Legal Maxims: Summaries and Extracts from Selected Case Law

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sébastien Brisard ◽  
Guglielmo Cantillo ◽  
Ramona Grimberger ◽  
Victoria Hanley-Emilsson ◽  
Rebeka Hevesi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Vice President ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Grand Chamber

Council of the European Union v. European Commission, Case C-409/13, Grand Chamber, Judgment, 14 April 2015European Commission v. Vanbreda Risk & Benefits, Case C‑35/15 P(R), Order of the Vice-President of the Court, 23 April 2015Geoffrey Léger v. Ministre des Affaires sociales, de la Santé et des Droits des femmes, Établissement français du sang...

scholarly journals The Recognition of Professional Qualifi cations in the European Union The Practice of Administration and European Courts – The Ski Instructor Example

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-115
Author(s):  
Stanisław Lipiec
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Recognition System ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Administrative Practices ◽  
Legislative Proposals ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Cation Recognition

The case of the English ski instructor Simon Butler working in France is the best example of the malfunctioning of the professional-qualifi cationsrecognition system in Europe. The practice of European and national administration as well as the jurisprudence of the CJEU and French courts shows how important and complex the subject of qualifi cation recognition is. A review of administrative practices and an analysis of case law show the positive and negative sides of the EU’s qualifi cation recognition system. The European Commission is carrying out numerous activities aimed at improving said system. The latest solutions make the idea of qualifi cation without borders a reality. The most important task is to examine the changes and legislative proposals of the European Union, analyse the case of Simon Butler and present proposals for changes against the background of activities undertaken throughout the Union. They should be realised through legal research methods and non-reactive social methods.

11. Free movement of goods II: non-tariff barriers

2020 ◽  
pp. 287-318
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods

This chapter examines European Union (EU) law concerning non-tariff barriers to free movement of goods. It describes member states’ attempts to influence imports and the way the European Commission and the European Court of Justice (CoJ) handled these issues. This chapter explains the provisions of the relevant legislation for non-tariff barriers, which include Articles 34, 36, and 35 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). It also analyses example cases including ‘Dassonville’, ‘Cassis de Dijon’, and post ‘Keck’ case law. It concludes with a consideration of the latest trend of cases concerning product use and residual rules.

Long Awaited Guidance on the Meaning of “Regulatory Act” for Locus Standi Under the Lisbon Treaty

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-122
Author(s):  
Camilla Buchanan
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
The European Union ◽  
General Application ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Legal Standing ◽  
The Eu

Case T-262/20 Microban International Ltd and Microban (Europe) Ltd v. CommissionThe conditions for bringing direct actions before the EU General Court have been opened under Article 263, fourth paragraph, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”) through the introduction of less restrictive rules on legal standing for private applicants challenging regulatory acts. The term “regulatory act” covers all acts of general application apart from legislative acts and includes implementing measures adopted by the European Commission under the comitology procedure. Initial case law provides welcome guidance on the application of the new rules on standing but questions still remain (author's headnote).

scholarly journals Commitment Decisions: Is the Sky the Limit? - Commentary to Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 15 September 2016, Case T-76/14, Morningstar, Inc. v European Commission

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-212
Author(s):  
Rita Leandro Vasconcelos
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Article 9 ◽  
Abuse Of Dominant Position ◽  
Limited Scope

In its judgment of 15 September 2016, the General Court ruled on whether the commitments offered by Thompson Reuters to the European Commission during an investigation of a possible abuse of dominant position were sufficient to address the competition concerns identified by the Commission. This is only the second time the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on Commission decisions rendering binding the commitments offered by an undertaking Article 9 of Regulation 1/2003. With regard to standing, the General Court ruled the appeal lodged by a competitor admissible. As for substance, the General Court generally confirmed the previous case law. It ruled on the commitments meet the competition concerns identified by the institution, the different proportionality standard in Article 9 decisions as compared to Article 7 Regulation 1/2003 decisions (formal decision finding an infringement), and the limited scope of judicial review of the Court of Justice of the European Union in these appeals.

Legal Maxims: Summaries and Extracts from Selected Case Law

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico Bianchi ◽  
Sébastien Brisard ◽  
Guglielmo Cantillo ◽  
Eirini Pantelodimou ◽  
Carmine Renzulli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union

Abdulbasit Abdulrahim v. Council of the European Union and European Commission, Case T-127/09, Third Chamber, Judgment, 14 January 2015Royaume d’Espagne c. Commission européenne, Affaire T-204/11, Arrêt, Quatrième Chambre, 11 Février 2015République française c. Commission européenne, Affaire T-135/12, Neuvième chambre, Arrêt, 26 Février 2015...

scholarly journals The regulation of collaborative economy in the european union

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-53
Author(s):  
Nuno Cunha Rodrigues
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Sharing Economy ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Specific Regulation

The paper distinguishes between sharing economy and collaborative economy, focusing on the legal framework of collaborative platforms (such as Uber or Airbnb) according to EU law. Case-law from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the position of the European Commission are analyzed in this regard. It is concluded that there is no harmonization, within the European Union, of the legal regime applicable to certain collaborative platforms. As such, specific regulation of collaborative platforms has followed different paths within the Member States.

scholarly journals Enlarging the Immunities of European Parliament’s Members: The Junqueras Judgment

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-101
Author(s):  
Victor Torre de Silva
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Members Of Parliament ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
Members Of European Parliament

AbstractMembers of Parliament have traditionally enjoyed different kinds of immunities; nowadays, these are openly criticized on several grounds. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has recently given a judgment on the inviolability of European Parliament’s members, which might be regarded as a milestone in its scarce case law on the matter: Oriol Junqueras Vies, Judgment of the Grand Chamber of December 19, 2019. This Article intends to summarize and comment on this decision, a preliminary reference requested by the Spanish Supreme Court in a notorious criminal procedure, connected with the suspended referendum on Catalonia’s independence. The CJEU reinforces the inviolability of Members of European Parliament (MEPs), thus strengthening the powers of this institution. However, the judgment perhaps fails to fully capture European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case law and was rendered at a time when the controversy on Mr. Junqueras had arguably become outdated.

scholarly journals The horizontal impact of the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights in accordance with the sentencing guidelines of the European Court of Justice

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 21-34
Author(s):  
Anna Moskal ◽  
Jakub Kozłowski
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Sentencing Guidelines ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Grand Chamber

One of the biggest challenges of European law is balancing the relations between the Member States and the European Union. An especially interesting aspect of this issue is the horizontal impact of the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights. The authors of the article will reconstruct the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which precisely settles problems related to this issue. Various examples will be examined, ranging from the renowned judgment of the Grand Chamber of the Court in Case C-617/10 Åklagaren v. Hans Åkerberg Fransson to the most recent judgment of the Grand Chamber of the Court in Joined Cases C-569/16 and C-570/16 Stadt Wuppertal v. Maria Elisabeth Bauer and Volker Willmeroth v. Martin Broßonn. The authors will also evaluate the settled case law using a holistic perspective on the whole system of European law and its principles. Horyzontalny skutek oddziaływania Karty Praw Podstawowych Unii Europejskiej w linii orzeczniczej Trybunalu Sprawiedliwosci UEJednym z największych wyzwań prawa europejskiego jest uzyskanie balansu między systemami prawnymi poszczególnych państw członkowskich a systemem Unii Europejskiej. Zagadnieniem, które jawi się jako niezwykle interesujące w tym kontekście, jest horyzontalny skutek oddziaływania Karty Praw Podstawowych Unii Europejskiej. Autorzy artykułu dokonali rekonstrukcji linii orzeczniczej Trybunału Sprawiedliwości UE, które w sposób konsekwentny rozwija wykładnię tej problematyki — od legendarnego już wyroku wielkiej izby Trybunału w sprawie C-617/10 Åklagaren przeciwko Hansowi Åkerbergowi Franssonowi po najnowszy w badanym zakresie wyrok wielkiej izby Trybunału w sprawach połączonych C‑569/16 i C‑570/16 Stadt Wuppertal przeciwko Marii Elisabeth Bauer oraz Volker Willmeroth przeciwko Martinie Broßonn. Autorzy podjęli się także ewaluacji dotychczasowej linii orzeczniczej w sposób holistyczny, biorąc pod uwagę czynniki wynikające z całego systemu prawnego UE oraz jej zasad i wartości.

Legal Maxims: Summaries and Extracts from Selected Case Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 565-590
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union

Michael Efler and Others v. European Commission, Case T-754/14, First Chamber, Judgment, 10 May 2017 Mohamed Marouen Ben Ali Ben Mohamed Mabrouk v. Council of the European Union, Case T-175/15, Fifth Chamber, Judgment, 5 October 2017 Marine Harvest ASA v. European Commission, Case T-704/14, Fifth Chamber, Judgment, 26 October 2017...

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document