Showing papers in "The Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law in 1997"
269 citations
TL;DR: The European Economic Community (EEC), the predecessor to the European Union (EU), and China established diplomatic relations on May 6, 1975 as mentioned in this paper and the 42-year-old EU-China relationship began as a framework of economic cooperation but has evolved into a comprehensive political, economic, and relationship.
Abstract: Background The European Economic Community (EEC), the predecessor to the European Union (EU), and China established diplomatic relations on May 6, 1975. The 42year-old EU-China relationship began as a framework of economic cooperation but has evolved into a comprehensive political, economic, and relationship. Today, the EU’s China policy prioritizes the search for reciprocal benefits in political and economic relations while advancing European values, such as the promotion of democracy, rule of law, human rights, and respect for the U.N. Charter’s principles.
14 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present the process of Hungarian harmonization to meet EC legal standards and emphasize the progress achieved so far as well as looking forward to issues which remain to be tackled.
Abstract: This article aims to present the process of Hungarian harmonization to meet EC legal standards. The first part deals with the background of EU-Hungary relations and the legal and policy framework for harmonization. The second part takes several different fields of Hungarian law required to be approximated to EC law and discusses the extent to which such approximation has had an impact on them. Finally the conclusion seeks to emphasize the progress achieved so far as well as looking forward to issues which remain to be tackled.
12 citations
Journal Article•
9 citations
7 citations
TL;DR: In the general field of international law, it is increasingly common to find obligations on States to apply to individuals rules and policies agreed at the international level, by making use of enforcement powers and procedures at the national level as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: In the general field of international law it is increasingly common to find obligations on States to apply to individuals rules and policies agreed at the international level, by making use of enforcement powers and procedures at the national level. Such arrange ments have been usually entered into under treaties dealing with problems of wide international concern, when States themselves have a clear interest in the enforcement of norms originally worked out in a spirit of cooperation at the international level; the control of terrorist activity and dealing with extreme forms of material damage to the environment, such as oil pollution, provide typical examples of international responses to problems which find their implementation in national rules.1 However, despite the existence of obligations at the international level for States to deal with different kinds of individual delinquency, there would seem to be little in the way of systematic moni toring of the effectiveness of national enforcement or indeed many established pro cedures for carrying out such scrutiny.2 There may thus be a significant gap between standard-setting and enforcement, which is neither very evident nor easily remedied, on account of the dislocation between norm-setting at the international level and the respon sibility for rule-application at the national level. Questions relating to the effectiveness
7 citations
TL;DR: In 1996, the European Commission adopted in addition to numerous decisions 2,341 regulations and 2,806 directives, being legal acts with general application, whereas the Council adopted 484 legal acts in total as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: In 1996 the European Commission adopted in addition to numerous decisions 2,341 regulations and 2,806 directives, being legal acts with general application, whereas the Council adopted 484 legal acts in total.1 In terms of mere quantity, the Commission is thus the Community’s main law-maker. In many of these cases the Commission’s legal acts were adopted after the Council had conferred implementation powers on the Commission, and a so-called comitology committee, composed of representatives of the Member States, had given its opinion on a Commission proposal. This executive law making at EC level with the participation of national government officials has repeatedly been criticized as undemocratic.2 It indeed raises fundamental questions with respect to the principle of separation of powers and the possibility for delegating powers:
5 citations
TL;DR: Curtin and O'Keeffe as mentioned in this paper proposed a framework for the enforcement of community law rights in European Community Law, which was made possible by C.N.R. funds.
Abstract: * Professor of General Public law , University di Torino, sede di Novara. This work was made possible by C.N.R. funds. 1. See D. Curtin, ‘The Decentralised Enforcement of Community Law Rights. Judicial Snakes and Ladders’, in D. Curtin and D. O’Keeffe (eds.), Constitutional Adjudication in European Community Law. Essays fo r T.F. O'Higgins, (Butterworth, 1992), 33; G. Bebr, ‘Court of Justice: Judicial Protec tion and the Rule of Law’, in D. Curtin T. Heukels (eds.), Institutional Dynamics o f European Integration. Essays in Honour o f Henry G. Schermers, vol. II, (Nijhoff, 1994), 303 at 316 ff.; F.G. Jacobs, ‘Remedies in national courts for the enforcement of Community rights’, in Hacia un nuevo orden intemacional y europeo. Estudios en homenaje M. Dlez de Velasco, (Tecnos, 1993), 969. 2. Case C-213/89 Factortame Ltd. v. Secretary o f State fo r Transport [1990] ECR 1-2433; note A.G. Toth, 27 Common Market Law Review (1990), 573. See also A. Barav, ‘Enforcement of Community Rights in the National Courts: The Case for Jurisdiction to Grant an Interim Relief, 26 Common Market Law Review (1989), 369; N.P. Gravells, ‘Disapplying an Act of Parliament Pending a Preliminaty Ruling: Constitutional Enormity or Community Law Right?’, Public Law (1989), 568; N. MacCormick, ‘Beyond the Sovereign State’, 56 Modem Lav/ Review (1993), 1; E. Szyszczak, ‘European Community Law: New Remedies, New Directions?’, 55 Modem Law Review (1992), 690; A. Tatham, ‘The sovereignty of Parliament after Factortame' , Europarecht (1993), 188; H.W.R. Wade, ‘Whathas Happened to the Sovereignity of Parliament?’, 107 Law Quarterly Review (1991), 1; Id., ‘Injunctive Relief against the Crown and Ministers’, ibidem, 4. 3. Joined Cases C-143/88 and C-92/89 Zuckerfabrik Suderdithmarschen A G v. Hauptzollamt Itzehoe and ZuckerfabrikSoest GmBHv. Hauptzollamt Paderbon [1991] ECRI-415; case note by H.G. Schermers, 29 Common Market Law Review (1992), 133.
4 citations
TL;DR: In the absence of such a procedure creditors have to choose between extra-judicial means of debt collection and the regular judicial proç cedures for money claims at sub-district and district courts as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The most important part of the workload of the Dutch district courts ([rechtbanken) and sub-district courts (kantongerechten) consists of money claims. The latter account for about 85 per cent of all civil and commercial cases, excluding family matters such as maintenance. A major part of these money claims concerns the collection of simple and uncontested debts, in which judgments are routinely rendered. At present the Dutch law of civil procedure does not contain special rules for the judicial collection of these claims (incassovorderingen). 1 In the absence of such a procedure creditors have to choose between extra-judicial means of debt collection and the regular judicial pro cedures for money claims at sub-district and district courts.
3 citations
TL;DR: The Euro-remedies as discussed by the authors were defined by the Court of Justice in key cases during the last 5 years and defined as a new generation of legal remedies. But they are not applicable to the Euro-case.
Abstract: The Court of Justice has defined increasingly far-reaching obligations on national judges in the context of the Community law mandate, virtually defining their powers and effectively conferring national courts with jurisdiction to review certain actions of the State, in circumstances where the applicable national law would not have allowed the national court to do so .1 I refer here to the new generation of legal remedies2 defined by the Court in key cases during the last 5 years: the so-called Euro-remedies.3 Lower
3 citations
TL;DR: The Treaty on European Union (TEU), better known as the Maastricht Treaty, provides for the calling of an inter-governmental conference in 1996 to negotiate its revision as discussed by the authors, which began on March 29, 1996 in Turin, lasted for about 15 months and ended in Amsterdam during a 48 hour session involving the heads of state and government leaders.
Abstract: Article N, paragraph 2, of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), better known as the Maastricht Treaty, provides for the calling of an intergovernmental conference in 1996 to negotiate its revision. This conference began on March 29, 1996 in Turin, lasted for about 15 months and ended in Amsterdam during a 48 hour session involving the heads of state and government leaders. In the early hours of June 18 the Dutch Prime Minister could announce that the conference had agreed on the text of a new treaty by which the TEU and the EC Treaty would be amended. This treaty, which will bear the name ‘Treaty of Amsterdam’, consists of 116 articles, 13 protocols and 45 (non binding) declarations.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss Case C-84/94 United Kingdom v Council on the Working Time Directive (C-13/94) and discuss the effect of the Court of Justice's decision on the working time Directive.
Abstract: This article discusses Case C-84/94 United Kingdom v Council on the Working Time Directive. It was written shortly after the Court of Justice gave its ruling.
TL;DR: The European Social Charter as discussed by the authors has experienced a much more modest existence compared to the flourishing Convention, and the impact of the findings resulting from the relatively complicated reporting procedure is hardly noticeable; the Charter provisions do not seem to play as important a role as national legal orders and in procedures before the national courts.
Abstract: Compared to the flourishing Convention, the ‘(ugly step-?)sister treaty’ the European Social Charter, has experienced a much more modest existence. Fewer European states have become parties to all the provisions of the Charter; a less authoritative and influential supervisory mechanism had been established; there is no possibility for groups and individuals to start an individual complaints procedure; the impact of the findings resulting from the relatively complicated reporting procedure is hardly noticeable; and the Charter provisions do not seem to play as important a role as Convention provisions do in national legal orders and in procedures before the national courts. In recent years many developments have taken place in order to attempt to redress this deplorable situation. As so often happens in the law, these developments took place in different places and settings, yet they coincided and can and do mutually strengthen each other and will hopefully do so in the future.
TL;DR: In this paper, the European Court and Commis- sion case law is analyzed in the context of recent developments in the law of parenthood in Dutch law and a new interpretation of the concept of "family life" is proposed.
Abstract: The question who is my father? or who is my son or daughter? is one of the most important questions which an individual can ask. In private law the asker will receive a restricted reply; it does not follow from the fact that someone is biologically a parent of a child that the person is also legally a parent. But the answer to this question does not come exclusively from private law. Where private law provisions deny parenthood the relationship may nevertheless fall under the constitutional protection of Article 8 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereafter: ECHR). Whether there is such constitutional protection turns, in the first place, upon the answer to the question whether the relationship between the persons concerned is ‘family life’ within the meaning of Article 8 ECHR. After the decisions of the European Court for the Protection of Human Rights (hereafter: the European Court) in Keegan v Ireland1 and Kroon v The Netherlands2 the outer limits of the concept ‘family life’ are unclear. In this contribution the European Court and Commis sion case law is analyzed in the context of recent developments in the law of parenthood in Dutch law and a new interpretation of the concept of ‘family life’ is proposed.