Scope Limitations

2020 ◽  
pp. 68-111
Author(s):  
Stavroula Karapapa
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Original Work ◽  
Innovative Activity ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Digital Goods ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
New Public ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Practical Sense

Copyright is not infringed in instances where the defendant’s activity falls outside the scope of exclusive rights. This is likely to be the case when the factual background of an alleged infringement does not meet the statutory prerequisites of a restricted act, for instance, when taking from an original work has not been such to amount to an act reserved by copyright, and hence falls beyond the scope of exclusive rights. As the Court of Justice of the European Union has affirmed in numerous cases, copyright protection is not absolute and exclusive rights are subject to a variety of internal limits that can serve as the basis of defensive claims in a practical sense. For instance, the court has indicated that exclusive rights are subject to internal scope limitations, some of which are relevant in the context of new technological uses. Hyperlinks, for example, do not infringe copyright when they are not addressed to a ‘new’ public, namely an audience that the rightsholders did not have in mind while making the work available online. Another example is the exhaustion principle, according to which the first authorized sale of content exhausts the authorial entitlement to further distributions. This principle is available in the online context only in relation to the resale of software, and this hinders innovative activity through the creation of electronic marketplaces for digital goods. Subject to examination in this chapter are the statutory and doctrinal limitations that inherently limit the scope of rights and remain outside the spectrum of proprietary entitlements.

scholarly journals The European arrest warrant in the case law of the Court of Justice

2014 ◽  
pp. 61-80
Author(s):  
Helena Patricio
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Framework Decision ◽  
European Area ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Impact

A key factor in the creation of a European area of freedom, security and justice is the principle of mutual recognition, which the Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002, for the first time, comprehensively implemented in the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters. The Court of Justice of the European Union has greatly contributed to the understanding of the Framework Decision, accentuating its goals and enhancing its guiding principles, which are the mutual recognition of judgments in the different Member States of the European Union and mutual trust that should settle among them, for the creation of the said area. The West judgment of 28 June 2012, C-192/12 PPU, on urgent preliminary ruling procedure, aptly illustrates the impact of this case law, highlighting the role of this procedure, implemented on 1 March 2008.

7. The Court of Justice: European integration and judicial institutions

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niamh Nic Shuibhne
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Euro Crisis ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Appointments ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Structure And Functions ◽  
Practical Sense

This chapter considers the structure and functions of the Court of Justice of the European Union. It first traces the history and development of the European Court of Justice before discussing its structure and functions. In particular, it describes the composition of the Court, judicial appointments, what the Court does, enforcement proceedings, actions for judicial review, and the preliminary rulings procedure. The chapter goes on to explain how the Court works in a practical sense by focusing on its judicial chambers. It also examines the wider political environment in which the Court operates, such as its role in addressing the regulatory steps taken to manage the ongoing euro crisis or the issue of EU citizenship in relation to free movement rights. The chapter also offers some reflections on the nature and influence of the Court and concludes by analysing its relationship with the European Court of Human Rights.

The Impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the Legal System of Ukraine

2019 ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
ROMAN PETROV
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal System ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Impact

У статті досліджено вплив Суду Європейського Союзу (ЄС) на впровадження і застосування Угоди про асоціацію між Україною та ЄС, що викликало безпрецедентні політичні, економічні та правові реформи в Україні. Зокрема, розглядаються конституційні виклики, які постали перед державою під час виконання Угоди в правовій системі. Крім того, досліджено два питання. Перше – ефективне впровадження та застосування Угоди про асоціацію між Україною та ЄС в українській правовій системі. Друге – сумісність і відповідність Угоди Конституції України. Проаналізовано останні політичні та правові події в Україні через призму ефективної реалізації Угоди про асоціацію між Україною та ЄС і зростання проєвропейського правового активізму в державі. На закінчення стверджується, що Угода про асоціацію між Україною та ЄС посилює пристосованість національного конституційного устрою до цілей досягнення європейської інтеграції та застосування європейських спільних цінностей в Україні. Угода про асоціацію між Україною та ЄС створила стійку інституційну та правову основу для застосування acquis ЄС (правового доробку ЄС), включаючи прецедентне право ЄС та комплексне законодавче наближення між законодавством України та ЄС. Однак інституційні реформи, які вже відбулися, не можна вважати цілком достатніми. Верховній Раді України не вдалося запровадити основні та процедурні засади для застосування та впровадження Угоди в правовий порядок України. Однак ця прогалина частково заповнюється зростаючим судовим активізмом в Україні. Вітчизняні судді вже почали посилатися на Угоду про асоціацію між Україною та ЄС і відповідні частини acquis ЄС у своїх рішеннях, тим самим закладаючи основу для регулярного застосування загальних принципів права ЄС у процесі виконання й імплементації Угоди про асоціацію між Україною та ЄС.

Institutional organisation of the European Union in the time of crisis – horizontal division of power and functions

2016 ◽  
pp. 54-66
Author(s):  
Monika Poboży
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
European Council ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Strong Position ◽  
Institutional System ◽  
The Eu

The article poses a question about the existence of the rule of separation of powers in the EU institutional system, as it is suggested by the wording of the treaties. The analysis led to the conclusion, that in the EU institutional system there are three separated functions (powers) assigned to different institutions. The Council and the European Parliament are legislative powers, the Commission and the European Council create a “divided executive”. The Court of Justice is a judicial power. The above mentioned institutions gained strong position within their main functions (legislative, executive, judicial), but the proper mechanisms of checks and balances have not been developed, especially in the relations between legislative and executive power. These powers do not limit one another in the EU system. In the EU there are therefore three separated but arbitrary powers – because they do not limit and balance one another, and are not fully controlled by the member states.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document