L'autonomie procédurale est la dénomination erronée du phénomène réel qu'est la subsidiarité juridictionnelle. La I agi que veut que I' on parie a, termes de compétences, puisque I a subsidiarité régule leur exercice entre les États membres et l'Union. En matière de subsidiarité juridictionnelle relative aux modalités procédurales de mire en œuvre du droit de l'Union, il s’agit ainsi de compétence procédurale. La conséquence majeure de ce glissement notionnel est une relecture de l'ensemble de la jurisprudence de la Cour dans ce domaine. Cette relecture donne à voir plusieurs éléments qui, mis bout à bout donnait une nouvelle logique d'ensemble à la jurisprudence de la Cour. Tout d'abord, équivalence et effectivité, qui sont traditionnellement considérées comme régulant cette compétence procédurale du juge national , ne sont pas des principes mais des critères. Il ne sont par ailleurs pas les seuls à exercer cette fonction de régulation de l'exercice de la compétence et sont concurrencés par le droit à un protection juridictionnelle effective. Cette relecture montre alors que l'effectivité est un frein à la primauté du droit d l'Union en droit interne. Par ailleurs, le juge de Luxembourg prend a, compte depuis les premières années des exigence des États membres désireux de s’affranchir ponctuellement du critère d'effectivité. Ce mouvement est en fait une intégration de leur identité nationale, érigée en justification corrigeant le contenu même de cette effectivité. En d'autres termes, les États membres peuvent de plus en plus avancer des motifs d' intérêt général pour justifier le non-respect de l'effectivité du droit de l'Union. / Procedural autonomy is a term often misused when talking about the very real phenomenon “judicial subsidiarity”. It is more accurate to talk in terms of competence considering the principle of subsidiarity regulates the role they play between Member States and the Union. As such, when discussing judicial subsidiarity in relation to the procedural aspects of implementing EU law, one should talk about procedural competence. This change in meaning ultimately leads to a revision of all relevant case law. Such a review brings to light a number of elements that, when juxtaposed, reveal an overarching rationale behind the Court's rare law. First, both equivalence and effectivity, long perceived as regulators of procedural competence national judges, are not in fact principles but criteria. Furthermore, they are not the only regulating criteria as the right to an effective judicial protection also comes into play. It then becomes apparent that effectivity is an obstacle to EU law having primacy over national law. Moreover, for a long time the ECJ has taken into account requests made by Member States to, on occasion, bypass the criteria of effectivity. As such, the ECJ accepts that national identity can serve as corrective justification of the very content of effectivity. In other words, Member States can put forward more and more arguments in the name of “public interest” to justify non-compliance with EU law effectivity .

The Swedish procedural legislation on class actions before general courts, GrL, was when coming into force in January 2003 the first generally applicable class action regime of continental Europe. However, it seems, it was never used in any notable extent. In this thesis I have analysed GrL, it’s potential flaws, how it could be affected by the ongoing EU legislative procedure of establishing a directive regarding representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers, and what the Swedish legislator could potentially learn from the Dutch model being primarily based on a regime of mass settlements. The ongoing EU legislative procedure will by all accounts result in a directive requiring Swedish class action regime to be adjusted with a few minor modifications, primarily the introduction of a certification procedure of entities to allow these to initiate representative actions in disputes concerning the protection of consumers’ collective interests. Apart from adjustments of Swedish class action legislation in order to harmonise it with the directive, I have argued for several additional adjustments of proceedings under GrL in order to make it in an increased degree correspond with the reasons by which the legislation was motivated, and in order to in general function in a more effective manner. For that purpose, I have argued that the opt in mechanism should be replaced with an opt out mechanism, or that opt out should at least be introduced as a supplementing option to an opt in main rule. Independently of the issue of whether an opt in or an opt out mechanism should be used to constitute the represented group, I have furthermore argued that the mechanism used should allow group members to leave the group during the proceedings. Finally, I have argued that the courts should be encouraged to use a for the Swedish legal system untypically active direction of proceedings in class actions specifically.

Genom åren har flyktingar och andra skyddsbehövande gjort försök att ta sig till Europa. Avsaknaden av reguljära vägar har dock resulterat i att hundratusentals människor har mist sina liv på de alternativa vägarna längs Medelhavet. År 2015 var migrationsströmmarna till Europa mest frekventa, vilket uppenbarade en ineffektivitet i EU:s migrationspolitik. Situationen med de ökade migrationsströmmarna har kommit att kallas för en flyktingkris, som har gett upphov till omedelbara kontrollåtgärder. Bland åtgärderna finns visumkrav, transportörsansvar och förstärkande av extraterritoriella gränskontroller genom fördjupade samarbeten med tredjeländer.  Syftet med denna uppsats är att undersöka EU:s extraterritoriella gränskontroller i förhållande till folkrättsliga normer, med fokus på skyddsbehövandes tillgång till skydd vid tredjelandssamarbeten.  Resultaten av undersökningen visar att EU:s extraterritoriella gränskontroller begränsar människors tillgång till skydd – genom att stoppa människor i ursprungs- och transitländerna eller genom att avlägsna dem från Europa till tredjeländer som exempelvis Turkiet och Libyen. Även om dessa länder anses utgöra så kallade säkra länder framgår av sammanställningen att överträdelser av mänskliga rättigheter är återkommande inslag. Härav följer att EU:s intresse av att reglera migrationen har fått stå i framkant, medan intresset av att ge skyddsbehövande tillgång till det skydd de är berättigade till har följaktligen fått stå tillbaka. / Over the years, refugees and those in need of protection have made several attempts to reach Europe. However, the lack of regular routes has resulted in hundreds of thousands of people losing their lives on irregular routes along the Mediterranean. In 2015, the migration flows across the Mediterranean reached high levels, which revealed inefficiency in the EU's migration policy. The situation with the increased migration flows across the Mediterranean has been labelled as a refugee crisis, and has given rise to immediate measures. The measures include border checks such as visa requirements, carrier responsibility, and extraterritorial border controls through deepened cooperation with third countries.  The purpose of this study is to investigate the EU's extraterritorial border controls in relation to public international law norms. The focus is on the possibility of access international protection in situations of collaborations with third countries.  The results of the study show that the extraterritorial border controls restrict people's access to protection - by stopping people in the countries of origin and transit, or by removing them from the European territory to third countries such as Turkey and Libya. Both are considered to be safe countries. However, evidence shows that neither Turkey nor Libya are such safe countries and that human rights are frequently violated. Accordingly, the EU's interest in regulating migration has remained at the forefront, while the interest in protecting those in need has been held back – even for those who are entitled to protection under public international law.

La tesi di dottorato esamina il tema della regolamentazione delle infrazioni alla disciplina doganale dell’Unione europea e delle relative sanzioni. La prima parte della tesi descrive le tappe rilevanti nel passaggio dall’unificazione tariffaria alla codificazione della legislazione doganale dell’Unione. Successivamente, è trattato il tema della compenetrazione tra potestà normativa dell’UE e residui ambiti di sovranità degli Stati membri in materia doganale, anche in riferimento al ruolo attualmente ricoperto dai principi generali del diritto, in particolare, per l’esercizio delle prerogative sanzionatorie. La seconda parte della tesi procede nell’esame della compatibilità tra il quadro normativo in materia di sanzioni doganali, precedentemente delineato, e la rilevante disciplina internazionale multilaterale. Infine, sono analizzati i profili di (in)coerenza tra le esigenze connesse alla realizzazione di un uniforme regime doganale dell’Unione e l’attuale contesto di diritto dell’UE, con particolare riferimento ai caratteri propri delle basi giuridiche, rilevanti per l’approntamento di una disciplina sanzionatoria doganale di fonte sovranazionale, ed alla concreta conformazione dei primi tentativi di normazione della materia. / The thesis examines the topic of the regulation of infringements to the European Union customs discipline, and the related sanctions. The first part describes the relevant steps in the transition from tariff unification to the codification of the EU customs legislation. Subsequently, the subject of the interpenetration between EU legislative power and residual areas of sovereignty of the Member States in customs matters is dealt with, also in reference to the role currently held by the general principles of law, in particular, for the exercise of the sanctioning competence. The second part of the thesis proceeds in examining the compatibility between the regulatory framework on customs sanctions, previously outlined, and the relevant international multilateral discipline. Finally, the thesis analizes the profiles of (in)coherence between the requirements related to the implementation of a uniform customs regime and the current EU law context, with particular reference to the characteristics of the legal bases, relevant for the setting of a supranational customs sanctioning discipline, and to the concrete conformation of the first attempts at regulating the matter.

No / EU law is not a subject enjoyed by most students but it really does not have to be difficult. Every EU law question is likely to ask you to apply your knowledge of the law to a particular context – either a practical one, as in problem questions, or a more theoretical one, as in essay questions. For both you need to remember that EU law does not exist in isolation but is inextricably linked with the national legal systems of the Member States. The interaction between European law and these systems is crucial to understanding how EU law works. EU law is often considered in a political context and this has become very apparent in the UK following the referendum in June 2016 and the vote for ‘Brexit’. At te time of writing Brexit negotiations are continuing and for now EU law applies as it always has in the UK. Recognising that your political stance is likely to influence your views on EU law is valuable and something which can make your answers stronger, particularly in relation to questions on historical, constitutional or institutional issues.

The intentional spread of incorrect information, ‘disinformation’ has increased rapidly in the past couple of years. Bringing with it serious threats to aspects of modern society that constitute central parts of the European Union’s values, thus requiring protection in line with the core aims and duties under EU law. Despite this, the phenomenon of disinformation has not been the focus of regulation until recently, and any attempts to further the regulation of disinformation risks limiting the fundamental right to freedom of expression and information. This right is embedded in Article 11 of the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter) and entails protection so fierce that it sets constraints for what actions the European Union (EU) and Member States may take to regulate any expression and information. In light of this information, the study aims to evaluate the current legal response to disinformation under EU law by assessing possible parallels with hate speech and examining possibilities for the EU and Member States to increase their response to disinformation. This aim is pursued through the use of the legal dogmatic method when investigating the sources and by juxtaposing disinformation with hate speech, which is more firmly regulated. The latter is assessed to determine whether the fiercer regulation of hate speech could arguably be a requirement for disinformation as well. The study offers a deeper understanding of the competencies and capacities within the complex and multilayered EU system and on these grounds then discusses the sufficiency of the current response to disinformation and if there are possibilities to enhance it. Through this assessment, disinformation is found homogenous to hate speech, and possibilities for the EU and Member States to enhance the regulation of disinformation are detected. The study therefore concludes that the current response to disinformation is insufficient in contrast with the response to disinformation and in line with the aims and duties to protect under EU law.

This diploma thesis explores content, purpose and impact of citizenship of the European Union. The European Union is an international organization that affects day-to-day lives of citizens of its Member States. From the beginning of its existence, the European Union (formerly the European Community) has always taken into consideration the interests of its Member States. As it has accrued more power while widening and broadening its competencies, it has made it possible for the European Union to tackle new problems. Eventually, in order to reduce democratic deficit participation of individual citizens became inevitable for the purpose of creation of a genuine link between individuals and the European Union, which helps to ensure its proper governance. Although some rights linked with citizenship had been already incorporated into the law of the European Union, citizenship of the European Union was embedded into the primary law of the European Union by the Maastricht Treaty. Entering into force on 1 November 1993, this represented a milestone for the quality of the relationship between the European Union and citizens of its Member States. Citizenship of the European Union, which is a citizenship sui generis, is characterised by its accessority and additionality to the citizenship of a Member State....

This thesis offers a political geography of unconventional energy development through a study of a particular fossil fuel resource called oil shale. Having long occupied a critical place in the politics and economy of certain states, most notably in Estonia, oil shale is now widely known as an ‘unconventional’ resource that is yet to become technically possible, commercially viable and socially acceptable to exploit. Following the movement through which oil shale becomes both unconventional and conventional, the thesis traces the resource through a series of geo-scientific, economic and political interventions. This study is based on analysis of technical literature and policy documents along with ethnographic fieldwork, interviews, and site visits conducted in Estonia, Colorado, Utah, Jordan, London and Brussels. Drawing together relational accounts of natural resources in political ecology and economic geography with insights from Science and Technology Studies, this project both contributes to critical research on the carbon economy and to recent debates on the concepts of materiality, anticipation, and marketization in social sciences. The thesis proposes a relational conceptualization of resource materiality, situating oil shale in multiple and conflicting forms which derive from geographically disparate practices in both resource assessment and technological development. The future of oil shale exploitation is not pre-determined by the process of global resource decline, nor is it precluded by international demands to move towards lower-carbon futures. Rather, it is determined through the conjunction of different future-oriented economic and political calculations that are entangled with resource materials and associated technological systems. Developing a non-essentialist account of markets as socio-technically distributed arrangements, the thesis argues that these rival calculations influence the design of market rules for both energy and emissions trading. The thesis concludes that what counts as ‘unconventional’ is not given, but continues to be both created and contested at the same time as it is ‘conventionalized’.

Internet intermediaries facilitate a wide range of conduct using services supplied over the layered architecture of modern communications networks. Members of this class include search engines, social networks, internet service providers, website operators, hosts, and payment gateways, which together exert a critical and growing influence upon national and global economies, governments and cultures. This research examines who should face legal responsibility when wrongdoers utilise these services tortiously to cause harm to others. It has three parts. Part 1 seeks to understand the nature of an intermediary and how its liability differs from the liability of primary defendants. It classifies intermediaries according to a new layered, functional taxonomy and argues that many instances of secondary liability in English private law reflect shared features and underlying policies, including optimal loss-avoidance and derivative liability premised on an assumption of responsibility. Part 2 analyses intermediaries’ monetary liability for secondary wrongdoing in two areas of English law: defamation and copyright. It traces the historical evolution of these doctrines at successive junctures in communications technology, before identifying and defending limits on that liability which derive from three main sources: (i) in-built limits contained in definitions of secondary wrongdoing; (ii) European safe harbours and general limits on remedies; and (iii) statutory defences and exceptions. Part 3 examines intermediaries’ non-monetary liability, in particular their obligations to disclose information about alleged primary wrongdoers and to cease facilitating wrongdoing where it is necessary and proportionate to do so. It proposes a new suite of non-facilitation remedies designed to restrict access to tortious internet materials, remove such materials from search engines, and reduce the profitability of wrongdoing. It concludes with several recommendations to improve the effectiveness and proportionality of remedies by reference to considerations of architecture, anonymity, efficient procedures, and fundamental rights.

This thesis explores the notion of the employer in English employment law. It seeks to develop a functional reconceptualisation of that notion in the hope of overcoming the theoretical and practical problems resulting from the tensions inherent in the current approach. The first part of the thesis analyses the notion of the employer as counterparty to the contract of employment. Two conflicting strands emerge: the employer is simultaneously identified as a single party to a bilateral contract (the unitary strand) and defined through the exercise of a range of employer functions (the multi-functional strand). As a result of this tension, full employment law coverage is restricted to a narrow paradigm scenario where a single legal entity exercises all employer functions. Modern economic developments, from the rise of employment agencies and service companies to corporate groups and Private Equity investors, have however increasingly led to the joint exercise of such functions across multiple entities. The second part illustrates the practical implications of these developments: regulatory obligations are placed on inappropriate entities, and workers may even find themselves without recourse to any employment law protection. An additional chapter compares this situation with the notion of the employer in German law, where a sophisticated apparatus has been developed in order to address the particular challenges of employment in multi-entity scenarios, in particular in corporate groups. On the basis of these observations the final part of the thesis then proposes a reconceptualised notion. The employer is defined as the entity, or combination of entities, exercising functions regulated in a particular domain of employment law. Each of the two strands of the current notion is addressed in turn to demonstrate how this more openly multi-functional approach addresses the rigidities of the current notion without abandoning an underlying unitary conceptualisation. It is hoped that the resulting notion of the employer will be able to place employment law obligations on the entity, or combination of entities, exercising the relevant employer functions, regardless of the formal legal organisation of the enterprise in question.