Suchergebnisse

The principle of proportionality plays a key role in shaping the principles of the tax law system, as it is an important element in the protection of taxpayer's rights. The interpretation directive related to the principle of proportionality has a doctrinal, normative, and jurisprudential character. It is an EU and constitutional standard and should become a rule used on a daily basis in the practice of tax authorities. As a general principle of tax law, it is addressed to the legislative, executive, and judicial authorities. The article analyses the case law of the CJEU, the Constitutional Tribunal and the Supreme Administrative Court, which leads to the following conclusions. The CJEU quite often refers to the principle of proportionality in its jurisprudence and has developed a jurisprudence doctrine based on the doctrine of law. The Constitutional Tribunal, although in a limited scope, also employs the principle of proportionality. In disputes between tax authorities and taxpayers, Polish administrative courts apply the principle of proportionality using a pro-EU and pro-constitutional interpretation. ; amudrecki@kozminski.edu.pl ; Artur Mudrecki is Associate Professor at the Kozminski University, and the Head of the Department of Financial and Tax Law, College of Law, Kozminski University in Warsaw, and a judge of the Supreme Administrative Court, Poland. ; Kozminski University in Warsaw, Poland ; Alexy R., A Theory of Constitution Rights, 2002. ; Barak A., Proportionality. Constitutional rights and their limitations, Cambridge University Press, 2012. ; Brzeziński B., Prawo podatkowe. Zagadnienia teorii i praktyki, Toruń 2017. ; Etel L., Pietrasz P., Niekompletność świadczeń o przeznaczeniu oleju opałowego a zastosowanie sankcji podatkowej, o której mowa w art. 89 ust. 16 u.p.a., "Zeszyty Naukowe Sądownictwa Administracyjnego" 2012, no. 2(41). ; Klatt M., Meister M., The Constitutional Structure of Proportionality, Oxford University Press, 2012. ; Korycka-Zirk M., Teorie zasad prawa a zasada proporcjonalności, Warszawa 2012 ; Łętowska E., Wprowadzenie do problematyki proporcjonalności, (in:) P. Szymaniec (ed.), Zasada proporcjonalności w ochrona praw podstawowych w państwach Europy, Wałbrzych 2015. ; Mikuła P., Obowiązki dokumentacyjne i formalne w prawie podatkowym. Granice formalizmu, Warszawa 2019. ; Mikuła P., Zasada proporcjonalności w orzecznictwie TSUE dotyczącym podatku od wartości dodanej, "Kwartalnik Prawa Podatkowego" 2014, no. 2. ; Zakolska J., Zasada proporcjonalności w orzecznictwie Trybunału Konstytucyjnego, Warszawa 2008. ; 26 ; 4 ; 37 ; 51

This Note examines the applicability of the law of armed conflict, and particularly the concept of proportionality, to cyber attacks. After exploring deviations in terminology that may lead to confusion in the field, it considers the difficulties associated with applying an area of law first implemented in the post-World War II era to technologies that have only become vitally important in recent years. Delving into some of the facets of cyber technology that make it unique as a potential battleground, this Note examines why those qualities make the law of proportionality particularly difficult to apply. Acknowledging that the law of armed conflict, although perhaps inapt, is nonetheless compulsory, this Note ends with several suggestions that may assist military commanders in conducting cyber operations in away that comports with the law as it exists today.

Proportionality increasingly dominates legal imagination. Its spread, accompanied by a global paradigm of constitutional rights, appears to be an irresistible natural development. Today, proportionality is perceived as a model of legal reasoning or even an emerging global grammar of constitutional adjudication. During the last decades, it has been at the core of a prescriptive human […]

The concepts of necessity, imminence, and proportionality play a central part in Daniel Bethlehem's sixteen proposed principles regulating a state's use of force against an imminent or actual attack by nonstate actors. While all three are requirements that must be considered in the law of self-defense, their exact content remains somewhat unclear. In this comment, we examine how each one is conceived in Bethlehem's principles and review the questions that remain unanswered.

With contributions from leading scholars in constitutional law, this volume examines how carefully designed and limited doctrines of proportionality can improve judicial decision-making, how it is applied in different jurisdictions, its role on constitutionalism outside the courts, and whether the principle of proportionality actually advances or detracts from democracy. Contributions from some of the seminal thinkers on the development of scholarship on proportionality (e.g. Alexy, Barak, and Beatty) extend their prior work and engage in an important dialogue on the topic. Some offer substantial critiques, others defend the doctrine and offer important clarifications and extensions of their prior work. Throughout, the authors engage not only with case law from around the world but also with existing scholarly treatments of the subject. Mathematical treatments are avoided, making the book accessible to readers from both 'soft' and hard' social science backgrounds

The paper analysis the principle of proportionality, which is widely applied in the EU legal order and is therefore one of the fundamental principles of the system of the European Union. It is one of the legal principles that govern decision-making processes and common strategic objectives, and which are applicable when establishing European Union legislation and transposing it into national law, including in the area of criminal law, although the current analyses do not often focus on discussing this aspect. Due to its complexity and significance for the processes of establishing and applying the law, the principle of proportionality requires detailed and separate discussion, especially in the context of European criminal law.

Abstract
The principle of proportionality has always operated as a means of protecting individuals from excessive uses of public power. When situated alongside the principles of conferral and subsidiarity, proportionality also possesses a federal dimension. In this guise, the principle limits the intensity of EU intervention in order to protect national regulatory autonomy. This federal element of proportionality has featured in recent Court of Justice of the European Union (cjeu) cases. For example, Member States have challenged European Union (EU) legislation for imposing disproportionate social and economic costs in their particular States. This article considers whether individuals can similarly challenge EU legislation for disproportionately interfering with the regulatory autonomy of the Member States? Having considered this question from the perspective of US federalism, it is argued that individuals are actually articulating "Member States' rights" in such cases. In so doing, attention is drawn to the question of whose rights and interests are really being articulated and balanced in these disputes.