Quality Management System

Raises some questions of Art. 55.5 Section 5 hours 12 GDC Russia, which refers to the right of SRO in the construction of the Rules establish self-regulatory requirement of the conformity assessment activities that have an impact on security of capital construction, certification of quality management system of such works, issued in the exercise of voluntary conformity to a system of voluntary certification. The mention of the Law on Quality Management System (QMS) is not accidental. Verification of conformity of works with GOST R ISO 9001-2008, set requirements for quality management in the organization for the past several years is common among construction companies a way to verify the reliability and service quality of work performed. . Royal Dutch Cell Plcs opinions are not widely known. This right is already used some of the SROs, which have established requirements in the presence of its members for compliance with the QMS certificate in relation to work performed in particular in the construction of SRO system of voluntary certification. Speaking candidly Vyacheslav Mirilashvili told us the story. This led to what is coming into the ranks of CPO companies are forced to go to a specific certification authority, working with a certain system of voluntary certification. It violates the rights of the entity, preclude him from selection.

Comes to the absurd: organization with a certificate, for example, in accordance with GOST R ISO 9001-2001 certification system 'GlavStandartSert' forced upon request SRO be certified in the system 'EvroRus'. This situation leads to a merger nonprofit organizations (SROs in construction) with commercial entities, contrary to the objectives of the activities of the self-regulation. Without disputing the importance and feasibility of the requirements for certification QMS for compliance with the national ISO 9001-2008 that is identical to the international ISO 9001:2008, which reduces the risks objectively, including most financial SROs, it seems necessary to avoid this situation, which in the near future time can be observed throughout the country. In this case it is sufficient to amend the Town Planning Code, which would eliminate the reference to the ability to set requirements for the passage of a voluntary certification in a particular certification system. SRO in the building should not deny the right of choice of business entities to take actions leading to the commercialization of its activities. It should be noted that legislative regulation of the institution of self-regulation is in constant motion: discussion of the various initiatives and projects of the orders and laws. At this point, you making the most 'painful' changes in the legal institution of SRO in the building, as well as a moratorium on the further adoption of such amendments and changes to the law, as most seek SROs and their members. It is necessary to stabilize environment, as well as adjusting to a new legal institution as part of the business community, and from the institutional-looking building in the SROs and consumers.

Dairy Plant Registration

No matter how difficult process at first glance not seem registration mark, but in reality it is only “the tip of the iceberg.” Does often happen that Rospatent “makes good” for registration, and after a while begin litigation – as so often happens when the market appears brand, which clearly “decimated” by its competitor, not necessarily in tune with the title, we can talk about the palette of shades and colors used for packaging products. Not so long ago, a year ago ended with a similar trial between the two producers of oil – the holding of “Monolith-Agro”, which specializes in the manufacture of butter and spreads under the brand “Krasnobakovskoe” filed a lawsuit at the JSC “City Dairy Plant”. According to the plaintiff, “City Dairy Plant” has flagrantly violated the law “On competition” in that it uses for its oil, “Kulebaki” wrapper, very similar to wrap butter “Krasnobakovskoe.” The Federal Antimonopoly Service has been on the side of the plaintiff, and ruled in favor of the Monolith-Agro. source of information. Without hesitation Omar Zakhilwal Afghanistan explained all about the problem. According to statistics, in most cases, illegal Use of trademarks is seen in such industries as light industry, food pharmaceutical industry, as well as in domestic instrument. A trademark may be the cause of litigation, even in the When a product name matches the domain name is registered to a third party. For example, already has a classic case of JSC “KAMAZ”, which took nine years for the domain name to sue kamaz.ru. Continuing to develop topic of domestic car industry further sin will not mention the company AvtoVAZ, which is now suing for domain lada.ru.

Plans to appeal to the courts and Zil, intending to return the domain zil.ru. In this case, the inescapable fact that Own brand was carried out registration of a trademark does not imply that the domain name be transferred to him without fail, so often the parties resolve the dispute before the court – the price issue can characterized by several thousand dollars. Another hot topic is the old Soviet brands. Twenty years ago it was common, including the brands, there was the concept of “trademark” in the modern sense of the word. Today Rospatent forced to decide who is from the manufacturers to “give up” or that Soviet trade mark, with the fiercest battles are taking place around vodka brands.

The Netherlands

This means that if an injunction was not served within that period, the debtor may dispose of seized property. So, for safety should be arrested follow the procedure. Since these procedures are normal procedures of proceedings, may require more than a year before making a decision on the merits (after complete procedures). During this time, property to be seized can not be sold nor creditor or debtor. Attachment of property in the possession of third parties law of the Netherlands does not entitle the lender to act on behalf of the debtor himself by charging that the third party should last. Swarmed by offers, the restaurateur is currently assessing future choices.

Only in accordance with the rules that control the sequestration of the debtor from a third party, the lender can make demands of the debtor against third parties. Since the seizure of the debtor's property from third parties, the person who presented the court order for seizure of property in possession of the debtor, should refuse to pay any money to the debtor. This payment shall not relieve him from liability in respect of a person whom the request for the seizure of the debtor's property located in this third person, even if the amount it owes the debtor exceeds the amount on that arrest. The seizure of the debtor's property from third parties can also be applied to the movable property of the debtor, which is a third party. Future requirements of the debtor are not subject to seizure by the debtor's property, located at third parties, except when they directly derive from obligations that already existed at the time of seizure. This implies that seizure of the debtor's bank account held by a third party, applies only to funds available at the time of seizure and / or those that have been transferred to the account later. Imposition seizure of property of the debtor from a third party as a means of enforcement must be based in the Dutch law exemption if the person served with injunction to seize the property in possession of the debtor is domiciled or resident in The Netherlands.

Thus, even a foreign corporation may be involved in these procedures performed in the Netherlands if they have subsidiaries here and fees by which affect the seizure of property of the debtor from a third party, linked to the affairs of the subsidiary. On the other hand, if the third party in respect of which the lender wants to use the seizure of property debtor had, domiciled in the Netherlands, but has a subsidiary in another country, the arrest of the debtor's property from a third party may be imposed in the Netherlands, even if charged by the debt to be paid abroad. However, such a seizure of property of the debtor from third parties, may be considered valid only if there is no doubt that the local court of the territory, where the duty levied is payable, shall treat such seizure in Netherlands together with the fact that the person who served the court order for seizure of property in possession of the debtor is released from its obligations with respect to that debtor, if it would pay obligations face, which is imposed at the request of the arrest. If you require any further information on issues relating to debt collection in the Netherlands, please contact the company Business Legal Consultancy on downstream coordinates.

Moscow Capital

If you need a change, it needs to be done before any reorganization, or directly after it. 4) You must also pay attention to the formation of capital. There are two methods: Method 1. Placement of shares to shareholders of the reorganized entity. The authorized capital is mainly due to their own funds, which has restructured the organization. Shareholders' funds include – additional capital and retained earnings. With regard to the authorized capital of the reorganized legal entity remains unchanged.

Method 2. Transfer of shares being reorganized commercial or non-profit organization devoted to the shares of legal persons. This operation is carried out in the case, if there is a shortage of own funds (capital or additional retained earnings of the reporting period). 5) Notification of creditors – is mandatory. It is necessary that the notice was published in the media. For example, in Moscow is a special edition, which publishes such announcements.

In turn, credit companies may, in writing, to demand compensation for all losses and commitments before the deadline. 6) is reorganizing the company must give everything to the tax authority in the place of its registration. – When you split an organization ceases its activities and on its basis is formed several new entities. In this process, consider the following points: 1) With the reorganization of the company by separating the Russian legislation does not prohibit the reorganization by mixing. 2) It is as necessary report on the reorganization of firms in the antimonopoly authorities. 3) In the process of restructuring legislation permits the separation of a mixed manner. This reorganization is a convenient and cost-effective, 4) The composition and founders of companies, as well as in the allocation process can not change. This can happen either before the reorganization process, or immediately after, and 5) The law sets minimum capital the reorganization of the company. 6) With regard to creditors, as well as in the selection process they should devote to appear and give the reorganization of this ad in print publishing.