DOCSLIB.ORG

Flash Reports on Labour Law December 2020 Summary and Country Reports

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Flash Reports on Labour Law December 2020 Summary and Country Reports Flash Reports on Labour Law December 2020 Summary and country reports Written by The European Centre of Expertise (ECE), based on reports submitted by the Network of Labour Law Experts December 2020 EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Unit B.2 – Working Conditions Contact: Marie LAGARRIGUE E-mail: [email protected] European Commission B-1049 Brussels Flash Report 12/2020 Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). LEGAL NOTICE The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the author(s). The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the position or opinion of the European Commission. Neither the European Commission nor any person/organisation acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use that might be made of any information contained in this publication. This publication has received financial support from the European Union Programme for Employment and Social Innovation "EaSI" (2014-2020). For further information please consult: http://ec.europa.eu/social/easi. More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2020 ISBN ABC 12345678 DOI 987654321 © European Union, 2020 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Flash Report 12/2020 Country Labour Law Experts Austria Martin Gruber-Risak Daniela Kroemer Belgium Wilfried Rauws Bulgaria Krassimira Sredkova Albena Velikova Croatia Ivana Grgurev Cyprus Nicos Trimikliniotis Czech Republic Nataša Randlová Denmark Natalie Videbaek Munkholm Mette Soested Estonia Gaabriel Tavits Elina Soomets Finland Ulla Liukkunen France Francis Kessler Germany Bernd Waas Greece Costas Papadimitriou Hungary Tamás Gyulavári Iceland Leifur Gunnarsson Ireland Anthony Kerr Italy Edoardo Ales Latvia Kristīne Dupate Liechtenstein Wolfgang Portmann Lithuania Tomas Davulis Luxemburg Jean-Luc Putz Malta Lorna Mifsud Cachia Netherlands Hanneke Bennaars Suzanne Kali Norway Marianne Jenum Hotvedt Alexander Næss Skjønberg Poland Leszek Mitrus Portugal José João Abrantes Isabel Valente Dias Romania Raluca Dimitriu Slovakia Robert Schronk Slovenia Barbara Kresal Spain Joaquín García Murcia Iván Antonio Rodríguez Cardo Sweden Andreas Inghammar Erik Sinander Flash Report 12/2020 United Kingdom Catherine Barnard Flash Report 12/2020 Table of Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................10 Austria ............................................................................................................17 1 National Legislation ...................................................................................17 2 Court Rulings ............................................................................................18 3 Implications of CJEU Rulings .......................................................................20 4 Other Relevant Information ........................................................................21 Belgium ...........................................................................................................22 1 National Legislation ...................................................................................22 2 Court Rulings ............................................................................................24 3 Implications of CJEU Rulings .......................................................................24 4 Other Relevant Information ........................................................................25 Bulgaria ..........................................................................................................26 1 National Legislation ...................................................................................26 2 Court Rulings ............................................................................................27 3 Implications of CJEU Rulings .......................................................................27 4 Other Relevant Information ........................................................................28 Croatia ............................................................................................................29 1 National Legislation ...................................................................................29 2 Court Rulings ............................................................................................30 3 Implications of CJEU Rulings .......................................................................31 4 Other Relevant Information ........................................................................31 Cyprus ............................................................................................................32 1 National legislation ....................................................................................32 2 Court Rulings ............................................................................................32 3 Implications of CJEU Rulings .......................................................................32 4 Other Relevant Information ........................................................................32 Czech Republic .................................................................................................33 1 National Legislation ...................................................................................33 2 Court Rulings ............................................................................................34 3 Implications of CJEU Rulings .......................................................................34 4 Other Relevant Information ........................................................................34 Denmark .........................................................................................................36 1 National Legislation ...................................................................................36 2 Court Rulings ............................................................................................38 3 Implications of CJEU Rulings .......................................................................40 4 Other Relevant Information ........................................................................41 Estonia ............................................................................................................42 1 National Legislation ...................................................................................42 2 Court Rulings ............................................................................................42 Flash Report 12/2020 3 Implications of CJEU Rulings .......................................................................42 4 Other Relevant Information ........................................................................43 Finland ............................................................................................................44 1 National Legislation ...................................................................................44 2 Court Rulings ............................................................................................45 3 Implications of CJEU Rulings .......................................................................46 4 Other Relevant Information ........................................................................46 France .............................................................................................................47 1 National Legislation ...................................................................................47 2 Court Rulings ............................................................................................48 3 Implications of CJEU Rulings .......................................................................51 4 Other Relevant Information ........................................................................51 Germany .........................................................................................................53 1 National Legislation ...................................................................................53 2 Court Rulings ............................................................................................54 3 Implications of CJEU Rulings .......................................................................55 4 Other Relevant Information ........................................................................55 Greece ............................................................................................................56 1 National Legislation ...................................................................................56 2 Court Rulings ............................................................................................56 3 Implications of CJEU Ruling ........................................................................56 4 Other Relevant Information ........................................................................56 Hungary ..........................................................................................................57 1 National Legislation ...................................................................................57 2 Court Rulings ............................................................................................57
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Portugal's Economy Contracted Sharply in 2020 As the Spread of The
    2.16. PORTUGAL Portugal’s economy contracted sharply in 2020 as the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic took a heavy toll on all aspects of social and business activities, with a particularly strong impact on the country’s large hospitality sector. Portugal’s GDP is estimated to have fallen by 7.6% in 2020. Quarterly rates closely followed the evolution of the pandemic and the consequent introduction of restrictions. After a cumulative drop of around 17% in the first half of 2020, GDP rebounded by 13.3% in 2020-Q3. However, the resurgence of infections brought new restrictions towards the end of the year and GDP growth weakened to 0.4% in the last quarter. With the introduction of a more stringent lockdown in mid-January 2021, GDP is projected to fall again in the first quarter of 2021, before starting to recover as of the second quarter of the year, with a major rebound in the summer months. This entails expectations for a notable rebound in tourism in the summer, particularly in intra- EU travel, and a more gradual recovery thereafter. However, the tourism sector is projected to remain somewhat below its pre-crisis level until the end of the forecast period. In full-year terms, GDP is projected to grow by 4.1% in 2021 and 4.3% in 2022. A full return to pre-pandemic levels is expected towards the end of 2022 but risks remain significant due to the country’s large dependence on foreign tourism, which continues to face uncertainties related to the evolution of the pandemic.
    [Show full text]
  • Doing Business Guide in EMEIA: Payroll Operations
    Payroll Operations in Europe, the Middle East, India and Africa — essential compliance and reporting considerations Introduction This booklet contains market-by-market newly established, stand-alone guidance1 on key HR payroll matters to operations. Where the EMEIA operation be considered as you expand your is a regional headquarters or a holding operations across EMEIA. company for foreign subsidiaries, or if In our experience, careful consideration there are existing operations in EMEIA, of these matters at the outset is the other considerations must be taken into most effective way of avoiding any account. issues and ensuring an optimal setup In all situations, we recommend that you structure of your business and seek specific professional advice from employees in new EMEIA markets. the contacts listed in each chapter. They This booklet is general in nature and not will take into consideration your specific to be relied on as professional advice. circumstances and objectives. Furthermore, the chapters focus on NB: This guide will work best with Adobe Acrobat Pro. 1 This information was compiled in July 2019. 2 Payroll Operations in Europe, the Middle East, India and Africa — essential compliance and reporting considerations EY contacts Payroll Operate Services Sheri Sullivan Michael Van Den Brand EY Global Payroll Operate Leader EY EMEIA Payroll Operate Leader T: +17168435050 T: +34 933 666 340 E: [email protected] E: [email protected] Country Payroll leader Email address Armenia Kamo Karapetyan [email protected]
    [Show full text]
  • No. 2138 BELGIUM, FRANCE, ITALY, LUXEMBOURG, NETHERLANDS
    No. 2138 BELGIUM, FRANCE, ITALY, LUXEMBOURG, NETHERLANDS, NORWAY, SWEDEN and SWITZERLAND International Convention to facilitate the crossing of fron tiers for passengers and baggage carried by rail (with annex). Signed at Geneva, on 10 January 1952 Official texts: English and French. Registered ex officio on 1 April 1953. BELGIQUE, FRANCE, ITALIE, LUXEMBOURG, NORVÈGE, PAYS-BAS, SUÈDE et SUISSE Convention internationale pour faciliter le franchissement des frontières aux voyageurs et aux bagages transportés par voie ferrée (avec annexe). Signée à Genève, le 10 janvier 1952 Textes officiels anglais et français. Enregistrée d'office le l* r avril 1953. 4 United Nations — Treaty Series 1953 No. 2138. INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION1 TO FACILI TATE THE CROSSING OF FRONTIERS FOR PASSEN GERS AND BAGGAGE CARRIED BY RAIL. SIGNED AT GENEVA, ON 10 JANUARY 1952 The undersigned, duly authorized, Meeting at Geneva, under the auspices of the Economic Commission for Europe, For the purpose of facilitating the crossing of frontiers for passengers carried by rail, Have agreed as follows : CHAPTER I ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF FRONTIER STATIONS WHERE EXAMINATIONS ARE CARRIED OUT BY THE TWO ADJOINING COUNTRIES Article 1 1. On every railway line carrying a considerable volume of international traffic, which crosses the frontier between two adjoining countries, the competent authorities of those countries shall, wherever examination cannot be satisfactorily carried out while the trains are in motion, jointly examine the possibility of designating by agreement a station close to the frontier, at which shall be carried out the examinations required under the legislation of the two countries in respect of the entry and exit of passengers and their baggage.
    [Show full text]
  • Flash Reports on Labour Law January 2017 Summary and Country Reports
    Flash Report 01/2017 Flash Reports on Labour Law January 2017 Summary and country reports EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Unit B.2 – Working Conditions Flash Report 01/2017 Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). LEGAL NOTICE This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2017 ISBN ABC 12345678 DOI 987654321 © European Union, 2017 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Flash Report 01/2017 Country Labour Law Experts Austria Martin Risak Daniela Kroemer Belgium Wilfried Rauws Bulgaria Krassimira Sredkova Croatia Ivana Grgurev Cyprus Nicos Trimikliniotis Czech Republic Nataša Randlová Denmark Natalie Videbaek Munkholm Estonia Gaabriel Tavits Finland Matleena Engblom France Francis Kessler Germany Bernd Waas Greece Costas Papadimitriou Hungary Gyorgy Kiss Ireland Anthony Kerr Italy Edoardo Ales Latvia Kristine Dupate Lithuania Tomas Davulis Luxemburg Jean-Luc Putz Malta Lorna Mifsud Cachia Netherlands Barend Barentsen Poland Leszek Mitrus Portugal José João Abrantes Rita Canas da Silva Romania Raluca Dimitriu Slovakia Robert Schronk Slovenia Polonca Končar Spain Joaquín García-Murcia Iván Antonio Rodríguez Cardo Sweden Andreas Inghammar United Kingdom Catherine Barnard Iceland Inga Björg Hjaltadóttir Liechtenstein Wolfgang Portmann Norway Helga Aune Lill Egeland Flash Report 01/2017 Table of Contents Executive Summary ..............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Trends in International Arms Transfers, 2020 3
    SIPRI Fact Sheet March 2021 TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL KEY FACTS w The volume of international ARMS TRANSFERS, 2020 transfers of major arms in 2016–20 was 0.5 per cent lower than in 2011–15 and 12 per cent pieter d. wezeman, alexandra kuimova and higher than in 2006–10. siemon t. wezeman w The five largest arms exporters in 2016–20 were the The volume of international transfers of major arms in 2016–20 was United States, Russia, France, 0.5 per cent lower than in 2011–15 and 12 per cent higher than in 2006–10 Germany and China. Together, they accounted for 76 per cent of (see figure 1).1 The five largest arms exporters in 2016–20 were the United all exports of major arms in States, Russia, France, Germany and China (see table 1). The five largest 2016–20. arms importers were Saudi Arabia, India, Egypt, Australia and China w In 2016–20 US arms exports (see table 2). Between 2011–15 and 2016–20 there were increases in arms accounted for 37 per cent of the transfers to the Middle East (25 per cent) and to Europe (12 per cent), while global total and were 15 per cent there were decreases in the transfers to Africa (–13 per cent), the Americas higher than in 2011–15. (–43 per cent), and Asia and Oceania (–8.3 per cent). w Russian arms exports From 15 March 2021 SIPRI’s open-access Arms Transfers Database decreased by 22 per cent includes updated data on transfers of major arms for 1950–2020, which between 2011–15 and 2016–20.
    [Show full text]
  • The EIB COVID-19 Economic Vulnerability Index – an Analysis of Countries Outside the European Union
    2020 THE EIB COVID-19 ECONOMIC VULNERABILITY INDEX 08/2020 – EN 2020 THE EIB COVID-19 ECONOMIC VULNERABILITY INDEX AN ANALYSIS OF COUNTRIES OUTSIDE THE EUROPEAN UNION The EIB COVID-19 Economic Vulnerability Index – An analysis of countries outside the European Union Thematic Study © European Investment Bank, 2020. Authors Emmanouil Davradakis Ricardo Santos Sanne Zwart Barbara Marchitto This is a publication of the European Investment Bank’s Economics Department. The mission of the EIB’s Economics Department is to provide economic analyses and studies to support the Bank in its operations and in its positioning, strategy and policy. The department, a team of 40, is led by Debora Revoltella, Director of Economics. [email protected] www.eib.org/economics The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of the European Investment Bank. The European Investment Bank does not endorse, accept or judge the legal status of any territories, boundaries, colours, denominations or information depicted on geographical maps included in its publications. All rights reserved. All questions on rights and licensing should be addressed to [email protected] For further information on the EIB’s activities, please consult our website, www.eib.org. You can also contact [email protected]. Get our e-newsletter at www.eib.org/sign-up Published by the European Investment Bank. Printed on FSC Paper. pdf: QH-03-20-412-EN-N ISBN 978-92-861-4713-5 doi: 10.2867/812925 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO RESILIENCE 3 GLOBAL SUMMARY 5 THE POWER OF A DIVERSE ECONOMY 7 HEALTHCARE AND ECONOMIC SYSTEMS 9 THE EIB COVID-19 VULNERABILITY INDEX 11 ANNEX: TECHNICAL DETAILS 15 INTRODUCTION There is a lot that we do not yet know about the health effects of COVID-19.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Baltic States
    A comparative review of socio-economic implications of the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) in the Baltic States 2020 Table of Contents 1. The uneven geography of the crisis: economic effects in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania .... 3 2. Key factors in overcoming the crisis and the potential long-term economic impact ......... 8 3. The bright side: opportunities arising from the crisis ...................................................... 14 4. Possible coordinated actions of the three Baltic States to build back better .................. 16 This review is a joint work of Foresight Centre of Parliament of Estonian, LV PEAK of the University of Latvia and Government Strategic Analysis Center (STRATA) of Lithuania. The review was finalized in October 2020. 2 Introduction and aims The COVID-19 crisis has been a true black swan – an unexpected event that is having enormous consequences on virtually every aspect of our daily life. Next to the 1918 flu pandemic that occurred in a very differenc socio-economic context, there are no historical parallels close to the current crisis, which makes forecasting and future prediction a tough task. Due to the global scale of the crisis, the collaboration and joint efforts are at the heart of solutions to the COVID-19 situation. Close cooperation is especially important in the Baltic region with highly interconnected economies and societies. This paper aims to provide a comparative picture of the effects of the crisis and describe the key factors and uncertainties affecting the recovery. Despite the sharp recession, there are also some opportunities arising from the situation, which are discussed in the third section of the paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Croatia's Constitution of 1991 with Amendments Through 2010
    PDF generated: 26 Aug 2021, 16:24 constituteproject.org Croatia's Constitution of 1991 with Amendments through 2010 This complete constitution has been generated from excerpts of texts from the repository of the Comparative Constitutions Project, and distributed on constituteproject.org. constituteproject.org PDF generated: 26 Aug 2021, 16:24 Table of contents I. Historical Foundations . 3 II. Basic Provisions . 4 III. Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms . 7 1. General Provisions . 7 2. Personal and Political Freedoms and Rights . 9 3. Economic, Social and Cultural Rights . 14 IV. Organization of Government . 18 1. The Croatian Parliament . 18 2. The President of the Republic of Croatia . 22 3. The Government of the Republic of Croatia . 26 4. Judicial Power . 28 5. The Office of the Public Prosecutions . 30 V. The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia . 31 VI. Local and Regional Self-Government . 33 VII. International Relations . 35 1. International agreements . 35 2. Association and Succession . 35 VIII. European Union . 36 1. Legal Grounds for Membership and Transfer of Constitutional Powers . 36 2. Participation in European Union Institutions . 36 3. European Union Law . 37 4. Rights of European Union Citizens . 37 IX. Amending the Constitution . 37 IX. Concluding Provisions . 38 Croatia 1991 (rev. 2010) Page 2 constituteproject.org PDF generated: 26 Aug 2021, 16:24 I. Historical Foundations • Reference to country's history The millenary identity of the Croatia nation and the continuity of its statehood,
    [Show full text]
  • Facts About German Foreign Trade Berlin, September 2019 Facts About German Foreign Trade
    Facts about German foreign trade Berlin, September 2019 Facts about German foreign trade Foreign Trade Figures in 2018 Exports Imports Net foreign demand Total Total Goods Services Total Goods Services (column 1–4) in billion EUR 1,585.8 1,295.0 290.7 1,379.7 1,068.7 311.0 206.1 Year-on-year change in % in billion EUR 3.1 3.1 3.2 5.5 6.5 2.2 -24.4 in % of GDP 47.4 38.7 8.7 41.3 32.0 9.3 6.2 Source: Federal Statistical Office of Germany; data at current prices • In 2018, Germany maintained its position as the • In 2018, Germany’s main trading region for the world’s third largest exporter (behind China, USA), exchange of goods continued to be Europe, which and third largest importer (behind USA, China). accounted for 68.5% of German exports and also for Germany’s share of world trade (exports and imports 68.5% of German imports. Germany’s share of trade of goods in USD) decreased slightly compared to the with the EU-28 increased slightly compared to 2017: previous year, falling to 7.2% (2017: 7.3%). Accounting German exports to the EU-28 amounted to 59.1% for 11.8% of global trade, China was able to further (2017: 58.6%) and imports from the EU-28 stood at extend its lead over the USA (10.9%) to reach first 57.2% (2017: 57.1%). German exports to countries place. from the eurozone amounted to 37.5% (2017: 37.0%) and imports from the eurozone stood at 37.2% • With a ‘degree of openness’ (imports plus exports in (2017: 36.9%).
    [Show full text]
  • Judging the East Timor Dispute: Self-Determination at the International Court of Justice, 17 Hastings Int'l & Comp
    Hastings International and Comparative Law Review Volume 17 Article 3 Number 2 Winter 1994 1-1-1994 Judging the East Timor Dispute: Self- Determination at the International Court of Justice Gerry J. Simpson Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/ hastings_international_comparative_law_review Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, and the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Gerry J. Simpson, Judging the East Timor Dispute: Self-Determination at the International Court of Justice, 17 Hastings Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 323 (1994). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_international_comparative_law_review/vol17/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings International and Comparative Law Review by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Judging the East Timor Dispute: Self-Determination at the International Court of Justice By Gerry J. Simpson* Table of Contents I. Introduction ............................................ 324 1E. Some Preliminary Remarks about the Case ............. 327 III. International Politics and the International Court: A Functional Dilemma .................................... 329 IV. Substantive Questions of Law .......................... 332 A. The Existence of a Right to Self-Determination...... 333 B. Beneficiaries of the Right to Self-Determination ..... 334 1. Indonesia's TerritorialIntegrity and the Principle of Uti Posseditis................................. 339 2. Enclaves in InternationalLaw .................. 342 3. Historical Ties .................................. 342 C. The Duties of Third Parties Toward Peoples Claiming a Right to Self-Determination ............. 343 V. Conclusion .............................................. 347 * Lecturer in International Law and Human Rights Law, Law Faculty, Univcrity of Melbourne, Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • FEUTURE EU 28 Country Report Lithuania
    March 2017 FEUTURE EU 28 Country Report Lithuania Liucija Verveckiene and Justinas Lingevicius, European Integration Studies Centre FEUTURE EU 28 Country Report: Lithuania 1. History of EU-Turkey Relations1 1.1. Turkish EU membership – no topic before Lithuania joined the EU Before evaluating Lithuania’s position on EU-Turkey relations historically, it is important to note two historical facts. Firstly, Lithuania accessed the EU in 2004. There was little debate on Turkey’s EU membership before Lithuania’s accession for all the attention was paid to Lithuania’s fulfillment of the Copenhagen criteria and other integration issues. Secondly, Turkey was already a NATO member when Lithuania accessed the Alliance in 2004. Therefore, Lithuania considered Turkey as a strong partner in the security and defence area. 1.2. Building mutual partnership When we look at the public attitudes towards EU-Turkey relations after 2004, more positive than negative discourse is evident. Firstly, this could be explained by the fact that Turkey has supported Lithuania’s NATO membership and politicians have underlined a strategic partnership between the two countries. Thus, the security narrative played an important role and the Lithuanian government has also acknowledged Turkey’s geo-strategical position with regard to the whole continent. Secondly, economic relations between the EU and Turkey and the value of an already implemented free trade regime was acknowledged. Thirdly, via diplomatic channels a Turkish message has been transferred right after 2004: it is important for Turkey to be supported by Lithuania and all the attempts of support for the Turkish-EU dialogue are highly valued by the 2 Turkish people.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural History in Spain History of Culture and Cultural History: Same Paths and Outcomes?*
    Cultural History in Spain History of Culture and Cultural History: same paths and outcomes?* CAROLINA RODRÍGUEZ-LÓPEZ An overview &XOWXUDOKLVWRU\LVFXUUHQWO\DERRPLQJWRSLFLQ6SDLQ&XOWXUDOKLVWRU\LVQRZ ÁRXULVKLQJ DQG FHUWDLQ DUHDV KDYH GLVWLQJXLVKHG WKHPVHOYHV DV DXWRQRPRXV ÀHOGVRIVWXG\WKHKLVWRU\RIFXOWXUDOSROLWLFVUHDGLQJDQGSULQWLQJDQGPHGLFDO FXOWXUDOSUDFWLFHVIRUH[DPSOH+RZHYHUZKDWLVGHÀQHGDVcultural history in FXUUHQW6SDQLVKKLVWRULRJUDSK\LVQRWDQHDV\LVVXH/LNHWKHUHVWRI(XURSHDQ HYHQ$PHULFDQ KLVWRULRJUDSKLHV6SDQLVKKLVWRULRJUDSK\KDVJRQHWKURXJKDQ H[WHQVLYHDQGLQWHUHVWLQJSURFHVVVKLIWLQJIURPVRFLDOWRFXOWXUDOKLVWRU\7KH SURFHVV KDV QRW EHHQ H[HPSW IURP SUREOHPV DQG PLVXQGHUVWDQGLQJV DQG KDV GHWHUPLQHGQRWRQO\WKHZD\VLQZKLFKFXOWXUDOKLVWRU\KDVWUDGLWLRQDOO\ÁRZHG EXWDOVRWKHNLQGVRIUHVHDUFKDQGVFLHQWLÀFZRUNVWKDWKDYHEHHQODEHOHGZLWK the cultural history title. 7KLVFKDSWHURIIHUVDEULHIRYHUYLHZRIZKDW,KDYHMXVWPHQWLRQHGDERYH ,QRUGHUWRGRVRLWLVGLYLGHGLQWRWKUHHVHFWLRQV7KHÀUVWRQHGHDOVZLWKWKH KLVWRULFDODQGKLVWRULRJUDSKLFDOFRQWH[WVZKHQWKHÀUVWUHVHDUFKDQGGHEDWHVLQ 6SDLQIRFXVHGRQFXOWXUDOKLVWRU\,QWKHVHFRQGVHFWLRQ,LQWURGXFHWKHUHVHDUFK JURXSVLQVWLWXWLRQVDFDGHPLFSURJUDPVDQGSXEOLVKLQJKRXVHSURMHFWVWKDWKDYH HQFRXUDJHG DQG DUH FXUUHQWO\ RUJDQL]LQJ 6SDQLVK FXOWXUDO KLVWRU\ NQRZOHGJH DQGSURGXFWLRQ$QGODVWEXWQRWOHDVW,SUHVHQWDÀUVWDQGWHQWDWLYHOLVWRIH[DFW- ,DPJUDWHIXOWR(OHQD+HUQiQGH]6DQGRLFDIRUGHWDLOHGVXJJHVWLRQVDQGWR3DWULFLD %HUDVDOXFHDQG(OLVDEHWK.OHLQIRUDFFXUDWHUHDGLQJRIWKLVFKDSWHUάVÀUVWYHUVLRQ 211 Carolina Rodríguez-López O\ZKDW6SDQLVKKLVWRULDQVKDYHZULWWHQRQWKHÀHOGRIFXOWXUDOKLVWRU\,QRWKHU
    [Show full text]