The provision of financial services in the EU is characterized by the increased integration of the internal market, as well as, globalisation of said services. On the one hand, companies in the Member States can use the passport for the financial services, which allows their provision throughout the EU without the need to acquire a permit in each country separately. On the other hand, the financial crisis has shown a strong interdependence among financial markets globally and the negative effects deficiency in one of them can have on the EU market. Consequently, the possibilities for companies from non-member states to provide their services are limited in scope. However, gradually several possible methods of access were developed. Among them are setting up an EU subsidiary, operating a branch in the EU, or seeking a national exemption. One of the methods is determining the equivalence of third-country regulations and supervision mechanisms with the EU regime. This approach is sometimes deemed as controversial because the decision on equivalence is in the sole discretion of the European Commission, which causes fears that the process could be influenced by the political and economic necessities. The mechanism is characterized by the fragmentary approach-it is not prescribed in all acts on financial services and it is tailored to the needs of each act separately-and is granting fewer rights than a passport for financial services. Despite the controversy, its significance is reflected in the incentives for regulatory convergence with the EU regime and closer cooperation among regulatory bodies. This issue is proving to be more and more important, especially having in mind the newest developments in the EU market, as Brexit or new regime for the financial markets.

This paper analyses chapter 25 – Science and Research in the EU integration process of the Republic of Serbia. The field of science and research in the European Union is mostly governed by soft law instruments and they are not transposed directly into national law. Having in mind the character of the said chapter, the paper analyses the main policies and instruments of the EU science and research acquis, on the one hand, and the current situation in Serbia, on the other. In analysing the current state of affairs in Serbia, we briefly outline normative framework and research capacity. Reports from the European Commission in the scientific field are then analysed in more detail. Finally, a special emphasis is put on the investment in science, which has been identified as an area in which there is room for progress.

The relation between companies and human rights is usually observed through the concept of corporate social responsibility, i.e. companies being human rights violators. However, this subject can be observed from a different angle that is gaining greater significance nowadaysthe possibility for companies to protect their rights before the European court of human rights (ECtHR). The aim of this paper is to determine how the scope of human rights protection has evolved and expanded. From the basic notion of human right belonging to a human being to the idea that this term can be expanded to capture 'human rights of companies' (Emberland). Indisputably company's right to property can be protected before the ECtHR, as it is officially recognised under Protocol No. 1 of the European convention on human rights. However, the case law has gradually started to expand the scope of the Convention to other rights that were not explicitly granted to companies-first by recognising procedural rights to companies, and later by recognising rights such as right to respect for private and family life (article 8), freedom of expression (article 10) and right to just satisfaction (article 41) (so-called 'hard cases'). This expandedpersonal scope of the Convention is raising many controversies. The major concern is that granting right to companies would diminish the rights of natural persons, as companies would utilise their newfound position to avoid honouring rights of natural persons. The question is where this case law dynamics will lead us to-shall we soon be raising the issue of company's right to life. Also, there is the issue whether shareholders have right to sue in case of violation of rights of their companies.

Predmet rada su stečajni protokoli kao osoben izvor stečajnog prava. Reč je sporazumima između učesnika u stečajnom postupku kojima se rešavaju brojna značajna pitanja u cilju ostvarivanja saradnje i komunikacije među učesnicima. Protokoli su karakteristični za međunarodni stečaj i njima se nastoje prevazići razlike između pravnih sistema koje mogu biti značajna prepreka ostvarivanju najvećeg mogućeg namirenja poverilaca ili efikasnom sprovođenju postupka reorganizacije. Poseban značaj ovog instrumenta uočava se u slučaju grupa društava gde se svaka članica grupe u stečaju tretira kao zaseban entitet, ali gde je u cilju očuvanja ekonomske vrednosti grupe potrebna saradnja između stečajnih upravnika i/ili sudova. Predmet rada posebno dobija na značaju, jer nova Uredba o stečajnim postupcima Evropske unije po prvi put eksplicitno predviđa upotrebu protokola kao mehanizama saradnje (Recital 49). To će svakako imati šire implikacije na stečajno pravo zemalja kontinentalnog prava i doprineti širenju upotrebe protokola.

No abstract