Suchergebnisse

Abstract
This article explores the concept of European Union (EU) resilience in the area of investment protection and Investor–State dispute settlement. The article adopts a functional approach to investment protection and suggests that reforming dispute settlement procedures in line with current Commission initiatives is key to promoting open strategic autonomy for the EU. Support for those initiatives is however weak, also among EU Member States. It is argued that EU resilience requires new tools for more unity and coherence in external EU action, both generally and for the reform of Investor–State dispute settlement in particular. The tool devised here is an increased loyalty standard coupled with a justification test, based on both a modernized comprehensive reading of loyalty obligations in primary law and the effectiveness principle and rationale as applied in case law. The novel approach promises significantly better results in terms of commanding coherence in external action while fully respecting the principle of conferred powers. It challenges traditional power dynamics, but incorporates a bold vision for external EU action that is truly autonomous and assertive.

This book takes a fresh look at the external relations of the European Union (EU) and in particular the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). Rather than focusing exclusively on the competence aspects of the institutions and actors, the book makes the case that the CFSP can be understood as a system of governance, which produces effects beyond the traditional tools associated with foreign policy. The theoretical approach draws on insights from new institutionalism, constructivism and the institutional theory of law and emphasises how the institutionalised forms of cooperation in the ex

The European Parliament enjoys an array of powers in development cooperation, ranging from legislative and budgetary powers to scrutiny and democratic oversight. However, its role has largely been overlooked and generally been absent from the key debates in the EU foreign policy literature. Partly this stems from the 'low politics' nature of development cooperation, when set against the 'high politics' of EU external relations as typified by CFSP/CSDP and trade. This article combines a legal analysis of the EP's post-Lisbon powers in EU development cooperation with an examination of the Multiannual Financial Framework, the European Consensus on Development and interinstitutional interactions to assess how the EP has succeeded in gaining a more significant role in this policy field. The article argues that the 'low politics' of EU development cooperation is highly susceptible to the EP's institutional assertion and empowerment in overall EU external relations.

A fully updated third edition, this unique compilation of materials, cases, and commentary on EU external relations law is both a valuable teaching tool on the foreign relations of the European Union, as well as an indispensable first initiation in the legal foundations of the external action of the Union for practitioners

AbstractThe Lisbon Treaty has fundamentally revised the external relations of the EU in pursuit of more visibility, coherence and consistency. The EU is, for instance, given a single legal personality, the pillar structure is (formally) abolished, new functions are created to reinforce its external representation and external policies appear to be streamlined. But is there more to it than meets the eye? A critical legal assessment is given of the major Treaty modifications relating to the EU external relations whilst addressing two underlying issues. First it is questioned whether the Member States have really given up their traditional reluctance to share fully the international scene with the EU. It is argued that the Lisbon Treaty in fact means to redress the balance in favour of intergovernmentalism under CFSP. A second crucial and related issue links to the silent dialogue with the CJEU to be discerned in the Lisbon Treaty. It wavers between the codification of important case law, such as Kadi, and attempts at containing or even reversing case law which was more prejudicial to the Member States' interests, such as the Ecowas judgment. In so doing the Lisbon Treaty again raises interesting yet complex legal questions which will most likely necessitate further clarification through case law.

Chapter 1. Intoroduction /Lorenzmaier) -- Part A: Evolution and Current Challenges of the External Action of the Union: From Shared Competences to Shared Values -- Chapter 2. New Challenges for The Union's Treaty Making Powers and Common Values in Implementing Its Agreements (Müller-Graff) -- Chapter 3. From ERTA to Singapore - and Beyond (Vedder) -- Chapter 4. Exclusive and Shared Competences after the Singapore Opinion of the European Court of Justice - 2/15 Revisited (Lorenzmaier) -- Chapter 5. Mixed Agreements after ECJ-Opinion 2/15 on the EU-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (Kumin) -- Chapter 6. The EU-Swiss Sectoral Approach Under Pressure – Not Least Because of Brexit (Tobler) -- Chapter 7. The Ratification Saga of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement: Some Lessons for the Practice of Mixed Agreements (van Elsuwege) -- Part B: EU Cooperation with its Eastern Neighborhood and Eurasia: Shared Values v. Closer/Remote Integration -- Chapter 8. Challenges of EU-Ukraine AA's Effective Implementation into the legal order of Ukraine (Petrov) -- Chapter 9. Impact of the EU-Georgia Association Agreement on the Legal Order of Georgia (Gabrichidze) -- Chapter 10. Principles and Values of Fair Competition in the EU and its Association Agreements with Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia (Smyrnova) -- Chapter 11. The EU-Kazakhstan Enhanced Partnership: An Overview and Evaluation (Kembayev) -- Chapter 12. - EU-Armenia Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement: A New Instrument of Promoting EU's Values and General Principles of EU Law (Khvorostiankina) -- Chapter 13. Pork, Peace and Principles: The Relations between the EU and the Eurasian Economic Union (Dragneva) -- Chapter 14. The EU and Russia: Old Legal Grounds for New "Selected Engagement" Relations (Kalinichenko) -- Chapter 15. The EU and Belarus. Current and Future Contractual Relations (Karliuk) -- Chapter 16. Conclusion (Lorenzmaier/Petrov).

EU External Relations Law and Policy significantly evolved since the seminal Singapore Opinion in the Court of Justice (ECJ). This paper analyses the new trade and sustainable development (TSD) policies by the European Union (EU) and highlights how the changes at the EU domestic level in the course of the EU Green Deal have fundamentally changed the outlook for EU external action and even changed EU External Relations Law in the process. The use of constitutional objectives in external relations is now firmly established but the new mix of autonomous and cooperative elements also changes the more fundamental principles on which EU foreign relations are based.While the EU is still finding the right balance between autonomous measures and international cooperation, the new flexibility, particularly to address global sustainable development challenges and in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) allow the EU greater foreign policy flexibility in areas covered by global targets such as the SDGs, the Paris Agreement and the new Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. It is argued that the existence of global goals and targets combined with EU internal action in the context of the EU Green Deal fundamentally change the availability and legality of EU External Relations Law on Trade and Sustainability.

In the final days of 2020, the European Union and the United Kingdom concluded a Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) covering a broad range of policy areas, including cooperation of law enforcement authorities and social security systems. The EU-UK TCA is unique as concerns the circumstances of its negotiation and adoption, as well as its substance. However, contrary to the argument of the EU institutions, the agreement will have broad implications for the understanding of the EU's external competence and Member States' ability to act in areas that are national competence and rely on national budgets. We are critical of the legitimacy of the TCA's conclusion process, consider that the lack of a deep constitutional analysis of the consequences of EU-only conclusion of the TCA, and of the TCA itself, are problematic, and believe that the choices made are likely to create difficulties for the implementation and enforcement of the agreement. ; Peer reviewed

Personality and powers of the EU -- International representation of the EU -- Treaty-making procedures -- Mixed agreements -- The EU in international organizations -- EU sanctions and countermeasures -- Common commercial policy -- Cooperation policies and humanitarian aid -- Enlargement and neighbourhood policy -- External environmental policy -- Common foreign and security policy -- The status of international law in the EU -- International agreements of the member states

In this second edition, new case law and legislative developments are critically discussed and previous material updated to reflect new international agreements. Combining key primary legal materials relating to foreign relations powers of the EU with editorial commentary, this book is an ideal resource for students, scholars, and practitioners

AbstractIn the European Union, private international law has almost exclusively been developed through the adoption of internal acts (particularly EU Regulations) in the pursuit of internal goals (principally, enhancing the efficient functioning of the internal market, and more recently and broadly the construction of an area of freedom, security and justice). This focus has and must come under challenge in light of two developments. The first is the apparent establishment of EU exclusive external competence in the field of private international law, creating the opportunity for external action by the EU. The second is the increased recognition that internal action by the EU has external effects, which should be viewed not merely as incidental but also as potentially instruments of external policy. In conjunction, these developments demand consideration of what role private international law could and should play as part of EU external relations. This article critically examines a range of possible techniques which might be adopted in relation to this new external dimension of EU private international law. These methods are not necessarily unique to private international law or the EU, and thus this article also provides a case study of the range of legal techniques which can be used by international actors to project policies externally.