The CJEU Crossing the Rubicon on the Same-Sex Marriages? Commentary on Coman Case

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-99
Author(s):  
Václav Stehlík
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
National Family ◽  
Extended Interpretation ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The article analyses the decision of the EU Court of Justice in Coman in which the Court derived residence rights for spouses in the same-sex marriages. The article outlines the basic grounds of the judgement and critically appraises them in the context of EU primary as well as secondary law and especially Directive 2004/38. The article raises concerns about the division of competences between the EU and its Mem­ber States, extended interpretation of the term “spouse” in the context of EU law, human rights considerations as well as potential effects of the decision on national family law.

THE EU COURT OF JUSTICE: THE GROWING CRISIS OF LEGITIMACY

2021 ◽  
pp. 40-51
Author(s):  
N.V. Kravchuk ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Eu

The review is focused to the problem of reducing the legitimacy of the EU Court, which is noted in the works of a number of scientists. In this context, the review analyzes court cases concerning the extraterritorial effect of EU law, as well as the observance and protection of human rights, considered by the EU Court in recent years. The positions of the EU Court cause not only criticism of representatives of the academic community, but also resistance of national constitutional courts.

Composing Europe’s Fundamental Rights Area: A Case for Discursive Pluralism

2015 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 210-246
Author(s):  
Louise HALLESKOV STORGAARD
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Normative Basis ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThis article offers a perspective on how the objective of a strong and coherent European protection standard pursued by the fundamental rights amendments of the Lisbon Treaty can be achieved, as it proposes a discursive pluralistic framework to understand and guide the relationship between the EU Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. It is argued that this framework – which is suggested as an alternative to the EU law approach to the Strasbourg system applied by the CJEU in Opinion 2/13 and its Charter-based case law – has a firm doctrinal, case law and normative basis. The article ends by addressing three of the most pertinent challenges to European fundamental rights protection through the prism of the proposed framework.

scholarly journals After the celebration: Marriage equality in EU Law post-Coman in eight questions and some further thoughts

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 549-572
Author(s):  
Dimitry Vladimirovich Kochenov ◽  
Uladzislau Belavusau
Keyword(s):  
Critical Analysis ◽  
The State ◽  
Marriage Equality ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Near Future ◽  
Opening Up ◽  
The Eu

This paper provides a detailed critical analysis of the case of Coman, where the Court of Justice clarified that the meaning of the term ‘spouse’ in Directive 2004/38 was gender-neutral, opening up the door for same-sex marriage recognition for immigration purposes all around the EU, thus destroying the heteronormative misinterpretations of the clear language of the Directive practised in a handful of Member States. The state of EU law after Coman is still far from perfect, however: we underline a line of important questions which remain open and which the Court will need to turn to in the near future to ensure that marriage equality moves beyond mere proclamations in the whole territory of the Union.

scholarly journals The Doctrinaire Authority: The Court of Justice of The EU and the Fundamental Rights / Doktrinarni Autoritet: Sud Pravde Evropske Unije I Osnovna Prava

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Goran Ilik
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights And Freedoms ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Interpretive Framework

Abstract This paper represents the analysis of the Court of Justice of the EU, in particular the Court of Justice, and its “interpretive power”, within its authority for diffusion and proliferation of the EU law. Namely, the paper describes the position, responsibilities, powers and the role of the Court of Justice, in order to penetrate into its institutional performances as doctrinaire authority, regarding the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU as its interpretive framework. Also, the paper presents the most representative axiological determinations of the EU as a basis of the “interpretive power” of the Court of Justice. Accordingly, the paper describes the Court as a central judicial EU institution that with its “interpretive power” generates legal doctrines through the prism of fundamental rights and freedoms. Consequently, the Court of Justice appears as undisputed doctrinaire authority that assumes the role of doctrine - maker and doctrine - keeper of the human rights and freedoms, accepted and promulgated by the EU.

scholarly journals Lietuvos Respublikos geros valios kompensacijos už žydų religinių bendruomenių nekilnojamąjį turtą įstatymas tarptautinės ir Europos Sąjungos teisės kontekste

Teisė ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 83 ◽  
pp. 138-159
Author(s):  
Nika Bruskina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Religious Communities ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
The Eu

Straipsnyje analizuojami tarptautinės teisės, Europos Sąjungos (toliau – ES) teisės ir užsienio nacionalinės teisės šaltiniai, žydų nevyriausybinių organizacijų ir užsienio valstybės institucijų veiksmai, paskatinę Lietuvos Respublikos geros valios kompensacijos už žydų religinių bendruomenių nekilnojamąjį turtą įstatymo (toliau – Įstatymas) priėmimą. Taip pat Įstatymo nuostatų analizė pateikiama remiantis tarptautinės ir ES teisės šaltiniais, ypatingą dėmesį skiriant Jungtinių Tautų Žmogaus teisių komiteto (toliau – JT ŽTK), Europos žmogaus teisių teismo (toliau – EŽTT) ir ES Teisingumo Teismo (toliau – ES TT) praktikai. The Article deals with international law, European Union (hereinafter – EU) law and foreign domestic law sources, acts of Jewish nongovernmental organizations and foreign state institutions which have urged the adoption of the Law on Good Will Compensation for the Immovable Property of Jewish Religious Communities (hereinafter – the Law). Furthermore, invoking international law and EU law sources, paying particular attention to the practice of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter – ECtHR) and the Court of Justice of the EU, the analysis of the provisions of the Law is provided. 

European Court of Human Rights case law as a source of European Union law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dmytro Boichuk ◽  
Vitalii Hryhoriev
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Eu

The article is devoted to the study of the legal nature of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights as a source of law of the European Union. Within the scope of the doctrinal sources and the existing case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union, the authors substantiate the logic of including existing the European Court of Human Rights case law in the EU law sources, citing arguments based on the EU law and the case law.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document