Redefining the outer boundaries of EU Law: the Zambrano, McCarthy and Dereci trilogy

In its three recent rulings in the cases of Zambrano, McCarthy, and Dereci, the Court appears to have been determined to redefine the external boundaries of EU law, in cases involving the family reunification rights of Union citizens.These three judgments can be read as an indication that for Article 20 TFEU to apply, there is no longer a requirement of a cross-border element on the facts of the case, and that it is sufficient if the contested national measure has the effect of ‘depriving citizens of the Union of the genuine enjoyment of the substance’ of their rights (the ‘Zambrano principle’).The cases can, at the same time, also be read as a confirmation that the free movement provisions do – still – require a cross-border element and, in particular, the exercise of inter-State movement, in order to apply. Though the result in these cases has not been entirely unexpected, especially in the aftermath of the Rottmann ruling, it is rather problematic in that, although it is obvious that the Court wishes to redraw the line dividing the national and EU spheres of competence, it does not make it entirely clear where this line now lies and leaves many essential questions unanswered, which will obviously require some time to be resolved. EU lawyers are consequently, once more, left with having to decipher as best as they can the real intentions of the Court in this new line of case-law, which has been further complicated by the fact that what the Court seems to have given with one hand in Zambrano (and before that in Rottmann), has taken it back to a large extent through its rulings in McCarthy and Dereci, which appear to confine the former two cases to their own exceptional facts.6 Moreover, the ‘reverse discrimination Pandora’s box’, the opening of which appears to have been the real target of these references, remains untouched: instead of providing a direct solution to this problem, the Court has chosen to – once again – broaden the scope of the Treaty provisions in order to include within it as many situations as possible and, thus, prevent the emergence of this type of differential treatment on a case-by-case basis.As will be explained, nonetheless, this is by no means an appropriate solution to the reverse discrimination conundrum.

Book Review: Public Service Media and Policy in Europe

Much has happened in the past fifty years, and the broadcasting system and in fact the entire media landscape have changed in many significant ways. Yet, the debate on the role of public service media and the involvement of the state in them still perseveres. It has indeed been reinvigorated due to the tectonic shifts in media production, distribution, access and consumption caused by digital technologies in general, and the Internet in particular. The gist of the debates has however curiously remained almost the same and is still focused on a set of economic arguments that call for state intervention in public media, and not unimportantly, on the various political interpretations of these economic arguments. In Europe, the debate has another essential core too, as Public Service Broadcasting (PSB) has been traditionally entrusted to serve some higher goals intrinsically related to key democratic and cultural processes. Accordingly, PSB in Western Europe has developed as the core media institution at the national level and has become deeply embedded in many facets of the nation’s economic, political, social and cultural life. Against the backdrop of PSB’s history, its vital tasks in society, as well as the dramatic changes brought about by the digitally networked environment, the question on the future of PSB and its transition into Public Service Media (PSM) is very interesting, to say the least, and highly challenging at the same time. The book by Karen Donders, Public Service Media and Policy in Europe (Palgrave, 2012), makes an essential contribution to these complex debates, and more importantly, adds some new value to an otherwise saturated discourse.

The Legal Status and Influence of Decisions of International Organizations and other Bodies in the European Union. College of Europe Research Paper in Law 01/2014

Introduction. The European Union’s external action is not only defined by its influence on international developments, but also by its ability and the need to respond to those developments. While traditionally many have stressed the EU’s ‘autonomy’, over the years its ‘dependence’ on global developments has become more clear.2 International law has continued to play a key role in, not only in the EU’s external relations, but also in the Union’s own legal order.3 The purpose of this paper is not to assess the role or performance of the EU in international institutions.4 Rather it purports to reverse the picture and focus on a somewhat under-researched topic: the legal status of decisions of international organizations in the EU’s legal order.5 While parts of the status of these decisions relate to the status of international agreements and international customary law, it can be argued that decisions of international organizations and other international bodies form a distinct category. In fact, it has been observed that “this phenomenon has added a new layer of complexity to the already complex law of external relations of the European Union”.6 Emerging questions relate to the possible difference between decisions of international organizations of which the EU is a member (such as the FAO) and decisions of organizations where it is not (irrespective of existing competences in that area – such as in the ILO). Questions also relate to the hierarchical status of these decisions in the EU’s legal order and to the possibility of them being invoked in direct or indirect actions before the Court of Justice. This contribution takes a broad perspective on decisions of international organizations by including decisions taken in other international institutions which do not necessarily comply with the standard definition of international organizations,7 be it bodies set-up by multilateral conventions or informal (transnational / regulatory) bodies. Some of these bodies are relatively close to the EU (such as the Councils established by Association Agreements – see further Section 5 below); others operate at a certain distance. Limiting the analysis to formal international organizations will not do justice to the manifold relationships between the European Union and various international bodies and to the effects of the norms produced by these bodies. The term ‘international decisions’ is therefore used to refer to any normative output of international institutional arrangements.

Cases and materials on the law and institutions of the Atlantic area : with a separate volume of documents /

Mode of access: Internet.

The American law review.

Imprint varies: St. Louis, Mo. : Review Pub. Co., 1883-1929.

Public report of review : NAO submission #940001 and NAO submission #940002.

"October 12, 1994."

Public report of review : NAO submission #940003.

"April 11, 1995."

Content and drivers of performance management in agency-type organizations of the hungarian public administration

The improving performance of public administration and the reform of public financing system have been on agenda in Hungary for many years, in accordance with the international trends. However, governments have not expected and supported creating of a performance-oriented public administration in a comprehensive and explicit way. Nevertheless, there are bottom-up initiatives at organizational level, which target performance-oriented organizational function. The research focuses on organizations of central public administration where the successful application of performance management methods is most likely based on the international literature. These are the so called agency-type organizations, which are in Hungary called autonomous state-administration organizations independent of the Government (e.g. Hungarian Competition Authority), government bureaus (e.g. Hungarian Central Statistical Office), and central offices subordinated to the government (either the cabinet or a ministry) (e.g. Hungarian Meteorological Service). The studied agencies are legally independent organizations with managerial autonomy based on public law. The purpose of this study is to get an overview on organizational level performance management tools applied by Hungarian agencies, and to reveal the reasons and drivers of the application of these tools. The empirical research is based on a mixed methods approach which combines both quantitative methods and qualitative procedures. The first – quantitative – phase of the author’s research was content analysis of homepages of the studied organizations. As a results she got information about all agencies and their practice related to some performance management tools. The second – qualitative – phase was based on semi-structured face-to-face interviews with some senior managers of agencies. The author selected the interviewees based on the results of the first phase, the relatively strong performance orientation was an important selection criteria.

La protection des données personnelles en droit international privé

Les nouvelles technologies et l’arrivée de l’Internet ont considérablement facilité les échanges transnationaux de données entre les entreprises publiques et/ou privées et également entre les personnes elles-mêmes. Cependant cette révolution numérique n’a pas été sans conséquences sur l’utilisation de nos données personnelles puisque cette abondance de données à la portée de tiers peut conduire à des atteintes : la commercialisation des données personnelles sans le consentement de l’intéressé par des entreprises ou encore la diffusion de sa photographie, de son nom, de son prénom à son insu en sont des exemples. La question qui vient alors se poser est en cas de litige, c’est-à-dire en cas d’atteintes au droit à la protection de nos données personnelles, présentant un ou des éléments d’extranéité, quels tribunaux pouvons-nous saisir ? Et quelle est la loi qui sera applicable ? Les droits québécois, de l’Union européenne, et suisse présentent différents critères de rattachement intéressants et adaptés à des situations prenant place hors et sur internet. Le droit commun de chacun de ces systèmes est envisagé, puis appliqué aux données personnelles dans le cadre d’une situation normale, et ensuite à internet si la situation diffère. La doctrine est également analysée dans la mesure où certaines solutions sont tout à fait intéressantes, et cela notamment sur internet. Un premier chapitre est consacré à la compétence internationale des tribunaux et aux critères de rattachement envisageables en droit commun à savoir notamment : le tribunal de l’État de survenance du préjudice, le tribunal de l’État de la faute ou encore le tribunal du domicile de la victime. Et ceux prévus ou non par la doctrine tels que l’accessibilité et le ciblage par exemple. Les conflits de lois sont étudiés dans un deuxième chapitre avec également l’énumération les différents facteurs de rattachement envisageables en droit commun comme la loi de l’État du préjudice, la loi de l’État de la faute ou encore la loi de l’État favorisant la victime. Et également ceux prévus par la doctrine : la loi de l’État « offrant la meilleure protection des données à caractère personnel » ou encore la loi de l’État où est établi le « maître du fichier ». Le tribunal le plus compétent au regard des principes généraux de droit international privé en cas d’atteintes au droit de la protection des données personnelles hors et sur internet est le tribunal de l’État du domicile de la victime. Et la meilleure loi applicable est la loi de l’État du domicile ou de la résidence principale du demandeur et du défendeur à l’instance, et dans le cas où la situation ne présente pas d’éléments d’extranéité, la meilleure loi est la loi favorisant la victime.