Search

An international dispute between the Republic of Poland and Czechia over the Turów mine has recently resulted in infringement proceedings brought before the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning the implementation of the Water Framework Directive. This case and the judicial and extrajudicial processes surrounding it facilitate an assessment of the procedure provided for in Articles 258 to 260 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The assessment of this procedure is undertaken both in terms of the achievement of the internal policy objectives of the Member State and in terms of the effectiveness of the implementation of European law. We argue that this procedure (under Articles 258–260 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union) is effective in both connections, because it provides a wide range of opportunities for both the judicial authorities of the European Union and the Member States themselves to achieve their objectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The toolbox for resisting illiberalism is quite diverse. It includes high-level diplomatic negotiations concerning sanctions to enforce democracy and citizens' mobilisation for local causes. This article focuses on strategic litigation as legal mobilisation, relying on the language of rights and the rule of law and addressing courts as defenders of liberal democracy. Such mobilisation leads to litigation before national and European courts concerning issues such as media freedom, judicial independence, minority rights or the rights of migrants. In order to be authoritative, however, courts need support from political institutions at national and EU levels from the transnational judicial community and from civil society. The embeddedness in structured civil causes and organisations seems particularly relevant in the context of strategic litigation. This article aims to map out particular factors in the EU legal and institutional systems that directly affect the prospects of strategic litigation against illiberal reforms using EU law. On the one hand, the EU legal system does not provide direct access to the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU). The multilevel system of judicial protection in the EU means that litigation aimed at resisting illiberalism mostly needs to start before national courts, making it vulnerable to political capture of national judiciary. On the other hand, the EU law system is based on the purposive constitutional framework of the Treaties. The tendency to follow a teleological interpretation of the CJEU makes it a promising ground for advocating for new interpretations of the law in light of a changing social context. Finally, EU law is a system with a particular legal culture and a field of experts who are well-versed in applying that culture. This field does not directly overlap with the specialised lawyers who often initiate strategic litigation; who tend to be experts in the fields of migration, transparency or the environment; and who do not have a broader understanding of EU law and its integration logic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

District heating and cooling networks represent a compelling energy system solution due to their capacity to integrate renewable energies and leverage local surpluses of thermal resources. The meticulous design and optimization of network infrastructure are imperative to fully exploiting the potential of these energy systems. The Life Cycle Assessment of district heating and cooling networks for the purpose of environmental sustainability is a crucial and increasingly demanded aspect, particularly in light of the progressively stringent European regulations. The Life Cycle Assessment methodology could offer an evaluation throughout the entire life cycle of such networks. The proposed review scrutinizes the application of the Life Cycle Assessment methodology to evaluating the environmental profile of district heating and cooling systems. The methods, findings, and challenges are examined through a literature review and case study analysis. The results highlight variations in the climate profile influenced by the network generation type and multifunctionality approaches. The analysis revealed a range of emission factors, spanning from 11 gCO2eq/kWhth to 470 gCO2eq/kWhth for district heating and 6 gCO2eq/kWhth to 64 gCO2eq/kWhth for district cooling. The discussion emphasizes integrating district heating and cooling network management considerations and addressing methodological challenges. This study concludes by proposing future research directions for developing a universal LCA-based tool for district heating and cooling network analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The principle of subsidiarity, which also appeared in antiquity, was refined and perfected by the Catholic Church. The essence of the principle of subsidiarity is to ensure that decision-making takes place as close as possible to the individuals, thus avoiding unnecessary centralisation and encouraging effective decentralisation. The rationale behind this principle is the recognition that higher levels of government do not always have an adequate level of insight or understanding of local realities, and that decision-making should therefore be taken at the lowest possible level of authority to achieve the best quality of governance. The principle of subsidiarity is a fundamental principle of the European Union’s decision-making system. A return to subsidiarity can play an important role in the constitutional disputes that have been revived in recent years between national constitutional courts and the Court of Justice of the European Union. This paper analyses the evolution of the subsidiarity principle in EU decision-making and the institutions and procedures that are supposed to guarantee its application. By examining the political and legal enforceability of the principle of subsidiarity, the paper draws conclusions on the present state of the enforcement of the principle and makes some proposals for the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Digital de Derecho Administrativo is the property of Universidad Externado de Colombia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Europarecht (05312485) is the property of Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Polish Journal of Allergology / Alergologia Polska is the property of Termedia Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper addresses the question of whether generative AI can create copyrightable works by making a comparative analysis between European Union law and U.S. copyright law. First, it is argued that for copyright law it does not seem possible for an entity other than a human being to be the copyright holder, thus ruling out the possibility of generative AI being considered a copyright holder. It is established that in US copyright the door it may be possible to register part of a work made using generative AI, and that in the EU this door remains open and pending evolution, although European jurisprudence already gives some guidelines. Afterwards, this paper explores possible infringement of exploitation rights in the different parts of the training process of generative AI models and in the activities that lead to the generation of content that is like intellectual works. It is concluded that in US law there is a gap in knowledge as to whether fair use would cover these types of activities. In European Law, although there are exceptions such as those in Directive 2001/29, it is not at all clear whether this will be sufficient to cover these activities, or whether the authorization of the rights owner will be necessary. If the latter is true and judging by the wave of lawsuits that have followed against companies and institutions that have made generative AI tools publicly available, it is possible that licensing negotiation may take a central role in the AI industry, with the negative consequences that this may bring for the advancement of science and for the public domain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to examine the right to access one's file in competition proceedings, as part of the right to fair trial provided by European legal instruments, in relation to limitations of this access imposed by competition legislation in the European Union (EU) and Western Balkan (WB) countries. Pursuant to their aspirations to become Member States in the EU, they must align their legislation with the EU's Acquis while ensuring the protection of rights, as established by the ECHR. The methodology used to answer the research question combines desk review and two-level comparative study methodologies. The desk review is applied in this paper to answer the research question, focusing on a careful examination of the EU legal framework, while comparative approach, seeks to identify similarities and differences in the provisions related to the right to access the competition file in the EU, Albania, and other WB countries such as Kosovo, North Macedonia and Montenegro. Additionally, the study presents the interpretations of the right to access the file, as part of the administrative and/or trial proceedings in the case law of the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights from a human rights perspective. The findings of this study indicate that the right to access the file is restricted by public enforcement of competition law, only in specific cases where limitation pursues a legitimate aim, is proportionate and does not jeopardise the party's situation. The European human rights instruments mandate that the EU institutions, Member States and Candidate Member States must carefully regulate the clash between human rights and competition law. The WB countries have adopted the EU standards regulating access to the competition file. However, each jurisdiction has its own specifications, challenges and domestic factors shaping the national rules. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Catalana de Dret Públic is the property of Revista Catalana de Dret Public and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The legislative changes implemented in the Labor Code of Georgia fundamentally changed the regulations governing the prohibition of discrimination. In order to bring them closer to the law of the European Union, a number of important issues were identified that require scientific processing and comparative legal research. One of the current and problematic types of discrimination in Georgian reality is not hiring a person and/or dismissing him/her due to political or other opinions. Case law regarding these topics practically does not exist. The present article deals with the existing regulation related to discrimination due to political or other opinions in pre-contractual relationships. The present paper examines whether Georgian legislation complies with acts of ILO and European law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Pravnik is the property of Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of State & Law and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: This research critically analyses the jurisdictional challenges and their implications for the proper administration of justice in the case of Mariana vs. BHP Group [2022] EWCA Civ 951. The legal route taken by the High Court of Appeal is examined, considering both the proceedings in the UK (pre-Brexit) and a third state (Brazil). This text examines the impact of the European legal framework on EU member states and evaluates the approach of UK towards Article 34 of the Brussels Regulation. The analysis examines whether pursuing damages based in civil or commercial liability suffered by victims domiciled in a Third State through European jurisdiction is appropriate. Methods: The study employs a case law analysis, supported by doctrinal legal research methodology, to systematically examine the balance of the principle of forum non conveniens and the consistent application of the Brussels Regulation in the Mariana Case. This is a critical review of the UK High Court's decision to overturn Judge Turner's ruling. The review emphasizes the adherence to historical national precedents, European Union Law, and the European Court of Justice's previous rulings against the United Kingdom's strike-out legal technique. The article explores the complexities of administering justice, focusing on the interplay between case management discretion, the principle of proportionality, and the court's responsibility to ensure a fair trial. It analyses the impact of factors such as the court's structure, case complexity, and the time required for resolution within this framework, while also considering the court's duty to administer justice effectively. Results and conclusions: The study's findings enhance comprehension of jurisdiction challenges in transnational litigations within the European Legal System and their implications for the proper administration of justice. The article recommends a balanced approach that upholds the substantial rights of claimants while aligning national practices with EU civil liability standards, promoting judicial harmony in transnational civil and commercial liability cases in the European Union. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The European Court of Justice recently annulled Council Decision (EU) No. 2019/217, which had authorised the conclusion of an agreement—in the form of an exchange of letters—between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco. This agreement initially extended coverage of preferential trade treatment between the two parties to products originating in Western Sahara and subject to the control of Moroccan customs authorities. The ECJ’s ruling has removed those trade preferences and imposed a de facto EU embargo on the region. This article critically discusses the ECJ’s ruling on both legal and policy grounds. From a legal standpoint, the ECJ’s decision foregoes consideration of notions of sovereignty applicable to Western Sahara in virtue of Islamic law, which would have led to recognition of its enduring ‘allegiance’ to Morocco. Moreover, the same decision amounts to an instance of extra-territorial application of EU law and infringes the principle of indivisibility of agreements. From a policy standpoint, by acknowledging standing in virtue of mere non-State armed military presence, the ECJ’s ruling has offered to terrorist groups and rebel militias—in a context of profound instability in the Sahel region—a blackmail strategy vis-à-vis regional governments. Methods: This critical review uses the descriptive approach to outline, analyse, interpret, and criticise the 2021 ECJ ruling, which denies preferential trade treatment to products from the Western Sahara region, even when under the control of Moroccan customs authorities, while Moroccan products continue to receive such treatment. Results and conclusions: The European Court of Justice partially used the concepts of international law as it paid no regard to the concept of sovereignty in the Islamic world, which is connected to tribe, allegiance and loyalty. Further, extending the application of the European Law to a third state, which has several agreements with the European Union, must be devoid of any political dimension affected by regional conflicts and international balances. The enforcement of the referred ruling is tantamount to the economic embargo on the Western Sahara Region, which will inevitably affect the security situation thereof and thus bring it closer to the influence of terrorist groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Pandectele Române is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Eurasian Journal of International Law is the property of L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Th is paper investigates the complexities associated with the principle of conferral within the European Union (EU) and highlights the diffi culties and challenges related to conferring competences both within the EU and in the relationship between the EU and its member states. Also the paper underscores the need to maintain vigilance and ongoing monitoring of issues related to conferral to ensure the effi cient functioning of the EU in an ever‑evolving context. (Th e paper was presented at the 6th National Conference, in Bucharest, with international participation, on the theme "Application of European Union Law in Romania", organised by the Romanian Society of European Law, a member of the International Federation of European Law, on October 27, 2023. ) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This contribution to the Symposium on Ecosystem Restoration and EU Law assesses the underground protection schemes suggested by the European Green Deal (EGD) for the European Union (EU). By addressing the overground bias that environmental laws and policies have traditionally suffered from, the analysis engages with the EU Soil Strategy for 2030, its 'Mission "A Soil Deal for Europe"', and the proposed 2023 Soil Monitoring Directive. The Article explores how and to what extent this agenda for the preservation and restoration of soils is legally reordering the European ground and, simultaneously, how and to what extent it is regrounding the European legal order. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At no time in recent history has it been more exciting to be a student of European patent law. Over the past ten years Europe has sought to create and restructure a significant portion of its patent law apparatus, including the introduction of a 'Unitary Patent' ('UP') that has effect in 17 European Union Member States (and counting), and the creation of a Unitary Patent Court ('UPC') that entered into force on 1 June 2023. The compelling policies underlying these dramatic changes are well documented, including enhanced uniformity, cost reductions, and other efficiencies. Indeed, the European patent system is poised to welcome international patent actors with a well-thought-out procedural regime. Yet all good policies must be supported by a legitimate legal foundation. The United Kingdom's highly publicized and often dramatic departure from the EU has reverberated throughout the European establishment, affecting issues relating to the economy, trade, immigration, labor, and Northern Ireland, to name just some of the most obvious. Perhaps what is not so evident, however, is the adverse legal effect that Brexit has had on the UPC, to such an extent that we are dubious about the court's legitimacy. Make no mistake, even if we prefer a fully integrated EU solution, we support the creation of UPC and the entire unitary initiative. However, in this paper we argue that it must be done in a manner that is legally principled, which requires an amended and re-ratified Unitary Patent Court Agreement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is a review of the monograph "Regularizations of irregular migrants in the EU. A comparative legal analysis of Austria, Germany, and Spain" written by Kevin Fredy Hinterberger. The author highlights the importance of investigating the regularization processes of immigrants in the context of the European Union and analyzes the procedures established by these three countries in their domestic law. The article emphasizes the relevance and complexity of this work, as well as the need to adopt a humane view of migration and recognize the rights of migrants. The author raises three main questions: the regularization processes in Austria, Germany, and Spain, how regularization can be used as an effective regulatory tool, and whether harmonization of regularization mechanisms at the EU level would be advantageous. The author proposes a Regularization Directive that would require Member States to harmonize their domestic legislation on the matter. The study demonstrates that there is no single possible answer and that regularization is a more humane and effective solution. [Extracted from the article]

Ukraine is currently carrying out some reforms recommended by the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe and by the European Commission (in order to become a Member State of the European Union), in order to strengthen democracy, the Rule of Law, human rights and protection of minorities. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate that legislative drafting techniques are a means to give effect to the principle of the Rule of Law, when it comes to Ukraine; and to recommend that Ukraine improves the way its institutions draft/scrutinise bills, and a dopts best practices from Europe. The methods of this article will be those of an analysis of constitutional law. The article will rely on the definition of the principle of the Rule of Law (given by AV. Dicey and developed by Lord Bingham) and the idea that legislative drafting techniques can be seen as a means to give effect to such a principle. The Ukrainian current constitutional context (viz., the impossibility of amending its Constitution under martial law, due to Article 157 of the Constitution of Ukraine) will be considered. Some pieces of Ukrainian legislation will be analysed in the light of the Venice Commission’s recommendations. Some of the main legislative drafting techniques and their aims, in the light of the best practices from Europe, will also be analysed. The results of the article will set out that in such a current constitutional context, where the recommended reforms can be implemented only by Acts of Parliament (although some amendments to the Ukrainian Constitution would be appropriate), in Ukraine the quality of primary legislation becomes crucial to give effect to the Rule of Law. Therefore, the scientific novelty of the article will be to test general concepts with regards to the exceptional constitutional circumstances of Ukraine. The conclusions, thus, is that Ukrainian institutions (such as the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine and the President of the Republic of Ukraine) should improve the way they draft/scrutinise bills, adopting best practices from Europe, in order to improve the quality of primary legislation and, thus, to give ef fect to the principle of the Rule of Law . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the environment increasingly emerges as a global concern, international entities like the European Union have set forth minimum standards to address cross-border environmental impacts. Even though these standards are binding only for the EU Member States, they are also being followed from the potential candidate states like the Republic of Kosovo as a path towards their accession in the European Union organization. This article analyses exactly this issue, the harmonization and implementation of European Union Legal Instruments in the national level. The article offers a three dimensional analysis of the Environmental National Legislation, respectively its adoption and harmonization with EU standards, its implementation and lastly its criminalization in order of guaranteeing its application. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the EU directive as a fundamental source of EU law, examining its characteristics, and also its direct and indirect effects. Directives play a crucial role in harmonizing national legislations and promoting legal coherence within the European Union. Additionally, the article discusses the indirect effect of directives, which requires member states to interpret and apply their national laws in line with the objectives of the relevant directive. This principle fosters consistency and alignment between national legislation and EU law, even in the absence of explicit provisions in the national legal framework. The article also refers to the significant case law of the European Court of Justice, illustrating the application of the direct and indirect effects of directives in specific legal disputes. These landmark cases demonstrate the Court's role in interpreting and clarifying the scope and implications of the direct and indirect effects, further shaping the legal landscape of EU law. Overall, the EU directive serves as a vital instrument for the development and enforcement of EU law. It empowers individuals, harmonizes national legal systems, and contributes to legal consistency and the protection of individual rights within the European Union. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European 'messianic' project was not particularly concerned with democracy or human rights, but rather sought 'legitimacy' in the nobility of its cause. However, when failure struck during the Euro-crisis, many sources of legitimacy suddenly collapsed. Similarly, failure struck the rule of law principle, demonstrating its precariousness and weak source of legitimation. The strong waves of de-europeanisation and the rise of illiberal democracies not only bolster the existing preoccupations of problematic democratic procedures, but further bring into question the continuity of the EU as a supranational entity. Interestingly, the European Union's answer to these issues furnishes a solution that, on the one hand, focuses on the enhancement of democracy, while focusing the safeguarding of rule of law on the other. Such an enhancement of democracy could be the result of the Conference on the Future of Europe, whereas, the rule of law crisis is meant to be addressed through financial and techno-managerial mechanisms. However, if the first mechanism aims to palliate or even mitigate the democratic deficit, the second one risks further alienating Union citizens by seeing in it another instance of European Union 'technocracy'. The solution to be foreseen is to reconnect democracy with rule of law as they have always been the foreign implants of European integration. Filling in these empty gaps of political messianism through an outright pairing of democracy and rule of law will rejuvenate the social legitimacy of European exceptionalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article addresses the question of how to explain and justify the allocation of politically sensitive legal questions to civil courts in the European Union. It proposes a pluralist theoretical view on interactions of private law adjudication with legislative initiatives in the process of building a European political community. This is elaborated on the basis of a reconstruction of the interaction between judicial and legislative processes in three high-profile cases (concerning non-discrimination, housing and climate change) in light of three theoretical perspectives: social justice, constitutionalism and public sphere theory. The first two perspectives shed light on the legal-political dimension of private legal questions in the European Union and manners in which to handle the plurality of sources and institutions in this field. They do, however, not fully clarify the distinction and relation between Habermasian discourses of justification and discourses of application of law in European Private Law adjudication. The Article suggests that public sphere theory, with a basis in Fraser's work on transnationalisation, can complement the theoretical understanding of the role of judges in European Private Law. It is submitted that the interaction between national and European levels of adjudication helps maintain transnational deliberative spheres in which the legal-political stakes behind private law can be discussed. This opens up space for the inclusion of different voices in democratic deliberations on questions of social justice. Private law adjudication may thus be considered to contribute to the initiation of discourses of justification which serve the re-imagination of a European political community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Directive 2000/78/EC regulates age discrimination within the European Union. The challenge posed by this legislation is to define the "how and why" of the age protection and to balance equality with economic interests. The Gordian knot is here represented by Article 6 of the Directive, which allows Member States to justify age discrimination when a legitimate aim is provided, and the means chosen to achieve that aim are proportionate and necessary. The implementation of Article 6 by Member States led to contrasting interpretations that define age equality both as a social priority and an obstacle to the economic growth. Member States have therefore referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to seek a harmonious interpretation of age protection, but the judgments of the Court eventually reveal how the conflict between equality and economic interests is far from being solved. This article discusses these jurisprudential developments and demonstrates how the principle of proportionality applied by the Court is influenced by market-based tendencies that dissolve that "Aristotelian" idea of equality. Consequently, cases are holistically compared on a cross-case level to contribute to a normative theory able to combine age justifications with the common principles and values that underlie European legislations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty in December 2009 was supposed to have far-reaching implications for the development of a European policy on justice and access to justice as it “constitutionalized” for the first time this important topic. However, at the time of writing, European Union (EU) law has been unable to construct and provide a proper system of access to justice for European citizens across all European Member States. In particular, the study of the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Luxembourg shows that the European model of access to justice based on litigation, access to courts and on the defense of individual rights is inherently limited. The author advocates a change of approach, aiming for a better definition of a substantive notion of access to justice in the light of a broad system of European social justice and equality. This new approach could be based on the classic theory and methodology of “access-to-justice” developed in the early 80s by Professor Mauro Cappelletti. His encyclopaedia on the topic offered a horizontal comprehensive strategy to construct a justice system and procedural laws based on the needs of the ordinary citizens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of FinanzRundschau is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Wirtschaft und Wettbewerb is the property of Fachmedien Otto Schmidt KG and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Contrary to predominant European constitutional narratives assuming the alignment between the European Union legal framework and national constitutional orders, this Article points at the current misalignment between the prevailingly purposive European Union institutional order and the prevailingly open character of the Democratic and Social Constitutional State. The evolutionary trajectories leading to the current status quo are examined by distinguishing an age of openness, in which the institutional frameworks of both the European Economic Communities and the Democratic and Social Constitutional State lent themselves to a range of competing legislative renderings, from an age of purposiveness opened by the Treaty of Maastricht, in which a neoliberal policy agenda was gradually entrenched in the Treaties, with the result of undermining the adaptability and inclusiveness of European public law structures. To counter this development, this Article identifies in a drastic deconstitutionalization of the Economic and Monetary Union the key move to favor the realignment of the European Union and the Democratic and Social Constitutional State. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Luridica is the property of Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Lodzkiego and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Studia Iuridica Lublinensia is the property of Maria Curie-Sklodowska University in Lublin and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Studia Iuridica Lublinensia is the property of Maria Curie-Sklodowska University in Lublin and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Why would a supranational law enforcer suddenly refrain from wielding its powers? The authors theorize the supranational politics of forbearance—the deliberate underenforcement of the law—and explain how they arise from cross-pressures between prosecutorial discretion and intergovernmental policy-making. The article then traces why an exemplary supranational enforcer—the European Commission—became reluctant to launch infringements against European Union member states. While the Commission's policy-making role as engine of integration has been controversial, its prosecutorial role as guardian of the Treaties has been viewed as less contentious. Yet after 2004, infringements launched by the Commission plummeted. The authors demonstrate that the Commission's political leadership grew alarmed that aggressive enforcement was eroding intergovernmental support for its policy agenda. By reining in the bureaucrats managing enforcement and embracing conciliatory dialogues with governments, the Commission sacrificed its role as guardian of the Treaties to safeguard its role as engine of integration. The article's findings highlight the consequences of politicizing international institutions and the tradeoffs facing executives double-hatting as prosecutors and policymakers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article centers on a recent decision by the German Federal Fiscal Court (BFH) concerning the taxation of leased or rented properties with operational installations. It mentions that the court ruled that there is no obligation to allocate the consideration between the property and the operational installations if the service is deemed a unified performance predominantly influenced by the provision of the property.

This piece addresses Case C-458/19 P before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) concerning a substance of long-term exposure, namely bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP). The case concerned the interplay of two complex procedures of European chemical law, namely: the procedure for authorising the use of a substance listed in Annex XIV of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH Regulation); and the procedure for listing a substance in Annex XIV of the REACH Regulation on the basis of its intrinsic properties as a substance of very high concern for the risks it poses, or may pose, to human and environmental health. The significance of this judgment is that it provides a better understanding of how Article 60(4) of the REACH Regulation is interpreted in an analogous manner in relation to other provisions of the same Regulation. Whether DEHP is a question of reproductive toxicity (Article 57(c) of the REACH Regulation) or endocrine-disrupting properties (Article 57(f) of the REACH Regulation), this judgment offers insights into the limits of the CJEU's willingness and/or ability to use a teleological approach to interpret legislation in this area. Furthermore, this work supports the possibility of applying the principle of intergenerational equity to issues related to long-term exposure such as this one. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Româna de Dreptul Muncii is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Pravnik is the property of Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of State & Law and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Since ancient times religion has influenced not only the lives of individuals and societies but also world politics and international relations. The confessional factor plays a crucial role in relations between states. Since states often use the confessional environment to realize their geopolitical interests, the aim of this article is to analyze the role and place of state-church relations in the processes of European integration and determine the legal basis for the activity of interfaith organizations. The methodological framework of this article is based on an axiological approach which allows the authors to analyze the influence of religion on the law-making processes and the formation of a system of norms and values of society. The authors apply the dialectic method to examine the "civilization-culture" continuum of law and substantiate its dependence on religion in developing a common vector of European integration processes. The author also used the methods of analysis and synthesis to identify the interaction of legal and religious norms and to characterize the influence of the church on relations in society. In the framework of the study, the comparative legal method was also partially used, which played a key role in determining the influence of religion on the formation of legal norms. The article concludes that the church has become the activating factor for the formation of the axiological dimension of European integration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In today's discourse, the concept of identity is profoundly contested, traversing socio-political movements like Black Lives Matter to intricate international law scenarios, such as Ukraine's identity contested by the Russian Federation. Central to these discussions is Europe, particularly post the 2016 Brexit referendum, which initiated a deep reflection on Europe's and the European Union's (EU) core identities. The myriad, spontaneous debates coalesce into a formidable challenge regarding European identity. A generic approach to this identity conundrum is to reference the values articulated in Article 2 of the Treaty on EU. However, this comes with complications. First, the current identity debate emerged precisely within the ambit of Article 2. Secondly, referencing David Hume's philosophical distinction, it is crucial to differentiate between the normative aspirations in European law ("what ought to be") and the prevailing reality ("what is"). Given the increasing discussions on identity, it is essential to bypass simplistic explanations and delve deeper. The pivotal questions surrounding Europe, its inherent identity, and the very essence of the EU might require an alternative analytical lens. This article intends to embark on a journey reflecting on European identity with a nuanced perspective from juridical logic, aiming to move beyond commonplace interpretations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The principles represent the first element to achieve the unity of the content of environmental law at the level of the three legal orders: national, European and international. Their propagation and joint action is the key to solving many environmental problems that go beyond the borders of a single territory. At the level of the European Union, along with the fundamental principles, three general principles have been developed and are applied, specific to the European construction: the principle of subsidiarity, the principle of correction (rectification) with priority at the source of pollution and the principle of integration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Athenaeum: Polskie Studia Politologiczne is the property of Faculty of Political Science & Security Studies Nicolaus Copernicus University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

There are numerous problems, of a theoretical and practical nature, raised by the implementation of European environmental law; in fact, they can be divided into three categories: failure to communicate to the Commission the internal legislation and measures adopted in order to transpose the legislation of the European Union, its incorrect, incomplete or late transposition and practical noncompliance with the requirements of the directives. As far as the directives are concerned, even the large number of infringement procedures initiated in the field of environmental protection appears to us as an indicator of errors committed in the process of their implementation, and this despite the existence of mechanisms for supervising the application of Union law, under the control of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Thus, the European Unuion Network for the Implementation and Compliance of Environmental Legislation (IMPEL), international non-profit association of environmental authorities form: European Union member state, EU acceding and candidate contries, EEA and EFTA countries and potentioal candidate countries for joining the European Union, its mission is to ensure the implementation and effective compliance with European environmental legislation by promoting professional collaboration, the exchange of information and best practices between regulatory authorities in the field of environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Técnica Tributaria is the property of Asociacion Espanola de Asesores Fiscales and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The process of harmonizing national legislation with European norms is a dynamic, continuous one and aims to ensure the harmonization and compatibility of domestic law norms with the legal system of the European Union, by adding, amending or supplementing national normative acts in accordance with the rigors of European law. In this way, the legal norms of European law become a component part of the national law system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]