Tag: EU

AI in the context of border management, migration and asylum in the EU: technological innovation vs. fundamental rights of migrants in the AI ​​Act

On By officialblogunioIn EssaysLeave a comment 
Maria Clara Pina (master’s student in Human Rights at the School of Law of the University of Minho)

I.

Currently, in the so-called era of techno-solutionism,[1] digital technologies, including Artificial Intelligence (AI), have become widely used.[2] We are witnessing the emerging but rapidly evolving phenomenon of border management and control through the use of new technologies[3] and automated individual decision-making (Article 22 of the General Data Protection Regulation, henceforth “GDPR”),[4] which employ AI, and promise faster and more efficient decisions. However, these systems have the potential to harm human rights. Migration is becoming a transaction that requires migrants to exchange biometric and biographical data for access to resources or a jurisdiction – and to be seen as people[5] with inherent rights and dignity.

At the same time, the number of migrants in the European Union (EU)[6] is growing, making it worthwhile to analyse the impact of these technologies and their regulation (or lack thereof), given their inevitable and rapid evolution, but, above all, the constant character of the migratory phenomenon over time, and the vulnerability inherent to the status of migrant. In this context, complex legal challenges arise, requiring the analysis of the EU regulatory framework on the use of AI in the context of border management, asylum and migration, considering the main gaps within the AI ​​Act[7] and its far-reaching implications on the human rights of migrants.

Continue reading “AI in the context of border management, migration and asylum in the EU: technological innovation vs. fundamental rights of migrants in the AI ​​Act” →

The EU-Mercosur Free Trade Agreement – A “race to the bottom” when it comes to EU’s climate goals?

On By officialblogunioIn EssaysLeave a comment 
Ana Cardoso (PhD candidate & Master's in European Union Law at the School of Law of University of Minho)

I.

The European Union (EU) is one of the most active actors in the field of environmental protection worldwide.[1] However, today some of the EU’s most important partners – namely the United States of America (USA) – have adopted highly protectionist positions[2] which aim to push forth economic growth without any consideration for its environmental consequences or international commitments.[3]

The issue has been so controversial, that Bloomberg Philanthropies has announced it will step in to cover the USA’s contribution to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), given that the country had been responsible for funding around 21% of the organisation’s budget, and its withdrawal would mean a severe disruption to environmental protection actions all around the planet.[4]

Additionally, Russia’s acts of continued aggression against Ukraine have emphasised the EU’s energetic dependency on unreliable partners making the need to boost the EU’s own energy autonomy more apparent, which the Commission proposes to do through renewables, energy efficiency and other European Green Deal (EGD) policies.[5]

Continue reading “The EU-Mercosur Free Trade Agreement – A “race to the bottom” when it comes to EU’s climate goals?” →

Summaries of judgments: Real Madrid Club de Fútbol | KUBERA

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 the Court (Grand Chamber) of 4 October 2024, Real Madrid Club de Fútbol, Case C-633/22, EU:C:2024:843

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Area of freedom, security and justice – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters – Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 – Articles 34 and 45 – Recognition and enforcement of judgments – Revocation of a declaration of enforceability of judgments – Grounds for refusal – Public policy in the State in which recognition is sought – Penalty imposed on a newspaper and one of its journalists for harm caused to the reputation of a sports club – Damages – Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Freedom of the press.

Facts

In 2014, the newspaper Le Monde and one of its journalists were convicted in Spain for the publication in 2006 of an article claiming that the football club Real Madrid had retained the services of the head of a doping ring in the cycling world. The Spanish court ordered them to pay EUR 300 000 to Real Madrid and EUR 30 000 to a member of the medical team of that club, by way of compensation for non-material damage suffered.

Continue reading “Summaries of judgments: Real Madrid Club de Fútbol | KUBERA” →

Commentary to the Bezirkshauptmannschaft Landeck judgment: a failure by the CJEU in appropriately balancing privacy, data protection and the interests of law enforcement [1]

On By officialblogunioIn EssaysLeave a comment 
Tiago Sérgio Cabral [Editor of this blog and Project Expert for the Portuguese team in the "European Network on Digitalization and E-governance" (ENDE)]

1. Background

The Court of Justice’s decision in Case C- 548/21 (Bezirkshauptmannschaft Landeck) probably got less attention than it deserved from legal scholars due to being issued at the same time as other high profile data protection cases and connected to Directive 2016/680/EU (the “Law Enforcement Directive”) instead of the GDPR. However, there are good reasons to engage in a deeper analysis of this case. The Bezirkshauptmannschaft Landeck judgment addresses access by law enforcement to mobile phones, which nowadays store large amounts of personal data that most people prefer to maintain private, but that law enforcement considers key for criminal investigation purposes. The Court of Justice’s conclusions regarding this issue are surprising as they seem out of step with previous case-law. Other less controversial but still relevant takeaways from this judgment, such as those regarding the scope of the concept of “personal data” may have relevance beyond data protection in the context of law enforcement.

    2. The Court of Justice’s Decision

    The case arises from a request for a preliminary ruling from the Regional Administrative Court of Tyrol (Austria). The factual background of the judgment is relatively straightforward: Austrian customs authorities seized a package for a data subject (CG) containing 85 grams of cannabis. Pursuant to this seizure, law enforcement conducted a search of CG’s residence, questioned him, and requested access to connection data on CG’s mobile telephone. CG refused and, as such, law enforcement seized his mobile phone, including SIM and SD cards.

    Continue reading “Commentary to the Bezirkshauptmannschaft Landeck judgment: a failure by the CJEU in appropriately balancing privacy, data protection and the interests of law enforcement [1]” →

    Procedural changes in the European Court of the European Union by entrusting preliminary ruling competences to the General Court: first impressions

    On By officialblogunioIn EssaysLeave a comment 
    Joana Covelo de Abreu (Editor of this blog and Key-staff member of Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence “Digital Citizenship & Technological Sustainability” - CitDig, Erasmus+).

    Protocol No 3 on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union was amended by Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2019 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of April, 11th 2024, which entered into force on September 1st 2024. These changes were mainly focused on relieving the Court of Justice from some of its jurisdictional demands, especially by entrusting the General Court the competence on certain specific areas in which preliminary questions could be raised. Notwithstanding, the opportunity was also embraced to “modernize and simplify procedures before the two courts”, i.e., the Court of Justice and the General Court.

    In fact, the Court of Justice of the European Union was already called upon to pronounce itself concerning the possibility to transfer jurisdiction on preliminary references to the General Court, under specific circumstances: under Regulation (EU, Eurotom) 2015/2422, this institution submitted a report to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on 14th December 2017, where it “took the view that there was no need, at that time, to propose changes as regards the manner of dealing with requests for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU.” However, in that same report, the Court also “pointed out that a subsequent transfer of jurisdiction to the General Court to give preliminary rulings in certain specific areas could not be ruled out if the number and complexity of requests for a preliminary ruling submitted to the Court of Justice were to be such that the proper administration of justice required it” (Recital 1 of Regulation 2024/2019).

    Continue reading “Procedural changes in the European Court of the European Union by entrusting preliminary ruling competences to the General Court: first impressions” →

    Summaries of judgments: Ordre néerlandais des avocats du barreau de Bruxelles and Others v Council | Administration of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine v EUIPO

    On By officialblogunioIn Summaries of judgmentsLeave a comment 
    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)

    Judgment of the General Court (Grand Chamber) 2 October 2024, Case T-797/22 Ordre néerlandais des avocats du barreau de Bruxelles and Others v Council

    Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine – Prohibition on the provision of legal advisory services to the Russian Government and entities established in Russia – Fundamental role of lawyers in a democratic society – Right of lawyers to provide legal advisory services – Right to be advised by a lawyer – Articles 7 and 47 and Article 52(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – Independence of lawyers – Rule of law – Proportionality – Legal certainty

    Facts

    The General Court (“GC”), dismissed an action brought by the Belgian Bar Association, as well as a certain number of individual lawyers, seeking to annul a Regulation adopted by the Council, which sought to restrict the provision of legal advisory services to the Russian Government, and entities, established in the Russian Federation.

    In light of the military aggression carried out by the Russian Federation (“Russia”) against Ukraine, several restrictive measures have been adopted by the Council targeting persons, entities and bodies supporting actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.

    Continue reading “Summaries of judgments: Ordre néerlandais des avocats du barreau de Bruxelles and Others v Council | Administration of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine v EUIPO” →

    Football and the Internal Market: Integration beyond passion? (CJEU “BZ” ruling of October 4, 2024)

    On By officialblogunioIn EssaysLeave a comment 
    Pedro Madeira Froufe [Editor of this blog and Coordinator of the Group "Studies in European Union Law" (CEDU), of JUSGOV - Research Centre for Justice and Governance, University of Minho).
    The current image has no alternative text. The file name is: pexels-photo-1171084.jpeg

    1. Football currently calls for multiple angles of analysis. In recent decades, as an economic activity, it has developed universally. It is a very specific economic activity that involves notable movements of capital and human resources, sociological and cultural aspects. It increasingly involves a technological, television and audiovisual aspect. It is common to say about football, that it – as a phenomenon – “moves passions and crowds”. In parallel, there are manifestations of local, regional and national identity associated with football. This has, directly and indirectly, a very significant economic weight.

    For example, according to a study/record of international transfers of football players, called “Transfer Matching System (TMS)”, between 2011 and 2020, the positive net balance of player transfers from Portugal to other countries would have been greater than 2.5 billion Euros.[1] Progressively, football developed its professional-economic aspect, inserted in its own relevant market, which was also being built, solidified and growing in recent decades. The so-called “football industry” (a relatively common expression) is overlapping, on a global scale, with the dimension of football as a mere sporting, educational and leisure activity.

    Continue reading “Football and the Internal Market: Integration beyond passion? (CJEU “BZ” ruling of October 4, 2024)” →

    Rethinking Public Acceptance Mechanisms and Ethical Frameworks for emerging technologies in the EU: The example of Virtual Reality

    On By officialblogunioIn EssaysLeave a comment 
    Manuel Resende Protásio (PhD candidate at the School of Law of University of Minho | FCT research scholarship holder – Bolsa UI/BD/152801/2022)

    Introduction

    The European Union (EU) faces a profound challenge in the regulation and oversight of rapidly advancing technologies such as Virtual Reality (VR). As technological progress accelerates, the mechanisms that assess, accept, and regulate such innovations are being tested like never before. This article seeks to unravel the complexities of these mechanisms, exploring how the EU addresses ethical, social, and economic challenges arising from VR through public consultations, impact assessments, and legislative initiatives such as the “Better Regulation” agenda.

    Drawing attention to key institutions such as the European Commission and advisory bodies like the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (EGE), we examine their roles in shaping the regulatory landscape. At the heart of this inquiry is the question: how can the EU balance the often competing demands of innovation, public safety, data protection, and ethical standards?

    By delving into real-world applications and regulatory obstacles—such as the effects of VR on mental health, consumer protection, and data concerns—this article presents an in-depth analysis of the current regulatory framework. Ultimately, the aim is to advocate for more transparent, inclusive, and adaptive approaches to governance, which are vital for fostering innovation while safeguarding societal interests.

    Continue reading “Rethinking Public Acceptance Mechanisms and Ethical Frameworks for emerging technologies in the EU: The example of Virtual Reality” →

    Summaries of judgments: Bytedance v Commission

    On By officialblogunioIn Summaries of judgmentsLeave a comment 
    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)

     ▪

    Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition), 17 July 2024, Case T-1077/23 Bytedance/Commission

    Digital services – Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 – Designation of gatekeepers – Online social networking service – Requirements – Presumptions – Rebuttal of the presumptions – Rights of the defence – Equal treatment.

    Facts

    The General Court (“GC”), interpreted for the first time the Digital Markets Act[1] (“DMA”), rejecting the action of annulment, brought by the Bytedance group (hereinafter, taken together, « Bytedance ») against the decision by the European Commission to designate Bytedance and the undertakings directly or indirectly controlled by it, as gatekeepers within the meaning of the DMA.

    The DMA aims to contribute to the good functioning of the internal market by establishing rules that ensure the contestability and equity of the digital markets. According to the DMA, the Commission designates an undertaking as a “gatekeeper” when certain cumulative qualitative criteria are met, namely: (i) it has a significant weight on the internal market; (ii) it provides a core platform service (“CPS”) that is an important gateway that allows business users to reach end users; and (iii) enjoys a solid and long lasting position in its activities, or it will, in all likelihood, enjoy such position in the near future.

    Additionally an undertaking is also presumed to be a gatekeeper when certain quantitative thresholds established based on its turnover, market value and number of users are met. However, if an undertaking meets these quantitative thresholds, it may still rebut its designation as a gatekeeper by presenting sufficiently substantiated arguments to demonstrate that, exceptionally, it does not meet the cumulative qualitative criteria required to be designated as a gatekeeper.

    Continue reading “Summaries of judgments: Bytedance v Commission” →

    Summaries of judgments: Fridman and Others v Council and T-644/22 | Timchenko and Timchenko v Council

    On By officialblogunioIn Summaries of judgmentsLeave a comment 
    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)

     ▪

    Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) 17 July 2024, Cases T-635/22 | Fridman and Others v Council and T-644/22 | Timchenko and Timchenko v Council

    Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Obligation to report funds or economic resources belonging to or owned, held or controlled by the applicants – Obligation to cooperate with the competent national authority – Participation in activities the object or effect of which is to circumvent restrictive measures – Article 9(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014.

    Facts

    In view of the increasing complexity of sanction evasion schemes, on 21 July 2022 the Council adopted a regulation laying down obligations to report funds and to cooperate with the competent authorities. Failure to comply with those obligations is treated as a circumvention of fund-freezing measures. In practical terms, the aim is to prevent use being made of complex legal and financial arrangements capable of making it, if not easier to circumvent measures, then at least more difficult for the competent national authorities to identify the funds or economic resources subject to restrictive measures.

    The parties concerned brought actions before the General Court of the European Union seeking the annulment of those obligations to declare their funds or economic resources before 1 September 2022 and to cooperate with the competent national authorities. They submit that, since those obligations are not laid down in a decision taken by the Council in the field of the common foreign and security policy (CFSP), they cannot be regarded as measures necessary for the implementation of such a decision. In particular, they argue that the Council regulation amounts to a misuse of powers, since the adoption of the obligations in question should fall within the implementing powers of the Member States.

    The General Court dismisses the actions in their entirety.

    Continue reading “Summaries of judgments: Fridman and Others v Council and T-644/22 | Timchenko and Timchenko v Council” →