Suchergebnisse

The aim of this paper is to examine the consequences of a failure to make a preliminary reference from the point of view of consumer organizations striving for the protection of collective consumer rights. Also, this paper argues against a strict application of the principle of procedural autonomy of Member States, as it makes the enforcement of consumer rights practically impossible, in particular with respect to Directive 2009/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on injunctions for the protection of consumers' interests (the Injunctions Directive). The author discusses both judicial and extrajudicial remedies that are available in case of a failure to make a preliminary reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union. She believes that procedural rules and the specific conditions for obtaining damages based on the Francovich judgment are not sufficiently harmonized throughout the European Union. Adapted from the source document.

The article documents the process of the increase in the relevance of fundamental rights in the European Union and calls attention to the fact that it is gradually approaching an important point whose attainment would have a considerable impact on the nature of the EU. The text traces the development of the EU's powers and activities in setting the norms related to fundamental rights, and deciding about their application, control and enforcement. The states have been reluctant to permit the Union to intervene into their domestic human rights affairs which are not connected to the EU's competences. Nevertheless, its recent activities indicate that the EU is starting to get more say even in this cautiously guarded domain of domestic competence. Adapted from the source document.

The article analyses the changes in norm enforcement in the EU that were triggered by the Eurozone crisis. It attempts to demonstrate that the Eurozone crisis contributed to a 'transplantation' of conditionality instruments (which traditionally exist within the EU's external relations) into the internal operations of the European Union. In particular, the article identifies which new internal rule-enforcement mechanisms of the EU share common structural features with the external EU conditionality (e.g. a vague legal framework; the use of the expertise of non-EU actors; an excess of competencies conferred to the EU; the institutional weakening of the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Court of Justice; the format of the sanctions). The article comes to the conclusion that the formation of the EU's internal conditionality occurred mainly within the instruments aimed at the crisis management of public finances of the Eurozone states (the EFSF, the EFSM, and the ESM), but it also concludes that there was an expansion of the new EU conditionality into other areas of the European integration, such as the Schengen cooperation and cohesion policy. Adapted from the source document.

JUDICIAL CONCENTRATION OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE LIGHT OF THE SETTLEMENT OF FACTS BASIS OF ADJUDGMENT IN CIVIL DISPUTE PROCEEDINGS Koncepcia silného sudcu v aktuálnom poňatí civilného sporového konania, ktorá korešponduje s princípom arbitrárneho poriadku podľa čl. 10 Civilného sporového poriadku, dáva súdu možnosť "režírovať" priebeh súdneho konania, a to najmä záväznými pokynmi pre sporové strany, ako aj určovaním lehôt na ich realizáciu. Tento aspekt sporového procesu kladie veľký dôraz na procesnú diligenciu sporových strán, ktoré sú v prevažnej miere zodpovedné za výsledok sporu. Sudcovská koncentrácia konania umožňuje súdu sankcionovať nehospodárne správanie sa strán v prípade, že prostriedky procesného útoku a procesnej obrany uplatnia oneskorene. The concept of a strong judge in the current concept of civil litigation, which corresponds to the principle of homogeneity of the civil proceedings under Article 10 of The code of the civil contentious proceedings, gives the court the opportunity to "direct" the course of the court proceedings, in particular by binding instructions to the parties to the dispute, as well as by setting deadlines for their implementation. This aspect of the dispute process places importance on the procedural diligence of the parties, who are responsible for the result of the dispute. Judicial concentration of proceedings enables the court to sanction the uneconomical conduct of the parties in case they apply the means of procedural attack and procedural defense late. URL: https://sic.pravo.upjs.sk/