scholarly journals The Horizontal Effects of Charter Rights Given Expression to in EU Legislation, from Mangold to Bauer

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-215
Author(s):  
Elise Muir
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Max Planck ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Eu Fundamental Rights

This paper investigates the relationship between legislative provisions and fundamental rights by analyzing the Egenberger, IR, Bauer, Max-Planck and Cresco cases. This paper understands these cases as an invitation to reflect on whether, and if so, to what extent, EU fundamental rights' legislation, read in conjunction with the Charter, could have an impact on the scope of application, substance and/or legal effects of the Charter. This paper argues that the Court of Justice's recent case law can be understood as allowing for EU legislative guidance on fundamental rights to interact in an upward process with the rights enshrined in norms with the same rank as EU primary law. This paper sheds light on the constitutional implications of the overlaps between legislation and constitutional norms on fundamental norms while other contributions in this special issue address effectiveness and the right to an effective remedy in a broader sense.

scholarly journals EU Law’s Half-Hearted Protection of Religious Minorities Minority Specific Rights and Freedom of Religion for All

Religions ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 830
Author(s):  
Kristin Henrard
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Special Rights ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

This article begins with some reflections on the definition of religious minorities, their needs and rights and how this relates to the discussion about the need for minority specific rights in addition to general fundamental rights as rights for all human beings irrespective of particular identity features. Secondly, an overall account of the ambiguous relationship between religious minorities and fundamental rights is presented. The third and most extensive section zooms in on the EU and religious minorities, starting with an account of the EU’s general approach towards minorities and then turning to the protection of fundamental rights of religious minorities in/through the EU legal order. First, the EU’s engagement with minority specific rights and the extent to which these norms have been attentive to religious themes will be discussed. Second, the CJEU’s case law concerning freedom of religion and the prohibition of dis-crimination as general human rights is analysed. The conclusion then turns to the overall perspective and discusses whether the EU’s protection of religious minorities’ fundamental rights can be considered ‘half-hearted’ and, if so, to what extent. This in turn allows us to return to the overall focus of the Special Issue, namely the relationship between the freedom of religion for all and special rights for religious minorities.

scholarly journals The right to paid annual leave as an EU fundamental social right. Comment on Bauer et al.: Joined Cases C-569/16 and C-570/16 Stadt Wuppertal v. Maria Elisabeth Bauer and Volker Willmeroth v. Martina Broßonn, EU:C:2018:871

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 441-448
Author(s):  
Maria Antonia Panascì
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Note ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Horizontal Direct Effect

This case note examines the judgment of Court of Justice of the European Union delivered in Joined Cases C-569/16 and C-570/16 Stadt Wuppertal v. Maria Elisabeth Bauer and Volker Willmeroth v. Martina Broßonn on 6 November 2018. It engages with the noteworthy aspects of the ruling, such as the horizontal direct effect of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter), the relationship between primary and secondary law in the European Union legal order and the scope of application of the Charter.

scholarly journals Exhaustion of domestic remedies as a condition of lodging a complaint before the European Court of Human Rights

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 168-173
Author(s):  
Tamara Gerasimenko
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Scientific Methods ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Court ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
The Right

The subject. The article is devoted to the subject of the exhaustion of domestic remediesbefore filing a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights.The purpose. The purpose of this article is to show and reveal the characteristics of suchimportant condition of lodging a complaint before the European Court of Human Rights asthe exhaustion of domestic remedies.The methodology. The following scientific methods have been used to write this article:analysis, comparing and making conclusions.Results, scope of application. The right of individual petition is rightly considered to be thehallmark and the greatest achievement of the European Convention on Human Rights. Individualswho consider that their human rights have been violated have the possibility oflodging a complaint before the European Court of Human Rights. However, there are importantadmissibility requirements set out in the Convention that must be satisfied beforea case be examined. Applicants are expected to have exhausted their domestic remediesand have brought their complaints within a period of six months from the date of the finaldomestic decision. The obligation to exhaust domestic remedies forms part of customaryinternational law, recognized as such in the case – law of the International Court of Justice.The rationale for the exhaustion rule is to give the national authorities, primarily the courts,the opportunity to prevent or put right the alleged violation of the Convention. The domesticlegal order should provide an effective remedy for violations of Convention rights.Conclusions. The rule of exhaustion of domestic remedies is an important part of the functioningof the protection system under the Convention and its basic principle. 

scholarly journals The relationship between EU secondary rules and the principles of effectiveness and effective judicial protection in environmental matters: towards a new dawn for the 'language of rights'?

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-116
Author(s):  
Mariolina Eliantonio
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Apparent Lack ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Aarhus Convention ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection

Environmental policy is an area which has been quite heavily proceduralised and is a rather peculiar example of 'multi-level proceduralisation' because of the presence of the Aarhus Convention. This paper explores the relevant procedural provisions taken in the field of environmental law and in particular in implementation of the Aarhus Convention, and examines the case law which has involved these provisions. This case law is specifically discussed as concerns the way in which the Court of Justice deals with the interaction between the relevant secondary rules and the general principles of effectiveness and effective judicial protection, as well as Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights concerning the right to an effective remedy. It is shown that it is difficult to distill a consistent approach on the part of the Court with regards to this interaction, and that much depends on the specifics of the case and the question posed by the referring court. However, with the latest case law, despite the apparent lack of underlying rights which would be able to trigger the applicability of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the Court of Justice seems to be moving towards a heavier involvement of Article 47 of the Charter and, consequently, of a 'language of rights', which increasingly plays a pivotal role in boosting the effectiveness of the Aarhus Convention.

Disagreement—Commonality—Autonomy: EU Fundamental Rights in the Internal Market

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 1-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Augenstein
Keyword(s):  
Economic Integration ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Legal Space ◽  
Weak Claim ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Eu Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The contribution explores the implications of disagreements about rights in the ‘multi-layered’ European polity for the autonomy of EU fundamental rights law. It argues that insomuch as the EU’s weak claim to supra-national political authority is corroborated by a strong case for economic integration, the internal market operates not simply as a constraining factor in the effective realisation of fundamental rights, but provides the very foundation of their autonomous interpretation in the EU legal order. Sections II and III elaborate upon the relationship between conflicts of authority in the European legal space and the autonomous interpretation of EU fundamental rights law under conditions of political disagreement. Section IV links the argument to the often-alleged instrumentalisation of EU fundamental rights in the service of the market. Sections V and VI substantiate the guiding contention of the contribution—that the autonomy of EU fundamental rights law is rooted in the unity of the market—with an analysis of pertinent case law. The concluding section suggests that the transformation of the EU into a ‘genuine’ human rights polity must proceed through a politicisation of the market by virtue of fundamental rights law.

The Unorthodox Relationship between the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Secondary Rights in the Court of Justice Case Law on Disability Discrimination

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 275-305
Author(s):  
Delia Ferri
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Right ◽  
Employment Equality ◽  
Different Sources ◽  
The Eu

Court of Justice – Discrimination on the basis of disability – Article 21 and 26 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – Employment Equality Directive – Relationship between different sources of law protecting the right of persons with disabilities – Charter as interpretative aid – Charter as a parameter of validity – Scope of application of the Charter – Constitutionalisation of the UN Convention

Article 47 CFR and the effective enforcement of EU labour law: Teeth for paper tigers?

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 391-402
Author(s):  
Jeremias Adams-Prassl
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Employment Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Late Professor ◽  
Positive Duties ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Early Case ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
The Right

‘Social rights’, the late Professor Sir Bob Hepple warned in 2007 ‘are like paper tigers, fierce in appearance but missing in tooth and claw.’ This note sets out to explore the potential of the right to an effective remedy in Article 47 of the European Union’s Charter of Fundamental Rights (‘CFR’) in equipping the Union’s social acquis with credible remedies. Article 47 CFR is one of the most-litigated and important Articles in the Charter. At the same time, however, it has received surprisingly little attention in the context of EU employment law. Discussion is structured as follows: section one explores the rise of the principle of effectiveness, from the early case law of the Court of Justice to the Charter’s entry into force in 2009. Section two sketches the powerful potential of Article 47 CFR, highlighting its utility both in tackling domestic obstacles to effective enforcement, and expanding the horizontal applicability of EU employment law. Section three briefly highlights some of the limitations litigants might encounter, including a general emphasis on broad regulatory discretion for Member States, and the difficult of crafting (positive) duties out of (negative) restraints. A brief concluding section turns to EU law more broadly, as well as the European Convention of Human Rights, for inspirations guiding the potential future development of Article 47 CFR.

scholarly journals The EU (non) co-ordination of minimum subsistence benefits: What went wrong and what ways forward?

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 138-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gijsbert Vonk
Keyword(s):  
Social Security ◽  
Cost Sharing ◽  
Social Assistance ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Legal Right

This contribution deals with the co-ordination of minimum subsistence benefits in EU law. It is argued that the distinction between social assistance schemes and non-contributory benefits in EU social security law is becoming increasingly redundant. This is recognised in the case law of the CJEU, although paradoxically not in a way that strengthens the rights of mobile citizens, but in an adverse manner that undermines the co-ordination efforts of non-contributory benefits under Regulation 883/2004. In order to overcome this problem, it is argued that social assistance should be included in the material scope of application of Regulation 883/2004. This regulation should abandon the concept of special non-contributory benefits and introduce a new category of minimum subsistence benefits, which would also include social assistance schemes. Such a change could be accompanied by a single, coherent principle to govern the relationship between the right to benefits (Regulation 883/2004) and residence rights (Directive 2004/38), if necessary supported by a cost sharing mechanism for minimum substance benefits under Regulation 883/2004 and, preferably, by a recognition of minimum protection standards for economically non-active EU citizens without a legal right of residence.

Fundamental Rights, General Principles of EU Law, and the Charter

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. 361-392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takis Tridimas
Keyword(s):  
Personal Data ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
General Principles Of Law ◽  
Judicial Scrutiny ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractThe purpose of this chapter is to explore selected aspects of the relationship between the general principles of EU law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The chapter first looks at the expansion of fundamental rights in EU law and the importance of general principles by reference to three principles which have provided fruitful grounds for judicial activism: the right to judicial protection, the principle of non-discrimination, and the right to personal data. It then examines the sources of fundamental rights under Article 6 TEU and the relationship between Charter rights and general principles. Finally, it explores a pivotal issue in EU constitutional discourse, namely, the scope of application of the Charter and the general principles of law. The chapter concludes by observing that, far from declining in importance, the general principles of law continue to be an integral part of judicial methodology; that, following the introduction of the Charter, the CJEU applies a heightened level of judicial scrutiny; and that it favours a centralised approach opting for an autonomous interpretation of the Charter, granting it precedence over national constitutional norms, and understanding broadly its scope of application.

Disagreement—Commonality—Autonomy: EU Fundamental Rights in the Internal Market

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 1-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Augenstein
Keyword(s):  
Economic Integration ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Legal Space ◽  
Weak Claim ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Eu Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe contribution explores the implications of disagreements about rights in the ‘multi-layered’ European polity for the autonomy of EU fundamental rights law. It argues that insomuch as the EU’s weak claim to supra-national political authority is corroborated by a strong case for economic integration, the internal market operates not simply as a constraining factor in the effective realisation of fundamental rights, but provides the very foundation of their autonomous interpretation in the EU legal order. Sections II and III elaborate upon the relationship between conflicts of authority in the European legal space and the autonomous interpretation of EU fundamental rights law under conditions of political disagreement. Section IV links the argument to the often-alleged instrumentalisation of EU fundamental rights in the service of the market. Sections V and VI substantiate the guiding contention of the contribution—that the autonomy of EU fundamental rights law is rooted in the unity of the market—with an analysis of pertinent case law. The concluding section suggests that the transformation of the EU into a ‘genuine’ human rights polity must proceed through a politicisation of the market by virtue of fundamental rights law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document