European Union law Part 2

European Union law Part 2

 

14

The Akzo ruling of the Court of Justice and the Private Enforcement of European Union Competition Law: Two Steps Back, One Step Forward
FRANCESCO RIZZUTO
Global Competition Litigation Review
Volume 3, Issue 4, 2010 p.131

LAW JOURNAL / LAW REVIEW

This article examines case law of the European Judicature in clarifying the relationship between the public and private enforcement of EU competition law. Of central importance in this regard are the rules governing the right of victims to access the administrative file in search of evidence to support a claim in follow-on actions for damages. In the recent Akzo ruling the ECJ confirms for the first time the exclusive competence of the EU to determine all rules on EU competition law enforcement but interprets the present division of competence between public enforcers in a way that ensures that victims of EU competition law do not enjoy equal procedural rights.

15

‘Sed Fugit Interea Fugit Irreparabile Tempus’ – Time Limits Under English Law. The Requirement of ‘Promptness’ and the Scrutiny of the Court of Justice of the European Union
Mariolina Eliantonio
Review of European Administrative law
Volume 3, Number 2, 2010 p.89

LAW JOURNAL / LAW REVIEW

16

Should the European Union embrace or exorcise Leegin’s “rule of reason”?
CRAIG CALLERY
European Competition Law Review
Volume 32, Issue 1, 2011 p.42

LAW JOURNAL / LAW REVIEW

For decades, the European Union has been plagued with the question of whether a US-style “rule of reason”has penetrated art. 101 TFEU (ex art. 81 EC). This discussion seeks to ascertain, through case law, whether such a development has been made.

17

Case Law of the European Union Courts Leading Judgments, 1 July to 30 November 2009
Johanna Engstrüm, Malte Beyer-Katzenberger, Laviero Buono, Kassiani Christodoulou and Angelika Fuchs, et al.
ERA Forum
Volume 11, Number 2, August 2010 p.281-320

LAW JOURNAL / LAW REVIEW

18

Latest Software Patent Law Developments in the US and EU
Perttu Virtanen
SCRIPTed: a Journal of Law, Technology & Society
Volume 7, Issue 3, 2010 p.562-567

LAW JOURNAL / LAW REVIEW

This article briefly summarises the current key developments in the area of patenting with a particular emphasis on patenting of software. The focus embraces the potential advances particularly in the United States and European Union.

19

Pragmatism Rules Legal Foundation of China and European Union Relations
KIM VAN DER BORGHT AND LEI ZHANG
International trade law & Regulation
Volume 16, Issue 3, 2010 p.69

LAW JOURNAL / LAW REVIEW

The relationship between China and the European Union has evolved well beyond the old trade agreement that has been the legal basis for their trade relationship since 1985. In the relationship, the European Union is balanced between a Parliament driven by principles but disconnected from their effective daily implementation and the pragmatism of the Commission looking for a realistic ambition of marrying the values and interests of the Union but hampered by Member States with a keen eye for their individual interests. China, being generally favourable towards a stronger relationship with a stronger EU, uses the weaknesses inherent in such a balancing act to knead the relationship according to its interests and objectives. This article shows how law is used in this relationship by a mixture of legal instruments that combine flexibility, respect and realism.

20

Hybrid Texts and Uniform Law? The Multilingual Case Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union
Karen McAuliffe
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law
Volume 24, Number 1, March 2011 p.97-115

LAW JOURNAL / LAW REVIEW

21

ROMANIA’S ROLE AS A MEMBER OF THE EUROPEAN UNION IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF EUROPEAN LAW
Laura Dumitrana Bosca Rath
Agora International Journal of Juridical Sciences
2010, Number 1

LAW JOURNAL / LAW REVIEW

22

In Transition…When Should In Transit Goods be Seized for IP Infringement in the EU?
STEPHANIE HUTCHINSON (Nà‰E MCAVINEY)
European Intellectual Property Review
Volume 32, Issue 12, 2010 p.614

LAW JOURNAL / LAW REVIEW

When should EU Customs be able to seize goods in transit suspected of infringing IP rights in the European Union? This article highlights the factors that have led to this issue gaining increased prominence in recent months, together with the legal and political tensions associated with this issue. The contrast between the current legal framework (intended to create a harmonised approach within the EU territory) and the case law (which has provoked controversy and confusion) demonstrates that further clarity is needed in the interpretation of the existing legislation and in the drafting of the new border control regulation, currently underway.

 

Conclusion

Notes

See Also

References and Further Reading

About the Author/s and Reviewer/s

Author: international

Mentioned in these Entries

Administrative law, European Union law, International trade law, Judicature.


Posted

in

, ,

by

Tags:

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *