Printer-friendly version
RSS

In the Name of the Rule of Law? CJEU Further Extends Jurisdiction in CFSP (Bank Refah Kargaran)

Insight

Abstract: In Bank Refah Kargaran (case C-134/19 P Bank Refah Kargaran v Council ECLI:EU:C:2020:793), the Court of Justice decided that it has jurisdiction to award damages for non-contractual liability incurred by the EU for harm caused by certain restrictive measures in Common foreign and security policy (CFSP) decisions. In so...

The European Union Customs Administration and the Fight Against Fraud

Insight

Abstract: The EU customs management system is based on uniform legislation that is implemented on a decentralised basis by the Member States. In theory, the Customs Union should operate as if it were one single administration. In practice, the non-harmonised and uncoordinated application of the common customs legislation disrupts the proper...

'Restrictive Measures' Under Art. 215 TFEU: Towards a Unitary Legal Regime? Brief Reflections on the Bank Refah Judgment

Insight

Abstract: In Bank Refah (judgment of 6 October 2020, case C-134/19 P) the Court of Justice provides important clarifications on the type of judicial remedies available in relation to CFSP decisions establishing restrictive measures. As in Rosneft, the Court seems to extend its jurisdiction beyond the so-called “claw-back” provision...

La sentenza Bank Refah Kargaran: l’evoluzione del controllo giurisdizionale sulla PESC

Insight

Abstract: In the Bank Refah Kargaran judgment (case C-134/19 P, judgment of 6 October 2020) the Court of Justice adds the action for damages against CFSP decisions to the list of legal remedies available to individuals targeted by EU restrictive measures. After a brief overview of the case, this Insight examines the reasoning of...

Stranieri trattenuti alle frontiere esterne dell’Unione: il quadro di garanzie individuato dalla Corte di giustizia e le sfide del Nuovo patto sulle migrazioni e l’asilo

Insight

Abstract: This Insight discusses the Court of Justice’s judgment of 14 May 2020 in the joined cases C-924/19 and C-925/19, which concerned two couples of asylum seekers detained in the Röszke transit zone, at the Hungarian-Serbian border. The analysis focuses on the approach followed by the Court, that has addressed several issues under EU...

Halcyon Days for the Right to Silence: AG Pikamäe’s Opinion in Case DB v. Consob

Insight

Abstract: The case DB v. Consob (request lodged on 21 June 2019, case C-481/19), pending before the Court of Justice, deals with preliminary questions referred by the Italian Constitutional Court on the applicability and scope of a natural person's right to remain silent during administrative proceedings which may lead to the imposition of...

Pre-trial Detention and EU Law: Collecting Fragments of Harmonisation Within the Existing Legal Framework

Insight

Abstract: Pre-trial detention has yet to be harmonised under EU law, although evidence points to an overuse that may affect mutual trust. Other instruments however exist that might impact on the way national authorities use pre-trial detention. In this Insight, we seek to detect fragments of harmonisation within the existing legal framework...

Dual Preliminarity Within the Scope of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights in the Light of Order 182/2020 of the Italian Constitutional Court

Insight

Abstract: The Insight discusses order 182/2020 of 30 July 2020 of the Italian Constitutional Court against the background of the latter Court’s approach to dual preliminarity inaugurated in decision 269/2017. It argues that the order confirms an expansionist trend as regards the scope of the Court’s competence in cases concerning the...

Pages