European Union Legal Research Articles

Hydrogen Valleys: Assessing the EU Legal and Financial Frameworks that Enable the Hydrogen Economy

To achieve the target of 10 million tonnes of renewable hydrogen production in the European Union (EU) by 2030, the REPowerEU Plan commits the EU to double the number of hydrogen ‘valleys’, which will contribute to accelerating the production of renewable hydrogen to replace natural gas, coal and oil in hard-to-decarbonise economic sectors. This article reviews ongoing efforts to lay down a regulatory framework to move from natural gas to renewable hydrogen and, not least, to define renewable hydrogen. As a strategic net-zero industry, renewable hydrogen is to grow and flourish in hydrogen valleys, meaning a place where energy production and multiple-uses will meet and expand. This requires substantial EU financial support, at least until renewable hydrogen becomes a mature technology that can compete in the market with today's cheaper (and polluting) fossil-based hydrogen. While there are open questions about the pace and viability of hydrogen-related technologies and infrastructure, for instance concerning long-distance transportation, hydrogen valleys appear as a no-regret option encompassing renewable energy production, repurposed gas infrastructure, electricity grid and batteries. If successfully implemented, the option would enhance renewable hydrogen production and the decarbonisation of the industry and transport.

Policy coherence for the protection of water resources against agricultural pollution in the EU and Norway

AbstractThroughout the European Union (EU), agricultural practices contribute significantly to the pollution of water resources by nitrates, phosphorus and pesticides. This article sheds light on the degree of horizontal legal coherence between the main EU legal and policy instruments applicable to the protection of water resources from agricultural pollution. After identifying key coherence challenges at the EU level, the article thoroughly assesses the regulatory and governance approach in Norway. The key question is how certain EU‐level coherence challenges could be mitigated at a national level through mechanisms aimed at facilitating cross‐sectoral coordination and policy coherence. Three types of mechanisms have been selected for this purpose: (i) legal mechanisms, including cross‐referencing and joint institutional responsibility for implementation; (ii) the establishment of platforms for cross‐sectoral policy coordination or actor participation; and (iii) the establishment of monitoring and reporting processes that ensure access to information and data sharing.

Victim’s Paradigm in European Union Criminal Law

The victim’s legal status and participatory rights in criminal proceedings vary among the European Union member states, which can potentially hinder the harmonisation of the field of criminal law. The aim of this article is to reveal the main features that determine the victim’s paradigm in European Union criminal law by focusing on the rights which the member states are obliged to guarantee in their criminal justice systems. Considering that criminal proceedings must result in a fair balance of interests of the parties involved, this article concludes that, in the victim’s paradigm enshrined in the European Union legal acts concerning the area of criminal law, the victim must be endowed with certain procedural rights, however, for that very reason, as an actor of the criminal justice system, the victim might be required to participate in the proceedings.

All That Glitters Is Not Gold? Civil Society Organisations and the (non‐)Mobilisation of European Union Law

AbstractIncreasingly, collective actors in Europe, such as in the Netherlands and Italy, turn to litigation as the preferred strategy to attain their goals. Both at the national level and at the European level, civil society organisations (CSOs) are active in high‐profile cases, for example, in the field of asylum law. These CSOs operate in a different national political and legal system but do have similar European‐level opportunities. However, the extent to which European Union (EU) law is mobilised differs per CSO. This begs the following key question: Why do some CSOs mobilise EU law more frequently than others? Using empirical data, this article attempts to uncover what factors are relevant for four CSOs from Italy and the Netherlands whether to mobilise EU law or not. Most importantly, the article concludes that the framing of EU legal opportunities by the CSOs is considered to be relevant in (non‐)mobilisation of EU law.

A Matter of Prescriptive Clarity? Analysing How Swedish Judges' Motives for Action Vary in the Preliminary Ruling Procedure

AbstractThis article explores how national judges' reasoning in the preliminary ruling procedure varies depending on the prescriptive clarity of European Union (EU) legal frameworks. Drawing on the logic of appropriateness and the logic of expected consequences, this article formulates hypotheses regarding judges' motivational patterns. Interviews with Swedish judges generate findings that partly corroborate these hypotheses. The findings show that when EU legal frameworks are clear, judges express a mix of considerations, including references to EU rules, expected politico‐strategic outcomes and professional norms. When the clarity of the frameworks is low, judges mainly motivate their decisions by invoking professional norms. In light of these findings, the article proposes a revision of the compliance pull explanation that takes into account how not only formal EU rules but also informal norms of appropriate professional conduct may influence the actions of national judges.

The environmental footprints of the feeds used by the EU chicken meat industry

Chicken meat production in the European Union (EU) causes environmental pressures within and beyond the EU, mostly due to feed consumption. The expected dietary shift from red to poultry meat will drive changes in the demand for chicken feeds and the associated environmental impacts, calling for a renewed attention on this supply chain. By performing a break-down analysis based on material flow accounting, this paper assesses the annual environmental burden caused within and outside of the EU by each single feed consumed by the EU chicken meat industry from 2007 to 2018. The increased feed demand required to support the growth of the EU chicken meat industry over the analyzed period caused a 17 % increase in cropland use - 6.7 million hectares in 2018. Instead, CO2 emissions linked to feed demand decreased by ~45 % over the same period. Despite an overall improvement in resource and impact intensity, chicken meat production was not decoupled from environmental burden. In 2018, 0.40 Mt. of nitrogen, 0.28 Mt. of phosphorous, and 0.28 Mt. of potassium inorganic fertilizers were implied. Our findings indicate that the sector is not yet compliant with the EU sustainability targets defined in the Farm To Fork Strategy, calling for an urgent need to fill existing policy implementation gaps. The EU chicken meat industry's environmental footprints were driven by endogenous factors such as the feed use efficiency at the chicken farming stage and the feed cultivation efficiency within the EU, as well as by exogenous factors such as the import of feed via international trade. Limitations on the use of alternative feed sources, as well as the exclusion of the imports from the EU legal framework constitute a crucial gap, which hamper fully leveraging existing solutions.

Between risk mitigation and labour rights enforcement: Assessing the transatlantic race to govern AI-driven decision-making through a comparative lens

In this article, we provide an overview of efforts to regulate the various phases of the artificial intelligence (AI) life cycle. In doing so, we examine whether—and, if so, to what extent—highly fragmented legal frameworks are able to provide safeguards capable of preventing the dangers that stem from AI- and algorithm-driven organisational practices. We critically analyse related developments at the European Union (EU) level, namely the General Data Protection Regulation, the draft AI Regulation, and the proposal for a Directive on improving working conditions in platform work. We also consider bills and regulations proposed or adopted in the United States and Canada via a transatlantic comparative approach, underlining analogies and variations between EU and North American attitudes towards the risk assessment and management of AI systems. We aim to answer the following questions: Is the widely adopted risk-based approach fit for purpose? Is it consistent with the actual enforcement of fundamental rights at work, such as privacy, human dignity, equality and collective rights? To answer these questions, in section 2 we unpack the various, often ambiguous, facets of the notion(s) of ‘risk’—that is, the common denominator with the EU and North American legal instruments. Here, we determine that a scalable, decentralised framework is not appropriate for ensuring the enforcement of constitutional labour-related rights. In addition to presenting the key provisions of existing schemes in the EU and North America, in section 3 we disentangle the consistencies and tensions between the frameworks that regulate AI and constrain how it must be handled in specific contexts, such as work environments and platform-orchestrated arrangements. Paradoxically, the frenzied race to regulate AI-driven decision-making could exacerbate the current legal uncertainty and pave the way for regulatory arbitrage. Such a scenario would slow technological innovation and egregiously undermine labour rights. Thus, in section 4 we advocate for the adoption of a dedicated legal instrument at the supranational level to govern technologies that manage people in workplaces. Given the high stakes involved, we conclude by stressing the salience of a multi-stakeholder AI governance framework.

Third Country Influence on EU Law and Policy‐making: Setting the Scene

AbstractThis introductory article conceptualizes the notion of third country influence on European Union (EU) law and policy and proposes an analytical framework theorizing the venues and means through which third countries may gain such impact, under what conditions and with which implications for the EU's legal and political order. The article first introduces the focus on outside‐in influence in the context of European studies, generally, and EU privileged third country relations, specifically. Thereafter, an analytical framework is developed for mapping and explaining the outside‐in dynamics on EU law and policy‐making differentiating between diplomatic, governance and discursive venues; coercive versus technocratic and normative mechanisms of influence; and the legal constraints and political implications of these processes. Turning to the potential determinants of these occurrences, the article then proposes a set of hypotheses for conditions under which third countries can influence EU law and policies, before summarizing the individual contributions to this Special Issue.

Decentralized Finance, Non-Fungible Tokens and Money Laundering: Is the European Union Legal Framework Ready to Address Financial Crime Risks Arising from the Crypto Business while Fostering Innovation?

Decentralized Finance, Non-Fungible Tokens and Money Laundering: Is the European Union Legal Framework Ready to Address Financial Crime Risks Arising from the Crypto Business while Fostering Innovation?

국제법질서에서의 EU의 지위 – Kadi 사례에 반영된 국제법질서를 중심으로 -

What is the European Union(EU)? The question of the legal status of the EU is important for making legal judgments in EU cases invol ving international organization and international dispute resolution, s uch as when the EU seeks to play a more prominent role in the int ernational legal order or when EU member states withdraw from the EU legal order. The debate over the legal status of the EU is also ev ident in the academic response to the Court of Justice of the Europ ean Union(CJEU)'s Kadi decision. This Article examines the response of European courts--and in particular of the Court of Justice of the European Union(CJEU)--to the dramatic challenges to the UN Securit y Council’s anti-terrorist sanctions regime brought before the courts. The CJEU in Kadi case annulled the European Community’s impleme ntation of the Security Council’s asset-freezing resolutions on the gr ound that they violated EU norms of fair procedure and of property protection. This Article argues that the robustly pluralist approach o f the CJEU to the relationship between EU law and international law in Kadi case represents a sharp departure from the traditional embr ace of international law by the EU. Paralleling in certain striking wa ys the language of the US Supreme Court in Medellin v. Texas , the approach of the CJEU in Kadi case carries risks for the EU and for the international legal order in the message it sends to the courts of other states and organizations contemplating the enforcement of Sec urity Council resolutions. More importantly, the CJEU’s approach ris ks undermining the image the EU has sought to create for itself as a virtuous international actor maintaining a distinctive commitment t o international law and institutions. This Article is preceded by an i n-depth analysis of the theoretical and concrete practical shortcomi ngs stemming from the lack of institutional cooperation between the UN and the EU in the Kadi case. Enhanced institutional cooperation between the institutions of the two systems will work to their mutua l advantage as well as, most importantly, maintain the rights and lib erties of individuals like Kadi.

Rozwój sztucznej inteligencji i jej wpływ na rynek finansowy

The purpose of this article. The aim of the article is to analyze selected issues related to artificial intelligence and its development, particularly its impact on the financial market, taking into account the opportunities and threats that artificial intelligence and its areas, such as machine learning or deep learning, pose to financial market participants. The research methods utilized in the study were used to evaluate the phenomenon on a macroeconomic scale. Methodology. The results of the research were based on the analysis of secondary data, such as source literature – both domestic and foreign, systems analysis of European Union legal acts, as well as the review of reports on the use of AI within the financial market. The paper is theoretical. The result of the research. The development of artificial intelligence in financial markets may provide an opportunity to gain competitive advantage, especially for financial market participants who aptly implement AI-based solutions in its initial phase. However, this entails both benefits and risks, the possible occurrence of which depends on many other factors.

European Union Work-Life Balance Directive: A Lesson for Indonesia

The aim of this article is to compare the legal development of the work-life balance directive in the European Union (EU) and Indonesia. The objective of the Work-Life Balance Directive is to enhance the existing EU legal framework for family-related leave and flexible work arrangements. The directive includes the introduction of paternity leave (the equivalent second parent/parent will be able to take at least 10 working days of maternity leave around the birth of the child, compensated at least at the rate of sick pay); the strengthening of the right to leave for birth for 4 months and the right to request flexible leave (e.g., part-time or gradually); and the establishment of nursing leave (5 days/year) for workers caring for permanency-impaired relatives. This policy can serve as a model for Indonesia in terms of defending worker rights and promoting a healthy work-life balance. Nonetheless, the Indonesian legal framework governing the work-life balance remains obscure. Therefore, the Indonesian legal system must modify existing regulations and/or pass new laws to ensure the quality of working time and life are balance which gradually could impact to the families economic stability.

Verb-based Action and Process Nominalisation Patterns in English and Lithuanian EU Legal Documents

Translators might face difficulties when working on legal texts due to their intricate features, such as nominalisation. The abstract nature of such structures could have a negative effect on text comprehension, as nominalisations are usually harder to process than verbs. In pursuit of making European Union (EU) documents more translator-friendly, the European Commission invites authors to communicate clearly, advising against the use of nominalisations. For this reason, a closer look at the current nominalisation patterns in English and Lithuanian EU legal documents is taken. The aim of the paper is to determine and compare the verb-based action and process nominalisations and their equivalent structures in English and Lithuanian EU legal documents, considering the impact of equivalent choices on the text. The focus is placed on verb-based action and process nominalisations derived by suffixation. Considering English and Lithuanian nominalisations, their equivalent structures are commonly expressed as nominalisations. The expression of nominalisations as nouns, as well as adjective-based nominalisations, is characteristic only to the Lithuanian language. The expression as an adverb, a prepositional structure or a pronoun is characteristic only to the English language. The analysis reveals that the verb-based action and process nominalisations might help follow the flow of information and emphasise key concepts. However, if the morphological properties were changed, repetition could be avoided, the dynamic properties of the text could be strengthened, or comprehension could be facilitated, which is essential for an effective translation process.

Actors and Roles in EU Law: Asking ‘Who Does What?’ in the European Union Legal System

Introduction to the special section – Actors of EU law – Activities of EU actors – Role definition in EU constitutional law – Constitutional theory – Separation of powers –Relationship between public authorities and individuals – Institutional actors – Private actors – Lobbyists – Law and practice – Legal doctrine – Research methods in EU law – Importance of theoretical frameworks in defining the parameters of legal research

Soft Law Behind the Scenes: Transparency, Participation and the European Union’s Soft Law Making Process in the Field of Climate Change

AbstractThe global climate crisis poses many risks; for instance, relating to the environment, to the economy and to public health. The mitigation and management of such risks create a complex and multifaceted regulatory conundrum that requires quick, flexible, efficient and adaptive policy solutions that transcend the state level. A quick look in the body of regulatory instruments employed in the field of climate change policy will reveal that soft law is used very frequently by the European Commission to aid with the application, transposition and interpretation of European Union (EU) environmental legislation relating to climate change. While soft law has become ever more prominent in the EU legal order and has been studied extensively at the ex-post phase (ie concerning its effects or effectiveness), little academic attention has been paid to the process of soft law-making. In simple terms, we know very little about how soft law instruments are made. This article peeks behind the scenes of soft law and examines the transparency and participation credentials of the articulation process of Commission Guidance Documents in the field of climate change regulation adopted under key legal acts in the field.

EU law, In-Work Poverty, and vulnerable workers

AbstractThe focus of the present contribution is the role of European Union (EU) law in shaping the working conditions of four groups of vulnerable workers. It assesses to what extent the impact of EU law favours, on these particular groups, an increased risk of In-Work Poverty (IWP) and explores whether the recent attention to IWP at EU level and the latest initiatives adopted may change the picture in the near future. The purpose is, therefore, to contribute to the debate on the role of EU law and policy in structuring vulnerability from the perspective of IWP. What is commonly known as EU labour law is a fragmentary legal corpus that has grown in a rather patchwork fashion as part of a social dimension of the European project that was, broadly speaking, functional to the logic of market integration. This originates in the early division of competences between the EU and the Member States in the Treaty of Rome, which left labour law and social protection outside the EU sphere of action. It partly explains why the protection of workers, particularly those that do not engage in cross-border situations, does not seem to be the EU’s primary goal, or at least it is not formulated as contrary to other potentially clashing rationales such as market integration, flexibility, enhanced competitiveness and so on. The prevention of IWP was not, in any case, one of the concerns of the original European project. Yet, EU law has produced several pieces of legislation that directly or indirectly contribute to shaping the working conditions of European workers, including those more exposed to IWP. The paper assesses the relevant EU legal framework and discusses its impact on the working conditions of those more at risk of IWP. It concludes by estimating the potential of a series of recent initiatives to enhance the protection of the most vulnerable workers, thus making a positive change.

The EU and protracted displacement: providing solutions or creating obstacles?

ABSTRACT In this paper, we explore how the European Union (EU) legal and policy framework relates to protracted displacement. To this end, we examine the existing legal, policy and institutional framework both in the EU and globally, including the Common European Asylum System (CEAS), the 2015 ‘European Agenda on Migration’, and the New Pact on Migration and Asylum. Analytically, we employ Norbert Elias’ concept of ‘figurations’ as a conceptual lens to describe and identify distinct constellations of relationships, norms and social interactions between different actors shaping approaches towards protracted displacement. We argue that policies on protracted displacement are shaped by a triangle of three figurations – the migration-security figuration, the humanitarian-refugee relief figuration, and the protection-rights figuration. We trace how the migration-security figuration has gained the upper hand in recent years and what this means for EU policies addressing protracted displacement. We conclude that the EU is an actor that facilitates, rather than addresses, protracted displacement, and the Pact on Migration and Asylum further cements that role.

Competence of the European Union to Decide on Judicial Appointments in Poland

A member state of the European Union (EU) cannot function within the EU network of legal regulations if it rejects the principle of cooperation based on the impartiality of the courts. This principle subscribes to the EU standards of the rule of law and mutual trust and cooperation with the Court of Justice of the European Union. In November 2019, it received judicial recognition when the Court laid down the characteristics of an unbiased court within the EU legal framework. Thus, it is imperative for member states, which includes Poland, to recognise this principle and ensure its application in their domestic legal structure. They have to acknowledge that the EU is still a supranational network of regulation, economics, and values

Inspecting Ships Autonomously under Port State Jurisdiction: Towards Sustainability and Biodiversity in the EU

Abstract This article examines the possibility of autonomous inspection robots being used to undertake inspection tasks conducted on the basis of port State jurisdiction in European Union (EU) Member States’ ports. A brief overview of technical research concerning such robots is offered. The article then outlines the EU legal framework concerning port State jurisdiction, and contextualises this legal landscape by recalling the history of attempts at the EU and international level to regulate in response to maritime disasters since the 1980s. Based on a close reading of the Port State Control Directive, alongside analysis of the aims pursued and policy options proposed in the context of the European Commission’s significant ongoing work on a review of this instrument, it is clear that the adoption of autonomous inspection technologies could offer significant benefits, permitting more efficient completion of existing inspection tasks and potentially changing what is and is not considered feasible in inspection scenarios.

Artificial Intelligence and Data Protection: A Comparative Analysis of AI Regulation through the Lens of Data Protection in the EU and Brazil

Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) is already a major part of our daily lives. From unlocking our smartphones with our faces to receiving film recommendations on streaming platforms, AI is part of our routines. In recent years, a widespread adoption of AI technologies both by public and private agencies has been observed. Notwithstanding the many conveniences it has created, the use of AI also involves many risks for people individually and for society as a whole. For instance, it may jeopardise fundamental rights such as privacy and data protection or even intensify existing discrimination against minorities. For this reason, various nations are now facing the challenge of regulating AI without limiting its development. In terms of data protection, the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) has been consistently applied and enforced in the European Union (EU) and has inspired many other data protection laws that came after it, such as the one in Brazil. In Brazil, the General Data Protection Law (LGPD) has finally come into force and is slowly being enforced. In 2021, a series of legislative initiatives concerning the development and use of AI systems drew the attention of governments, academics and the tech industry around the world. In the EU, the European Commission released a proposal for regulation in April that presents harmonised rules on AI. Meanwhile, in Brazil, in September, the Chamber of Deputies approved a rather superficial bill aiming to regulate AI in the country. Thus, one can wonder: what is the impact of data protection laws on AI regulations? And how could Brazil benefit once again from following the EU’s lead on regulating AI? In order to answer these questions, this article begins by explaining the concept of AI. It then presents the relation between AI and privacy and data protection as well as the main principles that guide privacy and data protection under both EU and Brazilian data protection laws. Subsequently, it introduces the EU legal framework for AI and focuses on the risk-based approach. Later, it presents the proposed Brazilian bill, focusing on its main principles from a comparative perspective with the EU. Finally, it will conclude how Brazil can benefit from taking inspiration from the EU experience on AI regulation.