Cristina Caffarra

If you work on the #AIAct or #standardisation, join us at Università degli Studi di Padova with Annalisa Volpato, Michèle Finck and myself for this seminar where we will discuss on all topics linked to the use of technical standards in the AI Act and which challenges this raises. 👇

33

📣 The EU #electricity market design reform acts have just been published in the Official Journal of the EU, dated 26 June 2024: 🔹Regulation (EU) 2024/1747 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 amending Regulations (EU) 2019/942 [ACER Regulation] and (EU) 2019/943 [Electricity Regulation] as regards improving the Union's electricity market design https://lnkd.in/ddQ5yCub 🔹Directive (EU) 2024/1711 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 amending Directives (EU) 2018/2001 [Renewable Energy Directive, REDIII] and (EU) 2019/944 [Electricity Directive] as regards improving the Union's electricity market design. https://lnkd.in/dXakz3bc 🏛️ Stay tuned for more analysis, research results and discussion opportunities on the legal aspects of electricity market design! 🖌️📨 And don’t forget to submit your work for publication in the OGEL Energy Law / Transnational Dispute Management (TDM) special issue on electricity market design: https://lnkd.in/dN5Mth-8 #EUlaw #energylaw #marketdesign #netzero #UiO #ELAWNET Centre on Regulation in Europe (CERRE)

69

🔗 Vertical interoperability remedies at stake - will the DMA deliver (what competition law cannot?) Next 4th June, DEEP-In and I-Com, Institute for Competitiveness organise a workshop to discuss the real implications of the DMA's obligations on Article 6(7) DMA (and maybe some on Article 6(4) DMA). Despite the obligations have not been front and centre of the European Commission's first enforcement actions in the form of the opening of non-compliance procedures, they are key to understanding the enhancement of inter-platform and intra-platform competition. On one side, business users can access software and hardware features embedded within the gatekeepers' operating systems, so they can innovate in the fashion of complementors to the digital ecosystem core. On the other side, narrowing the gap between the gatekeepers' downstream functionality (relying on their tight relationship with their cores) vis-à-vis those of its competitors is essential to discontinuing a contestability-lacking digital environments. In parallel, however, not all of the gatekeepers are subject to the same intensity of regulatory scrutiny as a consequence of the application of Article 6(7) DMA. Apple, Alphabet and Microsoft have presented different technical solutions to satisfy the DMA's interoperability thirst. I will be discussing them on the first panel of the workshop, alongside Antonio Manganelli who will be moderating the panel and Andrea Coscelli, Dr. Konstantina Bania and Stan Larroque. The programme is attached below! Filomena Chirico will close the event with her keynote speech and Giuseppe Colangelo will contribute to the discussion by presenting our key findings on vertical interoperability in our latest working paper, see here: https://lnkd.in/g8aVZFFv Registration for the event is available here: https://lnkd.in/gMJyaiKz #dma #tech #eu

37

1 Comment

Eurofenix Autumn 2024 edition is here and a must read! Congratulations to our Joint Chief Editors, Editorial Board and contributing authors as thought leaders on European and UK insolvency, particularly during challenging geopolitical and economic times. I am honored to contribute from the US perspective. https://lnkd.in/e6Gs-7n4 #bankruptcy #chapter11 #corporaterecovery #creditors #crossborder #crossborderinsolvency #davidconaway #INSOLEurope #Eurofenix #global #globalbusiness #globallaw #insolvency #manufacturing #restructuring #shumaker #turnaround

14

New eucrim article: A Plea for Common Standards on the Lawyer-Client Privilege in EU Cross-Border Criminal Proceedings in Light of Advancing Digitalisation In light of advancing digitalization, which offers smarter and more invasive surveillance techniques for law enforcement, a new eucrim article deals with the challenges of ensuring a trustful relationship between the lawyer and his/her client. After analysing the main benchmarks set by the European Court of Human Rights interpreting the ECHR, Lorena Bachmaier, Full Professor of Law at the Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM), Departamento de Derecho Procesal, points out the deficiencies of the lawyer-client privilege in the cross-border gathering of evidence in the EU. This includes European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) investigations, the European Investigation Order, and the European Production Order for e-evidence. She makes a case for common standards on the lawyer-client privilege in criminal proceedings at the Union level in order to ensure the effective protection of this right. #eucrim #ECHR #law #digitalisation #crimallaw #EuropeanLaw #e_evidence #criminalproceedings European Commission Max Planck Law Thomas Wahl, Anna Pingen Read the full article here 👇 https://lnkd.in/ezkghywv

31

New header, new blogpost! Professor Teemu Ruskola (University of Pennsylvania) introduces his paper inspired by Shucheng Wang's book on authoritarian legality. https://lnkd.in/dW3dRFKS

7

In today's Oxford Business Law Blog (OBLB) a short post of mine on a forthcoming paper on takeover law. https://lnkd.in/dxi2adpU #takeover directive #finance #minority protection #market for corporate control #merger and acquisitions #comparative law

36

An expert draft for a PRC Artificial Intelligence Law was released last month, and we had some questions to the drafting team. Here is the Q&A: https://lnkd.in/ecFTqyfJ

9

1 Comment

BSH Hausgeräte v Electrolux – cross border jurisdiction for non-EU Member States   CJEU Advocate-General Emiliou issued his initial Opinion in this case, in which he pleaded to reconsider the ruling in GAT v LuK, on 22 February. The case was then referred to the CJEU Grand Chamber, where it was again pleaded on 14 May. We now have the additional Opinion of the Advocate-General, issued 5 September, which focuses on jurisdiction of courts within the EU for patent infringement in non-EU Member States, in this case Türkiye. Jurisdiction of the Swedish court with regard to infringement was based under Article 4 of the Brussels I bis Regulation on the domicile of Electrolux and is undisputed. The question is what the court can do if an invalidity defence or counterclaim is raised. In his first Opinion the Advocate-General dealt with the situation of infringement within the EU, which is governed by Article 24 Brussels I bis Regulation. That does not apply to infringement outside the EU, where jurisdiction is governed by customary international law. This has to be respected by the private international law of the courts. The registration of such patents is a matter of sovereignty of the country of registration and is therefore excluded from the adjudicatory jurisdiction of the courts of other States. This limitation includes an erga omnes declaration of invalidity, which according to the Advocate-General would never be recognized by such third State. On the other hand, a preliminary or incidental opinion on an invalidity defence with inter partes effect in an infringement action is not excluded. The Advocate-General discusses two solutions. One possibility is that the courts within the EU do not have jurisdiction for erga omnes decisions on the validity of a patent in a non-EU Member State at all. That however has the disadvantage that it would also apply if the courts of the specific non-EU Member State cannot offer guarantees of a fair trial. Therefore the preferred solution is that the home court of the defendant does have jurisdiction on the basis of Article 4 Brussels I bis Regulation, but can deny to adjudicate on the issue of invalidity. It is my understanding that it therefore should deny adjudication with erga omnes effect on the basis of customary international law and the sovereignty of the non-EU Member State, perhaps unless that State cannot offer guarantees of a fair trial. However, it seems that the home court of the defendant can still deal with invalidity in a preliminary or incidental way inter partes when deciding an infringement claim.

24

2 Comments

New #OpenAccess title Fairness in #IntellectualProperty Law: Searching for a Uniform Concept by Annette Kur, Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Germany, nari lee, Hanken School of Economics, Helsinki, Finland and Anna Tischner, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland This Open Access title is free to read and download on Elgaronline. https://lnkd.in/dgH5z4FV ‘Fairness is a key concept of intellectual property law. The authors analyse it from different substantive and methodological angles and present its surprising theoretical and practical potential as a cornerstone of a modern, balanced and sustainable IP system. A highly instructive and original book.’ – Ansgar Ohly, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Germany ‘Issues of fairness have long been shortchanged in intellectual property scholarship, either sacrificed to arguments about economic efficiency or just assumed by commentators without rigorous analysis. Kur, Lee, and Tischner have produced a sweeping, thoughtful, and thought-provoking book on fairness in IP that deserves a lot of attention.’ – Justin Hughes, Loyola Marymount University, US

176

1 Comment

RBB’s Vitaly Pruzhansky will present on the topic of ‘Economics of Private Enforcement’ at the annual competition law conference in Riga, organised by Faculty of Law of the University of Latvia and European Law Institute, on 20 September. The conference will focus on the quantification of competition law infringements damages and will cover the principle of full compensation and its application in practice. It is supported by the Competition Council of Latvia and the Office of Sworn Attorneys, RASNAČS. More details can be found on the European Law Institute event page: https://lnkd.in/eguMTWye #CompetitionLaw #CompetitionLitigation

13

The current trends in #antitrust damages actions reflect a dynamic and evolving legal landscape in the #EU. The blog by Nils Imgarten and Lena Hornkohl summarizes the key findings of their analysis, highlighting the transitional phase of antitrust damages actions, the critical role of evidence disclosure, and other emerging trends in the #CJEU’s jurisprudence. The article is available on the Kluwer Competition Law Blog #competition #internationallaw #eucourt

19

⏰ Last month, the data protection agenda in Türkiye was dominated by legislative amendments. These amendments on the conditions for processing sensitive personal data, procedures for data transfers abroad, and appeals against decisions of the Turkish Data Protection Authority are the first step towards harmonizing the Turkish Data Protection Act with the GDPR, which has been included in various action plans for some time. 👩‍💻 A short article I wrote on this topic was published in Privacy Laws & Business International Report, April 2024. I hope it will be informative and helpful to those interested 👇 https://lnkd.in/dUZH79Ye #DataProtection #GDPR #PrivacyLaws #Turkey #LegalUpdates

91

🌍 Unlock Ukraine's reconstruction potential with Princeton University’s Innovations for Successful Societies program, in collaboration with Anti-Corruption Research & Education Centre (ACREC), Institute of Legislative Ideas and Debevoise & Plimpton LLP. 📚 Dive into the Ukraine Reconstruction Law Database, featuring over 450 legal documents, to empower businesses, CSOs, and stakeholders with essential tools for navigating Ukraine’s legal landscape. ℹ️ This resource is a key component of the Anti-Corruption Curriculum Rebuilding Ukraine Corruption Free project, aiming to minimize corruption risks in infrastructure reconstruction. By enhancing transparency and accountability, we strengthen Ukraine’s recovery efforts and bolster its attractiveness for American and European investments. 🔍 Gain insights into legislative developments and reduce risks with detailed summaries and histories. Let’s build a corruption-free future together! https://lnkd.in/dF7haW4s #UkraineReconstruction #AntiCorruption #LegalDatabase #PrincetonUniversity #DebevoisePlimpton #ACREC #KyivMohylaAcademy

6

What next for antitrust? Some thoughts on the present and future of antitrust enforcement, with HUGE thanks to many friends for comments and conversations, and to ProMarket for the invitation. https://lnkd.in/e5RXhudT

114

12 Comments

The new article "Copyright for technical standards after the CJEU judgment in the case Public.Resource.Org" has just been published in UfR 🎉 The article is written by scholars Thomas Riis and Jens Schovsbo from CIIR and William Unmack from CEPRI, and in the article it is examined whether "harmonized standards" are covered by section 9 in the danish copyright law, which excludes public documents from copyright protection. We conclude that harmonized standards with high probability will be covered by section 9. Find out more details about how harmonized standards are handled by copyright law by reading the article here: https://lnkd.in/deFHdFJ3  

3

Dear Colleagues, Embracing the Scientific May of 2024! We are excited to present our latest research paper, which delves into the pressing issues of law enforcement by the Supreme Court in criminal proceedings. Hlynska Nataliia, Basysta Iryna, Drozdov Oleksandr. Challenges to safeguarding individual rights when appealing a suspicion notice in combined criminal proceedings. No. 1 (2024): New Ukrainian Law. p. 105-118 The article examines the issue of ensuring individual rights in the context of combined criminal proceedings, specifically focusing on the appeal of a suspicion notice and subsequent appeal of a decision by an investigative judge to refuse a complaint against a change in the previously reported suspicion during the pre-trial investigation. The authors argue that the situation should not be considered within the framework of the single legal regime rule, as it concerns the acquisition of the procedural possibility to appeal to the court against procedural decisions that previously did not exist. It is emphasized that in this case, it is about ensuring the individual's right to judicial protection, rather than a single legal regime in the case of combining several pre-trial investigation materials. The article proves that a suspect or his/her defender can appeal a suspicion notice in a unified criminal proceeding on the basis of paragraph 10 of part 1 of Article 303 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, if at least one of the pre-trial investigation materials from this unified proceeding was entered into the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations after these amendments came into force. It is summarized that the ruling of the investigative judge on the refusal to satisfy a complaint against a change in the previously reported suspicion in a unified criminal proceeding is subject to appeal during the pre-trial investigation on the basis of part 2 of Article 309 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, if at least one of the pre-trial investigation materials from this unified proceeding was entered into the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations after these amendments came into force. We are confident that this work will be of great interest to a wide range of legal professionals in the field of criminal procedure and will serve as a valuable asset in their academic and practical endeavors. The link to the full text of the article is provided in the first comment below.

25

4 Comments

There have always been attempts by various stakeholders to “mobilise” EU Courts. The discussion on this issue has much greater visibility in the area of General EU Law than in EU Competition Law circles. In this conversation 🎥 https://lnkd.in/e_qPiJ_N with three EU Law & Policy experts Prof. Sabine Saurugger (Director of Sciences Po Grenoble) Prof. Elaine Fahey (The City Law School), and Dr Giulia Gentile (Essex Law School) we try to unravel this complex and so important issue. We discussed among other things: ✓ Mobilising (and occasionally weaponising) the vocabulary of rights  ✓ Strategic litigation as a bug of European integration  ✓ Strategic litigation as a feature of European integration  ✓ Strategic litigation: bad or good; avoidable or not? ✓Commercialising the ‘business’ of (strategic) litigation  ✓ European legalism  ✓ Strategic litigation and juristic creativity  ✓ Preliminary reference and the phenomenon of “ghost-writing” ✓ Examining the roles of different stakeholders: regulatees, lobbyists, NGOs, lawyers, interest group ✓ What strategic litigation is not? Doesn’t each case aim at a specific result?  ✓ Sociological perception of adjudication: Are judges policymakers?  ✓ Is the CJEU a political actor? ✓ Is court an island?  ✓ Are courts building the walls and should we try to decode what is behind the facade of the letter of law?  ✓ Measuring law & measuring politics  ✓ What is the counterfactual  ✓Competing discourses of rights ✓ Digital constitutionalism  ✓ Why are the judgments getting longer and more technical? ✓ Which areas of EU law are most prone to strategic litigations?  ✓ Recommendations to students New panel: 🎥 https://lnkd.in/e_qPiJ_N In previous 83rd episode (published last Tuesday) we discussed with Justin Lindeboom relationship between competition law & legal theory https://lnkd.in/ewqHeNQ6. In the next 85th episode (to be published next Tuesday) we’ll have a conversation with Massimiliano Kadar Head of Unit at DG COMP on Draft Guidelines on the application of Article 102 to abusive exclusionary conduct by dominant undertakings

54

6 Comments

A very useful overview of the timeline for implementation of the DMCC. Parts 3 and 4 are of particular note for any customer-facing businesses...

11