scholarly journals “Breaking through the Foul and Ugly Mists of Vapours”— Regulation of Alternative Tobacco and Related Products by the New TPD and Exercise of EU Competence

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 1291-1348
Author(s):  
Anatole Abaquesne de Parfourus
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Member States ◽  
Its Analysis ◽  
Philip Morris

AbstractDirective 2014/40—the new Tobacco Products Directive—was unsuccessfully challenged in three cases,Philip Morris,Poland v. European Parliament and Council, andPillbox 38. This Article examines provisions of the Directive relating to some alternative tobacco and related products, both in terms of exercise of EU competence and substantive regulation of these products. The main flavored tobacco products can no longer be placed on the market. Electronic cigarettes are regulated by the Directive, as the initial provisions of the Commission proposal were substantially amended. The new Tobacco Products Directive reproduced the prohibition of tobacco for oral use, already at issue in theSwedish MatchandArnold Andrécases, and again subject of another preliminary ruling reference by Swedish Match, the Advocate General's Opinion having concluded in its validity. The Directive also provides the possibility for Member States to prohibit categories of tobacco or related products. Parallel to its analysis of their substance in terms of health regulation, this Article considers European Union competence issues relating to these provisions and examines the adequacy of the Article 114 TFEU internal market legal basis as well as compliance with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity.

Court of Justice Upholds the Tobacco Products Directive 2014

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 623-628
Author(s):  
Katharina Ó Cathaoir
Keyword(s):  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Free Competition ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
Charter Member ◽  
Philip Morris ◽  
The Eu

C-547/14 Philip Morris Brands SARL and Others v Secretary of State for Health [2016] (not yet reported)C-477/14 Pillbox 38 (UK) Ltd v Secretary of State for Health [2016] (not yet reported)C-358/14 Poland v. Parliament and Council [2016] (not yet reported)Article 114 TFEU provides an adequate legal basis for the adoption of the Tobacco Products Directive 2014 in full, including measures relating to flavoured tobacco, labelling and packaging, and electronic cigarettes. These measures also comply with the principles of proportionality, subsidiarity, legal certainty, equal treatment and free competition, and the rights of companies under the EU Charter. Member States may introduce further requirements in relation to packaging of tobacco products that are not harmonised by the Directive.

3 The Regulatory and Institutional Framework of EU Cartel Law

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Argenton Cédric ◽  
Geradin Damien ◽  
Stephan Andreas
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Consumer Welfare ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Regulatory Framework ◽  
Institutional Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Eu

This chapter deals with the institutional and regulatory framework that applies to cartels in the European Union (EU), going over both the substantive and procedural rules. The key legal basis for the prosecution of cartels resides under Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), as interpreted by the case law of the EU courts. Article 101 TFEU is a three-pronged provision. First, the chapter shows how Article 101(1) TFEU establishes a prohibition rule providing that any agreement between undertakings which may affect trade between Member States and which restricts competition is to be deemed incompatible with the internal market. Next, the chapter takes a look at how Article 101(2) TFEU declares that agreements deemed incompatible pursuant to Article 101(1) TFEU are null and void. The ways in which Article 101(3) TFEU embodies an exception to the default prohibition rule, which defuses the application of Article 101(1) for agreements that bring a positive net contribution to consumer welfare, is also discussed.

CASE-LAW OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION ON MARKET ABUSE AT EUROPEAN LEVEL

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 294-313
Author(s):  
LIBOR KLIMEK ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Level ◽  
Legal Practice ◽  
Member States ◽  
Market Abuse ◽  
Court Of Justice

A set of legislative instruments regulating market abuse have been adopted by the European Union. The principal contemporary legislative instrument in this field, addressed to its Member States, is the Regulation No 596/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on market abuse. Legislation has been supplemented by the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (formerly known as the Court of Justice of the European Communities). It is a key element for the development of legal practice in all Member States of the European Union. The assessment of case-law on market abuse is therefore needed. The paper analyses relevant cases. In each case at the outset a reference for a preliminary ruling is mentioned. Further, dispute in the main proceedings and the question(s) referred for a preliminary ruling are analysed. The most important parts of analyses are considerations by the Court of Justice and its rulings

Please Smoke Your E-Cigarette Proportionally

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-87
Author(s):  
Marco Inglese
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Health Protection ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Directive 2014/40/eu harmonises the manufacture, sales and presentation of tobacco and related products, notably, electronic cigarettes. As its predecessors, Directive 2014/40/eu has already been challenged on three occasions. This article will tackle the Pilbox case and assesses the impact of the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity on market harmonisation and health protection. It seeks to demonstrate that, contrary to the old-fashioned stream of case law on this subject, the battlefield has been shifted from the scope of Art. 114 tfeu to the impact of general principles of eu law. It then assesses how health protection increasingly permeates internal market legislations, leading to a sort of ‘paternalistic’ harmonisation. Finally, it argues that after two decades of disputes concerning tobacco products, the Court of Justice of the European Union (cjeu) has successfully ended litigations on Directive 2014/40/eu, holding that its compliance with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity is beyond doubt.

scholarly journals Correlates of self-reported exposure to advertising of tobacco products and electronic cigarettes across 28 European Union member states

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (e2) ◽  
pp. e130-e133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Filippos T Filippidis ◽  
Anthony A Laverty ◽  
Esteve Fernandez ◽  
Ute Mons ◽  
Olena Tigova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Union Member ◽  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Union Member States

General Overview of Private Damages Claims

De Jure ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleonora Mateina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
General Overview

This article aims to provide a general overview of the regime of claims for private damages caused by breaches of competition law. The possibility for private damages claims existed even prior the adoption of the Directive 2014/104/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 November 2014 on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions of the Member States and of the European Union. Nevertheless, these claims were not popular among the business, even when the Commission for Protection of competition established breaches and imposed sanctions for breach of competition. With the transposition of the directive in the Bulgarian Competition Protection Act, an increased interest towards private damages claims is expected.

The Google Ireland Case and the Legal Battle over Digital Taxes in the European Union

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 209-220
Author(s):  
Giulio Allevato ◽  
Fernando Pastor-Merchante
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Digital Economy ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Topical Issue ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Battle ◽  
The Way

The preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Google Ireland case turned on the compatibility with the rules on free movement of some of the administrative arrangements put in place by Hungary in order to administer its controversial advertisement tax (namely, the obligation to register and the penalties attached to the failure to comply with that obligation). The preliminary ruling offers some interesting insights on the way in which the Court assesses the compatibility with the freedom to provide services of national administrative arrangements aimed at ensuring the effective collection of taxes. This is a topical issue in the context of the recent efforts made by Member States to tax the digital economy more effectively.

scholarly journals The EU after Brexit: Key Geopolitical and Geo-Economic Challenges

2020 ◽  
pp. 30-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petr YAKOVLEV
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
European Council ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Union History ◽  
The Eu

The decision on Britain’s secession from the European Union, taken by the British Parliament and agreed by London and Brussels, divided the Union history into “before” and “after”. Not only will the remaining member states have to “digest” the political, commercial, economic and mental consequences of parting with one of the largest partners. They will also have to create a substantially new algorithm for the functioning of United Europe. On this path, the EU is confronted with many geopolitical and geo-economic challenges, which should be answered by the new leaders of the European Commission, European Council, and European Parliament.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF INTESTATE SUCCESSION IN THE LEGISLATION OF THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (04) ◽  
pp. 164-169
Author(s):  
Elkhan Ajdar Askarov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Key Words ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Member States ◽  
Important Place ◽  
Judicial Practice

Intestate succession occupies an important place in the field of Succession law in the civil legislation of the European Union. Intestate succession (devolution of decedent’s property to persons indicated in law) is effective in case of an intestacy or if testament is declared invalid entirely or partly. The article reflects the concept, sequence, legal basis and place in judicial practice of intestate succession. Key words: intestate succession, succession law, civil code, legislation, comparative analysis

Article 262 TFEU

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernhard Schima
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legislative Procedure

Article 229a EC Without prejudice to the other provisions of the Treaties, the Council, acting unanimously in accordance with a special legislative procedure and after consulting the European Parliament, may adopt provisions to confer jurisdiction, to the extent that it shall determine, on the Court of Justice of the European Union in disputes relating to the application of acts adopted on the basis of the Treaties which create European intellectual property rights. These provisions shall enter into force after their approval by the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document