Maximum Residue Limits of Veterinary Medicinal Products and Their Regulation in European Community Law

This paper proposes a legal analysis of a legal and empirical tool (maximum residue limits (MRLs)) designed to protect the consumers of animal foodstuffs, as it is regulated in European Community law. After introducing the concept of MRLs in its legal context, MRLs are defined and the need for harmonisation in this field is explained. Then the main rules governing the establishment of MRLs at a Europe‐wide level are expounded, an important place being devoted to some problems occurred in the cases decided by the European Court of Justice: is it possible to establish an MRL only for certain therapeutic indications? What about the intention of placing on the market in the establishment of an MRL? Is the procedure for the establishment of MRLs a tight or lax one? The answer to some of these questions involves more general aspects of European Community law.     

Employee Rights on Transfer of Undertakings: Italian Legislation and EC Law

Abstract:  The authors examine the conformity with Community law of the recent regulatory changes introduced to the Italian legal system regarding the safeguarding of employees' rights during transfers of undertakings. The investigation takes place on the assumption that the principle of primacy of Community law applies, which first and foremost means that it must be verified whether the domestic legislation in question complies with the interpretation given to the relative provisions of Community law. According to the authors' opinion, domestic law could be judged as non-conforming to the interpretation that has been given by the Court of Justice, so that the question may be brought before the Court of Justice ex Article 226 EC or by recourse to the preliminary ruling procedure under Article 234 EC, which reveal cases of incorrect implementation of the Directive.     

Protecting Supremacy from External Influences: A Precondition for a European Constitutional Legal Order?

The number of international law obligations that have binding force on the Union and/or its Member States is sharply increasing. This paper argues that in this light the well‐functioning of the European Union ultimately depends on the protection of the principle of supremacy from law originating outside of the EU legal order. The supremacy of EU law is essential to ensuring that Member States cannot use national rules to justify derogation from EU law. As a matter of principle, international treaties concluded by the Member States rank at the level of ordinary national law within the European legal order and below all forms of European law (both primary and secondary). Article 351 TFEU exceptionally allows Member States to derogate from primary EU law in order to comply with obligations under anterior international agreements. It does not however allow a departure from the principle of supremacy that underlies the European legal order. In Kadi I, the Court of Justice of the European Union stated that Article 351 TFEU, while it permits derogation from primary law, may under no circumstances permit circumvention of the “very foundations” of the EU legal order. This introduces an additional condition that all acts within the sphere of EU law need to comply with a form of “super‐supreme law”. It also strengthened the principle of supremacy and gave the Court of Justice the role of the guardian of the Union's “foundations”. The Court of Justice acted on the necessity of defending the Union as a distinct legal order, retaining the autonomous interpretation of its own law, and ultimately ensuring that the Union can act as an independent actor on the international plane.     

Restrictions on the Use of Analogy in Law

This article touches on the issue of the restrictions and bans concerning the use of analogical reasoning in law. In order to clearly present this topic, the Author appeals to different branches of law, having thus a separate regard for criminal law, tax law, administrative law, private law and legal procedures. In this context, he also pays attention to the domain of the constitutional law and the practice of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Additionally, allowance has been made for some other interpretative directives that aim to truncate the potential usage of an analogical argument in law such as the principle that exceptions should not be extended, the requirement not to meddle with the plain and precise meaning of the wording of statutory provision or a ban on negating the ‘exhaustive’ nature of some statutory enumerations through extending them analogically.     

Social Values and the Multiple Sources of European Social Law

Abstract: The paper aims at describing the current status of European social law, by examining different sources. These include the most recent directives; the Protocol attached to the Maastricht Treaty; the Commission's latest White papers on social policies and on economic growth and unemployment; and the case law of the European Court of Justice. In such a variegated legal landscape, a significant role could be played by non-binding measures; the notion of soft law is slowly acquiring its own dignity in European social law and is emerging for open interpretation. Yet, European labour law houses a fragile body of norms. The spreading of social values would become a tangible prospect if the potential of the multiple sources here examined were better exploited by all actors. Although a coherent legal structure is still to come, a legal culture is being created which should be strengthened through action by all Community institutions.     

Compensation for Damage Caused by Defective Drugs: European Private Law between Safety Requirements and Free-Market Values

Abstract: Within the European Union, the success of private law harmonisation is based upon the fragile balance between legal integration and protection of national traditions. In this respect, a transversal analysis of the obligation of safety established by the Directive 374/85/CEE shows that harmonisation sometimes prevails over the potential protections granted to the victims of a damage caused by defective products. On the one hand, this reduction arises from the balance between objective and subjective criteria used in evaluating the defect as defined in the harmonised text. On the other hand, it results from problems of coordination between national laws and EC law remedies. This latter difficulty is illustrated by the 25 April 2002 European Court of Justice decisions on the French experience. The paradigmatic example of the pharmaceutical sector is a clear illustration of these tensions, since it heightens free‐market values at the same time as seeking to ensure compensation for breach of health and safety of consumers.     

European Union Soft Law: New Developments Concerning the Divide Between Legally Binding Force and Legal Effects

The judgment in Polska Telefonia Cyfrowa sheds light on the legal effects of soft law instruments that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) will recognise, while distinguishing between their legally binding force and their legal or practical effects. European soft law is now often relied on in national courts, and can have an important impact on the rights and obligations of individuals. However, some of the goals of the Commission are only partly attainable due to the specific legal status of soft law instruments, and the current languages policy of the European Union. Given that soft law was not found to expressly impose obligations on individuals, the Court held that there was no requirement to publish it in all the official languages of the European Union. This has a negative impact on transparency and legal certainty, diminishing the role of soft law instruments in promoting such goals.     

指导性案例的法源意义与确认路径——以最高人民法院公布的私法性指导性案例为研究对象

《最高人民法院关于案例指导工作的规定》确立了我国案例指导制度,由于该规定相关内容的模糊性,产生了两个需要回答的问题,一是指导性案例与英美法系判例法是否存在相同的裁判逻辑与法律效力,进而指导性案例是否具有法源意义;二是指导性案例的功能是对法官自由裁量权的控制,还是应该重视从法解释学层面去理解。建议以民法解释学为视角对最高人民法院公布的私法性指导性案例进行梳理和剖析,明确私法性指导性案例具有确认和发现法规则的功能和价值。从"法与法律区别"的自然法观视角,认为私法性指导性案例所确认和发现的法规则在我国当代具有私法法源意义。最后,从解释论和立法论两个方面,提出私法性指导性案例确认和发现的法规则的法源地位确认路径和具体建议。     

The Ideal of Codification and the Dynamics of Europeanisation: The Dutch Experience

Abstract:  In response to the growing incoherence of European contract law, the Commission is planning to adopt a 'common frame of reference' (CFR) in 2009. That CFR will effectively constitute a codification in a substantive sense. As a result, in codified systems such as The Netherlands, there will be a shift from the familiar tension between impressionistic harmonisation and systematic codification to a new tension between the system of the national civil code and the system of the substantive European code. Therefore, once the CFR is adopted by the Commission as a tool for revising the acquis and for drafting new directives, national legislators inspired by the codification ideal will have to reconsider their strategies towards the implementation of directives in the area of private law. Three such strategies are considered here: resistance, segregation and surrender. Each of them has advantages, but also disadvantages. None of them solve the tension between national codification and Europeanisation. It seems unlikely that private law will ever (again) be contained exclusively in one comprehensive code, either on the national or on the European level. The CFR will make a comprehensive national codification increasingly difficult to achieve, whereas a comprehensive European Civil Code that replaces national private law both lacks a legal basis and political support. Therefore, we will have to live with a two- (or multi-) level system of private law. As a result, the Dutch and other national legislators will have to revise their codification ideals.     

Looking for Coherence within the European Community*

Abstract: This paper discusses the relationship between the idea of coherence and the legal order set up by the European Community. It focuses on a specific dimension of this relationship and shows how the appeals to coherence made by the European Court of Justice have shaped a particular branch of the European legal order, namely, the judicial review of Community acts. The analysis of the Court of Justice's case law in this field shows that in its extensive use of coherence the Court of Justice explored and brought into play different types of coherence and, while it failed to distinguish between them, it made use of sorts of coherence that thus far legal theorists have disregarded. The article concludes that a closer collaboration between legal theory and legal practice would be profitable for both legal theorists and Community law specialists.     

The decision of the Italian Constitutional Court on numerus clausus: A matter for Community law

This article discusses the recent decision of the Italian Constitutional Court on the numerus clausus issue, containing the first relevant pronouncement by the highest jurisdiction on the constitutional legality of the measures adopted so far by the Ministry. The Constitutional Court considers these measures in conformity with the Constitution to the extent that they implement Community law, and especially certain directives on the recognition of qualifications. Thus, Community law is deemed to provide the proper legal framework to adopt certain regulations, amongst which restrictions to access. This article argues that, in the context of litigation on access to university, Community law has been used improperly and that, in any event, a convenient solution to the issue could have been found in national law. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Argumentation and Legal Interpretation in the Criminal Decisions of the Polish Supreme Court and the German Federal Court of Justice: A Comparative View

The subject of this study are the argumentation strategies applied by the Polish and German apex courts competent in criminal matters, namely the Supreme Court and the Federal Court of Justice, respectively. The investigation encompasses a total of 200 rulings issued by the criminal panels of these bodies. Particular focus was put on examining which arguments both courts apply to solve interpretation problems, and secondly, how these courts systematize the interpretation process. Methodologically, the examination utilizes, inter alia, the principles of qualitative research, without neglecting the legal dogmatic perspective. A crucial theoretical foundation underlying this study is the distinction between formalistic and substantive legal cultures. The examination reveals that neither the Polish nor the German legal culture is purely formalistic or value-oriented. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court of Poland shows greater affinity for formalistic arguments, whereas the substantive interpretation methods are more widespread in the judicature of the German Federal Court of Justice. In particular, the Polish Court prefers the linguistic interpretation, whereas the German Court favours the purposive approach.

     

Reflexive Governance and European Company Law

The use of reflexive forms of governance is growing within the EU, in particular as the open method of coordination (OMC) is applied to a wider range of contexts. Reflexive approaches view diversity of laws and practices across the Member States as the basis for experimentation and mutual learning within the overall process of European integration. Company law, however, seems to be an exception to this trend: recent activity in this area has mostly taken the form of 'hard law' harmonisation through directives, coupled with the stimulation of regulatory competition through judgments of the European Court of Justice concerning freedom of movement, most notably the Centro s case. The deliberations of the European Corporate Governance Forum barely qualify as a 'company law OMC' because of the limited space allowed for 'learning from diversity'; instead, differences in the laws of the Member States are seen, in the discourse of the Forum, as 'distortions of competition'. In the area of labour law, by contrast, a degree of functional convergence and a coordinated raising of standards have recently been achieved by the dovetailing of the OMC with social policy directives. The contrasting experiences of labour law and company law suggest that reflexive or experimentalist approaches to European governance can be effective when they operate so as to complement mechanisms of harmonisation and regulatory competition, rather than being presented as alternatives to them.     

Bite the Bullet

This paper discusses the Fedon case‐law of the European Court of Justice (Court of Justice), which involved a claim for compensation by Fedon (an Italian producer of eyeglass cases) from the EU for the imposition of World Trade Organization (WTO)‐authorised retaliatory trade barriers by the USA following the failure by the EU to comply with an adverse ruling by the WTO regarding its import regime for bananas. As a result of the EU non‐compliance, European banana distributors and some bananas producers benefited from WTO‐illegal protection, at the expense of a set of EU exporters, including Fedon, that were hit by US countermeasures. Fedon contested the non‐compliance by the EU before the Court of Justice and sought compensation. This paper assesses the ruling of the Court of Justice against Fedon and argues that the Court got it wrong, both in terms of legal principle and as a matter of legal technicalities.     

The Voice of the Community in Private Law Discourse

Formalist private lawyers, with their view of law as an autonomous sphere and their emphasis upon allocative rules, tend to approach the issue of the harmonisation of private law in Europe with the following question: are the substantive rights and remedies of private individual actors sufficiently similar within each of the Member States to allow for the unification of autonomous private legal systems. Here the issue is essentially one of terminology. While sceptical voices maintain that formal private law is also a more complex matter of interrelated procedures and practices, many formalists conclude that whilst the terms of rights and remedies may differ slightly throughout Europe, there is sufficient substantive convergence to allow for harmonisation. However, lawyers of a sociological persuasion who see private law as being contingent upon society Ð a process reflexively and recursively facilitating economic activities and responding to social change Ð consider harmonisation to be dependent upon the harmonisation of market practices themselves. This paper, one of the most subtle of sociological contributions, tackles this issue with an innovative eye to the increasing blurring of the distinction between public and private concerns. The voice of Europe is the voice of a political collective and theoretically, under the once sacrosanct paradigm of the public/private divide, should not be heard within the 'individualistic' sphere of private law. However, just as national private law judges are generally responding to social concerns and are seeking to integrate collective voices within a once 'atomised' realm, so too are they taking note of the political voice of Europe: attempting to respond to the desire for integration and harmonisation within their jurisprudence.     

欧洲共同体指令的直接效力

在欧洲共同体的所有二级立法渊源中,指令的法律效力是一个颇具争议的问题,尤其是指令在各成员国中是否具有直接效力,更是引起了诸多纷争,而《欧洲共同体条约》和《欧洲原子能共同体条约》均未对此做出规定.以欧洲法院的相关案例法为主线,对其提出的指令的纵向直接效力、协调一致解释及附带横向直接效力原则逐一进行了评析,最后得出结论:为切实有效实现欧洲共同体指令所追求的目标,欧洲法院应当重新定义其提出的指令的直接效力原则;其中,最具有关键性意义的是,应当赋予指令在自然人和法人等私人之间的横向直接效力的职能.     

Rediscovering the public/private divide in EU private law

This article explores the role of the public/private divide within EU private law. It shows that although EU private law cuts across the boundaries of public and private law, the conceptual distinction between these well‐established categories does matter within it and may lead to better law‐making in the EU more generally. The legal grammar of a particular EU harmonisation measure—which can be more “public” or “private”—may have important implications for the position of private parties at national level, for the CJEU's likely activism in this context, and ultimately for the measure's ability to realise its policy goals. Therefore, instead of ignoring the existing differences between public and private law, EU law should explicitly adopt the public/private law language in its discourse, without, however, introducing any sharp divide between these two areas.     

Effet utile and the (re)organisation of national judiciaries: A not so unique institutional response to a uniquely important challenge?

The current repurposing of the principle of effet utile of European Union law can be found in the revolutionary steps taken by the Court of Justice in its application of Article 19 TEU. The implicit goal of this recent body of case-law is to equip national judges with the tools to resist domestic judicial reforms that affect their freedom to adjudicate independently. Considering Simmenthal to Unibet, Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses to the latest case-law relating to the organisation of national judiciaries, this article contends that, while the case-law on judicial independence is unprecedented, the Court of Justice has gone to great lengths to ensure that the developments in EU law precipitated by its rulings are grounded in established doctrine. They follow a line of case-law that builds on the principle of primacy of EU law and the obligation to guarantee the effectiveness of EU law in the domestic legal order. Further, the current trajectory is for Article 19 TEU to form the operational basis of review of any judicially minded reforms, whether they be organisational (Article 19 TEU, together with Article 47 CFREU), limit actually or potentially the freedom for dialogue between national courts and the Court of Justice (Article 19 TEU together with Article 267 TFEU and Article 47 CFREU) or where they reduce the protection of the value of the rule of law (Article 19 TEU, Article 2 TEU, Article 49 TEU and Article 47 CFREU), with potential implications for the effective application in EU law of the principle of mutual trust.     

Levels of Generality in the Legal Reasoning of the European Court of Justice

The level of generality or of abstraction used to describe a precedent, a right, or the legislative intent behind a statutory provision or constituent purpose behind a constitutional provision can have a decisive impact on the outcome of a case. Characterising it in narrow terms has the effect of reducing the scope of decision of a judgment; conversely, a broader characterisation provides more leeway for a judge in a case to encompass its facts within the precedent, right or purpose in issue. The issue raised by the level of generality problem is the extent to which courts have a discretion or freedom of manoeuvre as to the level of generality they decide upon, and thus whether generality and abstraction are manipulable in the hands of judges and are not really predetermined by the legal sources in question or an established judicial method of interpretation. Uncontrolled judicial discretion of this kind is problematic from the point of view of the rule of law and democracy, especially when adjudication concerns constitutional provisions, the equivalent in the EU being interpretation by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) of the EU Treaties; reversal of ECJ interpretation through Treaty amendment is particularly difficult to achieve because it requires unanimous coordination by the Member States. This article examines two alternative ways of determining the correct or appropriate level of generality issue in ECJ interpetation, coherence or the legal traditions of the Member States, and argues in favour of the latter as a less subjective method. Application of the two alternative approaches is tested in two areas of EU law, state liability and criminal law.     

The CCJ decolonizing Caribbean constitutionalism

The Caribbean Court of Justice was conceived to further the Anglophone Caribbean’s decolonization process. Decolonization included not just transitions from colony to independent statehood but also the repudiation of imperial formations. The Court’s capacity to do this is evident in the McEwan Case. Using bold approaches to interpretation, the CCJ effectively erased the general savings law clause (which was previously treated as effective in immunizing colonial laws from inconsistency with the Bill of Rights) and affirmed the fundamental rights of trans persons. Since those clauses tethered post-independence constitutionalism to colonial era legal arrangements, erasure has the effect of bringing the Constitution forward and home. I argue that erasure is the result of proper methods of interpretation and not overreach since savings clauses are now functionally obsolete. The CCJ also signalled its decolonising capacity by articulating Caribbean identity in inclusive terms. It rightly affirmed that trans persons are entitled to full membership in the political community, in circumstances where its position is likely an anti-majoritarian one. The CCJ is demonstrating its decolonizing capacity in a context where, it is argued, the Privy Council cannot. It is hoped that other Caribbean States will be encouraged to accede to the CCJ’s appellate jurisdiction.