Legal Orders Of Member States Research Articles

Transpozycja konsumenckich dyrektyw maksymalnych na przykładzie dyrektywy turystycznej 2015/2302 do polskiego porządku prawnego

Dyrektywy konsumenckie licznie uchwalane w latach osiemdziesiątych i dziewięćdzie-siątych XX wieku były oparte na metodzie minimalnej harmonizacji. Nie przyniosło to jednak spo-dziewanych rezultatów w zakresie zadawalającego zbliżenia systemów prawnych państw człon-kowskich i na początku XXI wieku prawodawca unijny zrezygnował z harmonizacji minimalnej na rzecz harmonizacji zupełnej (maksymalnej). Na gruncie usług turystycznych obowiązywała dyrek-tywa z 1990 roku w sprawie zorganizowanych wakacji, wycieczek i podróży, oparta na najniższym wspólnym mianowniku. Obecnie została ona zastąpiona dyrektywą z 2015 roku w sprawie imprez turystycznych i powiązanych usług turystycznych, wpisującą się w trend dyrektyw maksymalnych. W artykule poddano analizie i ocenie skuteczność zastosowania metody pełnej harmonizacji jako sposobu realizacji celów i założeń dyrektyw konsumenckich na przykładzie dyrektywy turystycznej z 2015 roku. W założeniu harmonizacja maksymalna powinna wydatnie przyczyniać się do urze-czywistniania idei wspólnego rynku, ułatwiać przedsiębiorcom świadczenie usług w sposób tran-sgraniczny i jednocześnie zapewniać wysoki i jednolity poziom ochrony konsumentów. Jednakże analiza dyrektyw konsumenckich w kontekście ich transpozycji prowadzi do wniosku, że harmo-nizacja maksymalna raczej nie spełni pokładanych w niej oczekiwań. Nie doprowadzi do pełnego zbliżenia prawa w obszarach objętych zakresami dyrektyw; odrębności będą nadal występować i w dalszym ciągu będą zniechęcać konsumentów do usług transgranicznych. Natomiast negatywne konsekwencje transpozycji dyrektyw maksymalnych uwidoczniają się w postaci znacznej ingerencji w porządki prawne państw członkowskich i mogącym wystąpić negatywnym wpływem na stabil-ność krajowych systemów prawnych.

<b>LENIENCY POLICY IN EUROPEAN CARTEL ENFORCEMENT</b>

Leniency programs stand for a rather easy collection of evidence and intel-ligence. Added value is achieved by hindering upcoming and maintain-ing cartels to develop an organiza-tional structure. Leniency also in-creases uncertainty on the side of the cartel members and makes it more difficult for cartel participants to reach an agreement. Furthermore, the costs of adjudicating are decreased by the legal goal-oriented activity of whistle blowers. Therefore, the leniency programs of the EU and of the most member states proved to be a success story on the one hand. In contrary, there are a few adverse effects. In a theoretical approach, the notion of leniency is contradictory since blowing the whistle is the second best choice only. To make the exemption to become the rule gives wrong incentives to the market members to opt for the first best choice in order to build a cartel either not punished or not discovered and keep silent. For quite some principle reasoning such view would create an obstacle. Moreover practically, some adverse effects have been discussed. For my part, the most crucial notion is that leniency programs are thought to help to find out well hidden cartels, in other words to encourage discovery in hard cases. Instead, leniency is not eligible to be the main tool of lazy cartel enforcement. For regular investigation, there are other incentives in the law of discovery, in procedural law, and last but not least in private enforcement due to the action provided by the legal order of member states. However, I would not hesitate to vote for its limited supplementary use in cartel matters.

The Rise and Fall of the Tribunal of the Southern African Development Community: Implications for Dispute Settlement in Southern Africa

The article explores the impact of Zimbabwe’s land reform policies since the turn of the century on the Southern African Development Community (SADC), notably its central issue instrument for dispute settlement, namely the SADC Tribunal. In the landmark ruling of Campbell and Others v Zimbabwe the SADC Tribunal found the expropriation of agricultural land without compensation to be discriminatory and in violation of the SADC Treaty. While the Decision was rejected by Zimbabwe it was successfully implemented in South Africa, resulting inter alia in the attachment of Zimbabwean property situated in Cape Town. However, the Campbell Decision met with extensive political resistance throughout the SADC region which ultimately lead to the SADC Tribunal’s suspension in 2012. The article analyses in particular the jurisdiction of the SADC Tribunal to entertain human rights disputes; whether the Tribunal was legally constituted; as well as the manner of enforcement of the Tribunal’s decisions in the domestic legal orders of member States. In addition the article reflects on the consequences of the suspension of the SADC Tribunal for dispute settlement in Southern Africa.

BİRLİK HUKUKU VE ANAYASA ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ

This article intends to analyze the relationship and interaction of EC/EU law with the national constitutions of the old and new member states in the light of the legal and constitutional issues and questions such as whether the constitutions of member states allow the delegation or transfer of legislative powers to international organizations with or without limits, what is the legal situation in case of a conflict of the constitutions with the Treaty (primary law) or community secondary law, and a conflict of a prior or later national law with the Treaty on EU?, do the consitutional courts in member states accept the primacy of EU law obligations and do the courts accept a different attitude for primary or secondary community law and on which principles they base their reasoning? It also focuses on the question of the primacy of EU law and effects of it on the constitutional framework in relation to the national parliaments, federated units, regions and decentralised bodies. Finally, it gives special attention to the relationship of EU law with the fundamental rights and freedoms and its impact on the national constitutions and legal order of member states.

Sovereignty in the United Kingdom After Joining the European Economic Community

Opportunities are increasing for Australian corporations to export to Europe and to carry on business there. Until recently, there has been very little federal power in European Community — legislation was adopted by Council of Ministers from member states only on basis of unanimity achieved by package deals. That is now changing, and a uniform internal market embracing a population of 320 million is only just over horizon. There is much to be done, however, before that becomes a reality. Accordingly, methods of developing Community law should be of interest. Those concerned with concept of half sovereign states and federal constitutions might also be interested in way that a constitution said to be incapable of entrenchment has become subject to Community law. The European Economic Community (EEC) was established under Treaty of Rome 1957 (hereafter called the Treaty). Although it was intended to fall short of a federal state, governments were expected to co-operate in ways that go beyond normal international treaties.1 Community law was to be created by acts adopted by Council of Ministers, irrespective of monist or dualist character of municipal legal order of member states. Nevertheless, member states would have a hand in such law making,since ministers in Council were those appointed by them.