On the Issue of the Succession Law Reform in Russia and the European Union: Some Results of 2017 – 2019

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 871
Author(s):  
Alexandr А. PUKHART ◽  
Hajiyev Adil AFGANOGLY
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The Other ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Special Procedure ◽  
The Times ◽  
The One

The authors investigate the features of reforming the succession law in Russia and the European Union. It was revealed that: (1) the topic of cross-border succession  is becoming increasingly important in Europe, given that substantive laws in EU Member States vary significantly with respect to the form of will, the admissibility of succession  agreements, the rules of calling for inheritance, etc.; (2) these problems should have been adopted by Regulation No. 650/2012 on succession  adopted on July 4, 2012, which has been applied in all EU member states since August 17, 2015; (3) The Regulation introduced the European Certificate of Succession (ECS) - a document that must be recognized in all member states without any special procedure; (4) on the one hand, ECS has simplified the procedure for accepting and registering an inheritance; on the other hand, problems have been identified that arise as a result of applying the laws of individual states; (5) the reform of the Russian legislation on inheritance, which took place in 2017-2019, was aimed at ensuring the interests of heirs by introducing such institutions as: succession fund, succession agreement, joint testament of spouses; which made it possible to conclude that Russian legislation is increasingly intensively keeping up with the times and becoming more flexible in terms of inheritance.

Variable Geometry or Concentric Circles: Patterns for the European Union

1997 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 243-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. A. Usher
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The Other ◽  
Variable Geometry ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Community Institutions ◽  
European Court ◽  
Private Citizens ◽  
The One

Once upon a time, a Professor of European Institutions, at least if a lawyer by training, could simply assert that the European Communities are based on the rule of law, that they create institutions with autonomous powers, which are able to issue legislation binding as law throughout every member State of the Community, and that they create courts which have power to exercise judicial control over a complex network of relationships between the Community institutions, the member States and private citizens. While these statements are still true, however, they must now be laced in a rather more complex context. Furthermore, there is a contrast between on the one hand the intensification (to borrow a word from the Common Agricultural Policy) of certain fundamenta s of the EC legal order in the recent case law of the European Court, and on the other hand attempts by member States to escape this through non-EC forms of cooperation in the framework of the European Union, the development of the idea that not all the rules of the EC Treaty apply to all the member States, and the entry by the majority of the member States into a separate Treaty, the Schengen Agreement, dealing with matters which might be thought to fall under the EC Treaty or the Home Affairs and Justice pillar of the Treaty on European Union—all of which might generically be referred to as variable geometry. In the other direction, it may be observed that large amounts of substantive

Caught Between National and Supranational Values: Limitations to Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters as Part of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice within the European Union

2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-72
Author(s):  
Olivia den Hollander
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Third ◽  
The One ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
The Eu

AbstractCurrently, the European Union is based on both supranational (first pillar) and international (second and third pillar) law. The third pillar signifies police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters and although formally based on international law, it has been under increasing "supranational pressure" by the developments in the "Area of Freedom, Security and Justice". This Area is focused on a set of common values and principles closely tied to those of the single market and its four "freedoms". The main argument of this article is that the legal framework of the third pillar is an impediment to judicial cooperation in criminal matters in general, and to the coordination of conflicts of jurisdiction and the principle of ne bis in idem in particular. The legal framework of the third pillar finds itself in the middle of an identity crisis, since it can neither be identified as a traditional intergovernmental, nor as a supranational institutional framework. Criminal law is a politically sensitive matter, which on the one hand explains why the EU member states are reluctant to submit their powers over the issue to the European level and on the other hand, it implies that if the EU member states really want to cooperate on such an intensive level, they will have to submit some of their powers in order to strengthen EU constitutional law. The article suggests a reform of the third pillar through the method of "communitization", which is exactly what will happen in case the EU Reform Treaty will enter into force. This would offer the ingredients for a true international community in which the ambitious agenda of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice can realise its aim of a common set of values and principles which supersedes those of each of the member states individually.

scholarly journals COVID-19 AND EUROPEAN UNION – THE ANSWER TO THE HEALTH CRISIS AS A WAY FOR RESUMING THE PROCESS OF EUROPEAN INTEGRATION

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-116
Author(s):  
Stelio Mangiameli
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Economic Consequences ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
European Institutions ◽  
The Face ◽  
The One ◽  
Economic And Financial Crisis

The essay starts from a comparison in the European Union between the economic and financial crisis of 2009 and the health crisis of 2020, due to the Covid-19 pandemic. In particular, the scarce capacity of Member States and European institutions to carry out the recovery of the economic European condition and transformation of the European government system after the 2009 crisis, despite the indications of the Commission's Blueprint (of 2012) and of the Report of the five presidents (of 2015). On the other hand, in the face of the health crisis, the reaction of the European institutions seemed more decisive with the creation of various instruments to combat the economic consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic. These include in particular the Recovery fund - Next Generation EU, linked to the 2021-2027 MFF. The reaction to the pandemic shows the possibilities of the European Union to create a community of States in solidarity and with its own identity also in the international scenario. However, it is by no means certain that this idea can prevail over the one that sees the European Union as simply a free trade organization between the Member States. The decisions that will be taken in the Conference on the future of Europe between 2021 and 2022 appear to be decided to define the evolution of the European Union.

Sincere Cooperation and Respect for National Identities

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Guastaferro
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
National Identities ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Third ◽  
Vertical Division ◽  
The One ◽  
The Eu

Article 4 of the Treaty on the European Union is a core provision to understand the ‘federal’ nature of the European Union. It is composed of three paragraphs, any of which tries to strike a balance between the constitutive units of the composite legal order, namely the EU, on the one hand, and the Member States, on the other. The first paragraph enshrines the so-called ‘principle of presumed Member States competences’, according to which competences not conferred upon the EU remain to the Member States. The second paragraph requires the EU to respect Member States’ national identities, inherent in their fundamental political and constitutional structures. The third paragraph enshrines the principle of sincere cooperation. In this respect, all the paragraphs express a sort of ‘federal concern’. Article 4(1) TEU is devoted to the vertical division of competences and strengthens the respect of the principle of conferral, Article 4(2) TEU is devoted to the identities of the Member States of the EU thus protecting diversities in the composite legal order, and Article 4(3) TEU is devoted to loyalty, which, like in many federal or compound legal orders, should inform the cooperation among levels of government.

Introduction

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Eleonora Rosati
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
The Other ◽  
Property Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Copyright Policy ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Past ◽  
The One ◽  
The Eu

Compared to other areas of intervention at the European Union (EU) level, copyright harmonization is a relatively recent phenomenon. Compared to other areas of intellectual property law, copyright harmonization has not been as complete as with other rights. Yet, two phenomena may be observed: one the one hand, copyright policy and legislative initiatives have intensified over the past few years; on the other hand, the large number of references to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has substantially shaped the EU copyright framework and, with it, also the copyright framework of individual EU Member States....

scholarly journals Los efectos patrimoniales de los matrimonios y de las uniones registradas en la Unión Europea = Property consequences of marriages and of registered partnerships in the European Union

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 8
Author(s):  
Andrés Rodríguez Benot
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Property Regimes

Resumen: Desde el 29 de enero de 2019 la mayoría de los países de la UE aplica los Reglamentos 2016/1103 y 2016/1104, de 24 de junio de 2016, sobre los aspectos de Derecho internacional privado de los regímenes matrimoniales y de los efectos patrimoniales de las uniones registradas, respectivamente. Se trata de dos textos extensos y complejos que ofrecen una regulación global o de conjunto de los as­pectos de esta materia en supuestos que impliquen repercusión transfronteriza.Palabras clave: Régimen económico matrimonial,e Efectos patrimoniales de las uniones registra­das. Reglamentos de la UE 2016/1103 y 2016/1104.Abstract: Since 29th January 2019 most of EU Member States apply Regulations 2016/1103 and 2016/1104 concerning Private International Law in matters of matrimonial property regimes and in mat­ters of the property consequences of registered partnerships, respectively. Both are long and complex texts that govern comprehensively all issues of those matters having cross-border implications.Keywords: Matrimonial property regimes. Property consequences of registered partnerships. EU Regulations 2016/1103 and 2016/1104.

scholarly journals   Agri-food exports in the enlarged European Union

2012 ◽  
Vol 58 (No. 8) ◽  
pp. 354-366 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Antimiani ◽  
A. Carbone ◽  
V. Costantini ◽  
R. Henke
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
New Member States ◽  
Export Dynamics ◽  
Catching Up ◽  
Food Market ◽  
The One

  This paper explores the agri-food export dynamics in the New Member States and the Old Member States of the European Union during the enlargement process. The analysis relies on two different approaches based on the similarity and the sophistication indices of exported goods using a disaggregation at 95 items. The analysis shows that different and somehow divergent paths are in place. On the one side, the Czech Republic and Poland are involved in a quality catching up process and increase their competitiveness. On the other side, Bulgaria and Romania seem to be still trapped in the low-quality segment of the agri-food market with a decreasing competitiveness performance in the richest segment of the European market.  

scholarly journals Franchising, Validation, and Branch Campuses in the European Union

2014 ◽  
pp. 16-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lukas Bischof
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
European Union ◽  
Quality Assurance ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Branch Campuses ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Study Programs

European Higher Education is growing together. Both students and institutions are increasingly going abroad to obtain or offer education. Lately, the issue of branch campuses, franchising or validation arrangements have caused controversy. While European law guarantees all EU universities to offer their study programs in other EU Member States, there is not yet an overarching form of cross-border quality assurance. A recent study has investigated the prevalence of cross-border provision of higher education as well as its regulation in 27 Member States of the European Union. This article explores existing loopholes and makes recommendations for a European quality assurance framework for cross-border education.

scholarly journals Considerations on the Infringement Procedure against Romania

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Crina Mihaela Verga ◽  
◽  
◽  
◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Comparative Methods ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Relevant Case ◽  
The Eu

This paper is a study of the infringement procedure, as it is regulated at EU level. Thus, we first analyze the existing legal framework on the matter. The implementation of this procedure in various Member States of the European Union and its consequences are then presented. Last but not least, the article refers to a series of aspects regarding the fields in which the procedure was directed against Romania since its integration into the EU. The purpose of the essay is to present in detail Romania's situation regarding the violation of EU’s law.Thus, a comparative presentation throughout time of the number of such proceedings launched against the Romanian state was made.A relevant case in which Romania was tried and convicted was also presented in detail.The large number of cases launched in 2021 highlights the delays registered by Romania on the matter. The measures ordered by the Romanian government through the elaborated the Annual Transposition Plan-2021must be carefully and systematically implemented. Romania could also consider and effectively apply the examples of good practice from the other EU’s member states. The historical and the comparative methods used in this presentation reveal both the similarities between the application of this procedure in the EU Member States under review as well as the differences and its succession in time. The article is important not only for the scientists, but also for the practitioners to dispose all the necessary measures that are required.

scholarly journals ENVIRONMENT CRIMINAL LAW IN TODAY EUROPEAN UNION

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ion Flămînzeanu
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Union Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Distribution Of Powers ◽  
Union Action ◽  
The One ◽  
European Union Member States

AbstractEnvironment crime is among the European Union’s central concerns. The TampereEuropean Council of 15 and 16 October 1999 at which a first work program for theEuropean Union action in the field of Justice and Home Affairs was adopted asked thatefforts be made to adopt common definitions of offences and penalties focusing on a numberof especially important sectors, amongst them environment crime. But despite this agreementabout the importance of joint the European Union action, environmental criminal law hasbecome the centre of a serious institutional fight between the European Commission,supported by the European Parliament on the one hand and the Council, supported by thegreat majority of the European Union member states on the other hand. At stake is nothingless than the distribution of powers between the first and the third pillars, and therefore alsobetween the Commission and the European Union’s member states. The effect of this fight iscurrently a legal vacuum on general environmental criminal law that was closed with theDirective 2008/99/CE, taking into consideration the cross-border dimension of environmentalcrime and the existing significant differences in the national legislation of the EuropeanUnion member states.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document