Investigation of the institutions of EC Law. he main institutions of the European Community were primarily set up by the Treaty Establishing the European Community.
The main institutions of the European Community were primarily set up by the Treaty Establishing the European Community. The main objectives (Identified by Article 7) of the Community should be carried out by the following bodies: A Council, a European Parliament, a Commission, a Court of Auditors and also a Court of Justice. All of the above mentioned bodies are very closely linked and could be seen as inter-twined , this can sometimes lead to overlap, thus influencing each bodies decisions significantly. With all this in light, it can be seen that the European Community controls an institutional balance preventing the separate bodies from gaining too much power, contrasting to the classic division of powers identified by Montesquieu which will be later explored. According to Montesquieu - 'Charles Louis de Secondat' (Who was born in Bordeaux, France, in 16891) was in-fact a famous French political philosopher. Montesquieu argued that the best government would be one in which power was balanced among three groups of officials. He thought England - which divided power between the king (who enforced laws), Parliament (which made laws), and the judges of the English courts (who interpreted laws.) Basically, what is known now as the 'Separation of Powers' One of Montesquieu's most famous viewpoints on this was: "there would be an end to everything, if the same man ... were to
Critically analyse the decentralisation of Article 81
Article 81(3) is now directly applicable by NCAs and national courts. Undertakings have an increased burden to assess whether their agreements fall foul of Article 81. This assessment must be based on sophisticated legal and economic analysis which may lead to uncertainty and unpredictability. Critically analyse this statement. Competition law is essential to the increase and improvement of activity within the economic community as it encourages efficiency of production and distribution, promotes integration to create a single market and restricts any unfair behaviour by larger undertakings. Article 81 aims to support these objectives and ultimately regulate competition law by concentrating its policy upon prohibition of anti-competitive activity, such as abusive anti-competitive practices or distortion of competition within the market. However, the increased burden upon undertakings to assess their own behaviour and ensure it is compatible with the provisions in Article 81, will inevitably lead to inconsistent and uncertain analysis. Therefore, it is imperative to analyse the effect of Article 81 being decentralised and applied by the national courts and conclude whether or not it is working in the best interests of the economic community. Article 81 of the EC Treaty is an anti competitive policy which restricts trading agreements that may negatively effect the
The comitology procedures focus too much on institutional balance, and not enough on deliberation. Discuss.
"The comitology procedures focus too much on institutional balance, and not enough on deliberation." Discuss. Comitology became an important part of Community decision-making as a result of the increased workload of the Council in implementing all measures themselves. It is governed by Comitology Decision which outlines different procedures in order to ensure that the Commission is acting intra vires. There have been many arguments and criticisms about the democratic legitimacy of this process. In this essay, I will outline the comitology procedures and examine the reforms to the Comitology Decision in determining whether the procedures focus too much on institutional balance and not enough on deliberation. Comitology procedures Although the term comitology also refers to the study of committees and how they operate1, comitology in the European Union sense derives its meaning from comity rather than committee. Comitology is, the "system of procedures involving committees, made up of representatives from Member States and chaired by the Commission,"2 aimed to "enhance legitimacy, rationality and effectiveness of decision-making"3 which are delegated to the Commission. This is a response to "compensate the Council's lack of capacity to implement all measures itself since the 1960s"4. Committees are, therefore, established to "keep an eye on delegated legislation"5
EU Policy process
University of Bristol: School for Policy Studies Master's Programme in Public Policy 2008-2009 European Policy Process Assessed Essay Question: To what extent EU Enlargement is compatible with the deepening of the European Union? Word Count: 36433523 Introduction Undoubtedly, the EU enlargement process is not an easy one and it causes a lot of debate around. It is questioned whether processes of deepening and widening of the Union can be compatible. What will be the impact on the core institutions of the EU? What will be the role of the Commission and European Parliament? Will the enlargement bring deeper integration and strengthen European identity? Will it be beneficial for all members including new member states, and how it will be influential in the new neighbouring states? There is an argument that widening can be an obstacle to moving towards deepening because of the heterogeneity of the interests of member states of diverse Union. However the history of the EU, which can be considered as the history of permanent enlargement and closer integration processes, may be an evidence of widening and deepening going together. Blockmans and Prechal (2007) define the notion of deepening which is used to describe integration process within the EU. Firstly, deepening is defined as an intensity of the EU actions in different policy areas. Secondly, it is the process that
Free movement of workers
Free Movement of Workers Introduction The issue of Free Movement of Workers is central to the elimination of one of the barriers to the internal market, which as an essential basis for the European Community, is a matter of considerable debate. In determining which appears to be the prevailing interpretation, we will have to regard Article 39 of the Treaty governing the Free Movement of Workers. There will be an examination of cases and integration of political, social and economical context of the European Union with reference to the free movement of workers. It is submitted that although there is some evidence in support for a narrow interpretation, the conclusion made in Antonissen appears to be the prevailing view. Free Movement of Workers Article 18 is the primary right to free movement for citizens of the Union, subject to the 'limitations and conditions' of the Treaty and secondary legislation. Article 39 refers to the free movement of 'workers'. Article 39 (1) provides the principle of freedom of movement for workers shall be secured in the community. Article 1 of Regulation 1612/68 refers the right to take up an activity as an employed person. The definition of Worker European Court of Justice has placed a 'purposive' interpretation of a worker, as in Case 53/81 Levin; the ECJ attempted to lay down a definition but created essential characteristics from the
EU LAW Directives Problem Case - Grace would make a claim for discriminatory against her employer her to retire 5 years before any male employee of her age
Grace would make a claim for discriminatory against her employer her to retire 5 years before any male employee of her age. However, Hardwick’s policy on retirement of male and Female employees appears to be compliant with the Retirement Act 2012 as the legislation permits an employer to set discriminatory retirement ages. Therefore, Grace should attempt to enforce the EU Retirement Directive in the National court. The case of Van Gend en Loos was a groundbreaking judgment where the ECJ created the principle of direct effect. This concept allows an individual to enforce community law in the national courts over local legislation provided the local legislation does not comply with the community law. The rationale for this decision is that member states have limited their sovereign rights and community law is intended not only to impose obligations on individuals but to confer rights on them which are enforceable in the courts. Under community law, Grace is prima facie, allowed to enforce a regulation or decision. In contrast, the Retirement Directive allows the UK discretion in terms of its implementation provided it is effectively implemented. However, The Retirement Directive can still have direct effect in accordance with VAN Duyn V Home Office as it grans Grace the right not to be treated differently than a male employee, at least in the context of retirement. This
Why was Article 13 of the Convention left out of the Human Rights Act 1998 and with what results? How could the relationship between the Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Convention on Human Rights change after the entry into force of Article 6 (2 and 3) of the Lisbon Treaty?
Read Article 6 of the Lisbon Treaty 2009 together with the United Kingdom’s Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Convention on Human Rights 1950. Then answer the following questions: Why was Article 13 of the Convention left out of the Human Rights Act 1998 and with what results? How could the relationship between the Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Convention on Human Rights change after the entry into force of Article 6 (2 and 3) of the Lisbon Treaty? Article 13 of the European Convention of Human Rights 1950 promises the right to an effective remedy, stating “Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.”[1] This article was deliberately left out of United Kingdom’s Human Rights Act 1998, which integrated the ECHR into English law. For the years between 1951 and 1998, English courts were influenced by the European Convention of Human Rights 1950 yet it was not enforced.[2] “The House of Lords stated that they would presume that Parliament did not intent to legislate contrary to the ECHR.”[3] This leads us to assume that decisions taken by the House of Lords would most closely correspond with the rules set out in the ECHR, but that this compliance is not legally
How did the provisions of Part II of the Merchant Shipping Act 1988 and Part VII of the Merchant Shipping (Registration of Shipping Vessels) Regulations 1988 threaten the livelihoods of Factortame? On what grounds did they claim the provisions were contrary to European Economic Community law? Why was the prohibition they were seeking so urgent?
How did the provisions of Part II of the Merchant Shipping Act 1988 and Part VII of the Merchant Shipping (Registration of Shipping Vessels) Regulations 1988 threaten the livelihoods of Factortame? On what grounds did they claim the provisions were contrary to European Economic Community law? Why was the prohibition they were seeking so urgent? The provisions of Part II of the Merchant Shipping Act 1988 and Part VII of the Merchant Shipping (Registration of Shipping Vessels) Regulations 1988 threatened the livelihoods of the applicants as they set up a new structure for the registration of British vessels and barred the registration or the continuing registration of any fishing vessels to continue beyond 31 March 1989 that were not compliant with the Act. This act and its regulations were introduced due to Spain’s fishing vessels attempting to obtain a part of Britain’s fishing quota allocation.[1] The act demanded that the vessel could only be eligible for registration if the vessel is British owned, controlled from within the UK, and that the vessel’s management is a UK person or company. None of the applicant companies complied with the conditions, as they were mostly citizens of Spain. The consequences that the applicants could potentially incur would be the inability to fish in UK waters, which could result in agricultural difficulties and food shortages for areas
What does Dr. Symeonides mean when he characterises Rome II as a missed opportunity? Would it be fairer to see the Regulation as an essential step forward in the process of European harmonisation of conflict rules? Support your answer with practical examples.
In his article[1] Symeonides analyses the Rome II Regulation[2] (hereinafter the Rome II) and argues that this document is a ‘missed opportunity’. He states that the Rome II could be a more efficient document if the EU legislator would take into consideration all the recommendations by the GEDIP[3] and rapporteur that were given during the drafting and formatting of the Rome II and proposed more flexible structure of the document. Symeonides argues that the EU legislator has ‘failed to take advantage’[4] to create a modern and sophisticated document. Symeonides analyses the background and history of the Rome II, and he describes the original proposal of the Rome II as ‘an elegant, sophisticated and flexible document’. Later in 2002 the first official draft of the Rome II became available for public comments. The new document received comments, mostly from corporations and industrial groups who supported the most regressive provisions of the drafted document. The EU Parliament also wished to introduce some changes to the draft version that would make document more flexible, however most of these were rejected during the three Parliamentary readings. The final text of the Rome I, according to Symeonides, has adopted very strict rules with relatively few exemption clauses and left a little room for flexibility and judicial discretion. The Rome II covers
The Ordinary Legislative Procedure and Secondary Acts
________________ Introduction The paper will discuss briefly the 3 binding instruments of legislative and secondary acts, which are regulations, directives and decisions. This paper will also discuss the ordinary legislative procedure, outlining the process and the role of each institution. The focus then shifts to examine the two types of secondary acts mainly, delegated and implementing acts. This paper will also analyse the regime for the acts based on the language, showing that it’s more complex than it seems. An act of legislation may take form in 3 ways: Firstly, Article 288 TFEU provides that a Regulation shall have general application and be directly applicable to all member sates. They can be addressed to member states, companies and EU institutions. They become legally valid in the member states without any need for implementation. In fact, it is illegal for member states to try to implement it into national law as seen in the Variola case. They can be relied on by an individual or company against the state (vertical direct effect) or against another individual or company (horizontal direct effect). Secondly, Article 288 also specifies that Directives are binding as to the result to be achieved upon each member state to which it is addressed. Directives are particularly useful when the aim is to harmonise the laws within a certain area or to introduce complex