Equality bodies

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 144-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamás Kádár

The Treaty of Amsterdam and the subsequent adoption in 2000 of the so-called Race Directive was a genuine paradigm shift in European equal treatment legislation and practice. One of the major developments resulting from this Treaty change and new Directive was the introduction of a requirement for all European Union (EU) Member States to set up bodies for the promotion of equal treatment, first on the ground of race and ethnic origin, later extended to the ground of gender. This article analyses the emergence of these bodies – equality bodies – in EU Member States and candidate countries and the role they play in promoting equality and the implementation and monitoring of EU equal treatment legislation. It argues that equality bodies have a significant potential to contribute to more equal societies and they have proved to be effective agents of change. They do so, among others, by contributing to relevant case law in front of the Court of Justice of the EU leading to the further development and clarification of EU and national equal treatment legislation. The article also looks at the challenges experienced by equality bodies in different European countries as factors that influence and might limit their potential and contribution. To conclude, the article examines the necessary conditions for equality bodies to effectively contribute to the implementation of EU legislation and the achievement of substantive equality and it assesses whether current standards for equality bodies can guarantee these conditions.

2021 ◽  
pp. 11-41
Author(s):  
Emma Lantschner

In Chapter 1 the development of the EU non-discrimination regime is introduced, first in terms of legal developments. It recapitulates the steps starting from the founding Treaties, which only dealt with discrimination on the grounds of nationality and gender, up until the Treaty of Amsterdam, introducing the competence for the discrimination grounds of racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, age, disability, and sexual orientation, and the adoption of the two Directives which are the focus of the book: Directive 2000/43/EC and Directive 2000/78/EC. It also points at financial instruments and institutions set up in parallel to support the implementation of these Directives and the recent adoption of a series of Strategic Documents and Action Plans in the Commission’s attempts to achieve a Union of equality. The second sub-chapter then discusses the shift from non-discrimination to substantive equality on the basis of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and closes with some considerations regarding the different levels of impact of EU anti-discrimination law in national constitutional systems.


Author(s):  
Gert Würtenberger ◽  
Martin Ekvad ◽  
Paul van der Kooij ◽  
Bart Kiewiet

This book explains how the Community plant variety rights system works and provides guidance regarding the field of law relating to the Basic Regulation and other implementing regulations. It gives an idea of how the grant system works, the advantages of Community plant variety rights, and the aspects to be considered in exploiting and defending. It also explains the mechanisms in the Basic Regulation on how infringements of Community plant variety rights should be dealt with, including certain enforcement systems of the EU Member States. This book analyses major aspects that are considered of practical relevance in infringement proceedings under the applicable national law. It elaborates how the case law is limited in comparison with patent infringement proceedings throughout the EU Member States.


2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (43) ◽  
Author(s):  
V Bremer ◽  
A Bosman ◽  
D Coulombier

Strengthening capacity in intervention epidemiology is key to the overall goal of responding to the challenge to detect and counter threats posed by outbreaks of infectious diseases in the European Union (EU). Since its founding in 1995, the European Programme for Intervention Epidemiology Training (EPIET) has become a core resource in training in intervention epidemiology in the EU. EPIET was integrated into the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) on 1 November 2007 and this has resulted in an increased sustainability of the programme, allowing for long-term planning. Also, a new training programme, the European public health microbiology training (EUPHEM), was set up in 2008 to increase the response capacity for microbiology. Collaboration with EU Member States and other training programmes has been further intensified. Merging EPIET and other training activities in the ECDC training section has created the opportunity to develop an integrated multilevel approach to training in applied field epidemiology. An integrated approach to training activities on EU level, and increasing the number of EPIET and EPIET-associated fellows are essential to respond to the training needs of EU Member States, particularly new Member States. An external evaluation of EPIET in 2009 will provide guidance for a future strategy for the programme. This article examines the achievements of the EPIET programme after its transition to ECDC and provides an outlook on its future.


2005 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gareth Davies

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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 1104-1115
Author(s):  
Stanisław Biernat

AbstractA concern was voiced in commentaries after the PSPP judgment that the BVerfG’s position regarding the refusal to apply in Germany the CJEU judgment as issued on an ultra vires basis might be used in EU Member States infringing the rule of law, and the independence of the judiciary in particular. This issue is presented in relation to Poland. The article sets out the constitutional provisions which proclaim openness to European integration, as well as the union-friendly case-law of the Constitutional Tribunal (CT) until 2016. The CT jurisprudence at that time provided, however, for the possibility of refusing to apply EU law in exceptional situations, even though this never happened. Next, the article discusses endeavors of the new Polish authorities since the end of 2015 which drastically breach the rule of law in the field of the judiciary, as well as the measures taken by EU institutions to counteract these adverse phenomena. The Polish authorities argue that the competence to define the legal position of the judiciary has not been conferred on the Union and remains within the exclusive competence of the Member States. Such a stance was also taken by the politically dependent CT in April 2020. The PSPP judgment was therefore welcomed with joy by Polish politicians. There are major differences, however, between the rulings of the BVerfG and those of the Polish CT in its current composition, and the hopes pinned on the PSPP judgment by the Polish authorities are unfounded.


2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 84-106
Author(s):  
Tomasz Kubin

Abstract Initially, before the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty, differences in integration between members of the European Communities (EC; later the European Union) were relatively few and usually temporary in nature. The Schengen Agreement, the Maastricht Treaty and the Treaty of Amsterdam, and the possibility of establishing enhanced cooperation meant that the problem was becoming more and more important in the functioning of the EU—both in theory and in practice. The objective of the paper is to show that for several years, along with the stagnation in the deepening of integration between all the EU Member States, differentiation of integration in the EU is progressing very rapidly. The progressing differentiation in the EU is a consequence of mainly two processes: the development of enhanced cooperation and reforms in the eurozone, which are strengthened by the widening of the EU. The article covers the issue of the categorization of differentiation of European Union integration, which constitutes the theoretical framework for further considerations. Specified processes which contribute to increasing the differentiation of the EU are discussed, showing the development of enhanced cooperation in the EU and presenting the reforms of the eurozone. The article concludes with the identification and the consequences of differentiated integration, both those that have already occurred and those that may occur in the future.


Teisė ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. 123-138
Author(s):  
Vilius Kuzminskas

The article discloses the fixed exclusion regulation of Clause 346 in the Treaty of Function of the European Union in different EU member states. A further assessment of different relevant judicial approaches to regulation are disclosed and evaluated in accordance with the European Court of Justice case law and procurement in the defense area doctrine.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 41-56
Author(s):  
Anna Kosińska

The present study seeks to answer the question whether the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union in cases concerning the exercise of broadly understood cultural policies may in reality affect the extent of implementation of cultural rights—that is, access to products of culture, participation in cultural life and freedom of artistic creativity—at the level of Member States. Cultural rights are traditionally regulated by the constitutions of EU Member States and are classified by legal scholars and commentators as second generation rights. Culture, in turn, according to primary legislation of the European Union, is only a supporting competence (Article 6 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union). However, a review of the Court’s case law demonstrates that CJEU’s judgments form standards that contribute to a more effective implementation of cultural rights guaranteed in the national law of the Member States and international agreements to which they are parties. This results from the nature of the Union’s law, which penetrates a national system and thanks to the principle of direct effect and supremacy truly affects the situation of EU citizens.


2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-190
Author(s):  
Vibeke Blaker Strand

The reasoning and conclusions reached by the European Court of Human Rights in cases against some Member States that involve prohibitions against the wearing of religious clothes and symbols in public educational institutions have led scholars to argue that introduction of similar prohibitions in other Member States will be in conformity with the Convention. By broadening the spectrum of relevant case-law, this article will argue that the wide margin of appreciation often referred to, conceals that the strictness of review may vary considerably depending on the circumstances of each case. The principle of equal treatment of religious manifestations is introduced as a norm that influences the strictness of review. Further, it is discussed to what extent the aim of preserving gender equality and the aim of avoiding religious pressure may be put forward in order to justify the introduction of prohibitions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document