To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: European rights of free movement.
Journal articles on the topic 'European rights of free movement'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'European rights of free movement.'
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.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Habro, Iryna. "Free movement of persons as a component of the value system in the European Union." European Historical Studies, no. 14 (2019): 6–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/2524-048x.2019.14.6-14.
Full textAbstract:
The article deals with topical issues of regulating the freedom of movement of individuals as a component of the value system and the key right of citizens in the European Union. After all, freedom of movement itself includes a whole set of rights, which are both a guarantee of other natural rights and a sign of the rule of law. At the core of European values are liberal fundamental rights and freedoms, democratic principles of government, as well as the rule of law and social state. With the creation and development of the European Communities, the regulation of the right of nationals of Member States to move and reside freely has acquired not only national significance, but also a regional (cross–border) scale, which is an example for other integration entities. The European Union is trying to regulate the freedom of movement of individuals in a unified and at the same time as individualized way as possible. This is what is relevant for Ukraine in the context of European integration, because in Ukraine, some of the society has some fears over the loss of sovereignty through accession to the EU. Attention is drawn to the freedom of movement of all categories of EU and third–country nationals. Freedom of movement for individuals within the European Union covers the complex of rights of EU citizens, as well as their family members, for free movement, residence, employment, economic activity and enjoyment of all social rights in each Member State of the European Union, regardless of their nationality. The specific features of the exercise of the right of free movement within the EU for Ukrainian citizens in the context of the Association Agreement with the EU and the Visa–free Agreement between the EU and Ukraine are also identified. The provisions on working conditions apply only to citizens of Ukraine or EU Member States who work legally on the territory of the other party to the Agreement. The Association Agreement is not about freedom of movement for workers.
2
Novitz, Tonia. "Labour Rights as Human Rights: Implications for Employers’ Free Movement in an Enlarged European Union." Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 9 (2007): 357–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.5235/152888712802746911.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter considers the legal status of labour rights as human rights within the European Union (EU) and the implications that this may have for free movement provisions under European Community (EC) law. This is not by any means a new subject for analysis and reflection, but has been of particular concern since the fifth enlargement of the EU which commenced in 2004. It is in this context that we have witnessed significant litigation before the European Court of Justice concerning the scope of the right to strike, and widespread protest concerning the adoption of a new Directive on Services in the Internal Market.
3
Giubboni, Stefano. "Free Movement of Persons and European Solidarity Revisited." Perspectives on Federalism 7, no. 3 (December 1, 2015): 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/pof-2015-0016.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This paper analyses the case-law of the European Court of Justice on the scope and limits of cross-border access of economically inactive Union citizens to national systems of social assistance. The author de-constructs and challenges the weak rhetoric of transnational solidarity generously deployed by the Court of Justice at the beginning of the expansive cycle of its case-law on the transnational social protection rights of mobile EU citizens. The most recent case-law shows, in fact, a spectacular retreat from this rhetoric in tune with the neo-nationalistic and social-chauvinistic moods prevailing in Europe.
4
Connor, Tim. "Goods, Persons, Services and Capital in the European Union: Jurisprudential Routes to Free Movement." German Law Journal 11, no. 2 (February 11, 2010): 159–209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2071832200018484.
Full textAbstract:
This Paper considers the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice in relation to the free movement provisions of European Community law in relation to goods, persons, services and capital within the European Union. It examines the bases used by the Court in its application of Community free movement provisions to national measures that may seek to hinder the exercise of such rights. From limited enquiry originally founded on considerations of non discrimination based on nationality, to one most recently focussed on the ‘restriction’ to the free movement right, the Paper examines the methods employed by the Court of Justice in its scrutiny of the national measure appearing to conflict with Treaty free movement rights.The examination of the applicable free movement jurisprudence attempts to demonstrate the want of a thematically consistent underpinning within free movement case law. The Paper draws attention to the complexities and even the confusions that appear to be inherent within free movement jurisprudence and arguably evidenced within the Court's journey from ‘discrimination’ to ‘restriction’ as the basis of the enquiry with regard to the application of Treaty free movement rights. In its consideration of Case C-110/05Commission v Italy, Case C-142/05Åklagaren v. Percy Mickelsson v. Joakim Roos, recent jurisprudence with respect to the free movement of goods, the Paper notes that in the context of the ‘measure having equivalent effect’, the emphasis in the assessment of the national rule has shifted to an examination of the effect on market access, rather than a distinction based on the type of rule.
5
Novicic, Zaklina. "Freedom of movement for persons in the European Union Law." Medjunarodni problemi 55, no. 1 (2003): 57–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/medjp0301057n.
Full textAbstract:
In this article the author analyses the evolution of complex corpus of legislation concerning the freedom of movement for persons in European Union Law. The article deals with the subject in two aspects: the first part of the analysis considers the conceptual development of free movement of persons by way of deliberation of building-up the authority of Union in that area, and the second part analyses the contents of the right of the Union citizens to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member State. The freedom of movement for people includes the right of Union citizens to enter, move and reside in another Member State and, in that context prohibition of any discrimination based on nationality. Conceived originally as primarily an economic phenomenon, the free movement of persons was closely linked to the pursuit of an occupation. It was the mobility of human resources as a factor of production, which inspired the chapters of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957) relating to the free movement of workers, freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services. In that sense, freedom of movement is a part of a wider concept, that of the common/internal market. Since then, through the combined effect of secondary legislation and the case law of the Court of Justice, the concept has been broadened and it tends, from the Maastricht Treaty (1992), to form one of the fundamental and individual rights of Union citizens generally. Also, the amendments of EEC Treaty, which were made by the Single European Act (1985) and specially by the Treaty of Amsterdam (1997) and the Treaty of Nice (2001), have formalised the external aspect of freedom of movement. Namely, it was recognised that freedom of movement for persons could not take place at the expense of security, protection against crime and illegal immigration. The abolition of internal controls has generated the need of the transferring checks to the external frontiers of the Union and, in this connection, the gradual establishment of an area of freedom, security and justice. In the first part of the article the author presents and analyses the development of the Union power in the policies of freedom of movement: in facilitating of free movement of people as a principle of the common/internal/single market, in achievement of the right to free movement for Union citizens, and also in the fields related to the external aspect of freedom of movement, or, actually, the issues pertaining to visas, asylum and immigration. The second part presents the specific contents of freedom of movement for persons that consists of the corpus of individual rights enjoyed by Union citizens on the territories of EU Member States that are not countries of their origin. These are the right to entry and residence and the right to engagement in gainful activity as well as the related social rights. This part of the article also explores the freedom of movement restriction regime as well as the corresponding Union legislation in preparation.
6
Krusian, Anzhelika, Vadym Tsiura, Boris Perezhniak, Roman Sabodash, and Lyudmila Kazakova. "Realization of the right to free movement under quarantine conditions: practice of the European Court of Human Rights." Cuestiones Políticas 39, no. 68 (March 7, 2021): 103–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.3968.05.
Full textAbstract:
Under uncertain conditions, the introduction of a state of emergency and quarantine measures, the scope of human rights may be subject to state interference and some rights cannot be exercised at all. The aim of the work is to examine the problem of the exercise of the right to freedom of movement and personal integrity in the context of COVID-19 through the practice of the European Court of Human Rights ECTHR. The theme of the study is the social relations that arise in the exercise of the right to freedom of movement and personal integrity in the COVID-19 pandemic. Research methods are the dialectical method, the method of system analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, modeling, comparison, generalization, and formalization. As a result of the study, the problems of the realization of the right to freedom of movement and personal inviolability in COVID-19 were analyzed through the prism of ECtHR decisions. The international experience of regulating the right to circular under quarantine conditions was clarified and suggested ways to solve this problem to protect human dignity.
7
Newman, Karl, and Julian Lonbay. "I. Free Movement of Persons, Recognition of Qualifications, and Working Conditions." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 47, no. 1 (January 1998): 224–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589300061649.
Full textAbstract:
The European Commission has adopted an Action Plan to speed up the full implementation of the Single European Market. As part of its strategy the Commission has launched a stream of cases under Article 169 of the EC Treaty seeking to ensure the implementation of Community law in the fields covered by this note, which takes up and explains some of them. The first case is Commission v. Belgium where the European Court found that the Belgian rules, which effectively excluded those searching for work from Belgium after three months, contravened the job-seekers rights derived from Article 48 as interpreted in Antonissen. The Antonissen rights have also been extended to Turkish workers lawfully resident in Germany. Germany found itself condemned for failing to implement directives
8
Henriques, João Paulo. "Representations of Europe and a Typology of European Identity." Comparative Sociology 19, no. 4-5 (November 16, 2020): 585–608. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15691330-bja10022.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This article aims to examine the association between the representations of Europe and the level of European identification. Using a qualitative methodology, 36 Europeans, from the Free Movement Area, were interviewed from a life course perspective. The findings support the thesis that representations of Europe are a factor to explain European identification. Individuals that show a higher level of identification tend to see a similar European culture and/or to associate Europe with a set of Civic values (human rights, freedom, non-violence). When individuals tend to emphasise cultural diversity (multiculturalism) and/or the instrumental features associated with the EU project (the free movement) they tend to show a weaker identification. Thus, a typology with six types of Europeans is proposed: Transcendent, Symbolic-Stateless, Affective, Floating, Citizen, and Associative.
9
Yablunovska, K. "EUROPEAN STANDARDS FOR THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT AND RIGHT TO FREE CHOICE OF RESIDENCE." Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Legal Studies, no. 115 (2020): 63–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/1728-2195/2020/5.115-13.
Full textAbstract:
The article examines the system of standards for the right to freedom of movement and the right to free choice of residence that exist in the European Union. A wide range of general and special legal methods and techniques of scientific knowledge are used, in particular: comparative law, systemstructural and formal- dogmatic research methods, as well as the methods of scientific knowledge (analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, classification, etc). As a result of the study, the author substantiates the scientific position that the existing system of standards for the right to freedom of movement and the right to free choice of residence in Ukraine only partially meets the standards of these rights that exist in EU member states. The difference between these standards exists on the level of specifics of legal regulation for the implementation of these human rights by family members of citizens of EU member states, as well as the goals pursued by the implementation of relevant standards. Bringing Ukrainian standards of these human rights in line with European counterparts involves rule-making activities of public administration. The source of such rule-making should be Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (2004). The effectiveness of bringing Ukrainian standards for the right to freedom of movement and the right to free choice of residence in line with EU standard will be increased significantly if the public administration has standards for legal regulation of relations between it and individuals in the process of exercising these rights by the latter. In our opinion, the Allgemeine Verwaltungsvorschrift zum Freizügigkeitsgesetz / EU (AVV zum FreizügG / EU) (General Administrative Code of the Law on Freedom of Movement of Citizens) can be considered as such a standard, as it is created in strict accordance with the EU Directive and other EU legal acts
10
Maas, Willem. "Free Movement and Discrimination: Evidence from Europe, the United States, and Canada." European Journal of Migration and Law 15, no. 1 (2013): 91–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12342025.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This article surveys some general lessons to be drawn from the tension between the promise of citizenship to deliver equality and the particularistic drive to maintain diversity. Democratic states tend to guarantee free movement within their territory to all citizens, as a core right of citizenship. Similarly, the European Union guarantees (as the core right of EU citizenship) the right to live and the right to work anywhere within EU territory to EU citizens and members of their families. Such rights reflect the project of equality and undifferentiated individual rights for all who have the status of citizen. But they are not uncontested. Within the EU, several member states propose to reintroduce border controls and to restrict access for EU citizens who claim social assistance. Similar tensions and attempts to discourage freedom of movement also exist in other political systems, and the article gives examples from the United States and Canada. Within democratic states, particularly federal ones and others where decentralized jurisdictions are responsible for social welfare provision, it thus appears that some citizens can be more equal than others. Principles such as benefit portability, prohibition of residence requirements for access to programs or rights, and mutual recognition of qualifications and credentials facilitate the free flow of people within states and reflect the attempt to eliminate internal borders. Within the growing field of migration studies, most research focuses on international migration, movement between states, involving international borders. But migration across jurisdictional boundaries within states is at least as important as international migration. Within the European Union, free movement often means changing residence across jurisdictional boundaries within a political system with a common citizenship, even though EU citizenship is not traditional national citizenship. The EU is thus a good test of the tension between the equality promised by common citizenship and the diversity institutionalized by borders.
11
Malaga, Miłosz, and Anna Wilińska-Zelek. "Enhanced Cooperation and Free Movement. Territorial Aspects of ‘Harmonisation’." Przegląd Prawniczy Uniwersytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza 7 (December 15, 2017): 249–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/ppuam.2017.7.15.
Full textAbstract:
In this article we examine the notion of ‘harmonisation’ in its interplay with the application of provisions on the free movement of goods. Due to the introduction of the European unitary patent protection system, we are witnessing the first cases of adopting enhanced cooperation in the internal market. This fact raises new, systemic questions concerning the concept of ‘harmonisation’ in European Union law. Are only legal, substantive aspects covered by its definition or should the territorial range of a legal act be taken into account? If yes – to what extent? Since the adoption of enhanced cooperation covers the field of intellectual property rights, the above questions concern the relationship between exercising those rights on the one hand and the principle of free movement on the other. A closer look at this matter leads to the conclusion that the unitary patent might not provide the solution to one of the problems that created for. More generally, in this article we conclude that when defining the concept of ‘harmonisation’, one should take its territorial scope into account narrowly, so as not to infringe the principles of EU law.
12
Natea, Mihaela Daciana, Oana Elena Stoica, and Florin Buicu. "Free Movement of Patients in Need for Cardiac Surgery." Revista de Chimie 70, no. 11 (December 15, 2019): 4110–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.37358/rc.19.11.7713.
Full textAbstract:
Free movement of patients is a core condition of the functioning of European free market rules in health�s case. Nowadays, uniformizing practices and policies across Europe in patient�s rights and access to medical care, based on EU norms,are important steps in generating a greater convergence and better opportunities for European citizens. In this context cross-border healthcare becomes a cornerstone in ensuring European citizens health especially if they cannot find suitable healthcare at home. In Romania more than 650 cases of E112/S2 forms are approved every year, on various diagnostic category. From all the cases, we followed in particular the ones regarding diseases and disorders of the circulatory system with a special emphasis on the septal defect cases approved for treatment abroad. From our findings, from all E112/S2forms approved cases most of them concern diseases and disorders of the circulatory system, and, from this,a significant part, are procedures correcting septal defects.
13
Degoli, Maria-Cristina. "Free movement of workers and the RESAVER scheme for researchers." European Journal of Social Security 19, no. 2 (June 2017): 172–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1388262717712153.
Full textAbstract:
This paper aims to introduce the key features of the Retirement Savings Vehicle for European Research Institutions (RESAVER) that went live in September 2016. The pension fund was established for European researchers to allow them to accumulate their retirement provisions in one place, while changing jobs and moving between countries. The research used a qualitative methodology, analysing documents and legislation concerning social security in Europe. It describes how the measures taken by Member States to deal with the challenges facing the financial sustainability of pension systems are creating obstacles to workers’ mobility. The analysis of the feasibility study for the creation of a pan-European pension vehicle shows that it is possible to achieve a minimum harmonisation in pension rights. The successful implementation of this Retirement Savings Vehicle is likely lead to two main results. First, it could dissolve existing barriers to workers’ mobility and, secondly, it could ensure the financial adequacy for future pensions. In addition, it is highly likely that such cross-border pension product would foster the creation of a true European labour market.
14
Cullen, Holly. "From Migrants to Citizens? European Community Policy on Intercultural Education." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 45, no. 1 (January 1996): 109–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s002058930005867x.
Full textAbstract:
Policy-making in the European Community in the area of education for migrants is driven by two conflicting pressures. On one side, the principle of effectiveness requires that the rights of free movement within the Community be supported by the best possible education for the children of migrants. However, on the other side is the importance of primary education to the member States as a political and cultural matter. This pressure is reinforced by the principle of subsidiarity. Member States have been relatively willing to support co-operative action by the Community in the area of higher education, such as in the ERASMUS exchange programmes. However, member States have been active in protecting their jurisdiction over education policy, particularly at the primary and secondary levels. As result, Community laws protecting the education rights of migrants have been most effective where two factors are present: first, that the rules are closely attached to the rights of free movement within the single market; and second, that the rules interfere as little as possible with substantive education policy. The first factor constitutes a significant weakness in Community education rights because it has created a distinction between Community migrants and those from third countries. The second factor has meant that the only Community policy on the education of migrants which could be described as an education right is the guarantee of equality of access to education within a member State.
15
Lenaerts, Koen, and Tinne Heremans. "Contours of a European Social Union in the Case-Law of the European Court of Justice." European Constitutional Law Review 2, no. 1 (February 2006): 101–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1574019606001015.
Full textAbstract:
Tensions between national welfare systems and the social rights of the citizens of the Union — Fundamental principle of free movement and the degree of financial solidarity with nationals from other Member States — Introduction of internal market principles in health care — The balancing role of the Court of Justice of the European Communities.
16
Greve, Bent. "Free Movement as a Threat for Universal Welfare States?" European Review 22, no. 3 (June 30, 2014): 388–402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1062798714000234.
Full textAbstract:
The free movement of workers has been a cornerstone of the European Union since it was founded in 1957. A gradual improvement of rights to groups other than workers has implied that rights related to free movement have already had an impact on universal welfare states’ social security arrangements, especially in the area of pensions. Given the enlargement of the past 10 years and a strong increase in inter-EU migration this impact might even increase. This article, using Denmark as a case study, looks at how, over time, free movement may lead towards convergence and thereby Europeanization of welfare states in Europe. It focuses especially on the pressures brought to bear on the universality of the Danish welfare state, thereby moving it away from one of the distinctive characteristics of the Nordic welfare state model: the universal access to benefits. It also raises the question of whether or not recent developments are once again opening the debate on social dumping in Europe.
17
McMahon, Joe. "I. Fundamental Rights." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 55, no. 4 (October 2006): 973–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/iclq/lei138.
Full textAbstract:
The goal of constructing an Area of Freedom, Security and Justice across the Union was agreed at the Tampere EU Summit of 1999. The objective was to create the conditions in which EU citizens could exercise their rights of free movement while at the same time addressing legitimate security concerns. Central to this debate has been the need to ensure that not only are the free movement rights granted by the Treaty protected, but that more broadly, the fundamental rights of EU citizens are not infringed. The Tampere programme was a five-year agenda that concluded in 2004. In June 2004, the Commission presented a Communication taking stock of the implementation of the Tampere agenda and setting future guidelines for a new justice and home affairs strategy for the years to come. Following Council discussions in July and October 2004, the Dutch Presidency produced a new programme for justice and home affairs (subsequently renamed as ‘freedom, security and justice’). This will cover the period for the years 2005–2010, and is known as ‘The Hague Programme: Ten priorities for the next five years— The Partnership for European Renewal in the field of Freedom, Security and Justice.’1
18
Bruzelius, Cecilia. "Freedom of movement, social rights and residence-based conditionality in the European Union." Journal of European Social Policy 29, no. 1 (March 15, 2018): 70–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0958928718756262.
Full textAbstract:
This article stresses the need to study how European Union (EU) member states define and implement the concept of habitual residence to assess boundaries of welfare in the EU. It focuses specifically on EU migrant citizens’ social rights and draws on comparative qualitative research on two EU member states – Germany and Sweden. The article first clarifies the differences between legal and habitual residence, and distinguishes between legal definitions of habitual residence and administrative formalities tied to such definitions. After examining legal definitions at the EU level, it goes on to consider additional definitions found in each member state case and administrative formalities attached to these definitions. Following this, implications for EU migrant citizens’ social rights in each country are assessed. The analysis reveals how administrative processes of residence registration shape conditionality. In this way, administrative aspects of habitual residence can have far-reaching exclusive effects on EU migrant citizens’ access to social benefits and services in the destination member state, as well as inhibit their ability to enjoy their right to freedom of movement. The article thus illustrates the inherent tension between free movement and residence-based social rights in a Union with devolved social provision.
19
Junevičius, Algis, and Rasa Daugėlienė. "Restrictions on European Union Citizens’ Freedom of Movement and Residence in the Country on Grounds of Public Policy, Public Security and Public Health." Baltic Journal of European Studies 6, no. 1 (February 1, 2016): 48–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2016-0003.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe free movement of persons is one of the most successful European Union projects, serving as a majorly important factor promoting the European integration processes. The adoption of the Treaty on the European Union and the creation of EU citizenship implemented significant changes: the status of EU citizens and their right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States can no longer be interpreted in the way it was before the adoption of the Treaty on the European Union. There are no requirements for EU citizens within the Treaty to pursue professional or independent activities or to work under an employment contract in order to access provided rights. However, the right of free movement is not unlimited. The administrations of the Member State governments are authorized to impose restictions on the free movement of citizens. In the light of these facts, this article examines exceptions in the field of free movement of persons and indentifies concepts of public policy, public security and public health. Special attention is given to so-called rule limitation of restrictions and to the mechanism of protection against expulsion from the country. The article concludes by saying that the institutions of Member State governments have the right to evaluate threats within the territory of the country and to decide on the content of public security by themselves. However, their discretion can not be used as an instrument to treat the conduct of other Member State citizens in a worse way than that of their own local citizens.
20
Cremers, Jan. "The European Labour Authority and rights-based labour mobility." ERA Forum 21, no. 1 (February 14, 2020): 21–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12027-020-00601-1.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Regulation (EU) 2019/1149 establishes the European Labour Authority (ELA) as a decentralised operational EU-agency. The ELA has to help individuals and businesses to get most out of the opportunities offered by free movement and to ensure fair labour mobility. According to the Commission, it will serve the double mission of helping national authorities to fight fraud and abuse and making mobility easier for citizens. This article addresses existing problems with labour mobility and analyses reasons for insufficient compliance with local standards and other enforcement problems. The author reflects on the added value and future functioning of the ELA.
21
Iksanov, I. S. "The Role of the European Court of Justice in the Protection of Human Rights and Freedoms." Humanities and Social Sciences. Bulletin of the Financial University 9, no. 3 (December 4, 2019): 73–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.26794/2226-7867-2019-9-3-73-76.
Full textAbstract:
The article discusses the role of the European Court of Justice, the specifics of its activities, and its goals. The author also touches upon the historical aspect of the development of the European Court. According to the author, the European Court of Justice has had a beneficial effect on the development of the rights granted by Union citizenship. The actions of the European Court of Justice have created new ground for persons with Union citizenship, increasing access to social benefits beyond the rights of economic migrants, for all those who exercise their European rights. The European Court of Justice sought to allow students to travel for their education, looking for new ways to ensure their free movement and learning with funding in the event of unforeseen events. It is essential that the court focuses on three core values so that citizenship does not become a limitation: nondiscrimination, the right to freedom of movement and the right to family life. The European court of human rights is an international judicial body; its jurisdiction extends to all member States of the Union. The main thing for the European Court of Justice is to ensure compliance with and enforcement of the Convention by the States parties. Also, when considering cases, the Court can point to gaps in legislation and issues concerning law enforcement practice, positively influencing law enforcement policy and legal proceedings, and, as a result, contribute to the improvement of the law enforcement system. This article reflects the activities of the European Court of Justice aimed at identifying the problematic aspects of the legislation of the European Union.
22
Connor, Tim. "“Market Access” or Bust? Positioning the Principle within the Jurisprudence of Goods, Persons, Services, and Capital." German Law Journal 13, no. 6 (June 2012): 679–755. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s207183220002071x.
Full textAbstract:
The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides with respect to the free movement of goods that “[q]uantitative restrictions on imports and all measures having equivalent effect shall be prohibited.” In contrast, the TFEU provides that, with respect to the free movement of persons, services, and capital, restrictions at the national level on such rights are similarly unlawful.
23
WIESBROCK, ANJA. "The self-perpetuation of EU constitutionalism in the area of free movement of persons: Virtuous or vicious cycle?" Global Constitutionalism 2, no. 1 (January 31, 2013): 125–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2045381712000147.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis paper analyses the mutual influence and self-perpetuating cycle of legitimacy of EU legal scholars and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in expanding and broadening the free movement rights of Union citizens and their family members. It is argued that legal scholars have played a dual role in promoting the constitutional paradigm of an ever-expanding scope of directly enforceable residence and movement rights in the EU. First, by presenting the expansion of free movement rights as an inevitable outcome of the EU constitutional order based on directly enforceable individual rights, scholars have played a significant role in legitimizing the jurisprudence of the Court in the face of initial resistance from the member states. Second, legal scholars have been an important source for the Court of Justice in developing its case law in this area. The Advocates General in their opinions have drawn on an expanding field of scholarship presenting the expansion of free movement rights as an inherent feature of the EU as a constitutional legal order. Spurred by the objective of turning the EU into more than an internal market, the opinions of the Advocates General have mostly been followed by the Court. Legal scholars have thus served not only as a legitimizing force, but also as a source of inspiration for the perceived constitutionalization of free movement rights in the EU.
24
Deacon, Bob, Lorenzo Fioramonti, and Sonja Nita. "Regions without borders? Regional governance, migration, and social protection in Africa and Europe." Regions and Cohesion 3, no. 3 (December 1, 2013): 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.3167/reco.2013.030301.
Full textAbstract:
In many respects, Europe and Africa (particularly Southern Africa) represent two opposing examples in the study of intra-regional migration and social cohesion. The European Union (EU) has been a global pioneer in allowing freedom of movement and portability of social rights across member states. A centerpiece of the EU integration process has been the progressive establishment of a common market, in which goods, services, capital, and people can move freely. With regard to the la er, the concept of free movement originally only targeted the economically active population (in other words, the free movement of workers) but was gradually extended by Treaty amendments to all citizens of the EU. This extension was further strengthened by the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992, which introduced the concept of citizenship in the European Union thereby establishing the fundamental and personal right to move and reside freely within the EU.
25
Kondrackaitė, Karolina, and Ugnė Kastanauskaitė. "Protection of consumer rights and interests." Vilnius University Open Series, no. 4 (November 16, 2020): 29–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.15388/os.tmp.2020.2.
Full textAbstract:
The object of this scientific article is protection of consumer rights and interests in contractual relationship between seller and consumer. The ever-expanding trade development, increasing abundance of goods and services stimulates consumption and this obviously leads to the growing number of consumer contracts. The growing number of consumer contracts determines the need to regulate contractual relations of consumers and sellers as much detail as possible. The purpose of detailed regulation is to prevent unfairness and ensure effective protection of the consumer as the weaker party. The work also draws attention to European Union law. The European Union law not only develops and ensures free movement of goods, services, capital and persons in a single market of European Union, but also seeks to discover a balance between the competitiveness of various companies in different Member States and a high level of consumer protection.
26
Fichera, Massimo. "Brexit and the security of the European project: citizenship and free movement as a case study." Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 69, no. 3 (September 6, 2018): 249–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v69i3.163.
Full textAbstract:
The article makes use of the notion of security as a heuristic device providing a descriptive and normative conceptual framework for the purposes of interpreting the events associated with Brexit. It claims that security can be identified as a meta-constitutional rationale of the European project. In particular, two discourses of power (security and fundamental rights) have been constitutive of the process of European polity-building, although they are characterised by ambiguities and contradictions. Brexit, and in particular the complex issues relating to free movement and citizenship rights, confirms such contradictions and enables us to consider more carefully the nature of the EU polity and the reasons underpinning its development. In other words, security emerges at the same time as an opportunity for growth and as a threat for the European project. The article suggests that, in order to safeguard EU integration, a move from a self-referential to a heterarchical form of security is necessary.
27
Rosas, Allan. "Balancing Fundamental Rights in EU Law." Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 16 (2014): 347–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1528887000002664.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractIt appears more and more often that cases brought before the European Court of Justice raise issues relating to two or more fundamental rights and the relation between them. In such situations, it is often necessary to establish a ‘balance’ between the fundamental rights concerned. In some cases, one of the rights involved is not a fundamental right in the strict sense but, for instance, an economic freedom (such as the free movement of goods) recognised under the basic EU Treaties. Another configuration may be a situation where, for instance, two of the fundamental rights which are at issue are to be found in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights but only one of them appears in the European Convention on Human Rights. In such situations, one wonders what would be the relevance of Article 52(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which establishes a direct link between the Charter and the European Convention. The present contribution will look at the question of balancing of EU fundamental rights in general and also at more specific problems arising in this context, such as the two problems identified above.
28
Linde Paniagua, Enrique. "La libertad de circulación de los ciudadanos europeos : los nuevosretos más allá de la supresión de los controles fronterizos = Free movement of european citizens : new challenges beyond the border controls suppression." Teoría y Realidad Constitucional, no. 32 (July 1, 2013): 159. http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/trc.32.2013.11784.
Full textAbstract:
La constante expansión del mercado interior de la Unión Europea está desbordando las estrictas previsiones que se deducirían para el derecho a la libertad de circulación y residencia regulada en el Tratado de Funcionamiento de la Unión Europea y en el derecho derivado. Así, a la primigenia conexión del derecho a la libertad de circulación y residencia con la eliminación de las fronteras interiores han sucedido en la actualidad las múltiples conexiones de dicho derecho con el derecho fiscal, los derechos de la personalidad, la educación y la sanidad, tal y como acredita la jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea. Esas son las nuevas fronteras que deberán ser afrontadas por el Derecho de la Unión para lograr una ciudadanía plena.The steady expansion of the internal market of the European Union is overflowing the strict provisions that would be deducted for the right to freedom of movement and residence regulated in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and legislation. Thus, the primal connection of the right to freedom of movement and residence with the elimination of controls on persons at internal borders have happened today the multiple connections of this right with the tax law, rights of personality, the education and health, as proving the Court of Justice of the European Union. These are the new frontiers that must be addressed by EU law to achieve full citizenship.
29
Szydło, Marek. "The Process of Granting Exclusive Rights in the Light of Treaty Rules on Free Movement." German Law Journal 12, no. 7 (July 1, 2011): 1408–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2071832200017375.
Full textAbstract:
After theSporting ExchangeandErnst Engelmannrulings of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in 2010, it is now entirely clear that the process of granting exclusive rights to undertakings must be conducted in compliance with the Treaty rules on free movement, particularly in accordance with the consequent principles of non-discrimination, equal treatment and transparency, irrespective of whether the right is awarded by means of a public contract or by other legal means (public or private). Thus, even if public authorities wish to exclude competition in a given market due to justified reasons, and are authorized by EU law to do so, they must nonetheless ensure a sufficient degree of competition for that market so as to ensure an undistorted rivalry of the various market operators at the stage of application for that right. It is submitted that the public authorities granting exclusive rights should not complain about the requirements that are imposed upon them by the TFEU rules. After all, by granting exclusive rights within competitive and transparent procedures, the public authorities have an excellent chance to select, from among the many potentially interested operators— including those from other Member States— beneficiaries that will best serve the needs of the relevant community. In turn, if they want to depart from those requirements, they must substantiate the existence of a clearly defined public interest that is capable of outweighing the benefits resulting from a competitive and transparent procedure.
30
Sol, Marion Del, and Marco Rocca. "Free movement of workers in the EU and occupational pensions." European Journal of Social Security 19, no. 2 (June 2017): 141–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1388262717711776.
Full textAbstract:
The European Union appears to be promoting at the same time both cross-national mobility of workers and an increased role for occupational pensions. There is, however, a potential tension between these two objectives because workers risk losing (some of) their pension rights under an occupational scheme as a consequence of their mobility. After long negotiations, the EU has addressed this issue through a minimum standards Directive. Shortly before the adoption of this Directive, the Court of Justice also delivered an important decision in the same field, in the case of Casteels v British Airways. By analysing the resulting legal framework for safeguarding pension rights under occupational schemes in the context of workers’ mobility, we argue that the application of the case law developed by the Court of Justice in the field of free movement of workers has the potential to offer superior protection compared to the Directive. We also highlight the fact that the present legal framework seems to afford a much fuller protection to the intra-company cross-national mobility of workers employed by multinational companies, while also seemingly favouring mobility for highly specialised workers.
31
Szabados, Tamás. "Recent Golden Share Cases in the Jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union." German Law Journal 16, no. 5 (October 2015): 1099–130. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2071832200021052.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractIn several golden share cases, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the “Court”) condemned Member States for reserving certain special rights in privatized companies for themselves. In spite of the Court's consistently strict approach in the golden share cases, the more recent golden share judgments demonstrate that the Court's practice is not free from uncertainties. In its case law, the Court seems to hesitate between the application of the freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital. Additionally, it is not entirely clear which measures are caught by provisions on the freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital.
32
Bouveresse, Aude. "The Ambiguous Relationship Between the EU and its Internal Borders." Borders in Globalization Review 1, no. 2 (August 21, 2020): 64–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.18357/bigr12202019567.
Full textAbstract:
The free movement of EU citizens within the Union reveals the ambiguous relationship between the EU and borders. While the functioning of the internal market is essentially based on freedom of movement and implies the elimination of borders as barriers to trade, the freedom of movement of the European citizen remains defined largely within the conceptual framework of borders, since nationality is a prime requirement for European citizenship. Inside the EU, as this article highlights, borders are necessary and problematic at same time. The Court has played with the concept of borders to address these ambiguities with a view to deepening integration. The conclusion is that if the Court has been able to effectively remove obstacles related to internal borders concerning the free movement of goods and the movement of active economic persons, such has not been the case for the free movement of European citizens, economically inactive. It follows from the division of competences and the case law of the European judges that solidarity remains intrinsically linked to nationality and therefore inevitably leads to the re-establishment of borders and the separation of peoples. This demonstrates the resistance of the “paradigm of a European market citizenship”. By revaluing nationality in the context of the enjoyment of the rights linked to citizenship, the European Court of Justice could hamper the integration process by renationalising the individual and establishing new borders.
33
KOCHENOV, Dimitry Vladimirovich, and Jacquelyn Dietrich VERALDI. "The Commission against the Internal Market and European Union Citizens’ Rights: Trying to Shoot Down Sputnik with the “Digital Green Certificate”?" European Journal of Risk Regulation 12, no. 2 (June 2021): 404–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/err.2021.22.
Full textAbstract:
The Digital Green Certificate (DGC) proposed by the European Commission on the basis of facilitating the free movement rights of European Union (EU) citizens will be capable of effectively serving as a COVID-19 passport. In this contribution, we cast doubt on whether the DGC is fit for purpose, highlighting in particular the potential for the DGC to in fact facilitate greater free movement restrictions for a large number of EU citizens, in particular those who have received non- European Medicines Agency (EMA)-approved vaccines such as Sputnik V in compliance with EU law. Under the proposal as amended by the European Parliament, any destination Member State that accepts proof of vaccination “in order to waive restrictions to free movement” must apply the same waiver to any DGC-holder that has received an EMA-approved vaccine and has the option of doing so for vaccines added to the World Health Organization (WHO) Emergency Use Listing; however, such equal treatment is not available for DGC-holders who have received non-EMA/WHO vaccines. While this measure was alleged to be taken on grounds of public health, a convincing public health case has not been put forward. Instead, the DGC proposal as it stands disregards the promise of the internal market and sets the stage for its fragmentation through geopolitics and bilateralism.
34
Gehring, Jacqueline S. "Free Movement for Some: The Treatment of the Roma after the European Union’s Eastern Expansion." European Journal of Migration and Law 15, no. 1 (2013): 7–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12342021.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Securing the free movement of people has been one of the most difficult challenges for the European Union. The migration of Roma to ‘old’ Member States has been met with hostility and deportation, sometimes voluntary, other times forced. The states that have engaged in deportation have faced minimal sanction from the European Union. This article explores the European Union’s faltering enforcement of the right to free movement. Does the right to free movement exist only for a subset of EU citizens?
35
Ilieva, Raya. "The Free Movement of Services and The Right to Nondiscrimination." International conference KNOWLEDGE-BASED ORGANIZATION 23, no. 2 (June 25, 2017): 171–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/kbo-2017-0108.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The present article will explore the free movement of services, which is one of the four fundamental freedoms of the citizens of the European Union. The reader's attention will be drawn to the violation of the right to non-discrimination in view of the unfavourable treatment of Bulgarian citizens in comparison with citizens of the European Union regarding the prices of package holidays on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast offered by Bulgarian travel agencies.
36
Peeters, Miek. "Free Movement of Patients: Directive 2011/24 on the Application of Patients’ Rights in Cross-Border Healthcare." European Journal of Health Law 19, no. 1 (2012): 29–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157180912x615158.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This contribution comments on Directive 2011/24, providing a legal framework for cross border healthcare 13 years after the famous Kohll and Decker case law. The Directive contains provisions concerning the reimbursement of costs, the responsibilities of the Member States and their mutual cooperation in healthcare. Analysing the (potential) impact of the Directive 2011/24 on EU healthcare systems, patients and healthcare providers, it becomes clear that the impact of the Directives reaches far beyond patient mobility. The Directive creates patients’ rights, pays attention to the quality and safety of healthcare services and creates an excessive structure of cooperation in the field of healthcare. The European Union seems ready to use its economies of scale to improve healthcare for all European patients.
37
Dougan, Michael. "Addressing Issues of Protective Scope within the Francovich Right to Reparation." European Constitutional Law Review 13, no. 1 (February 15, 2017): 124–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1574019616000390.
Full textAbstract:
EU Law – Member State liability in damages – Issues of protective scope about exactly which individuals/interests are protected – Conditions for Member State liability – Intention to confer rights criterion – Tendency towards a ‘checklist’ approach by the Court of Justice of the European Union – Potential implications for scope of Member State liability – Finding appropriate balance between protecting individuals and punishing public bodies – Example of free movement rights – Example of environmental legislation – Example of employment legislation
38
Hoogenboom, Alexander. "Turkish Nationals and the Right to Study in the European Union: A Progressive Interpretation." European Journal of Migration and Law 15, no. 4 (2013): 387–412. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718166-00002042.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This contribution has as its main aim to analyse the rights that a Turkish national can derive from EU law, and in particular the Ankara Agreement acquis, with a view to engage in a course of study in one of the Member States of the European Union. In that regard, it is argued that a progressive interpretation of the applicable legal regime supportive of free movement of students is both necessary and warranted as (greater) student mobility may contribute to a closer relationship between the peoples of the (Member States of the) EU and Turkey as well as the realisation of mutual economic benefits. Coupled with the fact that the Ankara acquis allows for broad room of interpretation, this point of departure is used as a springboard and justification for reading an extensive set of rights into the acquis, including a right of entry and residence for study purposes, equal treatment with host Member States as regards access to education and under certain circumstances rights of access to the labour market and/or equal treatment as regards study grants.
39
Parker, Owen. "Critical political economy, free movement and Brexit: Beyond the progressive’s dilemma." British Journal of Politics and International Relations 19, no. 3 (June 8, 2017): 479–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1369148117711082.
Full textAbstract:
The progressive’s dilemma suggests that a trade-off exists between, on the one hand, labour and welfare rights underpinned by solidarity and shared identity and, on the other hand, open immigration regimes. With reference to debates on EU free movement in the United Kingdom, it is argued (1) that a progressive European critical political economy literature of the Left has a tendency to accept this dilemma and resolve it in favour of the former; (2) that it does so because it erroneously conflates the free movement of people with the (increasingly neoliberal) free movement of goods, capital and services; and (3) that it could and should treat human mobility as qualitatively different and, consequently, need not accept the terms of the progressive’s dilemma. The argument has important implications for a progressive politics in general and for the Left’s (particularly the Labour Party’s) position in the United Kingdom on free movement (and, by extension, on Brexit).
40
Dølvik, Jon Erik, and Jelle Visser. "Free movement, equal treatment and workers' rights: can the European Union solve its trilemma of fundamental principles?" Industrial Relations Journal 40, no. 6 (November 2009): 491–509. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2338.2009.00542.x.
Full text
41
Van Ballegooij, Wouter, and Petra Bárd. "Mutual Recognition and Individual Rights." New Journal of European Criminal Law 7, no. 4 (December 2016): 439–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/203228441600700405.
Full textAbstract:
This article focuses on the case-law of the Court of Justice and the dialogue it conducted with national apex courts when seeking to reconcile the ‘free movement of judicial decisions’, as facilitated by mutual recognition, and individual rights in its interpretation of the Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant. The present analysis shall concentrate on the recent judgment in Aranyosi and Căldăraru. The article concludes that for the sake of legal certainty, more guidance should be provided under EU legislation to make sure that judicial cooperation does not lead to disproportionate intrusions on individual rights or even violations of absolute rights. This should be accompanied by a permanent mechanism for monitoring and addressing Member State compliance with democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights. Ultimately, however, the courts will have to play a crucial role in carving out and applying fundamental rights exceptions. In providing guidance to national courts, the Court of Justice needs to further clarify that the application of mutual recognition and fundamental rights exceptions are not in conflict and show proper deference to the norms developed by the European Court of Human Rights and national (constitutional) courts.
42
Sharpston, Eleanor, and José Maria Fernández-Martín. "Some Reflections on Schengen Free Movement Rights and the Principle of Ne Bis In Idem." Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 10 (2008): 413–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1528887000001385.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter makes no attempt to present a definitive exposé of the relationship between Schengen free movement rights and the principle of ne bis in idem. Although elements of the basic structure of that relationship are relatively fixed, the questions that it raises are complex and sensitive. In the absence, thus far, of legislative action by the Council, it has fallen to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to define a number of core concepts in the contexts of references for preliminary rulings that have been made to it by national courts. In so doing, it has necessarily found itself choosing between two desirable goals that are partially irreconcilable with each other: liberalised free movement of persons within the ‘Schengen Area’, on the one hand, and the Union’s objective of ‘provid[ing] citizens a high level of safety within an area of freedom, security and justice’, on the other hand.
43
Ahmed, Tawhida. "A Critical Appraisal of EU Governance for the Protection of Minority Rights." International Journal on Minority and Group Rights 17, no. 2 (2010): 265–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157181110x495890.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe European Union (EU) has increasing regulatory capacity and capability for minority rights protection. A combination of old and new governance measures have been useful in affording the EU that capacity. Both modes of governance impact on EU migrant groups, particularly where they are free movers of a different nationality, race or ethnic orgin to the (dominant) members of the states to which they have migrated. In addition, new governance measures also allow a degree of impact on other minority groups, such as national minorities, whether or not individuals from these groups exercise free movement rights. Together, old and new governance measures offer certain extents of 'respect' for, 'protection' of and 'promotion' of minority rights.
44
Erimia, Cristina Luiza, Rodica Sîrbu, Radu George Cazacincu, Emin Cadar, Aneta Tomescu, and Stelian Paris. "European Patients' Rights to Be Protected Against Counterfeit Medicines." European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies 2, no. 1 (April 30, 2016): 34. http://dx.doi.org/10.26417/ejis.v2i1.p34-39.
Full textAbstract:
Because the falsification of medicines is a global problem, requires increased and effective international coordination and cooperation to ensure the effectiveness of the strategies to combat counterfeiting, especially in relation to the sale of such products on the Internet. In the context of people’s health and life rank foremost among the values and interests protected by the TFEU, this article examines the evolution of the legislative process regulating the internal market for medicinal products in order to ensure a high level of protection of public health against falsified medicines and to present the legislative initiatives that have been taken at EU level taking account of new risk profiles, measures meant to ensure, at the same time, the functioning of the internal market of medicinal products. However, this article aims to address consumers’ right to have access to safe, effective, quality and innovative medicinal products as a right of the European patient. Ensuring the free movement of medicinal products on the EU market must not violate or restrict this fundamental right of thepatient.The threat that falsified medicines pose to public health is also recognized by the World Health Organization (WHO), which has established the International Medical Products Anti-Counterfeiting Taskforce ("IMPACT").IMPACT has developed the Principles and Elements for National Legislation against Counterfeit Medical Products, which were endorsed by the IMPACT General Meeting in Lisbon on 12 December 2007.
45
Erimia, Cristina Luiza, Rodica Sîrbu, Radu George Cazacincu, Emin Cadar, Aneta Tomescu, and Stelian Paris. "European Patients' Rights to Be Protected Against Counterfeit Medicines." European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies 4, no. 1 (April 30, 2016): 34. http://dx.doi.org/10.26417/ejis.v4i1.p34-39.
Full textAbstract:
Because the falsification of medicines is a global problem, requires increased and effective international coordination and cooperation to ensure the effectiveness of the strategies to combat counterfeiting, especially in relation to the sale of such products on the Internet. In the context of people’s health and life rank foremost among the values and interests protected by the TFEU, this article examines the evolution of the legislative process regulating the internal market for medicinal products in order to ensure a high level of protection of public health against falsified medicines and to present the legislative initiatives that have been taken at EU level taking account of new risk profiles, measures meant to ensure, at the same time, the functioning of the internal market of medicinal products. However, this article aims to address consumers’ right to have access to safe, effective, quality and innovative medicinal products as a right of the European patient. Ensuring the free movement of medicinal products on the EU market must not violate or restrict this fundamental right of thepatient.The threat that falsified medicines pose to public health is also recognized by the World Health Organization (WHO), which has established the International Medical Products Anti-Counterfeiting Taskforce ("IMPACT").IMPACT has developed the Principles and Elements for National Legislation against Counterfeit Medical Products, which were endorsed by the IMPACT General Meeting in Lisbon on 12 December 2007.
46
Martinsen, Dorte Sindbjerg, Gabriel Pons Rotger, and Jessica Sampson Thierry. "Free movement of people and cross-border welfare in the European Union: Dynamic rules, limited outcomes." Journal of European Social Policy 29, no. 1 (May 30, 2018): 84–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0958928718767300.
Full textAbstract:
For decades, the European legislators and the Court of Justice have extended the rights to free movement and cross-border welfare in the European Union (EU). Strong assumptions on the impact of these rules have been made. It has been held by some that they will lead to welfare migration and thus to be a fundamental challenge to the welfare state. However, studies of how these rules are implemented and what become the de facto outcomes hereof remain scarce. We address this research gap, by examining domestic responses to and outcomes of dynamic EU rules. We based our research on a unique set of administrative data for all EU citizens living in the universalist, tax-financed welfare state of Denmark between 2002 and 2013. We find that domestic responses have been restrictive and outcomes limited.
47
Szwarc, Monika. "Swoboda przemieszczania się studentów w Unii Europejskiej — prawo dostępu do szkolnictwa wyższego i stypendiów w kontekście transnarodowym." Przegląd Prawa i Administracji 107 (April 4, 2017): 261–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.19195/0137-1134.107.15.
Full textAbstract:
FREE MOVEMENT OF STUDENTS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION — RIGHT TO EDUCATION, ACCESS TO EDUCATION AND ACCESS TO GRANTS IN THE TRANSNATIONAL CONTEXTThe right to education, recognised by Article 14 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union must be analysed and interpreted in the light of the previous evolution of EU law in this domain, as well as of the preceding jurisprudence of the Court of Justice. In the present state of EU law there is no doubt that access to higher education as well as access to student grants or loans falls within the scope of EU law. Therefore the article contains the overview of where EU law stands at present in the domain of mobility of students. The main two fields of interest are: access to education of migrant students, when they move from their home Member State to a host Member State in order to undertake studies, as well as access to social benefits, namely student grants or loans, which enable or make easier the mobility of students. The second field of interest concerning student grants or loans is divided into two parts: the first concerns access to grants or loans accorded by the host Member State to migrant student; the second concerns access to grants or loans accorded by the home Member State to its own citizens in order to encourage them to study abroad. The analysis, on the one hand, reveals that the scope of application of EU law to the situation of migrant students, due to the jurisprudence of the CJEU, is very wide, which means the wide scope of rights accorded to students and the narrow scope of freedom left to the Member States. On the other hand, the analysis leads to a conclusion that the case of migrant students is an exemplification of the challenges faced by the Union in the field of free movement, in particular the pressure to limit the social benefi ts for EU citizens exercising their right to free movement.
48
Mantu, Sandra, and Paul Minderhoud. "Exploring the limits of social solidarity: welfare tourism and EU citizenship." UNIO – EU Law Journal 2 (June 1, 2016): 4–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.21814/unio.2.2.
Full textAbstract:
Political debates concerning the free movement of (poor) EU citizens (mainly from the newer EU Member States) have focused upon the twin issues of abuse of free movement rights and welfare tourism, despite the lack of meaningful evidence that the two are actually taking place on a wide scale in the EU. This article discusses the increasing political contestation of EU mobility as captured by notions such as, welfare tourism and poverty migration. The analysis of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union on issues of social rights and EU citizenship shows a noticeable shift towards stricter interpretations of the scope of social solidarity for mobile EU citizens. We argue that the coupling of these two aspects of EU mobility raises questions about the scope of EU citizenship and its nature as a fundamental status.
49
Catalán Chamorro, María José. "El derecho a la libre prestación de servicios o libre circulación de capitales en la Unión Europea vs. la protección del consumidor nacional croata a la luz del asunto C-630/17 Anica Milivojević vs. Raiffeisenbank St. Stefan-Jagerberg-Wolfsberg Egen = The right to free provision of services or free movement of capital in the european union vs. the protection of the Croatian national consumer in the context of the case C-630/17 Anica Milivojević vs. Raiffeisenbank St. Stefan-Jagerberg-Wolfsberg Egen." CUADERNOS DE DERECHO TRANSNACIONAL 12, no. 1 (March 5, 2020): 531. http://dx.doi.org/10.20318/cdt.2020.5201.
Full textAbstract:
Resumen: En el presente trabajo se analiza el impacto que ha tenido la Ley de nulidad de los contratos de préstamo con elementos internacionales celebrados en la República de Croacia con un acreedor no autorizado y su confrontación con la normativa europea. Esto se realiza a través de las cuestiones prejudiciales planteadas por un Tribunal municipal croata sobre la afectación del derecho a la libre prestación de servicios y libre circulación de capitales en la Unión Europea; alteración de los fueros competenciales, extensión del concepto de consumidor a empresarios y la concepción de los derechos reales.Palabras clave: Derecho a la libre prestación de servicios, Reglamento 1215/2012, defensa de los consumidores y derecho real de hipoteca.Abstract: This paper analyses the impact of the Law on the nullity of loan contracts with international elements entered into in the Republic of Croatia with an unauthorised creditor and its confrontation with European regulations. This is done through prejudicial questions raised by a Croatian Municipal Court on the effect of the right to the free provision of services and free movement of capital in the European Union; alteration of the jurisdictional privileges, extension of the concept of consumer to entrepreneurs and the conception of mortgage rights. Keywords: Right to freedom to provide services, Regulation 1215/2012, consumer protection and mortgage liem.
50
Kattago, Siobhan. "The End of the European Honeymoon?" Anthropological Journal of European Cultures 26, no. 1 (March 1, 2017): 35–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.3167/ajec.2017.260103.
Full textAbstract:
With the rise of populism, European solidarity risks being eroded by a clash of solidarities based on nation and religion. Ranging from hospitality to hostility, ‘refugees welcome’ to ‘close the borders’, asylum seekers from Syria and other war-torn countries test the very ideas upon which the EU was founded: human rights, tolerance and the free movement of people. European solidarity is not only rooted in philosophical ideas of equality and freedom but also in the memory of nationalism, war and violence. The response to refugees seeking asylum into Europe cannot only be resolved by appealing to emotions, moral sentiments and a politics of pity. Disenchantment with government, fear of terrorism and resentment towards foreigners weaken European solidarity at a time when it is needed most.