Meetings of the European Commission
A decision is a legal norm of European Community law that binds its addressees in all its elements and in a direct and immediate manner. A decision may be addressed to the institutions, bodies, offices, agencies and officials of the Union, to one or more of its Member States, or to individuals. When it designates addressees, the decision is binding only on them.
The decision is one of the three types of rules or formal sources of law that exist in the European Union and are binding; the other two are the regulation and the directive. A decision is similar in its effects to a regulation, since it does not need to be transposed into the domestic law of the States as it is directly effective; however, it differs from the former because it does not necessarily have the general scope or the abstraction that characterizes a regulation.
Since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009, and in accordance with articles 289 to 291 of the TFEU, there are, with the aforementioned characteristics, three subtypes that are distinguished formally (according to the authority that issues them), functionally (by the function assigned to them) and hierarchically (with Lisbon this issue, previously discussed, seems to have been enshrined despite the omission of its explicit enunciation) within the general category of the decision, namely:
How the European Union makes decisions
How decisions are madeEU policies and legislation are carefully crafted to benefit citizens, businesses and other stakeholders in the EU. Better regulation instruments ensure that measures are based on evidence and best available practices. The Commission approves initiatives during the weekly meetings of the Commissioners, either through the oral procedure or the written procedure, depending on their degree of political importance.
Once the draft text has been finalized and all contributions received on the initiative have been taken into account, the draft is submitted for interdepartmental consultation. All relevant departments are consulted.
Initiatives concerning new policies or new legislation are approved by the Commission during the weekly meetings of the Commissioners, either through the oral procedure or the written procedure, depending on their degree of political importance.
When the entities receiving the data are located in a country, a territory or one or more specific sectors of that country or international organization that have been declared adequate level of protection by the European Commission. To date, the countries and territories have been declared adequate:
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) invalidated Commission Decision (EU) 2016/1250 of July 12, 2016, known as the Privacy Shield for data transfers to the United States. The European Data Protection Committee published the following frequently asked questions in relation to the CJEU ruling.
In this case the controller shall inform the supervisory authority of the transfer. In addition to the information referred to in Articles 13 and 14 of the GDPR, the controller shall inform the data subject of the transfer and of the compelling legitimate interests pursued.
Binding Corporate Rules (BCRs) are “the personal data protection policies undertaken by a controller or processor established in the territory of a Member State for transfers or a set of transfers of personal data to a controller or processor in one or more third countries, within a corporate group or a group of undertakings engaged in a joint economic activity”.
When the patent battle now seems to be on the back burner, Apple takes strength to fight in another one that since this summer was fanned when the European authorities determined that the company had to pay back a millionaire sum. Now Apple has decided to appeal this decision by the European Commission, arguing that it deliberately tried to increase the payment.
This response follows the Commission’s request for the repayment of 13.8 billion euros, which was communicated on August 30. The reasons: the company would have committed tax irregularities in Ireland by receiving tax aid, something that Apple denies alluding that the law has not been complied with and that it has been partly a price for its fame.
This is also what we read in the statement of the Irish Department of Finance, which also states that in the decision the activities of the units Apple Sales International (ASI) and Apple Operations Europe (AOE) were not well interpreted, and that because the important decisions of these are made in the United States, the taxes derived from them should not be attributed to these Irish units. Sewell also gives an example of this.