Suchergebnisse

The principle of mutual trust is not mentioned in the Treaties, but nonetheless, it has be-come a structural principle of EU law. The present contribution, written from the perspective of 'everyday judicial practice', explores how this principle has been given shape in the case law of the Court of Justice. It addresses the scope of application of this principle, its meaning and the way in which this principle is applied in the context of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. The con-tribution argues that the principle of mutual trust is an essential point of departure for the sound operation of this Area. However, the principle of mutual trust is not 'blind trust'; it is a presumption and like most presumptions, is not conclusive. There are a number of safety valves in the system of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice which are closely related to the protection of fundamen-tal rights. The framing of these safety valves in a way that it will do justice to the principle of mutu-al trust is a matter of a delicate balance. The contribution concludes with a broader reflection on the potential significance of the principle of mutual trust as a structural principle of EU law which extends beyond the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice.

Equality and non-discrimination in EU law are firmly embedded in EU law, either as general principles of law or they are written down in the Treaties and secondary legislation. This paper sketches the evolution of three specific forms of equality and non-discrimination, the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality, gender and a number of other grounds, listed in Article 13 TEC, i.e. race, ethnic origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, religion and belief. It briefly explains their origins, their mutual relationship and how they influence each other. The paper also points at the shift in the rationales underlying equality and non-discrimination and argues that they are to be considered as human rights standards.

In the area of free movement, the ECJ has formulated, as a part of the proportionality test, a number of guarantees as to administrative and judicial procedures. The present article argues that proportionality is no good rationale anymore for these guarantees, as better foundations may serve the general principle of effective judicial protection and good administration. This is nowadays not only a more fitting solution, but it also contributes to more coherence in European administrative law.