Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Transnational commercial law; European Union

europäischen union --- energiehandelsvalkerrecht --- bilaterale abkommenspraxis --- transnational commercial law --- grundlagen energiehandel --- energieauenhandelspolitik --- internationale energieorganisationen --- european union --- kompetenzverteilung --- Europa --- Vertrag über die Arbeitsweise der Europäischen Union --- Vertrag über die Europäische Union

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Waste is a commodity, and in particular the separately collected, single-variety waste from private households such as waste paper is a highly coveted commodity that public bodies responsible for waste management, i.e. the municipalities, and private sector waste management companies compete for. The German recycling law (KrWG), which came into force in 2012, allows for this waste according to §§ 17, 18 KrWG an exception to the general obligation to hand over the waste to the public bodies responsible for waste management. However, the exception is so narrow that the competent authorities, which are often the responsible bodies for waste management at the same time, can easily ban the collection of private companies. This restricts the European free movement of goods and infringes EU competition law. The present work highlights these restrictions and infringements and examines whether they can be justified, in particular, by the exemptions for Services of General Economic Interest (SGEI). Insofar as this does not succeed, an amendment of the relevant regulations of §§ 17 and 18 KrWG is proposed. Abfälle sind Waren, und insbesondere die getrennt erfassten, d. h. sortenreinen Verwertungsabfälle aus privaten Haushalten wie beispielsweise das Altpapier sind heiß begehrte Waren, um die die öffentlich-rechtlichen Entsorgungsträger (örE), also die Kommunen, und private Entsorgungsunternehmen konkurrieren. Das 2012 in Kraft getretene KrWG lässt für diese Abfälle nach §§ 17, 18 KrWG eine Ausnahme von der grundsätzlichen Pflicht, die Abfälle dem örE zu überlassen, zu. Allerdings ist die Ausnahme so eng gestaltet, dass die zuständigen Behörden, die oftmals zugleich örE sind, privaten Unternehmen die Sammlung leicht verbieten können. Damit werden die Europäische Warenverkehrs- und Wettbewerbsfreiheit eingeschränkt. Die vorliegende Arbeit zeigt diese Einschränkungen auf und untersucht, ob sie insbesondere nach den Ausnahmeregelungen für Dienstleistungen von allgemeinem wirtschaftlichem Interesse (DAWI, Daseinsvorsorge) gerechtfertigt werden können. Insoweit dies nicht gelingt, wird eine Änderung der einschlägigen Regelungen der §§ 17 und 18 KrWG vorgeschlagen.

Law --- Abfälle --- Abfall --- Abfallentsorgung --- Deutsche Hochschule für Politik --- Europäischer Gerichtshof --- Kreislaufwirtschaftsgesetz --- Vertrag über die Arbeitsweise der Europäischen Union --- Warenverkehrsfreiheit

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Waste is a commodity, and in particular the separately collected, single-variety waste from private households such as waste paper is a highly coveted commodity that public bodies responsible for waste management, i.e. the municipalities, and private sector waste management companies compete for. The German recycling law (KrWG), which came into force in 2012, allows for this waste according to §§ 17, 18 KrWG an exception to the general obligation to hand over the waste to the public bodies responsible for waste management. However, the exception is so narrow that the competent authorities, which are often the responsible bodies for waste management at the same time, can easily ban the collection of private companies. This restricts the European free movement of goods and infringes EU competition law. The present work highlights these restrictions and infringements and examines whether they can be justified, in particular, by the exemptions for Services of General Economic Interest (SGEI). Insofar as this does not succeed, an amendment of the relevant regulations of §§ 17 and 18 KrWG is proposed. Abfälle sind Waren, und insbesondere die getrennt erfassten, d. h. sortenreinen Verwertungsabfälle aus privaten Haushalten wie beispielsweise das Altpapier sind heiß begehrte Waren, um die die öffentlich-rechtlichen Entsorgungsträger (örE), also die Kommunen, und private Entsorgungsunternehmen konkurrieren. Das 2012 in Kraft getretene KrWG lässt für diese Abfälle nach §§ 17, 18 KrWG eine Ausnahme von der grundsätzlichen Pflicht, die Abfälle dem örE zu überlassen, zu. Allerdings ist die Ausnahme so eng gestaltet, dass die zuständigen Behörden, die oftmals zugleich örE sind, privaten Unternehmen die Sammlung leicht verbieten können. Damit werden die Europäische Warenverkehrs- und Wettbewerbsfreiheit eingeschränkt. Die vorliegende Arbeit zeigt diese Einschränkungen auf und untersucht, ob sie insbesondere nach den Ausnahmeregelungen für Dienstleistungen von allgemeinem wirtschaftlichem Interesse (DAWI, Daseinsvorsorge) gerechtfertigt werden können. Insoweit dies nicht gelingt, wird eine Änderung der einschlägigen Regelungen der §§ 17 und 18 KrWG vorgeschlagen.

Law --- Abfälle --- Abfall --- Abfallentsorgung --- Deutsche Hochschule für Politik --- Europäischer Gerichtshof --- Kreislaufwirtschaftsgesetz --- Vertrag über die Arbeitsweise der Europäischen Union --- Warenverkehrsfreiheit

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Translating and interpreting --- Translating services --- Translating and interpreting. --- Traduction et interprétation --- Services de traduction --- Europäische Kommission --- Europäische Union / Kommission. --- Übersetzungszentrum für die Einrichtungen der Europäischen Union. --- Vertaaldiensten --- Europese Unie --- Geschiedenis.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The role of the European judiciary in the process of European integration cannot be overestimated. The achievements of European integration after the second world war are usually analyzed from the perspective of political decisions that were made, initially, by the Founding Fathers and, subsequently, by the political leaders of the European countries. However, in the public debate we very often forget how much we owe to the two supreme jurisdictions of Europe, that is the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights. The continuing extension of the competences of the European Union, especially in the field of economic and monetary policy, calls for a new assessment of the nature of the decision-making process at the European level.From the foreword by Prof. Maciej Szpunar, Advocate General at the Court of Justice of the European Union'The European judiciary - i.e. the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and national courts interpreting and applying European law sensu largo - have shaped [the process of European integration] actively, alongside the Founding Fathers, European nations, European states and their citizens. The involvement of the judiciary raises its own wide range of questions concerning the very nature of democracy. Much ink has already been spilled over issues such as democratic legitimacy, subsidiarity and accountability, the rule of law or judicial activism.[...] seventeen scholars from across Europe [...] share their views on the European judiciary as a challenge for democracy. The various contributions to the present volume are split into two parts. The first provides ten chapters on the judicial systems of the European Union (EU), discussing, inter alia, recognition of democratic principles in the case law of the CJEU, contribution thereof to the democratisation of the Union and reception of EU law in the Member States. The second part discusses the judicial means to protect human rights in Europe, consisting of three chapters devoted to the promise of advisory opinions of the ECtHR as well as to democratic standards for voting and for fair trial.From the preface by the Editors'[...] the editors, authors and the publisher of this volume decided to take a closer look at the relation between democracy and activities of something that might be called "European judicial systems". And what is intriguing - these systems are perceived here as a challenge for democracy.[...] This book does not exhaust all problems and issues for European judicial systems confronted with the very notion of democracy; there are simply too many of them. But it comes with a fresh look on - perhaps - the most pertinent ones, like the issue of the legal creativity of judges in both Luxembourg and Strasbourg. It was worth waiting for this volume.'Prof. Dr. Paul De Hert, Free University Brussels and Tilburg University

Courts --- Democracy --- Human rights --- Judiciary --- Dispute resolution (Law) --- Judicial districts --- Law --- Procedure (Law) --- Judicial power --- Jurisdiction --- Justice, Administration of --- Law and legislation --- Europäische Union --- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte --- Europe. --- Europe --- Europarat --- EGMR --- European Court of Human Rights --- ECHR --- ECtHR --- Cour Européenne des Droits de l'Homme --- Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos --- Emberi Jogok Európai Bíróság --- Curtea Europeană a Drepturilor Omului --- Evropski Sud za Ljudska Prava --- Evropejski Săd po Pravata na Čoveka --- Evropský Soud pro Lidská Práva --- Europejski Trybunał Praw Człowieka --- Tribunal Europeu dos Direitos do Homem --- ЕСПЧ --- Internationale Strafgerichtsbarkeit --- Supranationale Organisation --- Straßburg --- Frankreich --- 1959 --- -EU-Gerichtshof --- Gerichtshof der Europäischen Union --- EuGH --- Europäische Union --- Court of Justice of the European Union --- CJEU --- Cour de justice de l'Union européenne --- CJUE --- CURIA --- Gericht --- Luxemburg --- Europäischer Gerichtshof --- 01.12.2009 --- -Europe. --- EU countries --- Euroland