Yesterday evening, the 9^th October 2017, Malta Finance Minister Hon Profs Scicluna laid out the plans of the Government for 2018 in the first budget in decades that was put in a context of a surplus for Malta, continual economic growth (currently around 5-6% annually) and record numbers for tourism and employment. Therefore, as the Minister proudly announced, this Budget did not include the addition of any new direct or indirect taxes, and several measures, as shown hereunder, in order to continue building on the positive context of the island as well as to seek improvement in key areas such as traffic control and roads, as well as property and rent.

For a breakdown of the main points please read our article through the link below:

Malta Budget 2018

According to the latest official statistics, Malta flag continued growing reaching more than 8,000 ships up to the end of August of this year and remains the largest maritime registry in EU and the sixth largest worldwide.

The Malta’s ship registry grew by 63% since 2012 and now boasts a total 74 million gross tonnage registered under Malta’s flag.

Grown was also seen in the registration of commercial yachts with a record of 97% increase in the number of new registrations.

Such statistics were announced by Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, Dr. Ian Borg, while addressing a news conference at the Lower Barrakka Gardens to mark World Maritime Day, which will be celebrated next Thursday.

GM Corporate and Fiduciary Services Limited has won the Award of the ‘Contributor With Most Popular Article In Malta’ for the month of July.

The article which is titled ‘‘The Intellectual (Monopoly) Property Perception’’ was written by Dr Christine Sammut and Mr Daniel Inguanez.

You may access the full article through the following link:

The Intellectual (Monopoly) Property Perception

Today, the 26th of June 2017, marks the deadline for the transposition of the Fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive by the EU Member States. The Prevention of Money Laundering and Funding of Terrorism Regulations(PMLFTR)and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) transpose the provisions of the Directive into Maltese law and the FIAU Implementing Procedures have been updated earlier this year to reflect the changes brought about by the Fourth AML Directive.

In accordance with the requirements of Article 4 of the PMLFTR, this weekend, the GM group organised a training seminar for all its employees to make them aware of the changes in due diligence and anti-money laundering obligations in terms of the updated FIAU Implementing Procedures. After these changes, due diligence has become noticeably stricter than before. Since the Fourth AML Directive, legal persons are explicitly required to hold adequate, accurate and current information on their beneficial ownership which may now include persons in senior management. The Implementing Procedures put further emphasis on ongoing monitoring while also increasing the penalties for being in default of due diligence obligations which penalties have been raised to the amount € 46,500.

A change which has been welcomed is the amendment to technological obligations of due diligence. For example, a subject person may now retain certified true copies in electronic form while in the case of face-to-face clients, a subject person may also certify documents through scanning documents through the use of software which meets certain specified requirements. In the case of non-face-to-face customers, alternative verification of identity details may be carried out through commercial electronic data providers, video conferencing, reference to electronic copies of identification documents, or use of systems such as e-ids or bank-ids. Records may now be retained in electronic format except where documents are certified by third parties, that is, when the documents are not certified by the subject person itself or its employees.

The revision of the FIAU Implementing Procedures represents a major step forward in the effort to combat the money laundering abreast of the recent efforts that have been taken by the EU. However, the FIAU Implementing Procedures still need to clarify certain aspects of the Fourth AML Directive. In particular it is unclear who will have access to the centralised registers of beneficial ownership (the “CRB”) for trustees and for corporate entities through which the Member States are obliged to request certain information from trustees and corporate entities and to disclose such information on the respective CRB. 

[1] Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES>. 

[2]  Subsidiary Legislation 373.01 Prevention of Title Money Laundering and Funding of Terrorism Regulations

<http://www.fiumalta.org/library/PDF/legislation/2015%20Regulations.pdf>. 

[3]  Cap. 373 Prevention of Money Laundering Act

<http://www.fiumalta.org/library/PDF/legislation/PMLA%20(17.03.2015).pdf>.

[4] Implementing Procedures issued by the Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit in terms of the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering and Funding of Terrorism Regulations <http://www.fiumalta.org/library/PDF/misc/27.01.2017-Implementing%20Procedures%20Part%20I2017.pdf>.

The findings of the ‘European Citizens and Intellectual Property: Perception, Awareness and Behaviour’ survey commissioned by the European Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) were published in a report yesterday, 23th of March[1]. The survey questioned 26,555 EU citizens, 500 of these were Maltese, aged 15 and over about their perceptions of intellectual property during October of 2016. The survey builds on a previous study carried out in 2013[2].

The survey shows that there is widespread support for intellectual property rights among EU citizens. 97% of respondents believed that it is important that inventors, creators and performing artists can protect their rights and be paid for their work. 70% of respondents said that nothing can justify the purchase of counterfeit goods, and 78% believed that buying counterfeits had a negative effect on businesses and jobs. Yet, the survey shows that the tolerance for buying counterfeits has increased since the 2013 study. The main reason for this was identified to be that a consumer feels that the original product is too expensive.

The initiative of the EUIPO to carry out the survey is to be commended. The reach of intellectual property rights has in recent years attracted some criticism. In the EU, some aspects of the Commission’s proposal to reform copyright have been criticised for granting more intellectual property rights. It is hoped that the public perception, as stated by António Campinos (EUIPO Executive Director), “will continue to have a vital role to play in the years ahead, by providing policymakers, businesses and citizens with impartial facts on which to base the debate on the way forward.”

[1] European Citizens and Intellectual Property: Perception, Awareness and Behaviour (2017):

https://euipo.europa.eu/tunnelweb/secure/webdav/guest/document_library/observatory/documents/
IPContributionStudy/2017/european_public_opinion_study_web.pdf 

[2] The European Citizens and Intellectual Property: Perception, Awareness and Behaviour (2013):

https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/documents/11370/80606/IP+perception+study

Yesterday GM participated in a session organised by Society Education entitled ‘Dissolution and Consequential Winding up of Companies’. This was an afternoon seminar which discussed the main types of dissolutions available under the Maltese Companies Act (Cap. 386) as well as a more practical overview of the subject.

Under Maltese law there are two main types of modes of winding up; winding up by the Court or voluntary winding up, which can either be a members’ or creditors’ voluntary winding up. The session first dealt with the notion of Court winding up and then moved onto the voluntary winding up. It was interesting to see that in a Court’s winding up, Maltese courts today still rely heavily on UK company law and case law, particularly, in light of the two possibilities for Court winding up under Maltese law through Article 214 (2) of the Companies Act which are frequently linked to the ‘cash flow insolvency’ and the ‘balance sheet insolvency’, respectively, as found under UK law, even though, the said types of winding up, are not specifically stated in our law.

When it comes to Voluntary winding up, Maltese law is somewhat clearer and more straightforward as to the procedures to be followed. It was emphasised during this part of the session that, whether there are two different types of voluntary winding up, the two are rather similar and the differences between them can be said to be of minimal nature.

The session ended with a brief discussion on winding up of insurance undertakings, the winding up of credit institutions and controlled companies as well as a brief on the duties of directors, both as directors of an active company as well as the duties and the seizure thereof of directors of companies which are placed in liquidation. 

The UK Prime Minister Theresa May has confirmed today that she will officially trigger the Brexit process on March 29th 2017 when Article 50 of the European Union Treaty shall be triggered.  In fact, Prime Minister May has plans to write to all the other 27 member states explaining the official intention for the UK to leave the European Union.  Following that, a long term of negotiation is expected to commence wherein both parties shall agree on the terms of the departure of the UK from the EU which should take place by March 2019 if the pre-established two year deadline is adhered to.

The other member states are expected to signal their response to the official start of the Brexit process within 48 hours.  Both parties expect a thorough negotiation process wherein the UK will seek appropriate balance in its exit from the EU while the rest of the EU are expected to go for strict terms which seek to harness the EU as an institution and do not harm its unity and protections.  Before negotiations officially start, each member state must agree on its position in this regard, and this, understandably, may take some time.

This will be the first time in which Article 50 shall be made use of by a member state and the UK is marked as the first member state seeking its exit from the Union.  This is a historic and controversial move which shall have a long-term and vital impact on the strength of the European Union and Europe as a whole.  The result shall remain to be seen in the months and years to come.

GM Corporate and Fiduciary Services Limited has won the Award of the ‘Contributor With Most Popular Article In Malta’ for the month of February.

The article which is titled ‘‘The Likelihood Of Confusion In The European Union Trade Mark Opposition Procedure – Part II’’ was written by Dr Roberta Farrugia Galea.

You may access both Part I and Part II through the following links:

The Likelihood Of Confusion In The European Union Trade Mark Opposition Procedure – part I

The Likelihood Of Confusion In The European Union Trade Mark Opposition Procedure – part II

In September of 2016 the EU Commission published its Proposal for a Directive to reform of the EU copyright framework, namely the Infosoc Directive (2001/29/EC).  Article 11 of the Proposed Directive seeks to introduce a ‘neighbouring right’ for press publishers – ‘Member States shall provide publishers of press publications with the rights provided for in Article 2 and Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the digital use of their press publications’. Articles 2 and 3(2) currently grant the right to authors, performers and the like to prohibit the reproduction and the making available to the public of their works.

In short, the proposal entails copyright protection for press publishers over their published news. Therefore search engines and new aggregators like Google News and Yahoo will be prevented from publishing snippets without paying a fee to the press publisher. The proposal aims to address the loss of revenue that the publishing industry has experienced in recent years.

In October of 2016 the Commission’s Directive Proposal was referred to the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) of the European Parliament for its review. The Committee appointed MEP Therese Comodini Cachia as rapporteur to draft amendments to the Commission’s proposal. The MEP has seemingly not done away with the ‘neighbouring rights’ as many where calling for. Rather it is suggested that the proposed Article 11 be amended to read – ‘ Member States shall provide publishers of press publications with a presumption of representation of authors of literary works contained therein and the legal capacity to sue in their own name when defending the rights of such authors for the digital use of their press publications’. Comodini Cachia seems to conclude that “[u]sing digital technology to facilitate the finding of news and press published in press publications is not necessarily disproportionately harmful to the financial interests of press publishers”. If Comodini Cachia’s wording is to be adopted then press publishers will still be given a right but will have the onus of proving the harm caused to them in legal proceedings.

Does this amendment of Article 11 make a difference? Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) is expected to discuss the amendment on the 22nd and 23rd of this month. 

Mr John A. Gauci-Maistre K.M., founder and CEO of GM International Services Limited has been attending the past week’s European Shipping Week 2017 (ESW) in Brussels which will draw to an end today.

This is the second ESW to be organised after the great success of the first which took place in March of 2015. The ESW is the brainchild of the European Community Shipowners' Associations (ECSA) and is run by a Steering Group made up of Europe's main shipping organisations as well as the European Commission and Shipping Innovation. It is therefore a platform where policy-makers from the main EU institutions meet and engage with European shipowners and other stakeholders from the shipping sector – an overall great networking opportunity which puts shipping, in all its aspects, on the European agenda.

This year’s ESW consisted of a number of industry seminars, workshops and roundtable debates with one overarching theme: the indispensable need for digitisation and modernisation in order for the maritime sector to become even more quality oriented, sustainable and competitive in the years ahead.  The week-long series of events, however, centred around the flagship Conference which took place on the 1st of March. The Conference dealt with two key issues: global trends affecting shipping like digital disruption and decarbonisation of shipping; and European shipping policy in view of maritime careers, the current business climate and simplification.

The ESW 2017 coincides with the current impetus to prioritise the maritime sector at the European policy-making level with the Commission theming 2017 as European Maritime Year and the Maltese Presidency identifying the maritime sector as a priority. The point was made by the Hon. Joe Mizzi, Maltese Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, during the opening of the first ESW 2017 workshop and also took the opportunity to reaffirm the priority of maritime affairs – “We must not forget that maritime transport is the catalyst for economic development; it has and will remain an important source for jobs, growth and income for the European economy. We all have the obligation to safeguard its sustainability.”

For more information about European Shipping Week 2017 you can visit the official website www.europeanshippingweek.com

Yesterday GM participated in the IPR Enforcement Conference held in Malta and organised by the Maltese Customs, the Malta EU Presidency and the European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights.

The sessions throughout the day ranged from an examination of the European Commission’s (EC) review of the IPR Enforcement Directive (2004/48 EC) to an overview of the European Union Intellectual Property Office’s (EUIPO) reports and sectoral studies including the quantification of infringements in smartphones, to an interesting discussion on customs’ key role in enforcing IPR and what is currently being done, a look at the Maltese perspective, as well as, ending with a session on strategies outside EU borders.

An interesting discussion arose with regards to the role of customs in enforcing IPR. Representatives for various customs offices and representatives of the private sector discussed the work being done at EU borders and how the issue of ‘goods in transit’ in not an easy one to tackle. The issue of storage and destruction of goods was also thoroughly addressed. A very interesting and valid point was made by Mr D’arcy Quinn, representing the Business Action to Stop Counterfeiting & Piracy (BASCAP), who queried as to the identity and the definition of the counterfeiter.  Presently, it is the manufacturer who produces the counterfeit goods who is deemed to be the counterfeiter.  Mr Quinn explained that the counterfeiter’s definition should be broadened to encompass the other elements of the supply chain; from the delivery vessel company, to the brokers, to the customs officers who knowingly clear such goods and to the retailer who sells the goods, amongst others. If this issue is not addressed, counterfeiting will remain on the increase as the ‘bad guys’ remain unpunished and unhindered.  It is short-minded to have the victim of the crime, being the right holder generally, or the government/authorities pay for the destruction of the goods once the original manufacturer is not found, and there are other known players of the supply chain. He encouraged all stakeholders to voluntarily work together in the sharing of intelligence and focus on measures wherein all the players of the supply chain are taken to chore for investigating their customers and therefore knowingly avoiding working relationships with manufacturers making counterfeit goods.

Malta finds itself ranked, year after year, as one of the top three Member States in terms of quantity of counterfeited goods seized and detained by customs. This clearly shows the importance of Malta in helping the fight against counterfeited goods, especially for goods in transit. Special praise was given to the Maltese customs department, a much respected department, which looks to continue in its success of stopping counterfeit goods to reach the market, both locally and internationally, where possible.  

The Council has today adopted a regulation revising the suspension mechanism which can apply to all existing visa liberalisation agreements. The revised regulation has the main objective of strengthening the suspension mechanism by making it easier for member states to notify circumstances which might lead to a suspension since the Commission will now be able to trigger the mechanism on its own initiative.

Maltese Minister for Home Affairs and National Security, Carmelo Abela, has said that;

“The revision of the suspension mechanism adopted today makes it easier to

tackle abuse of the system”1

The revision sees an extension in the grounds for suspension which include; increase in the refusal of readmission applications, increase in the risk to public policy or the internal security of the member states and also includes a decrease in cooperation on readmission. The reference periods and deadlines for the use of the mechanism have been shortened by this new regulation which has the objective of creating a faster procedure. In fact, the reference period for comparing the circumstances leading to the suspension with the situation during the previous year or before the visa liberalisation, has been shortened from 6 months to 2 months.

In accordance with this regulation, suspensions can now be triggered by a notification of a member state or by the Commission. If a simple majority of member states notify, the Commission will have to adopt an implementing decision temporarily suspending the exemption from the visa requirement for certain categories of nationals of the third country concerned for a period of 9 months. If the circumstances persist, the Commission shall adopt (at the latest 2 months prior to the expiry of the 9 months) a delegated act temporarily suspending the visa waiver for a further period of 18 months, for all the nationals of the third country concerned.

To ensure that third countries which have been granted visa exemptions continue to fulfil the criteria which were the basis for granting such visa free status, the regulation shall introduce a monitoring mechanism.

The Council has today also adopted a regulation on visa liberalization for Georgians travelling to the European Union for a period of stay of 90 days in any 180-day period2. Both regulations shall be signed and subsequently published in the EU Official Journal at the same time. The regulations will enter into force 20 days later. 

[1]Click the link here

[2]Click the link here

Malta is a leading yachting hub in Europe with more than 600 registered superyachts, more than anywhere else in the continent. This point was made by the Honourable Joe Mizzi, Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, in his opening presentation to the annual Opportunities in Superyachts Conference hosted yesterday, the 23rd of February 2017, in Valletta. The conference is a key networking event in the superyacht sector which brings together over a hundred professionals brokers, managers, builders, marina operators, lawyers, corporate service providers, registries, associations, tax advisors and accountants from around the globe making it a truly international forum.

The Honourable Minister’s statement means that the Maltese superyacht register has increased by around 100 yachts in one year; at the end of December 2015 it numbered at 501 yachts (Press Release 11 February 2016). The Maltese growth in this sector can be attributed to a straightforward registration process and tax regimes which are beneficial to owners rather than punitive. Earlier in the year Transport Malta also issued new ‘Guidelines for Pleasure Yachts Carriage Capacities’ which allow superyachts of over 500 gross tonnes to carry more than 12 passengers (excluding crew) without the need to comply with the Convection for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) or the Passenger Yacht Code (PYC) in order to adapt yacht requirements to contemporary trends in the industry. Transport Malta has also recognised the tendency for owners to commission superyachts that fall below the international 500 gross tonnes limit for conventions, therefore yachts of 499 gross tonnes and similar sizes will also be able to benefit from the guidelines.

On the 21st February 2017, the Economic and Financial Affairs Council (ECOFIN) within the EU Council approved new rules to help prevent tax avoidance via non-EU countries.  The EU has made tax transparency and combatting tax avoidance within the EU one of its main goals in recent years.  In fact, in 2016, an Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive was finalised.  This Directive set out anti-abuse measures against tax avoidance and included provisions curtailing hybrid mismatches between EU member states.  Hybrid mismatches are situations wherein different tax rules in different countries allow multinational companies to exploit the loopholes of the law and avoid being taxed in the EU.

The new provisions, amending this newly formed Directive, further help curtail tax-avoidance by prohibiting and neutralising hybrid mismatches involving third countries (non-EU countries).  In fact, the new provisions establish minimum rules that neutralise such hybrid mismatches where at least one of the parties involved is a corporate taxpayer in an EU member state.  These rules will come into force in January 1, 2020 with a longer phasing-in period of 2022 for one article regarding reverse hybrid mismatches.

The Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive was a vital step in the tackling of taxation within the EU and it provided for significant effect on taxation of multinational companies operating in the EU.  These new provisions further expand the scope of the Directive and the effect it shall have on the targeted corporate entities.  

Considering the reality of terrorism attacks reaching and wounding the EU in its heart all the more frequently in recent years, in February the EU approved new rules which seek to combat terrorism in more target-specific and evolving ways.  In fact, the new proposed Directive on combating terrorism seeks to prevent attacks and not merely react to them following their unfortunate taking place.  The EU sought a balance between increasing security and upholding fundamental rights of all its citizens.  This was stressed by Parliament’s lead MEP Monika Hohlmeier.

The new Directive seeks to address particular realities which bring about acts of terrorism and which must be curtailed while safeguarding the fundamental rights of freedom, human dignity and equality.  Thus, the EU has criminalised certain preparatory acts which aid in finalising and perpetrating acts of terrorism.  The intention of the individual in committing these acts remains the main factor to be taken into consideration.  The act of recruiting individuals for terrorism, the act of traveling abroad (such as countries like Syria or Iraq) to join a terrorist group and/or returning to the EU with the aim of carrying out a terroristic attack, training or being trained for terrorism purposes, aiding, abetting or attempting to carry out an attack, carrying out acts which provide for public incitement, encouragement or praise of terrorism and the financing of terrorism or terrorist groups are all listed as specific punishable criminal offences under the new Directive.  Such offences shall be punishable by heavy custodial sentences taking into consideration the special intent of committing them for terrorism purposes.

The new Directive also provides for provisions on protection, support and rights of victims of terrorism which include the surety of support services to families, assistance in repatriation, and adequate medical and psychological support as well as access to legal and financial advice to the victims and families.

This Directive shall now be published in the European Union’s Official Journal and shall enter into force on the twentieth day from publication.  The member states (excluding Denmark and the UK & Ireland) shall have 12 months from its adoption in which to transpose the Directive into national law.  This is a further step which the EU has taken in order to combat terrorism on EU soil and to further prevent such attacks from happening while protecting the victims when they unfortunately do take place. 

A new anti-terror legislation has been approved by a strong majority of MEPs on Thursday 16th February 2017. The new rules will amend the Schengen Borders Code (SBC) and will oblige all member states to systematically check all persons crossing EU external borders against a number of databases, such as, of stolen and lost documents, the Schengen Information System (SIS) and other relevant EU databases. These checks shall be mandatory at all sea, land and air borders, on both entry and exit points.

These new rules came to no surprise to most in response to several terrorist threats Europe has received in the past few years, and more recently attacks which took place in Brussels, Paris and also Berlin.  The regulation hopes to stop, or at least decrease, the phenomenon known as “foreign fighters”. These are EU citizens who are joining terrorist groups in conflict zones, such as Iraq and Syria. 

Rapporteur Monica Macovei has stated that; “Securing our external borders means building up a strong shield against terrorism in Europe and preserving the right to life, which is the corollary of all rights.”¹

Concerns have been made as to whether these checks would possibly slow down land and sea border traffic, in which case, EU countries will be able to carry “targeted” checks only following a risk assessment which shows that this would not lead to threats to internal security or public policy.

The transition period of six months will be given for air borders in which member states may use targeted checks. This period might be prolonged for a maximum period of 18 months, in some exceptional cases.  The regulation will enter into force on the twentieth day following its publication in the EU Official Journal. The rules will then be immediately enforceable, and in most member states simultaneously.

Furthermore, Monica Macovei added that “Every life that we save by unveiling a potential foreign fighter is worth the journey, and systematic checks against databases are a mandatory step towards this minimum protection that we have a duty to ensure for our citizens.”²

 In light of an opposition procedure under Article 8 of the European Union Trade Mark Regulation (EUTMR)¹, one must assess the similarity between marks to establish the possibility of finding ‘likelihood of confusion’, in conjunction with the similarity between goods and services, which was discussed in Part I of this piece.

In the assessment of marks, there is a very fine line between finding a mark to be similar or dissimilar, which line is not always easy to define. For most cases, it is sufficient to globally assess the marks through three important elements, which elements were firstly introduced in the Sabel vs Puma case²but still remain of great importance today.

Please click here to read the full article.

New standard specifications concerning liquefied natural gas (LNG) have been issued by the ISO yesterday, the 13th of February 2017.

Ships have been using liquefied natural gas (LNG) as fuel for more than ten years in Northern Europe but it is relatively new in other parts of the world. However, the demand for LNG-fueled ships today has increased and their use has spread to all parts of the world. Despite LNG’s good safety record, its’ now widespread use, has led the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the European Commission and the Baltic and International Maritime Council (BIMCO) to request to the ISO to issue new standard specifications for bunkering operations and bunkering equipment internationally.

In response, the ISO has issues the new standards on LNG entitled ‘ISO 20519 Ships and marine technology – Specification for bunkering of liquefied natural gas fueled vessels’. The IS0 20519 standards set requirements which are not covered by the International Code of the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC Code) which was last revised in 2014. The requirements listed in the ISO 20513 generally relate to:

(a) hardware relating liquid and vapour transfer systems, operational procedures;

(b) LNG bunker delivery notes which are to be provided by the LNG provider;

(c) training and qualifications of personnel involved; and

(d) the meeting of applicable ISO standards and local codes by LNG facilities.

The new requirements ensure that in all ports, the same safety and standard procedures are being applied in relation to bunkering operations of LNG. Furthermore, Steve O’Malley, Convener of TC 8 working group that developed ISO 20519, has added that “the requirement to comply with ISO standards is often incorporated into business contracts and may also be referenced by local regulations”. 

The European Union (‘EU’) has attempted to establish a unitary regime to provide for a single filing system for trade mark registration through the inception of the Community Trade Mark Regulation (‘CTMR’)¹, which due to recent amendments, has now been renamed the European Trade Mark Regulation (‘EUTMR’). The term ‘Community Trade Mark’ (‘CTM’), now ‘European Trade Mark’ (‘EUTM’), under the said Regulation, includes any mark which consists of different words, shapes, designs and graphics which together can differentiate between goods or services of one enterprise from another. Moreover, the EUTMR provides owners of earlier trade mark rights the opportunity to oppose registration regarding any mark which is identical, similar or creates confusion with their earlier mark and the goods or services it assimilates with.

Click here to read the full article.

Today, the leaders of the 28 EU Member States, including British PM Theresa May, have met in Valletta for an Informal Summit which touches upon the most concerning issues that the EU faces today: migration, Brexit and the election of US President Donald Trump.

During this morning’s working session the EU leaders have been discussing the external aspects of migration. The focus is namely to stem the flow of irregular migration departing from Libya through the Central Mediterranean route which the vast majority of irregular migrants use to enter the EU. The main target solution to relieve migratory pressure consists of stepping up cooperation with Libya in terms of training, equipping and supporting the Libyan national coast guard and above all to disrupt the human smuggling business. Following the end of the first session on migration the EU leaders are further expected to discuss international challenges, namely the effects of the Trump administration on the EU especially in light of Theresa May’s meeting with Donald Trump last Friday the 27th of January 2017. 

Another working session is set to take place in the evening which will be devoted to preparation for the 60th anniversary of the Rome Treaties which will be celebrated in March of this year. PM Theresa May will not attend this session since it will build upon the political reflection on the future of the EU which was begun in Bratislava following the Brexit referendum and set out the way ahead for the other 27 EU Member States in the hope of greater unity amongst them.

Malta is taking center stage in the EU during its Presidency of the Council of the EU and this summit is just one of many steps which it is set to take in order to continue to seek solidarity and long-term solutions towards irregular migration which touches it closely, as well as general peace and prosperity in the EU currently potentially under threat from worldwide as well as internal pressures.

Malta’s Presidency of the EU Council commenced on 1^st January of 2017. While the priorities of the Maltese Presidency focus largely on popular concerns, namely immigration and security [1], the published work programme [2] deals with more specific issues. In particular, it details that the Maltese Presidency is to facilitate the review of a number of financial services regulations:

1. To push forward discussion on the Capital Markets Union (CMU) Action Plan, finalise discussion with the European Parliament on the harmonisation of securitisation rules for simple, transparent and standardised securitisation, and push forward the narrative of growth and jobs in the CMU agenda and promoting access to finance of SMEs.

2. To finalise the revision of the European venture capital funds (EuVECA) regulation which covers alternative investment schemes that focus on start-ups and early-stage companies and of the European social entrepreneurship funds (EuSEF) regulation which covers alternative investment schemes that focus on social enterprises, i.e. companies set up with the explicit aim to have a positive social impact and address social objectives.

3. To make progress on proposals to amend the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD IV) and the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) which set out governance and supervision measures vis-à-vis credit institutions (such as banks) and investment companies, and also the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD) and the Single Resolution Mechanism Regulation (SRMR) which regulate the recovery and resolution of failing institutions. The proposals aim to create stability and reduce risk in the banking sector in light of the 2008 financial crisis.

4. To work on legislative proposals on the recovery and resolution of failing Central Counterparties (CCPs).

5. To initiate work on the review of the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR) which regulates the EU derivatives market.

6. To work on establishing the European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS). This will insure deposits of up to € 100,000 of all banks in the banking union.

[1] Full document can be found here

[2] Full document can be found here