15 October 2024
Bridging the CFSP Gap
The CJEU interprets its Common Foreign and Security Policy jurisdiction in light of the objectives set by the Lisbon Treaty, thereby integrating part and parcel of the CFSP into the rest of the European Union acquis. This aligns the CFSP with the general principles and constitutional rules set in the Treaty. As the Court advances the integration of CFSP jurisdiction within the broader EU legal order, the judgements of 10 September 2024 in Neves 77 Solutions and KS and KD v Council and Others serve as landmark ruling for the future of judicial review in CFSP. Continue reading >>
0 
09 October 2024
Dismissing the Genuine Link by Disregarding Constitutional Principles
The struggle over the Maltese investment citizenship scheme is probably one of the fiercest debates of EU constitutional law. The conflict revolves around the question of whether EU law contains requirements for the acquisition of Union citizenship and whether these requirements consist in a “genuine link” between the respective state and individual. The recent Opinion by AG Collins provides us with an extremely narrow and astonishingly one-sided view. In particular, he seeks to make us believe that there are no sound ways to anchor a genuine link requirement in EU law. Martijn van den Brink finds it “hard to disagree with the Advocate General”. Respectfully, I disagree. Continue reading >>24 September 2024
A Political Question Doctrine for the CFSP
On 10 September 2024, the CJEU issued its judgment in the joined cases of KS and KD, addressing the scope of its jurisdiction within the Common Foreign and Security Policy. Specifically, the Court asserted its jurisdiction in so far as the harm-causing conduct did not relate to “political or strategic” choices made in the context of the CFSP. I criticize the Court’s reliance on such an ill-defined concept to delineate the boundaries of its jurisdiction and argue that removing the limitations on the CJEU’s jurisdiction within the CFSP would require a reform of the Treaties. Continue reading >>
0
16 September 2024
Soft Law’s Increasing Clout
The non-binding nature of soft law is rather self-evident, yet, its influence is growing, as reflected in the recent Jemerak case, decided on 5 September 2024. While the judges in Luxembourg explicitly stated that the Commission’s guidance document had no effect on their interpretation of Union law whatsoever, their decision de facto indirectly reviewed that document. I argue that the Jemerak case exemplifies the growing significance of soft law. Continue reading >>
0
04 September 2024
Misjudging the Football Transfer System
In 1995, the Bosman ruling put an end to transfer fees for out-of-contract players. This year, the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) is dealing with the Diarra case, which concerns players still under contract. The Advocate General has already given the Opinion, which suggests that the upcoming CJEU's ruling will further weaken the transfer system. I argue that both rulings focus too much on the labour market and the freedom of movement of workers and neglect the fact that the football transfer system enhances competition in consumer markets at the benefit of smaller clubs and the football fans. Continue reading >>
0
28 August 2024
Strengthening the EU Legal Edifice for Data Transfers
GDPR provides the rulebook for international transfers of personal data from the EU and serves as the vehicle through which EU data protection law interacts with the wider world. However, the EU seems ambivalent about deciding how far it can expect third countries to adopt data protection standards similar to its own. Moreover, DPAs often fail to scrutinize data transfers to third countries that may lack the rule of law. Finally, the EU lacks a comparative methodology for assessing data protection equivalence in third countries. It is essential for the EU to elevate the public discourse so that the global significance of data transfers is recognized. Continue reading >>
0
12 June 2024
Two Steps Forward?
On May 25 2024 the Advocate General Nicholas Emiliou delivered his opinion in the Case C-406/22 CV v Ministerstvo vnitra České republiky, Odbor azylové a migrační politiky on several issues regarding the application of the safe country of origin (SCO) concept. The case could have significant impact on SCO policies of several EU Member States and the rights of refugees as it addresses the possibility of designating countries as safe with territorial exceptions as well as a more active approach to judicial review of SCO designations. If adopted by the CJEU, the AG’s suggestions could serve to enhance refugee protection, though the adoption of the Pact on Migration and Asylum might possibly counteract this. Continue reading >>10 June 2024
Waiting for Kinsa
On 18 June 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union will sit as a Grand Chamber in a hearing addressing the compatibility of the so-called Facilitators Package with the principle of proportionality set out in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR). The Kinsa case (previously named Kinshasa) provides an opportunity for the CJEU to counteract the trend towards overcriminalisation of humanitarian action that has taken hold across the EU. This blog highlights the ways in which the Facilitator Package fails to take account of important fundamental rights and why the criminalization of solidarity that it has facilitated is not an inevitability but a political choice. Continue reading >>
0
05 June 2024
From Strasbourg to Luxembourg?
KlimaSeniorinnen has established a remedy which, in EU law, is not easy to locate and may actually be unavailable in light of restrictive CJEU case law. Whatever one’s views on this restrictive case law, it is a fact that the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights now obliges the CJEU to do as much as it can to accommodate the KlimaSeniorinnen remedy and to interpret the relevant TFEU provisions flexibly. One may assume that, sooner or later, the CJEU will be confronted with a KlimaSeniorinnen claim. If the CJEU were to declare such a claim inadmissible, it will put itself in the corner of courts refusing to engage with climate change policies. That would be unfortunate for a court that has long been at the forefront of legal progress.
Continue reading >>
0
15 May 2024
The New Transgender Ruling in Czechia
In a recent decision in the case of N.G. (Pl. ÚS 52/23), the Czech Constitutional Court (CCC) addressed the pressing issue of trans persons’ rights, more specifically the requirements for legal gender reassignment, involving (often involuntary) sterilisation and castration. When compared to the earlier decision in T.H. (Pl. ÚS 2/20), the new ruling represents a major shift. In fact, the CCC changed its legal position by 180 degrees, giving preference to protecting individual rights over deferring to the legislator’s choices. Continue reading >>
0