欧盟电子商务立法的框架和特点

规范电子商务活动始终是欧洲联盟电子商务发展战略中的一项重要目标。这一努力体现在欧盟及其成员国自 1 995年以来所制定的一系列电子商务发展规划和具体的立法实践中。1 997年 4月 1 5日 ,欧盟委员会提出了著名的《欧洲电子商务行动方案》 (Ｅ -ＥｕｒｏｐｅａｎＩｎｉｔｉａｔｉｖｅｉｎＥｌｅｃｔｒｏｎｉｃｌＣｏｍｍｅｒｃｅ) ,为规范欧洲电子商务活动制定了框架。该行动方案在“建立一个有效的管理体制”的标题下 ,用一章的篇幅对欧洲电子商务的立法宗旨、立法原则做了阐述。行动方案指出 ,欧盟电子商务的立法宗旨是实现两个互补的目…     

欧盟“刑事司法区”述评

自建设欧盟"刑事司法区"理念提出以来,欧盟成员国致力于加强彼此之间的刑事合作。在欧盟宪法性条约的导引下,欧盟及其成员国通过制定与实施一系列重点行动计划及项目,在引渡、刑事互助、刑事判决的相互承认等方面取得了突破,一个欧盟范围内的"刑事司法区"正在形成。     

欧盟跨境刑事取证的立法模式

随着欧洲一体化进程的深入,欧盟及其成员国在打击跨境犯罪和犯罪分子自由流动上存在着共同利益,但要制定一部超越国别的欧盟刑事证据法典依然遥不可期.在跨境刑事取证立法中,欧盟存在着统一规则和相互承认两种立法模式,从现有立法看,后一种模式已成为欧盟立法者的现实选择.在后里斯本时代,欧盟在跨境刑事取证上实现了“超国家”的立法运作,欧盟跨境刑事取证立法存在着两种模式融合的趋势.欧盟的立法经验对中国区际刑事取证立法有重要启示.     

欧盟461/2004反倾销规则研究

2004年3月,欧盟颁布了461/2004反倾销规则,该规则是对欧盟现行反倾销基本条例的最新补充.该规则对欧盟原反倾销法律实体和程序方面进行的修改,充分体现了近年来国际上关于反倾销立法的潮流:反倾销作为WTO允许的贸易保护手段,其立法既应保证反倾销措施能有效地得以实施也应不断保持透明度.欧盟461/2004反倾销规则在这方面值得包括中国在内的其他WTO成员国借鉴.     

欧洲统一逮捕令的产生及其对引渡制度的变革

欧洲统一逮捕令是欧盟于2002年通过立法并逐步在成员国之间实施的一项代替引渡制度的机制。该项制度以刑事判决的相互承认为基础，通过在成员国司法机构问直接传递逮捕令，简化了移交犯罪嫌疑人和罪犯的程序，为成员国间快速、有效地打击刑事犯罪提供了制度保障。     

论欧盟金融服务法中的相互承认原则

相互承认是欧盟金融服务法的一项基本原则,其基本涵义是指各成员国共同作出承诺,以监管标准的最低限度协调为基础相互认可对方成员国的金融监管规则,对跨境金融服务开放本国市场并适用母国的监管规则,相应的监管责任也由母国予以承担。其基本精神是消除跨境金融服务的法律壁垒,并发挥市场机制的作用以促进管制竞争,从而自发地形成最优的监管标准。相互承认原则的确立与欧共体金融业一体化方法的转变有着密切联系,其普遍推行也是这种新的一体化模式成功运用的结果。就制度设计而言,相互承认原则具有不完整性;就实施效果而言,其在促进管制竞争、实现服务自由方面的价值目前尚未得到充分体现。     

从相互协助到相互承认——欧盟刑事取证立法变迁探析

欧盟刑事取证立法建立在两个不同原则上,一是传统的相互协助基础上的立法,一是1999年坦佩雷会议后,相互承认基础上的立法;这两种立法在欧盟范围内并存。从未来发展看,相互承认基础上的立法将逐步取代相互协助基础上的立法。欧盟理事会2008年12月通过的《欧盟证据令》是欧盟在相互承认基础上取代原有刑事取证立法的第一步,对原有立法进行了制度性革新。欧盟刑事取证立法在取得显著进步的同时,在相互承认原则和公民基本权利保障等方面也面临着诸多挑战。     

从相互协助到相互承认——欧盟刑事取证立法变迁探析

欧盟刑事取证立法建立在两个不同原则上,一是传统的相互协助基础上的立法,一是1999年坦佩雷会议后,相互承认基础上的立法;这两种立法在欧盟范围内并存。从未来发展看,相互承认基础上的立法将逐步取代相互协助基础上的立法。欧盟理事会2008年12月通过的《欧盟证据令》是欧盟在相互承认基础上取代原有刑事取证立法的第一步,对原有立法进行了制度性革新。欧盟刑事取证立法在取得显著进步的同时,在相互承认原则和公民基本权利保障等方面也面临着诸多挑战。     

论互联网立法的重点问题

互联网立法的重点问题就其立法模式而言,我国应当采取专门立法的模式,不宜制定一部大而全的“互联网管理法”,当前网络安全、网络侵权、隐私权和个人信息保护、电子商务等领域问题相对突出,且法律规范存在缺失,有必要在这些方面制定专门的法律。互联网立法中应处理好公共利益与私人利益、个人信息保护与信息资源高效利用,市场、技术与制度“三对关系”。互联网立法的重心在于规范网络服务提供者,并且应注重发挥行业自治能力。     

欧盟不公平商业行为指令简介

由于目前各成员国立法上的差异阻碍了欧盟消费者保护水平的提高和内部市场的完善,欧盟制定了《不公平商业行为指令》。指令以"最大协调"的全新立法模式,对不公平商业行为做出了禁止性规定。在制定的方法和涉及的领域方面都是对以往立法的突破。本文对指令的目标及适用范围、不公平商业行为的定义及分类等进行了介绍和分析,并在最后指出了其进步之处和存在的主要问题。     

欧盟电子废弃物指令适用范围探析

欧盟的电子废弃物指令(包括WEEE指令和RoHS指令)是目前影响范围最广、适用电子电气设备种类最多的电子废弃物管理法,不论从对欧贸易的角度来说,还是从我国自身立法的角度来看,都应对其认真研究.目前,国内对这两个指令的研究已经展开,但是对其适用范围尚缺乏系统深入的探究,本文准备弥补这一空白.     

文本·结构·功能——软法之于欧盟宪政的地位描述与作用分析

在欧盟宪政发展进程中，在硬法发挥作用的同时，欧盟软法所占据的地位与所发挥的作用也同样值得重视与研究。在文本意义上，欧盟软法在欧盟宪法性条约中占有很大的比重，在结构意义上，欧盟软法成为了欧盟治理结构发展、变化的一个重要机制，在功能意义上，欧盟软法成为了欧盟法律秩序形成的先导性力量。     

电子商务与消费者权益保护

本文首先分析了我国电子商务发展与消费者权益保护中存在的问题,然后介绍了美国、日本、韩国等在电子商务中保护消费者权益的有关法律法规和主要做法,最后对我国在电子商务发展过程中保护消费者权益方面提出了建议。     

Online selling and contracting: An overview of EU rules

In the second of our series of articles considering the EU’s limited harmonisation of the laws regulating the activities of businesses using the Internet, we look at the rules governing contracting and selling online. We consider the circumstances in which three key EU directives apply, the rights, under these directives, of consumers who contract online and the effect of electronic signatures as used for online contracting.     

EU–China Competition Dialogue: A New Step in the Internationalisation of EU Competition Law?

EU has been the protagonist in promoting the internationalization of competition laws based on EU competition law norms. The development of China's Antimonopoly Law shows that EU has succeeded so far in establishing itself as the main reference point for China's competition regulation. The success can be mainly attributed to the EU‐China Competition Dialogue (Dialogue), a new initiative set up by EU and China in 2004. The paper reviews the internationalization of EU competition law and its characteristics. It then examines the Dialogue and how EU exported its competition law norms to one of the latest AML secondary legislations on Antimonopoly Pricing. It argues that the Dialogue's informal nature, EU's routinized technical assistance to Chinese competition authorities and its China‐oriented strategy in communication have been highly important in ensuring that the EU Competition Law becomes the main reference point for the AML. However, the paper argues that it is for the same reasons that EU faces weakness in controlling the reception of EU competition law norms by China. Based on this, the paper further illustrates that EU's understanding of competition law internationalization as reflected under the Dialogue has not undergone fundamental changes.     

一体化进程中的欧盟税法

欧盟税法反映了欧盟税制协调的成果。欧盟税法在目标、功能、法律渊源等方面都不同于某一主权国家的税法;它的实现主要取决于其成员国的意志。就世界范围而言,欧盟一体化的税法在调整范围和调整深度方面也已经远远走在了各区域经济体的前面,但尚未达到任何一个联邦国家的联邦税法发展的程度。展望未来,欧盟税法一体化的发展仍将经历一个漫长而曲折的过程。     

Regulating internet platforms in the EU - The emergence of the ‘Level playing Field’

This paper analyses the European Union's regulatory policy on platforms. The first part of the paper looks at the how the EU formulates platform policy while the second analyses the proposed and existing laws that already cover them. The final part looks at the consequences of the level playing field as the guiding regulatory principle. The main argument is that EU regulatory intervention concerning platforms seeks to bring linear providers in line with platforms through the "level playing field" or, in other words, that the EU seeks to protect the incumbents and minimise disruption rather than enhance the value-creating potential of platforms.     

A comparison of data protection legislation and policies across the EU

Although the protection of personal data is harmonized within the EU by Directive 95/46/EC and will be further harmonized by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in 2018, there are significant differences in the ways in which EU member states implemented the protection of privacy and personal data in national laws, policies, and practices. This paper presents the main findings of a research project that compares the protection of privacy and personal data in eight EU member states: France, Germany, the UK, Ireland, Romania, Italy, Sweden, and the Netherlands. The comparison focuses on five major themes: awareness and trust, government policies for personal data protection, the applicable laws and regulations, implementation of those laws and regulations, and supervision and enforcement.The comparison of privacy and data protection regimes across the EU shows some remarkable findings, revealing which countries are frontrunners and which countries are lagging behind on specific aspects. For instance, the roles of and interplay between governments, civil rights organizations, and data protections authorities vary from country to country. Furthermore, with regard to privacy and data protection there are differences in the intensity and scope of political debates, information campaigns, media attention, and public debate. New concepts like privacy impact assessments, privacy by design, data breach notifications and big data are on the agenda in some but not in all countries. Significant differences exist in (the levels of) enforcement by the different data protection authorities, due to different legal competencies, available budgets and personnel, policies, and cultural factors.     

电子商务仲裁法律问题研究

电子商务的迅速发展使仲裁解决其纠纷成为必要,但和一般的民商事仲裁相比,电子商务仲裁有许多法律问题需要解决。本文即对电子商务仲裁所面临的若干法律问题,诸如电子仲裁协议的法律效力、电子商务证据效力、电子商务仲裁适用的法律等进行了深入的研究。     

EU Climate Change Litigation,the Role of the European Courts,and the Importance of Legal Culture

The purpose of this article is to show it is only in light of legal culture that climate change jurisprudence in the European Union can be explained. Examining the case law concerning the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, this article demonstrates that climate change proceedings in the European Union raise questions that stand at the heart of the EU legal order; that is, they demand that the boundaries of the EU's regulatory competences are drawn. In effect, the EU courts focus on ensuring that EU climate change laws are in accord with the rule of law or, in the context of EU law, the borders of the EU's environmental regulatory powers. As such, this article shows that attention needs to be given to the interaction between climate change laws and the constitutional role of the EU judiciary. These interactions are considered here together with the contingency of EU climate change litigation on EU legal culture.