The Impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union on Azerbaijan

2020 ◽  
pp. 220-240
Author(s):  
Azar Aliyev
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Strong Impact ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cooperation Agreement ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
German Model ◽  
The One ◽  
The Impact

The relationship between the EU and Azerbaijan is ambivalent: strong economic cooperation, membership in the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), on the one hand, and differences with regard to human rights issues and tough negotiations on a new Cooperation Agreement, on the other hand. However, many facts are in favour of strong impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) jurisprudence on Azerbaijan. Despite all the tensions, Azerbaijan consistently developed its legal system based on the European, especially German, model. European law is a mandatory course in the largest law faculty of the country. Azerbaijan has positive experience with the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which plays an important role in the development of the legal and court systems of the country. The chapter shows that despite the favourable circumstances, the impact of the CJEU jurisprudence on Azerbaijan remains very limited. It analyses three decisions of the Constitutional Court referencing to CJEU jurisprudence. Furthermore, the author tries to identify the reasons for this by analysing the legal and courts systems, as well as the legal education, and comes up with several proposals on how to make the CJEU jurisprudence more fruitful for Azerbaijan, but also for other neighbouring jurisdictions.

Das Karlsruher PSPP-Urteil – ein Corona-Jahr danach

IG ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-234
Author(s):  
Peter-Christian Müller-Graff
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Reference Procedure ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Future ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Impact

This article scrutinizes the impact of the widely criticized PSPP-judgement of the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) on the Union´s legal order. It shows that the European Commission´s opening of an infringement procedure was inevitable due to the FCC´s disregard of the rules of the preliminary reference procedure, denies the necessity of a modification of the Union´s judicial architecture and develops recommendations for the future loyal cooperation between the FCC and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in handling such disputes.

scholarly journals The Constitutional Court of Romania and European Union Law

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-85
Author(s):  
Dragoş Călin
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Accession ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The One ◽  
Normative Content ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The Constitutional Court of Romania has subjected the introduction of a norm of European Union law into the constitutionality control, as an interposed norm to the standard norm. On the one hand, the norm should be sufficiently clear, precise and unequivocal in itself, or its meaning should have been clearly, precisely and unequivocally established by the Court of Justice of the European Union, and on the other hand it should be circumscribed by a certain level of constitutional relevance, so that its normative content could support the possible breach of the Constitution - the only direct standard norm within the constitutionality control - by national law. However, the experience of the Constitutional Court of Romania over the eight years (2007-2014) since the EU accession, does not seem to be very convincing, irrespective of the way in which European Union law, including the case law of the CJUE has been used: as justifying or circumstantial argument, as a mere reference or in an inadequate context.

The Impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union on Tunisian Judges: Quo Vadis?

2020 ◽  
pp. 320-346
Author(s):  
Béligh Elbalti
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Current Situation ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Quo Vadis ◽  
The One ◽  
The Impact

This chapter examines the question whether the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has exercised an influence on Tunisian judges and the extent of that influence. After explaining the general legal background of Tunisia as a legal system and the attitude of Tunisian judges towards foreign legal sources in general, the chapter explores the available case law of Tunisian courts in order to identify the areas of law where such an influence manifests itself. It shows that, generally speaking, Tunisian judges are quite open to foreign legal sources and frequently cite those sources in their judgments. However, when it comes to the case law of the CJEU, two opposite trends could be identified. On the one hand, the case law of Tunisian ordinary courts shows that the CJEU exercises little influence on Tunisian judges, despite extensive and diversified cooperation between the EU and Tunisia. On the other hand, the case law of the Competition Council shows that the Council is more willing to refer to CJEU decisions in deciding the cases pending before them. The chapter considers several reasons that are likely to explain this double aspect of the influence of the CJEU on Tunisian judges. It argues that the weakness of comparative research, legal education in general, as well as the role played by legal actors in Tunisia are among the main reasons behind the current situation.

scholarly journals The Impact of the Case-Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Field of Public Procurement

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-193
Author(s):  
Albena Ivanova
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Administrative Practice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The One ◽  
The Impact

Abstract The article examines the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union on Public Procurement issues. On the one hand, the paper analyzes the control exercised by the Court in this area while the Member States implement the Public Procurement Directives by transposing them into national law or by administrative practice which is subject to judicial review. The Court's control is executed through the interpretation of provisions and through actions taken by the European Commission against Member States for breaches of EU law in the area of Public Procurement. On the other hand, in the references for a preliminary ruling, the Court of Justice of the EU defines some basic terms, such as 'public procurement' (at Union level), a contractor, a minimum threshold, etc., and affirms the key principles that must be respected for the fulfilment of Public Procurement objectives such as transparency, competition and equal treatment. The article aims to show the contribution of the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union to the development and uniform application of Public Procurement legislation in the Member States and facilitates the functioning of the Internal market

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.

scholarly journals Characteristics of Precedent: The Case Law of the European Court of Justice in Three Dimensions

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1073-1098 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mattias Derlén ◽  
Johan Lindholm
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
The One

AbstractThe case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is one of the most important sources of European Union law. However, case law's role in EU law is not uniform. By empirically studying how the Court uses its own case law as a source of law, we explore the correlation between, on the one hand, the characteristics of a CJEU case—type of action, actors involved, and area of law—and, on the other hand, the judgment's “embeddedness” in previous case law and value as a precedent in subsequent cases. Using this approach, we test, confirm, and debunk existing scholarship concerning the role of CJEU case law as a source of EU law. We offer the following conclusions: that CJEU case law cannot be treated as a single entity; that only a limited number of factors reliably affect a judgment's persuasive or precedential power; that the Court's use of its own case law as a source of law is particularly limited in successful infringement proceedings; that case law is particularly important in preliminary references—especially those concerning fundamental freedoms and competition law; and that initiating Member State and the number of observations affects the behavior of the Court.

Human rights and the rule of law in judicial cooperation in criminal matters under the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement

2021 ◽  
pp. 203228442199593
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Schomburg ◽  
Anna Oehmichen ◽  
Katrin Kayß
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cooperation Agreement ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
The Eu

As human rights have increasingly gained importance at the European Union level, this article examines the remaining scope of human rights protection under the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement. While some international human rights instruments remain applicable, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union did not become part of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA). The consequences, especially the inapplicability of the internationalised ne bis in idem principle, are analysed. Furthermore, the conditionality of the TCA in general as well as the specific conditionality for judicial cooperation in criminal matters are discussed. In this context, the risk that cooperation may cease at any moment if any Member State or the UK leave the European Convention of Human Rights is highlighted. Lastly, the authors raise the problem of the lack of judicial review, as the Court of Justice of the European Union is no longer competent.

scholarly journals Castaño avoids a clash between the ECtHR and the CJEU, but erodes Soering. Thinking human rights transnationally

2020 ◽  
pp. 203228442097974
Author(s):  
Sibel Top ◽  
Paul De Hert
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Union Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
European Union Member States

This article examines the changing balance established by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) between human rights filters to extradition and the obligation to cooperate and how this shift of rationale brought the Court closer to the position of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in that respect. The article argues that the ECtHR initially adopted a position whereby it prioritised human rights concerns over extraditions, but that it later nuanced that approach by establishing, in some cases, an obligation to cooperate to ensure proper respect of human rights. This refinement of its position brought the ECtHR closer to the approach adopted by the CJEU that traditionally put the obligation to cooperate above human rights concerns. In recent years, however, the CJEU also backtracked to some extent from its uncompromising attitude on the obligation to cooperate, which enabled a convergence of the rationales of the two Courts. Although this alignment of the Courts was necessary to mitigate the conflicting obligations of European Union Member States towards both Courts, this article warns against the danger of making too many human rights concessions to cooperation in criminal matters.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document