Articles

Free Trade Agreements after the Treaty of Lisbon in the Light of the Case Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union

A. VAN WAEYENBERGE, P. PECHO

European Law Journal

novembre 2014, vol. 20, n°6, pp.749-762

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2514608


Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) are increasingly employed by the European Union (EU) as a tool of its internal market and external relations policy. This article addresses the evolution of FTAs through the jurisprudential lens of the Court of Justice of the EU. To this end, and after clarifying key constitutional issues (competence, substance and hierarchy), it discusses the Court's case-law on the direct effect of certain measures, and addresses a selection of cross-functional questions regarding the interpretation of material law founded in the Court's case-law. As a matter of general tendency, the jurisprudence takes a rather liberal stance in recognising direct effects of FTAs concerning analogical interpretation of economic freedom. By contrast, a more restrictive approach appears to have been applied to the interpretation of provisions having an impact on the possibility of third states' citizens to reside in the EU

L'affaire Eurotunnel-SeaFrance : une mésentente cordiale en manque d'Europe

P. CORRUBLE

Le Droit Maritime Français

janvier 2014, vol. 66, pp.3-13

Départements : Droit et fiscalité

http://www.wk-transport-logistique.fr/preview/BeDhHlDgIoCfHkHkCgBe/presse/dmf/droit_maritime_franetccedilais_2014/accueil-acteurs-urbains.html


Le juge et les études d'impact

A. ALEMANNO

Revue Française d'Administration Publique

2014, vol. 1, n°149, pp.179-194

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Mots clés : Analyse d’impact contrôle juridictionnel transparence données empiriques élaboration des politiques publiques Impact Analysis judicial review empirical data public policy-making.


Cette contribution vise à explorer le rôle que le juge est amené à jouer dans le cadre des études d’impact de projets de loi ou d’actes réglementaires, et tout particulièrement leurs interactions, qui sont de plus en plus fréquentes. Elle montre comment ces instruments d’évaluation de l’impact législatif améliorent la rationalité et le caractère démocratique du processus décisionnel, mais aussi sa transparence et son accessibilité au public, tout en le soumettant à un contrôle juridictionnel de plus en plus approfondi. Au vu de l’utilisation accrue des instruments d’étude d’impact par les juridictions, celles-ci – lorsqu’elles sont amenées à décider de la légalité d’une mesure législative – ne se focalisent plus exclusivement sur le résultat du processus décisionnel, mais davantage sur la procédure ayant amené à l’adoption de l’acte en cause. Après avoir systématisé les différentes possibilités de « rencontres » entre les études d’impact, d’une part, et les juridictions, d’autre part, cet article identifie – à travers une analyse de la jurisprudence développée par des juridictions nationales et internationales – les conséquences normatives résultant de ces rencontres. Nous démontrerons que si l’inclusion des études d’impact dans le processus décisionnel empêche les décideurs politiques de prendre des décisions irrationnelles, leur intégration progressive dans le contrôle juridictionnel amène les juges à ne plus décider sur la base d’intuitions ou d’anecdotes, mais plutôt à se fonder sur des arguments empiriquement solides. Ce procédé vertueux est susceptible d’améliorer le cycle d’élaboration des politiques publiques

Le système européen des comptes nationaux et régionaux (S.E.C. 2010)

A. VAN WAEYENBERGE, M. DETHIER

Journal de Droit Européen

2014, pp.413-416

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)


Les états membres sont soumis à des règles de comptabilité qui permettent de mesurer leur activité économique et financière.Entré en vigueur le 1er septembre 2014, le règlement dit "S.E.C. 2010" permet à la Commission européenne d'exercer un meilleur contrôle sur le déficit et la dette des Etats membres

Nudging Legally - On the Checks and Balances of Behavioural Regulation

A. ALEMANNO, A. SPINA

International Journal of Constitutional Law

avril 2014, vol. 12, n°2, pp.429-456

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Mots clés : behavioural sciences, administrative law, nudges, regulation, regulatory policy, policymaking, global administrative law, behavioural policy, impact assessment, randomized control trials, judicial review


As behavioural sciences are unearthing the complex cognitive framework in which people make decisions, policymakers seem increasingly ready to design behaviourally-informed regulations to induce behaviour change in the interests of the individual and society. After discussing what behavioural sciences have to offer to administrative law, this paper explores the extent to which administrative law may accommodate their findings into the regulatory process. After presenting the main regulatory tools capable of operationalizing behavioural insights, it builds a case for integrating them into public policymaking. In particular, this paper examines the challenges and frictions of behavioural regulation with regard both to established features of administrative law, such as the principle of legality, impartiality and judicial oversight and more innovative control mechanisms such as the use of randomized control trials to test new public policies. This analysis suggests the need to develop a legal framework capable of ensuring that behavioural considerations may inform the regulatory process while at the same time guaranteeing citizens' constitutional rights and freedoms vis-à-vis the Regulatory State

Openness at the Court of Justice of the European Union: Toppling a Taboo

A. ALEMANNO, O. STEFAN

Common Market Law Review

janvier 2014, vol. 51, n°1, pp.97-139

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Mots clés : Openness, Transparency, Legitimacy, Accountability, Civil society, European Union, Good governance, Social Media, Participation, Civic empowerment

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2374665


Despite the pervasive rhetoric of transparency characterizing the work of the EU in recent years, the openness of the CJEU vis-à-vis the public appears to have escaped both institutional attention and academic scrutiny. The principle of openness consists of various forms of active cooperation and communication between the EU institutions and the public typically entailing access to information. While the CJEU has consistently guaranteed the principles of transparency of judicial proceedings and publicity of trial vis-à-vis the parties to a dispute as stemming from Article 6 ECHR, it has failed to provide a similar level of ‘openness’ beyond the parties involved in its judicial activities. By establishing that openness applies essentially to the work of the executive and legislative powers, the Court emphasised the specificity of the judicial task with which it has been invested. Yet, Article 15 TFEU expressly extends the application of this principle to the activities of the CJEU, while confining free access to only those related to the exercise of its administrative tasks. Against such backdrop, this article examines to what extent the public is informed or may obtain information concerning the activity of the Court. It does so by distinguishing in its assessment between input openness (related to the written stage of the procedure), throughput openness (related to the oral phase and the Courts’ deliberations), and output openness (related to the delivery of judgment and subsequent diffusion). The article pays due regard to the distinction made in Article 15 TFEU between administrative and judicial tasks. It commends the recent regulatory developments on access to administrative documents as well as the efforts made during the years towards ensuring access to information concerning the judicial activity of the Court. Nonetheless, the article argues that Article 15 (1) TFEU requires rendering all the activities of the Court – regardless of whether they are or are not of an administrative nature – more open to the public than before

The Concept of the Group of Companies: The Specificity of the French Model

N. STOLOWY

Journal of Business Law

2014, n°8, pp.635-650

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Mots clés : Belgium Comparative law Corporate finance Employment France Germany Groups of companies Tax

http://www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk/catalogue/productdetails.aspx?recordid=476&productid=7128


The New Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill

M. WINKLER

Quaderni di SIDIBlog

2014, vol. 1, n°16, pp.320-324

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

http://www.sidi-isil.org/sidiblog/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Quaderni-Sidi-Blog_1_2014-1.pdf


Unpacking the Principle of Openness in EU Law, Transparency, Participation and Democracy

Alberto ALEMANNO

European Law Review

février 2014, vol. 39, n°1, pp.72-90

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Mots clés : Democracy; EU law; Politics and law; Transparency

http://www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk/catalogue/productdetails.aspx\'?'recordid=427&productid=6968



JavaScriptSettings