When Violations of International and EU Law Overlap


On 11 December 2019, Advocate General Pikamäe issued his Opinion rejecting jurisdiction of the ECJ in an infringement procedure between Slovenia and Croatia (C-457/18). The case raises the question whether the ECJ may engage with asserted violations of EU law which result from Croatia’s non-recognition of the final and binding Arbitral Award determining the border dispute between both Members. The opinion of the Advocate General appears to be fuelled by political rather than legal considerations and the ECJ should not follow it in order to make clear that the EU is able to protect its autonomous legal system and that it stands on its foundational and common legal principles.

Continue Reading →

Welche Regeln, welches Recht?

,

Kaum hatten sich die Gemüter um die Urteile in den Rechtssachen Google LLC. v CNIL und GC and Others v CNIL etwas beruhigt, goss der Gerichtshof der Europäischen Union mit seiner Entscheidung in der Rechtssache Glawischnig-Piesczek v Facebook Ireland Limited vergangenen Donnerstag erneut Öl ins Feuer um die Diskussion zur normativen Gestaltung der Governance von Meinungsäußerungen im Internet. Der Fall führt ein weiteres Mal vor Augen, was fehlt: eine kohärente Theorie der Jurisdiktion und ihrer Grenzen im Cyberspace.

Continue Reading →

Unconstitutional "Constitutional Questions" – How Kosovo’s Constitutional Court Expands its Jurisdiction


The “Qeska” case has marked the beginning of a series of misuse of Kosovo’s Constitutional Court from political bodies in the Republic of Kosovo to avoid their constitutional responsibilities. The last two referrals from the President of the Republic of Kosovo submitted to the Court are putting Kosovo’s constitutional justice into question.

Continue Reading →

Spanish Jurisdiction at Stake: Puigdemont’s Judge to be Judged by a Belgian Court?


Tomorrow, a new weird chapter opens up in the „affair Puigdemont“: The Spanish Supreme Court Judge Pablo Llarena, who unsuccessfully issued the European Arrest Warrant against former Catalan premier Carles Puigdemont, is cited before a Belgian court. He is object of a civil lawsuit filed by Puigdemont who accuses the magistrate of a lack of impartiality and violating the presumption of innocence as well as his right to reputation. What is the most astonishing about this lawsuit is the fact that it is a Belgian court which shall judge the professional actions of a Spanish judge.

Continue Reading →
DEBATE «ICON*S 2016»

The Hungarian Constitutional Court’s case with the ECHR: an ambivalent relationship


Hungary was the first country in the post-Soviet bloc that joined the Council of Europe and ratified the European Convention on Human Rights and this remains a matter of national pride. While the Convention is perceived as a yardstick in human rights protection that may not be circumvented, still lively debate surrounds the authority of the case-law of European Court of Human Rights. The recent constitutional reform has left the status of the Convention largely untouched. The Convention still enjoys a supra-legislative rank: it is subordinated to the Fundamental Law but is superior to all other pieces of legislation.

Continue Reading →

Jurisdiction, legislation, and creative interpretations in the Opinion of AG Wathelet in C-72/15 Rosneft

,

The frequent legal challenges to the European Union’s economic sanctions regimes have resulted in several judgments chiseling out key issues of EU law. Case C-72/15 Rosneft, which will be decided in the coming months, provides the European Court of Justice (ECJ) yet another opportunity to do so. In particular, the Rosneft case invites the ECJ to clarify its jurisdiction and power of judicial review over decisions taken by the Council under the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) – in the context of a reference for preliminary ruling.

Continue Reading →
↑ Top of Page