Source: https://www.mruni.eu/en/mokslo_darbai/jurisprudencija/archyvas/?l=120810
Timestamp: 2019-07-22 01:44:08
Document Index: 282307430

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 49', 'Art. 49', 'Art. 39', 'Art. 39', 'Art. 39', 'Art. 39', 'EuG', 'EuG', 'EuG', 'EuG', 'EuG', 'EuG', 'EuG', 'EuG', 'EuG', 'EuG']

Jurisprudence, 2005, No. 72(64)
Saulius Katuoka. Particularities of the Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe
Abstract. Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe is the European Union document, reflecting its unanimity and new quality in general. The term itself – Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe – is absolutely new in international law and is firstly used as an official name of international treaty.
This article emphasizes the genesis of a very specific constitutionalism process of European Union. Even before the Constitution for Europe was signed, a few authors developed the idea of a „low intensity“ consitutionalization process in EU. This process may be defined analysing Establishing Treaties of European Union and jurisprudence of European Court of Justice. Adoption of the Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe obviously expanded the margins of European Union constitutionalism. Moreover, adoption of the Constitution for Europe raised many other theoretical and practical issues.
Status of the Constitution for Europe is one of the most important issues. This article states that Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe is an international treaty. Sucha conclusion is drawn after deep analysis of the Treaty itself and Vienna Convention on International Treaties.
Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe also sets forth the particular moment of states’ agreement what is one of the most important features of international treaties. Vienna Convention on International Treaties recognises international treaties as such, notwithstanding the name of a treaty and number of documents constituting it. Thus, second conclusion analysing the status of the Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe is that this Treaty is an establishing document of European Union.
It can be summarized that all particularities of an Establishing Treaties may be applied to the Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe. This means that the institutions of European Union will not be able to revise the Constitution for Europe. Revision will be possible only with the consent of all EU Member States. According to the jurisprudence of European Court of Justice it is expected that Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe will have superiority over other European Union legal acts.
Read Download (downloaded - 437)
Ignas Vėgėlė. The Decisions of the European Court of Justice on the Right of Establishment of Companies
Abstract. The freedom of establishment similarly to other freedoms provides broad prohibition of restrictions. This Article analyses the decisions of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on the freedom of establishment for companies, detailing definition of restriction, the conditions for justification of restriction. The special attention is drawn to the forms of establishment – primary and secondary as well as the stages of establishment.
The Article analyses the unwillingness of the Court at least for certain period of time to grant the right of primary establishment to legal persons. In it‘s two decisions Daily Mail and Überseering the ECJ analysed the right of primary establishment, however, even in these decisions the Court does not confirm the definition of primary establishment that is widely accepted by the legal scholars and that is said to be derived from EC art. 43 par 2 and covers the transfer of central administration. It is claimed that after decisions in Überseering and Inspire Art the ECJ has lifted the veil as regards the interpretation of the right of primary establishment under the Treaty establishing European Community (EC Treaty).
The Article concludes that the European Court of Justice clearly distinguishes several phases of establishment. As relates primary establishment, the ECJ distinguishes relations between a company and the Member state under the laws of which it had been incorporated (leaving the country of origin or „emigration phase“) as opposed to relations between the company and the state to which the company transfers its central administration („immigration phase“) applying different ambit of prohibition of restrictions.
Following the analysis of the jurisprudence of the ECJ, the author concludes that the investors are allowed to choose the jurisdiction that fits them best, i.e. seems to them the least restrictive. The investor may establish the company in an jurisdiction and further „re–establish” in another jurisdiction by setting–up agencies or branches. Such establishment may not be interpreted as abusive or fraudulent as the right of secondary establishment is inherent in European Community freedom of establishment. In other words, ECJ allows for so–called „forum shopping” and enables company law competition between the Member states.
The European Court of Justice views as incompatible with the EC Treaty the attempts of the Member states to introduce formally foreign company law regulation, i.e. to apply additional company law requirements for the companies and branches that are established in other Member states but operates exclusively or almost exclusively in the former Member state. The ECJ declares incompatible with the EC Treaty non–recognition of companies, if the company is validly incorporated and operates under the legal system that created it.
Read Download (downloaded - 581)
Skirgailė Žaltauskaitė-Žalimienė. Die neueste Entwiklungstendenzen der Dienstleistungsfreiheit in der EU
Abstract. Bei der Dienstleistungsfreiheit handelt es sich um eine der grundlegenden Freiheiten des Vertrages. Die klassische Dienstleistungsfreiheitskonzeption lässt dem Bestimmungsstaat verlangen, die Dienstleistungserbringer die nationalen Bestimmungen zu befolgen. Man kann doch sagen, dass der Hauptkonflikt (das Prinzip des Herkunftsstaates gegen das Prinzip des Bestimmungsstaates oder die Kompetenz der Staatsregelung gegen den Binnenmarkt) einseitig gelöst wird, d. h. zum Vorteil des Prinzips des Bestimmungsstaates oder der staatlichen Kompetenz. Nach ständiger Rechtsprechung verbietet Artikel 49 EG nicht nur jede Diskriminierung eines in einem anderen Mitgliedstaat ansässigen Dienstleistenden aufgrund seiner Staatsangehörigkeit, sondern auch jede Beschränkung und jede Behinderung des freien Dienstleistungsverkehrs, selbst wenn sie unterschiedslos für inländische wie für in anderen Mitgliedstaaten ansässige Dienstleistende gelten
Die Bestimmungen des Art. 49 des EG Vertrags als ein umfassendes Beschränkungsverbot verstanden werden. Sinn des Beschränkungsverbotes steckt darin, dass auf Grund dieser neuen Konzeption der Dienstleistungsfreiheit mehrere Nationalbestimmungen den Forderungen des Art. 49 des EG Vertrags gleichgestellt werden. Das führt zur Verbesserung des Rechtsstandes der freizügigen Ausländer.
Eingriffsverbot im Rahmen der Dienstleistungsfreiheit umfasste bereits seit dem Urteil van Binsbergen nicht nur Ungleichbehandlungen, sondern auch sonstige Beschränkungen. Die Rechtssache Alpine Investments zeigte allerdings, dass das ursprünglich allgemeine Beschränkungsverbot auf ein spezifisches zu reduzieren ist. Es muss also gefragt werden, ob die in Rede stehende nationale Regelung den Zugang zum Dienstleistungsmarkt in unmittelbarer Weise behindert.
Die Konzeption des Beschränkungsverbotes hat einen negativen Einfluss auf die Kompetenz der Mitgliedstaaten, weil sie einen Teil der Regelungskompetenz verlieren. Aber dieses Verlieren der Regelungskompetenz beschränkt sich nur in solchen Fällen, für die das Überschreiten der Staatsgrenze geeignet ist. Außerdem scheint es, dass das Prinzip des Beschränkungsverbotes den Unterschied zwischen dem Bestimmungs– und Herkunftsstaat verkleinert hat: es ist für alle Dienstleistungswilligen erlaubt, nach den Rechtsbestimmungen des Herkunftsstaates zu stützen, und der Bestimmungsstaat bekommt einen ordre–public Vorbehalt.
Ziel von der Kommission vorgelegtes Vorschlages für eine Richtlinie des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates über Dienstleistungen im Binnenmarkt von 25.2.2004 ist es, einen Rechtsrahmen zu schaffen, durch den die Hindernisse für die Niederlassungsfreiheit von Dienstleistungserbringern und für den freien Dienstleistungsverkehr zwischen den Mitgliedstaaten beseitigt werden und der den Dienstleistungserbringern ebenso wie den –empfängern die notwendige Rechtssicherheit bietet, die diese für die wirksame Wahrnehmung dieser beiden Grundfreiheiten des EG–Vertrags benötigen. Der Vorschlag erstreckt sich auf eine große Bandbreite von Dienstleistungstätigkeiten mit wenigen Ausnahmen, etwa den Finanzdienstleistungen, und er gilt nur für Dienstleistungserbringer, die in einem Mitgliedstaat niedergelassen sind. Zur Beseitigung der Hindernisse für den freien Dienstleistungsverkehr sieht der Vorschlag das Herkunftslandprinzip vor, nach dem der Dienstleistungserbringer einzig den Rechtsvorschriften des Landes unterliegt, in dem er niedergelassen ist, und wonach die Mitgliedstaaten die Erbringung von Dienstleistungen durch in einem anderen Mitgliedstaat niedergelassene Dienstleistungserbringer nicht beschränken dürfen. Dieses Prinzip wird durch generelle Ausnahmeregelungen, Übergangsregelungen und spezielle Ausnahmen für Einzelfälle ergänzt. Ziel der vorgeschlagenen Richtlinie ist es, die Modernisierung der einzelstaatlichen Regulierungssysteme für den Dienstleistungssektor gemeinschaftsweit zu koordinieren, so dass rechtliche Hindernisse für die Vollendung eines wirklichen Binnenmarktes für Dienstleistungen beseitigt werden. Bereits der Bericht offenbart Widerstände bei der Modernisierung der einzelstaatlichen Gesetzgebungen und stellt fest, dass „die Grundsätze des EG–Vertrags, die Tragweite, die ihnen der Gerichtshof verliehen hat, die ehrgeizigen Programme von 1962 und 1985 [...] sich noch immer nicht in dem Maße in einer Anpassung der nationalen Rechtsvorschriften niedergeschlagen, wie man dies hätte erwarten können“ [COM(2002) 441].
Read Download (downloaded - 443)
Justinas Žilinskas. The Role of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania in European Affairs Scrutiny: Drafting, Model, Procedures
Abstract. This article deals with the sources, drafting history and problems of recently created European Union affairs scrutiny model in Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania.
The first part of the article is devoted to general questions of the role of national parliaments in EU and its various models, stressing that Lithuania’s model is strongly influenced by Nordic countries experience, in particularly, Finland. The general principles embedded in the Constitutional Act on Membership in European Union, Statute (Rules of Procedures) of Seimas, as well as new institutional changes in the structure of Seimas are explained and debated.
The second part of the article examines, explains and illustrates various procedures of EU scrutiny model in Seimas. Special attention is paid to the procedure of preparation of national position with regard to the EU proposal to adopt legal acts that are related to the competence of Seimas. This procedure is the only procedure when the Committee of European Affairs and Committee of Foreign Affairs acts as „mandate“ committees and are empowered by Constitutional Act on Membership in the European Union to speak on behalf of Seimas expressing politically obligatory opinion to the Government on national position. This procedure also forms the rules that are applicable to other closely related procedures, such as consultation procedure with the Government, etc.
The final part of the article analysis system and role of Seimas in subsidiarity control procedure and procedure of nomination of officers (e.g. Member of Commission) in the European Union by the member state. It is noted that the subsidiarity control procedure in Seimas is very innovative and already reflects the newest developments, embedded in the Treaty Establishing Constitution for Europe.
Read Download (downloaded - 432)
Pavelas Ravluševičius. Implementation of European Union Consumer Protection Law into National Legislation
Abstract. The point of the following research subject is the enforcement of European Consumer Protection Law in the national legal order. It is without discussion that the EC – Consumer Protection Directives developed special law at the national level. Accordingly, the thesis deals with the questions, which regulation programme of the EC – Consumer Protection Directives is obligatory for the national legislator; and the concept thereof must be implemented in the domestic legal order. Thus, the technical transformation of the EC – directives into national law must be considered: either the directives are inserted into a Civil Codification Act or transformation takes place in a special act of the law, or an implementation is not necessary due to a directive – conform interpretation according to the criterion of the aims and purposes of the directive? Additionally, the question about the consequences of the domestic implementation of the regulation specifications has to be considered. The main interest of the research is to find the common principles for the implementation of the European directives into domestic law. The implementation of the EC directives must consider the problem that the legal protection must only extend to the actual needs. The research starts with a systematic survey of the consumer protection rules in relation to the system of private law. The question play an outstanding role in the emergence, authentication, the subject, concretion of the regulation place of the EC directives in the national legal order, the directives character and on the primary authorization bases in the EC – Treaty law. Afterwards one has to search for selected directives: Council Directive 85/374/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products; Council Directive 93/13/EEC on unfair terms in consumer contracts; Council Directive 2002/65/EC concerning the distance marketing of consumer financial services and amending Council Directive 90/619/EEC and Directives 97/7/EC and 98/27/EC. The final chapter presents the results and the conclusions of the research.
Read Download (downloaded - 456)
Agata Wnukiewicz-Kozłowska. Harmonisation of the Polish Law with the EU Directives in the Field of Biomedicine
Abstract. The article consists of four parts. The first one in a short way presents the notion of biomedical law. In the second part the author points out the main ways of harmonisation of the internal law of the Member States of EU by directives. The next part is dedicated to the polish laws connected with the biomedical law. The author analyses two EU directives: the first one about the principles of Good Clinical Practice – the document which is a set of internationally recognised ethical and scientific quality requirements which must be observed for designing, conducting, recording and reporting clinical trials that involve the participation of human subjects and the second one about patenting biomedical inventions, comparing them to Polish legal solutions in this field. The last part – conclusions – presents the opinion of the author about the concordance of polish and EU law in the field of biomedicine.
Barbara Mielink. Freedom of Movement of Workers between Old and New Member States of the EU
Abstract. This article was presented during the conference organized by Mykolas Romeris University in November 25–26, 2004. This paper analyses some legal questions on the free movement of workers in the EU after the enlargement. The presentation consists of two parts. The first one provides short description of the situation which exists in the old Member States of the EU. The second part presents the position of citizens of the new Member States in the area of free movement of workers and describes the mechanism connected with transitional periods and introduces some general remarks on the situation in the labour market of the EU.
Elżbieta Socha. Rights of Polish Citizens on the Basis of Schengen Convention
Abstract. Laisvo darbuotojų judėjimo ir Europos be sienų idėja buvo įgyvendinta remiantis Vieningos Europos aktu. Pažanga siekiant laisvo asmenų judėjimo buvo palyginti lėta, nes Europos Sąjungos valstybės nenoriai atvėrė savo vidaus sienas trečiųjų valstybių piliečiams, tačiau jų atvėrimas buvo gyvybiškai būtinas siekiant sukurti vieną rinką. Todėl 1995 m. įsigaliojus Šengeno konvencijai buvo panaikinti patikrinimai tarp vidaus sienų ir sugriežtinta išorėssienų kontrolė.
Europos Komisijos iniciatyva Bendrijos teisė ir Šengeno konvencija buvo susietos priėmus papildomą Amsterdamo sutarties protokolą. Acquis Schengen tapus Bendrijos teisės dalimi, stojančioms į Europos Sąjungą šalims, taip pat ir Lenkijai, buvo numatyta pareiga įgyvendinti Šengeno nuostatas. Per acquis Schengen nuostatų įgyvendinimo prizmę būtų galima įžvelgti tris Lenkijos ir Europos Sąjungos santykių laikotarpius kai: 1) Lenkijos piliečiai buvo laikomi užsieniečiais, t. y. trečiosios valstybės piliečiais; 2) Lenkijos piliečiai jau nebėra laikomi trečiosios valstybės piliečiais, bet Šengeno konvencijos nuostatos dar nėra privalomos Lenkijai; 3) Lenkijos piliečiai nebus laikomi užsieniečiais, t. y. trečiosios šalies piliečiais, ir Lenkija taikys acquis Schengen.
Nors įstojus į Europos Sąjungą Lenkijos piliečiai jau nebėra laikomi trečiųjų valstybių piliečiais, laisvai ir nekontroliuojamai kirsti senųjų Europos Sąjungos valstybių narių sienas jie galės tik tada, kai Lenkija pradės taikyti acquis Schengen.
Read Download (downloaded - 372)
Anželika Banevičienė. Meaning of „Concentration“ Differences according to Lithuanian Law and EC Law on Concentrations
Abstract. Lithuania has became a member of EU in 2004. Accordingly, Lithuanian legal entities which prepare to make concentrations have to comply with EU law as well Lithuanian law on concentration. The main task is to be aware of how Lithuanian law on competition covering concentration of legal entities corresponds to EU law regulating the same.
Undertakings have to satisfy three – level – test: at the first level, if the intended concentration involves undertakings which combined aggregate income is less than LTL 30 million for the financial year preceding concentration then undertakings may proceed on this transaction without any restrictions; at the second level the intended concentration must be notified to the Lithuanian Competition Council and its permission shall be required (if combined aggregate income of the undertakings concerned is more than LTL 30 million for the financial year preceding concentration and the aggregate income of each of at least two undertakings concerned is more than LTL 5 million for the financial year preceding concentration); the third level deals with concentrations reaching Community dimension where the undertakings concerned have to notify to Commission and get it’s permission.
If each of undertakings concerned achieves more than two–thirds of its aggregate Community–wide turnover within Lithuania, there is a second – level concentration and undertakings involved have to notify to Lithuanian Competition Council.
Consequently, if „concentration“ notion in EU law on Concentration is not similar to „concentration“ notion in Law on Competition of Lithuania, the undertakings depending on the single fact whether their aggregate turnover is within one territory or not may stay at different positions in the market.
Accordingly, this article analysis whether the „concentration“ concept in Law of Competition and EC Regulation on Concentration resembling to each other.
According to the Lithuanian law as well EC law the concentration may arise either as a result of a merger between independent undertakings or parts of it or as a result of a change of control. Analysis of cases law practices proved the fact that concept of „merger“ in Lithuania is not similar to EC law.
A merger within the meaning of Article 3(1) (a) of the Merger Regulation occurs when two or more independent undertakings amalgamate into a new undertaking and cease to exist as separate legal entities or when an undertaking is absorbed by another.
A merger within the meaning of Article 3(1)(a) may also occur where, in the absence of a legal merger, the combining of the activities of previously independent undertakings results in the creation of a single economic unit.
According to the Lithuanian case law term „merger“ involve only first meaning excluding the second. Whereas the meaning „change of control“ in Lithuanian case law is similar to the meaning in the EC case law.
Read Download (downloaded - 691)
Eglė Rinkevičiūtė. Ensuring of the Uniform Interpretation of the EU Law in the Judicial Practice of the Member States
Abstract. Legal disputes are most often focused on the problem how to harmonize the national law based on the pre-emption of the Constitution with the direct application and priority of the European Union law, what way to assure symbiosis and harmonious functioning of these two systems.
The essential grounds for recognition and application of the European Community law in the Member States, its transformation into the independent international law system and the indicator of the increasing authority of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) is the practice of presentation of preliminary rulings, predetermining the existence of permanent relations between the EU court institution and the courts of the Member States.
The provisions of Article 234 (ex.177) of the EC Treaty have a major effect on the central role of ECJ in the formation of the European Community and the dynamics of the application and acknowledgment of the EC law of Member States. According to this Article of EC Treaty, at the request of the Member State, the ECJ grants the right to adopt a preliminary ruling.
Article 234 (ex. 177) provides that a national court may, or in certain circumstances must, refer certain questions to the Court of Justice if it considers that a decision on the question is necessary to enable it to give judgement. The questions that may be referred are those as to the interpretation of the EC Treaty or of the secondary legislation and those as to the validity of the secondary legislation. In both cases, jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and national courts is directly interrelated in this process.
The right to request a preliminary ruling is given by Article 234 of the EC Treaty to any court or tribunal of a Member State. It is for the ECJ to decide whether a body is a court or tribunal for the purposes of this article and the categorization of that body under national law is not conclusive. It is fundamental to stress that notion “court of law” in the sense of Article 234 need not coincide with the corresponding notion under national law.
The Highest court may, on the basis of the acte clair and acte eclaire doctrines, examine a question of Community law without any preliminary ruling, on the condition that the court has no doubts whatsoever that national courts of other member states as well as the ECJ would share the view of the Highest Court.
Read Download (downloaded - 1122)
Inga Daukšienė. Die Freizügigkeit der Arbeitnehmer und die öffentliche Verwaltung
Abstract. Die im EG-Vertrag und auf seiner grundlage erlassenen Verordnungen geregelte Freizügigkeit der Arbeitnehmer zählt zu den wichtigsten Grundfreiheiten der Unionsbürger; sie gewährleistet die Gleichbehandlung von Arbeitnehmer aus anderen Mitgliedstaaten in Bezug auf Arbeitsbedingungen generell unzulässig. Diese weitgefaßte Gleichbehandlungspflicht wird durch die Ausnahmebestimmung des Art. 39 Abs. 4 EGV eingeschränkt, derzufolge die Freizügigkeit der Arbeitnehmer „keine Anwendung auf die Beschäftigung in der öffentlichen Verwaltung“ findet.
Die schon seit mehreren Jahrzehnten, nicht zuletzt aus dem Umfeld der Europäischen Kommission, geäußerte Kritik an der Antiquiertheit der Klausel hat daher keinen hinreichenden politischen Widerhalt gefunden. So ist zum Beispiel Art. 39 Abs. 4 EGV in der Kommentarliteratur als Ausdruck eines kaum erklärbaren Misstrauens gegenüber dem Fremdem, als Ausdruck eines nationalstaatlichen Denkens bezeichnet worden, das mit der Französischen Revoliution eingesetzt habe.
Es liegt auf der Hand, dass die Diskussion über die Funktion der Staatsangehörigkeit und die Souveränität der Mitgliedstaaten auch die Diskussion über die Reichweite des Vorbehalts des Art. 39 Abs. 4 EGV entscheidend beeinflusst.
Die Auslegung der in Art. 39 Abs. 4 EGV enthaltenen Bereichsausnahme gehört zu den dogmatisch und rechtspolitisch am heftigsten umstrittenen Fragen des Europarechts. Dabei konzentriert sich die Diskussion auf den Begriff der öffentlichen Verwaltung, der als Ausnahme von der Verpflichtung der Mitgliedstaaten zur Zulassung von EU–Ausländer zum öffentlichen Dienst bedeutsam ist.
Nach der ständigen Rechtsprechung des EuGH sind vom Anwendungsbereich der Freizügigkeit nur solche Stellen ausgenommen, die eine mittelbare oder unmittelbare Teilnahme an der Ausübung hoheitlicher Befugnisse und eine Wahrnehmung solcher Aufgaben mit sich bringt, die auf die Wahrung der allgemeinen Belange des Staates oder anderer öffentlicher Körperschaften gerichtet sind und die deshalb ein Verhältnis besonderer Verbundenheit des jeweiligen Stelleninhabers zum Staat, sowie die Gegenseitigkeit von Rechten und Pflichten voraussetzen, die dem Staatsangehörigkeitsband zugrunde liegt. Über die Bedeutung dieser Formulierung rätselt die Literatur nunmehr schon geraume Zeit. Eine Schwierigkeit besteht darin, dass weder der Begriff hoheitliche Befugnisse noch derjenige der Wahrung der allgemeinen Belange des Staates vom EuGH hinreichend klar definiert worden sind. Unklar ist auch, ob es sich um kumulative oder um alternative Voraussetzungen handelt. Der EuGH scheint die Formel einmal kumulativ, zum anderen alternativ zu verwenden.
Die Auslegung der Begriffe erschließt sich somit letzlich aus dem Überblick über die EuGH–Rechtsprechung ingesamt. Danach steht zunächst fest, dass grundsätzlich aufgrund einer funktionellen Betrachtungsweise der einzelnen Stelle zu ermitteln ist, ob sie als „typisch“ öffentliche Verwaltung, als „Verwaltung im eigentlichen Sinne“, vom Anwendugsbereich der Freizügigkeit ausgenommen ist. Schon früh hat der EuGH dabei festgesellt, dass es sich um gemeinschaftsrechtliche Begriffe handelt, die ohne Rücksicht auf mitgliedstaatliche Verwaltungsstrukturen auszulegen sind.
In der Literatur ist die Rechtssprechung des EuGH als Grundlage zur Auslegung der Bereichausnahme weitgehend anerkannt worden. Dies gilt inbesondere für das Erfordernis einer gemeinschaftsautonomen und funktionellen Auslegung. Akzeptiert wurden auch beide Auslegungskriterien des EuGH („unmittelbaren oder mittelbaren Teilhabe an der Ausübung hoheitlicher Befugnisse“; „die Wahrung der allgemeinen Belange des Staates“).
Ziel der vorliegenden Arbeit ist den Begriff der „Beschäftigung in der öffentlichen Verwaltung“ zu definieren, besonders den Gehalt der Auslegungskriterien des EuGH zu erschliessen. Unklar ist der Gehalt der Auslegungsformel des EuGH. Denn bereits der Begriff der „hoheitlichen Befugnisse“ ist nicht so eindeutig, dass er keiner weiteren Erläuterung mehr bedarf. Ebenso ist klarungsbedürftig, wann eine Teilnahme bzw. Mittelbare Teilnahme an der Ausübung dieser Befugnisse vorliegt. Welche Tätigkeiten dienen der Wahrung allgemeiner Staatsbelange? Die Unklarheite über den Prüfungsmasstab des EuGH lassen sich folglich nicht auf die zumeist problematissierte Frage der kumulativen oder alternativen Auslegung der Bereichsausnahme reduzieren.
Laurynas Biekša. Grounds for Detention of Asylum Seekers in the Republic of Lithuania
Abstract. While detaining asylum seekers account should be taken of the fact that the grounds for detention are applicable not to those who have committed criminal offences but to persons who often escape from their own country because their lives are in danger. Therefore, international and EU human rights instruments establish a general principle that asylum seekers should normally not be detained. Asylum seekers could be detained only in exceptional circumstances, when such a detention is necessary. Grounds for detention of asylum seekers should be interpreted narrowly. In Lithuania the detention of asylum seekers was regulated separately from the detention of foreigners until 29 April 2004. Grounds and procedures for the detention of asylum seekers were in compliance with relevant human rights standards, while foreigners were not provided sufficient safeguards against their detention. In the Lithuanian Law of 29 April 2004 „On Legal Status of Foreigners“ detention of asylum seekers and foreigners is regulated by the same provisions, which have merged. Grounds for detention are the following: prevention of illegal entry; illegal entry or illegal stay; non–admission; suspicion of forged documents being used; deportation; prevention of spreading of dangerous infectious diseases; danger to national security, public order or health. Additionally, the Lithuanian Law lists the following exemplary circumstances, which courts should take into account while issuing the decision not to detain: established identity, no danger to national security and public order, cooperation with court, etc. Such a regulation could be in violation of human rights requirements if, while interpreting grounds for the detention of asylum seekers, their specific situation was not taken into account. The article examines the grounds for detention, established in the Lithuanian Law of 29 April 2004 „On Legal Status of Foreigners“, their application practice in the cases of asylum seekers and their compatibility with international and EU legal requirements. Substantial attention is paid to the European Court of Human Rights case law in this field. On the other hand, the cases from the Lithuanian court practice, which could be in violation of ECHR, and the cases, which could represent a good practice, are examined. Finally, the conclusions propose the ways of systematic interpretation of the Lithuanian Law, taking into account international and EU legal safeguards against the detention of asylum seekers. It is also noted that some legislative amendments would also be useful in order to ensure a suitable judicial practice in this field.
Read Download (downloaded - 346)
Inga Kazlovaitė. Schengen Facility in Lithuania
Abstract. In the European Union’s area of justice and home affairs such conceptions as Schengen Agreement, Schengen Convention, Schengen acquis are often used. From the 1 st. May, 2004 Schengen Facility came also into use.
The purpose of this article is to scrutinize what is the Schengen Facility, how Lithuania is ready for the implementation and what purpose is expected to achieve.
Schengen Facility conception is defined in the 35 article of Act of the Treaty of Accession to the European Union which was signed on the 16th April, 2003. Schengen Facility is hereby created as a temporary instrument to help beneficiary Member States between the date of accession and the end of 2006 to finance actions at the new external borders of the Union for the implementation of the Schengen acquis and external border control. In order to address the shortcomings identified in the preparation for participation in Schengen, the following types of action shall be eligible for financing under the Schengen Facility:
– investments in construction, renovation or upgrading of border crossing infrastructure and related buildings,
– investments in any kind of operating equipment (e.g. laboratory equipment, detection tools, Schengen Information System-SIS 2 hardware and software, means of transport),
– training of border guards,
– support to costs for logistics and operations.
The Government of the Republic of Lithuania has firmed the management, control and verification system which was approved by the Commission. The Ministry of the Interior as the Responsible Authority, the Ministry of Finance as the Paying Agency and public institution Central Project Management Agency as the Implementing Agency has been adopted to manage Schengen Facility in Lithuania.
After successful implementation of Schengen Facility, Lithuania will be ready for coming the member of Schengen area. Full rights membership in the Schengen area will ensure the absence of any controls on persons, whatever their nationality, when crossing internal borders, strengthen monitoring of the crossing of external borders and integrated management system for external borders.
Read Download (downloaded - 430)
Peter Van Elsuwege. The Treaty of Accession and Differentiation in the EU
Abstract. With the entering into force of the Accession Treaty, on 1 May 2004, the process of European integration has entered a new phase. The EU of 25 will differ from the EU 15 in many ways.
First, the accession of 10 new Member States has fundamentally changed the institutional framework and decision-making capacity of the Union. Reaching agreement with 25 Member States is obviously much more difficult than with 15. It remains to be seen how the Nice arrangement for QMV will affect the EU’s decision-making in practice awaiting the entry into force of the Constitution.
Second, EU enlargement raises the question of balance in the EU. On the one hand, there is a question of balance between Member States: big and small, old and new, countries defending a more intergovernmental and supranational view on European integration. On the other hand, there is the traditional issue of balance between the institutions and in particular the institutional triangle constituted by the Commission, the Council and the European Parliament. The discussions surrounding the inauguration of the Barroso Commission clearly revealed the importance of this institutional balance and the power relations between the institutions.
Third, and this is the central topic of today’s conference, EU enlargement raises questions about the future functioning of the Union and the application of the acquis communautaire. Under the Accession Treaty, the 10 new Member States will not automatically apply the entire acquis nor will they be able to participate in all areas of EU activity on a par with the old Member States. In other words, the Accession Treaty provides for differentiation between the old and new Member States during the first years after enlargement. After a short introduction on the legal basis and structure of the Accession Treaty, this paper essentially tries to discuss the instruments of differentiation and their consequences for the future functioning of the Union.
Read Download (downloaded - 598)
Koen Van den Bossche. EU Enlargements and Fisheries: a Legal Analysis Steps towards the Re-Nationalisation of EU Maritime Waters
Abstract. The 2004 enlargement negotiations smoothly tackled the European Common Fisheries Policy. The reason is mainly to be found in the geographical transformation of ocean governance. The provisions regulating ‘who should fish what and where’, underwent a substantial change by means of temporal derogations. On the one hand the equal access principle eroded, as fishing in waters within 12 miles off the baselines - where most commercial fish stock are situated - became reserved towards the nationals of the coastal State. On the other hand the competence to adopt conservation measures has followed this geographical appropriation of fishing grounds, as the exclusive Community competence in this field is pushed out beyond the coastal waters. A return to the original provisions seems utopian, as evidenced again by the outcome of the 2004 enlargement negotiations. This paper analyses the process which led towards the re-nationalisation of EU maritime waters.
Read Download (downloaded - 558)
Stéphane Arnaud. European Union Enlargement Impact on the Activities of the European Court of Justice
Abstract. Traiter de l’"European Union enlargement impact on the activities of the European Court of Justice" implique deux précisions. La première, d'ordre terminologique, s'impose en raison de la signification du terme "impact" qui recouvre la même acception dans les versions linguistiques anglaise et française: celle d’une action brutale. Or l’étude de l'effet du dernier élargissement n'est pas celui d'une telle action mais présente le résultat d'une évolution préparée de longue date qui s'est réalisée dans le cadre prévu à cette fin. Aussi la préférence sera portée sur le terme "influence" comme conséquence conjecturée et mesurée.
Une précision de second ordre s’impose également quant à la compréhension de la problématique afin de délimiter le champ de l’étude. L’approche ne saurait en effet être bornée au champ d’action de l’influence exercée par l'adhésion sur le système communautaire. Il faut souligner qu’elle ne fait que répondre aux exigences de l’acquisition de la qualité d’État membre. Il s’agit donc d’un système de vases communicants où l’exécution des devoirs remplis par les nouveaux membres par la réception de l'acquis communautaire1 a pour conséquence logique la réalisation de modifications substantielles du système existant pour assurer sa viabilité. C’est dire que l’action exercée sur les activités de la juridiction communautaire ne s’est pas réalisée de manière inattendue et irrésistible mais prévue et efficacement administrée.
C’est dans ce cadre que doit se comprendre l’importance du dernier l’élargissement qui est sans précédent non pas exclusivement en raison du nombre exceptionnel d'États adhérents mais surtout par leur histoire. Libérés depuis plus d’une décennie d'une idéologie qui leur avait été imposée, l’adhésion a constitué une étape supplémentaire dans l'affirmation de leur identité pour mieux s'affranchir du passé. L'influence politique d'une Europe réunifiée est donc incontestable 2 mais nécessite des adaptations au plan économique, source de nombreuses interrogations voire d'inquiétudes3 par les enjeux4 et le défi1 qu'elle représente sur le plan de l'évolution institutionnelle2 et fonctionnelle du système ainsi que des politiques communautaires3 et de l'Union4 si bien que l'on peut s'interroger sur l'efficacité des mesures adoptées à Nice5. Malgré les critiques qui pourraient être formulées par l’adaptation insuffisante de ces mesures, l’aménagement des compétences assurant le bon fonctionnement de l’activité juridictionnelle a permis de s’adapter à l’influence de l’élargissement. La rapidité de l'intégration de l'acquis communautaire, conformément aux critères de Copenhague6, dans les ordres juridiques nationaux est très révélatrice de la volonté des derniers États adhérents de participer efficacement au système communautaire – il faut souligner d'ailleurs qu'au 31 août 2004 la Lituanie a transposé 99.76 % des directives7 – la question de la qualité de la transposition reste posée si bien que l'on peut s'interroger sur la future charge de travail de la Cour de justice des Communautés européennes (ci-après «CJCE») par l’augmentation des constatations en manquement ou encore par les questions préjudicielles. Comment continuer à préserver alors une communauté de droit avec 25 États membres sans apporter des modifications sauvegardant l’efficacité des institutions telle que la Cour de justice européenne8? Tel est l’objet de la présente étude qui tentera de présenter les tendances actuelles9 de la juridiction pour faire face à l’élargissement en soulignant de la sorte l’influence de ce dernier sur l’architecture et les fonctions de l’institution judiciaire communautaire. En effet, pour pouvoir s’adapter, la CJCE doit connaître une modification substantielle de sa structure10 tout en modifiant parallèlement ses méthodes de travail ainsi que certaines dispositions procédurales pour ne pas encombrer son prétoire.
L’influence de l’élargissement sera présentée, tout d’abord, au regard de l'influence exercée sur l'activité interne de la Cour (I), ensuite, en portant le regard sur les modifications procédurales effectuées pour assurer un traitement efficace des affaires (II); l'architecture judiciaire11 ainsi repensée et confirmée dans le traité constitutionnel12 permet de mesurer enfin l'influence de l'élargissement (III).