How does one know whether a service is supplied against payment? While the answer to that question appears to be self-evident, it is, in fact, the sole reason for a host of court procedures across the world of VAT. Indeed, the underlying concept of a supply for consideration has eluded and continues to elude courts and practitioners. This is in part due to the wide range of transactions that are arguably such that they cannot be categorised as a supply for consideration (i.e., a supply against payment). It is, e.g., not obvious how to treat the transaction happening when a by-passer gives a few coins to a street musician, considering that it is debatable whether the coins constitute payment for a music service or a gift given out of sympathy. As an attempt to elucidate the concept of a supply for consideration, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has developed the so called direct link test, consisting of four criteria. The  test  is  applied  in  cases  where  the  nexus  between  a  supply  and  a consideration is indefinite or called into doubt. Given that the CJEU is the supreme interpreter of EU law, the direct link test has consequently become a standardised test in all 28 Member States of the EU. In other jurisdictions, such as Australia and New Zealand, there stands no equally established test to resolve the question of a nexus. More so, the courts of these jurisdictions do not necessarily adhere to the same notions as the CJEU. Against this background, the criteria of the direct link test have been analysed as well as compared to the notions prevailing in other jurisdictions. Following the comparative studies, it stands evident that there are, in some instances, radically different understandings of what kind of transactions that constitute a supply for consideration. These differences exist between courts of different jurisdictions as well as courts of the same jurisdiction. Certainly, there will always be disagreements in respect of legal queries; however, by virtue of the comparative studies, divergences of a more conceptual nature have been unearthed. In turn, these conceptual divergences demonstrate the existence of fundamentally different perceptions of the concept of a supply for consideration within the world of VAT. In light of the analysis, the author has concluded that the direct link test is appropriate for the purpose it is meant to serve. That said, the actual application of the test leaves room for improvement, which may to some extent be sought in the rules and notions prevailing in other jurisdictions and in the comments and critiques put forward by scholars.

La jurisprudence de la CJUE correspond à un véritable mode d'emploi du marché intérieur des marchandises. En l'absence d'harmonisation, il revient en effet à la Cour d'arbitrer les choix conflictuels entre le principe de libre circulation des marchandises promu par le traité et les politiques non économiques défendues par les Etats membres de l'UE. Or, l'action du juge communautaire se caractérise par des interprétations ambitieuses du traité, mais au risque de sacrifier une ligne jurisprudentielle parfaitement claire. Notre analyse souligne à cet égard un compromis parfois critiquable entre les enjeux mercantiles, d'une part, et les impératifs non marchands, d'autre part. Elle promeut également une évolution vers une jurisprudence stabilisée signe d'une maturité dans la recherche du compromis nécessaire entre l'exigence d'un marché intégré et le respect des souverainetés nationales. / The influence of the Court of Justice of the EU on the evolution of the internal market for goods within the EU is at the heart of the issue to determine the degree of freedom that Community law intends to grant to the member states through the process of negative integration. The criteria selected by the judicial body of the EU to interpret and apply the provisions of the treaty are not neutral. Our analysis emphasizes a sometimes criticisable compromise between commercial issues on one hand, and non economic issues, on the other hand. It also promotes the idea that the time for a stabilised jurisprudence would be a sign of maturity in the search for a compromise between the need for an integrated market and respect of national sovereignties.

no / This chapter examines the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), which consists of three courts: the Court of Justice (or ‘the Court’), the General Court, and the Civil Service Tribunal. It focuses on issues of structure and procedure, the extent of the Courts’ jurisdiction, and their role in the promotion of European integration. The chapter also discusses the criticism directed at the CJEU for the way it exercises its judicial powers, which allegedly involve political considerations normally unacceptable for a judicial body. Lastly, the chapter looks at the main challenges facing the courts.

Cette thèse tente de mettre en exergue les difficultés que soulèvent les relations du droit de la concurrence avec la Convention européenne des droits de l’Homme.Tous les acteurs du droit de la concurrence s’accordent à dire que le comportement concurrentiel des entreprises sur le marché doit être encadré. Le maintien d’une concurrence saine et efficace dépend, entre autres, des pouvoirs des autorités de concurrence, de l’effectivité des procédures visant les comportements anticoncurrentiels et des sanctions infligées aux entreprises auteurs d’infractions. Néanmoins, la pratique révèle une forte carence de l'application des droits de la défense résultant de la Convention européenne des droits de l’Homme. Cette défaillance peut s’expliquer en partie par le caractère relativement récent et mouvant du droit de la concurrence. Plus préoccupées par le maintien d’une concurrence effective que par le respect des droits de la défense des entreprises, les autorités ont relégué au second plan la Convention européenne des droits de l’Homme. Pourtant, cette dernière est profondément ancrée dans notre système juridique et les droits de la défense qui en découlent constituent de surcroît le fondement d’un Etat de droit.Face aux incessantes critiques de praticiens et d’universitaires, les autorités et juridictions ont commencé à accorder plus d’importance au respect des droits de la défense. Par ailleurs, un certain nombre de mesures a été mis en place afin de permettre un respect accru de la Convention européenne des droits de l’Homme en droit de la concurrence. La réalité démontre que toutes ces mesures ne peuvent suffire à assurer le respect satisfaisant des droits de la défense des entreprises mises en cause par les autorités de concurrence. Néanmoins, même timide, cette évolution mérite d’être approuvée et encouragée. / This thesis tries to highlight the difficulties that may occur as a result of the correlations between competition law and the European Convention on Human Rights. All the actors of competition law agree to say that the competitive behavior of companies in the market must be framed. The preservation of a healthy and effective competition depends on many factors. Among them, the focus can be given on the powers of competition authorities and the effectiveness of the procedures aiming at a better competitive behavior. Furthermore, it can be added the role of the penalties imposed on companies breaching the rules of antitrust law. However, the practice shows that this goal is often pursued to the detriment of the rights of defense resulting from the European Convention on Human Rights.Nevertheless, the fundamental rights are profoundly anchored in our legal system and besides, improve the respect of the rule of law. Unlike other law areas, the youth of competition law might explain the reason why the authorities of competition have a more flexible approach of the European Convention on Human Rights. Entitled by the preservation of an effective competition, the authorities have pushed aside the European Convention on Human Rights.Coping with the constant critics of practitioners and academics, the authorities and the jurisdictions have gradually begun to pay attention to the violations of the defense rights. Moreover, measures have been set up to enforce a greater respect for the European Convention on Human Rights in the sphere of competition law. There is no doubt that all these measures cannot be enough to assure respect for the rights of defense of companies questioned by the authorities of competition. Nevertheless, it can be considered as a first step.

This dissertation investigates how legal and policy professionals have legally constructed the economic policy and governance of the EU since the beginning of the Eurozone crisis onwards. It follows the legal and policy professionals who received the mandate to enable and consolidate solutions, as well as defend these solutions in court. By tracing the practices and trajectories of these agents, I show how, during an unfolding crisis, economic policy and governance becomes legally constructed and changes the terms of legitimation for EU economic governance. The stakes involved for the professionals involved also change. In this way, the dissertation speaks to the question of how intrusive political power has been legitimated during the Eurozone crisis and what this means for the legitimacy of European governance. Theoretically, this thesis develops a Bourdieusian field approach that is adapted to the transnational and diachronic context of the Eurozone crisis, as it unfolded from the end of 2009 until the adjudication of key high-profile court cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union. Drawing on boundary work, bricolage, and network interactions to analyse the practices of legal and policy professionals, the process of enabling and consolidating solutions is elaborated. Attention is given to how this process engenders stakes for the professionals in this emerging euro-crisis law field, and what this means for emerging legal terms of legitimation for economic governance.Methodologically, field-based and social network analysis are combined in two distinct ways. First, by employing a temporally-focussed network analysis, which caters for change by measuring the shifting centrality of legal and policy professionals over time, I show which professionals have had a high-level of involvement in dealing with crisis issues. This then permits the construction of a referral network based on how these professionals refer to their peers. The involvement of the professionals is further articulated as their accumulated symbolic capital: i.e. their involvement together with being perceived to know well. From this, I infer a species of symbolic capital unique to being part of the Eurozone crisis policy response: juridical capital.This dissertation adds to scholarship on the Eurozone crisis by creating a theoretical framework based on Bourdieusian fields, which utilises a network analytical approach to show how the practices and interactions of legal and policy professionals reconfigure the transnational contexts that are implicated in the crisis policy response. Moreover, it is shown how these professionals’ practices enable solutions that are contested before the Court of Justice of the European Union, putting the Court in a position where it has to bring the definitional power of the law to bear on the actions of EU institutions and the Eurogroup. The Court must decide how responsibility should be attributed. The dissertation shows how legal and policy professionals developed practices, using jurisdictional and constitutionalising logics, and deployed at different times during the crisis, enabled and consolidated processes of legal integration and differentiation. / Doctorat en Sciences politiques et sociales / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

Les défis de la construction du droit d’auteur au niveau de l’UE sont d’abord définis sous l'angle du cadre institutionnel dans lequel ce processus dynamique se déroule (I). La deuxième partie est une perspective : elle décrit comment la construction du droit d’auteur de l’Union européenne pourrait être poursuivie, tant en termes de « forme » (c'est-à-dire en ce qui concerne le choix des instruments juridiques et la relation avec les droits d'auteur nationaux), qu’en termes de contenus (II). Les deux parties principales mettent en évidence des facettes différentes du cadre « institutionnel » et « juridique ». Dans la première partie, on abordera les « justifications et objectifs » du droit d'auteur dans l’UE ainsi que les « parties prenantes et intérêts » dans le droit d'auteur de l’UE. Au cours de la deuxième partie, deux chapitres donneront une idée de la forme et des contenus possibles d’un futur droit d’auteur de l’UE. Il est ainsi montré que les choix dans l'un de ces domaines auront un impact sur les choix dans l'un des autres domaines et vice versa. Afin de parvenir à un cadre plus équilibré, des recommandations concernant chacun des domaines sont formulées. / The challenges of constructing EU Copyright Law are first set out under the angle of the institutional framework in which this dynamic process takes place (I). An outlook is given on how the construction of EU Copyright Law could be taken further, both in terms of ‘form’ (i.e. regarding the choice of legal instruments and the relation to national copyright laws), and in terms of contents (II). Both main parts are subdivided in two chapters, highlighting different facets of the ‘institutional’ and the ‘legal’ framework. Within the first part, a first chapter will discuss 'rationales and objectives’ of EU copyright law. A second chapter is dedicated to ‘stakeholders and interests’ within copyright law in the EU. Within the second part, two chapters will give an outlook on the form and the possible contents of a future EU Copyright Law. The idea behind this structure is to show that the issues addressed in the two parts, but also in the four chapters, are interrelated: choices made in one of the four areas will have an impact on choices in any of the other areas, and vice versa. In order to achieve a more balanced framework, recommendations addressing each of the four areas are made.

La soutenance de thèse proposée est une soutenance sur travaux qui portent sur des questions de droit comparé des sociétés, de droit européen des sociétés et de l'arbitrage international. Les travaux portant sur le droit des sociétés s'interrogent sur les développements récents en matière de liberté d'établissement des sociétés en Europe suite à la jurisprudence rendue par la Cour européenne de justice et sur l'opération des Limited liability company de droit anglais en Allemagne et des questions de droit international privé que cela soulève. Le travail sur le droit de l'arbitrage s'interroge sur le sort des traités bilatéraux d'investissement conclus entre Etats devenus Etats membres de l'Union européenne face à la politique menée par la Commission Européenne qui vise leur annulation. / The papers submitted for the viva deal with various comparative company law, European company law and international arbitration related issues. The company law papers look at the recent developments in the freedom of establishment of companies in Europe resulting from the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and at the operation of English law limited liability companies in Germany and certain of the private international law questions that arise in that context. The paper on international arbitration discusses the future of bilateral investment treaties concluded between EU member states in light of the European Commission's hostile approach to such treaties aiming at obtaining their annulment.

Le Traité sur l’Union Européenne assigne à la Cour de Justice la mission de veiller au respect du droit dans l’application et l’interprétation des traités. A ce titre, elle interprète le droit de l’Union de manière à garantir une application uniforme du droit dans tous les Etats membres. De même, la Cour Commune de Justice et d’Arbitrage (CCJA) est chargée, conformément au Traité relatif à l’Organisation pour l’Harmonisation en Afrique du Droit des Affaires (OHADA), d’assurer dans les Etats Parties, l'interprétation et l'application communes du droit uniforme. Ces cours de justice partagent avec les juridictions nationales l’application judiciaire du droit né des traités. Mais les traités n’ont pas réalisé une fusion du système juridictionnel qu’ils ont créé avec celui des Etats membres et, une hiérarchie juridictionnelle n’a pas été établie entre la Cour de justice et les juridictions nationales. Se pose alors la question des moyens par lesquels ces cours de justice arrivent à imposer une application uniforme du droit dans les Etats membres. Après analyse, on relève qu’à travers l’attribution des pouvoirs juridictionnels, les traités ont conféré une autorité supranationale à la Cour de justice européenne et la Cour de justice de l’OHADA. En plus de cette autorité conférée qu’elles ne se contentent pas d’entretenir à l’égard des juridictions nationales, elles génèrent aussi de l’autorité dans le cadre de leur activité juridictionnelle. Ainsi, ces cours œuvrent pour une meilleure intégration régionale. De leur propre gré, elles n’hésitent pas à adopter des positions impérieuses de plus en plus conquérantes. Ce phénomène fait donc évoluer la conception classique des sources de l’autorité de ces cours. La CCJA bénéficie des prérogatives les plus offensives d’origine textuelle, au contraire de la Cour de justice européenne qui, quant à elle, apparaît plus conquérante dans sa jurisprudence. / According to the treaty on the European Union, the Court of justice ensures that, in the interpretation and application of the treaties the law is observed. As such, it interprets EU law to make sure it is applied in the same way in all EU countries. In the same way, the treaty of the Organization for the Harmonization of the Business Law in Africa (OHBLA) has conferred to the Common Court of Justice and Arbitration (CCJA) the power to rule on, in the contracting states, the interpretation and enforcement of the treaty. Both regional courts share with national courts the power to apply the law resulting from the treaties.But there has not been a fusion of the judicial system of the member states and the community judicial system. No judicial hierarchy has been established between community courts and national courts. This brings the question of by which means the regional courts can enforce the uniform application of the law in the member states. After analysis, it appears that by granting jurisdictional power, the treaties gave a supranational authority to the European Court of Justice and the CCJA. In addition to the power granted to them, the courts also generate authority through their jurisdictional activities. Thus, the courts work for a better integration of the judicial systems by adopting more and more conquering authoritarian positions. This phenomenon has led to a change in the classical conception of the sources of power of the courts. The CCJA enjoys more power from treaties than the European Court of Justice which is more offensive in case law setting.

Pour contrer la menace de la criminalité organisée qui ne se cesse de se développer en devenant l’un des plus graves enjeux au sein de l’UE, les États membres se trouvent dans l’obligation de renforcer la coopération pénale contre celle-ci. Avec le traité de Maastricht puis la création de l’ELSJ par le traité d’Amsterdam dont la lutte contre la criminalité organisée constitue le moteur essentiel, les États membres expriment leur volonté pour s’organiser les actions et s’unir contre les menaces de la criminalité organisée. Toutefois, ces deux phases ont montré l’ineffectivité de la répression ; la paralysie et beaucoup de faiblesses. Avec son entrée en vigueur en 2009, le traité de Lisbonne commence une nouvelle ère de la lutte contre la criminalité organisée au sein de l’ELSJ. Cependant, même en intégrant ses avancées, il n’amorce pas la rationalisation nécessaire du cadre juridique qu’institutionnel de l’ELSJ contre la criminalité organisée. Des fortes crises que l’UE et l’ELSJ ont connues posent des questions sur la confiance nationale dans cet espace et cette union. La présente thèse cherche à identifier le rôle actuel et futur de l’UE en matière pénale contre la criminalité organisée au sein d’un espace où la libre circulation est le principe. Le rôle attendu ne peut se réaliser réellement qu’à travers d’un système pénal autonome où l’UE a la main forte à l’appliquer dans un climat de confiance et le respect des droits fondamentaux ; des systèmes juridiques d’États membres et leur souveraineté nationale. Dans cette perspective, une modification radicale qui touche à la nature de l’UE et son rôle sera indispensable. Mais qui a la volonté de faire la révolution ? / To counter the threat of organized crime, which is constantly growing and becoming one of the most serious issues in the European Union, member states are under an obligation to strengthen penal cooperation against it. With the Maastricht Treaty, and the creation of the area of freedom, security and justice by Amsterdam Treaty, of which the fight against organized crime is the essential driving force, the Member States express their will to organize their actions and unite against the threats of organized crime. However, these phases have shown the ineffectiveness of the repression; paralysis and a lot of weaknesses. With its entry into force in 2009, Lisbon Treaty begins a new era in the fight against organized crime within the AFSJ. However, even in integrating its progress, it does not initiate the necessary rationalization of the institutional legal framework of the AFSJ against organized crime. Strong crises that the EU and the AFSJ have experienced raise questions about national confidence in this area and the EU. This thesis seeks to identify the current and future role of the European Union within a space where free movement is the principle. The expected role can only really be achieved through an autonomous criminal system where the EU has a strong ability in applying it in a climate of trust and respect for fundamental rights; legal systems of member states and their national sovereignty. In this perspective, a radical change that concerns the nature of the EU will be essential. But who has the will to make the revolution?

Thesis "Consumer Protection in transport in EU legislation" deals with consumer protection in specific areas. This thesis defined the rights and obligations of air passengers, rail transport, bus and coach transport and consumer protection when traveling by sea and inland waterways. The thesis is also exploring the awareness of EU citizens of their rights by the European Commission - Eurobarometer. Thesis is processed by analysis and comparison of selected judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union and EU legislation.