Steve Peers

The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union enshrines the key political, social and economic rights of EU citizens and residents in EU law. In its present form it was approved in 2000 by the European Parliament, the Council of Ministers and the European Commission. However its legal status remained uncertain until the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon in December 2009. The Charter obliges the EU to act and legislate consistently with the Charter, and enables the EUs courts to strike down EU legislation which contravenes it. The Charter applies to EU Member States when they are implementing EU law but does not extend the competences of the EU beyond the competences given to it in the treaties.

Immigration, Asylum and the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights

The essential aspect of the sovereignty is on the approach to immigration and asylum policy and the desire to control the borders and populations. The European Union (EU) institutions finally proved, European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights, immigration and asylum matters to be controversial issues. With the enhanced legal effect of the Charter resulted the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon. The Charter is set to play a key role in the development of EU immigration and asylum law. The chapter focusses on applying the Charter to issues of particular concern to immigration. The Charter became legally binding, and treated as the main source of human rights rules in the EU legal order. The interpretation defended in the chapter would mean a change to the existing legal position on the issues in many respects. Keywords: asylum; European Union (EU); European Union Charter; immigration; Treaty of Lisbon

Towards a new form of EU law?: The use of EU institutions outside the EU legal framework

Economic governance-Financial assistance-Economic and monetary union-Patent litigation-Treaties between member states-Jurisdiction of the Court of Justice-powers of the EU institutions-Enhanced cooperation.

II. Justice and Home Affairs

Since the last note on Current Developments in this area, the Amsterdam Treaty has entered into force on 1 May 1999, leading to a number of important developments in the legal system governing EU Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) law. In addition, the Court of Justice has clarified several aspects of the relationship between the first and third pillars.

Divorce, European Style: The First Authorization of Enhanced Cooperation

Council Decision of July 2010 to authorize enhanced cooperation for the first time – Planned Regulation on conflicts of law in divorce – Analysis of the application of the substantive and procedural rules applying to the authorization of enhanced cooperation in this case – Links between the planned legislation on this issue and other EU or international rules on related topics – Broader impact of the decision upon the EU legal order

Legislative Update: EU Immigration and Asylum Competence and Decision-Making in the Treaty of Lisbon

Perhaps the biggest changes that the Treaty of Lisbon would make as compared to the current Treaties affect Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) law, which concerns issues of great significance for national sovereignty and identity. Th e new Treaty would abolish the current ‘third pillar’ (policing and criminal law) and move its provisions into Title IV of Part Th ree of the current Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC),1 which presently concerns immigration, asylum and civil law. Th e European Community (EC) would be merged into the European Union (EU); consequently the TEC would be renamed the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and the current Title IV of the TEC would be renumbered Title V. In conjunction with this change in the structure of the Treaties, the Treaty of Lisbon would make major changes to the competence and decision-making procedures regarding JHA matters. Th is paper analyses the specific changes which the Treaty would make to decision-making and competence concerning immigration and asylum law. Simultaneously changes would also be made to the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice as regards immigration and asylum law (as well as civil law), entailing the application of the Court’s normal jurisdiction in this area, which would almost certainly lead to a significant increase in the Court’s role in this area. On the other hand, for the UK, Ireland and Denmark, the effect of the various changes is limited because of their opt-outs concerning JHA law, which would in turn be altered signi ficantly by the Treaty of Lisbon. I have examined these issues in separate articles.2

Free Movement, Immigration Control and Constitutional Conflict

European Court of Justice decision of 25 July 2008, Case C-127/08, Metock et al. v. Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform EU citizens and their third-country family members ECJ largely reverses Akrich case-law Dividing line between national and Community competences on immigration Reverse discrimination not a matter of concern for Community law Analysis of repercussions of decision on EU and national legal orders

The Stability Treaty: Permanent Austerity or Gesture Politics?

Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance - Economic governance - Stability Pact - The European Council - National constitutional law. Copyright

The Constitutional Implications of the EU Patent

Council Decision of March 2011 to authorize enhanced co-operation as regards unitary patent protection – Proposed Regulations implementing enhanced co-operation in this area – Proposed treaty concerning patent litigation – Challenges to the validity of the decision authorizing enhanced co-operation – Incompatibility of the patent litigation treaty with EU law – EU external competence concerning intellectual property and civil jurisdiction issues

Migration, Internal Security and the UK's EU Membership

A key part of the debate about the UKs membership of the EU is concern about levels of migration and the impact upon security. This paper assesses how much impact EU membership has on each of these issues, and examines the likely impact of leaving the EU in each of these areas.