scholarly journals Soft Law Implementation in the EU Multilevel System: Legitimacy and Governance Efficiency Revisited

2019 ◽  
pp. 193-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miriam Hartlapp
Keyword(s):  
Soft Law ◽  
Multilevel System ◽  
The Eu

EU Soft Law in Domestic Legal Systems: Flexibility and Diversity Guaranteed?

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilia Korkea-Aho
Keyword(s):  
Holistic Approach ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Member States ◽  
Regulatory Instruments ◽  
Modes Of Governance ◽  
Judicial Recognition ◽  
The Eu ◽  
New Modes Of Governance

New modes of governance are proliferating at all levels, most prominently in the EU. One main characteristic of new governance is adjustability and revisability in the form of soft law. The non-binding nature of soft law is said to contribute to flexibility and diversity in Member States and to secure national autonomy. However, this article argues that while soft law may not be legally binding, it nevertheless has legal effects that throw flexibility and diversity of national action into doubt. Beginning by demonstrating that soft law may have discernible effects on practices in Member States, at the same time restricting Member State choices, the article goes on to develop a categorisation of those effects and to document them in detail. These are: judicial recognition by the European courts, explicit terms of soft law instruments, which demand special types of national implementing measures, the role played by non-state actors, and hybrid forms of regulatory instruments comprising soft and hard law provisions. The analysis shows a need to add variety to existing research on EU soft law, which has traditionally focused on the role of the judiciary in giving legal effects to soft law. Instead, we should be more attentive to the other three factors when discussing soft law. Besides the more holistic approach, research should also analyse soft law in a more case-specific manner in order to fully grasp the implications of choice of soft law in a domestic legal system.

4. EU legislative powers

2020 ◽  
pp. 88-122
Author(s):  
Sylvia de Mars
Keyword(s):  
Transition Period ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Legislative Processes ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the sources of EU law. As with domestic law, there are two overarching categories of EU law: primary law and secondary law. EU primary law includes the EU Treaties and the general principles of EU law. Meanwhile, EU secondary law includes regulations, directives, decisions, international agreements, and ‘soft law’. The chapter then looks at the legislative processes that are used to adopt secondary legislation, and assesses when, or in what policy areas, the EU can make law. It also considers two mechanisms that aim to prevent the EU from extending its legislative power beyond what the Treaties have granted it: the principle of subsidiarity and the principle of proportionality. Finally, the chapter addresses the impact of Brexit on EU law, assessing what will happen to EU law in the UK during the Withdrawal Agreement's transition period.

Part III Regional Regimes, Ch.19 Regional Refugee Regimes: Europe

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tsourdi Evangelia (Lilian)
Keyword(s):  
European Convention ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Border Control ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Asylum Law ◽  
And Migration ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines refugee protection in Europe, defining Europe based on its two distinct legal regimes, the European Union (EU) and the Council of Europe (CoE). The EU and its Member States have developed a regional asylum framework, encompassing legislative, responsibility-allocation, and practical components. In parallel, EU border control, visa, and migration measures impact asylum by deflecting protection obligations to non-EU countries. The chapter then analyses the EU’s ambivalent asylum system before turning to the CoE, focusing on both the European Convention on Human Rights and soft law adopted in the CoE framework. EU asylum law has an expansive impact beyond the EU, including in neighbouring non-EU countries. To illustrate these expansive trends, the chapter looks at refugee protection in Turkey and Ukraine.

4. EU Law: Sources, Forms, and Law-Making

2021 ◽  
pp. 94-140
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Alternative Decision ◽  
Law Making ◽  
The Eu

This chapter takes an overall view of the EU legal order and examines its legal system, including the elements which are either different from or similar to member states’ legal systems. It begins by taking an overall view of the EU legal order, the different forms of EU law, and the various sources of law contributing to this legal order, in particular now the rich source of human and fundamental rights in the EU legal order. It considers the non-strictly legally binding rules known as ‘soft law’. It also looks at the ways or processes by which the binding laws are made and reviews alternative decision-making and law-making developments.

scholarly journals Multilevel regulatory governance: Establishing bank-regulator relationships at the European Banking Authority

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Coen ◽  
John-Paul Salter
Keyword(s):  
Financial Crisis ◽  
European Central Bank ◽  
Regulatory Regime ◽  
Multilevel System ◽  
Regulatory Governance ◽  
European Central ◽  
European Banking Authority ◽  
European Banking ◽  
New System ◽  
The Eu

AbstractFollowing the 2007–9 financial crisis, the EU strengthened its institutional apparatus for bank regulation, creating a trio of sectoral bodies, including the European Banking Authority (EBA). Various aspects of this new system have been studied, but to date, little is known about how banks engage with their new supranational regulator. We argue that such engagement fosters an interdependence between banks and regulators, thus contributing to the efficiency and robustness of the overall regulatory regime; but also that it is contingent on the regulator exhibiting the qualities of credibility, legitimacy, and transparency. These qualities are grounded in the domestic regulatory governance literature, but we suggest that they are rendered problematic by the complexities of the EU's multilevel system and, in particular, the overlap in competences between the EBA and the European Central Bank. We examine the EBA in the light of these criteria and find that banks’ engagement remains pitched towards established national regulators and the EU's legislative arena. This poses concerns for the efficacy of agency governance in the EU's regulatory regime for banking.

Principles of European Tort Law (PETL) and Their Impact on Approximation of Ukrainian Tort Law to European Standards

2017 ◽  
Vol 71 (0) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Olesia Otradnova
Keyword(s):  
Tort Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Tort Liability ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Association Agreement ◽  
Rules And Principles ◽  
European Values ◽  
European Standards ◽  
The Eu

Ukraine has chosen its way of development towards Europe, European values and respect for human dignity and human rights. The signing of the Association Agreement in 2014 obliged Ukraine to harmonize its legislation in priority spheres of life with the legislation of the European Union. But legislative approximation should touch not only upon the fields of public law, but private law too and, in particular, tort law. The main problem of tort law approximation is that there are no joint tort rules in the EU. All attempts to harmonize tort law stopped at the creation of acts of “soft law” – general non-binding rules and principles. One of the most significant examples is the PETL – the Principles of European Tort Law. The PETL show a modern understanding of torts, spell out the conditions of tort liability, as well as other relevant requirements. Ukrainian rules of tort law do provide protection of a victim’s violated rights, however some recommendations of the PETL, such as provisions governing the conditions of tort liability, the understanding of causation and fault should be taken into account when Ukrainian tort law is modernised.

Public Enforcement of EU Antitrust Law: A Circle of Trust?

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 127-154
Author(s):  
Naida Dzino ◽  
Catalin S. Rusu
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Design ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Antitrust Enforcement ◽  
Public Enforcement ◽  
The Public ◽  
Core Elements ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
The Eu

The concept of trust is key to effectively enforcing the EU antitrust prohibitions in the ECN multi-level administration context. The manifestation of this concept is identified at different stages of the public enforcement system, where the Commission and the NCAs share the enforcement workload and assist each other's actions. Various EU legislative, soft-law and case-law landmarks have progressively contributed to developing this idea of trust, culminating with the adoption of Directive 2019/1, which aims to render NCAs as more effective enforcers of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU. In this paper, we intend to determine whether the Directive furthers the trust already established in the last fifteen years of enforcement experience. We first track the development of the trust in the NCAs' EU antitrust enforcement work and assesses the building-blocks on which trust is shaped. Next, we evaluate the Directive's core elements (dealing with institutional design, enforcement and sanctioning powers, leniency, mutual assistance, etc.), in order to gauge their trust-enhancing potential, and to test whether the Directive correctly follows through the EU hard-, soft-, and case-law. We also look into any remaining enforcement gaps, which may undermine the trust between the European antitrust enforcers, and consequently the Directive's core objectives.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document