Zoekresultaat: 26 artikelen

x
Annotatie

One train! (but different working conditions)

CJEU 19 December 2019, C-16/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:1110 (Michael Dobersberger v Magistrat der Stadt Wien)

Tijdschrift Arbeidsrechtelijke Annotaties, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden Posting of workers, International train, Transport sector, Subcontracting, Short-term posting
Auteurs Marco Rocca
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Dobersberger decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union deals with the legal situation of posted workers on an international train. These workers, employed by a Hungarian company and based in Hungary, operate on a train connecting Budapest with Salzburg and Munich. The Court concludes against their inclusion under the Posting of Workers Directive, considering their connection to the Austrian territory as too limited. This decision is based on a selective representation of the facts and sits difficultly with the letter of the law and the intention of the legislator.


Marco Rocca
Dr. M. Rocca is werkzaam als CNRS Researcher aan de University of Strasbourg, UMR 7354 DRES, France, https://marcorocca.wordpress.com, mrocca@unistra.fr.
Article

Access_open The New Dutch Model Investment Agreement: On the Road to Sustainability or Keeping up Appearances?

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 4 2019
Trefwoorden Dutch model BIT, foreign direct investment, bilateral investment treaties, investor-to-state dispute settlement, sustainable development goals
Auteurs Alessandra Arcuri en Bart-Jaap Verbeek
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In 2019, the Dutch government presented a New Model Investment Agreement that seeks to contribute to the sustainability and inclusivity of future Dutch trade and investment policy. This article offers a critical analysis of the most relevant parts of the revised model text in order to appraise to what extent it could promote sustainability and inclusivity. It starts by providing an overview of the Dutch BIT (Bilateral Investment Treaty) programme, where the role of the Netherlands as a favourite conduit country for global FDI is highlighted. In the article, we identify the reasons why the Netherlands became a preferred jurisdiction for foreign investors and the negative implications for governments and their policy space to advance sustainable development. The 2019 model text is expressly set out to achieve a fairer system and to protect ‘sustainable investment in the interest of development’. While displaying a welcome engagement with key values of sustainable development, this article identifies a number of weaknesses of the 2019 model text. Some of the most criticised substantive and procedural provisions are being reproduced in the model text, including the reiteration of investors’ legitimate expectation as an enforceable right, the inclusion of an umbrella clause, and the unaltered broad coverage of investments. Most notably, the model text continues to marginalise the interests of investment-affected communities and stakeholders, while bestowing exclusive rights and privileges on foreign investors. The article concludes by hinting at possible reforms to better align existing and future Dutch investment treaties with the sustainable development goals.


Alessandra Arcuri
Alessandra Arcuri is Professor of Inclusive Global Law and Governance, Erasmus School of Law (ESL), Erasmus Initiative Dynamics of Inclusive Prosperity, Erasmus University Rotterdam, arcuri@law.eur.nl.

Bart-Jaap Verbeek
Bart-Jaap Verbeek is Researcher at Stichting Onderzoek Multinationale Ondernemingen (SOMO) and PhD Candidate Political Science at the Radboud University.
Article

Access_open The Peer Review Process of the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes

A Critical Assessment on Authority and Legitimacy

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information, exercise of regulatory authority, due process requirements, peer review reports, legitimacy
Auteurs Leo E.C. Neve
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Global Forum on transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes has undertaken peer reviews on the implementation of the global standard of exchange of information on request, both from the perspective of formalities available and from the perspective of actual implementation. In the review reports Global Forum advises jurisdictions on required amendments of regulations and practices. With these advices, the Global Forum exercises regulatory authority. The article assesses the legitimacy of the exercise of such authority by the Global Forum and concludes that the exercise of such authority is not legitimate for the reason that the rule of law is abused by preventing jurisdictions to adhere to due process rules.


Leo E.C. Neve
Leo Neve is a doctoral student at the Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam.
Artikel

Access_open Criminal law sanctions and the Return Directive: the position of illegally staying third-country nationals in the European Union

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 1 2017
Trefwoorden Crimmigration, Return Directive, Entry ban, Sanctions, Criminal law
Auteurs Aniel Pahladsingh LL.M. en Jim Waasdorp LL.M.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    At EU level, the use of substantive criminal law as a response to illegal migration is materialised by both the EU legislator and the Member States individually. EU involvement in criminalizing illegal migration takes place in a twofold manner: directly, through harmonization of national legislations, and indirectly, through the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). An example of the latter is the case law of the CJEU regarding criminal law sanctions for breaching an entry ban. In this article, we will analyse judgments of the CJEU in the light of crimmigration law and make a distinction between the Member States’ power to classify a breach of an entry ban as an offence and to lay down criminal law sanctions in national legislation, and their power to impose such sanctions.


Aniel Pahladsingh LL.M.
Mr. A. Pahladsingh is jurist bij de Raad van State en rechter-plaatsvervanger bij de Rechtbank Rotterdam. Hij is tevens lid van de redactie van Crimmigratie & Recht.

Jim Waasdorp LL.M.
Mr. J.R.K.A.M. Waasdorp LL.M. works as a lawyer at the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Dutch Council of State (as of the 1st of June 2017, Jim is seconded to the Directorate General of Library, Research and Documentation of the Court of Justice of the European Union) and is a researcher at the University of Utrecht.

    This paper provides a dialectical-historical description of the EU's constitutional discourse. It is argued that the early Community's member state blind principle of justice implied the notion of a European political community and led to the establishment of fair procedures for decision making. This coming of age of an encompassing European constitutional narrative of justice and fairness prompted the question of the demarcation between the political role of the European political community and that of member states' political communities. The answer proved to be subsidiarity. However, subsidiarity has introduced national conceptions of justice in the Union's constitutional discourse, at the risk of making European justice dependent on national conceptions of justice.


Dries Cools
Dries Cools works at the National Bank of Belgium and holds a Master of Laws and a Master in Philosophy of the KU Leuven and an LL.M. of Harvard Law School.
Artikel

Kroniek Europees burgerschap

Tijdschrift Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht, Aflevering 1 2016
Trefwoorden Europees burgerschap, EU-burgerschap, Vrij verkeer van personen, non-discriminatie, kroniek
Auteurs Mr. dr. H. van Eijken
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In deze kroniek worden de belangrijkste ontwikkelingen in de Europese en nationale rechtspraak van de afgelopen jaren, met een focus op de afgelopen drie jaar, met betrekking tot het Europees burgerschap besproken.


Mr. dr. H. van Eijken
Mr. dr. H. (Hanneke) van Eijken is universitair docent Europees recht en postdoc onderzoeker bij BEUcitizen, Universiteit Utrecht.
Article

Access_open Cutting Corners or Enhancing Efficiency?

Simplified Procedures and the Israeli Quest to Speed up Justice

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 4 2015
Trefwoorden Israel, austerity, civil procedure, simplified procedures, small claims
Auteurs Ehud Brosh
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Israel was spared the worst of the world financial crisis of 2008-2009. However, austerity concerns are by no means invisible in the developments in the field of civil procedure. These concerns correlate heavily with the long-standing Israeli preoccupation with ‘speeding up’ justice. An array of simplified procedural tracks, aimed at addressing the perceived inadequacy of ‘standard’ procedure, have been developed in Israel over the years. The importance of simplified procedures in the Israeli system cannot be overestimated. Their development illustrates the dialectical tension between the values of ‘efficiency’ and ‘quality’ in the administration of justice. During periods of austerity, the scales are easily (or easier) tipped in favour of efficiency and general or particular simplification of procedure. In times of prosperity, on the other hand, concerns over ‘quality’, access to justice, and truth discovery predominate, and attempts at promoting efficiency and/or simplification at their expense tend to be bogged down. Such attempts also tend to lose their extrinsic legitimacy and are widely viewed as ‘cutting corners’. This is evident in the recent Israeli experience with civil procedure reform.


Ehud Brosh
Ehud Brosh, LL.M., is a research student at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Artikel

Hugo Sinzheimer en de collectieve arbeidsovereenkomst

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2013
Trefwoorden Labour relations, collective agreement, Sinzheimer
Auteurs Robert Knegt
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The German lawyer / labour law professor Hugo Sinzheimer (1875-1945) has, in the first two decades of the twentieth century, contributed significantly to the legal recognition of the ‘collective labour agreement’. The imperative character of CLA provisions, now widely accepted all over the world, required a paradigmatic turn in the dominant private law perspective on labour relations. The paper tries to specify what made him able and prone to do this, both by reconstructing the legal and political discussion in Germany and the Netherlands and by relating elements of the process to social-scientific theories of institutional and intellectual innovation. I argue that his combination of commitments in various fields (legal practice, science, politics) allowed him to span the gap between the fields of labour relations and state law and to contribute to the constitutionalisation of labour relations.


Robert Knegt
Robert Knegt is als directeur onderzoek verbonden aan het Hugo Sinzheimer Instituut, centrum voor onderzoek van ‘arbeid en recht’ aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Hij doet daar onderzoek naar de praktijk van arbeidsrechtelijke regelingen (ontslagrecht, flexwerk, arbeidstijden) en werkt aan een bij uitstek interdisciplinair project over ‘langetermijnontwikkelingen in de regulering van arbeid’. In 2008 verscheen The employment contract as an exclusionary device (Antwerp-Oxford-Portland: Intersentia).
Artikel

Patientenrechtegesetz: geneeskundige behandeling in Duits Burgerlijk Wetboek

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Gezondheidsrecht, Aflevering 7 2013
Trefwoorden Patientenrechtegesetz, Medisch aansprakelijkheidsrecht
Auteurs Prof. mr. E.H. Hondius en prof. mr. J.G. Sijmons
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Afgelopen winter trad in Duitsland het nieuwe patiëntenrecht in werking. Een nieuwe titel in het Burgerlijk Wetboek, als de WGBO bij ons. In dit artikel bespreken de auteurs de contouren van deze compacte wet. Is de ontwikkeling in Duitsland vergelijkbaar met die in Nederland? De meest opvallende afwijkingen zijn een regeling van ‘Aufklärungspflichten’ voor de geïnformeerde toestemming naast ‘Informationspflichten’. Scherp gesteld zijn verder de verplichtingen over dossiervoering. Een bepaling over de aansprakelijkheid rondt de bepalingen in de titel van de geneeskundige behandelingsovereenkomst af, waarbij de patiënt tegemoet wordt gekomen in de op hem rustende bewijslast voor aansprakelijkheid van de hulpverlener.


Prof. mr. E.H. Hondius
Ewoud Hondius is hoogleraar Europees privaatrecht aan de Universiteit Utrecht en lid van de redactieraad van dit tijdschrift.

prof. mr. J.G. Sijmons
Jaap Sijmons is advocaat te Zwolle, bijzonder hoogleraar gezondheidsrecht aan de Universiteit Utrecht en lid van de redactie van dit tijdschrift.

Lucas Lixinski
Lecturer, University of New South Wales (Sydney, Australia); PhD in Law, European University Institute (Florence, Italy).
Artikel

Access_open Through the Looking Glass of Global Constitutionalism and Global Administrative Law

Different Stories About the Crisis in Global Water Governance?

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2013
Trefwoorden global water governance, global constitutionalism, global administrative law, water crisis, integrated water resources management
Auteurs Mónika Ambrus
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In addition to (or sometimes rather than primarily) attributing it to water scarcity, water crisis has been described as a ‘crisis of governance’; with the word ‘crisis’ also indicating that water governance lacks (full) legitimacy. The article undertakes the task to analyse the current status of global water governance (GWG) from the perspective of two competing theories relating to the legitimacy of global governance, namely global constitutionalism (GC) and global administrative law (GAL). Having mapped the current legal framework of GWG from these two perspectives, it is discussed how these theories might shape GWG and how this shaping could contribute to solving the water crisis. In addition, it is also explored whether reading one of the most accepted proposals for legitimising global water governance, the concept of ‘integrated water resources management’ (IWRM), through the lenses of either GC or GAL would have an impact on how this concept is interpreted, and whether it can be a useful mechanism to address the water crisis. The use of two theories analysing the same subject matter provides interesting insights into global water governance and the nature of the water crisis as well as the relationship between these two theories.


Mónika Ambrus
Assistant professor of public international law at the Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Artikel

Access_open The Value of Narratives

The India-USA Nuclear Deal in Terms of Fragmentation, Pluralism, Constitutionalisation and Global Administrative Law

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2013
Trefwoorden India-US Nuclear Deal, Nuclear Energy Cooperation, Non-Proliferation Treaty, Fragmentation, Constitutionalisation, Pluralism, Global Administrative Law
Auteurs Surabhi Ranganathan
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    ‘Fragmentation’, ‘pluralism’, ‘constitutionalisation’ and ‘global administrative law’ are among the most dominant narratives of international legal order at present. Each narrative makes a descriptive claim about the current state of the international legal order, and outlines a normative vision for this order. Yet we must not lose sight of the conflicts between, and the contingency of these, and other narratives. This article seeks to recover both conflicts and contingency by showing how each may be used to explain a given event: the inauguration of a bilateral civil nuclear cooperation between the United State and India, better known as the ‘India-US nuclear deal’. I explain how the four narratives may be, and were, co-opted at different times to justify or critique the ‘deal’. This exercise serve two purposes: the application of four narratives reveal the various facets of the deal, and by its example the deal illuminates the stakes attached to each of the four narratives. In a final section, I reflect on why these four narratives enjoy their influential status in international legal scholarship.


Surabhi Ranganathan
Junior Research Fellow, King’s College/Lauterpacht Centre for International Law, University of Cambridge.
Artikel

Access_open On Fragments and Geometry

The International Legal Order as Metaphor and How It Matters

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2013
Trefwoorden international law, fragmentation, archaeology, Foucault, geometry
Auteurs Nikolas M. Rajkovic
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article engages the narrative of fragmentation in international law by asserting that legal academics and professionals have failed to probe more deeply into ‘fragmentation’ as a concept and, more specifically, as a spatial metaphor. The contention here is that however central fragmentation has been to analyses of contemporary international law, this notion has been conceptually assumed, ahistorically accepted and philosophically under-examined. The ‘fragment’ metaphor is tied historically to a cartographic rationality – and thus ‘reality’ – of all social space being reducible to a geometric object and, correspondingly, a planimetric map. The purpose of this article is to generate an appreciation among international lawyers that the problem of ‘fragmentation’ is more deeply rooted in epistemology and conceptual history. This requires an explanation of how the conflation of social space with planimetric reduction came to be constructed historically and used politically, and how that model informs representations of legal practices and perceptions of ‘international legal order’ as an inherently absolute and geometric. This implies the need to dig up and expose background assumptions that have been working to precondition a ‘fragmented’ characterization of worldly space. With the metaphor of ‘digging’ in mind, I draw upon Michel Foucault’s ‘archaeology of knowledge’ and, specifically, his assertion that epochal ideas are grounded by layers of ‘obscure knowledge’ that initially seem unrelated to a discourse. In the case of the fragmentation narrative, I argue obscure but key layers can be found in the Cartesian paradigm of space as a geometric object and the modern States’ imperative to assert (geographic) jurisdiction. To support this claim, I attempt to excavate the fragment metaphor by discussing key developments that led to the production and projection of geometric and planimetric reality since the 16th century.


Nikolas M. Rajkovic
Lecturer in International Law at the University of Kent Law School. Contact: n.rajkovic@kent.ac.uk. The research for this article was supported by a Jean Monnet Fellowship from the Global Governance Programme of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute. Further support was given for the presentation and discussion of earlier drafts by COST Action IS1003 “International Law between Constitutionalization and Fragmentation”, the Institute for Global Law and Policy of the Harvard Law School, the Kent Law School and the International Studies Association (San Francisco Annual Convention). I am indebted to the helpful feedback of Tanja Aalberts, Katja Freistein, Alexis Galan, Harry Gould, Outi Korhonen, Philipe Liste, Nicholas Onuf, Kerry Rittich, Harm Schepel, Anna Sobczak, Peter Szigeti, Wouter Werner and the two anonymous reviewers.
Artikel

Access_open Revisiting the Humanisation of International Law: Limits and Potential

Obligations Erga Omnes, Hierarchy of Rules and the Principle of Due Diligence as the Basis for Further Humanisation

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2013
Trefwoorden humanisation, constitutionalism, legal positivism, human rights, erga omnes, due diligence, positive obligations, normative hierarchy, proportionality
Auteurs Dr. Vassilis P. Tzevelekos
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The article critically evaluates the theory of the humanisation of international law. First, it argues that despite human rights having impact on (other areas of) international law, this trend has in the past been somewhat inflated. A number of examples are given where human rights have been tested against other objectives pursued by international law, with humanisation revealing its limits and actual dimensions. The second argument consists in identifying and highlighting obligations erga omnes (partes) and the principle of due diligence as two ‘systemic’ tools, that are central to the humanisation of international law. Both these tools form part of modern positive law, but may also make a positive contribution towards the direction of deeper humanisation in international law, having the potential, inter alia, to limit state will, establish occasional material normative hierarchy consisting in conditional priority in the fulfilment of human rights, give a communitarian tone to international law and invite states to be pro-active in the collective protection of their common interests and values. In its conclusions, the article offers a plausible explanation about the paradox it identifies of the limits of the humanisation on the one hand, and its potential for further development on the other. For, it is inherent in international law that the line separating the law from deontology is thin. The process of humanisation needs to be balanced with the other objectives of international law as well as reconciled with the decentralised and sovereignist origins of the pluralistic international legal system.


Dr. Vassilis P. Tzevelekos
Lecturer in Public International Law, University of Hull Law School; Attorney, Athens’ Bar. PhD and M.Res, European University Institute; MA, European Political and Administrative Studies, College of Europe; DEA Droit international public et organisations internationales, Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne; LLB, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens.
Artikel

Access_open International Criminal Law and Constitutionalisation

On Hegemonic Narratives in Progress

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2013
Trefwoorden hegemony, constitutionalism, constitutionalisation, international criminal law
Auteurs Marjan Ajevski
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    As we move towards constructing narratives regarding the future outlook of global governance, constitutionalisation among them, the hope is that whatever shape this world order takes it will, somehow, forestall or hinder the possibility of a hegemonic order. This article tries to deconstruct the notion of hegemony and claims that as it currently stands it is useless in doing its critical work since every successful narrative will end up being hegemonic because it will employ the ‘hegemonic technique’ of presenting a particular value (or value system), a particular viewpoint, as universal or at least applying to those who do not share it. The only way for a narrative in this discourse not to be hegemonic would be for it to be either truly universal and find a perspective that stems from nowhere and everywhere – a divine perspective – or purely descriptive; the first being an impossibility for fallible beings and the other not worth engaging with since it has nothing to say about how things should be structured or decided in a specific situation.


Marjan Ajevski
Post-Doctoral research fellow part of the MultiRights project – an ERC Advanced Grant on the Legitimacy of Multi-Level Human Rights Judiciary – <www.MultiRights.net>; and PluriCourts, a Research Council of Norway Centre of Excellence – <www.PluriCourts.net>, Norwegian Centre of Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Oslo. I can be contacted at marjan.ajevski@nchr.uio.no.

Mr. M.J.C. van der Heijden LL.M. M.Phil
Mr. M.J.C. van der Heijden LL.M. M.Phil is verbonden aan het UD Molengraaff Instituut voor Privaatrecht van de Universiteit Utrecht.

    The central issue of this article is which European requirements apply when European and national authorities divide European grants among the applicants. Mostly, the European money which is available for awarding European grants is scarce. In this article, two questions come up for discussion. First: which distribution system has to be chosen? Second: to what extent the principles of equal treatment and transparancy – derived from the European procurement rules – are applicable to the distribution of European grants? This article will conclude that there is a difference between European grants awarded by the European Commission, European agencies and the so-called national agencies on the one hand, and European grants awarded by national authorities on the other.


Jacobine van den Brink
Jacobine van den Brink promoveert later dit jaar met het proefschrift ‘De uitvoering van Europese subsidieregelingen Nederland’ en is werkzaam als onderzoeker bij de Universiteit Leiden.
Artikel

Access_open De Drittwirkung van grondrechten

Retorisch curiosum of vaandel van een paradigmatische omwenteling in ons rechtsbestel?

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 1 2012
Trefwoorden Drittwirkung, horizontal effect of human rights, constitutionalisation of private law
Auteurs Stefan Somers
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article discusses whether the horizontal effect of human rights marks a new paradigm in legal systems or is merely a new style in legal rhetoric. In doing so, much attention is paid to the differences between direct and indirect horizontal effect. Departing from social contract theory the article explains that the protection of human right values in horizontal relations is an essential feature of modern constitutionalism. It also analyses whether these values in horizontal relations should be protected by private law or by human rights. This question is looked at from a substantial, a methodological and an institutional perspective. In the end, because of institutional power balancing, the article argues in favor of an indirect horizontal effect of human rights.


Stefan Somers
Stefan Somers is a researcher at the Department of Interdisciplinary Studies at the VUB (Free University of Brussels) and prepares a PhD on the relationship between human rights and tort law.
Discussie

Access_open Horizontal Effect Revisited

A Reply to Four Comments

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2011
Auteurs Gunther Teubner
Samenvatting

    In this concluding article, Gunther Teubner addresses his critics.


Gunther Teubner
Discussie

Access_open Hybrid Constitutionalism, Fundamental Rights and the State

A Response to Gunther Teubner

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2011
Trefwoorden societal constitutionalism, Gunther Teubner, system theory, fundamental rights
Auteurs Gert Verschraegen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution explores how much state is necessary to make societal constitutionalism work. I first ask why the idea of a global societal constitutionalism ‘beyond the state-and-politics’ might be viewed as a significant and controversial, but nonetheless justified innovation. In the second part I discuss what Teubner calls ‘the inclusionary effects of fundamental rights’. I argue that Teubner underplays the mediating role of the state in guaranteeing inclusion or access, and in a way presupposes well-functioning states in the background. In areas of limited statehood there is a problem of enforcing fundamental rights law. It is an open question whether, and under which conditions, constitutional norms within particular global social spheres can provide enough counter-weight when state constitutional norms are lacking.


Gert Verschraegen
Gert Verschraegen is Assistant Professor of Theoretical Sociology at the University of Antwerp, Belgium.
Toont 1 - 20 van 26 gevonden teksten
« 1
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.