scholarly journals Legal entity recognition in an agglutinating language and document connection network for EU Legislation and EU/Hungarian Case Law

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
György Görög
Keyword(s):  
National Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Entity Recognition ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Citation Networks ◽  
Concept Hierarchy ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
National Office ◽  
Hungarian Case ◽  
The Eu

We have developed an application aiming atfederated search for EU and Hungarian legislation andjurisdiction. It now contains above 1 million documents, withdaily updates. The database holds documents downloadedfrom the EU sources EUR-Lex and Curia Online as well aspublic jurisdiction documents from the Constitutional Courtof Hungary and The National Office for The Judiciary. Theapplication is termed Justeus. Justeus providescomprehensible search possibilities. Besides free text andmetadata (dropdown list) searches, it features hierarchicaldata structures (concept hierarchy trees) of directory codesand classification as well as subject terms. Justeus collects alllinks of a particular document to other documents (courtjudgements citing other case law documents as well aslegislation, national court decisions referring to EU regulationetc.) as tables and directed graph networks. Choosing adocument, its relations to other documents are visualized inreal time as a network. Network graphs help in identifying keydocuments influencing or referred by many other documents(legislative and/or jurisdictive) and sets of documentspredominantly referring to each other (citation networks).

scholarly journals Legal entity recognition in an agglutinating language and document connection network for EU Legislation and EU/Hungarian Case Law

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
György Görög
Keyword(s):  
National Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Entity Recognition ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Citation Networks ◽  
Concept Hierarchy ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
National Office ◽  
Hungarian Case ◽  
The Eu

We have developed an application aiming atfederated search for EU and Hungarian legislation andjurisdiction. It now contains above 1 million documents, withdaily updates. The database holds documents downloadedfrom the EU sources EUR-Lex and Curia Online as well aspublic jurisdiction documents from the Constitutional Courtof Hungary and The National Office for The Judiciary. Theapplication is termed Justeus. Justeus providescomprehensible search possibilities. Besides free text andmetadata (dropdown list) searches, it features hierarchicaldata structures (concept hierarchy trees) of directory codesand classification as well as subject terms. Justeus collects alllinks of a particular document to other documents (courtjudgements citing other case law documents as well aslegislation, national court decisions referring to EU regulationetc.) as tables and directed graph networks. Choosing adocument, its relations to other documents are visualized inreal time as a network. Network graphs help in identifying keydocuments influencing or referred by many other documents(legislative and/or jurisdictive) and sets of documentspredominantly referring to each other (citation networks).

scholarly journals Legal entity recognition in an agglutinating language and document connection network for EU Legislation and EU/Hungarian Case Law

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
György Görög ◽  
Péter Weisz
Keyword(s):  
National Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Entity Recognition ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Federated Search ◽  
Concept Hierarchy ◽  
National Office ◽  
Hungarian Case ◽  
The Eu

We have developed an application aiming at federated search for EU and Hungarian legislation and jurisdiction. It now contains above 1 million documents, with daily updates. The database holds documents downloaded from the EU sources EUR-Lex and Curia Online as well as public jurisdiction documents from the Constitutional Court of Hungary and The National Office for The Judiciary. The application is termed Justeus. Justeus provides comprehensible search possibilities. Besides free text and metadata (dropdown list) searches, it features hierarchical data structures (concept hierarchy trees) of directory codes and classification as well as subject terms. Justeus collects all links of a particular document to other documents (court judgements citing other case law documents as well as legislation, national court decisions referring to EU regulation etc.) as tables and directed graph networks. Choosing a document, its relations to other documents are visualized in real time as a network. Network graphs help in identifying key documents influencing or referred by many other documents (legislative and/or jurisdictive) and sets of documents predominantly referring to each other (citation networks).

scholarly journals Legal Entity Recognition in an Agglutinating Language and Document Connection Network for EU Legislation and EU/Hungarian Case Law

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
György Görög ◽  
Péter Weisz
Keyword(s):  
National Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Entity Recognition ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Federated Search ◽  
Concept Hierarchy ◽  
National Office ◽  
Hungarian Case ◽  
The Eu

We have developed an application aiming at federated search for EU and Hungarian legislation and jurisdiction. It now contains above 1 million documents, with daily updates. The database holds documents downloaded from the EU sources EUR-Lex and Curia Online as well as public jurisdiction documents from the Constitutional Court of Hungary and The National Office for The Judiciary. The application is termed Justeus. Justeus provides comprehensible search possibilities. Besides free text and metadata (dropdown list) searches, it features hierarchical data structures (concept hierarchy trees) of directory codes and classification as well as subject terms. Justeus collects all links of a particular document to other documents (court judgements citing other case law documents as well as legislation, national court decisions referring to EU regulation etc.) as tables and directed graph networks. Choosing a document, its relations to other documents are visualized in real time as a network. Network graphs help in identifying key documents influencing or referred by many other documents (legislative and/or jurisdictive) and sets of documents predominantly referring to each other (citation networks).

The Interaction of Judicial and Legislative Policymaking

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susanne K. Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
European Legislation ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
Political Preferences ◽  
General Rules ◽  
Judicial Policymaking ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

Chapter 4 systematizes the different ways that judicial policymaking can have an impact on European legislation. Identifying the codification of case-law principles in secondary law contributes to research on the EU in two important ways: it shows how EU legislation is embedded in case-law development, and that the impact of case law cannot be reduced to the question of compliance with single rulings. A differentiation is made between several types of judicial ‘shadow’ over the legislative process. Then the Services Directive and the regulation on the mutual recognition of goods are analysed. The principles of case law that were motivated by the specific circumstances of individual cases constrain the design of general rules. Secondary law cannot modify constitutional principles. At best, the legislature can hope to signal its political preferences to the Court.

scholarly journals Has the Action for Failure to Act in the European Union Lost its Purpose?

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inga Daukšienė ◽  
Arvydas Budnikas
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Remedy ◽  
The Eu

ABSTRACT This article analyzes the purpose of the action for failure to act under article 265 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The statements are derived from the analysis of scientific literature, relevant legislation, practice of the European Union Court of Justice (CJEU) and the European Union General Court (EUGC). Useful information has also been obtained from the opinions of general advocates of the CJEU. The article of TFEU 265, which governs the action for failure to act, is very abstract. For this reason, a whole procedure under the article 265 TFEU was developed by the EU courts. The original purpose of the action for failure to act was to constitute whether European Union (EU) institution properly fulfilled its obligations under the EU legislation. However, in the course of case-law, a mere EU institution’s express refusal to fulfill its duties became sufficient to constitute that the EU institution acted and therefore action for failure to act became devoid of purpose. This article analyzes whether the action for failure to act has lost its purpose and become an ineffective legal remedy in the system of judicial review in the EU. Additionally, the action for failure to act is compared to similar national actions.

Solidarity in EU Law

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 965-983 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esin Küçük
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Reciprocal Relationship ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Normative Force ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Integrated Concept ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Do So

Solidarity, although widely used in EU legislation and the early jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), lacks a clear meaning. It appears as an amorphous concept whose contours change depending on the legal areas and the actors involved, and which generates differing levels of commitment. This article explores the attributes common to the different expressions of solidarity as a binding legal obligation in order to develop European solidarity as an integrated concept. It examines the meaning and boundaries of solidarity by focusing on the reasons that generate solidarity obligations under the EU Treaties and by analysing the case law where the CJEU has drawn on solidarity or could have drawn on it, but decided not to do so. The article concludes that while different aspects of solidarity are embodied in EU legislation, the concept has normative force mainly when it is driven by self-interest in a reciprocal relationship. Although references have been made to its ethical underpinnings, in the absence of a reciprocal return, the normative premises of solidarity have remained weak.

scholarly journals Compatibility of the State Aid Recovery Order with the General Principles of EU Law

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 73
Author(s):  
Marek Rzotkiewicz
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
General Principle ◽  
Case Law ◽  
State Aid ◽  
The State ◽  
Current Paper ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Eu

According to the Article 16.1 of Regulation 2015/1589 the Commission shall not require recovery of the aid if this would be contrary to a general principle of EU law. The potential existence of such a contradiction can be then of un utmost significance to a Member State and aid beneficiaries. However, notwithstanding its significance, the notion of a general principle of EU law has not been defined in the EU legislation, has been derived from the case law of the Court of Justice. The current paper strives to analyze different sorts of general principles of the EU law and their impact on the recovery obligation, especially as such an obligation differs between particular principles. Some of those principles have no significance at all on the existence of the recovery order, while others can, and sometimes even should, bar the Commission from ordering a Member State to recover an aid.

The Court of Justice of the European Union and the Armenian Legal Order

2020 ◽  
pp. 199-219
Author(s):  
Narine Ghazaryan
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
National Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Partnership Agreement ◽  
The Eu

The chapter analyses the limited impact of Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) case law on the legal order of the Republic of Armenia. Despite Armenia’s geographic proximity to the EU, CJEU precedents feature in only two cases of the Constitutional Court of Armenia. In both cases, CJEU case law is seen merely as part of comparative international legal practice, informing the judgment of the national court, rather than affecting the ratio per se. The chapter analyses the main reasons behind the apparent lack of CJEU impact on Armenian judicial practice and the legal order more generally. These include, for example, low intensity in bilateral relations between the EU and Armenia and cognitive barriers. The chapter also addresses the main features of the Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement and covers future possibilities for judicial interaction between the two legal orders.

Effective Assistance of Counsel: The Influence of the ECtHR Case Law on Italian Criminal Procedure

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 202-221
Author(s):  
Marcello Busetto
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
The Eu

The essay highlights the influence of the ECtHR case law on Italian criminal procedure in the field of effective assistance of counsel. In particular, attention is paid towards the approach undertaken by domestic courts of directly applying the Strasbourg’s criteria concerning the “quality” of representation. The author points out possible dark areas and problematic aspects of this course, also in the light of the EU legislation.

Hic Sunt Nationes: The Elusive Limits of the EU Char ter and the German Constitutional Watchdog: Court of Justice of the European Union: Judgment of 26 February 2013, Case C-617/10 Åklagaren v. Hans Åkerberg Fransson

2013 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 315-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
Filippo Fontanelli
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
Ne Bis In Idem ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
German Constitutional Court ◽  
Theoretical Foundations ◽  
The Eu

In late February 2013, the ECJ handed down the Åkerberg Fransson preliminary ruling (Fransson), a ten-page decision which tackled the unresolved issue of the application of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (the Charter) to domestic measures. Notwithstanding the Advocate General's effort to investigate the theoretical foundations that legitimise this projection of the Charter upon state acts, the ECJ delivered a judgment which largely followed in the pattern of its own anodyne case-law on general principles. The judgment confirmed that the Swedish measures at stake – cumulating administrative and criminal penalties for tax evaders – ‘implemented’ EU law insofar as they contributed to the effective collection of VAT, one of the sources of the EU's budget. As a consequence, it is for the Swedish judge to check their compliance with the Charter's norm on ne bis in idem. This decision confirms that the Charter applies to national measures that do not transpose EU legislation and happen to fall within its scope only incidentally.Regardless of the relative conservativeness of this finding, its implications are fated to displease member states and the reasoning of the Court was not compelling enough to prevent distinguishing and criticism. The first attack was promptly brought by the German Constitutional Court, which in its anti-terror database decision made clear that it subscribes only to a restrictive reading of Fransson and does not accept that the Charter applies to domestic measures whose objectives are set domestically, even if their purposes are shared by EU legislation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document