1,721,318 research outputs found
Il caso Celmer dinanzi all'Alta Corte d'Irlanda: il ‘test' Aranyosi e Căldăraru e il diritto a un processo equo
No full textOn 12th March 2018, the Irish High Court refused to execute three European Arrest Warrants issued by Polish authorities due to concerns about the integrity of the Polish justice system. Instead, the Irish Court referred two questions for a preliminary ruling in order to assess whether the test developed by the European Court of Justice in Aranyosi e Căldăraru with regard to the possible violation of the prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment may apply in the event of a possible violation of the right to a fair trial. The Author tackles this topic and tries to assess whether the Polish issuing authorities may still be regarded as judicial in nature, in the light of the rule of law crisis Poland is facing
Communication Breakdown: The (Scarce) Use of the US Supreme Court Precedents in the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights
No full textNel corso del tempo, la cross-fertilization intesa quale uso da parte delle corti di fonti straniere e internazionali ha costituito oggetto di un ampio dibattito. In particolar modo, la prassi della Corte Suprema degli Stati Uniti è stata analizzata e lodata da alcuni, criticata da altri, spingendo il dibattito americano sul tema a concentrarsi sulla legittimità dell’utilizzo di materiali giuridici non statunitensi nei provvedimenti delle autorità giudiziarie. In Europa, questo non è stato considerato un problema e la cross-fertilization è stata fin da subito guardata come una realtà giuridica acquisita, portando così i giuristi a interrogarsi su come utilizzare fonti giuridiche non nazionali. Questo articolo concerne l’uso dei precedenti della Corte Suprema degli Stati Uniti da parte della Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo. Esaminando la giurisprudenza di quest’ultima, si mira a dimostrare che la Corte europea ha fatto riferimento alle decisioni della Corte Suprema in modo meramente ornamentale. Ciò fornisce ragioni per ritenere che, per quanto attiene al rapporto tra le due Corti, la cross-fertilization sia solo un’illusione o, tutt’al più, una mera aspirazione, non ancora giunta a realizzazione.Over time, cross-fertilization as the use made by courts of foreign and international legal sources has become the object of a major debate. In particular, the practice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America from the early ages to the present days has been analyzed and praised by some, criticized by others, leading the American debate over the use of non-American legal material to focus on whether American courts could recall that material in their judgments and resort to that in their legal reasoning. In Europe, the legitimacy of judicial comparison has not been deemed a problem and European legal scholars have enthusiastically subscribed to cross-fertilization as a legal reality definitely achieved and focused their attention on how make use of foreign legal material. This article deals with the use of the US Supreme Court precedents made by the European Court of Human Rights. By scrutinizing its case law and proving that, as a general rule, the European Court of Human Rights has referred to the Supreme Court decisions in a merely ornamental fashion, it provides reasons to believe that, as far as the relation between the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights, cross-fertilization is just an illusion or, on a more positive note, a mere aspiration that has not been achieved yet
There's a feeling I get when I look to the West: aiuti di Stato e allargamento dell'Unione europea ai Balcani occidentali
No full textOn 6 February 2018, the European Commission released its new expansion plan, which covers six Western Balkan countries – Macedonia, Albania, Montenegro, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Kosovo. According to the Commission, all these countries could achieve accession as members of the European Union in the next decade. However, in order to join the European Union, they need to comply with its acquis, a part of which concerns State aids. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to analyse the relevant provisions that can be found in the Stabilisation and Association Agreements concluded with these countries as well as in their national legislation, in order to assess whether the applicants are compliant with the EU’s model
Principle of lex mitior, Is that you? - Case note on C-218/15, Paoletti and others
No full textThe principle of applying the more lenient sanction – also called principle of lex mitior - constitutes a general principle of national criminal laws as well as a general principle of Union law, as confirmed by the Court of Justice of the European Union over time. In the case analysed here, a reference for a preliminary ruling was made in order to understand whether said principle applied to the case of some Italian nationals who had organised the illegal entry into Italy of some Romanian nationals. More specifically, given that the illegal acts had been carried out before the accession of Romania to the European Union, the Court was asked if Romania's subsequent accession could have had any effects on the criminal offence of facilitation of illegal immigration
Adapting to Change: COVID-19 as a Factor Shaping EU State Aid Law
No full textThe purpose of this Insight is to illustrate how State aid law will work in this troubled time. First, it focuses on Art. 107, para. 3, let. b) and c), TFEU and the Temporary Framework adopted by the European Commission to support the economy in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak. Furthermore, it clarifies the role that Art. 107, para. 2, let. b), TFEU may play. Finally, it takes into consideration the General Block Exemption Regulation, and the de minimis Regulations. It is argued that a new approach to State aid law will be needed in the coming years, based on a compensation mechanism and some other expedients to avoid competitive distortions
Listening to the wind of change? I rapporti problematici tra Consiglio d'Europa e Federazione Russa quanto alla tutela dei diritti umani e l'eterno ritorno del dominio riservato
No full textCongelamento e confisca di beni. Le novità del diritto dell'Unione europea nel quadro della cooperazione internazionale
No full textLa sentenza del Tribunal Supremo di Spagna del 9 luglio 2018 sui meccanismi di ricollocazione di migranti del 2015: note a prima lettura
No full textAut dedere aut iudicare, sed iudicare in Europa melius est: il caso Pisciotti e il rapporto tra il mandato d'arresto europeo e gli accordi di estradizione con Stati terzi
No full text- …
