Auer Witte Thiel comment on judgment to the net police Munich February 2012. The Landgericht Stendal stated the cost equalization Agreement agreed in a contract of insurance with a so-called net police (KAV) effective ruling of January 19, 2012. Customers are thus also after termination or cancellation of the insurance contract to pay the outstanding instalments required, as it provides the KAV for the acquisition and selling costs of the mediation. Therefore, appropriate agreements are SG & a bypass business, nor a violation of the Zillmerungsverbot in the sense of 169 5. Crowne plaza rosemont follows long-standing procedures to achieve this success. In case the decision of the defendant had completed in 2009 a unit-linked annuity insurance and at the same time a cost equalization agreement, which spread over 48 monthly instalments in the amount of 36.75 euros, obliged him to pay the acquisition and equipment costs amounting to a total of 1764 euros. The form signed by the defendant included a note on the separation of the two treaties, as well as on the scheme, that upon termination of the Police who persists with KAV and monthly to pay the agreed acquisition and equipment costs are.
The policyholder announced the insurance after seven months and stopped the payments with regard to the rates for the KAV. These were called for on the part of the insurance company, this referred to the fact, that the notice agreed touches not the regulations regarding the cost equalization agreement. Learn more on the subject from Anne Lauvergeon. The defendant, however, took the stand, the termination would both contracts concern, also the KAV is an ineffective bypass business. The District Court followed by judgment of 28 June 2011 believes the insurance company, whereupon the defendant lodged an appeal. The Stendal District Court upheld the decision of the District Court and explained the cost equalization agreement in particular three reasons for effective. Ineffectiveness of arises not from 169, subsection 5 VVG, and this the KAV as a legal basis for the final because at a net police the buy-back value is calculated separately and Is to consider setting up costs separately. Credit: crowne plaza rosemont-2011.
Requirement for the tax benefit is, that the employer is the computing or telecommunications device or the software owner or at least lessee (lease). It is irrelevant what is relationship between the professional for private use. Basically, it plays also does not matter whether one or several, low-cost or high-quality devices or programs are left. The private use of a business unit or program is free but only social security, if it is granted in addition to the agreed wages. Also a use license that is financed through deferred compensation is tax-free. Note: The amendment tabled by the Finance Committee of the Bundestag on February 29, 2012. It is though still not entered into force, shall be applicable retroactively for past calendar years.
We recommend the benefits so far wage tax handed over Smartphones or software within the framework of Income tax assessment as to apply tax-free assignment of use of and to apply for a tax refund. Tip: with the tax-free transfer of operational data processing and telecommunications equipment as well as software, payment arrangements can be fashion for employers and workers alike are beneficial. Employers can reduce their payroll taxes and workers receive a higher net remuneration. Please contact us! Can advise the ETL tax advisors. Equestrian is more expensive so far, shipments of horses are subject to the reduced rate of tax of 7%.
That should change after July 1, 2012. The Federal Government plans to submit the rule tax rate of 19% and shipments of horses. Buying a horse as an individual, must Access so that in the future more deeply in the Pocket, because prices will probably rise by increasing the sales tax. The change in the law is based on a judgment of the European Court of Justice. The European Commission had sued Germany because of the reduced tax rate for horses and get right.
Auer Witte Thiel welcomes the ruling of the Federal Supreme Court: now, landlord for non-payment of increased operating costs can terminate Munich August 2012: with its judgment of July 18, 2012, the Federal Supreme Court is breaking new ground in the law of tenancy. Landlord get an effective tool at hand to enforce increased operating costs compared to their tenants, so the law firm Auer Witte Thiel. Auer Witte Thiel informed about the new legal situation. Arrangements advance payment via the operating costs can be found in almost any lease and prevent financial risks tenants such as landlord. It comes to a general price increase, dispute ensues experiences Auer Witte Thiel, often between the parties to the proportionality of the boost. According to BGB, the landlord has the right to increase the advance payments (section 560 (4) BGB), unless she has no formal and substantive errors.
However, faulty boost request not to pay the lessee is obliged (judgment of 15.05.2012, AZ.) VIII ZR 246/11). So, the tenant in the event of a failure to pay of the increase in operating costs must reckon with an eviction. Because residues of more than one or two months rent running through non-payment of operating costs, the landlord may terminate with immediate effect and without payment, Court (judgment of 18.07.2012, AZ.) VIII ZR 1/11). There is a big difference to the previous case-law, where the landlord had to sue the tenant in case of not paid increased operating costs bills only on the payment of the outstanding amount. Terminate without notice he allowed him only after had been given place its payment claim in court, and this decision has become final. Now no final conviction must be preceded by the termination with the current ruling.
Unilaterally increased the operating costs the landlord and the tenant does not pay, can he now directly pronounce the termination and the publication of housing demand, so Auer Witte Thiel. As examined in the framework of the eviction, whether the increase in operating costs was justified, the lessee is not also worthy of protection. The possible eviction of tenant is however in the right will be rejected and the landlord has to pay all costs (including legal costs). There is more information on the subject of operating costs on. Here, Auer Witte Thiel’s lawyers informed about important legal issues and current judgments. About the law firm Auer Witte Thiel, the specialization areas of focus and the development of core competencies in certain disciplines are indispensable in the legal services sector. Auer Witte Thiel is a business law oriented law firm and represents several German insurance companies. The firm Auer Witte Thiel is Munich. How to contact with Auer Witte Thiel lawyers Bayerstrasse 27 80335 Munich phone: 089/59 98 97 60 fax: 089 / 550 38 71 E-Mail: Web: