text:
 Avis juridique important
 |
 21994A0517(20)
 Abkommen zwischen der Europäischen Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und der Ukraine über den Handel mit Textilwaren - Protokoll A - Protokoll B - Protokoll C - Protokoll D - Vereinbarte Niederschriften - Notenwechsel Nichtamtliche Übersetzung
 Amtsblatt Nr. L 123 vom 17/05/1994 S. 0718 - 0744 Finnische Sonderausgabe: Kapitel 11 Band 31 S. 0720 Schwedische Sonderausgabe: Kapitel 11 Band 31 S. 0720
 AGREEMENT between the European Economic Community and Ukraine on trade in textile products THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,of the one part, andTHE GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE,of the other part,DESIRING to promote, with a view to permanent cooperation and in conditions providing every security for trade, the orderly and equitable development of trade in textile products between the European Economic Community (hereinafter referred to as 'the Community') and Ukraine,RESOLVED to take the fullest possible account of the serious economic and social problems at present affecting the textile industry in both importing and exporting countries, and in particular, to eliminate real risks of market disruption on the market of the Community and real risks of disruption to the textile trade of Ukraine,HAVE DECIDED to conclude this Agreement and to this end have designated as their plenipotentiaries:THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,THE GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE,WHO HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS:Article 11. Trade in textile products listed in Annex I and originating within the Contracting Parties shall be liberalized for the duration of this Agreement under the conditions set out therein.2. Subject to the provisions of this or any successive Agreement, the Community undertakes, in respect of the products listed in Annex I, to suspend the application of quantitative import restrictions currently in force and not to introduce new quantitative restrictions.Quantitative import restrictions shall be re-introduced in case of denunciation or non-replacement of the present Agreement.3. Measures having equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions on the importation into the Community of the products listed in Annex I shall be prohibited for the duration of this Agreement.Article 21. Ukraine agrees to establish and maintain for each calendar year quantitative limits on its exports to the Community in accordance with Annex II. Such exports shall be subject to a double-checking system as specified in Protocol A.2. In administering the quantitative limits referred to in paragraph 1, Ukraine shall ensure that the Community textile industry shall benefit from utilization of the said limits.More particularly, as regards categories 1, 2, 2a and 3, Ukraine undertakes upon request from the Community to reserve, as a priority, 50 % of the quantitative limits concerned for Community industry users during a period extending between 1 January to 31 May of each year. For this purpose, contracts made with the industry during the periods in question shall be taken into consideration.3. To facilitate the implementation of these provisions the Community shall provide the competent Ukrainian authorities, before the end of each year, with a list of interested Community manufacturers and processors and, if possible, of the quantity of products requested for each firm. To this end, the firms concerned are invited to make direct contact with the relevant Ukrainian enterprises as early as possible during the two reservation periods mentioned in paragraph 2, in order to make their purchasing intentions known.Article 31. Imports into the Community of textile products covered by this Agreement shall not be subject to the quantitative limits established in Annex II, provided that they are declared to be for re-export outside the Community in the same state or after processing, within the framework of the administrative system of control which exists within the Community.However, the release for home use of products imported into the Community under the conditions referred to above shall be subject to the production of an export licence ißüd by the authorities of Ukraine, and to proof of origin in accordance with the provisions of Protocol A.2. Where the Community authorities ascertain that imports of textile products have been set off against a quantitative limit established under this Agreement, but that the products have subsequently been re-exported outside the Community, the authorities shall inform the Ukrainian authorities within four weeks of the quantities involved and authorize imports of identical quantities of the same products, which shall not be set off against the quantitative limit established under this Agreement for the current or the following year, as appropriate.3. The Community and Ukraine recognize the special and differential character of re-imports of textile products into the Community after processing in Ukraine as a specific form of industrial and trade cooperation.Provided that they are effected in accordance with the regulations on economic outward processing in force in the Community, these re-imports are not subject to the quantitative limits set out in Annex II when they are subject to the specific arrangements laid down in Protocol C.Article 41. In any Agreement year advance use of a portion of the quantitative limit established for the following Agreement year is authorized for each category of products up to 5 % of the quantitative limit for the current Agreement year.Amounts delivered in advance shall be deducted from the corresponding quantitative limits established for the following Agreement year.2. Carry-over to the corresponding quantitative limit for the following Agreement year of the amounts not used during any Agreement year is authorized for each category of products up to 7 % of the quantitative limit for the current Agreement year.3. Transfers in respect of categories in Group I shall not be made from any category except as follows:- transfers between categories 2 and 3 and from category 1 to categories 2 and 3 may be made up to 4 % of the quantitative limits for the category to which the transfer is made,- transfers between categories 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 may be made up to 4 % of the quantitative limit for the category to which the transfer is made.Transfers into any category in Groups II, III, IV and V may be made from any category or categories in Groups I, II, III, IV and V up to 5 % of the quantitative limit for the category to which the transfer is made.4. The table of equivalence applicable to the transfers referred to above is given in Annex I to this Agreement.5. The increase in any category of products resulting from the cumulative application of the provisions in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 above during an Agreement year shall not exceed the following limits:- 13 % for categories of products in Group I,- 13,5 % for categories of products in Groups II, III, IV and V.6. Prior notification shall be given by the Ukrainian authorities in the event of recourse to the provisions of paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 above, at least 15 days in advance.Article 51. Exports of textile products not listed in Annex II to this Agreement may be made subject to quantitative limits on the conditions laid down in the following paragraphs.2. Where the Community finds, under the system of administrative control set up, that the level of imports of products in a given category not listed in Annex II originating in Ukraine exceeds, in relation to the preceding year's total imports into the Community from all sources of products in that category, the following rates:- 1,2 % for categories of products in Group II,- 4 % for categories of products in Groups III, IV and V,it may request the opening of consultations in accordance with the procedure described in Article 15 of this Agreement, with a view to reaching agreement on an appropriate restraint level for the products in such category.3. Pending a mutually satisfactory solution, Ukraine undertakes, from the date of notification of the request for consultations, to suspend or limit at the level indicated by the Community exports of the category of products in question to the Community or to the region or regions of the Community market specified by the Community.The Community shall authorize the importation of products of the said category shipped from Ukraine before the date on which the request for consultations was submitted.4. Should the Contracting Parties be unable in the course of consultations to reach a satisfactory solution within the period specified in Article 15 (2), the Community shall have the right to introduce a definitive quantitative limit at an annual level not lower than the level resulting from the application of the formula set out in paragraph 2, or 106 % of the level of imports reached during the calendar year preceding that in which imports exceeded the level resulting from the application of the formula set out in paragraph 2 and gave rise to the request for consultations, whichever is the higher.The annual level so fixed shall be revised upwards after consultations in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 15, with a view to fulfilling the conditions set out in paragraph 2, should the trend of total imports into the Community of the product in question make this necessary.5. The limits introduced under paragraph 2 or 4 may in no case be lower than the level of imports of products in that category originating in Ukraine in 1992.6. The provisions of this Article shall not apply where the percentages specified in paragraph 2 have been reached as a result of a fall in total imports into the Community, and not as a result of an increase in exports of products originating in Ukraine.7. In the event of the provisions of paragraph 2, 3 or 4 being applied, Ukraine undertakes to ißü export licences for products covered by contracts concluded before the introduction of the quantitative limit, up to the volume of the quantitative limit fixed.8. Up to the date of communication of the statistics referred to in Article 12 (6), the provisions of paragraph 2 of this Article shall apply on the basis of the annual statistics previously communicated by the Community.9. The provisions of this Agreement which concern exports of products subject to the quantitative limits established in Annex II shall also apply to products for which quantitative limits are introduced under this Article.Article 61. In view of ensuring the effective functioning of this Agreement, the Community and Ukraine agree to cooperate fully in order to prevent, to investigate and to take any necessary legal and/or administrative action against circumvention by transhipment, re-routing, false declaration concerning the country or place of origin, falsification of documents, false declaration concerning fibre content, quantities description or classification of merchandise any by whatever other means. Accordingly, Ukraine and the Community agree to establish the necessary legal provisions and administrative procedures permitting effective action to be taken against such circumvention, which shall include the adoption of legally binding corrective measures against exporters and/or importers involved.2. Should the Community believe on the basis of information available that the present Agreement is being circumvented, the Community will consult with Ukraine with a view to reaching a mutually satisfactory solution. These consultations will be held as early as possible and at the latest within 30 days from the date of request.3. Pending the results of the consultation referred to in paragraph 2, Ukraine shall, as a precautionary measure, if so requested by the Community, take all necessary measures to ensure that, where sufficient evidence of circumvention is provided, adjustments of quantitative limits liable to be agreed following the consultation referred to in paragraph 2, may be carried out for the quota year in which the request to open consultations in accordance with paragraph 2 was made, or for the following year if the quota for the current year is exhausted.4. Should the Parties be unable, in the course of the consultation referred to in paragraph 2 to reach a mutually satisfactory solution, the Community shall have the right:(a) where there is sufficient evidence that products originating in Ukraine have been imported in circumvention of the present Agreement, to set off the relevant quantities against the quantitative limits established under the Agreement;(b) where sufficient evidence shows that false declaration concerning fibre content, quantities, description or classification of products originating in Ukraine has occured, to refuse to import the products in question;(c) should it appear the territory of Ukraine is involved in transhipment or re-routing of products not originating in Ukraine, to introduce quantitative limits against the same products originating in Ukraine if they are not already subject to quantitative limits, or to take any other appropriate measures.5. The Parties agree to establish a system of administrative cooperation to prevent and to addreß effectively all problems arising from circumvention in accordance with the provisions of Protocol A to this Agreement.Article 71. The quantitative limits established under this Agreement on imports into the Community of textile products of Ukrainian origin will not be broken down by the Community into regional shares.2. The Parties shall cooperate in order to prevent sudden and prejudicial changes in traditional trade flows resulting in regional concentration of direct imports into the Community.3. Ukraine shall monitor its exports of products under restraint or surveillance into the Community. Should a sudden and prejudicial change in traditional trade flows arise, the Community will be entitled to request consultations in order to find a satisfactory solution to those problems. Such consultations must be held within 15 working days of their being requested by the Community.4. Ukraine shall endeavour to ensure that exports of textile products subject to quantitative limits into the Community are spaced out as evenly as possible over the year dü account being taken in particular of seasonal factors.Article 8In the event of denunciation of this Agreement as provided for in Article 20 (3), the quantitative limits established in Annex II shall be reduced on a pro rata temporis basis unleß the Contracting Parties decide otherwise by common agreement.Article 9Ukraine exports of cottage-industry fabrics woven on hand- or foot-operated looms, garments or other made-up articles obtained manually from such fabrics and of traditional folklore handicraft products shall not be subject to quantitative limits, provided that these products originating in Ukraine meet the conditions laid down in Protocol B.Article 101. Should the Community consider that a textile product covered by this Agreement is being imported into the Community from Ukraine at a price abnormally lower than the normal competitive level and is for this reason causing or threatening to cause serious injury to Community producers of like or directly competing products, it may request consultations under Article 15, and in that event the following specific provisions shall be applicable.2. If following such consultations it is acknowledged by common accord that the situation described in paragraph 1 exists, Ukraine shall take, within the limits of its powers, the necessary steps, notably as regards the price at which the product in question will be sold, to remedy the situation.3. In order to determine whether the price of a textile product is abnormally lower than the normal competitive level, it may be compared with:- the prices generally charged for like products sold under the ordinary conditions by other exporting countries on the market of the importing country,- the prices of like national products at a comparable marketing stage on the market of the importing country,- the lowest prices charged by a third country for the same product in the course of ordinary commercial dealings in the three months preceding the request for consultations, and not having led to the adoption of any measure by the Community.4. Should the consultations referred to in paragraph 2 above fail to lead to an agreement within 30 days of the Community's request for consultations, the Community may, until these consultations have produced a mutually satisfactory solution, temporarily refuse consignments of the product in question at prices under the conditions referred to in paragraph 1 above.5. In totally exceptional and critical circumstances, where consignments of products are being imported from Ukraine into the Community at prices abnormally lower than the normal competitive level, such as to cause injury which it would be difficult to repair, the Community may temporarily suspend imports of the products concerned pending agreement on a solution in the course of consultations, which shall be opened immediately. The Contracting Parties shall do their utmost to reach a mutually acceptable solution within 10 working days' notice of the opening of such consultations.6. Should the Community have recourse to the measures referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5 above, Ukraine may at any time request the opening of consultations to examine the possibility of eliminating or modifying these measures where the causes which made them necessary no longer exist.Article 111. The classification of the products covered by this Agreement is based on the tariff and statistical nomenclature of the Community (hereinafter called the 'combined nomenclature', or in abbreviated for 'CN') and any amendments thereof.Where any decision on classification results in a change of classification practice or a change of category of any product subject to this Agreement the affected products shall follow the trade regime applicable to the practice or category they fall into after such changes.Any amendment to the combined nomenclature (CN) made in accordance with the procedures in force in the Community concerning categories of products covered by this Agreement or any decision relating to the classification of goods shall not have the effect of reducing quantitative limits introduced pursuant to this Agreement.2. The origin of the products covered by this Agreement shall be determined in accordance with the rules in force in the Community.Any amendment to these rules of origin shall be communicated to Ukraine and shall not have the effect of reducing any quantitative limit established in Annex II.The procedures for control of the origin of the products referred to above are laid down in Protocol A.Article 121. Ukraine shall supply the Commission with precise statistical information on all export licences ißüd for categories of textile products subject to the quantitative limits set out in Annex II, expressed in quantities and in terms of valü and broken down by Member States of the Community, as well as on all certificates ißüd by the competent Ukrainian authorities for products referred to in Article 9 and subject to the provisions of Protocol B.2. The Community shall likewise transmit to the Ukrainian authorities precise statistical information on import authorizations ißüd by the Community authorities and import statistics for products covered by the system referred to in Article 5 (2).3. The information referred to above shall, for all categories of products, be forwarded before the end of the month following the month to which the statistics relate.4. Upon request by the Community, Ukraine shall supply import statistics for all products covered by Annex I.5. Should it be found on analysis of the information exchanged that there are significant discrepancies between the returns for exports and those for imports, consultations may be initiated in accordance with the procedure specified in Article 15 of this Agreement.6. For the purpose of applying the provisions of Article 5, the Community undertakes to provide the Ukrainian authorities before 15 April of each year with the preceding year's statistics on imports of all textile products covered by this Agreement, broken down by supplying country and Community Member State.Article 131. Ukraine shall create favourable conditions for imports of textile products originating in the Community listed in Annex I and, where appropriate inter alia, accord to them non-discriminatory treatment as regards the application of quantitative restrictions, the granting of licences and the allocation of currency needed to pay for such imports. Ukraine will also recommend to its importers to use the possibilities offered by the Community producers of textiles mentioned above while according the highest possible degree of liberalization to those imports taking into account the development of trade between the Contracting Parties.2. Where a need for additional supplies arises and in particular a need leading to the diversification on imports of textile products in Ukraine, Ukraine shall accord non-discriminatory treatment to imports of textile products originating in the Community.Article 141. The Contracting Parties agree to examine the trend of trade in textile products and garments each year, in the framework of the consultations provided for in Article 15 and on the basis of the statistics referred to in Article 12.2. If the Community finds that in the cases foreseen in Article 13 (2) of this Agreement it is placed in an unfavourable position as compared with a third country, it may request consultations with Ukraine in accordance with the procedure specified in Article 15 with a view to taking appropriate action.Article 151. Save where it is otherwise provided for in this Agreement, the consultation procedures referred to in this Agreement other than those referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, shall be governed by the following provisions:- as far as possible consultations shall be held periodically. Specific additional consultations may also be held,- any request for consultations shall be notified in writing to the other Contracting Party,- where appropriate, the request for consultations shall be followed within a reasonable period (and in any case not later than 15 days following the notification) by a report setting out the circumstances which, in the opinion of the requesting Party, justify the submission of such a request,- the Contracting Parties shall enter into consultations within one month of notification of the request at the latest, with a view to reaching agreement or a mutually acceptable conclusion within one further month at the latest,- the period of one month referred to above for the purpose of reaching agreement or a mutually acceptable conclusion may be extended by common accord.2. The Community may request consultations in accordance with paragraph 1 when it ascertains that during a particular year of application of the Agreement difficulties arise in the Community or one of its regions dü to a sharp and substantial increase, by comparison to the preceding year, in imports of a given category of Group I subject to the quantitative limits set out in Annex II.3. At the request of either of the Contracting Parties, consultations shall be held on any problems arising from the application of this Agreement. Any consultations held under this Article shall take place in a spirit of cooperation and with a desire to reconcile the differences between the Contracting Parties.Article 16The Contracting Parties undertake to promote the exchange of visits by persons, groups and delegations from busineß, trade and industry, to facilitate contacts in the industrial, commercial and technical fields connected with trade and cooperation in textile industry and textile products and garments, and to assist in the organization of fairs and exhibitions of mutual interest.Article 171. Ukraine is prepared to cooperate fully and if necessary to take, within the framework of its trade policy and within the limits of its powers, measures to prevent the disruption of the trade for certain raw materials listed in Annex III.2. Taking into account its production and export possibilities, Ukraine in administrating exports of the products referred to in paragraph 1, shall give whenever possible favourable treatment, on a non-discriminatory basis, to the abovementioned products, requested by the Community with a view to meeting its needs.3. Problems arising in this area may be subject to the consultations provided for in Article 15.Article 18As regards intellectual property, at the request of either Contracting Party, consultations shall be held in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 15 with a view to finding an equitable solution to problems relating to the protection of marks, designs or models of articles of apparel and textile products.Article 19This Agreement shall apply, on the one hand, to the territories in which the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community is applied and under the conditions laid down in that Treaty and, on the other hand, to the territory of Ukraine.Article 201. This Agreement shall enter into force on the first day of the month following the date on which the Parties notify each other of the completion of the procedures necessary for that purpose. It shall be applicable until 31 December 1994. Thereafter, the application of all the provisions of this Agreement shall be extended automatically for a period of one more year up to 31 December 1995, unleß either Party notifies the other at least six months before 31 December 1994 that it dös not agree with this extension.2. This Agreement shall apply with effect from 1 January 1993.3. Either Contracting Party may at any time propose modifications to this Agreement or denounce it, provided that at least six months' notice is given. In that event, the Agreement shall come to an end on the expiry of the period of notice.4. The Contracting Parties agree to enter into consultations not later than six months before the expiration of the present Agreement with a view to possibly concluding a new Agreement.5. The Annexes, Protocols, Agreed Minutes and letters exchanged or attached to this Agreement, shall form an integral part thereof.Article 21This Agreement shall be drawn up in two copies in the Danish, Dutch, English, French, German, Greek, Italian, Portugüse, Spanish und Ukrainian languages, each of these texts being equally authentic.For the Government of UkraineFor the Council of the European CommunitiesANNEX I (The contents of this Annex I are identical to those of pages 9 to 41) ANNEX II (The full products descriptions of the categories listed in this Annex are to be found in Annex I to the Agreement) >PLATZ FÜR EINE TABELLE>ANNEX III Raw materials referred to in Article 17 AngoraCashmereCottonSilk and silk wastePROTOCOL A TITLE I CLASSIFICATION Article 11. The competent authorities of the Community undertake to inform Ukraine of any changes in the combined nomenclature (CN) before the date of their entry into force in the Community.2. The competent authorities of the Community undertake to inform the competent authorities of Ukraine of any decisions relating to the classification of products subject to the present Agreement, within one month of their adoption at the latest. Such communication shall include:(a) a description of the products concerned;(b) the relevant category and the related CN codes;(c) the reasons which have led to the decision.3. Where a decision on classification results in a change of classification practice or a change of category of any product subject to the Agreement, the competent authorities of the Community shall provide 30 days' notice, from the date of the Community's communication, before the decision is put into effect. Products shipped before the date of entry into effect of the decision shall remain subject to the earlier classification practice, provided that the goods in the question are presented for importation into the Community within 60 days of that date.4. Where a Community decision on classification resulting in a change of classification practice or a change of categorization of any product subject to the Agreement affects a category subject to quantitative limits, the Contracting Parties agree to enter into consultation in accordance with the procedures described in Article 15 of the Agreement with a view to honouring the obligation under the second subparagraph of Article 11 (1) of the Agreement.5. In case of divergent opinions between Ukraine and the competent Community authorities at the point of entry into the Community on the classification of products covered by the present Agreement, classification shall provisionally be based on indications provided by the Community, pending consultations in accordance with Article 15 with a view to reaching agreement on definitive classification of the product concerned.TITLE II ORIGIN Article 21. Products originating in Ukraine for export to the Community in accordance with the arrangements established by this Agreement shall be accompanied by a certificate of Ukrainian origin conforming to the model annexed to this Protocol.2. The certificate of origin shall be certified by the competent Ukrainian organizations authorized under the Ukrainian legislation if the products in question can be considered products originating in that country within the meaning of the relevant rules in force in the Community.3. However, the products in Group III, IV and V may be imported into the Community in accordance with the arrangements established by this Agreement on production of a declaration by the exporter on the invoice or other commercial document relating to the products to the effect that the products in question originate in Ukraine within the meaning of the relevant rules n force in the Community.4. The certificate of origin referred to in paragraph 1 shall not be required for import of goods covered by a certificate of origin Form A or Form APR completed in accordance with the relevant Community rules in order to qualify for generalized tariff preferences.Article 3The certificate of origin shall be ißüd only on application having been made in writing by the exporter or, under the exporter's responsibility, by his authorized representative. The competent Ukrainian organizations authorized under Ukrainian legislation shall ensure that the certificate of origin is properly completed and for this purpose they shall call for any necessary documentary evidence or carry out any check which they consider appropriate.Article 4Where different criteria for determining origin are laid down for products falling within the same category, the certificates or declarations of origin must contain a sufficiently detailed description of the goods so as to enable Ukrainian criterion to be determined, on the basis of which the certificate was ißüd or the declaration drawn up.Article 5The discovery of slight discrepancies between the statements made in the certificate of origin and those made in the documents produced to the customs office for the purpose of carrying out the formalities for importing the products shall not ipso facto cast doubt upon the statements in the certificate.TITLE III DOUBLE-CHECKING SYSTEM FOR THE CATEGORIES OF PRODUCTS SUBJECT TO COMMUNITY QUANTITATIVE LIMITS Section I Exportation Article 61. The competent authorities of Ukraine shall ißü an export licence in respect of all consignments from Ukraine of textile products referred to in Annex II, up to the relevant quantitative limits as may be modified by Articles 3, 4 and 6 of this Agreement, as well as of textile products subject to any definitive or provisional quantitative limits, established as a result of the application of Article 5 of the Agreement.Article 71. The export licence shall conform to the model annexed to this Protocol and it shall be valid for exports throughout the customs territory to which the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community applies. However, where the Community has made recourse to the provisions of Articles 5 and 7 of the Agreement in accordance with the provisions of the Agreed Minute No 1, or to the Agreed Minute No 2, the textile products covered by the export licences can only be put into free circulation in the region(s) of the Community indicated in those licences.2. Each export licence must certify inter alia that the quantity of the product in question has been set off against the quantitative limit established for the category of the products concerned and shall only cover one category of products subject to quantitative limits. It may be used for one or more consignments of the products in question.Article 8The competent authorities of the Community must be informed immediately of the withdrawal or modification of any export licence already ißüd.Article 91. Exports shall be set off against the quantitative limits established for the year in which the shipment of the goods has been effected even if the export licence is ißüd after such shipment.2. For the purpose of applying paragraph 1, shipment of the goods is considered to have taken place on the date of their loading onto the exporting aircraft, vehicule or vessel.Article 10The presentation of an export licence, in application of Article 12 hereafter, shall be effected not later than 31 March of the year following that in which the goods covered by the licence have been shipped.Section II Importation Article 11Importation into the Community of textile products subject to quantitative limits shall be subject to the presentation of an import authorization.Article 121. The competent authorities of the Community shall ißü the import authorization referred to in Article 11 above, within five working days of the presentation by the importer of the original of the corresponding export licence.2. The import authorizations shall be valid for six months from the date of their ißü for imports throughout the customs territory to which the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community is applied. However, where the Community has recourse to the provisions of Articles 5 and 7 of the Agreement in accordance with the provisions of the Agreed Minute No 1, or to the Agreed Minute No 2, the products covered by the import licences can only be put into free circulation in the region(s) of the Community indicated in those licences.3. The competent authorities of the Community shall cancel the import authorization already ißüd whenever the corresponding export licence has been withdrawn.However, if the competent authorities of the Community are notified of the withdrawal or the cancellation of the export licence only after the importation of the products into the Community, the relevant quantities shall be set off against the quantitative limits established for the category and the quota year concerned.Article 131. If the competent authorities of the Community find that the total quantities covered by export licences ißüd by the competent authorities of Ukraine for a particular category in any year exceed the quantitative limit established for that category established in Annex II for that category as may be notified by Articles 3,4 and 6 of the Agreement, or any quantitative limit established in accordance with Article 5 of the Agreement, the said authorities may suspend the further ißü of import authorizations. In this event, the competent authorities of the Community shall immediately inform the authorities of Ukraine and the special consultation procedure set out in Article 15 of the Agreement shall be initiated forthwith.2. Exports of products of Ukrainian origin subject to quantitative limits or a double-checking system and not covered by Ukrainian export licences ißüd in accordance with the provisions of this Protocol may be refused an import authorization by the competent Community authorities.However, without prejudice to Article 6 of the Agreement if the import of such products is allowed into the Community by the competent authorities of the Community, the quantities involved shall not be set off against the appropriate quantitative limits established in Annex II, or established by virtü of Article 5 of the Agreement, without the expreß agreement of the competent authorities of Ukraine.TITLE IV FORM AND PRODUCTION OF EXPORT CERTIFICATES AND CERTIFICATES OF ORIGIN, AND COMMON PROVISIONS CONCERNING EXPORTS TO THE COMMUNITY Article 141. The export licence and the certificate of origin may comprise additional copies duly indicated as such. They shall be made out in English or French. If they are completed by hand, entries must be in ink and in printed script.These documents shall measure 210 × 297 mm. The paper used shall be white writing paper, sized, not containing mechanical pulp, and weighing not leß than 25 g/m2. If the documents have several copies only the top copy, which is the original, shall be printed with the guilloche pattern background. This copy shall be clearly marked as 'original' and the other copies as 'copies'. Only the original shall be accepted by the competent authorities of the Community as being valid for the purpose of export to the Community in accordance with the provision of the Agreement.2. Each document shall bear a standardized serial number, whether or not printed, by which it can be identified.This number shall be composed of the following elements:- two letters identifying the exporting country as follows: UA,- two letters identifying the intended Member State of customs clearance as follows:BL = Benelux,DE = Federal Republic of Germany,DK = Denmark,EL = Greece,ES = Spain,FR = France,GB = United Kingdom,IE = Ireland,IT = Italy,PT = Portugal,- a one-digit number identifying quota year, corresponding to the last figure in the respective year, e.g. 3 for 1993,- a two-digit number from 01 to 99, identifying the particular issuing office concerned in the exporting country,- a five-digit number running consecutively from 00001 to 99999 allocated to the intended Member State of customs clearance.Article 15The export licence and the certificate of origin may be ißüd after the shipment of the products to which they relate. In such cases they must bear the endorsement 'délivré a posteriori' or the endorsement 'ißüd retrospectively'.Article 161. In the event of a theft, loß or destruction of an export licence or a certificate of origin, the exporter may apply to the competent Ukrainian authorities which ißüd the document for a duplicate to be made out on the basis of the export documents in his possession. The duplicate of any such certificate or licence so ißüd shall bear the endorsement 'duplicata' or 'duplicate'.2. The duplicate shall bear the date of the original export licence or certificate of origin.TITLE V ADMINISTRATIVE COOPERATION Article 17The Community and Ukraine shall cooperate closely in the implementation of the provisions of this Protocol. To this end, contacts and exchanges or views, including on technical matters, shall be facilitated by both Parties.Article 18In order to ensure the correct application of this Protocol, the Community and Ukraine offer mutual assistance for the checking of the authenticity and the accuracy of export licences and certificates of origin ißüd or of any declarations made within the terms of this Protocol.Article 19Ukraine shall send the Commission of the European Communities the names and addresses of the authorities to ißü and verify the export licences and the certificates of origin, together with specimens of the stamps used by these authorities and specimen signatures of officials responsible for signing the export licences and the certificates of origin. Ukraine shall also notify the Commission of any change in this information.Article 201. Subsequent verification of certificates of origin or export licences shall be carried out at random, or whenever the competent Community authorities have reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of the certificate or licence or as to the accuracy of the information regarding the trü origin of the products in question.2. In such cases, the competent authorities in the Community shall return the certificate of origin or the export licence or a copy thereof to the competent Ukrainian authorities, giving, where appropriate, the reasons of form or substance which justify an enquiry. If the invoice has been submitted, such invoice or a copy thereof shall be attached to the certificate or to the licence or their copies. The authorities shall also forward any information that has been obtained suggesting that the particulars given on the said certificate or licence are inaccurate.3. The provisions of paragraph 1 above shall also apply to subsequent verifications of the declarations of origin provided for in Article 2 of this Protocol.4. The results of the subsequent verifications carried out in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2 above shall be communicated to the competent authorities of the Community within three months at the latest. The information communicated shall indicate whether the disputed certificate, licence or declaration, applies to the goods actually exported and whether these goods are eligible for export under the arrangements established by the Agreement. The information shall also include, at the request of the Community, copies of all the documentation necessary to fully determine the facts, and in particular the trü origin of the goods.Should such verifications reveal systematic irregularities in the use of declarations of origin, the Community may subject imports of the products in question to the provisions of Article 2 (1) of this Protocol.5. For the purpose of subsequent verification of certificates of origin, copies of the certificates as well as any export documents referring to them shall be kept for at least two years by the competent Ukrainian authorities.6. Recourse to the random verification procedure specified in this Article must not constitute an obstacle to the release for home use of the products in question.Article 211. Where the verification procedure referred to in Article 20 or where information available to the competent authorities of the Community or of Ukraine indicates or appears to indicate that the provisions of this Agreement are being circumvented or infringed, the two Contracting Parties shall cooperate closely and with the appropriate urgency in order to prevent any such circumvention or infringement.2. To this end, the competent authorities of Ukraine shall, on their own initiative or at the request of the Community, carry out appropriate inquiries, or arrange for such inquiries to be carried out, concerning operations which are, or appear to the Community to be, in circumvention or infringement of this Protocol. Ukraine shall communicate the results, of these inquiries to the Community, including any other pertinent information enabling the cause of the circumvention or infringement, including the trü origin of the goods to be determined.3. By agreement between the Community and Ukraine, officials designated by the Community may be present at the inquiries referred to in paragraph 2 above.4. Pursuant to the cooperation referred to in paragraph 1 above, the competent authorities of the Community and Ukraine shall exchange any information considered by either Contracting Party to be of use in preventing circumvention or infringement of the provisions of this Agreement. These exchanges may include information on the production of textile products in Ukraine and on the trade in the type of products covered by this Agreement between Ukraine and third countries, particularly where the Community has reasonable grounds to consider that the products in question may be in transit acroß the territory of Ukraine prior to their importation into the Community. This information may include at the request of the Community copies of all available relevant documentation.5. Where sufficient evidence shows that the provisions of this Protocol have been circumvented or infringed, the competent authorities of Ukraine and the Community may agree to take the measures set out in Article 6 (4) of the Agreement, and any other measures as are necessary to prevent a recurrence of such circumvention or infringement.Annex to Protocol A, Article 2 (1) >VERWEIS AUF EINEN FILM>Annex to Protocol A, Article 7 (1): Model 1 >VERWEIS AUF EINEN FILM>PROTOCOL B referred to in Article 9 Cottage industry and folklore products originating in Ukraine1. The exemption provided for in Article 9 in respect of cottage industry products shall apply to the following types of product only:(a) fabrics woven on looms operated solely by hand or foot, being fabrics of a kind traditionally made in the cottage industry of Ukraine;(b) garments or other textile articles of a kind traditionally made in the cottage industry of Ukraine obtained manually from the fabrics referred to above and sewn exclusively by hand without the aid of any machine;(c) traditional folklore products of Ukraine made by hand, in a list to be agreed between the Community and Ukraine.Exemption shall be granted in respect only of products covered by a certificate conforming to the specimen attached to this Protocol and ißüd by the competent authorities in Ukraine. These certificates must indicate the reasons justifying their issuance; the competent authorities of the Community will accept them after having checked that the products concerned have fulfilled the conditions established in this Protocol. The certificates concerning the products envisaged in (c) above must bear a stamp 'FOLKLORE' marked clearly. In the case of a difference of opinion between the Parties concerning the nature of these products, consultations shall be held within one month in order to resolve these differences.Should imports of any product covered by this Protocol reach proportions liable to cause problems within the Community, consultations with Ukraine shall be initiated as soon as possible, with a view to resolving the situation by the adoption if necessary of a quantitative limit, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 15 of this Agreement.2. The provisions of Titles IV and V of Protocol A shall apply mutatis mutandis to the products covered by paragraph 1 of this Protocol.Annex to Protocol B >VERWEIS AUF EINEN FILM>PROTOCOL C Reimports into the Community, within the meaning of Article 3 (3) of this Agreement, of products listed in the Annex to this Protocol shall be subject to the provisions of this Agreement, unleß the special provisions below provide otherwise:1. Subject to paragraph 2, only reimports into the Community of products affected by the specific quantitative limits laid down in the Annex to this Protocol shall be considered reimports within the meaning of Article 3 (3) of the Agreement.2. Reimports not covered by the Annex to this Protocol may be made subject to specific quantitative limits following consultations in accordance with the procedures set out in Article 15 of the Agreement, provided the products concerned are subject to quantitative limits pursuant to the Agreement, to a double-checking system or to surveillance measures.3. Having regard to the interests of both Parties, the Community may at its discretion, or in response to a request under Article 15 of the Agreement:(a) examine the possibility of transferring from one category to another, using in advance or carrying over from one year to the next, portions of specific quantitative limits;(b) consider the possibility of increasing specific quantitative limits.4. However, the Community may apply automatically the flexibility rules set out in paragraph 3 above within the following limits:(a) transfers between categories may not exceed 20 % the quantity for the category to which the transfer is made;(b) carry-over of a specific quantitative limit from one year to the next may not exceed 10,5 % of the quantity set for the year of actual utilization;(c) advance use of specific quantitative limits from one year to another may not exceed 7,5 % of the quantity set for the year of actual utilization.5. The Community shall inform Ukraine of any measures taken pursuant to the preceding paragraphs.6. The competent authorities in the Community shall debit the specific quantitative limits referred to in paragraph 1 at the time of ißü of the prior authorization required by Council Regulation (EEC) No 636/82 which governs economic outward processing arrangements. A specific quantitative limit shall be debited for the year in which a prior authorization is ißüd.7. A certificate of origin made out by the organizations authorized to do so under Ukrainian law shall be ißüd, in accordance with Protocol A to the Agreement, for all products covered by this Protocol. This certificate shall bear a reference to the prior authorization mentioned in paragraph 6 above as evidence that the processing operation it describes has been carried out in Ukraine.8. The Community shall provide Ukraine with the names and addresses of, and specimens of the stamps used by, the competent authorities of the Community which ißü the prior authorizations referred to in paragraph 6 above.9. Without prejudice to the provisions of paragraphs 1 to 8 above, Ukraine and the Community shall continü consultations with a view to seek a mutually acceptable solution enabling both Contracting Parties to benefit from the Agreement's provisions on outward processing traffic and so ensure the effective development of trade in textile products between Ukraine and the Community.Annex to Protocol C (The product descriptions of the categories listed in this Annex are to be found in Annex I to the Agreement) OPT QUOTAS >PLATZ FÜR EINE TABELLE>Agreed Minute No 1 In the context of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and Ukraine on trade in textile and clothing products, initialled on 5 May 1993, the Parties agreed that Article 5 of the Agreement dös not preclude the Community, if the conditions are fulfilled, from applying the safeguard measures for one or more of its regions in conformity with the principles of the internal market.In such an event, Ukraine shall be informed in advance of the relevant provisions of Protocol A to the Agreement to be applied, as appropriate.For the Government of UkraineFor the Council of the European CommunitiesAgreed Minute No 2 Nothwithstanding Article 7 (1) of this Agreement, for imperative technical or administrative reasons or to find a solution to economic problems resulting from regional concentration of imports, or in order to combat circumvention and fraud of the provisions of this Agreement, the Community will establish for a limited period of time a specific management system in conformity with the principles of the internal market.However, if the Parties are unable to reach a satisfactory solution during the consultations provided for in Article 7 (3), Ukraine undertakes, if so requested by the Community, to respect temporary export limits for one or more regions of the Community. In such a case, these limits shall not preclude the importation into the region(s) concerned of products which were shipped from Ukraine on the basis of export licences obtained before the date of formal notification to Ukraine by the Community about the introduction of the above limits.The Community shall inform Ukraine of the technical and administrative measures, such as defined in the attached note verbale, that need to be introduced by both Parties in order to implement the above paragraphs in conformity with the principles of the internal market.For the Government of UkraineFor the Council of the European CommunitiesNote verbale The Direcotrate-General for External Relations of the Commission of the European Communities presents its compliments to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine and has the honour to refer to the Agreement on textile products negotiated between Ukraine and the Community initialled on 5 May 1993.The Directorate-General wishes to inform the Ministry, that the Community has decided to apply, starting from 1 January 1993, the provisions of paragraph 1 of Agreed Minute No 2 to the Agreement, initialled on 5 May 1993. Consequently, the corresponding provisions of Articles 7 and 12 of Protocol A to the Agreement shall also be applied as of the above date.The Directorate-General for External Relations avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine the assurance of its highest consideration.Agreed Minute No 3 In the context of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and Ukraine on trade in textile and clothing products, initialled on 5 May 1993, the Parties agreed that Ukraine shall endeavour not to deprive certain regions of the Community which have traditionally had relatively small shares of Community quotas of imports of products serving as inputs for their processing industry.The Community and Ukraine further agreed to hold consultations, should the need arise, in order to avert any problems which might occur in this respect.For the Government of UkraineFor the Council of the European CommunitiesAgreed Minute No 4 In the context of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Ukraine on trade in textile and clothing products, initialled on 5 May 1993, Ukraine agreed that, from the date of request for and pending the consultations referred to in Article 7 (3), it shall cooperate by not issuing export licences that would further aggravate the problems resulting from the regional concentration of direct imports into the Community.For the Government of UkraineFor the Council of the European CommunitiesExchange of notes The Directorate-General for External Relations of the Commission of the European Communities presents its compliments to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine and has the honour to refer to the Agreement on textile products between Ukraine and the Community initialled on 5 May 1993.The Directorate-General wishes to inform the Ministry that whilst awaiting the completion of the necessary procedures for the conclusion and the coming into force of the Agreement, the Community is prepared to allow the provisions of the Agreement to apply de facto from 1 January 1993. This is on the understanding that either Party may at any time terminate this de facto application of the Agreement provided that 120 days' notice is given.The Directorate-General for External Relations would be grateful if the Mission would confirm its Agreement to the foregoing.The Directorate-General for External Relations avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine the assurance of its highest consideration.Exchange of notes The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine presents its compliments to the Directorate-General for External Relations of the Commission of the European Communities and has the honour to refer to the Agreement on textile products between the Community and Ukraine initialled at Brussels on 5 May 1993.The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine wishes to confirm to the Directorate-General that whilst awaiting the completion of the necessary procedures for the conclusion and the coming into force of the Agreement, the Government of Ukraine is prepared to allow the provisions of the Agreement to apply de facto from 1 January 1993. This is on the understanding that either Party may at any time terminate this de facto application of the Agreement provided that 120 days' notice is given.The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the Directorate-General for External Relations of the Commission of the European Communities the assurance of its highest consideration.Agreed Minute No 5 In the context of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and Ukraine on trade in textile products initialled on 5 May 1993, the Parties agreed that, in conformity with Article 20 (2) of the Agreement, the quantities of products originating in Ukraine shipped during the year 1993 and falling within one of the categories of textile products subject to the quantitative limits referred to in Article 2 (1) of the Agreement shall be set off against the quantitative limits established for the year 1993 for the category concerned.For the Government of UkraineFor the Council of the European CommunitiesAgreed Minute No 6 In the context of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and Ukraine on trade in textile products initialled on 5 May 1993, the Parties agreed that, in conformity with Article 20 (2) of the Agreement, products listed in Annex I to the Agreement originating in Ukraine but not subject to the quantitative limits referred to in Article 2 (1) of the Agreement may be subject either to the double-checking system specified in Protocol A to the Agreement or to a prior system of surveillance.For the Government of UkraineFor the Council of the European Communities


type: contracts

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 21.2.2008
 ES
 Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea
 L 47/1
 DECISIÓN DEL COMITÉ MIXTO DEL EEE
 N
 o 96/2007
 de 27 de julio de 2007
 por la que se modifica el Protocolo 31 del Acuerdo EEE sobre la cooperación en sectores específicos no incluidos en las cuatro libertades
 EL COMITÉ MIXTO DEL EEE,
 Visto el Acuerdo sobre el Espacio Económico Europeo, adaptado por el Protocolo por el que se adapta el Acuerdo sobre el Espacio Económico Europeo (en lo sucesivo denominado «el Acuerdo»), y, en particular, sus artículos 86 y 98,
 Considerando lo siguiente:
 (1)
 El Protocolo 31 del Acuerdo fue modificado por la Decisión del Comité Mixto del EEE no 89/2005, de 10 de junio de 2005 (1).
 (2)
 Es preciso ampliar la cooperación de las Partes contratantes del Acuerdo para incluir la Decisión 2007/162/CE, Euratom del Consejo, de 5 de marzo de 2007, por la que se establece un Instrumento de Financiación de la Protección Civil (2).
 (3)
 Por consiguiente, es preciso modificar el Protocolo 31 del Acuerdo a fin de hacer posible esta cooperación más amplia a partir del 1 de enero de 2007.
 DECIDE:
 Artículo 1
 En el artículo 10, apartado 8, del Protocolo 31 del Acuerdo se añade el texto siguiente:
 «c)
 Actos comunitarios que surtirán efecto a partir del 1 de enero de 2007:
 —
 32007 D 0162: Decisión 2007/162/CE, Euratom del Consejo, de 5 de marzo de 2007, por la que se establece un Instrumento de Financiación de la Protección Civil (DO L 71 de 10.3.2007, p. 9).».
 Artículo 2
 La presente Decisión entrará en vigor el día siguiente al de la última notificación transmitida al Comité Mixto del EEE, de conformidad con lo establecido en el artículo 103, apartado 1, del Acuerdo (3).
 Será aplicable a partir del 1 de enero de 2007.
 Artículo 3
 La presente Decisión se publicará en la sección EEE y en el Suplemento EEE del Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea.
 Hecho en Bruselas, el 27 de julio de 2007.
 Por el Comité Mixto del EEE
 El Presidente
 Stefán Haukur JÓHANNESSON
 (1) DO L 268 de 13.10.2005, p. 25.
 (2) DO L 71 de 10.3.2007, p. 9.
 (3) No se han indicado preceptos constitucionales.


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: US

text:
This is the third time this court has been called upon to consider the contentions between the parties to this appeal. The case has been three times submitted to a jury, resulting each time in a verdict for the defendant below, appellee here. In the first appeal, Rent-A-Car Co. v. Globe Rutgers Fire Ins. Co.,158 Md. 169, 148 A. 252, the case was reversed because of the granting by the trial court of prayers which *Page 403
 held that, where a policy of fire insurance named the mortgagor and mortgagee as the assured and made the loss payable to the assured, as interest might appear, and where the evidence showed that the mortgagor had set fire to and destroyed the property, such fact constituted a defense against the mortgagee also, even though the mortgagee was entirely innocent of any participation in, or knowledge of, the incendiary act of the mortgagor. In the second appeal (161 Md. 249, 156 A. 847), the judgment was also reversed for the granting of erroneous prayers. In the last mentioned case it was held that the defendant's demurrer prayers were properly overruled; this court thereby deciding that there was sufficient evidence of the appellant's participation in or connection with a conspiracy to set fire to and destroy the insured property. On this appeal the appellant urges reversible error on three principal grounds: First, because of improper remarks of appellee's counsel in his opening statement to the jury; second, because of a conversation had between a juror and one of the witnesses for the defendant; and, third, because of error of the trial court in its ruling on the prayers.
 The facts in this case have been stated by this court at length in the two previous appeals, and it is therefore unnecessary to again detail them. Suffice it to say that the evidence as shown by the present record is substantially the same as in the preceding appeals. There is the testimony of several witnesses in the present record who gave evidence for the first time, but their testimony deals with the movements of George Winters on the night of January 2-3, 1928, the time of the fire, tending to show that he was not in the neighborhood of the property, wherein the fire took place, at any time during that night; such evidence not affecting the legal propositions now before us for determination. We will consider the contentions of the appellant in the order in which we have stated them.
 The record discloses the following:
 "During the opening statement of the defendant, the plaintiff excepted to a remark made by Mr. Weinberg to the effect that the plaintiff had Kezer arrested. (The Court): I think *Page 404
 I know what you are going to say and unless you press it we will meet it when the testimony comes in. (Mr. Weinberg): I do not think it is terribly material although I think it has been ruled on by the Court of Appeals. We will offer it at the proper time. (The Court): I do not think it has the importance that counsel seem to attach to it. (Mr. Weinberg): Well, at any rate, something happened to Kezer. (Mr. Pierson): At this point we object to that remark. (Objection overruled; exception noted)."
 In the previous trial the witness Kezer had testified that Charles Winters, the president and owner of all the stock of the appellant, and his brother George Winters, had, at a time shortly prior to the sale of the property to Astrin, suggested to the witness that, if they had a fire resulting in the destruction of the personal property, to wit, the automobiles used at 1239 and 1241 Light Street, the insurance company would have to worry about the condition of the automobiles; the witness having stated to the Winters that business had fallen by reason of the dilapidated condition and want of repair of the automobiles. Witness further stated that, after he had left the employ of Winters, he went to work for O'Brien Bros., a general garage and repair shop next door to the Light Street branch of the Rent-A-Car Company; that he met Charles Winters in the alley dividing the two properties: that Winters said: "What are you doing here? You better stay away from this neighborhood; you will hurt my business"; that subsequently he was arrested on a charge of embezzlement of $2.50 from the appellant; that the witnesses at the preliminary hearing, and at the trial of the case, which resulted in acquittal, were Charles W. Winters, George Winters, and Myer Astrin. This witness further testified that, at the time at which the Winters had the conversation with him in reference to the insurance on the cars, Charles Winters desired him and George Winters to operate the Light Street branch on shares, and he (the witness) said: "Mr. Winters, I haven't any money to go into this business"; Winters said: "I know you haven't; you don't need any money; I will turn the place over to you and George to work together — you only *Page 405
 have twelve cars down here, I will send more from the main office, give you a good bunch of cars, we will have a fire down here and let the insurance company worry about the automobiles"; "I got frightened and I told both of them I didn't care to enter into such a proposition, and Mr. George Winters said, `Don't be a damned fool, Jud, this is a chance for all of us to make money.' I said I was disinterested and afraid. Mr. Charles Winters said, `Other people get away with it, why can't we?'"
 The opening statement of the defendant's counsel had for its legitimate purpose an outlining of the defendant's case, stating to the jury what it expected to prove. We think this statement was entirely legitimate and proper under the circumstances. If later evidence was offered to prove the opening statement of counsel for the defendant, its admissibility could then be passed upon. If such evidence was held admissible, there could be no possible legal objection to the opening statement of defendant's counsel. If plaintiff believed such evidence was inadmissible, he could fully protect his rights by objecting to its admission and by proper exception have the admissibility vel non passed upon on appeal. As a matter of fact, the witness Kezer's testimony on this point was offered and submitted to the jury without objection. Neither was this testimony denied or in any manner contradicted. Under such circumstances, it became legal evidence in the case, and the statement by counsel at the opening of the case that Winters had brought about Kezer's arrest was confirmed by testimony unobjected to and unimpeached. In Hyatt on Trials,
 sec. 1453, the rule is thus stated: "If the statement is made in good faith, relying upon the production of proof, while improper in any case, it is not reversible error. The abuse of privilege must be a plain case and the statement must be plainly made in bad faith or made in a gross misconception of what is admissible resulting in bringing to the attention of the jury wholly irrelevant matters and of a nature calculated to create so profound a prejudice that it can not be eliminated by the charge of the court to justify a reversal." *Page 406
 In this case the evidence subsequently offered was relevant, and was admitted without objection.
 The second contention of the appellant arises out of these facts: During the progress of the trial and near its beginning, counsel for the appellant brought to the attention of the court alleged misconduct of a juror; this misconduct being a conversation between the juror and a witness for the appellee occurring in the corridor outside of the courtroom. Upon being thus advised, the court suspended the trial and retired to his chambers, where, in the presence of counsel for the parties, the juror in question and other witnesses, after being sworn, were examined by the court and counsel as to the conversation and circumstances surrounding the alleged misconduct. This examination was insisted upon by the appellant and acquiesced in by the appellee. The witness Warr, with whom the juror had the conversation, was chief of the salvage corps and was an acquaintance of the juror. According to Charles W. Winters, the president of the appellant, the conversation was with regard to the former trials of this case. His account of the conversation was as follows:
 "Q. What did you hear? A. This gentleman came in the door (indicating the juror) from St. Paul Street, and Chief Warr, and I don't know whether another fireman or police was standing with their back towards him, and he walked up to Chief Warr and kind of run into his shoulder and said, pardon me, Chief, good morning, and he shook hands, and shook hands with the other gentleman with the Chief, and this gentleman said, did you have a hard day in Washington yesterday, or did you have a good trip, I understood him to say, and Chief Warr said, yes, it was hard work, I have to go back there tomorrow. I walked away and they stood there talking, and later I came up alongside of them and I heard him say to Chief Warr, was the other case tried in Annapolis or in Baltimore, the first case, and he says, tried in Baltimore, and he said, the second case too, and Chief Warr said, yes, and he said, who won them, and Chief Warr said, we did, and I walked away." *Page 407
 The juror and Aspelmeyer both testified that the conversation consisted of an inquiry by the juror as to where the previous trials were had, and the answer of Warr that they were both held in Baltimore; but that there was absolutely no inquiry as to the result of those trials, and no information as to such result given to the juror.
 After the taking of this testimony in chambers, all of the witnesses thus examined were excused by the court, except the juror Custer; after which:
 "(The Court): Mr. Custer, will you tell me something about yourself? You live here in Baltimore? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you have been here for how many years? A. I have been here since December, 1912. Q. What is your occupation? A. At present I am the new business manager of the National Central Bank. Q. What was your occupation before that time? A. Before that for twelve years I was the representative of the Comptometer Calculating Machine, made by a Chicago company, and handled the State of Maryland in the sales, my office being in the Fidelity Building. Q. (The Court): Mr. Custer, there is a sharp conflict of testimony between you and the plaintiff in this case, and while I cannot afford to have the cases go off, mistrials had, because of assertions made by any one touching the qualifications of jurors after they have been sworn, it is possibly natural that you might feel some resentment from this little examination that has taken place, and I want to ask you, still under the sanctity of the oath which has been given to you as a juror, whether you feel that you can fairly and impartially try this case and decide it entirely on the merits of the controversy based entirely upon the testimony that is produced in court and the instructions of the court and do what in your conscientious judgment and opinion is justice to both sides? A. I feel I can, yes, sir. (The Court): All right, we will go on with the case. (Mr. Custer): I want to thank you gentlemen. I feel no resentment at all about it."
 Thereupon the juror withdrew. After which:
 "(The Court): I would like to have noted in this record that before making this examination of the witnesses I stated *Page 408
 to Mr. Preece and Mr. Pierson that if I did examine the persons interested in this conversation that it might have the effect of making the juror resentful, but that Mr. Pierson and Mr. Preece insisted upon the examination being made by the judge. Mr. Preece moves that a juror be withdrawn. (Mr. Preece): After examination of the juror and Mr. Warr, a witness for the defense, who had had the conversation with juror Custer, and this witness, Aspelmeyer, who denied the purport of the conversation, thereupon Charles Winters, the plaintiff, the complainant against the juror, was called, who stated that the result of the two previous trials in the case had been discussed between juror Custer and Chief Warr, the defendant's witness, and that Chief Warr stated that the results were a verdict for the defendant, and the motion was thereupon made by plaintiff's counsel that the court withdraw a juror and declare a mistrial, which motion was overruled and exception noted."
 Not every trivial act on the part of a juror during the course of the trial amounts to such misconduct as requires the withdrawal of a juror and the continuance of the case. A contrary holding would result in a multiplication of mistrials, with attendant additional expense and delay. There are many cases where the misconduct of the jury is sufficient to require an order of mistrial, but the misconduct must be such as to reasonably indicate that a fair and impartial trial could not be had under the circumstances. In 16 R.C.L. 312, sec. 120, it is stated: "Misconduct must, however, be such as to warrant the belief that the fairness and propriety of the trial have been impaired, that injury has resulted therefrom." Warner v. State,
 56 N.J. Law, 686, 29 A. 505. In Commonwealth v. White,147 Mass. 76, 16 N.E. 707, 710, the court said: "Remarks made in the presence or hearing of jurors as to cases on trial cannot always be prevented. Jurors are presumed to be, and are, with those exceptions that must always exist, men of intelligence, of good moral character, and fully competent and desirous to do their duty in the matters submitted to them. It is not to be presumed that they will be affected by casual observations made in their *Page 409
 presence, or even to them. It is for the judge in each instance to determine whether what has taken place is of this incidental character, or whether conversations or solicitations have been addressed to them, of such a nature that their effect must fairly be held to have been to deprive the injured party of a fair and impartial trial. Where a party to a suit has been guilty of countenancing or promoting an interference with the jury, a stricter rule would be adopted as against him than where this interference was the act of another, even of one of his own witnesses, acting without any countenance from him." InCommonwealth v. Poisson, 157 Mass. 510, 32 N.E. 906, 907, after the jury had had the case under consideration for several hours, they came into court for further instructions. The judge asked the foreman if the jury desired further instructions. The foreman then said: "This man here (pointing with his finger to the juror near him) would like to have further instructions." In passing upon this alleged misconduct, the court, speaking through Justice Holmes, said: "The presiding justice was the best judge whether it did any harm in this particular case. If he had given the defendant a new trial his decision would not have been open to criticism, and we cannot say that he was wrong in refusing one."
 The better rule in such cases would seem to be that such questions be left to the sound discretion of the trial court, whose decision should only be disturbed in those cases where there has been a plain abuse of discretion, resulting in palpable injustice. Especially should this be true in cases where there is conflict of evidence as to whether the act constituting the alleged misconduct in fact occurred. Epps v. State,102 Md. 539, 1 N.E. 491, at page 501; Hodges v. Bales, 102 Ind. 494, 1 N.E. 692, at page 695.
 In the present case all of the witnesses agree that the juror received information as to the situs of the two previous trials; the conflict being as to information given by Warr to the juror as to the result of those trials. There can be no question that information conveyed to a juror of the place where *Page 410
 a previous trial of the case has been had is not sufficient to declare a mistrial. It cannot be denied that the quality of the testimony produced, to the effect that no information was asked by or given to the juror in reference to the result of the previous trials, is as worthy of belief as that of Winters in contradiction. The quality of the testimony being the same, the quantity, and therefore the weight, of the evidence sustains the decision reached by the trial court. Jurors are usually men of intelligence, and it is difficult to conceive that in the retrial of a case some of them at least do not know that there has been a previous trial; and especially is this true in the counties of the state. If we admit that the testimony given by Winters was true, and all other testimony false, and that the juror was told of the result of the two previous trials, it is not clear that such information prejudiced the appellant; for assuming, as we must, that the juror Custer was of average intelligence, he must have known that there had been two reversals in favor of the appellant, which knowledge would naturally be to the benefit of the appellant, or which at least would neutralize the alleged effect of information as to the outcome of the previous trials.Brawner v. Hooper, 151 Md. 579, at pages 593, 594, 135 A. 420. There was no abuse of discretion in this case.
 Finally, the appellant contends that the first, second, third, fourth, sixth, and seventh prayers granted at the instance of the defendant are erroneous; and specially excepted to the second, third, sixth, and seventh of said prayers on the ground that there is no evidence in the case to support them. These exceptions were properly overruled, as in our opinion there is evidence, if believed by the jury, from which they could find the facts stated in the prayers. 161 Md. 249, at pages 264, 265,156 A. 847. The appellant further contends that the theory embodied in these prayers was condemned by this court in the former trial of this case reported in 161 Md. 249, 156 A. 847, 854. In the last appeal the court, speaking through Judge Offutt, said: "The defendant's second and fourth prayers both involve the proposition that if Charles W. Winters `instigated, originated, had knowledge of, consented *Page 411
 to, acquiesced in, or participated in any way' in any `plan, conspiracy, scheme or connivance' to burn `the property in question' and `mentioned in' the evidence' and owned a majority of the stock of the appellant company, and was its president and in control of it, the appellant was not entitled to recover. That statement of the law was incorrect and both prayers should have been refused. The several postulates enumerated as sufficient to bar a recovery are stated severally and disjunctively, so that under the prayers as granted the jury would have been required to find their verdict for the defendant if Winters participated `in any way' in the plan to burn the property, even though such participation was wholly innocent and without any knowledge that a conspiracy existed or that what he did had the effect of aiding it." It was there held that, under the instructions contained in the defendant's second and fourth prayers, if the jury found that Charles W. Winters participated in any way in the plan to burn the property, their verdict should be for the defendant, even though his act was entirely innocent and without any intention or design to commit a fraud or crime in connection with the burning of the property. To illustrate, under those instructions, if Charles W. Winters had sold the gasoline which Astrin was shown to have used in making the second floor of the garage more easily inflammable, Winters could have been said to have "in some way participated" in bringing about the fire, even though he had absolutely no knowledge of what the gasoline was to be used for by Astrin, or any intention to have it so used. We do not think the prayers in this case are open to that objection. The granted prayers, both plaintiff's and defendant's, properly stated the law as determined by this court in the previous decision, and fully and fairly presented the plaintiff's case to the jury. There was no error in the ruling on the prayers.
 Judgment affirmed, with costs. *Page 412