16. Review of Legality: Grounds of Review

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW
P. Craig, G. Búrca
{"title":"16. Review of Legality: Grounds of Review","authors":"P. Craig, G. Búrca","doi":"10.1093/HE/9780198856641.003.0016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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 the grounds for judicial review of a Union act. Article 263 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) specifies four grounds for review: lack of competence; infringement of an essential procedural requirement; infringement of the Treaty or any rule of law relating to its application; and misuse of power. Judicial review, whether direct through Article 263 or indirect through Article 267, is designed to ensure that decision-making is legally accountable. The UK version contains a further section analysing the relevance of these grounds of review in the UK post-Brexit.","PeriodicalId":29853,"journal":{"name":"China-EU Law Journal","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"China-EU Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HE/9780198856641.003.0016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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 the grounds for judicial review of a Union act. Article 263 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) specifies four grounds for review: lack of competence; infringement of an essential procedural requirement; infringement of the Treaty or any rule of law relating to its application; and misuse of power. Judicial review, whether direct through Article 263 or indirect through Article 267, is designed to ensure that decision-making is legally accountable. The UK version contains a further section analysing the relevance of these grounds of review in the UK post-Brexit.
16. 合法性审查:审查理由
所有的书在这个旗舰系列包含精心挑选的关键案例,立法和学术辩论的实质性摘录,为学生提供一个独立的资源。本章讨论对联邦法案进行司法审查的理由。《欧洲联盟运作条约》第263条规定了进行审查的四个理由:缺乏能力;违反一项基本程序规定;违反本条约或与本条约适用有关的任何法治;以及滥用权力。无论是通过第263条直接审查还是通过第267条间接审查,司法审查的目的都是确保决策具有法律责任。英国版本包含进一步的部分,分析英国脱欧后这些审查理由的相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信