A Comparative Look at the Divorce Systems in Egypt and Romania

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 372-404
Author(s):  
Ana Caterina Aniței
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Economic ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
European Union Level ◽  
International Couples ◽  
Historical Factors ◽  
Comparative Manner ◽  
Border Elements

Globalization, migration, and free movement have led to an increase in the diversity of international and inter-faith couples, and implicitly to an increase in the number of divorces with cross border elements. Although there are numerous regulations at European Union level, when it comes to international couples formed from an EU-citizen and a non-EU/third country one, for the purpose of this study Romanian, respectively Egyptian, there seems to be a lack of guidelines and cooperation mechanisms, ensuring the protection and enforcement of basic human rights. The main purposes of this study is examining in a comparative manner the divorce systems in Egypt and Romania and trying to answer the question of whether the differences are rooted in religion or are the result of different social, economic, cultural, and historical factors.

Tax revenues in the European Union countries

2017 ◽  
Vol 62 (5) ◽  
pp. 79-99
Author(s):  
Agata Szymańska
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Social Economic ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
Excise Duty ◽  
Tax Revenues ◽  
Historical Factors ◽  
European Union Countries ◽  
The Eu

The aim of this paper is to analyse tax revenues and examine similarities of selected tax revenues (mainly VAT, CIT, PIT and excise duty) in the European Union countries. The analysis of the EU members concerns the period between 2003 (i.e. the year preceding the biggest enlargement of the EU) and 2012 (due to data completeness). Tax rates and the structure of tax revenues in the EU countries were compared and then the cluster analysis was applied to assess the similarity of tax revenues. The analysis suggests that the process of tax harmonization, which took place in the period considered, did not exert a significant impact on the similarity of the structure of tax revenues in the EU countries. The structure seems to be still determined by e.g. social, economic or historical factors, which influenced the tax systems creation in particular EU countries.

scholarly journals Normativity in the EU’s Approach towards Disinformation

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 170-202
Author(s):  
Anna Kobernjuk ◽  
Agnes Kasper
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Comparative Method ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Code Of Practice ◽  
European Union Level ◽  
Joint Declaration ◽  
Human Rights Standards

Abstract With the rapid growth of disinformation, two major steps were taken to battle the phenomenon in the online environment—first on the global level, and second on the European Union level. The first step is the Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and “Fake News”, Disinformation and Propaganda, which provides a general overview of possible actions to be taken to fight disinformation, and how “things should be”. The steps are connected to following human rights standards, promoting the diversity of media, and paying special attention to intermediaries and media outlets. The second one is the Code of Practice on Disinformation, which is a self-regulatory document that can be voluntarily signed by major social media platforms and advertising bodies, and its main focus is making political advertising coherent and clear, preventing the creation of fake accounts, providing users with tools to report disinformation, and promote further research. Nevertheless, based on the reports and criticism from stakeholders, the Code of Practice has not reached a common ground regarding definitions, it has provided no mechanism to access the development, and has had several other drawbacks which need additional attention and discussion. The article is devoted to identifying gaps in the Code of Practice on Disinformation based on the reports and criticism provided by the stakeholders and elaborating on possible practices to regulate the legal issues raised by disinformation on the European Union level. We use doctrinal and comparative methods in the work. The doctrinal method targets the cluster that was identified in order to analyze the Code of Practice, identifies weak spots and inconsistencies, and offers solutions from different areas of law. The comparative method was selected since in several areas of law, such as human rights and consumer protection law, the previously identified approaches will be addressed to find the best outcomes. This combination of methods allows an in-depth understanding of legal documents and identifying successful solutions, which can influence further development based on efficient examples.

scholarly journals Ruch graniczny z Polski do Obwodu Kaliningradzkiego na tle pozostałych odcinków zewnętrznej granicy Unii Europejskiej

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 195-208
Author(s):  
Piotr Rosik ◽  
Rafał Wiśniewski
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Social Economic ◽  
The State ◽  
Economic Situation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Economic Changes ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Kaliningrad Oblast ◽  
Eastern Border ◽  
Political Conditions

The purpose of the paper is to present the cross-border mobility of Poles in a broader context of social, economic changes and formal and political conditions. The mobility of Poles is presented on the example of border traffic on the Polish-Russian border. We compare the situation on the border with Kaliningrad oblast with other sections of the eastern border. We focus on number of crossings and the movement of passenger and heavy good vehicles based on the data of the Border Guard. The conclusions are as follows: the intensity of border traffic was conditioned by both formal and legal changes as well as the economic situation on both sides of the state border. In the period from 1990, intensive travels of Poles to the Kaliningrad oblast were carried out: (1) from the mid-1990s until Poland's accession to the European Union; (2) during the operation of local border traffic, i.e. in the years 2012-2016.

Money for Life: Border Killings, Compensation Claims and Life-Money Conversions in Turkey’s Kurdish Borderlands

2019 ◽  
pp. 187-206
Author(s):  
Fırat Bozçalı
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Economic ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Alternative Form ◽  
Ethnographic Research ◽  
Financial Responsibility ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Symbolic Meanings ◽  
Compensation Claims

This chapter examines the state’s necropolitical management of cross-border mobility and the border killings that border patrols committed in Turkey’s Kurdish borderlands. Based on ethnographic research among Kurdish litigants and human rights lawyers in courtrooms and border villages of Van Province, the chapter examines compensation claims that Kurdish litigants pursued for the border killings at Turkish courts. Although most of the killing cases resulted in criminal impunity and individual perpetrators were often exonerated from criminal liability, compensation claims can still be pursued to hold state authorities financially responsible for the killings. The chapter discusses how Kurdish litigants and their lawyers articulated the state’s financial responsibility as an alternative form of justice-seeking and gave political-symbolic meanings to compensation claims. Examining the ways in which Turkish courts converted the lost lives into money value through factual as well as counterfactual legal, social, economic and biological assumptions, it further documents that the compensation awards often fell short of compensating the lost livelihoods and Kurdish litigants were compelled to engage back in smuggling and face a constant risk of death. The chapter ultimately shows the co-constituted and co-exercised political and economic subjugation of lives and livelihoods in Turkey’s Kurdish borderlands.

Labour Rights as Human Rights: Implications for Employers’ Free Movement in an Enlarged European Union

2007 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 357-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tonia Novitz
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Labour Rights ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Ec Law ◽  
The Eu

This chapter considers the legal status of labour rights as human rights within the European Union (EU) and the implications that this may have for free movement provisions under European Community (EC) law. This is not by any means a new subject for analysis and reflection, but has been of particular concern since the fifth enlargement of the EU which commenced in 2004. It is in this context that we have witnessed significant litigation before the European Court of Justice concerning the scope of the right to strike, and widespread protest concerning the adoption of a new Directive on Services in the Internal Market.

scholarly journals Ar egzistuoja palankesnės teisės ieškojimo galimybės bankroto bylose?

Teisė ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 74 ◽  
pp. 93-104
Author(s):  
Laura Kirilevičiūtė
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Jurisdiction ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
European Union Level ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
Insolvency Proceedings

Tarptautinio bankroto bylų jurisdikcijos klausimus Europos Sąjungos lygiu reguliuoja 2000 m. gegu­žės 29 d. Tarybos reglamentas (EB) Nr. 1346/2000 dėl bankroto bylų. Jame įtvirtintas vienas tarptauti­nę jurisdikciją tarptautinio bankroto bylose nulemiantis kriterijus – pagrindinių turtinių interesų vieta. Straipsnyje siekiama atsakyti į klausimą, ar pasirinktu reguliavimu yra pasiektas šio reglamento vienas iš tikslų – panaikinti teisines prielaidas galimybei bylos šalims perkelti turtą arba teismo procesą iš vienos valstybės narės į kitą ieškant palankesnės teisinės padėties. Tuo tikslu analizuojami jurisdikcijos klausimų reguliavimo ypatumai, sudarantys prielaidas palankesnės teisinės padėties ieškojimo galimybei. Jurisdiction of cross-border insolvency proceedings in the European Union level is regulated by Coun­cil regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings. It establishes one criterion, the place of main interests, for determining international jurisdiction in cross-border insolvency proce­edings. The article deals with the question, whether one of the aims of this Regulation, the aim to elimi­nate background for seeking to obtain a more favourable legal position by transferring assets or judicial proceedings from one Member State to another, is reached by the chosen regulation. For this purpose, peculiarities of regulating of jurisdiction, which form background for possibility to seek a more favoura­ble legal position, are analysed.

Between the medium and the minimum options to regulate mutual recognition of confiscation orders

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 432-445
Author(s):  
Ariadna H. Ochnio
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Policy Option ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Form ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
European Union Level ◽  
Side Door ◽  
Asset Recovery

The proposal for a regulation on the mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation orders is aimed at solving the problems of criminal asset recovery in cross-border cases. The policy option adopted is in fact an alternative to a deeper harmonization of national confiscation systems, accordingly the Member States may view it as an attempt to impact their internal legal systems by the so-called side door, with the mutual recognition principle and the idea of combatting terrorism being, respectively, the key and password to unlock It. If this strategy is successful, it can be anticipated that it will become in the future a model for regulation of non-confiscation issues at the European Union level for which deeper harmonization has proved too difficult. Among the four regulatory options discussed in the legislative process, there are good reasons in support of an evolutionary approach, which is reflected in the option referred to as the ‘minimum’, based on the use of the legal form of a directive.

THE RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS LACKING REASONS IN EUROPE: ACCESS TO JUSTICE, FOREIGN COURT AVOIDANCE, AND EFFICIENCY

2008 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gilles Cuniberti
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Border Enforcement ◽  
Policy Issues ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
European Court

AbstractThe recognition of foreign judgments lacking reasons raises several policy issues. Reason-giving is perceived by the European Court of Human Rights as critical to ensure an effective access to justice. Yet, foreign judgments often lack reasons because the defendant failed to appear before the foreign court, and it may be right to sanction this strategy of foreign court avoidance. Finally, the European Union has begun to implement its policy of efficiency of cross-border enforcement, which commands states to recognize such judgments irrespective of any other consideration. This article explores whether these conflicting issues can be reconciled.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document