Weekend Edition Nº88 by eulawlive

Nº88

FEBRUARY 5

2022

Weekend

Edition

stay alert keep smart

MARC STEIERT

A YEAR FOR EUROPE’S YOUTH? REALITIES AND PROSPECTS OF THE TRUE FUTURE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

www.eulawlive.com

Nº88 · FEBRUARY 5, 2022

Weekend

Edition stay alert keep smart

A Year for Europe’s Youth? Realities and Prospects of the True Future of the European Union Marc Steiert

2022 is the European Year of Youth. EU law and policy have increasingly become a reality for young people across the continent. Many EU initiatives, such as Erasmus+, the revised European Youth Guarantee, or Next Generation EU put the young person, their skills, and perspectives at their centre (1). ey are important building blocks for young people trying to integrate into society, that is for young people building their own futures. What is more, the EU Youth Dialogue (2), as well as the Conference on the Future of Europe (3), aim at encouraging political participation of the young generation within the Union. ese realities, further justi ed by the sacri ces of the young generation during COVID-19, have led the EU to designate 2022 as European Year of Youth (4). ereby, the young generation, their ‘needs and concerns’ join an illustrious set of thematic European Years existing since 1983 (5). e idea behind this policy tool is to sensibilize for the thematic year and, as the Union puts it, to set strong political signals and propose new legal rules on the ma er (6). Normatively, the European Year of Youth calls for an impetus in EU youth policy beyond the mere raising of awareness for the state of the young generation.

e European Year of Youth calls for an impetus in EU youth policy beyond the mere raising of awareness for the state of the young generation.

i. Marc Steiert is a Ph.D. Researcher in Law at the European University Institute (Florence, Italy) working on the EU’s regulatory framework for youth employment. Marc holds an LL.M. in Comparative, European and International Laws from the European University Institute and an M.A. in Economic Law from Sciences Po (Paris, France). 1. Regulation 2021/817/EU of the European Parliament and Council of 20 May 2021 Establishing Erasmus+: e Union Programme for Education and Training, Youth and Sport and Repealing Regulation 1288/2013/EU, OJ 2021 L 189, p. 1; Council Recommendation of 30 October 2020 on A Bridge to Jobs – Reinforcing the Youth Guarantee and Replacing the Council Recommendation of 22 April 2013 on Establishing a Youth Guarantee 2020/C 372/01, OJ 2020 C 372, p. 1; Regulation 2021/241/EU of the European Parliament and Council of 12 February 2021 Establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility, OJ 2021 L57, p. 17, Article 18. 2. European Union, ‘What is the EU Youth Dialogue?’, (accessed 24 January 2022). 3. Joint Declaration on the Conference on the Future of Europe – Engaging with Citizens for Democracy – Building a more resilient Europe. 4. Decision 2021/2316/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 December 2021 on a European Year of Youth (2022), OJ 2021 L 462, p. 1. 5. Decision 2021/2316/EU. 6. European Union, ‘European Years’, (accessed 24 January 2022).

Nº88 · FEBRUARY 5, 2022

Weekend

Edition stay alert keep smart

is Long Read precisely examines the realities and prospects of the European Year of Youth. In other words, I discuss some of the issues and proposals that the Union’s institutions might need to set on their agenda (7). is panorama goes beyond the descriptive level and critically analyzes the challenges that come with the Union’s youth policy – whether the EU will actually set strong political signals or argue for legal change in regard of the young generation. More speci cally, this Long Read consists of two parts. Section 1 divides the EU’s youth policy – a neglected topic – into two dimensions that allow to visualize the scope of this policy. EU youth participation policy targets the political and societal participation of young persons, whereas the Union also increasingly becomes a player in youth employment policy, that is in eﬀorts to improve the integration of the young generation into the labour market. Section 2 discusses the challenges associated with the Union’s legal and political activities during the European Year of Youth. A potential revision of the Union’s mechanisms of youth participation and the focus of its youth employment policy on the quality of young work serve as examples. Crucially, I argue for broadening youth participation and making clear that Union law and policy support quality work for young workers.

e Two Dimensions of the EU’s Youth Policy e European Year of Youth aims to ‘empower, honour, support and engage with young people’ and has a broad range of objectives with regard to the young generation (8). ere is, therefore, a need to delineate the EU’s framework for youth policy to understand the Union’s potential actions. 7. For a broader discussion, listen to 8. Decision 2021/2316/EU.

e EPP Group Podcast,

e future of employment: Are we in danger of having a lost generation?.

Nº88 · FEBRUARY 5, 2022

Weekend

Edition stay alert keep smart

Broadly, the Union’s youth policy is divided into two dimensions along the forms of integration and participation of the young generation these dimensions grapple with: youth participation policy and youth employment policy. Of course, this sketch simpli es the Union’s efforts. Erasmus+ and its focus on cultural skills but also a person’s employability exempli es for instance the overlap of both dimensions. e distinction ma ers, however, as it outlines the layers of law- and policymaking, in which the Union’s challenges manifest during this European Year of Youth. e rst element consists in what I call youth participation policy on the political and societal participation of young persons. Most essentially, the EU Youth Dialogue has been trying to involve young people within the decision-making processes at Union-level since the early 2000s by developing a multiannual youth strategy (9). e Dialogue links the Union and key interlocutors of the youth at the European level, such as the European Youth Forum. It is, however, not a proper participatory mechanism under the Treaties. Besides, the Conference on the Future of Europe aims for young Europeans to play a ‘central role in shaping the future of the European project’ (10), and, relying on its limited competences in education (165 TFEU) and training (166 TFEU), the EU has developed various programmes to strengthen the European social integration of young persons, such as the European Solidarity Corps or also to a certain extent the prominent Erasmus+ (11). e second element is the Union’s youth employment policy relating to the integration of the young generation into the labour market. Quite interestingly, the Union does not dispose of formal competences to act in (youth) employment policy beyond efforts of coordination. Yet, in the euro-crisis, the Member States recognized the EU as an appropriate forum for ghting youth unemployment. is political decision led to a growing legal framework for youth employment policy at the Unionlevel. As I have argued elsewhere (12), this framework consists today of three elements: free movement of workers is supposed to adjust the offer and demand for young labour in cases of asymmetric unemployment. 9. Resolution of the Council of the European Union and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States Meeting within the Council on a Framework for European Cooperation in the Youth Field: e European Union Youth Strategy 2019-2027, OJ 2018 C456, p. 1. 10. Joint Declaration on the Conference on the Future of Europe. 11. Regulation 2021/888/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021 Establishing the European Solidarity Corps Programme and Repealing Regulations 2018/1475/EU and 375/2014/EU, OJ 2021 L 202, p. 32. 12. Marc Steiert, ‘ e Pandemic, Youth and Europe: Will the EU Take the Strain of Youth Unemployment from Us?’ Politique Européenne, 2020.

Nº88 · FEBRUARY 5, 2022

Weekend

Edition stay alert keep smart

e revised European Youth Guarantee establishes non-binding guidelines for national youth employment policies, thus a framework for the coordination of national policies. It suggests for instance a timeframe for Member States to provide young workers with a quality oﬀer of employment, education or training and various means to a ain this objective. Finally, the Youth Employment Initiative allocated resources of the European Social Fund to support youth employment (13). Nowadays, the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) commits Member States to allocate an ‘appropriate amount’ of their ESF+ resources to support youth employment and training (14). Member States with more young people not in employment, education or training than the Union average need to allocate a substantial 12.5% of their resources received from the ESF+ to actions and reforms fostering the employment of the young generation (15). What is more, implementing the European Youth Guarantee has become a speci c objective of the ESF+, which helps this framework for national youth employment policy.

Realities of the European Year of Youth – Youth Employment

e EU, Youth Participation and the Quality of

Let me turn to the challenges of this European Year of Youth. As stated above, I chose to emphasize a potential revision of youth participation and the EU’s policy on the quality of young work. ese selected topics by no means exhaustively represent the political and legal challenges related to the young generation that the Union encounters on a daily basis. Yet, they serve to critically illustrate the future directions of the Union’s youth policy and how these directions will affect and already affect the young generation. It seems that social con ict plays less out within the Union’s policy for youth participation. is assessment, however, re ects reality incompletely as the European Parliament called for a ‘re ection process’ on the youth’s active participation (16). Why could it ma er, however, to revise the Union’s mechanisms of youth participation? First, despite the considerable work of the European Youth Forum to represent young people, the EU Youth Dialogue has been rightly criticized for its corporatist logic linking the EU and limited key interlocutors. is Dialogue consists of work cycles of 18 months that each deal with a topic determined by the Council of Youth Ministers and connected to the Union’s 11 youth goals set in 2018 together with the latest EU Youth Strategy. is logic has, however, difficulties to reach young persons more largely, in particular those le out from society (17). It appears conclusive that mainly those young people already engaged with the European project or acting in other representative functions will become involved in the conversation. Learning from young people in the Conference on the Future of Europe represents a unique opportunity to design this dialogue more inclusively. In particular, the establishment of randomly selected panels of young citizens could give more young people a voice in the dia-

13. Regulation 1304/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the European Social Fund and Repealing Council Regulation 1081/2006, OJ 2013 L347, p. 470 Articles 16-23. 14. Regulation 2021/1057/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 Establishing the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) and Repealing Regulation 1296/2013/EU, OJ 2021 L 231, p. 21 Article 7(6). 15. Regulation 2021/1057/EU Article 7(6). 16. is call rst appeared in a preparatory document by the European Parliament but is now an element of Decision 2021/2316/EU. 17. Chabanet D, ‘Between Youth Policy and Employment Policy: e Rise, Limits and Ambiguities of a Corporatist System of Youth Representation within the EU’ (2014) 52 Journal of Common Market Studies 479.

Nº88 · FEBRUARY 5, 2022

Weekend

Edition stay alert keep smart

logue. Calling for such randomly selected panels does not only follow the current trend in scholarship on deliberative democracy that led to the establishment of the Conference on the Future of Europe but does appear particularly appropriate for the young generation. In fact, the random selection of the panels involves a certain awareness-raising element: not only are citizens called up to factually determine the directions of future policymaking, but the more modest aim of the panels is to inform citizens on the Union’s actions, its set-up and their own possibilities. In other words, citizens panels are also a form of Education on democracy (18). Citizens panels would, therefore, be a perfect t for the EU Youth Dialogue and the European Year of Youth with their aim of empowering, honouring, supporting and engaging the young generation. What is more, the revision of youth participation could go beyond procedural innovation. Strengthening the EU Youth Strategy’s impact on the Union’s actions or a stronger legal basis for the Dialogue could be envisioned. For instance, Article 9 TFEU and the duty to mainstream ghting social exclusion could allow for youth policies, based on the strategy, to become a horizontal priority of Union policies. Europe might face a year of overhaul and broadening of how it involves the youth. Even more profound lines of social con ict shape the EU’s youth employment policy. Here, deeply opposed views on the integration of young people confront, e.g., whether youth employment is be er supported by deregulation and subsidies or whether the quality of work ma ers for nding employment. Since the eurocrisis, the Union’s institutions seem to conclude on the importance of the quality of the work of young workers for their integration into the labour market (19). However, an essential challenge of this European Year of Youth will precisely revolve around the EU’s commitment to the quality of youth employment. Two evolutions ma er in this regard. First, the Commission recently proposed an ALMA programme to provide young workers with a temporary employment opportunity in another

18. e Florence panel of the Conference on the Future of Europe speci cally included a substream on how to improve ‘Education on Democracy’ in the Union. For its proposals, Conference on the Future of Europe, ‘European Citizens’ Panel 2: “European democracy/Values and rights, rule of law, security”’. 19. European Commission, COM(2020) 277 Final - Proposal for a Council Recommendation on A Bridge to Jobs - Reinforcing the Youth Guarantee and Replacing Council Recommendation of 22 April 2013 on Establishing a Youth Guarantee; Council Recommendation of 30 October 2020 on A Bridge to Jobs; A90322/2021 - Report Verheyen on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on a European Year of Youth 2022.

Nº88 · FEBRUARY 5, 2022

Weekend

Edition stay alert keep smart

Now that treaty change may lose its status as taboo, it is time to admit that the Union has become an indispensable actor of youth employment policy

Member State (20). Yet, it is the same Commission that initially argued for ALMA’s participants not to be mandatorily remunerated, stripping them from essential labour rights, and, thereby, creating a new form of precarious young work (21). In addition, this lack of remuneration could deny young workers moving abroad with ALMA to access free movement rights (22). By now, the Commission withdrew its suggestion on optional salaries, but did neither clarify whether the participants are entitled to remuneration. Outrightly opposed, the European Parliament calls for mobilizing the EU to ban unpaid internships (23). While the debate is contested, I believe that the quality of young work ma ers. Normative underpinnings, such as the respect for the rights of young workers enacted in the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights, notably its neglected Article 32 on the protection of young persons at work, but also economic rationales, such as the acquisition and transferability of skills among employments, can justify this stance. In this sense, it would be imperious to put a clear emphasis on the quality of young work within the EU. Now that treaty change may lose its status as taboo (24), it is time to admit that the Union has become an indispensable actor of youth employment policy. 20. European Commission, ‘ALMA (Aim, Learn, Master, Achieve)’. 21. For initial contestation, see European Trade Union. 22. Consistently, the EU’s Court of Justice considers the existence of some remuneration in exchange for work provided to be a prerequisite to be considered a worker under EU law. Since Judgment of the Court of Justice of 3 July 1986, Lawrie-Blum, (C-66/85:EU:C:1986:284). 23. European Parliament Resolution of 17 December 2020 on a Strong Social Europe for Just Transitions (2020/2084(INI)), OJ 2021 C 445, p. 75. 24. See the new German governement‘s position: SPD, Grüne and FDP, ‘Mehr Fortschri Wagen – Bündnis für Freiheit, Gerechtigkeit und Nachhaltigkeit – Koalitionsvertrag zwischen SPD, Bündnis 90/Die Grünen und FDP‘.

Nº88 · FEBRUARY 5, 2022

Weekend

Edition stay alert keep smart

Conclusion To conclude, Europe is at a crossroads for shaping its future, that is the realities of those that will live Europe’s future: the young generation. In this Long Read, I have tried to distinguish the dimensions, in which the EU ma ers in the lives of the youth: youth participation and youth employment policy. I also tried to re ect on the challenges of the European Year of Youth we are living. Yet, one crucial fact remains clear: only if Europe takes up the challenge of se ing strong political and legal signals can this European Year of Youth become a success story that truly empowers and supports the young generation. Don’t they deserve this?

Europe is at a crossroads for shaping its future, that is the realities of those that will live Europe’s future: the young generation

Nº88 · FEBRUARY 5, 2022

Weekend

Edition stay alert keep smart

News Highlights 24 to 28 January 2022

New time-limit for applications before ECtHR applicable as of 1 February 2022 Monday 31 January

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e new time-limit of 4 months for an application to be made to the European Court of Human Rights became eﬀective, substituting the previous time-limit of 6 months a er the nal domestic decision taken in the framework of the exhaustion of domestic remedies.

European Chief Prosecutor sends le er to Commission on rule of law implications of Slovenian legislation Monday 31 January

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e European Chief Prosecutor, Ms Laura Kövesi, expressed concern over recent legislative changes in Slovenia that would signi cantly impact the powers and the eﬀective functioning of the European Public Prosecutor’s Oﬃce in Slovenia.

Oﬃcial Journal: European Medicines Agency Regulation published Monday 31 January

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

Regulation 2022/123 on a reinforced role for the European Medicines Agency in crisis preparedness and management for medicinal products and medical devices was published in the Oﬃcial Journal.

Composition of Chambers of General Court published Monday 31 January

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

Mr Dimitrakopoulos, Mr Kukovec and Ms Kingston entered into oﬃce as Judges of the General Court. e new Chamber composition is expected to be in force until 31 August 2022.

European Court of Auditors publishes its conclusions on how energy taxation ts with EU climate objectives

Ombudsman closes case on INEA’s refusal to grant public access relying on public security exception

Tuesday 1 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e European Court of Auditors published a review on EU energy taxation policies, concluding that overall it can support eﬀorts to combat climate change but that current tax levels do not re ect the extent to which diﬀerent energy sources pollute.

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e European Ombudsman delivered her decision in the case concerning the Innovation and Networks Executive Agency’s refusal to grant full public access to a document related to the Lyon-Turin base tunnel project.

Nº88 · FEBRUARY 5, 2022

Weekend

Edition stay alert keep smart

Council and Parliament reach agreement on Europol’s new mandate Wednesday 2 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e Council of the EU and the European Parliament reached a provisional agreement on a dra regulation amending the Europol Regulation, which will strengthen Europol’s capacity to be er support Member States in their ght against new threats and modus operandi.

General Court con rms ECB’s withdrawal of banking license of Pilatus Bank following indictment of main shareholder Wednesday 2 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

Ombudsman con rms maladministration in European Defence Agency’s handling of former chief executive taking position at Airbus Wednesday 2 February

e European Ombudsman found that the European Defence Agency’s decision to approve, with conditions, two intended jobs of its former chief executive, Jorge Domecq, amounted to two separate instances of maladministration.

General Court upholds Polish gas wholesaler’s appeal against rejection of its complaint over Gazprom but dismisses that against approval of Gazprom’s commitments Wednesday 2 February

e General Court’s Extended Chamber delivered its judgment in Pilatus Bank and Pilatus Holding v ECB (T-27/19), dismissing an appeal against the European Central Bank’s decision to withdraw the banking license of Pilatus Bank.

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e Court of Justice handed down two judgments (T-616/18 and T-399/19), concerning two appeals brought by a Polish gas wholesaler against the Commission’s measures taken in the context of addressing Gazprom’s abuses of dominant position in the market for gas supply.

880 million ne imposed on Scania for its participation in Trucks cartel upheld by General Court

New Deputy Director-General appointed in Commission’s department for competition

Wednesday 2 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e General Court in Scania and Others v Commission (T-799/17) dismissed the action lodged against the Commission Decision in the so-called Trucks cartel, by which Scania was imposed a ne of 880 million euros.

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e European Commission appointed Ben Smulders as Deputy Director-General for State Aids Policy in the Directorate-General for Competition (DG COMP), responsible for enforcing EU competition rules.

Nº88 · FEBRUARY 5, 2022

Weekend

Edition stay alert keep smart

Commission presents Taxonomy Complementary Climate Delegated Act on climate change mitigation and adaptation Wednesday 2 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e College of Commissioners reached a political agreement on the Taxonomy Complementary Climate Delegated Act on climate change mitigation and adaptation covering certain gas and nuclear activities.

EDPB adopts rst Opinion on certi cation criteria helping controllers to show compliance with GDPR Wednesday 2 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e EDPB adopted its Opinion on the GDPR-CARPA certication scheme submi ed to the Board by the Luxembourg Supervisory Authority, which aims to help controllers and processors demonstrate compliance with the GDPR.

Two Delegated Regulations adopted by Commission to foster sustainable and smart mobility ursday 3 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e European Commission adopted two new initiatives for sustainable and smart mobility as part of the Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy that helps advance the European Green Deal.

New Deputy Director-General of Commission Legal Service appointed Wednesday 2 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e College of Commissioners decided to appoint Mr Clemens Ladenburger as Deputy Director-General of its Legal Service.

Vacancy for IP Specialist in EUIPO ursday 3 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e European Union Intellectual Property Oﬃce, based in Alicante, is seeking candidates to ll the post of Specialist in the eld of Intellectual Property.

AG Pikamäe: Poland has failed to ful l its obligations by keeping Turów mine open ursday 3 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

Advocate General Pikamäe concluded in his Opinion in Czech Republic v Poland (C-121/21) that Poland has failed to ful l its obligations under EU law by extending a concession for lignite mining activities in the Turów mine by six years without carrying out an environmental impact assessment.

Nº88 · FEBRUARY 5, 2022

Weekend

Edition stay alert keep smart

AG Ćapeta: Court of Justice has jurisdiction to interpret CUI Uniform Rules in view of shared competence over transport ursday 3 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

Court of Justice: insolvency of successful tenderer allows for succession into its position without the need for new procurement procedure ursday 3 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

In ÖBB-In astruktur Aktiengesellscha (C-500/20), Advocate General Ćapeta advised the Court of Justice to ruled that it has jurisdiction to interpret the Uniform Rules concerning the contract for the use of infrastructure in international rail traﬃc because the EU has exercised its shared competence on transport.

e Court of Justice held in Advania Sverige and Kammarkollegiet (C-461/20) that insolvency of a contractor allows for succession into its position in a public framework agreement without there being a need to open a new procurement procedure.

Commission presents proposal to extend EU Digital COVID Certi cate until June 2023

AG Koko : Court of Justice has no jurisdiction to answer question on ratione temporis applicability of Unfair Terms Directive

ursday 3 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e European Commission proposed extending the EU Digital COVID Certi cate by one more year, until 30 June 2023, seeing that the COVID-19 virus remains prevalent in Europe.

ECtHR: Civil Chamber of Polish Supreme Court not independent and impartial tribunal ursday 3 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e European Court of Human Rights ruled in Advance Pharma sp. z o.o v. Poland that the Civil Chamber of the Polish Supreme Court is not an ‘independent and impartial tribunal established by law’, nding also a violation of the right to a fair hearing.

ursday 3 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

Advocate General Koko concluded in Zagrebačka banka (C-567/20) that the Court of Justice does not have jurisdiction to rule on whether, under the Unfair Terms Directive, a provision adopted a er the accession of a Member State must also guarantee that restitutory eﬀect in respect of unfair terms in a contract concluded before the accession.

EU administration’s duty of diligence does not confer rights to individuals: AG Szpunar’s Opinion ursday 3 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

Advocate General Szpunar in his Opinion in SGL Carbon & Others v Commission (joined cases C-65/21 P et al.) advised to dismiss an appeal against four judgments of the General Court dismissing actions for damages brought by manufacturers over the alledged erroneous classi cation of tar as hazardous.

Nº88 · FEBRUARY 5, 2022

Weekend

Edition stay alert keep smart

Council of the EU renews EU terrorist list

Commission closes trade investigation into Mexican tequila exports

Friday 4 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e list of persons and groups who are to be subjected to restrictive measures combating terrorism by the EU was renewed, as is done on a regular basis, by the Council of the EU.

e European Commission closed its investigation under the EU’s Trade Barriers Regulation concerning measures taken by Mexico relating to its exportation of tequila, following the successful resolution of the issue.

High Level Group on European Democracy of Commi ee of Regions adopts nal report

AG Emiliou: child-raising periods completed in another Member State must be taken into account only if all conditions under current social security Regulation are met

Friday 4 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e High Level Group on European Democracy of the Commi ee of Regions (CoR) adopted its nal report, which gives advice to the CoR on ways and means to strengthen and improve democracy in the EU.

Commission invites parties to submit comments on proposed information exchange guidance for dual distribution Friday 4 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e European Commission launched a targeted public consultation on the proposed guidance relating to information exchange in the context of dual distribution. Parties are invited to submit their comments by 18 February 2022.

Friday 4 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

Advocate General Emiliou found (C-576/20) that childraising periods spent in the other Member States can be excluded by a Member State competent to grant an old-age pension if the applicant does not meet all of the conditions established under Article 44(2) of Regulation 987/2009, thereby excluding the application of earlier Reichel-Albert case-law.

Vice-President Šefčovič criticises cease of sanitary and phytosanitary checks between Great Britain and Northern Ireland Friday 4 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

European Commission Vice-President Šefčovič criticised the recent instruction by the Northern Irish Minister for Agriculture to cease sanitary and phytosanitary checks between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Nº88 · FEBRUARY 5, 2022

Weekend

Edition stay alert keep smart

ECtHR upholds Croatia’s denial of classi ed presidential records on national security grounds Friday 4 February

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

e European Court of Human Rights ruled in Šeks v. Croatia that Croatia did not violate Article 10 (freedom of expression) by denying access to classi ed presidential records on the ground of national security that were requested by a former politician seeking to write a book on the history of Croatia.

Insights, Analyses & Op-Eds It’s the End of Intra EU Arbitration? Prior Intra-EU BITS A er Commission v European Foods

Goodbye to the ‘Sanctions Rebate’ for Large Member States in Infringement Procedures?: ‘Ferronickel’ (C-51/20)

by Andrés Delgado Casteleiro

by Albrecht Wendenburg

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

First Op-Ed on the EU Law Live Symposium on the Micula judgment of the Court of Justice. e author situates the judgment within the previous case-law of the Court and assesses whether there is any departure from it.

Op-Ed on the ‘Ferronickel’ judgment (C-51/20), a er which it seems likely that the ‘institutional weight of a Member State’ has served its time as a criterion when determining sanctions in infringement proceedings.

Are private nes for incorrect use of parking space subject to VAT?

e Disciplinary Court of the Warsaw Bar Association is a court but the Court of Justice lacked a broader perspective: Minister Sprawiedliwości (C-55/20)

by Darya Budova

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

Analysis of the judgment in Case C-90/20, Apcoa Parking Danmark A/S, in which, as put forward by the author, the Court completes a conceptual part of ‘supply of services for consideration’ and extends the concept of direct link to fees charged for a breach of terms and conditions of a given service in this particular case.

by Piotr Bogdanowicz

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

Op-Ed on the Court of Justice’s judgment in Minister Sprawiedliwości (C-55/20) where it was held that the Services Directive and, consequently, Article 47 of the Charter do not apply to appeal proceedings brought by a State authority before the Disciplinary Court of the Bar Association in Warsaw.

Nº88 · FEBRUARY 5, 2022

Weekend

Edition stay alert keep smart

e Court of Justice’s repeal of the General Court’s ruling in Micula: A controversial reaﬃrmation of the con ict between EU law and international in-

e Intel renvoi judgment: abuse of dominance doctrine applied by Lena Hornkohl

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

Op-Ed on the General Court’s judgment (T-286/09 RENV) that partially annulled the 2009 European Commission Decision ning Intel an at that time record of €1.06 billion for abusing its dominant position, and re ned the legal test for exclusivity rebate abuses, clari ed the necessary standard of proof and the ‘as eﬃcient competitor’ (AEC) test.

by Maurizia De Bellis

READ MORE ON EU LAW LIVE

Second Op-Ed on the EU Law Live Symposium on the Micula judgment of the Court of Justice. e author analyses the main arguments of the case and contrasts them with the previous case law, in order to show their implications.

Library - Book Review

By Ma eo Monti READ ON EU LAW LIVE

Giuseppe Martinico Filtering Populist Claims to Fight Populism: e Italian Case in a Comparative Perspective A review of a book that investigates the relationship between populism and constitutionalism, oﬀering a fascinating examination of comparative law, in which diachronic and synchronic comparisons are skillfully employed. A book that according to the reviewer is interesting not only for constitutional and comparative lawyers, but also for scholars of European Union law.