The Polluter Pays Principle in EU Climate Law: an Effective Tool before the Courts?

Climate Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Suzanne Kingston
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Potential Role ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Polluter Pays Principle ◽  
Energy Law ◽  
The Eu

In EU law the polluter pays principle (ppp) enjoys constitutional status: Article 191(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (tfeu) enshrines it among the fundamental principles of the EU’s environmental policy. This article considers the legal status and development of the ppp in EU law, in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (cjeu) and in EU policy, most recently in the EU’s Green New Deal. It goes on to identify three bodies of climate-related litigation where the ppp has been most influential to date: first, cases concerning the EU ets and emissions; second, cases concerning EU energy law; and third, cases concerning EU state-aid law. The conclusion reflects on the potential role of the ppp in other areas, including climate cases based on human and environmental rights, and climate cases brought against private parties.

Mixed Agreements: The EU Law Fundamentals

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joni Heliskoski
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Basic Characteristics ◽  
Mixed Agreements ◽  
The Eu

Whatever terminology one might wish to employ to describe the form of integration constituted by the European Union and its Member States, one fundamental attribute of that arrangement has always been the division, as between the Union and its Member States, of competence to conclude international agreements with other subjects of international law. Today, the fact that treaty-making competence—as an external facet of the more general division of legal authority—is divided and, to some extent, shared between the Union and its Member States is reflected by some of the opening provisions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Notwithstanding the changes to the scope and nature of the powers conferred upon the Union, resulting from both changes to primary law and the evolution of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the basic characteristics of the conferment as an attribution of a limited kind has always been the same; there has always existed a polity endowed with a treaty-making authority divided between and, indeed, shared by, the Union and its Member States. In the early 1960s mixed agreements—that is, agreements to which the European Union

The ‘puzzle’ of workers’ mobility in Italy

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-108
Author(s):  
Massimiliano Delfino
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Political Agenda ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Transnational Mobility ◽  
Italian Case ◽  
Eu Directives ◽  
Italian Legislation ◽  
The Eu

In Italy, workers’ mobility is a very complicated puzzle that is composed of different pieces. This paper deals with such different pieces under the perspective of workers' mobility within the European Union and highlights that the term mobility is not a synonym of posting (of workers), since the latter term indicates only one of the types (although the most relevant) of workers’ mobility. The author starts with workers’ mobility within the national border and beyond the European Union. Then, he concentrates his attention on the Italian way of transposing the EU Directives on the transnational posting of workers, which is very problematic, especially with reference to the role of collective bargaining agreements. Special attention is dedicated to the issue of public policy where an important role is played by Italian case law, which is very interesting and not uniform. The paper ends with some predictions about the forthcoming Italian legislation concerning both national and transnational mobility, which will be possibly influenced by the domestic political agenda.

From Washington with Love—Investor–State Arbitration and the Jurisdictional Monopoly of the Court of Justice of the European Union

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 425-453
Author(s):  
Philip Strik
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Forum Shopping ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Dispute ◽  
The Eu

AbstractWhile investor–State arbitration is to a large extent detached from the EU legal order, EU law has recently started to be invoked in investor-State arbitration proceedings. In the context of intra-EU bilateral investment treaties, the Commission has expressed the view that investor-State arbitration gives rise to a number of ‘arbitration risks’ for the EU legal order. Not only can it solicit investors to engage in forum-shopping, but it can also result in questions of EU law not being litigated in Member State or Union courts. This chapter explores the extent to which the compatibility of investor–State arbitration with the EU legal order is in issue. It examines the main features of investor-State arbitration as concerns its interplay with the EU legal order, as well as the Court of Justice’s case law on issues of compatibility between systems of international dispute settlement and the EU legal order. The chapter highlights that the way in which investor–State arbitral tribunals handle issues of EU law, as well as the involvement of interested parties, may foster the synergy between investor–State arbitration and the EU legal order.

scholarly journals Farewell to the EU Charter: Brexit and Fundamental Rights Protection

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-52
Author(s):  
Marco Galimberti
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

Twenty years after its drafting and more than one decade after its entry into force, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has ceased to be part of British law as a consequence of Brexit. Looking into this issue raised by the UK withdrawal from the European Union, the essay sheds some light on the legal status and impact of the EU Bill of Rights in the British legal order. Against this background, the article detects a connection between the UK Supreme Court’s case law and the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the direct effect of the Charter. From this perspective, the analysis highlights the implications of the UK departure from the Charter and disentanglement from the Luxembourg case law, thus arguing that they may weaken the standards of fundamental rights protection.

The European ombudsman as a body for the protection of the rights of individuals and legal entities in the European Union

2021 ◽  
pp. 55-61
Author(s):  
Ivanna Maryniv ◽  
Andriy Kotenko
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Annual Reports ◽  
Main Body ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Association Agreement ◽  
The Eu

Formulation of the problem. Today, the EU faces new challenges due to the globalization policy pursued by most EU member states, migration and the global pandemic - COVID-19. In the new conditions, the protection of human rights acquires a fundamentally new meaning. Therefore, the question of the role of the EU Ombudsman in the process of protection of individual rights and control over the activities of bodies is very relevant. By choosing the path of European integration and committing itself under the Association Agreement to adapt a number of areas in line with the acquis communautaire, Ukraine should also focus on the experience of the European Ombudsman. Since taking office as the Ukrainian Parliamentary Commissioner for Human Rights in 1998, it will not be an exaggeration to state that there are a number of problems in overseeing the proper activities of the authorities in respecting human and civil rights and freedoms. That is why, given the shortcomings and the chosen vector of development, the experience of the European Ombudsman is of great importance for Ukraine in order to improve the activities of the Ukrainian Parliament’s Commissioner for Human Rights. Target of research is to examine the role of the EU Ombudsman in the process of investigating good governance in the EU institutional mechanism. Article’s main body. The article is devoted to the study of the legal status of the European Ombudsman as a body that must investigate improper bodies of the activities of institutions, agencies to ensure the restoration of violated rights guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The analysis of the practice of the European Ombudsman in the official annual reports, as well as the development strategy is carried out. With the help of EU legislation research and conducting of the legal analysis of the Ombudsman’s annual reports, strategic development documents and enquiries, opened by the Ombudsman in the last decade, the complexity of the European ombudsman’s contribution to the implementation of the sustainable development principle within EU’s supranational legal framework. Conclusions. After analyzing the development of Ombudsman’s legal status and the results of his enquiries, conducted in the last decade, a conclusion has been made, that the European ombudsman considerably influences all the institutional system of the EU. His initiatives have far-reaching consequences which might have caused their effect on the whole legal framework of the EU, in case if the European ombudsman had been given some more legal powers. Though, having only recommendation mechanisms in possession, this body influences the governing system of the EU largely, causing positive changes, meeting the leading principles of the functioning of the EU.

scholarly journals Article 3(5) TEU a decade on: Revisiting ‘strict observance of international law’ in the text and context of other EU values

2021 ◽  
pp. 1023263X2110151
Author(s):  
Rupert Dunbar
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Balanced Approach ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
External Relations ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
The Eu

Article 3(5) of the Treaty on the European Union concerns EU external relations and was a new provision of the Lisbon Treaty. It has been seized upon by scholars for its reference to ‘strict observance of international law’ by the EU in its relations with the wider world. However, recent case law in the Court of Justice of the European Union has demonstrated little movement towards this supposed ideal. This article supports the fact that rigid and unquestioning adherence to international law has not emerged in case law, particularly as Article 3(5) TEU also mandates that the Union ‘uphold and promote its values and interests’. By taking a broader view of both the text and context of Article 3(5) TEU in EU law as a whole, and through consideration of the limited demands international law places on domestic courts, the article argues that – contrary to current literature – a more expressly balanced approach towards respect for international law is required and should be nurtured in the case law.

scholarly journals The Relationship Between the Charter and General Principles: Looking Back and Looking Forward

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Emily HANCOX
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Transformative Potential ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Article 6 Treaty on European Union sets out two sources of fundamental rights in the EU—the Charter and the general principles of EU law—without specifying a hierarchy between them. Even though the Charter became binding over a decade ago, the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘CJEU’) is yet to clarify unequivocally how these two sources interact. In this article I argue based upon the relevant legal framework that the Charter ought to replace the general principles it enshrines. This leaves a role for general principles in the incorporation of new and additional rights into the EU legal framework. Such an approach is necessary to ensure that the Charter achieves its aims in enhancing the visibility of the rights protected by EU law, while also providing the impetus for more coherent rights protection within the EU. What an extensive survey of CJEU case law in the field of non-discrimination shows, however, is that the CJEU has struggled to let its general principles case law go, potentially hampering the transformative potential of the Charter.

Twenty years later: Application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union as an Anthropocentric and Innovative Document

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (129) ◽  
pp. 23
Author(s):  
Angelo VIGLIANISI FERRARO ◽  
Goran Ilik
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Legal Obligation ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights And Freedoms ◽  
The Guardian ◽  
The Eu

The paper analyzes the legal content and scope of the norms of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and their meaning and application as a para-constitutional document of anthropocentric and innovative nature in the last twenty years. Special attention is paid to the place and role of the CJEU as a judicial body in charge of implementing and harmonizing EU law. The article also deals with the possibility of direct application of the norms of the Charter, both vertically and horizontally. In addition, the paper cites the CJEU case law to confirm the thesis that it must undertake a moral and legal obligation in order to impose itself not only as a creator of legal doctrines but also as the guardian of the fundamental rights and freedoms of the EU.

From Washington with Love—Investor–State Arbitration and the Jurisdictional Monopoly of the Court of Justice of the European Union

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 425-453
Author(s):  
Philip Strik
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Forum Shopping ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Dispute ◽  
The Eu

Abstract While investor–State arbitration is to a large extent detached from the EU legal order, EU law has recently started to be invoked in investor-State arbitration proceedings. In the context of intra-EU bilateral investment treaties, the Commission has expressed the view that investor-State arbitration gives rise to a number of ‘arbitration risks’ for the EU legal order. Not only can it solicit investors to engage in forum-shopping, but it can also result in questions of EU law not being litigated in Member State or Union courts. This chapter explores the extent to which the compatibility of investor–State arbitration with the EU legal order is in issue. It examines the main features of investor-State arbitration as concerns its interplay with the EU legal order, as well as the Court of Justice’s case law on issues of compatibility between systems of international dispute settlement and the EU legal order. The chapter highlights that the way in which investor–State arbitral tribunals handle issues of EU law, as well as the involvement of interested parties, may foster the synergy between investor–State arbitration and the EU legal order.

“A Very Eden of the Innate Rights of Man”? A Marxist Look at the European Union Treaties and Case Law

1997 ◽  
Vol 22 (03) ◽  
pp. 581-618 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gustav Peebles
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Integration Process ◽  
Commodity Fetishism ◽  
Exchange Value ◽  
Eu Integration ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

In this paper I approach the European Union Treaties (Rome and Maastricht) and the European Court of Justice's jurisprudence from a Marxist standpoint. I argue that the treaties and case law of the European Union (EU) revolve around the rights of things (commodities), rather than of people. People primarily gain rights within the EU by demonstrating that they embody exchange value and are therefore personified commodities; people are not accorded rights merely for being human. In essence, the treaties and case law have enshrined Marx's notion of commodity fetishism, which Marx asserted to be a social mystification, into transparent law. Focusing on the grand scheme of the treaties' jurisdiction in this manner also illuminates the role of the court as it struggles to balance the demands of capital's self-valorization with fundamental human rights. I then consider the consequences of this balancing act for the EU integration process. I argue that this phenomenon as a whole also carries implications for EU civil society and for notions of legal equality among persons.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document