The General Court annulled the freezing of assets from March 6, 2014 to March 5, 2015 for five Ukrainians including two former Ukrainian Prime Ministers. The Court found that the Council identified the Ukrainians as being responsible for misappropriation of Ukrainian state funds solely based on a letter from Ukraine's Prosecutor General stating investigations established funds were misappropriated, but providing no details on the specific allegations or nature of responsibilities against the individuals. As such, the freezing of assets did not satisfy the designation criteria and was annulled for that period, though assets of some remain frozen due to separate ongoing proceedings regarding measures after March 5, 2015.
Answer of Deputy Prosecutor General - Head of the Specialized Anti-corruption...NABU Leaks
Answer of Deputy Prosecutor General - Head of the Specialized Anti-corruption Prosecutor's Office Nazar Kholodnitskii under Statement of Criminal Offenses Committed by Officials of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (translation)
Between 5 and 18 February, the security situation in eastern Ukraine remained volatile. Periods of relative calm were interrupted by sudden violent flare-ups, in particular in the Svitlodarsk-Debaltseve area, in the west of Luhansk region and in areas east and north-east of Mariupol.
Генпрокурор Юрій Луценко і його заступник, військовий прокурор Анатолій Матіос використовують свої повноваження для політичних переслідувань, зловживають службовим становищем і причетні до тиску і тортур затриманих в рамках так званої «справи податківців».
Про це в своєму листі, адресованому Верховному представнику ЄС із закордонних справ і політики безпеки Федеріці Могеріні і членам Комітету постійних представників Ради ЄС (Coreper), написав лідер партії «Успішна країна» Олександр Клименко.
http://oleksandr-klymenko.com/newsroom/news/8739-klimenko-rasskazal-evrochinovnikam-o-zloupotrebleniyah-vlastyu-lutsenko-i-matiosa/
Criminal Complaints have been Filed by Turtle Creek Assets and Aaron'sTurtle Creek Assets Ltd
Criminal complaints are actively being filed by Turtle Creek Assets throughout the country, and thousands of criminal complaints that have already been filed by Aaron’s: Rent to Own in North Carolina.
Answer of Deputy Prosecutor General - Head of the Specialized Anti-corruption...NABU Leaks
Answer of Deputy Prosecutor General - Head of the Specialized Anti-corruption Prosecutor's Office Nazar Kholodnitskii under Statement of Criminal Offenses Committed by Officials of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (translation)
Between 5 and 18 February, the security situation in eastern Ukraine remained volatile. Periods of relative calm were interrupted by sudden violent flare-ups, in particular in the Svitlodarsk-Debaltseve area, in the west of Luhansk region and in areas east and north-east of Mariupol.
Генпрокурор Юрій Луценко і його заступник, військовий прокурор Анатолій Матіос використовують свої повноваження для політичних переслідувань, зловживають службовим становищем і причетні до тиску і тортур затриманих в рамках так званої «справи податківців».
Про це в своєму листі, адресованому Верховному представнику ЄС із закордонних справ і політики безпеки Федеріці Могеріні і членам Комітету постійних представників Ради ЄС (Coreper), написав лідер партії «Успішна країна» Олександр Клименко.
http://oleksandr-klymenko.com/newsroom/news/8739-klimenko-rasskazal-evrochinovnikam-o-zloupotrebleniyah-vlastyu-lutsenko-i-matiosa/
Criminal Complaints have been Filed by Turtle Creek Assets and Aaron'sTurtle Creek Assets Ltd
Criminal complaints are actively being filed by Turtle Creek Assets throughout the country, and thousands of criminal complaints that have already been filed by Aaron’s: Rent to Own in North Carolina.
Visa liberalization for Ukraine. Which is more difficult: to get it or to kee...Europe without barriers
Brief analytical report analyzing risks for Ukrainian visa-free regime with the EU after its entering into force, espeсially regarding the revised suspension mechanism
Main trends and stats regarding migration profile of Ukraine and Ukrainians in 2016, including
Regular migration
Visa applications
Refusal of entry at the border
Border management
Ukrainian detection of irregular migrants
Asylum seekers
Analysis of consequences of visa-free regime
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 February to 15 May 2015DonbassFullAccess
This is the tenth report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on the situation of human rights in Ukraine, based on the work of the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU). It covers the period from 16 February to 15 May 2015.
Visa liberalization for Ukraine. Which is more difficult: to get it or to kee...Europe without barriers
Brief analytical report analyzing risks for Ukrainian visa-free regime with the EU after its entering into force, espeсially regarding the revised suspension mechanism
Main trends and stats regarding migration profile of Ukraine and Ukrainians in 2016, including
Regular migration
Visa applications
Refusal of entry at the border
Border management
Ukrainian detection of irregular migrants
Asylum seekers
Analysis of consequences of visa-free regime
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 February to 15 May 2015DonbassFullAccess
This is the tenth report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on the situation of human rights in Ukraine, based on the work of the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU). It covers the period from 16 February to 15 May 2015.
WINDING UP of COMPANY, Modes of DissolutionKHURRAMWALI
Winding up, also known as liquidation, refers to the legal and financial process of dissolving a company. It involves ceasing operations, selling assets, settling debts, and ultimately removing the company from the official business registry.
Here's a breakdown of the key aspects of winding up:
Reasons for Winding Up:
Insolvency: This is the most common reason, where the company cannot pay its debts. Creditors may initiate a compulsory winding up to recover their dues.
Voluntary Closure: The owners may decide to close the company due to reasons like reaching business goals, facing losses, or merging with another company.
Deadlock: If shareholders or directors cannot agree on how to run the company, a court may order a winding up.
Types of Winding Up:
Voluntary Winding Up: This is initiated by the company's shareholders through a resolution passed by a majority vote. There are two main types:
Members' Voluntary Winding Up: The company is solvent (has enough assets to pay off its debts) and shareholders will receive any remaining assets after debts are settled.
Creditors' Voluntary Winding Up: The company is insolvent and creditors will be prioritized in receiving payment from the sale of assets.
Compulsory Winding Up: This is initiated by a court order, typically at the request of creditors, government agencies, or even by the company itself if it's insolvent.
Process of Winding Up:
Appointment of Liquidator: A qualified professional is appointed to oversee the winding-up process. They are responsible for selling assets, paying off debts, and distributing any remaining funds.
Cease Trading: The company stops its regular business operations.
Notification of Creditors: Creditors are informed about the winding up and invited to submit their claims.
Sale of Assets: The company's assets are sold to generate cash to pay off creditors.
Payment of Debts: Creditors are paid according to a set order of priority, with secured creditors receiving payment before unsecured creditors.
Distribution to Shareholders: If there are any remaining funds after all debts are settled, they are distributed to shareholders according to their ownership stake.
Dissolution: Once all claims are settled and distributions made, the company is officially dissolved and removed from the business register.
Impact of Winding Up:
Employees: Employees will likely lose their jobs during the winding-up process.
Creditors: Creditors may not recover their debts in full, especially if the company is insolvent.
Shareholders: Shareholders may not receive any payout if the company's debts exceed its assets.
Winding up is a complex legal and financial process that can have significant consequences for all parties involved. It's important to seek professional legal and financial advice when considering winding up a company.
Car Accident Injury Do I Have a Case....Knowyourright
Every year, thousands of Minnesotans are injured in car accidents. These injuries can be severe – even life-changing. Under Minnesota law, you can pursue compensation through a personal injury lawsuit.
NATURE, ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.pptxanvithaav
These slides helps the student of international law to understand what is the nature of international law? and how international law was originated and developed?.
The slides was well structured along with the highlighted points for better understanding .
How to Obtain Permanent Residency in the NetherlandsBridgeWest.eu
You can rely on our assistance if you are ready to apply for permanent residency. Find out more at: https://immigration-netherlands.com/obtain-a-permanent-residence-permit-in-the-netherlands/.
Responsibilities of the office bearers while registering multi-state cooperat...Finlaw Consultancy Pvt Ltd
Introduction-
The process of register multi-state cooperative society in India is governed by the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002. This process requires the office bearers to undertake several crucial responsibilities to ensure compliance with legal and regulatory frameworks. The key office bearers typically include the President, Secretary, and Treasurer, along with other elected members of the managing committee. Their responsibilities encompass administrative, legal, and financial duties essential for the successful registration and operation of the society.
A "File Trademark" is a legal term referring to the registration of a unique symbol, logo, or name used to identify and distinguish products or services. This process provides legal protection, granting exclusive rights to the trademark owner, and helps prevent unauthorized use by competitors.
Visit Now: https://www.tumblr.com/trademark-quick/751620857551634432/ensure-legal-protection-file-your-trademark-with?source=share
1. www.curia.europa.eu
Press and Information
General Court of the European Union
PRESS RELEASE No 7/16
Luxembourg, 28 January 2016
Judgments in Cases T-331/14 Mykola Yanovych Azarov v Council, T-332/14
Oleksii Mykolayovych Azarov v Council, T-341/14 Sergiy Klyuyev v Council,
T-434/14 Sergej Arbuzov v Council, T-486/14 Edward Stavytskyi v Council
The General Court annuls the freezing of the assets of five Ukrainians, including
Mykola Yanovych Azarov and Sergej Arbuzov, former Prime Ministers of Ukraine,
for the period from 6 March 2014 to 5 March 2015
A person cannot be treated as being responsible for misappropriation of funds solely on the ground
that he is the subject of a preliminary investigation in a third country, without the Council being
aware of the matters alleged against that person in that investigation
In response to the crisis in Ukraine which began at the end of 2013, the Council decided, on
5 March 2014, to freeze the assets and economic resources of the persons identified as
responsible for the misappropriation of Ukrainian State funds. Mykola Yanovych Azarov and Sergej
Arbuzov, who both successively held the position of Prime Minister of Ukraine until February 2014,
together with Mr Azarov’s son (Oleksii Mykolayovych Azarov) and two other Ukrainians (Sergiy
Klyuyev, brother of the former Head of Administration of the President of Ukraine, and Edward
Stavytskyi, former Minister for Energy and the Coal Industry of Ukraine) were, for the period from
6 March 2014 to 5 March 2015, included on the list of persons subject to the freezing of assets on
the ground that they were the subject of preliminary investigations in Ukraine relating to offences
connected with misappropriation of Ukrainian State funds and their illegal transfer outside Ukraine.
The five Ukrainians brought proceedings before the General Court with a view to having their
inclusion on the list annulled.1
In today’s judgments, the General Court upholds the actions brought by the five Ukrainians
and annuls the freezing of assets imposed on them for the period from 6 March 2014 to
5 March 2015.
The Court finds that, as in the Portnov case,2
the Council identified the five Ukrainians as being
responsible for misappropriation of funds solely on the basis of a letter of 3 March 2014 from the
office of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine stating that investigations of those persons had made it
possible to establish that large amounts of public funds had been misappropriated and had
subsequently been unlawfully transferred out of Ukraine. The Court takes the view that that letter
provides no details concerning the matters specifically alleged against the five Ukrainians
or the nature of their responsibility.
The Court concludes that the freezing of the assets of the five Ukrainians does not satisfy the
designation criteria, and therefore annuls that measure for the period from 6 March 2014 to
5 March 2015.
1
In the meantime, the Council has removed Mr Azarov’s son from the list as of 6 March 2015. By contrast, the names of
the four other Ukrainians have been maintained on the list for the period from 6 March 2015 to 6 March 2016 with slightly
different reasons for listing. The renewal of the freezing of those persons’ assets is the subject of separate proceedings
at present ongoing before the General Court (Cases T-215/15, Azarov v Council, T-221/15, Arbuzov v Council and
T-731/15 Klyuyev v Council; as for Mr Stavytskyi, he has not brought an action). It follows that, despite the annulment of
the freezing of assets for the period from 6 March 2014 to 5 March 2015, the assets of the three Ukrainians who have
brought proceedings against the new restrictive measures (Mr Azarov, Mr Arbuzov and Mr Klyuyev) will remain frozen
until the General Court rules in respect of the period after 6 March 2015.
2
Case T-290/14, Andriy Portnov v Council see also Press Release No. 129/15.
2. www.curia.europa.eu
NOTE: An appeal, limited to points of law only, may be brought before the Court of Justice against the
decision of the General Court within two months of notification of the decision.
NOTE: An action for annulment seeks the annulment of acts of the institutions of the European Union that
are contrary to EU law. The Member States, the European institutions and individuals may, under certain
conditions, bring an action for annulment before the Court of Justice or the General Court. If the action is well
founded, the act is annulled. The institution concerned must fill any legal vacuum created by the annulment
of the act.
Unofficial document for media use, not binding on the General Court.
The full texts T-331/14, T-332/14, T-341/14, T-434/14, T-486/14 of the judgments are published on the
CURIA website on the day of delivery
Press contact: Christopher Fretwell (+352) 4303 3355