The Constitutional Price for International Unilateralism in the European Banking Union

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 ◽  
pp. 320-360
Author(s):  
Adrian Dumitrescu-Pasecinic
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Institutional Framework ◽  
Voluntary Action ◽  
Banking Union ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
European Banking Union ◽  
The Eu

Abstract In order to enter the Banking Union, non-euro EU Member States must ‘step outside’ the EU legal order and the Union’s institutional framework, and resort to unilateral instruments of public international law. If the intergovernmental method has advanced the alternative project of integration based on voluntary policy, international unilateralism is seen as a similar integration technique based on the voluntary action of non-euro Member States, ie a tool for deeper integration that appears as a variation of intergovernmentalism. This article focuses on the constitutional deficiencies caused by the choice of unilateral instruments in the institutional set-up of a close cooperation arrangement in the Single Supervisory Mechanism. At first sight, leaving the EU legal order and entering the world of international law opens entirely new perspectives for the participating Member States. The possible attraction is escaping the constraining institutional framework of EU law. However, the international law route poses significant constitutional challenges vis-à-vis compatibility with the EU law.

The Jurisprudence of Integration

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Pavlos Eleftheriadis
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Effective Response ◽  
Member States ◽  
Political Problem ◽  
Political Interpretation ◽  
The Eu

This chapter introduces the central legal and political interpretations of the European Union (EU). The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) suggests a federalist legal account when it speaks of EU law as a ‘new legal order’ and as ‘autonomous’ from international law and the law of the member states. This doctrine has met with resistance by the courts of the member states, which have refused to apply EU law without reference to their domestic constitution. The courts’ views can be seen as either a ‘constitutional’ approach, which we find in Neil MacCormick’s ‘pluralism’ under international law, or in the ‘pluralism’ defended by Mattias Kumm, Neil Walker, and others. But the general legal architecture of the EU is not only a theoretical but also a political problem. These legal interpretations correspond to rival political approaches, namely ‘federalism’, ‘statism’, and a new view proposed in this book ‘internationalism’. The most challenging political view of the EU, articulated for example by the historian Noel Malcolm, believes that it is actually a serious risk to self-government and democracy. Any legal and political interpretation of the treaties supporting the legitimacy of the EU requires that we have an effective response to this democratic challenge. Can the EU be democratically legitimate?

Treaties between EU Member States as Quasi-Instruments of EU Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno De Witte ◽  
Thibault Martinelli
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Close Connection ◽  
Euro Crisis ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

This chapter deals with legal instruments that formally speaking are not EU legal acts, but whose function is so intimately linked to the EU legal order that they can be called ‘quasi-instruments of EU law’. These are treaties concluded between all of the EU Member States (complementary agreements) or between only a selected number of them (partial agreements), in close connection with the operation of the European Union. Such international ‘side agreements’ have lately become rather prominent and controversial, particularly in the context of the euro crisis. The chapter discusses the variety of reasons for the adoption of those instruments, as well as the questions of legitimacy and compatibility with EU law which they raise.

Resolving Perceived Norm Conflict through Principles of Treaty Interpretation: The January 2019 EU Member States’ Declarations

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-195
Author(s):  
Samantha J. Rowe ◽  
Nelson Goh
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Valid Consent ◽  
Energy Charter Treaty ◽  
Treaty Interpretation ◽  
The Eu

In January 2019, EU Member States issued three declarations concerning the “consequences of Achmea” which stated that all claims under intra- EU BIT S were contrary to the EU legal order, and that tribunals presiding over such claims have no jurisdiction as there is no valid consent to arbitrate. The declaration signed by a majority of EU Member States (“Majority Declaration”) extended this proposition to intra- EU claims under the Energy Charter Treaty. Following this, a number of EU Member States have sought to argue that the Majority Declaration is a subsequent agreement between the States Parties to intra- EU investment treaties—or evidence of a subsequent practice establishing their agreement—that the dispute resolution provisions in those treaties must be interpreted to exclude intra- EU disputes from their scope and thus from the jurisdiction of tribunals constituted thereunder, relying on Article 31(3)(a) and (b) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (“VCLT”). This paper considers: (i) the key cases in which the Majority Declaration has been invoked to contest jurisdiction in, or seek the termination of, intra- EU arbitration proceedings; (ii) the application of Article 31(3)(a) and (b) of the VCLT; and (iii) other fundamental tenets and rules of international law discussed in relation to those cases.

scholarly journals INTERNATIONAL LAW ASPECTS OF GERMAN COPYRIGHT LAW (GCL)

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 93-98
Author(s):  
Юрий Юмашев ◽  
Yuriy Yumashev ◽  
Елена Постникова ◽  
Elena Postnikova
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
World Intellectual Property Organization ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

The article deals with international law aspects of the GCL. To this aim firstly the international conventions on copyright law are analyzed, in particular: the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works in the wording of the Paris Act of 1971, the Convention on the Establishment of the World Intellectual Property Organization of 1967, the Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organizations of 1961 and Aspects of intellectual property rights (TRIPS) 1994. There is also an analysis of the EU copyright law in terms of its correlation with the law of the EU member-states and an assessment of its evolution. It is emphasized that the core fact of origin of authorship is determined on the basis of the national legislation of the Member-States. Special attention is paid to the scope of the “principle of exhausted rights”. The article also touches upon the aspect of private international law. Particular attention is paid to the legal regulation of the Internet, including Internet providers, and its impact on the formation of the GCL. The problem of combating Internet piracy is also raised, as copyright infringement often occurs in relation to works published online. In addition, the article revealed what changes were made to the GCL to comply with EU law (including secondary law acts and the practice of the EU Court). The result of the study is, among other things, the conclusion that special legal mechanisms should be developed to regulate new forms of selling works that have emerged as a result of technological progress and in the near future the Internet will undoubtedly form ways for the further development of the GCL. However, this process can negatively affect the leading role of the author as a creative person.

scholarly journals Multilevel cooperation in the EU resolution of cross-border bank groups: lessons from the non-euro area Member States joining the Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Smoleńska
Keyword(s):  
Euro Area ◽  
Banking Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Essential Condition ◽  
European Banking Union ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Single Resolution Mechanism ◽  
European Banking ◽  
Administrative Oversight ◽  
The Eu

AbstractCross-border banking presents a unique set of challenges in the EU from the perspective of arranging administrative oversight structures. Structuring cooperation between different EU and national authorities in a way which is conducive to trust-building and mutual engagement is an essential condition for overcoming disintegrative tendencies in the internal market. To assess how the existing EU arrangements fare in this regard in the context of EU resolution law, this article comparatively analyses the different models of multilevel administrative cooperation in the post-crisis EU framework. These are specifically the centralised model of the European Banking Union (Single Resolution Mechanism) and the relatively looser networked model of the resolution colleges. The multilevel cooperation under both models is nuanced given the distinct roles of the national resolution authorities, EU agencies and the differentiated status of non-euro area Member States in the EBU (Croatia, Bulgaria). The article’s findings allow to identify specific problems of constitutional nature pertaining to the accountability of administrative cooperation, equality of Member States and the implications of Meroni doctrine’s distortive effects.

scholarly journals The ‘Territory of the Union’ in EU Citizenship Law: Charting a Route from Parallel to Integrated Narratives

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niamh Nic Shuibhne
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Union Citizenship ◽  
Union Territory ◽  
The Eu

Abstract This paper examines the growing significance of the ‘territory of the Union’ in EU citizenship law and asks what it reveals about Union citizenship in the wider system of the EU legal order. In doing so, it builds on scholarship constructing the idea of ‘personhood’ in EU law by adding a complementary dimension of ‘place-hood’. The analysis is premised on territory as a place within—but also beyond—which particular legal qualities are both produced by and reflect shared objectives or values. In that respect, the paper offers a comprehensive ‘map’ of Union territory as a legal construct, with the aim of uncovering what kind of legal place the territory of the Union constitutes as well as the extent to which it is dis-connectable from the territories of the Member States. It also considers how Union territory relates to what lies ‘outside’. It will be shown that different narratives of Union territory have materialized in the case law of the Court of Justice. However, it is argued that these segregated lines of reasoning should be integrated, both to reflect and to progress a composite understanding of Union territory as a place in which concerns for Union citizens, for Member States, and for the system underpinning the EU legal order are more consistently acknowledged and more openly weighed.

Higher Education, Equal Access, and Residence Conditions: Does EU Law Allow Member States to Charge Higher Fees to Students Not Previously Resident?

2005 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gareth Davies
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Social Effects ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Financial Benefit ◽  
Member States ◽  
Policy Issues ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
The Eu

This article looks at the law and policy issues surrounding the practice of charging uniform fees for higher education to home students and students coming from other EU Member States. It begins with the observation that within the EU such fees are heavily subsidised by governments and therefore amount to a financial benefit (or a disguised grant) to students. In the light of this, this article suggests that restricting that subsidy to students resident prior to their studies would be not only compatible with recent case law on non-discrimination but would also fit better with the underlying logic of free movement, which denies any right to benefits for non-economic recent migrants. Secondly, it looks at the policy, and finds that while equal fees have a number of very positive social effects, they also carry moral and economic risks. A better approach, less distorting of the market for higher education and more consistent with the wider EU approach to welfare migration, might be to require exportability of subsidies from the student's state of origin.

Forced Migration Governance: In Search of Sovereignty

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 923-948 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anuscheh Farahat ◽  
Nora Markard
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Third World ◽  
Forced Migration ◽  
Loss Of Control ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
The Eu

The European Union (EU) Member States have experienced the recent refugee protection crisis in the EU as a de-facto loss of control over their borders. They find themselves unable to subject entry into their territory to a sovereign decision. In response, the Member States have sought to regain full sovereignty over matters of forced migration, both unilaterally and cooperatively, seeking to govern a phenomenon—forced migration—that by definition defies governance. Unilateral measures include forced migration caps and a search for ways to circumvent responsibility under the Dublin system. Cooperative efforts by EU Member States include the search for ways to more effectively govern forced migration at the EU level and beyond. Supranational EU efforts include the introduction of an internal relocation scheme and support for Italy and Greece in processing asylum claims in so-called “hotspots.” Beyond the EU, Member States are seeking to externalize protection responsibility to third world countries under international agreements, in particular, by returning asylum seekers to Turkey. This Article outlines the unilateral and cooperative governance efforts undertaken and shows that states' sovereign decisions over migration are significantly limited in the case of forced migrants, both by EU law and by international law.

Disclosure rules in eu public procurement: Balancing between competition and transparency

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 528-553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsi-Maria Halonen
Keyword(s):  
Public Procurement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Competitive Effects ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legal Remedies ◽  
Disclosure Of Information ◽  
Disclosure Rules ◽  
Procurement Procedure ◽  
The Eu

The paper examines the disclosure of information within public contract awards under EU law. EU Public Procurement rules have several objectives that may at some times be conflicting with each other. A certain level of transparency of public procurement procedure is necessary in order to fight corruption, enhance trade opportunities and ensure effective legal remedies. On the other hand, too much transparency may have certain anti-competitive effects. The national laws regarding disclosure of information vary in different EU member states. In Finland the EU law principle of effective remedies has been interpreted as requiring full transparency among the bidders. The transparency rules under EU law and certain Member States' national laws are analysed. As a conclusion, it is suggested that the rules on disclosure should not be left solely to the discretion of member states as the over-transparent approach taken by certain member states may negatively affect the markets both on a national and EU level.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document