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.

Geoarchaeology and taphonomy of plant remains in early urban environments in the Ancient Near East

A number of recent articles emphasize the fundamental importance of taphonomy and formation processes to interpretation of plant remains assemblages, as well as the value of interdisciplinary approaches to studies of environmental change and ecological and social practices. This paper examines ways in which micromorphology can contribute to integrating geoarchaeology and archaeobotany in analysis of the taphonomy and context of plant remains and ecological and social practices. Micromorphology enables simultaneous in situ study of diverse plant materials and thereby traces of a range of depositional pathways and histories. In addition to charred plant remains, also often preserved in semi-arid environments are plant impressions, phytoliths and calcitic ashes. These diverse plant remains are often routinely separated and extracted from their depositional context or lost using other analytical techniques, thereby losing crucial evidence on taphonomy, formation processes and contextual associations, which are fundamental to all subsequent interpretations. Although micromorphological samples are small in comparison to bulk flotation samples of charred plant remains, their size is similar to phytolith and pollen samples. In this paper, key taphonomic issues are examined in the study of: fuel; animal dung, animal management and penning; building materials; and specific activities, including food storage and preparation and ritual, using selected case-studies from early urban settlements in the Ancient Near East. Microarchaeological residues and experimental archaeology are also briefly examined.

Agricultural tenancy reform: the end of law; or a new popular culture?

This paper applies a reading of the postmodernisation of law to the incremental reform of agricultural holdings legislation over the last century. In charting the shifting legal basis of agricultural tenancies, from ‘black letter’ positivism to the cultural contextuality of sumptuary law, the paper theorises that the underlying political imperative has been allied to the changing significance of property ownership and use. Rather than reflecting the long-term official desire to maintain the let sector in British agriculture, however, the paper argues that this process has had other aims. In particular, it has been about an annexation of law to legitimise the retention of landowner power while presenting a rhetorical ‘democratisation’ of farming, away from its plutocratic associations and towards a new narrative of ‘depersonalised’ business.