scholarly journals La participación del público en la elaboración de planes con incidencia ambiental: algunas cuestiones irresueltas

2020 ◽  
pp. 75-106
Author(s):  
José Ignacio CUBERO MARCOS
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Environmental Assessment ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Strategic Environmental Assessment ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Aarhus Convention ◽  
The One ◽  
Spanish Legislation

LABURPENA: Lan honek honako hau azaltzen du: ingurumen ebaluazio estrategikoa eskatzen duten plan eta programak onartzeko prozedurak xedatutako araubideak dauzkan kontraesan eta hutsune juridiko batzuk. Espainiak Aarhus ituna berretsi zuenetik eta Europar Batasunak 2003/35 Zuzentaraua onartu zuenetik, barneko planen ingurumenaren inguruko ebaluaziorako prozeduretan, pertsonek parte hartzeko gabeziak erakusten ditu legediak. Alde batetik, barneko agintariek pertsonei emateko aurretiazko informazioa eskaintzeko garrantzia gutxietsi dute; bestetik, zalantzak sortu dira ondoko gai honetan: Oraindik ere zalantzak daude ingurumenaren arloan parte hartzeko baldintzak sektoreko legeriarekin edo legeria orokorrarekin nola artikulatzen diren. Izan ere, azken legeria horrek aurreikusten dituen bermeak eta parte hartzeko eskubide desberdinak dira eta, batzuetan, aurreratuagoak. Lanak xede izango du konponbide batzuk ekartzea, Aarhus itunaren interpretazio finalista batean eta EBJAk emandako jurisprudentzian oinarrituz. This work exposes some contradictions and legal gaps regarding the legislation that regulates the participation of people in the procedures aimed at passing plans and programmes subjected to the strategic environmental assessment. Since Spain ratified the Aarhus Convention and the European Union passed 2003/35 Directive, the Spanish legislation shows still shortcomings so as to achieve an effective participation in the environmental assessment of plans. On the one hand, domestic authorities have ignored how important is to supply previous information to the public; on the other, there are doubts about how the requirements of participation in the environmental field are articulated with those provided for in the specific or general legislation, that establishes guarantees and different rights to participate, sometimes more progressive. This works aims at bringing some solutions, in accordance with a finalist interpretation of the Aarhus Convention and with the developments in the case law of the CJEU. RESUMEN: Este trabajo expone algunas contradicciones y vacíos jurídicos que se desprenden de la legislación que regula la participación de las personas en los procedimientos dirigidos a la aprobación de planes y programas que requieran evaluación ambiental estratégica. Desde que España ratificara el Convenio de Aarhus y la Unión Europea dictase la Directiva 2003/35, la legislación interna todavía presenta carencias para el logro de una participación efectiva en los procedimientos para la evaluación ambiental de planes. Por un lado, las autoridades internas han ignorado la importancia de ofrecer información previa al público; por otro, todavía perviven dudas en torno al modo en que se articulan los requisitos de participación en materia medioambiental con la legislación sectorial o general, que también prevé garantías y reconoce derechos de participación distintos y, a veces, más avanzados. El trabajo tendrá por objeto aportar algunas soluciones, inspirándose en una interpretación finalista del Convenio de Aarhus y en el desarrollo jurisprudencial ofrecido por el TJUE.

scholarly journals The interpretation complying with EU law manifested in the case law unifying judgment No. 15/2013 of the Portuguese Supreme Court of Justice

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 82-96
Author(s):  
Carla Machado
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
The Other ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The One

This article aims to address the interpretation that has been made by Portuguese courts in relation to the concept of “communication of the work to the public” enshrined in Article 3 (1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001, duly transposed into the Portuguese legal order by Law No. 50/2006 of 24 August, which culminated in the drafting of the case law unifying judgment No. 15/2013. By verifying its content and analysing the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereinafter CJEU), concerning the interpretation of that concept, we conclude that the said case law unifying judgment does not comply with EU law. Therefore, we will list, on the one hand, the inherent consequences regarding the upkeep of the interpretation that has been held by the Portuguese judicial authorities and, on the other, we will suggest solutions for the resolution of similar cases by appealing to the principle of conforming interpretation.

The Cases of Edam Holland and Gouda Holland

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 444-450
Author(s):  
Vadim Mantrov
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Geographical Origin ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Case Note ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The One

Cases C-517/14 P and C-519/P, Schutzgemeinschaft Milch und Milcherzeugnisse e.V. v European Commission, Kingdom of the Netherlands, Nederlandse Zuivelorganisatie, unreported 24 October 2014 (Seventh Chamber).In the two related cases commented on, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) dealt with assessment of locus standi in the case of an applicant who disputed the validity of registration of two indications of geographical origin (IGOs), namely Edam Holland and Gouda Holland, being compound designations and containing a famous generic word designation (name), i.e. Edam and Gouda respectively. The importance of both cases relates, on the one hand, to the fact that registration of these IGOs was challenged on the basis of the generic names Edam and Gouda which are extensively used in practice, occupying a considerable market share. On the other, both cases could be a signal whether the CJEU re–affirms its restrictive approach to assessment of locus standi under Article 263 (4) TFEU. Although the CJEU re–affirmed its longstanding case law on restrictive assessment of locus standi also concerning registration of a compound geographical designation on the basis of a generic name, yet, as is argued in this case note, this approach did not take into account the specifics of registering IGOs (author's summary).

The Impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union on Tunisian Judges: Quo Vadis?

2020 ◽  
pp. 320-346
Author(s):  
Béligh Elbalti
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Current Situation ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Quo Vadis ◽  
The One ◽  
The Impact

This chapter examines the question whether the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has exercised an influence on Tunisian judges and the extent of that influence. After explaining the general legal background of Tunisia as a legal system and the attitude of Tunisian judges towards foreign legal sources in general, the chapter explores the available case law of Tunisian courts in order to identify the areas of law where such an influence manifests itself. It shows that, generally speaking, Tunisian judges are quite open to foreign legal sources and frequently cite those sources in their judgments. However, when it comes to the case law of the CJEU, two opposite trends could be identified. On the one hand, the case law of Tunisian ordinary courts shows that the CJEU exercises little influence on Tunisian judges, despite extensive and diversified cooperation between the EU and Tunisia. On the other hand, the case law of the Competition Council shows that the Council is more willing to refer to CJEU decisions in deciding the cases pending before them. The chapter considers several reasons that are likely to explain this double aspect of the influence of the CJEU on Tunisian judges. It argues that the weakness of comparative research, legal education in general, as well as the role played by legal actors in Tunisia are among the main reasons behind the current situation.

scholarly journals Characteristics of Precedent: The Case Law of the European Court of Justice in Three Dimensions

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1073-1098 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mattias Derlén ◽  
Johan Lindholm
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
The One

AbstractThe case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is one of the most important sources of European Union law. However, case law's role in EU law is not uniform. By empirically studying how the Court uses its own case law as a source of law, we explore the correlation between, on the one hand, the characteristics of a CJEU case—type of action, actors involved, and area of law—and, on the other hand, the judgment's “embeddedness” in previous case law and value as a precedent in subsequent cases. Using this approach, we test, confirm, and debunk existing scholarship concerning the role of CJEU case law as a source of EU law. We offer the following conclusions: that CJEU case law cannot be treated as a single entity; that only a limited number of factors reliably affect a judgment's persuasive or precedential power; that the Court's use of its own case law as a source of law is particularly limited in successful infringement proceedings; that case law is particularly important in preliminary references—especially those concerning fundamental freedoms and competition law; and that initiating Member State and the number of observations affects the behavior of the Court.

Six Dimensions of Public Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 399-430
Author(s):  
Paul Craig
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Six Dimensions ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Way

This chapter draws on the six dimensions of public law covered in the book: theory, institutions and accountability, constitutions and rights, process and procedure, legislation, and case law. It links discussion of these dimensions, by considering how they have been affected by Brexit. The chapter is not concerned with the contending arguments for leaving or remaining in the European Union. The focus is on the way in which Brexit has ‘pressure-tested’ the public law regime in the United Kingdom and the European Union. The six dimensions of public law that are discussed in the preceding chapters form the architectural frame through which the impact of Brexit on the public law regimes is assessed in both the United Kingdom and the European Union.

Of Apples and Mangoes

2018 ◽  
pp. 3-20
Author(s):  
Philipp Dann ◽  
Maxim Bönnemann ◽  
Tanja Herklotz
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal System ◽  
The Other ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
The One

Discussing several methods of comparative legal research and emphasizing upon the point that the two or more systems to be compared should not either be so similar that there is nothing for the one to learn from the other, nor should they be so dissimilar that there is no relationship whatsoever between them. Following this principle, this chapter finds that there is enough similarity as well as dissimilarity between the Indian legal system and the legal system of the European Union. Acknowledging that fact, the chapter then proceeds to compare some of the aspects of European and Indian legal systems from which both of them may benefit.

The EU after Brexit

2020 ◽  
pp. 83-109
Author(s):  
Federico Fabbrini
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Fiscal Federalism ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
New Horizons ◽  
The One ◽  
Unanimous Approval ◽  
Amendment Procedure ◽  
The Eu

This chapter focuses on the European Union after Brexit and articulates the case for constitutional reforms. Reforms are necessary to address the substantive and institutional shortcomings that patently emerged in the context of Europe’s old and new crises. Moreover, reforms will be compelled by the exigencies of the post-Covid-19 EU recovery, which pushes the EU towards new horizons in terms of fiscal federalism and democratic governance. As a result, the chapter considers both obstacles and opportunities to reform the EU and make it more effective and legitimate. On the one hand, it underlines the difficulties connected to the EU treaty amendment procedure, owing to the requirement of unanimous approval of any treaty change, and the consequential problem of the veto. On the other hand, it emphasizes the increasing practice by Member States to use intergovernmental agreements outside the EU legal order and stresses that these have set new rules on their entry into force which overcome state veto, suggesting that this is now a precedent to consider.

Perspectives on the United Kingdom's Withdrawal from the European Union

2015 ◽  
pp. 36-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Armağan Gözkaman
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Community ◽  
The Other ◽  
Controversial Issue ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Brighter Future

The European Community/Union has always been a controversial issue in the UK. At present, the probability of an in-or-out referendum makes it all the more divisive. Eurosceptics see a brighter future for their country outside the union both in political and economic terms. Pro-Europeans, on the other hand, maintain that British membership brings up benefits that outweigh the costs. Both sides have their arguments. The former seek success through social mobilizations and debates. The latter believe that the anti-EU stance may be costly in economic and political terms. Hence, the public must be convinced before the referendum – if it ever takes place.

Euro-Centrism vs. International Thinking

2006 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 12-14
Author(s):  
Stefan Fersterer
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The Other ◽  
European Identity ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Familiar Environment ◽  
The One ◽  
European Citizen

If European people are asked to answer the question, “Which of your different identities has the highest rank in your personal sense: the local, the national or the European?”, a high percentage rate would definitely still report to the two former and only a minority would define themselves primarily as an European citizen. This is no surprise. On the one hand, one defines its identity through that origin, with which he or she has the strongest relation. On the other hand it is extremely difficult for a huge and often aloof entity like the European Union to develop a common European identity that evokes those impressions and sentiments that people combine with their familiar environment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document