Curbing CO2 emissions from aviation: Is the airline industry headed for defeat?

Climate Law ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Doaa Abdel Motaal
Keyword(s):  
Airline Industry ◽  
Global Solutions ◽  
Civil Aviation ◽  
High Price ◽  
Aviation Industry ◽  
Climate Mitigation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Global Industry ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

Two industries have been historically exempt from climate mitigation efforts under the Kyoto Protocol: the international aviation and maritime sectors. This article focuses on the aviation industry, looking at howits “exceptionalism” under Kyoto has fashioned its response to the climate crisis. It is a story of a global industry that has sought to fend off regulation of its CO2 emissions at the global level, until faced with the unilateral imposition by the European Union of its emissions trading scheme on both domestic and international aviation. The EU aviation scheme advantages some carriers while disadvantaging others. Rushed responses by the industry to combat the EU aviation scheme at the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) have not helped matters, with a solution found at ICAO that would distort intraindustry competition, without necessarily fixing the environmental problem. Legal challenges to the EU scheme in the European Court of Justice by the industry have not borne fruit either, as the industry’s arguments have largely been overturned. Today, the industry pays a high price for a muddled approach at the international level to curbing its emissions. Is the lesson that global industries must actively pursue global solutions?

scholarly journals Economic and Environmental Consequences of the ECJ Genome Editing Judgment in Agriculture

Agronomy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 1212
Author(s):  
Alexander Gocht ◽  
Nicola Consmüller ◽  
Ferike Thom ◽  
Harald Grethe
Keyword(s):  
Genome Editing ◽  
Agricultural Sector ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Food Products ◽  
Food Prices ◽  
Farm Income ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Environmental Consequences ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

Genome-edited crops are on the verge of being placed on the market and their agricultural and food products will thus be internationally traded soon. National regulations, however, diverge regarding the classification of genome-edited crops. Major countries such as the US and Brazil do not specifically regulate genome-edited crops, while in the European Union, they fall under GMO legislation, according to the European Court of Justice (ECJ). As it is in some cases impossible to analytically distinguish between products from genome-edited plants and those from non-genome-edited plants, EU importers may fear the risk of violating EU legislation. They may choose not to import any agricultural and food products based on crops for which genome-edited varieties are available. Therefore, crop products of which the EU is currently a net importer would become more expensive in the EU, and production would intensify. Furthermore, an intense substitution of products covered and not covered by genome editing would occur in consumption, production, and trade. We analyzed the effects of such a cease of EU imports for cereals and soy in the EU agricultural sector with the comparative static agricultural sector equilibrium model CAPRI. Our results indicate dramatic effects on agricultural and food prices as well as on farm income. The intensification of EU agriculture may result in negative net environmental effects in the EU as well as in an increase in global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This suggests that trade effects should be considered when developing domestic regulation for genome-edited crops.

scholarly journals From social regulation of competition to competition as social regulation: transformations in the socioeconomic governance of the European Union

2017 ◽  
pp. 53-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonios Roumpakis ◽  
Theo Papadopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Industrial Relations ◽  
Social Regulation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Wage Setting ◽  
Regulatory Changes ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
New Procedures ◽  
The Eu

This chapter studies the character of contemporary socioeconomic governance in the EU. It draws on empirical evidence capturing the type and extent of regulatory changes in the fields of industrial relations, corporate governance, and the coordination of macro-economic policy in the EU. The effects of these changes are long term, cumulative, and mutually reinforcing and should be seen as integral elements of a relatively coherent project to establish a form of transnational polity in Europe that privileges competition as its regulatory rationale. Indeed, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has been institutionally prioritising market freedoms and competition over labour rights, and especially the right to collective action in an emerging transnational regulatory field in the EU. Meanwhile, the new procedures of European macro-economic coordination construe national wage setting, collective bargaining institutions, and, more generally, social policy as adjustment variables serving primarily the purpose of promoting or restoring member states' economic competitiveness.

The Practices of ‘Splitting’ and ‘Common Accord’ Under Scrutiny: the European Parliament‘s Request for an Opinion of the European Court of Justice on the Istanbul Convention

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 472-486
Author(s):  
Elizaveta Samoilova
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Forms Of Violence ◽  
Istanbul Convention ◽  
The Eu

Abstract With all eyes on the recent global COVID-19 pandemic, another pandemic has been growing in the shadows: violence against women. The Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention creates a legal framework in order to protect women against all forms of violence. Its ratification process, however, has faced considerable challenges, particularly in the Central and Eastern European Member States. This article discusses the basic elements of the Istanbul Convention, reflects on the ratification process in the EU and its Member States, and sets out the main legal issues raised in the European Parliament’s request for an opinion (A-1/19 of 22 November 2019) to the Court of Justice of the European Union. Special focus is put on the choice of the correct EU legal basis and the practices of ‘splitting’ and ‘common accord’. This article argues that the European Parliament’s request for an opinion provides the perfect opportunity for the Court of Justice of the European Union to further clarify the law and the practice of concluding mixed agreements by the EU and its Member States.

The German Constitutional Court and Preliminary References—Still a Match not Made in Heaven?

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 1491-1508
Author(s):  
Eva Julia Lohse
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
German Constitutional Court ◽  
In The Beginning ◽  
The Eu

So far, the German Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht, henceforth:BVerfG) has only made a single preliminary reference to the (now) Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), despite frequent rulings on matters connected with European Union (EU) Law. Its apparent reluctance seemed odd considering the atmosphere of dialogue and cooperation which prevails between the non-constitutional courts and the EU courts. This situation might, however, have changed with the preliminary reference from January 2014, proving predictions on the perceived “most powerful constitutional court” and its relationship to the EU partly wrong. The legal effects of its preliminary reference on the interpretation of Articles 119, 123, 127 ff. of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and the validity of Outright Monetary Transactions (OMT) by the European Central Bank (ECB) under EU Law are as yet unclear; although the Opinion of the Advocate General Cruz Villalón was delivered in the beginning of 2015, which did not confirm the doubts expressed by theBVerfGabout the conformity of the OMT programme with EU law. Nonetheless, the interpretative scheme and the normative questions as to the reluctance of theBVerfGremain the same after this single referral and offer explanations as to why theBVerfGhad for nearly sixty years not referred a question to the former European Court of Justice (ECJ).

Taricco principles beyond Taricco

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-37
Author(s):  
Fabio Giuffrida
Keyword(s):  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Form Part ◽  
The Right ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
Principle Of Legality ◽  
Alleged Incompatibility ◽  
The Eu

This contribution examines whether the principles laid down in M.A.S., M.B. (‘ Taricco II’) may play a role in some forthcoming decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). In Scialdone, the Court will be asked to strike a balance between the effectiveness of national legislation on VAT offences and the principle of lex mitior. The key difference between Taricco and Scialdone lies in the fact that the lex mitior principle, unlike the regulation of the statute of limitation, falls within the scope of the principle of legality at the European level. Kolev concerns instead an alleged incompatibility between Article 325 TFEU and the Bulgarian Code of Criminal Procedure. Unlike Taricco, therefore, the CJEU will have to deal with national rules that form part of procedural criminal law. Nevertheless, it cannot be excluded that the Court may reach a Taricco II-like conclusion (i.e. disapplication in theory, exception to the disapplication in practice), especially if the reasoning of the CJEU will rely on the importance of foreseeability and legal certainty in criminal matters. These same principles could lead the CJEU, in Menci, not to endorse the partial revirement of the European Court of Human Rights in the A. and B v. Norway ruling and, as a consequence, not to lower the EU standard of protection of the right not to be tried or punished twice for the same offence.

14. The European Union

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Berthold Rittberger
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines how the European Union acquired distinctive constitution-like features. It begins with a discussion of three routes to constitutionalization: the first is through changes in the EU's primary law; the second focuses on ‘in between’ constitutionalization; and the third leads directly to the European Court of Justice and its jurisprudence. The chapter proceeds by discussing two developments that have shaped the EU constitutional order almost since the beginning: the emergence of a body of EU law constituting a set of higher-order legal rules, and the consolidation of the constitutional principle of representative democracy. It explains how the supremacy and direct effect of EU law, as well as the EU court's concern with the protection of fundamental rights, helped transform the EU into a constitutional polity. It also considers how the extension of the legislative, budgetary, and other powers of the European Parliament animated the constitutional principle.

Part I Regulatory Structure, 3 European Financial Services

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walker George ◽  
Purves Robert ◽  
Blair Michael
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Primary Sources ◽  
Banking Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Regulatory Structure ◽  
European Court ◽  
Treaty Of Rome ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Council Of Ministers ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the evolution of the European Union' financial services law and its impact on the development of financial services law in the UK, as it stands at the end of 2016, six months after the EU referendum. It first describes the evolving role and functions of the EU institutions, namely: the Council of Ministers, the European Commission, the European Court of Justice, and the European Parliament. It then considers the primary sources of EU law, including treaties, and the effects of the various changes in the Treaty of Rome. It also discusses the establishment of the single market in financial services and the moves to establish a banking union. Finally, it analyses the substantive financial services measures that have been adopted in the EU since the 1970s.

scholarly journals The Limits of Agencification in the European Union

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (7) ◽  
pp. 1223-1255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miroslava Scholten ◽  
Marloes van Rijsbergen
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Road ◽  
European Court ◽  
On The Road ◽  
The Eu

Although not explicitly regulated by the EU treaties, EU agencies not only exist but also have increased in number and power. In addition, while EU agencies may exercise very similar functions to those of the Commission, Articles 290 and 291 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) do not list agencies among the possible authors of non-legislative acts. The existing situation raises the questions of the extent to which the ongoing agencification in the EU is legitimate and what its limits are. This article addresses these questions in the light of the old and new Treaties and case law, including the just releasedESMA-shortsellingcase. It shows that while the Lisbon Treaty made a few steps forward on the road of legitimizing EU agencies and delegating important powers to them, the scope of powers that EU agencies can have remains unclear. In this respect, the European Court of Justice's lenient approach in theESMA-shortsellingcase is unfortunate because it neither clarifies the issue nor pushes the Union Legislator and the Member States to address it. Consequently, in the absence of clear limits, further agencification is likely to persist at the risk of increasing the democratic legitimacy deficit and remaining accountability gaps.

scholarly journals CORSIA - Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-28
Author(s):  
Miloš Strouhal
Keyword(s):  
Airline Industry ◽  
Civil Aviation ◽  
Eu Ets ◽  
International Civil Aviation Organization ◽  
Reduction Scheme ◽  
Emission Mitigation ◽  
Carbon Offsetting ◽  
Practical Impact ◽  
The Eu

The article discusses the CORSIA - a newly introduced an emission mitigation approach for the global airline industry, developed by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). It also describes all phases of the project, their analysis and the practical impact of CORSA on aircraft operators. The examples show the operator’s costs associated with this project. The mutual coexistence of CORSIA and the EU ETS is also analysed.

scholarly journals The other side of tax discrimination

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 929-956
Author(s):  
Mateusz Wąsik
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Orientation ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Long Run ◽  
European Court ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Personal Taxation ◽  
The Eu

The purpose of the paper is to present the tax consequences resulting from the lack of recognition of registered partnerships and same-sex marriages in certain EU member states, taking the example of Poland. These aspects are usually perceived as discrimination of citizens based on their sexual orientation. The author of this paper has focused on various aspects of possible discrimination, mainly concerning discrimination on the grounds of personal taxation, including inheritance and gift taxes. For these purposes, the author analysed the domestic tax rules differentiating couples living in a marriage and couples without that possibility. These legal provisions have been analysed together with the most recent domestic jurisprudence. Furthermore, the paper presents comparative analyses of domestic rules with EU law. Due to the lack of case-law oriented towards fiscal discrimination due to sexual orientation, the relevant CJEU (the Court of Justice of the European Union, hereinafter: the CJEU) and ECHR (the European Court of Human Rights, hereinafter: the ECHR) case-law have been recalled to reveal possible violations of fundamental freedoms and tax discrimination. The author makes a connection between the lack of proper regulations implemented in the domestic law with the unjustified differentiation of cross-border families on tax grounds. In the long run, only the harmonisation of personal taxation at the EU level can lead to a resolution to this situation. Alternatively, as an interim solution, the relevant ECHR judgment may be of assistance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document