Utrecht Journal of International and European Law最新文献_第8页

The Eurozone Crisis: A Constitutional Analysis 欧元区危机:宪法分析

IF 0.6

Utrecht Journal of International and European Law Pub Date : 2015-08-14 DOI: 10.5334/UJIEL.DC

A. Sting

引用次数: 58

General Issues in International and European Law 国际法和欧洲法的一般问题

IF 0.6

Utrecht Journal of International and European Law Pub Date : 2015-08-14 DOI: 10.5334/UJIEL.DJ

Gentian Zyberi

引用次数: 0

The Experience of the European Court of Human Rights with the European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine 欧洲人权法院在《欧洲人权与生物医学公约》方面的经验

IF 0.6

Utrecht Journal of International and European Law Pub Date : 2015-08-14 DOI: 10.5334/UJIEL.DA

F. Seatzu

{"title":"The Experience of the European Court of Human Rights with the European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine","authors":"F. Seatzu","doi":"10.5334/UJIEL.DA","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/UJIEL.DA","url":null,"abstract":"Several papers have been written on the contribution of domestic courts to the interpretation of the Council of Europe’s Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine (Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, also known as the Oviedo Convention) and its Additional Protocols (the ‘Oviedo Convention system’) or to the development of new rules of international bio law. Nevertheless very few papers have thus far focused on the contribution of the European Court of Human Rights (‘ECtHR’) to the enforcement of the Oviedo Convention’s provisions. This is notwithstanding the very close relationship of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) with the Oviedo Convention and its Additional Protocols, namely the fact that the Oviedo Convention: “elaborates some of the principles enshrined in the ECHR” as elucidated by the Explanatory Report of the European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (the ‘Explanatory Report’). The purpose of this paper is to fill this major gap and to focus on the use of the Oviedo Convention when a specifi c biomedical issue is submitted to the ECtHR. The paper will briefly address, through some relevant examples, the ECtHR’s main contributions to implementation of the bio-law rights encompassed in the Oviedo Convention’s system. It also charts the evolution from the ECtHR’s original position, which tended to apply the Oviedo Convention directly, to its later less radical position, adopted in some of its most recent judgments, in which the Oviedo Convention is implemented exclusively: a) when the content of its provisions coincide with rights explicitly protected in the ECHR and b) when it helps to elucidate or understand better the ECHR. A correction article relating to the authorship of this publication can be found here: DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/ujiel.dk","PeriodicalId":30606,"journal":{"name":"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law","volume":"31 1","pages":"5-16"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2015-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70726758","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 5

Hassan v United Kingdom: The Interaction of Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law with regard to the Deprivation of Liberty in Armed Conflicts Hassan诉联合王国:人权法和国际人道主义法在武装冲突中剥夺自由问题上的相互作用

IF 0.6

Utrecht Journal of International and European Law Pub Date : 2015-08-14 DOI: 10.5334/UJIEL.DB

Cedric De Koker

{"title":"Hassan v United Kingdom: The Interaction of Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law with regard to the Deprivation of Liberty in Armed Conflicts","authors":"Cedric De Koker","doi":"10.5334/UJIEL.DB","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/UJIEL.DB","url":null,"abstract":"In Hassan v United Kingdom , the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights reviewed the deprivation of liberty of a young male by British armed forces during the phase of active hostilities in Iraq, which had raised issues relating to extraterritoriality, the right to liberty and security in times of armed conflict and the relationship between international humanitarian law (IHL) and human rights law (HRL).1 In its judgment of 16 September 2014, the Court ruled that by reason of the co-existence of the safeguards provided by IHL and by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in time of armed conflict, the grounds of permitted deprivation of liberty found in both bodies of law should, as far as possible, be accommodated and applied concomitantly. The greatest merit of the judgment is that for the first time it explicitly offered its view on the interaction between IHL and HRL and did not rely on the lex specialis principle, the traditional but flawed method for explaining the relationship between these spheres of law. However, the judgment is also a missed opportunity as the Court limited its analysis to the case at hand and provided limited guidance for the future, leaving a number of questions unaddressed.","PeriodicalId":30606,"journal":{"name":"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law","volume":"31 1","pages":"90-96"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2015-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70727564","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 5

Access to Justice in Environmental Cases after the Rulings of the Court of Justice of 13 January 2015: Kafka Revisited? 2015年1月13日法院判决后环境案件中的司法诉诸:卡夫卡的重访?

IF 0.6

Utrecht Journal of International and European Law Pub Date : 2015-08-14 DOI: 10.5334/UJIEL.DI

Hendrik Schoukens

{"title":"Access to Justice in Environmental Cases after the Rulings of the Court of Justice of 13 January 2015: Kafka Revisited?","authors":"Hendrik Schoukens","doi":"10.5334/UJIEL.DI","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/UJIEL.DI","url":null,"abstract":"By ratifying the Aarhus Convention in 2005 the EU committed itself to guaranteeing broad access to justice in environmental matters both at the national and the EU level. Yet, in spite of the clear-cut obligations incumbent upon the EU, EU courts have consistently rebuked pleas for a softening of the standing requirements in the context of direct actions against EU acts that might have an impact on the environment and/or public health. In addition, the internal review procedure set out by the 2006 Aarhus Regulation has been interpreted so restrictively by the EU institutions that that its added value in the stride toward better access to courts in environmental matters remains ephemeral at best. This led the General Court to finding that the Aarhus Regulation, by excluding general EU acts from the scope of internal review, was in breach of Article 9(3) of the Aarhus Convention. In its recent rulings of 13 January 2015, however, the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) overruled the General Court by holding that the Aarhus Regulation could not be reviewed in light of the Aarhus Convention. With its refusal to use Article 9(3) of the Aarhus Convention as a reference criterion for the purpose of reviewing the EU’s compliance with the Aarhus Convention’s obligations, the CJEU avoided tackling the unsatisfactory level of judicial protection in environmental cases at the EU level. This paper argues that the rulings of the CJEU are to be qualified as a significant step backwards for judicial protection in environmental matters at the EU level. It is established that, instead of addressing the current failings of the EU with respect to access to justice in environmental cases, the CJEU’s hands-off approach paves the way for yet another decade of non-compliance by the EU in the realm of access to justice in environmental cases.","PeriodicalId":30606,"journal":{"name":"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law","volume":"31 1","pages":"46-67"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2015-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70727910","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 12

From Multiple Legal Cultures to One Legal Culture? Thinking About Culture, Tradition and Identity in European Private Law Development 从多元法律文化到单一法律文化?欧洲私法发展中的文化、传统与认同思考

IF 0.6

Utrecht Journal of International and European Law Pub Date : 2015-08-14 DOI: 10.5334/UJIEL.DG

S. Law

{"title":"From Multiple Legal Cultures to One Legal Culture? Thinking About Culture, Tradition and Identity in European Private Law Development","authors":"S. Law","doi":"10.5334/UJIEL.DG","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/UJIEL.DG","url":null,"abstract":"This paper begins by briefly outlining private law’s evolution alongside the emergence of the Nation States; it then aims to set out the mutual influence of these concepts on national culture, tradition and identity in order to highlight the significance of the political, economic and legal as well as social and cultural contexts in which the processes of integration and Europeanisation occur. Against this background, the scope for European private law to emerge as a plural, multi-level construct and a dynamic endeavour is recognised. Building on this analysis of the significance of the diversity and commonality of cultures, traditions and identities in national private law development, institutionalised at the Union level in the principle of unitas in diversitate, the paper explores the need for a single, common European notion of culture, tradition or identity. This examination is undertaken with reference to an example, namely the evolution of the concept of consumer, from its national foundations to its engagement in Union legislation and CJEU jurisprudence. Drawing conclusions as to the need for such a common, European concept, the paper advances a plea for the recognition of a shift in the perspective of legal development, to one which acknowledges the dynamic evolution of private law within a pluralist, multi-level regulatory construct.","PeriodicalId":30606,"journal":{"name":"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law","volume":"31 1","pages":"68-89"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2015-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70727271","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Tracing the Scope of Religious Exemptions under National and EU Law: Section 37(1) of the Irish Employment Equality Acts 1998–2011 and Ireland’s Obligations Under the EU Framework Directive on Employment and Occupation, Directive 2000/78/EC 追溯国家和欧盟法律下的宗教豁免范围:1998-2011年爱尔兰就业平等法第37(1)条和爱尔兰在欧盟就业和职业框架指令下的义务，指令2000/78/EC

IF 0.6

Utrecht Journal of International and European Law Pub Date : 2015-08-14 DOI: 10.5334/UJIEL.DH

Amy Dunne

{"title":"Tracing the Scope of Religious Exemptions under National and EU Law: Section 37(1) of the Irish Employment Equality Acts 1998–2011 and Ireland’s Obligations Under the EU Framework Directive on Employment and Occupation, Directive 2000/78/EC","authors":"Amy Dunne","doi":"10.5334/UJIEL.DH","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/UJIEL.DH","url":null,"abstract":"This submission traces the scope of the religious exemptions for religious organisation both under the Irish Employment Equality Acts 1998–2011 at national level and under the EU Framework Directive on Employment and Occupation, Directive 2000/78/EC of November 2000, at EU level. It will be demonstrated that the Irish religious exemptions are broader in scope than those at EU level and therefore constitute a severe limitation on the equality rights of Irish citizens falling within protected grounds of non-discrimination other than religion or belief under the EU Employment Equality Directive. Special regard is had to the limitation of the rights of Irish citizens falling within the protected ground of non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. It is considered whether, by allowing overly broad exemptions to subsist beyond the exigencies of a strict proportionality test, the Irish State is in effect giving efficacy to the typified intolerance between religions organisations and the LGBT community and in so doing, contributing to the perpetuation of these intolerances in Irish society rather than their erosion.","PeriodicalId":30606,"journal":{"name":"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law","volume":"31 1","pages":"33-45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2015-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70727427","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

A Political Decision Disguised as Legal Argument? Opinion 2/13 and European Union Accession to the European Convention on Human Rights 伪装成法律论据的政治决定?意见2/13和欧洲联盟加入《欧洲人权公约》

IF 0.6

Utrecht Journal of International and European Law Pub Date : 2015-08-14 DOI: 10.5334/UJIEL.DF

G. Butler

{"title":"A Political Decision Disguised as Legal Argument? Opinion 2/13 and European Union Accession to the European Convention on Human Rights","authors":"G. Butler","doi":"10.5334/UJIEL.DF","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/UJIEL.DF","url":null,"abstract":"David Thor Bjorgvinsson was a judge of the European Court of Human Rights between 2004 and 2013. During this period, he was involved in many important judgments, including Scoppola v Italy (No. 3) , [1] Eweida and others v United Kingdom , [2] and Al-Jedda v the United Kingdom , [3] amongst others, and went on to serve as Vice-President of the Fourth Section. He has degrees from the University of Iceland, Duke University School of Law, and the University of Strasbourg, and is currently a Professor of Law at the Centre of Excellence for International Courts (iCourts) at the Faculty of Law, University of Copenhagen, Denmark. In this interview, carried out in June 2015 for the Utrecht Journal of International and European Law, David Thor Bjorgvinsson outlined his views to Graham Butler on Opinion 2/13 from the Court of Justice of the European Union on the Union’s accession to the European Convention on Human Rights, [4] the workings of the European Court of Human Rights, and what the future may have in store for this Court. [1] Scoppola v Italy (No. 3) (2013) 56 EHRR 19. [2] Eweida and others v United Kingdom (2013) 57 EHRR 8. [3] Al-Jedda v the United Kingdom (2011) 53 EHRR 23. [4] Opinion 2/13 (2014) Accession of the European Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, (not yet reported).","PeriodicalId":30606,"journal":{"name":"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law","volume":"31 1","pages":"104-111"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2015-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70727204","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 5

Courts: An Effective Venue to Promote Government Transparency? The Case of the Court of Justice of the European Union 法院:促进政府透明度的有效场所?欧洲联盟法院的案例

IF 0.6

Utrecht Journal of International and European Law Pub Date : 2015-02-27 DOI: 10.5334/UJIEL.CT

Irma Spahiu

引用次数: 5

The Right to Protection of Personal Data. Incapable of Autonomous Standing in the Basic EU Constituting Documents 保障个人资料的权利。在欧盟基本构成文件中缺乏自主地位

IF 0.6

Utrecht Journal of International and European Law Pub Date : 2015-02-27 DOI: 10.5334/UJIEL.CZ

P. Hert

{"title":"The Right to Protection of Personal Data. Incapable of Autonomous Standing in the Basic EU Constituting Documents","authors":"P. Hert","doi":"10.5334/UJIEL.CZ","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/UJIEL.CZ","url":null,"abstract":"Over the past few years an overhaul of the European data protection edifice has been under way. Practically all basic data protection regulating documents in effect until today have either already been replaced or are in the process of being thoroughly amended. This is probably a development that was long overdue, given that all of them have an age of several decades while none of them has been released taking the internet into account. The OECD is the first international organisation that issued any data protection regulations at all: it did so in 1980, and its Guidelines remained unchanged until 2013, when their amendment process was completed. The Council of Europe released its own data protection regulations, formulated in Convention 108, only a few weeks after the OECD; they too remained in effect unchanged over the decades that passed, admittedly complemented by rich secondary legislation, and are now in the process of being amended. However, most of the data protection work undoubtedly takes place within the EU which chose to dominate the international field since it became involved in it, through the EU Data Protection Directive in 1994. The Directive set the EU and international, through its “adequacy” criterion, data protection standard. However, it remained hopelessly outdated, because it was released before the advent of the Internet (although the Court of Justice through its recent Google Spain case showed that there is still some life left in it). The European Commission seized the opportunity presented by the Treaty of Lisbon, and its Article 16 TFEU, and took upon itself the herculean task of reconstructing the whole EU data protection edifice, both from an architectural and from a substantive law point of view","PeriodicalId":30606,"journal":{"name":"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law","volume":"31 1","pages":"1-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2015-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70727049","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4