Country of Origin Labelling on the Rise in EU Member States – An Analysis under EU law and the EU’s International Trade Obligations

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 414-423
Author(s):  
Ignacio CARREÑO ◽  
Tobias DOLLE ◽  
Yury ROVNOV
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Country Of Origin ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Trial Period ◽  
Member States ◽  
Milk Products ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
The Eu

AbstractOn 1 January 2017, France started a two-year trial of a mandatory country of origin labelling (hereinafter, COOL) scheme, which requires producers of milk, food containing milk products and food containing meat to provide information on the country of origin of the products. The scheme was introduced through Decree No 2016-1137 (i.e. Décret n° 2016-1137 du 19 août 2016 relatif à l’indication de l’origine du lait et du lait et des viandes utilisés en tant qu’ingrédient,1 hereinafter, the Decree). Before the end of this trial period, France has promised to provide a report to the European Commission (hereinafter, Commission) that would allow it to review consumer patterns and the potential impact on the internal market. In view of the report, the Commission may consider implementing such a scheme in all EU Member States. This article also notes that other EU Member States are introducing their own COOL measures and concludes that, when COOL is being made mandatory, the EU’s international trade obligations must be taken into account by the EU and its Member States.

The Enforcement of Intra-EU BIT Awards: Micula v Romania and Beyond

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 942-963 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanno Wehland
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Present Contribution ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

The European Commission and a number of EU Member States have long disputed the compatibility of intra-EU BITs with EU law. As illustrated by the Micula v Romania proceedings, where an investor seeks to enforce an intra-EU BIT award, which is seen as being in conflict with EU law, this can raise questions as to the extent to which an enforcing court should take this kind of conflict into account. The present contribution systematically analyses this issue with regard to both ICSID and non-ICSID awards, differentiating between enforcement proceedings within and outside of the EU. It concludes that within the EU even the enforcement of ICSID awards cannot be entirely taken for granted where such enforcement would lead to the violation of a fundamental provision of EU law.

scholarly journals COOL potatoes? Poland plans to introduce mandatory country of origin labelling for fresh potatoes

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 208-218
Author(s):  
Ignacio CARREÑO ◽  
Lourdes MEDINA PÉREZ
Keyword(s):  
Rural Development ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Fruits And Vegetables ◽  
Country Of Origin ◽  
Fruit And Vegetables ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Council Regulation ◽  
Draft Regulation ◽  
The Eu

On 14 November 2018, Poland’s Ministry for Agriculture and Rural Development notified the European Commission (hereinafter, Commission) of its intention to introduce mandatory country of origin labelling (hereinafter, COOL) for potatoes on the basis of a Draft Regulation of the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development amending the Regulation on the labelling of certain foodstuffs (hereinafter, Draft Regulation).1 Poland’s notification is the most recent example of the continuously increasing number of EU Member States’ measures on COOL for foodstuffs. While the EU already provides COOL requirements for fruits and vegetables in Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors2 (hereinafter, Regulation (EU) No 543/2011), they do not apply to fresh potatoes.

scholarly journals The Legal Mechanism for the Management of Radioactive Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel in EU Law

Legal Concept ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 39-44
Author(s):  
Yulia Lebedeva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Council Directive ◽  
Legal Mechanism ◽  
The Eu

Introduction: Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom on spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste, adopted in 2011, has become a legal mechanism for the management of RW and SNF in the EU. The provisions of the Directive have been fully implemented in the regulatory frameworks of the EU Member States, although the EU Member States are at different stages of implementing their RW and SNF management activities. The purpose of the research was the operation of the legal mechanism for the management of RW and SNF within the territory of the EU in the period from 2017 to 2019, as reflected in the Report of the European Commission in 2019. Methods: the methodological framework for the research is a set of methods of scientific knowledge based on dialectical and historical materialism, the methods of logical, system-structural, comparative-legal and information-entropy analysis. Results: the author’s position grounded in the work is based on EU law and the opinions of the competent scientific Russian and foreign community on the creation and operation of a new legal mechanism for the management of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel. The 2019 Report of the European Commission reveals the dynamics of improving this legal mechanism and its interaction with the IAEA. Conclusion: as a result of the research, the important role of the legal mechanism and its uniqueness as a legal model for the management of RW and SNF in the EU territory is revealed, which allows adapting the actions of the EU member states on the issue of the management of RW and SNF, to monitor the process by Euratom and the European Commission, to cooperate fruitfully with the IAEA.

21. Mergers (2): EU law

2021 ◽  
pp. 871-958
Author(s):  
Richard Whish ◽  
David Bailey
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Merger Control ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Merger Control ◽  
Merger Regulation ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Control Section ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines EU merger control. The chapter is organized as follows. Section 2 provides an overview of EU merger control. Section 3 discusses the jurisdictional rules which determine whether a particular merger should be investigated by the European Commission in Brussels or by the national competition authorities (‘the NCAs’) of the Member States. Section 4 deals with the procedural considerations such as the mandatory pre-notification to the Commission of mergers that have a Union dimension and the timetable within which the Commission must operate. Section 5 discusses the substantive analysis of mergers under the EU Merger Regulation (EUMR), and section 6 explains the procedure whereby the Commission may authorise a merger on the basis of commitments, often referred to as remedies, offered by the parties to address its competition concerns. The subsequent sections describe the Commission’s powers of investigation and enforcement, judicial review of Commission decisions by the EU Courts and cooperation between the Commission and other competition authorities, both within and outside the EU. The chapter concludes with an examination of how the EUMR merger control provisions work in practice.

Higher Education, Equal Access, and Residence Conditions: Does EU Law Allow Member States to Charge Higher Fees to Students Not Previously Resident?

2005 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gareth Davies
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Social Effects ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Financial Benefit ◽  
Member States ◽  
Policy Issues ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
The Eu

This article looks at the law and policy issues surrounding the practice of charging uniform fees for higher education to home students and students coming from other EU Member States. It begins with the observation that within the EU such fees are heavily subsidised by governments and therefore amount to a financial benefit (or a disguised grant) to students. In the light of this, this article suggests that restricting that subsidy to students resident prior to their studies would be not only compatible with recent case law on non-discrimination but would also fit better with the underlying logic of free movement, which denies any right to benefits for non-economic recent migrants. Secondly, it looks at the policy, and finds that while equal fees have a number of very positive social effects, they also carry moral and economic risks. A better approach, less distorting of the market for higher education and more consistent with the wider EU approach to welfare migration, might be to require exportability of subsidies from the student's state of origin.

Disclosure rules in eu public procurement: Balancing between competition and transparency

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 528-553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsi-Maria Halonen
Keyword(s):  
Public Procurement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Competitive Effects ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legal Remedies ◽  
Disclosure Of Information ◽  
Disclosure Rules ◽  
Procurement Procedure ◽  
The Eu

The paper examines the disclosure of information within public contract awards under EU law. EU Public Procurement rules have several objectives that may at some times be conflicting with each other. A certain level of transparency of public procurement procedure is necessary in order to fight corruption, enhance trade opportunities and ensure effective legal remedies. On the other hand, too much transparency may have certain anti-competitive effects. The national laws regarding disclosure of information vary in different EU member states. In Finland the EU law principle of effective remedies has been interpreted as requiring full transparency among the bidders. The transparency rules under EU law and certain Member States' national laws are analysed. As a conclusion, it is suggested that the rules on disclosure should not be left solely to the discretion of member states as the over-transparent approach taken by certain member states may negatively affect the markets both on a national and EU level.

scholarly journals Joined Cases A. K. v. Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa (C-585/18) and CP (C-624/18), DO (C-625/18) v. Sąd Najwyższy (C.J.E.U.)

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
pp. 459-486
Author(s):  
Joelle Grogan
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
European Standard ◽  
Current Case ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
National Measure ◽  
The Eu

Joined Cases C-585/18, C-624/18, and C-625/18 concerning the independence of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Sąd Najwyższy (Polish Supreme Court) is the latest in a series of European Union (EU) Member States requesting the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) to rule on the independence of their judicial systems. While the organization of justice systems within Member States is a competence of Member States (and thus not for the EU to determine or decide), the CJEU has held that Member States are nevertheless required to comply with obligations under EU law to ensure effective judicial protection and, as a necessary corollary, judicial independence. The significance of the current case lies in the formulation by the CJEU of a “European” standard of judicial independence, and its finding that national judges may set aside the jurisdiction of courts found not to be independent against that standard and to disapply any national measure (in accordance with the principle of the primacy of EU law over national law) that gives jurisdiction to a non-independent court.

scholarly journals National Law or EU Law

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-191
Author(s):  
Georgi Mihaylov
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Respective State ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The article examines cases of conflict between the national law of the EU Member States and European Union Law. There is an analysis of the legal advantage of EU law over national law or vice versa. Conclusions have been drawn that the national law should maintain its advantage when the reason for it is contained in the Constitution of the respective state.

Towards an Ever Closer Union Between Residents and Citizens?

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (01) ◽  
pp. 78-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michèle Finck
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
Voting Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Traditional Concept ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Domestic Reform ◽  
The Eu

Alien suffrage in Luxembourg – The traditional concept of the electorate – Link between nationality and voting rights – From the national to the resident worker? – The decoupling of nationality and citizenship – The transformation of the state as a consequence of European integration – Comparison to other EU member states – Consequences for EU law of domestic reform – The intertwinement of constitutional spheres in the EU

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document