An overview of litigation in the context of financial assistance to Eurozone Member States

Crisis-driven austerity measures adopted by some Eurozone Member States to satisfy the conditions for receiving financial assistance have raised concerns over the level of protection of fundamental rights afforded to individuals, and have thrown into sharp relief the problems surrounding the efficiency and the lack of transparency of crisis management mechanisms at the national and EU level. This contribution provides an overview of some of the most prominent litigation arising in the context of financial assistance given to, Greece, and Cyprus. Growing literature has examined the macroeconomic programmes of these countries from a constitutional (viz. the legal competence of the EU bailouts/bail-ins) and a social policy perspective (viz. the impact of the programmes on labour and employment social rights). Taking stock of these accounts, this article seeks to provide an updated picture of the most relevant case law, focusing on the position of the individual as a litigant. The article does not purport to provide an all-encompassing or comparative analysis of the litigation concerning the Eurozone bailouts. Such a challenging task would require extensive analysis not only of cases brought before numerous national courts, but also of the specifics of the national judicial systems of the three Eurozone Member States. Instead,this contribution aims to bring together the main attempts that have taken place so far to challenge measures adopted by the three Eurozone Member States in order to fulfill the conditions for receiving financial assistance. To this effect, the article first explains the concept of conditionality in the context of financial assistance (i). It then outlines some of the most pertinent cases at the national level (ii) and discusses the litigation before the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU), focusing on recent developments in the case law concerning financial assistance by the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) (iii). It concludes with an outlook on future developments in this saga of litigation. As a concise account of relevant case law, the article could be of interest to anyone who wishes to follow the development of the judicial responses to the Eurozone bailouts

Reference values of Schirmer tear test in sheep and the effect of season on the test results

The aim of this study was to determine the reference range of Schirmer tear test (STT) values in sheep using Greek indigenous and mixed breeds and to investigate the potential effect of breed and season on these values. Ninety (30 Chios, 30 Florina and 30 Lacaune mixed breed) ewes aged 2 years or more were used for the study. The aqueous portion of the tear film was measured using Schirmer tear test (STT) commercial strips bilaterally by the same investigator with the animal in standing position. The average STT value recorded was 18.45 ± 3.93 mm/min and the range 10.8–26.2 mm/min. STT was significantly affected by the season and the recorded values were significantly higher in summer compared to winter. The breed had no significant effect on tear secretion. The results of the present study provide a reference range of STT values in sheep and indicate that tear secretion is significantly affected by the season

Understanding the impact of legislation on 'reduction of disease risk' claims on food and drinks: The REDICLAIM project

The Nutrition and Health Claims Regulation (EC No. 1924/2006) has established a common framework for the regulation of nutrition and health claims used on foods across the European Union. This regulation aims to provide the European food industry opportunities for product innovation whilst protecting consumer interests with respect to controlling misleading advertising and promoting public health. However, in order to satisfy the approval of new health claims procedure particularly for new 'reduction of disease risk' claims [Article 14(1)(a) claims], significant research activity is required by industry to scientifically substantiate the claims they wish to make. There is a need to establish whether the implementation of this legislation is in fact driving product innovation and the development of healthy foods or whether it forms a barrier to such developments. The EU-funded REDICLAIM project is currently considering these issues. This article describes the project's preliminary results and outlines the further programme of work

Exploring the views of infection consultants in England on a novel delinked funding model for antimicrobials: the SMASH study

OBJECTIVES: A novel 'subscription-type' funding model was launched in England in July 2022 for ceftazidime/avibactam and cefiderocol. We explored the views of infection consultants on important aspects of the delinked antimicrobial funding model. METHODS: An online survey was sent to all infection consultants in NHS acute hospitals in England. RESULTS: The response rate was 31.2% (235/753). Most consultants agreed the model is a welcome development (69.8%, 164/235), will improve treatment of drug-resistant infections (68.5%, 161/235) and will stimulate research and development of new antimicrobials (57.9%, 136/235). Consultants disagreed that the model would lead to reduced carbapenem use and reported increased use of cefiderocol post-implementation. The presence of an antimicrobial pharmacy team, requirement for preauthorization by infection specialists, antimicrobial stewardship ward rounds and education of infection specialists were considered the most effective antimicrobial stewardship interventions. Under the new model, 42.1% (99/235) of consultants would use these antimicrobials empirically, if risk factors for antimicrobial resistance were present (previous infection, colonization, treatment failure with carbapenems, ward outbreak, recent admission to a high-prevalence setting).Significantly higher insurance and diversity values were given to model antimicrobials compared with established treatments for carbapenem-resistant infections, while meropenem recorded the highest enablement value. Use of both 'subscription-type' model drugs for a wide range of infection sites was reported. Respondents prioritized ceftazidime/avibactam for infections by bacteria producing OXA-48 and KPC and cefiderocol for those producing MBLs and infections with Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Acinetobacter spp. and Burkholderia cepacia. CONCLUSIONS: The 'subscription-type' model was viewed favourably by infection consultants in England

Exploring the views of infection consultants in England on a novel delinked funding model for antimicrobials: the SMASH study

OBJECTIVES: A novel ‘subscription-type’ funding model was launched in England in July 2022 for ceftazidime/avibactam and cefiderocol. We explored the views of infection consultants on important aspects of the delinked antimicrobial funding model. METHODS: An online survey was sent to all infection consultants in NHS acute hospitals in England. RESULTS: The response rate was 31.2% (235/753). Most consultants agreed the model is a welcome development (69.8%, 164/235), will improve treatment of drug-resistant infections (68.5%, 161/235) and will stimulate research and development of new antimicrobials (57.9%, 136/235). Consultants disagreed that the model would lead to reduced carbapenem use and reported increased use of cefiderocol post-implementation. The presence of an antimicrobial pharmacy team, requirement for preauthorization by infection specialists, antimicrobial stewardship ward rounds and education of infection specialists were considered the most effective antimicrobial stewardship interventions. Under the new model, 42.1% (99/235) of consultants would use these antimicrobials empirically, if risk factors for antimicrobial resistance were present (previous infection, colonization, treatment failure with carbapenems, ward outbreak, recent admission to a high-prevalence setting). Significantly higher insurance and diversity values were given to model antimicrobials compared with established treatments for carbapenem-resistant infections, while meropenem recorded the highest enablement value. Use of both ‘subscription-type’ model drugs for a wide range of infection sites was reported. Respondents prioritized ceftazidime/avibactam for infections by bacteria producing OXA-48 and KPC and cefiderocol for those producing MBLs and infections with Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Acinetobacter spp. and Burkholderia cepacia. CONCLUSIONS: The ‘subscription-type’ model was viewed favourably by infection consultants in England

Where two worlds meet: language policing in mainstream and complementary schools in England

We compare language policing in two educational contexts in England: mainstream schools and complementary schools. We draw on a varied dataset (policy documents, in-class observations, interviews) collected from mainstream schools and Greek complementary schools in London. We find similarities in how the two types of schools control, regulate, monitor and suppress the language of school students. Both settings hierarchise standardised and non-standardised varieties in institutional policies that delegitimise the non-standardised varieties. Teachers become vehicles for language ideologies in enacting monovarietal policies drawing on discourses around academic success and the primacy of written language over spoken language, including regional varieties such as Cypriot Greek. Our findings suggest that multilingual and multidialectal students in England who attend both mainstream and complementary schools are exposed to similar kinds of prescriptive discourses across the whole spectrum of their educational experiences, which can have a range of negative effects on their learning and the construction of their self-image. We argue that more links need to be forged between the two educational settings and that these should include the development of integrated pedagogies and policies that legitimise students’ whole linguistic repertoires, encompassing both their standardised and their non-standardised varieties as well as their other linguistic resources