the new political and legal order of the European Union and European Community law, as well as changes to the law relating to human rights. The English legal system has a concept of legal decision making that masks the use of discretion by judges. We only see their assertion of logical argument, objectivity and discriminatory ‘common sense’. The law as language is to be read, interpreted, questioned and seen in its fragmented contexts, to be the object of a healthy scepticism. It should not be invested with qualities it cannot control. Law is not justice—for indeed justice may demand that there be no law. But that’s another story!

2012 ◽  
pp. 320-320
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Common Sense ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Decision ◽  
Community Law ◽  
Legal Decision Making ◽  
The Law

The European Legal Order

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard Stirn
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Eu

Chapter 3 shows that the confluence of the law of the European Union and of the European Convention on Human Rights is a European legal order worthy of the name. It outlines the law of the European Union after the Lisbon Treaty, setting out its principles and the ways in which competences are shared in the EU post Lisbon, between the European Council, the Council, the Commission, the European Parliament, and the Court of Justice of the European Union. The chapter further sets out the outline of the system of rules of the European Union. Then the chapter turns to the characteristics of what has been termed a Europe of human rights, and how the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), in conjunction with domestic courts, police the law of the European Convention on Human Rights. Finally, the chapter brings together the law of the European Union and the ECHR.

Mediators and Moderators of Normative Reductionism: Towards a Testimonial Approach to Expertise in Legal Inquiry

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 532-556
Author(s):  
Suryapratim Roy
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
The Other ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Decision ◽  
Legal Decision Making

There has been an increasing interest in making legal decision-making and scholarship scientific or inter-disciplinary, without there being any interrogation of how or why this should be done. This has resulted in polarised views of the importance of science on one hand, and the primacy of democracy on the other. Such polarisation is not helpful primarily because both ‘science’ and ‘democracy’ remain unintelligible to those who do not have access to the particular epistemology that supports their usage. In this article, I seek to reconceptualise the conflict between democracy and science as the association of legal decision-makers and scholars with expert inquiry. I further conceptualise such association as a process that involves normative reductionism of testimonial exchange. Despite a claim to ‘a culture of justification’ in legal systems such as the European Union, the process of normative reductionism is essentially arbitrary. I seek to articulate a framework where this process may be approached in a disciplined manner, concentrating on the role of mediation and moderation of expert knowledge.

The Union Budget

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Crowe
Keyword(s):  
Public Finance ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Traditional Model ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Community Law ◽  
European Policies ◽  
And Control

The budget of the European Union is, in many respects, an innovative transnational public finance experiment. The transition to a system of own resources in the 1970s marked an attempt to push beyond the traditional model for financing international organizations (through ‘national contributions’ from the budgets of the participating states) to establish an autonomous European budgetary order that would complement the ‘new legal order’ of Community law. Expectations may not have been fully realized in that regard, but today’s Union does enjoy a level of budgetary autonomy far exceeding that accorded to other treaty-based organizations. On the expenditure side, over 94 per cent of the budget is invested in common European policies, and it performs transnational redistributive functions in certain policy sectors. Moreover, the institutional framework for the establishment and control of the budget includes particular features, such as a strong parliamentary dimension to decision-making on expenditure and an independent Court of Auditors, that are more characteristic of the budgetary system of a state.

scholarly journals PROTECTION OF ECONOMIC COMPETITION: AN OVERVIEW OF THE LATEST LEGISLATIVE NOVELTIES

2019 ◽  
pp. 165-171
Author(s):  
Sergii Shkliar ◽  
Olha Bulaieva
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Economic Competition ◽  
Time Limits ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

Purpose. The article is dedicated to the analysis of the main changes introduced by the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Some Laws of Ukraine ensuring the principles of procedural justice and increasing the efficiency of proceedings in cases of violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition”. Methods. Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Some Laws of Ukraine ensuring the principles of procedural justice and increasing the efficiency of proceedings in cases of violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition” proposes the implementation of several novelties. Among them are: the restriction for the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine by certain time limits for considering cases; possibility of extension of the term for consideration of cases by decision of the Committee’s State Commissioner or head of a territorial office; renewal of deadlines for consideration of cases where the respondent is replaced or a co-respondent is involved; provision for the consequences of missing the deadlines for considering cases and also the mechanism of consultations during the consideration of a case, which may be appointed either on the initiative of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine or on the motion of interested persons. Results. The abovementioned amendments will influence the existing system of economic competition protection in a serious way. Among the changes are: – the fine for delayed payment of a fine imposed by the Antimonopoly Committees of Ukraine decision on violation of the legislation on the protection of economic competition is cancelled; – the member of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine who conducted or organized an investigation is deprived of the right to vote in the process of decision-making in the respective case; – the procedure for holding hearings is defined; – recusals and self-recusals are envisaged for the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine officers; – the grounds for acquiring the third-party status in a case are changed; – the rights of persons involved in the case are specified and expanded. An important remark of the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Some Laws of Ukraine ensuring the principles of procedural justice and increasing the efficiency of proceedings in cases of violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition” is that a person that is exempted from liability or whose fine is reduced shall still be liable for damage caused by the violation to other persons. Conclusions. As a result, Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Some Laws of Ukraine ensuring the principles of procedural justice and increasing the efficiency of proceedings in cases of violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition” is expected to become an important step forward in increasing the effectiveness of investigations into violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition. It can also be regarded as the next step to harmonize Ukrainian legislation with the European Union acquis.

scholarly journals The Phenomena of Fragmentation in the Legal Relations between the Council of Europe and the European Union

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viktoriya Kuzma
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Continent ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Law

This article presents the current issues in the law of international organizations and contemporary international law in general. It is pointed out that the division of international law into branches and institutions, in order to ensure the effective legal regulation of new spheres of relations, led to the emergence of autonomous legal regimes, even within one region, namely on the European continent. To date, these include European Union law and Council of Europe law. It is emphasized the features of the established legal relations between the Council of Europe and the European Union at the present stage. It is determined that, along with close cooperation between regional organizations, there is a phenomenon of fragmentation, which is accompanied by the creation of two legal regimes within the same regional subsystem, proliferation of the international legal norms, institutions, spheres and conflicts of jurisdiction between the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union. It is revealed that some aspects of fragmentation can be observed from the moment of establishing relations between the Council of Europe and the European Union, up to the modern dynamics of the functioning of the system of law of international organizations, the law of international treaties, law of human rights. Areas and types of fragmentation in relations between international intergovernmental organizations of the European continent are distinguished. One way to overcome the consequences of fragmentation in the field of human rights is highlighted, namely through the accession of the European Union to the Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950. Considerable attention has also been paid to defragmentation, which is partly reflected in the participation of the European Union in the Council of Europe’s conventions by the applying «disconnection clause». It is determined that the legal relations established between an international intergovernmental organization of the traditional type and the integration association sui generis, the CoE and the EU, but with the presence of phenomenon of fragmentation in a close strategic partnership, do not diminish their joint contribution into the development of the law of international organizations and contemporary international law in general. Key words: defragmentation; European Union; European Court of Human Rights; Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950; conflict of jurisdictions; «disconnection clause»; Council of Europe; Court of Justice of the European Union; fragmentation; sui generis.

scholarly journals Algorytm jako informacja publiczna w prawie europejskim

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Mazur
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Access Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Automated Decision Making

The author verifies the hypothesis concerning the possibility of using algorithms – applied in automated decision making in public sector – as information which is subject to the law governing the right to access information or the right to access official documents in European law. She discusses problems caused by the approach to these laws in the European Union, as well as lack of conformity of the jurisprudence between the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights.

Can public access to documents support the transparency of automated decision-making? The European Union law perspective

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Mazur
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Access Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Automated Decision Making ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACT Due to the concerns which are raised regarding the impact of automated decision-making (ADM) on transparency and their potential discriminatory character, it is worth examining the possibility of applying legal measures which could serve to increase transparency of ADM systems. The article explores the possibility to consider algorithms used in ADM systems as documents subjected to the right to access documents in European Union (EU) law. It is focused on contrasting and comparing the approach based on the right to access public documents developed by the Court of Justice of European Union (CJEU) with the approach to the right to access public information as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The analysis shows discrepancies in the perspectives presented by these Courts which result in a limited scope of the right to access public documents in EU law. Pointing out these differences may provide a motivation to clarify the meaning of the right to access information in EU law, the CJEU’s approach remaining as for now incoherent. The article presents the arguments for and ways of bringing together the approaches of the CJEU and the ECtHR in the light of a decreasing level of transparency resulting from the use of ADM in the public sector. It shows that in order to ensure compliance with EU law, it is necessary to rethink the role which the right to access information plays in the human rights catalogue.

Wartości czy interesy? Przyczynek do rozważań o istocie procesów integracji w ramach Unii Europejskiej

2018 ◽  
pp. 96-115
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Szczerba-Zawada
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
International Organization ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Common Values ◽  
The Eu

The purpose of this article is to try to outline the essence of membership of the European Union. This international organization, by virtue of the decision of its creators, i.e. the Member States, has been equipped with attributes, which have determined its unique – supranational – character. As a new legal order, the European Union has been granted some scope of autonomy, but ontologically it is dependent on the Member States. It is the Member States that have taken decision on setting up a new integration structure with a center of decision-making located not only outside but also above them, the scope of its competences and instruments of their exercising, and as “masters of the Treaties”, may decide to dissolve it. The decision to join the European Union seems to be determined pragmatically and praxiologically – upon benefits of cooperation within the framework of the EU. In this perspective solidarity, understood as the unity and equality of the Member States, based on common values, becomes a factor legitimizing the EU, and at the same time – a guarantor of its existence, especially in times of crisis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document