scholarly journals Durable Relationship and Family Members “by Analogy” in the European Union

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 175
Author(s):  
Tanel Feldman ◽  
Marco Mazzeschi
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Family Member ◽  
Family Members ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Registered Partnership ◽  
The Family ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Union Citizen ◽  
The Eu

Rights of residence derived from a durable relationship with an EU citizen, are left to a relatively wide discretion of the Member States. Pursuant to Article 2.2 (b) Directive 2004/38/EC (“Directive”), “the partner with whom the Union citizen has contracted a registered partnership, on the basis of the legislation of a Member State, if the legislation of the host Member State treats registered partnerships as equivalent to marriage and in accordance with the conditions laid down in the relevant legislation of the host Member State” qualifies as family member. Provided that they have a durable relationship (duly attested) with an EU citizen, pursuant to Article 3.2(b), unregistered partners are as well beneficiaries of the Directive. The durable relationship was expressly excluded from the scope of Article 2(2)(b): “Unlike the amended proposal, it does not cover de facto durable relationships” (EU Commission, Document 52003SC1293). Article 3 (2)(a) covers “other family members” (no restrictions as to the degree of relatedness) if material support is provided by the EU citizen or by his partner or where serious health grounds strictly require the personal care of the family member by the Union citizen. Pursuant to Article 3.2, “other family members” and unregistered partners can attest a durable relationship, must be facilitated entry and residence, in accordance to the host Member State’s national legislation. In the light of Preamble 6 Directive, the situation of the persons who are not included in the definition of family members, must be considered “in order to maintain the unity of the family in a broader sense”. The questions discussed in this paper are the following: (i) are Member States genuinely considering the concept of durable relationship in view of maintaining the unity of the family in a broader sense? and (ii) how to overcome legal uncertainty and which criteria, both at EU and at international level, can be taken into account in order to assess whether a durable relationship is genuine and should be granted the rights set forth by the Directive?

scholarly journals Administrative Formalities Concerning The Members Of A Family Who Are Not Nationals Of A Member State

2015 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 446-449
Author(s):  
Florentina Lupsa ◽  
Florin Frant
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Family Member ◽  
Family Members ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Arrival Date ◽  
Residence Permit ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Family ◽  
Union Citizen

Abstract The member states issue a residence permit to the family members of a citizen of the European Union that are non-nationals of a member state, for the case that their planned residence exceeds three months. The deadline for presenting the request for granting a residence permit is at least three months from the arrival date. The disregard for requesting a residence permit may expose the person in question to indiscriminate and proportional sanctions. The residence right for family members of a Union citizen who are not nationals for a member state is confirmed by issuing a document entitled „Family member residence permit for a citizen of the Union”, in a timeframe of maximum six months from the date that his or her request is presented. A confirmation of filing the request for the residence permit is issued immediately.

scholarly journals Gloss to the Judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C 129/18, SM versus Entry Clearance Officer, UK Visa Section

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-200
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Woch
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Family Members ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
State Of The Union ◽  
Legal Guardianship ◽  
The Status ◽  
Union Citizen ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The right of family members of Union citizens to live with them in the host Member State has always been considered essential for an effective freedom of movement of citizens. However, the provisions of Directive 2004/38/EC contain a different description of the scope of rights of family members of Union citizens taking advantage of the freedom of movement of persons as to the possibility of accompanying or joining EU citizens taking advantage of the freedom of movement of persons, depending on whether they belong to the circle of ‘closer’ or ‘distant’ family members. This issue acquires particular significance in the context of family members who are not citizens of any Member State of the Union. For individuals belonging to the circle of ‘closer’ family members, the EU legislator grants the subjective right to accompany or join a Union citizen exercising the right of the freedom of movement of persons. In the latter case, the legislator only obliges the host Member States to facilitate entry and residence for such individuals in accordance with their national legislation. The glossed judgment, by determining the status of individuals under legal guardianship within the framework of the Algerian kafala system as a ‘distant’ family member of a Union citizen, clearly touches upon a significant issue in the context of the Union’s freedom of movement of persons.    

Responding through transposition: public Euroskepticism and European policy implementation

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Policy Implementation ◽  
Member State ◽  
Public Attitudes ◽  
State Governments ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Policy ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Directives ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

Do public attitudes concerning the European Union affect the speed with which member states transpose European directives? It is posited in this article that member state governments do respond to public attitudes regarding the EU when transposing European directives. Specifically, it is hypothesized that member state governments slow transposition of directives when aggregate public Euroskepticism is greater. This expectation is tested using extended Cox proportional hazard modeling and data derived from the EU’s legislative archives, the official journals of EU member states, and the Eurobarometer survey series. It is found that member state governments do slow transposition in response to higher aggregate public Euroskepticism. These findings have important implications for the study of European policy implementation, as well as for our understanding of political responsiveness in the EU.

scholarly journals The European Court of Justice and the Policy Process

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susanne K. Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Administrative Practices ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

The European Court of Justice is one of the most important actors in the process of European integration. Political science still struggles to understand its significance, with recent scholarship emphasizing how closely rulings reflect member states’ preferences. In this book, I argue that the implications of the supremacy and direct effect of the EU law have still been overlooked. As it constitutionalizes an intergovernmental treaty, the European Union has a detailed set of policies inscribed into its constitution that are extensively shaped by the Court’s case law. If rulings have constitutional status, their impact is considerable, even if the Court only occasionally diverts from member states’ preferences. By focusing on the four freedoms of goods, services, persons, and capital, as well as citizenship rights, the book analyses how the Court’s development of case law has ascribed a broad meaning to these freedoms. The constitutional status of this case law constrains policymaking at the European and member-state levels. Different case studies show how major pieces of EU legislation cannot move beyond case law but have to codify its principles. Judicialization is important in the EU. It also directly constrains member-state policies. Court rulings oriented towards individual disputes are difficult to translate into general policies, and into administrative practices. Policy options are thereby withdrawn from majoritarian decision-making. As the Court cannot be overruled, short of a Treaty change, its case law casts a long shadow over policymaking in the European Union and its member states, undermining the legitimacy of this political order.

scholarly journals The Concept Of Unfair Contract Terms

2021 ◽  
pp. 3-13
Author(s):  
I.M. Harhat
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legal Literature ◽  
Commercial Code ◽  
Unfair Terms ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Contractual Rights ◽  
The Eu

The article explores the concept of «unfair terms contract terms» through the analysis of its origin and fixing in the legislation and legal literature of the European Union, Ukraine and the United States. Comparisons of interpretations of this concept according to Directive 93/13/EEC, Model Rules of European Private Law, The Uniform Commercial Code, as well as the Law of Ukraine «On Consumer Protection». In the article author notes that the definition of unfair terms of the contract is a complex symbiosis of material and procedural, a combination of justice and dishonesty, comparison of signs of «imbalance of interests» and «significantly disadvantaged» and therefore at this stage of civil law is not can be defined unambiguously. It is investigated that the modern civil legislation of Ukraine is still in solidarity with the legislation of most EU member states in terms of introducing this concept primarily to protect consumer rights. Regarding the definition of «unfair terms», author notes that Ukrainian legislation follows common legal trends and recognizes unfair terms when they violate the principle of good faith and fairness, as well as when they lead to a significant imbalance of contractual rights and obligations of the parties and harm the consumer. As a result, it was found that in general the concept of «unfair terms» is evaluative and can not by its very nature reflect the motives laid down in the contract by one or another party. The Court of EU and the courts of the EU member states do not give general conclusions on a case-by-case basis, using the definitions contained in the text of Directive 93/13/EEC, which set out the conditions that may be considered unfair. Author proposes to use the sign «significantly unfavorable position» proposed by A.A.Leff to define the concept of «unfair terms of the contract», as it will improve the protection of the interests of the economically weaker party in the contract.

scholarly journals La independencia de Escocia en la Unión Europea : los efectos de la secesión de territorios en la UE entre política y derecho = The independence of Scotland in the European Union : the effects of territories’ secession within the EU between Law and Politics.

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (33) ◽  
pp. 69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto López Basaguren
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Law And Politics ◽  
Special Procedure ◽  
Independent Member ◽  
The Eu

Este trabajo analiza el problema de los efectos en el interior de la UE de la recesión de territorios en el seno de sus Estados miembros, en relación a la hipotética independencia de Escocia, en el supuesto de un apoyo mayoritario a la opción independentista en el referéndum que va a tener lugar el próximo 18 de septiembre de 2104. Frente a la convicción inquebrantable de los promotores de la independencia de que Escocia, tras la independencia, permanecerá en la UE, como Estado miembro de pleno derecho y que la modificación de un status es una cuestión interna, casi una mera formalidad, este trabajo analiza los problemas que plantea la pretención escocesa, en la UE, entre Derecho y Política.This paper’s aim is to analyze the effects the secession of territories in the Member States can have within the EU, regarding the hypothetical independence of Scotland in the case a majority of Scotish citizens would back that opinion in the referendum on September 18, 2014. Those who are promoting and independent Scotland are completely convinced that the territory will remain in the EU, as an independent Member State, and that it will reach this new status from within the EU. In their mind, that is an EU’s «internal» matter, which doesn’t need any special procedure, as far as it would be just little more than a formality. On the contrary, this paper analyzes the issues a proposal like this of Scotland encounter within the EU both in the fields of Law and Politics.

The (Rebuttable) Presumption of the European Union Member States as ‘Safe Countries’ under the Dublin Regulation

2012 ◽  
pp. 240-255
Author(s):  
Cristina Contartese
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
European Court ◽  
Dublin Regulation ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
European Union Member States ◽  
The Eu

The purpose of this chapter is to analyze a particular aspect of the so-called Dublin Regulation, whose aim is to determine the European Union (EU) Member State responsible for examining an asylum application, that is, the presumption that the EU Member States are “safe countries.” Although the notion of “safe country” is on the base of the Dublin Regulation functioning mechanism, as it implies that any EU Member States can transfer an asylum seeker to any other EU country which is responsible, the authors contend that the safety of an EU Member State can be given as presumed for the purpose of asylum seekers. The analysis of the present work starts, firstly, with the examination of the notion of “safe country” under the Dublin Regulation. In the second part, relying on the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECHR) case-law, it will be discussed to what extent the Court of Strasbourg clarifies the notion of “safe countries” and the test it applies to it. Finally, the Commission’s proposal for a recasting of the Dublin Regulation will be analysed with the aim of foresee possible future developments of the EU law mechanisms to rebut such a presumption as applied to the EU Member States. It will emerge that in order to assess the safety of an EU Member State, attention has to be given to the prohibition of both direct and indirect refoulement as well as to the effective remedy at the EU Member State’s domestic level.

4. Direct actions in the Court of Justice of the European Union: Articles 258–260, 263, 265, 277, and 340 TFEU

2020 ◽  
pp. 65-89
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Homewood
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Eu

This chapter discusses articles in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) that provide for actions that are brought directly before the Court. Under Articles 258 and 259 TFEU (ex Articles 226 and 227 EC), respectively, the European Commission and Member States may bring enforcement proceedings against a Member State in breach of Treaty obligations. Article 260 TFEU (ex Article 228 EC) requires compliance with the Court’s judgment. Article 263 TFEU (ex Article 230 EC) concerns judicial review of EU acts. The outcome of a successful action is annulment. Article 265 TFEU (ex Article 232 EC) provides for actions against the EU institutions for failure to act.

scholarly journals Member State nationality under EU law – To be or not to be a Union Citizen?

2021 ◽  
pp. 1023263X2098607
Author(s):  
Lorin-Johannes Wagner
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Union Citizenship ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Union Citizen ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

The question of who ought to be regarded as Union citizen is a central but not an easily answered question. Drawing on an analysis of the ECJ’s case-law and the underlying constitutional set up of Union citizenship, this article argues that the notion of nationality in EU law is based on a jurisdictional conception that builds on the idea of a genuine link and a territorial link with the EU. Relying on this understanding the article assesses the peculiar cases of Germany, the UK and Denmark, establishing not only if and how Member States can reconfigure the meaning of their nationality under EU law but also highlighting that the notion of nationality as a peremptory marker for Union citizenship is defined within the constitutional realm of EU law. The understanding that Member States are free to define their nationality within EU law, hence, is a misplaced overstatement of sovereignty. Against this backdrop the last part of the article turns to the case of Latvian non-citizens, arguing that Latvian non-citizens, who are generally not regarded as Union citizens, have been Union citizens all along.

scholarly journals Positioning of the concept of corporate restructuring in the EU member-states and its approval by the auditor

2021 ◽  
pp. 131-151
Author(s):  
Olga Nikolaevna Sinkina
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Corporate Management ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Current State ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Eu

The object of this research is the concept of restructuring, which in the conditions of crisis in the European Union is positioned as an instrument for its overcoming and the procedure for its verification by the auditor. The subject of this research is a range of question associated on the peculiarities of positioning of the concept of restructuring in the EU. The article analyzes the criteria for insolvency and tests for the presence of the signs of insolvency according to the national legislation of the EU jurisdiction based on the typical crisis process. The author introduces the definition of the concept of restructuring, its framework and elements. The recommendations of the European Commission on overcoming crisis situations and insolvency of companies are provided; the principles of preventive concept of restructuring are analyzed; the auditor’s procedures pertaining to the concept of restructuring are formulated. The research methodology relies on the fundamental provisions presented in the works of foreign scholars. The main conclusions are as follows: the responsibility of the corporate management in a number of EU member-states includes verification of compliance with the established criteria of insolvency on the regular basis; for this, it is necessary to submit the report to regulatory authorities on the current state of the company and decision on overcoming the crisis, usually in the form of the concept of restructuring approved by the auditor. The scientific novelty of this research consists in: 1) generalization of legal regulation of the criteria of insolvency in the EU member-states, tests for the presence of the signs of insolvency, responsibility of corporate management, outline of the restructuring plan; 2) positioning of the concept of restructuring, formulation of definition of the concept of restructuring, its framework and elements; 3) analysis of the principles of the preventive concept of restructuring of the European Commission; 4) development of audit procedures concerning the concept of restructuring.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document