欧盟新金融市场架构中的地位和司法审查

IF 2 Q1 LAW
A. Witte
{"title":"欧盟新金融市场架构中的地位和司法审查","authors":"A. Witte","doi":"10.1093/JFR/FJV002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The three European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) have been entrusted with various tasks relating to the supervision over financial market sectors by competent authorities. These tasks are complemented by legally binding powers vis-a-vis competent authorities. In addition, the ESAs draft standards are to be adopted in the form of directly applicable regulations. This article examines how private undertakings may challenge ESA acts judicially and quasi-judicially. The outcome of the analysis is that Union law may offer ample opportunities for private parties to challenge ESA acts not addressed to them. This may come as a surprise given the traditionally restrictive interpretation of standing in Union law, but can be supported de lege lata even though the question has not yet been ruled upon authoritatively. The article also discusses the question of standing against supervisory decisions of the European Central Bank within the framework of the Single Supervisory Mechanism. The question is placed within the broader context of the EU’s self-imposed standards of rule of law, which require extensive powers of European institutions to be accompanied with sufficient opportunities for judicial review, not only to protect rights of market actors but also to promote the further development and harmonization of substantive EU law.","PeriodicalId":42830,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Financial Regulation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/JFR/FJV002","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Standing and judicial review in the new EU financial markets architecture\",\"authors\":\"A. Witte\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/JFR/FJV002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The three European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) have been entrusted with various tasks relating to the supervision over financial market sectors by competent authorities. These tasks are complemented by legally binding powers vis-a-vis competent authorities. In addition, the ESAs draft standards are to be adopted in the form of directly applicable regulations. This article examines how private undertakings may challenge ESA acts judicially and quasi-judicially. The outcome of the analysis is that Union law may offer ample opportunities for private parties to challenge ESA acts not addressed to them. This may come as a surprise given the traditionally restrictive interpretation of standing in Union law, but can be supported de lege lata even though the question has not yet been ruled upon authoritatively. The article also discusses the question of standing against supervisory decisions of the European Central Bank within the framework of the Single Supervisory Mechanism. The question is placed within the broader context of the EU’s self-imposed standards of rule of law, which require extensive powers of European institutions to be accompanied with sufficient opportunities for judicial review, not only to protect rights of market actors but also to promote the further development and harmonization of substantive EU law.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42830,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Financial Regulation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/JFR/FJV002\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Financial Regulation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/JFR/FJV002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Financial Regulation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JFR/FJV002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

三个欧洲监管机构(esa)被主管当局委托承担与监管金融市场部门有关的各种任务。这些任务还辅之以对主管当局具有法律约束力的权力。此外,欧空局的标准草案将以直接适用的条例的形式加以采用。本文探讨了私营企业如何以司法和准司法的方式挑战欧空局的行为。分析的结果是,欧盟法律可能为私人当事方提供充足的机会来挑战欧空局没有针对他们的行为。考虑到传统上对联邦法律中地位的限制性解释,这可能会让人感到意外,但即使这个问题尚未得到权威裁决,也可以在法律上得到支持。本文还讨论了在单一监管机制框架内反对欧洲央行监管决定的问题。这个问题是在欧盟自我强加的法治标准的更广泛背景下提出的,这要求欧洲机构的广泛权力必须伴随着足够的司法审查机会,这不仅是为了保护市场参与者的权利,也是为了促进欧盟实体法的进一步发展和协调。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Standing and judicial review in the new EU financial markets architecture
The three European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) have been entrusted with various tasks relating to the supervision over financial market sectors by competent authorities. These tasks are complemented by legally binding powers vis-a-vis competent authorities. In addition, the ESAs draft standards are to be adopted in the form of directly applicable regulations. This article examines how private undertakings may challenge ESA acts judicially and quasi-judicially. The outcome of the analysis is that Union law may offer ample opportunities for private parties to challenge ESA acts not addressed to them. This may come as a surprise given the traditionally restrictive interpretation of standing in Union law, but can be supported de lege lata even though the question has not yet been ruled upon authoritatively. The article also discusses the question of standing against supervisory decisions of the European Central Bank within the framework of the Single Supervisory Mechanism. The question is placed within the broader context of the EU’s self-imposed standards of rule of law, which require extensive powers of European institutions to be accompanied with sufficient opportunities for judicial review, not only to protect rights of market actors but also to promote the further development and harmonization of substantive EU law.
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
5.60
自引率
3.80%
发文量
12
×
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