Breaking news

WHO’s Historic Agreement: A Major Step Towards Global Pandemic Preparedness

In a groundbreaking move, members of the World Health Organization (WHO) have reached a historic, legally binding agreement aimed at preparing the world for future pandemics. This pact, designed to address the lessons learned from the COVID-19 crisis, sets the stage for a more equitable global response to health emergencies, particularly in the distribution of essential drugs, vaccines, and medical technologies.

The agreement marks a significant milestone in global health governance, especially at a time when multilateral institutions like the WHO are facing considerable financial strain. The United States, which was once the WHO’s largest financial contributor, withdrew from negotiations after President Donald Trump initiated the U.S.’s departure from the organization. Despite this setback, the deal underscores a strong commitment from member states to work together on global health security, with or without U.S. involvement. “This is a historic moment,” said Nina Schwalbe, founder of global health think tank Spark Street Advisors. “It demonstrates that countries are committed to multilateralism and to collective action.”

This agreement, the second of its kind in WHO’s 75-year history (the first being a tobacco control treaty in 2003), focuses on structural inequalities in how pandemic-related health tools are developed and distributed. Article nine of the deal ensures that future pandemic-related drugs, therapeutics, and vaccines will be made globally accessible. It also gives the WHO stronger oversight over medical supply chains and paves the way for local production of vaccines during health crises.

A key challenge in the negotiations was the issue of technology transfer—sharing the knowledge and manufacturing capabilities necessary for lower-income countries to produce their vaccines and treatments. To address this, the agreement mandates that manufacturers allocate at least 20% of their real-time production to the WHO during a pandemic, with a minimum of 10% designated for donation and the rest priced affordably for developing nations.

The deal is not yet finalized, as it must be adopted at the WHO Assembly in May, and some details, such as the annex on Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing, still require further negotiation. However, once ratified, the agreement will bolster global preparedness, enabling quicker responses to future pandemics and more equitable access to life-saving resources.

As health experts emphasize, the global community must invest in preparedness now to avoid the costly toll of another pandemic. “We can’t afford another pandemic, but we can afford to prevent one,” said Helen Clark, co-chair of The Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness. This agreement represents a critical step toward ensuring that the world is better equipped to face future health crises with solidarity, transparency, and a commitment to equity.

Banks Required To Refund Unauthorized Transactions Immediately, Confirms EU Prosecutor

Introduction

Advocate General Athanasios Rantos of the Court of Justice of the European Union stated that banks must refund customers without delay for unauthorized transactions, even when the client may have acted with gross negligence. The opinion clarifies how European legislation should be applied in cases involving payment fraud.

Case Overview

The case concerns a Polish bank customer who became the victim of a phishing attack. A fraudster posed as a buyer on an online auction platform and sent the customer a link that closely resembled the bank’s official website. After entering her login credentials, the customer unintentionally gave the attacker access to her account. The fraudster subsequently carried out unauthorized transactions.

The bank refused to reimburse the funds, arguing that the client had demonstrated gross negligence by entering her banking details on the fraudulent website. The dispute was later brought before the Polish courts.

Legal Implications

The Polish national court asked the Court of Justice of the European Union to clarify whether European law requires banks to refund unauthorized payments immediately, even when the customer may have acted negligently.

Advocate General Rantos stated that EU legislation requires banks to restore the funds without delay unless the institution has reasonable grounds to suspect fraud and has formally reported the matter to the competent authorities. The opinion also explains that an immediate refund does not prevent the bank from later seeking compensation if it can prove that the customer failed to comply with their obligations under payment services regulations.

Consumer Protection And Regulatory Outlook

European payment legislation places strong emphasis on protecting consumers from financial fraud. The regulatory framework aims to ensure that users of payment services receive prompt reimbursement when unauthorized transactions occur. Banks may still investigate individual cases and pursue legal action if they believe the customer breached their responsibilities under payment service rules.

Conclusion

The Court of Justice of the European Union will now consider the Advocate General’s opinion before issuing its final ruling. Such decisions are often influential in shaping the interpretation of EU law. A ruling in line with the opinion could have significant implications for banks across the European Union and for how financial institutions handle reimbursement claims in cases of payment fraud.

The Future Forbes Realty Global Properties
Aretilaw firm
Uol
eCredo

Become a Speaker

Become a Speaker

Become a Partner

Subscribe for our weekly newsletter