Articles for category: Gerichte

Football at a Crossroads

The CJEU shook the world of football with its Diarra ruling on Friday, October 4. The impact of the ruling is all but a surprise for me. In a way, the FIFA transfer system was always on shaky legal grounds in terms of EU internal market law. Now, the chickens have come home to roost and key parts of the football transfer system have been brutally set aside. I aim to explain why the Diarra ruling marks a crucial turning point for football, its economy and even its identity.

Wie die Grundrechte-Charta unbegleitete Minderjährige vor dem europäischen Verschiebebahnhof schützt

Die Anfang Juni 2024 im Amtsblatt veröffentlichten neuen Regelungen über das Gemeinsame Europäische Asylsystem finden ab 2026 Anwendung. Weiterhin zentral bleibt dabei die Frage, welcher Mitgliedstaat für die Bearbeitung des Asylantrags zuständig ist. In Hinblick auf unbegleitete Minderjährige verstößt ein Zuständigkeitsbestimmungsverfahren, das regelhaft die Möglichkeit der Überstellung in den Erstregistrierungsstaat prüft, gegen die kinderrechtlichen Garantien der EU-Grundrechtecharta.

Getting a Grip on Migration but Mind European Law!

On September 13, the new Dutch government led by Dick Schoof outlined its programme for the next years. Unsurprisingly, a major point of this programme regards asylum and migration, for which the greatest ambition is to install the strictest regime ever and to include the Netherlands within the category of Member States of the European Union with the strictest admission rules. This post reviews these proposals through the lens of European Law to challenge their legal feasibility and flag the potential incompatibility with Dutch obligations stemming from EU and international law.

Unleashing Horizontal State Liability

The Common European Asylum System (CEAS) is under attack. In a recent Judgment against Hungary, the European Court of Justice has unambiguously stated that non-compliance with the rules of the CEAS undermines solidarity between Member States and strikes at the very heart of EU law. Traditional means of enforcement, however, seem insufficient to foster compliance with these rules. Against this backdrop, this blogpost argues for the unexplored avenue for enforcing the CEAS via horizontal state liability.

Fundamental Rights Score a Goal

Amid the significant number of rulings delivered by the ECJ on 4 October 2024, the long-awaited judgment pitting football against the media stands out. In Real Madrid vs Le Monde, the Court held that excessive defamation damages may breach the freedom of the press and trigger the public policy exception under Brussels Ia Regulation concerning recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. In doing so, the ECJ allowed national courts to conduct a substantive review of foreign judgments despite the principle of mutual trust, to ensure the enforcement of fundamental rights across the EU.

Taking Locus Standi of International Actors Seriously

On October 4th 2024 the Court of Justice issued its judgement in Front Polisario II upholding the judgement in which GC annulled Council’s decision on the conclusion of the trade agreement between European Union and Morocco. In its landmark judgement the Court acknowledged the legal standing of Front Polisario – the liberation movement representing rights of the people of Western Sahara. The Court’s findings advance the flexible and adequate approach on access to EU’s courts – and for that are worth applauding.

Bridging the CFSP Gap

The CJEU interprets its Common Foreign and Security Policy jurisdiction in light of the objectives set by the Lisbon Treaty, thereby integrating part and parcel of the CFSP into the rest of the European Union acquis. This aligns the CFSP with the general principles and constitutional rules set in the Treaty. As the Court advances the integration of CFSP jurisdiction within the broader EU legal order, the judgements of 10 September 2024 in Neves 77 Solutions and KS and KD v Council and Others serve as landmark ruling for the future of judicial review in CFSP.

Resurrected Colonial Courts and the Decolonization of the Chagos Archipelago

This post tells the fascinating story of two recent and remarkable developments in the decolonization of the Chagos Archipelago. Last week, the governments of Mauritius and the UK issued a surprise joint statement that the two countries had reached a ‘historical political agreement’ on the exercise of sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago. Running in counterpoint to the international plane, a once inactive colonial judiciary established as an administrative pretence has recently begun to hear cases, and in doing so set the administration of justice in conflict with the US military.

The principle of uti possidetis juris and the borders of Israel

The principle uti possidetis juris, raised in the Dissenting Opinion of Vice-President Sebutinde and according to which a new State established in formerly colonial territory inherits the former (colonial) borders is untenable in the situation of Israel. The reason is that at the time of independence Israel’s leaders accepted the principle of partition. No claim was made then or subsequently that the State of Israel inherited the borders of Mandatory Palestine and legislative acts reveal that Israel even regarded territories not within the UN Partition Plan borders as occupied territory.