The dangers of using Roundup weedkiller, Bayer found guilty of negligence by American judgesFor several years now, controversies have been emerging over the effects of weedkillers, particularly Roundup, which is well known by farmers and Sunday gardeners alike.
The increasing number of trials are aimed at demonstrating the dangerousness of glyphosate contained in large quantities in these products in particular.
In the United States, the judges did not hesitate to strongly condemn the company Mossanto, owned by the giant Bayer since June 2018. Last March, a man received no less than $81 million. The Californian judges ruled in favour of this plaintiff who demonstrated that he had developed blood cancer because of the repeated use of the weedkiller in his garden for more than 20 years.
Bayer appealed this decision, but this is not the first time that the American judges have recognized this responsibility on the part of this manufacturer.
A US court has just ordered Mossanto, in 2019, to pay 2 billion euros in damages. The company obviously appealed against this very severe sentence.
In France, in 2018, two parents assigned the same company to have its responsibility recognized for the malformations suffered by their son, now 11 years old. Since his birth he had to be operated on because of various malformations including the oesophagus. Since his birth he will have had more than fifty surgeries and his life is very complicated. Her mother used the famous weed killer at the very beginning of her pregnancy (when she didn't know it), which would have caused the malformations on the fetus.
Emmanuel Macron has undertaken to make glyphosate disappear in France by 2021, a challenge that specialists believe is difficult to meet, particularly in the field of agriculture, which uses this product on a massive scale. Let us hope that healthier alternatives will be found soon.
To be continued.......
Barrier-free tolls arrive in FranceIn recent days, new motorway toll systems have been tested in France. In concrete terms, cameras will be installed above certain motorway crossing points instead of the current counters and barriers.
Vehicle plates will be registered and the cost of the toll will be due as before except that the payment terms will be multiple:
- you can purchase a subscription badge to be affixed to the windshield in advance, the amount due will then be automatically debited from your bank account,
- you will be able to pay the amount due online on a dedicated website,
- you can pay in cash at a partner merchant (gas stations, post offices.....), - you can pay at the terminals provided for this purpose near the motorway gates. They will certainly be installed in nearby areas.
Whatever your choice, you will have 10 days to pay the amount due (except in the case of instant withdrawal).
If you fail to pay it will cost you 20 euros in penalty in addition to the amount to be paid initially.
These new installations will necessarily have a cost for the user, but the main advantage will undoubtedly be the fluidity of the motorway network.
The new definition of abuse of rights: its impact on the transmission of propertyThe notion of abuse of rights was broadened by the 2019 Finance Act. Previously, only transactions with an exclusively tax purpose were concerned, i.e. the sole purpose of the transaction was to reduce or evade tax. The 2019 Finance Act now includes operations that have a mainly tax purpose. This nuance is particularly important in the case of the transfer of assets (donations for example), because even if the main objective remains the transfer to his descendants, there is a tax dimension since in the case of a reserve of usufruct, upon the death of the usufructuary, the bare owner automatically becomes the owner of the property without paying any additional fees. The tax administration wishes to facilitate its controls and avoid fictitious transmissions aimed at evading tax. It is not a question for the administration to prevent the mechanisms for the transmission of assets but to limit their abuse and to eliminate certain niches. For example, a person who gives bare ownership of his property to his child only a few months before his death and knowing that he is ill would be a new case of abuse of rights because the only purpose would be to avoid inheritance tax. The administration could consider this donation as fictitious. It will have been understood that the purpose of the reworking of this old concept in legal language is to allow for better control by the tax administration.
The application of the recent scale of compensation for unfair dismissal by the labour courtsThe principle: The new article L1235-3 of the Labour Code, based on the Macron Ordinance of 22 September 2017, introduces a scale concerning the compensation due by the employer in the event of dismissal without real and serious cause. From now on, the maximum the employee will be able to receive is 20 months' salary for at least 30 years' seniority.
In practice: On the one hand, the Troyes Labour Court ruled on 13 December last year (Cons. Prud'h. Troyes 13-12-2018 No. 18/00036) that this scale was not in conformity with the European Social Charter and the ILO Convention to prevent its application. On the one hand, he argues that this scale does not deter employers who wish to get rid of a cumbersome employee.
On the other hand, it globalizes the situation of dismissed employees without any real and serious reason and does not make it possible to compensate fairly for the damage suffered individually.
The Troyes Labour Court therefore awarded compensation of 9 months' salary, whereas the application of the scale would have allowed her to obtain 3 months' salary given her low seniority. Amiens and Lyon followed the reasoning of the Troyes Labour Court in its decisions of 19 and 21 December 2018.
However, in September 2018, the Le Mans Labour Court ruled that this scale could be applied unless "in the event of a particularly serious breach by the employer" (Cons. prud'h. Le Mans 26-9-2018 n° 17/00538). A real legal uncertainty has arisen for employers, while the purpose of these orders was to facilitate the fluidity of the labour market.
To be continued.......