scholarly journals Maritime Concessions in Italy

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 59-80
Author(s):  
Raffaele Caroccia
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Legal Environment ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Council Of State ◽  
The Eu

The paper deals with the treatment – both legislative and judicial – of maritime concessions in Italy. It first analyses legal provisions regarding the term of duration of such concessions and then focuses on some recent sentences. The first of them could have made stronger the conflict between the Italian legal environment and EU one, as the legislative automatic prorogation of concessions was deemed to be legitimate. Luckily, further rulings stated that this legislative statute is not in line with EU law and so has to be non applied. The Council of State solved the question very recently: not only Italian legal discipline was sentenced not to be in line with the EU law, but also some guidelines were given to step out the impasse. Judicial review so proved out to be once again the key element to grant rule of law, even when relationships between different legal environments are concerned.

scholarly journals The independence and impartiality of the hybrid CETA Investment Court System: Reflections in the aftermath of Opinion 1/17

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Fanou
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Court System ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
The Eu

In its recent Opinion 1/17, the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) examined the compatibility of an external judicial body, the Investment Court System (ICS) under the EU–Canada Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement (CETA), with EU law. At a time when judicial independence has arisen as one of the main challenges for the rule of law in the EU, this article discusses the Court’s findings in relation to the compatibility of the ICS with the right of access to an independent and impartial tribunal.

scholarly journals The Rule of Law and the Roll of the Dice. The Uncertain Future of Investor-State Arbitration in the EU

2021 ◽  
pp. 333-359
Author(s):  
Wojciech Sadowski
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Treaty Law ◽  
Energy Charter Treaty ◽  
Uncertain Future ◽  
The Eu

AbstractInvestment treaty law and EU law began to develop in the same era and share some important philosophical and axiological foundations. The pressure on the CEE countries to enter into numerous bilateral investment treaties in late 80s and early 90s, in the context of the EU accession aspirations of the former communist countries, was likely to result, eventually, in a conflict between EU law and investment treaty law. The conflict could have been managed in three different ways, yet the CJEU decided in Achmea to declare an undefined volume of intra-EU arbitrations to be incompatible with EU law. This important judgment, which delivered an outcome desired by the European Commission and a number of Member States, is based on questionable legal reasoning that creates high uncertainty in this area of law. The doubts include the scope of application of Achmea, which is now a highly debatable issue. The CJEU itself saw it necessary to limit the scope of Achmea by declaring in Opinion 1/17 (CETA) that the legal reasoning of Achmea did not apply to investment protection treaties with third countries. The Member States of the EU remain politically divided in their views as to whether Achmea applies to the Energy Charter Treaty. And while the problems with the rule of law and independence of the judiciary in certain Member States continue to grow, Achmea has left an important gap for which there is no substitute in the current architecture of the EU legal system.

21. Mergers (2): EU law

2021 ◽  
pp. 871-958
Author(s):  
Richard Whish ◽  
David Bailey
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Merger Control ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Merger Control ◽  
Merger Regulation ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Control Section ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines EU merger control. The chapter is organized as follows. Section 2 provides an overview of EU merger control. Section 3 discusses the jurisdictional rules which determine whether a particular merger should be investigated by the European Commission in Brussels or by the national competition authorities (‘the NCAs’) of the Member States. Section 4 deals with the procedural considerations such as the mandatory pre-notification to the Commission of mergers that have a Union dimension and the timetable within which the Commission must operate. Section 5 discusses the substantive analysis of mergers under the EU Merger Regulation (EUMR), and section 6 explains the procedure whereby the Commission may authorise a merger on the basis of commitments, often referred to as remedies, offered by the parties to address its competition concerns. The subsequent sections describe the Commission’s powers of investigation and enforcement, judicial review of Commission decisions by the EU Courts and cooperation between the Commission and other competition authorities, both within and outside the EU. The chapter concludes with an examination of how the EUMR merger control provisions work in practice.

Application of the EU CFR by National Courts in Purely Domestic Cases

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
András Jakab
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
Local Courts ◽  
Domestic Level ◽  
The Eu

This chapter argues that the most promising way to conceptualize the values of European constitutionalism in a judicially enforceable manner is through a creative reinterpretation of Article 51(1) EU CFR. It asserts that in order to create a fully fledged value community which benefits all its citizens equally, the CFR should become fully applicable in every case in its own right—even in purely domestic cases in domestic courts and even in the absence of a systemic failure of fundamental rights protection at the domestic level. This would mean that judicial review would be introduced across Europe via the supremacy of EU law. This judicial review would be decentralized in the sense that local courts could exercise it, but its unified application would be ensured by the preliminary procedure. The EU could thus become a ‘community of fundamental rights’ with nobody left behind.

Reading the Tea Leaves: The Polish Constitutional Tribunal and the Preliminary Ruling Procedure

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 1543-1568
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Kustra
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Tea Leaves ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Constitutional Tribunal ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

The main purpose of the preliminary ruling procedure is to prevent divergences in judicial decisions applying European Union (EU) law and to ensure the uniform interpretation of EU legal provisions across Member States. The procedure, introduced in the Founding Treaties, has provided a platform for the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereafter, the ECJ or the CJEU) to deliver seminal judgments that have progressively defined the relationship between national and EU legal systems, among others. The procedure has also helped the ECJ to develop fundamental principles of EU law, including direct effect, indirect effect (i.e., the interpretation of national law in line with directives) and primacy. Being one of the most important aspects of the EU judicial system, the procedure provided by Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (hereafter, TFEU) has had an immense impact on the harmonious development of EU law and the way in which national courts and EU courts interact and communicate.

scholarly journals Values and objectives of the EU in light of Opinion 1/17: ‘Trade for all’, above all

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivana Damjanovic ◽  
Nicolas de Sadeleer
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Court System ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Eu

In Opinion 1/17 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled that the new Investment Court System (ICS) in the Canada–EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) is compatible with the EU constitutional framework. This article examines the CJEU’s analysis of the ICS in its Opinion through the prism of EU values and objectives. Given the judicial nature of the ICS, the article unfolds around the concept of the rule of law. The scope and the content of this core EU value are considered under both EU law and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). In particular, the ICS is analysed in light of the two core rule-of-law requirements: equal treatment and the independence of courts, enshrined in Articles 20 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR). Importantly, in Opinion 1/17 the CJEU for the first time applied Article 47 CFR to a court outside the EU judicial system. While the CJEU ruled that the ICS complies with the CFR rule-of-law criteria, this article argues that it nevertheless falls short of the rule-of-law standards required for judicial bodies under EU law. The article demonstrates that the CJEU prioritises free and fair trade as the CETA’s core objective, rather than the rule of law, and endorses the ICS as the conditio sine qua non of guaranteeing such trade. The Court’s findings have wider consequences for the rule of law in international law as the EU continues to pursue the establishment of a Multilateral Investment Court (MIC).

Weak Members and the Enforcement of EU Law

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Ioannidis
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Weak States ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Eurozone Crisis ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rich ◽  
The Eu

This chapter focuses on cases where the presumption that all Member States are effective in enforcing their law does not hold: when Member States show structural, persistent, and cross-sector ineffectiveness in enforcing their law. Borrowing from literature on international law as well as insights from the rich research on EU compliance, this chapter develops three main points. The first is that, on some occasions, the EU might face a similar challenge with that of international law when dealing with weak states. To describe such cases of structural ineffectiveness, this chapter develops the concept of ‘weak member’. The second point is that these problems can be captured through the lens of EU constitutional law, and more specifically as Rule of Law problems. The last point is to present some of the measures taken during the Eurozone crisis to respond to this type of problem with regard to Greece.

Access to the Market and the Transparency as Principles of Public Procurement in the Legal Environment of the EU Neighbourhood Policy

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 218-236
Author(s):  
Ondrej Blažo ◽  
Hana Kováčiková
Keyword(s):  
Public Procurement ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
Legal Environment ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
The Third ◽  
Eu Directives ◽  
Eu Neighbourhood Policy ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The authors confront complexness and rigour of EU directives on public procurement vis-à-vis broad wording of international agreements concluded within EU neighbourhood policy. The firs reason for this comparison is ongoing spread of prin­ciples of the EU law to the third countries. The second reason is that both rely on the same goals: access to market ad fair environment via transparency because these prin­ciples constitute a subtle legal basis for public procurement legislation at all. Finally, these approaches were compared to the approaches employed in recent FTAs - CETA and EUSFTA. This paper is an output in a project granted by APVV-17-0641: Improvement of effective­ness of legal regulation of public procurement within EU law context

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document