Printer-friendly version

RSS

Freedom of the Press as a Public Policy Reason Restricting the Principle of Mutual Trust: Lessons from the Real Madrid Preliminary Ruling

Insight

Abstract: In the Real Madrid case, the Court prioritized under the public policy proviso of the Brussels I Regulation the protection of freedom of the press over the mutual recognition of judgments in civil and commercial matters. The preliminary ruling explains the circumstances in which recourse to public policy is possible to decline the...

Un(packing) Sanctions Data: What Can Sanctions Numbers Teach Us

Insight

Abstract: There is an ongoing academic discussion on the concept of smart and targeted sanctions, suggesting that these measures should be tailored, allow for humanitarian exemptions, and include an accessible de-listing procedure for designated subjects, among other criteria. However, a question arises as to whether the concept of smart sanctions...

The “255 Committee” and the Procedure for Appointing EU Judges. The (Perhaps Unintended) Implications of the Valancius Judgment

Highlight

Keywords: EU judges' appointment procedure – “255 Committee” – judicial independence – art. 19 TEU – art. 254 TFEU – judicial review.

In its judgment of 29 July 2024, delivered in the Valančius case,[1] the Court of Justice ruled, for the first time, on the limits that...

On Mutual Recognition and the Possibilities of a “Single European Polity”: The Opinion of AG Collins in Case C-181/23 Commission v Malta

Insight

Abstract: The Advocate General’s Opinion in Commission in Commission v Malta is a useful opinion. Not because it is correct but because it highlights the central issue at stake in the case: the question of mutual recognition and its implications. The automatic mutual recognition of Member State nationality found in Micheletti has...

How the Court Tries to Deliver Justice in Common Foreign and Security Policy, Where the Need for Judicial Protection Clashes with the Principles of Conferral and Institutional Balance. Joined Cases C-29/22 P and C-44/22 P KS and KD

Insight

Abstract: KS and KD is a judgment where the European Court of Justice finds it has jurisdiction to hear actions for damages caused by the European Union’s (EU) civilian missions or military operations. It is the first time that this has happened. Although not entirely surprising, the finding of jurisdiction contributes to a growing line of...

La chiusura del dialogo “giudice a giudice” come extrema ratio nella sentenza L.G. c Krajowa Rada Sadownictwa

Insight

Abstract: Until recently, it would have been tautological to say that the question of assessing independence did not arise when the preliminary ruling instrument was activated by a national judge: judges in the Member States were presumed to be independent. However, in the context of the rule of law backsliding, with the adoption of national laws...

Access to Justice in Environmental Matters in the EU Legal Order: The “Sectoral” Turn in Legislation and Its Pitfalls

Insight

Abstract: Access to justice in environmental matters is one of the three pillars of the Aarhus Convention, to which both the EU and its Member States are Parties. In the Convention, access to justice is subdivided into four limbs. Art. 9(3) contains the general obligation of access to review procedures for the public of acts and omissions of private...

Beyond Collective Countermeasures and Towards an Autonomous External Sanctioning Power? The General Court’s Judgment in Case T-65/18 RENV, Venezuela v Council

Insight

Abstract: In case T-65/18 RENV Venezuela v Council the General Court was confronted with the question of the legality under international law of the EU’s restrictive measures against Venezuela. The judgment is of particular importance as it feeds into the burgeoning discussion regarding the juridical nature, and lawfulness, of EU...

Pages