Suchergebnisse

The article looks at Opinion 1/13 and the broader implications of the Lisbon Treaty for EU external relations competence and procedures. Two novel substantive issues are discussed. The first is the potential impact of the catalogue of competences in the Lisbon Treaty, and the codification of the doctrine of implied powers in Articles 3(2) TFEU and 216(1) TFEU. Has the Lisbon Treaty managed to reinstate the Member States as "masters of the Treaties" that can not only "codify" and "contain" but even "reverse" case law of the ECJ on EU external competence? The second is how far can the EU take part in "setting the international scene", in an extra-EU context. Should the outcome be different according to the subject matter, or the nature of EU competence? The article also examines the instrumentalization of the Opinion procedure by the Commission to force the adoption of a Union position in the Council.

AbstractThe Lisbon Treaty has fundamentally revised the external relations of the EU in pursuit of more visibility, coherence and consistency. The EU is, for instance, given a single legal personality, the pillar structure is (formally) abolished, new functions are created to reinforce its external representation and external policies appear to be streamlined. But is there more to it than meets the eye? A critical legal assessment is given of the major Treaty modifications relating to the EU external relations whilst addressing two underlying issues. First it is questioned whether the Member States have really given up their traditional reluctance to share fully the international scene with the EU. It is argued that the Lisbon Treaty in fact means to redress the balance in favour of intergovernmentalism under CFSP. A second crucial and related issue links to the silent dialogue with the CJEU to be discerned in the Lisbon Treaty. It wavers between the codification of important case law, such as Kadi, and attempts at containing or even reversing case law which was more prejudicial to the Member States' interests, such as the Ecowas judgment. In so doing the Lisbon Treaty again raises interesting yet complex legal questions which will most likely necessitate further clarification through case law.

A lot of attention has been devoted in the past few years to attempts made by intellectual property owners to oppose parallel imports. This refers in particular to imports without their consent of goods placed by themselves, or with their consent, on the export market. The question is crucial as it is inherently linked to the quest for the key to control international trade flows and to restrict intra-brand competition in the country of importation.

Defence date: 20 May 1994 ; Supervisor: Prof. Dr. J. Schwarze ; Co-supervisor: Prof. Dr. C. Joerges ; First made available online 27 July 2016

Part I: Introduction and State of Play -- 1. The Multi-faceted Nature of Better Regulation -- Sacha Garben and Inge Govaere -- 2. Integrating Regulatory Governance and Better Regulation as Reflexive Governance -- Colin Scott -- Part II: A Critical Assessment of the Main Elements of the Better Regulation Agenda -- 3. Improving the Quality of EU Legislation: Limits and Opportunities? -- Helen Xanthaki -- 4. Cost-Benefit Analysis and EU Policy: Limits and Opportunities -- Andrea Renda -- 5. The Better Regulation Agenda and the Deactivation of EU Competences: Limits and Opportunities -- Robert Zbíral -- Part III: Views from EU Institutional Practice -- 6. The European Commission and its Better Regulation Agenda -- Ben Smulders and Jean-Eric Paquet -- 7. The European Parliament and the Better Law-Making Agenda -- María José Martínez Iglesias -- 8. The Council: Some Historical and Practical Aspects to the Better Regulation Agenda -- Jeno Czuczai -- 9. The Member States and the Better Regulation Agenda: The Case of Belgium -- Flanders -- Jan de Mulder -- 10. From Better Regulation to Better Adjudication? Impact Assessment and the Court of Justice's Review -- Julian Nowag and Xavier Groussot -- Part IV: Broader Perspectives on the Better Regulation Agenda -- 11. Eurolegalism and the Better Regulation Agenda -- R Daniel Kelemen -- 12. An 'Impact Assessment' of EU Better Regulation -- Sacha Garben

Foreword -- Contents -- Notes on Contributors -- Part I General Reflections -- 1 -- The Division of Competences between the EU and the Member States: Reflections on the Past, the Present and the Future -- The Ever-Increasing Importance of the Competence Question -- The Legal Principles Limiting EU Competence -- The Problem of Competence Creep -- The Legal Principles Limiting Member State Competence -- Beyond Legislative Competence: The Real Sources of 'Creep' -- Implications for Legal Practice -- The Way Forward -- Final Thoughts -- 2 -- The Competence Divide of the Lisbon Treaty Six Years After -- General Observations -- New Developments Post Lisbon -- What about the Recent Crises and the Competence Divide? -- Conclusion -- 3 -- Classifying EU Competences: German Constitutional Lessons? -- Introduction -- German Competence Federalism: Dual Federalism -- European Federalism: Co-operative Federalism (with a Dualist Streak) -- Conclusion(s) -- Part II Areas of Complementary, Sharedand Exclusive EU Competence -- 4 -- Exclusive Member State Competences-Is There Such a Thing? -- Introduction -- Retained Competences -- Reserved Competences -- The Lisbon Treaty Reform: New Guarantees for Exclusive Member State Competence? -- Conclusion -- 5 -- The Competence to Create an Internal Market: Conceptual Poverty and Unbalanced Interests -- Introduction -- The Legal Basis of Internal Market Competences -- The Conceptual Basis of the Internal Market -- The Most Perfect Market: Full Harmonisation or Managed Diversity? -- What Place for National Interests in Internal Market Competences? -- Establishing a Disembedded Market -- Subsidiarity and Proportionality -- Conclusion -- 6 -- Monetary Policy: An Exclusive Competence Only in Name? -- Introduction -- Competence for Eurozone Monetary Policy and Related Policy Areas

The relationship between the legal exclusivity and economic market power : links and limits / Josef Drexl -- Intellectual property and sources of market power / Mark R. Patterson -- Controlling the unilateral exercise of intellectual property rights : a multitude of approaches but no way ahead? / Heike Schweitzer -- Is there an independent/additional (European, international) open-market criterion for determining abuse? / Mario Siragusa -- Article 82 ec as a "built-in" remedy in the system of intellectual property : the example of supplementary protection for pharmaceuticals in italy / Pablo Ibáñez Colomo -- Abuse of regulatory procedures in the intellectual property context : the Astrazeneca case / Matteo Negrinotti -- The strategic use of patent enforcement and acquisition methods and competition law / Steven Anderman -- Strategic branding : does trademark law provide for sufficient self help and self healing forces? / Annette Kur -- Trademarks as a tool for market contro; / Elzbieta Traple -- Can intellectual property rights be construed by the courts to limit their use for anti-competitive purposes? / Eileen Sheehan -- Research tools : patents and the information market in the knowledge based economy / Christine Godt -- Exploitative abuses : which competition policy, which public policy / Imelda Maher