#自由的崇高信条,“你不应歧视”

Nils Grosche
{"title":"#自由的崇高信条,“你不应歧视”","authors":"Nils Grosche","doi":"10.5771/2193-7869-2022-3-213","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using the example of the ECJ's decision on the German infrastructure use charge for passenger vehicles (C-591/17), the article addresses methodological questions of indirect discrimination in the context of the EU`s fundamental freedoms. In doing so, the question is raised whether the construction of the passenger vehicle use charge is – due to the controversy – a legal example of what can be described as a reversible figure. The central thesis is that this impression only arises due to a certain methodological perspective. The impression of a reversible figure can be dissolved as a mere illusion if one broadens the methodological perspective for the understanding of indirect discrimination. Figuratively speaking, one has to take a step back and not only focus on the discriminatory character of the vehicle use charge.","PeriodicalId":275616,"journal":{"name":"Kritische Vierteljahresschrift für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft","volume":"97 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Das grundfreiheitliche Gebot „Du sollst nicht diskriminieren“\",\"authors\":\"Nils Grosche\",\"doi\":\"10.5771/2193-7869-2022-3-213\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Using the example of the ECJ's decision on the German infrastructure use charge for passenger vehicles (C-591/17), the article addresses methodological questions of indirect discrimination in the context of the EU`s fundamental freedoms. In doing so, the question is raised whether the construction of the passenger vehicle use charge is – due to the controversy – a legal example of what can be described as a reversible figure. The central thesis is that this impression only arises due to a certain methodological perspective. The impression of a reversible figure can be dissolved as a mere illusion if one broadens the methodological perspective for the understanding of indirect discrimination. Figuratively speaking, one has to take a step back and not only focus on the discriminatory character of the vehicle use charge.\",\"PeriodicalId\":275616,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kritische Vierteljahresschrift für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft\",\"volume\":\"97 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kritische Vierteljahresschrift für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5771/2193-7869-2022-3-213\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kritische Vierteljahresschrift für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5771/2193-7869-2022-3-213","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文以欧洲法院关于德国客运车辆基础设施使用费的决定(C-591/17)为例,阐述了欧盟基本自由背景下间接歧视的方法问题。在这样做的过程中,有人提出了一个问题,即乘用车使用费的征收是否- -由于争议- -可以被描述为可逆数字的一个法律例子。中心论点是,这种印象只是由于某种方法论视角而产生的。如果拓宽理解间接歧视的方法论视角,对可逆图形的印象就可以被消解为纯粹的幻觉。打个比方,我们必须退后一步,不能只关注车辆使用费的歧视性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Das grundfreiheitliche Gebot „Du sollst nicht diskriminieren“
Using the example of the ECJ's decision on the German infrastructure use charge for passenger vehicles (C-591/17), the article addresses methodological questions of indirect discrimination in the context of the EU`s fundamental freedoms. In doing so, the question is raised whether the construction of the passenger vehicle use charge is – due to the controversy – a legal example of what can be described as a reversible figure. The central thesis is that this impression only arises due to a certain methodological perspective. The impression of a reversible figure can be dissolved as a mere illusion if one broadens the methodological perspective for the understanding of indirect discrimination. Figuratively speaking, one has to take a step back and not only focus on the discriminatory character of the vehicle use charge.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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