Formulation of rights and European legal discourse: any theory behind it?

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Ioriatti Ferrari
Keyword(s):  
Linguistic Diversity ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Actual Structure ◽  
Multilingual Communication ◽  
Consumer Rights ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
Council Regulation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Withdrawal ◽  
The Eu

AbstractEver since the very beginning of the European Economic Community, the EU has regulated European linguistic diversity through a policy of multilingualism (Art. 217 of the E.C. Treaty and Council Regulation No 1 April 15, 1958). Within this policy, the legislator introduced the right of EU citizens to communicate with the EU institutions in each one of the official languages. The possibility of multilingual communication with the EU institutions is not only a practical solution, but a real “core” right, recognized even in the Lisbon Treaty. In this framework, it is worth providing practical solutions as well as considering whether or not, the European Union is also favoring the enactment of rights at the European level, by formulating, enforcing and even communicating the same rule to all EU citizens, with the aid of a multilingual drafting. The EU legal terminology providing rights comes into being through specific mechanisms of lexical creation, which chiefly consist of coining semantic neologisms. Moreover, all legal texts must be written in accordance with EU drafting guidelines, prescribing that “rules have to be drafted bearing in mind their translation in all the official languages”. The consequence of these drafting techniques is that multilingualism influences not only the translation, but the actual structure and content of the rule: very often the result of this praxis is a pragmatic, detailed, concrete regulation of legal instruments, rather than a system of rights. A clear example is given by the directives on consumer protection – nowadays “Directive on Consumer Rights” – and particularly the well known “right of withdrawal”; a consumer opportunity to withdraw from a contract within seven (now fourteen) days is undeniably a proper “right”. However, the regulation provided in the directives is more focused on the procedure of withdrawal (the instrument) than on the effect of the withdrawal from the contract (the right). In general, the multilingual drafting of EU norms – and consequently of EU

scholarly journals Preparation of a Legislative Proposal in the Multilingual Legal System of the European Union

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-50
Author(s):  
Anna Doliwa-Klepacka
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal System ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Language Version ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legislative Proposal ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The principle of multilingualism in the legal system of the European Union is one of the key elements that guarantees, among others, the right of access to EU legislation. It is particularly important not only in the sphere of the direct application of the EU law, but also in the sphere of access to information during the lawmaking procedures at the EU institutions. A special case is, however, a stage of preparing a draft legislative proposal by the European Commission. The EU member states agree to limit the use of official language version to the working documents for “working” languages of the Commission, i.e. English, French and German. In practice, English and French are the most widely used languages for the working arrangements in the preparation of the draft legislation, mainly due to costs of the necessary translations and an effectiveness of this stage. This article presents a course of the stage of the drafting a legislative proposal by the Commission and illustrates the scope of work partly exempted from the obligation to ensure the full application of the principle of equivalence of all the official languages of the European Union.

scholarly journals Multilingualism as a Principle of the EU Court of Justice

2014 ◽  
pp. 245-252
Author(s):  
K. Kh. Rekosh
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Law And Order ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Discourse Relations ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

Since the jurisprudence reflects relations between the institutions, bodies and organizations of the EU and native speakers, the EU Court of Justice plays a huge role in shaping the legal discourse. Relations between the EU and citizens show the effectiveness of the principle of multilingualism, that is apparent before the Court. The enlargement of the Union to 28 member States and, accordingly, the increase of the number of official languages to 24 complicate the implementation of the principle of multilingualism and create many problems for the EU Court of Justice: legal, linguistic, budget, translation. All documents of the Court are not translated into 24 EU official languages completely and often limited to summaries. All documents are translated only into French and proceeding languages, for the scale of the translation work have a direct impact on the timing of legal proceedings. To provide help in written translations, much work is carried out in the Court on drawing up dictionaries, thesauri, where multilingualism is fully manifested. On the use of languages and language regime, There is an extensive legal practice, however, the term «multilingualism» is not used by the Court, despite the recognition of the principle of equality of all official languages, perhaps, due to the fact that the Court itself not always follows it. The article shows that multilingualism as a legal concept and principle opens up, sometimes adjacent to the already distinguished objects of regulation, new areas of legal research. Comparison of legal solutions to the problems of multilingualism in different states with a variety of languages, law and order, or in international organizations, lays basis of "comparative linguistic law" Now in the doctrine of law of the European Union neither the linguistic law, nor the comparative linguistic law do not exist, but to provide cooperation in the field of justice and mutual recognition of judicial decisions on the basis of the principle of multilingualism, the EU has adopted the Directive on the right to interpretation and translation in the framework of criminal proceedings.

Article 22 CFR

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobias Lock
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Diversity ◽  
Linguistic Diversity ◽  
Religious Diversity ◽  
Core Values ◽  
Cultural And Linguistic Diversity ◽  
The Core ◽  
The Status ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

Article 22 CFR aims to ensure the diversity of the Union and complements other provisions of the Charter and the Treaties pursuing similar objectives. Cultural and linguistic diversity are among the core values of the EU mentioned in Article 3(3) TEU. Cultural diversity finds further expression in primary law in Article 167(1) and (4) TFEU; and linguistic diversity in the right to address the EU institutions in any one of the EU’s official languages in Article 41(4) CFR as well as in Article 21 CFR, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of language. Moreover, the Union’s commitment to religious diversity is reflected in Article 17 TFEU protecting the status of churches, religious, philosophical, and non-confessional organizations and communities as well as in Article 10 CFR protecting freedom of religion and belief.

Citizenship of the European Union

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Willem Maas
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Political Agenda ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
European Elections ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

Citizenship is usually conceptualized as a unitary and exclusive relationship between an individual and a sovereign state; yet the European Union (EU) has developed the most advanced form of contemporary supranational citizenship. Citizenship of the European Union guarantees EU citizens and most members of their families the right to move, live, and work across the territory of the EU. It also guarantees the right to vote in local and European elections in the member state of residence, the right to consular protection outside the EU when the member state of nationality is not represented, the right to access documents or petition Parliament or the Ombudsman in any of the official languages, and the right to be treated free from nationality-based discrimination. Though on the political agenda since the postwar origins of European integration, EU citizenship was not formalized into EU law until the Maastricht Treaty. Since then, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has declared that “EU Citizenship is destined to be the fundamental status of nationals of the Member States” and there are ongoing discussions about the relationship between EU and member state citizenship. In terms of identity, increasing numbers of Europeans see themselves as citizens of the EU, and questions of citizenship are at the heart of debates about the nature of European integration.

Sale of goods made to the consumer’s specifications at a trade fair: ab initio no right of withdrawal: Case C-529/19 Möbel Kraft, EU:C:2020:846

2021 ◽  
pp. 1023263X2199601
Author(s):  
Reinhard Steennot
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Ab Initio ◽  
Trade Fair ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Consumer Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Withdrawal

Within the European Union, consumers concluding contracts with traders either at a distance or outside the traders’ premises are generally entitled to withdraw from the contract. However, in certain cases, enumerated in article 16 of the Consumer Rights Directive, the right of withdrawal does not apply. One of the exceptions to the right of withdrawal concerns contracts relating to the supply of goods that are made to the consumer’s specifications or that are clearly personalized. In Möbel Kraft, the ECJ decided that a trader may rely on this exception from the outset and not only after he has begun to produce the goods.

scholarly journals Will the imaginary active consumers please stand up? Case note to Walbusch Walter Busch: Case C-430/17 Walbusch Walter Busch GmbH & Co. KG v. Zentrale zur Bekämpfung unlauteren Wettbewerbs Frankfurt am Main eV, EU:C:2019:47

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 713-719
Author(s):  
Joasia Luzak
Keyword(s):  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Case Note ◽  
Recent Case ◽  
Frankfurt Am Main ◽  
Limited Space ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Technological Advances ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Withdrawal ◽  
The Eu

The questions posed to the Court of Justice of the EU in the recent case of Walbusch Walter Busch asked what qualifies as the means of communication with a limited space or time to display the information and how detailed the disclosure on the right of withdrawal needs to be on such a medium. The judgment in this case had to strike a balance between not limiting traders’ opportunities to use technological advances to reach consumers and one of the main objectives of consumer protection: ensuring consumers have a chance to make fully informed transactional decisions.

scholarly journals El sistema español de jerarquía lingüística. Desarrollo autonómico del artículo 3 de la Constitución: lengua del Estado, lenguas cooficiales, otras lenguas españolas y modalidades lingüísticas. Teoría y praxis. // The Spanish system of language hierarchy. Autonomic development of article 3 of the Constitution: State language, co-official languages, other Spanish languages and language modalities. Theory and praxis.

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (100) ◽  
pp. 51
Author(s):  
Vicenta Tasa Fuster
Keyword(s):  
Linguistic Diversity ◽  
Native Languages ◽  
Autonomous Communities ◽  
Linguistic Rights ◽  
Spanish Constitution ◽  
El Sistema ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
Special Respect ◽  
The Right ◽  
Official Recognition

Resumen:Este trabajo pretende dar una visión general del reconocimiento de la diversidad lingüística española que se deriva de la Constitución. Nos referimos exclusivamente a las lenguas autóctonas históricamente habladas en España; teniendo en cuenta, además, que una misma lengua puede recibir diversas denominaciones populares y oficiales.Partiendo de estas premisas, el trabajo estudia el reconocimiento que hace la Constitución Española de la diversidad lingüística en España en su artículo 3. Se subraya en el estudio que, en dicho artículo de la Constitución se establece que el castellano es la lengua española oficial del Estado y que todos los españoles tienen el deber de conocerla y el derecho a usarla (art. 3.1), que las otras lenguas españolas serán también oficiales en las respectivas comunidades autónomas, en función de la regulación que hagan sus estatutos (art. 3.2) y que España considera que la riqueza de las diferentes modalidades lingüísticas esun patrimonio cultural que deberá tener un respeto y una protección especiales (art. 3.3).El contenido de la Constitución, la jurisprudencia constitucional de las últimas cuatro décadas y los estatutos de autonomía y legislación lingüística autonómica, han asentado un reconocimiento de la diversidad lingüística española y de los derechos lingüísticos concretos de los hablantes de las distintas lenguas españolas fundamentado en el principio de jerarquía lingüística y no en los de seguridad lingüística e igualdad de derechos lingüísticos. El principio de jerarquía lingüística presupone considerar que existen unas lenguas que deben tener un reconocimiento legal y oficial superior a otras. Y, lo que es lo mismo, que los derechos lingüísticos de sus hablantes no tienen el mismo grado de reconocimiento. Llegándose a dar el caso que, en España, una misma lengua pueda llegar a tener diferentes niveles de reconocimiento legal-oficial y un número aún mayor de políticas lingüísticas que traten de convertir en una realidad substantiva todos o una parte de los derechos lingüísticos reconocidos formalmente a los hablantes de una lengua diferente del castellano en una comunidad autónoma.Así las cosas, se constata que legalmente una lengua (castellano) tiene una situación de preeminencia legal-oficial, seis lenguas españolas (catalán, gallego, vasco, occitano, aragonés y asturleonés) tienen algún tipo de reconocimiento oficial en parte del territorio en el que son habladas de manera autóctona, una lengua tiene reconocimiento político (tamazight), otra tiene un reconocimiento administrativo menor en Cataluña (caló), y tres lenguas autóctonas no tienen el más mínimo reconocimiento legal, político o administrativo (árabe, haquetia yportugués). El trabajo estudia detalladamente y de manera global la estructuración de la jerarquía lingüística en la legislación española derivadade la Constitución y concluye con una descripción de los seis niveles de jerarquía lingüística y de derechos lingüísticos que existen en España. Se defiende, finalmente, un cambio sistema lingüístico legalconstitucional que respete los principios de seguridad lingüística y el principio de igualdad de derechos lingüísticos de todos los ciudadanos españoles. Summary:1. Introduction. The Constitution and the Spanish languages. 2.Language in the statutes of monolingual communities. 3. Linguisticdiversity in multilingual communities with a single official language.4. Communities with co-officiality. 5. Final considerations: a hierarchicalrecognition. 6. Bibliography cited. Abstract:This paper is an overview of the recognition of the Spanish linguistic diversity derived from the Constitution. We refer exclusively to the native languages historically spoken in Spain; about that is important to know that the same language can receive diverse popular and official denominations.With these premises, the work studies the recognition in the article 3 of the Spanish Constitution of the linguistic diversity in Spain. It is emphasized in the study that this article establishes that the Castilian is the official Spanish language of the State and that all Spaniards have the duty to know it and the right to use it (article 3.1), that the other Spanish languages would be official in the respective autonomous communities, depending on the regulation made by their statutes of autonomy (article 3.2 ), and that Spain considers the richness of the different linguistic modalities a cultural heritage that must have special respect and protection (article 3.3).The content of the Constitution, the constitutional jurisprudence of the last four decades and the statutes of autonomy and autonomous linguistic legislation, have established a recognition of the Spanish linguistic diversity and of the specific linguistic rights of the speakers of the different Spanish languages based on the principle of linguistic hierarchy and not in those of linguistic security and equality of linguistic rights. The principle of linguistic hierarchy considers that there are some languages that have to have a legal and official recognitionsuperior to others. And, what is the same, that the linguistic rights of its speakers do not have the same degree of recognition. In Spain, the same language may have different levels of legal-official recognition and a lot of linguistic policies in the autonomous communities that try to be reality all or part of the linguistic rights formally recognized to speakers of a language other than Castilian. So it is verified that legally a language (Castilian) has a situation oflegal-official preeminence, six Spanish languages (Catalan, Galician, Basque, Occitan, Aragonese and Asturian) have some type of official recognition in part of the territory where are spoken, one language has political recognition (Tamazight), another has a lower administrative recognition in Catalonia (Caló), and three indigenous languages do not have the least legal, political or administrative recognition (Arabic, Hachetia and Portuguese).The paper studies in detail the structure of the linguistic hierarchy in Spanish legislation derived from the Constitution and concludes with a description of the six levels of linguistic hierarchy and of linguistic rights that exist in Spain. Finally, it defends a legal-constitutional linguistic system that respects the principles of linguistic security and of equality of linguistic rights of all Spanish citizens.

scholarly journals From social regulation of competition to competition as social regulation: transformations in the socioeconomic governance of the European Union

2017 ◽  
pp. 53-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonios Roumpakis ◽  
Theo Papadopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Industrial Relations ◽  
Social Regulation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Wage Setting ◽  
Regulatory Changes ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
New Procedures ◽  
The Eu

This chapter studies the character of contemporary socioeconomic governance in the EU. It draws on empirical evidence capturing the type and extent of regulatory changes in the fields of industrial relations, corporate governance, and the coordination of macro-economic policy in the EU. The effects of these changes are long term, cumulative, and mutually reinforcing and should be seen as integral elements of a relatively coherent project to establish a form of transnational polity in Europe that privileges competition as its regulatory rationale. Indeed, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has been institutionally prioritising market freedoms and competition over labour rights, and especially the right to collective action in an emerging transnational regulatory field in the EU. Meanwhile, the new procedures of European macro-economic coordination construe national wage setting, collective bargaining institutions, and, more generally, social policy as adjustment variables serving primarily the purpose of promoting or restoring member states' economic competitiveness.

scholarly journals Renewable energy resources in the EU (Policy scenario)

2013 ◽  
pp. 143-146
Author(s):  
Orsolya Nagy
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
European Union ◽  
Renewable Energy ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Biomass Energy ◽  
Energy Resources ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Renewable Energy Resources ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The use of renewable energies has a long past, even though its share of the total energy use is rather low in European terms. However, the tendencies are definitely favourable which is further strengthened by the dedication of the European Union to sustainable development and combat against climate change. The European Union is on the right track in achieving its goal which is to be able to cover 20% its energy need from renewable energy resources by 2020. The increased use of wind, solar, water, tidal, geothermal and biomass energy will reduce the energy import dependence of the European Union and it will stimulate innovation.

scholarly journals Gloss to the Judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C 129/18, SM versus Entry Clearance Officer, UK Visa Section

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-200
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Woch
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Family Members ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
State Of The Union ◽  
Legal Guardianship ◽  
The Status ◽  
Union Citizen ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The right of family members of Union citizens to live with them in the host Member State has always been considered essential for an effective freedom of movement of citizens. However, the provisions of Directive 2004/38/EC contain a different description of the scope of rights of family members of Union citizens taking advantage of the freedom of movement of persons as to the possibility of accompanying or joining EU citizens taking advantage of the freedom of movement of persons, depending on whether they belong to the circle of ‘closer’ or ‘distant’ family members. This issue acquires particular significance in the context of family members who are not citizens of any Member State of the Union. For individuals belonging to the circle of ‘closer’ family members, the EU legislator grants the subjective right to accompany or join a Union citizen exercising the right of the freedom of movement of persons. In the latter case, the legislator only obliges the host Member States to facilitate entry and residence for such individuals in accordance with their national legislation. The glossed judgment, by determining the status of individuals under legal guardianship within the framework of the Algerian kafala system as a ‘distant’ family member of a Union citizen, clearly touches upon a significant issue in the context of the Union’s freedom of movement of persons.    

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document