Standing up for your right(s) in Europe : a comparative study on legal standing (Locus Standi) before the EU and Member States' Courts
著者
書誌事項
Standing up for your right(s) in Europe : a comparative study on legal standing (Locus Standi) before the EU and Member States' Courts
（Ius commune, 116）
Intersentia, c2013
- : pbk
大学図書館所蔵 件 / 全1件
-
該当する所蔵館はありません
- すべての絞り込み条件を解除する
注記
Includes bibliographical references
内容説明・目次
内容説明
This book is based on a report submitted to the European Parliament, whose aim was to provide a comparative analysis of legal provisions, doctrine and case-law on locus standi before civil, administrative and criminal courts of some selected legal systems and before the EU courts. Apart from the EU legal system, the study focuses on the legal systems of nine Member States of the European Union (Belgium; England and Wales; France; Germany; Hungary; Italy; Netherlands; Poland; Sweden) and the legal system of one non-EU Member State (Turkey). On the basis of the findings, a conclusive chapter stresses the congruities and differences between the legal standing criteria in the Member States, on the one hand, and before the EU Courts, on the other. Moreover, the findings with regard to the different fields of law in the Member States are compared. On the basis of a thorough analysis of the status quo in the EU and Member States' legal systems, recommendations have also been developed, including suggestions on the possible improvements to the standing requirements in the EU and national legal systems.
目次
Chapter 1: Background and Aim of the Study 1. Definitions, Sources and Scope of the Study 1.1. Gender-neutral Language Use 1.2. Definition of Locus Standi 1.3. Sources Reviewed 1.4. Selection of Legal Systems 2. Structure of the Study 3. Methodology Chapter 2: Analysis of Locus Standi before the CJEU 1. Introduction 2. The Rationale of Standing 3. The Variations in Standing before the EU Courts 3.1. Action for Annulment 3.1.1. What are 'Natural and Legal Persons'? 3.1.2. What does 'Direct Concern' Mean? 3.1.3. What does 'Individual Concern' Mean? 3.1.4. What does 'Regulatory Act' Mean? 3.1.5. A 'Complete' System of Remedies? 3.2. Action for Failure to Act 3.3. Action for Damages 3.4. Appeal 4. Third Party Intervention before the EU Courts 4.1. What does 'Interest in the Result of a Case submitted to the Court' mean? 4.2. Intervention of Associations 4.3. Position of the Original Parties and Appeal 5. Multi-party Litigation at EU Level 6. The Protection of Public Interests before the EU Courts 7. Beyond the Plaumann Orthodoxy: The EU Courts' Practice in the Application of the Plaumann Doctrine 7.1. The Results of the EU Courts' Application of 'Individual Concern' in the Different Policy Fields 7.2. 'Individual Concern' and Claims of Associations 7.3.'Individual Concern' in Special Types of Claims 7.4.The Importance of the Claim 8.'Individual Concern' as a Tool forthe Administration of Justice? 9.Influence of General Principles 10.Accession to the ECHR 11.The EU and the Aarhus Convention 12.Conclusion: General Strictness with Some Exceptions Chapter 3: Comparative Analysis of Locus Standi before National Civil Courts .47 1.Court System 2.Specialisation 3.Definition of a Civil Claim 48 Definition, Rationale and Conditions of Locus Standi 5.Locus Standi of Public Authorities 6.Standing of Entities Lacking Legal Personality 7.Standing: Declaratory and Injunctive Relief 8.Locus Standi and Third Parties to the Action 9.Locus Standi on Appeal 10.Collective Interest Litigation and Locus Standi 11.Actio Popularis (Public Interest Litigation) and Locus Standi 12.Alternatives to Collective Interest Litigation 13.Strictness in the Application of Locus Standi at the National Level 14.Standing as a Tool for the Administration of Justice? 15.Human Rights as a Basis for Standing 16.EU Law and National Locus Standi Requirements 17.Influence of EU Law on Purely National Cases (no Cross-border Litigation) 18.Final Remarks: A French Particularity Chapter 4: Comparative Analysis of Locus Standi before National Administrative Courts 1.Court Systems in Administrative Law 2.Type of Administrative Action which may be Challenged before Administrative Courts 3.Types of Remedies Available before Administrative Courts 4.General and Specialised Administrative Courts? 5.How many Instances? 6.The Rationale of Standing 6.1.Right-based or Interest-based? 6.2.Objection Procedure as a Prerequisite? 7.Variations in Standing 7.1.Differences Depending on Court Instance 7.2.Differences Depending on Type of Remedy? 7.3.Differences Depending on the Sector of Administrative Law 7.4.Standing of Public Interest Groups 7.5.Representation of Collective Interests 7.6.Standing of Public Authorities 7.7.Human Rights as a Basis for Standing 7.8.Standing as a Tool for the Administration of Justice? 8.Third Party Intervention before Administrative Courts 9.Multi-party Litigation 10.Influence of EU Law 10.1.Influence of the Aarhus Convention 10.2.Influence of Secondary EU Law 10.3.General Principles of EU Law, notably the Principle of Effective Judicial Protection 10.4.Final Remarks Chapter 5: Comparative Analysis of Locus Standi of Victims of Crime before Criminal Courts 1.Court Systems in Criminal Law 2.Definition of Victims of Crime in Relation to Locus Standi 2.1.Belgium 2.2.England and Wales 2.3.France 2.4.Germany 2.5.Hungary 2.6.Italy 2.7.The Netherlands 2.8.Poland 2.9.Sweden 2.10.Turkey 3. Different Types of Standingbefore a Criminal Court 3.1. Private Prosecution 3.2. Standing in the Investigative or Pre-trial Stage of Criminal Proceedings 3.3. Review of Decisions not to Prosecute 3.4. Right to Compensation in Criminal Proceedings 3.5. Division of Standing between Criminal and Civil Courts 3.6. Right to be Heard 4. Procedural Requirements in Standing Rules and Courts' Practice 4.1. Belgium 4.2. Germany 4.3. France 4.4. Hungary 4.5. Italy 4.6. The Netherlands 4.7. Poland 4.8. Sweden 4.9. Turkey 4.10. Expedited Criminal Proceedings 5. Information provided to Victims of Crime 6. Influence of EU Law Chapter 6: Comparisons and Recommendations 1. Comparison EU and National Level 1.1.Introduction 1.2.Comparison 2.Horizontal Comparison of Findings in Civil, Criminal and Administrative Law 3.Recommendations 3.1.Recommendations at EU Level 3.2.Recommendations for Civil Law 3.2.1.General 3.2.2.Opt-in or Opt-out? 3.2.3.Identification of Group Members 3.2.4.Preventing Abusive Litigation 3.2.5.Alternatives for Collective Interest Litigation 3.2.6.Role of the EU 3.3.Recommendations for Administrative Law 3.3.1.Variety and Complexity of the National Systems of Judicial Review 3.3.2.Compliance with the Aarhus Convention 3.3.3.Other Recommendations 3.4.Recommendations for Criminal Law 3.4.1.The Requirements of the Framework Decision on the Standing of Victims in Criminal Proceedings of 15 March 2001 (2001/220/JHA) and the Proposal for a Directive Establishing Minimum Standards on the Rights, Support and Protection of Victims of Crime (COM (2011) 275).3.4.2.Expedited Criminal Proceedings Annex I: Questionnaire for Country Reporters on Administrative Law Annex II: Questionnaire for Country Reporters on Administrative Law Annex III: Questionnaire for Country Reporters on Criminal Law Annex IV: Guidance Document for Country Reporters Annex V: Guidance Document for Country Reviewers Annex VI: Country Reports Belgium England and Wales France Germany Hungary Italy The Netherlands Poland Sweden Turkey
「Nielsen BookData」 より
