scholarly journals national court follow-up in the CJEU case "Sindicatul Familia e.a.” regarding the working time of foster parents in Romania

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-142
Author(s):  
Răzvan Anghel
Keyword(s):  
Foster Parents ◽  
National Court ◽  
Working Time ◽  
Practical Result ◽  
Legal Professionals ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Working Time Directive ◽  
The Eu

The CJEU judgement in Sindicatul Familia case (C‑147/17) is a steppingstone for the working time Directive 2003/88 interpretation and application and  for the European debate regarding the foster carer for children statute, remuneration and working time. The article presents the national court decision fallowing the CJEU judgement accompanied by the author commentaries. The purpose of the article is to offer to legal professionals the information on the practical result of the dialog between CJEU and national courts and the way national courts uses the European legislation interpretations given in the preliminary ruling procedure that aims an uniform application of it in the EU member states.

scholarly journals THE NATIONAL COURT FOLLOW-UP IN THE CJ EU CASE “SINDICATUL FAMILIA E.A.” REGARDING THE WORKING TIME OF FOSTER PARENTS IN ROMANIA

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Răzvan Anghel
Keyword(s):  
Foster Parents ◽  
National Court ◽  
Working Time ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
Legal Professionals ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Working Time Directive ◽  
The Eu

The CJEU judgement in Sindicatul Familia case (C‑147/17) is a steppingstone for the working time Directive 2003/88 interpretation and application and for the European debate regarding the foster carer for children statute, the remuneration and working time. The article presents the national court decision following the CJEU judgement accompanied by the author´s commentaries. The purpose of the article is to provide legal professionals with the information on the practical results of the dialog between CJEU and national courts and the way national courts use European legislation interpretations given in the preliminary ruling procedure aiming at its uniform application in the EU member states.

CJEU Judgment in Case C-284/16 Achmea: Single Decision and Its Multi-Faceted Fallout

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-32
Author(s):  
Bartosz Soloch
Keyword(s):  
International Investment ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Investments ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
International Investment Agreements ◽  
The One ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Investment Agreements ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Recent decisions of European and national courts, as well as those of arbitral tribunals, concerning the Achmea saga seem to be plentiful enough to draw preliminary conclusions as to the relationship between EU law, intra-EU international investment agreements (IIAs) and the national laws of EU-Member States. In order to get the proper picture of the situation, however, it is necessary not only to analyse the recent decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and their consequences from these three perspectives, but, equally, to understand how they interact with each other. Such an analysis indicates the real possibility of the emergence of a rift between the practice of the EU and national courts rejecting the validity of investment arbitration agreements, on the one hand, and investment tribunals, on the other. In any case, such a divergence would put into question the IIAs’ claim to provide a stable regulatory framework for international investments in the EU, which, in turn, would strengthen the argument for termination of intra-EU IIAs.

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 El Derecho internacional privado de la Unión Europea frente a las acciones por daños anticompetitivos = European Union Private International Law in front of antitrust damages actions

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 7
Author(s):  
Alfonso-Luis Calvo Caravaca ◽  
Javier Carrascosa González
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Legal Standing ◽  
Palabras Clave ◽  
European Competition Law ◽  
The Eu

Resumen: Este trabajo muestra cómo el TJUE y los tribunales nacionales de los Estados miem­bros de la UE aplican los Reglamento Bruselas I-bis y Roma II a las acciones de daños por infracción del Derecho antitrust europeo. Este trabajo subraya algunas de las dificultades que está encontrado la aplicación privada del Derecho de la competencia: la frecuente inoperancia de los foros de sumisión, la peculiar interpretación del forum delicti commissi, las sorpresas derivadas del forum connexitatis y las soluciones contrapuestas a las cuestiones de legitimación procesal activa y pasiva (como, por ejemplo, la responsabilidad de la sociedad matriz por el comportamiento de sus filiales).Palabras clave: acciones para la indemnización de daños anticompetitivos, acciones autónomas, acciones de seguimiento, acciones declarativas negativas, acciones Torpedo, competencia judicial inter­nacional, daños, defensa basada en la repercusión de sobrecostes, Derecho antitrust, Derecho aplicable, Derecho europeo de la competencia, efecto paraguas, passing-on, Unión Europea.Abstract: This essay shows how the CJEU and the national courts of the EU Member States apply the Brussels I-bis and Rome II Regulations to actions for damages for infringement of European anti­trust law. This paper highlights some of the difficulties encountered in the private application of Euro­pean competition law: the frequent inoperativeness of the submission forums, the peculiar interpretation of the forum delicti commissi, the surprises derived from the forum connexitatis and the opposing solu­tions to the issues of active and passive legal standing (as, for example, the responsibility of the parent company for the behavior of its subsidiaries).Keywords: Antitrust damages actions, Stand-alone actions, Follow-on actions, negative declara­tory actions, Torpedo actions, Jurisdiction, Damages (Torts), passing-on defence, Antitrust Law, Appli­cable Law, European Competition Law, umbrella effect, European Union.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document