scholarly journals La tutela de las libertades económicas fundamentales en el proceso de integración europea

2014 ◽  
pp. 935
Author(s):  
Joaquín Sarrión Esteve
Keyword(s):  
Dominant Role ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Free Movement Of Workers ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
Integration Project ◽  
The Relationship

Premio de artículos jurídicos «GARCÍA GOYENA» (Curso 2013-2014). Tercer accésit El proceso de integración europea, en el que vivimos inmersos, reviste caracteres económicos, sociales, políticos y jurídicos; que dotan de características peculiares a un proyecto de integración cuya naturaleza está en constante discusión, casi tanto como su futuro. Sin duda, uno de los grandes protagonistas del proceso de integración ha sido y es el Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea, sobre todo con la proclamación y consagración de los principios definitorios de la relación entre el ordenamiento comunitario, hoy de la Unión Europea con los ordenamientos nacionales: los principios de eficacia directa y de primacía del Derecho comunitario. Esto lo ha hecho a la vez que desarrollaba su jurisprudencia sobre las libertades económicas fundamentales consagradas en el Tratado de la Comunidad Económica Europea (libre circulación de mercancías, libre prestación de servicios, libre circulación de trabajadores y libre circulación de capitales). Este trabajo tiene por objeto estudiar dicha jurisprudencia, analizando el papel preponderante de la libre circulación de mercancías, así como las perspectivas de futuro tras la entrada en vigor del Tratado de Lisboa.The process of European integration, in which we are immersed, has economic, social, political and legal characters giving special characteristics to an integration project whose nature is in constant discussion as its future. Certainly one of the great protagonists of the integration process has been and is the European Court of Justice, especially with the proclamation and consecration of the defining principles of the relationship between Community law, now European Union law, and national law: principles of direct effect and supremacy of EU law. ECJ recognised this principles while it developed its jurisprudence on fundamental economic freedoms recognised in the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (free movement of goods, freedom to provide services, free movement of workers and free movement of capitals). This work aims to study this case law, analyzing the dominant role of the free movement of goods as well as the future trends after the entry into force of Lisbon Treaty.

scholarly journals Enhanced Cooperation and Free Movement. Territorial Aspects of ‘Harmonisation’

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 249-267
Author(s):  
Miłosz Malaga ◽  
Anna Wilińska-Zelek
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
The Other ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
The One ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Unitary Patent

In this article we examine the notion of ‘harmonisation’ in its interplay with the application of provisions on the free movement of goods. Due to the introduction of the European unitary patent protection system, we are witnessing the first cases of adopting enhanced cooperation in the internal market. This fact raises new, systemic questions concerning the concept of ‘harmonisation’ in European Union law. Are only legal, substantive aspects covered by its definition or should the territorial range of a legal act be taken into account? If yes – to what extent? Since the adoption of enhanced cooperation covers the field of intellectual property rights, the above questions concern the relationship between exercising those rights on the one hand and the principle of free movement on the other. A closer look at this matter leads to the conclusion that the unitary patent might not provide the solution to one of the problems that created for. More generally, in this article we conclude that when defining the concept of ‘harmonisation’, one should take its territorial scope into account narrowly, so as not to infringe the principles of EU law.

11. Free movement of goods II: non-tariff barriers

2020 ◽  
pp. 287-318
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods

This chapter examines European Union (EU) law concerning non-tariff barriers to free movement of goods. It describes member states’ attempts to influence imports and the way the European Commission and the European Court of Justice (CoJ) handled these issues. This chapter explains the provisions of the relevant legislation for non-tariff barriers, which include Articles 34, 36, and 35 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). It also analyses example cases including ‘Dassonville’, ‘Cassis de Dijon’, and post ‘Keck’ case law. It concludes with a consideration of the latest trend of cases concerning product use and residual rules.

scholarly journals The Ambiguous Relationship Between the EU and its Internal Borders

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 64-70
Author(s):  
Aude Bouveresse
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
European Citizenship ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
The Individual ◽  
European Citizen ◽  
The Eu

      The free movement of EU citizens within the Union reveals the ambiguous relationship between the EU and borders. While the functioning of the internal market is essentially based on freedom of movement and implies the elimination of borders as barriers to trade, the freedom of movement of the European citizen remains defined largely within the conceptual framework of borders, since nationality is a prime requirement for European citizenship. Inside the EU, as this article highlights, borders are necessary and problematic at same time. The Court has played with the concept of borders to address these ambiguities with a view to deepening integration. The conclusion is that if the Court has been able to effectively remove obstacles related to internal borders concerning the free movement of goods and the movement of active economic persons, such has not been the case for the free movement of European citizens, economically inactive. It follows from the division of competences and the case law of the European judges that solidarity remains intrinsically linked to nationality and therefore inevitably leads to the re-establishment of borders and the separation of peoples. This demonstrates the resistance of the “paradigm of a European market citizenship”. By revaluing nationality in the context of the enjoyment of the rights linked to citizenship, the European Court of Justice could hamper the integration process by renationalising the individual and establishing new borders.

scholarly journals Human dignity: an illusory limit for the evolutive interpretation of the ECHR?

Amicus Curiae ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 20-28
Author(s):  
Pavel Bureš
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Senior Lecturer ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Relationship

In this article Pavel Bureš (Senior Lecturer in Public International Law in the Faculty of Law at Palacky University, Czech Republic) aims to portray some basic elements of the relationship between the concepy of human dignity and the evolutive interpretation, setting out key elements, notions and considerations for further thoughts. The article presents some basic issues related to the subject matter, then focuses on the evolutive interpretation, and finally outlines the role of human dignity in the case law related to the evolutive interpretation. Index keywords: Human rights, human dignity, European Court of Human Rights

5. The doctrine of judicial precedent

2020 ◽  
pp. 163-208
Author(s):  
Steve Wilson ◽  
Helen Rutherford ◽  
Tony Storey ◽  
Natalie Wortley ◽  
Birju Kotecha
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Appellate Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Stare Decisis ◽  
European Court ◽  
Rules And Principles ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter considers an essential source of law in the English legal system: judicial precedent (or ‘case law’). This chapter discusses the rules and principles of the doctrine of judicial precedent, including how precedents are created, developed, and followed. The chapter considers the rule that forms the precedent—the ratio decidendi, or the reason for the decision—as well as the importance of other judicial statements that do not form part of those reasons—the obiter dicta. The principle of binding precedent is captured by the expression ‘stare decisis’ (stand by what is decided) and binding precedent relies on a hierarchy of courts. The hierarchy can help to establish whether a particular ratio decidendi binds a particular court and whether an appellate court is bound by its own previous precedents. The chapter is packed with case law examples and it also highlights the role of non-binding precedent which may still be deemed persuasive for a particular court. Again, the relationship between the English courts and the Court of Justice of the European Union (EU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is considered. Finally, the chapter considers how a court may avoid following a particular precedent by the process of overruling, distinguishing, or reversing.

Comparative Law and European Union Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 523-556
Author(s):  
Sir Francis Jacobs
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Union Model

This chapter discusses three primary roles of comparative law in EU law. First, comparative law is used in the making and application of European law: for example, in the crafting and interpretation of European legislation and in the case law of the European Court of Justice. Second, European law has exerted a significant influence on other legal systems. A third role of comparative law relates to questions about the very nature of European law: how it is to be classified, or whether it is a novel form of ‘transnational law’. Civil and common law systems are also considered in relation to comparative law, along with the ‘components’ or ‘sources’ of European law: treaty provisions and constitutional principles, EU legislation, general principles of law, international law, and case law of the Court. The chapter concludes with an overview of the distinction between private law and public law, a comparison of EU and federal systems, and a survey of other transnational systems inspired by the European Union model.

Importing and exporting poor reasoning: worrying trends in relation to the case law on the free movement of goods

2007 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 761-775
Author(s):  
Anthony Dawes
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Recent Case ◽  
European Court ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods

This article focuses on the European Court of Justice's [ECJ] recent case law on the free movement of goods in order to show how the boundaries of the prohibition laid out under Articles 28 to 30 EC are once again coming under strain. Such a development, it will be argued, can be observed both in terms of the modification of the scope of the prohibitions set out by Articles 28 and 29 EC and of their application to purely internal situations.

Public Procurement Principles Generated by the Treaty of Rome

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-223
Author(s):  
Ioan-Gabriel Popa
Keyword(s):  
European Economic Community ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
European Directives ◽  
Community Institutions ◽  
Treaty Of Rome ◽  
General Principles Of Law ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
The One

AbstractIn order to understand the principles of public procurement in Romania, it is necessary to analyze, on the one hand, the European directives that regulate the actual public procurement and, on the other hand, the context in which the European directives were adopted. Even with the directives in force, the more general provisions contained in the Treaty of the European Economic Community (EEC) in Rome, hereinafter referred to as the Treaty, are applied, as well as many more general principles of law that will guide the interpretation of these directives. The Treaty was adopted in Rome, in 1957 and became applicable from January 1, 1958. It is considered that the source of the principles of public procurement is the Treaty. Even if in Treaty contained no specific provisions regarding the field of public procurement, it reflects the principles and the general framework for the functioning of the single market, a market characterized through the prism of the fundamental freedoms established by the Treaty: the free movement of goods, services, capital and persons. As the field of public procurement is closely linked to the free movement of goods, this principle is promoted and implemented in the practice of this field based on the regulations, directives and decisions of the Community institutions. The role of the free movement of goods is to harmonize the relationships involved in the process of purchasing goods, but also to ensure the homogeneity, coherence and balance of this process.

Rola uzasadnienia sądowego w realizacji prawa do rzetelnego procesu sądowoadministracyjnego– standard strasburski

2014 ◽  
pp. 13-31
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Grzelak-Bach
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Basic Level

Following a brief introduction of article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the author begins by analyzing case law from the European Court of Human Rights regarding the legal reasoning in judicial proceedings. The main premise of this paper is to present a formula for preparing legal reasoning in administrative court proceedings. The author draws attention to the role of judges who, in the process of adjudication, should apply creative interpretation of the rules of law, when they see errors or omissions in legislative provisions, or blatant violations of the European legal order. The conclusion of those deliberations finds, that the process of tailoring the approach to meet Strasbourg’s requirements should, on a basic level, be at the discretion of judges rather than the legislators.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document