Zoekresultaat: 212 artikelen

x
Artikel

Dismissal protection in Denmark

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Ontslagrecht, Aflevering 4 2021
Trefwoorden protection against dismissal, flexicurity, industrial relations, social security, dynamic and adjustable labour market
Auteurs mr. dr. Natalie Munkholm
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The article gives an overview of the protection against dismissal according to Danish statutory acts and collective agreements.


mr. dr. Natalie Munkholm
Natalie Munkholm is werkzaam als associate professor Labour Law aan de Aarhus Universiteit, Denemarken.
Rulings

ECJ 30 September 2021, case C-285/20 (Raad van bestuur van het Uitvoeringsinstituut werknemersverzekeringen (Uwv)), Social Insurance

K – v – Raad van bestuur van het Uitvoeringsinstituut werknemersverzekeringen (Uwv), Dutch Case

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 3 2021
Trefwoorden Social Insurance
Samenvatting

    Article 65 (2 and 5) must be interpreted as applying to applicants who received sickness benefits in another member state if the social security legislation of the competent member state equates receiving sickness benefits to the pursuit of an activity.

Artikel

Constructief omgaan met conflicten en ­geschillen

Inleiding in probleemoplossend onderhandelen en bemiddelen

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 2 2021
Auteurs Alain-Laurent Verbeke en Geert Vervaeke
Auteursinformatie

Alain-Laurent Verbeke
Prof. Dr. Alain-Laurent Verbeke (1964) is gewoon hoogleraar aan de KU Leuven. Hij doceert er sinds 1991 onder meer onderhandelen en bemiddelen, nationaal en internationaal familiaal vermogensrecht, bijzondere overeenkomsten, zowel in de bachelor en master rechten als in de master notariaat. Aan de rechtsfaculteit is hij directeur van het Rector Roger Dillemans Instituut Familiaal Vermogensrecht, codirecteur van het Leuvens Centrum Notariaat en van het Instituut Contractenrecht. Aan de faculteit psychologie is hij covoorzitter van het Leuven Center for Collaborative Management (LCM). Hij is mede-oprichter (in 2001), lesgever en lid van de stuurgroep van het postgraduaat bemiddeling van de KU Leuven. Ook is hij (co)promotor van talrijke doctoraten, in de rechten en in de psychologie. Hij is advocaat aan de balies van Brussel en West-Vlaanderen, partner Greenille Private Client Team @ Deloitte Legal. Hij is sinds 2007 Visiting Professor of Law aan Harvard Law School, waar hij negotiation doceert. Sinds 2008 is hij ook Professor of Law & Negotiation aan UCP Lisbon Global School of Law en sinds 1999 deeltijds gewoon hoogleraar privaatrecht en rechtsvergelijking aan Tilburg University. Hij ontving de Francqui Leerstoel (VUB, 2010-2011), de KBC Chair in Family Wealth (Antwerp Management School, 2014-2015) en de Van Oosterwyck Leerstoel notarieel recht (VUB, 2003). In Harvard is hij verbonden aan het Program on Negotiation (PON). Zie www.law.kuleuven.be/fvr/nl/pdf/cvALV.

Geert Vervaeke
Prof. Dr. Geert Vervaeke (1960) is Decaan van de Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid van Tilburg University. Hij is tevens deeltijds Gewoon Hoogleraar aan de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de KU Leuven in de criminologische en rechtspsychologie. Momenteel is hij voorzitter van de European Association on Psychology and Law (https://eapl.eu). Tevens is hij voorzitter van de stuurgroep van het postgraduaat bemiddeling aan de KU Leuven. Hij is gewezen Voorzitter van de Belgische Hoge Raad voor de Justitie (2004-2012: www.hrj.be/nl). Hij was tussen 2004 en 2012 tevens lid van het bestuur van het Europees Netwerk van Hoge Raden (www.encj.eu) en curator van het wetenschappelijk luik van het Stadsfestival Op.Recht.Mechelen (2015-2017: www.oprechtmechelen.be).
Artikel

Access_open GMO Regulation in Crisis – The Experimental Potential of Regulation (EU) 2020/1043 on Covid-19 in Addressing Both a Crisis and a ­Pandemic

Special Issue Experimental Legislation in Times of Crisis Sofia Ranchordás & Bart van Klink (eds.)

Tijdschrift Law and Method, september 2021
Trefwoorden experimental legislation, regulatory knowledge, GMO regulation, evaluation
Auteurs Lonneke Poort en Willem-Jan Kortleven
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article, we analyse Regulation (EU) 2020/1043 on Covid-19 against the backdrop of the current deadlock in EU-regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). We build on temporary and experimental legislation scholarship and employ a normative framework of regulatory knowledge. The Covid-19 Regulation aims at speeding up the development of GMO-based Covid-19 treatments or vaccines by temporarily suspending requirements that otherwise would have made for time-consuming and burdensome authorization processes. Although the Regulation lacks an explicit experimental purpose, we hypothesize that experiences with its functioning may be utilized in evaluation processes serving attempts to change the GMO legal framework. As such, it may fulfil a latent experimental function. We reflect on the types of knowledge that are relevant when evaluating experimental legislation and developing regulation more generally and argue that the inclusion of social knowledge is pertinent in dealing with complex issues such as GMO regulation. Experimental law literature focuses on gathering evidence-based knowledge about the functioning of legislation but virtually neglects knowledge about different experiences and value appreciations of various societal actors and social-contextual mechanisms. We propose that such social knowledge be included in the design of experimental legislation and that evaluation be approached bottom-up instead of top-down.


Lonneke Poort
Lonneke Poort is Associate Professor at the department of Sociology, Theory and Methodology of Law at Erasmus School of Law.

Willem-Jan Kortleven
Willem-Jan Kortleven is Assistant Professor at the department of Sociology, Theory and Methodology of Law at Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam.
Article

Access_open Grandparents’ and grandchildren's right to contact under the European Convention on Human Rights

Tijdschrift Family & Law, september 2021
Trefwoorden Grandparents, Grandchildren, Family life, Contact, Best interests of the child, Child's views
Auteurs Prof. K. Sandberg
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The article explores the extent of the right to family life under Article 8 ECHR with regard to contact between grandparents and grandchildren. An analysis of decisions from the European Court of Human Rights shows that although such a right may exist, it is not strong and depends heavily on the circumstances of the specific case. The article points to what seems to be an inconsistency in the Courts approach to these cases and questions the position of the children and their views and best interests.


Prof. K. Sandberg
Kirsten Sandberg is Professor of Law at the University of Oslo Faculty of Law.

Lukas van den Berge
Lukas van den Berge is assistent professor of legal theory at Utrecht University.

    In its decision rendered on 28 February 2019, the Luxembourg Court of Appeal (Cour d’appel de Luxembourg) examined under which circumstances on-call duty performed at the workplace qualifies as actual working time.
    The issue raised was whether the time spent at night by an employee (i.e. the presence of an employee at the workplace) performing the work of a live-in carer was to be considered as ‘actual working time’.
    The Court expressly referred to EU case law and decided that the concept of actual working time is defined by two criteria, namely (i) whether the employee during such a period must be at the employer’s disposal, and (ii) the interference with the employee’s freedom to choose their activities.
    In view of the working hours provided for in the employment contract and in the absence of evidence proving that the employee would not have been at the employer’s home during her working hours, the Court found that the employee stayed at the employer’s home at night and at the employer’s request. It was irrelevant in this respect whether it was for convenience or not. It was further established that the employee could not leave during the night and return to her home and go about her personal business, so that the hours she worked at night were to be considered as actual working time.
    Given that the employee’s objections regarding her salary were justified (as the conditions of her remuneration violated statutory provisions), the Court decided that the dismissal was unfair.


Michel Molitor
Michel Molitor is the managing partner of MOLITOR Avocats à la Cour SARL in Luxembourg, www.molitorlegal.lu.

    The Supreme Court (SC) has unanimously decided that drivers engaged by Uber are workers rather than independent contractors. It also decided that drivers are working when they are signed in to the Uber app and ready to work.


Colin Leckey
Colin Leckey is a partner at Lewis Silkin LLP.

    On 22 May 2020, fifty-two members of the Hungarian parliament petitioned the Constitutional Court which was requested to establish the unconstitutionality of Section 6(4) of Government Decree no. 47/2020 (III. 18), its conflict with an international treaty and to annul it with retroactive effect to the date of its entry into force. According to Section 6(4) of the Decree “in a separate agreement, the employee and the employer may depart from the provisions of the Labour Code” (i.e. ‘absolute dispositivity’). The petition, among other things, alleged the violation of equal treatment and the right to rest and leisure. The Constitutional Court rejected the motion to establish the unconstitutionality of Section 6(4) and its annulment, since it was repealed on 18 June 2020. The Constitutional Court may, as a general rule, examine the unconstitutionality of the legislation in force, however it was no longer possible to examine the challenged piece of legislation in the framework of a posterior abstract norm control.


Kristof Toth
Kristof Toth is PhD student at the Karoli Gaspar University in Hungary.
Pending Cases

Case C-120/21, Paid Leave

LB – v – TO, reference lodged by the Bundesarbeitsgericht (Germany) on 26 February 2021

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Paid Leave

    The Bucharest Tribunal has ruled that the time spent by employees in isolation at work during a Covid-19 pandemic state of emergency represents working time. However, the time spent in isolation at home following the period of isolation at work does not constitute rest time.


Andreea Suciu
Andreea Suciu is Managing Partner of Suciu | The Employment Law Firm.

Teodora Manaila
Teodora Manaila is a Senior Associate at Suciu | The Employment Law Firm, Bucharest, Romania.

    According to German law, leave entitlements of an employee shall in principle expire at the end of the calendar year or a permissible carryover period. However, based on the case law of the ECJ, this shall only apply if the employer has previously enabled and summoned the employee to take leave and the employee has nevertheless not taken it. But what happens if an employee is incapacitated for work for a longer period of time and therefore is unable to take his or her annual leave? Does the employer also have to inform this employee about their leave entitlement? The Federal Labour Court (Bundesarbeitsgericht, ‘BAG’) recently had to deal with this question in two cases and now the ECJ will have to address this matter. This is because the BAG has asked the ECJ to decide whether and when an employee’s entitlement to paid leave can expire if an employee loses their ability to work during the course of the leave year, while the employee could have taken at least part of the annual leave before becoming incapacitated for work, but the employee was not properly informed by the employer about their leave entitlement.


Katharina Gorontzi
Katharina Gorontzi is an attorney-at-law at Luther Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH.

Nina Stephan
Nina Stephan is an attorney-at-law at Luther Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH.

Jule Rosauer
Jule Rosauer is a legal trainee at Luther Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH.
Case Law

Access_open 2021/1 EELC’s review of the year 2020

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 1 2021
Auteurs Ruben Houweling, Daiva Petrylaitė, Marianne Hrdlicka e.a.
Samenvatting

    Various of our academic board analysed employment law cases from last year. However, first, we start with some general remarks.


Ruben Houweling

Daiva Petrylaitė

Marianne Hrdlicka

Attila Kun

Luca Calcaterra

Francesca Maffei

Jean-Philippe Lhernould

Niklas Bruun

Jan-Pieter Vos

Luca Ratti

Andrej Poruban

Anthony Kerr

Filip Dorssemont
Pending Cases

Case C-574/20, Social Insurance

XO – v – Finanzamt Waldviertel, reference lodged by the Bundesfinanzgericht (Austria) on 3 November 2020

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 1 2021
Trefwoorden Social Insurance

    The UK failed properly to implement EU health and safety law by restricting protection from detriment on health and safety grounds to ‘employees’, the High Court (HC) ruled in a recent case. Such protection should be extended to the broader category of ‘workers’. Importantly, this ruling potentially increases employers’ exposure to Covid-19-related health and safety claims.


Shalina Crossley
Shalina Crossley is Partner at Lewis Silkin LLP.

    Following ECJ case law, the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia has ruled that a worker is entitled to compensation for unused annual leave in the event that the termination of employment has occurred 15 months after the end of the transfer period (i.e. the period for the transfer of the right to use annual leave) provided for in national legislation. The relevant transposition period is therefore three months longer than the transposition period set out in the Slovenian law.


Petra Smolnikar
Petra Smolnikar is the founder and manager at PETRA SMOLNIKAR LAW.

Tjaša Marinček
Tjaša Marinček is a student assistant at PETRA SMOLNIKAR LAW.
Artikel

Bounding Border Checks

A Comparative Approach to Crimmigration, Race, and Policing at the US Internal Border

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 1 2021
Trefwoorden Border checks, US International Border, US Border Patrol, Schengen area
Auteurs David Hamburger
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Crimmigration – the hybridization of criminal law and migration policy – is a transatlantic phenomenon. Despite this growing recognition, however, academic attention has thus far tended to focus more on discrete cases than on the similarities across regional contexts. In considering internal checkpoint stops conducted by US Border Patrol within the context of ongoing debates about racial profiling and policing of the internal border in the Schengen area, this article aims to provide a comparative lens by which to assess the questions at the heart of the current European discussion. An examination of both the jurisprudence and practice of the US internal border, this comparison suggests, offers a cautionary tale for European attempts to balance the fight against cross-border crime with the principles of human rights and the promise of a Europe free of internal frontiers.


David Hamburger
D.J. Hamburger LLM is a recent LLM graduate of the Europa Instituut at Leiden Law School, where he was an NAF-Fulbright fellow.
Artikel

Access_open Theme: introduction to the Dutch system of dismissal and its constituents

The editorial board

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Ontslagrecht, Aflevering 1 2021
Trefwoorden Ontslagrecht, Rechtsvergelijking, Dismissal law
Samenvatting

Artikel

Access_open The ECHR and Private Intercountry Adoptions in Germany and the Netherlands: Lessons Learned from Campanelli and Paradiso v. Italy

Tijdschrift Family & Law, januari 2021
Trefwoorden Private intercountry adoptions, surrogacy, ECHR, UNCRC, the best interests of the child
Auteurs dr. E.C. Loibl
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Within the past half century, a market in adoptable children has emerged. The imbalance between the demand for and the supply of adoptable children, combined with the large sums of Western money, incite greedy actors in poor countries to illegally obtain children for adoption. This renders intercountry adoption conducive to abuses. Private adoptions are particularly prone to abusive and commercial practices. Yet, although they violate both international and national law, German and Dutch family courts commonly recognize them. They argue that removing the child from the illegal adopters would not be compatible with the rights and best interests of the individual child concerned. In 2017, the ECtHR rendered a ground-breaking judgement in Campanelli and Paradiso v. Italy. In this case, the Court dealt with the question as to whether removing a child from the care of an Italian couple that entered into a surrogacy agreement with a Russian clinic, given that surrogacy is illegal in Italy, violated Article 8 ECHR. Contrary to previous case law, in which the ECtHR placed a strong emphasis on the best interests of the individual child concerned, the Court attached more weight to the need to prevent disorder and crime by putting an end to the illegal situation created by the Italian couple and by discouraging others from bypassing national laws. The article argues that considering the shifting focus of the ECtHR on the prevention of unlawful conduct and, thus, on the best interests of children in general, the German and Dutch courts’ failure to properly balance the different interests at stake in a private international adoption by mainly focusing on the individual rights and interests of the children is difficult to maintain.

    ---

    In de afgelopen halve eeuw is er een markt voor adoptiekinderen ontstaan. De disbalans tussen de vraag naar en het aanbod van adoptiekinderen, in combinatie met grote sommen westers geld, zet hebzuchtige actoren in arme landen ertoe aan illegaal kinderen te verkrijgen voor adoptie. Dit maakt interlandelijke adoptie bevorderlijk voor misbruik. Particuliere adoptie is bijzonder vatbaar voor misbruik en commerciële praktijken. Ondanks het feit dat deze privé-adopties in strijd zijn met zowel internationaal als nationaal recht, worden ze door Duitse en Nederlandse familierechtbanken doorgaans wel erkend. Daartoe wordt aangevoerd dat het verwijderen van het kind van de illegale adoptanten niet verenigbaar is met de rechten en belangen van het individuele kind in kwestie. In 2017 heeft het EHRM een baanbrekende uitspraak gedaan in de zaak Campanelli en Paradiso t. Italië. In deze zaak behandelde het Hof de vraag of het verwijderen van een kind uit de zorg van een Italiaans echtpaar dat een draagmoederschapsovereenkomst met een Russische kliniek is aangegaan, in strijd is met artikel 8 EVRM, daarbij in ogenschouw genomen dat draagmoederschap in Italië illegaal is. In tegenstelling tot eerdere jurisprudentie, waarin het EHRM sterk de nadruk legde op de belangen van het individuele kind, hechtte het Hof meer gewicht aan de noodzaak om de openbare orde te bewaken en criminaliteit te voorkomen door een einde te maken aan de illegale situatie die door het Italiaanse echtpaar was gecreëerd door onder andere het omzeilen van nationale wetten. Het artikel stelt dat, gezien de verschuiving in de focus van het EHRM op het voorkomen van onwettig gedrag en dus op het belang van kinderen in het algemeen, de Duitse en Nederlandse rechtbanken, door met name te focussen op de individuele rechten en belangen van de kinderen, er niet in slagen om de verschillende belangen die op het spel staan ​​bij een particuliere internationale adoptie goed af te wegen.


dr. E.C. Loibl
Elvira Loibl is Assistant Professor Criminal Law and Criminology, Universiteit Maastricht.
Annotatie

One train! (but different working conditions)

CJEU 19 December 2019, C-16/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:1110 (Michael Dobersberger v Magistrat der Stadt Wien)

Tijdschrift Arbeidsrechtelijke Annotaties, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden Posting of workers, International train, Transport sector, Subcontracting, Short-term posting
Auteurs Marco Rocca
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Dobersberger decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union deals with the legal situation of posted workers on an international train. These workers, employed by a Hungarian company and based in Hungary, operate on a train connecting Budapest with Salzburg and Munich. The Court concludes against their inclusion under the Posting of Workers Directive, considering their connection to the Austrian territory as too limited. This decision is based on a selective representation of the facts and sits difficultly with the letter of the law and the intention of the legislator.


Marco Rocca
Dr. M. Rocca is werkzaam als CNRS Researcher aan de University of Strasbourg, UMR 7354 DRES, France, https://marcorocca.wordpress.com, mrocca@unistra.fr.
Toont 1 - 20 van 212 gevonden teksten
« 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.