Subsidiarity breeds contempt

2011 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-181
Author(s):  
David Fernández Vítores

When the principle of subsidiarity was introduced into Community law in 1992, it was hailed as a triumph of diversity over the previous uniformity of an excessively centralised European Union. It was generally believed to be an infallible way to preserve the cultural and linguistic heritage of each Member state, as it meant that responsibility for the design and implementation of educational, cultural and linguistic policies lay with the Member States. However, this transfer is not producing the desired results. On the contrary, it is helping to consolidate a monolingual tendency already observed in the EU since the United Kingdom joined the EU in 1973. In this context, the article examines the defensive strategies based on subsidiarity adopted by France and Germany and briefly assesses the outcome of these strategies.

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-244
Author(s):  
Howard Chitimira

The European Union (EU) was arguably the first body to establish multinational anti-market abuse laws aimed at enhancing the detection and curbing of cross-border market abuse activities in its Member States. Put differently, the EU Insider Dealing Directive was adopted in 1989 and was the first law that harmonized the insider trading ban among the EU Member States. Thereafter, the European Union Directive on Insider Dealing and Market Manipulation (EU Market Abuse Directive) was adopted in a bid to improve and effectively discourage all forms of market abuse in the EU’s securities and financial markets. However, the EU Market Abuse Directive had its own gaps and flaws. In light of this, the Market Abuse Regulation and the Criminal Sanctions for Market Abuse Directive were enacted to repeal and replace the EU Market Abuse Directive in 2016. The article examines the adequacy of the EU Market Abuse Directive and its implementation in the United Kingdom (UK) prior to the UK’s vote to leave the European Union (Brexit). This is done to investigate the possible implications of the Brexit referendum outcome of 23 June 2016 on the future regulation of market abuse in the UK.


2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 436-465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tore Vincents Olsen ◽  
Christian F. Rostbøll

The Lisbon Treaty from 2009 introduced the possibility for individual member states to withdraw from the European Union (EU) on the basis of a unilateral decision. In June 2016 the United Kingdom decided to leave the EU invoking article 50 of the treaty. But is withdrawal democratically legitimate? In fact, the all-affected principle suggests that it is undemocratic for subunits to leave larger political units when it adversely affects other citizens without including them in the decision. However, it is unclear what the currency of this affectedness is and, hence, why withdrawal would be undemocratic. We argue that it is the effect of withdrawal on the status of citizens as free and equal that is decisive and that explains why unilateral withdrawal of subunits from larger units is democratically illegitimate. Moreover, on the ‘all-affected status principle’ that we develop, even multilaterally agreed withdrawal is undemocratic because the latter diminishes the future ability of citizens to make decisions together regarding issues that affect their status as free and equal. On this basis, we conclude that it is undemocratic for a member state such as the United Kingdom to withdraw from the EU.


2019 ◽  
Vol 113 (4) ◽  
pp. 799-805
Author(s):  
Danae Azaria

The CJEU held that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (UK) is allowed to unilaterally revoke the notification of its intention to withdraw from the European Union (EU) as long as the revocation is submitted in writing to the European Council before the UK's withdrawal takes effect, and as long as the revocation is “unequivocal and unconditional, that is to say that the purpose of that revocation is to confirm the EU membership of the member state concerned under terms that are unchanged as regards its status as a member state, and that revocation brings the withdrawal procedure to an end” (para. 74).


Author(s):  
Sylwia Majkowska-Szulc

Brexit is a unique phenomenon as no Member State has ever expressed the will to leave the European Union. Never before had the in-depth impact of a Member State withdrawal been analysed. The issue has started to be analysed after the referendum in which the British voted in favour of leaving the European Union. The topic of the potential consequences of Brexit in the field of private international law concerns, inter alia, national jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters, mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments, specific procedures of EU uniform law, judicial cooperation between Member States or the functioning of the e-Justice Portal and dynamic forms. Before a given Member State withdraws from the EU, interested parties should have been informed, inter alia, of how pending proceedings will be conducted starting with the withdrawal day, what about proceedings initiated at the date of withdrawal or later on, and what about the rulings of the courts of the applicant state covered by the exequatur procedure before the withdrawal. Therefore, the primary purpose of the article is to determine the framework for the future relationship between the EU and the UK in the field of private international law. An additional aim of this paper is to better prepare natural and legal persons for the new post-Brexit reality. European integration has brought Europe peace and prosperity and enabled unprecedented cooperation in all areas of common interest. Following the withdrawal decision, the state and its citizens cease to benefit from the acquis communautaire. In fact, the United Kingdom left the European Union on 31 January 2020. As far as private international law is concerned, the United Kingdom has become a third country. Subsequently, on 1 February 2020 a transition period has started and it aims to provide more time for citizens and businesses to adapt. The negotiations on the future partnership between the EU and the UK has started in March 2020, but they were postponed due to the coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic. The relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union is sometimes compared to love that has passed away, but former lovers must continue to meet from time to time to manage certain common affaires. The analysis of the topic leads to the conclusion that, in fact, Brexit is a unique phenomenon that has no added value.


Author(s):  
Federico Fabbrini

This book examines how the European Union has changed during Brexit and because of Brexit, while also reflecting on the developments of the EU besides Brexit and beyond Brexit. It argues that the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU—the first ever case of disintegration since the start of the European integration process—creates an urgent need to reform the EU. In fact, while the EU institutions and its Member States have remained united in their negotiations vis-à-vis the UK, Brexit has created transitional problems for the EU, and exposed other serious fissures in its system of governance which need to be addressed moving forward. As the EU goes through another major crisis in the form of the response to the Covid-19 pandemic, the case for increasing the effectiveness and the legitimacy of the EU grows stronger. In this context, the book analyses the plan to establish a Conference on the Future of Europe, considering its precedents and discussing its prospects.


Author(s):  
Scotford Eloise

This chapter evaluates international environmental law (IEL) in the courts of the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom. This topic potentially covers many different kinds of courts, considering that the EU comprises many member states, each with its own court system, and the United Kingdom itself is a system of devolved government with different court systems. To draw out some key themes, the chapter focuses on decisions of the EU courts and the UK courts in England and Wales, as well as particularly notable decisions of other EU member state courts (available in English). The different experiences of IEL in these three sets of courts demonstrate that the doctrines of different legal systems and their legal cultures are critical to the experiences of their courts in implementing IEL. The chapter examines the reception and application of IEL in these different courts in two steps. It first looks at cases in which IEL has been directly applied by courts, considering the complex EU law in this area, and the EU's special role in implementing IEL in member states. The chapter then addresses cases where IEL applies indirectly in judicial reasoning.


Author(s):  
Oleksandra Hissа-Ivanovych ◽  
Yana Kybich

Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union is an extraordinary event in the history of the EU and the European continent as a whole. For the first time since the Union’s existence, one of the member states is leaving it. Of course, this situation has caused a significant resonance in the world community, because the question of the consequences that may arise as a result of such an event has become acute. It is clear that Brexit will not only provoke changes in the economic, political and cultural spheres of the relations between the United Kingdom and the European Union, but may also affect relations with third countries, including Ukraine. This article examines the possible effects of Brexit on the further development of the United Kingdom, on the future of the EU in the context of growing Euroscepticism among member states, and on Britain’s and the European Union’s relations with Ukraine as a country that has clearly declared its pro-European position, and strives to become part of the EU by all means.


2021 ◽  
pp. 146511652110001
Author(s):  
Markus Gastinger

Which member states could leave the European Union in the years ahead? To answer this question, I develop the ‘EU Exit Index’ measuring the exit propensities of all European Union member states. The index highlights that the United Kingdom was an outlier and uniquely positioned to leave the European Union. While all other states are far behind the United Kingdom, the index still reveals substantial variation among them. Moreover, the index allows monitoring the development of exit propensities over time. It shows that the European Union is in better shape today than before the Brexit referendum and that, currently, no further exits are on the horizon. Still, this could change in the future and the EU Exit Index provides systematic and reproducible measurements to track this development.


2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (05) ◽  
pp. 160-163
Author(s):  
Sevil Aliheydar Damirli ◽  

As in any community, coexistence and cooperation only works if it is well organized. In the EU, there are EU bodies for this purpose. We all know that living together of different members can often lead to a dispute. In the European Union, the subject of dispute can not only be the violation of primary law, but also the violation of secondary community law. In order to better understand the important role of the Commission in the EU, we examine in this paper its composition and Tasks. We know that the European Union is based on the rule of law. This means that every EU activity is based on treaties that have been accepted by all EU Member States on a voluntary and democratic basis. A contract is a binding agreement between the EU member states. It sets out the objectives of the EU, the rules governing the EU institutions, the decision-making process and relations between the EU and its Member States. Therefore it is important to adhere to these treaties to carry out community policy. According to Art. 258 and 259 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, actions for breach of contract can be filed against a Member State by the EU Commission or another Member State (1, Art.258-259). For the European Commission, as the «Guardian of the Treaties», this option is a particularly important instrument of power politics that it can use against member states' governments that do not recognize or do not comply with the norms of Community law. In practice, the infringement procedures requested by the Commission are of particular importance for ensuring compliance with Community law by the Member States. In no other area does the Commission have so much power and independence against the Member States. Now we should take a closer look at the EU institution and especially the EU Commission.


2006 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 705-717
Author(s):  
Elena Katselli

The Republic of Cyprus became independent on 16 August 1960 with the conclusion of three agreements between Cyprus, Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom: the Treaty of Establishment,1 the Treaty of Guarantee,2 and the Treaty of Alliance.3 Due to limited space, this article will not consider the troubled history of the new Republic the structures of which were literally shattered by an unworkable and dysfunctional Constitution a few years only after its establishment and which eventually led to the Turkish invasion and continuing occupation of one third of its territory.4 Rather, this article intends to focus on recent legal developments provoked by Turkey's refusal to recognize the Republic of Cyprus, a Member State of the United Nations and as from May 2004 a Member of the European Union, in the context of Turkey's own aspirations to become an EU Member State.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document