12. Stresses that any attempt to move away from Article 77 TFEU as the proper legal basis for all measures in this field will be considered to be a deviation from the EU Treaties, and reserves the right to use all available legal remedies if necessary;

7. Highlights that any attempt to move away from Article 77 TFEU as the correct legal basis for any measure in this field will be considered as a deviation from EU Treaties and reserves the right to use all legal remedies available in case of need;

In the extremely rare circumstances in which management concludes that compliance with a requirement in an IFRS would be so misleading that it would conflict with the objective of financial statements set out in the Framework, the entity shall depart from that requirement in the manner set out in paragraph 20 if the relevant regulatory framework requires, or otherwise does not prohibit, such a departure.

570 | ( Detailed explanation of the proposal by chapter or by article Chapter I: General principles A common procedure is established for assessing and authorising additives, enzymes and flavourings. This procedure has been designed to be simple, fast and effective, while respecting the principles of good administration and legal certainty. It is centred around the updating, on the basis of the criteria laid down in the sectoral laws, of a list of authorised substances that must be created and maintained by the Commission. Chapter II: Common procedure Under the proposed procedure, requests for updates must be addressed to the Commission, without first going through a national authority. The Commission shall send the request file to the Auth ...[+++]ority and to the Member States and shall seek the opinion of the Authority, which must issue such opinion within six months. So as to ensure the binding effect of the updating measures, the proposal provides for their adoption to take the legal form of a regulation adopted in accordance with the comitology procedure. When the list is being updated within the framework of this proposal for a Regulation, any other relevant legitimate factors must be taken into account. Thus, when initiating the decision-making process, the Commission, as risk manager, may propose a measure that is not in line with the outcome of the risk assessment carried out under the responsibility of the Authority. In such cases, the Commission must explain its reasons for such a departure. This is in line with the Codex Alimentarius General Principles on Risk Analysis.

The same should apply in relation to incorrect data contained in the computerised database both in respect of claimed bovine animals for which such irregularities not only constitutes a non-respect of a cross compliance obligation but also a breach of an eligibility-criterion, and in respect of unclaimed bovine animals where such irregularities are relevant only under the cross compliance obligations.

If the deviation is greater than 10 % the analysis must be repeated in comparison with another standard solution until the deviation is within 10 %.