Álit: tímarit löggiltra endurskoðenda - 01.01.1993, Blaðsíða 24

Álit: tímarit löggiltra endurskoðenda - 01.01.1993, Blaðsíða 24
on the European Economic Area, there is every reason in the world to assume that we will be even more regarded as “one in the family.” Final remarks. Two final remarks: The European Community is sometimes criticised for its shortcomings: the Danish “no” to Maastricht, the problems of the monetary union, the failure to prevent the atrocities in what used to be Yugoslavia. I think this is unfair. A few weeks ago we observed the fiftieth anniversary of the battle of Stalingrad. In the next year or two we shall be reminded, for similar reasons, of the terrible final years of World War II. Let us not forget that bitter enemies of half a century ago are just those countries we criticise now for not having created the perfectly harmonious common market. I think the very fact that countries like Britain and Germany are now working together towards a common goal is the real miracle. The transition from enemies to partners demonstrates the great idea of the Community. Finally, let us not forget there is a world outside Europe. The Nordic Federation of Accountants is represented on the council of IFAC and on the board of IASC. In the Viking ages Icelanders and Norwegians looked westward to another continent, and we Swedes looked eastward, to Russia and beyond. I have a feeling that even today we have a lot of enthusiasm to share with the good forces in Europe, those who do not want a “Fortress Europe” but who want to keep an open mind to the rest of the world. 1) Cassis de Dijon. The Treaty of Rome demands free movement of goods and services across the borders. At the same time it recognises important national needs to protect consumers and others. Cassis de Dijon (case 120/78) was a landmark decision conceming the delicate balance. A french fruit liqueur, Cassis de Dijon, was prohibited by the German authorities because its alcohol contents were lower than the minimum required by German law. The E.C. Court heard complaints against the prohibition and ruled that certain trade barriers can be introduced by legislation in spite of Article 30 of the Treaty. Such barriers, however, can be accepted by virtue of Article 36 only if they are necessary in order to satisfy important needs such as fiscal control, health protection, consumer protection or the maintenance of good trading practices. The German alcohol law was not founded upon needs of that importance and was thus declared illegal. The case has been extensively used for interpretation of the Treaty, and its message is generally referred to as the Cassis de Dijon Principle. 2) Ramrath. Calus Ramrath is a German Wirtschafts- priifer who had also qualified under the law of Luxembourg. After leaving Luxembourg and returning to his home country he claimed the right to continue doing regulated professional work in the Grand Duchy. This was refused, based on a residential requirement in the Luxembourg law. The Court (case 106/91) ruled that Ramrath should be allowed to practice in the regulated area (in this case statutory audit). There are diverging opinions as to how extensively the decision can be used in interpreting the mles on cross-border services.

x

Álit: tímarit löggiltra endurskoðenda

Beinir tenglar

Ef þú vilt tengja á þennan titil, vinsamlegast notaðu þessa tengla:

Tengja á þennan titil: Álit: tímarit löggiltra endurskoðenda
https://timarit.is/publication/1258

Tengja á þetta tölublað:

Tengja á þessa síðu:

Tengja á þessa grein:

Vinsamlegast ekki tengja beint á myndir eða PDF skjöl á Tímarit.is þar sem slíkar slóðir geta breyst án fyrirvara. Notið slóðirnar hér fyrir ofan til að tengja á vefinn.