Fag og Arbejde v. Kommunernes Landsforening (CJEU)

2015 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 735-746
Author(s):  
Krista Nadakavukaren Schefer
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Body Weight ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
Unequal Treatment ◽  
Court Of Justice

On December 18, 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU or the Court) issued its judgment of the case Fag og Arbejde (FOA) v. Kommunernes Landsforening (KL).1 The CJEU’s decision is notable for being the first in which the Court directly rules on the question of whether discrimination based on body weight is prohibited under European law. Finding that there is no general prohibition on obesity discrimination in the employment context, the Court of Justice of the European Union nevertheless considers that in some cases, obesity can be a cause of disability. As a result, unequal treatment of obese persons could be a violation of the protections of non-discrimination enjoyed by persons with disabilities.

8. European Actions

2020 ◽  
pp. 180-208
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Strict Sense ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Enforcement Action ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Judicial Actions ◽  
The Eu

This chapter describes the direct enforcement of European law in the European Courts. The judicial competences of the European Courts are enumerated in the section of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) dealing with the Court of Justice of the European Union. The chapter discusses four classes of judicial actions. The first class is typically labelled an ‘enforcement action’ in the strict sense of the term. This action is set out in Articles 258 and 259 TFEU and concerns the failure of a Member State to act in accordance with European law. The three remaining actions ‘enforce’ the European Treaties against the EU itself. These actions can be brought for a failure to act, for judicial review, and for damages.

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.

SPRAWA PUSZCZY BIAŁOWIESKIEJ PRZED TRYBUNAŁEM SPRAWIEDLIWOŚCI UNII EUROPEJSKIEJ – UWAGI Z (ODPOWIEDNIEJ) PERSPEKTYWY CZASU

2021 ◽  
pp. 412-428
Author(s):  
Maciej Perkowski ◽  
Wojciech Zoń
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Forest Stand ◽  
European Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Subject Knowledge ◽  
Białowieża Forest ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Subject

The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 17 April 2018 in Case C-441/17 (failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations), brought by the European Commission against Poland, concerning “logging” in the Białowieża Forest, was widely reported in the media and on the scientific forum (naturally, also in the doctrine of international and European law). Analysing this decision and referring to the jurisprudence and achievements of the doctrine, commentators cautiously (but, in essence, not always correctly) indicated what decisions and actions constituted the basis of this dispute, which ultimately led to Poland’s defeat before the Court, considering the judgment an end to the case and, at the same time, the canon for the subject knowledge. It should be emphasised, however, that the judgment itself did not resolve the dispute as to which model of protection of the Białowieża Forest is appropriate. In particular, it has not contributed to determining whether the previous activities of the State Forests (although it proved them formally inconsistent with EU law) were beneficial (or harmful) to the protection of the Białowieża Forest stand. By emphasising the imperfection of the situation, the authors try to constructively draw from it conclusions de lege lata and de lege ferenda.

11. Judicial Powers II

2021 ◽  
pp. 409-450
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
General Duty ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Procedural Autonomy ◽  
Compensatory Damages

This chapter discusses the ‘decentralized’ powers of the European Court of Justice. It looks at two specific constitutional principles that the Court has derived from the general duty of sincere cooperation: the principle of equivalence and the principle of effectiveness. Both principles have led to a significant judicial harmonization of national procedural laws. The chapter then turns to a third incursion into the procedural autonomy of national courts: the liability principle. While the previous two principles relied on the existence of national remedies for the enforcement of European law, this principle establishes a European remedy for proceedings in national courts. An individual can here, under certain conditions, claim compensatory damages resulting from a breach of European law. Importantly, the remedial competence of national courts is confined to national wrongs. They cannot give judgments on ‘European’ wrongs, as jurisdiction over the latter is—like the power to annul Union law—an exclusive power of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Finally, the chapter explores what happens in areas in which the Union has harmonized the remedial or jurisdictional competences of national courts.

10. Judicial Powers I

2021 ◽  
pp. 357-408
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Reference Procedure ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Central Pillar ◽  
Cooperative Federalism ◽  
Indirect Action

This chapter highlights the ‘centralized’ powers of the Court of Justice of the European Union. It begins with an analysis of the Court's annulment power. The power of judicial review is the founding pillar of a Union ‘based on the rule of law’. The chapter then moves to the remedial power of the European Court, and the question of when the Union legislative or executive branches will be liable to pay damages for an illegal action. It also investigates the Court's power to adjudicate disputes between parties. In addition to a number of direct actions (direct actions start directly in the European Court), the EU Treaties also envisage an indirect action starting in the national courts: the preliminary reference procedure. This procedure is the central pillar of the Union's cooperative federalism for it combines the central interpretation of Union law by the Court of Justice with the decentralized application of European law by the national courts.

Infringement Procedure in the European Union. The importance of the preliminary procedure

2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (04) ◽  
pp. 144-146
Author(s):  
Sevil Əliheydər qızı Dəmirli ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Important Place ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court

Judicial practice formed in the practice of the European Court of Justice belongs to the category of the main sources of law of European law. This practice was the source of law referred to by all Member States and their respective judicial authorities. The article discusses the important place of the preliminary proceedings in the case of violation of the contract by the Court. In practice, the proper conduct of preliminary proceedings shows that court time is used effectively in many disputes. This reflects the European Court's exceptional legal role in ensuring the rule of law and its direct force. The article can be used by university students, teachers, lawyers, researchers, European legal scholars and other practitioners Key words: contract violation, the preliminary proceedings, procedure, European Comission, European Court of Justice

scholarly journals Tracing the Boundaries between Disability and Sickness in the European Union: Squaring the Circle?

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-35
Author(s):  
Silvia Favalli ◽  
Delia Ferri
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Social Model ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
Social Model Of Disability ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Social ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Employment Equality

In recent years the European Union (eu) has sought to develop a far-reaching policy regarding persons with disabilities. However, to date, eu non-discrimination legislation does not provide any clear legal definition of what constitutes a disability. The Court of Justice of the European Union (cjeu) has attempted to fill this gap and, in several decisions, has elaborated on the concept of disability and its meaning under eu law. The cjeu, with reference to the application of the Employment Equality Directive, has explained the notion of disability mainly by comparing and contrasting it to the concept of sickness. Against this background, this article critically discusses recent case law and attempts to highlight that, even though the Court has firmly embraced the social model of disability envisaged by the un Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the boundaries between the concepts of sickness and disability remain blurred.

SEP Litigation and Huawei

2017 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 786-805 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rupprecht Podszun
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Essential Patent ◽  
Patent Thickets ◽  
Standard Essential Patent

In the 2015 case Huawei/ZTE, the Court of Justice of the European Union took one of its rare opportunities to rule on the interface of antitrust and patent law. The question before the Court was whether the holder of a standard-essential patent abuses a dominant position by seeking an injunction against a potential licensee. Regarding a previous line of cases under European law, the Court took a surprisingly easy solution by forcing the companies to get back to the negotiation table. This may be attributed to a new methodological balancing approach of the Court. While acknowledging the problem of patent thickets, the Court restrains the role of antitrust authorities in this field.

Introduction

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Claire Kilpatrick ◽  
Joanne Scott
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Large Data ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Approaches To Studying ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Law

This volume has its origins in the 2017 Academy of European Law summer course on the Law of the European Union which focused on new legal approaches to studying the Court of Justice. The chapters explore a number of innovative legal approaches to studying the Court. Each of these approaches differs from the classic, and still dominant, doctrinal work of understanding and systematizing the Court’s jurisprudence. Developing critical, large data, historical, sociological, and reflective institutional approaches to the Court of Justice, the contributors aim to enrich our understanding of the Court of Justice and to expand our understanding of the range of methods, approaches, and sources available to study it. The contributions exemplify the inter-disciplinarity which increasingly characterizes the study of the CJEU.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document