Laws in Progress? Reconceptualizing Accountability Strategies in the Era of Framework Norms

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 363-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilia Korkea-aho
Keyword(s):  
National Level ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Specific Focus ◽  
Chemicals Regulation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Rule Making ◽  
Peer Control ◽  
Eu Chemicals Regulation ◽  
The Eu

AbstractEU law is teeming with framework norms – ‘laws in progress’. They provide little clarity for those to whom they apply, engendering rule-making in networks to assist those charged with implementing and applying laws at the national level. Taking as its specific focus the particular process through which the concept of an ‘article’ was constructed and constituted in a set of negotiations around the EU Chemicals Regulation, REACH, this article shows that networks not only make framework norms operational but also transform them in the process. The fact that networks have an important role in laying out what the law says throws the effectiveness of traditional forms of accountability in doubt. In particular, judicial control is in need of rethinking in order to accommodate norms that change and the networks that change them. This article suggests looking at the connections between internal peer control and externally operating judicial control as a way to keep up with the progress of laws in progress.

scholarly journals A tale of two citizens: The Brey-Dano proportionality gap in UK courts and tribunals

2021 ◽  
pp. 138826272110049
Author(s):  
Victoria E. Hooton
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
National Level ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The Law

The role of proportionality and individual assessments in EU residency and welfare access cases has changed significantly over the course of the last decade. This article demonstrates how a search for certainty and efficiency in this area of EU law has created greater uncertainty, more legal hurdles for citizens, and less consistency in decision-making at the national level. UK case law illustrates the difficulty faced by national authorities when interpreting and applying the rules relating to welfare access and proportionality. Ultimately, the law lacks the consistency and transparency that recent CJEU case law seeks to obtain, raising the question of whether the shift from the Court's previous, more flexible, case-by-case approach was desirable after all.

The EU as an “enforcement patchwork”: the impact of national enforcement for compliance with EU water law in Spain and Britain

2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 331-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mónica García Quesada
Keyword(s):  
Waste Water Treatment ◽  
National Level ◽  
State Level ◽  
Detailed Examination ◽  
Deterrent Effect ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

AbstractFailures of compliance with European Union (EU) directives have revealed the EU as a political system capable of enacting laws in a wide range of different policy areas, but facing difficulties to ensure their actual implementation. Although the EU relies on national enforcement agencies to ensure compliance with the EU legislation, there is scarce analysis of the differential deterrent effect of national enforcement in EU law compliance. This article examines the enforcement of an EU water directive, the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive, in Spain and the UK. It focuses on the existing national sanctions for disciplining actors in charge of complying with EU requirements, and on the actual use of punitive sanctions. The analysis shows that a more comprehensive and active disciplinary regime at the national level contributes to explain a higher degree of compliance with EU law. The article calls for a detailed examination of the national administrative and criminal sanction system for a more comprehensive understanding of the incentives and disincentives to comply with EU law at the national state level.

4. Freedom of movement for EU nationals

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gina Clayton ◽  
Georgina Firth ◽  
Caroline Sawyer ◽  
Rowena Moffatt ◽  
Helena Wray
Keyword(s):  
Free Movement ◽  
European Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Third Country Nationals

Course-focused and comprehensive, the Textbook on series provides an accessible overview of the key areas on the law curriculum. This chapter discusses the law which governs the free movement of people within the EU. As such, it is principally about the movement of EU nationals. The movement of non-EU nationals, known in European law as third-country nationals, may come within the ambit of EU law due to their connection with EU nationals; for instance, as a spouse or employee. The chapter concentrates on the rights of EU nationals and their families to move within the EU, and covers the powers to deport or remove EU nationals. It also considers the possible impacts of Brexit on free movement rights.

scholarly journals La tutela judicial de los derechos fundamentales en el ámbito de aplicación nacional del derecho de la Unión Europea : recientes acotaciones del Tribunal de Justicia y del Tribunal ConstitucionalEspañol = The judicial protection of fundamental rights in the sphere of the national application of EU law : recent remarks by the Court of Justice and by the Spanish Constitutional Court

2013 ◽  
pp. 391
Author(s):  
Juan Ignacio Ugartemendia Eceizabarrena
Keyword(s):  
National Level ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
National Standards ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
El Sistema ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
The Eu

Este artículo es un estudio relativo a la tutela judicial de los Derechos Fundamentales cuando se aplica Derecho de la Unión en el ámbito interno, y a cuáles son los principales problemas con los que se topa el Juez nacional que aplica el Derecho de la Unión al llevar a cabo dicha función protectora. El trabajo, dicho de forma más concreta, se centra en el examen de una serie de recientes y decisivas resoluciones jurisdiccionales, dictadas tanto por parte del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea como por parte del Tribunal Constitucional Español, que analizan problemas y señalan soluciones relativas a esas cuestiones, además de mostrar cuál es la evolución y el estado de la situación al respecto. Se trata de resoluciones que abordan cuestiones de fondo, como, por ejemplo: ¿hasta qué punto es posible utilizar estándares nacionales de protección de los Derechos Fundamentales en situaciones conectadas con el Derecho de la Unión o con su aplicación, en lugar de utilizar el sistema de protección de los Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europea? Y asimismo, resoluciones que atienden a cuestiones de dimensión más procesal como la de dirimir hasta qué punto tiene autonomía el Juez nacional a la hora de plantear una petición prejudicial (se entiende a la hora de tutelar derechos reconocidos por normas de la Unión) en relación a las normas procesales nacionales.This article deals with the judicial protection of fundamental rights when EU Law is applied at national level and the main problems national judges have to deal with when applying EU Law as protectors of rights. More precisely, the work is focused on the examination of some recent and decisive judicial decisions, both by the European Court of Justice and by the Spanish Constitutional Court which analyze the problems and address the solutions to those questions besides showing the evolution and current situation in that regard. They are decisions that deal with the merits as for example to which extent it might be possible to use national standards of protection of fundamental rights in situations connected to EU Law or to its application instead of using the system of protection of EU human rights. Likewise, they are decisions which handle with more procedural questions as for example to what extent national judges are autonomous to file a preliminary question (it is understood that when it comes time to protect rights acknowledged by the EU) relative to national procedural rules.

Administrative factual conduct: Legal effects and judicial control in EU law

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-73
Author(s):  
Napoleon Xanthoulis
Keyword(s):  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Legal Requirements ◽  
Public Power ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Administrative Practice ◽  
The Eu

This article analyses the legal effects and avenues for judicial control over the factual conduct of EU administrative authorities. It posits that the uncertainty that characterises the justiciability of Union's factual conduct conceals a conceptual obscurity surrounding acts and their effects in EU law. Legal and physical acts are both means for exercising public power. To the extent that all manifestations of public power must adhere to the applicable legal requirements, the EU administration remains judicially accountable where its conduct, irrespective of how it manifests itself, has an impact on the rights and obligations of persons. The article presents an analytical framework that aims to translate the language of legal effects to a language of EU rights and obligations and vice versa. Moreover, it contextualises this inquiry within a broader threefold uncertainty that characterises EU law and illustrates the increasing significance of physical acts in the Union's multi-layered administrative practice.

scholarly journals National Security Concerns as an Exception to EU Standards on Data Protection

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 86-91
Author(s):  
Araceli Turmo
Keyword(s):  
National Level ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Public Security ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Conflicting Interests ◽  
Security Concerns ◽  
The Eu

Discussions on the appropriate fundamental rights standards in the EU and the need to take into account conflicting interests are increasingly being reframed as debates on the conflict between the primacy of EU law and the constitutional standards of the Member States. One example of this reframing is the French administrative supreme court’s decision following the ECJ judgment in La Quadrature du Net. The Conseil ruled that the EU standards set in that judgment must be reviewed, at the national level, with regard to a national understanding of security concerns and the requirements of the fight against terrorism. Thus, constitutional requirements related to public security may be relied upon to argue for a lower standard of protection of personal data than those which the ECJ requires. As this decision shows, the ability of corporations and Governments to rely on litigation before national courts to challenge the standard of protection set at the EU level creates a significant risk, not only for the uniformity of EU law, but also for the protection of the rights of individuals. 

scholarly journals Smart meters’ roll out, solutions in favour of a trust enhancing law in the EU

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Domenico Orlando ◽  
Wim Vandevelde
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
National Level ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Critical Assessment ◽  
Smart Meters ◽  
The Law ◽  
Roll Out ◽  
The Eu

The article briefly describes the smart meters technology in the electricity field, its potentials and risks in terms of privacy and data protection, which could undermine the trust of customers. Then, the article delineates the EU legal framework that applies to the technology. A critical assessment of the latter follows, with the identification of some flaws. The focus shifts subsequently to the national level of legislation, when the Flemish laws on the matter are analysed. A different part is dedicated to the role that some technologies could have to reduce the risks and implement privacy. In conclusion, some recommendations are proposed to make the law more prone to enhance trust by the customers.   

scholarly journals An approach to today’s EU constitutionality control – understanding this EU inter-jurisdictional phenomenon in light of effective judicial protection

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-124
Author(s):  
Joana Covelo de Abreu
Keyword(s):  
National Level ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Constitutional Level ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
The Eu

Under today’s European constitutional demands, effective judicial protection sets the tone concerning potential jurisdictional instruments able to act as constitutionality control mechanisms. Inter-jurisdictionality stands for different and complementary jurisdictional systems living togetherin the same space and it aims to understand how their reflexive interactions can be maintained to promote effective judicial protection. Both the infringement procedure and the preliminary ruling act as constitutional controls. The first allows the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to evaluate the incompatibility of national solutions/omissions with EU law but, to meet its full effectiveness, widening legitimate parties needs to be considered as well. Also, validity preliminary rulings act as a constitutional control in proceedings relating to individuals – national judges should be aware of their referring obligations to the CJEU. There are voices amongst European academia that advocate a new constitutional procedure to promote fundamental rights’ protection. However, the main formulas highlighted rely on solutions tested on the national level which can compromise their efficacy. We perceive an inter-jurisdictional paradigm as the proper approach since it will allowthe promotion of effective judicial protection at a constitutional level as a new EU dogmatically thought phenomenon. This is to ensure judicial integration can be perceived as a reality, engaged in pursuing the future of the EU.

scholarly journals New Challenges for European Comparative Law: The Judicial Reception of EU Non-Discrimination Law and a turn to a Multi-layered Culturally-informed Comparative Law Method for a better Understanding of the EU Harmonization

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 721-770 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jule Mulder
Keyword(s):  
National Level ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Culturally Informed ◽  
Harmonization Process ◽  
Legal Harmonization ◽  
The Eu

This article argues that comparative law needs to explore its critical potential when engaging with the European harmonization process and its effects on the law of the Member States. In the first part, the article evaluates existing comparative law methods and their suitability to identify legal and cultural factors that influence the judicial reception of EU harmonized law on a national level. Using EU non-discrimination law as a case study, it questions to what extent traditional methods are suitable to explain differences in the national judicial reception of EU harmonized law, despite the exclusive competence of the Court of Justice of the European Union to interpret EU law. In doing so, it considers the potential of critical comparative law for the development of a deeper understanding of the national courts' reception of EU harmonized law as a key part of the broader legal harmonization process. In the second part, the article develops an original multi-layered culturally informed method to compare EU harmonized law. The proposal goes beyond the existing methods of comparative law by including critical aspects and stressing the relevance of embedding a general normative framework in any comparative critique. It challenges comparatists to reach deeply into national cultural spheres and to identify key influences on the application of EU rules and EU-national legal ‘hybrids’. The method creates room for multi-layered narratives of comparison aimed at gaining a deeper understanding of the national legal and non-legal cultural background that can hinder or facilitate harmonization processes. This enriched comparative critique can offer new insights into the process of legal harmonization in the EU, particularly by focusing on the point of application rather than the previous phases of creation of EU law and its reception by Member States.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document