Right now its seems I will stay a visiting professor at Northwestern Polytechical University in Xi’an (China) in the second part of April. If everything goes well, this will be an extremely inspiring journey.
After my last short article was published on Social Europe, I received many encouraging emails, which made me really happy, especially since as I represent a minority opinion (thanks to you all!).
Moreover, Professor Simon Wren-Lewis from Oxford University wrote about it on his Mainly Macro blog (‘The two types of populism within Brexit’, the entry can be accessed here).
I also received several articles written by Anton Jäger from Cambridge University. One of them (The Myth of “Populism”) is accessible on Jacobin Magazine here. Why this piece is interesting to me is because it shows the misunderstandings regarding the roots of American populism.
I also intend to write another article about euroscepticism (it will be called ‘Critisizing the EU – the post fascist, the demagogue, and the proactive way’), as I would like to make it clear that I do not consider every kind of criticism post-fascism, only if such criticism is mixed with racism, overtly nationalism and authoritarianism.
As it seems right now I will also speak on a workshop at Central European University next week about the same topic.
When political parties are chauvinistic, racist, paranoid, anti-elitist, macho-ist, use emotions to attack minorities, create scapegoats, we cannot say that this is the normal course of democracy.
The article can be accessed here or by clicking on the image above.
I am really grateful to the colleagues at Warwick University, it was really inspiring to meet them, had a great time at the School of Law. I gave sereval lectures/seminars. One of them was about disintegration within the EU and the occurance of negative (reverse) spillovers in EU law (it was called Negative (reverse) spillovers in EU law – First thoughts on a theoretical framework – the slides are available here). Another lecture was about conflict-of-laws issues, it was called The magic evolution of conflict of laws – Internationalisation, interdependence and the role of tolerance (the slides are available here).
Reviewing European Union Accession
Tom Hashimoto and Michael Rhimes
The year 2017 has been an uneasy one for the EU, with so-called Brexit on the horizon and the rise of populist euroskepticism in a number of Member States. This year, with the tenth anniversary of the Romanian and Bulgarian accession to the Union, is a good year to pause and reflect over the life and future of the Union. In this work, we envision the next decade with Europe 2020 strategy and review the fruits of the 2004 accession in Central and Eastern Europe. What has the Union achieved? Which policy areas are likely to change and how? How successful, and by what measure, has the accession of the 10 Member States in 2004 been? Reviewing European Union Accession addresses a wide range of issues, deliberately without any thematic constraints, in order to explore EU enlargement from a variety of perspectives, both scientific and geographical, internal and external. In contrast to the major works in this field, we highlight the interrelated, and often unexpected, nature of the integration process – hence the subtitle, unexpected results, spillover effects and externalities.
I wrote a book review about a book on the democratisation efforts of the EU in Eastern Europe (about Luca Tomini’s Democratizing Central and Eastern Europe – Successes and Failures of the European Union. 2015. Routledge).
The book is an interesting attempt to summarize the actions of governments in certain countries of the region. It presents an analysis to the reader about the major changes of governance in some Eastern European countries (like Poland, Bulgaria, Slovakia). This analysis can be very useful for readers who do not know too much about these countries, and want to have a basic sketch.
The review can be accessed here, or by clicking on the image above.
As mentioned before, I gave a lecture at the Italian National Research Council about Hungary’s actions regarding refugees and the connection of legislative/political changes to European human rights (esp. EU law and the European Convention on Human Rights) in Rome. The lecture was given in the framework of a joint research project of the Institute for International Legal Studies and the Hungarian Acadey of Sciences on refugee protection.
I am grateful for the colleagues at the Institute for International Legal Studies for their cooperation and their support. The slides of my lecture can be downloaded here. They can be useful for anyone who wants to have a draft about Hungary and the international/European standards regarding asylum seekers.
We (ie. the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and the Institute for International Legal Studies) have a joint research project on refugee protection and EU law/international law standards, I will give a lecture this week on Friday. I am extremely happy to visit Rome, the Institute and the Italian colleagues!
I participated in the works of a report for the bEUcitizen fp7 project (the website of the project is available here), which was basically a project focusing on the possible barriers EU citizens have to face when moving to another country. Why I liked this project was that it tried to give answers to the actual problems of free movement within the EU, i.e. it tried to focus on barriers and how EU citizen’s life could be helped. As a result, there are some nice reports published which addressed real life problems, many of which are related to administrative procedures or private international law/private international procedural law isues.
I created the country report about Hungarian law in a longer report. Just like the other parts of the work, this chapter focused on many important and interesting questions like family relations in Hungary, the right to register a name, rules on obtaining citizenship, problems occuring of double citizenships, domestic rules of family unification and their connection to EU law, status of registered partners, some issues of the public register and acceptance of foreign judgments and public documents. The report is available here (for my part see page 220 et seq) or by clicking on the image below.
I am very grateful to the Bergen University community, had a wonderful time at the university, the city was beautiful, the discussion was inspiring and I enjoyed my stay a lot.
I attach the slides of my lectures below:
- The slides of the first lecture (given for the Research Group in Competition & Market Law) about the connection between EU single market rules, non-discrimination of foreign companies and the new system of oligarchs (Nationalism vs. the single European market – the case of Hungary) can be accessed here.
- The slides of the second one, a more general lecture (given for Project Group on Constitutional law and Democracy) about the changes of rule of law in Hungary and their connection with EU law and the European Convention on Human Rights (Constitutionalism, rule of law and the Hungarian phenomenon) can be accessed here.
Please find my blog entry about the collection of related publications in these fields here, they can serve of interest to anyone who wants to know more abut Hungary’s position within the EU. I also added some more pictures of the university. 🙂
This is the case (did not see such “questions” before) in which a preliminary procedure becomes an insult. It also shows how the judicial branch in Hungary accepts the xenophobic, homophobic, racist, paranoid narrative of the Hungarian government regarding the refugee crisis. Privacy and human dignity is not important any more. What kind of physical examination do they talk about? Sad and very primitive.
” CJEU: C-473/16 F – Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrative and Labour Court Szeged (Hungary), 29 August 2016
Friday, October 21, 2016
The Administrative and Labour Court Szeged (Hungary) has referred a request for preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the interpretation to be given to Article 4 of the Qualification Directive. The case relates to a Nigerian national, who had submitted an application for international protection based on sexual orientation in Hungary.
The Administrative and Labour Court Szeged has referred two question to the CJEU:
Should Article 4 of the Qualification Directive be interpreted in light of Article 1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as not precluding that, when LGBTI’s apply for international protection, advice by a psychologist, based on projective personality tests, is taken into account when assessing the application for asylum, even if the opinion was drawn up without any questions asked by the applicant about his sexual habits and without being subjected to a physical examination?
If the expert opinion referred to in the first question cannot be used as evidence, should Article 4 of the Qualification Directive be interpreted that, in the light of Article 1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, when the applicant puts forward, in support of his application, that he is being persecuted because of his sexual orientation, neither the administrative authorities nor the courts have the ability to investigate the credibility of the asylum seeker on the basis of an expert’s report, regardless of the specific characteristics of the methods used in this report?”
Hope you enjoy(ed) your stay in Budapest and my lecture was not too detailed (especially after the long journey 🙂 ).
Please find the slides here.
Wish you all the best with your studies!
Created a part of a report on the European Union’s external relations. This report aims to analyse the different dimensions and levels of EU-US relations, to survey the instruments the EU uses in this relation and to provide some recommendations for future EU actions. It provides an overview of the main similarities and differences between the EU and the US regarding human rights, and measures the influence of the EU on the state and practice of human rights in the United States. Likewise, it analyses how the United States may affect human rights in the EU and its Member States, notably in light of US policies that are strongly criticised by the EU from a human rights-based perspective. To conduct this analysis, we selected three case-studies: 1) capital punishment 2) data protection and surveillance programmes and 3) the problem of extraordinary rendition.
The report can be accessed here on by clicking on the image above.
The provisions of the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the major trade agreement between the EU and the US received serious criticism from the public, some NGOs and even some scholars. Disputes surrounding many of its special provisions got highly emotional, with extreme commentaries in the media. There is a high chance the conclusion of the deal will be blocked because of public opposition. This article tries to analyse four of the most important questions, namely the transparency of negotiations, the issue of investor-state dispute settlement, and the agreement’s effects on environment-sustainable development and regulatory issues/consumer standards. Based on the analysis, it concludes that even though TTIP may contain some serious pitfalls, there is a high chance it would not lead to the devastating results as is regularly portrayed, and most of the problematic points could be settled relatively easily.
You can access the article here or by clicking of the image above.
THE LINKS BETWEEN HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE SINGLE EUROPEAN MARKET: DISCRIMINATION AND SYSTEMIC INFRINGEMENT
The aim of this article is to prove that the legal system of an EU member state in which weakening of democratic rights and distortion of the constitutional system of checks and balances takes place also hurts the frameworks of the single market. The best example for this situation can be seen in Hungary nowadays. The connection between constitutional principles and single market regulations is not as obvious as it seems. Many would claim that multinational companies do not need basic rights to perform well. However, this is not true. Anti-democratic developments create a framework that not only results in institutional, legal and sociological changes, but also hurts free competition leading to a loss in profit. There is a great chance that a country rife with breaches of fundamental rights will, as a spill-over effect, also face a large number of single market regulation breaches.
The article can be accessed by clicking here or on the image above.
How should life be after Brexit? Even though the academic and intellectual communities, just like the public, got highly emotional after the Brexit referendum, we assume that it can serve as the start of something new and functioning both for the UK and the EU. Here are some pointers for the future already visible.
Wrote an article about Brexit for Social Europe Journal together with Anna Unger. The article can be accessed here or by clicking on the image above.
In the first lecture I talked about Hungary’s illiberal turn and especially about the transformation of the domestic free market into a less competitive, centrally governed market in which state capture and oligarchs dominate. I used examples from Hungarian history to show such actions have historical tradition in the country, and I explained why there is a conflict between EU law and government policies. You find the slides of the lecture here.
Second, we watched the movie Sin nombre, and after watching it I gave a small presentation (in Hungarian) about US and Central American gangs, and especially about Mara Salvatrucha. Since following gang/maffia related conflicts in the US is one of my hobbies, I enjoyed talking about them a lot, even though this is not srrictly related to my scientific work . You can download the slides here.
Published an article in OpenDemocracy on the connection between new populists like Trump, Putin, Orban, Erdogan and fascism. Tried to overview the most important theories on fascism for non-experts. My statement is that most of these politicians are dangerous to democracy and most of them represent an anti-enlightment attitude. In the future, I intend to mix this area with my original, EU related researches, and especially singe market rules. I would like to do some researches on economic policies in the twenties and thirties, because I have a sense of feeling present anti-market politics have deep roots in our societies, especially in Eastern Europe.
You can reach the article by clicking here or on the picture below.
Published a new article on constitutional rights and the free market in Hungary (in Hungarian, available here) in Állam- és Jogtudomány.
Also published another article in Acta Juridica Hungarica (Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies, available here). This article summarizes the background of child abduction cases related to Hungary, giving a comprehensive analysis of such cases between the period of 2000 and 2014. In the first section, the reader finds a statistical analysis and the second part deals with the legal and practical background. The final conclusions give some recommendations for the European and domestic legislators. The essay was created as part of a report published by the European Parliament, collected by the Swiss Institute of Comparative Law on the actual situation of child abduction in Europe.
The website of the course can be reached here:
About this course
Whether you are an EU citizen or not, this course concerns you! The EU is a major global actor in the field of human rights. EU treaties state that human rights are a fundamental value of the Union, which must be a ‘silver thread’ in all its policies. The EU now acts within an impressive array of competences, and therefore has the potential to impact – positively or negatively – anyone’s human rights.
This EU and Human Rights course teaches the basics of human rights, placing the EU at the centre of investigation. The course will examine a number of key questions:
- What factors are key to making the EU a positive or a negative force for human rights? An example is the economic crisis: what impact has it had on people’s human rights in the EU and the world?
- Which actors, friends or foes, must the EU engage with to successfully promote human rights? Examples include NGOs, businesses, or other international organisations like the Council of Europe or the United Nations.
- In key policy sectors in which the EU is active, what is on balance the impact of the EU? Examples include trade, development, migration social policy or international crisis management.
All of the course activities aim to improve your understanding of how the EU, alone or in combination with other local or global, state or non-state actors, can better promote and uphold human rights worldwide.
The course is intended for anyone interested in human rights and the EU, human rights law, European law, European Studies, international relations, global governance, etc.
It is divided into four modules:
1: The EU and Human Rights: Value Promotion and Coherence
2: Promoting Human Rights inside the EU
3: Promoting Human Rights in EU External Action
4: Capitalising on Success and Remedying Flaws
This MOOC is based on the FRAME project (www.fp7-frame.eu), which has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration. (Grant Agreement No. 320000)
What you’ll learn
- How the EU works
- What the EU does
- How the EU affects human rights
- Where the EU can do better to be a positive force for human rights
Week 1: Human Rights Challenges in EU Policies
The course will first outline the background to EU action, presenting the environment in which the EU acts. Subsequently, focus will move to the challenges and factors that affect EU performance in relation to human rights.
Week 2: EU as a Human Rights Actor
In this week the core concept of human rights will be introduced, and subsequently examined in relation to two other values making up the EU’s constitutional triad: namely the rule of law and democracy. These are set against EU policy requirements provided for by the Treaties according to which coherence is to be ensured in all the EU’s internal and external policies.
Weeks 3-5: EU’s Internal Setting and Fundamental Rights Policies; Themes and Priorities of EU External Human Rights Policies; Actors and Geographic Approaches in EU External Relations
In weeks 3 to 5 the selected policy fields will illustrate this complexity compartmentalising the initiatives undertaken by the EU to fulfil its human rights obligations both internally and externally. The presentation of the complex policies will be accompanied by concrete case studies and insights from the practice of policymaking.
Week 6: EU Human Rights Policy Evaluation
Finally, the course will provide insights into monitoring and evaluating possibilities, which may aid the EU in improving its human rights related performance both in terms of the use of policy instruments and shaping the policy content.
Meet the instructors
Joana Abrisketa Uriarte
Eva Maria Lassen
Carmen Márquez Carrasco
Free access to the best education, open to anyone
The best classes from the best professors and universities
Learn through cool tools, videos, quizzes and game-like labs
On your schedule
Take courses when you want and at your own pace
available on ssrn here
Upholding the Rule of Law in the EU: On the Commission’s ‘Pre-Article 7 Procedure’ as a Timid Step in the Right Direction
Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University; University of Groningen – Faculty of Law
Middlesex University – School of Law
!!! Unfortunately, I had to skip the conference below – however, for those who have time, it still could be of interest.
The Project for Democratic Union’s Budapest Office is partnering with AEGEE-Budapest in organizing a Conference on the European refugee crisis. The primary focus of the event will be Hungarian migration and refugee policy in light of general European practice.
For many years the migration of European citizens within the EU has been causing worries due to its effect on the European labour market. Due to the high number of foreign job-seekers, governments of some Member States have raised their voices and called for urgent action and the reform of the EU’s migration policy. At the same time, the question of refugees coming from third countries – mainly war-zones – has been brought to the fore, after several accidents have occurred in the Mediterranean Sea.
Initially, only Mediterranean states were concerned by this situation, but lately other border countries of the EU, such as Bulgaria and Hungary, have become affected by the massive flow of often illegal immigrants and refugees. Although the EU is trying to find a coordinated answer to the problem, some countries managed to receive opt-outs and were able to carry out unilateral responses to this unprecedented situation. However, these practices are not far from being dangerous because in countries where extremism and xenophobia are on the rise, such as Hungary or Poland, they can result in a hostile attitude and hatred towards the people in despair.
Hungary’s fence erected on its Serbian border is only one example of the questionable methods EU Member States are using to solve the refugee crisis. The conference will address the Hungarian migration and refugee policy in light of the general European practice. It will also cover the EU’s current attempts to reform its migration policy and to show paths towards an acceptable solution to the situation.
Péter Balázs – Professor at Central European University, former Member of the European Commission, former Foreign Minister of Hungary
Carlos Puente – Economist, Attorney at Law, Political Scientist, Senior Visting Professor
Dezső Tamás Ziegler – Senior Lecturer at Eötvös Loránd University – Faculty of Social Sciences, Research Fellow at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences – Institute for Legal Studies
Event audience: Open to Public
For any further questions you may contact: Veronika Czina from PDU Budapest firstname.lastname@example.org or Péter Sczigel from AEGEE-Budapest email@example.com
Fővám tér 8 – Budapest
Date(s) – 23/09/2015
7:10 pm – 8:40 pm
Fővám tér 8
Created a part of a report on cross-border child abduction in the European Union for the European Parliament’s LIBE Committe. The other parts were written by different scholars, a major part was created by lawyers of the Swiss Institute of Comparative Law. The report can be accessed here or by clicking on the image above.
FRAME is a large-scale, collaborative research project funded under the EU’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) coordinated by the Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies and conducted by 19 research institutes from around the world. Our research focuses on the contribution of the EU’s internal and external policies to the promotion of human rights worldwide.
Our job will be to create a report on US-EU relations in the field of human rights. The website of the project can be reached here.
EU actions against imports:
EU against others in WTO:
Cases against EU (in WTO dispute settlement)
Complete WTO materials:
A new case against China:
I’m expecting several more scientific articles to get published in a couple a months:
- created a report fot the European Parliament on child abduction in Hungary, with special regard to private international law rules and the application of the 1980 Hague Convention – the report will be published on the website of the Parliament
- an article on the myths of consumer protecion in the EU in Hungarian Yearbook of International and European Law
- another article on the change of Hungary’s attitude towards the European Union (will be published in a book on Eastern-European states by Brill in Boston).
Furthermore, right now I am working on a piece on the commercial law relationship between the Hungarian illiberal state and the free European market.
Hungary is obviously moving towards autocracy. But we have to ask ourselves two questions. Would it be useful for the EU to introduce measures against a country with democratic problems? Secondly, is Europe in the moral, political and economic state to be able to act? Both questions require thorough deliberation.
The article can be reached here, or by clicking on the images below.
A Hungarian language version of the article was created by Budapest Beacon (Mikor az európai morális vákum talűlkozik a magyar önkényuralmi rendszerrel), which can be reached here or by clicking below.
(Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Field of application – Article 51 – Implementation of European Union law – Punishment of conduct prejudicial to own resources of the European Union – Article 50 – Ne bis in idem principle – National system involving two separate sets of proceedings, administrative and criminal, to punish the same wrongful conduct – Compatibility)
1. The ne bis in idem principle laid down in Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union does not preclude a Member State from imposing successively, for the same acts of non-compliance with declaration obligations in the field of value added tax, a tax penalty and a criminal penalty in so far as the first penalty is not criminal in nature, a matter which is for the national court to determine.
2. European Union law does not govern the relations between the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, signed in Rome on 4 November 1950, and the legal systems of the Member States, nor does it determine the conclusions to be drawn by a national court in the event of conflict between the rights guaranteed by that convention and a rule of national law.
Pls find below the text of Act V of 2013 on the Civil Code of Hungary. Could be of use for all foreign scholars:
Found two new important cases on the application of the EU Charter on Fundamental rights.
“In its judgment in AMS (15 January 2014), the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on whether the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union can apply in a dispute between private parties, holding that the Charter is applicable ‘in all situations governed by European Union law’.”
Available here or by clicking on the image above.
2) The Austrian Constitutional Court’s judgement on the Charter
Pls find below an article by Anna Holmes originally published in the Time (here), I liked it a lot.
A new book by ‘Tiger Mom’ Amy Chua claims to explain why some groups fail and others succeed. We’ve heard this all before.
Let’s be clear, there’s nothing “new” about “the new racism,” the term Suketu Mehta uses to characterize the arguments of Amy Chua and Jed Rubenfeld in reviewing their new book, “The Triple Package.” Chua and Rubenfeld’s ahistorical and condescending-sounding treatise, which seems primed to satisfy the appetites of salivating marketing departments and morning show producers, argues that three traits — a superiority complex, insecurity, and impulse control — account for why immigrant groups like Asians and Indians thrive in America. Mehta argues that this constitutes a “new racism,” where some groups are praised in order to denigrate others — who apparently deserve to fail because they lack these traits.
But isn’t this just the same old racism — barely wearing new clothes? Racism has always come in a variety of costumes and cloaks. Put another way: bigotry, intolerance, discrimination and violence can be as covert as they are overt; can owe a debt as much to the seemingly reasonable intellects of academies and legislatures as the Neanderthal ranting of the ugliest segregationists and supremacists.
The umbrella term for these scourges, “racism,” is the physical and psychological genocide of generations of stolen people, yes, but it is also the root of modern-day drug policy and the for-profit, institutionalization of millions of black and brown men. It is the privileging of the needs of luxury real estate developers over a commitment to fair, safe, affordable housing. It is a member of Congress shouting “You lie.” And it is the wink-wink of the modern-day Republican party insisting that “yes, you built that.”
Racism is not, nor has it ever been, “new” — it is what this country was built on. It is as American as apple pie.
To be fair, Suketu Mehta says as much, writing that Chua and Rubenfeld’s “The Triple Package” contains within it ideas and conclusions about American achievement that have long been dressed up in other, perhaps more explicitly distasteful — genetic, religious, economic — disguises.
But even calling this slightly new shade, this culture-based argument for achievement, this soft bigotry of the myth of group Exceptionalism, “new” obscures the realities of injustice in America. It assigns to publicity-hungry individuals and pseudoscientists responsibility for a narrow-mindedness that is, in fact, long-established and structural — as political as it is personal. It suggests that there is an “old” racism we have somehow moved beyond. As the Los Angeles Times’ Ellen D. Wu says of the model minority myth, it “both fascinates and upsets precisely because it offers an unambiguous yet inaccurate blueprint for solving the nation’s most pressing issues.”
So let’s not call it “new.” Let’s acknowledge that even if, as Mehta says, the United States thinks it has moved beyond race, many Americans refuse to believe that “race” was ever an issue to move beyond in the first place. Let’s not only recognize but thoroughly explore this nation’s longstanding, stubborn and self-deluding need to believe that success is based solely — or mostly — on merit, not the more complex, messy stew of opportunity, visibility, class, physical privilege, social capital, psychological stamina, and yes, race, gender, and sexual orientation.
“The Triple Package” is not evidence of a “new racism.” It’s the same old garbage, in a slightly different, Ivy League-endorsed disguise.
You can find a short summary of the program on the website of EESC.
Enjoyed reading it (even though, in the European Union, the essence of an e-commerce contract is NOT the concept of characteristic performance as it can be found in the Rome Convention, but the solution which can be found in Art 3-4-6 Rome I regulation).
However, it still is a nice piece to read.
You can download the article here or by clicking on the picture.
One of our shorter articles was cited in a material on the relationship between the UK and the EU. I really enjoyed reading how they collected the different viewpoints, it is always nice to meet opposing opinions about the same problem.
You can reach the article here.
Recently, I published two new articles.
The first one, published in the Yearbook of Private International Law summarizes the different conflicting private international law provisions of the EU. It classifies the rules by making several subgroups in order to understand the attributes of different regulations/directives. In fact, it is similar to my former works, but instead of only finding the provisions, it tries to make groups and make some statements based on the findings.
For the table of contents, please click here.
You can find the article on ssrn here.
The second one, published in the Hungarian journal Külgazdaság, was written in Hungarian together with Katalin Raffai from Pázmány Péter Catholic University (I am really happy to have a common article with her). This is its abstract:
“Several new laws which deal with the international aspects of family law issues have been adopted in the European Union in the recent years. According to the statements of the European institutions, these rules are important in order to strengthen the background of the free movement of EU citizens. Numerous problems had to be solved, like the question of the law applicable in case of a divorce proceeding or the procedure of maintenance payments. The article summarizes the provisions of the most important legal sources, with special regard to the private international law aspects of such cases. Furthermore, it also deals with the basic differences between the related domestic substantive family law regimes.”
“Az Európai Unióban az elmúlt években több olyan jogszabály is elfogadásra került, amely családjogi kérdésekkel foglalkozik. E normák megalkotására a belső piac logikája miatt, az uniós polgárok szabad mozgásának biztosítása végett volt szükség. A szabad mozgás folyományaképpen rendezni kellett számos kérdést, így például, hogy a házasság felbontására milyen jogot alkalmazzanak, vagy a tartásdíjakat milyen keretek között kelljen fizetni. E szabályok nemzetközi magánjogi (más néven: nemzetközi kollíziós) normák, azaz azt határoznák meg, milyen eljárási rendben kell végrehajtani és végrehajtatni a tagállami anyagi jogi családjogi szabályokat, illetve részletesen leírják, mely állam jogát alapul véve kell eljárni. Az írás kimondottan az alkalmazandó jog megállapításával foglalkozik, ám röviden kitér az anyagi jogi háttérszabályokra is.”
You can find the article on my SSRN profile here.
E-Consumer Protection In the Us – The Same Jungle As In Europe
With the use of the Internet, a new form of contract has appeared: the electronic contract, which is concluded online. In most cases, two parties are present: a consumer, who is in a relatively exposed position and a business entity. This article focuses on the protections given to consumers in the US in these cases – i.e. electronic consumer law in the US – at both federal and state level (with special regard to New York state). Principal questions are the following: do consumers in the US receive the same protections as consumers in Europe when purchasing goods online? When we buy goods from the US here in Europe through the Internet and have them shipped over, do we receive the same protections as in Europe? And what options exist for protecting ourselves? What are the rules and remedies that help us? Last, but not least: what can we learn from the US system, if anything? Summarising substantive US provisions that may be relevant for Europe is also beneficial with an eye to putting continuously evolving European directive law into a broader perspective.
Pls find below the slides of a lecture on the weaknesses and possible development of EU consumer law.
The slides can be reached here.
I teach English Language Terminology of International Relations.
In the European Union Regulation No. 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the law applicable to contractual obligations (the so called Rome I regulation) governs which law to apply to contracts containing international elements. With the continuing internalization of business activities, such rules have elementary importance. However, beside the unified rules of the regulation, numerous EU rules exist, which also have relevance. This is because of a provision in Rome I, which states that the regulation shall not prejudice the application or adoption of rules of the institutions of the EU which lay down rules concerning particular areas of contractual law. As an effect, several rules exist which override the provisions of Rome I. Thus, the present system of rules is fragmented, which may cause serious malfunctions in the legal practice. Most of these provisions can be found in consumer law directives, but other fields like employment law may also be of relevance. The article tries to collect these „hidden” provisions and analyse their effect on the Hungarian legal regime.
The article can be found here.