Insurance Europe, the European Banking Federation and the European Fund and Asset Management Association, along with other financial sector associations (the Associations), have issued a statement calling for European Union policymakers to reassess the retail investment strategy (RIS) in light of the European Commission's (Commission’s) competitiveness objectives, stating that the current RIS proposal contradicts the Commission’s objectives of boosting competitiveness and simplifying regulatory frameworks. The Associations recommend focusing on three key areas: simplification for firms and retail investors, streamlined sales processes, and reduction of information overload. The statement was co-signed by the various Associations ahead of the European Union interinstitutional negotiations on the RIS planned for January 2025.

ARCHIVED: this Practice Note is no longer maintained as it covers the implementation of EU free movement law in the UK prior to IP completion day, on which date domestic legislation implementing EU free movement law was revoked, subject to certain savings and modifications. For further details, including of the relevant savings and the position of CJEU case law, see Practice Note: Brexit and the end of EU free movement law in the UK. The Practice Note has been retained in archived form for historical interest, because EU law as previously implemented in the UK remains relevant in certain limited situations. For historical versions of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016, SI 2016/1052, including immediately prior to revocation, see Legislation.gov.uk. For the ongoing development of EU free movement law in EU Member States, see: Immigration, employment & share incentives (EU Law)—overview. Free movement of persons is one of the four freedoms that underpin the single market doctrine of the EU. The other three freedoms are of goods, services

Free movement of persons is one of the four freedoms enshrined since 1957 under the treaty establishing the European Economic Community (the Treaty of Rome) and which underpin the single market of the EU. The other three concern the free movement of goods, services and capital, and all four freedoms are founded on the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of nationality. With the laying down of the Treaty of Rome, and the subsequent enactment of secondary legislation in 1964 and 1968, nationals from Member States and family members have had the right to enter and reside in other Member States, subject to certain conditions and limitations. These rights and limitations have been set out in the treaty establishing the European Economic Community 1957 (the Treaty of Rome) and its successor treaties, and in Directives and Regulations made under the treaties. Sources of law The treaty which forms the basis of current EU law is the Treaty of Lisbon. This came into force on 1 December 2009 and updated

EU law The EU’s core objective of achieving European unification is based exclusively on the rule of law. EU law is an independent legal system which has primacy (or supremacy) over national legal provisions. A number of key players are involved in the process of implementing, monitoring and further developing this legal system for which a variety of procedures apply. In general, EU law is composed of three different but interdependent types of legislation, ie primary, secondary and tertiary. The combined law of the EU is also known as the ‘acquis communautaire’. Categories and areas of EU competence Competence is a term used to denote the power of the EU to undertake specific action where such power is conferred upon it by the Member States in the EU Treaties. The EU’s competences are set out in the EU Treaties, which provide the basis for any actions the EU institutions take. The EU can only act within the limits of the competences conferred on it by the Treaties, and where the Treaties do not confer competences on

This Practice Note considers Regulation (EC) 1896/2006 , the European Order for Payment Regulation or EOP Regulation as amended by Regulation (EU) 2015/2421. It explains the European Orders for Payment (EOPs) or European Payment Orders (EPOs) as they are sometimes referred to. They are used in cross-border cases to obtain payment of an uncontested specific money claim without court proceedings. Article 2 of the EOP Regulation sets out excluded claims. A defendant to such claims has options to make a ‘statement in opposition’, seek review of the order in exceptional circumstances if out of time to make such a statement, or can apply for the enforcing court to refuse enforcement. This Practice Note also makes reference to the 17 October 2016 Report on review of the Regulation. Relevant regulations and report European order for payment procedure • Regulation (EC) 1896/2006 creating a European order for payment procedure (EOP Regulation) • Commission Regulation (EU) 936/2012 amending the Annexes to the EOP Regulation • Council Regulation (EU) 517/2013 adapting certain regulations and decisions

The European Parliament's Committee on Culture and Education has adopted an own-initiative report calling for stronger enforcement and implementation of existing EU legislation to create a safer online environment, particularly for children and young people. The report calls on the European Commission to ensure the consistent application of Directive (EU) 2018/1808 (the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD)), Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)), the EU Digital Services Act (EU DSA), the EU Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act and the proposed Digital Fairness Act, and recommends that online services be designed in accordance with the principles of privacy-by-design, safety-by-default, age-appropriate design and algorithmic transparency. It also calls for the prohibition of the most harmful addictive design features, greater transparency of recommender systems, the introduction of a 'youth mode' to disable targeted advertising and limit addictive features for minors, and the imposition of personal liability for serious and persistent failures to protect children.

A European patent is a patent which is granted under the European Patent Convention.

This Practice Note provides an overview of the European patent application requirements and procedures at the European Patent Office (EPO), including EPO post-grant opposition and limitation proceedings. It also discusses how, once a European patent has been granted, the proprietor can file a ‘request for unitary effect’ at the EPO to obtain a unitary patent. European patents There are two types of European patents: • European bundle patents—these are sometimes referred to as ‘classic’ or ‘traditional’ European patents, or simply European patents or EPs for short, and • European patents with unitary effect—these are typically referred to as unitary patents European bundle patents The European Patent Convention (EPC) established a single procedure for obtaining patents in different countries based on a single patent application. The EPC is implemented by the EPO which is the executive arm of the European Patent Organisation, an international organisation with 39 member states, including all 27 EU Member States plus certain non-EU member states such as the UK, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey. European bundle patents can provide protection in the 39 member states of

Three major pharmaceutical bodies—the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA), Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI), and Medicines for Europe—released reports on 7 May 2025 detailing legal challenges in EU medicines access. EFPIA data shows average approval-to-access time reaching 578 days, while Medicines for Europe proposes reducing exclusivity periods from 11 to 9 years. The reports examine implementation of EU pharmaceutical reform and Critical Medicines Act, highlighting regulatory barriers across member states.

The European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) has responded to the consultation on the draft implementing act (IA) on Joint Clinical Assessment (JCA) of medicinal products as part of the implementation of the new Health Technology Assessment Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2021/2282 (HTA Regulation) warning that although it broadly supports the process, it has 'serious concerns' about the draft IA' and believes these 'in their current format will create an unworkable framework for JCAs and consequently lead to duplication of work'. Most notably, it criticises that the JCAs do not involve the pharma companies whose products are subject to the JCAs except in exceptional circumstances and it believes the timelines are 'unworkable'. Ultimately, it concludes that 'these draft rules, due to lack of involvement and clarity at the scoping stage of the assessment, leave companies with the high risk of producing a JCA dossier which will not serve its purpose and be a clear waste of resources.' The EFPIA has listed out six concerns and proposed solutions it asks the Member States representatives to take into account when finalising the draft rules for the JCA process which are set to apply from 12 January 2025.

The European pharmaceutical industry, represented by AESGP, European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA), and Medicines for Europe, has joined forces to enhance the content of medicinal product information leaflets to prioritise patients’ needs. Key recommendations have been created to improve leaflet content and accessibility, therefore advancing health literacy. The Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (Nivel) published a report in 2015 initially flagging a demand for more patient-focused leaflets, which has persistently increased despite legislation, and some recommendations, of which some require legislative change to become a reality.

The National Crime Agency (NCA) has reported that the Director General of the NCA and European Police Chiefs are calling for technology companies and governments to consider public safety when implementing end-to-end encryption on messenger platforms. 32 European Police Chiefs have released a declaration expressing deep concern that if they are unable to lawfully access data due to end-to-end encryption, this could hinder their ability to investigate serious crime and keep the public safe.