scholarly journals The EU (non) co-ordination of minimum subsistence benefits: What went wrong and what ways forward?

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 138-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gijsbert Vonk
Keyword(s):  
Social Security ◽  
Cost Sharing ◽  
Social Assistance ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Legal Right

This contribution deals with the co-ordination of minimum subsistence benefits in EU law. It is argued that the distinction between social assistance schemes and non-contributory benefits in EU social security law is becoming increasingly redundant. This is recognised in the case law of the CJEU, although paradoxically not in a way that strengthens the rights of mobile citizens, but in an adverse manner that undermines the co-ordination efforts of non-contributory benefits under Regulation 883/2004. In order to overcome this problem, it is argued that social assistance should be included in the material scope of application of Regulation 883/2004. This regulation should abandon the concept of special non-contributory benefits and introduce a new category of minimum subsistence benefits, which would also include social assistance schemes. Such a change could be accompanied by a single, coherent principle to govern the relationship between the right to benefits (Regulation 883/2004) and residence rights (Directive 2004/38), if necessary supported by a cost sharing mechanism for minimum substance benefits under Regulation 883/2004 and, preferably, by a recognition of minimum protection standards for economically non-active EU citizens without a legal right of residence.

L'azione dell'Unione europea contro le discriminazioni basate sulla religione: l'impatto della giurisprudenza della Corte europea dei diritti umani

2012 ◽  
pp. 475-511
Author(s):  
Federico Casolari
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
General Framework ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

Law Although EU law has established a general framework concerning the fight against discriminations on the grounds of religion (namely as far as equal treatment in employment and occupation is concerned), the related ECJ case law is not very rich. This article tracks and evaluates the impact of the ECHR case law devoted to the freedom of religion on the interpretation and application of EU law concerning religion discriminations. It argues that the ECHR case law may contribute to identify the notion of ‘religion' which is relevant for EU law, while several arguments may be put forward against the application of the Strasbourg approach to the balancing between the right to quality based on religion and others human rights into the EU legal order.

scholarly journals The Horizontal Effects of Charter Rights Given Expression to in EU Legislation, from Mangold to Bauer

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-215
Author(s):  
Elise Muir
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Max Planck ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Eu Fundamental Rights

This paper investigates the relationship between legislative provisions and fundamental rights by analyzing the Egenberger, IR, Bauer, Max-Planck and Cresco cases. This paper understands these cases as an invitation to reflect on whether, and if so, to what extent, EU fundamental rights' legislation, read in conjunction with the Charter, could have an impact on the scope of application, substance and/or legal effects of the Charter. This paper argues that the Court of Justice's recent case law can be understood as allowing for EU legislative guidance on fundamental rights to interact in an upward process with the rights enshrined in norms with the same rank as EU primary law. This paper sheds light on the constitutional implications of the overlaps between legislation and constitutional norms on fundamental norms while other contributions in this special issue address effectiveness and the right to an effective remedy in a broader sense.

The Relationship between the EU and Member States in Constitutional Case Law: A Comparison between Western and Eastern Europe

2008 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 189-198
Author(s):  
Constance Grewe
Keyword(s):  
Turning Point ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
European Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Constitutional Identity ◽  
The Eu

It is indeed a crucial moment now that Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries have begun to join the EU. The Maastricht Treaty was itself, in several respects, a turning point in European construction; Member States then became aware of the increasing influence of EU law and started to defend their autonomy against the ‘attacks’ stemming from it. With the accession of the CEE states, the ‘Solange story: a story about national constitutional courts resisting a straightforward surrender of national legal sovereignties, and insisting on their own role as guardians of any further transfer of powers from the national to the European level’, can now enter into ‘its chapter 3’. National or constitutional identity is the main arm of resistance, and these national reactions require a rethinking of the relationship between national and European law.

scholarly journals Whose Autonomy is it Anyway? Freedom of Contract, the Right to Work and the General Principles of EU Law

2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 285-317
Author(s):  
Niall O’Connor
Keyword(s):  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
Legal Studies ◽  
Right To Work ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Just how significant is the freedom of contract found in Article 16 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights for the regulation of the employment relationship? For the first half of its existence, few could have foreseen that Article 16 would soon be at the centre of debates surrounding the place of business freedoms within EU employment law. This has changed in the wake of a number of controversial decisions in which the Court of Justice of the EU relied on Article 16 to undermine the effectiveness of employee-protective legislation. The article begins by setting out the nature of freedom of contract in EU law and its effects in the employment context. This is followed by a consideration of the relationship between the general principles and the Charter. Critical Legal Studies is relied on to show that existing arguments as to the use of Article 16 as a radical tool in the employment context have been both exaggerated and underplayed. Finally, potential counterweights to freedom of contract are examined, notably the right to work as both a general principle and Charter right.

Effective Judicial Protection: some recent developments – moving to the essence

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sacha Prechal
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Concrete Case ◽  
Effective Protection ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

This article looks briefly into the evolution of the principle of effective judicial protection in EU law and into the relationship between the different manifestations of that principle, which is by now given expression in Article 47 CFR, Article 19 TEU and various provisions of secondary law. Next, it focusses on recent developments in the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU, which concern two central aspects of the principle of effective judicial protection: the compliance with court judgments and the independence of the judiciary. As far as the first topic is concerned, two rather extreme cases addressed the issue what should be done, as a matter of EU law, in situations where a public authority refuses to comply with a final judicial decision. Then the article continues by discussing the independence of the judiciary as a key rationale for the principle of effective protection. In particular, it summarizes the increasingly detailed requirements to be satisfied in order to protect the independence of judges and indicates how an alleged lack of independence should be assessed in a concrete case.

Composing Europe’s Fundamental Rights Area: A Case for Discursive Pluralism

2015 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 210-246
Author(s):  
Louise HALLESKOV STORGAARD
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Normative Basis ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThis article offers a perspective on how the objective of a strong and coherent European protection standard pursued by the fundamental rights amendments of the Lisbon Treaty can be achieved, as it proposes a discursive pluralistic framework to understand and guide the relationship between the EU Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. It is argued that this framework – which is suggested as an alternative to the EU law approach to the Strasbourg system applied by the CJEU in Opinion 2/13 and its Charter-based case law – has a firm doctrinal, case law and normative basis. The article ends by addressing three of the most pertinent challenges to European fundamental rights protection through the prism of the proposed framework.

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.

The Unorthodox Relationship between the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Secondary Rights in the Court of Justice Case Law on Disability Discrimination

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 275-305
Author(s):  
Delia Ferri
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Right ◽  
Employment Equality ◽  
Different Sources ◽  
The Eu

Court of Justice – Discrimination on the basis of disability – Article 21 and 26 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – Employment Equality Directive – Relationship between different sources of law protecting the right of persons with disabilities – Charter as interpretative aid – Charter as a parameter of validity – Scope of application of the Charter – Constitutionalisation of the UN Convention

scholarly journals Regressing into the right direction: Non-contractual claims in proceedings between contracting parties under Article 7 of the Brussels Ia Regulation

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 390-398
Author(s):  
Michiel Poesen
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

This case comment addresses the interpretation of ‘matters relating to a contract’ in the EU law of civil jurisdiction, contained in the Brussels Ia Regulation. Recently, this topic received renewed attention in the Wikingerhofv.Booking.com judgment of the CJEU. More particularly, the judgment addressed whether non-contractual claims in proceedings between contracting parties can be characterized as a ‘matter relating to a contract’. This seemingly trivial question has been a recurring source of trouble in the case law of the CJEU as well as national courts. The annotation will side with the approach taken in this judgment, but criticize it for taking a long way round to settling the issue.

scholarly journals The ECJ's Coman judgment: Recognition of same-sex marriage indirectly?

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 77-93
Author(s):  
Milena Petrović
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
European Court ◽  
To Come ◽  
Union Citizen ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

In the Coman case, the European Court of Justice was asked whether the term "spouse" - for the purpose of EU law - includes the same-sex spouse of an EU citizen who has moved between EU Member States. The ECJ answered this question affirmatively, holding that a refusal to recognise a same-sex marriage and the resultant refusal to grant family reunification rights to a Union citizen who moves to another Member State, would constitute an unjustified restriction on the right to free movement that Union citiyens enjoy under EU law. This case comment analyses the judgment, arguing that the Court's pronouncement is a very welcome first step towards marriage equality at a cross-border level in the EU. At the same time, the case poses a number of important questions, which will only be answered in case law and practice in the years to come.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document