DOCSLIB.ORG

Legal Obstacles in Member States to Single Market Rules

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Legal Obstacles in Member States to Single Market Rules STUDY Requested by the IMCO committee Legal obstacles in Member States to Single Market rules Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies Directorate-General for Internal Policies Authors: Erik DAHLBERG et al. EN PE 658.189 - November 2020 Legal obstacles in Member States to Single Market rules Abstract This study analyses the current state of national obstacles to free movement in the EU Single Market. It focuses on various aspects of obstacles related to free movement of goods and services, the right to establishment, the Digital Single Market, consumer protection and public procurement. This document was provided by the Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies at the request of the committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO). This document was requested by the European Parliament's committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection. AUTHORS Erik DAHLBERG, Sigurd NÆSS-SCHMIDT and Laura VIRTANEN, Copenhagen Economics Scott MARCUS, Bruegel Mattia DI SALVO and Jacques PELKMANS, CEPS Virginia DALLA POZZA and Katarina KUBOVICOVA, VVA ADMINISTRATORS RESPONSIBLE Christina RATCLIFF Mariusz MACIEJEWSKI EDITORIAL ASSISTANTS Roberto BIANCHINI Irene VERNACOTOLA LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN ABOUT THE EDITOR Policy departments provide in-house and external expertise to support European Parliament committees and other parliamentary bodies in shaping legislation and exercising democratic scrutiny over EU internal policies. To contact the Policy Department or to subscribe for email alert updates, please write to: Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies European Parliament L-2929 - Luxembourg Email: [email protected] Manuscript completed: November 2020 Date of publication: November 2020 © European Union, 2020 This document is available on the internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/supporting-analyses DISCLAIMER AND COPYRIGHT The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the European Parliament is given prior notice and sent a copy. For citation purposes, the publication should be referenced as: Dahlberg, E. et al., Legal obstacles in Member States to Single Market rules, Publication for the committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg, 2020. © Cover image used under licence from Adobe Stock. Legal obstacles in Member States to Single Market rules CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 6 LIST OF BOXES 9 LIST OF FIGURES 9 LIST OF TABLES 10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11 1. INTRODUCTION 15 2. THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF THE SINGLE MARKET 21 2.1. The legal basis of the Single Market 21 2.2. The principles of the Single Market 23 2.3. The freedoms 25 2.3.1. Free movement of goods 25 2.3.2. Free movement of services 27 2.3.3. Posting of workers 30 3. FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS 31 3.1. Difficulties in meeting requirements to sell goods 32 3.1.1. What are the current problems? 35 3.1.2. Concluding remark: Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 42 3.1.3. What tools exist at EU and national level to address these problems? 43 3.2. Insufficient information about applicable rules 47 3.2.1. What are the current problems? 47 3.2.2. Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 48 3.2.3. What tools exist at EU and national level to address these problems? 48 3.3. Problems with mutual recognition affecting the free movement of goods 49 3.3.1. What are the current problems? 51 3.3.2. Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 55 3.3.3. What tools exist at EU and national level to address these problems? 55 3.4. A note on the impact of COVID-19 on intra-EU trade in goods 56 3.5. How can these obstacles be removed and prevented? 58 4. FREE MOVEMENT OF SERVICES AND RIGHT TO ESTABLISHMENT 61 4.1. Difficulties in meeting requirements to sell services 63 4.1.1. What are the current problems? 63 4.1.2. Restrictions on retail and wholesale 73 4.1.3. Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 77 3 PE 658.189 IPOL | Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies 4.1.4. What tools exist at EU and national level to address these problems? 78 4.2. Insufficient information about applicable rules 79 4.2.1. What are the current problems? 79 4.2.2. Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 81 4.2.3. What tools exist at EU and national level to address these problems? 82 4.3. Difficulties with accessing a regulated profession 83 4.3.1. What are the current problems? 83 4.3.2. Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 91 4.3.3. What tools exist at EU and national level to address these problems? 91 4.4. Restrictions on corporate ownership 92 4.4.1. What are the current problems? 92 4.4.2. Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 92 4.4.3. What tools exist at EU and national level to address these problems? 95 4.5. Burdens and obstacles in the context of posting workers to other Member States 96 4.5.1. What are the current problems? 96 4.5.2. Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 101 4.5.3. What tools exist at EU and national level to address these problems? 102 4.6. Franchising in the EU 102 4.7. A note on the impact of COVID-19 on intra-EU trade in services 104 4.8. How can these problems be removed and prevented? 106 5. DIGITAL SINGLE MARKET 109 5.1. Overall fragmentation of rules for cross-border e-commerce 115 5.1.1. What are the current problems? 115 5.1.2. Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 119 5.1.3. What tools exist, or could exist, at EU and national level? 120 5.2. Burdensome issues related to Value Added Tax 120 5.2.1. What are the current problems? 120 5.2.2. Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 122 5.2.3. What tools exist at EU and national level to address these problems? 123 5.3. Copyright and Geo-blocking: Obstacles to cross-border sales 123 5.3.1. What are the current problems? 125 5.3.2. Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 128 5.3.3. What tools exist at EU and national level to address these problems? 128 5.4. Insufficient information about applicable rules 129 5.4.1. What are the current problems? 129 5.4.2. Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 129 PE 658.189 4 Legal obstacles in Member States to Single Market rules 5.4.3. What tools exist at EU and national level to address these problems? 129 5.5. COVID-19 and digital services 130 5.6. How can these problems be addressed and prevented? 131 6. CONSUMER PROTECTION 135 6.1. Differences in consumer protection 135 6.1.1. What are the current problems? 136 6.1.2. Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 139 6.2. Insufficient information about applicable rules 140 6.2.1. What are the current problems? 140 6.2.2. Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 142 6.2.3. What tools exist at EU and national level to address these problems? 142 6.3. COVID-19 and consumer protection 142 6.4. How can these problems be addressed and prevented? 142 7. PUBLIC PROCUREMENT 145 7.1. Uneven access to public procurement 145 7.1.1. The importance of EU rules-based public procurement 145 7.1.2. The EU regulatory framework for public procurement 147 7.1.3. What are the problems and shortcomings? 149 7.1.4. Is there a growing trend of these problems in the EU? 152 7.1.5. What tools exist at EU and national level to address these problems? 153 7.2. How can these problems be removed and prevented? 153 REFERENCES 155 5 PE 658.189 IPOL | Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS B2B Business-to-Business B2C Business-to-Consumer CEN European Committee for Standardisation CENELEC European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation CJEU Court of Justice of the European Union CMO Collective Management Organisation CPB Central Procurement Body CPR Construction Products Regulation CRD Consumer Rights Directive CSGD Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive DG Directorate-General DSA Digital Services Act DSM Digital Single Market EC European Communities EEA European Economic Area EEC European Economic Community ELA European Labour Authority EP European Parliament EPE European Parliament of Enterprises EPO European Patent Office EPR Extended Producer Responsibility ESPD European Single Procurement Document ETSI European Telecommunications Standards Institute PE 658.189 6 Legal obstacles in Member States to Single Market rules EU European Union FCM Food Contact Materials FDI Foreign Direct Investment GATS General Agreement on Trade in Services GBR Geo-blocking Regulation GDP Gross Domestic Product GMP Good Manufacturing Practices GS Geprüfte Sicherheit (Tested Safety) ICT Information and Communications Technology IMCO European Parliament's committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection IMI Internal Market Information [system] IOT Internet of Things LVCR Low Value Consignment Relief MEAT Most Economically Advantageous Tender MFN Most Favoured Nation MS Member State/Member States NOC Negotiated Procedure without prior publication OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OJEU Official Journal of the European Union OSS One Stop Shop PCP Product Contact Points PCPC Product Contact Points for Construction PD
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Regulation of Professional Services in EU Member States
    SERVICEGAP Discussion Paper No. XXX Regulation of Professional Services in EU Member States Classification, Measurement and Evaluation November 2012 Iain Paterson, Bianca Brandl* and Richard Sellner* * Institute for Advanced Studies, Vienna, Austria Corresponding Author: Iain Paterson ([email protected]) This paper was developed as part of Deliverable 2.3 of SERVICEGAP “Papers on linkages between manufacturing and services, regulation in professional services and banks” SERVICEGAP project is funded by the European Commission, Research Directorate General as part of the 7th Framework Programme, Theme 8: Socio-Economic Sciences and Humanities. Grant Agreement no: 244 552 1 Regulation of Professional Services in EU Member States: Classification, Measurement and Evaluation Iain Paterson Bianca Brandl, and Richard Sellner November 2012 Abstract This paper has a two-fold purpose: on the one hand of presenting methods and results from studies (mainly involving the authors) that have fed into ongoing efforts at European Union level to classify regulatory systems in Member States, to find ways to measure the extent of regulation, and to evaluate whether state-legislated or self-regulation is anti-competitive as distinct from quality- enhancing regulation for consumers’, rather than producers’, benefit. On the other hand, the paper presents results from a partial update of regulatory knowledge (regulation indices) and further develops a new measure of regulatory effect of professional services throughout the Member States’ economies based on newly developed empirical measures of interlinkage (Cf. Paterson and Sellner 2012). The results of the updated indicator show some modest decrease in anti-competitive regulation in professional services, mainly with respect to market conduct behaviour: more openness to new forms of businesses, price setting, fees and advertising.
    [Show full text]
  • Saisie-Contrefaçon
    Sabine Agé ÖV-Expertengespräch IP-Rechtsdurchsetzung in Europa Vienna ● 16 January 2017 Bringing evidence of infringement in France after the Enforcement directive: the saisie- contrefaçon and other available tools ÖV-Expertengespräch “IP-Rechtsdurchsetzung in Europa: Gut, besser … und morgen?” Vienna ● 16 January 2017 Sabine AGÉ Avocat Paris Lyon Evidence gathering in France after the IP Enforcement Dir. Overview Provisions of the IP Enforcement Directive (IPED) and of the French Intellectual Property Code (IPC) Overview of the means of evidence used in France Saisie-contrefaçon Protection of confidential information Use of the information gathered during the saisie- contrefaçon Right of information and rendering of accounts 2 Bringing evidence of infringement in France after the Enforcement directive: the saisie-contrefaçon and other available tools 1 Sabine Agé ÖV-Expertengespräch IP-Rechtsdurchsetzung in Europa Vienna ● 16 January 2017 Evidence gathering in France after the IP Enforcement Dir. IPED: a minimum Art. 2 : Scope “Without prejudice to the means which are or may be provided for in Community or national legislation, in so far as those means may be more favourable for rightholders, the measures, procedures and remedies provided for by this Directive shall apply, in accordance with Article 3, to any infringement of intellectual property rights as provided for by Community law and/or by the national law of the Member State concerned.” 3 Evidence gathering in France after the IP Enforcement Dir. IPED: fairness and proportionality Art. 3 : General obligation “1. Member States shall provide for the measures, procedures and remedies necessary to ensure the enforcement of the intellectual property rights covered by this Directive.
    [Show full text]
  • Mutual Recognition of Food Information
    August 8, 2019 MSc Thesis LAW-80436, Law and Governance group, 36 ECTS Mutual Recognition of Food Information How does mutual recognition work and is it a suitable concept for the area of food information? Carmen Lok – 950805526060 Mutual Recognition of Food Information How does mutual recognition work and is it a suitable concept for the area of food information? Carmen Lok – 950805526060 Master Food Safety Specialisation Food Law and Regulatory Affairs Chair Group: Law and Governance group Course code: LAW-80436 – 36 ECTS Supervisor and First Examiner: dr. Kai P. Purnhagen LL.M. Second Examiner: dr. Hanna Schebesta August 8, 2019 Image frontpage: (Micromax Design and Consulting Inc., 2019). 2 Acknowledgements I would hereby like to thank my supervisor Kai Purnhagen and examiner Hanna Schebesta for providing helpful feedback that aided me to improve the content of this thesis. During the courses they taught they have sparked my interest for the field of food information as well as for the principle of mutual recognition. Furthermore, I would like to express my gratitude to everyone who has supported me and listened to me during this challenging period. Because of them, I was able to persevere and can now proudly present the outcome of my research in this thesis. Carmen Lok August, 2019 3 Abstract Due to the eagerness of Member States to regulate the area of food information, national differences exist that hinder the free movement of goods and deprive businesses and consumers of the benefits a Single Market can provide. The purpose of this thesis is to determine how the principle of mutual recognition works and whether it is a suitable concept for the area of food information.
    [Show full text]
  • The Macroeconomics of Regulation
    International Finance 18:3, 2015: pp. 343–360 DOI: 10.1111/infi.12077 BOOK REVIEW The Macroeconomics of Market Regulation y z Matteo Cacciatore and Giuseppe Fiori y z HEC Montreal, and North Carolina State University. Boeri,T.,M.Castanheira,R. Faini and V. Galasso, eds., Structural Reforms Without Prejudices. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2006. Schindler, M., H. Berger, B. B. Bakker and A. Spilimbergo, eds., Jobs and Growth: Supporting the European Recovery. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. 2014. Solow, R., ed., Structural Reform and Economic Policy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 2004. I. Introduction In each country, a complex set of laws and institutions regulates the functioning of product and labour markets. Broadly defined, the regulation of labour directly affects hiring and firing decisions, the number of working hours, the intensity of job search and wage dynamics. Examples include employment protection legislation, the generosity and duration of unemployment benefits, restrictions on the length of contracts, the level of centralization in wage bargaining, labour unions and © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd 344 Matteo Cacciatore and Giuseppe Fiori minimum wages. Product market regulation affects producer entry and exit in a given market or industry, the incentives to create and commercialize goods and services, and the behaviour of prices. Examples include the procedures governing market entry (e.g. the legal requirements to be met for a business to start operating), the laws and institutions that limit the market supply of goods and services, and price controls. The rationale for the emergence and consolidation of such laws and institutions has been related to various factors, including the promotion of social equity goals, the correction of market imperfections (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of the EU Copyright Framework
    Review of the EU copyright framework European Implementation Assessment Review of the EU copyright framework: The implementation, application and effects of the "InfoSoc" Directive (2001/29/EC) and of its related instruments European Implementation Assessment Study In October 2014, the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) requested from the European Parliament Research Service (EPRS) an Ex Post Impact Assessment on Directive 2001/29/EC on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (InfoSoc). This EPRS publication was originally commissioned in the context of JURI's own- initiative implementation report, which was adopted in Plenary in July 2015, Rapporteur Julia Reda MEP. However, it is also relevant to the work of JURI Committees' Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights and Copyright (CWG), chaired by Jean Marie Cavada MEP. Furthermore, this request was made in the wider context of the Commission's review of the EU legislative framework on copyright, and the ensuing legislative proposals, which have been a long time in the planning and which are now expected for the 4th quarter of 2015. The objective of these proposals is to modernise the EU copyright framework, and in particular the InfoSoc Directive, in light of the digital transformation. Accordingly, in response to the JURI request, the Ex-Post Impact Assessment Unit of the European Parliament Research Service decided to produce a "European Implementation Assessment on the review of the EU copyright framework". Implementation reports of EP committees are now routinely accompanied by European Implementation Assessments, drawn up by the Ex-Post Impact Assessment Unit of the Directorate for Impact Assessment and European Added Value, within the European Parliament's Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services.
    [Show full text]
  • EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 31.5.2018 COM(2018
    EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 31.5.2018 COM(2018) 379 final 2018/0204 (COD) Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (service of documents) {SEC(2018) 272 final} - {SWD(2018) 286 final} - {SWD(2018) 287 final} EN EN EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 1. CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL • Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Among the EU’s tasks is that of developing a European area of justice in civil matters based on the principles of mutual trust and the mutual recognition of judgments. The area of justice requires judicial cooperation across borders. For this purpose, and to facilitate the proper functioning of the internal market, the EU has adopted legislation on the cross-border service of judicial documents1 and on cooperation in the taking of evidence2. These instruments are crucial in the regulation of judicial assistance in civil and commercial matters between the Member States. Their common purpose is to provide an efficient framework for cross-border judicial cooperation. They have replaced the earlier international, more cumbersome system of the Hague Conventions3 between the Member States4. This legislation on judicial cooperation has a real impact on the everyday lives of EU citizens, be it as private individuals or business operators. It is applied in judicial proceedings with cross-border implications, where its proper functioning is indispensable to ensuring access to justice and fair trials (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Cost of Service Regulation in the Investor-Owned Electric Utility Industry: a History of Adaptation
    Cost of Service Regulation In the Investor-Owned Electric Utility Industry A History of Adaptation Prepared by: Dr. Karl McDermott June 2012 © 2012 by the Edison Electric Institute (EEI). All rights reserved. Published 2012. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system or method, now known or hereinafter invented or adopted, without the express prior written permission of the Edison Electric Institute. Attribution Notice and Disclaimer This work was prepared by Dr. Karl McDermott. When used as a reference, attribution to EEI is requested. EEI, any member of EEI, and any person acting on its behalf (a) does not make any warranty, express or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of the information, advice or recommendations contained in this work, and (b) does not assume and expressly disclaims any liability with respect to the use of, or for damages resulting from the use of any information, advice or recommendations contained in this work. The views and opinions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect those of EEI or any member of EEI. This material and its production, reproduction and distribution by EEI does not imply endorsement of the material. Published by: Edison Electric Institute 701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004-2696 Phone: 202-508-5000 Web site: www.eei.org Cost of Service Regulation in the Investor-Owned Electric Utility Industry: A History of Adaptation Table of Contents Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Shifting Attitudes to Injunctions in Patent Cases
    ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| EUROPE PATENT INJUNCTIONS ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Shifting attitudes to injunctions in patent cases Final injunctions for successful parties in patent cases in Europe have generally been seen as automatic. But, as Stephen Bennett , Stanislas Roux-Vaillard and Christian Mammen explain, attitudes are evolving ntil relatively recently, the question of whether a final injunction should be granted to a pat - MINUTE entee who has succeeded at trial has not really READ troubled the courts of Europe. Although the 1 Continental European civil law systems and the Despite their differing common law common law systems have approached the and civil law systems, courts in the Uissue from different starting points, the outcome has been over - UK and continental Europe have whelmingly the same: injunctions are granted to successful pat - tended to grant injunctions to suc - entees at the end of trial as a matter of course. cessful patent owners after a trial as Things are changing and the issue has been receiving a greater a matter of course. However, this po - degree of interest in recent times. This has arisen because of ar - sition has come under pressure guments made by defendants in (predominantly) cases con - thanks to arguments advanced by cerning patents for multi-function devices (mobile
    [Show full text]
  • Find out More About the National Justice Systems Throughout the EU (E-Justice)
    What to do if Union law has been breached? If you are a national of a country of the European Union, or if you live in one of these countries, or if you run a business in the European Union, Union law gives you a number of rights. If you would like to know more, you can: • Ask a question about the EU (Europe Direct) • Find out more about your EU rights when moving around in the EU (Your Europe) • Ask a question about your rights in a situation you are facing in the EU (Your Europe Advice). • Find out more about the national justice systems throughout the EU (e-Justice). If you feel that your rights under Union law have not been respected by the national authorities of a country of the European Union, you should first of all take up the matter with national bodies or authorities. This will often be the quickest and most effective way to resolve the issue. Available means of redress at national level As stated in the Treaties, public authorities and national courts have the main responsibility for the application of Union law. Therefore, it is in your interest to make use of all possible means of redress at national level (administrative and/or out-of-court mediation mechanisms). Depending on the system of each country, you may also submit your file to the national ombudsmen or regional ombudsmen. Or you can bring your matter to the court of the country where the problem occurred. Find out more about national judicial systems or going to court.
    [Show full text]
  • EUI Working Papers
    DEPARTMENT OF LAW EUI Working Papers LAW 2010/21 DEPARTMENT OF LAW NEW CHALLENGES FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF FAIRNESS IN A COMMON MARKET Edited by Hans-Wolfgang Micklitz, Viktor Smith & Mette Ohm Rørdam Contributors: Jesper Clement, Gorm Gabrielsen, Jochen Glöckner, Peter Møgelvang-Hansen, Marcin Rogowski, Henrik Selsøe Sørensen, Viktor Smith, Jan Trzaskowski EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE, FLORENCE DEPARTMENT OF LAW New Challenges for the Assessment of Fairness in a Common Market JESPER CLEMENT, GORM GABRIELSEN, JOCHEN GLÖCKNER, PETER MØGELVANG- HANSEN, MARCIN ROGOWSKI, HENRIK SELSØE SØRENSEN, VIKTOR SMITH, JAN TRZASKOWSKI EDITED BY HANS-WOLFGANG MICKLITZ, VIKTOR SMITH, METTE OHM RØRDAM EUI Working Paper LAW 2010/21 This text may be downloaded for personal research purposes only. Any additional reproduction for other purposes, whether in hard copy or electronically, requires the consent of the author(s), editor(s). If cited or quoted, reference should be made to the full name of the author(s), editor(s), the title, the working paper or other series, the year, and the publisher. ISSN 1725-6739 © 2010 Hans-Wolfgang Micklitz, Viktor Smith & Mette Ohm Rørdam (Eds.) Printed in Italy European University Institute Badia Fiesolana I – 50014 San Domenico di Fiesole (FI) Italy www.eui.eu cadmus.eui.eu Author/Editor Contact Details Hans Wolfgang Micklitz Professor of Economic Law European University Institute Florence, Italy Email: [email protected] Viktor Smith Associate Professor, PhD Centre for Language, Cognition and Mentality Department of International
    [Show full text]
  • The Risks of Patent Litigation Within the EU Enforcement Framework – How to Address Abusive Practices
    CRIDES Working Paper Series no. 2/2020 The Risks of Patent Litigation Within the EU Enforcement Framework – How to Address Abusive Practices by Alain Strowel and Amandine Léonard February 2020 Cite as: Alain Strowel and Amandine Léonard, The Risks of Patent Litigation Within the EU Enforcement Framework – How to Address Abusive Practices, CRIDES Working Paper Series no.2/2020 The CRIDES, Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire Droit Entreprise et Société, aims at investigating, on the one hand, the role of law in the enterprise and, on the other hand, the function of the enterprise within society. The centre, based at the Faculty of Law – UCLouvain, is formed by four research groups: the research group in economic law, the research group in intellectual property law, the research group in social law (Atelier SociAL), and the research group in tax law. www.uclouvain.be/fr/instituts-recherche/juri/crides This paper © Alain Strowel and Amandine Léonard 2020 is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ THE RISKS OF PATENT LITIGATION WITHIN THE EU ENFORCEMENT FRAMEWORK HOW TO ADDRESS ABUSIVE PRACTICES Alain Strowel and Amandine Léonard The Risks of Patent Litigation Within the EU Enforcement Framework The Risks of Patent Litigation Within the EU Enforcement Framework – How to Address Abusive Practices By Alain Strowel and Amandine Léonard* Keywords: Patent litigation, Flexibility and Injunctive Relief, Proportionality, Abuse of Rights, Patent Assertion Entities, Patent Trolls, Article 3(2) Enforcement Directive, Directive (EU) 2004/48 Abstract The debate over the degree of flexibility at the disposal of national courts in Europe to grant, deny, or tailor, injunctive relief in patent litigation seems to be a never-ending story.
    [Show full text]
  • The Single Rulebook: Legal Issues and Relevance in the SSM Context
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Lefterov, Asen Working Paper The Single Rulebook: legal issues and relevance in the SSM context ECB Legal Working Paper Series, No. 15 Provided in Cooperation with: European Central Bank (ECB) Suggested Citation: Lefterov, Asen (2015) : The Single Rulebook: legal issues and relevance in the SSM context, ECB Legal Working Paper Series, No. 15, ISBN 978-92-899-1960-9, European Central Bank (ECB), Frankfurt a. M., http://dx.doi.org/10.2866/204472 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/154669 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Legal Working Paper Series Asen Lefterov The Single Rulebook: legal issues and relevance in the SSM context No 15 / October 2015 Note: This Legal Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the European Central Bank (ECB).
    [Show full text]