L’analyse de la jurisprudence de l’Union Européenne a trop longtemps fait l’objet de la seule attention des juristes. Mais, si des analyses jurisprudentielles successives ont jusqu’à présent appréhendé les principes structurant de cette jurisprudence et se sont tentés à des conceptualisations, il sera avancé que ces entreprises n’ont été que partielles. En effet, le principe principal, quoiqu’implicite, de l’évolution de la jurisprudence de l’Union Européenne est le principe d’efficience économique. Cette carence, ne rendant l’effort de conceptualisation de la jurisprudence européenne qu’imparfait, est due à l’absence d’analyse économique méthodique et systémique du droit européen et, plus particulièrement, de la jurisprudence européenne. Cette thèse entend combler cette lacune. Au-delà d’entreprendre une analyse économique approfondie de la jurisprudence européenne permettant une conceptualisation renouvelée et précisée de la figure du juge européen, notre étude permettra de s’inscrire dans le débat de la supériorité alléguée des systèmes de Common Law en termes d’efficience économique. De plus, notre thèse, par une grille d’analyse originale renouvelant l’analyse du droit (européen), mettra en exergue les points de convergence et de divergence entre lignes de jurisprudence. La systématisation de notre analyse jurisprudentielle par la perspective du principe d’efficience économique nous permettra, ainsi, d’élaborer une 10 véritable hypothèse scientifique falsifiable et falsifiée. Nous formulerons une hypothèse de l’efficience économique de la jurisprudence européenne. / For too long, lawyers were the only scholars scrutinizing the ECJ case-law. Consequently, numerous jurisprudential analyses have scarcely portrayed the complexity of the underpinning concepts beneath the ECJ case-law. These approaches to the ECJ case-law have only been partial, it will be argued, due to the neglect of the fundamental principle driving the ECJ case-law’s evolution – meaning, the principle of economic efficiency. This neglect can be explained from the absence of thoroughly in-depth economic analyses of European law, and especially of the ECJ case-law. This thesis aims at filling up this gap. Beyond the economic analysis of the ECJ case-law allowing for an original, updated and renewed perspective of the EU judicial reasoning, this thesis shall pave the way for a better grasping of the academic debate pertaining to the alleged economic efficiency of the Common law over civil law traditions. Moreover, this thesis, from this original viewpoint that is an overtly economic perspective of the EU judicial reasoning, shall draw new conclusions on some specific stances of the EU judges. The systemic approach undertaken here from the perspective of the principle of economic efficiency shall lead us to formulate the scientific hypothesis that is falsifiable and falsified. Indeed, the hypothesis of the economic efficiency of the ECJ case-law shall be advanced.

The aim of this paper is to investigate if it is compatible with the free movement of capital (Article 63 TFEU) to levy a withholding tax on Swedish-sourced dividends paid to non-EU investment funds with legal personality (in the paper referred to as investment companies). This question is of relevance since several Swedish intermediaries do not pay any income tax on dividends, either due to a formal tax exemption or to de facto practice. As such, it is clear from CJEU case law that non-EU investment companies should also be exempt from withholding tax on dividends, provided that they are in an objectively comparable situation with any of these Swedish entities and that no justification ground is applicable.   The conclusion of the thesis is that there are indications of that the current Swedish lower court practice, which is to deny comparability between non-EU investment companies and Swedish tax-exempt investment funds with reference to that the foreign entities have a different legal form, is contrary to EU law. Alternatively, it is possible to find discriminatory treatment when comparing the dividend tax treatment of a non-EU investment company with the dividend tax treatment of a Swedish fiscal investment enterprise (investmentföretag). For this reason, it is welcome that leave to appeal was recently granted by the Supreme Administrative Court of Sweden in one of the lower court cases dealing with this issue.

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.

Cette thèse vise à analyser l’émergence de l’individu comme un sujet du droit de l’Union européenne s’affirmant face à l’État membre. Elle défend l’idée selon laquelle le droit de l’Union connaît un processus de « subjectivisation fonctionnelle », de source essentiellement juridictionnelle, qui se manifeste par la reconnaissance des droits, des intérêts et de la situation subjective de l’individu, de façon à placer ce dernier au service de la réalisation du projet d’intégration européenne. Prenant une portée constitutionnelle, ce mouvement s’inscrit dans une double logique de protection et d’instrumentalisation de l’individu par l’Union, dialectique inhérente à l’ordre juridique incomplet que constitue l’Union. / This dissertation aims at describing the emergence of the individuals as subjects of European Union law, asserting themselves against the Member State. It upholds the idea that European Union law undergoes a “functional subjectivation” process, mostly based on case-law, materialized by the recognition of the individuals’ rights, interests and subjective situation, in order to make them agents of the European integration project realization. This movement, taking on a constitutional dimension, is part of both a protective and instrumental approach of the individual by the European Union, dialectic inherent to the European Union incomplete legal order.

Die Arbeit untersucht aus der Perspektive der Arbeitsmigration die Niederlassungsrechte der Staatsangehörigen und der Unternehmen aus Mittel- und Osteuropa in der Europäischen Union im Zeitraum 1990-2009. Erörtert werden das relevante EU-Recht und die entsprechenden nationalen Regelungen am Beispiel Deutschland und Bulgarien. Behandelt werden u.a. unterschiedliche Fallkonstellationen, in denen die gewährten Niederlassungsrechte nicht zweckentsprechend genutzt werden. Untersucht werden dabei die rechtlichen Aspekte der unlauteren Nutzung der erwähnten Niederlassungsrechte als eine ungewöhnliche Form der legalen Migration aus Mittel- und Osteuropa. Diese können unter bestimmten Umständen als Mittel eines legalen Zugangs zu sonst gesperrten Arbeitsmärkten der „alten“ EU-Mitgliedstaaten dienen oder als Instrumentarium für eine Aufenthaltsverfestigung in Hinsicht auf die Versuche, durch die Niederlassungsrechte einen vorher unrechtmäßigen Aufenthalt in einem EU-Mitgliedstaat zu legalisieren. Die Untersuchung berücksichtigt die relevante Rechtsprechung im Bereich und verläuft komplex auf drei Ebenen - auf Ebene des internationalen Privatrechts Bulgariens, des EU-Rechts und des deutschen alten und neuen Ausländerrechts. / The dissertation examines the right of establishment of nationals and companies of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) in the European Union from the perspective of labour migration. It discusses the relevant EU legislation combining the corresponding German and Bulgarian national regulations over the period 1990-2009. The dissertation presents inter alia different constellations, in which the right of establishment is not used according to the spirit and purpose of the law. It analyzes the legal aspects of such unfair practices as a nontypical form of legal migration from Central and Eastern Europe in the European Union. In the years preceding the EU accession 2004/2007 and in the transitional periods after that the labour markets of the “old” EU Member States were subject of restrictive regulations. That fact provoked the CEE nationals under certain circumstances to use the right of establishment improperly - as an instrument for a legal access to the aforementioned labour markets, as a tool for acquiring a permanent residence status in the host country or even as an attempt to legalize an illegal residence. The study takes into account the relevant EU and German case law and runs complex on three levels - on the level of EU law and on the level of the corresponding Bulgarian and German law.

En medlemsstat inom Europeiska Unionen (EU) ska anpassa de nationella bestämmelserna för att möta de EU-rättsliga bestämmelserna. Ett exempel på en sådan reglering är mervärdesskatten. Syftet med regleringen av mervärdesskatten har varit att skapa och stimulera en inre marknad inom EU, utan skillnader mellan medlemsländerna. Mervärdesskatten har harmoniserats genom mervärdesskattedirektivet som medlemsstaternas är förpliktigade att implementera. Implementering av ett direktiv ger medlemsstaterna möjligheten att själva tolka och avgöra tillvägagångssättet, så länge direktivets syfte uppnås. Dock har flertalet talan om fördragsbrott uppkommit i Europeiska Unionens domstol, grundat på kommissionens åsikt om att medlemsstater har underlåtit att uppfylla sina skyldigheter enligt mervärdesskattedirektivet. Därav uppkommer frågan hur den konstitutionella grunden för EU ger medlemsstaterna eget handlingsutrymme att tolka och implementera bestämmelserna i mervärdesskattedirektivet utifrån EU:s fördrag, rättspraxis och principerna om neutralitet, legalitet, likabehandling och lojalitet. Rättspraxis behandlar områdena för mervärdesskattegrupper och reducerade skattesatser. Det kan konstateras att medlemsstaterna har ett begränsat handlingsutrymme för implementering av mervärdesskattedirektivets bestämmelser. EU:s fördrag, principer och praxis ger inte medlemsstaterna något större utrymme att själva tolka och implementera bestämmelserna. Vidare framgår att det finns en osäkerhet kring tillämpningsområdet och vidden av neutralitetsprincipen, vilket gör att medlemsstaterna inte kan försäkra sig ett större skydd mot fördragsbrott i frågan om implementering av mervärdesskattedirektivet. Därmed finns en rättsosäkerhet i frågan om medlemsstaternas handlingsutrymme gällande implementeringen av mervärdesskattedirektivet bestämmelser vilket även påverkar varje enskild medborgare inom EU. / As a member of the European Union (EU), nations commit to accommodate its national legislation to EU law. An example of this is the regulation of value added tax (VAT). The purpose with the regulation of VAT is to create and stimulate the internal market within EU, without differences between the member states. The VAT is harmonized through the VAT Directive, which every member state is obligated to comply with. The implementation of a directive imposes an opportunity for the member states to make their own interpretations and determine how the implementation shall be handled, as long as the result of the directive is fulfilled. However, several claims have been raised in the Court of Justice of the European Union, claiming failure to fulfil an obligation under the Directive on the common system of VAT. This is based on the Commission’s view that member states do not comply with its obligations within the VAT Directive. Thereby arises the question of; how the constitutional rights of EU actually gives the member states an opportunity to interpret the implementation of the VAT Directive into national legislation. In the thesis this question is set in relation to EU Treaties, legal principals and an analysis of case law in the areas of VAT groups and reduced tax rates. The thesis concludes that the member states have a limited discretion for implementation of the VAT Directive. EU Treaties, principles and case law do not give the area of discretion that has been interpreted. Furthermore there is an uncertainty about the area of application and the principle of neutrality. Therefore member states cannot ensure protection against failure to fulfil an obligation under the Directive on the common system of VAT. Thus, there is a legal uncertainty in the question of discretion regarding the implementation of the VAT Directive, which affects all citizens within the EU.

Idag befinner sig över 50 miljoner människor på flykt runt om i världen. De har behövt lämna sina hem till följd av väpnade konflikter, förföljelse eller andra grova människorättskränkningar. Flera av dem behöver få skydd i andra länder. Dock är det svårt för många att få det. Inte minst gäller det de skyddsbehövande som försöker finna en fristad inom EU. Unionens yttre gränser har de senaste åren stärkts och blivit allt mer ogenomträngliga för tredjelandsmedborgare på flykt. De riskerar därmed att hindras från att få tillgång till skydd. Syftet med denna studie är att lyfta den här frågan ur ett rättighetsperspektiv och att undersöka det nuvarande rättighetsskyddet för de människor som behöver få tillgång till skydd inom EU. Delar av gällande folkrätt och EU-rätt undersöks för att se vad dessa rättssystem idag innebär för skyddsbehövandes tillgång till skydd. Vidare granskas den gällande rätten utifrån ett moraliskt och kritiskt perspektiv som utgår ifrån principen om skyddsbehövandes rätt till rättigheter. Principen grundas på de mänskliga rättigheternas grundtanke om att alla människor har lika och inneboende rättigheter samt Hannah Arendts analys om att människor på flykt riskerar att hamna utan rättighetsskydd i praktiken. Studien visar att skyddsbehövande som kommit till EU:s fysiska gränser eller möter medlemsstaterna till havs under vissa omständigheter har, i alla fall rent formellt, rätt att få komma in i unionen och erhålla skydd där. Detta enligt vissa bestämmelser inom både folkrätten och EU-rätten. Studien visar dock att skyddsbehövande som fortfarande befinner sig i ursprungslandet riskerar att i praktiken hamna utan skydd av sina rättigheter under gällande rättssystem. Folkrättens skydd når inte riktigt dit på ett tydligt sätt och EU:s extraterritoriella gränskontroll, i form av regler kring visum och transportöransvar, riskerar att stänga flera av dem ute från det skydd som de har rätt till när de väl kommit fram till unionens territoriella gränser. Flera skyddsbehövande blir således nekade sin rätt till rättigheter idag. / Today, over 50 million people are forcibly displaced worldwide. They have been forced to leave their homes due to armed conflicts, persecution or other human rights violations. Numerous people need protection in another state. However, for many of them it is difficult to get that kind of protection. This is true for many refugees and other people in need of international protection who are trying to find refuge within the EU. The union has in recent years strengthened the external borders which has made it increasingly difficult for third-country nationals to get access to the EU. This is affecting people in need of protection and their access to asylum. The purpose of this thesis is to highlight this issue from a human rights perspective and study how the rights of those people who need access to protection within the EU are safeguarded today. Parts of international law and EU law are examined to see what different rules mean for people’s access to protection. The existing law is then reviewed from a moral and critical point of view that revolves around the understanding that people in need of international protection have a right to have rights. This theoretical approach is partly based on the core principle of human rights which emphasizes the equal and inherent rights of all people and partly based on Hannah Arendt’s thoughts about the fact that people who are forcibly displaced risk being denied their rights. The study shows that people in need of international protection who have arrived at the EU’s physical borders or who the member states encounter at sea have, under certain circumstances, a right to enter the union and receive protection there through parts of both international law and EU law. However, people in need of protection who are still in the country of origin risk being denied their rights. This is because of possible gaps in international law and certain EU rules concerning visas and carrier sanctions which can exclude them from the protection that they are entitled to once they have arrived to EU territory. Thus, many people in need of international protection are today being denied their right to have rights.

La thèse analyse la nature, la portée et l’effectivité du principe de non-discrimination en raison de l’âge dans le système juridique de l’Union européenne du point de vue théorique ainsi que du point de vue de la protection juridictionnelle que l’Union européenne lui confie. Au niveau conceptuel, on met en évidence que l’âge représente un critère discriminatoire très particulier, se prêtant à être employée aussi de façon légitime en tant que instrument de gestion du marché du travail, et ayant une portée universelle, puisque il s’agit d’un facteur touchant tout le monde. Au niveau applicatif, il faut souligner que – dans la mesure où l’âge n’est pas toujours un facteur de discrimination – la Cour de justice – s’appuyant sur le fait que la directive 2000/78, visant à combattre les discriminations fondées (aussi) sur l’âge, introduit des multiples et larges justifications aux disparité de traitement liées à l’âge – exerce un contrôle assez souple. En même temps, toutefois, suite aux arrêts Mangold et Kücükdeveci, la Cour de justice a étendu les marges de son contrôle du moment où elle a affirmé que le principe de non-discrimination en raison de l’âge fait partie des principes généraux du droit de l’UE, dont le respect doit être assuré aussi dans les litiges entre particuliers. / This thesis focuses on the development of the issue of age discrimination in the EU context and in the Court of Justice leading cases. On the one side, the paper underlines the weaknesses of this specific ground of discrimination due to three main elements: i) the variability and universal impact of the “age factor”; ii) the existence of some provisions (such as art. 6, Council Directive 2000/78/EC) which seem to be unable in ensuring a complete protection in this field; iii) the role of age as an intrinsic criteria of labour market legislation, meaning that, in some circumstances, differences in treatment may be justified under legitimate aims. On the other side, the analysis of recent ECJ case law addresses other reflections concerning, first of all, the horizontal direct effect given to non-discrimination on ground of age as a general principle of EU law; then, the role and the importance of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights and its provisions on age discrimination; furthermore, the necessity to balance the protection of this fundamental right with Member States discretion concerning employment policies.

No description available.

No description available.