scholarly journals Farewell to the EU Charter: Brexit and Fundamental Rights Protection

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-52
Author(s):  
Marco Galimberti

Twenty years after its drafting and more than one decade after its entry into force, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has ceased to be part of British law as a consequence of Brexit. Looking into this issue raised by the UK withdrawal from the European Union, the essay sheds some light on the legal status and impact of the EU Bill of Rights in the British legal order. Against this background, the article detects a connection between the UK Supreme Court’s case law and the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the direct effect of the Charter. From this perspective, the analysis highlights the implications of the UK departure from the Charter and disentanglement from the Luxembourg case law, thus arguing that they may weaken the standards of fundamental rights protection.

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 884-903
Author(s):  
Kathleen Gutman

AbstractThis contribution examines the developing contours of the essence of the fundamental right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial in the light of salient case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. It is divided into three main parts. The first part provides an overview of the meaning of the essence of fundamental rights in EU law and the scope of the inquiry in relation to Article 47 of the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union (“the Charter”). The second part evaluates the essence of the fundamental right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial in connection with justified limitations that may be placed on its exercise as provided for in Article 52(1) of the Charter within the framework of the EU system of fundamental rights protection, which in turn implicates the relationship with the Court’s case-law on national procedural autonomy, equivalence, and effectiveness. The third part delves into the essence of the fundamental right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial within the framework of the EU system of judicial protection, as illustrated by the Court’s case-law in several areas, including standing for individuals in direct actions before the EU courts, judicial independence, and restrictive measures in the Common Foreign and Security Policy. Through this analysis, the author argues that, while much awaits further refinement, certain recent developments in the Court’s case–law indicate that the essence of the fundamental right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial can play a meaningful role in the EU system of fundamental rights protection and the EU system of judicial protection more broadly, and thus the best may be yet to come as that case-law progresses in the future.


EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 929-994
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses EU anti-discrimination law, which, over the past decade and a half, has expanded significantly to cover a wide range of grounds and contexts. In addition to requiring equal treatment for women and men, the Treaty provides legislative competence to combat discrimination on a range of grounds. The Charter of Fundamental Rights, which has a chapter devoted to equality, has been incorporated into the EU Treaties. Article 21 of the Charter prohibits discrimination on any ground. Articles 8 and 10 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) contain horizontal clauses requiring the EU to promote equality between men and women, and to combat discrimination based on certain grounds, namely sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, or sexual orientation in all of its policies and activities. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues concerning EU discrimination law and the UK post-Brexit.


Author(s):  
Emily HANCOX

Abstract Article 6 Treaty on European Union sets out two sources of fundamental rights in the EU—the Charter and the general principles of EU law—without specifying a hierarchy between them. Even though the Charter became binding over a decade ago, the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘CJEU’) is yet to clarify unequivocally how these two sources interact. In this article I argue based upon the relevant legal framework that the Charter ought to replace the general principles it enshrines. This leaves a role for general principles in the incorporation of new and additional rights into the EU legal framework. Such an approach is necessary to ensure that the Charter achieves its aims in enhancing the visibility of the rights protected by EU law, while also providing the impetus for more coherent rights protection within the EU. What an extensive survey of CJEU case law in the field of non-discrimination shows, however, is that the CJEU has struggled to let its general principles case law go, potentially hampering the transformative potential of the Charter.


2015 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 145-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuli MIETTINEN ◽  
Merita KETTUNEN

AbstractThe Court of Justice of the European Union has historically rejected references to preparatory work in the interpretation of EU Treaties. However, the preparatory work for the EURATOM, Maastricht, and Constitutional Treaties have played a role in recent judgments. The ‘explanations’ to the Charter of Fundamental Rights are expressly approved in the current Treaties. We examine the emerging case law on preparatory work. Reference to the drafters’ intent does not necessarily support dynamic interpretation, and may potentially even ossify historical interpretations. Even if the consequence of their introduction is a conservative interpretation, their use raises questions of transparency and democracy, and complicates the already difficult task of interpreting the EU constitution.


2021 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 174-182
Author(s):  
Kaie Rosin

Although the EU lacks explicit competence to harmonise national principles of criminal law, there are many ways in which EU law and national criminal law are interconnected on a level deeper than mere minimum standards adopted from directives. The article analyses these intersections between EU law and fundamental principles of Estonian substantive criminal law, explaining how the principles of criminal law recognised and interpreted in the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU and covered by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union exhibit the capacity to affect fundamental principles of Estonian substantive criminal law. The article focuses on five principles specific to substantive criminal law, which are derived from the fundamental principles of the Estonian Constitution and have equivalents in human-rights law: the principle of legality of criminal law, the principle of retroactive application of the more lenient criminal law, proportionality, ultima ratio, and the principle of individual guilt. The analysis demonstrates that the relationship between EU law and the various principles of substantive criminal law is not uniform because the principles of substantive criminal law are not developed evenly at European Union level.


EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 963-1030
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses EU anti-discrimination law, which, over the past decade and a half, has expanded significantly to cover a wide range of grounds and contexts. In addition to requiring equal treatment for women and men, the Treaty provides legislative competence to combat discrimination on a range of grounds. The Charter of Fundamental Rights, which has a chapter devoted to equality, has been incorporated into the EU Treaties. Article 21 of the Charter prohibits discrimination on any ground. Articles 8 and 10 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) contain horizontal clauses requiring the EU to promote equality between men and women, and to combat discrimination based on certain grounds, namely sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, or sexual orientation in all of its policies and activities. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues concerning EU discrimination law and the UK post-Brexit.


Author(s):  
Christina Angelopoulos

This chapter reviews the lessons of European tort law for intermediary liability in copyright in order to plot a path towards the European harmonization of the area. In the absence of a complete EU framework for intermediary accessory copyright liability, Member States currently rely on home-grown solutions. This chapter examines three examples of such solutions: those of the UK, France, and Germany. The selected national jurisdictions represent three major tort law traditions of Europe. The analysis reveals three cross-jurisdictional approaches to intermediary liability in copyright: intra-copyright solutions, tort-based solutions, and injunction-based solutions. On the basis of these options, and taking into account the lessons of existing projects on the harmonization of European tort law, as well as the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the chapter proposes a framework for European intermediary liability in copyright. As the chapter explains, this is informed by existing EU and national law on the copyright, tort, and fundamental rights level.


2021 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 109-143
Author(s):  
Joanna Ryszka

Social rights protection in the European Union has undergone significant development. Currently their protection is regulated by relevant treaty provisions and the Charter of Fundamental Rights (Charter), both of a primary law nature, as well as by the non-binding European Pillar of Social Rights (Pillar). The aim of the paper is the assessment of the social rights protection in the EU, and whether all social rights provided in the CFR have their counterparts in the EPSR, hence whether and in what way the EPSR assists the actual exercise of social rights provided by the CFR. Comparing the content of the above-mentioned legal instruments makes it possible to answer the question whether all social rights provided in the Charter have their counterparts in the Pillar. This can help determine whether the latter affects the implementation of the former. If the answer is in the affirmative, it can further allow for determining in what way the principles of the Pillar assist in the actual exercise of social rights provided by the Charter. This is very important taking into account the need for an ongoing response to unforeseen threats, like for example COVID-19. The social aspects of EU integration thus are and will remain a subject of interest in the nearest future.


2009 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 257-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christof Mandry

AbstractThe self-understanding of the Europeans has been profoundly put into question since 1989, and during the EU reform process, 'Europe' was confronted by the task of describing itself anew. In this context, the debate about the significance of the religious patrimony took on a key position in the discourse. The broad public discussions of the preambles to the European Charter of Fundamental Rights and the Treaty establishing a Constitution for the European Union (ECT) indicate that the relationship between religion and political remains a controversial issue. The article argues that the 'preamble disputes' are part and parcel of the European Union's quest for a political identity and that the outcome of the identity debate—the self-description as a 'community of values'—deals in a specific way with this fundamental question.


2021 ◽  

The volume includes contributions from a meeting of the Frankfurt Institute for the Law of the European Union of the Faculty of Law of the European University Viadrina on the effectiveness of the protection of fundamental rights in the EU on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the legal binding nature of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. With contributions by Markus Rau, LL.M.; Dr. Peter Szczekalla; Prof. apl. Dr. Carmen Thiele; RA Dr. Christian Hilbrandt; Prof. Dr. Walter Frenz; Prof. Dr. Ines Härtel; Clara Pira Machel and Gabriel N. Toggenburg.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document