Abstract

Adoption of the EU budget involves drafting of EU regulations that provide a uniform framework for spending the allocated funds. Such was also the case in the current period of programming EU funds what are spent pursuant to regulations that are directly binding in all Member States. The Polish legislator has introduced domestic regulations which accommodate a number of legal definitions including one of the term ‘beneficiary’, which in essence refers to provisions laid down in EU regulations. As a consequence, it means that EU laws that are subject to officially binding interpretation of the Court of Justice should be applied accordingly. Earlier decisions which addressed both the rights and obligations of the ‘beneficiary’ must be recognized as at least substantiated for the needs of implementing the Cohesion Policy. This article aims to analyse and assess the practice of implementing the term ‘beneficiary’ in the European Union from the perspective of European Union law in the context of Cohesion Policy. It considers present Polish legislative changes which followed the changes in at the Union level in the area of Cohesion Policy concerning the term ‘beneficiary’. The author mainly use the formal-dogmatic method typical to law studies. The author analyse the case-law concerning the term ‘beneficiary’ in Cohesion Policy. The analysis is based on the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The assessment includes only relevant judgements issued by the European Court Justice, which still play a significant role in present legislative changes driven at the Union level regarding Cohesion Policy. This text provides an overview of the general requirements for implementing European Law in accordance with the basic standards construed by the European Court of Justice. The paper deals with the autonomous interpretation of the term ‘beneficiary’ in the procedure of distributing EU in the field of Cohesion Policy. The author indicates the applicable interpretation of the scope of the term ‘beneficiary’ and outlines how the state administration bodies in the domestic legal system are charged with enforcing the term ‘beneficiary’. In conclusion of this paper, the author points out that the European Court of Justice did not directly construe the legal definition ‘beneficiary’ existing in European law. However, the optimal functioning of administrative bodies of Member States should take into consideration some judgements of ECJ concerning the fore-mentioned term. Such proceedings can be helpful in adjusting the legal system of implementation of Cohesion Policy in every Member State. More precisely, such proceedings are necessary to adapt appropriately the provisions of the legislative changes existing in the present EU regulation on the Cohesion Policy. In consequence, it can also eliminate potential administrative barriers and give more protection to the actors applying for EU grants.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call