Jeg synes ikke at kunne finde denne i danske medier endnu
Er jeg helt dum, eller kan jeg ikke se at oliefirmaet har en sag? Er det ikke meget normalt, at der er skatter på produkter, som man ønsker ikke skal benyttes (cigeratter fx)
Det er meget normalt at energi-baroner kan, igennem faciliteter som World Trade Org og World Bank, sagsøge lande på basis af at skade den ‘frie globale handel’, hvad det så end skal betyde. Dette sker primært imod alle tiltag der underminere olie baroners profit, hvilket grøn energi gør.
Ja, det er virkelig mærkeligt at vi bor i en verden hvor virksomheder kan sagsøge et land, men det er ikke et nyt koncept.
Ah ja, det skal jo aldrig ske, at folk på magten i dag ikke sidder på den i morgen. /s
Deprimerende, men de skal nok få de penge one way or another
This is the best summary I could come up with:
A Jersey-based oil-refining company is suing the EU, Germany and Denmark for at least €95m over a windfall tax introduced during the Ukraine war that it sees as a “pretext” for undermining fossil fuel firms, leaked documents show.
In July, Brussels proposed a “coordinated withdrawal” from the pact following domino-style exit announcements by several EU countries including France, Spain and the Netherlands.
Klesch declined to comment on the issue but is seeking a declaration that the windfall tax violated the ECT, according to the leaked EU trade policy committee experts document, which is classified as “sensitive” and marked for “distribution on a need to know basis”.
It says Klesch claimed that the EU had “used the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine and the high electricity prices during 2022 as a pretext to constrain the competitiveness of fossil fuel companies”.
Cleodie Rickard, the trade campaign manager at Global Justice Now, said: “Countries like the UK that are teetering on the edge of a decision, while the EU contemplates a bloc-wide exit, must wake up to the risk and seize the window of opportunity to leave the ECT in coordination and before ever more egregious claims emerge.”
A company spokesperson, Pietro Jolli, said: “AET does not criticise nor question the coal ban, only requests to be financially compensated according to the ECT rules.
The original article contains 607 words, the summary contains 222 words. Saved 63%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
