EU-UK relations enter a decisive period

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Competitive Regions ◽  
The Eu

Significance The proposals are ambitious and bring both sides closer on some important issues, such as agrifood trade and customs paperwork. However, the proposals ignore UK demands to remove European Court of Justice (ECJ) oversight in Northern Ireland. This issue threatens to thwart a compromise. Impacts UK triggering of Article 16 would put pressure on Dublin to stop Irish businesses from buying goods from Northern Ireland. The UK government will seek to downplay tensions with the EU over the NIP until after the UN climate change conference in Glasgow. UK regulatory divergence will be a source of tension for EU-UK ties, as London will want Northern Ireland to follow the UK direction. If the NIP is fully implemented, Northern Ireland could become one of the most competitive regions in the United Kingdom.

West may resist UK cyber surveillance lead

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Data Retention ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Court Of Appeal ◽  
The Eu

Subject Trends in online surveillance laws. Significance The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled on December 21 against the UK government's Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act on the grounds that the legislation required the general and indiscriminate retention of communications data. Intelligence agencies and police forces in liberal democracies have been upgrading their powers regarding online surveillance, but none have gone as far as the United Kingdom in requiring communication companies to retain all users' browsing histories for a year. Impacts The court ruling -- and its likely application by the UK Court of Appeal -- will make a challenge to this year's legislation very likely. The UK government will have to reconsider its plans for data retention or be in breach of EU law. Brexit may enable the United Kingdom to retain the law. Maintenance of a different surveillance regime in the United Kingdom would jeopardise data transfers between it and the EU.

Future of climate change will depend on China

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Green Economy ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Slow Progress ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

Subject China's climate change policy. Significance The Trump administration’s planned withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and the UK government’s preoccupation with Brexit have allowed China to present itself as a global leader on climate change. Ahead of the COP26 summit in the United Kingdom next November, countries and negotiating blocs such as the EU will focus on China as a major emitter that needs to increase its pledges to avoid a business-as-usual trajectory. Impacts Germany, holding the EU presidency for July-December 2020, will be key to new China-EU diplomatic arrangements on climate change. An EU-China summit in Leipzig during the German presidency will put climate change high on the agenda. At COP26, the United Kingdom is likely to emphasise finance, nature-based solutions, adaptation and resilience, and the Green economy. The UK government may also emphasise long-term ‘net zero’ commitments, as it has made to 2050. Inadequate national targets and slow progress in UN talks will fuel grassroots activism and calls for radical approaches.

scholarly journals Time to Revisit Forum Non Conveniens in the UK? Group Josi Reinsurance Co v UGIC

2001 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 705
Author(s):  
Christopher D Bougen
Keyword(s):  
Fundamental Question ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Forum Non Conveniens ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Conflicts Of Jurisdiction

There has been much debate in the United Kingdom over the last decade on whether the discretionary doctrine of forum non conveniens is compatible with the mandatory provisions of the Brussels Convention on jurisdiction issues in the European Union.  A recent decision of the European Court of Justice has answered affirmatively the question of whether a plaintiff domiciled in a non-Contracting State can invoke the rules of the Covention.  The Court has arguably not settled the more fundamental question of whether the Convention applies to conflicts of jurisdiction between courts of a Contracting State and non-Contracting State.  However, there is evidence of a growing acceptance of an expansive view of the scope of the Convention.  Such a development would bring welcome simplicity to cross-border litigation in the UK. 

UK government is preparing for an early election

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
General Election ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Uk Government ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

Significance Johnson's cabinet overhaul is the largest in decades, replacing 17 cabinet ministers from the previous government mostly with individuals who support Johnson’s hard-line stance on Brexit. Impacts Brussels could offer London a ‘Northern Ireland only’ backstop, but this will be rejected by the UK government. The government will likely pass legislation to protect EU citizens’ rights in the United Kingdom if there is a no-deal Brexit. The EU will only grant another extension if a deal is almost agreed, or if there is a UK general election or second Brexit referendum.

scholarly journals THE FATE OF INVESTMENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION AFTER THE ACHMEA DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Burkhard Hess
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Dispute ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

This article explores the contents and consequences of the Achmea judgment recently given by the European Court of Justice (6 March 2018, case C-284/16). In its first part, the article analyses the judgment from a European point of view. It notes that Achmea is primarily concerned with the autonomy of the EU legal order in international dispute resolution and only secondarily with investment arbitration. The judgment seamlessly ties in with the Court’s Opinion 2/13 on the Accession of the EU to the European Convention of Human Rights. In its second part, the article assesses the consequences of the judgment for current and future investment dispute resolution. It argues that (i) investment arbitration is over for intra-EU Bilateral Investment Treaties and (ii) most likely also for intra-EU disputes under the Energy Charter Treaty; (iii) the European Commission must be careful not to jeopardise the supremacy of the ECJ in interpreting the EU law when concluding future international dispute resolution agreements; (iv) the same holds true regarding dispute resolution under the UK Withdrawal Agreement when negotiating the Brexit.

scholarly journals Regulatory Autonomy of Great Britain: Problems and Perspectives

2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (7) ◽  
pp. 71-79
Author(s):  
A. Bolshakov
Keyword(s):  
Great Britain ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Regulatory Policy ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Settlement Mechanism ◽  
The Eu

Sovereignty does not imply regulatory autonomy. After Brexit, the UK should align its regulatory policy with European norms, if it is interested in close partnership with the EU. Compromises must be made by both sides in order to ensure stability of the partnership. The EU will have to acknowledge the UK’s right to diverge from European rules. Britain will have to partly accept the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. The structure of dispute settlement mechanism which will be created under the partnership agreement should be a product of a compromise. The present study shows that optimal structure of dispute settlement mechanism must include two different procedures: one for political issues and the other for commercial issues. The central role for the European Court of Justice must be envisaged as a part of politically oriented procedure. There must be no role for the European Court of Justice or any Union to set the pace of political communication. The latter reflects the interest of Great Britain to simplify economic relations, which means that, firstly, disputes are resolved by independent arbiters; secondly, the EU acknowledges the UK’s right to diverge from European regulations; and thirdly, the UK accepts the EU’s right to impose countervailing duties to compensate for adverse effects of divergence on competition. This article also examines the main problems of future British regulatory policy, especially in the field of state aid. Boris Johnson’s government has decided not to form a full-fledged regulatory regime in the area of state aid. Its stance is politically appropriate since Conservative party manifesto for the 2019 general election promised to support local industries without limitations. But that decision created a great deal of economic risk. Firstly, the absence of a domestic subsidy control regulator can cause chaos within regulation system because workable norms and rules can only be sustained by a tight enforcement mechanism. Secondly, the EU can cite lack of subsidy control as an obstacle for British business to have unrestricted access to the European market.

Standards for Independent Oversight

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nico van Eijk
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Data Retention ◽  
Digital Rights ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Intelligence Services ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Point Of Departure

The point of departure for this chapter is the decision of the European Court of Justice in the Digital Rights Ireland case, which annulled the European Data Retention Directive, in part because the use of retained data was not made subject to independent oversight. Next, it examines judgments from the national courts of the Netherlands and the UK, also focusing on the independent oversight issue, declaring invalid the data retention laws of those two countries. From the Digital Rights Ireland case and others, seven standards for oversight of intelligence services can be drawn: the oversight should be complete; it should encompass all stages of the intelligence cycle; it should be independent; it should take place prior to the imposition of a measure; it should be able to declare a measure unlawful and to provide redress; it should incorporate the adversary principle; and it should have sufficient resources.

Centros Ltd—A Complete U-Turn in the Right of Establishment for Companies?

2000 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 621-642 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Looijestijn-Clearie
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Member State ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Registered Office ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Right ◽  
A Company

InCentros Ltd and Erhvers-og Selskabsstyrelesen (hereinafter Centros),1 the European Court of Justice ruled that it is contrary to Article 52 (now Article 432) and Article 58 (now Article 48) of the EC Treaty for the authorities of a member State (in casu Denmark) to refuse to register a branch of a company formed under the law of another member State (in casu the United Kingdom) in which it has its registered office, even if the company concerned has never conducted any business in the latter State and intends to carry out its entire business in the State in which the branch is to be set up. By avoiding the need to form a company there it would thus evade the application of the rules governing the provision for and the paying-up of a minimum share capital in force in that State. According to the Court, this does not, however, prevent the authorities of the member State in which the branch is to be set up from adopting appropriate measures for preventing or penalising fraud, either with regard to the company itself, if need be in co-operation with the member State in which it was formed, or with regard to its members, where it has been determined that they are in fact attempting, by means of the formation of a company, to evade their obligations towards creditors established in the territory of the member State of the branch.

Debates over Irish unification will gain traction

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Political Agenda ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Northern Irish ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Status ◽  
Scottish Independence ◽  
The Uk

Significance The differing perspectives of unionists and nationalists on the creation of Northern Ireland as a political entity within the United Kingdom, together with Brexit and tensions over the Northern Ireland Protocol (NIP), have brought the contentious issue of Irish reunification onto the political agenda in Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic. Impacts Scottish independence would likely increase momentum for a referendum on Irish unity. Successful implementation of the NIP, giving firms access to EU and UK markets, may support arguments for maintaining the status quo. If the UK government abandons the NIP, the adverse trade impact on Northern Irish firms could increase support for unification.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document