 1952. The ECSC established a unified market for coal, steel, iron ore, and scrap among member nations and coordinated their policies in these sectors. The Treaty lapsed in July 2002 after 50 years of enforcement. The founding members included Belgium, France, West Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands. In 1957, these six nations signed the Treaty of Rome, establishing the European Economic Community.
- Published on
Legal Terms - European Commission (Commission of the European Communities)
A European Union institution established in 1967, has both administrative and legislative powers. The body consists of 27 Commissioners, one from each member state, who must be nationals of those states and are selected by mutual agreement among the member states, subject to approval by the European Parliament. Each Commissioner bears responsibility for a certain area of activity and supervises the corresponding Directorate General. Upon appointment, the Commissioners are obligated to prioritize the interests of the EU; they should not be perceived as representatives of their respective nations and must refrain from soliciting or accepting directives from any government or external entity. Each Commissioner is appointed for a renewable term of four years. The Commission's executive tasks encompass the administration of Community money and the enforcement of Community legislation (refer to the European Court of Justice). Its legislative tasks largely involve proposing legislative proposals to the *Council of the European Union and the *European Parliament, either at the behest of the Council or on its own initiative. It possesses its own legislative authority, partially under the Lisbon Treaty and partially through delegation by the Council, albeit restricted to a narrow scope of subjects.
A European Union institution established in 1967, has both administrative and legislative powers. The body consists of 27 Commissioners, one from each member state, who must be nationals of those states and are selected by mutual agreement among the member states, subject to approval by the European Parliament. Each Commissioner bears responsibility for a certain area of activity and supervises the corresponding Directorate General. Upon appointment, the Commissioners are obligated to prioritize the interests of the EU; they should not be perceived as representatives of their respective nations and must refrain from soliciting or accepting directives from any government or external entity. Each Commissioner is appointed for a renewable term of four years. The Commission's executive tasks encompass the administration of Community money and the enforcement of Community legislation (refer to the European Court of Justice). Its legislative tasks largely involve proposing legislative proposals to the *Council of the European Union and the *European Parliament, either at the behest of the Council or on its own initiative. It possesses its own legislative authority, partially under the Lisbon Treaty and partially through delegation by the Council, albeit restricted to a narrow scope of subjects.
- Published on
Legal Terms - mistake or error (in tax law)
As long as the Revenue hasn't sent out a notice that it is looking into the return, a taxpayer may, at any time up to 12 months from the date the return was filed, change a figure they unintentionally included on their personal tax return without providing an explanation (Taxes Management Act 1970 § 9ZA). For all other taxes, there are comparable provisions for returns. An "error or mistake" claim for restitution of the overpaid tax may be filed under the Tax Management Act 1970 sch 1AB if the taxpayer made a mistake on the tax return that resulted in an overpayment of tax. This claim needs to be submitted within four years of the tax year in question ending. The First-tier Tax Tribunal has the authority to extend the deadlines in these two clauses. In evaluating such an extension, the Tribunal must follow the guidelines outlined in William Martland v. HMRC [2018] UKUT 178 (TCC). According to this clause, a return input that turns out to be inaccurate later on is not considered a "mistake." In British Mexican Petroleum Co Ltd v. Jackson [1932] UKHL TC 16, the creditor waived a portion of the taxpayer company's substantial liability that had been accrued in year one.
According to the House of Lords, the release could not change the liability entered for the first year. STC 195 phased payments to architects in Symons v. Weeks [1983] included a sizeable portion of payment in advance, but the precise total cost could not be determined until the work was finished. Change was not allowed. Likewise, if the return was made in compliance with "prevailing practice" (TMA 1970 sch 1AB para 2(8)), even if that practice is later found to be incorrect, it is not a mistake. In contrast to the statute, rents were included in trading income in Carrimore Six Wheelers Ltd v. IRC [1944] 2 All ER 503.
There was no way to fix this. On a legal matter, the Revenue modified its interpretation in Arranmore Investment Co Ltd v. IRC [1973] TR 151, NI CA. The Court of Appeal denied the company's claim of error or mistake, stating that the "prevailing practice" under which the earnings were initially remitted was the prior interpretation of the law. In Monro v. R & C Comrs [2008] EWCA Civ 306, Mr. Monro included the profit he received from exercising an employee share option in his 1999/2000 tax return. He calculated the gain by deducting the price he paid from the £7,386,955 in sale profits. In Mansworth v. Jelley [2002] EWCA Civ 1829, the Court of Appeal declared that such a computation is unlawful after he filed his tax return. The market value, not the purchase price, should be the expense that is subtracted. As a result of this ruling, Mr. Munro paid £846,000 more in taxes than he was legally required to. HMRC declined to reimburse the excess tax. He made a plea. The court denied the tax repayment claim because, in 1999–2000, it was customary to deduct base costs rather than market values, which was later determined to be the proper method. In Lipman Gorman v. Karpnalel Ltd [1991] 2 AC 548, Lord Gough succinctly outlined the common law remedy of *restitution, which can be used as an alternative to the statutory claim. Deutsche Morgan v. IRC [2007] STC 1 (HL) and Campbell v. Hall (1774) 1 Cowp 204 both filed a claim for tax recovery under the law of restitution. *Sometimes a taxpayer's error can be fixed by the Court through rectification. In Toronto-Dominion Bank v. Oberoi & Others [2004] STC 1197, a foreign bank agreed to pay £345,000 in rent for a 22-month lease on a home for one of its senior staff members. The Court drastically reduced the *benefit in kind charged to the employee by renaming the £345k as "premium" instead of "rent."
As long as the Revenue hasn't sent out a notice that it is looking into the return, a taxpayer may, at any time up to 12 months from the date the return was filed, change a figure they unintentionally included on their personal tax return without providing an explanation (Taxes Management Act 1970 § 9ZA). For all other taxes, there are comparable provisions for returns. An "error or mistake" claim for restitution of the overpaid tax may be filed under the Tax Management Act 1970 sch 1AB if the taxpayer made a mistake on the tax return that resulted in an overpayment of tax. This claim needs to be submitted within four years of the tax year in question ending. The First-tier Tax Tribunal has the authority to extend the deadlines in these two clauses. In evaluating such an extension, the Tribunal must follow the guidelines outlined in William Martland v. HMRC [2018] UKUT 178 (TCC). According to this clause, a return input that turns out to be inaccurate later on is not considered a "mistake." In British Mexican Petroleum Co Ltd v. Jackson [1932] UKHL TC 16, the creditor waived a portion of the taxpayer company's substantial liability that had been accrued in year one.
According to the House of Lords, the release could not change the liability entered for the first year. STC 195 phased payments to architects in Symons v. Weeks [1983] included a sizeable portion of payment in advance, but the precise total cost could not be determined until the work was finished. Change was not allowed. Likewise, if the return was made in compliance with "prevailing practice" (TMA 1970 sch 1AB para 2(8)), even if that practice is later found to be incorrect, it is not a mistake. In contrast to the statute, rents were included in trading income in Carrimore Six Wheelers Ltd v. IRC [1944] 2 All ER 503.
There was no way to fix this. On a legal matter, the Revenue modified its interpretation in Arranmore Investment Co Ltd v. IRC [1973] TR 151, NI CA. The Court of Appeal denied the company's claim of error or mistake, stating that the "prevailing practice" under which the earnings were initially remitted was the prior interpretation of the law. In Monro v. R & C Comrs [2008] EWCA Civ 306, Mr. Monro included the profit he received from exercising an employee share option in his 1999/2000 tax return. He calculated the gain by deducting the price he paid from the £7,386,955 in sale profits. In Mansworth v. Jelley [2002] EWCA Civ 1829, the Court of Appeal declared that such a computation is unlawful after he filed his tax return. The market value, not the purchase price, should be the expense that is subtracted. As a result of this ruling, Mr. Munro paid £846,000 more in taxes than he was legally required to. HMRC declined to reimburse the excess tax. He made a plea. The court denied the tax repayment claim because, in 1999–2000, it was customary to deduct base costs rather than market values, which was later determined to be the proper method. In Lipman Gorman v. Karpnalel Ltd [1991] 2 AC 548, Lord Gough succinctly outlined the common law remedy of *restitution, which can be used as an alternative to the statutory claim. Deutsche Morgan v. IRC [2007] STC 1 (HL) and Campbell v. Hall (1774) 1 Cowp 204 both filed a claim for tax recovery under the law of restitution. *Sometimes a taxpayer's error can be fixed by the Court through rectification. In Toronto-Dominion Bank v. Oberoi & Others [2004] STC 1197, a foreign bank agreed to pay £345,000 in rent for a 22-month lease on a home for one of its senior staff members. The Court drastically reduced the *benefit in kind charged to the employee by renaming the £345k as "premium" instead of "rent."
- Published on
Legal Terms – escape
. The common-law crime of evading legal detention. The custody could take place outdoors, in a police station, or even in a prison. As long as his imprisonment is legal (for example, he might be held to furnish a *specimen of breath), the escaper need not have been charged with any crimes. Furthermore, he doesn't have to break out in any way. Helping a prisoner escape or allowing a prisoner who is being held in connection with a criminal case to escape is also illegal. A person commits the distinct crime of jail breaking if he actually escapes a building where he is legally detained. R v. Dhillon [2006] 1 WLR 1535 is the case.
. The common-law crime of evading legal detention. The custody could take place outdoors, in a police station, or even in a prison. As long as his imprisonment is legal (for example, he might be held to furnish a *specimen of breath), the escaper need not have been charged with any crimes. Furthermore, he doesn't have to break out in any way. Helping a prisoner escape or allowing a prisoner who is being held in connection with a criminal case to escape is also illegal. A person commits the distinct crime of jail breaking if he actually escapes a building where he is legally detained. R v. Dhillon [2006] 1 WLR 1535 is the case.
- Published on
Legal Terms - espousal of claim
The action by which a state undertakes to gain redress
of a grievance on behalf of one of its subjects or citizens.
The action by which a state undertakes to gain redress
of a grievance on behalf of one of its subjects or citizens.
