59

toradh/torthaí

Focal/focail
Saghas foilseacháin
Réimse beartas
Údar
Eochairfhocal
Dáta

The role of constitutional courts, a comparative law perspective - Canada: The Supreme Court

23-07-2019

This study is part of a wider project investigating, from a comparative law perspective, the role of constitutional courts of different states. Following a brief historical introduction to the jurisdiction of the state in question, the various reports examine the composition, internal organization, functioning, jurisdiction of the various highest courts, as well as the right of access to its courtroom, its procedural rules, and the effects and the execution of its judgments. The present study examines ...

This study is part of a wider project investigating, from a comparative law perspective, the role of constitutional courts of different states. Following a brief historical introduction to the jurisdiction of the state in question, the various reports examine the composition, internal organization, functioning, jurisdiction of the various highest courts, as well as the right of access to its courtroom, its procedural rules, and the effects and the execution of its judgments. The present study examines Canada’s highest court, the Supreme Court. While all judicial courts may rule on constitutional matters, the Supreme Court of Canada enjoys a privileged status in the Canadian legal landscape. As the ultimate arbiter of the Constitution, it has the final word with respect to constitutional interpretation, notably in constitutional matters. It thus plays a central role in Canada’s federal democracy.

Údar seachtarach

EPRS, Comparative Law

Access to legal remedies for victims of corporate human rights abuses in third countries

01-02-2019

European-based multinational corporations can cause or be complicit in human rights abuses in third countries. Victims of corporate human rights abuses frequently face many hurdles when attempting to hold corporations to account in their own country. Against this backdrop, judicial mechanisms have increasingly been relied on to bring legal proceedings in the home States of the corporations. This study attempts to map out all relevant cases (35 in total) filed in Member States of the European Union ...

European-based multinational corporations can cause or be complicit in human rights abuses in third countries. Victims of corporate human rights abuses frequently face many hurdles when attempting to hold corporations to account in their own country. Against this backdrop, judicial mechanisms have increasingly been relied on to bring legal proceedings in the home States of the corporations. This study attempts to map out all relevant cases (35 in total) filed in Member States of the European Union on the basis of alleged corporate human rights abuses in third countries. It also provides an in-depth analysis of 12 cases and identifies various obstacles (legal, procedural and practical) faced by claimants in accessing legal remedy. On the basis of these findings, it makes a number of recommendations to the EU institutions in order to improve access to legal remedies in the EU for victims of human rights abuses by European based companies in third countries.

Údar seachtarach

Dr. Axel Marx, Dr. Claire Bright, Prof. Dr. Jan Wouters, Ms. Nina Pineau, Mr. Brecht Lein, Mr. Torbjörn Schiebe, Ms. Johanna Wagner, Ms. Evelien Wauter

Policy Departments' Monthly Highlights - December 2018

10-12-2018

The Monthly Highlights publication provides an overview, at a glance, of the on-going work of the policy departments, including a selection of the latest and forthcoming publications, and a list of future events.

The Monthly Highlights publication provides an overview, at a glance, of the on-going work of the policy departments, including a selection of the latest and forthcoming publications, and a list of future events.

Action for damages against the EU

07-12-2018

Most legal systems, both of states and of international organisations, provide for the liability of public administrations for damage done to individuals. This area of the law, known as 'public tort law', varies considerably from country to country, even within the European Union (EU). The EU Treaties have, from the outset, provided for liability of the EU for public torts (wrongs), in the form of action for damages against the EU, now codified in the second and third paragraphs of Article 340 of ...

Most legal systems, both of states and of international organisations, provide for the liability of public administrations for damage done to individuals. This area of the law, known as 'public tort law', varies considerably from country to country, even within the European Union (EU). The EU Treaties have, from the outset, provided for liability of the EU for public torts (wrongs), in the form of action for damages against the EU, now codified in the second and third paragraphs of Article 340 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). However, these rules are notoriously vague and brief, and refer to the 'general principles common to the laws of the Member States' as the source for the rules of EU public tort law. Since the laws of the Member States on public torts differ significantly, the reference has been treated by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) as empowerment to develop EU public tort law in its own case law. The rules developed by the CJEU have been criticised by some academics as being very complex, non-transparent and unpredictable. Experts have also pointed out that the threshold of liability is set so high that actions for damages prove successful in very few cases only. According to the data available, from the establishment of the EU until 2014, the Court only actually granted compensation to applicants in 39 cases. As a result, some scholars have even pointed out that the principle of EU liability for public torts is 'illusory' and that action for damages is not an effective means of protecting fundamental rights. Other academics add that the question of establishing the principles of EU public tort law is not merely a technical issue, but a political one, as it touches upon fundamental questions of distributive justice and the form of government in the Union, and therefore should be the subject of democratic debate. This Briefing is one in a series aimed at explaining the activities of the CJEU.

The Future Relationship between the UK and the EU following the UK’s withdrawal from the EU in the field of family law

23-10-2018

This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Legal Affairs, explores the possible legal scenarios of judicial cooperation between the EU and the UK at both the stage of the withdrawal and of the future relationship in the area of family law, covering the developments up until 5 October 2018. More specifically, it assesses the advantages and disadvantages of the various options for what should ...

This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Legal Affairs, explores the possible legal scenarios of judicial cooperation between the EU and the UK at both the stage of the withdrawal and of the future relationship in the area of family law, covering the developments up until 5 October 2018. More specifically, it assesses the advantages and disadvantages of the various options for what should happen to family law cooperation after Brexit in terms of legal certainty, effectiveness and coherence. It also reflects on the possible impact of the departure of the UK from the EU on the further development of EU family law. Finally, it offers some policy recommendations on the topics under examination.

Údar seachtarach

Marta REQUEJO ISIDRO, Senior Research Fellow, Max Planck Institute Luxembourg/Altair Asesores, Tim AMOS, Barrister, Collaborative Lawyer and Resolution Mediator/Altair Asesores, United Kingdom Pedro Alberto DE MIGUEL ASENSIO, Professor, Complutense University of Madrid/Altair Asesores, Spain Anatol DUTTA, Professor, Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich/Altair Asesores Mark HARPER, Partner at Hughes Fowler Carruthers, Academy Court, United Kingdom/Altair Asesores

Recast of the Brussels IIa Regulation

10-01-2018

On 21 November 2017, Parliament's Committee on Legal Affairs adopted its report on the Commission proposal for a recast Brussels IIa Regulation concerning the 'free movement' of judgments in non-patrimonial family matters. Since a special legislative procedure applies, the European Parliament is only consulted; it is expected to vote during its January plenary session.

On 21 November 2017, Parliament's Committee on Legal Affairs adopted its report on the Commission proposal for a recast Brussels IIa Regulation concerning the 'free movement' of judgments in non-patrimonial family matters. Since a special legislative procedure applies, the European Parliament is only consulted; it is expected to vote during its January plenary session.

The state of implementation of the EU Succession Regulation’s provisions on public policy’s exception, universal application and renvoi, the European Certificate of Succession and access to registers

20-11-2017

This briefing, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, provides an assessment of the state of implementation of the EU Regulation on cross-border succession with a view to determining whether it is fulfilling its goal of ensuring legal certainty, predictability and simplification for citizens. It focusses, in particular, on the provisions on public policy’s exception, universal application, renvoi and on the European Certificate ...

This briefing, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, provides an assessment of the state of implementation of the EU Regulation on cross-border succession with a view to determining whether it is fulfilling its goal of ensuring legal certainty, predictability and simplification for citizens. It focusses, in particular, on the provisions on public policy’s exception, universal application, renvoi and on the European Certificate of Succession.

Údar seachtarach

Isidoro Antonio Calvo Vidal, Civil Law Notary, Doctor in Law

The state of implementation of the EU Succession Regulation’s provisions on its scope, applicable law, freedom of choice, and parallelism between the law and the courts

20-11-2017

This briefing, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, provides an assessment of the state of implementation of the EU Regulation on cross-border succession with a view to determining whether it is fulfilling its goal of ensuring legal certainty, predictability and simplification for citizens. It focusses, in particular, on the provisions on the scope, applicable law, party autonomy and parallelism between forum and jus.

This briefing, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, provides an assessment of the state of implementation of the EU Regulation on cross-border succession with a view to determining whether it is fulfilling its goal of ensuring legal certainty, predictability and simplification for citizens. It focusses, in particular, on the provisions on the scope, applicable law, party autonomy and parallelism between forum and jus.

Údar seachtarach

François Trémosa, notary in Toulouse, France

Legal Proceedings available to Individuals before the Highest Courts: A Comparative Law Perspective - Canada

06-10-2017

This study is part of a wider project seeking to investigate, from a comparative law perspective, judicial proceedings available to individuals before the highest courts of different states, and before certain international courts. The aim of this study is to examine the various judicial proceedings available to individuals in Canadian law, and in particular before the Supreme Court of Canada. To this end, the text is divided into five parts. The introduction provides an overview of Canadian constitutional ...

This study is part of a wider project seeking to investigate, from a comparative law perspective, judicial proceedings available to individuals before the highest courts of different states, and before certain international courts. The aim of this study is to examine the various judicial proceedings available to individuals in Canadian law, and in particular before the Supreme Court of Canada. To this end, the text is divided into five parts. The introduction provides an overview of Canadian constitutional history, which explains the coexistence of rights derived from several legal traditions. It then introduces the federal system, the origins of constitutional review, as well as the court structure (I). As Canada practises a ‘diffuse’ (or ‘decentralized’) constitutional review process, the second part deals with the different types of proceedings available to individuals in matters of constitutional justice before both administrative and judicial courts, while highlighting proceedings available before the Supreme Court of Canada (II). This is followed by an examination of the constitutional and legal sources of individual — and in some cases collective — rights (III), as well as the means developed by the judiciary, the legislative, and the executive branches to ensure the effective judicial protection of rights (IV). The conclusion assesses the effectiveness of proceedings available to individuals in matters of ‘constitutional justice’. Essentially, while Canadian citizens benefit from a wide range of rights and proceedings, access to the country’s Supreme Court is restricted due to the limited number of cases the Court chooses to hear every year. More generally, access to justice continues to pose real challenges in Canada. This is not due to judicial failings or a lack of sources of rights per se, but rather to lengthy judicial delays and the often enormous costs of proceedings.

Údar seachtarach

EPRS, Comparative Law

Establishing the European Public Prosecutor

28-09-2017

The European Parliament is expected to vote during the October I plenary session on giving its consent to the proposed regulation on the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), agreed by 20 Member States under enhanced cooperation in June 2017.

The European Parliament is expected to vote during the October I plenary session on giving its consent to the proposed regulation on the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), agreed by 20 Member States under enhanced cooperation in June 2017.

Imeachtaí atá ar na bacáin

30-11-2020
EPRS online Book Talk | How to own the room (and the zoom) [...]
Imeacht eile -
EPRS
30-11-2020
Hearing on Future-proofing the Tourism Sector: Challenges and Opportunities Ahead
Éisteacht -
TRAN
30-11-2020
LIBE - FEMM Joint Hearing: Combating Gender based Violence: Cyber Violence
Éisteacht -
FEMM LIBE

Pairtnéirí