Das Brexit-Abkommen und Europarecht

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Frau

This book analyses the legality of the Brexit agreement under European Union law. While the political debate has been highly publicised in recent months, a legal analysis was always lacking. This legal analysis deals with the interpretation and application of the draft withdrawal agreement, the ECJ’s responsibilities, EU citizenship for British citizens after Brexit, the framework within which British authorities can apply EU law, creating laws after Brexit as well as the law on movement of goods and customs. This monograph compares the agreement with other manifestations of integration and association throughout the European Union, and it deals with the ECJ’s jurisprudence extensively. Last but not least, it applies the agreement to the external economic law of the EU. Beyond Brexit, the monograph proposes a framework for the application of EU law by a non-member state.

2021 ◽  
Vol 61 (5) ◽  
pp. 277-286

The European Union law (EU law) and the international law are two different but complementary systems. The variety of cases, the dynamic matter, as well as the many legislative changes both from international and national perspective in the field of direct taxes, gives rise to the necessity to delineate the boundaries between the EU law and the international law. This would help to ensure the proper law enforcement and to limit the possible conflicts between them. In the present paper, through a comparative legal analysis of the relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the scope of the EU law is derived, as well as its interaction with international law. This helps to draw conclusions about their relationship, and in particular in the observance of their hierarchy in practical cases.


2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-71
Author(s):  
Maciej Etel

Abstract The European Union and its member-states’ involvement in the economic sphere, manifesting itself in establishing the rules of entrepreneurs’ functioning – their responsibilities and entitlements – requires a precise determination of the addressees of these standards. Proper identification of an entrepreneur is a condition of proper legislation, interpretation, application, control and execution of the law. In this context it is surprising that understanding the term entrepreneur in Polish law and in EU law is not the same, and divergences and differences in identification are fundamental. This fact formed the objective of this article. It is aimed at pointing at key differences in the identification of an entrepreneur between Polish and EU law, explaining the reasons for different concepts, and also the answer to the question: May Poland, as an EU member-state, identify the entrepreneur in a different way than the EU?


2021 ◽  
pp. 124-141
Author(s):  
Colin Faragher

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the Treaty framework and sources of EU law as well as the institutions of the EU. It covers the legal background to the UK’s departure from the EU, the legal process through which the UK left the EU, the key provisions of the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (2020), and the European Union (Future Relationship) Act 2020. This chapter also discusses the effect of the UK’s departure from the EU on the status of the sources of EU law and the effect of leaving the EU on the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms as well as failure to transpose a Directive into national law and the effect of leaving the EU on the Francovich principle.


2015 ◽  
Vol 74 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Peers

THE recent judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the case of Dano (ECLI:EU:C:2014:2358) clarified some important points as regards access to social welfare benefits by EU citizens who move to another Member State. Furthermore, the judgment could have broad implications for any attempts by the UK Government to renegotiate the UK's membership of the EU, which is likely to focus on benefits for EU citizens coming to the UK. This note is an updated and expanded version of my analysis on the EU Law Analysis blog: http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/benefit-tourism-by-eu-citizens-cjeu.html.


2020 ◽  
pp. 108-143
Author(s):  
Pavlos Eleftheriadis

This chapter examines the question of the relations between EU law and domestic law from the point of view of a political theory of the European Union. It is common to see EU law under ‘federalism’ or under a theory of ‘statism’. These two views are outlined at the start of this chapter by examining various arguments made for them. They are both rejected. The chapter defends a rival view, the ‘internationalist’ reading of the EU, according to which it is a branch of the law of nations. A careful look at the EU treaties and the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU shows that the EU endorses an internationalist model based on equality and reciprocity. The EU does not replace the relation between citizens and political power. It does not establish a new constitutional law that replaces the national ones. It is a new way of organizing the relations between the various member states whose equality it fully respects. The coherence of European Union law is therefore not provided by uniformity imposed by a single master or constitutional rule, but is given by the political coordination of the laws of the member states achieved under the treaties. Coherence is achieved because the member states have adopted similar, although not identical, constitutional principles.


Author(s):  
Bermann George A

This chapter also looks at issues that typically arise in Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) cases. In particular, it explores those cases in which respondent states have made use of EU law in mounting a jurisdictional or substantive defence under the ECT. First, regarding EU law as a jurisdictional defence, the chapter looks both at intra-European BIT cases and intra-European ECT cases. Regarding the latter, the chapter addresses, among other things, the critical question of whether the ECT is applicable to disputes between an EU member state and a national of another EU member state, or whether such application is precluded by an implicit ‘disconnection clause’ under the ECT, as argued by the EU Commission. Second, regarding EU law as a substantive defence, the chapter analyzes scenarios in which EU law arguably requires conduct, on the part of a member state, that the ECT itself forbids, or vice versa.


2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jarmila Lazíková

Abstract Consumer protection is a dominant policy of the EU. Despite this fact, the article 169 of the Treaty on Functioning of the European Union does not enable to adopt the binding legal laws on consumer protection per se. The binding legal laws could be adopted only within the context of other politics and activities on the internal market of the EU. The paper addresses the consumer policy and its status in the EU law by the historical development and legal analysis of the article 169 of the Treaty, secondary law development of consumer protection, jurisprudence, and judicature of the Court of the Justice of the EU.


2014 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-119
Author(s):  
Maciej Jabłoński

The organization of environmental protection in Poland and the European Union is a mutual connection of competencies and a correlation of systems and rights according to national and EU laws. The legal system of the EU is the result of decades of cooperation undertaken by the will of the Member States known as the acquis communautaire. EU law has primacy over national law, which in practice means that in the event of a conflict between the provisions of national law and EU law, the national law is deemed inapplicable and needs to be adjusted by the Member State.


2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 309 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herwig C.H. Hofmann

This article gives a brief overview of the main features, functions and future perspectives of agencies in the European Union [EU]. It highlights the specific notion of the EU’s highly integrated, multi-level legal system as an explanatory factor for the specificities of agency design. The article looks at agencies in the EU through the lens of the structural and procedural arrangements for their independence and their accountability. The article comes to the conclusion that, generally speaking, accountability and independence are defined by and adapted to the position of an agency within the structure of administrative networks implementing EU law and policy. Their raison d’être is usually to coordinate Member State implementing activities rather than taking on these responsibilities themselves.Cet article présente un bref aperçu des caractéristiques principales, des fonctions et des perspectives d’avenir d’agences au sein de l’Union Européenne [UE]. Il met en évidence la notion particulière que les spécificités de la façon dont les agences sont structurées s’expliquent par le fait que le système juridique de l’UE est hautement intégré et à niveaux multiples. L’article examine des agences de l’UE dans la perspective des arrangements structuraux et procéduraux en vue de leur indépendance et de leur obligation de rendre compte. L’article conclut que de façon générale l’obligation de rendre compte et l’indépendance sont définies par, et adaptées à, la position d’une agence dans le cadre des réseaux administratifs qui appliquent la loi et les politiques de l’EU. Leur raison d’être est généralement de coordonner les activités d’application des États Membres plutôt que d’être chargées elles-mêmes de ces responsabilités.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Lane Scheppele ◽  
Dimitry Vladimirovich Kochenov ◽  
Barbara Grabowska-Moroz

Abstract Although compliance with the founding values is presumed in its law, the Union is now confronted with persistent disregard of these values in two Member States. If it ceases to be a union of Rule-of-Law-abiding democracies, the European Union (EU) is unthinkable. Purely political mechanisms to safeguard the Rule of Law, such as those in Article 7 Treaty of European Union (TEU), do not work. Worse still, their existence has disguised the fact that the violations of the values of Article 2 TEU are also violations of EU law. The legal mechanisms tried thus far, however, do not work either. The fundamental jurisprudence on judicial independence and irremovability under Article 19(1) TEU is a good start, but it has been unable to change the situation on the ground. Despite ten years of EU attempts at reining in Rule of Law violations and even as backsliding Member States have lost cases at the Court of Justice, illiberal regimes inside the EU have become more consolidated: the EU has been losing through winning. More creative work is needed to find ways to enforce the values of Article 2 TEU more effectively. Taking this insight, we propose to turn the EU into a militant democracy, able to defend its basic principles, by using the traditional tools for the enforcement of EU law in a novel manner. We demonstrate how the familiar infringement actions—both under Article 258 and 259 TFEU—can be adapted as instruments for enforcing EU values by bundling a set of specific violations into a single general infringement action to show how a pattern of unlawful activity rises to the level of being a systemic violation. A systemic violation, because of its general and pervasive nature, in itself threatens basic values above and beyond violations of individual provisions of the acquis. Certified by the Court of Justice, a systemic violation of EU law should call for systemic compliance that would require the Member State to undo the effects of its attacks on the values of Article 2. The use of Article 260 Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) to deduct fines from EU funds due to be received by the troubled Member State would provide additional incentives for systemic compliance. We illustrate this proposed militant democratic structure by explaining and critiquing what the Commission and Court together have done to reign in the governments of Hungary and Poland so far and then showing how they can do better.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document