Home
Search results “Principles of eu law supremacy”
EU supremacy, direct and indirect effect and state liability
 
09:36
EU supremacy, direct and indirect effect, state liability | http://www.essaylaw.co.uk | Online law education
Views: 15737 Essaylaw.co.uk
29 - Supermacy of EU Law
 
03:45
Section 8 - EU and UK Law - Lecture 3
EU Supremacy
 
01:18
EU Supremacy | http://www.essaylaw.co.uk | Online law education
Views: 4156 Essaylaw.co.uk
EU Law - Direct Effect
 
09:15
Direct effect allows rights under EU law to be enforced within a domestic court system. Vertical direct effect allows rights to be enforced against an emanation of the state while horizontal direct effect allows rights to be enforced against other individuals or against companies. Direct effect is also conditional on the type of EU law that is being enforced. Treaties are a form of primary legislation and have vertical and horizontal direct effect so long as the relevant treaty article matches the conditions set out in Van Gend en Loos (1963): Clear and unconditional Prohibition Not dependent on member state implementation Regulations are directly applicable and as such also have vertical and horizontal direct effect. Directives, in principle, only have vertical direct effect because they are an obligation for member states to implement them. Even then they can only be enforced when they grant rights to individuals (Defrenne v SABENA (No. 2) (1979)) and the time limit for implementation has passed (Pubblico Ministero v Ratti (1979)). However there is a way that directives can have horizontal direct effect and this is known as indirect effect. This works because the courts themselves can be considered as emanations of the state and so in their judgments have to enforce EU law between individuals. This concept first arose in Von Colson v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (1984) and was applied in the UK through Lister v Forth Dry Dock [1989]. An emanation of the state was defined in Foster v British Gas plc [1990] as a body that: Provides a public service Under the control of the state Has special powers beyond those of individuals
Views: 41357 marcuscleaver
EU Law: Direct Effect in 8mins
 
08:09
This video provides an in-depth analysis of the workings of direct effect with diagrams and notes to aid understanding. For more educational tools please see: www.komillachadha.com
Views: 58385 Komilla Chadha
Sources of EU law - key points
 
03:46
A very quick overview of treaties, regulations and directives, plus direct applicability and direct effect with reference to case law. Sorry if it's a little shaky, muffled or you can't read the writing - needs must.
Views: 903 Sarah Harwood
EU Law - State Liability
 
06:33
State liability is slightly different from direct effect because rather than suing an emanation of the state they are suing that member state itself. We know that directives have vertical direct effect but not horizontal direct effect especially when there is no national law in place. In the case of Francovich this was a real problem as he wanted to enforce his rights against a bank which was a private entity. When this wasn't possible he instead decided to sue the state directly and the European Court of Justice allowed this when the following conditions are met: The directive gives rights to individuals The rights are identifiable within the directive Causal link between the failure to implement the directive and the damage suffered Francovich concerned the non-implementation of directives but in Brasserie du Pêcheur and Factortame [1996] it was applied in relation to all forms of EU law although the condition was added that the breach must be sufficiently serious State liability can come up as an essay question in terms of how liable the state is for the actions of the judiciary but is also likely to come up indirectly regarding questions of article 258 and the enforcement of Community law.
Views: 18144 marcuscleaver
Constitutional Law - Parliamentary Sovereignty
 
14:47
GET THE COMPLETE COURSE FOR $10! - https://goo.gl/wGcMuF For Private Tutoring: [email protected] Enroll in the Online Law School: https://www.patreon.com/TheLawSimplified NEW! Public Law on Kindle - http://bit.ly/PublicLawKindle Recommended Reading: Q&A Public Law by Richard Glancey (Kindle Edition) - http://amzn.to/2g56Wvq Q&A Public Law by Richard Glancey (Paperback Edition) - http://amzn.to/2fADCcu Constitutional & Administrative Law by Hilaire Barnett - http://amzn.to/2gLj1Hj For complete courses, including Spider Graphs and Case Summaries, visit: English Legal System: http://www.udemy.com/learn-english-law/ Criminal Law: https://goo.gl/N1PM61 Contract Law: https://goo.gl/MBC7A8 Constitutional Law: https://goo.gl/wGcMuF Property Law: https://goo.gl/tGExGJ Tort Law: https://goo.gl/GAhG6p Trust Law: https://goo.gl/9JHgRH Jurisprudence: https://law.vhx.com Commercial Law: https://goo.gl/r22QDr Conflict of Laws: https://goo.gl/TVzZmj History of English Law: https://goo.gl/A22PDL GET ALL COURSES FOR $50! https://goo.gl/9K5UXs Examination Techniques: ACE Constitutional Law: https://goo.gl/JiHNp7 ACE Contract Law: https://goo.gl/rp4Vh9 ACE Criminal Law: https://goo.gl/swxuCc ACE Tort Law: https://goo.gl/1BLVCe FACEBOOK: http://www.facebook.com/TheLawSimplified GOOGLE+: http://www.plus.google.com/+TheLawSimplified INSTAGRAM: http://www.instagram.com/thelawsimplified
Views: 57274 The Law Simplified
27 - Introduction to EU Law
 
03:21
What is EU law? In this video, we try to offer our audience an easy to understand introduction to the extremely popular topic, starting off with its two branches: primary (such as treaties) and secondary legislation (such as regulations, directives and decisions derived from the principles and objectives set out in treaties). We then delve deeper into primary legislation, focusing mainly on the two founding treaties: Treaty of the EU (TEU) and Treaty of the Functioning of the EU (TFEU), and the purposes each of them serve as well as the aims set out in them that are achieved through legal acts. It is mentioned that not all of these legal acts are binding nor do all of them apply to all EU countries. Moving on, we focus on secondary legislation, discussing what regulations, directives, decisions, recommendations and opinions are and who can issue them, with examples of course. Where can you find out more? Follow us on each of our social media platforms: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/swbil/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/swbil/ OR Visit our website: https://www.bsolpk.org/
1 - Introduction to EU Law
 
03:25
Did you know that EU itself was created by the Treaty on European Union? Do you know what is that treaty called? It is called the Maastricht Treaty. The Treaty on European Union has a non-unitary structure. Which means it established the ‘three pillar’ approach to the EU. What are those three pillars? They are: 1) the Community; 2) the Common Foreign and Security Policy ; 3) Justice and Home Affairs. Interestingly Case-law delivered in Luxembourg has moved a lot since 1957. It harmonizes with the creation of a Constitution for Europe. Supremacy and direct effect are typically viewed as two of the three essential principles epitomizing the legal constitutionalization of the Treaty, the third concept is pre-emption. EU Community was never intended to be a democratic organization. The preamble and the first part of the Treaty of Rome have not used the word ‘democracy’ at all and ‘liberty’ is spoken of, like ‘peace,’ as a value to be defended. Indeed, the Assembly, composed of members chosen by the national Parliaments, was involved in the exercise of legislative power solely as the addressee of information and as a consultative organ. The power to legislate, though admittedly only on the basis of proposals submitted by the Commission, belonged to the Council of Ministers, an institution composed paradoxically of the leading members of the national executives. In the case of Van Gend en Loos v. Nederlandse Administratie, the focus is on the direct effect of Community law, but the court also notes that the Community is a new legal order, under which they established a new legal order for the benefit of which the States have LIMITED their sovereign rights and the subjects of which comprise not only Member States but also their nationals. The essential characteristics of the Community legal order which has thus been established are in particular its primacy over the law of the Member States and the direct effect of a whole series of provisions which are applicable to their nationals and to the Member States themselves. States have limited sovereign rights in order to access Community benefits. Then in the case of Brunner v. European Union Treaty, The Constitutional court clarified that it wouldn't give up its capacity to settle on the similarity of Community law with the essentials of the German Constitution, and would keep on practicing an intensity of audit over the extent of Community skill. Foundation Kadi and Al Barakaat International v. Council case is a rare example of fundamental rights being used to challenge EU legislation, rather than member state legislation.This case illustrates The importance of fundamental rights protection in the EU as a constitutional guarantee forming part of the very foundations of the legal order. The EC as ‘autonomous legal system which is not to be prejudiced by an international agreement’. Lastly, the EEC (which is the European economic community) Treaty, which is an international agreement, makes up the constitutional charter of a Community, based on the Rule of Law. As the Court of Justice has consistently held, the Community treaties · a new legal order for the benefit of which the States have limited their sovereign rights, in established r wider fields, and the subjects of which comprise not the only Member States but also their nationals. The essential characteristics of the Community legal order which has thus been established are in particular its primacy over the law of the Member States and the direct effect of a whole series of provisions which are applicable to their nationals and to the Member States themselves.
EU Law: Article 267 Procedure/Preliminary Rulings in 9mins
 
09:33
This video covers how Art 267 references are made, why they are used and the effect of the preliminary rulings which result from this. For more videos please see www.komillachadha.com
Views: 15831 Komilla Chadha
Law-making in the EU
 
02:46
The checks and balances which help guarantee a representative process. Comment on: Google + http://tinyurl.com/orh99s6 Facebook http://www.facebook.com/europeanparliament Twitter https://twitter.com/Europarl_EN EuroparlTV video ID: 5d5939dc-e3bf-4b45-b902-a63f0160e51a
Views: 17299 European Parliament
[HOT NEWS] We will end the supremacy of EU law- Davis
 
01:24
[HOT NEWS] We will end the supremacy of EU law- Davis Brexit Secretary David Davis sets out the key goals of the planned Great Repeal Bill.
Views: 123 HOT NEWS
Public Law - Parliamentary Sovereignty
 
16:33
A video lecture on the subject of parliamentary sovereignty for UK law students.
Views: 26380 marcuscleaver
What is... The Free Movement of Goods
 
16:29
Free Movement of Goods you say? In this first EU encyclopedia piece I explain the basic principles and advantages of the free movement of goods, one of the four constituent areas of the European Single Market. SOURCES: General Information: Barnard and Piers EU Law, Chapter 12 Ian Dunt: Brexit What the Hell Happens Next? pp 40-45 Cassis de Dijon: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:61978CJ0120&from=en Article 30 TFEU http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-the-functioning-of-the-european-union-and-comments/part-3-union-policies-and-internal-actions/title-ii-free-movement-of-goods/chapter-1-the-customs-union/172-article-30.html Article 110 TFEU: http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-the-functioning-of-the-european-union-and-comments/part-3-union-policies-and-internal-actions/title-vii-common-rules-on-competition-taxation-and-approximation-of-laws/chapter-2-tax-provisions/378-article-110.html Article 144 TFEU http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12008E114&from=EN Article 36 TFEU- Read in conjunction with Articles 34 and 35 http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-the-functioning-of-the-european-union-and-comments/part-3-union-policies-and-internal-actions/title-ii-free-movement-of-goods/chapter-3-prohibition-of-quantitative-restrictions-between-member-states/178-article-36.html Also very interesting watch and covers the topics in detail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxEvHRRaGY8&t=2336s
Views: 2333 Niklas Sloan
EU Judicial Review - Arts 263 and 265 TFEU
 
23:49
An examination of judicial review and the relevant procedure under EU law and in particular articles 263, 264 and 265. Firstly there has to be a binding piece of secondary legislation such as a regulation, directive or decision and not a recommendation or opinion as these are not binding. A review has to be brought within two months of publication in the Official Journal or two months from when the applicant first new about the act. There are four grounds of review: Lack of competence (Germany v EP & Council [2000] (Tobacco advertising case)) Infringement of an essential procedural requirement (Roquette Frères v Council [1980]) Infringement of the Treaty or any rule of law relating to its application (Hautala v Council [2001]) Misuse of power (UK v Council (Re. Working Time Directive) [1996]) Locus standi for privileged applicants such as the European Council, European Commission, European Parliament and Member States is automatic. Semi-privileged applicants such as the European Central Bank, the Court of Auditors and the Committee of Regions can also challenge legislation when it affects their prerogaative. Challenging legislation through judicial review is much harder for non-privileged applicants as they can only challenge three types of act: An act addressed to that person An act of direct and individual concern A regulatory act of direct concern with no implementing measures The interpretation of direct and individual concern by the Court of Justice has been very problematic. A person is only directly concerned when they are directly affected by a piece of legislation such as in Société Louis Dreyfus et Cie v. Commission [1998]. There can be no intervening discretion exercised by a Member State as was the case in Eridana v Commission [1969]. Individual concern is the most controversial area of judicial review since the case of Plaumann v Commission [1963] and the establishment of the Plaumann test. The idea of a fixed, closed class has been interpreted so narrowly as to be almost meaningless. In fact it almost only ever applies retrospectively as in the case of Alfred Toepfer v Commission [1965]. There have been attempts to ameliorate the effects of Plaumann such as the abstract terminology test of Calpak [1980] but this had little practical effect despite claiming to look behind the form to the substance of a piece of legislation. Codorniu [1994] took Calpak to its logical conclusion but unfortunately has never been followed. Attorney-General Jacobs in Unión de Pequeños Agricultores (UPA) v Council [2002] suggested an alternative test based on whether the legislation had a substantial, adverse impact on the applicant but this was rejected in that case itself as well as in Jégo-Quéré [2004]. The actual meaning of the final type of act (A regulatory act of direct concern with no implementing measures) is still unclear since the Lisbon treaty but both Inuit v EP & Council [2013] and T&L Sugars v Commission [2015] shed some light and suggest the insertion does not break new ground beyond Plaumann. Article 264 empowers the court to annul a piece of legislation if a successful challenge is brought by an applicant. Article 265 is the converse to article 263 and allows a challenge for failure to act. However there has to be a duty to act (European Parliament v Commission [1985]) but the legislation must have been addressed to that person (Lord Bethel v Commission [1982]). Even if the applicant is successful the institution can respond by simply defining its position. An alternative for non-privileged applicants is to use art 267 (the preliminary reference procedure) but this has its own risks. An applicant has to break the law to bring the challenge and it is not certain that a court will make a reference to the CJEU.
Views: 16222 marcuscleaver
What is PRINCIPLE OF CONFERRAL? What does PRINCIPLE OF CONFERRAL mean?
 
02:10
What is PRINCIPLE OF CONFERRAL? What does PRINCIPLE OF CONFERRAL mean? PRINCIPLE OF CONFERRAL meaning - PRINCIPLE OF CONFERRAL definition - PRINCIPLE OF CONFERRAL explanation. Source: Wikipedia.org article, adapted under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ license. SUBSCRIBE to our Google Earth flights channel - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6UuCPh7GrXznZi0Hz2YQnQ The principle of conferral is a fundamental principle of European Union law. According to this principle, the EU is a union of member states, and all its competences are voluntarily conferred on it by its member states. The EU has no competences by right, and thus any areas of policy not explicitly agreed in treaties by all member states remain the domain of the member states. This principle has always underpinned the European Union, but it was explicitly specified for the first time in the failed Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe and carried over into its replacement, the Treaty on European Union. It is spelled out fully in Articles 4 and 5 of the TEU. Both Articles make clear that the Union acts only within the limits of the competences conferred upon it by the Member States, but then state clearly that 'Competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States'. Article 4(1) repeats this and goes on to stipulate that 'The Union shall respect the equality of Member States before the Treaties as well as their national identities, inherent in their fundamental structures, political and constitutional, inclusive of regional and local self-government. It shall respect their essential State functions, including ensuring the territorial integrity of the State, maintaining law and order and safeguarding national security. In particular, national security remains the sole responsibility of each Member State.' In many areas the Union has shared competence with the Member States. Once the Union has passed legislation in these fields competence moves to the Union.
Views: 1128 The Audiopedia
4 - Introduction to Parliamentary Supremacy
 
09:14
Section 2 - Parliamentary Sovereignty - Lecture 1
The myth of the supremacy of the UK parliament
 
11:15
Newsnight 3 February 2016
Views: 1243 Still Incorrigible
Public Law: Parliamentary Sovereignty, LLB Study Weekend 2011
 
45:54
Rob Jago provides a lecture on Public Law and parliamentary sovereignty at the 2011 University of London International Programmes LLB Study Weekend. To find out more about our undergraduate laws programmes visit: http://www.londoninternational.ac.uk/llb
Views: 84438 University of London
Public Law - Judicial review
 
21:53
A lecture for law students on judicial review in the UK.
Views: 51273 marcuscleaver
Overview of Separation of Powers & Supremacy Clause
 
02:26
American Government - U.S. Constitution
Views: 811 desoriente0
Parliamentary Sovereignty
 
10:04
Views: 5797 ijmsmith
Fundamental Case Law of the Court of Justice – Making EU Law Work for Citizens
 
02:21
Through its decisions, the Court of Justice of the European Union has made EU law more effective, and strengthened the rights of citizens. This short video explains how 3 of its early rulings have helped achieve this.
The EU Competences Review: Expert Meeting (1)
 
01:26:15
The review of the balance of competences between the UK and the EU, launched by the UK in 2012, sparked a political and academic debate on the core business of the European Union. This expert meeting aims at nourishing this debate. Liberals supporting further European integration in certain policy fields are challenged by others in the same liberal family insisting on a clear division of tasks and competences. In search for a liberal view on the balance of competences, we reflect on this issue from both a theoretical and a practical point of view. How can the concept of multi-level governance and the subsidiarity principle guide us in this debate? And which lessons should we learn from areas where European regulation already limits national scope for policymaking significantly? Answers to these questions might be the stepping stones towards a liberal view on the balance of competences between the EU and its Member States, so as to identify what the EU is all about – and what it is not. The EU competences review: expert meeting The Hague, October 30, 2014 An event organised by the European Liberal Forum asbl (ELF). Supported by TeldersStichting in cooperation with The Academy of Liberalism and Atvira visuomené ir jos draugai. Co-funded by the European Parliament. Neither the European Parliament nor the European Liberal Forum are responsible for the content of the programme, or for any use that may be made of it. The views expressed herein are those of the speaker(s) alone. These views do not necessarily reflect those of the European Parliament and/or the European Liberal Forum asbl.
France: PACE 'betrayed' supremacy of law, human rights - Pushkov
 
00:52
Video ID 20140410 025 M/S Russian delegation sitting [cutaway] M/S Press conference [cutaway] SOT, Alexey Pushkov, Russian delegation head at Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (in Russian): "The worst thing about this story is that PACE betrayed its own principles. The majority in PACE betrayed the principles of the supremacy of law and the supremacy of human rights. The majority just followed suit of serving interests of those countries which are focused on geopolitical accusation against Ukraine. It is very sad to state this because PACE should be an organisation above politics, an organisation that sets standards in certain areas." M/S Olga Borzova and Anvar Makhmutov [cutaway] M/S Journalists and Russian delegation exiting SCRIPT France: PACE 'betrayed' supremacy of law, human rights - Pushkov Leader of the Russian delegation at the Council of Europe, Alexei Pushkov, spoke of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) as having "betrayed the principles of the supremacy of law and the supremacy of human rights" in Strasbourg on Thursday. Referring to the results of talks as part of the PACE Spring Session, the Russian politician continued that it was "very sad to state this because PACE should be an organisation above politics." Earlier Thursday, the Russian delegation to PACE did not attend a session debating the future of Russian powers at the Council of Europe. Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/Ruptly Twitter: http://twitter.com/Ruptly LiveLeak: http://www.liveleak.com/c/Ruptly Google Plus: http://plus.google.com/111498286331086224967 Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/Ruptly YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/RuptlyTV Video on Demand: http://www.ruptly.tv
Views: 448 Ruptly
Against Judicial Supremacy: Obligation of all 3 branches to intepret the Constitution
 
05:50
http://Newt.org/law In his lecture series at the UGA Law School, Newt gives a historical primer on judicial supremacy and the opposing view where all 3 branches need to interpret the Constitution
Views: 3701 Newt Gingrich
Keck et Mithouard - C-269/91 and C-268/91
 
03:31
A brief explanation
Views: 6624 DrWernaart
The role of the Charter of Fundamental Rights within the EU legal framework.
 
05:10
Law Society, Matrix Chambers & Middlesex University Talks: Session Eight: 26 March 2015, 6pm-8pm. The role of the Charter of Fundamental Rights within the EU legal framework and its relevance for the UK legal order. Aidan O’Neill QC (Scot), Barrister, Matrix Chambers, London and Laurent Pech, Jean Monnet Professor of EU Public Law, Head of the Law and Politics Department at Middlesex University London. Respect for fundamental rights is one of the basic principles on which the European Union is based. This joint-lecture will first examine the Charter’s key features, its role within the human rights protection regime of the EU and the remedies available at EU level for violations of human rights. The relevance of the Charter for UK lawyers and judges will be subsequently discussed. Special focus will be given to the following issues: The application of the Charter in national proceedings; the potential for (vertical and/or horizontal) direct effect of Charter rights and the effect of the UK/Polish protocol relating to the EU Charter. Human Rights Practice Short Course This course will focus on the latest developments and emerging issues in European and international human rights practice: themes and systems, law and practice. It is a collaborative course between Middlesex University School of Law, Matrix Chambers and The Law Society, who will host each session. The course is aimed at a broad range of participants, including students, practising lawyers, NGOs, civil servants and academics. There will be nine two hour sessions (on Thursdays, 6pm – 8pm) running from January to April 2015.
Restoring the Supremacy of Parliament to Reject Unwanted Law - Gerard Batten MEP
 
01:50
http://www.ukipmeps.org | http://www.ukip.org • European Parliament, Strasbourg, 20 January 2016 • Bluecard Question: Gerard Batten MEP (London), UK Independence Party (UKIP), Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy group. www.gerardbattenmep.co.uk @GerardBattenMEP - Response: Syed KAMALL MEP (UK Conservatives), ECR group • Debate: Programme of activities of the Dutch Presidency Council and Commission statements [2015/2963(RSP)] .................... • Video: EbS (European Parliament) .................................. • EU Member States: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, Spain, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, United Kingdom
Views: 498 UKIP MEPs
Parliamentary Supremacy - Public Law Free Video Tutorial
 
05:51
Is the UK Parliament Still Supreme? Watch the video understand more For Full Video Discussion http://www.onlinelegalcoach.com
Views: 9137 Adrian Choong
Art 258, 259 and 260 EU Enforcement Procedure
 
22:42
A video for students in the first year at the University of Huddersfield writing their EU Law Coursework on Articles 258, 259 and 260 TFEU - the enforcement procedure under EU law.
Views: 17117 marcuscleaver
The EU Legal Order Part III: EU Institutions
 
09:55
In the following series of clips, I introduce developments associated with the emergence of supranational (EU) and transnational regulatory regimes for a state-based legal framework. You will be referred to sources of law that originate outside the UK but which affect day-to-day life within it, most notably ECHR law and EU law.
Views: 6612 mohsenalattar1
The Sources of EU Law and their Relationships  long clip
 
14:11
BOOK REVIEW THE SOURCES OF EU LAW AND THEIR RELATIONSHIPS: LESSONS FOR THE FIELD OF TAXATION Primary Law, Secondary Law, Fundamental Freedoms and State Aid Rules By Rita Szudoczky IBFD Doctoral Series Volume 32 ISBN: 978 9 08722 294 9 (print) 978 9 08722 295 6 (eBook) www.ibfd.org A THOROUGH AND RIGOROUS APPROACH TO THE STUDY OF EUROPEAN UNION LAW WITH A FOCUS ON TAXATION An appreciation by Phillip Taylor MBE and Elizabeth Taylor of Richmond Green Chambers If you are a tax expert, (whether lawyer, academic, or accountant) or aspire to be one, this book, which features a refreshing, as well as scholarly approach to the taxation aspects of European Union law, should help you enhance your expertise. Published by IBFD it is one of the latest volumes in the “IBFD Doctoral Series”, in line with the declared mission of this distinguished publishing house which has dedicated itself to the dissemination of knowledge of international taxation and also the promotion of the study of taxation in general. This particular and very rigorous examination of the complexities of EU tax law is the doctoral thesis of the author Rita Szudoczky written at the Amsterdam Centre for Tax Law at the University of Amsterdam following her introduction to, in her words, ‘the fascinating world of international and European tax law… at the International Tax Centre in Leiden’. Clearly the author’s EU orientation, as well as her obvious expertise in and enthusiasm for this highly specialized subject makes this book a valuable find for students and academics as well as tax lawyers. The central question which this thesis seeks to address can be broken down into two parts. First, what rules and principles govern the relationships of the different sources of EU law, and second, how do these rules and principles need to be interpreted and applied in order to reflect and reinforce the constitutional character and system nature of EU law. One gathers that the author’s insistence on taking a systematic approach to the examination of EU law as a whole has hitherto been lacking, due for the most part to a number of factors, one of which is that the EU is a ‘supranational’ or federal organization which has evolved from what started out as an economic union. The focus of the book therefore is not just on abstractions and theories, but on the role of case law in the evolution of a legal system that has been developed principally by the Court of Justice. ‘Cases,’ says the author ‘inspire the methodological imagination of juries’ and of course emerge as the basis of a legal system which, it is hoped, has been influenced to a large extent by the prevailing ethos of common law systems. Pointing out that ‘EU law is rarely examined as a legal system’, the author has presented a methodical approach to the subject that is rare. International lawyers, whether tax specialists of not, will doubtless find that the views expressed and substantiated in this book will generate much food for thought, particularly among those concerned about the future of the EU. Certainly the book has made a worthy contribution to the growing body of analysis and commentary on the various aspects of EU law. The publication date is cited as at 23 August 2014.
Views: 920 Phillip Taylor
UK constitution (part 2)
 
08:45
An explanation of major constitutional principles: the rule of law, the supremacy of parliament and the separation of powers.
Views: 9726 LearnLoads
Phillip Taylor MBE review. The Effectiveness & Application of EU & EEA Law in National Courts
 
10:59
BOOK REVIEW THE EFFECTIVENESS AND APPLICATION OF EU AND EEA LAW IN NATIONAL COURTS Principles of Consistent Interpretation Editor: Christian N K Franklin ISBN: 978 1 78068 655 4 INTERSENTIA LTD Intersentia Studies on Courts and Judges www.intersentia.com A TOPICAL REVIEW AT A TIME OF MASSIVE UPHEAVAL IN EUROPE WITH BREXIT An appreciation by Elizabeth Robson Taylor of Richmond Green Chambers and Phillip Taylor MBE, Head of Chambers and Reviews Editor, “The Barrister” This excellent new text from Christian Franklin has been published by Intersentia Studies on Courts and Judges arrives at a turning point for Europe as the United Kingdom prepares to leave the European Union. “The Effectiveness and Application of EU and EEA Law in National Courts” will strike a particular chord with many practitioners and judges as the debate heats up on the issues of jurisdiction. As the author says, “in the current decentralized system of European Union (EU) and European Economic Area (EEA) law enforcement”, national courts will continue to “play a crucial role in securing the effectiveness and application of the law”. And, they play this role at a time of legal turbulence whilst the political world remains deadlocked on the UK’s European future in either the EU or the EEA. It is recognized that much legal research “has been expounded” on how the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Free Trade Association Court (EFTA Court) have established and developed the key mechanism for doing so – namely the principle of consistent interpretation. We are grateful to Franklin for giving us some sage advice of where we are at present on matters of interpretation. And, yet, the principle’s scope and limits can only be fully understood if one looks to the final outcome of cases at national level, and how national courts charged with the duty of applying the principle actually do so when faced with such issues in practice. Adopting an ambitious and consistent approach, contributors from 14 European states have reviewed the reception of the principle through national case-law, focusing on three issues: reception and understanding of the concept, its criteria for application, and its limitations. The individual contributions are “further synthesized and compared in an overarching comparative chapter”. That chapter identifies considerable tension between “the goals of uniform and homogenous application of the principles, and a plurality of different approaches at national level”. The findings further touch on a broader range of issues, providing the reader with insights into the cooperative dialogue between European and national courts more generally. We feel that Franklin’s book is of great interest to academics, undergraduates, national and EU/EEA/EFTA institutional actors, judges, practitioners, and all who are interested in gaining unique insights into the workings of EU and EEA law and culture in practice, including the bunch of Brexiteers seeking radical change within the UK. Thank you. The book was published on 1st September 2018.
Views: 47 Phillip Taylor
EU Law and Integration
 
08:47
BOOK REVIEW EU LAW AND INTEGRATION Twenty years of judicial application of EU Law By Jose Luis Da Cruz Vilanca Hart Publishing ISBN: 978 1 84946 508 3 www.hartpub.co.uk ATTENTION ALL EU WATCHERS! HERE’S A COLLECTION OF ARTICLES TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT ON THE JUDICIAL APPLICATION OF EU LAW An appreciation by Phillip Taylor MBE and Elizabeth Taylor of Richmond Green Chambers To practitioners and lay people alike, the issue of European Union Law can remain something of an enigma especially with the current controversies bubbling around in the United Kingdom. The substantive law area itself has become an effective compulsory subject for law students so the articles by Jose Luis Da Cruz Vilaca are to be welcomed for their insight into this perplexing and often controversial area. Writing the Foreword, Koen Lenaerts who is Vice President of the ECJ describes these articles from his friend as “of great academic interest in that it presents an overview of EU law that, despite covering a period that goes back more than twenty years, has lost none of its relevance”. Lenaerts goes on to say that da Cruz Vilaca also brings an enrichment of practical experience as a legal practitioner and member of the judiciary. These two attributes make this work of great importance as the UK goes through a tortuous period of self-doubt about the efficacy of the European Union itself and how it is working. All will be revealed (we hope) in 2015 when, no doubt, the issue of continued membership will reach a particular political plateau at the General Election. Meantime we have this most interesting and informative collective of diverse commentaries in five parts which cover EU constitutional law; the EU judicial architecture; individuals’ access to justice; European competition law; and various other aspects of substantive EU law under the heading “Studies on EU Law and Economic Integration”. In view of the continuing discussions about whether any changes can be made to the Treaties it is worth remembering what the author puts forward. He writes that the powers of the Member States to amend the Treaties is limited “by the existence of a hard core of principles of EU Treaty law, which cannot be revised without changing the ‘constitutional’ identity of the Union. He goes on to say that this leads to the conclusion that Member States can no longer be considered as the ‘absolute’ masters of the Treaties’. Much of what da Cruz Vilaca says has been echoed recently by Professor Sir Francis Jacobs in the 14th Annual Lecture of the Law Reform Committee at Inner Temple in November 2014 where he addressed the vexed issue of “The European Courts and the UK- what future? A new role for English courts” and specifically endorsed the point da Cruz Vilaca makes so this issue will run for the politicians! We leave the final word to Lenaerts who recommends this collection to readers “who are looking for a work that covers a wide range of rich and varied ideas in the field of EU law.” It does just that. Thank you.
Views: 166 Phillip Taylor
Federalism: Crash Course Government and Politics #4
 
09:15
In which Craig Benzine teaches you about federalism, or the idea that in the United States, power is divided between the national government and the 50 state governments. Craig will teach you about how federalism has evolved over the history of the US, and what powers are given to the federal government, and what stuff the states control on their own. And he punches an eagle, which may not surprise you at all. Produced in collaboration with PBS Digital Studios: http://youtube.com/pbsdigitalstudios Support is provided by Voqal: http://www.voqal.org Want to find Crash Course elsewhere on the internet? Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/YouTubeCrashCourse Twitter - http://www.twitter.com/TheCrashCourse Tumblr - http://thecrashcourse.tumblr.com Instagram - http://instagram.com/thecrashcourse
Views: 1559892 CrashCourse
How Merkel's Germany is legally ALLOWED TO IGNORE EU rules all other nations cave in to
 
04:28
How Merkel's Germany is legally ALLOWED TO IGNORE EU rules all other nations cave in to EUROPEAN Union bosses show a flagrant disregard for their own rules by allowing Germany to ignore the bloc’s laws that other weaker countries are forced to abide by, Express.co.uk can reveal today. Germany has established back-door legislation which overrules the EU’s laws on SUPREMACY. Under these supremacy laws all member nations must subjugate their own courts and laws to the over-arching powers of the European Union. Supremacy is supposed to be the bedrock of the EU. However the Germans have found a way around it, according to an EU lawyer and legal expert. Last year, a shock report revealed that Berlin is the EU’s top rule breaker despite efforts by Angela Merkel, the bloc’s most influential leader, to lecture her colleagues on their wrongdoings. Legal expert Dr Gunnar Beck argues that German lawmakers have fiercely fought to stop the EU from acquiring control over their country’s legislature like no other member of the Brussels project. Dr Beck claims the German Federal Constitutional Court has longed prevented Brussels eurocrats from implementing its true integration strategy. Under EU 'supremacy' laws Euro-legislation trumps national legislation in almost all cases. But Germany has fiercely protected its own sovereignty thorough shrewd and uncompromising legal moves. Dr Beck highlighted three legal challenges where the FCC moved to reject the "supremacy" of EU law. He added: "In its long and politically charged judgment the FCC made clear that Germany’s acceptance of the supremacy of Community law was limited by at least four factors." Outlining those factors, he added: "The need for democratic legitimation by means of parliamentary assent, the presence of a demos as the expression of the ‘spiritual, social and political’ homogeneity of a people which understands itself as ‘one’ as a necessary source of political allegiance, the constitutional guarantee of fundamental rights and the basic principles of the legal certainty and predictability as one of the constituents of the rule of law which underlie the principle of the specific transfer of limited competences to the EU." The guidelines set by the FCC prevent the EU from taking full control over the law-making process in Germany. The German constitution acts as a "side-constraint" to anything done in Brussels, Dr Beck argues. "Through the act of conferral of sovereign rights and powers by parliamentary assent to the founding treaties of the European Union, the Union acquires the democratic legitimacy it would otherwise lack," he said. "At the same time the principle limits the powers of the European Union by reference to the overriding requirements imposed by the liberal-democratic basic order guaranteed by the German constitution. "The principle of conferral thus safeguards the democratic-majoritarian foundation of the German constitution through the need for German parliamentary assent as a precondition for every additional step in the process towards European integration." Berlin's FCC has the "jurisdiction to strike down any unconditional legislation" whether it is created in Brussels or by the German parliament. The EU, which claims to be a political partnership "based on the rule of law" signs each of its members up to follow the rules it devises in Brussels and enforced by the Luxembourg-based European Court of Justice. EU countries opting to flout the rules are often penalised through fines, sanctions and even limited decision-making abilities. Infringements against member states can even be started for delayed implementation or inadequate conversion into national laws, which are often related to policy areas like air pollution, water quality and fire protection. The European Commission, the bloc's civil service, released figures that revealed from the end of 2016, Germany ranked joint top, with Spain, of a list of countries facing the enforcement actions. Enforcement procedures are started by the Commission, who estimate whether EU rules have been broken, although it is ultimately the Court of Justice who take the final decision.
Views: 45 News News
Parliamentary sovereignty
 
04:46
UK parliamentary sovereignty explained by Essaylaw.co.uk | http://www.essaylaw.co.uk | Online law education Facebook: http://facebook.com/essaylaw.co.uk Twitter: http://twitter.com/essay_law
Views: 1479 Essaylaw.co.uk
The Supremacy Clause - The Treaty 1.1
 
00:23
The Actual Law of the Land
Views: 61 CentralSource
Brexit BOMBSHELL: Harold MacMillan's CHILLING EU warning revealed
 
04:54
Brexit BOMBSHELL: Harold MacMillan's CHILLING EU warning revealed HAROLD MACMILLAN issued a chilling warning about the EEC – the precursor to the EU – before Britain joined the bloc, claiming that Germany was using it as an instrument to assert its supremacy across the continent once more, it can be revealed. On Wednesday, the House of Commons voted in favour of legislation which forces the Government to request another extension for Brexit. Despite Government opposition, the motion passed by just one vote on its third reading, by 313 MPs to 312, and it will now proceed to the House of Lords, which is likely to give its approval. Should this take place, the motion will become legally binding, significantly reducing the chances of a no deal EU exit. It comes as the Conservative Party descended into civil war over Mrs May’s strategy. Senior figures in both main parties raised the prospect of a second referendum to obtain the British public's backing for any deal – and to offer the choice of remaining in the EU. As Britain's future appears even more uncertain with Brexiteers arguing the views of the 52 percent who historically voted to leave the EU in June 2016 are being betrayed, a newly-resurfaced warning about the bloc by former Prime Minister Harold Macmillan has resurfaced. In the late Fifties, full employment combined with an unprecedented rise in consumerism meant Britons saw their standard of living rise. Wages, exports and investment were all up, particularly compared to the austerity of the war years. Despite the good sentiment, suspicions of Germany remained strong in the post-war era, particularly when, by the late Fifties, West Germany’s economy appeared to challenge Britain’s. In 1958, Harold Macmillan issued a chilling warning about the EEC, a year after its creation. He said: “Western Europe dominated in fact by Germany and used as an instrument for the revival of power through economic means… is really giving them on a plate what we fought two wars to prevent.” Mr Macmillan was not the only one who feared Berlin. According to 2017 report “Euroscepticism and Opposition to British Entry into the EEC” by the French Journal of British studies, a British official similarly warned that the EEC would provide “a means of re-establishing the hegemony of Germany”. Despite the warning, three years after, Mr Macmillan made a formal application to join the EEC after "long contemplation", as the entry was beginning to make economic sense for him. As the Sixties drew on, the EEC – set up in 1958 – accounted for more and more of the UK's trade. However, his hopes were crushed by French President Charles De Gaulle, who denied Britain an entry as he feared it was still too closely tied to the US to co-operate fully with its European partners. After De Gaulle's death in 1970, Britain successfully applied for a third time under Prime Minister Edward Heath. Since the bloc's creation, Germany has been accused of trying to reassert its supremacy across the continent many times. More recently, political analyst Mark Brolin claimed in his 2016 book “A State of Independence: Why the EU is the problem and not the solution” that the Maastricht Treaty, which was signed in 1992 by members of the European Community to further European integration, planted the seed to make Germany the most powerful country in the bloc. The political analyst explained the Treaty established the famous “Maastricht criteria”, which meant to put limits on “how much money governments in the EU could spend, a country’s deficit – the difference between expenditure and income – could not exceed 3 percent while total debt would have to be less than 60 percent of the size of the country’s economy”. Mr Brolin noted that in order to calm “German anxiety” about giving away their beloved Deutsche Mark, the Treaty also instituted a “no bailout principle”, meaning that no eurozone country was ever going to be forced to bail out another. According to the economist, the “Maastricht criteria” along with the creation of the European Monetary Institute in Frankfurt, did three things: “It turned the European Community into a fundamentally political project. “It put Britain on a coalition course with France and Germany. "And ironically, contrary to [French President Francois] Mitterand’s strategic gamble, it planted the seeds for again making Germany Europe’s most powerful country.”
Views: 6395 Gevul News
Sakharov Debate 2018: "Control taken back? Brexit, the People & Parliament" (30.11.18)
 
01:30:07
The European Parliament Liaison Office in the UK co-hosted the 2018 Sakharov public debate with the UCL European Institute. The demand to “take back control” played a central role in the Leave campaign. The UK was to regain power not only over its borders, but also over its way of life and its laws. UK citizens would be re-empowered through their democratically elected national, for some regional, and local representatives, whom they could hold to account at the ballot box. Parliament was to become sovereign again, able to change legislation it deemed no longer appropriate. Laws and rules applicable in the country would be made here once again, freeing the country from the shackles of the European Court of Justice and the supremacy of EU over UK law. As such, Brexit promised to enhance both citizens’ political rights and parliamentary sovereignty. The former, which are the original and main part of international human rights, encompass rights of participation, including the rights to vote and to petition, as well as to seek legal remedy or redress and to procedural fairness. The latter, as a principle of the UK constitution, makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK, which can create or end any law. Generally, the courts cannot overrule its legislation and no Parliament can pass laws that its successors cannot change. Four months before the UK is scheduled to leave the EU, this panel debate will take stock of both. o How have our political rights and parliamentary sovereignty fared in the process of negotiating Brexit and drafting the withdrawal bill? How has this process affected the balance between the government/ civil servants and the legislature? How far was Parliament able to check, influence, and hold the executive accountable? How did checks and balances between government, Parliament and the Courts play out in the negotiations, and in transposing the whole body of EU law onto the UK statute book? o What is the situation likely to be as a result of Brexit? Will Parliament stand empowered? Will we as citizens be able to exercise our political rights more meaningfully? How much of our law will be made domestically, and how far will UK laws, standards and regulations, still have to mirror EU ones? Will this change down the line and, if so, when and how? What will it mean for UK citizens to lose their EU citizenship and the political rights that come with it? o What will the Brexit referendum do to the political rights of particular groups, including British citizens in the UK, British expats settled in the EU and EU citizens living in the UK? SPEAKERS: Gina MILLER, Businesswoman and transparency activist James CARVER, MEP for the West Midlands Prof Matthew GOODWIN, University of Kent and Chatham House Dr Ronan McCrea, Faculty of Laws, UCL MODERATOR: Martine CROXALL, BBC News Presenter Find out more: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/unitedkingdom/en/brexitpublic/past_events/events2018/sakharov-debate-2018-control-taken-back-brexit-the-people-and-parliament.html ➡️ Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/EPinUK ➡️ Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/EPinUK/ ➡️ Follow us on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/epiouk/
Views: 133 EPinUK
The EU Legal Order Part II: The European Union
 
11:13
In the following series of clips, I introduce developments associated with the emergence of supranational (EU) and transnational regulatory regimes for a state-based legal framework. You will be referred to sources of law that originate outside the UK but which affect day-to-day life within it, most notably ECHR law and EU law.
Views: 2884 mohsenalattar1
Brexit: Legal & Constitutional Requirements
 
01:40:09
Held on 13 July 2016, UCL Faculty of Laws hosted this public event on the constitutional implications of Brexit. Constitutional and European law experts from UCL discussed what the legal constraints are on the process of leaving the European Union, and how they might influence the process of negotiations and the UK’s future relations with the EU. About this event Following the result of the referendum, the country is about to embark on a process of leaving the EU. In these difficult moments, it is crucial that this process is in accordance with legal and constitutional requirements. The constitutional framework governing Brexit needs to be laid out clearly, and with precision, for the benefit of both the people and government officials. Questions that were addressed included: - Is Parliamentary approval needed for triggering article 50? - What role should Parliament have in the Brexit process? - Can and should there be exit negotiations with the EU before the triggering of article 50? - What are the possible options after article 50 has been triggered? - Can the notice of withdrawal be withdrawn? - What are the options for future relations with the EU? - How will Brexit affect areas of UK law that have been heavily dependent on EU law? - How will Brexit affect the constitutional dimension of devolution? Introduction by Professor Dame Hazel Genn DBE QC (Hon), Dean of UCL Laws Chaired by Joshua Rozenberg, Legal Commentator and Journalist Speakers included: Professor Piet Eeckhout (UCL Laws), Professor of EU Law Dr Tom Hickman (UCL Laws), Reader in Public Law Professor Jeff King (UCL Laws), Professor of Law Professor George Letsas (UCL Laws), Professor of the Philosophy of Law Dr Virginia Mantouvalou (UCL Laws), Reader in Labour Law & Human Rights Dr Ronan McCrea (UCL Laws), Senior Lecturer in EU and Constitutional Law This event has been generously supported by UCL’s Global Engagement Office More information: http://www.laws.ucl.ac.uk/event/brexit/
Views: 578 UCL LAWS
Transnational Law as an Excuse
 
04:04
Law teaching and theory in continental Europe is based on the supremacy of the nation state, but in the modern world this makes no sense. Recent research by Professor César Arjona of ESADE Law School challenges the idea of the supremacy of the nation state and reflects on the importance of promoting transnational law as a key factor in facting the challenges of a globalised world. According to Arjona, "Transnational law is changing paradigms because it's challenging the main principle that law means law from the state, and that non-state forms of regulation do not deserve to be part of legal education."
Views: 805 ESADE

Crtani za djecu online dating
Application to go fuck yourself
Caixinha de promessas evangelicas online dating
Documentales de terrorismo online dating
Interesting first messages online dating