Contexts of Transnational Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 869-897 ◽  
Author(s):  
Uwe Kischel
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
South America ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
General Level ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Technical Approach ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
Transnational Law

This concluding chapter addresses transnational law. Public international law and European Union law are by no means the only transnational legal orders. There are also smaller transnational systems in South America or Africa which are modeled on European Union law, but which lag far behind in terms of importance and level of sophistication. The context of public international law is marked by a number of features which distinguish it from the various contexts of national law. At a very general level, public international law is characterized by a stronger interweaving of fact and law; heightened importance of politics; and a less technical approach to norms, their text, and their meaning than lawyers may be accustomed to. Meanwhile, European Union law is an independent legal system which, at least in its present, highly-developed form, has much more in common with national legal systems than with public international law.

Regulating Vessel Discharges on the International and EU Level

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 1-81
Author(s):  
Alexander Proelss ◽  
Valentin J. Schatz
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Ballast Water ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Legal Requirements ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
Rules And Principles ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Different Levels

Abstract This study analyzes the legal requirements concerning discharges from ships, a matter that is characterized by a considerable degree of complexity. This complexity results, inter alia, from the highly technical nature of the applicable norms, but also from the fact that the relevant rules and principles are prescribed in a wide and often overlapping variety of instruments on different levels of law, namely public international law, European Union law (where applicable) and domestic law. Taking into account that the individual legal instruments within these sub-systems of law significantly differ in their spatial and substantive scopes and regulatory approaches, a risk of conflicts of norms exists both from a vertical (i.e., between different levels of law) and horizontal (i.e., between different instruments on the same level of law) perspective. This situation gives rise to legal uncertainties, which may ultimately threaten the lawful and effective application and implementation of the relevant norms. This study attempts to clarify the existing uncertainties and to suggest harmonized interpretations and applications of the pertinent rules and principles. It does not address the issue of pollution from ships in general, but focuses on three specific categories of vessel discharges, namely scrubber washwater, sewage and ballast water.

STATE LIABILITY FOR JUDICIAL DECISIONS IN EUROPEAN UNION AND INTERNATIONAL LAW

2012 ◽  
Vol 61 (3) ◽  
pp. 585-611
Author(s):  
Arwel Davies
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Significant Divergence ◽  
State Liability

AbstractAs a consequence of the state unity theory, the conduct of all state organs is attributed to the state in an undifferentiated manner. It follows that, in both international and European Union law, state liability can be based on the substance of judicial decisions despite the independence of the judicial branch. However, beyond the matter of attribution, there is a significant divergence between the two legal systems. In international law, the judicial origin of challenged decisions does not influence the application of liability criteria, whereas, in EU law, the liability criteria can be applied to judicial decisions in a tightened manner. This article has the twofold aim of establishing and explaining this difference.

The Descriptive Value of Legal Monism

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Gragl
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Pure Theory ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
The Real ◽  
Precise Analysis ◽  
Theory Of Law ◽  
Better Than

The aim to defend legal monism requires more than just mere epistemology, as sceptics might argue that monism is incapable of describing the real legal world and the law as it is. Consequently, this part offers a precise analysis as to whether two or more distinct bodies of law blend into a unitary legal order or whether they evade such integration. Thus, it will assess the assumptions of the pure theory of law, and in particular those of legal monism, namely between national law and public international law; and between national law and European Union law. The objective of this assessment is to show whether monism is in fact capable of describing the legal reality as well as or even better than dualism or pluralism.

Two Legal Orders: Divergent or Convergent?

1999 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eileen Denza
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Effective System ◽  
Ec Law ◽  
Treaty Of Amsterdam

The conclusion of the Treaty of Amsterdam and its progress through the ratification procedures of the 15 member States of the European Union provides an occasion to re-examine a familiar question. What is meant by the claim by the European Court of Justice that the European Com-munity Treaties have created “a new legal order of international law”1 or, more radically, “a new legal order”?2 Is EC law to be regarded as a particularly effective system of regional international law, or has it been created as, or mutated into, an entirely new species of law? If there are indeed two legal orders, to what extent are they still capable of cross-fertilisation? What about “European Union law”? Have the Treaty on European Union and now the Treaty of Amsterdam eroded the dichotomy between the two legal orders of public international law and EU law? Is public international law itself taking on some of the characteristics which have made EC law an attractive as well as an effective system for regulating relations between sovereign States? Are the two streams converging?

scholarly journals The EU law and the law of third countries: problems of interaction

2021 ◽  
Vol 118 ◽  
pp. 02003
Author(s):  
Dmitriy Viacheslavovich Galushko ◽  
Natalya Valerievna Oganova ◽  
Andrey Leonidovich Belousov ◽  
Elena Valerievna Grigorovich ◽  
Aleksey Valerievich Sereda
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal System ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Respective State ◽  
The Eu

The article discusses the problems of the interaction process of legal systems of international integration organizations with law of states that are not members of those entities. The research has been conducted on the example of the European Union. The authors conclude that the degree of influence of the international treaties between the EU and third countries on the legal orders of these states differs depending on the level of cooperation between the parties, which is precisely determined by such agreements. The European Union law is the main means of spreading the influence of the European Union on the legal systems of non-member states. Approximation of national legislation with the European Union’s acquis is a consistent process of approximation of the legal system of the state, including legislation, lawmaking, legal technique, law enforcement practice in accordance with the criteria set by the Union. Peculiarities of the legal approximation of law of particular states with law of the European Union are determined by the nature of the relationship between those subjects, by the goals set for such cooperation and fixed in mutual international treaties, as well as by the peculiarities of the state mechanism and the legal system of the respective state. Consequently, regarding European Union – Russia interaction in the field, regulatory engagement can be hardly called as efficient, smooth, and cloudless.

scholarly journals Environmental Law and Public International Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 1159-1184
Author(s):  
Leslie-Anne Duvic-Paoli
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Unit Of Analysis ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
The Status ◽  
Domestic Law

This chapter examines how—and the extent to which—public international law influences domestic environmental law. It first considers the assumption that the domestic–international divide is relevant to understanding current legal processes in the field of environmental governance before exploring the status of international law within domestic systems. In particular, it discusses the theoretical frameworks used to explain how domestic legal systems relate to public international law, including the dualism versus monism dichotomy, and the main transposition techniques used to integrate international law into domestic legal systems. The chapter also describes the effects of international law within domestic law in terms of unit of analysis, types of incidence, and the beneficiaries of these effects. Finally, it looks at factors that influence a state’s approach to the interactions between its legal system relative to environmental protection and public international law.

Effektiver Umweltrechtsschutz in Planungskaskaden

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Langstädtler
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Disposal Site ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Federal Highway ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
Judicial Protection

This treatise examines and compares the remedy in the Federal Highway Act (FStrG), Grid Expansion Acceleration Act (NABEG) as well as in the Determination of a Final Nuclear Disposal Site Act (StandAG) in terms of ensuring an effective remedy to enforce environmental law. Particularly the concentrated remedy in the NABEG proves to be conflictual. There are reasonable doubts whether it guarantees a sufficiently effective judicial protection concerning the enforcement of environmental law. This leads to questions regarding its compatibility with international law (especially the Arhus Convention) and European Union law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document