scholarly journals El locus standi de terceros Estados para interponer recurso de anulación contra medidas restrictivas de la UE: el asunto C-872/19 P, Venezuela/Consejo

2021 ◽  
pp. 1037-1060
Author(s):  
Beatriz Vázquez Rodríguez
Keyword(s):  
Locus Standi

La sentencia del Tribunal de Justicia de 22 de junio de 2021, Venezuela/Consejo, abre una nueva dimensión en relación con el alcance de los criterios de admisibilidad del art. 263 TFUE, párr. cuarto, puesto que el TJ considera por primera vez que Venezuela, un Estado tercero, debe considerarse «persona jurídica» y por tanto está legitimado —siempre que se cumplan los demás requisitos de admisibilidad— para plantear un recurso de anulación contra medidas restrictivas dirigidas contra él. Según el TJ, esta interpretación es acorde con el principio a la tutela judicial efectiva y el respeto del Estado de Derecho. Además, el interés de este asunto también radica en las argumentaciones en torno al alcance de principios de derecho internacional público como el de reciprocidad y el de inmunidad soberana. Finalmente, el fallo del TJ también permite aventurar la posibilidad de un cambio de paradigma en la elección y adopción de medidas restrictivas por la UE.

scholarly journals A Comparative Discussion of the Judicial Disqualification of Directors under the South African Companies Act

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Rehana Cassim
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
South African ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
The South ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Locus Standi

Abstract Section 162 of the South African Companies Act 71 of 2008 empowers courts to declare directors delinquent and hence to disqualify them from office. This article compares the judicial disqualification of directors under this section with the equivalent provisions in the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States of America, which have all influenced the South African act. The article compares the classes of persons who have locus standi to apply to court to disqualify a director from holding office, as well as the grounds for the judicial disqualification of a director, the duration of the disqualification, the application of a prescription period and the discretion conferred on courts to disqualify directors from office. It contends that, in empowering courts to disqualify directors from holding office, section 162 of the South African Companies Act goes too far in certain respects.

scholarly journals Public Interest Environmental Litigation: Recent Cases Raise Possible Obstacles

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
Michael Kidd
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Environmental Management ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
The Republic ◽  
History Books ◽  
National Environmental

Despite the broadening of locus standi in environmental cases by both Section 38 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, and Section 32 of the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998, two recent cases suggest that the pre-constitutional approach to locus standi still holds sway in our Courts.  Moreover, failure to recognise the environmental right in Section 24 of the Constitution may be an impediment to applicants' ability to bring an interdict application successfully.  Correct use of the relevant constitutional provisions ought to obviate such problems, but alternatives are suggested.  In the course of the article, it is suggested that the rule in Patz v Greene is no longer relevant and should be consigned to the history books.

Judicial Protection Under the Constitution

2004 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 108-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Spyridon Flogaitis ◽  
Andreas Pottakis
Keyword(s):  
Organisational Structure ◽  
Modus Operandi ◽  
High Court ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Draft Constitution

The challenges for the system of judicial protection of the EU spring from two main developments: first, the enlargement of the EU, which inevitably affects all institutions of the Union, most notably their organisational structure and modus operandi, second, the deepening and widening of the areas falling within the scope of competences of the EU. Article I-28 Draft Constitution states that the Court of Justice of the EU shall include the ECJ, the High Court and specialised courts. These courts, together with the national courts of all levels, constitute the intricate nexus offering judicial protection in the EU. The issues that dominated debates on the reform of the system of judicial protection varied from the amendment of Article 230.4 EC on the locus standi of applicants, to the impact of the incorporation of the Charter of Human Rights and to the competences of the ECJ in the areas of the second and third pillar. They all relate to the deepening and widening of the Union through this Draft Constitution.

What Changes for the Constitutional Court with the New Russian Constitution?

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-49
Author(s):  
Ivan S. Grigoriev
Keyword(s):  
Political System ◽  
Institutional Development ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
The Political ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
The Status ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
International Obligations

Abstract Of the 206 amendments introduced to the Russian constitution and adopted on July 1, 2020, 24 deal directly with the Constitutional Court, its organization, functioning, and the role it plays in the political system. Compared to many other, these are also rather precise and detailed, ranging from the number of judges on the bench, their nomination and dismissal, to the Court’s inner procedures, new locus standi limitations, and the primacy of the Constitution over Russia’s international obligations. Most changes only reproduce amendments brought to the secondary legislation over the last twenty years, and are therefore meant to preserve the status quo rather than change anything significantly. At the same time, a number of amendments aim at politicizing and instrumentalizing the Court for the president’s benefit, marking a significant departure from the previous institutional development.

Locus Standi in State Aid Litigation After Montessori

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 512-528
Author(s):  
V. Noël ◽  
S. Thomas
Keyword(s):  
State Aid ◽  
Locus Standi

10. Administrative Law:

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Clements
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Natural Justice ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Public Body ◽  
Chapter Deal ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

The Q&A series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each chapter includes typical questions; diagram problem and essay answer plans, suggested answers, notes of caution, tips on obtaining extra marks, the key debates on each topic and suggestions on further reading. This chapter is about judicial review. This is the means by which the citizen can use the courts to ensure that a public body obeys the law. The questions in the chapter deal with issues such as the erratic development of administrative law; the procedure to apply for judicial review; the right to apply (locus standi), procedural ultra vires; natural justice; and substantive ultra vires.

10. Derivative claims

Company Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 177-206
Author(s):  
Alan Dignam ◽  
John Lowry
Keyword(s):  
Majority Rule ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Liability Insurance ◽  
Minority Shareholders ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
The Core ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Stage Process ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Management Principle

Titles in the Core Text series take the reader straight to the heart of the subject, providing focused, concise, and reliable guides for students at all levels. This chapter examines derivative action as a means of safeguarding minority shareholders against abuses of power and its implications for the principle of majority rule. It begins by analysing the rule in Foss v Harbottle (1843), which translates the doctrine of separate legal personality, the statutory contract, the ‘internal management principle’, and the principle of majority rule into a rule of procedure governing locus standi (that is, who has standing to sue), as well as the exceptions to that rule. It then considers various types of shareholder actions, including personal claims, representative actions (group litigation), and derivative claims. It also discusses derivative claims under the Companies Act 2006, with emphasis on the two-stage process of the application for permission to continue a derivative claim. The chapter concludes by assessing bars to a derivative action, together with liability insurance and qualifying third party indemnity provisions.

7. Challenging EU action or inaction

2019 ◽  
pp. 312-355
Author(s):  
Elspeth Berry ◽  
Matthew J. Homewood ◽  
Barbara Bogusz
Keyword(s):  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Explanatory Text ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Primary Materials ◽  
The Eu

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter discusses the role of the Court of Justice in ensuring that the rule of law in the EU is observed both by Member States and EU Institutions. The chapter examines infringement actions under Article 258 TFEU, and financial penalties for Member States under Article 260 TFEU. The discussion of judicial review considers acts that may be challenged; who can bring an action under Article 263 TFEU; permissible applicants under Article 263 TFEU; non-privileged applicants; reforming the criteria for locus standi for non-privileged applicants. The chapter also explains the grounds for annulment; the effect of annulment; the plea of illegality; failure to act; and the relationship between Article 263 TFEU and Article 265 TFEU.

13. Breach of trust: the personal liability of trustees

2020 ◽  
pp. 453-488
Author(s):  
Gary Watt
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Trust Property ◽  
Personal Liability

The powers enjoyed by trustees are incidents of their legal ownership of the trust property, whereas their duties are incidents of their personal office. The beneficiary of any trust, even if it is a discretionary trust, has locus standi (which means ‘a place to stand’, used to describe a claimant’s right to be heard in a court of law) to bring an action against trustees for breach of trust. Common law concepts such as causation are increasingly being introduced to limit trustees’ liability for breaches of bare trusts in commercial contexts. This chapter examines the nature and potential extent of trustees’ liability for breach of their duties, along with the remedies that are available against trustees when they breach their trust. It also looks at defences that may be available to trustees in breach and, in the absence of defences, whether trustees may be relieved of personal liability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document