Search
Search Results
-
The right to take collective action in EU law based on the European Pillar of Social Rights and the recent case law of the CJEU
9-24Views:237This paper is built around the workers’ fundamental right to take collective action and collective bargaining. Although, this right is firmly embedded in the majority of labour law systems in the social policy (meaning labour law, too) of the European Union, it is worth analysing it separately with an independent meaning. We can approach this right from the fundamental rights, the fundamental treaties or from certain directives, so we can find several questions that are difficult to answer properly. These problems are mostly catalysed by the necessary collision between the need for socially motivated legal protection and the fundamental economic freedoms. In my research, I analyse this right – along with some other connected ones – with the help of the recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Pillar of Social Rights because the latter highlights the holistic approach in the current reforms of EU social policy.
-
New attempts in EU law for the improvement of the consular protection of EU citizens in third countries
9-23Views:145The right of EU citizens to consular protection in third countries, where their Member State is not represented, is one of the most significant rights attached to the European citizenship. With the existing legal basis laid down in the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the right to consular protection of EU citizens has all the conceivable chances to be established uniformly by union actions and under the supervision of the European Court of Justice. The aim of the Council Directive (EU) 2015/637 is to lay down the cooperation and coordination measures necessary to further facilitate consular protection to unrepresented citizens of the European Union. Nevertheless the directive does not affect consular relations between Member States and third countries. The present paper focuses on the actions had been taken in this field from the treaty establishing the European Economic Community until the achievements of the Treaty of Lisbon and the aforementioned Council Directive.
-
The right to strike in the case-law of the ECtHR
115-133Views:242The right to strike has been long recognized as an important labour right in the European countries protected by constitutions and international conventions on labour and social rights. However, these international conventions mainly contain mere declarations to only pursue the right to strike and do not have an effective protection mechanism. Nevertheless, in the last few decades a human rights perspective on labour law gained ground and thus international organizations and international courts started to derive labour rights like the right to strike from civil and political rights and therefore some of these labour rights enjoy the same level of protection as the first generation human rights. In its recent judgements, the European Court of Human Rights stated that the right to strike is protected under Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights and developed a case law on the requirements of a lawful strike action, secondary strike actions and the restrictions of the right to strike.
-
The Basic Regulatory Issues of Agricultural Application of Precision Genome Editing and the Precautionary Principle
42-64Views:334The rapidly developing gene manipulation techniques (more recently „gene editing”) have long been controversial, which is reflected in the evolution of legal regulation in Europe. Hungaryʼs Fundamental Law (Art. XX.) clearly states that Hungarian agriculture desires to remain free from genetically modified organisms. According to the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA resolution, 2017), the results of the new techniques (without transgenic implantation) are not regarded as GMOs (by the proper application of the genetic engineering law), these new techniques are not governed by the provisions of the Fundamental Law. Recently, a lawsuit was filed before the Court of Justice of the European Union in which the main question was whether GMOs should be considered the result of new techniques (if not, they do not need to be licensed). In the light of a detailed analysis of the precautionary principle, the study examines the question of whether genetic engineering or its results cover the scope of the legislation. According to the author, this question (as long as the revision of the regulation is not on the agenda) is not for the genetic technologists and plant breeders, but for the lawyers to decide. The conclusion of the study is that genetic engineering, respectively its results are subject to the regulation.
-
Luxembourg v Strasbourg – Legal Impediments in the Process of the Accession of the EU to the ECHR
101-119Views:149The 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.
-
Fiscal Conditionality in EU Law
143-156Views:108This paper analyses the evolution, objectives, and instruments of fiscal conditionality legislation of the European Union. The author provides a detailed analysis of the relevant elements of the existing legislation, as well as the recent judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the subject. The paper demonstrates that the Financial Conditionality Regulation is not an instrument for protecting the rule of law in general, but its general purpose is to protect the EU budget by enforcing the fundamental requirements deriving from the rule of law.
-
Withdrawal from the European Union: Article 50 TEU and Brexit
97-117Views:486The 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.
-
Censorship as a Tool Against State Disinformation: Media Freedom Implications of the Russian-Ukrainian War
Views:138Disinformation campaigns originating from Russia have been frequently debated in recent years. Disinformation also plays a major role in the Russian–Ukrainian war that started in February 2022. The issue has been on the agenda in the European Union in recent years, so it is not surprising that among the many sanctions the EU introduced against Russia, action against disinformation was also added. This paper sets out to describe the previously unprecedented ban on Russian media service providers, including the problems the provision creates for freedom of expression. In particular, it will examine the content of the Decision and the Regulation, which prohibited the distribution of the Russian media outlets concerned and the consequences of the EU legislation. It will then go on to critically analyse the provisions from the perspective of freedom of expression, and finally, the relevant judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
-
Environmental Tax Harmonisation and Market-Oriented Legal Regulation in the Light of the CJEU Practice
95-117Views:199The subject of the present paper is the explanation and justification of environmental taxes in general terms and, in particular, the assessment of the recent european trends as well as the examination of the practice of the EU Court of Justice followed in this field. The paper considers ecotaxes as the means of fiscal policy that can be put into the service of green growth. For the time being, the enforcement of ecological policy is restricted in many aspects within the EU framework, being unilaterally subordinated to the requirement of free competition. For this reason, the EU law mechanisms of adjustment may get stuck in cases where intervention is not necessary in order to have more but, on the contrary, to have less freedom of market. Since it can be considered as obvious from the perspective of thermodynamic restraints that market imperfections cannot be precluded, the possible aim of intervention is certainly not the reconstruction of free trade, but the suspension of the laws of market. The political and legal basis for this is still missing in the European Union both in theory and practice what can be seen as a serious problem.
-
Access to higher education and right to free movement in the case-law of the CJEU
134-156Views:149This article examines the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) concerning the right of EU citizens to gain access to higher education in other EU Member States. The case-law plays an important intermediary role between various EU policies, often contributing to their more effective implementation in this way. The paper presents an obvious example for that as legal principles developed by the Court in free movement and antidiscrimination cases essentially facilitate the promotion of student mobility that is one of the fundamental objectives of the Bologna Process and the Union‘s education policy. At the same time, free student mobility may go against national education policies and interests and Member States are often reluctant to accept that the rulings, despite the limited competencies conferred upon the EU to take measures in the education sector, set narrow boundaries for national actions. The analysis also seeks to indicate those factors which have an influence on the Court‘s sensitivity towards interests and policy autonomy of the Member States in the field of higher education.