Draft Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union; Joint Statement and outline of the Political Declaration on the future relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union, as agreed at negotiators’ level.
Draft budgetary plan submitted by Italy for 2019 – Italia, documento programmatico di bilancio per il 2019
The European Commission has identified in the draft budgetary plan submitted by Italy for 2019 a particularly serious non-compliance with the fiscal recommendation addressed to Italy by the Council on 13 July 2018.
La Commissione europea ha riscontrato nel documento programmatico di bilancio presentato dall’Italia per il 2019 un’inosservanza particolarmente grave della raccomandazione in materia di bilancio che il Consiglio ha rivolto al paese il 13 luglio 2018.
Commission letter to Italy – 23 October 2018
Commission opinion on the 2019 Draft Budgetary Plan of Italy – 23 October 2018
Italy – reply to Commission – 22 October 2018
Commission letter to Italy – 18 October 2018
Draft budgetary plan Italy 2019
Commission letter to Italy – 5 October 2018
Aiuti di Stato: la Corte annulla la decisione con cui la Commissione ha rinunciato a ordinare il recupero di aiuti illegali concessi dall’Italia sotto forma di esenzione dall’imposta comunale sugli immobili.
I concorrenti direttamente interessati dei beneficiari di aiuti di Stato hanno il diritto di rivolgersi ai giudici dell’Unione per chiedere l’annullamento di una simile decisione
(Sentenza nelle cause riunite C-622/16 P, Scuola Elementare Maria Montessori Srl / Commissione, C-623/16 P, Commissione / Scuola Elementare Maria Montessori Srl, e C-624/16 P, Commissione / Pietro Ferracci)
Il giudice non deve estendere una normativa nazionale riferita alla Cedu alla violazione del diritto dell’Unione ( art. 50 Carta )
Il diritto dell’Unione, e in particolare i principi di equivalenza e di effettività, deve essere interpretato nel senso che non obbliga un giudice nazionale ad estendere alle violazioni del diritto dell’Unione, e segnatamente alle lesioni del diritto fondamentale garantito dall’articolo 50 della Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’Unione europea e dall’articolo 54 della Convenzione di applicazione dell’Accordo di Schengen, del 14 giugno 1985, tra i governi degli Stati dell’Unione economica Benelux, della Repubblica federale di Germania e della Repubblica francese, relativo all’eliminazione graduale dei controlli alle frontiere comuni, firmata a Schengen (Lussemburgo) il 19 giugno 1990 ed entrata in vigore il 26 marzo 1995, un mezzo di impugnazione di diritto interno che consente di ottenere, unicamente in caso di violazione della Convenzione europea per la salvaguardia dei Diritti dell’Uomo delle Libertà fondamentali, firmata a Roma il 4 novembre 1950 o di uno dei suoi protocolli, la ripetizione di un procedimento penale concluso con una decisione nazionale passata in giudicato.
EU27 leaders reaffirmed their full confidence in Michel Barnier as the negotiator and their determination to stay united. They also noted that, despite intensive negotiations, not enough progress has been achieved.
Dopo la firma del Protocollo d’intesa tra la Corte di Cassazione e la Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, avvenuta a Strasburgo l’11 dicembre 2015, la Corte di cassazione ha dato attuazione al Protocollo costituendo un gruppo di lavoro permanente, composto di un componente per ciascuna Sezione, civile e penale, della Corte, nonché di due magistrati del Massimario, che cura sia l’immediata selezione delle sentenze di legittimità che applichino in maniera significativa la normativa europea, sia la segnalazione delle sentenze CEDU che più direttamente riguardino l’Italia, diffondendone la conoscenza tra i colleghi della Corte con sintetici abstracts.
Rsearchers from the US and RAND Europe explored the economic implications of eight different trade scenarios involving the UK, EU and US after Brexit:
The United Nations circulated a report concerning ISIL (Da’esh), Al-Qaida and associated individuals and entities.
Obligation to disapply national legislation contrary to a directive. Obbligo di disapplicare una normativa nazionale contraria a una direttiva
“EU law, in particular Article 288 TFEU, must be interpreted as meaning that a national court, hearing a dispute between private persons, which finds that it is unable to interpret the provisions of its national law that are contrary to a provision of a directive that satisfies all the conditions required for it to produce direct effect in a manner that is compatible with that provision, is not obliged, solely on the basis of EU law, to disapply those provisions of national law and a clause to be found, as a consequence of those provisions of national law, in an insurance contract.
In a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, a party adversely affected by the incompatibility of national law with EU law or a person subrogated to the rights of that party could however rely on the case-law arising from the judgment of 19 November 1991, Francovich and Others (C?6/90 and C?9/90, EU:C:1991:428), in order to obtain from the Member State, if justified, compensation for any loss sustained.”
“Il diritto dell’Unione, in particolare l’articolo 288 TFUE, dev’essere interpretato nel senso che un giudice nazionale, investito di una controversia tra singoli, che si trovi nell’impossibilità di interpretare le disposizioni del suo diritto nazionale contrarie ad una disposizione di una direttiva che soddisfa tutte le condizioni richieste per produrre un effetto diretto in un senso conforme a quest’ultima disposizione, non è tenuto, sulla sola base del diritto dell’Unione, a disapplicare tali disposizioni nazionali nonché una clausola contenuta, conformemente a queste ultime, in un contratto di assicurazione.
In una situazione come quella di cui trattasi nel procedimento principale, la parte lesa dalla non conformità del diritto nazionale al diritto dell’Unione o la persona surrogata nei diritti di tale parte potrebbe tuttavia invocare la giurisprudenza scaturita dalla sentenza del 19 novembre 1991, Francovich e a. (C-6/90 e C-9/90, EU:C:1991:428), per ottenere eventualmente, da parte dello Stato membro, il risarcimento del danno subito”.
Frequently Asked Questions on the European Public Prosecutor’s Office – Domande frequenti sulla Procura europea
Ukraine: EU adds six entities involved in the construction of the Kerch Bridge connecting the illegally annexed Crimea to Russia to sanctions list
The Council added six entities to the list of those subject to restrictive measures over actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine. They are listed because of their involvement in the construction of the Kerch Bridge, connecting Russia to the illegally annexed Crimean peninsula. Through their actions they supported the consolidation of Russia’s control over the illegally annexed Crimean peninsula, which in turn further undermines the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.
A judicial authority called upon to execute a European arrest warrant must refrain from giving effect to it if it considers that there is a real risk that the individual concerned would suffer a breach of his fundamental right to an independent tribunal and, therefore, of the essence of his fundamental right to a fair trial on account of deficiencies liable to affect the independence of the judiciary in the issuing Member State – L’autorità giudiziaria chiamata a eseguire un mandato d’arresto europeo deve astenersi dal darvi seguito se ritiene che la persona interessata rischi di subire una violazione del suo diritto fondamentale a un giudice indipendente e, quindi, del contenuto essenziale del suo diritto fondamentale a un equo processo, a causa di carenze idonee a incidere sull’indipendenza del potere giudiziario nello Stato membro emittente
Judgment in Case C-216/18 PPU Minister for Justice and Equality v LM (Deficiencies in the system of justice)
It follows that, where the person in respect of whom a European arrest warrant has been issued, pleads, in order to oppose his surrender to the issuing judicial authority, that there are systemic or generalised deficiencies, which, according to him, are liable to affect the independence of the judiciary in the issuing Member State and his fundamental right to a fair trial, the executing judicial authority must, as a first step, assess, on the basis of material that is objective, reliable, specific and properly updated, whether there is a real risk, connected with a lack of independence of the courts of the issuing Member State on account of deficiencies of that kind, of such a right being breached in the issuing Member State.
The Court considers that information in a reasoned proposal recently addressed by the Commission to the Council on the basis of Article 7(1) TEU is particularly relevant for the purposes of that assessment.
(Sentenza nella causa C-216/18 PPU, Minister for Justice and Equality / LM (Carenze del sistema giudiziario))
Ne discende che, qualora la persona oggetto di un mandato d’arresto europeo faccia valere, per opporsi alla propria consegna all’autorità giudiziaria emittente, l’esistenza di carenze sistemiche o generalizzate che, a suo avviso, sono idonee a pregiudicare l’indipendenza del potere giudiziario nello Stato membro emittente e il suo diritto fondamentale a un equo processo, l’autorità giudiziaria dell’esecuzione è tenuta, in un primo momento, a valutare, in base a elementi oggettivi, attendibili, precisi e debitamente aggiornati, l’esistenza di un rischio reale di violazione di tale diritto nello Stato membro emittente, connesso a una mancanza di indipendenza dei giudici di detto Stato membro a causa di siffatte carenze.
La Corte considera che le informazioni contenute in una proposta motivata recentemente rivolta dalla Commissione al Consiglio in base all’articolo 7, paragrafo 1, TUE costituiscono elementi di particolare rilevanza ai fini di tale valutazione.
These publications set out the government’s approach to bringing EU financial services legislation into domestic law under the EU (Withdrawal) Act.
The Government has published a White Paper on how it will legislate for the Withdrawal Agreement between the UK and the EU.
This report gives a detailed overview of the UK’s Strategic Export Controls work in 2017.
The report includes sections on:
information on export licensing processes and responsible departments
export Licensing data and performance statistics
UK and EU policy developments and a section on Brexit
export licensing and industry
UK support to allies and partners
international policy and regimes
compliance and enforcement
It also contains case studies and detailed information about the UK’s export licensing processes and procedure.
Kerch Strait bridge (“the Crimean Bridge”): individual sanctions against 6 people involved in the illegal construction of the Kerch Strait bridge.
It seems that at the recent EU-Ukraine Summit the ambassadors of the EU member states approved the decision to impose individual sanctions against 6 people involved in the illegal construction of the Kerch Strait bridge.
In the absence of a Withdrawal Agreement, there will be no transition period and EU law will cease to apply to and in the UK as of 30 March 2019. *** In assenza di un accordo sull’uscita del Regno Unito dall’UE, non vi sarà un periodo transitorio e le regole UE termineranno di applicarsi nel Regno Unito a partire dal 30 marzo 2019.
In the absence of a Withdrawal Agreement, there will be no transition period and EU law will cease to apply to and in the UK as of 30 March 2019.
Brexit: European Commission publishes Communication on preparing for the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. Comunicazione della Commission sulla fase preparatoria alla Brexit
Brexit: European Commission publishes Communication on preparing for the UK’s withdrawal from the EU
The European Commission has today adopted a Communication outlining the ongoing work on the preparation for all outcomes of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union.
If the Withdrawal Agreement is ratified before 30 March 2019, most of the legal effects of Brexit will apply as of1 January 2021, i.e. after a transition period of 21 months, the terms of which are set out in the draft WithdrawalAgreement.
In the absence of a Withdrawal Agreement, there will be no transition period and EU law will cease to apply to and in the UK as of 30 March 2019.
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL
Protection of intra-EU investment
Migration and Asylum: Commission takes further steps in infringement procedures against Hungary. La Commissione ha deferito l’Ungheria davanti alla Corte di giustizia per violazione delle regole in materia di migrazione e asilo.
Migration and Asylum: Commission takes further steps in infringement procedures against Hungary
The European Commission has today decided to refer Hungary to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for non-compliance of its asylum and return legislation with EU law.
Today the European Commission is announcing provisional safeguard measures concerning imports of a number of steel products. These measures will address the diversion of steel from other countries to the EU market as a result of the recently imposed US tariffs. The safeguard measures will come into effect on Thursday 19 July. Traditional imports of steel products will not be affected.
Antitrust: Commission fines Google €4.34 billion for illegal practices regarding Android mobile devices to strengthen dominance of Google’s search engine – Antitrust: la Commissione infligge a Google un’ammenda di 4.34 miliardi di € per pratiche illegali riguardanti i dispositivi mobili Android volte a rafforzare la posizione dominante del motore di ricerca di Google
The European Commission has fined Google €4.34 billion for breaching EU antitrust rules. Since 2011, Google has imposed illegal restrictions on Android device manufacturers and mobile network operators to cement its dominant position in general internet search.
Iran institutes proceedings against the United States with regard to a dispute concerning alleged violations of the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights between Iran and the United States, and requests the Court to indicate provisional measures
Iran claims that, through the “8 May sanctions” and further sanctions that have been announced, the United States “has violated and continues to violate multiple provisions” ofthe 1955 Treaty.
Tokyo, 17 July 2018
The EU and Japan successfully concluded today their talks on reciprocal adequacy. They agreed to recognise each other’s data protection systems as ‘equivalent’, which will allow data to flow safely between the EU and Japan.
Tokyo, 17 July 2018: At the EU-Japan summit in Tokyo, Presidents Jean-Claude Juncker and Donald Tusk, and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, signed today the EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA).
State aid: Commission adopts Best Practices Code to streamline and speed up State aid control – Aiuti di Stato, la Commissione adotta un codice di Best Practices per semplificare e velocizzare il controllo degli aiuti di Stato
The European Commission has adopted a new Best Practices Code for State aid control. The Code provides guidance to the Commission, Member States, businesses and other stakeholders on the day-to-day conduct of State aid procedures, to improve their effectiveness, transparency and predictability.
Beijing, 16 July 2018_ The 20th Summit between the European Union and the People’s Republic of China held today in Beijing has underlined that this partnership has reached a new level of importance for our own citizens, for our respective neighbouring regions and for the international community more broadly.
“Today, Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross announced that Zhongxing Telecommunications Equipment Corporation, of Shenzhen, China (“ZTE Corporation”) and ZTE Kangxun Telecommunications Ltd. of Hi-New Shenzhen, China (“ZTE Kangxun”) (collectively, “ZTE”) has placed $400 million in escrow at a U.S. bank. Shortly after the deposit, the Department lifted the denial order on ZTE pursuant to a June settlement agreement that included the harshest penalties and strictest compliance measures ever imposed in such a case. The escrow funds are in addition to the $1 billion penalty imposed by Commerce that ZTE paid to the U.S. Treasury last month.
“While we lifted the ban on ZTE, the Department will remain vigilant as we closely monitor ZTE’s actions to ensure compliance with all U.S. laws and regulations,” said Secretary Ross. “Three interlocking elements – a suspended denial order, the $400 million in escrow, and a compliance team selected by and answerable to the Department – will allow the Department to protect U.S. national security.”
The $1.4 billion paid under the new settlement agreement are in addition to the $892 million in penalties ZTE has already paid to the U.S government under a March 2017 settlement agreement.
ZTE will also be required by the new agreement to retain a team of special compliance coordinators selected by and answerable to the Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) for a period of 10 years. Their function will be to monitor on a real-time basis ZTE’s compliance with U.S. export control laws. This is the first time BIS has achieved such stringent compliance measures in any case. The new agreement once again imposes a denial order that is suspended, this time for 10 years, which BIS can activate in the event of additional violations during the ten-year probationary period. Finally, ZTE also has replaced the entire board of directors and senior leadership for both entities.
The purpose of this settlement is to modify ZTE’s behavior while setting a new precedent for monitoring to assure compliance with U.S. law. The unprecedented access afforded the compliance team by this agreement vastly improves the speed with which the Department of Commerce can detect and deal with any violations.”
The seventh review of the trade policies and practices of China takes place on 11 and 13 July 2018. The basis for the review is a report by the WTO Secretariat and a report by the Government of China.
Trade Policy Reviews are an exercise, mandated in the WTO agreements, in which member countries’ trade and related policies are examined and evaluated at regular intervals. Significant developments that may have an impact on the global trading system are also monitored. All WTO members are subject to review, with the frequency of review depending on the country’s size.
Every year, the European Commission draws up an annual report on its monitoring of the application of EU law in response to requests from the European Parliament and the EU countries. These EU country factsheets provide a national breakdown on the application of EU law for 2017.
U.S. Department of Commerce to Host Public Hearing on the Section 232 National Security Investigation of Imports of Automobiles and Automotive Parts
The U.S. Department of Commerce will host a public hearing on its Section 232 investigation of imports of automobiles and automotive parts on Thursday, July 19 in the U.S. Department of Commerce Auditorium. The hearing, which begins at 8:30 a.m., will feature testimony from approximately 45 individuals, representing domestic and international companies, industry groups, labor, and foreign countries. Officials from the Department of Defense will also be participating.
This hearing provides an opportunity for stakeholders to present information and advice relevant to the investigation on the effects of imports of automobiles and automotive parts on national security.
The investigation will consider all relevant facts and input from stakeholders compiled during the notice and comment process before reaching a final determination, which will be based on facts and the statutory requirements. Information from Thursday’s hearing and the more than 2,300 public comments submitted on this issue, in addition to rebuttal comments, will be considered in the Department of Commerce’s investigation and analysis.
Switzerland has requested WTO dispute consultations with the United States regarding US duties on certain imported steel and aluminium products. The request was circulated to WTO members on 12 July.
Switzerland claims the US duties of 25% and 10% on imports of steel and aluminium products respectively are inconsistent with provisions of the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 and the Agreement on Safeguards.
UK white paper on
THE FUTURE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND THE EUROPEAN UNION