Academic literature on the topic 'Article 8 EU Charter'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Article 8 EU Charter.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Article 8 EU Charter"
1
Milios, Georgios. "A Re-examination of the Family Reunification Directive in the post-Lisbon Fundamental Rights Scene." ICL Journal 12, no. 1 (2018): 85–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/icl-2017-0083.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The article examines the issue of compatibility of the Family Reunification Directive with the important changes that the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty brought to the field of fundamental rights in the EU especially considering the fact that the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU gained the same legal value as the treaties. The article examines all possible scenarios that may derive from Art 52 (3) of the Charter and the problems or issues that each of them may entail for the immigrants’ right to family life in the EU. This examination reveals that certain aspects of the provisions of the Family Reunification Directive are not compatible with Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and proposes that the EU should, in any event, provide more extensive protection than the one provided for by the Convention. The article proposes a reunification model which may be more compatible with the post-Lisbon fundamental rights scene.
2
Gotthardt, Michael. "Effective enforcement of EU labour law: A comparative example." European Labour Law Journal 11, no. 4 (2020): 403–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2031952520905385.
Full textAbstract:
The article looks at the outcome of the two legal proceedings in the Schüth and IR cases. In both cases employees of the Catholic Church – a choirmaster and organist in a Catholic parish and a trained physician working as Head of the Internal Medicine Department of a Catholic hospital - were dismissed because of the violation of the Basic Regulations on Employment Relationships in the Service of the Church. In the Schüth case Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which protects the right to private and family life, had been violated. In the IR case the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the Directive establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation were applicable. The dismissal in IR was held to be unequal treatment in employment. But the outcome of both cases was very different. We find that Union law and in particular Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union makes all the difference. In the Schüth case, the employment relationship was terminated and the claimant’s only consolation was a claim for damages from the State. In the IR case, on the other hand, the termination was declared invalid and the employment relationship continued, i.e. the head physician did not lose his job. The comparison of the cases demonstrates that European law, backed by Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, has not only permeated procedural law, it has also led to an increase in judicial reviews of substantive law which in the application of Union law is a far cry from a mere plausibility review.
3
Scarcello, Orlando. "The Randstad Case: Melki Reloaded? The Fundamental Right to Effective Judicial Protection as Battleground for Judicial Supremacy in European Law." Nordic Journal of European Law 4, no. 1 (2021): 53–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.36969/njel.v4i1.23445.
Full textAbstract:
This paper will examine the recent preliminary reference to the European Court of Justice issued by the Italian Court of Cassation in the Randstad case, aimed at rearranging the internal constitutional separation between ordinary and administrative courts (article 111(8) of the Constitution). I will first provide some context on both the relations between Italian and EU courts (2.1) and on the confrontation between the Court of Cassation and the Constitutional Court in interpreting article 111 (2.2). I will then specifically examine the referring order to the Court of Justice of the EU (3), focusing on the role of general clauses of EU law as articles 4(3) and 19 TEU and 47 of the Charter in it. Finally, I will consider the instrumental use of EU law made by the Cassation to overcome an unpleasant constitutional arrangement. This aligns Randstad with previous cases such as Melki or A v. B and may foster constitutional conflict in the future.
4
Kornezov, Alexander. "THE RIGHT TO VOTE AS AN EU FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT AND THE EXPANDING SCOPE OF APPLICATION OF THE EU CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS." Cambridge Law Journal 75, no. 1 (2016): 24–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197316000167.
Full textAbstract:
IS the right to vote in European Parliament elections a matter for EU law? Until recently, the answer to this query seemed to be a clear “no”. Indeed, while Article 223(1) of the TFEU does confer on the European Union the competence to lay down a uniform procedure for the election of Members of the European Parliament (“MEPs”), this competence has not been exercised so far. Consequently, Article 8 of the Act concerning the election of the MEPs by direct universal suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom (OJ 1976 L 278 p. 1, henceforth “the 1976 Act”), provides that the “electoral procedure shall be governed in each Member State by its national provisions”. Apart from the general principles of “direct universal suffrage in a free and secret ballot” and of non-discrimination on the ground of nationality, enshrined respectively in Article 14(3) of the TEU, Article 1(3) of the 1976 Act, and Article 20(2)(b) of the TFEU, there is nothing in EU law that governs specifically the eligibility to vote in EP elections.
5
Vavoula, Niovi. "Consultation of EU Immigration Databases for Law Enforcement Purposes: a Privacy and Data Protection Assessment." European Journal of Migration and Law 22, no. 2 (2020): 139–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340072.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Since the past three decades, an elaborate framework of EU-wide information systems processing the personal data of third-country nationals has emerged. The vast majority of these systems (VIS, Eurodac, EES, ETIAS) are conceptualised as multi-purpose tools, whereby their consultation for crime-related objectives is listed among their ancillary objectives. As a result, immigration records may be accessed by national law enforcement authorities and Europol for the purposes of fighting terrorism and other serious crimes under specified and limited conditions. Drawing from the relevant jurisprudence of the European Court, this article evaluates whether the EU rules on law enforcement access to EU immigration databases comply with the rights to respect for private life and protection of personal data, as enshrined in Article 7 and 8 of the EU Charter respectively. In addition, challenges posed by the forthcoming interoperability between databases are also examined.
6
De Bellis, Maurizia. "Multi-level Administration, Inspections and Fundamental Rights: Is Judicial Protection Full and Effective?" German Law Journal 22, no. 3 (2021): 416–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/glj.2021.14.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractIn the last decades, an increasing number of EU institutions and agencies have been given the power to conduct administrative inspections. While the legal literature has traditionally focused on the Commission’s inspection powers in competition proceedings, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), the European Central Bank (ECB), the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), and the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) are also entrusted with such powers. The Commission has also been granted inspection powers in the field of Food Safety. Inspection powers can have a crucial impact on the fundamental right of the inviolability of the home, recognized by the Court of Justice as a general principle of EU law, and protected under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) and Article 7 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (ECFR). This Article argues that the current remedies do not fulfill all the criteria set forth by the Strasbourg Court for ex post judicial control vis-à vis inspections to be full and effective, in particular when these powers are used in the context of composite procedures, and suggests remedies to improve the system of review, in order to effectively protect fundamental rights.
7
Brkan, Maja. "The Essence of the Fundamental Rights to Privacy and Data Protection: Finding the Way Through the Maze of the CJEU’s Constitutional Reasoning." German Law Journal 20, no. 6 (2019): 864–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/glj.2019.66.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractIn the constitutional shaping of the concept of essence of fundamental rights, the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU (“CJEU” or “the Court”) in the field of privacy and data protection plays a crucial role. The Court’s interpretation of this notion had a considerable impact not only jon perception of the essence in other fields of law, but also on the constitutional doctrine more generally. This Article focuses on specificities of the notion of essence of fundamental rights to privacy and the protection of personal data from Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. After a general analysis, situating this notion into the framework of multi-level protection of fundamental rights in Europe, the Article addresses further interpretative challenges relating to the essence in the Court’s case law. At the core of the analysis are the Schrems and Digital Rights Ireland cases, where the CJEU developed, for the first time, the modalities of the breach of essence of fundamental rights to privacy and data protection and laid down constitutional foundations for interpretation of this notion. Further jurisprudence, including the Tele2 Sverige and Opinion 1/15 cases, is analyzed as an example of fine-tuning of the CJEU’s approach towards the normative understanding of this concept. Against this backdrop, the Article elaborates on the importance of insights in the fields of privacy and data protection for the general constitutional understanding of the concept of essence and proposes a generalized method for determination of infringement of essence in fundamental rights jurisprudence.
8
Maryniv, Ivanna, and Andriy Kotenko. "The European ombudsman as a body for the protection of the rights of individuals and legal entities in the European Union." Law and innovations, no. 1 (33) (April 5, 2021): 55–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.37772/2518-1718-2021-1(33)-8.
Full textAbstract:
Formulation of the problem. Today, the EU faces new challenges due to the globalization policy pursued by most EU member states, migration and the global pandemic - COVID-19. In the new conditions, the protection of human rights acquires a fundamentally new meaning. Therefore, the question of the role of the EU Ombudsman in the process of protection of individual rights and control over the activities of bodies is very relevant. By choosing the path of European integration and committing itself under the Association Agreement to adapt a number of areas in line with the acquis communautaire, Ukraine should also focus on the experience of the European Ombudsman. Since taking office as the Ukrainian Parliamentary Commissioner for Human Rights in 1998, it will not be an exaggeration to state that there are a number of problems in overseeing the proper activities of the authorities in respecting human and civil rights and freedoms. That is why, given the shortcomings and the chosen vector of development, the experience of the European Ombudsman is of great importance for Ukraine in order to improve the activities of the Ukrainian Parliament’s Commissioner for Human Rights. Target of research is to examine the role of the EU Ombudsman in the process of investigating good governance in the EU institutional mechanism. Article’s main body. The article is devoted to the study of the legal status of the European Ombudsman as a body that must investigate improper bodies of the activities of institutions, agencies to ensure the restoration of violated rights guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The analysis of the practice of the European Ombudsman in the official annual reports, as well as the development strategy is carried out. With the help of EU legislation research and conducting of the legal analysis of the Ombudsman’s annual reports, strategic development documents and enquiries, opened by the Ombudsman in the last decade, the complexity of the European ombudsman’s contribution to the implementation of the sustainable development principle within EU’s supranational legal framework. Conclusions. After analyzing the development of Ombudsman’s legal status and the results of his enquiries, conducted in the last decade, a conclusion has been made, that the European ombudsman considerably influences all the institutional system of the EU. His initiatives have far-reaching consequences which might have caused their effect on the whole legal framework of the EU, in case if the European ombudsman had been given some more legal powers. Though, having only recommendation mechanisms in possession, this body influences the governing system of the EU largely, causing positive changes, meeting the leading principles of the functioning of the EU.
9
Torkunova, E. A., and K. G. Zharinov. "Implementation of standards of the european convention on human rights regarding forced removal of aliens in the European Union law." Moscow Journal of International Law, no. 4 (December 31, 2020): 6–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.24833/0869-0049-2020-4-6-22.
Full textAbstract:
INTRODUCTION. The global migration crisis taking place in the world and especially within the European Union provokes debates regarding the necessity to change the current approaches to the regulation of migration issues. Thus, extensive work has been done in the recent years on the new future reform of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice of the EU including the Common European Asylum System. Besides that, the Lisbon Treaty, which entered into force in 2009, provides that the European Union shall accede to the European Convention on Human Rights. Despite the failed attempt of accession in 2014 blocked by the Court of Justice of the EU, the European Union still must fulfill its obligation, which is bound to happen sooner or later. That is why the topic of the present article is of particular interest at the moment. However, it is important to clarify the understanding of certain terms used in the heading of the article. In particular, it should be noted that the term “aliens” in relation to the European Union legal order covers nationals of states that are not EU-members and do not apply the European Union law concerning migrants on other grounds (for example, due to the membership in the European Economic Area) and stateless persons as well. Further, the reader should take into account that the European Convention on Human Rights as an international treaty is not, strictly speaking, a source of EU law per se as the EU is not a party to the ECHR, at least so far. Therefore, the European Union is not directly obliged under international law to implement the ECHR. Nevertheless, the provisions of the Convention formed the basis for one of the most significant sources of the EU law – the so-called “general principles of the EU law”. Most of them were later codified in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which expressly stipulates that the meaning and scope of the Charter rights which correspond to rights guaranteed by the ECHR shall be the same as those laid down by the ECHR. It means that today the EU already shall comply with the Convention standards regardless of its non-accession to the ECHR as a collective party. Due to objective limits of the text volume the present article concentrates on implementation of the key substantive Convention guarantees concerning forced removal. Consequently, it does not cover the procedural standards laid down by Article 13 of the ECHR. Moreover, the research does not touch upon the general standards of Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention applied not only in the context of removals of aliens but also in other situations (e.g., regarding the conditions of detention). The aim of the present article is to evaluate the implementation of standards of the European Convention on Human Rights regarding forced removal of aliens in the European Union law and to suggest measures to ensure compliance with the Convention guarantees in case of detecting any problematic issues.MATERIALS AND METHODS. The research refers to the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, the primary and secondary EU law, the case-law of the ECtHR and the CJEU, the recent works of Russian and foreign scholars and also the Council of Europe handbooks. The methodological basis of the research consists of general scientific methods (analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction, classification, systematization, prediction) and special legal methods (comparative legal and formal-legal methods).RESEARCH RESULTS. Today the EU law thoroughly regulates such areas as granting international protection to third country nationals; determination of the member state responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the member states by an alien and his/her subsequent removal to this member state; removal of illegal immigrants to third countries and also the legal status of third country nationals who are family members of an EU citizen. The provisions of EU legal acts in this regard were formulated inter alia on the basis of the case-law of the ECtHR. Although the ECtHR has found violations of the Convention by the EU member states in a number of cases concerning the application of the EU law in the migration context (for example, within the framework of the Dublin system), all these violations were rather caused by exercising of discretionary powers by the member states than resulted from the content of the EU law itself. Moreover, the human rights-based approach used by the CJEU in the interpretation of certain potentially problematic legal acts (in particular, the Framework Decision on the European arrest warrant) contributed to the fact that the ECtHR has never come to a conclusion that the presumption of equivalent protection granted by the EU law (formulated in «Bosphorus Airways v. Ireland» in 2005) was rebutted in any cases regarding forced removal of aliens. Besides that, as of today in many aspects connected with migration the EU law provides broader protection that the Convention.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The standards of the European Convention on Human Rights regarding forced removal of aliens have been success-fully implemented in the European Union law despite certain originality of how the Convention guarantees are incorporated to the EU legal order in general. This is confirmed, among other things, by the fact that the ECtHR has never come to a conclusion that the presumption of equivalent protection granted by the EU law was rebutted in any cases regarding forced removal of aliens. However, the theoretical possibility of rebuttal of the said presumption in future cannot be excluded and the whole concept of such presumption has been occasionally criticized. The time will show whether the future EU legal acts (in particular, those adopted in the course of the ongoing reform of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice in response to the escalation of the migration crisis) will fully comply with the European Convention on Human Rights.
10
Versaci, Giuseppe. "Personal Data and Contract Law: Challenges and Concerns about the Economic Exploitation of the Right to Data Protection." European Review of Contract Law 14, no. 4 (2018): 374–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ercl-2018-1022.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The so-called ‘free’ digital business models – users are not requested to pay a price, but to disclose personal data – are a very common reality. To tackle this phenomenon, the European Commission’s proposal of Directive on contracts for the supply of digital content used the concept of personal data as counter-performance. This stance proved to be quite problematic. It has been opposed by the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) arguing that it should not be possible to subject the fundamental right to data protection to a commercial transaction. This article dwells upon the economic exploitability of the right to data protection, showing that Article 8 of the EU Charter of fundamental rights and the related case law of the CJEU do not justify the concerns raised by the EDPS. This seems to be confirmed by the fact that the legal traditions of the EU Member States recognize that personality rights can be the object of a contract, although they limit to a certain extent the private autonomy of the parties. Thus, the commodification of personal data – like the commodification of other incorporeal attributes of personality – is not banned. Rather, there is now a policy issue about how to handle the risk of personalized discrimination and the problem of inequality of bargaining power in digital business models based on personal data. In this respect, political decisions should not be too affected by conceptual barriers between data protection law and contract law. In line with this position, the author argues that the economic exploitation of the right to data protection should not be considered a waiver of the same right.
Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Article 8 EU Charter"
1
Strindberg, Mona. "Protection of Personal Data, a Power Struggle between the EU and the US: What implications might be facing the transfer of personal data from the EU to the US after the CJEU’s Safe Harbour ruling?" Thesis, Uppsala universitet, Juridiska institutionen, 2016. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-294790.
Full textAbstract:
Since the US National Security Agency’s former contractor Edward Snowden exposed the Agency’s mass surveillance, the EU has been making a series of attempts toward a more safeguarded and stricter path concerning its data privacy protection. On 8 April 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the CJEU) invalidated the EU Data Retention Directive 2006/24/EC on the basis of incompatibility with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter). After this judgment, the CJEU examined the legality of the Safe Harbour Agreement, which had been the main legal basis for transfers of personal data from the EU to the US under Decision 2000/520/EC. Subsequently, on 6 October 2015, in the case of Schrems v Data Protection Commissioner, the CJEU declared the Safe Harbour Decision invalid. The ground for the Court’s judgment was the fact that the Decision enabled interference, by US public authorities, with the fundamental rights to privacy and personal data protection under Article 7 and 8 of the Charter, when processing the personal data of EU citizens. According to the judgment, this interference has been beyond what is strictly necessary and proportionate to the protection of national security and the persons concerned were not offered any administrative or judicial means of redress enabling the data relating to them to be accessed, rectified or erased. The Court’s analysis of the Safe Harbour was borne out of the EU Commission’s own previous assessments. Consequently, since the transfers of personal data between the EU and the US can no longer be carried out through the Safe Harbour, the EU legislature is left with the task to create a safer option, which will guarantee that the fundamental rights to privacy and protection of personal data of the EU citizens will be respected. However, although the EU is the party dictating the terms for these transatlantic transfers of personal data, the current provisions of the US law are able to provide for derogations from every possible renewed agreement unless they become compatible with the EU data privacy law. Moreover, as much business is at stake and prominent US companies are involved in this battle, the pressure toward the US is not only coming from the EU, but some American companies are also taking the fight for EU citizens’ right to privacy and protection of their personal data.
2
Koumpli, Christina. "Les données personnelles sensibles : contribution à l'évolution du droit fondamental à la protection des données personnelles : étude comparée : Union Européenne, Allemagne, France, Grèce, Royaume-Uni." Thesis, Paris 1, 2019. http://www.theses.fr/2019PA01D003.
Full textAbstract:
La protection des données personnelles sensibles consistait, jusqu'au RGPD, en un contrôle préalable réalisé par une autorité indépendante, malgré l’obstacle posé à la libre circulation. Cette protection renforcée est aujourd'hui remplacée par l’obligation du responsable de traitement d’élaborer une étude d’impact. Une telle mutation implique un risque de pré-légitimation des traitements et peut être favorable au responsable de traitement. Or, est-elle conforme au droit fondamental à la protection des données personnelles ? La thèse interroge le contenu de ce droit et la validité du RGPD. À partir d'une étude comparative allant des années 1970 à nos jours, entre quatre pays et l’Union européenne, les données personnelles sensibles sont choisies comme moyen d'analyse en raison de la protection particulière dont elles font l’objet. Il est démontré qu’en termes juridiques, la conception préventive fait partie de l’histoire de la protection européenne des données et peut donner un sens à la protection et à son seul bénéficiaire, l’individu.Un tel sens serait d’ailleurs conforme aux Constitutions nationales qui garantissent aussi l’individu malgré leurs variations. Cependant, cette conception n’est pas forcement compatible avec l’art. 8 de la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’UE. La thèse explique que cette disposition contient la garantie d’une conciliation (entre les libertés de l’UE et celles des individus) qui peut impliquer une réduction de la protection de ces dernières. Or, il revient à la CJUE, désormais seule compétente pour son interprétation, de dégager le contenu essentiel de ce droit ; objectif auquel la thèse pourrait contribuer<br>Before the GDPR, protection of sensitive personal data consisted of a prior check by an independent authority despite limiting their free movement. This has been replaced by the obligation of the controller to prepare a privacy impact assessment. With this modification, one can assume a risk of pre-legitimization of data processing, putting the controller at an advantage. Is that compatible with the fundamental right to the protectionof personal data ? This thesis questions the content of this right and the validity of the GDPR. It is based on a comparative study from 1970s until present day between four European countries and the European Union, in which sensitive data are chosen as a meanto the analysis due to their particular protection. Research shows that in legal termsthe preventive conception is a part of the history of protection in the European Union. By limiting freedom of processing it gives meaning to protection and its only subject,the individual. Such an interpretation is compatible with National Constitutions despite their variations. However, the preventive conception of data protection is not so easily compatible with article 8 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights. The thesis puts forward that this article contains the safeguard of a balancing, between EU liberties and individuals’ freedoms, which implicates reduced protection. It is up to the European Court of Justice to identify the essence of this right, an aim to which this thesis could contribute
3
Mádr, Petr. "Právo na ochranu osobních údajů dle článku 8 Listiny základních práv Evropské unie." Master's thesis, 2016. http://www.nusl.cz/ntk/nusl-349189.
Full textAbstract:
This thesis deals with the fundamental right to the protection of personal data as enshrined in Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union ('the Charter'). An analysis of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on Article 8 of the Charter reveals an intriguing paradox: although this provision has been repeatedly invoked in order to enhance protection of personal data and has featured prominently in several far-reaching judgments (Digital Rights Ireland, Google Spain or Schrems), there is considerable uncertainty as to the substantive scope of the right to the protection of personal data. The relationship between the right to privacy and the right to data protection has proved difficult to untangle, and the autonomous nature of Article 8 of the Charter has not always been respected. The aim of the thesis is to analyse the purpose and content of this fundamental right with reference to the CJEU's case law and recent academic debate. This thesis is divided into four chapters. Chapter 1 provides an overview of the European legal framework for data protection and demonstrates the limited value of the 'Explanations relating to the Charter' in interpreting Article 8. Chapter 2 analyses the CJEU's approach to interpreting and applying Article 8, while Chapter 3 is...
4
Mailloux, Véronique. "Les décisions rendues par les arbitres de griefs dans les cas de sanctions visant des policiers ayant eu des démêlés judiciaires." Thèse, 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/1866/11032.
Full text
5
Schindehütte, Alexandra. "Das Schengener Informationssystem." Doctoral thesis, 2013. http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-1735-0000-0001-BC1D-C.
Full textAbstract:
Hauptgegenstand der Arbeit ist das Schengener Informationssystem der ersten Generation, SIS. Dargestellt werden zunächst der Weg zu einem elektronischen europaweiten Fahndungssystem, die rechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen dieses Fahndungssystems und seine Funktionsweise.
Daran anschließend folgt die Prüfung der Verletzung des Demokratieprinzips beim Zustandekommen des Schengener Durchführungsübereinkommens und bei seiner Transformation in innerstaatliches Recht. Weitere Prüfungspunkte sind die Notwendigkeit eines Gesetzes nach Art. 24 Abs. 1 Grundgesetz bei der Umsetzung in innerstaatliches Recht sowie die Vereinbarkeit der Fahndungskategorie der Verdeckten Registrierung nach Art. 99 Schengener Durchführungsübereinkommen mit Art. 8 der Europäischen Grundrechte-Charta.
Während in der Arbeit eine Verletzung von Demokratieprinzip und Art. 24 Absatz 1 Grundgesetz nicht festgestellt werden kann, bestehen im Hinblick auf die Vereinbarkeit mit Art. 8 der Europäischen Grundrechte-Charta unter verschiedenen Gesichtspunkten durchgreifende Bedenken.
Die Arbeit schließt mit einem Ausblick auf das Schengener Informationssystem der zweiten Generation, SIS II, sowie einer Zusammenfassung und einer Bewertung ab.
Books on the topic "Article 8 EU Charter"
1
Craig, Paul, and Gráinne de Búrca. 8. The Application of EU Law:. Oxford University Press, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198714927.003.0008.
Full textAbstract:
All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter examines the application of EU law by national courts and the way in which the CJEU controls national remedies for breach of EU law. Article 19 of the Treaty on European Union contains a new clause added by the Lisbon Treaty, which specifies that ‘Member States shall provide remedies sufficient to ensure effective legal protection in the fields covered by Union law’. Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights provides that ‘[e]veryone whose rights and freedoms guaranteed by the law of the Union are violated has the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal in compliance with the conditions laid down in this Article’. However, beyond these broad new provisions, EU law does not lay down any general scheme of substantive or procedural law governing remedies for its enforcement. The European Court of Justice has responded to the lack of a harmonized system of EU remedies by requiring national courts, in certain cases, to make available a particular type of remedy (e.g., restitution or interim relief), regardless of whether this would be available under national law.
2
Ausloos, Jef. The Right to Erasure in EU Data Protection Law. Oxford University Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198847977.001.0001.
Full textAbstract:
This book critically investigates the role of data subject rights in countering information and power asymmetries online. It aims at dissecting ‘data subject empowerment’ in the information society through the lens of the right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’) in Article 17 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In doing so, it provides an extensive analysis of the interaction between the GDPR and the fundamental right to data protection in Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (Charter), how data subject rights affect fair balancing of fundamental rights, and what the practical challenges are to effective data subject rights. The book starts with exploring the data-driven asymmetries that characterize individuals’ relationship with tech giants. These commercial entities increasingly anticipate and govern how people interact with each other and the world around them, affecting core values such as individual autonomy, dignity, and freedom. The book explores how data protection law, and data subject rights in particular, enable resisting, breaking down or at the very least critically engaging with these asymmetric relationships. It concludes that despite substantial legal and practical hurdles, the GDPR’s right to erasure does play a meaningful role in furthering the fundamental right to data protection (Art 8 Charter) in the face of power asymmetries online.
3
Hustinx, Peter. EU Data Protection Law: The Review of Directive 95/46/EC and the General Data Protection Regulation. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198807216.003.0005.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter looks at the origins and the current state of EU data protection law, and highlights the context of the ongoing review of Directive 95/46/EC as its key instrument, as well as the main lines of the proposed General Data Protection Regulation which will replace the Directive in the near future. The analysis shows a gradual development along two lines: one aiming at stronger rights in order to provide more effective protection, and one ensuring more consistent application of those rights across the EU. It also demonstrates the increasing impact of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, both in the case law of the Court of Justice and in the review of the legal framework. At the same time, it is argued that a lack of awareness of the difference in character between Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter could prevent Article 8 from reaching its full potential.
4
Craig, Paul, and Gráinne de Búrca. 24. Equal Treatment and Non-Discrimination. Oxford University Press, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198714927.003.0024.
Full textAbstract:
All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses EU anti-discrimination law, which, over the past decade and a half, has expanded significantly to cover a wide range of grounds and contexts. In addition to requiring equal treatment for women and men, the Treaty provides legislative competence to combat discrimination on a range of grounds. The Charter of Fundamental Rights, which has a chapter devoted to equality, has been incorporated into the EU Treaties. Article 21 of the Charter prohibits discrimination on any ground. Articles 8 and 10 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) contain horizontal clauses requiring the EU to promote equality between men and women, and to combat discrimination based on certain grounds, namely sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, or sexual orientation in all of its policies and activities.
5
Homewood, Matthew J. 8. EU competition law: Article 102 TFEU. Oxford University Press, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198815181.003.0008.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter focuses on Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Article 102 prohibits, as incompatible with the internal market, any abuse by undertakings in a dominant position within the internal market in so far as it may affect trade between Member States. It should be noted at the outset that ‘dominance’ itself is not prohibited, but only when such dominance is accompanied with abusive behaviour that may affect trade. Like Article 101, Article 102 is enforced by the European Commission, national competition authorities, and national courts under powers conferred by Regulation 1/2003.
6
Kellerbauer, Manuel, Marcus Klamert, and Jonathan Tomkin, eds. The EU Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198794561.001.0001.
Full textAbstract:
This Commentary provides an article-by-article summary of the TEU, the TFEU, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, offering a quick reference to the provisions of the Treaties and how they are interpreted and applied in practice. Written by a team of contributors drawn from the Legal Service of the European Commission and academia, the Commentary offers expert guidance to practitioners and academics seeking fast access to the Treaties and current practice. The Commentary follows a set structure, offering a short overview of the Article, the Article text itself, a key references list including essential case law and legislation, and a structured commentary on the Article itself. The editors and contributors combine experience in practice with a strong academic background and have published widely on a variety of EU law subjects.
7
Kaj, Hobér. Part II Investor-State Arbitration in the Energy Sector, 8 Overview of Energy Charter Treaty Cases. Oxford University Press, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198805786.003.0008.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter analyzes rendered awards and pending Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) cases using detailed statistical data on the disputes overall (including the number of cases brought and their outcomes), the parties involved (including the types of investors making use of the ECT, and most frequent respondent states), the underlying investment (including the different energy sectors concerned), and the arbitration rules used. It also discusses a number of issues that often arise in ECT cases. First, the chapter looks at jurisdictional objections regularly raised by respondents, including the provisional application of the ECT under Article 45; the ‘denial of benefits’ clause of Article 17(1); and the definition of an ‘investment’ under Article 1(6). The chapter then analyzes selected merits issues that have been addressed in the ECT awards rendered to date. Finally, this chapter considers the future of the ECT.
8
Foster, Nigel. Foster on EU Law. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198839804.001.0001.
Full textAbstract:
Foster on EU Law offers an account of the institutions and procedures of the EU legal system as well as focused analysis of key substantive areas including free movement of goods, free movement of persons, citizenship, and competition law including state aids. This clear two-part structure provides a solid foundation in the mechanisms and applications of EU law. The book considers the supremacy of EU law in relation to ordinary domestic law, member state constitutional law, and international law including UN Resolutions. It includes a consideration of EU law and the UK, including a consideration of the Brexit referendum result and its possible consequences; also of Germany and France, as well as a briefer look at a number of other member states. It also contains discussion of human rights, in particular the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the moves of the EU to accede to the ECHR. The material on remedies in Chapter 6 has been rearranged to aid presentation and understanding. It follows the further developments of Article 263 TFEU and has rearranged the material on the free movement of persons to take account of the judgments of the Court of Justice.
9
Trevor C, Hartley. Part II Jurisdiction, 8 Special Jurisdiction. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198729006.003.0008.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter considers the rules of special jurisdiction contained in Article 7 of Brussels 2012 and Article 5 of Lugano 2007, rules that apply when the defendant is domiciled in another EU or Lugano State. Topics discussed include rules on contract; tort, delict, and quasi-delict; civil claims in criminal proceedings; recovery of cultural objects; branch, agency, or other establishments; trusts; salvage of a cargo or freight; and claims for maintenance. The rules discussed are all subject to an exception where the courts of another Member State have exclusive jurisdiction, under Brussels 2012, Article 24 or 25, or where another Section of Title II of the Regulation sets out a complete code of provisions with regard to a given subject.
10
Dame Rosalyn, DBE, QC, Higgins, Webb Philippa, Akande Dapo, Sivakumaran Sandesh, and Sloan James. Part 2 The United Nations: What it is, 8 Membership. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198808312.003.0008.
Full textAbstract:
The Charter of the United Nations provides for two different means by which it is possible to become a member of the organization. Article 3 of the UN Charter relates to original members of the organization, while other members may be admitted under Article 4 of the UN Charter. The main distinction between original members and other members is that the organization is able to exercise control over whether the latter become members but had no control over the admission to membership of original members. This chapter discusses the admission to membership process; loss of membership and membership rights; readmission to membership; state succession and membership; problems of extinction and continuity; representation of members/credentials; and the position of observers.
Book chapters on the topic "Article 8 EU Charter"
1
Kochenov, Dimitry. "Article 8 TEU." In The EU Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198759393.003.11.
Full textAbstract:
Article 8 TEU formally constitutionalizes the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) of the EU, which, until the ToL has only been based on soft law. Before the entry into force of the ToL not a single provision of the Treaties dealt specifically with the strengthening of relations with the neighbourhood of the EU. Article 8 TEU was supposed to bridge this gap, providing both the principles of the engagement with the neighbourhood and a special procedure for this. Until this day the provision has never been used as a legal basis of any EU action.
2
Klamert, Marcus. "Article 8 TFEU." In The EU Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198759393.003.80.
Full text
3
Lock, Tobias. "Article 8 CFR." In The EU Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198759393.003.528.
Full text
4
Kranenborg, Herke. "Article 8 – Protection of Personal Data." In The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Nomos, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.5771/9783845259055_266.
Full text
5
Martin, Denis. "Article 23 CFR." In The EU Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198759393.003.544.
Full textAbstract:
According to the Explanations, paragraph 1 is based on what is now Article 3 TEU and Article 8 TFEU, which are intended to promote equality between men and women in the Union, and on Article 157(1) TFEU. It draws on Article 20 of the revised European Social Charter (rESC) of 3 May 1996 and on point 16 of the Community Charter on the rights of workers. It is also based on Article 157(3) TFEU and Article 2(4) of Council Directive 76/207/EEC.
6
Klamert, Marcus. "Article 343 TFEU." In The EU Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198759393.003.501.
Full textAbstract:
Article 291 EC The Union shall enjoy in the territories of the Member States such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the performance of its tasks, under the conditions laid down in the Protocol of 8 April 1965 on the privileges and immunities of the European Union. The same shall apply to the European Central Bank and the European Investment Bank.
7
Hijmans, Hielke. "Article 1 Subject-matter and objectives." In The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Oxford University Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198826491.003.0003.
Full textAbstract:
The protection of natural persons in relation to the processing of personal data is a fundamental right. Article 8(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’) and Article 16(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provide that everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him or her.
8
Klamert, Marcus. "Title I Common Provisions." In The EU Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198759393.003.3.
Full textAbstract:
The title ‘Common Provisions’, comprising Articles 1–8 TEU, regroups norms that are very different both in terms of their nature and their subject matter. Articles 1–6 TEU are general provisions on the foundations of EU integration and of the EU legal order. Article 7 TEU establishes a procedure for safeguarding the Union’s founding values as enshrined in Article 2 TEU. Article 8 TEU deals with quite a specific policy area, namely relations with neighbouring countries.
9
Lynskey, Orla. "Article 8: The Right to Data Protection." In The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights in the Member States. Hart Publishing, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781509940943.ch-0018.
Full text
10
Klamert, Marcus. "Title II Provisions Having General Application." In The EU Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198759393.003.78.
Full textAbstract:
Under Title II of the TFEU, the Treaty assembles a general consistency rule (Article 7 TFEU), a number of horizontal ‘mainstreaming’ provisions (Articles 8–13 TFEU), a provision on services in general economic interest (Article 14 TFEU), a principle of EU law plus legal basis (transparency, Article 15 TFEU), a fundamental right plus legal basis (data protection, Article 16 TFEU), and a provision on religion similar to Article 4(2) TEU on respect for national identities (Article 17 TFEU). Thus, the ‘provisions having general application’ have little in common. There are however some general remarks that can be made with regard to the horizontal provisions in Articles 8–13 TFEU, including the related consistency clause in Article 7 TFEU.