scholarly journals Labour Law of E.U. About the Free Circolation: A Comment on Recent Discussion According to Most Relevant Pronunciations of Justice Court

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
Antonio Vito Pasquale Boccia

Today, into Shengen’s area, some of the european countries -among which the Austrian Republic- because of illegal immigration and because of the terrorist attacks too, decide for the temporany national frontier closing: directly between the same countries that build up the European Union. If it happens, in this period, it would mean also the unavoidable restriction of the working rights among the european citizens. But what did represent and does represent the freedom of circulation among the workers in the law Community system? Naturally there will be a law discussion about: in this occasion we try to give an aswer to this question, according to the right, but -above all- let’s try to bring back the discussion on a line of law correctness, according to the recent decisions of the European Court of Justice that set limits to the topic.

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
Antonio Vito Pasquale Boccia

Today, into Shengen’s area, some of the european countries -among which the Austrian Republic- because of illegal immigration and because of the terrorist attacks too, decide for the temporany national frontier closing: directly between the same countries that build up the European Union. If it happens, in this period, it would mean also the unavoidable restriction of the working rights among the european citizens. But what did represent and does represent the freedom of circulation among the workers in the law Community system? Naturally there will be a law discussion about: in this occasion we try to give an aswer to this question, according to the right, but -above all- let’s try to bring back the discussion on a line of law correctness, according to the recent decisions of the European Court of Justice that set limits to the topic.


2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-185
Author(s):  
Charles Poncelet

Abstract The right of access to justice in environmental matters constitutes one of the three pillars enshrined by the Århus Convention to which the European Union is a Party. This article will examine a recent judgment of the European Court of Justice. Indeed, the latter appears to play an important role in the implementation of this procedural right.


2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-152
Author(s):  
Oskar J. Gstrein

The Digital Age has fundamentally reshaped the preconditions for privacy and freedom of expression. This transpires in the debate about a "right to be forgotten". While the 2014 decision of the European Court of Justice in "Google Spain" touches upon the underlying issue of how increasing amounts of personal data affects individuals over time, the topic has also become one of the salient problems of Internet Governance. On 24th September 2019 the European Court of Justice delivered its judgment in "Google vs CNIL" (C-507/17) which was supposed to clarify the territorial scope of the right. However, this judgment has raised doubts about the enforceability of the General Data Protection Regulation, and reveals the complex, multi-layered governance structure of the European Union. Acknowledging such complexity at a substantive and institutional level, this article starts by analysing the judgment. Additionally, to better understand the current situation in the European Union and its member states, recently produced draft guidelines by the European Data Protection Board are presented and discussed, as well as two judgments of the German Federal Constitutional Court. Subsequently, the European developments are put in international context. Finally, the insights from these sections are combined which allows to develop several conceptual ideas. In conclusion, it is argued that the right to be forgotten remains complex and evolving. Its success depends on effective multi-layer and multistakeholder interaction. In this sense, it has become a prominent study object that reveals potential venues and pitfalls on a path towards more sophisticated data protection frameworks.


1999 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 203-230
Author(s):  
Karsten Engsig Sørensen

The ruling of the European Court of Justice in C-212/97 Centros Ltd v. Erhvervs- og Selskabsstyrelsen suggests that the right of establishment enshrined in Article 43 (ex Article 52) of the EC Treaty includes the right to incorporate a company in the EC Member State with the most favourable company laws. The case provides a platform for arguing that choice of place of incorporation within the European Union is at the absolute discretion of business operators, after which point branches may be set up in any other Member State. Even if all activities are conducted in the Member State where the branch is situated, rather than in the Member State of incorporation, no abuse of Article 43 will arise, and the Member State in which the branch is located may be in no position to impede the establishment of a business which has utilised the vehicle of a foreign company.


1999 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 203-230
Author(s):  
Karsten Engsig Sørensen

The ruling of the European Court of Justice in C-212/97Centros Ltdv.Erhvervs- og Selskabsstyrelsensuggests that the right of establishment enshrined in Article 43 (ex Article 52) of the EC Treaty includes the right to incorporate a company in the EC Member State with the most favourable company laws. The case provides a platform for arguing that choice of place of incorporation within the European Union is at the absolute discretion of business operators, after which point branches may be set up in any other Member State. Even if all activities are conducted in the Member State where the branch is situated, rather than in the Member State of incorporation, no abuse of Article 43 will arise, and the Member State in which the branch is located may be in no position to impede the establishment of a business which has utilised the vehicle of a foreign company.


2010 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 303-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carsten Gerner-Beuerle ◽  
Michael Schillig

AbstractThe judgment of the European Court of Justice in Cartesio was eagerly awaited as a clarification of the questions concerning the scope of the right of establishment (articles 49, 54 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), (ex-articles 43, 48 EC) that remained after previous landmark decisions such as Centros, Überseering, and Inspire Art. This article analyses the implications of Cartesio in light of different scenarios of transfer of the registered and the real seat within the European Union. It assesses the interrelations of right of establishment and private international law rules for the determination of the law applicable to companies and concludes that the case law of the European Court of Justice after Cartesio, rather than providing for a coherent system of European company law, leads to arbitrary distinctions and significantly impedes the free movement of companies.


Author(s):  
I. S. Iksanov

The article discusses the role of the European Court of Justice, the specifics of its activities, and its goals. The author also touches upon the historical aspect of the development of the European Court. According to the author, the European Court of Justice has had a beneficial effect on the development of the rights granted by Union citizenship. The actions of the European Court of Justice have created new ground for persons with Union citizenship, increasing access to social benefits beyond the rights of economic migrants, for all those who exercise their European rights. The European Court of Justice sought to allow students to travel for their education, looking for new ways to ensure their free movement and learning with funding in the event of unforeseen events. It is essential that the court focuses on three core values so that citizenship does not become a limitation: nondiscrimination, the right to freedom of movement and the right to family life. The European court of human rights is an international judicial body; its jurisdiction extends to all member States of the Union. The main thing for the European Court of Justice is to ensure compliance with and enforcement of the Convention by the States parties. Also, when considering cases, the Court can point to gaps in legislation and issues concerning law enforcement practice, positively influencing law enforcement policy and legal proceedings, and, as a result, contribute to the improvement of the law enforcement system. This article reflects the activities of the European Court of Justice aimed at identifying the problematic aspects of the legislation of the European Union.


Author(s):  
Antonio EMBID IRUJO

LABURPENA: Justizia eskuratzeko aukera ingurumenerako eskubidearen funtsezko alderdia da, eta, oro har, ingurumen-babesarena. Europar Batasuneko Justizia Auzitegiak paper oso garrantzitsua du ingurumenaren zaintzan, eta berdin gertatzen da justizia eskuratzeko aukeraren gaineko jurisprudentziarekin ere. Bereziki, legitimazioa zabaltzeko lan egiten du, hori Europako araudiarentzat eta Europak ere berretsi duen Aarhus Hitzarmenarentzat mesedegarri den moduan interpretatuz. Era berean, prozedura administratiboek eta judizialek gehiegizko gasturik ez eragiteko erabaki garrantzitsuak ere badaude. RESUMEN: El acceso a la justicia es parte esencial del derecho al medio ambiente y, en general, de la protección ambiental. El Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea juega un papel relevante en la protección ambiental y lo mismo sucede en la jurisprudencia sobre el acceso a la justicia. En particular su labor se desarrolla para ampliar la legitimación, interpretando de forma favorable a la misma normativa europea y el Convenio de Aarhus también ratificado por Europa. Igualmente existen decisiones relevantes para impedir un coste excesivo de los procedimientos administrativos y judiciales. ABSTRACT: Access to justice is a key element of the right to environment and in general of the enviromental protection. The European Court of Justice of the European Union plays a relevant role in the enviromental protection and the same applies to its case law regarding access to justice. Particularly, its work is carried out in order to broaden the locus standi by interpreting the same European normative and the Aahrus convention also ratified by Europe more favaourably. Likewise, there exist relevant rulings to prevent an excesive cost of administrative and judicial procedures.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuele Menegatti

The ongoing transformation of work has been increasing the number of working relationships not falling within the domain of labour law. Non-standard and contingent working arrangements, most recently those prompted by the so-called gig economy, struggle to meet customary employment tests, since the employee/self-employed dichotomy has long been eclipsed. As this article will argue, the Court of Justice of the European Union, in shaping the scope of EU labour law, has been looking beyond the traditional categories. Starting from the area of the free movement of workers, the Court has built a common European concept of worker, broader than that of ‘employee’ endorsed by national jurisdictions, applying it to an increasing body of EU social legislation. Because of the primacy of EU law, the Court’s approach is bound to influence national laws.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2-2019) ◽  
pp. 419-433
Author(s):  
Stefanie Vedder

National high courts in the European Union (EU) are constantly challenged: the European Court of Justice (ECJ) claims the authority to declare national standing interpretations invalid should it find them incompatible with its views on EU law. This principle noticeably impairs the formerly undisputed sovereignty of national high courts. In addition, preliminary references empower lower courts to question interpretations established by their national ‘superiors’. Assuming that courts want to protect their own interests, the article presumes that national high courts develop strategies to elude the breach of their standing interpretations. Building on principal-agent theory, the article proposes that national high courts can use the level of (im-) precision in the wording of the ECJ’s judgements to continue applying their own interpretations. The article develops theoretical strategies for national high courts in their struggle for authority.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document