scholarly journals The right to take collective action in EU law based on the European Pillar of Social Rights and the recent case law of the CJEU

Pro Futuro ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Márton Leó Zaccaria
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Social Policy ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Recent Case ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Labour Law

This paper is built around the workers’ fundamental right to take collective action and collective bargaining. Although, this right is firmly embedded in the majority of labour law systems in the social policy (meaning labour law, too) of the European Union, it is worth analysing it separately with an independent meaning. We can approach this right from the fundamental rights, the fundamental treaties or from certain directives, so we can find several questions that are difficult to answer properly. These problems are mostly catalysed by the necessary collision between the need for socially motivated legal protection and the fundamental economic freedoms. In my research, I analyse this right – along with some other connected ones – with the help of the recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Pillar of Social Rights because the latter highlights the holistic approach in the current reforms of EU social policy.

scholarly journals Constitutional identity as a tool to improve defence rights in European criminal law

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 446-463
Author(s):  
Cristina Sáenz Pérez
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
National Level ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Recent Case ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
Constitutional Identity

Since the early years of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW), fundamental rights concerns have been at the centre of the development of judicial cooperation in criminal matters that has taken place in the European Union (EU). The attempts to ensure compliance with minimum standards across the EU after Lisbon did not solve the other pressing issue in this area, namely the existence of different fundamental rights safeguards at the national level. Melloni tried to settle this dispute by limiting the protection of fundamental rights to those harmonized by EU law, but recent case law has questioned this approach. This article explores the possibility of applying Article 4(2) Treaty on European Union to protect a degree of legal diversity that contributes to improving the fundamental rights framework applicable to judicial cooperation measures. The goal is to analyse the possibility of implementing a limited constitutional identity exception that enables Member States to protect rights that are part of their constitutional identity. For this purpose, the recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the Taricco saga will be examined and compared with the way in which domestic courts have implemented national identity exceptions.

6 The Court of Justice as a Labour Court

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 145-175
Author(s):  
ACL Davies
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Recent Case ◽  
Critical Examination ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Labour Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Labour Disputes

AbstractMany legal systems have specialist labour courts with jurisdiction over individual employment disputes or collective labour disputes or both. The literature identifies a number of possible justifications for the use of specialist labour courts. This chapter will engage in a critical examination of this literature in order to develop a framework for analysing the performance of courts (whether specialist or otherwise) in deciding labour law cases. We shall then apply that framework to some of the recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

The Court of Justice as a Labour Court

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 145-175
Author(s):  
ACL Davies
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Recent Case ◽  
Critical Examination ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Labour Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Labour Disputes

AbstractMany legal systems have specialist labour courts with jurisdiction over individual employment disputes or collective labour disputes or both. The literature identifies a number of possible justifications for the use of specialist labour courts. This chapter will engage in a critical examination of this literature in order to develop a framework for analysing the performance of courts (whether specialist or otherwise) in deciding labour law cases. We shall then apply that framework to some of the recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Court of Justice of the European Union (Seventh Chamber) Kerly Del Rosario Martinez Silva v Instituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) Comune di Genova

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 357-363
Author(s):  
Bjarney Friðriksdóttir
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Report ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Labour Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights

Abstract This case report provides an account of the issues addressed in the preliminary ruling of the CJEU in Martinez Silva vs. Italy. The case centres on the limitations Member States of the European Union are permitted to apply in granting third-country nationals in employment equal treatment with nationals in social security rights according to Directive 2011/98/EU (the Single Permit Directive). Additionally, the preliminary ruling of the Court is discussed is discussed in the context of the human rights principle of equal treatment as it is enshrined in EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and International Labour Law.

scholarly journals The Council of Europe and the European Union frameworks in the legal protection of minority languages: unity or diversity?

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 347-366
Author(s):  
Alessia Vacca
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Treaty Of Lisbon ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Regional Or Minority Languages

This article focuses on the comparison between European Union Law and Council of Europe Law in the field of the protection of minority languages and looks at the relationships between the two systems. The Council of Europe has been very important in the protection of minority languages, having created two treaties of particular relevance: the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages in 1992 and the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities in 1995; both treaties contain many detailed provisions relating to minority languages. Not all countries, even of the European Union, have ratified these treaties. 12 out of 27 EU countries did not ratify the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. The European Union supports multilingualism because it wants to achieve unity while maintaining diversity. Important steps, with respect to minority languages, were taken in the European Community, notably in the form of European Parliament Resolutions. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, approved in Nice the 7th December 2000, contains art. 21 and art. 22 related to this topic. The Treaty of Lisbon makes a cross reference to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union which is, consequently, legally binding under the Treaty of Lisbon since December 2009. The Charter could give ground for appeal to the European Court of Justice in cases of discrimination on the grounds of language

scholarly journals COLLECTIVE LABOUR RIGHTS AS THE PRINCIPLES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION LABOUR LAW

2019 ◽  
pp. 43-46
Author(s):  
O. M. Rym
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Collective Bargaining ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Labour Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Labour Rights ◽  
Social Partners ◽  
The Right

The article deals with certain aspects of collective labour rights in the European Union. Prerequisites and procedure of this rights guaranting as general principles of EU law are analyzed and their content is characterized. It is emphasized that such legal establishing took place somewhat haphazardly, both at the level of the acts of primary and secondary law of the European Union and in the case law. As a result, there is no single position on the spectrum of collective labour rights as principles of EU labor law. The author focuses on significant changes in the understanding of the necessity of cooperation of social partners and the extension of their interaction at the supranational level. It is under the responsibility of the European Commission to promote cooperation between Member States and to facilitate coordination of their activities in the field of the right of association and collective bargaining between employers and employees. The article clarifies the content of collective labour rights as general principles of EU law on the basis of EU legal acts, the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, as well as the scientific works of domestic and foreign scholars. It is noted that the system of collective labour rights, as general principles of EU labour law, consists of the right of collective bargaining and collective action, the right of employees to information and consultation within the enterprise, as well as the freedom of assembly and association. It is concluded that the necessity of cooperation between the social partners is recognized as one of the foundations of EU labour law. Herewith appropriate interaction is ensured through the normative-legal consolidation of collective labour rights and procedures for their implementation. After all, European Union legal acts allow employees and employers’ representatives to play an active role in regulating labour legal relations. For example, Member States may instruct employers and employees, upon their joint request, to implement Council directives or decisions. In addition, many directives contain warnings about the possibility of derogating from their provisions through the adoption of a collective agreement.

Two Charters and a Pillar

2020 ◽  
pp. 191-202
Author(s):  
Bruno de Witte
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Social Protection ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
Social Progress ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Social ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights

This chapter retraces the post-enlargement trajectory of the protection of fundamental social rights in Europe. The chapter selects three years that signpost this trajectory: 2000, when the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights was adopted, with the inclusion of a social rights chapter; 2009, when the Lisbon Treaty seemed to contain a renewed promise of social progress in the Union; and 2017, when the European Union launched a European Pillar of Social Rights, as part of an effort to revitalize the social protection agenda of the European Union after the disappointing post-Lisbon years.

Between Informal Dialogue and Official Criticism

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 409-420
Author(s):  
Anna Podolska
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Proceedings

Abstract There are various forms of jurisdictional dialogue. In addition to drawing from the case law of another court or seeking direct assistance of such another court in passing the judgment, we can notice in practice situations when by issuing a verdict the courts are communicating with each other. The rulings of the Bundesverfassungsgericht, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and the European Court of Human Rights regarding the free movement of judgments in the European Union and protection of fundamental rights are the example of such activities. Each of these bodies was interpreting separately the extent to which the mechanisms of recognising and executing the judgments may interfere with the level of protection of fundamental rights. A common conclusion concerns assigning the priority to protection of fundamental rights, while individual bodies were determining differently the standards of such protection. The analysed judgments can be construed as a communication between these bodies. Although no direct discussion takes place between these courts, this is still a form of interaction which affects the development of the case law and understanding of the boundaries of mutual recognition of judgments and protection of human rights within judicial proceedings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document