DOCSLIB.ORG

Welcome to Oslo Courthouse Monumental Open Door Building

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Welcome to Oslo Courthouse Monumental Open door building The Oslo Courthouse is situated The Oslo architect firm Østgaard in the heart of Oslo. Most of the A.S has created a contemporary court hearings are public, and the monumental building that com- Courthouse is open to visitors. municates the function and significance of the Courthouse. Oslo District Court and Oslo County Court, the two first-level courts in Light, untreated granite covers the Oslo, are both located here. main façade towards C.J. Hambros plass. Borgarting Court of Appeal is just two blocks away in Keysersgate 13. Twenty-four simple square The Supreme Court is also situated ornaments of white marble from in the immediate neighbourhood, at Fauske in northern Norway, created Høyesteretts plass 1. by the sculptor Øivind Åstein, adorn the wall. A variety of activities Eight corresponding ornaments are located on the foundation wall, The Courthouse buzzes with marking the framework of the activity. Some cases are difficult or building. challenging, some constructive or clarifying. Many people find help in solving financial problems here. The happiest visitors are probably those who marry in the ceremony room of this building. Lex Portalis - the Renovation and gateway to the law reorganisation Inside the revolving doors of Oslo Oslo Courthouse was constructed in Courthouse your first impression is 1994. that of Lex Portalis, two walls covered by dark porcelain boards reaching Extensive renovation of the building’s right up to Level 6. interior took place in 2005 - 2006, affecting every single floor and a Ole Lislerud, a renowned Norwegian quarter of the total interior. sculptor, is responsible for the interior The renovation was motivated by the decoration of the Courthouse. need for additional courtrooms and negotiation rooms. Parts of the Norwegian Constitution and the Law of Magnus Lagabøte For the same reason, Borgarting (year 1200 AD) are shown in his Court of Appeal moved out of the handwriting on the boards. Courthouse in 2005. Law, Justice and Mercy Under the same roof The sculptor Ole Lislerud has placed In 2006, Oslo Court of Enforcement and small ceramic sculptures in wall Notary Public and Oslo Probate niches on the four top floors. Court & City Recorder were merged into one court under the new name of Their titles are related to activities in Oslo County Court. the building, such as “Upstander of Since then the two first-level courts in the law”, “Judge in armchair”, Oslo have been located under the same “Unicorn - Law, justice and mercy”, roof in Oslo Courthouse. “Divorce” and “Life together”. Two first-level courts are located under Ceramic sculptures by the sculptor Ole the same roof in Oslo Courthouse.. Lislerud are placed in wall niches. Openness Most court hearings are open to the public. The interior design of the Courthouse emphasizes this openness, with many of the courtrooms having windows facing the atrium. Educational visits Many students visit the Courthouse. They come from secondary schools or more advanced courses such as journalism or law studies. Most days there are students attending court sessions. The Courthouse staff do their best to make such visits as educational as possible. More information You can read more about the Norway’s courts on the Internet: www.domstol.no Oslo District Court and Oslo County Court also have informative websites: www.domstol.no/otir www.domstol.no/obyf Oslo District Court Resolving conflicts Oslo District Court is the largest court in Norway. The court handles When two or more parties disagree, a court solution can help resolve their one fifth of all civil and criminal cases in the country. conflict. Each year more than 2000 civil actions are settled atthis court. Crime and Punishment Court Mediation Every year, Oslo District Court hands Programme down approximately 5000 criminal It is often wise to resolve a conflict sentences. as early as possible. One out of five civil disputes is resolved through a In Norwegian criminal procedure, there mediation procedure. is extensive use of lay judges. The main objective is to find the middle ground and a solution that The Norwegian Government has both parties can accept. In the end determined that a case must take no Instead of a normal main hearing, the court there is no winner or loser, as is the more than three months from it is can call the parties in for court conciliation. case in traditional civil procedures. brought before the court until a decision Settling a dispute through mediation is made. Oslo District Court generally usually reduces time and costs for the handles its cases well within this limit. parties. Witness support Family conflicts A confident witness is a good Disagreements between parents witness, contributing to a correct concerning visitation rights and verdict. A witness support office custody often lead to intense conflicts. is located on Level 2 of the Oslo District Court makes active use Courthouse. of family experts in the mediation programme for these cases. The staff’s job is to provide the witnesses with practical help, During the mediation process the information and emotional support. family can consider different solutions, The main purpose of the witness and hopefully find one that satisfies all Family experts are used in mediation support service is to reinforce the parties. This is also the best guarantee concerning visitation rights and custody. legal rights and duties of all parties. that everyone will comply with the ©iStockphoto.com/Imgorthand The witness support service helps to create agreement reached. confident witnesses. Oslo County Court Distributing assets Many circumstances may lead people to Oslo County Court. In Oslo County Court, resolutions are often made through court mediation. Legal enforcement Division of estate Legal enforcement is appropriate in a Deaths are reported to Oslo County number of situations. If a tenant does Court, which also grants probate of not meet his obligations as stated in the will. the tenancy agreement, the owner may If the inheritors disagree on the request his eviction. settlement of the deceased’s estate, Demands for compulsory sale of real they can seek public division of the estate due to non-payment of rent, inherited estate. loans or taxes are other examples. Oslo County Court also handles public Many court decisions are made in Oslo division of marital property upon County Court. Oslo County Court handles public division divorce. In these cases, Oslo County Bankruptcy of marital property upon divorce. Court attempts to resolve disputes through court mediation. Oslo County Court handles bankruptcy Court injunction and insolvency proceedings. If you can make a claim plausible A petition for bankruptcy or insolvency and there is an urgent need to proceedings can be submitted either by Notary Public secure this claim, you can demand a creditor or the debtor himself. A basic a court injunction. These cases are Oslo County Court is designated to carry requirement for opening proceedings is handled in a matter of out the functions of a Notary Public. that the debtor is insolvent. hours if need be. If you need an official verification of a document or a signature, this is the Debt right place to go. settlement The Notary Public also performs civil marriages. In the ceremonial room on If you are incapable Level 2 of Oslo Courthouse you may marry of paying your debts in a before the registrar. Approximately 1 500 long-term perspective, an enforced couples are married here each year. debt settlement can be arranged by the Court. The Ceremonial Room, situated on Level 2 of the Courthouse. Opening hours Main entrance: 7.45 am – 6 pm Reception: 7.45 am – 3.45 pm*­ *­3 pm in summer Tram/Tube The tram number 11, 17 and 18 stops close by the Courthouse. The nearest tube station is Stortinget, a five-minute walk from the Courthouse. Cafeteria The cafeteria is located on Level 2. Opening hours: Monday – Thursday 8 am – 2.15 pm Friday 8 am – 1.15 pm Parking Oslo Courthouse does not offer parking facilities, but there is a public pay parking lot under the Courthouse. Published by: Telephone: +47 22 03 52 00 E-mail: [email protected] Oslo Courthouse Administration Fax: +47 22 03 53 54 Internet: P.O.Box 8023 Dep., Visiting address: www.domstol.no/obyf 0030 Oslo C. J. Hambros plass 4, Oslo www.domstol.no/otir .
Recommended publications
  • Annual Report for 2004

    Annual Report for 2004

    Norwegian Criminal Cases Review Commission Annual Report for 2004 The Norwegian Criminal Cases Review Commission is an independent body which considers whether a convicted person should have his/her case retried by another court. 1 Norwegian Criminal Cases Review Commission Annual Report for 2004 The Criminal Cases Review Commission’s activities and composition The Criminal Cases Review Commission was set up following a revision of Chapter 27 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The amendment came into force on 1 January 2004. The Commission has five permanent members and three alternates, all of whom are appointed by the King in Council. The Chairperson, Vice Chairperson [I’m not sure whether this is the done thing in Norway – our first chairperson was female and this is the way she was designated] and one member must hold a university degree in law [LLM]. The Chairperson is appointed for a period of five years and members for a period of three years. The Commission is made up as follows: Chairperson: Janne Kristiansen Vice Chairperson: Ann-Kristin Olsen, Governor of Vest-Agder County Members: Vidar Stensland, Court of Appeal Judge at the Hålogaland Court of Appeal. Svein Magnussen, Professor of Psychology at the University of Oslo. Anne Kathrine Slungård, Director of Communications at SINTEF. Alternates: Anne Elisabeth Landsverk, District Court Judge at the Skien and Porsgrunn District Court (until October 2004) Helen Sæter, District Court Judge at the Fredrikstad District Court (from October 2004) Harald Stabell, advocate and defence counsel Øystein Mæland, Chief Consultant/Head of Department at Ullevål University Hospital. The Commission’s Chairperson is also employed full-time as Head of the Secretariat.
  • Draft Monica Viken 160220

    Draft Monica Viken 160220

    Denne fil er hentet fra Handelshøyskolen BIs åpne institusjonelle arkiv BI Brage http://brage.bibsys.no/bi Franchising in Norway: balancing complexity in a contractual relationship Monica Viken Handelshøyskolen BI Dette er siste forfatterversjon av artikkelen etter fagfellevurdering, før publisering i JFT: Tidskrift utgiven av Juridiska Föreningen i Finland, 152(2016)3: 338-365 Tidsskriftets forlag, Juridiska Föreningen i Finland, tillater at siste forfatterversjon legges i åpent publiseringsarkiv ved den institusjon forfatteren tilhører. http://jff.fi/ 1 Franchising in Norway – Balancing Complexity in a Contractual Relationship1 Associate Professor Ph.D Monica Viken 1. Introduction 1.1 Background and context The first known organized chain in Norway operating as a franchise is said to be a textile wholesale chain, established in 1966.2 The term “franchise” was not used, but the system matched the description of a franchise system. Franchising can be described as a commercial development strategy based on an interdependent partnership between independent commercial entities: the franchisor and franchisees.3 This partnership is typically based on the transfer of a package of intellectual property rights relating to trademarks, trade names, shop signs, utility models, designs, copyrights, know-how or patents, to be exploited for the resale of goods or the provision of services to end users.4 The number of franchise systems, as organisational forms, increased in Norway during the 1970´s, with 183 systems operating as franchises by 1998.5 The number is still increasing, with an estimated 242 franchise systems in 2004 and 300 systems in 2016.6 Within the retail industry one third of local units are owned or hired by a franchisee.7 As a result of this growth, 1 The author wishes to thank Petra Sund-Norrgård, Stojan Arnerstål and René Franz Henschel for their valuable feedback and comments.
  • The Supreme Court of Norway

    The Supreme Court of Norway

    THE SUPREME COURT OF NORWAY On 28 June 2017, the Supreme Court gave judgment in HR-2017-1297-A, (case no. 2017/445), civil case, appeal against judgment and case no. 2017/474, appeal against order ING Bank N.V. (Counsel Henning Harborg Counsel Peder Alvik Sanengen – qualifying test case) v. The Bankruptcy estate of (Counsel Kristoffer Larsen Rognvik Bergen Bunkers AS – qualifying test case) Assisting counsel Egil Horstad) OPINION: (1) Acting justice Kaasen: The case concerns the dismissal of an action from a Norwegian bankruptcy estate against a foreign secured party due to lack of jurisdiction, and the choice of law if the case is not dismissed. (2) Bergen Bunkers AS (hereinafter Bergen Bunkers) engaged in the purchase and sale of bunkers (ship fuel) and in bunker brokerage. The company was wholly owned by O.W. Bunker Norway AS, and both companies were part of a large group. The Danish company O.W. Bunker & Trading A/S was the parent company of the group and had subsidiaries in a number of countries. (3) ING Bank N.V. (hereinafter ING) is a Dutch bank acting as agent and lender under a loan agreement where a number of lenders granted the O.W. Bunker group a loan of 2 USD 700 000 000. The loan agreement was entered into on 19 December 2013 under the condition that the Danish parent company and a total of sixteen other group companies granted security for the loan. ING would also be granted a security interest in the group companies' trade receivables. (4) Bergen Bunkers was not a direct borrower under the loan agreement, but the loan amount was "streamed" downwards in the group so that Bergen Bunkers could also benefit from the loan.
  • Data Analysis of the Pilot Courts Replies to the Questionnaire Prepared by the Steering Group of the SATURN Centre

    Data Analysis of the Pilot Courts Replies to the Questionnaire Prepared by the Steering Group of the SATURN Centre

    Strasbourg, 11 December 2008 CEPEJ- SATURN(2008)7 EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR THE EFFICIENCY OF JUSTICE (CEPEJ) Groupe de Pilotage of the SATURN Centre for judicial time management (CEPEJ-SATURN) Data analysis of the pilot courts replies to the questionnaire prepared by the Steering Group of the SATURN Centre Working document Data analysis of the pilot courts replies to the questionnaire prepared by the Steering Group of the SATURN Centre of the Commission for the Efficiency of Justice of the Council of Europe − Draft, 20 November 2008 Marco Fabri and Domenico Piscitelli1 Research Institute on Judicial Systems, National Research Council, Italy Research Centre for Judicial Studies, University of Bologna, Italy Introduction This analysis is based on the replies to the questionnaire designed by the SATURN Centre of the Commission for the Efficiency of Justice of the Council of Europe. The first section is an Executive Summary, the second section is the Data Analysis. The Appendix, as requested by the SATURN working group, entails four documents: a) the detailed tables that were not decided to include in the main Data Analysis, b) the complete answers to the so called “hypothetical cases”, c) the questionnaire, d) the Programme known as “Strasbourg” implemented by the court of first instance of Turin, Italy. Executive Summary Data analysis synthesis The courts that replied to the questionnaire were 79 from 27 countries. Most of the replies came from Serbia (27), “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (15), and Georgia (5). As agreed by the SATURN Group, in order to have a balanced database, it was decided to include in this analysis only the official pilot courts, and not more than two courts for the countries mentioned above.
  • Durham E-Theses

    Durham E-Theses

    Durham E-Theses On the Legitimacy of Economic Development Takings DYRKOLBOTN, SJUR,KRISTOFFER How to cite: DYRKOLBOTN, SJUR,KRISTOFFER (2016) On the Legitimacy of Economic Development Takings, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/11559/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk On the legitimacy of economic development takings Sjur Kristoffer Dyrkolbotn Thesis submitted to Durham Law School at Durham University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 24th March 2016 99 947 words excluding bibliography Contents List of Abbreviations 2 Abstract 7 Acknowledgements 9 List of Abbreviations 10 1 Introduction and Summary of Main Themes 11 1.1 Property Theory and Economic Development Takings . 15 1.2 A Democratic Deficit in Takings Law? . 19 1.3 Putting The Theory to the Test . 21 1.4 A Judicial Framework for Compulsory Participation .
  • Case No. 2007/207

    Case No. 2007/207

    SUPREME COURT OF NORWAY On 8th November 2007, the Supreme Court delivered the following judgement in HR-2007-1869-A, case no (2007/207), civil appeal against conviction A (Counsel Mr Harald Stabell) v. The Norwegian State, represented by the (Attorney General Mr Tolle Stabell, assisted Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion by Counsel Mr Christian H.P. Reusch) J U D G E M E N T : (1) Mr Justice Flock: The case concerns the validity of an administrative decision pursuant to section 30 subsection 2 a) of the Immigration Act to expel a foreign national on the grounds that expulsion is necessary in the interests of national security. (2) A was born on ** 1956 in Northern Iraq. He came to Norway on 30th November 1991 together with his wife and three children as a UN quota refugee. The Norwegian Directorate of Immigration found that A satisfied the conditions to be recognized as a refugee and he and his family were granted refugee status by an administrative decision dated 13th April 1992. A was granted a residence and work permit, which was subsequently renewed several times. In 1998, he was granted a settlement permit in Norway. His wife and the four children that he had at the time were granted Norwegian citizenship in 2000. Later that year, A’s own application for Norwegian citizenship was rejected. In Norway, A is known as B. (3) When A came to Norway, the information he gave to the immigration authorities about his background and situation in Northern Iraq was very limited. On the basis of the information which is now available, his background can briefly be summarized as follows: (4) As a youth, A was an active member of an international Islamist Sunni movement known as the Society of the Muslim Brothers,.
  • The Two EEA Courts’ – a Norwegian Perspective 1

    The Two EEA Courts’ – a Norwegian Perspective 1

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives ‘The two EEA Courts’ – a Norwegian perspective 1 Dr. Halvard Haukeland Fredriksen, University of Bergen A. Introduction – the notion of ‘EEA Courts’ To most Norwegian lawyers, the term ‘the two EEA Courts’ would probably be understood as a reference to the EFTA Court and the Supreme Court of Norway rather than, as suggested here, to the EFTA Court and ECJ. The understanding of the ECJ as not only an EU but also an EEA Court of Justice has only slowly sunk in to the Norwegian legal community.2 However, not least due to the somewhat troubling prospects to the free movement of capital in the EEA offered by the ECJ’s application of Article 40 EEA in a recent string of cases, 3 appreciation of the ECJ as the gatekeeper for market operators from the EFTA States seeking judicial protec- tion in the EU appears to gain ground: If the ECJ embarks on an interpretation of EEA law which differs from its own interpretation of corresponding provisions of EU law, the result will be gradual undermining of the Agreements overall goal to extend the internal market to include the EFTA States. Thus, the fate of the EEA Agreement at long last hangs on its continued acceptance by the ECJ. Even acknowledging that the ECJ is to be understood as an EEA Court, most Norwegian lawyers would probably argue that this raises the number of EEA Courts to three – the Supreme Court of Norway, the EFTA Court and the ECJ.4 A recent survey of the applica- tion of EEA law in Norwegian courts 1994-2010 has revealed that lower Norwegian courts indeed do appear to see the Supreme Court as an EEA Court proper, taking its decisions into 1 Readers with command of Norwegian should be warned at the outset that this contribution draws heavily upon the more extensive account in the author’s report ‘EU/EØS-rett i norske domstoler’ [EU/EEA law in Norwegian Courts], Report commissioned by the Norwegian EEA Review Committee, Oslo 2011.
  • The Supreme Court of Norway - Order - HR-2019-2206-A

    The Supreme Court of Norway - Order - HR-2019-2206-A

    Utskrift fra Lovdata - 15.01.2021 15:16 The Supreme Court of Norway - Order - HR-2019-2206-A Authority The Supreme Court of Norway – Order Date 2019-11-27 Published HR-2019-2206-A Keywords Civil process. Jurisdiction. Lugano Convention. Summary A number of European truck manufacturers had been charged with extensive fines by the European Commission for price fixing. Posten Norge AS with Norwegian and foreign subsidiaries had purchased a large number of trucks from these manufacturers, also from one manufacturer's Norwegian subsidiary. This subsidiary was not comprised by the European Commission's decision. Posten Norge AS with subsidiaries brought an action before Oslo District Court against all manufacturers together with the Norwegian subsidiary invoking Article 6 (1) of the Lugano Convention on special jurisdiction. It was held that the defendants were jointly and severally liable for the loss that the price fixing had caused for the claimants. The Supreme Court, after having conducted an oral hearing, stated that the condition in Article 6 (1) of the Lugano Convention that the claims must have been closely connected that the provision to apply – the «closeness requirement» – assumes that the same legal and factual situation creates a risk of conflicting judgments resulting from separate proceedings. The claimant carries the burden of proving that the conditions for accumulation are met. In the review, a relatively thorough assessment must be made of whether the claims are so closely connected, legally and factually, that it is expedient to hear and determine them together. The claimant must demonstrate a certain likelihood that the closeness requirement is met.
  • To Borgarting Court of Appeal Written Observations

    To Borgarting Court of Appeal Written Observations

    Brussels, 28 July 2014 Case No: 75554 Event No: 710884 TO BORGARTING COURT OF APPEAL WRITTEN OBSERVATIONS submitted, pursuant to Article 15(3) of Chapter II of Protocol 4 to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice, implemented in Norwegian law by Section 9(2) of the Norwegian EEA Competition Act, by the: EFTA Surveillance Authority Rue Belliard 35 1040 Brussels, Belgium Represented by Agents: Gjermund Mathisen, Senior Officer and Janne Tysnes Kaasin, Temporary Officer, Department of Legal & Executive Affairs in Case No. 13-178315ASD-BORG/02 Appellant: Bastø Fosen AS v/styrets leder Postboks 94 3191 Horten Counsel: Advokat Morten Goller Wikborg, Rein & Co. DA Advokatfirma Postboks 1513 Vika 0117 Oslo Legal representative: Advokat Simen Klevstrand Wikborg, Rein & Co. DA Advokatfirma Respondent: Color Line v/styrets leder Postboks 82 4662 Kristiansand Counsel: Advokat Gunnar Sørlie Advokatfirmaet BA-HR DA Postboks 1524 Vika 0117 Oslo Subject matter: Claim for damages for breach of competition law ________________________________________________________________________ Rue Belliard 35, B-1040 Brussels, tel: (+32)(0)2 286 18 11, fax: (+32)(0)2 286 18 00, www.eftasurv.int TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 3 2 THE IMPORTANCE OF PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT OF EEA COMPETITION LAW ............................................................................................... 4 3 THE
  • Supreme Court of Norway 2016

    Supreme Court of Norway 2016

    SUPREME COURT OF NORWAY 2016 SUPREME COURT OF NORWAY - Annual Report 2016 1 CONTENTS The Supreme Court in 2016 4 Summary of Supreme Court cases and procedure 6 New Chief Justice 7 Retirement of the Chief Justice 7 Tore Schei - reflections after 30 years at the Supreme Court 8 Toril Marie Øie - her thoughts on taking up appointment as the new Chief Justice 10 Supreme Court procedure 12 From paper to tablet 16 A selection of cases 18 The Appeals Selection Committee - The heart of the Supreme Court 24 The Supreme Court and International Law 25 Supreme Court decisions 26 Justice Ingse Stabel resigns 28 New justice Espen Bergh 30 The Supreme Court's Administration 32 Merete Koren - secretary to the Chief Justice 36 County tour 2016 38 Law clerks on a study tour to Luxembourg 39 Outside the courtroom 40 External activities 41 Statistics 42 From the Supreme Court entrance hall, brass sculpture of a lion modelled by Lars Utne. Photo: Sturlason SUPREME COURT OF NORWAY - ANNUAL REPORT 2016 3 THE SUPREME COURT IN 2016 In 2015, the Supreme Court celebrated its Chief Justice Scheie’s retirement was duly celebrated. The main bicentenary and in 2016, yet another milestone event was the farewell ceremony on 29 February 2016 in the was reached. Tore Schei retired as Chief Justice Supreme Court’s Grand Chamber attended by the King, the President of the Norwegian Storting, the Norwegian Prime on 29 February 2016, after having been a Minister, the Minister of Justice and other invited guests. Supreme Court justice for exactly 30 years - to the Later that day, a reception was held in the Supreme Court day.
  • Norway Norway to Enforce Tough Measures for IP Rights

    Norway Norway to Enforce Tough Measures for IP Rights

    Amund Brede Svendsen and Felix Reimers Advokatfirmaet Grette Norway Norway to enforce tough measures for IP rights Strengthening IP rights enforcement for a long time in Norway, the rules are not uniform across Background all IP rights and, generally, only wilful infringements are In April 2011 the Ministry of Justice issued a proposal to punishable. With the exception of infringements against strengthen IP rights enforcement. One reason for the trademarks and integrated circuit rights in certain reform being proposed is increased public awareness of aggravating circumstances, the maximum prison sentence the need to combat dangerous counterfeit products is three months. It is thus unsurprising that only a few (especially pharmaceutical ones). The proposal includes all rights holders have taken the time to press charges against IP rights laws, with the exception of copyright. IP infringers. Since Norway is not an EU member state, it is not The ministry now proposes that all IP rights should obliged to implement the EU IP Rights Enforcement have similar rules in this area, namely that: Directive (2004/48/EC). However, if the amendments • negligent infringements become punishable; proposed by the ministry are enacted, IP rights • the statutory maximum sentence be one year rather enforcement in Norway will become more similar than three months; and (although not identical) to the solutions put forward by • the statutory maximum sentence be extended to three the EU directive. years in particularly aggravating circumstances. Calculating damages Procedural law The proposal’s most fundamental amendment relates to Right to information the way in which damages are calculated for IP rights New provisions modelled on the EU directive are proposed infringement.
  • JUDGMENT of the COURT 30 June 2021

    JUDGMENT of the COURT 30 June 2021

    JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 30 June 2021 (Social security – Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 – Articles 7, 63 and 64 – Unemployment benefits – Requirement to stay in the competent EEA State – Unemployed person going to another EEA State) In Case E-15/20, REQUEST to the Court under Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice by Borgarting Court of Appeal (Borgarting lagmannsrett), in criminal proceedings against P, concerning the interpretation of the Agreement on the European Economic Area, in particular Articles 3, 7, 28, 29 and 36 thereof, Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems, and Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, THE COURT, composed of: Páll Hreinsson, President (Judge-Rapporteur), Per Christiansen and Bernd Hammermann, Judges, Registrar: Ólafur Jóhannes Einarsson, having considered the written observations submitted on behalf of: * Language of the request: Norwegian. Translations of national provisions are unofficial and based on those contained in the documents of the case. – 2 – - P, represented by Henrik Boehlke and Dag Sørlie Lund, advocates; - the Oslo Public Prosecution Office (Oslo statsadvokatembeter), represented by Henry John Mæland, Acting Director of Public Prosecutions (setteriksadvokat);