For the purposes of implementation of the Regulation of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 17 July 2015 No. 7191 on the criteria of assigning goods to industrial production having no Russian analogues, the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation (hereinafter – the “Ministry of Industry”) adopted an Order dated 12 November 2015 No. 35682 (hereinafter – the “Order”). The Order sets forth a procedure for confirming that industrial production was performed on the territory of the Russian Federation and specifies the rules for classification of industrial products having no Russian analogues. This regulation is generally directed at promoting localization in industry area and establishment of terms and limitations of admission of foreign goods on the market, including, in the course of state and municipal procurement.
Monthly Archives: December 2015
We are proud to announce that Clark Wilson lawyer Mr. Mark Weintraub was recently appointed as Queen’s Counsel (QC). The BC Lieutenant-Governor in Council, on the recommendation of the BC Attorney General, bestows this honorary title in recognition of Mr. Weintraub’s exceptional merit and contribution to the legal profession.
Clark Wilson Managing Partner James Speakman reiterates this prestigious recognition: “Mr. Weintraub is an outstanding lawyer and tireless advocate for his clients. His work translates into tangible and workable solutions. He is a strong leader and uses his professional platform to benefit both the legal industry and the greater community.”
Although we’re in the middle of December, this will be our final roundup post of the year, with the Christmas holiday falling on next Friday, and New Year’s Day the following Friday. There will be a couple of other posts to round out 2015, but for today, enjoy our final round up of this week’s top posts from ILNToday! We’re bringing you a top TEN this week, because we have a lot of substantive content from around the world to share with you:
- What is a marriage-like relationship? from Clark Wilson (Canada)
- Transfers of Personal Dada to the USA – Cancellation of European Commission Decision 2000/520/EC from PETERKA & PARTNERS (Czech Republic)
- Five Years Later: The SEC’s Proposed Rule for Clawbacks of Incentive-Based Compensation from Davis & Gilbert (US)
- 3 questions to consider before terminating a sales representative from McDonald Hopkins (US)
- The Court of Justice Ruling: US Safe Harbor Not Valid from Hellstrom (Sweden)
- KLA Alert – Direito Administrativo – Dezembro 2015 from KLA – Koury Lopes Advogados (Brazil)
- DÅRLIGT VEJR KAN UDSKYDE AFLEVERINGSTIDSPUNKTET from DAHL Law Firm (Denmark)
- FIVE TAX TRAPS FOR FOREIGN INVESTORS from Davis Malm & D’Agostine (US)
- ILN IP Insider: California Amends its Franchise Relations Act from Howard & Howard (US)
- Dollar Tree Resolves Multiple OSHA Citations in Burdensome Corporate-Wide Settlement Agreement: Is This a Sign of Things to Come? from Epstein Becker & Green (US)
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has in a ruling on 6 October 2015 – Maximillian Schrems versus the Data Protection Commissioner ¹, declared the decision by
the European Commission on the adequacy of US Safe Harbor ², to be invalid.
The case concerns a complaint from Maximillian Schrems, an Austrian citizen, to the Irish Data Protection Commissioner regarding Facebook’s transfer of personal data from the EU to the US. The personal data of Facebook users within the EU is collected by Facebook’s subsidiary in Ireland and then transferred to servers hosted by Facebook’s US entity. The transfer is conducted on the basis of Facebook US Safe Harbor certification. Mr Schrems argued that the US and the Safe Harbor regime did not offer an adequate level of protection for the personal data of EU citizens as the US authorities could get hold of the personal data for non-specific surveillance and monitoring operations – this in light of the revelations made in 2013 by Edward Snowden concerning the activities of the US intelligence services, in particular the NSA. The Irish authority rejected the complaint. The High Court of Ireland, before which the case was brought, asked the CJEU for a preliminary ruling.
Howard & Howard Attorneys PLLC is pleased to announce that Emily E. Bennett, Paul T. Engel, Sam A. Fares, Steven M. Van Beek and Daniel L. Villaire Jr. have all become shareholders in the firm.
Emily E. Bennett concentrates her practice in civil litigation with an emphasis on commercial, class action, patent infringement, and employment disputes. Prior to joining Howard & Howard, she worked as a judicial law clerk for the Honorable Morton Denlow, United States Magistrate Judge for the Northern District of Illinois (ret).
Omnibus on the floor today – what’s in it?
BREAKING NEWS: The House passed the omnibus spending bill by a vote of 316 to 113. 150 Republicans were joined by 166 Democrats in passing the bill.
Today, the omnibus spending bill went to the floor in the House. As of this morning, there remained some uncertainty as to whether the bill would pass. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-WI), like his predecessor John Boehner (R-OH), had to rely on the votes of Democrats to get the omnibus across the finish line thanks to the defection of conservative House Republicans.
The omnibus spending bill clocks in at 2,009 pages and contains $1.15 trillion in federal spending through September of next year.
In its recent decision in William Osler Health Centre v. Compass Construction et al., 2015 ONSC 3959, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice considered the scope of tort immunity arising from a covenant to insure in a CCDC 2 Contract (the “Contract”). Generally, tort immunity acts to prevent a party who covenants to insure another party from suing the other party for the losses which are insured. In this case, the Court considered whether the covenant to insure and related tort immunity extended only to the portion of the subject property that was under renovation or whether it extended to other parts of the subject property that were damaged in the course of construction.
Ministry of justice of the Russian Federation together with the Federal notarial chamber developed draft order “On approval of notary actions’ registration registers, notary certificates, verification inscriptions on transactions and certified documents” (hereinafter “Draft order”).
For the moment many of the notary inscriptions adopted by the current order No. 99 of the Ministry of justice of the Russian Federation dated 10 April 2002 have become irrelevant due to introduction of amendments into current legislation stipulating among other changes procedure for verifying decision of legal entities’ management bodies and order of entering into EGRUL information on facts of implementing activities by legal entities in view of the latest amendments to the Civil code of the Russian Federation1.