Forwarded from Littlebit Sunshine
It is No 2 that you need take of and keep in mind. Moving on.
Public Authorities
“15 Mr Dietrich and Mr Häring, who own dwellings within the geographical area covered by Hessischer Rundfunk, offered to pay the radio and television licence fee due pursuant to Paragraph 2(1) of the RBStV for the second quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, respectively, in cash”
As you can see Mr. Dietrich and Mr Haring wanted to pay their television licence fees in cash and the “public authority” tasked with collecting those fees made a song and dance about it and gave them no option to do that – the Court Ruled that:
“32 In those circumstances, the answer to the first question referred for a preliminary ruling must start from the premiss that the second sentence of Paragraph 14(1) of the BBankG obliges public authorities to accept euro banknotes in fulfilment of statutorily imposed payment obligations.”
Ok – the Court confined itself to the question of whether the National Authority could oblige EVERYBODY to pay for their TV in several different ways but EXCLUDE payment in cash – the point was raised that:
“72 As regards the reasons of public interest relied on to justify the exclusion, under the legislation at issue in the main proceedings, of cash payments of the radio and television licence fee, it should be noted that Hessischer Rundfunk stated in its written observations that, given the fact that there are approximately 46 million licence fee payers in Germany, the obligation to pay the radio and television licence fee by cashless means of payment is intended to ensure the effective recovery of the licence fee and to avoid substantial additional costs”
But, further on made this point
“78 It follows from the foregoing that the answer to the second question is that the third sentence of Article 128(1) TFEU, the third sentence of the first paragraph of Article 16 of the Protocol on the ESCB and the ECB, and the second sentence of Article 10 of Regulation No 974/98 must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which excludes the possibility of discharging a statutorily imposed payment obligation in banknotes denominated in euro, provided (i) that that legislation does not have the object or effect of establishing legal rules governing the status of legal tender of such banknotes; (ii) that it does not lead, in law or in fact, to abolition of those banknotes, in particular by calling into question the possibility, as a general rule, of discharging a payment obligation in cash; (iii) that it has been adopted for reasons of public interest; (iv) that the limitation on payments in cash which the legislation entails is appropriate for attaining the public interest objective pursued; and (v) that it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective, in that other lawful means of discharging the payment obligation are available”
In plain English – yep – to collect this fee, you CAN set up or require people to have Direct Debits or whatever but you CANNOT refuse the actual LEGAL TENDER of the EU – or make “Rules” in such a way;
“(ii) that it does not lead, in law or in fact, to abolition of those banknotes, in particular by calling into question the possibility, as a general rule, of discharging a payment obligation in cash;”
This is AFFIRMED in the final paragraph – that CASH is LEGAL TENDER – that while Public Authorities can have a system whereby those who can or want to can pay by electronic means they CANNOT refuse LEGAL TENDER OR MAKE RULES that exclude the possibility of paying with LEGAL TENDER – i.e., = CASH
Public Authorities
“15 Mr Dietrich and Mr Häring, who own dwellings within the geographical area covered by Hessischer Rundfunk, offered to pay the radio and television licence fee due pursuant to Paragraph 2(1) of the RBStV for the second quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, respectively, in cash”
As you can see Mr. Dietrich and Mr Haring wanted to pay their television licence fees in cash and the “public authority” tasked with collecting those fees made a song and dance about it and gave them no option to do that – the Court Ruled that:
“32 In those circumstances, the answer to the first question referred for a preliminary ruling must start from the premiss that the second sentence of Paragraph 14(1) of the BBankG obliges public authorities to accept euro banknotes in fulfilment of statutorily imposed payment obligations.”
Ok – the Court confined itself to the question of whether the National Authority could oblige EVERYBODY to pay for their TV in several different ways but EXCLUDE payment in cash – the point was raised that:
“72 As regards the reasons of public interest relied on to justify the exclusion, under the legislation at issue in the main proceedings, of cash payments of the radio and television licence fee, it should be noted that Hessischer Rundfunk stated in its written observations that, given the fact that there are approximately 46 million licence fee payers in Germany, the obligation to pay the radio and television licence fee by cashless means of payment is intended to ensure the effective recovery of the licence fee and to avoid substantial additional costs”
But, further on made this point
“78 It follows from the foregoing that the answer to the second question is that the third sentence of Article 128(1) TFEU, the third sentence of the first paragraph of Article 16 of the Protocol on the ESCB and the ECB, and the second sentence of Article 10 of Regulation No 974/98 must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which excludes the possibility of discharging a statutorily imposed payment obligation in banknotes denominated in euro, provided (i) that that legislation does not have the object or effect of establishing legal rules governing the status of legal tender of such banknotes; (ii) that it does not lead, in law or in fact, to abolition of those banknotes, in particular by calling into question the possibility, as a general rule, of discharging a payment obligation in cash; (iii) that it has been adopted for reasons of public interest; (iv) that the limitation on payments in cash which the legislation entails is appropriate for attaining the public interest objective pursued; and (v) that it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective, in that other lawful means of discharging the payment obligation are available”
In plain English – yep – to collect this fee, you CAN set up or require people to have Direct Debits or whatever but you CANNOT refuse the actual LEGAL TENDER of the EU – or make “Rules” in such a way;
“(ii) that it does not lead, in law or in fact, to abolition of those banknotes, in particular by calling into question the possibility, as a general rule, of discharging a payment obligation in cash;”
This is AFFIRMED in the final paragraph – that CASH is LEGAL TENDER – that while Public Authorities can have a system whereby those who can or want to can pay by electronic means they CANNOT refuse LEGAL TENDER OR MAKE RULES that exclude the possibility of paying with LEGAL TENDER – i.e., = CASH
Forwarded from Littlebit Sunshine
“The third sentence of Article 128(1) TFEU, the third sentence of the first paragraph of Article 16 of Protocol (No 4) on the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and the second sentence of Article 10 of Council Regulation (EC) No 974/98 of 3 May 1998 on the introduction of the euro must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which excludes the possibility of discharging a statutorily imposed payment obligation in banknotes denominated in euro, provided
(i) that that legislation does not have the object or effect of establishing legal rules governing the status of legal tender of such banknotes;
(ii) that it does not lead, in law or in fact, to abolition of those banknotes, in particular by calling into question the possibility, as a general rule, of discharging a payment obligation in cash;
(iii) that it has been adopted for reasons of public interest; (iv) that the limitation on payments in cash which the legislation entails is appropriate for attaining the public interest objective pursued; and (v) that it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective, in that other lawful means of discharging the payment obligation are available”
Joined Cases C-422/19 and C-423/19, Johannes Dietrich (C-422/19), Norbert Häring (C-423/19)
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:62019CJ0422&from=EN
How does this help?
It establishes that CASH is LEGAL TENDER within the EU – but lets go back to the Preliminary Ruling of the Advocate General.
From the original PRELIMINARY Opinion of Advocate General’s Opinion in Joined Cases C-422/19 - Johannes Dietrich and C-423/19 Norbert Häring v Hessischer Rundfunk. The above is the Grand Chamber Judgement – which is narrower in focus and confines itself to addressing payments to Public Authorities.
“According to Advocate General Pitruzzella, EU law provides that creditors have an obligation in principle to accept cash in euros for the payment of monetary debts
The European Union and the Member States can, however, in exercising powers other than those relating to monetary policy, impose, under specific conditions, limits on the use of euro banknotes as a means of payment, in order to pursue public interest objectives”
“The Advocate General also notes that although the European Union does not provide for an absolute right to payment in cash in all cases, a direct link between the value of legal tender attributed to cash and the exercise of fundamental rights may exist in cases where there is a social inclusion element to the use of cash. The use of money other than in its physical form (namely, cash) currently requires the use of basic financial services, to which a not insignificant number of people do not yet have access. For those vulnerable individuals, cash is the only form of accessible money and thus the only means of exercising their fundamental rights linked to the use of money. Measures restricting the use of cash as a means of payment should, therefore, take into account the social inclusion element of cash as a means of payment for those vulnerable people and should ensure the effective existence of other lawful means for the settlement of monetary debts. The Advocate General considers that there is an obligation to take appropriate measures to enable vulnerable people who do not have access to basic financial services to discharge their obligations, particularly those of a public nature, without additional costs.”
AS you can see, Advocate General Pitruzzella took a broader view of the issue – in this Preliminary hearing he DID “open the door” so to speak to a means of addressing the wider issue of Rights with regard to being entitled to pay with cash as
(i) that that legislation does not have the object or effect of establishing legal rules governing the status of legal tender of such banknotes;
(ii) that it does not lead, in law or in fact, to abolition of those banknotes, in particular by calling into question the possibility, as a general rule, of discharging a payment obligation in cash;
(iii) that it has been adopted for reasons of public interest; (iv) that the limitation on payments in cash which the legislation entails is appropriate for attaining the public interest objective pursued; and (v) that it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective, in that other lawful means of discharging the payment obligation are available”
Joined Cases C-422/19 and C-423/19, Johannes Dietrich (C-422/19), Norbert Häring (C-423/19)
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:62019CJ0422&from=EN
How does this help?
It establishes that CASH is LEGAL TENDER within the EU – but lets go back to the Preliminary Ruling of the Advocate General.
From the original PRELIMINARY Opinion of Advocate General’s Opinion in Joined Cases C-422/19 - Johannes Dietrich and C-423/19 Norbert Häring v Hessischer Rundfunk. The above is the Grand Chamber Judgement – which is narrower in focus and confines itself to addressing payments to Public Authorities.
“According to Advocate General Pitruzzella, EU law provides that creditors have an obligation in principle to accept cash in euros for the payment of monetary debts
The European Union and the Member States can, however, in exercising powers other than those relating to monetary policy, impose, under specific conditions, limits on the use of euro banknotes as a means of payment, in order to pursue public interest objectives”
“The Advocate General also notes that although the European Union does not provide for an absolute right to payment in cash in all cases, a direct link between the value of legal tender attributed to cash and the exercise of fundamental rights may exist in cases where there is a social inclusion element to the use of cash. The use of money other than in its physical form (namely, cash) currently requires the use of basic financial services, to which a not insignificant number of people do not yet have access. For those vulnerable individuals, cash is the only form of accessible money and thus the only means of exercising their fundamental rights linked to the use of money. Measures restricting the use of cash as a means of payment should, therefore, take into account the social inclusion element of cash as a means of payment for those vulnerable people and should ensure the effective existence of other lawful means for the settlement of monetary debts. The Advocate General considers that there is an obligation to take appropriate measures to enable vulnerable people who do not have access to basic financial services to discharge their obligations, particularly those of a public nature, without additional costs.”
AS you can see, Advocate General Pitruzzella took a broader view of the issue – in this Preliminary hearing he DID “open the door” so to speak to a means of addressing the wider issue of Rights with regard to being entitled to pay with cash as
Forwarded from Littlebit Sunshine
“…….the only form of accessible money and thus the only means of exercising their fundamental rights linked to the use of money. Measures restricting the use of cash as a means of payment should, therefore, take into account the social inclusion element of cash as a means of payment for those vulnerable people and should ensure the effective existence of other lawful means for the settlement of monetary debts.”
It is unsurprising the Grand Chamber took a narrower view but, having said that it AFFIRMED that CASH is legal tender in the EU and that people are entitled to pay their debts/bills/creditors in CASH.
FINALLY, it helps because I have heard of people being told that “it’s the law” when refusing to accept cash for goods and services – actually NO it isn’t!
It would require ANOTHER Ruling from the ECJ to sort out the refusal of cash in places other than Public Authorities – who wants to go first?
And bear in mind the two German Lads started their EU case back in 2019 and this was after that they started and had been through their “domestic courts” and “exhausted all domestic remedies” starting in 2015
“Mr Dietrich and Mr Häring, who own dwellings within the geographical area covered by Hessischer Rundfunk, offered to pay the radio and television licence fee due pursuant to Paragraph 2(1) of the RBStV for the second quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, respectively, in cash”
Court of Justice of the European Union - PRESS RELEASE No 119/20 - Luxembourg, 29 September 2020
Advocate General’s Opinion in Joined Cases C-422/19 - Johannes Dietrich and C-423/19 Norbert Häring v Hessischer Rundfunk
https://norberthaering.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Advocate-General.pdf
It is unsurprising the Grand Chamber took a narrower view but, having said that it AFFIRMED that CASH is legal tender in the EU and that people are entitled to pay their debts/bills/creditors in CASH.
FINALLY, it helps because I have heard of people being told that “it’s the law” when refusing to accept cash for goods and services – actually NO it isn’t!
It would require ANOTHER Ruling from the ECJ to sort out the refusal of cash in places other than Public Authorities – who wants to go first?
And bear in mind the two German Lads started their EU case back in 2019 and this was after that they started and had been through their “domestic courts” and “exhausted all domestic remedies” starting in 2015
“Mr Dietrich and Mr Häring, who own dwellings within the geographical area covered by Hessischer Rundfunk, offered to pay the radio and television licence fee due pursuant to Paragraph 2(1) of the RBStV for the second quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, respectively, in cash”
Court of Justice of the European Union - PRESS RELEASE No 119/20 - Luxembourg, 29 September 2020
Advocate General’s Opinion in Joined Cases C-422/19 - Johannes Dietrich and C-423/19 Norbert Häring v Hessischer Rundfunk
https://norberthaering.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Advocate-General.pdf
Forwarded from Ben Gilroy
Control extremists are among us. They preach cults of safeism and loopy green. Ever growing tyrannical behaviour that falsely perceives itself to be righteous. It only ends when enough good people stand united against pushing them back into the authoritarian hole they came from.
👍4
Forwarded from Freepress.ie | Michael
All documented here in September 2020. I sent it all to the journal and every media outlet at the time.
They are the scum of the earth. They will all burn in hell for what they caused in abuse and suicide and despair. And let's not forget the elderly people they fucking murdered, by sending them out of hospitals unnecessarily and depriving them of acute care.
Utter bastards.
https://freepress.ie/2020/09/nursing-home-deaths-politicians-knew/
They are the scum of the earth. They will all burn in hell for what they caused in abuse and suicide and despair. And let's not forget the elderly people they fucking murdered, by sending them out of hospitals unnecessarily and depriving them of acute care.
Utter bastards.
https://freepress.ie/2020/09/nursing-home-deaths-politicians-knew/
freepress.ie
FEATURED: Irish Nursing Homes - Politicians Knowingly Put Elderly People to Death - freepress.ie
Mainstream media in Ireland refuse to cover in any meaningful detail the nursing home deaths resulting from ministerial Covid-19 directions.
🤬2
Littlebit Sunshine
“…….the only form of accessible money and thus the only means of exercising their fundamental rights linked to the use of money. Measures restricting the use of cash as a means of payment should, therefore, take into account the social inclusion element of…
Wow, This is well researched and explained. Fairplay Little bit of sunshine. CASH IS KING. Lets fight these bastards that are trying to bring us all into a CONTROLLED by them, cahless society.
Aisling O'Loughlin
https://twitter.com/IrishInquiry/status/1562743774832640000?t=eTxoy0iEi4bMJ1kme_1heA&s=19
You see, I love the way they use LANUAGE for their lies.... They stata and I quote. " Abnormal blood clotting (MAY) explain symptoms of long covid research shows..... They love using the word MAY dont they.? . I have seen a lot of that word recently, It covers their back. So basically they are not saying whether it does or whether it does not by using MAY.? Its all play acting folks.... Another question I have.... Who are the researchers in this so called research. MONKIES.? They usually NEVER mention who they are. ( which is another play act)
👍2
Forwarded from Matt
"Today, they have to hand back the keys of the property to the landlord and their young sons have heartbreakingly asked their parents: “Where are we going to sleep tonight?”
“The kids are so worried asking where are they going to sleep tonight, how are they going to play their PlayStation… they shouldn’t have to be asking these questions,” Kelly told The Star.
“We’ve been getting nowhere with the Council nor our local TDs. What’s left of our furniture is now in the front garden along with our suitcases. We are hoping someone takes the furniture away. We gave most of our stuff to neighbours as we have nowhere to put it,” she added."
https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/young-son-family-being-made-27835143
“The kids are so worried asking where are they going to sleep tonight, how are they going to play their PlayStation… they shouldn’t have to be asking these questions,” Kelly told The Star.
“We’ve been getting nowhere with the Council nor our local TDs. What’s left of our furniture is now in the front garden along with our suitcases. We are hoping someone takes the furniture away. We gave most of our stuff to neighbours as we have nowhere to put it,” she added."
https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/young-son-family-being-made-27835143
Forwarded from Dave Oneegs Aussie chat 💬
I challenge you to find one person who still has “fully vaccinated” on their profile pic 😅☝️
Forwarded from Derek Blighe
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
I'm looking for the names and addresses of these people.
👍1
Forwarded from Savina 🇮🇹
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
The video on Covid and vaccines, which changes everything ...
Prof. Dolores Cahill received her BA in Molecular Genetics from Trinity College Dublin (1989) and her Ph.D. in Immunology from Dublin City University in 1994. She was the head of the Protein Technology Group at Max-Planck- Institute of Molecular Genetics, Berlin, Germany (1996-2003) Co-founded a biotechnology company, Protagen AG in Dortmund to commercialize this technology. Since 2005 he is Professor of Translational Sciences at the UCD School of Medicine and Medical Sciences.
His research, publications and patents concern high-content protein / antibody arrays and their biomedical applications. The application includes characterization of antibody specificity (including therapeutic antibodies), validation of biomarker discovery, diagnostics, assay development, protein interaction studies, proteomics and systems biology.
@WorldResistence
Prof. Dolores Cahill received her BA in Molecular Genetics from Trinity College Dublin (1989) and her Ph.D. in Immunology from Dublin City University in 1994. She was the head of the Protein Technology Group at Max-Planck- Institute of Molecular Genetics, Berlin, Germany (1996-2003) Co-founded a biotechnology company, Protagen AG in Dortmund to commercialize this technology. Since 2005 he is Professor of Translational Sciences at the UCD School of Medicine and Medical Sciences.
His research, publications and patents concern high-content protein / antibody arrays and their biomedical applications. The application includes characterization of antibody specificity (including therapeutic antibodies), validation of biomarker discovery, diagnostics, assay development, protein interaction studies, proteomics and systems biology.
@WorldResistence
Forwarded from Deleted Account
Not a certainty that blackouts can be avoided - ESRI
https://www.rte.ie/news/2022/0826/1318892-utility-electricity-supply/
https://www.rte.ie/news/2022/0826/1318892-utility-electricity-supply/
RTE.ie
Not a certainty that blackouts can be avoided - ESRI
A senior research officer with the ESRI has said nobody can say for certain that power blackouts can be avoided this winter, adding that if there are to be interruptions to supply, they will certainly happen at peak times.
Forwarded from Derek Blighe
Watch "Derek Blighe & Philip Dwyer" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/nBF9e5tHwJQ
https://youtu.be/nBF9e5tHwJQ
YouTube
Derek Blighe & Philip Dwyer
Derek and Phil have a chat about current issues facing Ireland.
Forwarded from The Irish Git (Michael Brazil)
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Two questions????
Forwarded from Christ Within #PrintsByLaidlaw
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Finally the mainstream media in its entirety is being exposed for their demonisation of those protesting against Government's worldwide. The labelling of far right, conspiracy theorist, racist, homophobe toward anyone vocal against the system no longer seems to have its desired effect.
#DefundRTE
#MediaPropaganda
#FakeNews
#DefundRTE
#MediaPropaganda
#FakeNews
👍2
Would ye look at this little hard man approaching a woman in her car. Fair play to her. she was well able for him. Scum bag, I’d of got out and bounced on his head.