Search

In Slovenia v Croatia the Court of Justice of the European Union had the opportunity to clarify the boundaries of its own jurisdiction over alleged breaches of EU law, when these derive from alleged violations of international agreements. ft declined jurisdiction over claims that a Member States would have violated EU law, because these claims were merely ancillary violations to an international agreement whose subject matterfell outside of EU competence andwas thus not part of EU law. In an important and cautious pronouncement over the relationship between international law and EU law, the Courtformalised a doctrine of "ancillary violation" and showed self-restraint by limiting the scope of its jurisdiction when this would result, albeit indirectly, in an expansion over a matterfalling within the exclusive competence of Member States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The understanding of the independence of bodies sitting someway between judicial authorities and administrative entities is changing, and the breadth of legal guarantees that must be in place for who may make an order for a preliminary reference is undergoing a quiet transformation. When an order for reference is received at the Court of Justice of the European Union, a number of jactors are taken into account to determine whether a referring body is a "court or tribunal" for the purposes of art.267 TFEU. On occasion, there is uncertainty as to whether referring bodies meet the Court's criteria. This article investigates the Court's tightening of the independence criterion through implicit invocation of art. 19 TEU, in which it can now commence a more assertive denial to referring bodies to receive a preliminary reference gthey are insufficiently independent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Germany v ECHA and BASF v ECHA, the General Court was asked, for the very first time, to review decisions of the European Chemical Agency (ECHA) Board of Appeal (BoA). The General Court took this opportunity to define which role the BoA should play within ECHA, how it is tofulfil its function, how it stands out from the Boards of Appeal of other agencies, and how the BoA:s review compares to the General Court's review. The General Court has confirmed that the BoA should not perform a de novo review, but that it cannot restrict itself to a review Of the external legality of an act either. Together with the scope and the intensity of the review of this specific Board of Appeal, it has clarined some procedural issues, including the relationship between the BoA and the General Court itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article considers the pervading influence of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union for the UK following Brexit. The UK Government has been clear in its wish that the Charter have no influence in the UK after the UK 's withdrawal from the European Union (EU). However, the government position shows a misunderstanding of the Charter, its potential ongoing efects notwithstanding Brexit, and the nature of the UKs Withdrawal Agreement with the EU. This article looks to inform British understandings of the Charter. The article argues that in the myriad positions that the UK may find itself following Brexit the Charter ought to and likely will have some role to play. This proposition is based on a legalistic discussion of the relevant instruments but also on the theoretical understandings of ones "right to have rights" based upon the work of Hannah Arendt undjurthered by Emmanuel Levinas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Rimsevics v Latvia and ECB v Latvia the ECJ had the opportunity to consider for the first time the interpretation of art. 14.2 of the ECSB Statute which provides for redress where central bank Governors are relieved from their position in the Governing Council of the ECB. In a bold judgment, the Court held that, even though the decision to dismiss a Governor is a national act, art. 14.2 vests the Court with jurisdiction to annul it. The judgment departs from the national-EU dichotomy in the exercise of public power that determines the allocation of jurisdiction between EU and Member State courts. Although correct in its context, Rimsevics is of limited exportability to other EU institutional or administrative contexts. It is, however, indicative of a trajectory of increasing hybridity where traditional boundaries between EU and national action as separate expressions of pouvoir public break down. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This contribution explores the role of art. 16 CFR in the enforcement of art. 102 TFEU by building on the close link existing between them in terms of the guarantee of individual economic freedom. It is submitted that their distinctive normative purposes shape the divergent forms of manifestation of individual economic freedom vested in them that, in turn, generate a two-sided interaction. On the one hand, the subjective right to business equality and free competition embodied in art. 16 CFR can be construed to reinforce the notion of economic freedom protection as the rationale of art. 102 TFEU in containing the exercise of market power in the EU internal market. On the other hand, consolidating the freedom to exercise an economic or commercial activity and contractual freedom, the protective safeguards of art. 16 CFR taken in conjunction with the benchmarks under art.52(1) CFR also offer dominant market actors a new analytical path to assert their interests in the enforcement of art. 102 TFEU. This, however, requires the adoption of a more systematic approach over the benchmarks under art. 52(1) CFR, particularly the "essence " test, given the uncertainty surrounding its actual contours. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Building on an earlier article published in this Review in 2011, this article considers the relationship between art.47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR) and the principle of national procedural autonomy. The first section sketches the main contours of that principle. The second section considers some of the antecedents of art. 47 CFR in the case law of the Court of Justice. The third and main section examines the impact of art.47 on the case law since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. The fourth section reflects on the principles that have now emerged. The final section offers some concluding thoughts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article critically discusses the Directive on the accessibility requirements for products and services, better known as "European Accessibility Act" (EAA),from an EU constitutional perspective. It locates this new legislative intervention within the scope of the "social market economy " ideal set out in art. 3 (3) of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU). In doing so, this contribution endeavours to revisit the scholarly interpretations of art. 3(3) TEU itself and to provide novel insights on its practical implications. The analysis shows that the EAA presents a juxtaposition of market and social goals (broadly conceived). It argues that, while the EAA falls short of the wide-ranging obligations undertaken internationally by the EU under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, it does fulfil the constitutional ideal envisaged in art. 3(3) TEU. On the whole, this article contends that the EU has taken on the mandate ofthe social regulation of capitalism, and that the enactment of the EAA signals an attempt to re-orientation of positive integration in the pursuit of hon-economic goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article critically analyses recent policy initiatives at international and national level regarding the regulation of the crypto-asset sector, including the European Commission's consultation document. It also aims to provide a comparative analysis of two notable crypto-asset frameworks which have been established in the EU, namely the frameworks established by Malta and France, which cover the conduct, prudential and market integrity aspects of the sector. The article identifies the relative strengths and weaknesses of the respective frameworks and extract the positive elements which could be incorporated into a holistic, harmonised crypto-asset framework for EU adoption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When a case before a domestic court gives rise to EU law questions, this court may (andsometimes must) ask the European Court of Justice to rule on the correct answer. The number of these preliminary references varies considerably between Member States. We set out to design a structural model that allows us to explain these variations. We base the model on the preliminary reference system which allows us to identify the structural and behavioural factors that form a pre-condition for a preliminary reference. Since observable data defining these factors does not exist, we further transform them into sub-components, thereby enabling us to identify proxies such as the size of the general government expenditure on law courts and the duration of EU membership. We perform statistical analyses of the associations between these proxies and the number ofpreliminary references. On this basis, we find that structural differences may explain about 85 per cent of the variation in preliminary references between the Member States, whereas at most the remaining 15 per cent can be attr ibuted to differences in judges ' behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

President Juncker wanted the Commission to be "more political", focusing its policies on key challenges. The aim ofthis article is to take stock of the consequences of the "more political approach " ofthe Juncker Commission in the area of infringement procedures. It analyses in particular the Commission's Communication "EU law: Better results through better application " of 2017, in which the Commission announced a strategic approach towards infringement management and a stricter application of the sanction scheme of art.260(3) TFEU. Following that, an analysis will be offered of key proceedings before the Court of Justice which either reflect or are likely to have an impact on the strategic approach taken by the Juncker Commission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The market operator test (MEO) is a key economic test for the assessment of whether a measure grants an advantage under Article 107 TFEU. The Commission has also provided some clarifications on the notion of aid and the measures to apply the market operator test. The present contribution analyses a recent Grand Chamber case of the Court of Justice, Commission v FIH Holding and FIH Erhversbank,' where the complex and intricate analysis of this (economic) criterion under Article 107 TFEU was made for the recapitalisation of a credit institution in Denmark. The examination of the case gives grounds to discuss some essential elements of the MEO test: the various facets of the MEO test, the distinction between "applicability " and "application " of the test, the case of measures granted by the State as public authority and those as a market operator, the situation of previously granted aid. While the analysis critically looks at the above points raised in the judgment, it submits that the Court provides limited guidance on the interpretation of the MEO test and the way in which it should be logically framed when State measures are granted. Rather the Court seems to adopt an excessively formalistic approach and to complicate further an already complex and intricate test in EU law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Commission v Council (Kazakhstan) (C-244/I7), the Court reaffirmed the well-established case law that the subject-matter question-that is, the identification of the correct substantial legal basis of an act-is to be answered with reference to the aim and content of that act (the so called "centre of gravity test"). However, it may be questioned whether the classic centre of gravity test may' be the appropriate way to determine the subject-matter question when the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) is involved, i.e. in disputes on art.40 TEU. In the light of the distinctiveness of CFSP within EU law, crystallised in art. 40 TEU, this analysis proposes two alternative approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the EU legislative practice, legislative directives (their non-essential elements) are sometimes supplemented or amended by EU delegated regulations, that is, not by EU delegated directives, as one would reasonably expect, given the quite different nature and effects of EU directives and EU regulations. This question-begging practice has rather significant implications especially for the national transposition and application of the legal acts in question. The purpose of this contribution is to identify and analyse these implications. The analysis leads to two conclusions. First, the provisions of an EU directive that were amended by an EU delegated regulation can and should as a rule be transposed into national legislation, but without concealing the fact that they were amended by an EU regulation. Secondly, the provisions of an EU delegated regulation that supplement certain non-essential elements of an EU legislative directive cannot as a ride be transposed into a national legislative measure transposing the (supplemented) directive in question. However, specific normative measures must be taken on the national level for the sake of ensuring full application in a sufficiently clear and precise manner of both the supplemented EU directive and the supplementing EU delegated regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Ayubi judgment rules out the possibility that refugees holding a temporary residence permit are treated to a lower level of social assistance than nationals of the State which granted the status on the basis of the principle of national treatment established in art.29 of Directive 2011/95. The article comments on the Court's choice to interpret art.29 on the sole basis of art. 2 3 of the Geneva Convention, while ignoring the prohibition on discrimination on ground of nationality established in art. 18 TFEU and art.21(2) of the Charter. It relies on the Court's observations in Ayubi to raise doubts on the content of art.24 of Directive 2011/95. It takes inspiration from the application of the principle of non-discrimination in social assistance to a certain category of refugees in Ayubi to review the choice of Directive 2011/95 to allow States to grant individuals eligible for subsidiary protection a lower level of social assistance than refugees, on the basis of the Geneva Convention and of the general principle on equality of treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article responds to the trend of process review advocacy in EU academic literature. It offers a critical assessment of process review, broadly defined as idea that the Court ought tofocus on the process by which decisions are made when conducting its review of a given measure. The article explores John Hart Ely's theory of process review, developed in the context of the US Supreme Court, and how this has influenced the EU's own process review advocates. It seeks to add value to this literature by engaging with the extensive critique of Ely's theory. In doing so, it argues that process review may fad to live up to the expectations placed upon it, both in terms of the outcomes of review and its legitimacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The past three decades have been marked by the proliferation of E d databases processing various personal data collected from different categories of third-country nationals. At present, three databases are fully operational: the second-generation Schengen Information System (SIS II), the Visa Information System (VIS) and Eurodac. However, in the future three new databases will be set up: an Entry/Exit System (EES); a European Travel and Information Authorisation System (ET1AS); and a European Criminal Record Information System for third-country nationals (ECRIS-TCN). In addition, interoperability among these systems is in the making. By mapping the historical evolution of databases for third-country nationals in three distinct waves, this article demonstrates the progressive generalisation of their surveillance via the mass collection of their personal data, which are used for various purposes. Then, drawing on the jurisprudence of the European Courts, this article examines key privacy and data protection concerns about the necessity of setting up or maintaining information systems, their personal scope, the categories of personal data processed, access to stored data for law enforcement purposes and interoperability among the systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article investigates the excessive restrictions that impede NGOs (Non-Governmental Organisations) and other stakeholders from directly accessing the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in environmental public interest cases, arguing that reform of the Aarhus Regulation is well overdue. The article uses three recent cases decided by the General Court to illustrate the extent to which public interest challenges to EU environmental acts are fraught with difficulties. Against this backdrop, it argues that the CJEU has sofar relied too heavily on the "complete system of legal remedies and procedures" established by the Treaties, and paid too little attention to the specificities of environmental public interest litigation. The article thus advocates reforming the Aarhus Regulation to extend its scope of application so as to encompass regulatory acts of general application, regardless of whether they entail further implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Are our legal systems, and in particular that of private law, prepared to deal with crypto-assets in a way that ensures legal protection for the rights and obligations of citizens and private firms, without hindering innovation? After defining the new phenomenon of crypto-assets and its complex relationship with established legal concepts, this article deals with how the courts have characterised crypto-assets and the rights they are considered to confer; how these rights can be enforced; and the actions the judiciary and especially the legislator could undertake, among prohibition, benign neglect, regulation or extensive interpretation, and compulsory insurance, to allow our legal systems to adapt and ensure that crypto-assets prosper without shifting risk on society. Given the global nature of the crypto-assets phenomenon, only an international approach will be able to tackle this challenge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines how the UK Withdrawal Agreement handles one of the most important aspects of the EU's external acquis: its international agreements, and the extent to which the Withdrawal Agreement clarifies the legal implications for those agreements of UK withdrawal from the EU. It is argued that, although the Withdrawal Agreement is not intended to establish the future relationship, the process of "disentanglement" should entail a recognition of the impact of withdrawal from the EU on existing treaty relations with third States, and should enhance legal certainty by providing the basis for a common approach in handling negotiations with those treaty partners. Although the European Council Guidelines and Council negotiation directives recognised this as desirable, it was not translated into Withdrawal Agreement commitments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The United Kingdom withdrew from the European Union on 31 January 2020 and immediately entered into a period of "transition". With the EU acquis continuing to apply to the UK during this period, regulatory alignment with the EU is maintained until transition ends. However, this "shadow membership" is not an intimation of the desire of the UK to maintain alignment following transition. Indeed, the UK has stipulated that continuing alignment is incompatible with its direction of travel out of the EU. Rather, in its desire to protect and enhance its "regulatory autonomy ", the UK is set to ditch the discipline on its autonomy experienced during membership--a "free movement" discipline--in favour of a looser "free trade" discipline. In response, the EU has asserted the need to protect its own autonomy by demanding that the UK commit to "level playing-field" requirements aimed at preventing the EU's balance of market liberalism and regulation and regulatory competition and neutrality from being eroded. The aim of this article is to evaluate whether the ambition to agree a comprehensive economic partnership is compatible with EU and UK attempts to protect their regulatory autonomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Part II of the Withdrawal Agreement provides for the rights of UK/EU citizens resident in the EU/UK by the end of the transitional period (Brexit citizens). The stated aim of the negotiators was to ensure that no loss of rights would arise from Brexit for those citizens who had exercised their free movement rights; for this reason the Withdrawal Agreement seeks to provide certainty of residence for the lifetime of those involved, as well as rights equivalent to those currently enjoyed by EU citizens residing in another Member State. The Withdrawal Agreement, however, leaves some gaps in the protection afforded to Brexit citizens, most notably by allowing the residence status to be constitutive of the rights provided by the Withdrawal Agreement, by allowing the public policy derogation to be determined by national law for behaviour that occurred after the end of transition and by failing to recognise the British citizens' rights tofree movement. It is to be hoped that at least some of these gaps will be remedied by national courts and authorities by means of an extensive interpretation of the relevant provisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The UK duly left the EU on 31 January 2020, subject to a transitional period that ends on 31 December 2020, during which period EU law will continue to apply in the UK, but the UK will have no voice in the EU's decision-making institutions. This article considers the process that led to the UK's exit, building on previous work in this respect. There is detailed analysis of the forces that drove the respective players, more especially the UK executive, the EU executive and the UK legislature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Almost three and a half years since its famous Gauweiler ruling, the Court was called upon in Weiss to rule on another important preliminary reference made by the German constitutional court, concerning this time the validity of the quantitative easing programme of the European Central Bank. Weiss makes it apparent that the two courts continue to have conflicting views about the role and the extent of the mandate of the ECB, the measure and the nature of the judicial review that should be exercised upon it and the delineation between monetary and economic policy under the Treaties. At the same time, it is equally clear that the German Constitutional Court continues its attempt to prepossess the outcome of its preliminary rulings and to guide the Court towards its own interpretation of the law. However, the much more conciliatory language of the preliminary reference compared to Gauweiler and the absence of an explicit ultra vires threat in case the ruling is not given in the manner suggested by the constitutional court leaves room for optimism that the direct judicial dialogue established between these two courts will progressively lead to the normalisation of their institutional relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusion of "mixed" international agreements is a legal phenomenon peculiar to the EU legal order. Essentially, two main forms of mixity can be distinguished: facultative mixity and obligatory mixity. A number of recent decisions of the Court have dealt with this dichotomy. The aim of this article is to provide some critical insight with respect to that case law. On the one hand, that case law made it clear that the Court has never rejected the very idea of facultative mixity. On the other hand, however, even after that case law, it remains unclear whether there are limits of a constitutional nature to the Council's room for manoeuvre when having to take a decision on the (EU-only or mixed) nature of international agreements. A first issue is whether any agreement which affects, no matter how little, some area of law still subject to Member States' exclusive competence must inevitably be concluded as mixed. A second issue is whether there are systemic limits, respect of which the Court is entitled to check, to the Council's discretion in choosing the nature of an agreement that appears to trigger facultative mixity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Surprising as it may seem, the European arrest warrant (EAW) can be used by one State to take over a domestic prosecution from another State, even though the crime, the accused, the victim and all the primary evidence were located in the latter State and the competent authorities of that State have already decided that there is no basis for prosecution. Focusing on the remarkable facts of the Bailey case, this article critically examines how that bizarre situation is facilitated by the EAW Framework Decision and Ireland s implementing legislation. It finds that the punitive criminal law enforcement demands of the EU's area of freedom, security and justice are prioritised over the due process norms, human rights standards and internal checks and balances of domestic criminal process. The result is that the EAW can be used by prosecutors to expose the accused to a punitive, hybridised, criminal procedure lacking in normative coherence and democratic legitimacy. The article concludes that there is an urgent need to rethink the mutual responsibilities of Member States in the EAW regime. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is the first study entirely devoted to analysing the content of the European Commission's observations in CJEU copyright referrals, with an emphasis on the online/digital dimension. It examines the Commission's view of the EU copyright acquis in relation to economic rights, exceptions and limitations and enforcement, and evaluates it in light of international and EU law. The observations have been sometimes consistent with case law, but this has not been so in a number of topical instances. This article suggests that all this signals an (unsuccessful) attempt on the side of the Commission to persuade the CJEU to depart from consolidated case law. justified more by policy considerations rather than a rigorous reading of the law and earlier jurisprudence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the safeguarding and information obligations the NIS Directive imposes on operators of essential services (OES). The Directive aims to ensure that such services are protectedfrom disruption by requiring OES to take "appropriate and proportionate" security measures. In this article, we look at what this means in practice, with a focus on air transport services. We argue that OES need to identify, assess, and address the cyber risks they face and that such risk management inevitably entails a level of subjective judgement and difficult trade-offs. Regulators should accordingly accord OES significant discretion. However, this raises the risk that OES will abuse their discretion, particularly by engaging in "paper compliance". Regulators will need to actively challenge OES to ensure that they exercise this discretion appropriately. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The legislative proposal for the new Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) 2021-2027, published by the European Commission in June 2018, introduces a number of importantfeatures for the support of European rural areas. While the success of the proposed modifications--inspired primarily by subsidiarity, simplification and the so-called "delivery model"--depends on a number of factors, this article will specifically focus on one, i.e. the relationship between the institutional actors involved. Consequently, the main question is to what extent the new approach carries with it a paradigm shift in regard to the concept of shared management of rural development between the Commission and Member States. This will also reveal whether the post-2020 CAP is marked by a "renationalisation" of rural policy in Europe, or whether the key principles inspiring the reform signify a new step for EU integration. Following a comparative analysis of the current regime and the one enshrined in the new legislative proposal, selected groups of provisions will be taken as case studies to assess both the nature and extent of the change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Proponents of a "more economic approach " (MEA) to EU competition law criticise the case law on abuse of dominance as overly form-based-- i.e. as being built on categorisations rather than case-specific assessments of competitive effects. While the Commission has largely accepted this criticism, the EU Courts are generally said to be sceptical about effects-based assessments of art. 102 TFEU cases. This could pose a problem for the Commission's recent decision in Google Search, which primarily relies on effects, not form. However, it is argued here that the Courts' reluctance in this matter is mainly driven by worries about the effective enforcement of competition law. Thus, although the Courts have occasionally rejected requiring the Commission to prove effects in addition to the elements of a form-based legal test, it cannot be assumed that they are equally sceptical about relying on effects where such tests are unavailable. In fact, the Courts ' treatment of novel abuses, in particular, shows that they do not consider form a defining element oj abuse. Thus, it is unlikely that the Courts will find fault with an alleged abuse's lack of form if they are convinced that the practice in question is anti-competitive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In its recent Coman ruling, the European Court of Justice held that the term "spouse" includes the same-sex spouse of a Union citizen, for the purpose of the grant of family reunification rights in free movement cases. Hence, a Union citizen can rely on EU law to require the Member State of destination to admit within its territory his/her same-sex spouse, irrespective of whether that Member State has opened marriage to same-sex couples. Coman is clearly a landmark riding of great constitutional importance which changes the legal landscape for the recognition of same-sex marriages within the EU. It is also a ruling that is hugely significant at a symbolic level, as through it, the EU's highest court made it clear that same-sex marriages are equal to opposite-sex marriages for the purposes of EU free movement law. This article will aim to analyse the case, explaining its overall importance but also highlighting the gaps in protection that persist even after the delivery of the Court's judgment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the legal nature of sex-segregated services as provided for in the Equal Treatment Directive 2004/113 and its positioning in relation to positive action measures. The Directive prohibits discrimination in the access to goods and services on the grounds of sex, while allowing the provision "exclusively or primarily to members of one sex " under certain conditions (art.4(5)) and positive action measures to promote equality between the sexes (art. 6). This raises questions: do these provisions differ and, if so, how? How do they fit into the system of equality law? The analysis sets off with a general investigation into the principle of equality and then locates positive action measures and sex-segregated services within the equality law structure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Data Economy initiative is built on the belief that the current regulatory environment is not capable of unleashing the full potential of the data-driven economy. The initiative focuses on " non-personal data " as a way to complement data protection rules that regulate the processing of personal data. The article argues that the notion of non-personal data as a starting-point for new data innovation policies is counterproductive for three fundamental reasons: datasets are often mixed and the boundaries of personal data are too fluid to act as regulatory anchor; having two separate regimes applicable to mixed datasets might lead to strategic behaviour of firms exploiting this regulatory rivalry; and data has economic value irrespective of its legal classification, and there is no evidence that an elusive zone of non-personal data is more essential as innovation input. We conclude that a holistic approach to "data" as such, which a priori incorporates data protection considerations in its design, is more likely to deliver a successful innovation policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Owing to the lack of European legislative measures on cross-border transfer ofregistered offices, Member States currently retain their competence in this field. However, Member States are required to respect the fundamentalfreedoms of the EU internal market under the purview of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The purpose of this article is to comment on the latest stage of this jurisprudential evolution through an analysis of the Polbud judgment. This case clarifies the regulatory context surrounding the transfer of a registered office within the internal market since it liberalises companies' cross-border mobility by accepting that the benefit of freedom of establishment does not require the pursuit of a genuine economic activity or the relocation of the real head office of the company. Finally, the practical and political consequences of the ruling complete the analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyses the key issues in the implementation of the new corporate ownership and beneficial ownership disclosure obligation introduced by the fourth EU Anti-money Laundering Directive. It discusses some of the immediate and potential issues arising from the interlinked problems of effectiveness and efficiency of identification and evidencing of corporate ownership structures and beneficial owners, and comes up with a possible comprehensive solution for these issues which consists in developing a practical guidance on disclosure of corporate and beneficial ownership structures. This guidance--in the Practical Guide on disclosure and evidencing of corporate and control structures and beneficial owner(s) for the process of verification of disclosed ownership structures and beneficial owners, and in the Handbook for disclosure of beneficial ownership and beneficial owners for the process of investigation of unknown ownership structures and beneficial owners--would elaborate in detail the provisions of the guidance on transparency of beneficial ownership issued by the Financial Action Task Force. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article illustrates the interrelation between the EU law and international law in the institutional set-up of the close co-operation arrangement in the Single Supervisory Mechanism, the first arm of the European Banking Union. Based on the legal status of the unilateral acts of states in public international law, the article sheds light on the legal character of the unilateral undertaking of the non-euro Member State to abide by European Central Bank acts. The article challenges the official opinions on the lack of a transfer of sovereignty from national to Union level and alleges the illegality of the close co-operation mechanism, given the legal restraints inferred from the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It seemed that Court ofJustice of the European Union wanted to make it short and sweet: it took the Grand Chamber in its Achmea judgment fewer than 15 pages to conclude that investor-state dispute settlement in an inlra-EU context is incompatible with EU law. The judgment is noteworthy in terms of both the conceptualisation as well as of the application of the principle of autonomy of EU law. In terms of conceptualisation of the principle, what we witness in Achmea, read in conjunction with another decision, could be a first subtle attempt to enrich the principle with notions of the rule of law. In terms of application, the Court further strengthens legal equality, its judicial monopoly, and--perhaps even more importantly--the role of the Member States ' courts, understood as "traditional permanent State courts ", in the judicial dialogue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Commission presented, in its White Paper on the Future of Europe, scenarios on the future of the EU in 2025, which prompt the question as to their meaning for the future of EU administrative law. This article explores the implications of the scenarios for the future of EU executive rulemaking and its constitutional consequences. As some scenarios imply a more powerful political role of the Commission, and almost all expand the scope and usage of executive rulemaking, the executive power gains induce the need for more distinct constitutional guidelines for executive ridemaking and for strengthened parliamentary control, to preserve the institutional power balance between legislative and executive rulemaking. The analysis develops proposals insofar and demands respect for constitutional barriers already enshrined in EU primary law but not sufficiently addressed yet in institutional practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When two Member States enter into an agreement to enhance free movement of goods, persons, companies, services or capital, this may cause distortion of the functioning of the internal market. Consequently, the Member States must observe EU law when they adopt such an agreement. This article analyses how the free movement rights may affect such agreements, and it concludes that Member States should be careful not to adopt restrictions tofree movement under an agreement. Furthermore, they should be careful not to unjustly exclude goods, persons and companies from Member States that are not party to the agreement from benefiting from the agreement. The most important question is, however, whether the Member States must observe the requirement for most favoured nation treatment when adopting such an agreement. After analysing the existing case law--including the non-conclusive recent judgement in Achmea--it is concluded that Member States are likely to avoid intra-EU agreements being scrutinised under this principle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent case law on the scope of professional secrecy for the supervisory authorities of the financial sector and on the measure of openness of their files highlights the lack of co-ordination among the silos of supervision and the absence of clear and uniform professional secrecy rules across the financial sector. The introduction of the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) makes this situation more acute: notwithstanding a centralised system of banking supervision, different approaches may exist in respect of access tofiles, even when based on EU legislation. This contribution addresses the accountability of supervisory authorities and, notably the European Central Bank (ECB), from the perspective of access to supervisory files, as a prelude to possible follow-up proceedings for failing supervision. Recent judgments in the Altmann, Baumeister, Buccioni and UBS Europe cases slowly move the case law on supervisory secrecy towards more openness, long after Hillegom v Hillenius (1984). The judgments make us wonder whether the absence of legislative co-ordination and questionable drafting is being remedied by the judiciary. The variety of legislative provisions and relevant recent case law form the backdrop of our proposal to adopt a Regulation on professional secrecy for supervisory authorities in the financial sector, which would institute a single standard directly applicable across Member States and supervisory authorities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On 29 March 2017, the UK notified its intention of leaving the EU. This activated the two-year disconnection period foreseen in art. 50 TEU, thus resulting in a default Brexit at the end of March 2019. The firming up of a draft agreement on a transition period to run until 31 December 2020 could provide a longer timescale for the Brexit disconnection, as well as some clarity on the process of disentanglement of the UK's and EU's legal systems. The draft transition agreement of 19 March 2018, updated on 19 June 2018 and still under negotiation at the time of writing, provides explicit rides on public procurement bound to regulate "internal'' procurement trade between the UK and the EU for a period of over 15 months. However, the uncertainty concerning the future EU-UK relationship remains, and the draft agreement does not provide any indication on the likely legal architecture for future EU-UK trade, including through public procurement. The draft agreement has thus not suppressed the risk of a " cliff-edge " disconnection post-Brexit, but rather only deferred it. The transition is currently not into an alternative system of procurement regulation, but rather into the void. There have also been very limited developments concerning the UK's and EU's repositioning within the World Trade Organization Government Procurement Agreement (WTO GPA), which creates additional legal uncertainty from the perspective of "external" trade in procurement markets due to the absence of a "WTO rules" default applicable to public procurement. Against the backdrop of this legal uncertainty, this article critically assesses the implications of the 2018 draft transition agreement, both for the re-regulation of " internal" EU-UK procurement, and for the repositioning of both the EU and the UK within the WTO GPA, as the basis for their "external" procurement trade with third countries. The article concludes that it is in both the UK's and the EU's interest to reach a future EU-UK FTA that ensures continued collaboration and crystallises current compliance with EU rules, and to build on it to reach a jointly negotiated solution vis-a-vis the rest of WTO GPA parties. The article constitutes a detailed case study that provides insights applicable to other areas of Brexit-related trade re-regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This contribution discusses the preliminary ruling in Coty (C-230/16) in which the European Court of Justice addresses competition law ambiguities pertaining to selective distribution, in particular with respect to the use of third-party online platforms as a distribution channel. Importantly, the judgment confirms that suppliers of luxury products can prohibit authorised distributors from selling goods on general online platforms. This contribution analyses the ruling and discusses selective distribution, preserving a luxury or prestigious product image, and vertical agreements in the context of e-commerce. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To promote and facilitate free movement in the European Union, Directive 2004/38 provides a generous regime for family reunification for EU citizens who move to a Member State of which they are not a national. In Ruiz Zambrano, the European Court of Justice established a right to family reunification for citizens who reside in the Member States of which they are a national on the basis of art.20 TFEU i f the refusal of such a right would deprive them of the genuine enjoyment of the substance of their rights as European citizens. A legal framew>ork to determine the limits and conditions under which this right can be exercised is lacking, however. This article investigates these limits and conditions through an analysis of the case law concerning art.20 TFEU. To shape this inquiry, a comparison is made between family reunification rights awarded by Directive 2004/38 and those derivedfrom art. 20 TFEU. The last part of the analysis explores the role of the right to family life in the art.20 TFEU case law, and compares the protection of family life it offers to the threshold of art. 8 EC HR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the importance of the "agreement " concept under art. 101(1) TFEU, the concept remains underdeveloped by courts and commentators. This article reconstructs the "agreement " concept based on theories of legal interpretation and contract as well as comparative law insights. It argues, based on a theoretical framework for EU Treaty interpretation and a broad, objective conception of an antitrust agreement, that the objectivity and correspondence requirements for contractual agreements have continuing relevance, while the precision requirement should be appropriately relaxed, for antitrust agreements. Drawing on insights from US antitrust jurisprudence, it advances three concrete proposals emerging from the in-depth comparison between antitrust and contractual agreements, namely that the art. 101(1) "agreement" concept embraces tacit collusion, encompasses concerted practices and decisions of associations, and is independent of subjective intentions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A conventional story argues that the ECJ developed a human rights jurisprudence in response to national pressures. The purpose of this article is to reconsider and nuance this simplistic understanding. First, the article underlines how the case law of the ECJ recognising fundamental rights as general principles of EU law predates the Solange case law of national courts. Secondly, the article carries out a structural examination of fundamental rights in the founding EU Member States and reveals that the mechanisms for human rights protection were weak--ifnot absent--in the majority of them. Thirdly, the article examines in depth the jurisprudence of national constitutional courts and emphasises how even in states like Italy or West Germany in the 1950s and 1960s constitutional courts were anything but aggressive in protecting fundamental rights. In conclusion, the article suggests that the rise of an EU human rights jurisprudence should be seen as the result of a transnational development consisting of greater sensitivity towards human rights at all levels of government--and not of a supranational response to national pressures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The James Elliott ruling opened the Court of Justice's doors to the interpretation of harmonised standards, i.e. technical specifications issued by private parties to implement EU law. Yet, on that occasion no real judicial engagement with the content of the standard occurred. The Anstar judgment represents the first occurrence of this type. The decision is remarkable as it outlines a brief vade mecum on the interpretation of harmonised standards, enucleating the basic elements that courts take into account when exercising their hermeneutic discretion. Moreover, the judgment confirms the Court's willingness to enter into technical standardisation and indirectly offers a chance to reflect on the interplay between judicial and scientific authorities within the European Standardisation System. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The issue of the inviolability of the archives of the European Central Bank (ECB) has gained practical relevance with the seizure of ECB documents held by Banka Slovenije, the national central bank of Slovenia. Suddenly the largely unexamined scope of the privileges and immunities of the EU has appeared on the agenda. Whereas an extremely narrow interpretation of those privileges and immunities has been strongly advocated recently in this Review,' this article foregrounds the functional conception of the EU's privileges and immunities and illustrates its consequences. The author takes the view that the responsible entity behind both the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) and the Eurosystem is the EU, and that the national central banks (NCBs) are vested with virtually no autonomy when they perform tasks within these systems. Accordingly, the ECB documents they hold do not forfeit their inviolability. Similar considerations apply for the national competent authorities (NCAs) in the field of banking supervision when they act within the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM). The inviolability of the ECB's archives even extends to documents originating from NCBs if they relate to functions within the ESCB/Eurosystem. From afunctional perspective, national authorities closely interrelated with the ECB in substance thus have two different archives of which one enjoys protection under EU law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"Sport" may defy definition. Nevertheless, as an autonomous concept of EU law, the term is found in hundreds of directives, regulations and decisions, as well as the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. In The English Bridge Union (C-90/16), the CJEU provides an interpretation of "sport" for a national court applying art. 132(1)(m) of the VAT Directive 2006/112. Bridge is not a "sport" because sport necessarily requires a "not negligible" element of physical activity. The judgment and the Opinion of AG Szpunar provide detailed guidance on defining "sport" which is likely to spill over to other contexts and may influence the development of new activities such as e-sport. This judgment and the recent British Film Institute judgment also raise questions about the uniformity of VAT treatment and the extent to which individuals can rely on the directive when national VAT rules are applied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article hinges on the preliminary ruling rendered by the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) (Grand Chamber) on 18 October 2016 and the related judgment of the German Federal Labour Court of 26 April 2017 in the Nikiforidis case to investigate an area of private international law that is undergoing a substantial development: overriding mandatory provisions. In Nikiforidis, the CJEU excluded that two Greek laws cutting the salary of public employees may be enforced against a teacher working in Germany for the Greek Government under an employment contract governed by German law. The question addressed to the CJEU was whether the said laws were "overriding mandatory provisions " according to the Rome I Regulation. The Court denied it, and left to the referring court to determine whether they could nevertheless operate "as matter of fact " under the governing law. This article explains how the CJEU's conclusion has broader implications by regulating third countries' interference in international business transactions. Starting with an analysis of the case, the article examines the history and nature of overriding mandatory provisions under EU private international law and argues that the solution embraced by the CJEU leaves room for uncertainty and unpredictability in the operation offoreign mandatory provisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]