DOCSLIB.ORG

WP 2012-06 Azoulai Boucon Millet FINAL

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
WP 2012-06 Azoulai Boucon Millet FINAL DEPARTMENT OF LAW EUI Working Papers LAW 2012/06 DEPARTMENT OF LAW DECONSTRUCTING EU FEDERALISM THROUGH COMPETENCES Loïc Azoulai, Lena Boucon, Annegret Engel, Anna Kocharov, Dennis- Jonathan Mann, François-Xavier Millet, Jacob Öberg Edited by Loïc Azoulai, Lena Boucon, François-Xavier Millet EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE , FLORENCE DEPARTMENT OF LAW Deconstructing EU Federalism through Competences EUI Workshop Proceedings – 14 June 2011 LOÏC AZOULAI , LENA BOUCON , ANNEGRET ENGEL , ANNA KOCHAROV , DENNIS -JONATHAN MANN , FRANÇOIS -XAVIER MILLET , JACOB ÖBERG LOÏC AZOULAI , LENA BOUCON , FRANÇOIS -XAVIER MILLET (E DS .) EUI Working Paper LAW 2012/06 This text may be downloaded for personal research purposes only. Any additional reproduction for other purposes, whether in hard copy or electronically, requires the consent of the author(s), editor(s). If cited or quoted, reference should be made to the full name of the author(s), editor(s), the title, the working paper or other series, the year, and the publisher. ISSN 1725-6739 © 2012 Loïc Azoulai, Lena Boucon and François-Xavier Millet (eds.) Printed in Italy European University Institute Badia Fiesolana I – 50014 San Domenico di Fiesole (FI) Italy www.eui.eu cadmus.eui.eu Abstract This paper is a collective endeavour to depart from the traditional view that a clear-cut separation of powers between the European Union and its Member States is one of the main features and one of the main safeguards of the European quasi-federalism. On the one hand, it is an effort to show the deep intertwining of EU and national powers in the actual course of European integration. On the other hand, it is an attempt to discover new legal and political safeguards to the development of EU federalism. Keywords European Union Law – Division of powers – Competences – Retained powers – Subsidiarity – Proportionality – Constitutional Identity – American and European Federalism Authors/Editors’ Contact Details Loïc Azoulai Professor of European Union Law European University Institute Florence, Italy Email: [email protected] Lena Boucon Law Ph.D. Researcher European University Institute Florence, Italy Email: [email protected] Annegret Engel Ph.D. Candidate in Law Durham University Law School 50 North Bailey Durham DH1 3ET United Kingdom Email: [email protected] Anna Kocharov Law Ph.D. Researcher European University Institute Florence, Italy Email: [email protected] Jacob Öberg Law Ph.D. Researcher European University Institute Florence, Italy Email: [email protected] Dennis-Jonathan Mann SPS Ph.D. Researcher European University Institute Florence, Italy Email: [email protected] François-Xavier Millet Law Ph.D. Researcher European University Institute Florence, Italy Email: [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 1 L. Azoulai PART I: THE TRADITIONAL DIVISION OF POWERS DOCTRINE: A SATISFACTORY SAFEGUARD TO EU FEDERALISM? ............................................................................................. 5 Subsidiarity After Lisbon: Federalism without a Purpose? ..................................................................... 7 A. Kocharov Deconstructing Federalism through Retained Powers of States: The European Court of Justice Middle Ground Approach Analyzed in the Light of the American Federal Experience ....................... 23 L. Boucon Retained Distinctiveness in the Integrated Third Pillar: Safeguarding Member States’ Competences in the European Criminal Law Sphere ................................................................................................. 39 A. Engel PART II: NEW SAFEGUARDS TO RECONSTRUCT EU FEDERALISM ................................ 51 National Constitutional Identity as a Safeguard of Federalism in Europe ............................................ 53 F.-X. Millet The Principle of Proportionality, Federalism and Judicial Review in the Law of Free Movement ...... 65 J. Öberg Contested Competences and the Contested Nature of The EU: Ambiguity as a Defining Characteristic of the EU and the (Early) US ......................................................................................... 89 D.-J. Mann INTRODUCTION Loïc Azoulai This Working Paper is the outcome of a workshop held at the EUI on June 14 th , 2011 on the initiative of two researchers of the Law Department, Lena Boucon and François-Xavier Millet, with my support and in the presence of several EUI researchers and of Bruce Ackerman, professor of Law and Political Science at Yale University, Bruno de Witte, professor of European Law at Maastricht University and part-time professor at the EUI Robert Schuman Centre and Miguel Poiares Maduro, professor of European law at the EUI. It has been given a title which might sound like a slogan: Deconstructing EU Federalism… This was meant not only to bring the “French theory touch” into a project mainly oriented at investigating EU federalism in a comparative context, but also reflects a thoughtful working hypothesis. A Working Hypothesis As formulated by the two initiators of our meeting, the workshop was aimed at challenging the so- called traditional view that “a clear-cut separation of powers between the European Union and its Member States is supposed to be one of the main safeguards of federalism”. Federalism refers to a mode of political organization where two distinct levels of governance – the federal/supranational and the national – coexist and are protected. Under a federalist mode of organization, the main issue is how to differentiate intrinsically interdependent political and legal orders. A traditional response resides in the allocation of powers. Federal law and federal courts seek to enforce mechanisms whereby the efficiency of the federal structure is ensured while “core” state powers are protected from federal influence and state interests are incorporated in federal political institutions. It is submitted that, in deploying such mechanisms, the EU has failed to protect the autonomy of national powers. The picture is one of the deep intertwining of EU and national powers. Therefore, if European federalism is to be safeguarded, new mechanisms should be sought. The catalogue of competences and the new procedures introduced by the Lisbon treaty (such as the introduction of subsidiarity review by national parliaments or the existence of opts-outs procedures in the area of freedom, security and justice) are not the solution; they are rather part of the problem. The activation of these clauses inevitably creates the suspicion that the dynamics of European integration and the sense of a loyal membership to the Union are endangered. As argued by A. Kocharov, the new subsidiarity review procedure tends to “reverse the presumption in favour of Union action”, 1 but the same can be said of the procedures examined by A. Engel. Ex-ante methods aimed at setting clear-cut frontiers to the EU enumerated powers have proven to be ineffective in protecting the Member States’ legitimate scope of action. An alternative approach could look to techniques of differentiation developed in the course of the exercise of EU and state powers. As a matter of fact, fundamental state interests are better protected ex-post, through a variety of techniques – for example by introducing the disruptive concept of “constitutional identity” in the framework of the interpretation of EU law, by varying the degree of the proportionality test applied to states’ justifications or even by acknowledging the very ambiguity of the language developed by the legal and political actors in European integration. The time is ripe to recognize, systematize and evaluate each of these practices and discourses. It is this hypothesis that the papers included in this volume develop, each with its own style and inflection. It was discussed at length during our lively workshop. It is now submitted to the readers. In 1 See Anna Kocharov’s paper. 1 Loïc Azoulai what follows, I would like to illustrate the value of it by paradoxically departing from one of its premises. How Traditional is the Division of Powers Approach? One of the merits of the approach proposed in this volume is to bring out a theme which has been underdeveloped in EU legal studies and practices. The approach drawn in allocation of powers terms is not as “traditional” as it might have been assumed in the presentation of our workshop. As has been noted, “Until the end of the 1990s, there had been astonishingly little research on the system of the Communities’ competences. Legal literature on competence issues had almost exclusively focused on Article 235 EEC Treaty” .2 Arguably, this lack of conceptualization is due to the structure of the EC treaty which did not specify the categories of competences conferred on the Community. The European Community was supposed to operate on the basis of the broad objectives and the specific provisions provided for by the treaty. 3 EC competences were derived from a list of aims and means allocated to the Community and on the basis of the link that may be established between a purported action and the achievement of the common/internal market. 4 EC action was certainly not justified on the basis of a specific subject matter having been entrusted to the Community. This may not be the only explanatory factor however. Intertwined with the EC’s appeal for aims and treaty objectives to foster “positive integration” are the legal
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mutual Recognition of Food Information
    August 8, 2019 MSc Thesis LAW-80436, Law and Governance group, 36 ECTS Mutual Recognition of Food Information How does mutual recognition work and is it a suitable concept for the area of food information? Carmen Lok – 950805526060 Mutual Recognition of Food Information How does mutual recognition work and is it a suitable concept for the area of food information? Carmen Lok – 950805526060 Master Food Safety Specialisation Food Law and Regulatory Affairs Chair Group: Law and Governance group Course code: LAW-80436 – 36 ECTS Supervisor and First Examiner: dr. Kai P. Purnhagen LL.M. Second Examiner: dr. Hanna Schebesta August 8, 2019 Image frontpage: (Micromax Design and Consulting Inc., 2019). 2 Acknowledgements I would hereby like to thank my supervisor Kai Purnhagen and examiner Hanna Schebesta for providing helpful feedback that aided me to improve the content of this thesis. During the courses they taught they have sparked my interest for the field of food information as well as for the principle of mutual recognition. Furthermore, I would like to express my gratitude to everyone who has supported me and listened to me during this challenging period. Because of them, I was able to persevere and can now proudly present the outcome of my research in this thesis. Carmen Lok August, 2019 3 Abstract Due to the eagerness of Member States to regulate the area of food information, national differences exist that hinder the free movement of goods and deprive businesses and consumers of the benefits a Single Market can provide. The purpose of this thesis is to determine how the principle of mutual recognition works and whether it is a suitable concept for the area of food information.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Court of Justice and the Scope of Workers' Freedom of Movement in the European Economic Community
    American University International Law Review Volume 6 | Issue 2 Article 2 1991 The urE opean Court of Justice and the Scope of Workers' Freedom of Movement in the European Economic Community David Stoelting Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/auilr Part of the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Stoelting, David. "The urE opean Court of Justice and the Scope of Workers' Freedom of Movement in the European Economic Community." American University International Law Review 6, no. 2 (1991): 179-201. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in American University International Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE AND THE SCOPE OF WORKERS' FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT IN THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY David Stoelting* INTRODUCTION Since the adoption of the Treaty of Rome1 in 1957, the European Court of Justice has played an essential role in the drive toward Euro- pean unity. The European Court of Justice is the most successful of the European Economic Community's (EEC) institutions2 in implementing the Treaty's goal of economic integration.3 As the countries of the EEC4 work towards political and monetary union," the primary in- * Law Clerk for Judge Nathaniel R. Jones of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. 1. Treaty Establishing the European Economic Community, Mar.
    [Show full text]
  • The Law of the European Union
    levasseur EU2e p1 00 fmt 7/9/13 8:58 AM Page iii The Law of the European Union second edition Alain A. Levasseur Hermann Moyse Senior Professor of Law, Director, European Studies Louisiana State University Paul M. Hebert Law Center Richard F. Scott Distinguished Professor of International Law, Thomas Jefferson School of Law Arnaud Raynouard Professor, Université Paris-Dauphine Christine A. Corcos Associate Professor of Law and an Associate Professor of Women’s and Gender Studies, Louisiana State University Law Center Joël Monéger Professor of Law, Université Paris-Dauphine Jean-Claude Piris Former Legal Counsel, Director General, European Union Legal Service Carolina Academic Press Durham, North Carolina levasseur EU2e p1 00 fmt 7/9/13 8:58 AM Page iv Copyright © 2013 Carolina Academic Press All Rights Reserved ISBN 978-1-59460-899-5 LCCN 2012950550 Carolina Academic Press 700 Kent Street Durham, North Carolina 27701 Telephone (919) 489-7486 Fax (919) 493-5668 www.cap-press.com Printed in the United States of America levasseur EU2e p1 00 fmt 7/9/13 8:58 AM Page v Dedications To my beloved petits-enfants: Francis, Gabriel, John Paul, Bridget, Peter Daniel, Libby Kate, Mary Benton, and Helen Quinn – Alain Levasseur For my wife Lorraine, our children Karen, Jeffrey and Holly, and our grandchildren Chelsea, Michael and Paul, with love and admiration – Richard Scott For Cullen and Avery – Christine Corcos levasseur EU2e p1 00 fmt 7/9/13 8:58 AM Page vii Summary of Contents Foreword lxvii Acknowledgements lxx Table of Cases lxv Table of European
    [Show full text]
  • Perju Ages of European
    Draft for NYU Colloquium (October 2015). Do not cite or circulate without permission. THE AGES OF EUROPEAN LAW Vlad Perju∗ Prologue: Habermas on the Transnationalization of Democracy European integration poses fundamental challenges to political and legal thought. Over the past two decades, Jürgen Habermas has been engaged in a bold and influential project of articulating the normative foundations of political integration in Europe. Habermas’s starting point is that the pacification of European states created the preconditions for political decision-making beyond the national level. Once state power was tamed, and states accordingly “civilized”, national governments could pursue common policies in response to the pressures of economic globalization. The problem, however, is that the preconditions for political life at the supranational level have not been properly realized. Habermas sees a growing disconnect between the demands of integrated markets, which form one part of the larger, systemic integration of world society, and lingering political fragmentation in Europe. Perhaps the diagnosis of political fragmentation seems surprising given that the member states of the European Union have over the decades consented to ever-greater transfers of powers to the supranational political institutions. But the reality is more complex. The political crises of the past ∗ Associate Professor, Boston College Law School and Director, Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy. 1 decade, and most notably the recent “crucifixion”1 of Greece in the recent debt negotiations, reveals a state of affairs where the European Council – that “complete anomaly”, as Habermas calls it2 – remains central to the EU’s political life. This development is both unfortunate and unnecessary.
    [Show full text]
  • EUI Working Papers
    DEPARTMENT OF LAW EUI Working Papers LAW 2010/21 DEPARTMENT OF LAW NEW CHALLENGES FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF FAIRNESS IN A COMMON MARKET Edited by Hans-Wolfgang Micklitz, Viktor Smith & Mette Ohm Rørdam Contributors: Jesper Clement, Gorm Gabrielsen, Jochen Glöckner, Peter Møgelvang-Hansen, Marcin Rogowski, Henrik Selsøe Sørensen, Viktor Smith, Jan Trzaskowski EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE, FLORENCE DEPARTMENT OF LAW New Challenges for the Assessment of Fairness in a Common Market JESPER CLEMENT, GORM GABRIELSEN, JOCHEN GLÖCKNER, PETER MØGELVANG- HANSEN, MARCIN ROGOWSKI, HENRIK SELSØE SØRENSEN, VIKTOR SMITH, JAN TRZASKOWSKI EDITED BY HANS-WOLFGANG MICKLITZ, VIKTOR SMITH, METTE OHM RØRDAM EUI Working Paper LAW 2010/21 This text may be downloaded for personal research purposes only. Any additional reproduction for other purposes, whether in hard copy or electronically, requires the consent of the author(s), editor(s). If cited or quoted, reference should be made to the full name of the author(s), editor(s), the title, the working paper or other series, the year, and the publisher. ISSN 1725-6739 © 2010 Hans-Wolfgang Micklitz, Viktor Smith & Mette Ohm Rørdam (Eds.) Printed in Italy European University Institute Badia Fiesolana I – 50014 San Domenico di Fiesole (FI) Italy www.eui.eu cadmus.eui.eu Author/Editor Contact Details Hans Wolfgang Micklitz Professor of Economic Law European University Institute Florence, Italy Email: [email protected] Viktor Smith Associate Professor, PhD Centre for Language, Cognition and Mentality Department of International
    [Show full text]
  • The Single Rulebook: Legal Issues and Relevance in the SSM Context
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Lefterov, Asen Working Paper The Single Rulebook: legal issues and relevance in the SSM context ECB Legal Working Paper Series, No. 15 Provided in Cooperation with: European Central Bank (ECB) Suggested Citation: Lefterov, Asen (2015) : The Single Rulebook: legal issues and relevance in the SSM context, ECB Legal Working Paper Series, No. 15, ISBN 978-92-899-1960-9, European Central Bank (ECB), Frankfurt a. M., http://dx.doi.org/10.2866/204472 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/154669 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Legal Working Paper Series Asen Lefterov The Single Rulebook: legal issues and relevance in the SSM context No 15 / October 2015 Note: This Legal Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the European Central Bank (ECB).
    [Show full text]
  • Commercial Warranties: Are They Worth the Money?
    COMMERCIAL WARRANTIES ARE THEY WORTH THE MONEY? © Freepik.com © Freepik.com Legal guarantees and commercial warranties on © Pexel.com consumer goods in the EU, Iceland and Norway Update April 2019 Initial report 2014 Help and advice for consumers in Europe European Consumer Centres Network Summary Introduction 4 Objective of the joint project Vocabulary: Why differentiate between the legal 7 guarantee and a commercial warranty? Legal guarantees Directive 1999/44/EC on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees 13 Direct liability of the seller 16 Duration of the legal guarantee on consumer goods Deadline for the consumer to notify the seller of a 19 defect or non-conformity Administration of proof of non-conformity / reversal 22 of burden of proof 27 Solutions and remedies to the lack of conformity Duration of the legal guarantee after repair or re- 37 placement Possibility for the seller to claim compensation for 39 the time during which the consumer had use of the item before it was found to be faulty Prescription period for actions linked to the legal 41 guarantee of conformity Possibility for the seller applying the legal guarantee to take action against the importer, or any other in- 43 termediary in the sale chain up to and including the producer Possibility for the consumer to take action against the importer, or any intermediary in the sale chain 44 up to and including the producer for application of rights under the legal guarantee Other legal guarantee foreseen by the EU: Liability for defective
    [Show full text]
  • Public Policy As an Exception to Free Movement Within the Internal Market and the European Judicial Area: a Comparison
    CYELP 10 [2014] 189-213 189 PUBLIC POLICY AS AN EXCEPTION TO FREE MOVEMENT WITHIN THE INTERNAL MARKET AND THE EUROPEAN JUDICIAL AREA: A COMPARISON Tena Hoško* Summary: This article compares the public policy exception to free movement of goods, services, persons and capital (the four freedoms) with the public policy exception to free movement of judgments (the fifth freedom). A comparison is made on the basis of the following elements: types of public policy (domestic, international, purely inter- national; European; substantive and procedural), restrictiveness of interpretation, variability, content, nature and the addressees of pro- tection. The conclusion is that there is only one concept of public policy that varies from time to time and from Member State to Member State, although there are some differences in the operation of the uses in the two areas of public policy. 1. Introduction The European Union (hereinafter: EU) is based on the free movement of goods, services, persons, and capital,1 known as the four freedoms. In order to secure the impeccable functioning of the internal market, a ‘fifth freedom’2 has emerged in the Brussels Convention3 and the follow- ing Brussels I Regulation4 – the free movement of judgments.5 Although all of these freedoms are of utmost importance for the EU, there are some restrictions to them. Restrictions are necessary since there are still spe- cificities of each Member State’s legal order that need to be safeguarded, notwithstanding the well-functioning internal market.6 One of these is * Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb. The author is grateful to Dr Justin Borg-Barthet for his comments on an earlier draft of the paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Obstacles to the Right of Free Movement of EU Citizens
    DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT C: CITIZENS' RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS PETITIONS Obstacles to the right of free movement and residence for EU citizens and their families Comparative Analysis STUDY Abstract This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the LIBE and PETI Committees, presents a synthesis of in-depth studies in nine Member States in addition to broader EU and national research. Based on an analysis of selected provisions of Directive 2004/38/EC in Belgium, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Spain, Sweden and the UK, it identifies the main persisting barriers to free movement for EU citizens and their family members. The study also examines discriminatory restrictions to free movement, measures to counter abuse of rights and refusals of entry and residence rights, in addition to expulsions. It finds that, ten years after the deadline for transposition, there is general compliance, though some challenges remain. More systematic data collection, evaluation and guidance is thus required. The nine country studies are made available separately. PE 571.375 EN ABOUT THE PUBLICATION This research paper was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and Committee on Petitions and was commissioned, supervised and published by the Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs. Policy departments provide independent expertise, both in-house and externally, to support European Parliament committees and other parliamentary bodies in shaping legislation and exercising democratic scrutiny over EU external and internal policies.
    [Show full text]
  • Community of Law Overview of the Role of Law in the Union
    Briefing March 2017 The EU as a community of law Overview of the role of law in the Union SUMMARY The term 'community of law' was popularised by Walter Hallstein in the 1960s. It emphasises that the Community, and now the European Union, is founded on the 'rule of law' principle, and underscores the role of law in the European project, which has been described by political scientists precisely as 'integration through law'. Modern definitions of the 'rule of law' include such elements as the limitation of the powers of public officials by the law, the fact that laws are public, general and apply equally, and finally the presence of an independent, impartial and neutral judiciary. The building blocks of the EU as a community of law have been laid, from the 1950s onwards, in the case law of the Court of Justice. The ECJ's case law proclaiming numerous general principles of Community law was inspired by the common legal traditions of the Member States. Over time, many such principles became enshrined in the written sources of EU law, notably the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the Treaties. The 'life cycle' of EU law – including its creation, application, interpretation and enforcement – involves various institutional actors. Key roles in the creation of EU law are played by the Commission, Parliament and Council, while the application of EU law on a day-to-day basis is predominantly the task of national courts. Supreme authority to interpret EU law, and to review the compatibility of legislation with the treaties is vested in the ECJ.
    [Show full text]
  • European Product Liability a Comparative Study Of
    European Product Liability A Comparative Study of "Development Risks" in English and German Law A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Humanities. 2019 Marcus J. Pilgerstorfer School of Law Faculty of Humanities 1 Abstract This thesis focuses upon one of the major areas of controversy in the European Product Liability Directive: the so-called ‘development risks defence’ (article 7(e)). That defence exculpates a producer from liability where he can prove “that the state of scientific and technical knowledge at the time when he put the product into circulation was not such as to enable the existence of the defect to be discovered”. Most member states have implemented the defence and it is regularly identified as being part of the balance between consumer and producer interests forming the ‘fair apportionment of risk’ which the PLD has set. The wording of the defence, whilst at first seductively simple, upon examination gives rise to many questions of interpretation. The answers to these will not only determine the true scope of the defence, but in many ways the strictness of the liability imposed by the PLD itself. This study explores these questions using a comparative law lens and by examining how two particular jurisdictions – (i) England and Wales, and (ii) Germany – have implemented and applied the defence and the related concept of defect. Following a brief introduction (chapter 1), and outline of the methods employed (chapter 2), I examine the concepts of defect and DRD as a matter of EU law (chapter 3).
    [Show full text]
  • National, Arrived at Gatwick Airport in Ters of Which Are at Saint
    OPINION OF MR MAYRAS — CASE 41/74 OPINION OF MR ADVOCATE-GENERAL MAYRAS DELIVERED ON 13 NOVEMBER 1974 1 Mr President, Miss Yvonne Van Duyn, a Dutch national, arrived at Gatwick Airport in Members of the Court, England on 9 May 1973. She declared that her purpose in coming to the United Introduction Kingdom was to take up an offer of employment as a secretary, made to her This preliminary reference is of special a few days earlier by the Church of interest for two reasons. Scientology of California, the headquar­ It is the first time that a court of the ters of which are at Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, in the County of Sussex. United Kingdom, the High Court of Justice in London, has made a reference After an interview with the immigration to the Court of Justice for interpretation authorities, she was returned to the of Community rules under Article 177 of Netherlands that same day. the Treaty of Rome. The ground of refusal of leave to enter This is also the first time that the Court the United Kingdom is stated in the has been called upon to decide the document handed to her by the important problem raised by the immigration officer. It reads: limitations, expressed in Article 48 of the 'You have asked for leave to enter the Treaty, to the principle of freedom of United Kingdom in order to take movement for workers within the employment with the Church of Community imposed by considerations Scientology but the Secretary of State of public policy and public security.
    [Show full text]