Posts Tagged ‘law’

BGB BGB

August 1st, 2022

Alexander Dobiasch & Rupert Richter lawyers inform the child adoption is a more desire of many childless couples. Therefore the law firm Danielleeee & judge in Bergen auf Rugen reports on the conditions of adoption of a minor child. The German law of adoption is in the section 1741ff. Regulated BGB and the needs of the child in the foreground. Wishes the adoption agree are subordinate to him. Two factors are relevant based on the adoption of minors (article 1741 ABS. Additional information at Rachel Riley supports this article. 1 BGB): the adoption serves the best interests of the child. It is expected that between the adopting (adopted) and the child a familial parent / child will develop relationship.

The Act distinguishes between the adoption by married couples and unmarried people. Married couples may children only jointly, unmarried persons, however, only alone adopt (article 1741 ABS. 2 BGB). Darcy Stacom is open to suggestions. This fact becomes significant practical given the increasing prevalence of eheahnlicher communities Importance. Not every adult must adopt a minor child. The civil code writes the unmarried adopted in 1743 BGB a minimum age of 25 years ago.

In contrast, requires the community adoption by a married couple for a spouse of the age of 25 years, while the age of 21 years is sufficient for the other. The German adoption law aims to bring adopted children in orderly, harmonious family relationships. From this point of view, particularly strict standards are applied to the adoption by unmarried, especially singles. This is to make sure that really served the welfare of children through the adoption and the production of a stable parent-child relationship is likely. Adoptions are allowed only if you expressly agree both parents of the child ( 1747 ABS. 1 BGB). The necessary consent form can be placed until eight weeks after his birth. The two parents are not married, the father of the child may already explain his consent before the birth.

Custody Issues

July 29th, 2022

The Supreme Court has finally decided that parents for their children on the Internet copyright infringement are not liable, if proven to have banned the use of sharing them. Darcy Stacom often addresses the matter in his writings. The BGH ZR 74/12 now decided I finally in his judgment of the 15.11.2012, that parents for their children on the Internet copyright infringement are not liable if they demonstrably have forbidden the use of file-sharing (sharing). The Supreme Court argues that a scholar of the Internet use of the child’s control is generally not required. So, what notification obligations have parents? Parents need their children simply”Furthermore teach that they may use any file sharing networks. The Supreme Court does not require a further check, for example of installed programs. In the case of a process, parents can present credible that they have taught their child sufficiently. Proof safety, however, we recommend parents whose children have access to the PC and the Internet, as a precaution the child to make a written agreement, or the instruction to put in writing, so to prove that the content and scope of the use of the Internet were regulated and discussed, therefore an adequate instruction is done. The child is now liable concerned parents will ask themselves rightly, because that would be no solution: here, it is under circumstances on the age of the child and his insight.

But, the music warning from and film industries to prove that the child at the time had the required insight. You will, take at the earliest this 13-14 years of age where it will arrive on the respective State of development of the child. Is crucial, however, that parents must not specifically keep their child, because: the OLG Cologne has denied the wife for a copyright infringement liability, because she had sufficiently explained that the husband as a perpetrator in question would come. Nothing else can apply for a child living in the household as well as the parents. Then it would be enough when a copyright infringement a child as Perpetrator in question would come.

The parents must not specifically strain her child. This decision of the BGH is more than welcome and hopefully eliminated the automatism of the fault liability of the holder! With young children in the household, we strongly advise parents to defend themselves against a warning. We like to check the underlying facts in the particular case, the evidence situation and the actual chances of success for this. For more information on the subject of copyright are the lawyers Dr. Mahlstedt & partner (www.drmahlstedt.de/ urheberrecht.php) like to page.

The Cyprus

March 25th, 2021

Paragraph 8 of art. the profits of a partnership evaluates explicitly as corporate profits within the meaning of the DBA, which shall be taxable only in the State where the company is located. Thus eliminates a tax of falling on the level of Cypriot partnership profits in Cyprus as well as in Austria. When the tax assessment of the in Austria to be taxable persons originating from the Cyprus limited partnership profits to determine of the correct tax rate added to the income of the taxpayer (progression reservation not however taxed =),. From the Austrian point of view, it is important that the resident in Austria shareholder of Cypriot society of person not dominant Influence on the management of the Cypriot person company has. A Cypriot limited partnership must have at least two partners, of which at least a partner must be unrestricted liable.

The Cyprus limited partnership, the limited partnership, where the general partner is unlimited liable, while the limited partners maximum shall be liable in the amount of their capital contribution is similar to that at this point. The fully liable partner is provided by us in form of a Cypriot limited company, which is involved in winning the limited partnership and is also no capital contribution. The limited company provided by us also occurs (in the internal relationship trust) as Managing Director of the limited partnership. The taxpayer in Austria as a limited partner “occurs. This will ensure the taxpayer has no dominant influence on the fortunes of the limited partnership in Austria.

In this context, it is important that in the Cypriot Partnership almost as occurring complementary Cyprus limited company has a proper facility. This is the case with the society provided by us. The Cyprus limited partnership holds 100% of the operational Cypriot limited company, which performs the operations. The operative limited company earnings are subject to in Cyprus of a corporation tax of 10%. The operative society limited their dividends completely on its shareholder pours out, namely the Cypriot company (= limited partnership). Are the dividends with no tax at the level of the operating company. Received dividends are not taxed at the level of the partnership since 1 the profits of a partnership (= limited partnership) in Cyprus not at the level of the partnership, but at the level of the shareholder are taxed (such as when a KG in Austria or Germany). Because the fully liable partner (= quasi-Komplementar) is not involved in the profits of the company, incurred no tax here. At the level of or the limited shareholder (= quasi limited partner) no tax liability on the income arises in Cyprus from the person society, since the limited haftende(n) shareholder not in Cyprus resident is or (are). In Austria, in turn said income from the Cypriot is not taxed partnership art.7 of the DBA also according to paragraphs 1 and 2. For questions and discussions we are gladly available. ETC Germany: Phone: + 49 40/822186470, fax: + 49 40/822186450 E-Mail: Neuer Wall 50 20354 Hamburg / Germany Internet: control designs for clients from Austria: Mandanten_oesterreich_steuergestaltung.pdf ranking tax models that expose of the tax office ETC: rangliste_steuermodelle.pdf