One of the major analytical shortcomings regularly made by EU and NATO experts today lies with exclusively seeing the European defence project as a post-World War II (WWII) phenomenon and the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) as mainly a post-Cold War product. No analyst has so far seriously explored the idea of European defence predating WWII and the 20th century. Instead, since 1999 one frequently reads and hears about the ‘anomalous,’ ‘elusive’ CSDP suddenly complicating transatlantic relations. But the CSDP is hardly an oddity or aberration, and it is certainly not as mysterious as some might suggest. Drawing extensively from primary sources and predicated on an overarching evolutionist approach, this thesis shows that the present CSDP is an ephemeral security and defence concept, only the latest of its kind and full of potential. Drawing its deepest ideational roots from the (pre-)Enlightenment era, the CSDP leads to a pan-European defence almost irreversibly. A common defence for Europe is quite possible and, due to the growing impact of the exogenous (multipolar) momentum, can be realized sooner rather than later even without a full-fledged European federation. / May 2016

This Dissertation is focused on issues concerning the position of an expert in international arbitration proceedings and in international investment disputes. Unlike proceedings conducted before general courts of law, arbitration proceedings have a number of advantages, and therefore they are used very often to resolve disputes in this area, and arbitration proceedings are used almost exclusively with regard to resolution of disputes relating to international investments. The aim of the Dissertation was an analysis of dispute resolution in arbitration proceedings from the expert's point of view and the expert's position in this procedure. It is without any doubt that experts can help arbitrators to reach a qualified resolution of disputes in a significant way. At first, the Dissertation deals with general and historical issues, such as comparison of methods of dispute solution where an international element appears, in both arbitration and judicial proceedings, and it lists the advantages of arbitration proceedings as well. After specification of the term "expert", the Dissertation provides a view into the expert's profession history in the territory of our country and into its legal regulation. With regard to our membership in the European Union it is, of course, necessary for the Dissertation to...

Les défis de la construction du droit d’auteur au niveau de l’UE sont d’abord définis sous l'angle du cadre institutionnel dans lequel ce processus dynamique se déroule (I). La deuxième partie est une perspective : elle décrit comment la construction du droit d’auteur de l’Union européenne pourrait être poursuivie, tant en termes de « forme » (c'est-à-dire en ce qui concerne le choix des instruments juridiques et la relation avec les droits d'auteur nationaux), qu’en termes de contenus (II). Les deux parties principales mettent en évidence des facettes différentes du cadre « institutionnel » et « juridique ». Dans la première partie, on abordera les « justifications et objectifs » du droit d'auteur dans l’UE ainsi que les « parties prenantes et intérêts » dans le droit d'auteur de l’UE. Au cours de la deuxième partie, deux chapitres donneront une idée de la forme et des contenus possibles d’un futur droit d’auteur de l’UE. Il est ainsi montré que les choix dans l'un de ces domaines auront un impact sur les choix dans l'un des autres domaines et vice versa. Afin de parvenir à un cadre plus équilibré, des recommandations concernant chacun des domaines sont formulées. / The challenges of constructing EU Copyright Law are first set out under the angle of the institutional framework in which this dynamic process takes place (I). An outlook is given on how the construction of EU Copyright Law could be taken further, both in terms of ‘form’ (i.e. regarding the choice of legal instruments and the relation to national copyright laws), and in terms of contents (II). Both main parts are subdivided in two chapters, highlighting different facets of the ‘institutional’ and the ‘legal’ framework. Within the first part, a first chapter will discuss 'rationales and objectives’ of EU copyright law. A second chapter is dedicated to ‘stakeholders and interests’ within copyright law in the EU. Within the second part, two chapters will give an outlook on the form and the possible contents of a future EU Copyright Law. The idea behind this structure is to show that the issues addressed in the two parts, but also in the four chapters, are interrelated: choices made in one of the four areas will have an impact on choices in any of the other areas, and vice versa. In order to achieve a more balanced framework, recommendations addressing each of the four areas are made.

No description available.

No description available.

1990 年代俄羅斯與歐盟的關係並不是很熱絡，雙方皆因專注於內部的改革而對彼此興趣缺缺。葉爾欽政府對於歐盟充滿了無知與誤解，而布魯塞爾對於中、東歐國家的關注也遠超過俄羅斯。不過，90年代末期之後，隨著歐盟東擴的進行與雙方經貿互賴程度越來越深，莫斯科再也無法承擔誤解歐盟的後果。同時，歐盟亦為了穩定東擴後的東部邊境，不得不與俄羅斯進一步的加強合作。然而，俄羅斯與歐盟的政經關係日益密切，彼此間隱含的問題也一一浮現。 　　俄羅斯與歐盟無論是在安全、反恐、車臣、民主、人權、內政與司法事務、加里寧格勒、經貿與能源、世貿組織、京都議定書以及環境保護等議題上都存在著巨大的認知差異與分歧，使得雙方很難有真誠的合作。不過，若要因此強調俄羅斯與歐盟的衝突面似乎太過於悲觀。因為，與歐洲整合並非不符合俄羅斯的國家利益，而歐盟遇到困難便會再協商或擱置爭議的特殊運作模式也讓它在與俄羅斯的交往過程中不至於陷入危機。俄羅斯與歐盟還是能夠透過不斷的對話、談判與妥協來解決紛爭，雙方的夥伴關係仍然有相當大的發展潛力。 / In the 1990s, the relationship between Russia and the EU was not very enthusiastic. Both parties concentrated mainly on their own internal reforms, and therefore they had no interest in each other. Yeltsin’s regime was full of ignorance and misunderstanding about the EU, and Brussels also paid much more attention on the Central and Eastern European states than on Russia. However, since the late 1990s, the EU’s enlargement has been underway, and the level of interdependence between the EU and Russia has become higher and higher, Moscow can no longer afford the consequences of misunderstanding about the EU. Meanwhile, in order to stabilize the EU’s eastern border after enlargement, the EU has no choice but to enhance cooperation with Russia. Nevertheless, the closer political and economic relationship between Russia and the EU becomes, the more underlying problems emerge. There is a wide cognitive gap and many disputes between Russia and the EU over various issues, such as security, anti-terrorism, Chechnya, democracy, human rights, justice and home affairs, Kaliningrad, economic and trade, energy, WTO, Kyoto Protocol and environmental protection, etc. Therefore, it is unlikely for them to engage in any serious cooperation. However, it would be too pessimistic to highlight the aspects of conflicts for the above reason, because integration with Europe is also corresponding to Russia’s national interests. Besides, the EU’s particular working model of consulting with each other again and again or leaving aside the disagreements when encountering problems prevents the disputes between the EU and Russia from escalating to crisis. Russia and the EU can solve problems through talks, negotiations and compromises. It still has great potential for the further development of partnership between Russia and the EU.

The role of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the process of direct tax integration in the European Union (EU) has been widely discussed in the academic literature, while another important actor, the European Commission, has attracted much less attention. The Commission’s input is commonly perceived to be limited to the right of legislative initiative. This study questions such an oversimplified interpretation and draws a more nuanced picture of EU tax harmonisation by integrating an analysis of the complex regulatory approaches adopted by the Commission for the establishment and smooth functioning of the Internal Market. It is argued that the past decade brought a notable change in the Court-dominated pattern of direct tax integration. This change is apparent first in the evolution of enforcement strategies under Articles 258 and 260 TFEU; and second, in the increased reliance upon non-binding regulatory measures. Both developments have strengthened the role of the Commission, supplying it with more possibilities for influencing national direct tax systems, despite the reluctance of Member States to agree upon legislative harmonisation. Against this background, the procedural and substantive problems associated with these instruments require closer examination. The normative scope of this research covers the key procedural problems related to the infringement procedure and non-binding regulatory measures. The empirical component explores the Commission’s enforcement and coordination practices, drawing particular attention to two case studies: the tax treatment of losses in cross-border situations and exit taxation. Following the analysis of enforcement and coordination in the field of direct taxation, the study argues the need and proposes potential solutions for (i) the developing of a more comprehensive procedural framework for the infringement procedure and non-binding regulatory acts; (ii) the strengthening of accountability mechanisms; and (iii) the enhancing of the effectiveness of their application.

Magister Legum - LLM

The thesis deals with transnational islamist terrorism and with the policy of the European Union (EU) and the United States (U.S.) in countering the threat. It is assumed that it is the EU's policy that is more relevant given the recent evolution of the threat. The assumption is subsequently tested throughout the paper. In the opening part, the focus is on the international, or transnational, islamist terrorism, in particular its root causes, ideological background and organizational forms. Second chapter is devoted to the EU's counterterrorism policy, first from the institutional point of view, as that has obvious implications for the formulation and implementation of policy. Then, the prevailing perceptions of terrorism, basic tenets of strategy and some concrete measures are analyzed. The chapter dealing with the U.S. policy is structured analogously, even if the institutional aspects are omitted due to the obvious absence of EU-specific problems. Chapter four provides a comparison of both actors' policies, followed up by the fifth, final, chapter, with some concluding remarks. Most importantly, the initial assumption is assessed as valid, i.e., the European Union counterterrorism policy is found to be more relevant than that of the United States.

With the implementation of more and more stringent measures to prevent money laundering, criminals are resorting to the expertise of lawyers for assistance in the formulation of increasingly complex money laundering schemes. This expertise is provided both wittingly and unwittingly. The purpose of this research was to consider whether the South African anti-money laundering legislation places suspicious transaction reporting obligations, which are in line with and meet international directives, conventions and best practice frameworks, on attorneys. The study entails a consideration of the suspicious transaction reporting obligations of lawyers introduced by the Financial Action Task Force, the European Union, the United Kingdom and South Africa and provides an understanding of the concept of money laundering, the money laundering process and the areas in which lawyers are vulnerable to money laundering. The research found that the suspicious transaction reporting responsibilities of attorneys in terms of South African anti-money laundering legislation are not in line with international frameworks and best practice. / Dissertation (MPhil)--University of Pretoria, 2014. / tm2015 / Auditing / MPhil / Unrestricted