Comparative Institutional Analysis, the European Court of Justice and the General Principle of Non-Discrimination-or-Alternative Tales on Equality Reasoning

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-173
Author(s):  
Johanna Croon
Keyword(s):  
General Principle ◽  
Institutional Analysis ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Comparative Institutional Analysis ◽  
Equality Reasoning

scholarly journals Piktnaudžiavimas jurisdikcija: quo vadis Europos Sąjunga?

Teisė ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 71 ◽  
pp. 88-105
Author(s):  
Aurimas Brazdeikis
Keyword(s):  
General Principle ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Council Regulation ◽  
Quo Vadis ◽  
Rules Set

Straipsnyje autorius analizuoja galimybes piktnaudžiauti jurisdikcijos taisyklių, įtvirtintų Tarybos re­glamente (EB) Nr. 44/2001, sistema bei su tuo susijusią Europos Bendrijų Teisingumo Teismo praktiką. Autorius mano, kad Europos Bendrijų Teisingumo Teismo praktika kai kuriose paskutinėse šio teismo išnagrinėtose bylose sudaro prielaidas piktnaudžiavimui Europos teisminėje erdvėje plisti, todėl argu­mentuotai siūlo sprendžiant jurisdikcijos klausimus taikyti bendrąjį draudimo piktnaudžiauti teisėmis principą. In this article the author analyzes the opportunities of abusing jurisdiction rules set forth in the Council Regulation No 44/2001 and related practice of the European Court of Justice. The author considers that recent practice of the ECJ gives a positive background for the abuse in the European Judicial Area to spread, therefore suggests to apply general principle prohibiting abuse of rights when dealing with the jurisdiction issues.

The Double Life of Effectiveness

2008 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 287-302
Author(s):  
Paolisa Nebbia
Keyword(s):  
General Principle ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Effective Protection ◽  
Community Law ◽  
Community Rights ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court

As a general principle of Community law elaborated by the European Court of Justice (hereinafter, ECJ or ‘the Court’), effectiveness ‘requires the effective protection of Community rights and, more generally, the effective enforcement of Community law in national courts’: its origins—it has been argued—‘lie in the interpretative techniques of the Court which, even at an early stage, favoured a liberalised construction of the Treaty provisions so as to ensure their effet utile’. In fact, the roots of the principle of effectiveness can be found in the seminal case of Van Gend en Loos, which, without expressly naming that principle, provided the conceptual tools that have moulded its construction throughout the Community case law.

scholarly journals Abuse of Law Doctrine in Tax Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 156
Author(s):  
Viola Tanto
Keyword(s):  
Tax Evasion ◽  
General Principle ◽  
Tax Avoidance ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Abuse Of Law

This paper was written in order of the reforming of the tax system’s framework. Analysing phenomena such as tax evasion, tax avoidance, the use of legal loopholes to reduce tax liability in Italy was very challenged. The purpose of this paper is to verify, in the light of most interventions the latest case law of the European Court of Justice, if it exists in the field of direct and indirect taxes, a general principle of abuse of law. The existence of this provision will be analyzed in the context of the principle of legal certainty. We should analyse the concept of abuse of law as a normative problem and historical-evolutionary phenomenon. In this paper a special place is taken by the genesis of the concept of abuse of Community law and the general principle of prohibition of abuse of the right in function of a general anti-avoidance norm, its meaning, effects and role as a corrector of the system. We have addressed the role of jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice, dividing it into two parts: Abuse in field of harmonized taxation- Halifax Doctrine and Abuse in the field of disharmonized taxation -The leading case-Cadbury Schweppes.

Case Note – Case C-555/07, Kücükdeveci v. Swedex, Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 19 January 2010

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 539-549 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anja Wiesbrock
Keyword(s):  
General Principle ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Case Note ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Community Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Implementation Period ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Relationship

On 19 January 2010 the European Court of Justice (ECJ) was asked to rule on the application and scope of the general principle of non-discrimination under Community law. In Kücükdeveci the Court had the opportunity to clarify a number of questions concerning the principle of non-discrimination and the application of Directive 2000/78 that had remained unanswered after the famous Mangold judgment and subsequent case law. The case was particularly apt to clarify the scope of Mangold, as it concerned a similar factual situation, albeit after the implementation period of Directive 2000/78 had expired. Consequently, many issues addressed in that judgment arose anew. The Court had to deal with the relationship between Directive 2000/78 and the general principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of age, the possibility of justifying differential treatment on the basis of national social and employment policies, the extent of the doctrine of indirect effect, and the direct horizontal effect of directives.

Fighting for Authority: Strategic Actions of National High Courts in the European Union

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2-2019) ◽  
pp. 419-433
Author(s):  
Stefanie Vedder
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Principal Agent Theory ◽  
Strategic Actions ◽  
High Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Lower Courts

National high courts in the European Union (EU) are constantly challenged: the European Court of Justice (ECJ) claims the authority to declare national standing interpretations invalid should it find them incompatible with its views on EU law. This principle noticeably impairs the formerly undisputed sovereignty of national high courts. In addition, preliminary references empower lower courts to question interpretations established by their national ‘superiors’. Assuming that courts want to protect their own interests, the article presumes that national high courts develop strategies to elude the breach of their standing interpretations. Building on principal-agent theory, the article proposes that national high courts can use the level of (im-) precision in the wording of the ECJ’s judgements to continue applying their own interpretations. The article develops theoretical strategies for national high courts in their struggle for authority.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document