Cool Investments

A post by specialist lawyer for employment law Alexander Bredereck Authority Chief Jahn seems according to latest media reports determined the 47 “to remove former full-time Stasi employees who do service in his authority from the authority. “Der Spiegel reports in its edition of the 16.5.2011, that the former employees of the MfS with the Jahn authority de facto tenure” were. What does the labour code? Basically can be cancelled of course the staff. The employer needs a reason for termination. The former Stasimitarbeit the Jahn authority is can not rely on the termination, because it was known to the employer for a long time.

Other grounds for dismissal are still eligible. Here nothing is considered the normal”, so their employees. Likely, that will collect the terminated employee dismissal lawsuit and a labour court the redundancies invalid, is however, if the employer not by the Recognized cause for termination to the page is dismissal. Against the background that workers decide during a dismissal procedure regularly for a severance payment instead of a continuation of the employment relationship, it seems rather impractical, to say that the authority could get rid of the staff absolutely not. They could get the golden handshake, which intends to offer the authority according to mirror the former Stasi employees within the framework of a code comparison.

He will have to fall off but quite lush, after all staff without a safe and well-paid job. Should a former back complain is nevertheless, the transfer of the remaining 47 could be called second step “are the order of the day in other authorities. Specialist Attorney tip workers: they are typically strong on the defensive, if your employer is determined to get rid of you. Experience has shown that golden handshakes are”within the framework of a Termination agreement but no good solution for you. The severance, termination or dismissal suit, you can achieve in a code comparison is usually much higher. If a separation is inevitable, is usually the best announce it himself and to bring dismissal action, however, within the prescribed period. Against a transfer, you can defend yourself also before the Labour Court. Specialist Attorney tip employers: always, remember the possibility of transfer of the employee to another department or a different branch. The reason for the termination of a weakness of an employee be other than in the exceptional situation in the j-body, for your employees, a change may well do him and your company correctly. But be careful: not every transfer is permitted. Can always consult with an expert before such a measure. A post by lawyer Alexander polymath, Berlin lawyer specializing in labour law

Bill to strengthen investor protection Gottingen, 05 March 2010 – press release from 03 March announced the Federal Minister of finance, Dr. Wolfgang Schauble, to introduce a discussion draft for a law to strengthen in April of investor protection and improving the functioning of the capital market. At the heart is the extension of the validity of the securities trading Act (WpHG) also on assets. The introduction of a consultation Protocol obligation as well as a registration and sanctions in relation to the investment advice is intended for institutions in this area. At the same time, the proposal involves tightening the requirements on prospectuses, as well as a substantive review by the Bundesanstalt fur Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BFin).

Increased requirements for prospectuses relating to the requirements for equity and bond prospectuses are so-called assets also for providers such as closed-end funds in the future more detailed brochure content, such as information on bankruptcies required, which should allow investors a better assessment of the seriousness of the initiators of the offer. Also the way is namely not only formally liberated with the proposed amendment to the prospectus requirements for a more extensive examination of BFin investment prospectuses – completeness in terms of statutory minimum information, but also in terms of content clarity and consistency (so called coherence test”), how she has taken place so far only in securities. Restricted aggravations for advice and mediation at the sales in the future also apply to the sales of shares in closed-end funds requirements of the WpHG, such as investor-friendly advice, keeping a log of the advice and disclosure of commissions. Dr. Matthias Gundel, Managing Director of the firm GK-law.de, specialising in capital market law generally welcomed the proposed changes, admits the following in terms of distribution however: “these increased requirements concern only a part of the distributors because according to the specifications of the Ministry are but not intended for free agents only for KWG licensed financial services provider. “This also applies to registrations of advisors with the BFin and sanctions in case of non-compliance with German Securities Trading Act regulations”. To ensure legal certainty with a single legal framework in the area of closed-end funds and other assets, the consultation requirements should be designed regardless of the distribution channel. Remains to be seen how the Bill will be modified in this regard yet. The Government Bill to be adopted by the Cabinet in the summer.

Munich, 23.01.2012 – on behalf of the Ministry of finance, the Institute for financial services in the IFF has a draft of a so-called ‘ leaflet developed and now presented. With a such product information sheet funded Riester and Rurup should be made more transparent and comparable insurance for investors. The firm specializing in investor and investor protection Cape attorneys at law is a principle to support idea. According to the law firm Cape lawyers has been shown, that significant mistakes are made at the advice of these products. Although the investor in relation to a compensation claim can again reclaim his money around at the Advisory Bank.

This means an effort yet for the already anxious policyholders. “It has shown that we represent investors in the framework of the pension does not have the Unverausserbarkeit of their pension have been informed before the onset of the pension. Also be the cost of the financial statements of the Riester and Rurup insurance not comprehensible disclosed”, the specialist lawyer Anja Appelt specialized in capital investment law, informs lawyers, partner of the law firm of Cape. “Studies have shown that the costs often consume the State allowances. Also the individual Riester and Rurup exhibit a wide range of risk contracts. These differences are often not clear to investors and are not represented by the consultants also. The average investor is a State pension support for the least amount of risk, apart from the fact that the advisors are assisting this belief”, Appelt continues.

Which is not so. The design of the product information sheet makes it clear: five risk classes are provided by “inflationsgeschutzt” and “Speculation”. Also for the yield expectations categories are produced by less than zero percent to more than six percent. If at all possible, both the costs and the consumption of money such as premature termination should be represented. A time frame for a There is no statutory implementation. While urgent action is required lawyers from the perspective of the law firm of Cape. Investors have a right to a proper education. Since the consultant partially unfortunately unable to provide this experience by Anja Appelt, a sheet of such information would be very helpful. But this must be then once presented. The investor is unsure of themselves. He would like to know whether he actually completed it, what the Adviser explained it, the investor firm Cape recommends a specialized department or a specialized attorney to contact lawyers in Munich. Contact: Cape lawyers Krause Appelt Partnerschaft von rechtsanwalten Sonnenstrasse 19 D-80331 Munich phone: + 49 (0) 89 – 41 61 72 75-0 fax: + 49 (0) 89 – 41 61 72 75 – 9 E-mail: entered in the partnership register of the Amtsgericht of Munich, PR 1069 Cape lawyers have the representation of damaged investor specialized in. The lawyers of our Office have many years experience in the area of investor protection for capital investments. They were involved in many ground-breaking decisions and bring this experience to the benefit of their clients. The partner, Attorney for banking and capital market law Anja Appelt and lawyer Thorsten Krause, have experience in investor protection, the credit-financed system (“pension model) all types of funds (including ship -, solar -, and real estate funds) to atypical silent companies. This required in-depth background research lawyers work Cape closely with specialists such as accountants, auditors and investigators.

District Court Weilheim: Attorney contract is void stirrings of we have expressed us, what to keep is by unsolicited ‘information letter’, which en masse to send various law firms. We have pointed out among other things here, that such circulars can be problematic. They have, even if they are mostly as neutral, often exclusively commercial character. The people is suggested in the form of a survey, one is interested in their experiences and could also help – if necessary. Regularly also own creates the need by about impending limitation of damages is pointed out. District Court Weilheim: Attorney contract is null and void! By judgment of the 09.07.2012 District Court Weilheim rejected (legally) the claim of a firm, which claimed the payment of remuneration by an investor in a film fund. The mandate was achieved through one of these mass writing that currently fill the mailboxes of investors; However, these come not only from Lawyers but also investor protection community, associations and similar entities.

The Court justified the dismissal of the action so that the mandate by illegal advertising was established. Section 43B BRAO (Federal lawyer rules) prohibits advertising a job individually. Exactly what happened as a result that sent a letter to many shareholders of a Fund, it was pointed to a looming Statute of limitations and other information should be interested in. “From the wording of the letter itself () and of further action” it was clearly apparent that here should be the establishment of a mandate, the Court ruled. That will made also through participation in a community of interests there planned not in question, on the contrary. Serious consequences for the affected investors threaten! Stirrings of, courts had to deal with the advertising practice of lawyers. This prompted the Rechtsanwaltskammer Munchen to among other things to point out. It is not so important, that the respective Lawyers here have committed a breach of professional rules, harm the reputation of lawyers or have the clients not to pay the compensation.