20. Free movement of payments and capital

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorna Woods ◽  
Philippa Watson ◽  
Marios Costa
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Financial Crisis ◽  
Monetary Union ◽  
The Other ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Free Movement Of Capital

This chapter examines the rules concerning free movement of payment and capital within the European Union provided in Articles 63–6 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). It explains the scope of and exceptions to the free movement of capital. The chapter also considers restrictions on free movement of capital between Member States and third countries. It highlights the willingness of the Court of Justice (CJ) to borrow principles from the other freedoms. This chapter also considers briefly the provisions relating to monetary union and the developments in the light of the financial crisis.

18. Free movement of payments and capital

2020 ◽  
pp. 417-435
Author(s):  
Marios Costa ◽  
Steve Peers
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Financial Crisis ◽  
The Other ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Rule Of Reason ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Economic Union ◽  
Free Movement Of Capital

This chapter examines the rules concerning free movement of payment and capital within the European Union provided in Articles 63, 64, 65 and 66 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). It explains the scope of and derogations to the free movement of capital. The chapter also considers restrictions on free movement of capital between Member States and third countries. It highlights the willingness of the Court of Justice (CJ) to borrow principles (i.e. rule of reason) from the other freedoms. This chapter also considers briefly the provisions relating to monetary and economic union and the developments in the light of the financial crisis.

Recent Golden Share Cases in the Jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1099-1130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamás Szabados
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Freedom Of Establishment ◽  
Member States ◽  
Golden Share ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Special Rights ◽  
Free Movement Of Capital

AbstractIn several golden share cases, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the “Court”) condemned Member States for reserving certain special rights in privatized companies for themselves. In spite of the Court's consistently strict approach in the golden share cases, the more recent golden share judgments demonstrate that the Court's practice is not free from uncertainties. In its case law, the Court seems to hesitate between the application of the freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital. Additionally, it is not entirely clear which measures are caught by provisions on the freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital.

scholarly journals Obrót nieruchomościami rolnymi w świetle traktatowej swobody przepływu kapitału – rozważania na gruncie orzecznictwa Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej

2020 ◽  
pp. 37-46
Author(s):  
Beata Włodarczyk
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
National Level ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
General Interest ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Free Movement Of Capital

The aim of the article is to outline the legal issues of trading in agricultural property in the European Union, which is entirely subject to basic treaty rules. The free movement of capital, regulated in Article 63 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, is of particular importance in relation to cross-border operations connected with trading in agricultural property. Therefore the legislation in force and applicable in EU Member States should ensure that citizens of other Member States have the possibility of exercising this freedom. However, the free movement of capital is not absolute. In the light of the established case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, regulations limiting free movement of capital may be introduced at national level, provided that they pursue general interest objectives and comply with the principles of proportionality and non-discrimination.

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.

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.

The Concept of ‘Worker’ in the Free Movement of Workers and the Social Policy Directives: Perspectives from the Case Law of the Court of Justice

2020 ◽  
pp. 203195252094533
Author(s):  
Vincent Février
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Social Policy ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Social ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
Free Movement Of Workers

The Concept of worker is the gateway to the access to the protection of labour and social security law. The Court of Justice of the European Union first defined this concept in the field of the Free Movement of Workers in the Lawrie-Blum case. The scope of this article is to compare the definitions used by the Court in the fields of the free movement of workers and in the Social Policy Directives, in order to ascertain to which extent they can differ. Our in-depth analysis of the case law offers a nuanced picture. On one hand, it highlights that the Court tries to extend the application of the Lawrie-Blum formula to Directives which do not refer back to the national definitions of a worker, but that specificities remain in this area, like the emphasis on the link of subordination. On the other hand, for Directives referring to a national concept of workers, the Court began recently to state that, even if the competence of the Member States on this question must be acknowledged, it is not limitless.

scholarly journals Wykładnia umowy jurysdykcyjnej zawartej na podstawie art. 25 Rozporządzenia Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady (UE) Nr 1215/2012. Glosa do postanowienia Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 5 października 2018 r., I CSK 611/17

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 123-137
Author(s):  
Andrzej Torbus
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
The Other ◽  
Main Argument ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Law ◽  
Formal Requirements

The choice of court agreement (forum selection clause) is effectively concluded if there is no doubt that the party has actually become acquainted with its content. The Court of Justice of the European Union focuses on those aspects of the conclusion of the contract that allow the assessment that the other party is not surprised by the establishment of a subjective link. The compliance with formal requirements implies that the parties agreed on the conclusion of the contract. There are no objections about so understood “real consent of the parties” as a consequence of fulfilling not only the requirements as to the form, but above all as the way of the conclusion of the contract. The acceptance of the thesis that since the party expressed the undoubted consent to conclude the contract, there is thus no problem of the interpretation of the declaration of intent, is impossible. There is no dispute that the interpretation of a declaration of intent is a legal matter,since the methods of interpretation are determined by the law. According to the Polish Supreme Court, on the basis of Regulation 1215/2012 there is no problem of seeking of the applicable law, because the rules for the interpretation of a jurisdictional agreement should be interpreted from the provision of art. 25 of this regulation. This position is based on the main argument that any deviation from the autonomous rules of interpretation creates the danger that the courts of the Member States will differently determine the law applicable. The Court of Justice of the European Union accepts that an objective (normative) method of interpreting party’s statements should be used. In some situations, it is necessary to apply legis causae to effectuate a supplementary interpretation of the declarations of will.

scholarly journals Unveiling the overlooked freedom – the context of free movement of capital and payments in the EU law

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-145
Author(s):  
Ondrej Hamuľák
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Slow Release ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Treaty Provision ◽  
Free Movement Of Capital ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Free movement of capital and payments represents the youngest of the freedoms within the single internal market of the European Union. Th e title “youngest” points on the very slow release of capital markets within the European Community and the European Union which leads to the tardy development of this freedom. It is young also from the view of the legal effects because it was the last of the freedom where direct effect of basal Treaty provision was accepted by the Court of Justice. In the heading of this article I awarded the forth freedom with the adjective “overlooked” which is clearly my subjective opinion on the approach of the EU law scholars to this part of the internal market law. In the most of the substantive textbooks and casebooks we may find only marginal space devoted to this field, especially in comparison with the other market freedoms. My objective is to off er and general introductive insight to this area and to certain extent cover the emerging gap.

Article 265 TFEU

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernhard Schima
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Central Bank ◽  
European Central Bank ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
The Other ◽  
European Council ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Central ◽  
Court Of Justice

Article 232 EC Should the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the Commission or the European Central Bank, in infringement of the Treaties, fail to act, the Member States and the other institutions of the Union may bring an action before the Court of Justice of the European Union to have the infringement established. This Article shall apply, under the same conditions, to bodies, offices and agencies of the Union which fail to act.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document