scholarly journals The challenge of comparing EU Member States judicial data

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alina Onţanu ◽  
Marco Velicogna
Keyword(s):  
Case Definitions ◽  
Member States ◽  
Extreme Caution ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Justice Systems ◽  
Key Indicators ◽  
Case Number ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Policy Discourses

The number of cases is measured through a broad range of quantitative variables used in various studies and policy papers as key indicators of the volume of activity of national courts. Additionally, these variables, together with other data (e.g. time needed to resolve a case, number of judges, etc.) are part of a broader discourse on the efficiency of justice systems. However, such discourse can be problematic when data is not actually comparable. To raise the attention on this very relevant but poorly explored topic, this paper analyses the comparability of the caseload data by focusing on apparently simple categories like civil and commercial litigious or non-litigious cases and administrative cases. The EU Justice Scoreboard and CEPEJ data and national case definitions in France, Italy, and Romania are used to assess the most relevant justice EU datasets. The findings point towards significant differences between analysed systems that suggest extreme caution should be exercised when using such data for scholarly, legislative or policy discourses.

scholarly journals Transformation of the European arrest warrant in light of protection of the rights of extradited individuals

2020 ◽  
pp. 42-48
Author(s):  
Kamila Danilovna Shaibakova
Keyword(s):  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Foreign National ◽  
Member States ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
The Eu

The subject of this research is the norms of international legal acts, legislations of the EU member-states, decisions of foreign national courts, as well as decisions of the European Court on Human Rights and European Court of Justice. A hypothesis is advanced that within the framework of the European arrest warrant there are new trends associated namely with the desire to strengthen the system of protection of rights of the extradited individuals, which can negatively affect functionality of the procedure as a whole. Thus, a number of cases of the national courts (for example Artur Celmer case) and Court of the European Union (Pál Aranyosi and Robert Căldăraru case), as well as provisions of the constitutional courts lead to the fact that the principle of mutual recognition of court decision is used with caution. The article examines the case law of national courts of the EU member-states, as well as practice of the European Court of Justice and European arrest warrant. The author compared the decisions of the aforementioned courts for confirming the hypothesis that the protection of extradited individuals plays a significant role in the context of operation of the European arrest warrant. The intention to provide legal guarantees to individuals extradited in the context of the European arrest warrant, which loses its main influence; particularly the procedure is interrupted due to absence of guarantees of protection of rights in case of extradition, as well as raises doubt towards judicial systems and their decisions of some EU member-states brought forth by political actions of these countries. Moreover, protection of rights and guarantee of fair trial increases.

scholarly journals European law, national law and (un)certainty of law

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-177
Author(s):  
Gian Benacchio
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Binding Effect ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Fundamental Values ◽  
Radical Shift ◽  
The Eu

One of the fundamental values of any legal system is the principle of certainty of law, whose highest expression is its encoding in the various bodies of law. However, today this value is strongly, albeit inadvertently, called into question by the European Union - in particular, by a set of principles, and related mechanisms, designed to ensure uniformity of law across the EU Member States. These include the principle of primacy of EU law over the laws of its Member States, the principle of the disapplication of national laws that are incompatible with EU law (including the provisions of directives that have not yet been implemented, or that have implemented in a manner deemed incorrect), the principle of interpretation of national law in conformity with EU law and, above all, the conclusive and binding effect of the judgments of the EU Court of Justice even when they provide a 'unique' or unusual interpretation, not expressly provided for in EU law. These principles are now well-established benchmarks in supreme and national courts as well, to the extent that there has been a radical shift in the system and hierarchy of sources of law in each legal system of the EU Member States, at the expense of citizens, businesspeople and legal practitioners, who all find it hard to identify the exact rule to apply to specific cases.

scholarly journals Basic Surveillance Network, a European database for surveillance data on infectious diseases

2004 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 1-2 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Ternhag ◽  
A Tegnell ◽  
B Lesko ◽  
K Skaerlund ◽  
P Penttinen
Keyword(s):  
Infectious Diseases ◽  
Surveillance Data ◽  
Easy Access ◽  
Case Definitions ◽  
Surveillance Network ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Incidence Trends ◽  
European Database ◽  
The Eu

The Basic Surveillance Network was started in 2000 and is one of the networks on infectious diseases funded by the European Commission. The network collects and makes readily available basic surveillance data on infectious diseases from all the 'old' (pre-2004) European Union member states. The aim is to provide easy access to descriptive data that already exist in national databases, so that it is possible to monitor and compare incidence trends for infectious diseases in the EU member states. The list of diseases covered by the network has recently been expanded from 10 initial 'pilot' diseases to over 40 diseases listed by the EU to be under surveillance. In the near future, the new member states will be invited to participate in the network. Data are case-based and comprise date of onset of disease, age and sex. Only a very short list of disease specific additional variables, such as country of infection or immunisation status, is collected. Classification of cases ( possible, probable, confirmed) is specified according to EU case definitions. The participants of the network have access to an internal web site were all the data is presented in tables and graphs. An open website is available for the public at https://www.eubsn.org./BSN/

scholarly journals The Directive 2006/24 declaration of invalidity and the consequences of metadata retention in the EU Member States: A Fundamental Rights Standards Approach

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-68
Author(s):  
Alessandra Silveira ◽  
Pedro Miguel Freitas
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Electronic Communications ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
Legal Model ◽  
Legal Equality ◽  
The Eu

Purpose – The text deals with the recent case law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on the directive on the retention of data (metadata) by providers of electronic communications services for the purposes of investigation, detection and prosecution of serious crimes. The authors seek to clarify the implications of the declaration of invalidity of this European directive for the EU Member States, towards the protection of legal equality of European citizens. Methodology/approach/design – The text was drafted while there was a pending ECJ’s response to the questions referred by two national courts (one Swedish and one British) on the effects of that invalidity decision on the domestic legislation that transposed it. Thus, the authors sought to anticipate the Court's decision in the light of its settled case law and the reaction of the Member States’ authorities’ after the declaration of invalidity of the referred directive. Findings – In the light of the particularities of the protection of fundamental rights in the EU and the legal model of integration, the authors draw some guidelines as to the procedure to be followed in future cases in order to safeguard the effectiveness of the Union law, namely when it comes to the legal equality of European citizens.

Non-uniform Application of European Union Private International Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 83-94
Author(s):  
Katarina Trimmings ◽  
Burcu Yüksel
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
Funded Project ◽  
The Eu

This chapter draws on the findings of an EU-funded project titled (‘Cross-Border Litigation in Europe: Private International Law Legislative Framework, National Courts and the Court of Justice of the European Union’ (EUPILLAR) and discusses concerns over the lack of uniformity in the interpretation and application of the key EU Private International Law Regulations (Brussels I Regulation, Brussels IIa Regulation, Rome I Regulation, Rome II Regulation, Maintenance Regulation) across the EU Member States. The chapter provides examples of differing interpretations and applications of the same EU private international law rules in the EU through examples from various EU Member States, analyses the reasons behind the non-uniform interpretation and application, and suggests specific ways to rectify these problems.

BIOECONOMY DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL BASED ON MORE EFFICIENT LAND USE IN THE EU

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irina PILVERE ◽  
Aleksejs NIPERS ◽  
Bartosz MICKIEWICZ
Keyword(s):  
Green Growth ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Growing Stock ◽  
Europe 2020 ◽  
Europe 2020 Strategy ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
Key Industries ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Production Resource

Europe 2020 Strategy highlights bioeconomy as a key element for smart and green growth in Europe. Bioeconomy in this case includes agriculture, forestry, fisheries, food and pulp and paper production, parts of chemical, biotechnological and energy industries and plays an important role in the EU’s economy. The growth of key industries of bioeconomy – agriculture and forestry – highly depends on an efficient and productive use of land as a production resource. The overall aim of this paper is to evaluate opportunities for development of the main sectors of bioeconomy (agriculture and forestry) in the EU based on the available resources of land. To achieve this aim, several methods were used – monographic, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, statistical analysis methods. The findings show that it is possible to improve the use of land in the EU Member States. If all the Member States reached the average EU level, agricultural products worth EUR 77 bln would be annually additionally produced, which is 19 % more than in 2014, and an extra 5 billion m3 volume of forest growing stock would be gained, which is 20 % more than in 2010.

THE STANDARD OF LIVING OF HOUSEHOLDS IN POLAND COMPARED TO OTHER EU MEMBER STATES

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 634-638
Author(s):  
Joanna Szwacka Mokrzycka
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Economic Condition ◽  
Standard Of Living ◽  
Consumption Expenditure ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Financial Condition ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Structure Of Consumption ◽  
The Eu

The objective of this article is to present the standard of living of households in Poland in comparison with other EU member states. The starting point for analysis was the economic condition of Poland against the background of other EU member states. The next step consisted of assessment of the standard of living of inhabitants of individual EU member states on the basis of financial condition of households and the structure of consumption expenditure. It was found that the differences within the EU in terms of economic development and the standard of living of households still remain substantial.

Political aspects of security of the European Union Member States

2020 ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Kusztykiewicz-Fedurek
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Political Security ◽  
New Institutions ◽  
The Stability ◽  
Key Aspects ◽  
The Eu

Political security is very often considered through the prism of individual states. In the scholar literature in-depth analyses of this kind of security are rarely encountered in the context of international entities that these countries integrate. The purpose of this article is to draw attention to key aspects of political security in the European Union (EU) Member States. The EU as a supranational organisation, gathering Member States first, ensures the stability of the EU as a whole, and secondly, it ensures that Member States respect common values and principles. Additionally, the EU institutions focus on ensuring the proper functioning of the Eurozone (also called officially “euro area” in EU regulations). Actions that may have a negative impact on the level of the EU’s political security include the boycott of establishing new institutions conducive to the peaceful coexistence and development of states. These threats seem to have a significant impact on the situation in the EU in the face of the proposed (and not accepted by Member States not belonging to the Eurogroup) Eurozone reforms concerning, inter alia, appointment of the Minister of Economy and Finance and the creation of a new institution - the European Monetary Fund.

The preliminary ruling procedure at the court of justice of the European Union and transformation of European anti-discrimination law

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (3) ◽  
pp. 66-72
Author(s):  
Elena Sorokina
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Essential Feature ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Eu

The preliminary ruling procedure is an essential feature of the EU legal system, which is a unique cooperation tool as part of the dialogue between the Court of Justice of the EU and national courts of the Member States. Its main purpose is to ensure uniform interpretation and application of the provisions of EU law with all Member States and to preserve the uniformity of the European legal system. The continuous use by national courts of the Member States of the mechanism of preliminary ruling and constructive inter-judicial cooperation, the Court of Justice has developed an extremely extensive case law on the prohibition of discrimination and with the result to introduce substantial changes in European anti-discrimination law.The preliminary rulings of the Court of Justice have shown its inclination to expand notions of what constitutes discrimination and in most cases the Court prompt by the desire to interpret the provisions of European law so as to ensure the full effectiveness of the law, as well as a willingness to promote and strengthen protection against discrimination in Europe. While the protection against discrimination on some grounds is stronger than others, however, the preliminary rulings of the Court of Justice are important contribution to the transformation of anti-discrimination law, promote change in the national legislation of the Member States and provide the more effective protection of human rights in general.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document