int law summary

7/25/2019 Int Law Summary

1/32

Lecture 4

Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961) Is Customary International Law

Regulates the establishment o bilateral !iplomatic missions to represent the interests o a sen!ing statean! protect its nationals

Concerns the privileges an! immunities grante! to those missions an! their sta necessary or them to

carry out their wor" (o representing their state) Very important# Diplomacy is how states communicate

$embers o the mission %ea! o mission& must be e'pressly accepte! by receiving state amily

Diplomatic sta amily !ministrative * +echnical sta amily

,ervice sta -ot necessary. besi!es %o$. to notiy receiving state or immunity to apply

Immunity or !iplomatic an! *+ sta rom criminal /uris!iction is absolute& person is inviolable0

ersonal inviolability -o arrest or !etention. unless a !anger to themselves or others (but certainly no charges)

Receiving state must ta"e 2all appropriate steps3 to protect person. ree!om an! !ignity o !iplomats rivate resi!ence is also inviolable Inviolability o private papers. correspon!ence an! property Immunity rom giving evi!ence 4'emptions to inviolability in respect to certain civil procee!ings Immunity can be waive!5 it is not 2personal3

Commencement an! termination

rivileges an! immunities apply rom moment o entry to begin post (i alrea!y there. notiication tooreign 7ice)

7n en!ing o post. termination o privileges an! immunities occur on inal !eparture rom receiving

state Diplomats given a reasonable length o time to !epart

Immunity continues or all acts perorme! in e'ercise o oicial unction

remises o the $ission

Deine!. in rticle 1. as inclu!ing all buil!ings an! lan!s use! or the purpose o the mission. inclu!ingresi!ence o the %ea! o $ission. irrespectiveo whether the property is lease! or owne!

remises o the $ission are inviolable(rt0 88(1))

Inviolability is absolute -o oicial o the receiving state can enter e0g0 olice oicers

-o service o legal process Immunity rom /uris!iction

Inclu!es means o transport e0g0 the ambassa!or3s car Receiving state must ta"e 2all appropriate steps3 to protect the premises against intrusion an! !amage by

thir! parties rt 88(8)0 In practice. liability is absolute i0e0 pays compensation even where not at ault

7icial Correspon!ence

Receiving state must permit an! guarantee 2ree communication3 or all oicial purposes Rules on 7icial Correspon!ence

ll correspon!ence relating to the mission an! its unctions is inviolable(rt0 8:(1)) i0e0 it cannot be opene! or rea! or e'amine!

inal e'ception is wars o national liberation i0e0 the use o orce relate! to sel;!etermination0


2/32

?nless. in most e'treme circumstances. that national security is threatene! or human lie is at ris" 4asy way out

Can ,can the !iplomatic bag. where Reasonable suspicions e'ist that the bag is being use! or prohibite! reasons +he scan is not intrusive an! !oes not reveal the !etaile! contents o the bag

%owever. even i scan reveals illegal content. host state not entitle! to open the bag or !elay it

Instea!. must notiy the sen!ing state an! as" them to with!raw@ accept it bac" I they reuse. the bag continues on its /ourney0

7bligations o mission to sen!ing state Duty to respect the laws o the lan!

$ust not interere in internal aairs o receiving state 7icially business must be con!ucte! via the oreign ministry $ission premises must not be use! or any purpose incompatible with the oicial unction o the

mission e0g0 commercial purposes uences are Beneral rules in!ivi!ual regimes oten have own rules (e0g0 =+7 very !etaile! rules) Internal law is no e'cuse 81 ILC Drat rticles on ,tate Responsibility

-ot yet law. but largely relect CIL0 +hese are secon!ary rules o int law they tell you when astate has breache! an international obligation an! what happens when they !o0 +hese aregeneral rules. which means that where treaties or charters o international organisations lay!own speciic rules (lex specialis). these rules ta"e priority e0g0 rules on countermeasuresun!er the =+7 regime& or settlement o !isputes un!er the Law o the ,ea Convention0

+o whom the obligation is owe! 7bligations are owe! to other states

-ormally unction as bilateral obligation. even in a multilateral treaty


3/32

ll wrongul acts entail responsibility@ liability (rt 1) =hether an act is wrongul is !etermine! by international law (rt H) or an obligation to be breache!. that obligation must have e'iste! at the time o the allege! breach (rt

1H)

breach can be an act oran omission i0e0 a ailure to act =here a state ai!s. assists or coerces another state to commit a wrongul act (rt 16;1F)

40g0 has a treaty entere! into orceG =as there rule o CIL e'istent at the time o the breach e0g0 theprohibition on the use o orceG

Note: serious breaches of ius cogens no concept o international crimes (e';rt 19). but ius cogens

breaches treate! separately0 breach is serious i it involves a gross orsystematic breach0Conse>uencesG ,tates are oblige! to cooperate to bring such a breach to an en! by any means lawul&no state may recognise a situation create! by such a breach as lawul e0g0 Ira>3s invasion o uwait0

ttribution is responsibility o a state i5

Committe! by an organ o the state (rt E)& or by persons e'ercising elements o governmentalauthority (rt J)

n organ is legislative. /u!icial. e'ecutive or any other functions o the state0 =hether

something is an organ is in!epen!ent o national law& i0e0 out;sourcing the unctions o thestate will not remove liability e0g0 privately;run prisons or police orces0

7icials act in e'cess o their authority (ultra vires) but connecte! to their oicial unction (where theyare 2cloa"e! with governmental authority3) (rt :)

?, vs $e'ico is a classic case

=rongul con!uct is !irecte! or controlle! by a state (rt F) e0g0Nicaragua case& eective control test0 IC+K create! overall control test. where un!ing. bac"ing etc0 is enough IC has conirme!

only eective control test# Con!uct is carrie! out in absence o oicial authorities (rt 9)

=here a revolutionary movement becomes the new government (rt 1) =here a state nonetheless ac"nowle!ges an! a!opts the wrongul con!uct (rt 11) e0g0 Iran hostages

case

Ba!hai claime! responsibility or terrorists attac"s they ha! nothing to !o with Keager v0 Iran actions o in!ivi!uals can incur responsibility where they are in act e'ercising govt

authority in the absence o oicial authorities e0g0 !ue to their total or partial collapse& an! where there

is a nee! or such unctions to be carrie! out e0g0 law * or!er unctions -on;state actors incur liability

Circumstances preclu!ing wrongulness Consent (rt 8)

,el;!eence (rt 81) Countermeasures (rt 88)

I they it within the rules o countermeasures Force majeure(rt 8H)

orce ma/eure M an irresistible orce or unoreseen event which ma"es ulilment o anobligation materially impossible e0g0 an earth>ua"e0 It !oes not apply where the state

concerne! brought about the event or where it ha! alrea!y accepte! liability or such asituation0

Distress (rt 8E) about imme!iate action necessary to save lives e0g0 entering the territorial waters o another

state or their territory in or!er to assist a sin"ing ship or plane crash survivors -ecessity (rt 8J) a grave an! imminent peril

ct against something that en!angers a ,tate Compliance with peremptory norms (rt 86)

Conse>uences o a wrongul act Cessation an! non;repetition (rt H) ull reparation or in/ury. whether material or moral (rt H1) Reparation consists o

RestitutionN Compensation ,atisaction ac"nowle!ge you have committe! a wrongul act an! apologiOe

N unless not materially possible or where the bur!en is out o all proportion to in/ury


4/32

Countermeasures IL is sel;enorcing

re limite! to the non;perormance o obligations owe! towar!s the breaching state (rt E9 D,R) i0e0 cannot involve orce#

lso cannot aect obligations in relation to human rights& o a humanitarian character& or o /us cogens

obligations& or aect !iplomatic immunity $ust be proportional to the in/ury suere!

Can only ollow the reusal o breaching state to !esist action notiication o intention to use

countermeasures ter notiication. wait reasonable time to see i state starts complying

$ust cease when breaching action stops or where arbitration agree!

eaceul ,ettlement o DisputesChapter V 7rganisation o ,C

rt 8(H) ?- Charter ll $embers shall settle their international !isputes by peaceul means in such amanner that international peace an! security. an! /ustice. are not en!angere!0

rt 8(E) ?- Charter prohibition on use o orce i0e0 states must settle their !ispute peaceully#

Chapter VI

,ecurity Council maintenance o international peace an! security Can 2call upon3 states to settle their !isputes& i0e0 as" nicely

$ay investigate !isputes that may threaten int p*s Disputes that cannot be resolve! by peaceul means shall be reerre! to the ,ecurity Council or

recommen!ations

Role o IC ,C will ta"e action where it consi!ers the !ispute a threat to int p*s

state !oes not have to agree to any "in! o settlement. but i it !oes boun! by the outcome

orms o ,ettlement=e3re tal"ing about legal !isputes. not political !isputes (although o course everything can be ren!ere! into a

legal >uestion e0g0 al"lan! Islan!s@ $alvinas) -egotiations an! conciliation

$e!iation Compulsory bin!ing settlement re>uires mutual consent

+reaty;speciic ,pecial tribunals e0g0 Iran;?, Claims +ribunals

ermanent Court o rbitration IC

!missibility Criteria=hen can a tribunal hear a caseG

+ribunal must have /uris!iction Consent o state parties concerne!

uris!iction ratio temporis:/uris!iction not over acts committe! beore certain !ate Legal interest i0e0 the claimant party must be in/ure!

4'haustion o local reme!ies@ nationality rule !missibility criteria are oten lai! !own in treaties establishing arbitration&

=here not. the tribunal is empowere! to establish its own rules e0g0 IC

IC composition an! /uris!iction rinciple /u!icial organ o the ?-& replace! CI o Lo- ermanent court& in!epen!ent o the ,ecurity Council c IC+K. IC+R 1J /u!ges electe! or 9 years. representing geographical an! legal !ivisions always a $ /u!ge ,tates must consent to /uris!iction o IC

by compulsory !eclaration Can be with!rawn

Case;by;case basis


5/32

uris!iction o IC uris!iction is base! upon consent

Can sign up to compulsory /uris!iction Can accept treaty;base! /uris!iction

Can accept /uris!iction on an ad hocbasis (inclu!ingforum prorogatum) ,tates who accept compulsory /uris!iction oten enter limiting clauses

M /uris!iction o IC is a complicate! business# e0g0 blan"et reservations e0g0 not be a party with a party who has not also accepte! compulsory

/uris!iction0 7r not un!er multilateral treaties with merican states unless all state parties are also

parties to the case0 7r v speciic e0g0 Cana!a an! environmental provisions0

IC proce!ure * enorcement

rovisional $easures to protect the rights o parties prior to settlement e0g0La Grand.,uch measuresare bin!ing0

=ritten memorials& oral hearings

+hir! party intervention. where interest also aecte! u!gments are inal i0e0 no possibility o appeal

Compliance is compulsory ?- bo!ies may re>uest !visory 7pinions on a point o law& states may intervene but not ma"e a

re>uest

Lecture !: "se of #orce & the La$ of %rmed onflicts

Centrality o this topic to the purpose o international law Brotius calle! his seminal wor" 27n the Law o =aran! eace3

rticle 8(E) Pll $embers shall rerain in their international relations rom the threat or use o orce against the

territorial integrity or political in!epen!ence o any state. or in any manner inconsistent with the urposes o the?nite! -ations0Q

rovision is o universal vali!ity as a rule o customary international law Constitutes a norm ius cogens

breach M crime o aggression

?npac"ing rticle 8(E) 2the threat or use o orce3

i0e0 not only use o orce is prohibite! use of force not only war is prohibite! M much broa!er scope

2in their internal relations3@ 2against the territorial integrity or political in!epen!ence o ,tates3 not prohibiting internal use o orce not only territorial integrity@ political in!epen!ence e0g0 Corfu Channelcase

,trict interpretation o rticle 8(E) most li"ely

4'ception 1 ,C authorisation

?- Charter. chapter VII. rticle E82,houl! the ,ecurity Council consi!er that measures provi!e! or in rticle E1 woul! be ina!e>uate orhave prove! to be ina!e>uate. it may ta"e such action by air. sea. or lan! orces as may be necessary to

restore international peace an! security30 2all necessary means3 phrase ,C !oes not have to try alternative measures irst

In practice. it !oes try alternatives irst Increasingly. since 199. authorise! peace;"eeping missions to ta"e 2all necessary means3 to achieve

their mission goals

4'ception 8 ,el;!eence ,el;!eence is both a treaty right an! customary international law

rticle J1 ?- Charter 2-othing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right oin!ivi!ual or collective sel;!eence i an arme! attac" occurs against a $ember o the ?-.

until the ,ecurity Council has ta"en the measures necessary to maintain international peacean! security3

Caroline case (1FE1) 7nly to repel attac"


6/32

$ust be necessary -D proportional nticipatory sel;!eenceG 2i an arme! attac" occurs3

Beneral principle that e'ceptions shoul! be narrowly interprete! lus. v little state practice or anticipatory sel;!eence as states recognise! the !anger o it or

escalation e0g0 Israel bombing o Ira>i nuclear reactor in 19F10 n 2inherent right3. so rt J1 !oes not aect the customary right

ttac" nee! not be by another ,tate Collective !eence allowe! e0g0 -+7

+he Carolinecase or sel;!eence to be lawul. there must be

2a necessity o sel;!eence. instant. overwhelming. leaving no choice o means. an! no moment o!eliberation an! involvingS nothing unreasonable or e'cessive3M response may be to an imminent attac"0


7/32

7ccupation

Lea!ing rinciple(s)5

+he means o warare are limite! by the !ictates o humanity no unnecessary suering +here is a un!amental !istinction between combatant an! non;combatant (civilian inviolability)

Civilians must not be the sub/ects o !irect attac"

Civilian ob/ects must not be the sub/ect o !irect attac" =here combatants lay !own arms. they become non;combatants an! are protecte!

$eans must be proportionate to military goal

Combatants an! Punlawul combatantsQ Combatants are

$embers o the arme! orces o a arty to the conlict. inc voluntary corps or militia $embers o other groups elonging to a Party to the conflict. inc0 organiOe! resistance

movement. where they ulil the ollowing criteria


8/32

%uman rights law applies

Lecture ': (nternational )rganisations

International 7rganisations

Create! by states to serve speciic unctions by co;or!inating state co;operation e0g0 I+? or =%7 $embership limite! to states

-ormally establishe! by treaty inance! by members

International Legal ersonality separate rom members $ore than J I7s. ranging rom ?- to ?- specaliOe! agencies e0g0 =%7. IL7. ?-4,C7. =I7.

I$7 etc. to regional political bo!ies e0g0 4?. 7,. 7?. ,4-. rab League. the Commonwealth&military alliances e0g0 7,C4. -+7

I7 Legal ersonality

Limite! personality (c states) i0e0 in respect o certaininternational rights an! obligations necessary toserve unctions

Limitations normally lai! !own in oun!ing treaty

Pthe sub/ects o law in any legal system are not necessarily i!entical in their nature or in the e'tent o

their rights. an! their nature depends upon the needs of the communityQ (!eparation for "njuries

(19E9)) ,tates have unlimite! personality& I7s have personality only in respect o the unctions that they were

create! to serve0 %ow !o you "now what their rights an! obligations areG Depen!s upon the nee!s othe international community A see nee!s o the ?- in RoI0 40g0 ?- can authorise the use o militaryorce but the =+7 cannot0

I7s act ultra viresi they act beyon! conerre! authority uestion concerne! whether the members were liable or the !ebts that

the +in Council ran up on the Lon!on $etals 4'change0 %ouse o Lor!s rule! thatthey were not0

lows rom act o international personality0 7nly most senior oicials are li"ely to have ull immunity.but it may be oere! by ,tate o which oicial is a national e0g0 7,C40 19:J Vienna Convention on theRepresentation o ,tates in their Relations with I7s that lays !own rules on immunities an! privilegesthat go urther than customary law establishe! by 19E6 Convention on rivileges an! Immunities o the?- not yet in orce0

+he ?- 4stablishe! by the ?- Charter in 19EJ& now has some 19H members urposes o the ?- in rt 1 ?- Charter

+o maintain international peace an! security

+o !evelop rien!ly relations among nations +o achieve international co;operation in solving international problems o an economic. social.

cultural or humanitarian character. an! in promoting respect or human rights

+o be a centre or harmoniOing action in respect o achievement o above goals0 Diiculties o interpretation o the ?- Charter E oicial versions (4nglish. Russian. rench. Chinese)

an! + in both 4nglish an! rench. although neither was the irst language o most !elegates0

$isun!erstan!ing inevitable0 In or!er to un!erstan! the powers o the ?-. nee! to loo" at its purposes R4$4$


9/32

rticle 8(:) P-othing in this Charter shall authoriOe the ?- to intervene in matters which areessentially within the !omestic /uris!iction o any ,tate or shall re>uire the $embers to submit suchmatters to settlement 5& but this principle shall not pre/u!ice the application o enorcement measuresun!er Chapter VII0Q

?nli"ely to be seen as intererence i involves a breach o international law e0g0 a gross violation ohuman rights

4'press e'ception or Chapter VII actions

$embership 7pen only to (peace;loving) states

eace;loving not ta"en too seriously e0g0 ?, an! -orth orea# $embership ta"en as evi!enceo being a state

$ust be recommen!e! by ,ecurity Council to Beneral ssembly. who must be in avour by a two;thir!s ma/ority

-on;members can have observer status at B e0g0 alestine. Vatican. ,witOerlan!

$embers that are sub/ect o !ispute may have voting rights suspen!e!& can be e'pelle! or consistentCharter violations

Is possible to with!raw $embers pay ees or ?- operations

,ecurity Council 1J $embers J 1 or 8 years (J or rican * sian states& 8 or ,0 merican& 1 or C44 * 8 or

=47,)

,C has primary responsibility or the maintenance o international peace an! security& in carrying out its!uties here. the ,C acts on behal o all members (rt0 8E)

$embers must carry out !ecisions o the ,C (rt0 8J) M the ,C has power to ta"e legally bin!ing

!ecisions an! $embers have a legal obligation to obey0 +hese obligations overri!e all otherinternational obligations rt0 1H

roce!ure 4ach members has 1 vote

Decision on proce!ural matters is by ma/ority 1 i0e0 9 votes& no veto Decisions on substance is by ma/ority 1 but must inclu!e 2concurring vote3 o all J

In practice. 2concurring vote3 means that they must vote against it 0e0g J cannotboycott ,C meetings as ?,,R trie! in 19Js0

Collective veto possible i0e0 by F non;permanent members& thereore J must carry othermembers

Veto rarely use!


10/32

ll members represente!& 1 vote& no vetoes (normally. !ecisions by two;thir!s o those present) $ay !iscuss any matter within scope o Charter $ain purpose is to promote international co;operation in economic. social. cultural. e!ucational an!

health iel!s promote human rights


11/32

=+7 $a!e up o a series o agreements B++. B+,. +RI,. the ?n!erstan!ing on Rules an! roce!ures

-ew negotiations !ea!loc"e! since 81 (Doha roun!) Doha was inten!e! to ma"e tra!e globalistion more inclusive. to sprea! the beneits more

e>uitably0 It has stalle! because !eveloping countries wont bac" !own on agricultural subsi!iesin the -orth0

Decisions ta"en by simple ma/ority 4'tensive !ispute settlement system that controls ability o states to ta"e counter;measures

ower lies in ability to tell states what an acceptable barrier to tra!e is e0g0 environmental measures e0g0

turtles or !olphin. or health measures e0g0 antibiotic;ree meat

ually (although e'act re>uirements !ier

across agreements)

4'ceptions to $- or !eveloping countries an! custom unions0 ,ee =i"i page0 Reciprocity no ree;ri!ing

+ransparency members publish openly their tra!e an! customs regulations annual reports


12/32

Regional Courts e0g0 4uropean Court o %uman Rights (4Ct%R). rican Court o %uman Rights. Inter;merican Court o %uman Rights

?- bo!ies %uman Rights Council. 7%C%R. ,pecial Rapporteurs Inormal mechanismsG 40g0 =orl!


13/32

o I7 (with legal personality) o regional integration

+he 4? as Psui generisQ actor o IL

o (ntergo,ernmentalan! supranationaleatures

o ,imilarities with a federal,tate (i0e0 !ivision o competences)

o political internal lan! e'ternal !imension

,upranationalism -o gran! integrations steps unctionalist. gra!ualist logic long;term. step;by;step

Continue towar!s an Pever closer ?nionQ ,upranationalis institutions "ey actors in the integration process

amous igures ean $onet. ac>ues Delors (resi!ent o the 4uropean Commission 19FJ;199E)

Intergovernmentalism Re/ect powerul 4uropean institutions Coor!inate! cooperation among $, Real powers with $, $, as "ey actors o the integration process amous igures Charles !e Baulle. $argaret +hatcher

+he initial reasons an! ob/ectives

In the atermath o ==8

o eace. security. stability

o olitical cooperation

o 4conomic prosperity

$any sites o International cooperation ater ==8- 19EJ ?-- 19E: B++- 19EF 744C@74CD- 19E9 -+7- 19E9 Council o 4urope

o 19JH +he 4uropean Convention on %uman Rights

oun!ing athers 4? ean $onnet. Robert ,chuman. =inston Churchill

ttempts at urther political cooperation- 19E6 =inston Churchill in Turich

o P=e must buil! a "in! o the ?nite! ,tates o 4uropeQ

- 4uropean Deence Community (4DC) propose! in 19J

o 4uropean army

o Re/ecte! by the rench -ational ssembly

- 4uropean olitical Community (4C) propose! in 19J8

o -egotiations aban!one! ater 4DC aile!

+he uniying orce behin! the birth o the 4? ean $onnet- P


14/32

o


15/32

J)


16/32

articularly since the 199s. rise o agencies in the 4?0

-o tra!itional separation o power?sually western !emocracies embo!y separation o powers0+his is not the case in the 4?0 40g0 4uropean Commission0 %as some legislative. some /u!iciary. some

a!ministrative powers0 +here is still balance o institutional powers. since no one institution hol!s all the. or

e'ample. /u!iciary power0

Dierent institutions represent !ierent interests& either embo!y interinstitutionalism or supranationalism -Dembo!y !ierent interest0

## +here is no clear !ivision o tas"s between the two treaties (+4?. +4?)& nee! to loo" at both0

+he ey players of the 6institutional triangle7

+he 4uropean arliament- Voice o the people- resi!ent o the 4uropean arliament $artin ,chulO (Bermany)- Initially as 4uropean ssembly an! very small powers (only a!visory)- Change! now co;legislator

-arty groups not national. but transnational

+he 4uropean Commission- Common (?nion) voice- resi!ent ean;Clau!e unc"er (Lu'embourg)- 7ne commissioner o each $, 8F commissioners

o Inclu!ing. the presi!ent. the %igh Representative o the 4? or oreign airs an! ,ecurity

olicy

o 4ach commissioner is responsible or his or her own portolio on certain policy area

o +here was a proposal to !iminish number o commissioner. too many commissioners with the

e'pansion o 4? (68F)0 otential problem or eectiveness o Commission0


17/32

o Roving olicy


18/32

4? primary law- 4? treaties

o Institutional setting o the 4?

o ,ubstantive law (our ree!oms@policy areas)

o u!icial review

- ccession +reaties

-H: rotocols (rt J1 +4?)

- +he Charter o un!amental Rights- 6J Declarations (not bin!ing)- Beneral rinciples o 4? law

o Reerence to national constitutions an! the 4uropean Convention o %uman Rights (4C%R)

an! its bin!ing orce in all $,

o s general principles o 4? law

- +he Charter o un!amental Rights

o roclaime! in 8 as not a legally bin!ing instrument

rovi!e! inspiration but !i! not create obligations

o Lisbon +reaty !eclare! raise! its status to have Pthe same legal value as the +reatiesQ

o Limite! to 4? institutions an! $, when they apply@implement 4? law

,econ!ary 4? law legal acts o the 4?- Deine! in rticle 8FF +4?- !opte! un!er proce!ures !escribe! in rticle 8F9 +4? (core 7L)-


19/32

o rimary law must provi!e a legal basis to a!opt secon!ary law

o ,econ!ary law is base! on primary law

o ,econ!ary law must comply with primary law

- ,econ!ary law can e'plain an! complement primary law- Legality o 4? secon!ary law can be reviewe! by the Court o ustice in light o primary law- rticle 8 +4? CitiOenship o the 4?

o Directive 8E@HF on 4uropean citiOenship

Competences o the 4?

=hy is the !etermination o 4? competences importantG- Competence has the 4? power to actG- Constitutional reasons

o +ranser o sovereign powers un!er IL

o ,cope an! e'tent o powers

o Dynamic interpretation o 4? competences (competence creep)

- Institutional reasonso =ho !eci!es. ollowing what proce!ures an! sub/ect to which constraints

+he rinciple o ttribute!@Conerre! owersrticle J +4?

10 +he limits o ?nion competences are governe! by the principle o conerral80 ?n!er the principle o conerral. the ?nion shall act only $ithin the limits of the competences

conerre! upon it by the $, in the +reaties to attain the ob9ecti,es set out thereinCompetences notconerre! upon the ?nion in the +reaties remain with the $,0

- Limite! not general transer o competences- 4? cannot act beyon! the e'press an! implie! powers grante! by the +reaties

4? Competence A +he Lisbon +reaty- rt 8 +4?- 4'clusive Competence rt H +4?

o 7nly the 4? can legislate in the area

o +he $, can a!opt legally bin!ing acts only i empowere! by the 4? or the implementation o

4? law

o reas (rt H(1))

Customs ?nion

Competition rules necessary or the unctioning o the internal mar"et

$onetary policy or the 4uroOone

+he conservation marine biological resources un!er the common isheries policy

Common Commercial olicy

- ,hare! competence (rt E +4?)

o


20/32

4!ucation. vocational training. youth an! sport

Civil protection

!ministrative cooperation

,ubsi!iarity * roportionality- Determine whether an! how an! e'isting competence shoul! be e'ercise!

-Limit the e'ercise o an e'isting competence

- rt J +4?

rinciple o ,ubsi!iarity- rticle J(H) +4??n!er the principle o subsi!iarity. in areas which !o not all within its e'clusive

competence. the ?nion shall act only i an! in so ar as the ob/ectives o the propose! action cannot besuiciently achieve! by the $ember ,tates. either at central level or at regional an! local level. but canrather. by reason o the scale or eects o the propose! action. be better achieve! at ?nion level0

- ,tarting point national action

rinciple o roportionality- rticle J(E) +4? ?n!er the principle o proportionality. the content an! orm o ?nion action shall not

e'cee! what is necessary to achieve the ob/ectives o the +reaties0

-7ten use! in practice

10 ,uitability test is the measure suitable or the attainment o the !esire! ob/ective80 -ecessity test is the measure necessary to achieve the !esire! ob/ectiveG 7r can the ob/ective be

attaine! by a less onerous metho!. less restrictive o the in!ivi!ual3s ree!omG

=ho saeguar!s their applicationG- +he institutions o the ?nion themselves

o 7bligation o the Commission to consult wi!ely

- -ational parliamentso 7b/ect to Commission3s proposals (rt 6;: +4?)

o rotocol (-o0 8) 7n the pplication o the rinciples o ,ubsi!iarity an! roportionaility

- +he Court o ustice

o $aniestly inappropriate e'ercise o !iscretion

Internal $ar"et Competencerticle 11E +4? (4' article 9J +4C)

10 ,ave where otherwise provi!e! in the +reaties. the ollowing provisions shall apply or the achievement

o the ob/ectives set out in rticle 860 +he 4uropean arliament an! the Council shall. acting inaccor!ance with the or!inary legislative proce!ure an! ater consulting the 4conomic an! ,ocialCommittee. a!opt the measures or the appro'imation o the provisions lai! !own by law. regulation ora!ministrative action in $ember ,tates which have as their ob/ect the establishment an! unctioning othe internal mar"et0

rticle 86 +4?10 +he ?nion shall a!opt measures with the aim o establishing or ensuring the unctioning o the internal

mar"et. in accor!ance with the relevant provisions o the +reaties080 +he internal mar"et shall comprise an area without internal rontiers in which the ree movement ogoo!s. persons. services an! capital is ensure! in accor!ance with the provisions o the +reaties0

Lecture -;: Substanti,e 1" La$

Internal $ar"etrticle H +4?

H0 +he ?nion shall establish an internal mar"et0 It shall wor" or the sustainable !evelopment o 4uropebase! on balance! economic growth an! price stability. a highly competitive social mar"et economy.aiming at ull employment an! social progress. an! a high level o protection an! improvement o the

>uality o the environment0 It shall promote scientiic an! technological a!vance0rticle H6 +4?

80 +he internal mar"et shall comprise an area without internal rontiers in which the ree movement o

goo!s. persons. services an! capital is ensure! in accor!ance with the provisions o the +reaties0

+ra!e barriers


21/32

- hysical barriers bor!er stoppages. custom controls. paperwor"- +echnical barriers %ealth an! saety stan!ar!s. consumer an! environmental protection. other technical

regulation- iscal barriers !ouble ta'ation. !ierent V+ rates. !uties- Distinctly applicable (!iscriminatory) rules rules applying !ierently to !omestic vs oreign

goo!s@services@wor"s@capital

-Double bur!en Rules that nee! to be complie! with in home an! host country (content. weight. selling.a!vertising.5)they can be !ierent in home an! host country

,tages o economic integration- reerential tra!ing area

o reerential taris or selecte! goo!s rom participating countries

- ree tra!e areao ree movement o goo!s no taris. >uotas an! preerences on most (or all) goo!s an! services

tra!e! between participating countries& no common e'ternal tari (4+. beore 44.-+)

- Customs ?nion

o ree tra!e area within ?nion a common e'ternal tari (aim o 44C rom the beginning)

- Common or single internal mar"et

o Customs ?nions an! ree movement o actors o pro!uctiono ,ingle mar"et to un!erline the eort or era!ication o physical (bor!ers). technical

(stan!ar!s) an! iscal (ta'es) barriers (!ea!line set by the ,4 A completion by 1998)- $onetary ?nion

o ,ingle mar"et an! common currency (4$? A a!opte! in $aastricht)

- 4conomic ?nion

o ,ingle mar"et an! common economic. monetary (incl0 common currency) an! iscal policies

$etho!s o integration

- -egative integrationo Remove obstacles@barriers to tra!e among $,

o rocee!s through /u!gments o the Court o ustice in the 4?

-

$utual recognition Cassis !e Di/ono ccept stan!ar! o other $,

o 4nsuring mar"et access an! promoting regulatory !iversity

- ositive integration

o %armoniOation o legal systems through common (4?) rules

o Can you i!entiy a legal basis (alrea!y !iscusse!) or 4? secon!ary law as an instrument o

positive integrationG

-egative integration in the internal mar"et- ree movement o goods

o rt H +4? ustoms duties on imports an! e'ports 5 shall be prohibitedbetween $,

o rt HE +4? uantitative (non;inancial) restrictions

o Wuantitative measures an! Regulatory restrictions ($4WR) rt HE;H: +4?

Common Customs ?nion- Common Customs +ari Common Customs Co!e

o Reg 891H@98

o +he same tari or regar!less o the importing $,

o Determine! on the basis o the thir! country o origin an! the value o the importe! goo!


22/32

- rt 89 +4? 7nce all import ormalities have been complie! with an! the Common Customs +arihas been pai!. the goo!s importe! rom thir! countries are in ree circulation in the $, (M in theinternal mar"et)

+ari barriers customs !uties- rticle 8F(1) +4?

o +he ?nion shall comprise a customs union which shall cover all tra!e in goo!s an! which shallinvolve the prohibition between $, o customs !uties on imports an! e'ports an! o allcharges having e>uivalent eect. an! the a!option o a common customs tari in the relationswith thir! countries

- rticle H +4?

o Customs !uties on imports an! e'ports an! charges having e>uivalent eect shall be prohibite!

between $,0 +his prohibition shall also apply to customs !uties o a iscal nature

+ari barriers Charges having e>uivalent eect (C%44)M Pany pecuniary charge. however small an! whatever its !esignation an! mo!e o application. which is impose!

unilaterally on !omestic or oreign goo!s by reason o the act that they cross a rontier5Q- er se unlawul& always. no /ustiication- Regar!less o the purpose o the charge

-4ven i it is not !iscriminatory in eect

ermissible tari barriers- Case 1F@F: Commission v Germany

o Charge! or inspections i inspections re>uire! by 4? law

$ust correspon! to value o the service

+a' S

o pplie! to oreign an! !omestic goo!s

o

Discriminatory an! protectionist ta'es prohibite!

Lecture -4:

Wuantitative barriers

-on;monetary barriersrt HE +4? PWuantitative restrictions on import an! all measures having e>uivalent eect shall be prohibite!between $,Q

- rt HJ provi!es e'actly the same or e'ports- Wuantitative restrictions M restrictions in numbers

o +otal ban o import@e'port

o Import@e'port >uota3s M total ban on import@e'port once the >uota has been achieve!

o In principle prohibite!

?nless /ustiication un!er rt H6 +4?


23/32

ustiications un!er rticle H6 +4?- ,peciic groun!s provi!e! (close! list)

o ublic morality

o ublic policy

o ublic security

o ublic health

o Cultural heritageo In!ustrial an! commercial property

- proportionality principle- ,uitability test the measure is a!e>uate an! appropriate to serve the !eclare! ob/ective- -ecessity test there are no less restrictive measures

$4WR $easures having e>uivalent eect to >uantitative restriction- F@:E%assonville

o ll tra!ing rules

o 4nacte! by $,

o =hich are capable o hin!ering.

o Directly or in!irectly.

o

ctually or potentially.o Intra;Community tra!e

- In principle. prohibite!

o 4'ceptions see ollowing

$4WRs Dassonville- Discriminatory (!istinctly applicable) measures

o 7nly aect importe!@e'porte! goo!s M oreign an! !omestic goo!s treate! !ierently

o In law an! act (!e /ure !iscrimination)

o 7ten protectionist

o ustiication rt H6 +4?

- -on;!iscriminatory (in!istinctly applicable) measureso Impose! on all pro!ucts regar!less o origin M oreign an! !omestic goo!s treate! e>ually

o In law but !ierent in act (!e acto !iscrimination)o Rules may be impose! in the general 2goo!3

o ustiication rule o reason

Discriminatory measures- Import an! e'port licenses

o P-ational legislative provisions prohibiting imports an! e'ports without a licence but which in

act are not applie! because e'emptions are grante! rom the prohibition an!. where this is notso. because the licence is always issue! on re>uestQ (J1;JE@:1"nternational Fruit &No.'()

- Inspections o imports or e'ports only ()ouhelier)- reerence or a!vantage or !omestic pro!ucts (P


24/32


25/32

H0 gainst renumeration


26/32

Right to e>ual treatment,peciie! in Regulation E98@811@4? (which replace! Reg0 1618@6F. not much !ierent rom the ol! one)rticles 1;1

- 4>ual access to /obs- 4>ual treatment in wor"ing con!itions

-4>ual social an! ta' a!vantages

- 4>ual access to training- 4>ual tra!e unions rights- 4>ual right to housing- 4>ual right on e!ucation or their chil!ren

Violation o the right to e>ual treatment1) ll !irect !iscrimination on the groun!s o nationality is prohibite! (limite! !erogations)

a0 Direct !iscrimination M similar situations are treate! !ierently or !ierent situations aretreate! ali"e

8) lso in!irect !iscrimination is prohibite! unless it can be ob/ectively /ustiie!

H) $ar"et access genuinely non;!iscriminatory measures prohibite! unless /ustiie! by Poverri!ingre>uirementsQ o public interest

Derogations rom the ree movement rights (1)1) 7nly on the groun!s o public policy. public security or public health (rt EJ para0 H. J8. 68 +4?)

a0 ollowing or con!itions

b0 Case law co!iie! in rt 8: o CitiOenship Directive8) In a!!ition. $ o wor"ers not applicable to employment in public services (rt EJ para E +4?)H) u!icial /ustiications or non;!iscriminatory measures

Derogations rom $ rights10 ublic policy an! public security

o $, have a certain margin o !iscretion to !etermine the concepts o public policy an! security

A the 4? !oes not impose a uniorm set o values

o Limitations must be base! on personal con!uct o the in!ivi!ual concerne! an! Pgenuine.

present an! suiciently serious threatQ ustiications that are isolate! rom the particulars o the case or that rely on

consi!erations o general prevention shall not be accepte! revious criminal conviction in itsel is not suicient groun! or limitations

o ny limitations must meet principle o proportionality

80 ublic healtho 7nly !iseases with epi!emic potential

o +he principle o proportionality

H0 +hese groun!s shall not be invo"e! to serve economic en!s

rt EJ (E) +4? ublic ,ervice 4'ception- Restrictive interpretation by C4?

o Depen!ent on the nature o the !uties an! responsibilities involve! at wor". not on the concept

o public service (Commission v. )elgium(- ccor!ing to the 4? Commission

o osts within meaning o public service arme! orces. /u!iciary. ta' authorities

o osts outsi!e the meaning teaching. non;military research in public bo!ies

u!icial /ustiications o genuinely non;!iscriminatory measures- legitimate aim (Poverri!ing re>uirementQ) in general public interest

o


27/32

o Regar!less o the economic status o person

CitiOenship o the ?nion- Right to move an! resi!e reely in a territory o a $,- Rights to vote. to stan! as can!i!ates in elections to the 4 as well as in municipal elections in their host

$, o resi!ence

-Right to consular an! !iplomatic protection in territories o a thir! country

- Right to petition the 4 an! to apply to the 4uropean 7mbu!sman- Regar!less o economic status o person

4? citiOenship right to resi!ence

rt0 81 +4?10 4very citiOen o the ?nion shall have the right to move an! resi!e reely within the territory o the

$ember ,tates. sub/ect to the limitations an! con!itions lai! !own in the +reaties an! by the measuresa!opte! to give them eect0

a0 ,ee citiOenship !irective

Lecture -!: 1" La$ in >S 3 %uthority of 1" La$

=hen can in!ivi!uals rely on 4? lawG

-Direct eect o 4? law ?nion law provision can be invo"e! by an in!ivi!ual an! enorce! beore anational court

o Dierent rom !irect applicability

- +ypes o !irect eecto Vertical invo"e! against a state

o %oriOontal invo"e! against in!ivi!uals

Direct eect o 4? +reaties. Regulations * Decisions

Con!itions or !irect eect un!er /an Gend en Loos10 Coner a right to in!ivi!uals80 Clear an! preciseH0 ?ncon!itional

I these con!itions are satisie!. then the provision has

-Vertical !irect eect always

- %oriOontal !irect eect !epen!s on wor!ing o the provision

Direct eect o !irectivesVertical Direct 4ect (/an %uyn# !atti(

10 Coner a right to in!ivi!uals80 Clear an! precise

H0 ?ncon!itional (!iscretion o $,)E0 Dea!line or transposition has passe!

-7 %oriOonatl Direct 4ect (,arshall# Faccini %ori)


28/32

o =hen in conlict a rule o 4? law prevails over a rule o national law

o bsolute supremacy

4? law o any ran" prevails o national law o any ran"

4? law prevails over previous an! subse>uent national law

Costa v 3N3L

-


29/32

- +ypes o >uestionso Vali!ity an! interpretation o 4? law

o Relevant to the substance o the !ispute at han!

- =ho can reer- Duty or !iscretion to reer

o Last instance

o mbiguity concerning 4? law- 4ects- Wuestions rom national courts to C4? concerning

o Interpretation o 4? law

o Vali!ity o 4? law

- Reerences to be ma!e. when necessary. at some stage in national procee!ings. beore a case is inallyconclu!e!

o rior to the application o 4? law by a national court

- unction to ensure uniormity an! coherence o 4? law across the 4?- Cooperation between national courts Pin their capacity as courts responsible or the application o

Community lawQ an! the C4?- -ot an appeals proce!ure

+ypes o preliminary reerences

10 Interpretation o the +reatiesa0 C4? cannot apply 4? lawb0 C4? cannot !eci!e on the vali!ity o national law

80 Vali!ity an! interpretation o acts o the institutions. bo!ies. oices or agencies o the 4?a0 I a national court consi!ers that an 4? act is vali! no nee! to reerb0 C4? has e'clusive power to !eclare 4? acts invali!

i0 -ational courts cannot !o this (oto;rost)c0 -ote reerences can be ma!e irrespective o whether or not the provision is !irectly eective

=hat an! how to as"- Reerences must be clear. not hypothetical an! relevant to the substance o the !ispute- 4? law >uestion Pis necessary to enable to give /u!gmentQ

o Can aect outcome o the case

- It is or the national court to !etermine the relevance o the >uestions reerre!0 I the national courtconsi!ers the >uestion is not relevant. a reerence will not be necessary

=ho can reerG- -ational courts an! tribunals (%orsch(

o 4stablishe! by law

o ermanent

o Compulsory /uris!iction

o pplies the rule o law

o In!epen!ent

- 4'clu!e!

o -ational competition authorityo +a' authority

o roessional ssociations

ey in!epen!ence rom the national a!ministrative authorities

Discretion to reer 86:(8) +4?- nynational court- -ational law cannot limit this !iscretion

7bligation to reer 86:(H) +4?

- Courts o last instance in the current procee!ings (Mno reme!ies available)o I a national court is in !oubt it must reer (CILI+)

-


30/32

cte clair the answer is obvious (CILI+)

+he matter must be e>ually obvious in other national courts. also in other

$,

+a"ing into account !ierent language versions

4? law must be places in its conte't an! interprete! in the light o the

provisions o 4? law as a whole. ta"ing into account its ob/ectives an! its

state o evolution -o ris" o inconsistent interpretation by !ierent national courts

+he eects o a preliminary ruling- man!atory /u!gment or the reerring national court

o -ot an a!visory opinion

- -ational courts have to !eci!e on the merits- +he national court has a !uty to apply the Court3s ruling to the acts beore it

Reme!ies in national courts or breach o 4? law- rticle 19(1) +4? $, shall provi!e reme!ies suicient to ensure eective legal protection in the iel!s

covere! by union lawQ

-

7n the one han! 4? law protects national proce!ural autonomy- uires that national proce!ural rules an! reme!ies are

o 4>uivalent to cases regar!ing breach o national law

-on;e>uivalent or those or breach o national law less avourable

o 4ective an!

It is impossible in practice to e'ercise the rights which the national courts are oblige!

to protect (!ewe( Does not Pguarantee real an! eective /u!icial protectionQ. !oes not have Pa real

!eterrent eectQ (Von Colson)o !e>uate

In relation to the !amage suere!

Reme!ies in national courts

=hat can national courts !o i national reme!ies are not a!e>uate or eectiveG- Disapply national law (e0g0 rules on limitations.!ewe)

- ,upplement national reme!ies with new reme!ies (interim relief# 4tate liaility(

4? reme!ies ,tate liability+he con!itions or ,tate liability (rancovich. paras0 H9;E.


31/32

u!icial hase

o Declaratory /u!gement

o enalties (rt 86 +4?)

I a $, !oes not comply with the /u!gement

secon! proce!ure an! a separate /u!gment nee!e!#

?nless non;implementation o a !irective

+he Court o ustice o the 4?- +he Court ,ystem

o +he Court o ustice (1 /u!ge rom each $,)

o +he Beneral Court (1 /u!ge rom each $,)

%earing at irst instance actions base! on 86H. 86J. 86F. HE +4?

Decisions can be appeale! to the Court o ustice on points o law

o ,pecialiOe! court Civil ,ervice +ribunal (: /u!ges)

- Composition o the Court o ustice

o 8F /u!ges

o 9 a!vocate generals

- uris!iction base! on (an! speciie! in) the +reaties

-+he Court3s /u!gment an! its role as prece!ent

o 4nsuring 4? law is interprete! an! applie! the same in every 4? countries& ensuring countries

an! 4? institutions abi!e by 4? law

Routes to the Court o ustice an! the Beneral Court

u!icial review o 4? Law ction or annulmentction or annulment (rticle 86H +4?)

- Reviewable acts

o cts o 4? institutions Commission. Council. 4. 4uropean Council

o cts that pro!uce legal eects

Legislative acts (rt 8F9 +4?)

-on;legislative acts

- +ime limito rticle 86H(6) +4?

o 8 months ater !ate o publication@notiication

- ,tan!ing

o H types o applicants

rivilege! applicants ($,. Commission. 4. Council)

-o special re>uirements

n instrument commonly use! by the $, an! the other 4? institutions

,emi;privilege! applicants (4C


32/32

o Regulatory act o !irect concern that !oes not entail implementing

measures- Broun!s o review

o Lac" o competence

Disputes regar!ing a legal basis

Institution o the 4? acts outsi!e the ?nion3s competences

Institution o the 4? acts within the competence o another institutionso Inringement o an essential proce!ural re>uirement

$a/ority voting instea! o unanimity

=rong law;ma"ing proce!ure

rticle 896 +4? giving reasons or the act a!opte!

o Inringement o the +reaties or o any rule o law relating to their application

un!amental rights

Beneral principles o 4? law. li"e proportionlity

o $isuse o powers

Institution crosse! boun!aries o its !iscretion as conerre! by the +reaties

maniest error o assessment

- Legal eects

o rt 86E +4?o +he legislative act is null an! voi!

o +he annulment has eect erga omnes an! ab initio

o Liability or !amages

o resumption o lawulness o acts until they are annulle! by C4?

4norcement o 4? law overview

int law summary

Documents