Choice Of Legal Basis Research Articles

The Choice of Legal Basis in EU Competition Law: Shifting the Competence in the Digital Era

The Choice of Legal Basis in EU Competition Law: Shifting the Competence in the Digital Era

Book review: The Choice of Legal Basis for Acts of the European Union. Competence Overlaps, Institutional Preferences, and Legal Basis Litigation, by Annegret Engel. (Cham: Springer, 2018)

Book review: The Choice of Legal Basis for Acts of the European Union. Competence Overlaps, Institutional Preferences, and Legal Basis Litigation, by Annegret Engel. (Cham: Springer, 2018)

The choice of legal basis and the principle of consistency in the procedure for conclusion of international agreements in CFSP contexts: Parliament v. Council (Pirate-Transfer Agreement with Tanzan)

The choice of legal basis and the principle of consistency in the procedure for conclusion of international agreements in CFSP contexts: <i>Parliament v. Council</i> (Pirate-Transfer Agreement with Tanzan)

Interinstitutional Gravity and Pirates of the Parliament on Stranger Tides: the Continued Constitutional Significance of the Choice of Legal Basis in Post-Lisbon External Action

Choice of legal basis in EU external action – Conclusion of international agreements – Application of the centre of gravity test – Delimitation of the Common Commercial Policy, the Common Foreign and Security Policy and Development Cooperation Policy – Institutional balance

Criminal competence and the choice of legal basis: space in the margins?

Criminal competence and the choice of legal basis: space in the margins?

EU Criminal Policy at a Crossroads between Effectiveness and Traditional Restraints for the Use of Criminal Law

The article studies EU criminal policy from a constitutional perspective. Since all EU secondary law measures must be founded on a legal basis – on a specific provision of the Union's constitution – EU criminal policy is also a constitutional matter in this sense. Initially, the article clarifies what EU criminal policy is, putting it into a broader context presenting it as a public policy issue in a multi-level constitutional framework. Secondly, the article demonstrates the key elements of EU criminal policy. The article answers the questions of what the interrelationship between the choice of legal basis and the EU criminalisation principles is and whether the EU criminalisation principles are effective in terms of limiting the use of EU-level criminal law.

From ‘Don’t Mention the Titanium Dioxide Judgment’ to ‘I Mentioned it Once, But I Think I Got Away with it All Right’: Reflections on the Choice of Legal Basis in EU External Relations after the Legal Basis for Restrictive Measures Judgment

Abstract This chapter examines the choice of legal basis in EU external relations post-Lisbon in the light of the judgment of the Court of Justice in the Legal Basis for Restrictive Measures case. Before reaching the conclusion that the regulation at issue there was rightly based on Article 215(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and rejecting the European Parliament’s argument that the measure ought to have been taken on the basis of Article 75 TFEU, the Court made a number of important observations on the principles to be followed when choosing a legal basis and recalled some of its earlier case law, in particular Titanium Dioxide and its progeny. This chapter reflects upon the application of those principles in a post-Lisbon framework.

From ‘Don’t Mention theTitanium DioxideJudgment’ to ‘I Mentioned it Once, But I Think I Got Away with it All Right’: Reflections on the Choice of Legal Basis in EU External Relations after theLegal Basis for Restrictive MeasuresJudgment

AbstractThis chapter examines the choice of legal basis in EU external relations post-Lisbon in the light of the judgment of the Court of Justice in theLegal Basis for Restrictive Measurescase. Before reaching the conclusion that the regulation at issue there was rightly based on Article 215(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and rejecting the European Parliament’s argument that the measure ought to have been taken on the basis of Article 75 TFEU, the Court made a number of important observations on the principles to be followed when choosing a legal basis and recalled some of its earlier case law, in particularTitanium Dioxideand its progeny. This chapter reflects upon the application of those principles in a post-Lisbon framework.

EU Security Policies and the Pillar Structure: A Legal Analysis

Politico-institutional factors influence the choice of legal basis provisions and legal basis litigation. This is particularly true in the area of security policies where, due to their cross-pillar or inter-pillar nature, the ‘choice of legal basis' often entails a ‘choice of pillar’. This chapter analyses the legal rules governing the relationships between pillars in the context of security policies, and assesses the impact of politico-institutional factors in this respect. The analysis shows that the pillar structure is liable to widen the margin of discretion that political institutions enjoy as to the choice of legal basis and instruments. The rules on inter-pillar relationships are, in their interpretation and application, subject to a certain degree of flexibility. In some cases, the Council and the member states try to preserve national prerogatives and, therefore, to limit the scope of EC competences and the role of supranational institutions. In others, they resort to flexible interpretations of legal rules for bringing security issues within the first pillar. However, the article points out that the discretion enjoyed by political institutions (especially the Council) is not unlimited. While issues concerning the ‘choice of pillar’ have not emerged so far in the context of Common Foreign Security Policy–Police and Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters relationships, the situation is likely to change due to some elements stemming from the SEGI case law. The main limitation, in any case, flows from Article 47 EU. This provision seems to enshrine a prevalence of the first pillar over the others. However, the effectiveness of such constraints depends in the end on the European Court of Justice (ECJ), which, representing a judicial body aware of political concerns, tends to play a well-balanced role.

Dual Legal Basis for Adoption and Implementation of the Rotterdam Convention: Annulment of community acts--Choice of legal basis--Articles 133 EC and 175 EC--Allocation of competence between Community and Member States--Prior informed consent for trade in hazardous chemicals--Approval of the Rotterdam Convention--Regulation (EC) No 304/2003 concerning the export and import of dangerous chemicals

Dual Legal Basis for Adoption and Implementation of the Rotterdam Convention: Annulment of community acts--Choice of legal basis--Articles 133 EC and 175 EC--Allocation of competence between Community and Member States--Prior informed consent for trade in hazardous chemicals--Approval of the Rotterdam Convention--Regulation (EC) No 304/2003 concerning the export and import of dangerous chemicals