1,721,008 research outputs found
È ipotizzabile una responsabilità civile dello Stato nella salvaguardia del clima?
No full text1. L’istituto della responsabilità civile è idoneo a conseguire una decisione che obblighi lo Stato a porre in essere gli strumenti necessari per fronteggiare la crisi climatica? - 2. La sentenza del Tribunale di Roma nel caso “Giudizio universale” ed il problema dell’enforcement, sul piano interno, delle obbligazioni climatiche assunte dallo Stato a livello internazionale. – 3. La scarsa incidenza del diritto dell’Unione europea sulla configurabilità di un’obbligazione risarcitoria in capo agli Stati membri per mancata adozione delle misure di contrasto al cambiamento climatico. – 4. La sentenza della Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo nel caso KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz. – 5. Rilievi critici sull’interpretazione della Corte europea ed analisi delle conseguenze che la stessa produce sul piano interno. – 6. Conclusioni: il margine ristretto, nel nostro ordinamento, per il contenzioso climatico strategico
Trust e qualificazione nel diritto internazionale privato in una recente decisione del Privy Council
No full textLa cooperazione interstatale nell’esecuzione di misure per la prevenzione dei reati transnazionali
No full textStudio sull'ambito di applicazione delle misure di prevenzione nell’ordinamento internazionale ed europe
Intelligenza artificiale e dati personali
Full text linkThe European Commission, on April 21, 2021, adopted a legislative proposal of a regulation on artificial intelligence.
This proposal was formulated after a long preparatory work, in which all the political institutions of the EU have been involved.
The proposal does not intend to interfere with the regulatory framework for the protection of personal data (regulation 2016/679).
However, there appears to be some overlap between the two sources of EU law. These overlaps concern the principle of consent, the so called minimization, the pseudoanonymization, the improper use of involuntary discriminatory biases and the right to the explanation of the outcome of a specific system of artificial intelligence.
The author tries to overcome the overlaps and the disharmonies due to the cumulative application of the two sources of EU law (reg. 2016/679 and the future regulation on AI), but it would be better for the European legislator to clarify how to solve the difficulties discending from the application of the GDPR to artificial intelligence systems
Il Recovery Fund
No full textThe Next Generation EU (also called Recovery Fund for its function of restructuring the economy of the member States, after the COVID-19 pandemic) is a plan with which the European Union aims to raise funds on the market through the issue of bonds and, subsequently, to disburse sums of money, including non-repayable funds, for the realization of projects of common European interest. With this plan, the EU intends to finance the so-called green transition, bridge the digital divide and, in addition, support the structural reforms necessary for each member State. The program is very ambitious and marks a turning point in the European Union’s approach to managing economic crises, in the sense that, instead of the so-called ‘austerity’, the supranational legislator prefers to finance investments capable of supporting growth and industrial reconversion. The paper analyzes the conclusions of the extraordinary meeting of the European Council in July and the main draft acts published by the European Commission. The author notes that the program presents certain provisions which, at first glance, may appear incompatible with the Treaty, such as the power of the Commission to issue bonds and the incidence of the no bail-out clause on the legitimacy of non-repayable aids. However, these doubts can be resolved in the light of the correct reading of the provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The problem is that the Next Generation EU plan ends up restricting the already limited room for maneuver of national parliaments in defining economic policies, so it does not seem really lawful in the light of the democratic principle enshrined in Article 10 TEU
La proposta della Commissione europea di adozione del “Digital Markets Act”
No full textI mercati digitali presentano caratteristiche molto peculiari, che ne hanno determinato una struttura fortemente oligopolistica. Questo assetto ha, fino a questo momento, prodotto diverse conseguenze dannose, sia sul funzionamento del mercato che sullo sviluppo di nuove imprese e nuovi prodotti. In questo contesto, diversi Stati hanno cercato di contrastare il fenomeno attraverso l’intervento delle autorità antitrust. Tuttavia, al momento, i tentativi sembrano non aver prodotto gli effetti sperati. L’approccio ora tentato dalla Commissione europea, che sta cercando di introdurre una specifica regolamentazione ex ante delle piattaforme online, fa sperare in una parziale soluzione del problema. La proposta non appare, tuttavia, molto chiara su una questione cruciale, che è il rapporto della stessa con la normativa antitrust. A parere dell’Autore, il Digital Markets Act deve essere considerato come una fonte di diritto complementare, il che significa che gli obblighi previsti al suo interno devono sommarsi agli obblighi previsti dagli artt. 101 e 102 TFUE.Digital markets present very peculiar characteristics, which have determined a strongly oligopolistic structure of the market. This structure has produced several harmful consequences, both on the functioning of the market and on the development of new businesses and new products. In this context, several States have tried to tackle the phenomenon through the intervention of the antitrust authorities. However, at the moment, the attempts do not seem to have produced the desired effects. In this context, the approach now attempted by the European Commission, which is trying to introduce specific ex ante regulation of online platforms, gives hope for a partial solution to the problem. The proposal is not very clear on a crucial matter, which is the relationship between the proposal itself and the antitrust rules. According to the opinion of the Author, the Digital Markets Act must be regarded as a complementary source of law, which means that the obligations provided within should add up to the obligations provided for by Articles 101 and 102 TFEU
- …
