See you in court

首页> 外文期刊>The economist >See you in court

【24h】

See you in court

机译：在法庭上见

获取原文

获取原文并翻译 | 示例

掌桥外文数据库（机构版） >>

开具论文收录证明 >>

文献代查 >>

页面导航

摘要
著录项
相似文献
相关主题

摘要

Porsche, a profitable maker of sports cars in Stuttgart, and the European Commission, guardian of the Europe Union's internal market, are unlikely allies. But both have recently renewed efforts to strip Volkswagen (vw), Europe's biggest carmaker, of the protective barriers enshrined in a law in 1960. Last October the European Court ruled that the vw law had to go. The German government, the Land of Lower Saxony and vw itself are fighting a rearguard action to keep one bit of it intact: Lower Saxony's right to veto board decisions, even though it has only 20.3% of the voting rights (the usual blocking minority is 25% under German law).rnAn amended vw law, passed by the German cabinet last month, retains the veto, which would protect the company against unpopular measures such as closing factories in Germany. That prompted the European Commission to open infringement proceedings on June 5th. Germany has two months to respond. Rather lamely, it has added a protocol to the amended law making further changes negotiable-a better prospect, perhaps, than facing fines of up to E∪D100,000 ($155,000) a day. Porsche is happy to see pressure applied to vw and the government. It has a 31% stake in vw, which it says it will raise to over 50% by the end of the year. Its plan is to bring vw under the wing of its holding company.

机译：保时捷是斯图加特一家可盈利的跑车制造商，而欧盟委员会是欧盟内部市场的守护者，不太可能成为盟友。但是，两家公司最近都在重新努力，以剥夺欧洲最大的汽车制造商大众汽车公司1960年一部法律所规定的保护性屏障。去年10月，欧洲法院裁定必须废止大众汽车公司的法律。德国政府，下萨克森州和大众本身在与后卫行动进行斗争，以保持其中的一部分不变：下萨克森州拥有否决董事会决定权，尽管它只有20.3％的投票权（通常是少数派根据德国法律25％。）rn上个月德国内阁通过的经修改的大众法保留了否决权，这将保护公司免受不受欢迎的措施（例如关闭德国工厂）的侵害。这促使欧盟委员会于6月5日启动侵权诉讼。德国有两个月的时间来回应。颇为me脚的是，它在修订后的法律中增加了一项协议，可以进行进一步的变更，可以商讨-也许比每天面临高达100,000迪拉姆（155,000美元）的罚款更好的前景。保时捷很高兴看到大众和政府受到压力。它拥有大众31％的股份，并表示到年底将提高到50％以上。它的计划是将大众汽车纳入其控股公司的旗下。

著录项

来源
《The economist》 |2008年第8584期|86|共1页
作者

展开▼
作者单位

展开▼
收录信息
原文格式 PDF
正文语种 eng
中图分类
关键词

相似文献

外文文献
中文文献
专利

1. Illumina, Inc. v. TDL Genetics Ltd.High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts of England and Wales Patents Court, 2017No. HP-2016-000001, [2017] EWHC 2930 (PAT) [J] . Biotechnology Law Report . 2018,第1期

机译：Illumina，Inc.V.TDL Genetics Ltd.
英国的高等法院，英格兰和威尔士专利法院的商务和物业法院，2017年
。 HP-2016-000001，[2017] EWHC 2930（PAT）
2. Quo Vadis General Election Dispute Handling: Between the Constitutional Court, Supreme Court or Election Court [J] . La Ode Bariun Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization . 2016,第4期

机译：Qua Vadis大选争议处理：宪法法院，最高法院或选举法院之间
3. Court fees, criminal courts charges, court closures. [J] . The Barrister . 2016,第2016期

机译：法院费用，刑事法院费用，法院关闭。
4. The Effect of Organizational Culture and Information Technology on Employee Performance with Employee Satisfaction as a Mediator in The Electronic Court System (E-Court) in District Court of Sleman, Yogyakarta [C] . Muhammad Luthfi Hendrato, Arief Subyantoro, Wisnalmawati International Conference on Sustainable Innovation - Accounting and Management . 2021

机译：组织文化与信息技术对员工满意度作为员工院制（电子法院）在地区法院的员工绩效的影响，Yogyakarta
5. An Empirical Study of the Political Party Balance Requirement of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces and Its Predecessor-Court, the United States Court of Military Appeals, from 1951 to 2016 [D] . Anderson, David A. 2017

机译：1951年至2016年美国武装部队及其前身上诉法院对政党平衡要求的实证研究
6. Court as a health intervention to advance Canada’s achievement of the sustainable development goals : a multi-pronged analysis of Vancouver’s Downtown Community Court [O] . Regiane A. Garcia, Kristi Heather Kenyon, Claire E. Brolan, 2019

机译：法院作为健康干预措施以促进加拿大实现可持续发展目标：对温哥华市中心社区法院的多方面分析
7. The Function (or Malfunction) of Equity in the Charity Law of Canada’s Federal Courts: This essay explores what, if anything, it means for the Federal Court of Appeal to be a “court of equity” in the exercise of its jurisdiction over matters related to charitable registration under the Income Tax Act. The equitable jurisdiction over charities encompasses a number of curative principles, which the Court of Chancery traditionally invoked to save indefinite or otherwise defective charitable gifts. The author identifies some of these equitable principles and contemplates how their invocation might have altered the course of certain unsuccessful charitable registration appeals. She then considers the principal arguments for and against the Federal Court of Appeal applying these equitable principles when adjudicating matters related to registered charity status. [O] . 2016

机译：加拿大联邦法院《慈善法》中的平等职能（或失灵）：本文探讨了联邦上诉法院在行使对相关事宜的管辖权时成为“平等法院”的含义（如果有的话）根据《所得税法》进行慈善注册。对慈善组织的公平管辖权包括许多治疗原则，传统上，检举法院援引这些原则以保存无限期或其他有缺陷的慈善礼物。作者指出了其中一些公平原则，并考虑了其调用可能如何改变了某些不成功的慈善注册上诉的过程。然后，她在裁定与注册慈善身分有关的事项时，考虑支持和反对联邦上诉法院的主要论据，运用这些公平原则。

See you in court

摘要

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅