Suchergebnisse

Die Vorbereitungen laufen bereits viele Jahre, nun liegt er endlich vor: der Entwurf der Europäischen Kommission für ein Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrecht als Optionales Instrument. Beteiligte an den Vorarbeiten und wichtige Kritiker derselben setzen sich in diesem höchst empfehlenswerten Buch mit dem Kommissionsentwurf auseinander. Wie wird die Harmonisierung des europäischen Vertragsrechts durch den Entwurf vorangetrieben? Wie "schlägt" sich der Entwurf im Vergleich zum BGB, zum DCFR oder zu den Acquis-Principles? Beleuchtet werden insbesondere Irrtumsanfechtung, AGB-Kontrolle, allgemeines und besonderes Leistungsstörungsrecht beim Kauf und bei verbundenen Dienstleistungen sowie übergreifende Fragestellungen zum Verbraucherrecht. Der Band wird abgerundet durch eine Synopse des Kommissionsentwurfs und der vorangegangenen Machbarkeitsstudie, in der die Entwicklung des Textes deutlich wird.

The Lisbon Treaty has brought significant changes into the architecture of the European Union. The most important novelty, however, is the establishment of a full unity of the Union structure achieved by creating new and strengthening the existing elements. The new elements of this unity are the disappearance of the European Community, the 'independence' of the European Atomic Energy Community, constituting the European Union as a single entity and the introduction of EU values. At the same time, the Lisbon Treaty has strengthened the existing elements of the common institutional mechanisms, rules on amending the founding treaties and EU membership. However, constituting the Union as a single entity which has replaced and succeeded the European Communities has not abolished the EU elements of diversity. In the areas that differed, even before the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty, from the community pillar, there remain significant differences in the nature and the scope of competences of the Union institutions. This mainly regards the common foreign and security policy, which now includes the defense policy, where the existing model of inter-state cooperation has been only slightly interfered with. In contrast, in the field of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, which has become part of a larger Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, the inter-state model of cooperation has been abandoned in some of its most important elements. However, the implementation of some of the important elements of the supranational model has been postponed.

This paper is an attempt to analyse European leadership and the role played by a reunited Germany in the European Union. The author proposes five fundamental theses: 1) the reunification of Germany ruined the balance of power in Europe; 2) the Eastern enlargement of NATO and the EU has moved the zone of political and military influence of the USA to the line of the Bug river; 3) the Germans have confirmed their position as a European power; 4) the foreign policy of Angela Merkel is a continuation of Gerhard Schroder's policy, meaning a transfer of the focus from European policy to prioritising German national interests; 5) the German issue has remained open. ; This paper is an attempt to analyse European leadership and the role played by a reunited Germany in the European Union. The author proposes five fundamental theses: 1) the reunification of Germany ruined the balance of power in Europe; 2) the Eastern enlargement of NATO and the EU has moved the zone of political and military influence of the USA to the line of the Bug river; 3) the Germans have confirmed their position as a European power; 4) the foreign policy of Angela Merkel is a continuation of Gerhard Schroder's policy, meaning a transfer of the focus from European policy to prioritising German national interests; 5) the German issue has remained open.

The article concerns the idea as well as the form of international cooperation between states and international organizations, illustrated by the example of the relationship between the European Union and the Pacific region. There is some useful literature on the subject but this needs be to completed. The influences of the world's leaders collide on the Pacific Ocean, which gives this area primacy in geopolitical domination, slowly downgrading the Atlantic Community. The main purpose of the paper is, therefore, to research the possibilities and methods of legal and extrajudicial cooperation betweentwo continents which are very distant from each other. This work underlines the difference between official policy, presented by the regional intergovernmental organizations, and the individual policies of member states, who are not tied down by Brussels politics and may maintain their own foreign relations. ; The article concerns the idea as well as the form of international cooperation between states and international organizations, illustrated by the example of the relationship between the European Union and the Pacific region. There is some useful literature on the subject but this needs be to completed. The influences of the world's leaders collide on the Pacific Ocean, which gives this area primacy in geopolitical domination, slowly downgrading the Atlantic Community. The main purpose of the paper is, therefore, to research the possibilities and methods of legal and extrajudicial cooperation between two continents which are very distant from each other. This work underlines the difference between official policy, presented by the regional intergovernmental organizations, and the individual policies of member states, who are not tied down by Brussels politics and may maintain their own foreign relations.

In multiculturalism, "exit", or to be more precise, "right to exit" is very often thought of in terms of a condition of state's non-interference in the minority groups. However popular, this account seems to be flawed with a number of controversial assumptions, questionable theoretical and practical implications and can lead to significant paradoxes. First of all, treating "exit" as a state's non-interventionism condition also means that in fact representatives of minority groups should actually leave their communities in order to obtain all of the civil rights and liberties – be treated as "full", not "partial" citizens. Various other problems connected with this account (i.a. the issue of general function of "right to exit" and civil rights and liberties or mutual relations between these two categories) presented and discussed in the paper justify a proposal of change of approach towards concept of "exit". Either one should take really seriously the assumed normative character of it and construct a whole separate theory of "right to exit" from scratch, or maybe one should simply stop treating leaving one's oppressive culture in terms of "right" or "freedom" and understand it only in descriptive manner. ; In multiculturalism, "exit", or to be more precise, "right to exit" is very often thought of in terms of a condition of state's non-interference in the minority groups. However popular, this account seems to be flawed with a number of controversial assumptions, questionable theoretical and practical implications and can lead to significant paradoxes. First of all, treating "exit" as a state's non-interventionism condition also means that in fact representatives of minority groups should actually leave their communities in order to obtain all of the civil rights and liberties – be treated as "full", not "partial" citizens. Various other problems connected with this account (i.a. the issue of general function of "right to exit" and civil rights and liberties or mutual relations between these two categories) presented and discussed in the paper justify a proposal of change of approach towards concept of "exit". Either one should take really seriously the assumed normative character of it and construct a whole separate theory of "right to exit" from scratch, or maybe one should simply stop treating leaving one's oppressive culture in terms of "right" or "freedom" and understand it only in descriptive manner.

In multiculturalism, "exit", or to be more precise, "right to exit" is very often thought of in terms of a condition of state's non-interference in the minority groups. However popular, this account seems to be flawed with a number of controversial assumptions, questionable theoretical and practical implications and can lead to significant paradoxes. First of all, treating "exit" as a state's non-interventionism condition also means that in fact representatives of minority groups should actually leave their communities in order to obtain all of the civil rights and liberties – be treated as "full", not "partial" citizens. Various other problems connected with this account (i.a. the issue of general function of "right to exit" and civil rights and liberties or mutual relations between these two categories) presented and discussed in the paper justify a proposal of change of approach towards concept of "exit". Either one should take really seriously the assumed normative character of it and construct a whole separate theory of "right to exit" from scratch, or maybe one should simply stop treating leaving one's oppressive culture in terms of "right" or "freedom" and understand it only in descriptive manner. ; 3 ; 1 ; 103 ; 124 ; 6 ; Filozofia Publiczna i Edukacja Demokratyczna

The current financial crisis has significantly highlighted the issue of leadership in the European Union. The topic is both timely and worthy of analysis. The author tries to outline the theoretical approach to political leadership with regard to the current political scene in the European Union. A politician has to meet four criteria to be deemed a leader: his decisions are strategic, they exert permanent influence, he has a sufficient political background, and he has the highest position in a given political composition. The author makes the following hypothesis: on the basis of factor analysis (as regards the four factors above) only two current politicians are the true leaders of the EU, namely the Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel, and the President of France, Francois Hollande. Both politicians meet the four attributes presented gabove to at least the minimum degree, thus becoming (international) EU leaders. The paper also discusses the issue of distinguishing between an (international) statesman and (international) leader. ; The current financial crisis has significantly highlighted the issue of leadership in the European Union. The topic is both timely and worthy of analysis. The author tries to outline the theoretical approach to political leadership with regard to the current political scene in the European Union. A politician has to meet four criteria to be deemed a leader: his decisions are strategic, they exert permanent influence, he has a sufficient political background, and he has the highest position in a given political composition. The author makes the following hypothesis: on the basis of factor analysis (as regards the four factors above) only two current politicians are the true leaders of the EU, namely the Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel, and the President of France, Francois Hollande. Both politicians meet the four attributes presented gabove to at least the minimum degree, thus becoming (international) EU leaders. The paper also discusses the issue of distinguishing between an (international) statesman and (international) leader.

The purpose of this text is to present the results of a research in which the author analysed succeeding crisis situations that could constitute the basis for some of the changes in the political system of the EC/EU and subsequently made an attempt to delineate a certain scheme behind such behaviours. It is justified to seek the answer to the following question: What is the underlying reason for introducing changes in such situations and is it possible to pinpoint certain shared elements in different cases?To achieve that goal the author takes a closer look on the "empty chair" crisis, Schengen Area crisis and the recent financial crisis in Europe. In order to confirm the actual value of the conducted research, the author will make an attempt to relate his observations to the current geopolitical situation in Eastern Europe with reference to the EU competences in the existing political system.

The purpose of this text is to present the results of a research in which the author analysed succeeding crisis situations that could constitute the basis for some of the changes in the political system of the EC/EU and subsequently made an attempt to delineate a certain scheme behind such behaviours. It is justified to seek the answer to the following question: What is the underlying reason for introducing changes in such situations and is it possible to pinpoint certain shared elements in different cases?To achieve that goal the author takes a closer look on the "empty chair" crisis, Schengen Area crisis and the recent financial crisis in Europe. In order to confirm the actual value of the conducted research, the author will make an attempt to relate his observations to the current geopolitical situation in Eastern Europe with reference to the EU competences in the existing political system.

The paper analyzes military capabilities of the European Union, as an important element of the credibility of the EU Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP). It discusses the development of these capabilities, and main problems that go along with the operationalization of these capabilities, as well as the prospects of their further development. Is the intergovernmental approach to the area of the EU security and defense policy a barrier to the development of EU military capabilities? What is the extent of the harmonization between 'military' competences of the EU and national specificities? The paper aims to provide answers to these questions. The first section analyzes the institutionalization of the EU security and defense policy, which includes both the establishment of special political and military structures responsible for the decision-making process within the framework of this policy, and the adoption of specific goals for the development of EU military capabilities. The second section analyzes the main difficulties met in the operationalization of EU military capabilities, concerning the efficiency of decision-making procedures, lack of strategic capabilities, the discord of national reforms regarding the modernization of the armed forces, and duplication of national programs covering the military equipment. The third section discusses the prospects of the development of EU military capabilities in the light of EU member states' military budget cuts. It concludes that the gradual evolution of the EU security and defense policy can be seen as an incentive for coordinating the efforts of the member states in the development of EU military capabilities.