scholarly journals The Meaning of Regulatory Act Explained: Are There Any Significant Improvements for the Standing of Non-Privileged Applicants in Annulment Actions?

2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (9) ◽  
pp. 1851-1865
Author(s):  
Haakon Roer-Eide ◽  
Mariolina Eliantonio

The right to an effective legal remedy is a generally accepted principle of modern legal systems and is enshrined in national constitutions as well as international treaties, such as the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. On the European Union (hereinafter EU) level, the right to an effective remedy is laid down in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Author(s):  
Ciro Milione

Desde la entrada en vigor del Tratado de Lisboa, la Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europea (CDFUE) ha adquirido una relevancia incuestionable en su ámbito material. El Tribunal de Luxemburgo, en calidad de supremo intérprete de la Carta, interviene para definir el alcance de sus preceptos, construyendo con sus sentencias un verdadero estándar de protección de los derechos en seno a la Unión. Este estudio pone de manifiesto esta evolución a partir del análisis las resoluciones más relevantes del Tribunal de Luxemburgo en relación al art. 47 (CDFUE) por el que se consagra el derecho a la tutela judicial efectiva y a un juez imparcial.Since the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFREU) has acquired an unquestionable relevance in its material scope. The Luxembourg Court, as ultimate interpreter of the Charter, intervenes to define the extent of its precepts, establishing a European standard of protection of fundamental rights. This paper describes this evolution, taking into consideration the most relevant resolutions from the Luxembourg Court on the art. 47 CFREU, which establishes the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial.


2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-156
Author(s):  
Marco Inglese

Abstract This article seeks to ascertain the role of healthcare in the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). The article is structured as follows. First, it outlines the international conceptualisation of healthcare in the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the European Social Charter (ESC) before delving into the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Second, focusing on the European Union (EU), it analyses the role of Article 35 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter) in order to verify its impact on the development of the CEAS. Third, and in conclusion, it will argue that the identification of the role of healthcare in the CEAS should be understood in light of the Charter’s scope of application. This interpretative approach will be beneficial for asylum seekers and undocumented migrants, as well as for the Member States (MSs).


2018 ◽  
Vol 331 ◽  
pp. 29-39
Author(s):  
Justyna Matusiak ◽  
Marcin Princ

The right to good administration constitutes an established principle of European Union law, which includes the procedural rights of stakeholders in administrative proceedings, the result of which may affect their interests. Article 41 of the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights states that every person has the right to have his or her affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time by the institutions and bodies of the Union. When it comes to reasonable time of handling the case one can ask if eGovernment solutions are the guarantee of such a right. eGovernment understood as the use of all kinds of electronic means of communication, in particular, however, the Internet, improves services provided by the state to its citizens. The usage of IT technology in public administration allows it to perform its activities in a more efficient way. This improvement applies not only to the communication between parties but also to the quality of citizens’ life. To sum up, one can ask the question if the European right to good administration can be understood as the right to eGovernment solutions and if so, to what extent. Which services and technical solutions should be guaranteed as ones ensuring challenges of good administration?


Author(s):  
Lorna Woods ◽  
Philippa Watson ◽  
Marios Costa

This chapter examines the development of the general principles by the Court of Justice (CJ) to support the protection of human rights in the European Union (EU) law. It analyses the relationship of the general principles derived from the CJ’s jurisprudence to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and the European Charter of Fundamental Rights (EUCFR). It discusses the possible accession of the EU to the ECHR and the implications of Opinion 2/13. It suggests that although the protection of human rights has been more visible since the Lisbon Treaty and there are now more avenues to such protection, it is debatable whether the scope and level of protection has increased.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 403-412
Author(s):  
Michael Gotthardt

The article looks at the outcome of the two legal proceedings in the Schüth and IR cases. In both cases employees of the Catholic Church – a choirmaster and organist in a Catholic parish and a trained physician working as Head of the Internal Medicine Department of a Catholic hospital - were dismissed because of the violation of the Basic Regulations on Employment Relationships in the Service of the Church. In the Schüth case Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which protects the right to private and family life, had been violated. In the IR case the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the Directive establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation were applicable. The dismissal in IR was held to be unequal treatment in employment. But the outcome of both cases was very different. We find that Union law and in particular Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union makes all the difference. In the Schüth case, the employment relationship was terminated and the claimant’s only consolation was a claim for damages from the State. In the IR case, on the other hand, the termination was declared invalid and the employment relationship continued, i.e. the head physician did not lose his job. The comparison of the cases demonstrates that European law, backed by Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, has not only permeated procedural law, it has also led to an increase in judicial reviews of substantive law which in the application of Union law is a far cry from a mere plausibility review.


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 441-448
Author(s):  
Maria Antonia Panascì

This case note examines the judgment of Court of Justice of the European Union delivered in Joined Cases C-569/16 and C-570/16 Stadt Wuppertal v. Maria Elisabeth Bauer and Volker Willmeroth v. Martina Broßonn on 6 November 2018. It engages with the noteworthy aspects of the ruling, such as the horizontal direct effect of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter), the relationship between primary and secondary law in the European Union legal order and the scope of application of the Charter.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document