scholarly journals La reparación del incumplimiento del plazo razonable en el Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea y una posible consecuencia para el estatus de los derechos fundamentales

2017 ◽  
pp. 21-58
Author(s):  
Edorta COBREROS MENDAZONA
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
El Sistema ◽  
Per Se ◽  
The Eu

LABURPENA: Zentzuzko epea funtsezko eskubidea da Europar Batasunaren ordenamenduan. Askotan eztabaidatu da eskubide hori urratzeak eragin ahal izan dituen kalteak konpentsatzeko moduaren gainean, eta Justizia Auzitegiaren interpretazioa eboluzionatuz joan da. Horren inguruko azken jarreraren ondorioz, kalte ordaina emateko errekurtsoa abiarazi behar da Auzitegi Nagusiaren aurrean, konpentsazioa jaso nahi bada. Ondorio berri bat ekar dezake horrek Europar Batasunaren kontratuz kanpoko erantzukizun-sisteman; hau da, oinarrizko eskubide bat kaltetzeak per se ekar lezake behar beste ezaugarritutako urraketa egotea. Horrek indartu egingo luke oinarrizko eskubideek lehentasunezko kokalekua edukitzea Europar Batasunaren ordenamenduan. RESUMEN: El plazo razonable es en la actualidad un derecho fundamental en el ordenamiento de la Unión Europea. La compensación de los daños que pudiera haber producido su conculcación ha sido una cuestión debatida y en la que la interpretación del Tribunal de Justicia ha experimentado una clara evolución. La última postura al respecto obliga a iniciar un recurso de indemnización ante el Tribunal General para obtenerla. Ello plantea una posible consecuencia novedosa en el sistema de responsabilidad extracontractual de la Unión Europea, como es que la lesión de un derecho fundamental podría constituir per se una violación suficientemente caracterizada, lo que reforzaría la posición preferente de los derechos fundamentales en el ordenamiento de la Unión Europea. ABSTRACT: Reasonable period of time is currently a fundamental right in the EU legal order. The compensation of damages that might have been caused by its infringement is a discussed matter and there the interpretation provided by the Court of Justice has experienced a clear evolution. The last position on this matter calls for filing an action for damages before the General Court in order to obtain a compensation. This raises a possible new consequence within the legal regime of the non contractual liability of the European Union, that is that the impairment of a fundamental right might be considered per se as a sufficiently serious breach which would strengthen the prevalent position of fundamental rights in the legal order of the European Union.

scholarly journals The European Union and WTO law: a nexus of reactive, coactive, and proactive approaches

2007 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANTONIS ANTONIADIS
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Comprehensive View ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Community Legal Order ◽  
The Eu

Ranging from the denial of direct effect to WTO law by the Court of Justice to a WTO-friendly legislative culture currently booming in the EU's political institutions, different approaches towards WTO law have been adopted within the EU. This article classifies the different approaches into reactive, coactive, and proactive by drawing on their common characteristics. The principal aim is to explore the considerations shaping the development of the different approaches and to argue that these stem from the interaction between the judiciary and the legislature. In doing so, this article purports to provide a comprehensive view of the application of WTO law within the Community legal order.

Case C-233/18 Zubair Haqbin v. Federaal Agentschap Voor de Opvang van Asielzoekers (C.J.E.U.)

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 694-707
Author(s):  
Justine N. Stefanelli
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Violent Behavior ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
First Time ◽  
The Eu

In its preliminary ruling in Haqbin, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU or Court) ruled for the first time on whether the EU Reception Conditions Directive 2013/33 (RCD) prohibits Member States from withdrawing material reception conditions in the event of a breach of the rules of accommodation centers, or in the context of violent behavior within those centers. In holding in the negative, the CJEU affirmed the important role played by fundamental rights in the EU's asylum system.

14. The European Union

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Berthold Rittberger
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines how the European Union acquired distinctive constitution-like features. It begins with a discussion of three routes to constitutionalization: the first is through changes in the EU's primary law; the second focuses on ‘in between’ constitutionalization; and the third leads directly to the European Court of Justice and its jurisprudence. The chapter proceeds by discussing two developments that have shaped the EU constitutional order almost since the beginning: the emergence of a body of EU law constituting a set of higher-order legal rules, and the consolidation of the constitutional principle of representative democracy. It explains how the supremacy and direct effect of EU law, as well as the EU court's concern with the protection of fundamental rights, helped transform the EU into a constitutional polity. It also considers how the extension of the legislative, budgetary, and other powers of the European Parliament animated the constitutional principle.

From Washington with Love—Investor–State Arbitration and the Jurisdictional Monopoly of the Court of Justice of the European Union

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 425-453
Author(s):  
Philip Strik
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Forum Shopping ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Dispute ◽  
The Eu

AbstractWhile investor–State arbitration is to a large extent detached from the EU legal order, EU law has recently started to be invoked in investor-State arbitration proceedings. In the context of intra-EU bilateral investment treaties, the Commission has expressed the view that investor-State arbitration gives rise to a number of ‘arbitration risks’ for the EU legal order. Not only can it solicit investors to engage in forum-shopping, but it can also result in questions of EU law not being litigated in Member State or Union courts. This chapter explores the extent to which the compatibility of investor–State arbitration with the EU legal order is in issue. It examines the main features of investor-State arbitration as concerns its interplay with the EU legal order, as well as the Court of Justice’s case law on issues of compatibility between systems of international dispute settlement and the EU legal order. The chapter highlights that the way in which investor–State arbitral tribunals handle issues of EU law, as well as the involvement of interested parties, may foster the synergy between investor–State arbitration and the EU legal order.

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.

2. The Foundations of European Union Intellectual Property Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 36-66
Author(s):  
Justine Pila ◽  
Paul L.C. Torremans
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Central Bank ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Property Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Central ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Union Section ◽  
The Eu

This chapter discusses the role of the EU in the IP field before and since the introduction of the Lisbon Treaty. To that end it introduces the EU legal order itself, including its founding Treaties, institutions, and authority to act (competence), with a focus on IP. The chapter is organized as follows. Section 2.2 traces the establishment of the European Economic Community and its development to the European Union. Section 2.3 describes the seven EU institutions: the European Council, European Commission, European Parliament, Council, Court of Justice of the EU, European Central Bank, and Court of Auditors. Section 2.4 explains the legal authority of the EU, in relation particularly to IP. Section 2.5 covers EU measures and their legal effects. And Section 2.6 discusses the actions of the Court of Justice.

4. Constitutionalism and the European Union

2020 ◽  
pp. 75-100
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Liberal Constitutionalism ◽  
The Eu

This chapter addresses the question of whether the EU has a constitution. It explores the formal constitutionalist credentials of the Union legal order and shows that the Union has claimed that the EU Treaties constitute the highest law in Europe. It then examines the constitutional nature of the Union from a ‘democratic’ perspective. Finally, it evaluates the Union legal order through the lens of liberal constitutionalism. This ‘classic’ constitutionalism assesses the legal nature of a document by insisting on a separation of powers and the existence of fundamental rights.

The Freedom to Conduct a Business in the EU, Its Limitations and Its Role in the European Legal Order: A New Engine for Deeper and Stronger Economic, Social, and Political Integration

2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (9) ◽  
pp. 1867-1888 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Usai
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Social Economic ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Political Integration ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

This paper examines the role and importance of the freedom to conduct a business enshrined in Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFR). With the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the CFR became legally binding, gaining the same legal value as the Treaties. It will be argued here that Article 16 CFR, which recognizes the right to economic initiative, can be an important force for European integration by acting as a new engine of European social, economic, and political integration. That said, Article 16 should be read bearing its limitations in mind.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document