WilmerHale’s Post

Start your afternoon with reading my Op-Ed on the Staatsanwaltschaft Aachen (C-819/21) judgment of the Court of Justice on EU Law Live, where I elaborate on the significance of the ruling for the principle of mutual trust in the EU!

Check it out here:
https://lnkd.in/dCS8QnCi

#eulaw #cjeu #mutualtrust

At its latest meeting, N&T’s Dispute Resolution Group discussed certain issues related to the preliminary ruling procedure. Participants shared their personal experiences in connection with specific cases and their outcomes as well as regarding the specificities of acting before the Court of Justice of the European Union in person, covering, inter alia, the issue of interpretation and the questions arising in connection with the language of the oral statements. Participants also discussed the upcoming reform about the partial transfer of jurisdiction to give preliminary rulings from the Court of Justice to the General Court. #preliminaryrulingprocedure #cjeu #eulaw

This Practice Direction states basic and important principles on the giving of written reasons for decisions in the First-tier Tribunal. It is of general application throughout the First-tier Tribunal. It relates to the whole range of substantive and procedural decision-making in the Tribunal, by both judges and non-legal members. Accordingly, it must always be read and applied having regard to the particular nature of the decision in question and the particular circumstances in which that decision is made. https://lnkd.in/eSc4i4uu

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES STATEMENT OF THE COURT REGARDING THE CODE OF CONDUCT 13/11/2023 " (...) The absence of a Code [...] has led in recent years to the misunderstanding that the Justices of the Court, unlike all other jurists in this country, regard themselves as unrestricted by any ethics rules. To dispel this misunderstanding, [the undersigned Justices] are issuing this Code, which largely represents a codification of principles that [they] have long regarded as governing [their] conduct."  CANON 1: A JUSTICE SHOULD UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY. (...) CANON 2: A JUSTICE SHOULD AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL ACTIVITIES. (...) CANON 3: A JUSTICE SHOULD PERFORM THE DUTIES OF OFFICE FAIRLY, IMPARTIALLY, AND DILIGENTLY. A. RESPONSIBILITIES. (...) CANON 4: A JUSTICE MAY ENGAGE IN EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITIES THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE OBLIGATIONS OF THE JUDICIAL OFFICE. (...) CANON 5: A JUSTICE SHOULD REFRAIN FROM POLITICAL ACTIVITY. (...)

When are measures taken by competition authorities pursuant to dawn raid powers properly the subject of judicial review? As my colleague Angelos Vlazakis discusses below, courts in Europe have been reluctant to intervene until an investigation’s conclusion, save in circumstances where the challenged measures produce ‘independent’ legal effects. By contrast, intermediate measures (e.g., copying documents, interviewing employees) might lead to no infringement decision or prove immaterial to the one adopted, and so (it’s sometimes said) present incomplete or hypothetical questions which a court should not decide. But as Laws LJ once countered, hypothetical questions connote only a situation in which the events have not yet happened which will ‘clothe the answer to the question with immediate practical effects’. As the frequency and scope of dawn raids increase, is the tide now slowly turning in the exercise of the courts’ supervisory jurisdiction? https://lnkd.in/eqnpx6FQ

I have filed review petition against October 16 judgment authored by Justice Isa whereby Supreme Court declared that it is under Article 19A of the constitution but NOT under Right of Access to Information Act 2017. I have argued: SC can’t claim to be excluded from the purview of the Act. The definition of public body in the Act is quite inclusive as it covers “any court” that is “under the Federal law”, whereas the term “Federal law” includes both the Constitution and ordinary laws, as per its definition in Article 260 of the Constitution.

It is a honor to be invited as an expert in the Court of Justice of the European Union case C-365/23, Arce, in Luxembourg. It is assumed that the court's decision will have a significant impact on the future development of consumer law. An insight into the issue considered in the case can be found in my article "Will Latvia change the established doctrine of consumer status identification". Link to the article: https://lnkd.in/dGHPydvH

SA will fortunately be able to access established jurisprudence on fair use in at least 12 countries globally, whilst developing its own jurisprudence (as was done re: constitutional & other laws). The 4 factors of fair use have already been used in SA courts. #SignTheBill #CAB

The EFTA Court ⚖️🇪🇺 delivered a major ruling last week as regards, 1) its jurisdiction, and 2) the right of lower instance national courts and tribunals to send cases to it. 1) The EFTA Court confirmed it has jurisdiction to interpret not only the EEA Agreement, but also the Surveillance and Court Agreement (SCA) 🤝 2) The EFTA Court also confirmed that notwithstanding actions of higher instance national courts and tribunals, there remain rights for lower instance national courts and tribunals to send cases to the EFTA Court as requests for advisory opinions where they believe it to be necessary ✋ A solid judgment confirming the full availability of judicial protection, and the legal rights of parties to ensure EEA law is properly applied in the EFTA pillar of the EEA 🇪🇺 More on the NIELS website: https://lnkd.in/gghHdW84

The Hague Judgments Convention (Hague 2019) provides a framework for recognising and enforcing judgments between the courts of contracting states. When it comes into force in the UK in 2025, it will significantly widen the scope for enforcing a UK judgment in the EU27. International Injury partner Chris Deacon has examined the limitations of the Hague Judgments Convention for the victims of accidents abroad in the EU in a letter published by The Law Society Gazette, and a full-length article for the 2 August 2024 edition of New Law Journal. Read the full article here: https://lnkd.in/eVhz5wk8 #Hague2019 #HagueConvention #InternationalInjury