9. European Union law and institutions

2019 ◽  
pp. 127-140
Author(s):  
Colin Faragher

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the framework and institutions of the European Union. It covers European Union Treaty framework since 1957; sources of EU law and their status after the UK leaves the European Union; the effect of leaving the European Union on the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms; failure to transpose a Directive into national law; the effect of leaving the European Union on the Francovich principle; breach of a Treaty provision by the national legislature; breach of a Treaty provision by the national administration; incorrect transposition of a Directive into national law; liability of judicial acts; the Lisbon Treaty and the procedure for withdrawal from the European Union under Art 50. This chapter also looks at the legislative process of withdrawal from the European Union including the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018.

2021 ◽  
pp. 124-141
Author(s):  
Colin Faragher

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the Treaty framework and sources of EU law as well as the institutions of the EU. It covers the legal background to the UK’s departure from the EU, the legal process through which the UK left the EU, the key provisions of the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (2020), and the European Union (Future Relationship) Act 2020. This chapter also discusses the effect of the UK’s departure from the EU on the status of the sources of EU law and the effect of leaving the EU on the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms as well as failure to transpose a Directive into national law and the effect of leaving the EU on the Francovich principle.


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?


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-52
Author(s):  
Marco Galimberti

Twenty years after its drafting and more than one decade after its entry into force, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has ceased to be part of British law as a consequence of Brexit. Looking into this issue raised by the UK withdrawal from the European Union, the essay sheds some light on the legal status and impact of the EU Bill of Rights in the British legal order. Against this background, the article detects a connection between the UK Supreme Court’s case law and the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the direct effect of the Charter. From this perspective, the analysis highlights the implications of the UK departure from the Charter and disentanglement from the Luxembourg case law, thus arguing that they may weaken the standards of fundamental rights protection.


EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 929-994
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses EU anti-discrimination law, which, over the past decade and a half, has expanded significantly to cover a wide range of grounds and contexts. In addition to requiring equal treatment for women and men, the Treaty provides legislative competence to combat discrimination on a range of grounds. The Charter of Fundamental Rights, which has a chapter devoted to equality, has been incorporated into the EU Treaties. Article 21 of the Charter prohibits discrimination on any ground. Articles 8 and 10 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) contain horizontal clauses requiring the EU to promote equality between men and women, and to combat discrimination based on certain grounds, namely sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, or sexual orientation in all of its policies and activities. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues concerning EU discrimination law and the UK post-Brexit.


Author(s):  
Francisco Javier Donaire Villa

Se analiza en este artículo el primer diálogo judicial directo entre el TC español y el Tribunal de Justicia de la UE, sobre la Euroorden y la interpretación del artículo 53 de la Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales de la UE cuando el nivel nacional de protección de los derechos es superior al dispensado por una norma de Derecho derivado de la Unión. Se ponen de manifiesto las posibles tensiones entre supremacía constitucional y primacía del Derecho de la Unión Europea, y la evocación por el Tribunal Constitucional de su doctrina de los derechos constitucionalmente reconocidos como límites a la integración en la Sentencia que cierra el diálogo con el Tribunal de Justicia en el Asunto Melloni.This paper surveys the first direct judicial dialogue between the Spanish Constitutional Court and the Court of Justice of the European Union on the European Arrest Warrant and the interpretation of Article 53 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU when the national level of protection of rights is higher than that provided by a rule of secondary legislation of the Union. It highlights the possible tensions between constitutional supremacy and primacy of European Union law, and the evocation made by the Constitutional Court of its doctrine on rights constitutionally recognized as limits to the European integration contained in the judgment which closes the dialogue between both Courts within the so-called Melloni case.


Author(s):  
Colin Faragher

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the framework and institutions of the European Union. It covers European Union Treaty framework since 1957; sources of EU law; failure to transpose a Directive into national law; breach of a Treaty provision by the national legislature; breach of a Treaty provision by the national administration; incorrect transposition of a Directive into national law; liability of judicial acts; the Lisbon Treaty and the procedure for withdrawal from the European Union under Article 50.


EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 963-1030
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses EU anti-discrimination law, which, over the past decade and a half, has expanded significantly to cover a wide range of grounds and contexts. In addition to requiring equal treatment for women and men, the Treaty provides legislative competence to combat discrimination on a range of grounds. The Charter of Fundamental Rights, which has a chapter devoted to equality, has been incorporated into the EU Treaties. Article 21 of the Charter prohibits discrimination on any ground. Articles 8 and 10 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) contain horizontal clauses requiring the EU to promote equality between men and women, and to combat discrimination based on certain grounds, namely sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, or sexual orientation in all of its policies and activities. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues concerning EU discrimination law and the UK post-Brexit.


Author(s):  
Paulina Kochańska

This article aims to present the importance of ensuring effective judicial protection in the Member States of the European Union. Within the scope of the study, the substance and content of the rule of law were studied, with particular emphasis of court independence, an important part of the effective judicial protection principle (article 19 TEU and article 47 Charter of Fundamental Rights). The perspective was captured in general, directing the considerations directly towards the principle of effective judicial protection. The legal analysis was carried out in the light of the recent case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, and enriched by the analysis of the EU law doctrine.


Laws ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 19
Author(s):  
Miroslav Baros

The purpose of this article is to assess the impact of the UK government’s response to the Covid-19 outbreak from a human rights perspective, particularly its apparent tension with Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in relation to non-Covid-19 patients whose lives were put at risk by not being able to attend appointments and treatments for pre-existing conditions and illnesses. The UK has also rejected the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union with the European Union Withdrawal Act 2018, which will leave the population even more exposed to potential human rights violations. This seems to be a direct consequence of the narrative and slogan employed by the government: “Stay Home; Protect the NHS; Save Lives”. Other potentially threatened categories, the NHS staff and prisoners are also mentioned in the same context. The latter have already launched a judicial review application along the same lines: Article 2 of the ECHR and the due regard duty stemming from the Equality Act 2010. The NHS staff were directly at risk, and evidence was emerging almost on a daily basis that implied authorities’ responsibility for the shortage of personal protective equipment and testing kits. While there have been a number of discussions on other issues in relation to the lockdown and the strategy directly or indirectly impacting human rights, it appears that no discussion on the impact of the strategy for non-Covid-19 patients and other categories from a human rights perspective has taken place. This gap in analyses and literature merits the present analysis.


2021 ◽  
Vol 115 (4) ◽  
pp. 700-706
Author(s):  
Csongor István Nagy

On October 6, 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) handed down its judgment in Commission v. Hungary. It found that Hungary had violated the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), as well as internal European Union law—specifically the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (EU Charter). The case arose out of Hungary's 2017 amendment to its higher education law. The amendment imposed two novel requirements on foreign universities operating in Hungary. It barred any non-EU university from operating unless its country of origin concluded a specific enabling treaty with Hungary. Moreover, it required that the foreign university actually provide educational services in its country of origin. While framed in general terms, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the 2017 amendment was aimed at ending the operations of the Central European University (CEU) in Hungary.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document