31 March 2025
Silencing Greenpeace
In a stark example of a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP), a United States (US) state court compelled Greenpeace to pay hundreds of millions of dollars for facilitating trespass, conversion, nuisance, defamation, and civil conspiracy. The EU has correctly recognized the harm posed by SLAPPs in so far that they diminish civil society’s capacity to represent under- or unrepresented interest groups, and leverage civil law proceedings to stifle dissent in favor of the economically and politically powerful. Now, we will see if the Anti-SLAPP Directive is robust enough to protect European civil society actors from abusive lawsuits. Continue reading >>
2 
15 June 2021
The Courts Strike Back
The Shell case, decided by the Hague District Court on 26 May 2021, is part of a growing body of climate cases. What the Shell case does is that it liberates the political-decision maker from the suffocating grip of investor state dispute settlement mechanisms, in particular the mechanism under the Energy Charter Treaty. Continue reading >>10 May 2021
Separation of Powers in Climate Cases
On 29 April 2021, the Bundesverfassungsgericht published its decision that the Federal Climate Change Act of 12 December 2019, establishing national climate targets and annual emission amounts allowed until 2030, violates fundamental rights. Do the judges in such a case undermine separation of powers as a time-honoured achievement of modern constitutional democracies in order to force the political branches to take urgently necessary actions? No. By allocating different functions to the three branches, executive, legislature, and judiciary, separation of powers aims to ensure that the tension between law and majoritarian politics is perpetuated and that neither law nor politics dominates the other. Continue reading >>
0
18 October 2020
Constitutionalising the EU Foreign and Security Policy
In the appeal case of Bank Refah Kargaran v Council (C-134/19 P), the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has held that the EU Courts have jurisdiction over claims for damages in the area of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). This is coherent with the rationale of the exceptional exclusion of jurisdiction under CFSP and confirms that the Union’s commitment to the rule of law extends to CFSP. Continue reading >>09 October 2015
Safeguarding European Fundamental Rights or Creating a Patchwork of National Data Protection?
On Tuesday, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union declared the Commission’s US Safe Harbour Decision invalid. The Court’s ruling in Case C-362/14 of the Austrian Internet activist Maximillian Schrems v the Irish Data Protection Commissioner is a milestone in the protection of European fundamental rights, but it also preserves space for different national supervisory standards and national discretion on whether data may actually be transferred. Is the ruling opening the way for a patchwork of national data protection? How does this ruling influence the TTIP negotiations? Continue reading >>
0
25 March 2014