贝卢斯科尼与菲尼维斯特案C-219/17判决对单一决议机制机构行为合法性法院管辖权的影响

Q4 Social Sciences
Martin Maarand
{"title":"贝卢斯科尼与菲尼维斯特案C-219/17判决对单一决议机制机构行为合法性法院管辖权的影响","authors":"Martin Maarand","doi":"10.13165/j.icj.2019.12.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A case of the European Court of Justice C-219/17, Berlusconi and Fininvest, laid down important rules for differentiating between the jurisdictions of EU courts and national courts in actions challenging the final decisions of composite procedures in the Single Supervisory Mechanism. As this judgement does not cover all scenarios, nor are there such decisions regarding the Single Resolution Mechanism, a universal test is developed for revealing if EU courts or national courts have jurisdiction over acts of composite procedures in the Banking Union. This test is then implemented on the most important acts within the Single Resolution Mechanism.","PeriodicalId":32140,"journal":{"name":"International Comparative Jurisprudence","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of the Judgement in Case C-219/17, Berlusconi and Fininvest, on Court Jurisdiction Regarding Legality of Acts by Institutions of Single Resolution Mechanism\",\"authors\":\"Martin Maarand\",\"doi\":\"10.13165/j.icj.2019.12.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A case of the European Court of Justice C-219/17, Berlusconi and Fininvest, laid down important rules for differentiating between the jurisdictions of EU courts and national courts in actions challenging the final decisions of composite procedures in the Single Supervisory Mechanism. As this judgement does not cover all scenarios, nor are there such decisions regarding the Single Resolution Mechanism, a universal test is developed for revealing if EU courts or national courts have jurisdiction over acts of composite procedures in the Banking Union. This test is then implemented on the most important acts within the Single Resolution Mechanism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":32140,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Comparative Jurisprudence\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Comparative Jurisprudence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13165/j.icj.2019.12.004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Comparative Jurisprudence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13165/j.icj.2019.12.004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

欧洲法院C-219/17案Berlusconi和Fininvest在对单一监督机制中的复合程序的最终裁决提出质疑的行动中,为区分欧盟法院和国家法院的管辖权制定了重要规则。由于该判决并不涵盖所有情况,也没有关于单一解决机制的此类决定,因此制定了一个通用测试,以揭示欧盟法院或国家法院是否对银行联盟的复合程序行为具有管辖权。然后对单一解决机制内最重要的行为进行此测试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Impact of the Judgement in Case C-219/17, Berlusconi and Fininvest, on Court Jurisdiction Regarding Legality of Acts by Institutions of Single Resolution Mechanism
A case of the European Court of Justice C-219/17, Berlusconi and Fininvest, laid down important rules for differentiating between the jurisdictions of EU courts and national courts in actions challenging the final decisions of composite procedures in the Single Supervisory Mechanism. As this judgement does not cover all scenarios, nor are there such decisions regarding the Single Resolution Mechanism, a universal test is developed for revealing if EU courts or national courts have jurisdiction over acts of composite procedures in the Banking Union. This test is then implemented on the most important acts within the Single Resolution Mechanism.
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
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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