-- BankingUnder existing European law a bank and its branches operating throughout the EU constitute a single legal entity subject to the supervision of the member state where it is licensed.

Directive 2001/24/EC (OJ L 125, 5 May 2001, pages15 to 23) provides for the reorganisation and winding-up of credit institutions.The directive provides for the law applicable to reorganisations, publication of notice of a reorganisation, notification to creditors and the right of creditors to file claims.

(Specific provision is made for reorganisation and winding-up where the head office is outside the EU.)The directive also provides the law applicable to winding-up proceedings, the publication of notice of the proceedings, notification to creditors, the effect of payments made by third parties to the bank instead of to the liquidator, and the right to file claims in the proceedings.

The directive also contains provisions common to both types of proceedings: effect of the proceedings on contracts and rights and pending legal proceedings, third parties' rights in rem, reservation of title, rights of set off, netting agreements and repurchase agreements.

National implementing measures must be in force by 5 May 2004.-- Competition lawThe commission is empowered to impose a fine on persons who supply incorrect or misleading information in a notification under the Merger Regulation (see art.14(1)(b)).Similarly, it can impose a fine on persons who intentionally or negligently supply incorrect information in response to a request for information made under the Merger Regulation (see art.

14(1)(c)).In case IV/M.1610 (Deutsche Post/trans-o-flex, OJ L 97, 6 April 2001, page 1) the commission imposed a fine of [50,000 (approximately, £31,400) on Deutsche Post for supplying incorrect and misleading information in a notification; the fact that the incorrect and misleading information related to the acquisition of control was an aggravating factor, as it related to the commission's jurisdiction in the notified transaction; and the fact that the incorrect and misleading information was intended to deceive the commission was a further aggravating factor, and in the absence of mitigating factors the maximum fine was imposed.The maximum fine ([50,000) was also imposed in respect of the intentional or negligent supply of incorrect information in response to requests from the commission; the fact that the incorrect replies related to the jurisdiction of the commission was an aggravating factor, as was also the intention to deceive.In case COMP/35.141 (Deutsche Post AG, OJ L 125, 5 May 2001, p.

27) the commission ruled that Deutsche Post had infringed art.

82 EC (abuse of dominant position) between 1974 and 2000 by granting a special price to customers for mail-order parcel services only in exchange for undertakings to send a high percentage of non-bulky parcels or of catalogues weighing over 1kg via Deutsche Post.

From 1990 to 1995 it had infringed art.

82 EC by supplying mail-order parcel services below the additional costs of providing those services.Deutsche Post was required to end the former infringement forthwith, and to refrain from repeating the latter infringement; in respect of the former infringement it was also fined [24,000,000 (approximately £14,942,000).-- Treaty of NiceIn a referendum in early June 2001 the Republic of Ireland voted against ratification of the Treaty of Nice.Ratification of the treaty by all member states is required before the treaty can enter into force.

The commission has poi nted out (see The Times, 9 June 2001) that the treaty will be open for ratification until the end of 2002, and this may enable some palliative to be offered which would enable the Republic of Ireland to accept ratification on a second referendum held before that date.