scholarly journals Organizacja administracji ochrony środowiska w Polsce i Unii Europejskiej

2014 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-119
Author(s):  
Maciej Jabłoński
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Acquis Communautaire ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Will ◽  
The Eu

The organization of environmental protection in Poland and the European Union is a mutual connection of competencies and a correlation of systems and rights according to national and EU laws. The legal system of the EU is the result of decades of cooperation undertaken by the will of the Member States known as the acquis communautaire. EU law has primacy over national law, which in practice means that in the event of a conflict between the provisions of national law and EU law, the national law is deemed inapplicable and needs to be adjusted by the Member State.

scholarly journals Agency Design in the European Union

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 309 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herwig C.H. Hofmann
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Future Perspectives ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
Agency Design ◽  
The Eu

This article gives a brief overview of the main features, functions and future perspectives of agencies in the European Union [EU]. It highlights the specific notion of the EU’s highly integrated, multi-level legal system as an explanatory factor for the specificities of agency design. The article looks at agencies in the EU through the lens of the structural and procedural arrangements for their independence and their accountability. The article comes to the conclusion that, generally speaking, accountability and independence are defined by and adapted to the position of an agency within the structure of administrative networks implementing EU law and policy. Their raison d’être is usually to coordinate Member State implementing activities rather than taking on these responsibilities themselves.Cet article présente un bref aperçu des caractéristiques principales, des fonctions et des perspectives d’avenir d’agences au sein de l’Union Européenne [UE]. Il met en évidence la notion particulière que les spécificités de la façon dont les agences sont structurées s’expliquent par le fait que le système juridique de l’UE est hautement intégré et à niveaux multiples. L’article examine des agences de l’UE dans la perspective des arrangements structuraux et procéduraux en vue de leur indépendance et de leur obligation de rendre compte. L’article conclut que de façon générale l’obligation de rendre compte et l’indépendance sont définies par, et adaptées à, la position d’une agence dans le cadre des réseaux administratifs qui appliquent la loi et les politiques de l’EU. Leur raison d’être est généralement de coordonner les activités d’application des États Membres plutôt que d’être chargées elles-mêmes de ces responsabilités.

scholarly journals EU Values Are Law, after All: Enforcing EU Values through Systemic Infringement Actions by the European Commission and the Member States of the European Union

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Lane Scheppele ◽  
Dimitry Vladimirovich Kochenov ◽  
Barbara Grabowska-Moroz
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Although compliance with the founding values is presumed in its law, the Union is now confronted with persistent disregard of these values in two Member States. If it ceases to be a union of Rule-of-Law-abiding democracies, the European Union (EU) is unthinkable. Purely political mechanisms to safeguard the Rule of Law, such as those in Article 7 Treaty of European Union (TEU), do not work. Worse still, their existence has disguised the fact that the violations of the values of Article 2 TEU are also violations of EU law. The legal mechanisms tried thus far, however, do not work either. The fundamental jurisprudence on judicial independence and irremovability under Article 19(1) TEU is a good start, but it has been unable to change the situation on the ground. Despite ten years of EU attempts at reining in Rule of Law violations and even as backsliding Member States have lost cases at the Court of Justice, illiberal regimes inside the EU have become more consolidated: the EU has been losing through winning. More creative work is needed to find ways to enforce the values of Article 2 TEU more effectively. Taking this insight, we propose to turn the EU into a militant democracy, able to defend its basic principles, by using the traditional tools for the enforcement of EU law in a novel manner. We demonstrate how the familiar infringement actions—both under Article 258 and 259 TFEU—can be adapted as instruments for enforcing EU values by bundling a set of specific violations into a single general infringement action to show how a pattern of unlawful activity rises to the level of being a systemic violation. A systemic violation, because of its general and pervasive nature, in itself threatens basic values above and beyond violations of individual provisions of the acquis. Certified by the Court of Justice, a systemic violation of EU law should call for systemic compliance that would require the Member State to undo the effects of its attacks on the values of Article 2. The use of Article 260 Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) to deduct fines from EU funds due to be received by the troubled Member State would provide additional incentives for systemic compliance. We illustrate this proposed militant democratic structure by explaining and critiquing what the Commission and Court together have done to reign in the governments of Hungary and Poland so far and then showing how they can do better.

Review by Constitutional Courts of the Obligation of National Courts of Last Instance to Refer a Preliminary Question to the Court of Justice of the EU

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 1663-1700 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clelia Lacchi
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
Member States ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Judicial Remedy ◽  
The Eu

The Constitutional Courts of a number of Member States exert a constitutional review on the obligation of national courts of last instance to make a reference for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).Pursuant to Article 267(3) TFEU, national courts of last instance, namely courts or tribunals against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law, are required to refer to the CJEU for a preliminary question related to the interpretation of the Treaties or the validity and interpretation of acts of European Union (EU) institutions. The CJEU specified the exceptions to this obligation inCILFIT. Indeed, national courts of last instance have a crucial role according to the devolution to national judges of the task of ensuring, in collaboration with the CJEU, the full application of EU law in all Member States and the judicial protection of individuals’ rights under EU law. With preliminary references as the keystone of the EU judicial system, the cooperation of national judges with the CJEU forms part of the EU constitutional structure in accordance with Article 19(1) TEU.

Legal conflict between the EU and the republic of Poland regarding polish judicial reform

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Yakovyuk ◽  
Suzanna Asiryan ◽  
Anastasiya Lazurenko
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Constitutional Tribunal ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Eu

Problem setting. On October 7, 2021, the Constitutional Tribunal of the Republic of Poland ruled in favor of Polish law over European Union law, which in the long run may violate the principles according to which the Union operates and the rights enjoyed by citizens of the state. Such a precedent can further serve as a basis for identical decisions of the bodies of constitutional jurisdiction of those states that have problems in fulfilling their obligations in the European community. Analysis of recent researches and publications. The problems of the functioning of the bodies of the European Union, the implementation of their decisions and the general status in EU law are widely studied in national science. In particular, many scholars have studied the legal nature of the EU, including: TM Anakina, VI Muravyov, NM Ushakov, A. Ya. Kapustina, NA Korolyova, Yu. Yumashev, BN Topornin, OYa Tragniuk, SS Seliverstov, IV Yakovyuk and others. Target of research is to establish the foundations of EU law in the functioning of Union bodies, especially the Court, as well as to determine the hierarchy of national law and EU law. Article’s main body. Over the years, the Court has, within its jurisdiction, issued a large number of judgments which have become the source of the Union’s Constituent Treaties and of EU law in general. Over the last two decades, the powers of the Court of Justice have changed significantly. In particular, this is due to the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty, which amended the EU’s founding treaties on the powers of the Court, then the reform of the European Court took place in 2015-2016, which concerned a change in the organizational structure of the Court. Despite the generally well-established case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the unification of the observance by the Member States of the basic principles of the European Union, the Constitutional Tribunal of the Republic of Poland adopted a decision on 7 October. Conclusions and prospects for the development. Following the decision of the Constitutional Court, the Polish authorities found themselves in a situation that significantly complicated its internal and external situation. The way out of which requires answers to fundamental questions about the legal nature of the EU. Undoubtedly, this is an issue not only between Poland and the EU, but also between other member states.

scholarly journals Polish “Entrepreneur” and EU “Undertaking”: Multilingualism and Differences in Legal Identification

2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-71
Author(s):  
Maciej Etel
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Precise Determination ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Economic Sphere ◽  
Polish Law ◽  
Legal Identification ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The European Union and its member-states’ involvement in the economic sphere, manifesting itself in establishing the rules of entrepreneurs’ functioning – their responsibilities and entitlements – requires a precise determination of the addressees of these standards. Proper identification of an entrepreneur is a condition of proper legislation, interpretation, application, control and execution of the law. In this context it is surprising that understanding the term entrepreneur in Polish law and in EU law is not the same, and divergences and differences in identification are fundamental. This fact formed the objective of this article. It is aimed at pointing at key differences in the identification of an entrepreneur between Polish and EU law, explaining the reasons for different concepts, and also the answer to the question: May Poland, as an EU member-state, identify the entrepreneur in a different way than the EU?

Non-EU Legal Instruments (EFSF, ESM, AND Fiscal Compact)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Martucci
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Fiscal Discipline ◽  
Member States ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Fiscal Compact ◽  
Angela Merkel

‘Another Legal Monster?’ That was the question asked by the Law Department of the European University Institute on 16 February 2012 in a debate about the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union (TSCG), also known as the Fiscal Compact Treaty. On 2 March 2012, twenty-five Member States of the European Union minus the United Kingdom and the Czech Republic signed the TSCG. A month before, on 2 February 2012, the euro area Member States signed the Treaty Establishing the European Stability Mechanism (ESM Treaty), another legal monster. In both cases, the monstrosity lies in the fact that Member States have preferred to conclude an international treaty, rather than to use the European Union (EU) institutional system. Why did the European Commission not propose a legislative act to establish a financial assistance mechanism in the Eurozone and strengthen the fiscal discipline in the EU? Does this mean the end of community method and a victory for the intergovernmental method? As Herman Van Rompuy commented about the crisis; ‘often the choice is not between the community method and the intergovernmental method, but between a co-ordinated European position and nothing at all’. In 2010, Angela Merkel defended her vision of a new ‘Union Method’ in a speech held at the College of Europe. This approach can be defined by the following description: ‘co-ordinated action in a spirit of solidarity–each of us in the area for which we are responsible but all working towards the same goal’. Each of us means the European institutions and Member States. The new ‘Euro-international’ treaties (or inter se treaties) raise a number of questions regarding their compatibility with EU law, implications for the Union legal system, institutional balance, national sovereignty and democratic accountability. These questions are all the more important because international treaties raise a number of questions on their compatibility with EU law, implications for the Union legal system and institutional balance.

Mixed Agreements: The EU Law Fundamentals

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joni Heliskoski
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Basic Characteristics ◽  
Mixed Agreements ◽  
The Eu

Whatever terminology one might wish to employ to describe the form of integration constituted by the European Union and its Member States, one fundamental attribute of that arrangement has always been the division, as between the Union and its Member States, of competence to conclude international agreements with other subjects of international law. Today, the fact that treaty-making competence—as an external facet of the more general division of legal authority—is divided and, to some extent, shared between the Union and its Member States is reflected by some of the opening provisions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Notwithstanding the changes to the scope and nature of the powers conferred upon the Union, resulting from both changes to primary law and the evolution of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the basic characteristics of the conferment as an attribution of a limited kind has always been the same; there has always existed a polity endowed with a treaty-making authority divided between and, indeed, shared by, the Union and its Member States. In the early 1960s mixed agreements—that is, agreements to which the European Union

6. The European Union and the environment

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart Bell ◽  
Donald McGillivray ◽  
Ole W. Pedersen ◽  
Emma Lees ◽  
Elen Stokes
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
National Standards ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Different Sources ◽  
The Eu

This chapter provides a brief overview of how the EU shapes UK environmental law and policy. It begins by providing an introductory guide to EU law, outlining the key institutions of the EU, the different sources of EU law, and how EU law is made. The chapter then proceeds to look at the more substantive elements of EU law as they affect environmental protection, starting with the policy and constitutional bases for EU environmental law, and gives a flavour of the scope of EU environmental legislation, before considering the scope for national standards to exceed those set at EU level or to disrupt trade between the Member States. This is followed by a discussion of the challenges faced in making EU environmental law work, and then with some thoughts on the impact of Brexit and how this may shape UK environmental law.

9. The European Union and Brexit

Public Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 355-396
Author(s):  
Mark Elliott ◽  
Robert Thomas
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Membership ◽  
Parliamentary Sovereignty ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

This chapter focuses on the constitutional implications of the UK’s membership of the European Union and the constitutional implications of its exit from the EU (or ‘Brexit’). The chapter examines how EU law was accommodated within the UK legal system during the period of the UK’s membership of the EU, and in particular considers the consequences of the primacy of EU law for the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty. The chapter also considers the extent to which lessons learned about the UK constitution as a result of EU membership will remain relevant now that the UK has left the EU.

4. Member States

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brigid Laffan
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
State Structure ◽  
Acquis Communautaire ◽  
Member States ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
Flexible Integration ◽  
Economic Ideology ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

This chapter focuses on the member states of the European Union. It first considers six factors that determine how a state engages with the EU: the date of entry, size, wealth, state structure, economic ideology, and integration preference. It then examines how member states behave in the EU's institutions and seek to influence the outcome of negotiations in Brussels. It also discusses the informal and formal activities of the member states before concluding with an overview of the insights offered by theory in analysing the relationship between the EU and its member states. The chapter clarifies some key concepts and terms such as Europeanization, acquis communautaire, and flexible integration, and explains how the EU's Intergovernmental Conferences work.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document