bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
The Parties to Appeal Proceedings
Authors: Naômé Caroline 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
This chapter analyses the position of those participating in appeal proceedings before the Court of Justice (ECJ). It describes the parties entitled to bring an ordinary appeal, or an appeal against a refusal of leave to intervene or against an interlocutory decision. The possibility, for interveners at first instance, to bring an appeal is limited, because they must show that the decision of the General Court (GCEU) directly affects them. An exception to the general rules is allowed in the case of Member States and Union institutions, which, except in staff cases, may bring an appeal even if they were not parties to the proceedings at first instance. The chapter also describes the position of ‘other parties to the relevant case’ and of those who wish to intervene for the first time when the case is at the appeal stage.
Article 1 Subject-matter and objectives
Authors: Hijmans Hielke 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
The protection of natural persons in relation to the processing of personal data is a fundamental right. Article 8(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’) and Article 16(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provide that everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him or her.
Article 4(10). Third party
Authors: Tosoni Luca 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Article 4(1) (Definition of ‘data subject’); Article 4(7) (Definition of ‘controller’); Article 4(8) (Definition of ‘processor’); Article 4(9) (Definition of ‘recipient’); Article 6(1)(f) (Processing based on legitimate interests); Article 13(1)(d) (Information to be provided to data subjects); Article 14(2)(b) (Information to be provided to data subjects); Article 29 (Processing under the authority of the controller or processor).
Article 30 Records of processing activities
Authors: Kotschy Waltraut 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Article 13 (Information to be provided where personal data are collected from the data subject); Article 14 (Information to be provided where personal data have not been obtained from the data subject); Article 15 (Right of access by the data subject); Article 24 (Responsibility of the controller); Article 32 (Security of processing); Article 35 (Data protection impact assessment); Article 37 (Designation of a data protection officer); Article 49 (Derogations for specific situations concerning transborder data flows); Article 83 (General conditions for imposing administrative fines)
Article 33 Notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority
Authors: Burton Cédric 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Recital 88; Article 4(12) (Definition of a personal data breach); Article 5(2)) (Accountability principle); Article 28(3)(f) (Processor); Article 32 (security of processing); Article 34 (Communication of a breach to the data subject) (see too recital 86); Article 70(1)(g)(h) (Tasks of the Board); Article 83(4)(a) (Fines for infringement of Article 33).
Article 43 Certification bodies
Authors: Leenes Ronald 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Recital 77; Article 5(2) (Principle of accountability); Article 42 (Certification); Article 55 (Competence of the supervisory authorities); Article 56 (Competence of the lead supervisory authority); Articles 57(1)(p)–(q) (Tasks of the supervisory authorities); Article 58(3)(e) (Powers of the supervisory authorities); Article 63 (Consistency mechanism); Article 64(1)(c) (Opinions of the board); Article 70(1)(o)–(q) (Tasks of the board) (see too recital 77); Article 92 (Exercise of delegated acts by Commission) (see too recitals 166 and 168).
Article 57 Tasks
Authors: Hijmans Hielke 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Article 4(21) (Definition of a supervisory authority); Article 28(8) (Adoption of processors’ standard contractual clauses); Article 36(2) (Prior consultation) (see too recitals 84 and 94); Articles 40(1), (5) and 41(3) (Codes of conduct) (see too recital 98); Article 42(1), (5), (7) and 43(1) (Certification) (see too recital 100); Article 46(2)(d), (3) and (4) (Standard data protection clauses for data transfers) (see too recitals 108–109); Article 47 (Approval of binding corporate rules); Article 50 (International cooperation for the protection of personal data) (see too recitals 104 and 116); Article 58 (Powers) (see too recitals 129, 148 and 150); Article 59 (Activity reports); Article 60 (Cooperation between supervisory authorities); Article 61 (Mutual assistance between supervisory authorities); Article 62 (Joint operations of supervisory authorities); Article 70 (Tasks of the Board, including promotion of cooperation between supervisory authorities; contribution to activities of the Board); Article 77 (Complaint handling and investigations) (see too recital 141); Article 83 (Administrative fines) (see too recital 148).
Article 58 Powers
Authors: Georgieva Ludmila , Schmidl Matthias 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Article 4(21) (Definition of a supervisory authority); Article 36 (Advisory and other powers concerning prior consultation, national legislative measures and mandatory prior consultation or authorisation) (see too recital 94); Article 50 (Supervisory authorities to take steps to provide international mutual assistance in enforcement, including through investigative assistance) (see too recital 116); Article 52 (Exercise of powers with complete independence) (see too recital 117); Article 55 (Competence with regard to the exercise of powers, competence over public bodies) (see too recitals 122, 128 and 131); Article 57 (Tasks of supervisory authorities) (see too recitals 122, 123, 132 and 133); Articles 60(2) and 61 (Mutual assistance) (see too recital 133); Article 62 (Joint operations of supervisory authorities, including joint investigations and conferring of powers) (see too recitals 130 and 134); Article 90 (Possibility for Member States to adopt specific rules to set out supervisory authorities’ powers) (see too recital 164).
Article 64 Opinion of the Board
Authors: Van Eecke Patrick , Šimkus Anrijs 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Article 61 (Mutual assistance) (see too recitals 123 and 133); Article 62 (Joint operations of supervisory authorities) (see too recital 134); Article 63 (Aim of consistency mechanism); Article 65 (Procedure for the consistency mechanism where Article 64 is not complied with); Article 67 (Information exchange arrangements for the standardised format under Article 64(4)); Article 70(1) (Tasks of the Board) (see too recitals 136 and 139).
Article 80 Representation of data subjects
Authors: Fuster Gloria González 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Article 57(1)(f) (Tasks of supervisory authorities); Article 77 (Right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority); Article 78 (Right to an effective judicial remedy against a supervisory authority); Article 79 (Right to an effective judicial remedy against a controller or processor); Article 82 (Right to compensation and liability).
Article 88 Processing in the context of employment
Authors: Van Eecke Patrick , Šimkus Anrijs 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Article 4 (Definition of consent) (see too recital 42); Article 7 (Conditions for consent) (see too recital 43); Article 9 (Processing of special categories of personal data in the context of employment) (see too recital 52); Article 83 (Fines for breaches of any obligations pursuant to Member State law adopted under Article 88) (see too recital 148).
Article 99 Entry into force and application
Authors: Moore Dominique 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
The GDPR was published in the EU Official Journal on 4 May 2016. The two-year period from the entry into force of the GDPR on 24 May 2016 (as provided by Article 99(1)) until its application starting on 25 May 2018 (as provided by Article 99(2)), and the concomitant repeal of the DPD under Article 94, was intended to allow sufficient time for all concerned to prepare sufficiently for the important changes to be brought about by the new legal regime of the GDPR. This two-year period is longer than the norm for EU legislation.
Sham Trusts and Reserved Powers
Authors: Kosky Jeremy , Mossman Maxine , Buncher Nicole 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
The concept of sham came to prominence in England in the late 1960s in a contractual context. The classic articulation is said to be in Snook v London and West Riding Investments Limited, a case about a hire-purchase agreement: … it means acts done or documents executed by the parties to the ‘sham’, which are intended by them to give to third parties or to the Court, the appearance of creating between the parties legal rights and obligations different from the actual legal rights and obligations (if any) which the parties intend to create.
Appeals
Authors: Angus Tracey 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Appeals may arise in trust litigation in a number of different contexts. The most obvious is where a final decision has been made by the court which one party considers is wrong. However, there may be decisions made during the course of the litigation with regard to case management, injunctions, or other interim orders, with which one of the parties is aggrieved and they too can often be appealed.
Switzerland
Authors: Wüstemann Tina , Frigg Marco 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Swiss law does not recognize the concept of trusts (although it does recognize trusts created under foreign law). Hence a trust cannot be governed by Swiss law. Yet, Switzerland is seen by many foreigners as an attractive place to live and trusts are often imported by settlors relocating to Switzerland. Switzerland’s popularity as a hub for trust administration and related services has risen during the last years and so has the number of litigation matters involving trust structures. Trustees have become increasingly involved in Swiss proceedings and are frequently parties to complex cross-border disputes; the trustees become a target for aggrieved beneficiaries and family members or ex-spouses.
Class Meetings and Class Consents
Authors: Kosmin Leslie , Roberts Catherine 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
It is legitimate for the issued share capital of a company to be divided into shares of different classes, for example, the share capital may include deferred shares, preference shares or redeemable shares as well as ordinary shares. The reasons for such a subdivision of a company’s share capital may be many and arise in a variety of different situations. Where the issued share capital of a company is so divided it may be necessary from time to time to convene separate class meetings when such a course is required by statute or under the terms of a company’s articles of association. Provided that there is due and proper compliance with the legislation and with any applicable provisions in a company’s articles or shareholders’ agreement it is possible for members of a company to vary the rights that may be attached to a particular class of shares. This power must not be abused and the court has specific jurisdiction under CA 2006, s 633 to protect a minority of the members of a class of shares provided that they constitute not less than 15% of the issued shares of the class. Such persons may apply to the court to have
Annotation of 1985 Table A Regulations Relating to Meetings and Decisions of Members and Proceedings and Decisions of Directors
Authors: Kosmin Leslie , Roberts Catherine 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
In addition to the statutory provisions regulating the proceedings of meetings of members and of directors, a company’s articles of association will contain rules and regulations governing these types of meeting. Plainly, where the legislation prescribes minimum requirements a company is not entitled to have provisions in its articles of association that depart or derogate from these basic rules. For a long time as an adjunct to the statutory provisions relating to meetings there have been articles of association in what may be called a ‘standard form’. Companies may choose to adopt these standard form provisions in their entirety, or with certain amendments, modifications and exclusions. In this part of the book the familiar provisions relating to meetings and decisions of members and of directors that are contained in the Companies (Tables A to F) Regulations 1985 (SI 1985/805) (1985 Table A) are considered and analysed. Many companies on the register of companies retain as their articles the 1985 Table A with various additions, modifications or exclusions.
Magistrates and their Courts
Authors: Sprack John , Engelhardt–Sprack Michael 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
The office of justice of the peace, or magistrate, is an ancient one first mentioned in 1264. As early as 1361 the Justices of the Peace Act provided for the appointment in each county of ‘one lord and three or four of the most worthy in the county with some learned in the law’ whose duty it would be to ‘pursue, arrest … and chastise’ offenders and rioters, and take surety of good behaviour ‘towards the King and his people’ from those who were not ‘of good fame’. The magistrates retain their original function of assisting in the keeping of the peace, and, to further that end, can still bind a person over to keep the peace or be of good behaviour even though no offence has been proved against him.
Mode of Trial
Authors: Sprack John , Engelhardt–Sprack Michael 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
An offence is either summary or indictable (see 1.07 to 1.09). An indictable offence is one for which an adult either must or may be tried on indictment; a summary offence is one which must be tried summarily: Interpretation Act 1978, Sch 1. As the definition of indictable offence implies, some are only triable on indictment and some may be tried either on indictment or summarily. The latter are known as offences triable either way.
Appeals from the Magistrates’ Courts
Authors: Sprack John , Engelhardt–Sprack Michael 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Appeal to the Crown Court is only by a person convicted. The other two procedures are available to any person aggrieved by a magistrates’ court decision, which includes both a convicted accused and an unsuccessful prosecutor. Decisions of the Crown Court, not made in connection with its jurisdiction over trials on indictment, may also be challenged through a case stated for the opinion of the High Court or an application for judicial review.
Introduction
Authors: Lodge Hugo D 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Without the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 (‘the 2018 Act’), the UK would not meet its international obligations post Brexit. Further, the 2018 Act gives the UK the means to take a different course from the EU on sanctions policy. Early signs are that the UK is determined to diverge, at least in respect of freezing the assets of Russian citizens, amongst others, whom the UK holds responsible for human rights abuses.
Announcement and the Offer Dance
Authors: Kershaw David 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
This Chapter considers the Code’s regulation of the pre-offer period. It considers both the regulation of the provision of information to shareholders and to the market about the possibility that an offer may be made and the regulation of the courtship period prior to the offer where the bidder attempts to persuade the target board and the target shareholders to be receptive to the offer (the “pre-bid dance”). More precisely, it considers the disclosures that any shareholder must make when specified ownership thresholds are crossed and the circumstances in which the Code requires an announcement about the possibility of an offer. The Chapter critiques the Code’s strict approach to the suggested terms included in a possible offer announcement, questioning whether its restriction on amendment in the absence of reservations significantly reduces the unavoidable uncertainty surrounding a possible offer. The Chapter is also critical of the Panel’s approach to requests to amend terms when no reservations to suggested terms are included in the announcement. In this regard, it shows how the Hearings Committee’s reasoning supporting its very strict approach in the Kalahari Minerals case is unpersuasive. The Chapter then considers the regulation of the pre-bid dance including the put-up or shut up rule and the Panel’s post-Cadbury difficulties in regulating statements of future intention, which initially led to expansive and unthought-through regulation of intention statements and then to recent Code amendments providing for Post-Offer Undertakings and Post-Offer intention statements. This section concludes by arguing that although several of Code pre-bid rules and rulings are difficult to make sense of on their stated terms, they can be made sense of in terms of attempts to shift the structural pro-bidder power balance of the Code back towards the target board. They demonstrate that the Code does not, as it purports to do, take a neutral position between facilitating and impeding takeovers and that the structural power balance, generated most importantly by the non-frustration rule, distorts rule-making in other areas of the Code. Finally, the Chapter considers the firm offer announcement and its effects and the Codes share purchase disclosure regime during an offer.
Regulating Timetable and Disclosure
Authors: Kershaw David 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
The Chapter considers Code regulation of the bid timetable as well as its regulation of the information provided to shareholders and stakeholders as part of the bid process. With regard to time regulation the Chapter details the Code’s bid timetable for contractual offers and schemes: from the commencement of the offer period, the competing bid timetables, to the payment of consideration. The Chapter explores and challenges the assumptions about investors and market practice on which this time regulation is premised. The Chapter then turns to disclosure. It explores and details the types of disclosure required in relation to the bid itself and of the bidder and target companies, and explores the techniques deployed by the Code to ensure the accuracy, and informativeness, of the disclosures. The Chapter argues that for mandatory takeover bid disclosures to be justified they must be additive, informative in practice and actually used. The Chapter raises questions about whether all Code disclosures comply with these criteria. Particular concerns are raised about predictive information relating to the commercial effects of the business combination as well as the effects on employment and business location. The Chapter submits that practical business considerations and concerns about ex-post reputational damage where reality departs from prediction (as well as concerns about ex-post enforcement action by the Panel, results in disclosures that are often uninformative, benefiting only those who are paid for producing them.
The European Top-Level Domain ‘.eu’
Authors: Bettinger Torsten 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
In February 2000, as part of the eEurope Initiative, the European Commission commenced public consultation on the introduction of a new ccTLD, ‘.eu’. Its aim was to create a clearly recognizable link with the Community, thereby making the internal market more visible on the Internet-based virtual market, and allowing enterprises, organizations, and natural persons within the European Community the opportunity to register their sign or name under a top-level domain that would manifest their European identity.
Belgium (‘.be’)
Authors: Strowel Alain , Docquir Benjamin 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
The trademark owner can also request the President of the Court to appoint a sequestrator or trustee to store the infringing items until the Commercial Court has decided on the merits of the case, and to appoint an expert to create a list of all infringing items, tools used for infringing activities, and relevant business-related data.
Germany (‘.de’)
Authors: Bettinger Torsten 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Disputes arising under trademark and competition law owing to the registration and use of domain names have become commonplace in German courts. Following a phase of widespread legal uncertainty, in the meantime the core problems of domain names under trademark and competition law have been resolved. There are more than 50 judgments from the German Federal Supreme Court (BGH) and a multitude of decisions from the courts of the lower instances in disputes concerning domain names.
Listed Company Considerations
Authors: O’Dea Geoff , Long Julian , Smyth Alexandra 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Whilst a scheme of arrangement is a court-sanctioned process, any company that proposes a scheme to its members or creditors or is otherwise involved with the scheme (for example, as a bidder in a takeover offer that is affected by way of a scheme of arrangement) must consider whether the corporate action at the centre of the scheme is governed by other applicable laws and regulations. These laws will include the laws of the country of its incorporation and, where the shares of the company are publicly listed, the rules of the relevant market or markets.
Types of Member Schemes
Authors: O’Dea Geoff , Long Julian , Smyth Alexandra 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Member schemes implemented pursuant to Part 26 of the Companies Act 2006 can be used to effect a wide variety of compromises and arrangements between a company and its shareholders. As described in Chapter 1, examples of these arrangements include: (i) the takeover of that company; (ii) a demerger of, or involving, that company; (iii) the addition of a new holding company above that company (often used to effect a corporate redomiciliation of the company’s group or to help facilitate making a capital reduction); (iv) a return of capital to shareholders of that company; (v) the removal of minority shareholders of that company; and (vi) group reorganisations combining one or more elements of (ii) to (v).
National Report for Mexico
Authors: y Velasco Carlos Sánchez-Mejorada 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
In civil law systems, such as Mexico, a distinction is made between civil law (‘derecho civil’) and commercial law (‘derecho mercantil’), which can be confusing to persons unfamiliar with the system. As is the case in common law jurisdictions, law in civil law systems can be divided into public law and private law, the latter being those laws that govern relationships between and among private parties, regarding which the state functions more as a ‘supervisor’ or an ‘umpire’ than as an authority. Public law would include constitutional law, administrative law, etc. In turn, private law comprises civil law, ie those rules governing the status, rights, and obligations of the residents of the state as persons, their property, their estates, their obligations, and their contracts; and commercial law, those rules governing all acts of the residents of the state that have a profit motive, which in Mexico—as well as in other jurisdictions—are called ‘acts of commerce’ (‘actos de comercio’).
National Report for Poland
Authors: Porzycki Marek , Rachwał Anna 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
The treatment of contracts under Polish insolvency law varies depending on the type of insolvency proceedings. Legal relationships between the debtor and other parties are modified to a significant extent in winding-up bankruptcy (‘upadłość likwidacyjna’ or ‘upadłość obejmująca likwidację majątku upadłego’), while most contracts remain unchanged by reorganization bankruptcy (‘upadłość układowa’ or ‘upadłość z możliwością zawarcia układu’). In rarely used rehabilitation proceedings (‘postępowanie naprawcze’), contracts are almost unaffected except for a general ban on performance of obligations. Even though in reorganization bankruptcy there are two distinct possibilities of the debtor remaining in possession of the estate or of the estate being managed by an administrator, this subdivision does not result in any further differences in treatment of contracts.