European Union Litigation

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 320-334
Author(s):  
Fabrizio Esposito ◽  
Lucila de Almeida

Abstract This article provides an overview of cases decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning contract law. The present issue covers the period between the beginning of January 2021 and the end of May 2021.

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 212-232
Author(s):  
Fabrizio Esposito ◽  
Philipp Hacker

AbstractThis article provides an overview of cases decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning contract law. The present issue covers the period between the beginning of July 2019 and the end of December 2019.


2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-79
Author(s):  
Philipp Hacker ◽  
Marie-Sophie Schäfer

AbstractThis article provides an overview of cases decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning contract law. The present issue covers the period between July 2017 and the beginning of January 2018.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 340-363
Author(s):  
Philipp Hacker ◽  
Betül Kas

Abstract This article provides an overview of cases decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning contract law. The present issue covers the period between the beginning of February and the end of June 2019.


2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 273-291
Author(s):  
Betül Kas ◽  
Fabrizio Esposito

Abstract This article provides an overview of cases decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) concerning contract law. The present issue covers the period between mid-January 2018 and mid-July 2018.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-83
Author(s):  
Fabrizio Esposito ◽  
Philipp Hacker

Abstract This article provides an overview of cases decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning contract law. The present issue covers the period between mid-July 2018 and the end of January 2019.


2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp Hacker ◽  
Fabrizio Esposito

AbstractThis section provides an overview of cases in front of the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning contract law. The present issue covers the period between January 2017 and the middle of July 2017.


2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabrizio Esposito ◽  
Philipp Hacker

AbstractThis section provides an overview of cases in front of the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning contract law. The present issue covers the period between the beginning of April 2015 and the beginning of January 2017.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 1178-1186
Author(s):  
Ovidiu Ioan Dumitru

AbstractFrom the far beginning of the European Communities, with broader objective of creating a perfect unique market for the member states, it must be underlined the importance of the results of the harmonisation process of the contract law and the single market and that, in time, the institutions struggled in their tumultuous work for fulfilling the indicated objectives to overcome the interventions from each Member State, interested, also, in shaping a great and prosperous common market, but trying, subsequently, to reason with their traditions, culture, ideological and political choices. The legislation on single market and European contract law is a subjected to the three guiding principles of the European Union: the principle of conferral, which empowers the European Union in terms of competence, the principle of subsidiarity, which underlines the European Union’s competence in a certain field that is shared with a Member State and the principle of proportionality, which applies if the first two principles are validated, dealing with the how the European Union should legislate. However, there are some critics who express their worries in that there are insufficient empirical proofs for redefining the harmonisation process. Taking into account the criticism, the European Court of Justice has ruled in numerous occasions that the authorisation to harmonise laws, with the scope of safeguarding the proper functioning of the European internal market does not grant the European Union a carte blanche in order to interfere with the sake of harmonisation any law it wishes. The way the above indicated principles maintained their roles provided by the treaties or they were subject of modification, by enrichment or limitation, by the caselaw provided by the European Court of Justice, we must investigate in order to picture a possible “finale” of our Single Market and this paper will concentrate of the influence of subsidiarity and proportionality on the fields most dynamic in the past years, the Digital Single Market and its contract law. This paper wishes to clarify how the two fundamental principles, of subsidiarity and proportionality, provided in time by the modifying treaties and consolidated by the European Court of Justice, influenced the evolution of the legislation regarding the Single Market and how those two may help or block the future evolution in the context of a continuous pressure coming from the development of the digital framework and online contracts.


2019 ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
ROMAN PETROV

У статті досліджено вплив Суду Європейського Союзу (ЄС) на впровадження і застосування Угоди про асоціацію між Україною та ЄС, що викликало безпрецедентні політичні, економічні та правові реформи в Україні. Зокрема, розглядаються конституційні виклики, які постали перед державою під час виконання Угоди в правовій системі. Крім того, досліджено два питання. Перше – ефективне впровадження та застосування Угоди про асоціацію між Україною та ЄС в українській правовій системі. Друге – сумісність і відповідність Угоди Конституції України. Проаналізовано останні політичні та правові події в Україні через призму ефективної реалізації Угоди про асоціацію між Україною та ЄС і зростання проєвропейського правового активізму в державі. На закінчення стверджується, що Угода про асоціацію між Україною та ЄС посилює пристосованість національного конституційного устрою до цілей досягнення європейської інтеграції та застосування європейських спільних цінностей в Україні. Угода про асоціацію між Україною та ЄС створила стійку інституційну та правову основу для застосування acquis ЄС (правового доробку ЄС), включаючи прецедентне право ЄС та комплексне законодавче наближення між законодавством України та ЄС. Однак інституційні реформи, які вже відбулися, не можна вважати цілком достатніми. Верховній Раді України не вдалося запровадити основні та процедурні засади для застосування та впровадження Угоди в правовий порядок України. Однак ця прогалина частково заповнюється зростаючим судовим активізмом в Україні. Вітчизняні судді вже почали посилатися на Угоду про асоціацію між Україною та ЄС і відповідні частини acquis ЄС у своїх рішеннях, тим самим закладаючи основу для регулярного застосування загальних принципів права ЄС у процесі виконання й імплементації Угоди про асоціацію між Україною та ЄС.


2016 ◽  
pp. 54-66
Author(s):  
Monika Poboży

The article poses a question about the existence of the rule of separation of powers in the EU institutional system, as it is suggested by the wording of the treaties. The analysis led to the conclusion, that in the EU institutional system there are three separated functions (powers) assigned to different institutions. The Council and the European Parliament are legislative powers, the Commission and the European Council create a “divided executive”. The Court of Justice is a judicial power. The above mentioned institutions gained strong position within their main functions (legislative, executive, judicial), but the proper mechanisms of checks and balances have not been developed, especially in the relations between legislative and executive power. These powers do not limit one another in the EU system. In the EU there are therefore three separated but arbitrary powers – because they do not limit and balance one another, and are not fully controlled by the member states.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document