Editorial of October 2024

By the Alessandra Silveira (Editor)

On peace and sustainability

Between 27 and 29 September 2024, the University of Minho hosted “Greenfest” – the largest sustainability event held in Portugal and one that has been running for 17 years.[1] I had the honour of speaking on the panel dedicated to “Peace” – which addressed issues related to the promotion of peaceful, just and inclusive societies – essential for sustainable development and social cohesion. 

In legal sciences, sustainability is understood as a process through which we pursue a global society capable of perpetuating itself indefinitely over time in conditions that ensure human dignity. From this perspective, anything that contributes to this process would be sustainable, while anything that deviates from it would be unsustainable. [2] For this reason, constitutionalists such as Peter Häberle or Gomes Canotilho consider sustainability to be the structural principle of a new secular paradigm – along the lines of those that followed in the development of modern constitutionalism: humanism in the 19th century, sociality in the 20th century, sustainability in the 21st century.

In any case, talking about peace at a “Greenfest” necessarily brings us back to Kant and what he described as “Perpetual Peace” – a philosophical proposal on how peace can be achieved – especially as 2024 marks the 300th anniversary of the philosopher’s birth.  Kant’s question was not whether perpetual peace would be feasible or utopian, but to devise the means to achieve this end. In other words, to adopt stable institutions that make it possible to avoid war – and thus achieve a peace that represents more than the absence of war.

Continue reading “Editorial of October 2024”

Law and politics: the Puigdemont case and the dialogue between courts

Teresa Freixes (President of Citizens pro Europe and Jean Monnet Professor ad personam) 
           

In recent weeks, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has handed down judgments that shatter the assertion, so dear to some, that law cannot constrain policy. I am referring, essentially, to those that have considered the EU’s agricultural and fisheries agreement with Morocco to be contrary to EU law because it does not respect the will of the Sahrawi people, guaranteed by international law (Judgment in Joined Cases C-778/21 P and C-798/21 P and in Joined Cases C-779/21 P and C-799/21 P); also, the EU must grant political asylum to Afghan women who request it because they objectively meet all the legally established requirements for it to be granted, given the systematic violation of rights to which they are subjected in their country (Judgment in Joined Cases C‑608/22 and C‑609/22); and, of course, that which rejects the appeal of Mr. Puigdemont and Mr. Comín, confirming that they cannot be considered MEPs because they have not fulfilled the requirements established in national law to do so (Judgment C-600/22 P).

No matter how much political agreement there has been between the political bodies of the EU and Morocco, ignoring the fact that legally speaking Western Sahara is still a territory to be decolonised, regardless of the political decision that has been taken to abandon Afghan women asylum seekers to their fate, or the political will that some have had in pretending that one can be an MEP without complying with the electoral law of the Member State, the CJEU has guaranteed the rule of law and the application of the competent rules in the disputes that are the subject of its rulings. This is an example to be followed by the high courts, both supreme and constitutional, in all EU Member States and, particularly, as far as Spain is concerned.

Continue reading “Law and politics: the Puigdemont case and the dialogue between courts”

New open access publication available – The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union: A Commentary

By the Editorial Team

We are pleased to announce the release of the English version of the Commentary on the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, coordinated by Alessandra Silveira, Larissa Araújo Coelho, Maria Inês Costa and Tiago Sérgio Cabral. This work is an important addition to our continuous work (within the JusGov research centre) to build a body of publications that contribute to the advancement of legal knowledge on fundamental rights in the context of the European Union and is an extensive update of the Portuguese version published in 2013.

Continue reading “New open access publication available – The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union: A Commentary”

Are the Portuguese antitrust sanctions sufficient to guarantee the proper functioning of the internal market?

Isabel de Paiva (master’s student in European Union Law at the School of Law of the University of Minho) 
           

Competition and free economic initiative structure the regulation of markets. In a legal order that follows and preserves economic freedom – that is, in a market economy, or more precisely, in a ‘social market economy’ such as the European one – competition and free economic initiative end up boosting economic development and growth. The promotion of free enterprise is largely underpinned by the existence of competition (and vice versa). Competition promotes innovation, better allocation of resources between economic agents and, to that extent, better satisfaction of consumer interests.

In any case, and regardless of the economic function and virtues of competition, there is also a sense of economic justice: competitive conditions must naturally be equal for all, and must not be distorted to the advantage of a few and to the detriment of the collective interest – which consists of the best possible allocation of available resources. This leads us to consider the importance of competition and guaranteeing its effectiveness from a perspective that goes beyond its strictly economic virtues: it begins as an imperative of economic justice and therefore has an ethical and normative aspect. A free market is necessarily a market with as high a level of competition as possible.

Continue reading “Are the Portuguese antitrust sanctions sufficient to guarantee the proper functioning of the internal market?”

Summaries of judgments: Medel v Council | Symphony Environmental Technologies and Symphony Environmental v Parliament and Others

Summaries of judgments made in collaboration with the Portuguese judges and référendaire of the General Court (Maria José Costeira, Ricardo Silva Passos and Esperança Mealha)
 ▪

Order of the General Court (Grand Chamber), 4 June 2024, Cases T-530/22 to T-533/22, Magistrats européens pour la démocratie et les libertés (Medel), International Association of Judges, Association of European Administrative Judges e Stichting Rechters voor Rechters v Council of the European Union, Actions for annulment – Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council – Council Implementing Decision of 17 June 2022 on the approval of the assessment of the recovery and resilience plan for Poland – Lack of direct concern – Inadmissibility)

Facts

The General Court, sitting in Grand Chamber, dismissed as inadmissible the actions brought by four international judges associations[1], whose members consist, in general, of national professional associations, including those of Polish judges, seeking the annulment of the Council’ implementing decision that approved the assessment of Poland’s recovery and resilience plan.

The Recovery and Resilience Facility, established by Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021, allows the European Union (“EU”) to grant funds to Member States, in the form of a financial contribution.

On 17 June 2022, the Council adopted a decision, subsequently amended by a decision on 8 December 2023, (hereinafter the “contested decision”), approving the assessment of the Recovery and Resilience Plan proposed by Poland – which specifies, the milestones that Poland must achieve for the financial contribution to be granted. These milestones include, in particular, the reform of Poland’s judicial system, detailed in milestones F1G, F2G, and F3G. In accordance with milestone F1G, legislative measures must be adopted to strengthen the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. Furthermore, milestone F2G requires measures to ensure that the judges affected by decisions of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Polish Supreme Court have access to proceedings allowing a review of the decisions of that Chamber. Lastly, milestone F3G enshrines that any proceedings initiated under milestone F2G must be concluded during the fourth quarter of 2023.

Continue reading “Summaries of judgments: Medel v Council | Symphony Environmental Technologies and Symphony Environmental v Parliament and Others”

Holiday break

By the Editorial Board 

Dear readers,

We will be taking a short break for summer holidays. We will resume our regular publishing schedule in early September 2024.

In the meantime, we are always open to receiving new academic contributions from our readers. If you have an innovative, dynamic, thoughtful piece that you believe would fit in this blog, feel free to send it to us at: unio.cedu@direito.uminho.pt.

If you would like to catch up on some reading on EU matters please check our news, commentsessaysreviews, and case law of the ECJ sections. Do not forget to subscribe to the blog by filling your email on the “FOLLOW THE OFFICIAL BLOG OF UNIO” section in the sidebar so you can be updated on all our latest posts.


Pictures credits: Photo by VH S on Pexels.com

Romania: A declaration of war from the High Court of Cassation and Justice against the Court of Justice of the European Union

Dragoș Călin (Judge at the Bucharest Court of Appeal and Co-President of the Romanian Judges' Forum Association) 
           

The judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union regarding the rule of law and the serious fraud against the financial interests of the European Union appear to have been optional for the Romanian courts, and a new interpretative decision of the High Court of Cassation and Justice – Panel for the Clarification of Certain Points of Law in Criminal Matters, Decision No 37/2024, binding erga omnes, is the last proof of this fact.

For qualified researchers, the case of the Constitutional Court of Romania is well known. By Decision No 390/2021, the Constitutional Court of Romania created a ‘brick wall’ between the national courts and the CJEU, in order to maintain the applicability of national legislation contrary to the judgment of the CJEU in Joined Cases C-83/19, C-127/19, C-195/19, C-291/19, C-355/19 and C-397/19, Asociația Forumul Judecătorilor din România and Others, by requiring national ordinary judges not to analyse the conformity of a national provision, already found to be constitutional by a decision of the Constitutional Court, in the light of provisions of European Union law.

Continue reading “Romania: A declaration of war from the High Court of Cassation and Justice against the Court of Justice of the European Union”

Summaries of judgments: Landeshauptstadt Wiesbaden | NADA e o.

Summaries of judgments made in collaboration with the Portuguese judge and référendaire of the CJEU (Nuno Piçarra and Sophie Perez)

 ▪

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 21 March 2024, Landeshauptstadt Wiesbaden, Case C-61/22, EU:C:2024:251

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Regulation (EU) 2019/1157 – Strengthening the security of identity cards of EU citizens – Validity – Legal basis – Article 21(2) TFEU – Article 77(3) TFEU – Regulation (EU) 2019/1157 – Article 3(5) – Obligation for Member States to include two fingerprints in interoperable digital formats in the storage medium of identity cards – Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Respect for private and family life – Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – Protection of personal data – Regulation (EU) 2016/679 – Article 35 – Obligation to carry out a data protection impact assessment – Maintaining the effects for a certain time of a regulation which has been declared invalid

Facts

The request for a preliminary ruling was made in proceedings between RL, a German national, and the Landeshauptstadt Wiesbaden (City of Wiesbaden, Land capital, Germany) concerning the rejection by the latter of RL’s application for an identity card which does not include RL’s fingerprints. The application was rejected due to a national provision according to which the inclusion of two fingerprints in the storage medium of identity cards is mandatory. This national provision transposes Article 3(5) of Regulation 2019/1157, on strengthening the security of identity cards of Union citizens and of residence documents issued to Union citizens and their family members exercising their right of free movement.

RL brought an action before the Verwaltungsgericht Wiesbaden (Administrative Court, Wiesbaden, Germany), seeking an order requiring the Landeshauptstadt Wiesbaden to issue him with an identity card with no fingerprints being collected. The referring court had doubts regarding the validity of Regulation 2019/1157 or, at least, the validity of Article 3(5) thereof, on the grounds that, firstly, it was adopted on an incorrect legal basis, secondly, it violates Article 35 of the GDPR and, thirdly, it violates Articles 7 and 8 CFREU.

Continue reading “Summaries of judgments: Landeshauptstadt Wiesbaden | NADA e o.”

Responsible credit in the European Union: on the pre-contractual duty to analyse the consumer’s creditworthiness when granting credit

Mariana Marques (Master's student in European Union Law at the School of Law of the University of Minho) 
           

Introduction

In practice, financial institutions often grant credit without analysing the consumer’s creditworthiness. In most cases, credit is granted without analysing any variant that could compromise the borrowers’ financial capacity – and this is particularly prevalent in the granting of credit cards. Thus, any individual can obtain a credit card from most organisations without having to provide essential data, such as their salary slip, for example. Without prejudice to the consumer’s responsibility to take out credit that is appropriate to their income, would consumer credit institutions not have any duty in this regard?

On 11 January 2024,[1] the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) handed down a ruling in which it clarified the duty to analyse the consumer’s creditworthiness –imposed on financial institutions before granting consumer credit. This pre-contractual duty, which is often (and unduly) brushed aside by the entities responsible for it, has been the subject of important developments in the new law governing consumer credit – Directive 2023/2225 of 18 October 2023.

Continue reading “Responsible credit in the European Union: on the pre-contractual duty to analyse the consumer’s creditworthiness when granting credit”

New UNIO issue now online

By the Editorial Team

The Editorial Board is happy to announce that a new issue of the UNIO – EU Law Journal is now online. The 10(1) issue of UNIO includes contributions from various highly respected scholars and young academics and heavily focuses on digital issues such as data protection and the challenges of regulating artificial intelligence.

We hope this new issue is relevant for our readers and would like to remind you that we are accepting submissions at UNIO and also at our blog.

You may find UNIO’s 10(1) issue here.