Month: July 2023

Portuguese Supreme Court’s Decision n. º 268/13.2YHLSB.L1.S1 in relation to CJEU case C-683/17: portraying the empirical importance of preliminary rulings

On By officialblogunioIn Case notesLeave a comment 

Sandra Fernandes  (Master Student in Judicial Law, School of Law, University of Minho)
▪           

On the 15th of January 2020, the Portuguese Supreme Court issued a decision concerning a dispute on copyright relating to clothing designs.

The process began in August 2013 with an action brought before a Portuguese court of first instance by G-Star Raw, against Cofemel, requesting the latter to be ordered to cease several acts constituting infringement of the former’s copyright and unfair competition. G-Star Raw further requested compensation for the harm suffered in consequence of such acts taken by Cofemel, by means of a penalty payment. Specifically, G-Star Raw argued that some designs of jeans, sweatshirts and t-shirts manufactured by Cofemel were comparable to some of their own designs in a way that violated copyright, given that those designs constituted original intellectual creations and, as such, ought to be classified and protected as ‘works of art’. This status would place G-Star Raw’s creations under protection of article 2 of Portuguese Code on Copyright and Related Rights.

Continue reading “Portuguese Supreme Court’s Decision n. º 268/13.2YHLSB.L1.S1 in relation to CJEU case C-683/17: portraying the empirical importance of preliminary rulings” →

Summaries of judgments: E.D.L. (Ground for refusal based on illness) | TAP Portugal (Death of the co-pilot)

On By officialblogunioIn Summaries of judgmentsLeave a comment 
Summaries of judgments made in collaboration with the Portuguese judge and référendaire of the CJEU (Nuno Piçarra and Sophie Perez)

 ▪

Judgment of 18 April 2023 , E.D.L. (Ground for refusal based on illness), Case C‑699/21, EU:C:2023:295

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – European arrest warrant – Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA – Article 1(3) – Article 23(4) – Surrender procedures between Member States – Grounds for non-execution – Article 4(3) TEU – Duty of sincere cooperation – Postponement of the execution of the European arrest warrant – Article 4 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment – Serious, chronic and potentially irreversible illness – Risk of serious harm to health affecting the person concerned by the European arrest warrant

Facts

On 9 September 2019, the Općinski sud u Zadru (Municipal Court, Zadar, Croatia) issued a European arrest warrant (EAW) against E.D.L., who resides in Italy, for the purposes of conducting a criminal prosecution in Croatia.

Continue reading “Summaries of judgments: E.D.L. (Ground for refusal based on illness) | TAP Portugal (Death of the co-pilot)” →

Editorial of July 2023

On By officialblogunioIn Editorials2 Comments 
By Alessandra Silveira (Editor) and Maria Inês Costa (PhD candidate, School of Law, University of Minho)
▪

Regulating Artificial Intelligence (AI): on the civilisational choice we are all making

It is worth highlighting the role of the European Parliament (EP) in taking its stance on the negotiation of the AI Regulation, which in turn aims to regulate the development and use of AI in Europe.[1] With the EP having approved its position, European Institutions may start trilogue negotiations (the Council voted on its position on December 2022). The AI Regulation that will apply across the European Union (EU) will only enter into force if the co-legislators agree on a final wording.

The AI Regulation follows a risk-based approach, i.e., establishes obligations for those who provide and those who use AI systems, according to the level of risk that the application of the AI system entails: is the risk high, is it low, is it minimal? In other words, there is a hierarchisation of risks, and the different levels of risk will correspond to more or less regulation, more or less impositions, more or less restrictions. The EP’s position, even if introducing further safeguards (for example, on generative AI) does not deviate from the idea that the Regulation should protect citizens without jeopardising technological innovation. To this extent, systems with an unacceptable level of risk to people’s safety should be banned, and the EP extended the list of prohibited AI uses under the Commission’s original proposal. These are, for instance, systems used to classify people based on their social behaviour or personal characteristics (such as Chinese-style social control systems); emotion recognition systems in the workplace and educational establishments; predictive policing systems based on profiling or past criminal behaviour; remote and real-time biometric identification systems (such as facial recognition) in publicly accessible spaces, etc.

Continue reading “Editorial of July 2023” →

The Nature Restoration Law in the European Parliament

On By officialblogunioIn EssaysLeave a comment 

Isabel Estrada Carvalhais (MEP | Full Member of the Committee of Agriculture and Rural Development and of the Committee of Fisheries | Member of the Group of the Progressive Alliance of the Socialists and Democrats)
▪           

Introduction[1]

This is not an article with academic purposes and even its modest informative and reflective intent is far from complete. Its main aim is to contribute to further information and reflection on a quite important topic presently on top of the European political agenda: the Nature Restoration Law.

I suggest we look at the European Commission’s (EC) proposal for a regulation on the restoration of nature (hereinafter referred to as the Nature Restoration Act or NRL), at the on-going negotiation process in the European Parliament (EP) with recent votes in two associated committees (the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and the Committee on Fisheries) and in the EP leading committee (Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety).               

Let us start from the beginning and the beginning is not in the EC proposal itself, but a bit further back, in the conclusions of the European Council of 20 June 2019, immediately after the European elections of 26 May.

The conclusions provided (and still do) a clear preview of the key priorities for action in the European political agenda, as understood by the heads of state and government of the 27 Member States. It is important here to make this reference especially in a social context where we tend to ignore (or are instrumentally led to ignore) the active role that our states and our rulers play in the design of the European project. Chapter III of the conclusions of the European Council[2] reads as follows: “The European Council underlines the importance of the Climate Action Summit that the UN Secretary-General will organise in September 2019 to strengthen global climate action in order to achieve the objective of the Paris Agreement, including by pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels, and welcomes the active participation of Member States and the Commission in the preparations.”

Continue reading “The Nature Restoration Law in the European Parliament” →