Maciej Durbas

In view of the legal position settled by the Apex Page 17 / 25 https://lnkd.in/d5_yBvsD  Crl.O.P.No.17906 of 2017 and Crl.M.P.Nos.10920 and 10921 of 2017 court in Prem Dass's case ( supra) , it cannot be held that the legal position laid down by this Court in G.Viswanathan's case (supra) is good law. In the instant case, admittedly there is no concealment of any source of income or taxable item, inclusion of a circumstance aimed to evade tax or furnishing of inaccurate particulars regarding any assessment or payment of tax. What is involved is only a failure on the part of the petitioner to pay the tax in time, which was later on paid after availing installment facility with interest. The penalty imposed is now pending consideration before the appellate authority. So it would not fall under the mischief of Section 276 C of the Income Tax Act.Ansari Solicitor Firm

4

Mark your calendars 🗓Wednesday, 22 May 2024;🕔5:00 – 6:30 PM🕡‼️ Sąd Arbitrażowy przy Krajowej Izbie Gospodarczej w Warszawie/Court of Arbitration at the PCC together with Deutsche Institution für Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit e.V. (DIS) German Arbitration Institute and Sąd Arbitrażowy przy Konfederacji Lewiatan/Lewiatan Court of Arbitration would like to invite you to participate in discussion on “Supplementary rules for third-party notices in arbitration – German remedy needed/fit for Polish arbitration too?” Deutsche Institution für Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit e.V. (DIS) German Arbitration Institute introduced on 15 March 2024 its supplementary rules for third-party notices (DIS-TPNR) to fill a gap in arbitration proceedings to allow to involve third parties to bind them in future proceedings to fact findings in an arbitration award. For example, a general contractor can use a third-party notice to avoid losing out to its employer in a legal dispute but not being able to take recourse against its subcontractor because the same issues are decided differently in the recourse proceedings. The need for such rules is therefore significant. The DIS-TPNR follow the third-party notice model known from the German Code of Civil Procedure (Sections 72 et seqq.) preventing contradictory decisions and promoting both procedural economy and legal consistency. In that sense in its core is a minimally invasive approach by limiting the third party's role to supporting the party issuing the third-party notice as an intervener. Together with our panelists we will explore how this solution tailored to the German procedural setting as a response to the arbitration users’ needs and expectations might answer some of the Polish procedural issues, if any.   Moderation: Aleksandra Orzeł-Jakubowska (White & Case LLP) Warsaw, Poland   Panelists: Christian Borris (Borris Hennecke Kneisel) Cologne, Germany Michał Kocur (Kocur & Partners) Warsaw, Poland Katarzyna Michałowska (Sołtysiński Kawecki & Szlęzak) Warsaw, Poland Christina Cathey Schuetz (Clifford Chance) London, UK 🏫Place: Sąd Arbitrażowy przy Krajowej Izbie Gospodarczej w Warszawie/Court of Arbitration at the PCC, ul. Trębacka 4; 00-074 Warszawa The panel discussion will take place in English with no simultaneous translation. 📧RSVP: [email protected]. Space at the event is limited, so early registration is recommended.

10

The Supreme Court's ruling in UniCredit Bank GmbH v RusChemAlliance LLC marks an important moment in the enforcement of arbitration agreements. The ruling reinforces England's position as a pro-arbitration jurisdiction and providing essential guidance on the interpretation of arbitration agreements.  #Arbitration  #ArbitrationAgreements  #EnglishLaw  #AntiSuitInjunctions  #ForeignSeat #ConstructionDisputes  #ConstructionAgreement  #Disputes  #Litigation  #London  #Law  #SupremeCourt  #Ruling  #BarnesLaw

9

Szymon Sieniewicz, LL.M. Eur., CIPP/E and Małgorzata Czubernat of Linklaters Warsaw were the authors of the CEE Legal Matters Comparative Legal Guide: Data Protection 2024's country chapter for Poland. The CEE Legal Matters Comparative Legal Guide: Data Protection 2024 looks at key aspects of data protection laws across different jurisdictions, focusing on the main regulations, entities, and sectors covered. It discusses the territorial application, regulatory authorities, and data breach protocols. The guide also explores penalties for non-compliance, enforcement trends, the influence of emerging technologies, and expected legal changes. The country chapter for Poland is available here: https://lnkd.in/dgpeRVCJ #CEELegalMatters #ComparativeGuide #DataProtection #Poland

24

Plaintiff's claim dismissed (plaintiff=Tanita's rights invalidated). ｜YKUBOZON https://lnkd.in/dEq9FxhE https://lnkd.in/dsgs3p4R https://lnkd.in/du2vvQVC This is the second new case in which the Intellectual Property High Court has determined that it is a violation of the amendment requirements and that the rights are invalid. It appears that the plaintiff, Tanita Co., Ltd., which is the patentee, did not verify the "validity" of its patent No. 3,830,255 (body fat scale). ``Validity'' refers to conducting an ``invalidity document search'' regarding your company's patents, so that even if an ``invalidation trial'' is filed by a third party such as an interested party, your company's patents will remain valid. Be sure that it is rock solid. Despite this, Tanita Co., Ltd. believed that the patent granted by the Japan Patent Office was valid and filed suit against Owa Medical Co., Ltd., accusing it of infringing the patent. First, the Tokyo District Court ruled that ``The patent in question falls under Article 123, Paragraph 1, Item 1 of the Act and should be invalidated, and the plaintiff must exercise the same right pursuant to Article 104, Paragraph 3 of the Act.'' I can't do that.'' The Tokyo District Court gave the following reason: ``The plaintiff's claim is dismissed because the patent is invalid due to the violation of the amendment restriction, and because the constituent requirements for the admittedly imported item are not satisfied, there is no basis, so the plaintiff's claim is dismissed. I make a judgment accordingly.'' Here, Article 123, Paragraph 1, Item 1 of the Patent Act is the addition of new matter (if an amendment is made to add new matter), which is a "violation of the requirements for amendment." The Intellectual Property High Court stated, ``We cannot accept that Products 1 to 8 infringe the patent rights, the appellant's claims in this lawsuit are all groundless, and the original judgment is appropriate. , the court ruled that there is no basis for this appeal. Therefore, we believe that originally, the Japan Patent Office should not have granted a patent to Tanita Co., Ltd.'s application. On the other hand, in the examination process at the Japan Patent Office, only "Document A" was obtained using the childish and sloppy search formula created by the searcher (Shigeru Sato) of the IPCC. Using the cited documents obtained as a result, the examiner (Akio Yasuda 3704) issued a ``Notice of Reasons for Refusal'', but the applicant avoided this by submitting a ``Written Amendment'' and eventually won the registration. Even though it was registered, the above result was reached in court. 

1

Sarah Schoenmaekers’s Op-Ed discusses the recent judgment of the European Court of Justice in Adusbef (C-683/22), which examined the legality of modifications made to a motorway concession following the Morandi Bridge collapse in Genoa. The case focused on whether such modifications, made without a new award procedure, were in line with the EU’s Concessions Directive (2014/23/EU).´ Read more at EU Law Live.

34

1 komentarz

The England & Wales High Court has provided useful guidance on challenges under s67 and s68 of the Arbitration Act 1996. The judgment offers helpful insights for those involved in international commercial arbitration, bilateral investment treaty disputes and investor-state claims. #arbitration #bilateralinvestmenttreaty #BIT #investorstate #internationalcommercialarbitration

9

The new Chambers and Partners Environmental Law 2024 Global Practice Guide offers a comprehensive overview of the current environmental law landscape, covering 20 jurisdictions. Schoenherr experts Christoph Cudlik, Christoph Jirak, Christian Holzer and Julia Kandler contributed the Austrian chapter of the guide, addressing numerous crucial topics ranging from environmental policies and laws to issues of insurance and liability, as well as environmental disclosure and due diligence. To read the full chapter, visit https://lnkd.in/d4QYaWFP #environmentallaw #umweltrecht

62

1 komentarz

❗ 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐑𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐠𝐧𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐮𝐥𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐡𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐑𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐀𝐫𝐛𝐢𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐀𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐋𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧❗ On 13 September 2024, the Constitutional Court issued a normative resolution on consideration of Article 52.3 of the Arbitration Law of Kazakhstan dated 8 April 2016 as to be in line with the Constitution, according to which the court 𝐦𝐚𝐲 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐫𝐞-𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐫𝐛𝐢𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐝 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐬 when considering an application for revocation of the arbitral award, rejection to issue an enforcement order. After losing the arbitration proceedings, the application initiator filed a claim to court for revocation of the arbitral award, including for re-consideration of the issues on the merits of the dispute. The court dismissed this claim, referring to the above legislative restriction. The applicant decided that this restricts her constitutional right to judicial protection and violates the principle of equality before law and court and applied to the Constitutional Court. Please see below the key findings: ◾ Interpretation and Conclusions of the Constitutional Court ◾ Proposal of the Constitutional Court on Legislation Improvement   For more information, please see the attached file.

11

If you are attending one of the international legal conferences next week in Warsaw (EU-Eastern Partnership Legal Forum or Dispute Resolution in M&A Transactions) and would like to catch up over a cup of coffee ☕️, please DM or email me. Karol Macias and I are attending the bi-annual Dispute Resolution in M&A Transactions Conference on 23 and 24 May and we hope to meet some old friends as well as make some new ones. 🤝 #arbitration #internationalarbitration #disputeresolution #litigation #warsaw

14

4 komentarze

Arbitration proceedings are often part of a more complex economic context. In particular, the arbitration proceedings may result in potential recourse claims against third parties. To address such a scenario, Deutsche Institution für Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit e.V. (DIS) German Arbitration Institute launched new supplementary rules for third-party notices in arbitrations it administers. They essentially mirror the idea of third-party interventions which we all know from the state court proceedings in Germany and Poland. How do the supplementary rules work in practice? Does arbitration need more options for third parties? Are more complex procedural rules good for arbitration? These and other questions will be discussed by Christian Borris, Michal Kocur, Katarzyna Michałowska and Christina Cathey Schuetz during the debate organized by DIS, Court of Arbitration at the PCC and Sąd Arbitrażowy przy Konfederacji Lewiatan/Lewiatan Court of Arbitration. Happy to be involved in such an interesting event! Join us on Wednesday, 22 May in Warsaw! #arbitration #thridparties #complexdisputes #DIS #SAKIG #Lewiatan

23

Revision of ECtHR judgments is a rare practice. In this latest blog post of Strasbourg Observers, Marie-Hélène Ludwig and I reflect on the developments in the case of Y.T. v Bulgaria. We analyse the path to the original ruling and the recent revised judgment, by placing the case in the context of hardships faced by the #trans community in #Bulgaria.  We also address the need for an updated terminology in the Court’s future decisions in trans rights cases, particularly in French, which is essential for adequate implementation of human rights. If you are looking for end of year reading suggestions, have a look: https://lnkd.in/ehYifyQk. Happy holidays!

42

An important opinion of the Venice Commission in the case of Poland on the draft law amending the law on the National Council of the Judiciary. This is a crucial step for the restoration of the rule of law in Poland, especially as the NCJ in its current politicised form and composition has been identified by the ECtHR as the core of the crisis of judicial independence. Without its dissolution, there is no chance of restoring an independent judiciary that enjoys the confidence of society. According to the Venice Commission, the draft law on the election of NCJ judges is in line with European standards, ensuring direct election by judges with quotas for diverse representation. However, the Venice Commission and the DGI urge reconsideration of the blanket exclusion of between 2,000 and 3,000 judges (out of approximately 10,000) appointed with the participation of the current NCJ from being candidates for the NCJ to be elected, as this lacks individual assessment and thus raises questions of proportionality. Early termination of the functions of current NCJ members is considered justified to safeguard the independence of the judiciary, with provision for remedies to prevent violations of the ECHR. The whole opinion can be found here: https://lnkd.in/da5PKaz4 #venicecommission #ruleoflaw #judicial #independence #judiciary #proportionality

55

Arbitration in Poland: Arbitration in Poland has developed considerably over the years. Currently, the key place of arbitration is Warsaw, which hosts the most reputable arbitration institutions, including the Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Commerce. The majority of cases concern commercial disputes, including post-M&A, construction, and lease-related disputes.[1] Arbitration in Poland is governed by Part […] Aceris Law - International Arbitration Law Firm #arbitration

9

In legal reasoning, ratio decidendi and obiter dictum are both elements found in judicial opinions, but they differ in purpose and influence on future cases. Let’s learn about the concept of ratio decidendi today! 🎓 Audio Law Reader: Your Ultimate Study Companion for Law 🎓 Download from Play Store: https://lnkd.in/eBqZjcgW Or visit us at: audiolawreader.com #law #lawstudent #lawschool #lawstudies #legal #legaleducation #lawyer #attorney #constitution #constitutionallaw #politicallaw #legalrights #billofrights #legislative #congress #senate #executive #president #governmentagencies #judicial #justice #judge #supremecourt #caselaw #lawsuit #RatioDecidendi #LegalPrinciple #CourtRuling #JudicialReasoning #LegalDoctrine #StareDecisis

4

Is the case law consistent and are the draft guidelines consistent with the case law, including Intel 2? Join us for an in-depth EU Competition Law Briefing webinar where our competition law experts will address where are we now in the wake of: ➡️ Recent Court case law including the second CJEU Intel judgment on 24th October 2024; and ➡️ The European Commission’s draft Art 102 Guidelines Register to attend: https://lnkd.in/ej3UNq2k Moderator: Kai Neuhaus Speakers: Brian Sher, Dr. Michael Bauer #CMSlaw #competitionlaw #EU #caselaw #EUcompetitionlaw #CJEU

32

⚖️We Have the First Judgment of the Year! Looks like the Commission got a privacy check, but it’s not a Meta payment! 💸 On January 8, 2025, CJEU published its judgment in Case T-354/22 Bindl v Commission, which orders the Commission to pay the individual €400 for unlawful transfer of personal data, including IP addresses. Obviously, the amount of money is "nothing", however, I found the story behind it interesting, even though it feels like everyone wants a piece of the "Schrems" spotlight. The main point is the transfer of IP address to the US. The individual's data was transferred to a server in Germany and to Meta Platforms during registration for a Conference on the Future of Europe event via a 'Sign in with Facebook' link (" the Commission created the conditions for the transmission of his IP address to Facebook"). 🔔Personally, I see this case as a reminder that an IP address is (obviously) personal data, and even if it doesn’t directly identify someone, it must be treated with the same caution. Because when it comes to Authorities, they can create some unnecessary headache. Important to clarify that at the time of that transfer, on 30 March 2022, there was no Commission decision finding that the United States ensured an adequate level of protection for the personal data of EU citizens.

31

The proposed EU SEPs Regulation unduly blocks access to courts – no, it does not.   Yes, it contains a 9 month conciliation procedure.   But, that is not the terribly long, yet-more-scope-for-evil-hold-out-antics beast opponents of the EU SEPs Regulation make it out to be. In an article just published in European Intellectual Property Review (EIPR), my good colleague Konstantina Sideri and I set out to systematically run the proposal against the proportionality case law rendered by the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU). The CJEU has consistently held that the right to access to courts is not absolute and has given very clear guidance what aspects of proportionality come to bear in this regard; the proposal comes out fully in line with the CJEU’s guidance.   For those not convinced, consider this, too: the proposal does contain that 9 month conciliation procedure, to be commenced prior to legal action, but it says no-where that commencing legal action needs to wait for 9 months or the conclusion of the conciliation procedure. Just give it 24 hrs after commencing the conciliation procedure, and, should you so feel inclined, schlepp that thwarted legal action to court. You will not see your access to court denied, at least not as a result of the EU SEPs Regulation.   The EU SEPs Regulation needs further fine-tuning, sure, and one can expect the EU Council to do so under the Hungarian and possibly Polish presidencies. But no need to hit the barricades over the 9 month conciliation procedure.     #antitrust #kartellrecht #competitionlaw #seps #standards #intellectualproperty

3

1 komentarz

【#仲裁知識小教室 第十八課：仲裁裁決可以在法院上訴嗎‍️👩🏻‍⚖️‍⚖️‍️‍️？】 仲裁裁決通常是終局的，法院一般不能覆核實體問題。📜根據《仲裁條例》(第 609 章)，仲裁各方一般無權就法律問題提出上訴。如當事人希望法院能以更大程度介入仲裁案件，雙方可在仲裁協議中訂明允許就法律問題對仲裁裁決提出上訴。《仲裁條例》附表2載有選擇行使此等權利的條文📜。 就有關法律問題的上訴👩🏻‍⚖️‍⚖️‍️‍️，法庭一般只會在有關問題的裁定會實質影響一方或多方的權利及該問題有廣泛重要性，而仲裁庭的決定最起碼令人有重大疑問時才會批予上訴許可。 [#ArbitrationLearningCorner - Lesson 18: Can an arbitral award be appealed in Courts👩🏻‍⚖️‍⚖️‍️‍️?] Arbitral awards are generally final and not subject to reviews on their merits. 📜Under the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 609), the default position is that the parties do not have the right to appeal on a question of law. However, if parties would like to have greater court intervention, they may expressly state in the arbitration agreement to provide for appeals to the Court on a question of law. The opt-in provisions are contained in Schedule 2 to the Arbitration Ordinance.📜 In an appeal on a question of law,👩🏻‍⚖️‍⚖️ the Courts would generally only grant leave to appeal if the decision of the question will substantially affect the rights of one or more of the parties, and the question is one of general importance and the decision of the arbitral tribunal is at least open to serious doubt. #律政司 #仲裁 #替代爭議解決方式 #裁決 #上訴 #DoJ #Arbitration #AlternativeDisputeResolution #Award #Appeal

1