Neu › Ergebnisse des Justiz-Projekts

Search
Generic filters

Supported by:

+++ Neuerscheinung › „Verwundbarkeit und Resilienz der dritten Gewalt“ – Ergebnisse des Justiz-Projekts +++

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Gesa Kübek

Dr. Gesa Kübek is an Assistant Professor of European Law at the University of Groningen.
POSTS BY Gesa Kübek
18 February 2026

Has the European Parliament Shot Itself in the Foot?

After 25 years of negotiations, on 6 December 2024, the EU and four Mercosur countries – Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay – reached an EU-Mercosur Agreement. The geoeconomic importance of this Agreement cannot be understated. Against this background, it came as a surprise when a narrow majority in the EP, backed by far-right and far-left parties alike, on 21 January 2026, requested an opinion on its compatibility with EU law. By contesting the legality of the Agreement, the EP risks losing a formal say over the temporal application of the “trade part” of broader mixed agreements pending ratification in the Member States. Continue reading >>
1
04 July 2018

CETA’s Investment Court System and the Autonomy of EU Law: Insights from the Hearing in Opinion 1/17

On 26 June 2018, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) held its hearing in Opinion 1/17, which concerns the compatibility of CETA’s Investment Court System (ICS) with EU law. Due to the depth of the substantive issues covered and the length of hearing, this post only addresses the first of four questions posed to the ECJ by Belgium, which relates to the principle of autonomy. It is fair to say though that autonomy-related questions and arguments featured the hearing most prominently and may therefore be particularly contentious. Continue reading >>
2
23 May 2017
,

The Singapore Opinion or the End of Mixity as We Know It

Last week on Tuesday, with its decision in Opinion 2/15, on the Union’s competence to conclude ‘new generation’ EU trade and investment agreements, the Court dropped a bombshell. The Court’s ruling is set to significantly simplify the EU’s international economic relations with third countries. If the Commission, the Council and the member states had demanded clarity as to which institutions may legitimately pursue the Union’s external action objectives in its commercial relations: clarity is what they earned. The decision indeed has the potential to greatly facilitate an ‘EU-only’ signing and conclusion of future EU trade agreements. At the same time, as we argue below, the Court’s reasoning entails a number of contradicting elements that may add confusion over the legal parameters of post-Lisbon EU external relations conduct. Continue reading >>
2

Verfassungsblog is a global forum of scholarly debate at the interface of academy and society. We open up debates in public law – internationally, interdisciplinary and open access.

Help Secure Our Future for 2026

We make expert legal analysis freely accessible – when democracy needs it most.
3,600 authors. 9,500 articles. Nearly five million views last year.

Independent. Open Access. Reader-funded.
Now we need your help to keep it that way.

380000
274832

Goal 2: 380,000 € by April 2026

Go to Top