EU Mixed Agreements in International Law under the Stress of Brexit

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuliya Kaspiarovich ◽  
Nicolas Levrat
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Mixed Agreements

Foreign Affairs Federalism in the European Union

2019 ◽  
pp. 331-351
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Court ◽  
Treaty Of Rome ◽  
Formed Part ◽  
Mixed Agreements

The European Union was born as an international organization. The 1957 Treaty of Rome formed part of international law, although the European Court of Justice was eager to emphasize that the Union constitutes “a new legal order” of international law. With time, this new legal order has indeed evolved into a true “federation of States.” Yet how would the foreign affairs powers of this new supranational entity be divided? Would the European Union gradually replace the member states, or would it preserve their distinct and diverse foreign affairs voices? In the past sixty years, the Union has indeed significantly sharpened its foreign affairs powers. While still based on the idea that it has no plenary power, the Union’s external competences have expanded dramatically, and today it is hard to identify a nucleus of exclusive foreign affairs powers reserved for the member states. And in contrast to a classic international law perspective, the Union’s member states only enjoy limited treaty-making powers under European law. Their foreign affairs powers are limited by the exclusive powers of the Union, and they may be preempted through European legislation. There are, however, moments when both the Union and its states enjoy overlapping foreign affairs powers. For these situations, the Union legal order has devised a number of cooperative mechanisms to safeguard a degree of “unity” in the external actions of the Union. Mixed agreements constitute an international mechanism that brings the Union and the member states to the same negotiating table. The second constitutional device is internal to the Union legal order: the duty of cooperation.

scholarly journals El TJUE y el Derecho Internacional: la defensa de su propia autonomía como principio constitucional básico = The CJEU and International Law: the defence of its own autonomy as a basic constitutional principle

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 330
Author(s):  
Luis Ignacio Gordillo Pérez
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Mixed Agreements ◽  
Fundamental Conclusion

Resumen: Este trabajo realiza un análisis crítico de la jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia respecto del Derecho internacional. Para ello, analiza los acuerdos internacionales y otras fuentes afines, la problemática derivada de los acuerdos firmados por los Estados miembros con terceros Estados, la relación entre el Derecho de la UE y el Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos y, finalmente, el valor que el Tribunal confiere al Derecho internacional general y a la Carta de Naciones Unidas. La conclusión fundamental será que el principio básico que guía la jurisprudencia del TJ es la reivindicación y protección de su propia autonomía.Palabras clave: monismo, dualismo, pluralismo, autonomía, acuerdos mixtos, Dictamen 2/13, Dictamen 2/15.Abstract: This paper critically analyzes the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union on International law. To that end, it analyzes international agreements and other related sources, the problems arising from agreements signed by Member States with third States, the relationship between EU law and the European Convention on Human Rights, and finally the value that the Court confers on general international law and the Charter of the United Nations. The fundamental conclusion will be that the basic principle guiding the jurisprudence of the CJEU is the claim and protection of its own autonomy.Keywords: monism, dualism, pluralism, autonomy, mixed agreements, Opinion 2/13, Opinion 2/15.

The Jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice to Give Preliminary Rulings on the Interpretation of Mixed Agreements

2000 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 395-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
First Case ◽  
European Court ◽  
The World ◽  
Article 50 ◽  
Mixed Agreements

AbstractThis article is about the scope of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice to interpret, under Article 234 of the EC Treaty, international agreements which include among their contracting parties the European Community, all or some of its Member States and one or more other subjects of international law and which fall partly within the competence of the Community and partly within the competence of the Member States (so-called ‘mixed agreements’). In particular, the article addresses the question of whether, and if so to what extent, the Court's jurisdiction covers those provisions of mixed agreements which have been concluded under Member State powers. New light has been shed upon the question of jurisdiction by the Court's judgment in Case C-53/96 Hermès v. FHT concerning the interpretation of Article 50 of the Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) annexed to the 1994 Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization (WTO) – the first case where the jurisdiction issue is addressed by the Court outside the context of association agreements. The article analyses the judgment and its implications in the light of both the Court's earlier case law and the legal and policy considerations at stake when the scope of the Court's jurisdiction is determined.

scholarly journals Shared Obligations and the Responsibility of an International Organization and Its Member States

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-40
Author(s):  
Nataša Nedeski
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Organization ◽  
Member States ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
International Responsibility ◽  
Mixed Agreements ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Do So

Abstract Discussions on the allocation of international responsibility between an international organization and its member states do not comprehensively engage with the role of obligations in assigning responsibility to the organization and/or its members. The present article sets out what will be termed an obligations-based approach to the allocation of international responsibility by exploring the phenomenon of sharing international obligations by an international organization and its members, as well as the implications thereof for their responsibility under international law. It will do so by focusing on the practice of concluding mixed agreements by the EU and its member states, which commonly results in overlapping obligations for the organization and its members. It is ultimately argued that a distinction should be made between two types of shared obligations in mixed agreements in order to untangle who can be held responsible in case of a breach: the EU, the member state(s), or both.

The Responsibility of Member States of International Organizations?

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 448-467
Author(s):  
Esa Paasivirta
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
International Organization ◽  
General Question ◽  
Modus Operandi ◽  
Member States ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Mixed Agreements ◽  
Special Case

This article outlines the contours of the special case of the eu in the context of the general question of the responsibility of a member State of an international organization. The special case of eu member States is connected with the modus operandi of the eu in general, and the fact that the implementation of eu acts is largely carried out by national authorities rather than by the eu relying solely on its own organs. This special case is also connected with the phenomenon of so-called ‘mixed agreements’ to which both the eu and its member States are parties. In both situations, the role of the member States is important and appears as part of the normal conduct of the organization. Against the background of these observations, the paper reviews the central concepts of legal personality, competence and responsibility in order to consider and assess the special case of the eu in a broader international law context. The paper also reviews recent legal developments which bear on the assessment of the special case of the eu.

Responsibility in the EC for Mixed Agreements –Should Non-Member Parties Care?

2001 ◽  
Vol 70 (3) ◽  
pp. 373-402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Member States ◽  
Mixed Agreements

AbstractThe author discusses and questions the settled approach relating to responsibility under international law for mixed agreements, i.e. agreements to which both the EC and all or some of its member states are parties. He concludes that the rosy picture prevailing in much of the literature may not be justified, and stresses the difficulties involved for third parties.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document