Private copying exception is an exception to copyright which is present both in Lithuanian national law and law of the European Union. Recent jurisprudence of Court of Justice of the European Union interpreted legal regulation of private copying exception in the laws of the European Union. The mentioned jurisprudence raised concern whether Lithuanian copyright laws on private copying exception and their interpretation in case law of Supreme Court of Lithuania are compatible with the European Union law. This paper analyses the (...) nature and intention of private copying exception, its reflection in Lithuanian and European copyright law and evaluates Lithuanian laws and case law in the light of recent jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The authors conclude that recent jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union on private copying exception shall not lead to any dramatic or substantial changes of Lithuanian national copyright laws. (shrink)

A practising lawyer is not always aware of the fact that case decisions are more determined by legal doctrine – attitudes of authoritative lawyers and scientific legal discussion of other forms – than by changes in positive law. Regulations of specific case decisions are directly reliant on the ideas and statements of legal discussions – as one of the factors influencing the decisions of the courts. During the twenty years of independence, the form, content and argumentation of the Lithuanian court (...) judgments has fundamentally changed, especially with regard to the understanding of the courts (the judiciary) in terms of how unrestrained they are when interpreting a legal text and making decisions. The judicial discretion to interpret a legal text is treated diversely in various legal traditions and within the scope of the western legal tradition itself. In common law countries, the competence of a judge to deviate from a legal text or to create their own legal framework is treated with much greater understanding. In civil law tradition, the attempts of judges to take over the functions of the legislature are usually considered more critically. Even the representatives of comparative law emphasise that judges in civil law tradition countries tend to call the creation of legal rules differently – mostly as interpretation of the law. The discussion on the power of judges to create law through its interpretation has been taking place everywhere and at all times. Judicial discretion in decision-making is not due to individual factors such as era, social structure, cultural background, but is determined by some other factors that are not easy to identify. The interpretative activity of the courts is also influenced by the prevailing doctrinal regulations of judicial activity. It is the changes of the Lithuanian legal doctrines that could have encouraged the courts to determine the scope of their activity in the direction of its growth. After the restoration of independence, the Lithuanian legal community began an active discussion on whether legal positivism was the correct form of legal understanding. Studies appeared, in which legal positivism was seen exclusively negatively, reminding that it was specifically this legal concept that had eliminated values from law and was likely to be blamed for the ills of humanity such as the Holocaust or genocide. Numerous publications emerged calling judges to be active and reminding them to check every rule of law in accordance with its consistency with the principles of law and to disapply any rule of law that did not meet this requirement. Almost universally, lawyers (and especially the courts) were encouraged to move from mechanical (a priori improper) application of the law to the creative (a priori the best and aspirational) one. The courts were encouraged: they started to freely interpret legal rules, under which the legislature established their competence; although court judgments have become more reasoned, this did not prevent them from applying speculative or ambivalent arguments; criticism could be expressed to courts due to lengthy processes that are, objectively looking, not required, and for low activity in exercising their powers to prevent abuse of law. Respect for the legislature directly responsible for creating legal rules and taking care of legal protection, judicial recognition that a court should deviate from the legal text or otherwise create new rules only when it is objectively inevitable, and lawyers’ societal openness to discussion on various issues – these can become conceptual prerequisites for higher confidence in the courts. (shrink)

The present article analyses the qualitative and quantitative parameters of the execution of foreign policy in the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania. It should be noted that the matters of foreign policy were on the brink of constitutional regulation for a long time. The powers of institutions of the state in the field of foreign relations were established laconically by the Constitutions of first and second “waves” of establishment of constitutionalism. It was argued that the choices of decisions and (...) the execution of foreign policy were determined by political reasons and the law could only fix the results of that policy. That is why these constitutions should be seen as establishing quantitative characteristics of action of the state institutions in the field of foreign policy. As a result of the changes in the concept of the Constitution and the general recognition of the relevance of constitutional regulation from the middle of the twentieth century the constitutional acts began to define not only the powers of certain state institutions in the field of the foreign policy but also the objectives and principles of this policy. These objectives and principles are qualitative parameters of the action of state institutions, which are mandatory constitutional requirements to all subjects engaged in foreign policy. From a qualitative standpoint, the powers of the state institutions can be exercised only by taking the constitutional objectives into account and by respecting the Constitution. The Constitution establishing both qualitative and quantitative characteristics of the execution of foreign policy becomes an actual basis of this policy. It is unlawful to execute foreign policy without complying with its objectives and constitutional principles. The institutions of constitutional review have the powers to determine the constitutionality of legal acts related to the execution of foreign policy. Constitutional regulations previous to the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania of 1992 only defined the powers of state institutions, i.e. the quantitative parameters of their action. The Lithuanian Constitution of 1992 also established the constitutional objectives and principles of foreign policy. This area of constitutional regulation has been enhanced by the participation of the Republic of Lithuania in the European Union. The author suggests analysing this matter as an autonomous constitutional principle and not only as a case of participation in international organisations or an integral element of the principle of geopolitical orientation. Constitutional objectives and principles of foreign policy, as well as the other provisions of the Constitution regarding the exercise of foreign policy, are interpreted in constitutional jurisprudence. In cases concerning the constitutionality of international treaties, laws and other legislative acts directly related to the exercise of foreign policy, the Constitutional Court reveals the content and meaning of the qualitative and quantitative constitutional parameters of foreign policy. Despite the fragmented nature of the case law one can see the precise contours of the foreign policy system. (shrink)

The aim of this article is to analyse different goals of the competition law, which are established in European Union and Lithuania. EU Commission and the Court of Justice distinguish a number of goals of the competition law. Most commonly, mentioned goals of competition law are the following: the integration of the Internal Market, the protection of consumers, protection of the competitors, freedom of competition and economic efficiency. Different goals of competition law are analysed in this paper and relationship between (...) them is explained. Special attention is given to the analysis of protection of the consumers as one of the main objectives of competition law. While analysing protection of the consumers in competition law, a difference between the concept of consumer in competition law and consumer protection law is explained. The authors express a number of critical thoughts towards practice of the EU Commission and the Court of Justice so far, as there is a lack of consistency in evaluation of the protection of consumers’ rights in the context of the other objectives of competition law. Relevance of the present article is supported by the several facts such as revision of the competition law goals by the EU Commission and adoption of resolution “Concerning priority of the activities of the Lithuanian Competition Council” by the Lithuanian Competition Council that establishes main principles (priorities) applied while implementing competition policy in Lithuania. Setting out the main goals in Lithuanian competition law may have important practical consequences in the everyday activities of the Lithuanian national competition authority. (shrink)

The main goal of concentration control and basic legal tests applied worldwide for the evaluation of concentrations, such as “dominance”, “significant impediment of competition” and “substantial lessening of competition” are analysed in this article. Every control, whatever its nature, is implemented in order to reach certain goals. In the first part of this article we analyse the goals of concentration control in different jurisdictions – mostly in the European Union, the USA and Lithuania. Four basic market security standards are excluded: (...) economic efficiency, protection of consumers, protection of competitors and protection of effective market competition. At the end we make a conclusion that the same standard, namely that of consumer protection, is applied in all those jurisdictions and that more attention should be paid for the protection of competitors and competition as a whole. Secondly, “dominance” test, applied in the EU under Regulation 4064/89, is analysed in detail. Moreover, the article discusses the meaning of a “dominant position”. We uphold the clarification of “dominance” provided by the Court of Justice, according to which dominance means the ability “to act to a considerable extent independently of their competitors, their customers and, ultimately, of consumers”. It is argued that “dominance” test is not sufficient for contemporary economics. The main disadvantage of this rule is that it is inapplicable for concentrations that do not create or strengthen dominant position. Furthermore, the new European Union rule of “significant impediment of competition” can be named as a smart European decision that tackled several problems: the practice of the Court of Justice remained applicable for future cases, because no serious changes to the wording of the rule were made. The detection of “dominant position” became only an alternative means to impede competition. In addition to this, the USA, the UK rule of “substantial lessening of competition” is compared to the two rules referred above. The concept of “monopoly” used in the wording of the rule, as well as the practice of the USA courts concerning the evaluation of market concentrations is analysed. We conclude that literally the phrases “significant impediment of competition” and “substantial lessening of competition” are different, but the content of these rules is the same. Different decisions taken in the same or similar cases on both sides of the Atlantic depend not on a certain rule but on the means of its application and some other circumstances (social, political factors, etc.). Finally, it is argued that practice of the evaluation of concentrations in the Republic of Lithuania is extremely poor. According to the present findings of the Competition Council of the Republic of Lithuania, it is hard to say the kind of approach the Council follows or, in other words, what kind of a rule the Council applies. Despite the fact that competition law in Lithuania was updated in conformity with the changes made in the EU competition law, we state that the test of “dominance” is further applied in certain concentration cases. (shrink)

Taxation of residential property is difficult to be implemented in many jurisdictions and in this respect Lithuania is not an exception. Many taxpayers do not comprehend why property should be levied by the government. Indeed, any owner of real estate would usually resist to any attempts to increase this tax burden. However, even when the threshold is once overstepped and a new unpopular statutory framework is introduced, the government still faces new dilemmas regarding the administration of this tax. Sometimes weak (...) tax administration but not the tax itself undermines the credibility of the public. Commercial premises as well as land have been continuously levied in the Republic of Lithuania since 1990. Thus, the taxes paid by enterprises and the land tax were not a big issue of public debate in Lithuania. The burden of this tax was not very significant in the light of all taxes paid by enterprises or land owners. The most problematic issue remains the taxation of residential property. (shrink)