Propane Cooking Burners

Federal Labour Court for Collective bondage - Change in an OT membership

(Stuttgart) Several on 12/15/2010 by the Fourth Division of the Federal Labor Court (BAG) decided Parallel cases have unionized plaintiffs claims for tariff benefits claims of a salary and wage agreement of the retail trade in Saxony Anhalt.

this case, the Stuttgart labor law specialist Michael Henn, President of the VdAA - Association of German labor law lawyers e. V., headquartered in Stuttgart, was it essentially a question of whether the defendant is bound by the requirements underlying collective agreements from 2006 or was already in 2001 effectively changed from full membership of a member without bargaining coverage (OT membership).

The Senate confirmed its previous case law, an employer may provide to the association in its charter membership in an OT-phased, not the collective bondage in accordance with § 3 para 1 TVG out. According to this model, employers subject to collective constraint, together with such organized without a collective bondage under one roof. However, it must be ensured by the statutes that OT-members on collective political decisions have no direct influence. For the functioning of collective bargaining requires a view to concluding collective agreements and their normative effect on third parties affected by this principle with respect to the synchronization of responsibility and concern of the collective agreements. This can also be assured by a very general, but clear rules to separate the powers of OT and full members.

After these Standards had opened one of employers' organization affected the ability of OT-effective membership. This defendant had used the 2001, so they concluded subsequently to the collective agreements, which were based on the plaintiffs was not committed and dismissed the complaints with the courts below were.

on the effectiveness of the removal of tariff constraint also changed the provision is nothing that the transfer statement "until the expiration of the applicable collective agreements" works. These statutes, though not literally, but for meaning, purpose and collective integrity of the end as an indication of the in § 3 paragraph 3 TVG anyway resulting to understand the law. (BAG, ruling of 15 December 2010 - 4 AZR 256/09 - and others).

Vuez Create Totrrent Unauthorized

arm Bavaria * pfffft *


Since about a year now isser
already here in Bavaria and is once again stirred up panic,
the bird shoot it again (as with Bruno the Bear)
from our great Bavarian politicians!!
If I were reading a bullshit, I get the cold horror!

Excerpt from 'World Online - spread on Bruno's wolf tracks
problem anxiety in Upper Bavaria. "

The Bayrischzell Mayor Helmut Limbrunner (CDU)
least want the wolf comes off.
"We believe that the wolf here in our
has no right to life. We are indeed a
cultural landscape and not Wildzoo," he said on Friday.
The policy should take care of, Environment Minister Markus Söder (CSU)
is required . 'It is his partner, "says Limbrunner
" We do not see an animal you as harassment. "
And with regard to the protection of the wolf and the
he often severely injured and painfully dying sheep.
" The sheep also have a right to life. "

I could puke!

Sad greetings
wool and polar projections

http://wolfsfreunde-germany.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Phlegm In Throat On Babys

iPad marketing started successfully: Axel Springer Media Impact Volkswagen wins as the exclusive customer for IMAGE iPad

One of the most promising approaches for the prevention of a driving ban for a traffic violation may be the assertion of a so-called "instantaneous failure.

Even in the case of an objectively serious and dangerous traffic offense, the requirements for the saying of a driving ban does not, unless the person concerned in the commission of the offense only slight negligence can be attributed to him.

What does "instantaneous failure" exactly?

this is meant a momentary lapse in concentration, also a careful and conscientious driver can not always avoid.

Why is the moment of failure against a driving ban?

In Fines Regulation provides that for certain serious offenses on the road, such as speeding or failing to stop at a red light to impose a driving ban is. However, it is not a legislative command that automatically is mandatory for each case, but to rule examples. The imposition of a driving ban requires that the infringement, in gross or persistent violation of the obligations of a motor vehicle driver was committed (§ 25 para 1 sentence 1 StVG). A rough Breach of duty is in the implementation of a control sample, such as indicated in urban areas the speed limit by 31 km / h, because of the danger of such an abstract reality.

However, it also has to play in individual cases to a failure to act of the person concerned, which is also a subjective point of irresponsibility on a particular driver, that is due a lack of law-abiding attitude. The law assumes that with implementation of a rule typically given this particular example of irresponsibility and negligence, warranting the imposition of a driving ban. There are also atypical patterns are possible, in which the benefit of the individual only by negligence can be assumed.

Slight negligence can be, for example, will be presumed if the person pleads to understand that they have not observed the speed limit or red light by mistake and this mistake is not in turn is due to gross negligence or indifference.

believe Often car or motorcycle driver, for example, they were at the time of speed measurement outside urban areas, because out of the consideration to make, the more profit, are to measuring systems often chosen locations where roads are well developed and with a corresponding number of vehicles excessive speed are expected. Was the person that was flashed in such a "speed trap", non-local and could he force due to missing or incomplete development nor that he was inside a built-up area, he only acted negligently

. The result: Special irresponsibility can not be the victim in this particular case accused. The indication as to the imposition of a driving ban is refuted. by the imposition of a driving ban, apart has since become the offense is missing from a subjective point that the law presumed special weight.

affected should a instantaneous failure speaking circumstances and evidence during the proceedings before the fine detail and authority as possible based on accurate evidence to Tatörtlichkeit and signs (maps, photo, video) state. Only if the person qualifies argues, will address the prosecuting authority or the court with the possibility of instantaneous failures and thus refuting the indication as to the imposition of a ban on driving.

How To Make Flet Slippers

filesharing Current trends in case law - a low value, cost capping

Although it denied many of the warnings in the area of file sharing firms again and again, so now is a certain tendency can be seen in the case law that are regularly made to amounts claimed in copyright warnings from the Court be reduced more and more.

In the following, therefore some decisions from this and last year are presented in support of this trend.

I. The value of the item omission

The copyright in the lichen warnings regularly scheduled object value for the omission is crucial for the reimbursement of the opposing lawyers. So it comes naturally tend to provoke the recognized object values are estimated too high in the warnings in many cases. For example, when alleged copyright infringement of music albums or films of some Abmahnkanzleien object values in the amount of 50,000.00 € deemed appropriate in order to then a corresponding "settlement offer" to suggest Proper, the relevant firms refer here often to the jurisdiction of the Higher Regional Court Cologne, the correspondingly high amounts in dispute seems to be the case, however, more and more to want to put a stop to..

first (Judgement of the district court of Aachen, 16.07.2010, Az: 115 C 77/10)

In this context, the District Court of Aachen in a file-sharing case to the problem of illegal offers of an actual music album with twelve titles decided this year that a contrary of the established in the original warning amount in dispute in the amount of 50,000.00 € such must be considered only in the amount of € 3,000.00 as reasonable. If one were to apply the appropriate decision on copyright warnings of music albums, so could the warnings firms in terms of financial compensation for their use only an amount of € 265.70 demand.

second (Judgement of the District Court of Halle, 24.11.2009, Az: 95 C 3258/09)

In this regard, another decision of the district court hall from the year 2009 is mentioned. There, the district court hall for a reasonable amount in dispute for the illicit supply of a film had to judge. There, the court had an object of the amount of € 1,200.00 for maintained properly, which also significantly differed from the original in the warning or action in the alleged object of value.

third BGH of 12.05.2010 "Summer of our lives" (Federal Supreme Court 12.05.2010-I ZR 121/08)

Regardless of the foregoing, this is not the cost cap of § 97 a UrhG II considered. Also in this year furore caused and euphoric awaited ruling by the Federal here has unfortunately brought no clear clarity. subject of the proceedings in this case was the allegation of copyright infringement on a single song. In the contemporary press release had the Supreme Court announced that it the provision of § 97 a II Copyright Act, which in turn provides a corresponding cost ceiling for the reimbursement of the opposing attorneys to 100, 00 €, holds to be applicable. The Federal Court had then expressed in the grounds with no word on the subject. From the ranks of the warning of this fact is interpreted on a regular basis so that the rule did not apply. Here, however, frequently overlooked that the relevant question for the case to be decided by the Supreme Court was not decisive. Because of the time alleged infringement took place at a time when the relevant provision was not yet existent, so that the Supreme Court in its Enzscheidung this not comment on it and had also waived. In our view, the former press release, however, had clear indication of action, which is rejected by the warnings firms regularly for obvious reasons. The further development remains to be seen.

II license for damages

In the case of a legitimate warning, the owners generally require the Abgemahnt a so-called royalty damages. Here are the warnings from law firms regularly required amounts, for example, for copyright infringement on a track, in the amount of 150,00 €. However, in this respect, as a recent decision of the Landgericht Hamburg Caused a stir (see the LG Hamburg, 10.08.2010, Az: 308 O 710/09). There, the court had in relation to the alleged royalty damages for breach of copyright in a song such a salary in the amount of 15.00 € is appropriate. In this case, was correctly parked on what reasonable parties would have agreed with the conclusion of a fictitious license agreement as a reasonable royalty. In this regard must be given of course that it was at the disputed work to older titles. However, this decision also shows a certain tendency in the case law that the amounts for the appropriate license for damages are often set too high. It means, for example in some of the relevant copyright warnings firms that own the license subject to the offender liable for damages in the five-digit would be set. This is the case of copyright infringement on a single plant in this side view, totally unrealistic, while in reality the court is not even enforceable.

III. Conclusion

Even if it is only such decisions are individual decisions, it some trends in case law can be derived. What is certain is that these decisions the defense positions in the file-sharing defense improved significantly since the the Abmahnkanzleien despite the possibility of selecting the court can not be quite as safe as before. Due to a variety of machined warnings we have the necessary experience to advise you comprehensively in the area of file sharing and defending.

Delete Orange Account

MHG Legal Jena - a criminal organization?

Since short-term investors are written in Germany by the lawyers of the MHG in Jena. Not directly suggest how you should do but on the up by such lawyers and patrons for the Protection of the European consumer rights - in short FSEV.
A look into the register with the No. 515 of the district court Sondershausen reveals that the former board of the association Gerhard was a certain Andrew Morgenstern.
Mr. Andre Gerhard morning star is also a partner of law firm MHG (Andre Gerhard Morgenstern, Steffen Hielscher and Torsten Geissler) in Jena.
thus serves the association, founded in 2007 to catch clients to simultaneously obscure the pursuit of an illegal business model of unscrupulous lawyers from Jena.
Every citizen has any reason the right to inspect the register of associations and can them to check the veracity of the statements in this way.

It can only be recommended to the recipients in each case to make a complaint and ask for information publishers to § 34 BDSG. If the request is not met, it can be filed in court.

is likely there will only be a matter of time before these lawyers down the craft.

Here is a certainly a very interesting link to the topic: http://www.fsev-mhg.com

Tech Deck Ramps With Gray Plastic Parts

warnings of the firm Waldorf Frommer Sony Music: The three? - Path of Fear including radio plays

The firm is currently warns Waldorf Frommer from Munich on behalf of Sony Music Entertainment Germany GmbH.

subject of the warnings are the popular radio plays from the series "The Three Investigators"

including the consequences
path of fear (137)
The secret staircase (138)
The mystery of the Diva (139)
Where is the Connection owners to deliver an imitator, the payment of legal costs and damages incurred. The Abgemahnt shall submit a settlement offer from 856.00 EUR.

is claimed that the audio book was offered on the Internet Abgemahnt for download. It was also indicated that regardless of the actual perpetration, Sony BMG was entitled to substantial damages, as the Abgemahnt in any event be obligated to reimburse the legal costs and the required expenses according to § 97 a UrhG.

If the connection shall be liable for damages or for the costs of warning depends However, the individual case. A note the recent decision by the BGH of 12 May 2010:

If you follow the reasoning of the Supreme Court, so therefore there is no general and "automatic" liability

The court thus presupposes a violation of auditing requirements, which leads only to a liability then individuals have a duty to be reasonably.. to examine ways that the port is through adequate safeguards adequately protected against being abused by outside third parties for the commission of violations. What is reasonable, are determined first by the respective technical capabilities, the connection owner is only obligated at the time use of purchase of the router for the private sector arm's backups.

How should one behave?

A response to the warning should be done in any case, since the Abgemahnt otherwise you risk the opening of court proceedings (interim order or injunction). This leads to much higher costs of infringement litigation.

The requested cease and desist should not be turned over in the format requested. It goes beyond that which may require the warning. The explanation is, therefore, modify it under expert advice. In particular, often the whole repertoire of the copyright holder is included, far beyond what the act of infringement goes out

Beware also cautions that decided to take matters in hand and explain your point of view of the firm warning letters. You risk giving the other party information to the hand that can be used against you.

If you have been recipients of a warning, we are happy to develop a strategy based on the individual case and your agent nation-wide. We have experience in hundreds of Abmahnfällen and throughout Germany.