Nachrichten der Wirtschaftskanzleien

Central Bank Digital Currencies and Stablecoins – how might they work in practice?

Clifford Chance - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 16:38

The payments landscape is changing rapidly. Central bank digital currencies (or CBDCs) and stablecoins have received growing attention, particularly around Facebook’s announcement of its proposed global stablecoin “Libra” in 2019 and the resulting regulatory backlash. Advocates hail them as the future for payments - an unmatched tool for financial inclusion and limiting financial crime, by linking payments to identity - while critics have concerns around regulatory standards and financial stability (in the case of global stablecoins) and whether the improvements are as impressive or distinct as supporters argue.

In this report we consider how adoption of a global stablecoin or a retail CBDC would look in practice, and explore the legal structures that might be employed.

An den Verfall von Urlaub auch bei Langzeitkranken gedacht?

Beiten Burkhardt // BLOG - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 14:00

In einem meiner letzten blogs („Psssst! Friendly Reminder – An den Verfall von Urlaub denken“) habe ich Arbeitgeber daran erinnert, an den Verfall von Urlaub bei den Arbeitnehmern zu denken. Das BAG hatte 2019 entschieden, dass der Anspruch eines Arbeitnehmers auf bezahlten Jahresurlaub nur dann am Ende des Kalenderjahres erlischt, wenn der Arbeitnehmer vorher vom Arbeitgeber aufgefordert wurde, den Urlaub zu nehmen und über den sonstigen Verfall belehrt wurde. Gilt das auch für Langzeitkranke?

Liebe Leserin, lieber Leser,

ist es sinnvoll, Langzeitkranke beispielsweise im September aufzufordern, den verbleibenden Urlaub zu nehmen, da er andernfalls Ende Dezember verfällt. An sich wäre das Unsinn, jedenfalls wenn davon ausgegangen wird, dass der Arbeitnehmer tatsächlich dauerhaft krankheitsbedingt arbeitsunfähig ist. Er könnte keinen Urlaub nehmen, da die krankheitsbedingte Arbeitsunfähigkeit dem Urlaub vorgeht. Das BAG hat diese Frage jedoch mit Beschluss vom 07.07.2020 (9 AZR 401/19) dem EuGH vorgelegt.

Grundsatz: Urlaub im Kalenderjahr nehmen – Ausnahme: Übertragung

Der Urlaub entsteht jeweils für ein Kalenderjahr. Er soll im laufenden Kalenderjahr gewährt und genommen werden und erlischt – soweit noch nicht genommen - grundsätzlich mit Ablauf des Kalenderjahres. Urlaub wird ausnahmsweise bis zum 31.03. des Folgejahres aus dringenden betrieblichen Gründen oder aus Gründen in der Person des Arbeitnehmers übertragen.

BAG 2019 Hohe Anforderungen an den Verfall von Urlaub

Nach dem Urteil des BAG vom 19.02.2019 obliegt dem Arbeitgeber „konkret und in völliger Transparenz dafür zu sorgen, dass der Arbeitnehmer tatsächlich in der Lage ist, seinen bezahlten Jahresurlaub zu nehmen, indem er ihn – erforderlichenfalls förmlich – auffordert, dies zu tun“. Ferner habe der Arbeitgeber dem Arbeitnehmer „klar und rechtzeitig mitzuteilen, dass der Urlaub am Ende des Bezugszeitraums oder eines Übertragungszeitraums verfallen wird, wenn der Arbeitnehmer ihn nicht nimmt“.

Verfall von Urlaub bei Langzeiterkrankten

Wenn der Urlaub im Kalenderjahr aufgrund von krankheitsbedingter Arbeitsunfähigkeit nicht genommen werden kann, wird er übertragen und muss bis zum 31.03. des Folgejahres genommen werden. Nach der Rechtsprechung des EuGH und des BAG erlöschen die gesetzlichen Urlaubsansprüche nicht, wenn der Arbeitnehmer aufgrund krankheitsbedingter Arbeitsunfähigkeit gehindert war, den Urlaub im Urlaubsjahr und im Übertragungszeitraum zu nehmen. Gesetzlicher Urlaub bedeutet 4 Wochen Urlaub (z.B. 20 Tage bei einer 5-Tage-Woche). Übergesetzliche Urlaubs- und Urlaubsabgeltungsansprüche können von den Arbeitsvertragsparteien frei geregelt werden.

Damit verfällt jedenfalls der gesetzliche Urlaubsanspruch bei Langzeitkraken nicht nach dem gesetzlichen Übertragungszeitraum, am 31.03. des Folgejahres. Wann dann? Nach der Rechtsprechung des BAG erlischt der gesetzliche Urlaubsanspruch von langzeiterkranken Arbeitnehmern nach 15 Monaten nach Ablauf des Urlaubsjahres. Der Urlaubsanspruch 2019 erlischt bei dauerhafter krankheitsbedingter Arbeitsunfähigkeit damit mit Ablauf des 31.03.2021.

Hinweispflicht und Langzeiterkrankung – BAG vom 07.07.2020 (9 AZR 401/19)

Höchstrichterlich bisher nicht geklärt ist die Frage, ob die Mitwirkungsobliegenheiten des Arbeitgebers für den Verfall von gesetzlichen Urlaubsansprüchen auch gegenüber langandauernd erkrankten Arbeitnehmern bestehen. Zwei Landesarbeitsgerichte (LAG Hamm und LAG Rheinland Pfalz) haben diese Frage - meiner Meinung nach in völlig zutreffender Weise - verneint.

Das BAG legt dem EuGH diese Frage zur Vorabentscheidung vor. Kann der Urlaubsanspruchs nach Ablauf einer 15-Monats-Frist oder ggfs. einer längeren Frist auch dann erlöschen, wenn der Arbeitgeber im Urlaubsjahr seine Mitwirkungsobliegenheit nicht erfüllt hat, obwohl der Arbeitnehmer den Urlaub bis zum Eintritt der Arbeitsunfähigkeit zumindest teilweise hätte nehmen können. Jetzt hat der EuGH das Wort.

Die Vorlagefrage betrifft wohl nur den vor der langandauernden Arbeitsunfähigkeit des Arbeitnehmers entstandenen und nicht genommenen Urlaub. Arbeitgebern muss dennoch aus größtmöglicher Vorsicht geraten werden, bei den Aufforderungen und Hinweisen zum Verfall des Urlaubs ggf. auch Ihre Langzeitkranken einzubeziehen.

Make holiday not sickness - herzliche (arbeitsrechtliche) Grüße

Ihr Dr. Erik Schmid

Hinweis: Dieser Blog ist bereits im arbeitsrechtlichen Blog von Erik Schmid im Rehm-Verlag (www.rehm-verlag.de) erschienen.

Brexit – just three months to prepare your business left

Beiten Burkhardt // BLOG - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 14:00

The odds are now stacked against the EU27 and the UK agreeing a comprehensive framework for trade in goods and services among others. As the UK becomes a third country on 1st January 2021, you and your business will have to calculate with increased costs, barriers to trade and travel. Only three months are left for you to prepare for the changes and the challenges of doing business in and with the UK post-withdrawal. These changes pose significant risks and costs.

The changes to doing business resulting from the UK's withdrawal from the EU are wide-ranging, indeed covering every aspect of business and life. Their impact on business depends on the activities concerned, be it sale of goods, cross-border manufacturing operations, providing services or maintaining a commercial or manufacturing presence in the UK or the EU27. Even if some small agreement can be reached between the parties, it is certain that Brexit will generate additional costs and risks for all economic operators, both in the UK and in the EU27.

General remarks on key risks and challenges

Businesses need to prepare themselves by identifying and addressing the challenges and risks in advance. BEITEN BURKHARDT will support you in finding the right commercial and legal answer to all issues arising out of Brexit.

As mentioned, the changes and therefore the challenges and range of risks resulting from the UK's withdrawal from the EU encompass all aspects of doing business. Of course, the impact depends on the activities concerned, be it sale of goods, cross-border manufacturing operations, providing services or maintaining a commercial or manufacturing presence in the UK or the EU27. Nevertheless, we can group them into several broad categories that every person or company doing business with the UK should evaluate:

  • The entire manufacturing and / or supply chain should be reviewed and eventually modified in light of Brexit.
  • All contracts related to the UK, which will still be valid or have effects after the end of the transition period should be reviewed and eventually adapted or terminated.
  • All cross-border shareholdings between the UK and EU27 countries that will continue after December 2020 should be reviewed and eventually modified.

All future movement and postings of persons and goods must be Brexit-proofed.

In detail:

Manufacturing and supply chains

Brexit poses the greatest risks and challenges for manufacturing and supply chains, irrespective of whether a free trade agreement is concluded and what such an agreement may provide. From the outset, it should be emphasised that all known EU rules concerning free movement of goods, services, capital and people between EU27 countries and the UK will no longer apply. Disruption has been guaranteed! Additional paperwork at both ends, registration with the EU27 and with new UK bodies and new rules will become reality. At best, the UK and the EU will agree on a limited free trade deal as with for instance Canada, reducing or eliminating customs tariff rates but not paperwork and other new burdens or obstacles to trade.

When evaluating the consequences of Brexit and the possible need for action, you have to think of doing business with most other non-EU countries, for instance, India. This means the movement of goods between the UK and any EU27 country will be subject to customs control and the payment of duties. The UK will keep most of its tariffs at similar levels as the current EU28 tariff rates for industrial products, which will result in additional costs in manufacturing and supply chains. The origin of a product may now change. The burden for companies that carry out production steps in different countries will increase significantly, as will the costs of doing business in general.

For a retailer and trader additional costs for customs duties, customs procedures, delays for transport have to be taken into account in the business planning. For a manufacturer with a supply chain over the Channel, business will become much more complicated and costly. By way of example, Airbus mentioned additional costs in the order of one billion EUR. Consider the following: If a gas heating system made in Germany is installed in a motor vehicle manufactured in the UK, which is then sold in France, duties will have to be paid on the gas heating system in the UK and duties on the vehicle in France. Duties on the imported parts may possibly be refunded, but this will require further efforts and possibly delays.

As the shipping conditions change to those applicable to businesses in a third country, additional regulatory burdens for customs documents, taxes and import turnover tax will arise and pose challenges. Delays in crossing the UK/EU border are a likely result of additional export and import controls. This needs to be taken into account upfront. Thousands of additional customs officers have already been recruited border, new customs forms created and new electronic procedures foreseen. It is reported that the UK authorities will generate 215 million customs declarations a year and need 50,000 extra customs agents. The additional "red tape" would cost British businesses £7 billion.

A free trade agreement, should one be concluded, will only reduce these additional burdens to some extent. Indeed, such an agreement can avoid the levying of customs duties on goods originating within the area, but must lead to additional controls. Currently, once goods have cleared customs in one EU country, they can circulate freely within the EU. As of 2021, customs controls, origin checks and the like become necessary. Moreover, physical movement between countries for goods and persons will be subject to agreements on (air, road, rail and sea) transport.

To guarantee the conformity of goods with applicable standards will become more cumbersome. The CE-Marking and self-certification will be different in the UK. Product requirements will diverge over time. The certification (within the British, EU and other markets), recognition of certifying bodies and costs for meeting standards will pose additional challenges for manufacturers and traders alike. Today, there is a one-stop-shop for homologating chemicals, medicine, medical apparatus, pharmaceuticals, etc. On 1st January 2021, decades of progress towards frictionless will became history, with the irony that it had been the UK that pushed for the completion of the single or internal market in the 1980s! Additionally, tax-related issues have to be taken into account (; for further details please see below).

For all of these reasons, trading, manufacturing and supply chains must be analysed in terms of economic viability and cost-effectiveness, and adapted if necessary. Companies should evaluate their costs and exposure, assuming the UK is India. They should review manufacturing and supply chains with their most important customers and suppliers:

  • Identify the most important suppliers for each manufacturing site or trading operation. While economic importance of a part or operation will be key to identifying the importance in the manufacturing and supply chain, attention must be given to smaller, but strategic supply chain relationships which could have a big impact on both production and supply as well.
  • Analyse supplies to and from the UK:
    -How should supply chain relationships be configured, in particular will they be maintained or replaced, and how will contracts be adapted? For details see below “Contracts related to the UK”.
    -How will the company react to foreseeable delays? Do you need to build-up stocks, look for additional or alternative suppliers, etc.?
    -How will the company react to increasing costs and who will bear them? Increased costs as a result of customs duties, import turnover taxes, logistics, certifications for products, etc. need to be assessed and taken into account in business planning. Future contracts should include terms to apportion responsibilities for costs and risks; for details see below under “Contracts related to the UK”.
    -As the movement of people will be restricted, which location should be used to provide services (installation, repair, maintenance)?
    -If applications for industrial property rights (especially EU trademarks and community designs) were filed, which ones will need to be resubmitted or renewed in the UK or the EU27 after Brexit?
    -If there are products with CE certification, which ones might have to meet new UK safety standards?
    -Are IT systems prepared to handle new requirements for customs and statistical declarations, or can they be adapted? Possible diverging data protection requirements in the processing of data should be taken into account. As of the time of writing, the processing of EU27 personal data in the UK would be illegal.
  • Identify the most important customers that are supplied from different factories, warehouses and other places.
  • Analyse customers located in or supplied from the UK:
    -How should supply chain relationships be configured post-Brexit, in particular should they be maintained or replaced, and how should contracts be adapted? (For details see below under “Contracts related to the UK”);
    -How should the company manage increased costs and who should bear responsibility for these costs and risks?
Contracts related to the UK

Irrespective of a free trade agreement being agreed, if any, 2021 will bring additional costs and challenges. Contracts that will remain in effect beyond the Brexit transition period need to be examined closely. Some long-term contracts may no longer be adequate and need to be adapted or terminated. For new contracts that will still be valid after December 2020, the distribution of costs and responsibilities for risks should be taken into consideration when negotiating the contract and be spelled out in clear terms.

A key aspect that needs to be reviewed and (re-)considered in contracts is the apportionment of additional risks and costs as a result of Brexit. These can be caused by border delays, shortage of supplies, additional export/import controls and new documentation requirements. The changes and additional requirements regarding the modalities for the submission of documents and licenses, customs, VAT and import-turnover tax will give rise to long-term costs.

The UK will introduce its own procedures in steps, for instance accepting the CE marking for some time, but requiring as soon as possible a new UKCA (UK Conformity Assessed) sign to be used on imported products.

In addition, in the case of territorial limitations or industrial property rights, you must verify whether the contract still includes the UK after Brexit. If this is not the case, an evaluation should be performed as to whether it is appropriate to adapt the contract in question.

In most cases, the risks associated with Brexit have not been calculated and taken into account, nor have the attributions or sharing of responsibilities for new risks been agreed on and set out in the contract. Rarely will it be possible to terminate a contract because the implicit basis of the contract no longer exists (which can lead to an adaptation of the contract under German law) or for "frustration" (which can lead to termination of a contract under British law).

Irrespective of the conclusion of a free trade agreement, a company should:

  • Identify the most important contracts (as deemed necessary for manufacturing and supply chains).
  • Review the distribution of costs and the attribution of responsibilities for risks, taking into account the applicable law.
  • In particular, review the distribution of additional costs and the allocation of responsibilities for risks arising from delays, supplementary services, new or modified approvals required (safety and certification standards) and for the impossibility to fulfil a contract.
  • If these elements are not yet defined, will it be possible to terminate or adapt the contract?
  • Which applicable law and jurisdiction were agreed upon?
  • Adapt or terminate contracts with greater risks, if possible.
  • Consider hedging for currency fluctuations.
  • Conclude new contracts with an appropriate distribution of costs and attribution of risks, taking into account the choice of law and jurisdiction, and possibly arbitration rather than court proceedings in the case of dispute.
Corporate law

Post-Brexit and the transition period, companies established and operating in the UK will no longer have to abide by EU rules on the one hand but no longer benefit from EU rules with respect to their subsidiaries in EU countries on the other hand, unless UK law or international or bilateral agreements apply rules that are similar or identical to EU law. EU regulations regarding disclosure, incorporation, transparency, capital maintenance and alteration, cross-border restructurings and mergers will no longer apply to the UK. The same is true for rules on the common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments between associated companies of different Member States, and on the elimination of double taxation within corporate groups from profit distribution between related EU companies. Whether or not this will have consequences for the company or group has to be examined in detail and solutions for any negative developments must be sought.

Over time, UK corporate law may start to deviate from the current EU law requirements, since it will no longer have to comply with EU regulations. UK companies hoping to establish a branch in the EU will, in principle, be subject to the more extensive disclosure formalities applicable to branches of non-EU companies. They will be treated as “third country companies”.

Companies that use the English legal form of limited company but are located in EU Member States will no longer be able to rely on the right of establishment granted by the European treaties. After Brexit, limited companies resident in Germany, for example, will no longer be regarded as corporations, but they will be subject to the rules for partnerships and might lose their limited liability status. As a consequence, shareholders of such limited companies may be personally liable without limitation. In order to remedy this situation, Germany allows a transformation of companies concerned into acceptable German company law forms.

An EU Member State may in the future require companies resident in the UK to appoint a fiscal representative when they register for VAT within the EU. The representative usually takes on joint and several liability for the VAT debts and accounts of the company.

Finally, Brexit will have consequences for European works councils, since the EWC agreements under UK law will not automatically endure. If the agreements are not renegotiated, EWCs will lose their UK members.

Companies must:

  • Identify agreements concerning dividend and royalty payments, supplies as well as the supply of goods and services within the corporate group.
  • Review which tax regulations apply if EU regulations are no longer applicable (see as a fall back double taxation agreements).
  • Calculate the financial consequences of the upcoming changes and consider optimisation measures.
  • If changes to the group structure are already being considered, review whether it is appropriate to implement them before or (if still useful) after Brexit.
  • Determine cash flows within the company group and whether they need to be adapted.
  • Determine whether there are accumulated profits and losses and whether they may be claimed or offset post-Brexit.
  • If you have a limited company established in a EU27 country, prepare the appropriate adaptations under corporate law.

In our view, the above-mentioned points are the most important issues that you need to consider. However, every business is different and is confronted with different risks and challenges as a result of Brexit. Tailored legal advice is therefore strongly recommended. General information can be found on the websites of the EU and the UK at the following addresses:

Dr Rainer Bierwagen

Investitionskontrolle in Mittel- und Osteuropa: Russische Föderation

CMS Hasche Sigle Blog - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 08:06

Nach unserem ersten Beitrag zum Thema Investitionskontrollen soll hier die Situation in der Russischen Föderation dargestellt werden. Anders als in den bereits behandelten Jurisdiktionen Polen, Tschechien, Rumänien und Ungarn spielen europäische Regelungen keine unmittelbare Rolle. Es ist auch nicht ersichtlich, dass die neuen europäischen Regelungen bisher zu Reaktionen des russischen Gesetzgebers geführt hätten.

Keine gesetzgeberischen Aktivitäten erforderlich

Derzeit sind in der Russischen Föderation (RF) keine verstärkten Tendenzen hin zu einer Beschränkung des Marktzugangs für ausländische Unternehmen zu beobachten. Allerdings ist das entsprechende Instrumentarium bereits vorhanden, so dass aktuell keine weitere Notwendigkeit für den Gesetzgeber besteht, aktiv zu werden. Die Zielrichtungen der Beschränkungen sind vielfältig: neben wirtschaftlichen Gründen spielen Aspekte der nationalen Sicherheit ebenso eine Rolle wie politische Aspekte. Der Schutz von Technologie, der in der EU meist im Vordergrund steht, wird weniger verfolgt.

Zentrale Bedeutung für die Regulierung des Marktzugangs hat das Gesetz über strategische Investitionen (Gesetz Nr. 57-FZ vom 29. April 2008), wonach Investitionen in strategisch für die Sicherheit und Verteidigung der RF bedeutsame Unternehmen einer staatlichen Kontrolle unterliegen. Strategisch bedeutsam in diesem Sinne sind Unternehmen, die bestimmte, im Gesetz aufgezählte Tätigkeiten ausüben. Die Aufzählung enthält 46 Tätigkeitsarten. Insbesondere sind Tätigkeiten erfasst;

  • in Zusammenhang mit strahlenden Materialien,
  • Tätigkeiten in der Verteidigungsindustrie, Luft- und Raumfahrt,
  • Tätigkeiten in der Verbreitung von Informationen (Funk, Fernsehen, Presse),
  • Aktivitäten in der Rohstoffgewinnung sowie
  • speziell gefährliche Tätigkeiten wie die Arbeit mit Krankheitserregern.
Kontrolle über strategisch bedeutsame Unternehmen erfordert staatliche Erlaubnis

Die Kontrolle greift ein, wenn der Investor durch seine Beteiligung oder in anderer Weise die Kontrolle über das strategisch bedeutsame Unternehmen erwirbt. Dabei wird angenommen, dass ein ausländischer Investor ein Unternehmen kontrolliert, wenn er einen Anteil von mindestens 25% am stimmberechtigten Kapital der Gesellschaft erwirbt. Daneben kontrolliert ein Investor eine Gesellschaft auch dann, wenn er die Möglichkeit hat, das Exekutivorgan einer Gesellschaft oder mindestens die Hälfte des Aufsichtsorgans einer Gesellschaft einzusetzen. Ist das der Fall, muss eine staatliche Erlaubnis der Beteiligung beantragt werden. Über den Antrag entscheiden in einem zweistufigen Verfahren in der ersten Stufe die Antimonopolbehörde FAS und in der zweiten Stufe eine Regierungskommission unter Vorsitz des Premierministers.

Bisher ungenutzt: Erlaubnisvorbehalt bei jeglicher Beteiligung

Die Regierungskommission ist darüber hinaus bevollmächtigt, jegliche Beteiligung ausländischer Investoren an russischen Unternehmen unter Erlaubnisvorbehalt zu stellen, soweit dies zur Landesverteidigung oder Sicherheit des Staates erforderlich ist. Rechtsgrundlage dafür ist das Gesetz über ausländische Investitionen (Gesetz Nr. 160 FZ vom 09.07.1999). Bislang hat die Regierungskommission von dieser Befugnis allerdings nicht Gebrauch gemacht.

Ebenfalls aufgrund des Gesetzes über ausländische Investitionen unterliegt eine Beteiligung an einem russischen Unternehmen von mehr als 25% durch einen ausländischen Staat oder internationale Organisation der Genehmigungspflicht.

Absolute Beschränkungen ausländischer Beteiligungen gibt es in einigen Sektoren der Wirtschaft, ohne dass über ein Genehmigungsverfahren eine direkte staatliche Kontrolle ausgeübt würde. So ist in der Versicherungswirtschaft eine ausländische Beteiligung nur bis in Höhe von 49% am Kapital der jeweiligen Gesellschaft zulässig. Ist die Beteiligungsquote höher, darf eine solche Gesellschaft die wichtigsten Versicherungsarten nicht mehr anbieten. Will ein Gesellschafter einer Versicherungsgesellschaft seine Anteile ins Ausland verkaufen, bedarf er dafür einer Genehmigung.

Im Bankensektor gilt eine Quote von 50% ausländischen Kapitals im Sektor, die nicht überschritten werden darf. Wird die Quote erreicht, wird die Zentralbank keine Banklizenzen mehr erteilen und keine Kapitalerhöhungen in ausländischen Banken mehr zulassen.

Ausländische Beteiligung an Massenmedien bereits seit 2014 eingeschränkt

Im Bereich der Massenmedien gilt das Gesetz FZ Nr. 2147-1 „über Massenmedien″ vom 27. Dezember 1991. Nachdem anfänglich eine liberale Regelung galt, wird mittlerweile durch dieses Gesetz die Möglichkeit ausländischer Beteiligung an Massenmedien erheblich eingeschränkt. Eine Beteiligung eines ausländischen Investors ist seit der Novelle von 2014 nur noch bis in Höhe von 20% am stimmberechtigten Kapital eines Massenmediums zulässig. Die Beschränkungen hinsichtlich der Beteiligung ausländischer Unternehmen waren ursprünglich in der Gesetzgebung nicht enthalten und sind erst nachträglich in verschiedenen aufeinander folgenden Novellen eingeführt worden. Über diese Bestimmungen sind in den vergangenen Jahren praktisch alle ausländischen Investoren in russische Massenmedien außer Landes gedrängt worden.

Ebenfalls über das Gesetz „Über Massenmedien″ können ausländische Organisationen, die Informationen an eine unbestimmte Anzahl Personen (insbesondere über das Internet) zur Verfügung stellen, als ausländische Agenten eingestuft werden. Gleiches gilt für Personen und Organisationen, die sich über Zahlungen aus dem Ausland finanzieren. Als ausländische Agenten sind sie verpflichtet, die von ihnen verbreiteten Informationen entsprechend zu kennzeichnen. Weiterhin müssen sie halbjährlich über ihre Tätigkeit durch Internetpublikation Rechenschaft ablegen. In der Praxis werden diese Bestimmungen häufig auf politisch abweichende Personen angewandt.

Andere Beschränkungen existieren im Immobiliensektor. Hier können seit jeher Ausländer nicht Eigentümer von Agrarflächen sein. Miete und Pacht sind allerdings zulässig.

Gemäß Präsidialukaz Nr. 26 vom 9. Januar 2011 dürfen Ausländer nicht Eigentümer sogenannter grenznaher Grundstücke sein. Als grenznah gelten dabei sämtliche Grundstücke, die in entsprechende Listen aufgenommen sind. Seit 2019 gehören dazu sämtliche Grundstücke auf der Krim. Ausländische Eigentümer dieser Grundstücke sind gehalten, diese innerhalb einer Frist von einem Jahr zu veräußern.

Der Beitrag Investitionskontrolle in Mittel- und Osteuropa: Russische Föderation erschien zuerst auf CMS Blog.

Revolutionary changes in CIT and PIT - draft legislation published

Dentons Insights - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 02:00

Poland: On September 16, 2020, the Ministry of Finance published an extensive draft of a significant amendment to the income tax acts. The changes are to apply from 2021.

Zero-rating in the EU - implications of the recent CJEU judgment in Telenor

Dentons Insights - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 02:00

EU: On 15 September 2020 the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) handed down an important judgment concerning “zero-rating”, a practice where providers of Internet access services do not count the data traffic related to use of a specific application or class of applications towards the general data cap offered to end-users as part of an Internet package. The practice of zero-rating has recently raised serious questions as to its compliance with provisions of Regulation 2015/2120. The judgment provides some guidance in this regard.

Successful decision for Foothills County in Alberta: Judge upholds bylaw banning ad-bearing trailers

Dentons News - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 02:00

In a judgment rendered September 8, 2020, Justice Nick Devlin of the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta ruled that while vehicle-advertising signs along roadways constitute a protected form of commercial expression under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, those constitutional rights can be reasonably restricted by local governments.

Dentons Flashpoint - September 21, 2020

Dentons Insights - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 02:00

Global trade is rebounding much more quickly than after the 2008 financial crisis. The UN General Assembly convenes remotely this week with dueling speeches by the US and Iran. The UK weighs returning to lockdown due to a surge in coronavirus cases.

Andrea Miskolczi appointed Europe Innovation Director at Dentons

Dentons News - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 02:00

Global law firm Dentons has recruited Andrea Miskolczi as Europe Innovation Director. In her new role, she will be responsible for driving Dentons’ innovation agenda across continental Europe and Central Asia and helping to develop innovative client solutions.

Dentons recruits Holger Ellers as partner in the German Restructuring, Insolvency and Bankruptcy practice

Dentons News - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 02:00

Global law firm Dentons has expanded its Restructuring, Insolvency and Bankruptcy practice in Germany with the recruitment of Dr. Holger Ellers, who joined the Berlin office as a partner effective today. 

Exemption from contributions for companies not requesting further redundancy funds: first clarifications from the National Social Security Authority INPS (in Italian)

Dentons Insights - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 02:00

Italy: The first clarifications from the National Social Security Authority INPS regarding the August Decree.

Linklaters working with Business In The Community on how businesses can Build Back Responsibly

Linklaters Latest News - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 02:00

Covid-19 has sparked a radical rethink in how we do things. Businesses have acted with urgency and inventiveness to meet the challenges raised by the pandemic. There is a huge opportunity for businesses to harness this momentum as play their part in building back responsibly.

Linklaters is proud to have contributed to Business In The Community’s new report and campaign on how businesses can Build Back Responsibly. The report and campaign, which are being launched as part of United Nations General Assembly week, is the result of hundreds of conversations with people across business and the not-for-profit spheres, and will form a central part of Business In The Community’s campaigning efforts.

Click here for more information.

Linklaters working with Business In The Community on how businesses can Build Back Responsibly

Linklaters Publications - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 02:00

Covid-19 has sparked a radical rethink in how we do things. Businesses have acted with urgency and inventiveness to meet the challenges raised by the pandemic. There is a huge opportunity for businesses to harness this momentum as play their part in building back responsibly.

Linklaters is proud to have contributed to Business In The Community’s new report and campaign on how businesses can Build Back Responsibly. The report and campaign, which are being launched as part of United Nations General Assembly week, is the result of hundreds of conversations with people across business and the not-for-profit spheres, and will form a central part of Business In The Community’s campaigning efforts.

Click here for more information.

New chamber of amicable settlement at the French-speaking Enterprise Court of Brussels (French)

Dentons Insights - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 02:00

In order to allow parties to an ongoing dispute to reach a settlement, and thus reach a more (cost) efficient and faster outcome than a court judgment, the French-speaking Enterprise Court of Brussels has created a chamber for amicable settlement (“chambre de règlement amiable”), which has been launched this month, September 2020. (French)

New chamber of amicable settlement at the French-speaking Enterprise Court of Brussels

Dentons Insights - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 02:00

In order to allow parties to an ongoing dispute to reach a settlement, and thus reach a more (cost) efficient and faster outcome than a court judgment, the French-speaking Enterprise Court of Brussels has created a chamber for amicable settlement (“chambre de règlement amiable”), which has been launched this month, September 2020.

Dentons is named a Stonewall Top Global Employer 2020 and partner, Igor Ostrowski, a Stonewall Global Senior Champion

Dentons News - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 02:00

Dentons, the world’s largest law firm spanning 76 countries, has been named a Stonewall Top Global Employer 2020; and partner Igor Ostrowski has been named Stonewall Global Senior Champion of the year in recognition of his efforts to defend LGBT+ human rights in his native Poland.

Dentons' role in Seven Energy's restructuring recognised at IFLR Sub-Saharan Africa Awards 2020

Dentons News - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 02:00

Dentons' role in Seven Energy's debt restructuring and acquisition by Savannah Petroleum was recognised at the inaugural IFLR Sub-Saharan Africa Awards 2020. The acquisition and restructuring of Nigerian gas producer Seven Energy by UK-listed oil and gas company Savannah Petroleum in 2019 was awarded Deal of the Year at the awards.

Employment updates

Dentons Insights - Mo, 21.09.2020 - 02:00

Italy: The outbreak of COVID-19 emergency in Italy and subsequent measures taken by the Italian Government and public authorities raise several challenging issues for employers. This section includes articles on how to handle the emergency from the employment law perspective and regular updates on new related legal provisions (contents are in Italian and English).