Baker McKenzie’s EMEA Tax Practice Group presented an overview on Tax Dispute Resolution on 1 September 2020, the seventh in a series of short webinars to keep tax professionals abreast of recent developments in these less than certain times.
The Federal Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs (BMAS) has already published general regulations for infection protection in April 2020 as part of the SARS-CoV-2 Occupational Safety and Health Standard. Following some criticism, the working committees of the Federal Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs have now specified the requirements for occupational health and safety and, together with the Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA), published the SARS-CoV-2 Occupational Health and Safety Regulation on August 10, 2020.
Baker McKenzie’s EMEA Tax Practice Group presented an overview on Tax Dispute Resolution on 1 September 2020, the seventh in a series of short webinars to keep tax professionals abreast of recent developments in these less than certain times.
As COVID-19 rapidly spreads to every corner of the globe and is officially declared a pandemic, governments across the world are adopting emergency measures to fight against this extraordinary situation. Ultimately, all these measures are aimed at protecting the health and wellbeing of citizens. However, on the healthcare and life sciences front in particular, such measures range from intervention powers to guarantee adequate supplies of treatment and medical equipment, to the relaxation of deadlines and regulatory requirements to simplify administrative procedures wherever possible, so that competent authorities, manufacturers and other actors can focus on urgent priorities related to the COVID-19 crisis.
This is the fourth in a series of guidance notes on what the ‘Schrems II’ decision means for companies that rely on EU-U.S. Privacy Shield, controller-to-processor standard contractual clauses, SCCs for transfers to controllers, derogations/exceptions to transfer restrictions, and binding corporate rules, as well as what ‘Schrems II’ means for Brexit and what companies can expect with the road ahead on these issues.
This is the sixth in a series of guidance notes on what the “Schrems II” decision means for companies that rely on EU-U.S. Privacy Shield, controller-to-processor standard contractual clauses, SCCs for transfers to controllers, derogations/exceptions to transfer restrictions, and binding corporate rules, as well as what “Schrems II” means for Brexit and what companies can expect with the road ahead on these issues.
The Digital-Supply-Act (Digitale-Versorgung-Gesetz, “DVG”), which aims to further promote digitization in the German health care system, entered into force on 19 December 2019 and regulates, inter alia, the prescription of Digital Health Apps by HCPs (including the cost bearing by statutory health insurance). Patients insured with statutory health funds are eligible for reimbursement of Digital Health Apps. As of this August, prescription for Digital Health Apps will be available, according to statements made by the Federal Ministry of Health at an event of the Health Innovation Hub on 16th July 2020.
For four months we have been providing you with regular updates on all relevant legal developments regarding the…
What has happened? This July, the German Federal Council approved, with changes, an amendment to the German Batteries Act (Batteriegesetz, “BattG”) suggested by the German cabinet. The bill became necessary, as the current German system of battery take-back was no longer sustainable. The legal structure imposed an unfair burden upon GRS Batterien, Europe’s largest collection scheme, which became increasingly financially unattractive and was therefore abandoned by many battery manufacturers who set up their own take-back schemes.
The new Batteries Act aims to set a level playing field. In addition, it introduces a registration obligation for anyone placing batteries on the German market and it transposes certain new requirements under the amended Waste Framework Directive into German law.
On May 28, 2020 the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, “BGH”) decided on the “Planet49” case regarding cookies (see decision in German here, reference number I ZR 7/16). The decision follows upon the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) of October 1, 2019 (see our publication regarding that ruling). On July 6, 2020 the reasons of the BGH decision have been published and we have summarized those in this client alert.