Sentences with phrase «directive in member states»

The commission said it will seek to speed up the development and uptake of alternative methods, and to better monitor compliance with the directive in member states.

«The commission said it will seek to speed up the development and uptake of alternative methods [to replace the use of animals in the lab], and to better monitor compliance with the directive in member states,» Rabesandratana wrote.

Not exact matches

The Treasury is working with other member states and the Commission to ensure a common risk - based approach to due - diligence in implementing the directive.

The fourth EU money laundering directive, about to be rubber - stamped after political agreement was reached in December, will call on banks to carry out due diligence on MPs, judges, peers, council chiefs, diplomats and anyone else «who are or have been entrusted by the member state with prominent public functions».

Rights at work in European law are often implemented through directives — member states are usually obliged to put them through as secondary legislation.

Urges all Member States to promptly and correctly transpose into their national legislation all existing EU and international legal instruments concerning organised crime, corruption and money laundering; urges Member States and the Commission to complete the Roadmap on the rights of suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings, including a directive on pre-trial detention;

Meanwhile, a former Governor of Ekiti State, Segun Oni; Senior Special Assistant to the President, Babafemi Ojudu; a former member of the House of Representatives, Opeyemi Bamidele, and 24 other aspirants in the primary have rejected the directive by the APC National Working Committee that the aborted primary election should continue from where it stopped.

A landmark in the history of battery egg farming was Council Directive 1999 / 74 / EC, under which all EU member states were obliged to phase out «battery» cages, and replace them entirely with larger «enriched» cages by 2012.

However, following reports that 13 Member States were unlikely to be compliant with the EU directive by 1 January 2012, meaning an estimated 50 million hens would still be housed in battery cages, Defra announced that many retailers and major food suppliers were putting in place «stringent traceability tests» to guarantee they will not supply eggs produced from illegal conventional cages or use them as ingredients in their own brand products.

Last year Italy took advantage of a recently passed European Union directive that allows EU Member States to restrict or prohibit the cultivation of GMOs in their territory.

Formal risk assessments are required in Europe since the 1989 Framework Directive for Health and Safety at Work, and are now implemented in all the member states.

All 27 E.U. member states were supposed to have «transposed» the directive in national legislation by 10 November 2012.

In August 2007, the journal Science published the results of a study * which concluded that the trans - national conservation measures required to be implemented by European Member States under the EU Birds Directive have made a significant contribution to reverse the population decline and provide protection for many of Europe's most threatened bird species.

Instead, ESSA has puffed up the role of state departments of education (whose staff is mainly appointed) and, to a lesser extent, the (mostly appointed) boards of education typically in charge of them, with members who tend to follow the directives they have been given if they want to keep their seats.

EU legislation allows Member States to apply reduced VAT rates to a limited list of goods and services set out in Annex III to the VAT Directive.

«The effects of such unfair competition are felt in Member States that apply the VAT Directive correctly.

This followed from a hard - fought derogation from the Directive by Tony Blair in 2006 which allowed member states without a domestic resale right on the entry into force of the Directive, to exclude ARR from the heirs or the estates of artists deceased within 70 years of the date of sale up until 1 January 2012.

After some years of watching diverging regulation develop in Member States, the EU passed the Directive 94 / 62 / EC, on packaging and packaging waste.

Beginning with Euro 5 (adopted in 2009), standards have been issued by direct Regulations, which are directly enforceable in all Member States, as opposed to Directives, which must be transposed into each individual Member State.

After discussions in the Parliament and the Council, a new NEC directive was adopted in December 2016, setting legally binding emission reduction commitments for the member states» emissions of five important air pollutants, to be achieved by 2030.

Parliamentary representatives will now negotiate with European Council ministers from member states, before a final version of the directive goes to all MEPs for a European Parliamentary vote later in the year.

The Court further reminded that the Qualification Directive (Directive 2011 / 95 / EU) requires the Member States to grant the refugee status when a third country national or a stateless person meets the relevant conditions under that Directive, and then pointed out that «after the application for international protection is submitted in accordance with Chapter II of Directive 2011/95, any third - country national or stateless person who fulfils the material conditions laid down by Chapter III of that directive has a subjective right to be recognised as having refugee status, and that is so even before the formal decision is adopted in that regarDirective (Directive 2011 / 95 / EU) requires the Member States to grant the refugee status when a third country national or a stateless person meets the relevant conditions under that Directive, and then pointed out that «after the application for international protection is submitted in accordance with Chapter II of Directive 2011/95, any third - country national or stateless person who fulfils the material conditions laid down by Chapter III of that directive has a subjective right to be recognised as having refugee status, and that is so even before the formal decision is adopted in that regarDirective 2011 / 95 / EU) requires the Member States to grant the refugee status when a third country national or a stateless person meets the relevant conditions under that Directive, and then pointed out that «after the application for international protection is submitted in accordance with Chapter II of Directive 2011/95, any third - country national or stateless person who fulfils the material conditions laid down by Chapter III of that directive has a subjective right to be recognised as having refugee status, and that is so even before the formal decision is adopted in that regarDirective, and then pointed out that «after the application for international protection is submitted in accordance with Chapter II of Directive 2011/95, any third - country national or stateless person who fulfils the material conditions laid down by Chapter III of that directive has a subjective right to be recognised as having refugee status, and that is so even before the formal decision is adopted in that regarDirective 2011/95, any third - country national or stateless person who fulfils the material conditions laid down by Chapter III of that directive has a subjective right to be recognised as having refugee status, and that is so even before the formal decision is adopted in that regardirective has a subjective right to be recognised as having refugee status, and that is so even before the formal decision is adopted in that regard».

The Court further pointed out that the objective of the Family Reunification Directive is, in particular, to guarantee through Article 10 (3)(a) an additional protection to refugees who are unaccompanied minors, by providing them with an enforceable right to family reunification which consequently entail a positive obligation on the Member States to give a right of admission to their parents.

As part of its armoury, the European Community has adopted myriad directives to prevent member states from insisting that citizens qualified in other member states also obtain the domestic qualification in order to practise their profession or trade.

While similarities in the medical and veterinary professions meant that member states were able to agree on co-ordinating their training for these professions, agreeing the Architects» Directives was much harder, requiring 17 years of negotiation.

With the Directives on the right to information in criminal proceedings and the right to access to a lawyer successfully passed, the Proposal for a Directive on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and the right to be present at trial in criminal proceedings marks a new step in the recent efforts of the Commission to create common EU framework of defence rights which minimally need to be respected by the Member States.

Second, the Qualifications Directive has simplified the system for the recognition of qualifications where migrant citizens want to establish themselves permanently in another member state.

Germany can not reject the British qualification, as the Qualifications Directive requires member states to accept qualifications obtained in other member states at least equivalent to the level immediately below that which is required in the host state.

In this regard, as the wording of both Articles 2 (f) and 10 (3)(a) does not provide sufficient help, the Court looked at the general scheme of the Family Reunification Directive; from here the Court concluded that the more favourable regime for refugees» family reunification would only apply after a third country national or stateless person would be recognised as a refugee by Member States.

As host Member States may not demand from EU citizens in this first period to have sufficient means of subsistence and personal medical cover, it is legitimate, according to the Court, not to require those Member States to be responsible for those citizens during this Following explicitly the opinion of the Advocate - General, such an interpretation would meet the objective stated in recital 10 of the Directive to maintain the «financial equilibrium of the social assistance systems of the Member States» (para. 45).

What will happen, if a member state decides, after the Directive enters into force in 2019, to extend considerably the limitation periods not only for new but also ongoing investigations, prosecution or judicial proceedings in VAT cases?

In the case at hand, Ms. Reyes was older than 21 years old when she applied for a residence permit as a family member of an EU citizen and according to the Directive she should prove to be dependent on the EU citizen or his / her spouse in order to be admitted in the host Member StatIn the case at hand, Ms. Reyes was older than 21 years old when she applied for a residence permit as a family member of an EU citizen and according to the Directive she should prove to be dependent on the EU citizen or his / her spouse in order to be admitted in the host Member member of an EU citizen and according to the Directive she should prove to be dependent on the EU citizen or his / her spouse in order to be admitted in the host Member Statin order to be admitted in the host Member Statin the host Member Member State.

Directive 89/48 on the mutual recognition of qualifications was the first of two general system directives, providing that a member state may not reject as inadequate a professional qualification obtained in another member state after three years» post-secondary education and any necessary professional training.

A different approach would in practice discourage family members from looking for employment in the host Member State, which would contradict Art. 23 of the Directive that clearly provides family members with a right to employment and self - employment.

Mr. Akyüz appealed his convictions, and the German court sent a preliminary reference to the ECJ to ask whether Directives 91/439 and 2006/126 «must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a host Member State which allows that State to refuse to recognise, within its territory, a driving licence issued in another Member State in the case where the holder of that licence... was refused a first driving licence in that State on the ground that he did not satisfy, under that State's legislation, the physical and mental requirements for the safe driving of a motor vehicle» (para. 35).

On such a basis, the Court considered that there are indeed provisions in the Family Reunification Directive expressly referring to national law, such as Articles 5 (1) and 11 (2) and thereby concluded that if the EU legislature intended to leave the Member States with the leeway to decide when the condition of a child being «below the age of eighteen» would be satisfied, it would have included an express reference in that context too (paras 41 - 42).

At least in theory, Article 3 (1) of the Directive was also capable of having direct effect: the provision provided for a certain margin of discretion for Member States as to the measures taken to implement the obligations of the Directive; however, Member States still were compelled to take into account all employees in their calculations (para 33 - 34).

The case concerns a requirement in Austrian company law which creates — based on Article 12 of Eleventh Council Directive 89 / 666 / EEC — a system of automatic penalty payments for the failure of a capital company in another Member State with a branch in Austria to submit certain accounting documents within a nine - month period.

2001/83 states that Member States may allow off - label use, substitutability depends not on the Directive, but on the way in which Member States transposed this requirstates that Member States may allow off - label use, substitutability depends not on the Directive, but on the way in which Member States transposed this requirStates may allow off - label use, substitutability depends not on the Directive, but on the way in which Member States transposed this requirStates transposed this requirement.

This Directive is one of the so - called Roadmap Directives, the latest attempt of the EU to increase the mutual trust between Member States (MS) in the field of criminal justice, by establishing EU minimum rules for procedural safeguards.

The special protection for unaccompanied minor asylum - seekers under the Family Reunification Directive would therefore extend beyond the age of maturity if the person concerned is able to access the territory of a Member State, submit an application for the refugee status before turning eighteen and is successively successful in their application.

The structure of Article 28 of the Directive suggests with its Article 28 (3) that after a period of 10 years residence, the simple fact of this period of residence requires a specific treatment of EU citizens, preventing their expulsion from a host Member State unless there are exceptional circumstances (see also the Court in para 19 and in para 40 of Tsakouridis).

The rationale is set out in pragmatic terms in Ursula Becker v Finanzamt Münster - Innenstadt [1982] CJEU (Case 8/81) as follows: `... in cases in which the Community authorities have, by means of a directive, placed Member States under a duty to adopt a certain course of action, the effectiveness of such a measure would be diminished if persons were prevented from relying upon it in proceedings before a court....»

One disadvantage of doing this is that they cease to be foreigners, people living in a state «other than that of which they are a national» (Article 3, Citizenship Directive) and so lose all the specific rights that EU law grants to migrants in a host state, most notably those concerning family members.

Indeed, it held that Article 15 (1) «necessarily presupposes» that the national measures referred to therein fall within the scope of that directive «since it expressly authorizes the Member States to adopt them only if the conditions laid down in the directive are met».

«since the approximation of the legislation of Member States in the field concerned has already been largely achieved by Directive 98/84, the primary objective of the Convention is not to improve the functioning of the internal market, but to extend legal protection of the relevant services beyond the territory of the European Union and thereby to promote international trade in those services.»

Private parties that saw themselves burdened with unforeseen obligations as a consequence should start an action for damages against the Member State having incorrectly implemented the directive in question according to the Advocate General.

This includes taking all legislative and administrative measures appropriate for ensuring collection of VAT in conformity with the obligations imposed on Member States by the EU VAT Directive (Directive 2006 / 112 / EC) and its predecessors (amongst which the Sixth Directive, 1977 / 388 / EEC).

For this wider circle of «other family members» (as opposed to the narrow circle of family members set out in Article 2 (2) of the Directive), Member States enjoy a broader margin of discretion and do not have to grant an «automatic» right of entry and residence (para 20).

Putting these objectives into practice, Article 28 of the Directive requires in its first paragraph that before taking an expulsion decision based on «public policy or public security», factors to be taken into account by a Member State are the period of residence, age, state of health, family and economic situation, social and cultural integration into the host Member State and the extent of links with the country of origin of the EU citState are the period of residence, age, state of health, family and economic situation, social and cultural integration into the host Member State and the extent of links with the country of origin of the EU citstate of health, family and economic situation, social and cultural integration into the host Member State and the extent of links with the country of origin of the EU citState and the extent of links with the country of origin of the EU citizen.