Suchergebnisse

Central European Constitutional Courts in the Face of EU Membership explores German legal influence on other systems of constitutional justice, concentrating on the impact of the Federal Constitutional Court's approach to EU integration on constitutional courts in Hungary and Poland.

Con el clima global para el comercio multilateral experimentando una marcada desaceleración y el mecanismo de solución de controversias (MSC) de la Organización Mundial del Comercio bajo una fuerte tensión, la atención ha comenzado a centrarse en la priorización de las estructuras comerciales regionales. Si bien los MSC de la ASEAN han seguido tradicionalmente un camino consensuado hacia la resolución, este documento analiza las oportunidades actuales para establecer un Tribunal de Comercio de la ASEAN (TCA) permanente. Tal entidad necesitaría encajar dentro de los límites de un paso cauteloso en el desarrollo gradual del sistema de comercio de la ASEAN basado en normas, ampliando las oportunidades para utilizar el arbitraje en controversias y para proporcionar un procedimiento para garantizar una interpretación coherente de la legislación comercial de la ASEAN.Recibido: 22.10.2019 Aceptado: 21.11.2019 Publicación en línea: 31.12.2019

Over recent years, most particularly with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the protection of national identity or constitutional identity has become a bone of contention between the Court of Justice of the European Union and the courts of EU Member States. While of obvious relevance to the development of the Union legal order, this concept has implications beyond the borders of the Union especially with respect to those EFTA states which are also members of the European Economic Area. With its own court, the EFTA Court, having successfully transposed (to varying degrees) fundamental EU law principles into the sui generis EEA system, this article considers whether or not it might repeat the process with national identity and, if so, the extent to which it might be successful.

The evolution of the EU diplomatic system has allowed for a broader understanding of the role of networks and different stakeholders in diplomacy. So far, scant attention has been paid to the pivotal position of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in judicial diplomacy. The aim of this article is to chart the various strategies employed by the CJEU in conducting its diplomacy, with a particular focus on its relations with apex courts of regional economic communities and complex federal states. Taking a practice-based approach to the study of diplomatic actions, the article seeks to examine the networks created or enhanced by the CJEU; how different sites for diplomacy impact on the success of the Court's extra-forum activities; and how the CJEU might use new technologies to build on those strategies to bolster its own role in the development of the EU diplomatic system.

Abstract
The Divisional Court of the Queen's Bench Division of the England and Wales High Court handed down its decision on 20 April 2016 in the judicial review case of Shindler. This ruling confirmed that British citizens living in other EU Member States for more than 15 years remain barred from voting in the June 2016 referendum.
The case sparks further consideration of the voting rules in general and may therefore be of interest to others in considering questions of legitimacy in respect of the eventual outcome of the popular vote on 23 June. Unlike other states, the UK has no established rules on referendums and each such popular vote (and the franchise for it) is therefore treated on an ad hoc basis. Fears have been expressed that the government could manipulate the outcome of a referendum, particularly in determining a different franchise for each popular vote.