Fundamental Rights Flashcards
(36 cards)
State the 2 Atricles that list the General Principles
Article 19 TEU
Article 263 TFEU
Article 19 TEU
The CJEU in interpreting and applying the treaties should observe the law
Article 263 TFEU
Ground for JR
THE CJEU can determine the validity of legislation if it infringes RoL of fundamnetal rights in its application
What must the CJEU uphold
Equal treatment
Legitimate Expectations
Name the case which triggered the evolution of fundamental rights in the EU
Internationalle Handelgeeleschaft
Internationalle Handelgeeleschaft
Facts:
Concerned EU law implementing grain export license
Needed to pay a deposit fo the license
Company didnt export as much grain as in license so lost deposit
Argued that thiis was disporoportionate as they ffuilled part of the lciense but lost all of the deposit
Argued that this went against german con princoples of economic freedom
Held;
EU law must be applied consistnetluy- national law cant dictate its application then it will be less effective and less uniform
Fundamnetal rights at national elvel cant dictate whether EU law is followed
CJEU has job to enforce fundamental rights and ensure the protection of them but that must be acheived within the EU structure and its goals
Appeal and german federal court
Why was this significant
Stated that Eu law didnt breach the con in thsi instance
Notwd that the EC lacked a codified catelogue of fundamental rights
In an instance where EU law conflicts with fundamental rights, Con will prevail
Significance: Need for fundamental rights to be codified
Did the courts shift from this perspective
In what case
Yes
Wunsche Handeelgeelschaft
Wunsche Handeelgeelschaft
If the Ec ensures protection of fundamental rights then the national german court will not interfere with EU law by the standard of the consitution
What case established general principle for respect for fudamental rights
Hauer
Hauer
Concerned EU ban on planting bines to grow grapes for wine due to oversaturation of market
Argued that this breached property rights
Held: Stated that it is important to have repsect for undamental rights
read treaties, national con and ECHR and found that a right to property existed and therefore it must also be reflected in EU law
However the right is not absolute and can be limited
In this instance the ban was termporary, justified and in the public intrest so it was upheld
How were fundamental rughts implemented in EU law
Creation of the Charter of Fundamwnral rights
Why was this charter so significant
Because it howed a shift away from that economic justification of the EU and rather focused on social rights and the citizens themselves
Rigths under the EU charter
Dignity
Freedom
Equality
Citizens rights,ie. freedom of movement
Solidarity
JUstice
What provision of treaties implements charter
Article 6 TEU
Article 6 TEU
- Charter is on par with the treaties- same legal importance
- EU should acceeed to ECHR
- Fundamental rights form general principles governing the EU
Name case that talked about fundamental rights
Digital rights ireland
Digital rights Ireland
Facts: Concerned a directive on the retention of communications data.
Telecom providers had to retain data for 2 years on all calls: not the content but who called and when, etc.
Argument: This directive infringed Articles 7 and 8 of the Consitution to private life and the protection of personal data.
Justification for Directive: To combat terrorism.
Held: The restriction on rights must be proportionate.
This directive applied to the whole public.
However, there were no procedural conditions like having to apply for a supervisory authority to oversee the data use and the state could use the data in an unrestricted way.
P56: This was an interference with the fundamental rights of practically the entire European population.
Conclusion: The directive was deemed invalid.
What are the 2 main issues with the charter
The scope of its applicaiton
Rights and principles
The scope of its applicaiton
Name Article
Article 51(1) of the charter
Article 51(1) of the charter
Provisions of the charter applicable only for the implementation of EU law
Satte cases on application scope
Anrangosi/caladaura
Irish Human RIghts comission v Miniter for childe,, freedp, , eq
Broader scope
Franson
Anrangosi/caladaura
Facts: Concerns European arrest warrants and detention conditions in Hungary and Romania.
Both applicants argued that they should not be returned.
Argued that the prison conditions were so bad that it amounted to inhumane and degraded treatment, going against the charter.
Held: Just because there were problems with prison conditions, it wasn’t enough that you could never return people to either of those countries.
If there were ‘substantial grounds’ to believe that they would incur ‘a real risk’ of being subject to inhumane or degrading conditions then the arrest warrant should not be executed.
A higher standard of proof: Detention conditions for that specific person.
Irish Human RIghts comission v Miniter for childe,, freedp, , eq
Facts: The state does not provide accommodation for all single male applicants for international protection.
Held: Cannot put a person in a position where they can’t even meet basic dignity.
The weekly allowance provided was not enough to prevent extreme poverty.
Article 1: Human dignity is inviolable. It must be respected and protected.
HC: Ireland was implementing EU legislation on reception conditions for International protection applicants to the charter was applicable.
Conclusion: Failure to provide accommodation breached Article 1 of the Charter.