European Union Law

Group	Teacher	Department	Language
Sec: A	José María de Areilza Carvajal	Derecho	ENG

Group	Teacher	Department	Language
Sec: B	Núria González Campañá	Derecho	ENG

CONTENT

1. EUROPEAN UNION LAW (SECOND SEMESTER)
1.1. INTERNAL MARKET AND STRUCTURE OF FREE MOVEMENT Analysis of market integration techniques and the relationship between negative and positive integration. Review of harmonization approaches and legal & institutional challenges of EU economic regulation. The Common Market concept and the economic theory behind it. From the Common Market to the Internal Market. Study of the 1992 project and market integration through product standards and governance rules. ¿ The Treaty protects the free movement of goods, services, capital and persons (both workers and non-workers) throughout the Union. These rules can be understood from an economic perspective (as fostering the most efficient allocation of resources) or from a more social perspective (as aiming towards the integration of peoples in Europe). In this first session, we will discuss the free movement provisions from a general and constitutional perspective, before looking at two specific freedoms in the next session. Reading: - Chalmers et al, chapter 16 and pp 892-925
1.2. FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS AND SERVICES The provisions on the free movement of goods (Articles 34-36 TFEU) have enjoyed more attention from the Court and academics than any other. This is partially because of the constitutional reasons discussed last week: the way in which we understand `free movement of goods¿ has significant implications for the question who regulates the market and the level of regulation that is allowed. As such, it has always attracted criticism that it either allows for too much protectionist rules by Member States; or, alternatively, curtails the democratic articulation of non-economic values by Member States. The free movement of services (and of service-providers) has become increasingly important in the EU ¿ in economic, political and legal terms. In economic terms, services provide over 70% of EU¿s GDP. In political terms, it has been the site for significant and vigorous contestation, both within the context of the Services Directive and in the aftermath of the Court¿s rulings in Viking and Laval. Legally, the freedom to provide services has proved very difficult for the Court to conceptualise. Because of its range of application, the Court¿s test under Article 56 TFEU is not very clear. Controversy (unlike in the area of free movement of goods) has not centred on whether Article 56 TFEU should generally be understood as prohibiting discriminatory rules or as an instrument to foster market access. Rather, much of the controversy surrounding Article 56 TFEU has emerged in light of its effect on specific policy areas Reading: - Chalmers et al., chapter 17 and 18
1.3. EMU AND EURO-CRISIS These sessions explore institutions and rules of Economic and Monetary Union and their transformation during the euro crisis. We will analyze the measures adopted since 2010 to redesign the single currency rules and the role of the European Central Bank, the European Council and the European Commission in the crisis. We will also consider constitutional issues raised by the crisis, both national and European, especially the challenges presented by the German Constitutional Court. Reading: - Chalmers et al., chapter 16
1.4. FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS AND CITIZENSHIP Union citizenship was introduced in 1992 in the Treaty of Maastricht as a `purely political declaration¿. The idea was, bluntly put, that the construction of a Political Union presupposed the creation of a `European people¿, even if just formally. Since then, the concept of Union citizenship has changed significantly, and now constitutes the `most fundamental status of nationals of the Member States¿, entitling them to equal treatment wherever they find themselves in the EU. The first part of the lectures will trace the normative and political significance of the concept of Union citizenship: what it means to be a `European citizen¿, how it compares to national citizenship, and which rights are connected to it. The second part will look at the most important of such rights: the right to move freely throughout the EU and to enjoy equal treatment in the host state. We will consider whether this free movement and equal treatment is a positive contribution to `ever further integration¿, or, conversely, threatens to undermine the stability of national welfare systems by fostering `welfare tourism¿. We will analyse in depth the different ways in which the CJEU has tried to balance between these extremes. Reading: ¿ Chalmers, Davies and Monti, Chapter 11
1.5. EU BEYOND THE MARKET ¿ EQUALITY AND THE ARREST WARRANT These sessions will challenge the view that the EU is `just about the market¿. We will look at two policy fields, which have been developed quite independently from the market integration rationale: equality and antidiscrimination law and criminal law. Equality belongs among the EU¿s foundational values (Article 2 TEU); its beginnings were however modest and related to the fair competition on the internal market. That is how one could read the provision which sought to ascertain that `the principle of equal pay for male and female workers for equal work or work of equal value is applied¿ (Article 157 TFEU), in addition to (sometimes implicit) prohibitions on discrimination related to the free movement provisions that we have already studied. This has changed with the formal creation by the TEU of the European Citizen and the growing body of the case law of the ECJ in that area, which we explored in the previous session. The Treaty of Amsterdam then added specific legal basis for the adoption of rules aimed at combating discrimination based on sex, racial and ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation (Article 19 TFEU). The EU Charter then provided for a very broad understanding of equality (cf. what its Title III, entitled `Equality¿ actually covers). Equality begun to form an important part of the EU `social policy¿- or this is at least what some people have claimed. European criminal law has developed into one of the most dynamic fields of EU law. It has made it more and more difficult to claim that European integration is ¿only¿ about the Internal Market and economic freedoms. It also means, however, that it is harder to justify the exercise of public authority in the name of the European Union and the imposition of various limitations on European citizens¿ freedoms. The resistance by national constitutional courts in this field is real, as you will see from reading material selected for this session. Reading: ¿ Chalmers, Davies and Monti, Chapters 13, 14
1.6. JUDICIAL ARCHITECTURE AND ENFORCEMENT AND REVIEW OF EU LAW Courts in the EU, both at the supranational and national levels is what has given the EU its distinctive form. We will look at the most important procedure: preliminary reference, through which national courts can send questions on the interpretation and validity of EU law to the European Court of Justice, in Luxemburg. We will pay particular attention to new case law on the interaction between national courts and the ECJ, to the question of national procedural autonomy, and also focus on the type of applicants that make use of the preliminary reference procedure. The EU does not have a police, or an elaborate system of EU courts to enforce the obligations that Member States enter into. So how does it ensure that Member States do not breach EU law but implement and enforce its norms? We will look here at the infringement procedure, through which the Commission can take Member States to Court to ensure that it obeys EU law. We will also look at the possibility for institutions, Members States and individuals to challenge the validity of EU law in an action before the ECJ ¿ and ask ourselves whether this system could be improved or suffices to ensure judicial review of EU law. Reading: ¿ Chalmers, Davies and Monti, Chapters 4, Chapter 7, pp. 298-308, Chapter 8 and Chapter 10, pp. 423-455
1.7. JUDICIAL APPLICATION: DIRECT EFFECT, INDIRECT EFFECT AND STATE LIABILITY EU legal norms would lose much of their bite if they could not be invoked in national court proceedings and constitute a basis for legal redress. We will focus now on the judicial application of EU law in the Member States. We investigate under which circumstances EU law has 'direct effect', which means that litigants can rely on them vis-à-vis public authorities or private parties in national proceedings. Also, since successful litigants typically seek to obtain a form of redress, it is necessary to explore whether and to what extent EU law requires Member States to remedy breaches of EU law. Reading: - Chalmers, Davies and Monti, Chapter 7

1. EUROPEAN UNION LAW (SECOND SEMESTER)

1.1. INTERNAL MARKET AND STRUCTURE OF FREE MOVEMENT

Analysis of market integration techniques and the relationship between negative and positive integration. Review of harmonization approaches and legal & institutional challenges of EU economic regulation.
The Common Market concept and the economic theory behind it. From the Common Market to the Internal Market. Study of the 1992 project and market integration through product standards and governance rules.
¿ The Treaty protects the free movement of goods, services, capital and persons (both workers and non-workers) throughout the Union. These rules can be understood from an economic perspective (as fostering the most efficient allocation of resources) or from a more social perspective (as aiming towards the integration of peoples in Europe).
In this first session, we will discuss the free movement provisions from a general and constitutional perspective, before looking at two specific freedoms in the next session.

Reading:
- Chalmers et al, chapter 16 and pp 892-925

1.2. FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS AND SERVICES

The provisions on the free movement of goods (Articles 34-36 TFEU) have enjoyed more attention from the Court and academics than any other. This is partially because of the constitutional reasons discussed last week: the way in which we understand `free movement of goods¿ has significant implications for the question who regulates the market and the level of regulation that is allowed. As such, it has always attracted criticism that it either allows for too much protectionist rules by Member States; or, alternatively, curtails the democratic articulation of non-economic values by Member States.
The free movement of services (and of service-providers) has become increasingly important in the EU ¿ in economic, political and legal terms. In economic terms, services provide over 70% of EU¿s GDP. In political terms, it has been the site for significant and vigorous contestation, both within the context of the Services Directive and in the aftermath of the Court¿s rulings in Viking and Laval. Legally, the freedom to provide services has proved very difficult for the Court to conceptualise. Because of its range of application, the Court¿s test under Article 56 TFEU is not very clear. Controversy (unlike in the area of free movement of goods) has not centred on whether Article 56 TFEU should generally be understood as prohibiting discriminatory rules or as an instrument to foster market access. Rather, much of the controversy surrounding Article 56 TFEU has emerged in light of its effect on specific policy areas

Reading:
- Chalmers et al., chapter 17 and 18

1.3. EMU AND EURO-CRISIS

These sessions explore institutions and rules of Economic and Monetary Union and their transformation during the euro crisis. We will analyze the measures adopted since 2010 to redesign the single currency rules and the role of the European Central Bank, the European Council and the European Commission in the crisis. We will also consider constitutional issues raised by the crisis, both national and European, especially the challenges presented by the German Constitutional Court.

Reading:
- Chalmers et al., chapter 16

1.4. FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS AND CITIZENSHIP

Union citizenship was introduced in 1992 in the Treaty of Maastricht as a `purely political declaration¿. The idea was, bluntly put, that the construction of a Political Union presupposed the creation of a `European people¿, even if just formally. Since then, the concept of Union citizenship has changed significantly, and now constitutes the `most fundamental status of nationals of the Member States¿, entitling them to equal treatment wherever they find themselves in the EU.

The first part of the lectures will trace the normative and political significance of the concept of Union citizenship: what it means to be a `European citizen¿, how it compares to national citizenship, and which rights are connected to it. The second part will look at the most important of such rights: the right to move freely throughout the EU and to enjoy equal treatment in the host state. We will consider whether this free movement and equal treatment is a positive contribution to `ever further integration¿, or, conversely, threatens to undermine the stability of national welfare systems by fostering `welfare tourism¿. We will analyse in depth the different ways in which the CJEU has tried to balance between these extremes.

Reading:

¿ Chalmers, Davies and Monti, Chapter 11

1.5. EU BEYOND THE MARKET ¿ EQUALITY AND THE ARREST WARRANT

These sessions will challenge the view that the EU is `just about the market¿. We will look at two policy fields, which have been developed quite independently from the market integration rationale: equality and antidiscrimination law and criminal law.

Equality belongs among the EU¿s foundational values (Article 2 TEU); its beginnings were however modest and related to the fair competition on the internal market. That is how one could read the provision which sought to ascertain that `the principle of equal pay for male and female workers for equal work or work of equal value is applied¿ (Article 157 TFEU), in addition to (sometimes implicit) prohibitions on discrimination related to the free movement provisions that we have already studied. This has changed with the formal creation by the TEU of the European Citizen and the growing body of the case law of the ECJ in that area, which we explored in the previous session. The Treaty of Amsterdam then added specific legal basis for the adoption of rules aimed at combating discrimination based on sex, racial and ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation (Article 19 TFEU). The EU Charter then provided for a very broad understanding of equality (cf. what its Title III, entitled `Equality¿ actually covers). Equality begun to form an important part of the EU `social policy¿- or this is at least what some people have claimed.

European criminal law has developed into one of the most dynamic fields of EU law. It has made it more and more difficult to claim that European integration is ¿only¿ about the Internal Market and economic freedoms. It also means, however, that it is harder to justify the exercise of public authority in the name of the European Union and the imposition of various limitations on European citizens¿ freedoms. The resistance by national constitutional courts in this field is real, as you will see from reading material selected for this session.

Reading:

¿ Chalmers, Davies and Monti, Chapters 13, 14

1.6. JUDICIAL ARCHITECTURE AND ENFORCEMENT AND REVIEW OF EU LAW

Courts in the EU, both at the supranational and national levels is what has given the EU its distinctive form. We will look at the most important procedure: preliminary reference, through which national courts can send questions on the interpretation and validity of EU law to the European Court of Justice, in Luxemburg. We will pay particular attention to new case law on the interaction between national courts and the ECJ, to the question of national procedural autonomy, and also focus on the type of applicants that make use of the preliminary reference procedure.

The EU does not have a police, or an elaborate system of EU courts to enforce the obligations that Member States enter into. So how does it ensure that Member States do not breach EU law but implement and enforce its norms? We will look here at the infringement procedure, through which the Commission can take Member States to Court to ensure that it obeys EU law. We will also look at the possibility for institutions, Members States and individuals to challenge the validity of EU law in an action before the ECJ ¿ and ask ourselves whether this system could be improved or suffices to ensure judicial review of EU law.

Reading:

¿ Chalmers, Davies and Monti, Chapters 4, Chapter 7, pp. 298-308, Chapter 8 and Chapter 10, pp. 423-455

1.7. JUDICIAL APPLICATION: DIRECT EFFECT, INDIRECT EFFECT AND STATE LIABILITY

EU legal norms would lose much of their bite if they could not be invoked in national court proceedings and constitute a basis for legal redress. We will focus now on the judicial application of EU law in the Member States. We investigate under which circumstances EU law has 'direct effect', which means that litigants can rely on them vis-à-vis public authorities or private parties in national proceedings. Also, since successful litigants typically seek to obtain a form of redress, it is necessary to explore whether and to what extent EU law requires Member States to remedy breaches of EU law.

Reading:
- Chalmers, Davies and Monti, Chapter 7

Methodology

Lectures, case studies, problem-solving

Type:	OB	Curs:	2	Period:	S semester
ECTS Credits:	4 ECTS

Description	%
Final exercise	60
Class participation and working groups memoranda	40

European Union Law (GED70160)

General information

Type:

Curs:

Period:

ECTS Credits:

Teaching Staff:

Prerequisites

Previous Knowledge

Workload distribution

Course Learning Objectives

CONTENT

1. EUROPEAN UNION LAW (SECOND SEMESTER)

1.1. INTERNAL MARKET AND STRUCTURE OF FREE MOVEMENT

1.2. FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS AND SERVICES

1.3. EMU AND EURO-CRISIS

1.4. FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS AND CITIZENSHIP

1.5. EU BEYOND THE MARKET ¿ EQUALITY AND THE ARREST WARRANT

1.6. JUDICIAL ARCHITECTURE AND ENFORCEMENT AND REVIEW OF EU LAW

1.7. JUDICIAL APPLICATION: DIRECT EFFECT, INDIRECT EFFECT AND STATE LIABILITY

Methodology

ASSESSMENT

ASSESSMENT BREAKDOWN

Bibliography

Timetable and sections

Horari Sec: A

Horari Sec: B