El-Watan

Promoting Democracy in Algeria

Assignment On Notaries Into Force

Land access since the 1.9.2013 even when possible for notaries. To the 1.9.2013 the assignment of voluntary jurisdiction on Notaries Act entered into force. Notaries have jurisdiction then exclusively for the official recording of the estate inventory and conducting estate and total credit disputes. Also, a notarial power of Attorney certificate is introduced as registration basis to facilitate the register and land transport. Finally, a country opening clause in relation to applications for certificate of inheritance was introduced, according to which the countries can establish the exclusive competence of the notary.

Another important innovation is nF section 133a of the GBO. So far, the land registry insight by notaries public only in connection with a notarial Office business was allowed. After the new article 133a ABS 1 S 1 GBO notaries may those who 12 GBO presents a legitimate interest iSv them, share with the content of the land register, even if not related to a certification order. For a real estate agent can be a legitimate “Have interest about then, if he acts on behalf of the owner of proven or in their own right” wants to research whether his mediation led to the conclusion of a purchase contract with a customer proven by him. On the communication of the land register, the notary takes a Protocol (section 133a ABS 3 S 1 GBO nF), what is to inform the owner or the holder of a same plot right on request (section 133a ABS 3 S 2 GBO nF). The land registry insight and communication an i.H.v fee to KV No. 25209 15 as well as the expenses for the retrieval of land amounting to 8. Land inspection in the land registry itself remains more cost effective (simple 10 or 20 certified extract).

The Finance Committee

Are the investment income on the savers tax credit and the expenses standard amount of 801,-EUR / 1.602,-euro (single/married) – 2006 these were still at 1.421,-euros / 2.842,-euro or a taxpayer where other income than those from the statutory pension insurance, this rule of thumb does not apply. An income tax obligation generally relating to other income. The highest German tax court, the Federal fiscal court in Munich, with its decision of November 26, 2008 has paved the way for evaluating the pension cover releases by the tax authorities (Federal fiscal judgment v. 26.11.2008, XR 15/07, DStR 2009 p. 32) made free, in which the Federal fiscal court has decided that the legislature has not exceeded the limits of his wide margin of discretion. The Finance Committee of the Bundestag had in the context of the legislative procedure that deals, that many retirees in the past her Income held unjustly for non-taxable and therefore made no tax declaration. What 1979 began with classical tax advising in the founding year, has evolved over the years to a multi-disciplinary full service offering.

Today Roland Franz & partners among the major tax firms in Essen with its approx. 40 employees. From this location, clients are served within and outside the region equally intensive. The first steps towards the realization of a multidisciplinary client consultation were created by cooperation of auditing practice with a law firm in the same House already in the 1990s. Today offers Roland Franz & partner as powerful partnership various consulting and services from a single source, making equally usable for synergy clients at a high level, as well as a minimizing of the coordination effort.

Cost Compensation Arrangements

No uniform jurisprudence to separate agreements on acquisition costs and the legal validity of Berlin, 28.05.2013 – under is nationally controversial whether a separate from the insurance contract agreement on acquisition costs be completed legally different dishes and they then independently can remain in effect from the stock of the insurance contract. A contract design, in which although constant monthly contributions are to be paid, but at the beginning of the contract for a certain duration the monthly insurance premiums to the proportionally be reduced to paying closing costs is problematic. I.e. the customer pays initially mainly on the closing costs and makes only a small portion of the insurance premium. “Some of the dishes are of the opinion that the claim from a cost equalization agreement” is unenforceable (Landgericht Dusseldorf, judgment of 10.02.2011 – 11 O 401/10 and 03.05.2011 – 9 O 402/12;) Landgericht Rostock (10), NJW-RR 2010, 1694, AG, Krefeld, 24.06.2010 – 5 C-277/09).

So also, a recent decision of the Amtsgericht Warstein. The Court considers such a contract is S. 2 VVG among others according to section 169, para. 5 void. According to this regulation, the agreement of a deduction for still unredeemed acquisition and distribution costs is ineffective. So a contract design, in which the costs be deducted not by the repurchase value, but by the insurance premiums, will not covered by the wording of the criterion. Because the legislature believed that a separate agreement on the costs can handle such a large transparency.

Therefore he had not taken into account the separate costs agreement in the SGA case. But, the contracts go to the protective purpose of 169 5 S. 2 VVG. Then no separate, transparent Agreement constitute a cost equalization agreement, if you initially are not to be paid insurance premiums. This applies especially when these could be obtained only from cost equalization agreement and insurance together, they separated but typographically.

Employer Termination

The employer received notice? Not every termination is effective! Quit your employer? Not every termination is also legitimate. Leave in any case by a specialist lawyer for employment law help, to proceed against this termination. In the event of termination of a worker must take into account many different interests. The employer can a worker not just by tomorrow today Cancel. The company consists for example of more than 5 employees since 2004 and before 2004, 10 workers so dismissal protection law is applicable. In the case of the applicability of the employment protection act, the employer may terminate an employee but only for the reasons in the law. Thus, the employer may terminate the employee only for operational, person-related or behavioral reasons.

Behavioral termination requires that the workers put a behavior on the day, that the employer is no longer tolerate. As in this formulation was deliberately expressed that the reason for termination in the person of the employee for behavioral reasons is extremely vague. Indisputably, the employer may terminate an employee then if this “steals Golden Spoon”. The behavioral employer termination requires that the employee has violated massively against his contractual obligations or the confidence of the employer. Keyword: secret treason or theft. Defend themselves against such a termination. It is still on the employer, that he also must prove that your workplace has ceased due to person-related need, precisely. Here, there are many approaches as you can shake a such person-related dismissal.

I want to save now at this point legal formalism you and can only appeal to you, defend themselves against such a termination. Also, if you never wanted to work again for this operation, because you are hurt, so this is all too understandable. There are however other Possibilities as to demand the continued employment. Reserve: Compensation! In the case of the applicability of the employment protection act and reasonably positive prospects of your dismissal lawsuit against a dismissal, you are can negotiate with usually a severance package. Please do not forget that you must defend themselves against a termination badly within three weeks for delivery of this notice, because it is otherwise no longer vulnerable. Get so help. We have 16 years successfully represented before the labour court workers and are available at any time in your matter. Georg Schafer Attorney