Search

Published After
Published Before

Search Results

  • Luxembourg v Strasbourg – Legal Impediments in the Process of the Accession of the EU to the ECHR
    101-119
    Views:
    122

    The accession of the European Union (EU) to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) has been on the agenda of the EU for long. Although the Lisbon Treaty settles this question in theory by obliging the EU to accede, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) resorted to its rights laid down in the Treaties and published its Opinion 2/13 on the matter by the full Court. This opinion scrutinizes the draft document concerning accession. According to the opinion the EU cannot accede to the ECHR in the present form because the draft document is not in compliance with the special characteristics and features of EU law, therefore it would require the amendment or reorganisation of the whole EU legal system. By this judgement the ECJ outlines the legal impediments in the way of the accession. The main objective of our article – after summarizing the brief history and legal framework of the accession – is to present and evaluate the critical elements of accession determined by the ECJ and predict the decision’s possible consequences.

  • Withdrawal from the European Union: Article 50 TEU and Brexit
    97-117
    Views:
    454

    The unilateral right of a member state to withdraw from the EU is an entirely new feature of EU Law introduced by the Lisbon Treaty. The practical application of the withdrawal clause was placed on the agenda as a result of the 23 June 2016 Brexit- referendum in the UK. The exit raises some non-legal and legal, theoretical and practical issues which – as we are talking about an unprecedented event – have to be elaborated on now. The paper analyzes Article 50 TEU by analytical methods, summarizing the incomplete frameworks, the main procedural rules, and those issues that require the interpretation of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The paper aims to highlight the points of the withdrawal clause that have interpretative gaps, which might not have been unintentionally left by the EU legislator.