In our second installment of the Small Business Starter Kit series - we’re tackling a topic that’s sometimes tricky, sometimes confusing, but ever-present: taxes. Hosts Austin and Jannese have an insightful conversation with entrepreneur Isabella Rosal who started 7th Sky Ventures , an exporter and distributor of craft spirits, beer, and wine. Having lived and worked in two different countries and started a company in a heavily-regulated field, Isabella is no stranger to navigating the paperwork-laden and jargon-infused maze of properly understanding taxes for a newly formed small business. Join us as she shares her story and provides valuable insight into how to tackle your business’ taxes - so they don’t tackle you. Learn more about how QuickBooks can help you grow your business: QuickBooks.com See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
The Lauterpacht Centre for International Law (LCIL) and the Centre for European Legal Studies (CELS) held an online Rapid Response Seminar on the War in Ukraine on 7 March 2022. On the 24 February 2022 Russian troops launched a fully-fledged invasion of Ukraine after force had been used between the two countries in February 2014 with the annexing of Crimea by Russia. The UN General Assembly in its emergency session decided on 2 March 2022 that it: ‘[d]eplores in the strongest terms the aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine in violation of Article 2 (4) of the Charter; demands that the Russian Federation immediately cease its use of force against Ukraine and to refrain from any further unlawful threat or use of force against any Member State; also demands that the Russian Federation immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all of its military forces from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders and [d]eplores the 21 February 2022 decision by the Russian Federation related to the status of certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine as a violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine and inconsistent with the principles of the Charter.’ In this Webinar we aimed to analyse the international and EU law aspects of the war in Ukraine. Experts on international and EU law, discussed different aspects of the use of force by Russia, and the European Union’s reaction. It will brought different legal perspectives together and provided expert opinions on this new and troubling development in international law in Europe. Speakers: - Professor Marc Weller: Use of Force – UN Charter – Security Council, also Peace Treaty and International Humanitarian Law - Dr Dan Saxon: International Criminal Law – Crime of Aggression – International Criminal Court jurisdiction - Francisco-José Quintana: Human Rights in War - Professor Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger: Protection of Livelihoods and the Environment during War in Ukraine - Dr Emilija Leinarte: European Union Relations with Ukraine – EU-Ukraine Association Agreement - Dr Markus Gehring: EU Common Foreign and Security Policy, external dimension of migration and prospect for Ukraine’s EU membership For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/ and https://www.lcil.cam.ac.uk/
The Lauterpacht Centre for International Law (LCIL) and the Centre for European Legal Studies (CELS) held an online Rapid Response Seminar on the War in Ukraine on 7 March 2022. On the 24 February 2022 Russian troops launched a fully-fledged invasion of Ukraine after force had been used between the two countries in February 2014 with the annexing of Crimea by Russia. The UN General Assembly in its emergency session decided on 2 March 2022 that it: ‘[d]eplores in the strongest terms the aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine in violation of Article 2 (4) of the Charter; demands that the Russian Federation immediately cease its use of force against Ukraine and to refrain from any further unlawful threat or use of force against any Member State; also demands that the Russian Federation immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all of its military forces from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders and [d]eplores the 21 February 2022 decision by the Russian Federation related to the status of certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine as a violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine and inconsistent with the principles of the Charter.’ In this Webinar we aimed to analyse the international and EU law aspects of the war in Ukraine. Experts on international and EU law, discussed different aspects of the use of force by Russia, and the European Union’s reaction. It will brought different legal perspectives together and provided expert opinions on this new and troubling development in international law in Europe. Speakers: - Professor Marc Weller: Use of Force – UN Charter – Security Council, also Peace Treaty and International Humanitarian Law - Dr Dan Saxon: International Criminal Law – Crime of Aggression – International Criminal Court jurisdiction - Francisco-José Quintana: Human Rights in War - Professor Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger: Protection of Livelihoods and the Environment during War in Ukraine - Dr Emilija Leinarte: European Union Relations with Ukraine – EU-Ukraine Association Agreement - Dr Markus Gehring: EU Common Foreign and Security Policy, external dimension of migration and prospect for Ukraine’s EU membership For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/ and https://www.lcil.cam.ac.uk/
Speaker: Dr Bernadette Zelger, University of Innsbruck Abstract: The debate about the future of the European Union has long left academic circles, arrived in the midst of society and been awarded political attention. Meanwhile, there has been an increase of Euroscepticism accompanied by more nationalist political developments echoed in the swings to the right all across the EU. These developments may, arguably at least in parts, be explained by social resentments of the peoples of Europe. While acknowledging that law constructs and contributes to a social reality of its own it is thus, arguably also about the lack of a genuine socio-economic equilibrium within the law and political system of the EU. This imbalance is not only found within the EU legal constitutional framework, but also within the case-law of the European Court of Justice. However, possible solutions to solve this socio-economic imbalance are limited: It is either (i) Treaty reform or, alternatively, (ii) a change in the approach of the Court in its jurisprudence. While these alternatives are both valid and, to some extent, mutually exclusive, they unveil and epitomise different visions as regards the future of the European Union. However, while acknowledging the differences in the approach, they are arguably different means to serve the very same end: Warrant the European Union’s future success. For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series…
Speaker: Professor Orla Lynskey, University College London Abstract: The EU ‘digital empire’ seeks to align technological development to its rights and values by adopting and promoting a rights-driven model of technological regulation. Bradford’s influential characterisation of EU digital strategy is credible when one maps the array of legal ‘Acts’ applicable to data, digital markets, digital services and AI adopted by the EU in recent years, all of which are without prejudice to the EU data protection law. Yet, when one delves deeper, the EU’s commitment to rights-based regulation of the digital sphere is not iron-clad. Rather, as we demonstrate through an empirical analysis of the European Commission’s adequacy decisions over a quarter of a century (1999-2024), there are clear divergences amongst EU institutions about the balance to be struck between fundamental rights and economic interests. Such divergence suggest the EU might more accurately be characterised as an amalgamation of fiefdoms rather than an empire. This inter-institutional dynamic is relevant to the legitimacy of EU actions in the digital sphere and may foreshadow the future direction of EU data law. For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series…
Speaker: Dr Andriani Kalintiri, King’s College London Abstract: Is EU antitrust law resilient in the face of change? This question has acquired prominence amidst the many crises and disruptions of recent times, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change and digitalisation. Attempts to answer it though have been rather narrow in scope and tend to employ the language of resilience casually. This article contributes to knowledge (a) by developing a conceptual framework for understanding and assessing legal resilience in administrative enforcement systems and (b) by applying it to Articles 101 and 102 TFEU with a view to investigating its ability to respond to change in a systematic manner. The analysis reveals that the current regime exhibits several design features that enable decisionmakers to make resilience choices as needed, and the resilience choices that have been made on various occasions are prima facie justifiable given the nature of the problem the European Commission and/or the EU Courts were faced with. However, certain aspects of the existing legal framework may weaken or limit EU antitrust law’s ability to deal with certain problems, in particular (very) complex ones, whereas some of the resilience choices that have been made have had implications for legal certainty, coherence and legitimacy that may not have been sufficiently appreciated so far. The article highlights the added value of a legal resilience perspective for effectively using EU antitrust law as a tool for tackling problems in an ever-changing world and demonstrates that, albeit not a panacea, such a perspective may reinforce the quality of enforcement and public’s trust in it. 3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners: https://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/centre-activities For more information about CELS see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series…
Speaker: Professor Barend van Leeuwen, Durham University Abstract: What do we mean when we talk about the "horizontal direct effect" of the free movement provisions? You would think that, after decades of case law on the free movement provisions, the meaning of this concept should be relatively clear and crystallised. However, there is still a significant amount of disagreement about the very meaning of the concept of "horizontal direct effect". While some EU lawyers speak of horizontal direct effect when the free movement provisions are applied in a dispute between private parties (a procedural approach), other EU lawyers will only refer to horizontal direct effect when the rule or conduct that is being challenged is of a private nature (a substantive approach). This paper will analyse these different interpretations of the concept of horizontal direct effect through the lens of the "Familiapress dilemma". It will be argued that a distinction should be made between horizontal direct effect cases (in which private rules or actions are challenged in a dispute between private parties) and horizontal enforcement cases (in which State rules or actions are challenged in a dispute between private parties). The problem with a procedural approach to horizontal direct effect is that no connection is made between direct effect and the question of who is held responsible (and liable) for breaches of the free movement provisions. This makes it more difficult to provide effective judicial protection to victims of breaches of free movement law, because it is unclear who should ultimately "pay the bill". Against this background, it will be argued that the CJEU should develop more explicit techniques or "formulas" to allocate responsibility in free movement cases. In parallel, the CJEU should improve the effectiveness of the remedies of State liability and private liability for breaches of the free movement provisions. For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series…
Speakers: Professor Eleanor Sharpston KC, Advocate General, CJEU (2006-2020) and Goodhart Professor, University of Cambridge (2023/2024) and Dr Markus W. Gehring, Associate Professor, Faculty of Law and Member of CELS. Abstract: On 18 September 2023 the Group of 12 Experts from both France and Germany released their proposal ‘Sailing on High Seas: Reforming and Enlarging the EU for the 21st Century’. The Group make two proposals on the Rule of Law and five further proposals for institutional reform. Overall, the Group had three objectives to increase the EU’s capacity to act, to get the institutions ready for enlargement and strengthen democratic legitimacy and rule of law. This resulted in a series of proposals for inter alia treaty change. The proposals are all on a continuum but largely aim for reform rather than a recreation of the European Union. They align with other reform proposals and at times take up proposals that were made for EU reform in the past or indeed discussed during the EU Constitutional convention process in the early 2000s. The objective here was clearly reformation rather than revolution. This conversation discusses some of the individual reform proposals in the context of the practice of the Court of Justice – could these proposal mean the beginning of 'Europe’s Second Constitution'? For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series…
Speaker: Professor Eleanor Sharpston KC, Advocate General, CJEU (2006-2020) and Goodhart Professor, University of Cambridge (2023/2024) Abstract: As an AG Professor Sharpston worked on religious discrimination and employment matters, delivering an opinion in one of the first two hijab cases (Bougnaoui) and then the ‘shadow opinion’ in Wabe and Müller, which she posted via Professor Steve Peers’ EU law blog after leaving the Court. She has already compared Achbita and Bougnaoui to the decisions in Egenberger and the Caritas hospital case (IR v JQ) in her festschrift contribution for Allan Rosas. Unsurprisingly, she has been keeping an eye open for further developments in that case law (WABE and Müller, S.C.R.L (Religious clothing) and, most recently, Commune d’Ans (Grand Chamber, 28 November 2023). Additionally, she has also been looking at what the Court has been saying in relation to ritual slaughter of animals (as required for meat-eating observant Jews and Muslims). Notable cases include Liga van Moskeeën, Oeuvre d’assistance aux bêtes d’abattoirs (OABA) and Centraal Israëlitisch Constistorie. The case law of the European Court of Human Rights also addresses these issues: Eweida v UK on religious symbols in the workplace, and the very recent decision (13 February 2024) in Executief van de Moslims van België and Others v Belgium on banning ritual slaughter of animals without prior stunning. The cases are constitutionally important in terms of the deference shown to Member States; and in some respects, they are troubling for anyone who is religious and non-Christian. Discussion chaired by Dr Markus W. Gehring, Associate Professor, Faculty of Law and Member of CELS. For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series…
Speaker: José Barroso, former President of the European Commission Biography: José Manuel Durão Barroso served twelve years in the Government of Portugal including as Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Minister. He was President of the European Commission during two mandates (2004/2014). His academic appointments include visiting professor at Georgetown University and visiting professor at Princeton University. He is currently a visiting professor at the Catholic University of Portugal and at the European University Institute, School of Transnational Governance, Florence. José Manuel Barroso studied Law (University of Lisbon) Political Science and International Affairs (University of Geneva). He is currently Chair of the Board of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and Chairman of International Advisors, Goldman Sachs. For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series…
Speaker: Eleanor Sharpston KC, Advocate General, CJEU (2006-2020) and Goodhart Professor, University of Cambridge (2023/2024) Abstract: The CJEU is a court that speaks through a single judgment, and that ‘dialogues’ with its Advocates General without ever saying quite what that dialogue means. What is the reader to make of the interplay between the individual opinion of the advocate general and the collective decision of the judges? The final seminar in the series asks some questions, suggests some partial answers, and invites reflection on whether the current arrangements should ‘evolve’ (and, if so, in what direction). For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series…
Speakers: João Vale de Almeida, Former Ambassador of the European Union to the United Kingdom (2020-2022) and Eleanor Sharpston KC, Advocate General, CJEU (2006-2020) and Goodhart Professor, University of Cambridge (2023/2024) Abstract: The UK and EU relationship has not been straight forward since Brexit but since Rishi Sunak became Prime Minister a certain amount of pragmatism has prevailed. Meanwhile, the European Union is facing significant geo-political challenges – not least the war in Ukraine and the Israel-Palestine conflict. Does it have capacity to think about these broader issues? The Ukraine conflict has led to much deeper thinking about enlargement of the EU, not just for Ukraine but also the Baltic states. The question of Europe of concentric circles has been raised again. What might a Europe of concentric circles mean for the accession and neighbourhood countries? What else can be done to improver relations with our closest trading partner? For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series…
Speaker: Eleanor Sharpston KC, Advocate General, CJEU (2006-2020) and Goodhart Professor, University of Cambridge (2023/2024) Abstract: A common complaint of common lawyers is that the way in which CJEU judgments are written is abstract and obscure. The criticism is levelled most notably at judgments that reply to requests for a preliminary ruling from national courts. Once you understand about language and the Court, there are a lot of hidden clues, if you only know where to look for them. This second seminar is designed to help you squeeze the maximum information out of the text, and alert you to what those formulae you’re reading really mean. For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series…
Speaker: Eleanor Sharpston KC, Advocate General, CJEU (2006-2020) and Goodhart Professor, University of Cambridge (2023/2024) Abstract: The CJEU is unique in having 24 equally valid languages of procedure, plus an informal and unofficial working language (French) which is not necessarily spoken by as great a percentage of staff members in 2023 as it was when the Court was first set up by the original six founding Member States. What does running a 24-language court mean in theory and in practice? How does the diversity of language – and indeed of legal tradition (in the sense of how legal argument is presented) – impact upon the way the CJEU functions, how it handles its caseload, and how it writes its judgments? For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series…
On 12 May 2023 the Cambridge University Centre for European Legal Studies and (CELS) and the Ukrainian Catholic University School of Law held a webinar on the topic 'The Impact on Russia’s War against Ukraine and the EU Legal Order'. Dr Luigi Lonardo (University College Cork) will discussed his book ‘Russia’s 2022 War Against Ukraine and the Foreign Policy Reaction of the EU: Context, Diplomacy, and Law’ which focuses on the pre-war EU-Ukraine relations and the effects of Russia’s 2022 war against Ukraine on the EU, and the EU’s reaction to the war. There were five speakers at the event: Speaker: Dr Luigi Lonardo (University College Cork) Chair: Dr Markus Gehring (University of Cambridge) Introduction: Nataliya Haletska Respondent: Professor Taras Leshkovych (Ukrainian Catholic University Law School) Respondent: Dr Maxim Kolyba (Ukrainian Catholic University Law School) This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.…
Speaker: Professor Wolfgang Wurmnest Biography: Wolfgang Wurmnest is a full professor of law at the University of Hamburg since 2021. Previously he served as a full professor at the Universities of Augsburg (2013–2021) and Hanover (2009–2013), and as a Senior Research Fellow at the Max Planck Institute of Private International and Comparative Law, Hamburg (2004–2008). He was a visiting scholar in Foggia, Lyon, Hanoi and (from September 2022 onwards) Cambridge. His main fields of research are comparative and international tort and competition law. 3CL runs the 3CL Travers Smith Lunchtime Seminar Series, featuring leading academics from the Faculty, and high-profile practitioners. The Cambridge Private Law Centre acknowledges with gratitude the generous financial support of Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP and of South Square: https://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/centre-activities For more information about CELS see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.…
The Centre for European Legal Studies (CELS), Centre for Public Law (CPL) and the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law (LCIL) warmly invite you to an online Rapid Response Seminar on the UK Internal Market Bill. The United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 2019-21 was introduced on 9 September 2020 and contained what observers have called constitutional dynamite and the newspapers described as ‘Britannia waives the rules.’ Ministers have alternatively called it ‘his does break international law in a specific and limited way’ or justified it as a reaction to a material breach by the EU to the Withdrawal Agreement and the Northern Ireland/Ireland Protocol. A detailed provision authorising Ministers (possibly with consent of Parliament) to breach international law and preventing access to the courts is unprecedented. The three Research Centres of the Faculty of Law have joined forces to analyse three aspects of the UK Internal Market Bill in a rapid response seminar. Experts on EU law, international law and public law will jointly discuss different aspects of the introduction, passage and potential consequences of the Bill. While the content of the Bill and the rules governing the internal market are equally controversial, these will be discussed in detail in November during an academic CELS seminar. The rapid response given by members of the three research centres is designed to bring different legal perspectives together and provide expert opinions on this new legislation from diverse points of view. It will allow enough time for an online Q&A, so please submit your questions through the chat. Welcome – UK Internal Market Bill Rapid Response Seminar (5 min) Professor Mark Elliot (for the Faculty of Law) Professor Alison Young (for the Centre for Public Law) Professor Catherine Barnard (for CELS) Dr Lorand Bartels (for the LCIL) Panel 1 – The Withdrawal Agreement, the Northern Ireland Protocol and the Withdrawal Agreement Act (Special status of EU law, international law in UK domestic law, why are state aid and customs checks a problem for the UK internal market?) (25 min) Chair: Dr Gehring Dr Bartels– International law Professor Barnard – EU law Dr Steinfeld – Public law Panel 2 – The breach of an international treaty, the rule of law and sovereignty of Parliament (Is there a breach, does it matter, does the Ministerial Code prevent it, why are the devolved administrations concerned?) (25 min) Chair: Dr Hinarejos Dr Bartels – International law Dr Gehring – EU law Professor Young – Public law Panel 3 – Consequences of breaches in international law, reactions by the EU, ongoing trade negotiations and dispute settlement (Analysis of the statements by the Cabinet Office and the EU Commission and EU Parliament, US politicians?) (25 min) Chair: Professor Barnard Dr Bartels – International Law Professor Armstrong – EU Law Professor Young – Public law Questions and Answers (30 min) This entry provides an audio source.…
The Centre for European Legal Studies (CELS), and the Centre for Public Law (CPL) warmly invite you to an online Rapid Response Seminar on the proposed UK Northern Ireland Protocol Bill. The United Kingdom Foreign Secretary announced on 17 May that a Bill will be introduced in response to "the grave situation in Northern Ireland", there was a "necessity to act to ensure institutions can be restored as soon as possible". (BBC News) While there is still the preference for a negotiated solution the Government highlighted that if a resolution cannot be reached, the UK would take steps to "cement provisions" that are working in the protocol, while "fixing those elements that aren't". The EU expressed grave concern and signalled that countermeasures would be adopted if the UK went ahead with its plans. The two Research Centres of the Faculty of Law have joined forces to analyse two aspects of the proposed cause of action in a rapid response seminar. Experts on EU law and public law will jointly discuss different aspects of the proposal. It will allow enough time for an online Q&A, so please submit your questions through the chat. Speakers: - Professor Lorand Bartels – UK Border Concerns - Professor Catherine Barnard – Linkages of the Protocol with the TCA and similarities/differences in Dispute Settlement - Dr Stefan Theil – Reactions by the EU and in the Member States Broader Systemic Implications - Professor Alison Young – International Legal Advice in the Westminster Government - Dr Markus Gehring – Unilateral Actions in EU and International Law For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/ and https://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk/ This entry provides an audio source.…
Welcome to Player FM!
Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.