scholarly journals Legal Regulation of the EU Common Agricultural Market

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-97
Author(s):  
E. G. Martirosyan
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Farm Animals ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Agricultural Market ◽  
Member States ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
European Union Legislation ◽  
The Eu

Introduction. The article presents the analysis of legal regulation on the agricultural market of the European Union. The high growth of international economic integration, contributing to the intensification of interstate cooperation for the simplified movement of goods and services induces the harmonization of regulatory and legislative frameworks to develop uniform mechanisms of legal regulation. The diversification of agricultural exports should be considered as one of the highly promising, priority and sustainable trends of agricultural policy. EU law requirements must be taken into account by organizations engaged in foreign economic activities of food supplies. The article gives the updated analysis of the Eurasian Union regulatory framework in the sphere of agricultural products. Materials and methods. The methodological basis of the study comprises the universal dialectic method of scientific knowledge, general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, analogy, induction, deduction, modeling, etc.), particular scientific (logical-legal method, comparative legal method of systemic analysis, etc.). Methods of content analysis of legal documentation, allowing to study key trends in the legal regulation and policies of the European Union in relation to the agricultural market were also used.The results of the study. The conducted analysis revealed that there is a confusing situation in the European Union legislation about the agricultural market. The exceptional attitude to agriculture in the European Union legislation was widely under-mined, which led to serious consequences not only for the interpretation of agricultural provisions in EU law, but also for the legal provisions about the agricultural market in other countries. The article also analyzes the changes in legislation that pave the way for a deeper understanding of agricultural law in the European Union after the reforms introduced by the Lisbon Treaty.Discussion and conclusion. Since 1974, the European Union has developed a wide range of legislative provisions related to agriculture. Pursuant to EU treaties, animals are recognized as living creatures, and therefore the EU and Member States must take due care of animal welfare requirements preparing and implementing policies in agriculture or on the domestic market. Currently, EU legislation on the welfare of farm animals contains specific provisions for the cultivation of poultry, calves and pigs,  as well as to all types of agricultural machinery and livestock slaughter. Nevertheless, there are contradictions between the EU Member States stemming from the legal regulation of the common agricultural market in the European Union.The author concludes that the EU food law is comprehensive and aimed to provide consumers with safe and high-quality products, subject to timely and comprehensive information about possible risks. Taking into account the experience of the European Union in the development and correction the relevant legislative system will significantly increase the effectiveness of the measures to increase the export potential of domestic products.

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.

Practice of the member states of the European Union in the field of anti-corruption regulation

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dmytro S. Melnyk ◽  
Oleg A. Parfylo ◽  
Oleksii V. Butenko ◽  
Olena V. Tykhonova ◽  
Volodymyr O. Zarosylo
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Analysis Method ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Content Analysis Method ◽  
The Eu

Purpose The experience of most European Union (EU) Member States has demonstrated effective anti-corruption practices, making the EU one of the leaders in this field, which can be used as an example to learn from in the field of anti-corruption. The purpose of this study is to analyze and identify the main features of anti-corruption legislation and strategies to prevent corruption at the national and supranational levels of the EU. Design/methodology/approach The following methods were used in the work: discourse and content analysis, method of system analysis, method of induction and deduction, historical-legal method, formal-legal method, comparative-legal method and others. Using the historical and legal method, the evolution of the formation of anti-corruption regulation at the supranational level was revealed. The comparative law method helped to compare the practices of the Member States of the EU in the field of anti-corruption regulation. The formal-legal method is used for generalization, classification and systematization of research results, as well as for the correct presentation of these results. Findings The main results, prospects for further research and the value of the material. The paper offers a critical review of key EU legal instruments on corruption, from the first initiatives taken in the mid-1990s to recent years. Originality/value In addition, the article analyzes the relevant anti-corruption legislation in the EU member states that are in the top 10 countries with the lowest level of corruption, namely: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany and Luxembourg.

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

scholarly journals The European Union competence in the public health field

2021 ◽  
pp. 87-92
Author(s):  
V. O. Tyumentsev
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
European Union ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Health Protection ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Health Field ◽  
The Eu

The subject of this article is the competence of the European Union (EU) in the public health field within the territory of the Member States of this organization. The purpose of this article is to analyze how the EU's competence is distributed in relation to the competence of the member states using the primary treaty of the organization as a source. The article examines the powers of the EU organization within both the main and additional competence and analyzes how the EU interacts with the member states in the framework of health protection in accordance with the legal provisions of the primary source. The main and additional competence of the EU is considered separately, and there is also an analysis of the features and possible prospects of the legal regulation of health protection within the relevant branch of the law of the European Union.

A Community of Principle

2020 ◽  
pp. 108-143
Author(s):  
Pavlos Eleftheriadis
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Rival View ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the question of the relations between EU law and domestic law from the point of view of a political theory of the European Union. It is common to see EU law under ‘federalism’ or under a theory of ‘statism’. These two views are outlined at the start of this chapter by examining various arguments made for them. They are both rejected. The chapter defends a rival view, the ‘internationalist’ reading of the EU, according to which it is a branch of the law of nations. A careful look at the EU treaties and the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU shows that the EU endorses an internationalist model based on equality and reciprocity. The EU does not replace the relation between citizens and political power. It does not establish a new constitutional law that replaces the national ones. It is a new way of organizing the relations between the various member states whose equality it fully respects. The coherence of European Union law is therefore not provided by uniformity imposed by a single master or constitutional rule, but is given by the political coordination of the laws of the member states achieved under the treaties. Coherence is achieved because the member states have adopted similar, although not identical, constitutional principles.

Part II The Treaty-Makers, 6 Who Can Make Treaties? The European Union

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cremona Marise
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
Multilateral Agreements ◽  
International Responsibility ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Mixed Agreements ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the EU’s robust and complex treaty-making. The first section deals with the EU’s treaty-making capacity from the perspective of EU law, and then of international treaty practice. It examines the ways in which international treaty-making practice has accommodated EU participation in bilateral and in multilateral agreements. The second section discusses the legal effects of treaties concluded by the EU, first as regards the EU legal order, including their enforcement and interpretation by the Court of Justice of the European Union and the legal effects of mixed agreements. A discussion of the impact of EU treaty-making on the powers of the Member States follows: through the doctrines of exclusivity and pre-emption, the impact of EU law on treaties concluded by the Member States, and finally EU treaty-making from the perspective of international responsibility.

scholarly journals Regulatory and Legal Enforcement of Cyber Security in Countries of the European Union: The Experience of Germany and France

Teisė ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 121 ◽  
pp. 135-147
Author(s):  
Sviatoslav Kavyn ◽  
Ivan Bratsuk ◽  
Anatoliy Lytvynenko
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Information Security ◽  
National Security ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Vector System ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

This article is devoted to the study of information security in the EU member states, in particular Germany and France, in the context of the analysis of their national legislation, state, national programs and regulations. Particular attention is paid to the study of the features of regulatory and legal security of information security of Germany and France in the context of the study of their national legislation in terms of economic security as an inherent component of national security. In the course of this study the peculiarities of the functioning of the institutional and legal mechanism of cyber defense in the context of the multi-vector system of international security and legal regulation of international cooperation are analyzed. The article substantiates the expediency of developing an integrated, coordinated information policy of the EU member states in order to unify approaches to information security.At the same time, the current realities of European Union policy require comprehensive research in the context of ensuring national interests, developing effective mechanisms for protecting the information space, and legal mechanisms for shaping the economic system as a strategic factor of national security. Accordingly, the approaches to information security adopted in the European Union are currently not unified due to the geopolitical specifics of the EU’s countries. Therefore, the research, evaluation, and implementation of the positive experience of Germany and France in this area, according to the authors, is important in building the information security system of the European Union in the context of reliable protection against cyber threats.

scholarly journals ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEGAL GROUNDS FOR DEPORTATION AND EXPULSION OF THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION’S MEMBER STATES

2020 ◽  
pp. 5-17
Author(s):  
Yuriy Voloshyn ◽  
◽  
Nataliia Mushak ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Illegal Migration ◽  
Member States ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Grounds ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Third Country Nationals

The purpose of the article is to highlight key issues related to the deportation and eviction ofthird-country nationals from the Member States of the European Union.The article covers the key issues related to the deportation and expulsion of third-country nationalsfrom the European Union’s member states. The research determines that within the European Union most of the issues related to the deportation and expulsion of third-country nationals fromthe EU territory and EU member states are classified as a common immigration policy.The study used a set of methods that defined its purpose and objectives. The authors used acomplex of general scientific and special scientific methods. The dialectical method of cognitionwas used in the analysis of legal relations that are developed within the EU and are in conditionsof continuous development and improvement. The historical and legal method provided anopportunity to investigate the practice of deportation by states at different stages of EU lawdevelopment. The comparative and legal method was used in comparison with the conditions ofdeportation in different European countries.The results of the article are determined by key provisions regulating the issue of deportationand eviction, which serve as legal measures in the fight against the EU and its member states withillegal migration.It has been established that deportation and expulsion serve as legal measures in the fight againstthe EU and its member states with illegal migration. It is emphasized that among the effectivemeans of combating illegal immigrants is the adoption by both the European Union and its MemberStates of the readmission agreements with third countries, which provide for the procedure ofsimplifying the return of persons who do not have legal grounds for staying in the territory of anEU member state, to the country of origin or transit, as well as solving problems related to thereturn procedure, formalizing the effective process of returning persons and preventing problemsin this in the field.The conclusions highlight that in most European countries, the issues of deportation and expulsionare regulated solely on the basis of national legislation, taking into account the standards andnorms of EU law. A number of documents that determine a safe third country have been analyzed.A safe third country is a country that guarantees the right of third-country nationals to apply forasylum.The research analyses the legal instruments of the European Union, which guarantee the right toasylum and provides for compliance with the principle of non-adoption. It is stated that no onecan be expelled or extradited to a state in which there is a serious danger that such a person maybe given a death penalty.There are legal grounds for non-resettlement, and individuals cannot be tortured or punished.

scholarly journals References for a Preliminary Ruling to the European Union Court of Justice: The Substantive Criteria of Admissibility

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 131-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena A. Sorokina
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
National Court ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Legal Traditions ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Acceptability Criteria ◽  
The Eu

The preliminary ruling procedure as stipulated by Article 276 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union had a significant impact on the de-ve lop ment of EU law and became a collaborative tool as part of the dialogue bet-ween supranational and national judges.The mechanism of preliminary ruling enables to ensure a uniform interpretation and application of the provisions of EU law with all member states and consti tutes an instrumental element for preserving the uniformity of the European legal system.When developing the mechanism of preliminary ruling at EU level one consi-dered constitutional & legal traditions of member states, however, for long periods, the EU was perceived as "exotic" one and its impact on the national law was often underesti mated. Initially there were no any clear concepts how the mechanism of preliminary ruling would work. The EU court encouraged national judges of member states to use this mechanism; however, gradually it started introducing certain acceptability criteria in respect of such requests.The practice of the EU Court was summarized in the updated Rules of Procedure of 25 September 2012. During the period from 2014 to 2018, the number of cases sub mitted for preliminary ruling procedure was increasingly growing. Consequently, natio nal courts had started using this procedure relatively intensively and the con so-li dation of acceptability criteria created no serious problems for them.The imposition by the EU Court of minimal requirements towards the substance of requests does not reduce their number, since the acknowledgement of a re quest as inadmissible does not prevent a national court from sending a repeated re quest. However, it contributes to the improvement of quality and efficiency of the pre li mi-nary ruling procedure. The establishment of the respective requirements is necessary to ensure that the EU Court could provide national courts with an interpretation of EU law useful for resolution of a specific dispute and ensure constructiveness of the dialogue.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document