My laptop caught a virus three days before an exam! Consequently, blog-photo-uploading-consistency will suffer henceforth.
I had three cups of free coffee today from the trolley outside the Law Library. I am high on learning and "Assuming that in Sweden there is no rule on minimum fruit % in jam sold with the word 'jam' on it. There is in NL (40%). Swedish jam has 30%..."
I had three cups of free coffee today from the trolley outside the Law Library. I am high on learning and "Assuming that in Sweden there is no rule on minimum fruit % in jam sold with the word 'jam' on it. There is in NL (40%). Swedish jam has 30%..."
Interesting note on the German's attitude to drinking (of course, not representative of the whole country):
The Germans had to justify in the case of Cassis de Dijon (European Court of Justice), why their import restriction on low alcoholic producets was necessary in the EU's single market. So they argue, to one's countertuition, that having a mimimum alcohol content is in the public interest. In other words, they said that having a higher alcohol content in drinks was healthier!
How did they justify this? By saying that people would develop a tolerance on lower alcohol drinks and develop drinking problems in the future!
No comments:
Post a Comment