Regulation No 17: First Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty set out that in carrying out the duties assigned to it by Article 89 and by provisions adopted under Article 87 of the Treaty, the officials authorized by the EU Commission were empowered inter alia to enter any premises, land and means of transport of undertakings. Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 (...) and 82 of the Treaty has expanded Commission’s powers stating that Commission can by decision order an inspection to be conducted in any other premises, land and means of transport, including the homes of directors, managers and other members of staff of the undertakings and associations of undertakings concerned. Such an expansion of the investigative powers of the Commission raises a question of the balance between effectiveness of the EU competition law and a person’s right to privacy, which is guaranteed to everyone by the Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Nevertheless this right is not absolute and the conditions for the possible limitations of the exercise of it are enshrined in paragraph 2 of the same article. For this reason the aim of this article is to find out whether Commission’s power to carry out searches in private homes meet the requirements set in Article 8(2) of the Convention, i.e., whether the Commission’s power to conduct such searches could be justified under the ECHR Article 8(2). In this study, the authors analyse the Commission’s extended investigative powers, clarify what is covered by the concept of “privacy”, evaluate the requirements set in Article 8(2) of the Convention, analyse conditions of exercising Commission’s extended investigative power and thus qualify if the latter satisfies the requirements set in Article 8(2) of the ECHR. (shrink)

Lietuvos, kaip ir kitų Europos valstybių, teisės aktai numato bendrovės visuotinio akcininkų susirinkimo sprendimų teisėtumo užtikrinimo priemonę – tokių sprendimų pripažinimo negaliojančiais institutą. Civiliniame kodekse išvardijami teisiniai šio instituto taikymo pagrindai. Kita vertus, visuotinio akcininkų susirinkimo sprendimų pripažinimo negaliojančiais pagrindų sistemos skirtingose valstybėse skiriasi. Šiame straipsnyje siekiama pateikti bendrą įstatymo numatytų bendrovės visuotinio akcininkų susirinkimo sprendimų pripažinimo negaliojančiais pagrindų Lietuvos teisėje apžvalgą, minėtų pagrindų sistemą lyginant su užsienio valstybių teisiniu reglamentavimu.

The article deals with the entrenchment of the institute of criminal liability of a legal person in the Lithuanian criminal law. Upon approval of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter also referred to as the CC) on 26 September 2000, the criminal liability of a legal person was provided almost in every fifth (at present—in every second) article of the Special Part of the CC. Although criminal liability has been increasingly applied to legal persons (e.g., in 2011, (...) if compared to 2005, almost three times as much punishments were imposed), however, almost 90 percent of the articles of the CC providing also for criminal liability of a legal person are “dead”. One doubt arises with regard to social legitimacy of such lawmaking and the quality thereof in the sense of juridical technique. (shrink)