Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

English (EN)·Polski (PL)·Yкраїнський (UK)
Przejdź do strony domowej biblioteki Centralna Biblioteka Wojskowa Link otwiera się w nowym oknie Logo biblioteki Prolib Integro - strona głównaCentralna Biblioteka Wojskowa

Wyszukujesz frazę "applicable law" wg kryterium: Temat

  Lista filtrów
Wyrównaj
    Wyświetlanie 1-5 z 5
    Tytuł:
    Kolizyjnoprawna problematyka skuteczności przelewu wierzytelności wobec osób trzecich - projekt rozporządzenia Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady w sprawie prawa właściwego dla skutków przelewu wierzytelności wobec osób trzecich (COM(2018) 96 final)
    The conflict-of-laws problems regarding the third-party effects of the assignment of claims - the Proposal for a Regulation on the law applicable to the third-party effects of assignment of claims (COM(2018) 96 <i>final</i>)
    Autorzy:
    Kurowski, Witold
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/782430.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2019
    Wydawca:
    Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego
    Tematy:
    conflict of laws
    assignment
    the third-party effects of assignments
    law applicable to the proprietary effects of assignments
    contractual obligations
    Rome I Regulation
    Opis:
    The question of which law should govern the third-party effects of assignments of claims was considered during the preparation of the Rome I Regulation. The European Commission’s proposal for the Rome I Regulation admitted the law of the assignor’s habitual residence as the law that should apply to the proprietary effects of assignments of claims. Finally, EU Regulation on the law applicable to contractual obligations did not include the issue of the third-party effects of the assignment. However, Article 27(2) of the Rome I Regulation required the European Commission to present a report on the question of the effectiveness of assignments of claims against third parties accompanied, if appropriate, by a proposal to amend the Rome I Regulation. Proposal for a Regulation on the law applicable to the third-party effects of assignments of claims (COM(2018) 96 final) is a response to this request. This paper analyses current draft of the new EU Regulation, the rules on determination of the third-party effects of assignments of claims (law of the assignor’s habitual residence and law of the assigned claim) and "super conflict rules" in specific cases. The author argues that the law of the assignor’s habitual residence remains the appropriate conflict rule for proprietary effects of assignments of claims.
    Źródło:
    Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego; 2019, 25; 67-90
    1896-7604
    2353-9852
    Pojawia się w:
    Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Wpływ nowelizacji dyrektywy 96/71/WE Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady z dnia 16 grudnia 1996 r. dotyczącej delegowania pracowników w ramach świadczenia usług na statut stosunku pracy
    The impact of the revision of the Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 on the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services on the applicable law to the employment relationship
    Autorzy:
    Kurowski, Witold
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1030067.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2020-12-29
    Wydawca:
    Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego
    Tematy:
    the posted workers
    freedom to provide services
    law applicable to the individual employment contracts
    Rome I Regulation
    Directive 96/71/EC
    Directive (EU) 2018/957
    Opis:
    The Directive (EU) 2018/957 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 June 2018 introduced several changes to the Directive 96/71/EC on the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services, affecting the posted worker’s employment relationships directly. Article 3(1) of the Directive 96/71/EC requires that an employer has to guarantee his workers posted to the Member State, the terms and conditions of employment, in matters listed in it, resulting from the law where the work is carried out, regardless of the law applicable to employment relationships. First of all, the Directive (EU) 2018/957 introduced the new concept of “remuneration” paid to the posted workers. Secondly, it extended the list of mattes in article 3(1) by adding point (h) — “the conditions of workers’ accommodation where provided by the employer to workers away from their regular place of work” and point (i) — “allowances or reimbursement of expenditure to cover travel, board and lodging expenses for workers away from home for professional reasons.” Finally, the Directive (EU) 2018/957 established the posting period, not clearly defined before, which should not last longer than 12 months (18 months when the service provider submits a motivated notification).This paper analyses the main changes introduced by the Directive (EU) 2018/957 amending the Directive 96/71/EC in the employment relationship field.
    Źródło:
    Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego; 2020, 27; 283-302
    1896-7604
    2353-9852
    Pojawia się w:
    Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Glosa do wyroku Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej z dnia 12 lutego 2015 r. w sprawie Sähköalojen ammattiliitto ry c/a Elektrobudowa Spółka Akcyjna (C‑396/13)
    A note to the judgment of the CJEU of 12 February 2015 in case Sähköalojen ammattiliitto ry v. Elektrobudowa Spółka Akcyjna (C‑396/13)
    Autorzy:
    Kurowski, Witold
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/782424.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2019
    Wydawca:
    Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego
    Tematy:
    posted workers
    freedom of movement for workers
    law applicable to individual employment contracts
    assignment of pay claims
    Rome I Regulation
    Directive 96/71/EC
    Opis:
    This paper aims to comment an important ruling concerning the Posted Workers Directive (Directive 96/71/EC). In the judgement C-396/13 (Sähköalojen ammattiliitto ry v. Elektrobudowa Spółka Akcyjna), the European Court of Justice providedits pro-worker’s interpretation of Art 3 of Directive 96/71/EC concerning the scope of the "minimum pay rate". The second issue raised by the European Court of Justice was the assignability of pay claims governed by Polish law based on Art 14 (2) of Rome I Regulation and prohibited under that law. In commented judgement, the Court admitted the assignment of claims arising from employment relationships in light of article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and accepted the trade union’s right to represent the posted workers.
    Źródło:
    Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego; 2019, 24; 191-209
    1896-7604
    2353-9852
    Pojawia się w:
    Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Kolizyjnoprawna problematyka skuteczności przelewu wierzytelności wobec osób trzecich Glosa do wyroku Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej z dnia 9 października 2019 r. w sprawie BGL BNP Paribas SA c/a TeamBank AG Nürnberg (C‑548/18)
    The conflict of laws issues concerning the third party effects of the assignments of claims. The gloss to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 9 October 2019 in the case of BGL BNP Paribas SA v. TeamBank AG Nürnberg (C‑548/18)
    Autorzy:
    Kurowski, Witold
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/21151105.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2020-06-29
    Wydawca:
    Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego
    Tematy:
    the conflict of laws
    the assignments
    the third-party effects of assignment
    the law applicable to the proprietary effects of assignments
    the contractual obligations
    Rome I Regulation
    Opis:
    The question of the law applicable to the third-party effects of assignments of claims is widely discussed in the doctrinal debates. In common opinion, the existing European conflict-of-laws regulations do not provide for a rule governing this issue. In the case BGL BNP Paribas SA v. TeamBank AG Nürnberg (C‑548/18), the Court of Justice of the European Union confirmed this gape of the Rome I Regulation.The gloss presents the justification of the European Union Court’s judgment, the reasons for the lack of the uniform conflict-of-laws regulation, and the consequences of this state. It also analyses briefly the European Commission’s proposal for the EU Regulation concerning the law applicable to the third-party effects of assignments of claims (COM(2018) 96 final), as a response to this situation. Finally, it examines the appropriate conflict-of-laws rules for proprietary effects of assignments of claims (the law of the assignor’s habitual residence and the law of the assigned claim).
    Źródło:
    Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego; 2020, 26; 223-236
    1896-7604
    2353-9852
    Pojawia się w:
    Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Wybór prawa dla umowy o pracę. Glosa do wyroku Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej z dnia 15 lipca 2021 r. w sprawach połączonych DG, EH c/a SC Gruber Logistics SRL (C-152/20) oraz Sindicatul Lucrătorilor din Transporturi, TD c/a SC Samidani Trans
    The gloss to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 1 July 2021 in the joined cases of DG, EH v. SC Gruber Logistics SRL (C-152/20) and Sindicatul Lucrătorilor din Transporturi, TD v. SC Samidani Trans SRL (C-218/20)
    Autorzy:
    Kurowski, Witold
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/20745505.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2021-12-29
    Wydawca:
    Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego
    Tematy:
    a choice of law to the individual employment contract
    the law applicable to the individual employment contract in the absence of a choice
    an employee’s protection, a concept of „provisions that cannot be derogated from by agreement”
    the minimum wage
    Rome I Regulation
    Opis:
    This paper comments on a recent ruling concerning the choice of law to the individual employment contract according to the Rome I Regulation. In the judgement in the joined cases C–152/20 and C–218/20 (DG, EH v. SC Gruber Logistics SRL and Sindicatul Lucrătorilor din Transporturi, TD v. SC Samidani Trans SRL), the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) provided the interpretation of Article 8 of the Rome I Regulation on two issues. At first, the EU Court was asked about the freedom of choice of law applicable to the individual employment contract if (a) national law required the inclusion of a clause into that contract under which the contractual provisions are supplemented by national law and (b) the contractual clause concerning that choice was drafted by the employer. The second issue was connected with the concept of the employee’s protection, under which the choice of law may not have the result of depriving the employee of the protection afforded to him (her) by provisions that cannot be derogated from by agreement, under the law that would have been applicable to the contract in the absence of choice. Regarding the first question, the CJEU admitted that the parties to an individual employment contract dispose of freedom to choose the law applicable to that contract, even if the contractual provisions are supplemented by national labour law under a (relevant) national provision, if “the national provision in question does not require the parties to choose national law as the law applicable to that contract”. Secondly, the Court found that the parties to an individual employment contract were “to be regarded as being, in principle, free to choose the law applicable to that contract, even if the contractual clause concerning that choice is drafted by the employer”. Therefore, the CJEU confirmed the application of the rules concerning the choice of law resulting from Article 3 of the Rome I Regulation to the individual employment contracts. Referring to the second issue of the commented ruling, the CJEU confirmed that Article 8 (1) of the Rome I Regulation must be interpreted as meaning that, where the parties have chosen the law governing the individual employment contract, the application of the law that would apply to the contract in the absence of choice must be excluded, with the exception of “provisions that cannot be derogated from by agreement”, if those provisions offer the employee concerned greater protection than those of the law chosen by the parties. The EU Court underlined that rules on the minimum wage could be treated as “provisions that cannot be derogated from by agreement” and the law that, in the absence of choice, would be applicable should decide about it. Unfortunately, it is necessary to follow the commented judgment’s justification to correctly understand the concept of an employee’s protection applied in Article 8 (1) of the Rome I Regulation. The thesis of the ruling in this regard seems to be too laconic, and it can be misinterpreted. 
    Źródło:
    Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego; 2021, 29; 169-190
    1896-7604
    2353-9852
    Pojawia się w:
    Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
      Wyświetlanie 1-5 z 5

      Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies