scholarly journals The International Dimension of EMU: The Interplay Between the Global Financial Stability Architecture and the European Union

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shawn Donnelly ◽  
Ramses Wessel
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Financial Institutions ◽  
Financial Stability ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
External Influence ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Primary Method ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

It is a truism that the European Union’s self-proclaimed autonomy may be a helpful concept in legal terms–primary to preserve the monopoly of the European Court of Justice to interpret European Union (EU) law–but it is equally clear that the EU is to a large extent influenced by the decisions and policies of other international institutions. The present chapter aims to assess this external influence in relation to a specific, but core dimension of the EU, the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). More specifically, we will assess the influence of what these days is known as the Global Financial Stability Architecture (GFSA), on the EMU. As will be further explained below, the GFSA is a network of the key global financial institutions that collect data, conduct research, provide insight and propose rules of conduct for the financial sector. Its mission is to rethink (global) macroeconomic policy to make economies more resilient–how to steer the economy clear of risks that could lead it to collapse; how to deal with real-time crises; and how to initiate recovery. Its primary method is to find out how differing components of financial markets act and react to one another, and to propose prudential regulation that shapes the behaviour of private financial service providers, of governments and of central banks.

scholarly journals The European Court of Justice and the Policy Process

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susanne K. Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Administrative Practices ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

The European Court of Justice is one of the most important actors in the process of European integration. Political science still struggles to understand its significance, with recent scholarship emphasizing how closely rulings reflect member states’ preferences. In this book, I argue that the implications of the supremacy and direct effect of the EU law have still been overlooked. As it constitutionalizes an intergovernmental treaty, the European Union has a detailed set of policies inscribed into its constitution that are extensively shaped by the Court’s case law. If rulings have constitutional status, their impact is considerable, even if the Court only occasionally diverts from member states’ preferences. By focusing on the four freedoms of goods, services, persons, and capital, as well as citizenship rights, the book analyses how the Court’s development of case law has ascribed a broad meaning to these freedoms. The constitutional status of this case law constrains policymaking at the European and member-state levels. Different case studies show how major pieces of EU legislation cannot move beyond case law but have to codify its principles. Judicialization is important in the EU. It also directly constrains member-state policies. Court rulings oriented towards individual disputes are difficult to translate into general policies, and into administrative practices. Policy options are thereby withdrawn from majoritarian decision-making. As the Court cannot be overruled, short of a Treaty change, its case law casts a long shadow over policymaking in the European Union and its member states, undermining the legitimacy of this political order.

scholarly journals The Political Role of the European Court of Justice: How the EU Institutional Thresholds Shield the Integrationist Power of the Court

2019 ◽  
pp. 195-212
Author(s):  
Roberto Reyes Izquierdo
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Role ◽  
Fundamental Factor ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

The aim of this paper is to analyse how the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has been a fundamental factor in the integration process of the European Union, in spite of the obstacles posed by the intergovernmental dynamics that have traditionally hindered the construction of a stronger, cohesive and more integrated Europe. Important principles such as direct effect or supremacy of EU law have been developed through ECJ rulings and case law, even when such principles were not literally foreseen in the foundational Treaties. Therefore, this paper argues that the role and power of the Court as an “indirect law-maker” have been essential for the construction of the European Union, and this has been possible due to the complexities and weaknesses of the legislative process involving the three main decision-makers: the Commission, the Council of the EU, and the European Parliament.

Treaty-making Procedures

2021 ◽  
pp. 57-100
Author(s):  
Jan Wouters ◽  
Frank Hoffmeister ◽  
Geert De Baere ◽  
Thomas Ramopoulos
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Historical Evolution ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Provisional Application ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Important System ◽  
The Eu

This chapter provides an overview of the treaty-making procedures in the European Union. It explains the historical evolution of primary law in the field and gives examples for each step under Article 218 TFEU (negotiation, signature, provisional application, and conclusion). Excerpts of European Court of Justice (ECJ) case law illustrate how these provisions are interpreted and applied in practice. The chapter also discusses the principles covering suspension and termination of EU agreements, and the ever more important system that allows the EU to contribute to the adoption of international secondary law under Article 218, paragraph 9 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). A final section describes EU practice for adopting non-legally binding instruments and reproduces the new guidance of December 2017 issued by the Council and the Commission in this respect after the ECJ’s judgment in the case relating to the EU–Swiss Memorandum of Understanding.

Negotiating Turkey's Membership to the European Union. Can the Member States Do As They Please?

2007 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 269-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christophe Hillion
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
European Union Enlargement ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

Limits to member states' discretion in European Union enlargement negotiations – Changing the fundamentals of the EU constitutional order through the conclusion of accession treaties – The case of Turkey – Caveats, precautions and fallback strategies in the ‘Negotiating Framework for Turkey’ – Enforcing the limits to member states' discretion in European Union enlargement negotiations – The jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice before ratification and after entry into force.

scholarly journals The Untouchable Nature of the ‘EU Seal Regime’—Is the European Union Liable for the Damages Suffered by the Canadian Inuit Due to the Violation of WTO Law in EC—Seal Products?

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 403-414
Author(s):  
Martin Hennig
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Economic Damage ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Current State ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

Abstract In this article, the author assesses whether Canadian Inuit sealers, who have suffered economic damage in the wake of the introduction of the European Union (EU) ban on seal products, can bring an action for damages against the EU before the European Court of Justice. The author reviews why the EU ban on seal hunting violates World Trade Office (WTO) law and discusses if, and why, Canadian Inuit sealers can rely on a violation of the WTO Agreements as a legal basis in a potential claim for damages under EU law. Moreover, the author criticizes the current state of EU law, which does not grant reparation of the economic damage suffered by indigenous communities when carrying out their traditional seal hunts that are protected under UN human rights law.

4. Sources and forms of EU law

2020 ◽  
pp. 100-130
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal System ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the forms and sources of European Union (EU) law. It describes the nature of the EU legal system and discusses the classification of various elements of EU law, which include institutional laws, procedural laws, and substantive laws. It explains that the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) are the principal sources of law for the Union. Other sources include regulations, Directives, procedural requirements, and international agreements and conventions. This chapter also discusses the contribution of the European Court of Justice (CJEU) to the sources of EU law.

4. Sources and forms of EU law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal System ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the forms and sources of European Union (EU) law. It describes the nature of the EU legal system and discusses the classification of various elements of EU law, which include institutional laws, procedural laws, and substantive laws. It explains that the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) are the principal sources of law for the Union. Other sources include regulations, Directives, procedural requirements, and international agreements and conventions. This chapter also discusses the contribution of the European Court of Justice (CoJ) to the sources of EU law.

Fighting for Authority: Strategic Actions of National High Courts in the European Union

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2-2019) ◽  
pp. 419-433
Author(s):  
Stefanie Vedder
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Principal Agent Theory ◽  
Strategic Actions ◽  
High Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Lower Courts

National high courts in the European Union (EU) are constantly challenged: the European Court of Justice (ECJ) claims the authority to declare national standing interpretations invalid should it find them incompatible with its views on EU law. This principle noticeably impairs the formerly undisputed sovereignty of national high courts. In addition, preliminary references empower lower courts to question interpretations established by their national ‘superiors’. Assuming that courts want to protect their own interests, the article presumes that national high courts develop strategies to elude the breach of their standing interpretations. Building on principal-agent theory, the article proposes that national high courts can use the level of (im-) precision in the wording of the ECJ’s judgements to continue applying their own interpretations. The article develops theoretical strategies for national high courts in their struggle for authority.

A Constitutional Court for Europe?

2004 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 1-34
Author(s):  
Anthony Arnull
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
European Council ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
Draft Constitution

The purpose of this article is to consider the effect of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe on the European Court of Justice (ECJ). At the time of writing, the future of the draft Constitution is somewhat uncertain. Having been finalised by the Convention on the Future of Europe in the summer of 2003 and submitted to the then President of the European Council, it formed the basis for discussion at an intergovernmental conference (IGC) which opened in October 2003. Hopes that the text might be finalised by the end of the year were dashed when a meeting of the IGC in Brussels in December 2003 ended prematurely amid disagreement over the weighting of votes in the Council. However, it seems likely that a treaty equipping the European Union with a Constitution based on the Convention’s draft will in due course be adopted and that the provisions of the draft dealing with the ECJ will not be changed significantly. Even if either assumption proves misplaced, those provisions will remain of interest as reflecting one view of the position the ECJ might occupy in a constitutional order of the Union.

‘Losing Leverage’ in the Neighbourhood: A Cognitive Frame Analysis of the European Union Migration Policy

2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 302-323
Author(s):  
Jyri J. Jäntti ◽  
Benjamin Klasche
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
Burden Sharing ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cognitive Frames ◽  
Playing Field ◽  
Power Shift ◽  
Security Problem ◽  
The Eu

The European Union (EU)–Turkey deal consolidated a shift in the EU’s migration policy. The deal is the culmination of the dominance of the security frame and depicts the continuous externalization of the EU’s responsibility of asylum protection and burden sharing. The strengthening of the security frame has weakened the humanitarian norms that previously dictated EU’s behaviour. This has led to the EU losing some of its comparative advantages in negotiations. Simultaneously, the instrumentalization of the value of asylum, paired with an increased number of asylum seekers, has given negotiation leverage to the neighbouring countries turned service providers. These changes in perception and norms have created a power shift, at the disadvantage of the EU, creating a more leveled playing field for negotiations between the parties. This article tracks the historical shifts in the global refugee regime to explain how today’s situation was created. Hereby, the existence of two competing cognitive frames—humanitarian and security—is assumed, tracked and analysed. While looking at the EU–Turkey deal, the article shows that the EU has started treating refugees as a security problem rather than a humanitarian issue, breaking the normative fabric of the refugee regime in the process. The article also displays how Turkey was able to capitalise on this new reality and engage with negotiations of other neighbouring countries of EU that point towards a change of dynamics in the global refugee regime.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document