All EU-related News in English in a list. Read News from the European Union in French, German & Hungarian too.

You are here

European Union

144/2018 : 4 October 2018 - Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-416/17

European Court of Justice (News) - Thu, 04/10/2018 - 10:41
Commission v France
Freedom of establishment
The Conseil d’État should have referred a question to the Court for a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of EU law, in order to determine whether it was necessary to refuse to take into account the tax incurred by a non-resident subsidiary on the profits underlying dividends redistributed by a non-resident company

Categories: European Union

143/2018 : 4 October 2018 - Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-105/17

European Court of Justice (News) - Thu, 04/10/2018 - 10:40
Kamenova
Environment and consumers
A person who publishes a number of sales advertisements on a website is not automatically a ‘trader’

Categories: European Union

148/2018 : 4 October 2018 - Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-379/17

European Court of Justice (News) - Thu, 04/10/2018 - 10:28
Società Immobiliare Al Bosco Srl
Area of Freedom, Security and Justice
The Brussels I Regulation does not preclude legislation of a Member State which provides for the application of a time limit for the enforcement of a preventive attachment order from being applied in the case of such an order which has been adopted in another Member State and is enforceable in the Member State in which enforcement is sought

Categories: European Union

147/2018 : 4 October 2018 - Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-337/17

European Court of Justice (News) - Thu, 04/10/2018 - 10:27
Feniks
Area of Freedom, Security and Justice
A creditor’s action seeking to render a fraudulent disposal of property by its debtor ineffective as regards that creditor is a ‘matter related to a contract’ within the meaning of the regulation on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters

Categories: European Union

146/2018 : 4 October 2018 - Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-242/17

European Court of Justice (News) - Thu, 04/10/2018 - 10:27
L.E.G.O.
Environment and consumers
The requirement to submit sustainability certificates imposed by Italy on intermediaries which do not take physical possession of the bioliquids which are the subject of the transaction in which those intermediaries are involved complies with EU law

Categories: European Union

Brussels, not Birmingham

Ideas on Europe Blog - Thu, 04/10/2018 - 10:11

I’ll be frank with you: I’ve never done a full party conference. Some fringe activities, yes, but not the whole shebang. Indeed, the nearest I’ve got is the pile of DVDs of an early 2000s UKIP conference, back when I worked more on euroscepticism (and when UKIP sold DVDs of their conference).

This is all a prelude to saying that I also don’t think that party conferences matter as much as some say.

In media terms, they are convenient staging posts in the year, with all the merits of having the key players in one place for long enough that they might let their hair down a bit. In political terms, the gathering also allows for plotting and planning.

But for European policy, conference is almost never the place to look. None of the major interventions in either Brexit or the pre-Cameroonian period came from conference, but from stand-alone speeches and events.

That’s largely because both Conservatives and Labour are split, have been split and (probably) will continue to be split on matters European. And basic party management says you don’t wash your dirty laundry when everyone’s watching.

I write this despite having marked Birmingham as one of the key staging posts to an Article 50 deal (along with Salzburg). On reflection, that was because I thought by Birmingham, Tory Chequers-rebels would have had to have made their move, rather than at the conference proper.

That they didn’t – possibly couldn’t – reflects my long-held view that May is the convenient scapegoat, carrying the UK out next March with whatever’s needed to avoid immediate disaster, only to be cast aside by critics who will point to their grumblings now as evidence of “why this was never the right way to go about it.” Why own the problem when someone else is there to carry the can for you?

It also underlines how wedded to Chequers May has become. Ironically, the range of criticism seems to have made it easier for her to bluster through her conference speech, redirecting fire at second-referendumers and connecting Brexit to a domestic project. Conference season appears to have had no appreciable impact on her policy.

This is Brussels calling

But this is not to say that policy isn’t changing.

The coming week is going to see a lot of work going into Article 50 negotiations, building up to next Wednesday’s release of a draft Political Declaration by the EU.

That work will entail movement by both sides, but also some careful framing of what is happening.

Importantly, the Withdrawal Agreement and the Political Declaration aren’t going to embody ‘Chequers’, in the sense that the focus of the former is on the ending of the UK’s EU membership and the focus of the latter is a set of principles guiding the negotiations for a future relationship. Those principles do not necessarily – maybe even necessarily cannot – map out the specific shape of that relationship, given the incompleteness of both sides’ positions.

Thus the Article 50 ‘deal’ potentially could be sold not as ‘Chequers’, but as a stepping stone to what comes next. For all those Tory rebels and opposition parties planning to ‘vote against Chequers‘, this might come either as a nasty surprise or as a means to get themselves out of a hole (given that there’s little enthusiasm for a no-deal alternative).

With rumours of new options on the Irish dimension flying about, it is going to be in Brussels that this next stage of Brexit is going to be determined, rather than Birmingham (or even London).

This was both inevitable and necessary.

Brexit was never just about the UK, but also about the UK’s relationship with the EU. To pretend that as long as the British had worked out what they wanted, that was that, was always a foolish enterprise. Instead, it needs the involvement of both the UK and EU in finding mutually-acceptable solutions.

If that much is now better recognised by British politicians and commentators as a result of the past and coming weeks, then we should count that as an advance in our public understanding of how the EU (and Brexit) works.

Perhaps also it will underline how the contingent issue of Brexit (and it’s a huge contingency) sits within the bigger picture of the UK’s place in the world.

I’ll fall back on that trope of self-help instagram posts – “no man is an island entire of itself” – with its message that connections and context are indispensable.

And then I’ll remind you that this particular stanza finishes with the equally famous line about who the bell is tolling.

 

The post Brussels, not Birmingham appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Categories: European Union

149/2018 : 4 October 2018 - Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-12/17

European Court of Justice (News) - Thu, 04/10/2018 - 10:06
Dicu
SOPO
A provision of national law which, for the purpose of determining the duration of paid annual leave to which a worker is entitled, does not include a period of parental leave taken by that worker complies with EU law

Categories: European Union

Draft opinion - Establishing a European Instrument for Nuclear Safety complementing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument on the basis of the Euratom Treaty - PE 627.713v03-00 - Committee on Foreign Affairs

DRAFT OPINION on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing a European Instrument for Nuclear Safety complementing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument on the basis of the Euratom Treaty
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Petras Auštrevičius

Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP
Categories: European Union

Highlights - 27 September: Presentation of Sakharov Prize 2018 nominees - Committee on Foreign Affairs

On 27 September, Members of the Committees on Foreign Affairs and Development and from the subcommittee on Human Rights met jointly for presentations of this year's nominees for Parliament's Sakharov Prize for freedom of thought. Seven personalities and several NGOs have been nominated by MEPs and political groups for Parliament's renowned human rights prize which is awarded each year in December (for details see links below).
The presentation of the nominees took place on Thursday, 27 September, 12.00-13.00 in room József Antall (JAN) 2Q2 and was webstreamed live. A shortlist of three nominees will be drawn up by a vote that will take place on 9 October.
Further information
Nominations
Meeting documents
Webstreaming
Sakharov Prize website
Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP
Categories: European Union

Latest news - The next SEDE meeting - Subcommittee on Security and Defence

will take place on Wednesday, 10 October (9:00-12:30 and 14:30-18:30) and Thursday, 11 October (9:30-12:30) in Brussels.


Organisations or interest groups who wish to apply for access to the European Parliament will find the relevant information below.


Further information
watch the meeting live
Access rights for interest group representatives
Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

Agenda - The Week Ahead 01 – 07 October 2018

European Parliament - Wed, 03/10/2018 - 13:04
Plenary session, Strasbourg

Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP
Categories: European Union

Amendments 1 - 33 - Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament's position with a view to an agreement - PE 627.887v01-00 - Committee on Foreign Affairs

AMENDMENTS 1 - 33 - Draft opinion Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament's position with a view to an agreement
Committee on Foreign Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP
Categories: European Union

Regional application of the (in)security concept: a case study of Ukraine´s Transcarpathia region

Ideas on Europe Blog - Tue, 02/10/2018 - 16:03

Apart from protection from hostile forces, security also refers to a wide range of other issues, such as the absence of harm, the presence of an essential good, quality or conditions in which equitable and sustainable relationships can develop within political systems, institutions and states.

 

There are various hazards, faced by the Ukrainian state in the region of Transcarpathia (Zakarpattya), rich in cultures, ethnicities, political preferences and bordering Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and Romania. The challenges of insuring constitutional order, prevention of separatism by co-opting and locking-in, surprisingly, could be done by promotion of neopatrimonial ties, clientalism, patronage and policies of controlled corruption and other informal mechanisms.

 

In the December 1991 referendum 78% of the region´s voters approved a proposal for Transcarpathian autonomy. Rather than employing force, the Ukrainian state exerted other kinds of control on local officials. Regional movements were defused through co-opting and brokeraging mechanisms, in which local politicians were included into the political networks with the center, whereby the voices demanding autonomy were stifled.

 

Dissatisfaction and high aspirations for separate identity recognition and redistribution of resources and power present obstacles for stability internationally and successful nation-building/consolidation domestically. Various political groups thus tend to vigorously compete for their right to influence the level of societal (in)security. Since 1991 Ukraine demonstrated an easily identifiable polarization along regional and cultural lines. These cleavages attained political dimension through regionally based political parties. This polarization often led the country to the brink of political confrontation. An examination of this regional case shows the importance of the actual control means in the ability to defuse separatist movements.

 

Regionalism is the constant factor in Ukrainian political life, and is likely to remain so in the foreseeable future. The country’s principal regional cleavages are result of a historically separate political development under heavy foreign domination. In this context, unconstitutional establishment of autonomy structures may inflame tensions and raise various hazards, as groups may mobilize different ethnicities around the issue. Furthermore, once an autonomous structure has been established, it can easily serve as an institutional foundation for separatist movements and inflate claims. Region´s elites advancing their own political careers may use autonomy as a vehicle for the mobilization of ethnicity, thus producing violent conflict.

 

Authoritarian governments often view autonomy claims as a zero-sum game, responding harshly and provoking further resistance. Violent conflict may also be more likely under authoritarian regimes because minority groups often fear that extreme action will be the only way to produce a response from such a government. More democratic regimes, however, are more likely to deal with demands more pragmatically, with a strategy resulting in non-violent compromise. In the state hierarchy, based on the Weberian legacy, the center is stronger than the periphery and commands the local agents, who entertain control on the exercise of power in the region. The exceptions to this model may include the situation, where local actors hold stronger de facto control, often by informal means.

 

Ukraine´ state leadership successfully exercised informal mechanisms of control in relation to the periphery. It allowed and even encouraged corruption by local elites. But the state also collected information on illicit activities of local elites and carefully stored it. When directives from the center were given to local elites for implementation, the locals had nothing but to comply in order to avoid criminal prosecution.  Another means of control was the promise of jobs and positions to individuals who support central policies of elites. These types of patronage control are quite effective and inexpensive, compared to direct coercion.

 

Hub-and-spoke pattern of a network with little connection between subunits is a more effective way of control, compared with other. This type of structure balanced the power in favour of the center, as regional actors had to go through the center in order to communicate with each other, and “blackmail state” could effectively forbid collusion between regional actors.

 

The elite that emerged in independent Ukraine came out of the old Soviet-era nomenklatura bred in a neo-patrimonial culture. Thus in Ukraine emerged the system of party of power, characterised by dependence on state, rather formal ideology, barely realized in practice, and strong linkage to specific interest groups, who increasingly took control of political power. The parties were not meant to become autonomous political forces in their own right, but were utilised by the center. They also served the regime in upholding a network of patronage relationships with the major socio-political, economic and administrative actors.  At the same time Ukraine has not managed to achieve a level of national consolidation where regional and national identities could be complementary rather than competitive.

Alexander Svetlov

 

The post Regional application of the (in)security concept: a case study of Ukraine´s Transcarpathia region appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Categories: European Union

Highlights - Public hearing on Artificial intelligence and its future impact on security - Subcommittee on Security and Defence

SEDE is organising a public hearing on 'Artificial intelligence and its future impact on security' on Wednesday 10 October 2018, from 09.00 to 11.30, with four external experts
Further information
Draft programme
Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

Latest news - Artificial intelligence and its future impact on security - Subcommittee on Security and Defence

SEDE is organising a public hearing on 'Artificial intelligence and its future impact on security' on Wednesday 10 October 2018, from 09.00 to 11.30, with four external experts
Further information
Draft programme
Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

Hearings - Artificial intelligence and its future impact on security - 10-10-2018 - Subcommittee on Security and Defence

SEDE is organising a public hearing on 'Artificial intelligence and its future impact on security' on Wednesday 10 October 2018, from 09.00 to 11.30, with four external experts
Location : Paul-Henri Spaak, room 5B001
Further information
Draft programme
Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

Highlights - The further development of the Common Position 944/2008/CFSP on arms exports control - Subcommittee on Security and Defence

In view of the upcoming review of the EU Common Position 944/2008/CFSP on arms exports, the aim of the workshop was to provide an overview of the context in which this process will take place together with a set of possible outcomes the review could produce.
The speakers from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), first defined the context by describing how, since the EU Common Position was adopted in 2008, EU member states performed in terms of military expenditure, arms production and arms transfers. Recent measures adopted at the EU level to boost defence industrial cooperation were also indicated as part of this framework. The speakers also highlighted the divergences in member states' export policies which emerged in the last decade, most recently during the conflict in Yemen. They then provided a number of options that could be taken into consideration during the 2018 review, covering both adjustments to the language of the criteria and the user's guide and measures to improve the implementation of the EU Common Position, the quality of reporting and to increase coherence and coordination of the EU export control regime.
Further information
Workshop report
Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

Latest news - Next AFET Meeting - Committee on Foreign Affairs

The next AFET meetings are scheduled to take place on:

Monday, 8 October, 15:00-18:30, room JAN 2Q2
Tuesday, 9 October, 09:00-12:30, room JAN 2Q2
Tuesday, 9 October, 14:30-18:30, room JAN 2Q2


Further information
Information for visitors
Draft agendas
Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP
Categories: European Union

142/2018 : 2 October 2018 - Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-73/17

European Court of Justice (News) - Tue, 02/10/2018 - 09:55
France v Parliament
Law governing the institutions
The European Parliament may exercise some of its budgetary powers in Brussels, instead of Strasbourg, if that is required for the proper functioning of the budgetary procedure

Categories: European Union

Pages