Court of Justice of the European Union’s Case Law on Family Law Matters Under Brussels IIa and Maintenance

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Family Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Court Of Justice

scholarly journals Conjugalidades Simultâneas na Jurisprudência do Tribunal de Justiça de Santa Catarina depois da Emenda Constitucional Nº 66/2010

2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
André Soares Oliveira ◽  
Pedro Francisco Mosimann Da Silva ◽  
Guilherme De Melo Rossini
Keyword(s):  
Family Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Pursuit Of Happiness ◽  
Santa Catarina ◽  
New Family ◽  
Brazilian Legislation ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Family ◽  
Legal Position

CONJUGALIDADES SIMULTÂNEAS NA JURISPRUDÊNCIA DO TRIBUNAL DE JUSTIÇA DE SANTA CATARINA DEPOIS DA EMENDA CONSTITUCIONAL Nº66/2010. SIMOULTANEOUS CONJUGALITIES IN JURISPRUDENCE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF SANTA CATARINA AFTER CONSTITUTIONAL AMMENDEMENT 66/2010 André Soares OliveiraPedro Francisco Mosimann da SilvaGuilherme de Melo RossiniRESUMO: O direito das famílias contemporâneo busca proteger os diversos arranjos familiares, tendo em vista a busca pela felicidade na família e a proteção da dignidade de seus membros. A legislação brasileira ainda impõe barreiras a determinados arranjos familiares, em especial as famílias oriundas de conjugalidades simultâneas. A presente investigação procurou demonstrar como o novo direito das famílias equaciona a realidade das conjugalidades simultâneas. Procedeu-se uma pesquisa bibliográfica em cotejo com análise jurisprudencial, tendo-se elegido o Tribunal de Justiça de Santa Catarina. O resultado foi que o posicionamento legalista de rejeitar a simultaneidade ainda reverbera na jurisprudência. Contudo, os novos posicionamentos, que valorando o elemento da boa-fé, reconhecem a conjugalidade simultânea e estendem a elas a proteção do direito das famílias também estão presentes na jurisprudência do tribunal analisado.  PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Monogamia; Conjugalidades Simultâneas; Jurisprudência. ABSTRACT: The contemporary Family Law seeks to protect the various family arrangements, with a view to the pursuit of happiness in the family and the protection of the dignity of its members. The Brazilian legislation still imposes barriers to certain family arrangements, especially families from simultaneous conjugalities. This research intended to demonstrate how the new family law deals with simultaneous conjugalities. A bibliographic research was performed along with a case law analysis of the Court of Justice of Santa Catarina. The result was that the legal position that rejects simultaneity still resounds on the case law. Notwithstanding, new understandings that promote good faith and recognize the simultaneous conjugalities, giving them the protection of the Family Law, also appear on the case law of the analyzed Court. KEYWORDS: Monogamy; Simultaneous Conjugalities; Case Law. SUMÁRIO: Introdução 1. Monogamia e a formação de famílias paralelas. 1.1 Monogamia e o dever da fidelidade. 1.2 A tutela jurídica das famílias oriundas de conjugalidades simultâneas. 2. A jurisprudência do Tribunal de Justiça de Santa Catarina depois da EC nº66/2011. Considerações finais. Referências. 

The Best Interests of the Child

2020 ◽  
pp. 203-221
Author(s):  
Wouter Vandenhole ◽  
Gamze Erdem Türkelli
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Law ◽  
Children's Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Children’S Rights ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
European Court ◽  
Elusive Concept

The best interests of the child principle is considered a pillar of children’s rights law and, according to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), is to be a primary consideration in all actions concerning children. Yet best interests is an elusive concept and principle that has no single authoritative definition or description. Internationally and domestically relevant in such diverse areas as family law, adoption, migration, and socioeconomic policymaking, the best interests principle requires flexibility and is best served by a case-by-case approach, as has been recognized by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child and the European Court of Human Rights. This chapter analyzes relevant international case law and suggests the use of a number of safeguards to prevent such requisite flexibility from presenting a danger of paternalism, bias, or misuse.

scholarly journals Characteristics of Precedent: The Case Law of the European Court of Justice in Three Dimensions

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1073-1098 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mattias Derlén ◽  
Johan Lindholm
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
The One

AbstractThe case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is one of the most important sources of European Union law. However, case law's role in EU law is not uniform. By empirically studying how the Court uses its own case law as a source of law, we explore the correlation between, on the one hand, the characteristics of a CJEU case—type of action, actors involved, and area of law—and, on the other hand, the judgment's “embeddedness” in previous case law and value as a precedent in subsequent cases. Using this approach, we test, confirm, and debunk existing scholarship concerning the role of CJEU case law as a source of EU law. We offer the following conclusions: that CJEU case law cannot be treated as a single entity; that only a limited number of factors reliably affect a judgment's persuasive or precedential power; that the Court's use of its own case law as a source of law is particularly limited in successful infringement proceedings; that case law is particularly important in preliminary references—especially those concerning fundamental freedoms and competition law; and that initiating Member State and the number of observations affects the behavior of the Court.

The case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union on ‘judicial authority’ and issuing European arrest warrants

2021 ◽  
pp. 203228442110276
Author(s):  
Tricia Harkin
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Advocate General ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Judicial Authority ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
Judicial Protection

The case law of the Court of Justice from 2016 to 2019 on the interpretation of ‘judicial authority’ in Article 6(1) FD-EAW essentially examines whether a public prosecutor can be an issuing judicial authority and if so, how Member States’ systems for issuing EAWs ensure effective judicial protection for the person concerned. For the Advocate General, applying the Court’s ‘rule of law’ jurisprudence, effective judicial protection when deprivation of liberty is involved can only be assured by a body with the highest level of judicial independence, being a court. The Court’s broader approach of including public prosecutors with sufficiency of independence from the executive and requiring their decisions to be amenable to review by a court, when applied in practice arguably falls short of the requisite standard of effective judicial protection. There is also a lack of clarity about access to the interpretative jurisdiction of the Court by public prosecutors acting as judicial authorities. Effective judicial protection and EU cooperation in criminal matters would now be better served by the designation in all Member States of a court as the issuing judicial authority for the FD-EAW. This is against the background of the uniquely coercive nature of the EAW in terms of deprivation of liberty; the differences in Member States’ institutional arrangements for public prosecutors and the post-Lisbon effective constitutionalisation of judicial protection of rights of individuals.

Property and Expropriation: Two Concepts Revisited in the Light of the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 172-191
Author(s):  
Sabrina Praduroux
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
Domestic Law

Abstract In the late 1950 s René Savatier foretold that the qualification of economic value itself as property (bien) would have been the ultimate evolution of the theory of property rights. This prediction has come true with regard to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the European Court of Justice (CJEU). This paper investigates the implications of the understanding of property developed by the two European Courts on the concept of expropriation itself as well as for the principles governing expropriation law. Hence, the paper illustrates the role played by both the ECtHR and the CJEU in laying down the parameters of legitimacy for national law, including property law. Within this context, the focus falls on cases in which the Courts characterize the facts as deprivation of property requiring for compensation, even though the relevant property could not be the object of expropriation under the domestic law of the defendant State. My contribution brings new insights into the current transformation of the traditional property categories and suggests the reinterpretation of some key concepts of expropriation law.

Divorce on grounds of discord: Did the Moroccan family law reform bring the guarantee of divorce for women? An ethnographic perspective on the changing landscape of divorce. The Mudawwana a decade on

2020 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-65
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Nössing
Keyword(s):  
Women's Rights ◽  
Family Law ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Family Court ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
Women’S Rights ◽  
Mena Region ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Moroccan Family

AbstractThis article discusses the new divorce on grounds of discord procedure (taṭlīq li-š-šiqāq) within the context of the Moroccan family law reform of 2004. Literature available in English and French has, so far, focused primarily on the improvements the Moroccan family law reform has brought in regard to women’s rights. The reform is considered one of the most progressive legislative projects in the MENA region and a milestone for gender equality, notably the reform of divorce law. Divorce on grounds of discord was seen as the long-awaited divorce guarantee for women. However, legal scholars maintained that case law jeopardised the divorce guarantee. This legal-anthropological study is informed by fieldwork at the family court in Rabat, as well as official statistics, case law and the standard legal commentary. It aims to scrutinise how divorce on grounds of divorce is put into practice by the judiciary, how Moroccan men and women make use of it and how changes on a procedural and institutional level affect the implementation of the new divorce procedure. My empirical findings show that divorce on grounds of discord effectively guarantees Moroccan women’s right to divorce. Well beyond the discussion on women’s rights in divorce, I will demonstrate that, within a decade, divorce on grounds of discord developed into a standard divorce procedure for both men and women across socio-economical milieus and age groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document