Search

European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2017 2(2), 519-542, I. Introduction. - II. The legal phenomenon of IEMEIs. - II.1. IEMEIs regulating conduct abroad on the basis of environmental regulatory requirements. - II.2. IEMEIs regulating trade: market access conditions and obligations on Third Country actors. - II.3. Compliance with IEMEIs: "contingent unilateralism", equivalence and flexibility. - III. Access to justice. - III.1. Avenues for access to justice for different kinds of third country actors. - III.2. Standing. - III.3. The Aarhus Convention and access to justice. - IV. Conclusion., The EU conducts its external relations through different types of tools, including through unilateral domestic measures with extraterritorial implications that extend its regulatory power to processes occurring partly abroad. These are increasingly prevalent in the area of environmental protection, including climate change. Examples include the sustainability criteria for biofuels, the inclusion of aviation emissions in the EU emissions trading system, ship recycling, exports of electrical and electronic waste and imports of timber. Because these measures are unilateral in nature, developed within the EU legal order, but have important legal and policy effects beyond EU borders, they raise complex legitimacy questions and may give rise to an external accountability gap. The role of EU administrative law, which controls the exercise of EU public power, is important in "disciplining" the exercise of EU power beyond EU borders and filling this gap. The Article explores some of the novel regulatory techniques employed in these kinds of internal measures to conduct external action and how administrative law responds to their complexities. It focuses on access to justice in the EU legal order in exploring the extent of an external accountability gap. The constraints of accessing the EU judicial system may accentuate the external accountability gap if the EU cannot be held into account on the basis of its own rule of law by third country actors affected by its action.

European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2016 1(3), 1153-1170, European Forum Insight of 22 December 2016, I. Introduction - II. The Judgment in Context - II.1. Theory and Practice of Market-Based Environmental Regulation - II.2 Emissions Trading in the EU - III. The DK Recycling Case - III.1 Background - III.2. DK Recycling before the General Court - III.3. DK Recycling before the Court of Justice - IV. A Parallel Between DK Recycling and the Regulatory Shift to Auctioning: The Normative Landscape of Allowance Allocation - V. DK Recycling, Allowance Allocation and Theoretical Constructions of the EU ETS., In its judgment of 22 June 2016, DK Recycling und Roheisen GmbH v. Commission, the Court of Justice ruled on an appeal brought by a German undertaking operating installations subject to the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), i.e. a "carbon market" where operators trade greenhouse gas emission allowances. At issue in the case were the rules on free allocation of emission allowances. After putting the case in context by providing an overview of the normative framework of the mechanism, the present analysis examines how the case contributes to the understanding of the theoretical implications of the EU ETS.

European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2022 7(2), 527-532, European Forum Highlight of 27 July 2022, The Highlight discusses the EU policy on soil protection and preservation. It is argued that the EU has thus far failed to establish a comprehensive and effective legal framework on this issue. Rather, the EU acquis is extremely fragmented, with soils being addressed as ancillary elements to other environmental priorities. The Highlight points out that the current state of affairs is largely due to the Council's inability to conduct successful negotiations on the Commission's 2006 proposal for a Soil Framework Directive. This legislative initiative was abandoned in 2014 following claims of its violation of the subsidiarity principle. However, in the framework of its new Soil Strategy for 2030, the Commission has included an upcoming proposal for a comprehensive Soil Health Directive. The Highlight argues that, while the Commission is taking seriously the pre-proposal impact assessment, subsidiarity check and consultations, the current state of the environment requires the governments sitting in the Council to leave aside their formalistic criticisms and to adopt a proactive approach to the negotiations, with a view to bridging the existing gap in EU environmental law.

European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2022 7(1), 253-264, European Forum Insight of 18 May 2022, I. Introduction. - II. Un insuccès imputable à l'obstacle de la recevabilité des requêtes climatiques auprès de la Cour de justice. - III. Explorer les voies de droit à même de porter la défense du climat devant la Cour de justice. - IV. Mobiliser en Europe des droits fondamentaux substantiels adaptés au contentieux climatique., So far, climate change litigation in the European Union has been a disappointment, since the European Court of Justice denied the admissibility of two promising cases in 2021: Sabo ECLI:EU:C:2021:24 and Carvalho ECLI:EU:T:2019:252. Nonetheless, the European human rights litigation can still play a significant role in alleviating the ongoing climate crisis in the future. There is still a path to find the access to the Luxembourg Court for future claims related to climate change. Renewed standards of European Human Rights could also be one of the keys to create a proper case law to fight global warming.