Suchergebnisse

Introducing the collaborative economy -- Market access and consumer protection in the collaborative economy -- Data in the collaborative economy -- The collaborative economy and EU competition law -- Labour relations in the collaborative economy -- Dispute resolution -- The regulation of the collaborative economy.

Literaturverz.

Undertheimpactoftheeconomicand legal developmentsofthe last years, an unprecedentedsurgeofservices' caseshavetransformedtheCourt'scaselawintocaseload. Sheernumberscombinewith strong diversity: cases touching upon crucial social issues, the delivery of welfare and the definition of citizenship, alternate with cases raising highly technical taxation issues and touching upon procedural specificities of public procurement or of copyright protection. Thearticle puts this case law into context and accounts for its input in the completion of the Internal Market. First, it explores the scope of the rules on services, the way they impinge upon the other EU fundamental freedoms, and the conditions under which they apply to private measures, as well as to purely internal situations; burden of proof issues are also important in this respect. Second, the interplay between the rules on services and other EU policy areas is discussed: fundamental rights, citizenship, services of general economic interest and migration rules either complement or antagonize with the rules on services. Third, the way in which this recent case law has affected essential regulatory means and concepts of the Internal Market, such as mutual recognition and proportionality, is presented. The conclusion drawn is that the increase and trivialization of the Court's case law on services has overstretched the judiciary's capacities in this area, thus calling for some sector-specific regulation; and with it, for fresh and/or alternative means of regulation.

AbstractAt least three generations of governance methods have been—and are still being—used for the regulation of the internal market: the classic EU method, leading to harmonisation and (more rarely) unification; the 'new approach' based on mutual recognition and the use of standards; and 'new governance' which does not entail any formal delegation of powers to the EU and operates through self-regulation, the creation of EU agencies and networks, administrative cooperation and other means of open coordination. It is impossible to establish either a hierarchy or a clear chronological order between these methods, while it is also quite difficult to reach a clear conclusion as to their efficiency. What is certain is that all methods of governance are under constant adjustment and that they all feed into one another in order to secure the smooth operation of the internal market. The interaction between these methods is the topic of the present chapter.

The internal market for services is one of the objectives set by the founding fathers of the EC back in 1957. It is only in the last 10 to 15 years, however, that this aspect of the internal market has seriously attracted the attention of the EC legislature and judiciary. With the exception of some sector-specific directives dating back to the late 1980s, it was only with the deregulation of network industries, the development of electronic communications and the spread of financial services in the 1990s that substantial pieces of legislation were adopted in the field of services. Similarly, the European Court of Justice (hereinafter, 'the ECJ' or 'the Court') left the principles established in Van Binsbergen back in 1973 to hibernate for a long time before fully applying them in Säger and constantly thereafter. Ever since, the Court's case law in this field has become so important that it is now the compulsory starting point for any study concerning the (horizontal) regulation of the internal market in services. The limits inherent to negative integration and to the casuistic approach pursued by judicial decisions have prompted the need for a general legislative text to be adopted for services in the internal market. This text, however, hotly debated both at the political and legal levels, has ended up in little more than a complex restatement of the Court's case law. It may be, however, that this 'little more' is not that little.