Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Administrative procedure – European Union countries'

Defence date: 30 March 2007
Examining Board: Prof. Philip Alston (European University Institute) ; Prof. Francesco Francioni (European University Institute) ; Prof. Olivier de Schutter (University of Louvain) ; Prof. Kevin Boyle (University of Essex Colchester)
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digital archive of EUI PhD theses

Les effets de l’intégration européenne sur les droits nationaux ont nourri une littérature scientifique abondante. Toutefois, les relations entre le public et l’Administration semblent être aujourd’hui un angle mort des études portant sur les interactions entre le système européen et les systèmes nationaux. L’étude se propose donc d’analyser l’effet de cette intégration européenne sur les relations entre le public et l’Administration, grâce à une comparaison des systèmes français, espagnol et européen. La thèse établit l’existence d’une convergence européenne relative à ces relations. L’analyse comparée permet de conclure qu’il existe un jeu d’influences réciproques qui conduit à un rapprochement des relations entre le public et l’Administration dans les systèmes étudiés. Dans un premier temps, cette convergence oblige à s’interroger sur les notions utilisées pour décrire ces relations, notamment celle de procédure administrative. Dans une perspective moderne, celle-ci doit être considérée comme un ensemble d’échanges d’informations entre le public et l’Administration. Ces échanges sont de plus en plus encadrés et codifiés afin de contribuer à une plus forte légitimité des décisions administratives. Dans un second temps, cette convergence met en lumière deux types de relations. Dans les procédures d’édiction d’acte administratif individuel, l’échange d’informations sert à la protection de l’intéressé, selon un modèle inspiré de la procédure juridictionnelle. À côté de ces procédures traditionnelles se développent des procédures innovantes et l’échange d’informations change de fonction. Ce dernier crée un dialogue administratif qui contribue à la pertinence et l’acceptabilité de la décision adoptée. Ce modèle coopératif de relations sert principalement l’efficacité administrative
The effects of European integration on national rights have generated extensive scholarly literature. However, the relationships between the citizens and the public administration appear to be still barely addressed in studies considering the interactions between the European system and the national systems. The research presented here aims therefore to analyze the impact of EU integration on the relationships between the citizens and the public administration through a comparison of the French, Spanish and European systems. This dissertation argues for the existence of a European convergence in these relationships. The comparative analysis indeed reveals that there is a complex interplay of reciprocal influences in the systems studied which results in the development of closer relationships between the citizens and the public administration. First, the very existence of a convergence makes it necessary to reconsider the notions that are used to describe these relationships, notably the notion of administrative procedure. Within a contemporary perspective, such a procedure is to be regarded as a set of information exchanges taking place between the citizens and the public administration. These exchanges are more and more regulated and codified so as to give stronger legitimacy to administrative decisions. Secondly, the observed convergence brings to light two types of relationships. In the procedure by which an individual administrative act is issued, the exchange of information serves to protect the citizen, according to a model derived from court proceedings. In addition to these traditional procedures, innovative procedures have been developing and the exchange of information has been repurposed. Within these procedures, it creates an administrative dialogue that supports the relevance and acceptability of the decision taken. This cooperative model of relationships primarily contributes to administrative efficiency

Булатін, Д. О. Адміністративно-правові засади здійснення превентивної діяльності поліцією: порівняння досвіду України та країн ЄС : дис. ... д-ра філос.: 12.00.07, 081 / Дмитро Олексійович; МВС України, Харків. нац. ун-т внутр. справ. - Харків, 2020. - 247 с.
У дисертації міститься теоретичне узагальнення актуальної наукової проблеми, пов’язаної із визначенням адміністративно-правових засад здійснення превентивної діяльності поліцією через порівняння досвіду України та країн ЄС, а також шляхів їх удосконалення. В результаті проведеного дослідження сформульовано низку положень та висновків котрі спрямовані на досягнення поставленої мети.
The dissertation contains a theoretical generalization of the current scientific problem related to the definition of administrative and legal principles of preventive activities by the police through a comparison of the experience of Ukraine and the EU, as well as ways to improve them. As a result of the research, a number of provisions and conclusions have been formulated which are aimed at achieving the set goal.
В диссертации содержится теоретическое обобщение актуальной научной проблемы, связанной с определением административно-правовых основ осуществления превентивной деятельности полицией через сравнение опыта Украины и стран ЕС, а также путей их совершенствования. В результате проведенного исследования сформулирован ряд положений и выводов которые направлены на достижение поставленной цели.

El principio de publicidad de las actuaciones judiciales se encuentra consagrado como un derecho fundamental en el artículo 24.2 de nuestra Constitución. Este derecho no es de carácter absoluto y se encuentra sometido a ciertas limitaciones previstas legalmente. La publicidad del proceso penal implica que tengan conocimiento de las actuaciones, no solo los propios interesados, sino también extraños al proceso. Esta actividad de difusión de la noticia, garantía de funcionamiento del Poder Judicial en una sociedad democrática, se efectúa principalmente por los medios de comunicación. El problema se produce cuando se informa sobre un hecho noticiable que se encuentra sub iudice y los Mass Media, a través de un “juicio paralelo”, pretenden, de forma continua y sesgada, examinar y valorar el proceso judicial, las pruebas y las personas implicadas en los hechos y asumen así el papel de juez e inducen a éste a un veredicto anticipado de culpabilidad o inocencia ante la opinión pública. Esta actividad colisiona con posiciones subjetivas de los individuos, que también tienen la consideración de derechos fundamentales como son los derechos a: (i) un proceso justo; (ii) un juez imparcial; (iii) la presunción de inocencia y (iv) recibir y comunicar información. Con esta tesis doctoral se ha procedido a estudiar dicha problemática así como las respuestas que la legislación, la jurisprudencia y la doctrina dan, en nuestro Ordenamiento jurídico y en derecho comparado, para conciliar estos derechos fundamentales con los intereses mediáticos de le prensa, así como las garantías previstas legalmente en el ámbito penal, civil y contencioso- administrativo para la salvaguarda de los mismos. En la parte final del trabajo se apuntan posibles soluciones al problema de los “juicios paralelos” que puedan dar respuesta al interés general de la sociedad en su pretensión de obtener una justicia eficaz en la represión del delito a la vez que respetuosa con los derechos de todos los ciudadanos que se pueden ver involucrados en el proceso judicial.
El principi de publicitat de les actuacions judicials es troba consagrat com un dret fonamental en l’article 24.2 de la nostra Constitució. Aquest dret no és de caràcter absolut i està sotmès a determinades limitacions previstes legalment. La publicitat del procés penal implica que tinguin coneixement de les actuacions, no només els propis interessats, si no també estranys al procés. Aquesta activitat de difusió de la notícia, garantia del funcionament del Poder Judicial en una societat democràtica, és realitzada, principalment, pels mitjans de comunicació. El problema es produeix quan s’informa d’un fet que és notícia i que es troba sub iudice, i els mass media, mitjançant un “judici paral·lel”, pretenen de forma continuada i esbiaixada examinar i valorar el procés judicial, les proves i les persones implicades en els fets, assumint el paper de jutge, induint a un veredicte anticipat de culpabilitat o innocència a aquest en front de l’opinió pública. Aquesta activitat topa amb posicions subjectives dels individus que també tenen la consideració de drets fonamentals com són els drets a: (i) un procés just; (ii) un jutge imparcial; (iii) la presumpció d’innocència i (iv) rebre i comunicar informació. Amb la present tesis doctoral s’ha procedit a estudiar la referida problemàtica així com les respostes que la legislació, la jurisprudència i la doctrina donen en el nostre Ordenament Jurídic i en dret comparat, per tal de conciliar aquests drets fonamentals amb els interessos mediàtics de la premsa, així com les garanties previstes legalment en l’àmbit penal, civil i contenciós – administratiu per a la salvaguarda dels mateixos. En la part final del treball s’apunten possibles solucions al problema dels “judicis paral·lels” que poden donar resposta a l’interès general de la societat en la seva pretensió d’obtenir una justícia eficaç en la repressió del delicte a la vegada que respectuosa amb els drets de tots els ciutadans que es puguin veure involucrats en el procés judicial.
The principle of publicity of judicial actions is set forth as fundamental right in article 24 of the Spanish Constitution. Nevertheless, this is not an absolute right: it has some legal limitations. The publicity of the criminal procedure implies that not only those directly affected by the procedure know the state of acts but third people. Information disclosure, which serves as a warranty of the functioning of the judicial system, is done in a democratic society by the media. The problem arises when mass media start a parallel trial while reporting on case which is still sub iudice, assessing and judging with a biased viewpoint the procedure, its participants and the evidences submitted, assuming the judge’s role and, therefore, trying to induce him/her to an anticipate judgement before the public opinion. Such activity collides with the position of the defendant, who has his/her own fundamental rights such as the right to (i) a fair trial; (ii) an impartial judge; (iii) the presumption of innocence and (iv) receive and communicate certain information. In the present thesis, the problem of parallel trials and the collision of rights have been studied taking into account the solutions provided by Law, case law and scholars both of Spanish Legal System and comparative Law in order to reconcile such fundamental rights with media’s interest and also the legal guarantees for defendants in civil, criminal and administrative procedures. In the final part of this thesis, there are some possible solutions to the problem of parallel trials which try to give an answer to society’s general interest to find an efficient justice system in punishing crimes which also respects the rights of all citizens which may be part of the process.

Defence date: 13 June 2018
Examining Board: Professor Deirdre Curtin, European University Institute (Supervisor) ; Professor Miguel Poiares Maduro, European University Institute ; Professor Paul Craig, St. John's College, Oxford ; Professor Herwig Hofmann, University of Luxembourg
The thesis examines how EU courts have addressed the rule of law challenges of composite procedures. Composite procedures are pervasive administrative processes which involve joint decision-making by national and EU authorities. Such procedures fit poorly into the EU’s traditional model of administrative law, EU executive federalism, which is designed for an administrative system where decisional power is exercised separately by the two levels of administration. This mismatch would make it difficult to observe several key requirements of the rule of law in EU administrative law – such as the right to be heard, the right to a reasoned decision, judicial protection, and the control of legality. The thesis argues that EU courts have crafted a series of unprecedented implicit principles that specifically aim at ensuring the observance of rule of law requirements in composite decision-making. In doing so, EU case law has departed from the old doctrine of EU executive federalism. This was however not an easy transition. Indeed, since the EU’s foundational period, EU executive federalism was considered to be a constitutional doctrine, i.e., to immediately flow from the Treaties. Given the almost complete lack of references to administrative issues in the Treaties, this reading was entirely question-begging. Its espousal in the case law is explained in the dissertation as the likely result of a shared federalist conception of the European Union and of the administrative order created under its aegis. The thesis further argues that, just as the doctrine of EU executive federalism, the judge-made law of composite procedures relies on a series of assumptions on the relations between national and EU administration. The principles of composite decision-making do not treat national and EU authorities as two strictly separate spheres of power. Rather, they handle the two levels as a single, integrated administration, where national authorities are treated as an extension of the Commission – as the EU administration’s ancillary bureaucracy.

Defence date: 15 June 2012
First made available online on 29 July 2019
Examining Board: Professor Neil Walker, EUI / University of Edinburgh (Supervisor); Professor Marise Cremona, EUI; Professor Valsamis Mitsilegas, Queen Mary, University of London; Professor Kimmo Nuotio, University of Helsinki.
This thesis shall contribute to European Criminal Procedure, a rapidly evolving area of EU policy that has attracted much attention, but has also been subject to criticism. The research will first identify and analyse the main rationales of this area. Since the Tampere European Council of 1999, mutual recognition has become the most fundamental concept of judicial cooperation in criminal matters and has experienced a steep career, having been adopted by Art. 82 TFEU. When the principle of mutual recognition was introduced, it was based on an analogy to the free movement of goods. This analogy has often been regarded as flawed. Moreover, there has always been a notion of mutual recognition in judicial cooperation as well. The study will show how these two factors have influenced the development of the area, and how policy concepts, such as the principle of mutual trust, have had a greater influence on the development of the law than any legal doctrine. The lack of a coherent approach to the area of judicial cooperation and the unsystematic combination of different legal orders have caused unforeseen frictions for the individual. These will be illustrated by an analysis of the law of transnational evidence-gathering according to the European Evidence Warrant and the proposed European Investigation Order. It will be shown that most of the problems result from the lack of a uniform allocation of jurisdiction and from an overly confined understanding of fundamental rights in the context of judicial cooperation. By analysing the nature and purpose of jurisdictional rules in a national and a European context, the thesis aims at uncovering the theoretic foundations on which a uniform allocation of jurisdiction could be built. Finally, the thesis analyses the role of fundamental rights in judicial cooperation. It will uncover the ineptness of a nation-state oriented interpretation of fundamental rights to adequately address the problems of mutual recognition and argue for a European understanding of transnational judicial rights.

Award date: 31 December 1997
Supervisor: R. Dehousse
First made available online: 14 June 2017
In current debates turning on the fundamental values which the legal order of the European Community should be committed to respect and protect legal issues relating to administrative process and, in particular, the adequate degree of procedural protection to be accorded to individuals have increasingly come to the forefront. This paper seeks to contribute to the discussion by trying to demonstrate that and why the significance ascribed to the law governing Community administrative procedures has indeed gone through a deep metamorphosis during the last decade which arguably has not yet come to an end. In fact, in the face of the recent case-law of the Community courts, which will be analyzed, it seems not too daring to speak of an ongoing process of 'constitutionalization' with respect to procedural requirements. In the context of this broader development, an attempt will be made to reveal some of its exemplary features, namely, the dynamic expansion of a specified set of procedural standards of good administration. It will be argued that process standards, such as the right to access to information or the right to be heard, tend to be extensively interpreted in particular instances as well as to gradually gain universal applicability in the vast field of what has come to be named 'Community' or 'European administrative law'. However, the marked trend towards constitutionalizing process principles, which is primarily being supported by judicial intervention, is understandable only with a view to the extraordinarily heterogeneous nature of the Community administrative 'system' referred to; its 'structure' therefore calls for some further elucidation.

Awarded the Mauro Cappelletti Prize for the best comparative law doctoral thesis, 2010.
Defence date: 16 March 2009
Examining Board: Loïc Azoulai (University of Paris II); Paul Craig (St. John's College, Oxford); Bruno De Witte (EUI); Jacques Ziller (Supervisor, former EUI and University of Pavia)
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digital archive of EUI PhD theses
This dissertation critically assesses the current scope and meaning of participation rights in European administrative law and proposes a different normative solution to the problem of the procedural protection of rights and legally protected interests. The analysis of the Courts' case law on this matter demonstrates that their view on participation rights is determined by a bilateral conception of the procedure which involves the decision-maker and the decisiontaker and justifies the latter's right to be heard. All extensions of this right endorsed by the Courts' case law fall within the realm of this basic construction. Likewise, the exclusion of participation rights from rulemaking procedures is a consequence of this basic approach to participation rights. It is defended that the structural scheme within which the European Courts conceive participation rights prevails over the consideration of the substantive adverse effects that may be produced in the legal sphere of legal and natural persons. It is defended that this status quo is too restrictive and overlooks the procedural protection of rights and legally protected interests where this would be justified. An extension of the scope of participation rights is thus proposed. The solution defended is grounded on a concept of participation, built on the basis of rationales of participation that can be derived from the Courts' case law as well as from rules and principles of national laws, and is framed by the concept of legal administrative relationship, which was developed in national administrative law. The solution proposed is deemed to be more consonant with the rule of law, as well as with specific features of European administrative law (in particular with the characteristics of European normative acts and with the centrality of the individual conveyed by principles of European law). This study consists of two parts. First and foremost, it is an interpretation of the Courts' case law regarding participation rights, as well as of selected relevant legal provisions covering this matter. For this purpose, this interpretation combines the literal, teleological, historical and systematic elements of interpretation. The theoretical conceptions that frame the critical analysis of the Courts' stance are grounded on rules, principles and theories found and developed in selected national legal systems. These contribute to a better understanding of participation rights from a de lege lata perspective because they have inspired some of the current features of European administrative law on this matter. Furthermore, they are capable of providing a valuable second level of analysis to critically assess the current status quo. Secondly, this dissertation includes a study of those forms of participation that exist in the EU political system and that do not constitute legally enforceable rights and duties. These demonstrate that participation is a constitutive feature of the EU political system. Moreover, this permits to consider other meanings of participation, which are not fully deprived of legal meaning, to contrast them with the rights-based approach to participation proposed in this dissertation, as well as to demonstrate the little attention given to rights-based participation in European decision-making.

Examining board: Professor Christian Joerges (supervisor) EUI; Professor Loïc Azoulai EUI; Professor Ellen Vos Maastricht University; Professor Maria Lee University College London
Defence date: 30 August 2012
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digital archive of EUI PhD theses
This thesis aims at addressing the problem of a potential dis-embedding of the EU administration from democratic institutions. For that purpose it explores the potential of a novel approach to EU constitutionalism, namely of European conflicts-law to ensure the democratic legitimacy of EU administrative governance of GMOs. The term administrative governance is being used as referring to a system of administrative action, in which EU administrative actors implement EU law in cooperation with national administrations, as well as with scientific and private experts. In order to analyse the functioning of this system governance is employed as analytical framework. This thesis shows that the conflicts-law approach constitutes a valuable constitutional framework. It helps to identify and better understand the legitimacy problems of EU administrative governance in the field of GMOs. The existent legal rules in this area can to a certain extent be reconceived as embodying conflicts-law mechanisms and ideas. This is most visible in their aim to procedurally organise cooperation between various actors within horizontal network structures of decision-making. However, the implementation of GMO rules in practice has considerably undermined the functioning of conflicts-law mechanisms. The analysis reveals problematic shifts of authority, which go beyond the system of shared responsibility envisaged by the EU legislator. Instead of administrative cooperation between national and supranational actors, hierarchy in the sense of central decision-making by the Commission dominates the process. Moreover, instead of shared responsibility between public authorities and the biotech industry, the applicant has become a powerful player of GMO regulation. This has to some extent also undermined the application of the precautionary principle in this area. This thesis concludes that attempts of EU law to constitutionalise administrative governance of GMOs in a legitimate way have not proven to be successful so far. Finally, this thesis also reveals certain limitations of the conflicts-law approach. It is suggested that conflicts-law at present should not be considered as a fully-fledged theory of European integration. Its strength lies in the ability to re-direct the discussion on democratic legitimacy of EU law, and to offer constitutional ideas for further elaboration of regulatory solutions. However, further conceptual clarifications seem necessary in order to make it operational in concrete cases of EU regulation.

Defence date: 13 December 2016
Examining Board: Professor Marise Cremona, European University Institute (EUI Supervisor); Professor Edoardo Chiti, University of La Tuscia (External Supervisor); Professor Christophe Hillion, University of Leiden and University of Oslo; Professor Joana Mendes, University of Luxembourg
The thesis uses as case studies the Stabilisation and Association Process and the European Neighbourhood Policy in order to exemplify the increasing role played by the Unionﾒs administrative power in external relations. While seemingly harmless, the administrative power bears important legal consequences regarding the position of individuals, of third countries, and of the Union as a whole. In a system based on the rule of law (and committed to its respect in external relations), it is crucial to question whether implementing arrangements are in place or ought to be put in place with the aim of subjecting the external administrative power to administrative rules and principles. The analytical framework suggested by the thesis uses as a starting point the features and the impact of the administrative power externally. Based on this analysis, it identifies which administrative law principles (as developed within the framework of the internal market) have the potential of giving effect to the administrative rule of law externally once applied and operationalized in the external domain. Despite the increasing role granted to administrative power externally, administrative law in external relations is underdeveloped. Therefore, the analytical framework suggested by this thesis is relevant as it helps to ensure that the action of the Union in the international scene is carried out in compliance with its constitutional spiration, i.e. upholding the rule of law in its relations with the outer world, and as it structures the relation between the Union and individuals, and between the Union and third countries. The 'long-overdue encounter' between EU external relations and EU administrative law ought to be encouraged. The thesis aims to offer a methodology for structuring such an encounter and for planning venues for future meetings.
Chapter 1 of the thesis draws upon a previously published EUI LAW WP; 2015/08

Defence date: 15 September 2017
Examining Board: Professor Giorgio Monti, EUI (supervisor); Professor Dennis Patterson, EUI; Professor Davíð Þór Björgvinsson, University of Iceland; Professor Ioannis Lianos, UCL
The question of procedural fairness in EU’s competition procedure has been discussed widely in the academic literature based on the traditional positivistic legal method; so far without a success in producing a consensus on where the practical limitations of the concept of procedural fairness ought to lie. This thesis sets out to approach the problem more fundamentally by propping beyond the concept of procedural fairness in the legal positivistic sense, and venture into the territory of moral and political philosophy for establishing a practical understanding of the more general concept of fairness in human relations. Once the concept of fairness has been properly revealed in practical terms, the thesis attempts to quantitatively translate this concept of fairness into the laws to facilitate the composition of a fair legal rule. To achieve this, a novel methodological model is constructed based on microeconomic tools. This model, the model of fair rules, is then used to assess two dilemmas of procedural fairness in the context of EU’s competition procedure that have been solved by the CJEU based on the traditional juridical method. The results of the assessment suggest that methodological improvements can be made in the design of competition procedures with regards to facilitating procedural fairness. Such improvements would also have implications for the legal interpretive methodologies used by the EU courts.

Defence date: 9 October 2006
Supervisor: Prof. Jacques Ziller
Awarded the Mauro Cappelletti Prize for the best comparative law doctoral thesis, 2007.
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digitised archive of EUI PhD theses completed between 2013 and 2017
This dissertation examines a burgeoning policy area of the EU - the regulation of cross border civil and commercial litigation. The dissertation analyses the EU's specific legislative measures regulating civil procedure and assesses their impact on litigation, particularly due process rights. The policy is then placed in the broader contexts of European integration and the international codification of civil procedure.

Defence date: 2 February 2001
Examining board: Mr Jon Andersen, Deputy Permanent Secretary, the Danish Parliamentary Ombudsman Office ; Prof. Renaud Dehousse, EUI (supervisor) ; Prof. Carol Harlow, the London School of Economics and Social Sciences ; Prof. Jacques Ziller, EUI
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digitised archive of EUI PhD theses completed between 2013 and 2017

Defence date: 8 September 2009
Examining Board: Profs. Christian Joerges (Supervisor, former EUI and University of Bremen); Hans-W. Micklitz (EUI); John Paterson (External Co-Supervisor, University of Aberdeen); David M. Trubek (University of Wisconsin, Madison)
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digital archive of EUI PhD theses
This thesis is devoted to analysing the emerging relationship in the European Union between 'new governance' - epitomised by the development of the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) - and law. While some scholars have seen the project of new governance as a purely political or functional enterprise - a mechanism of 'soft law' - the thesis will argue against such a view through an empirical analysis of a particular OMC process - the OMC for social inclusion and social protection (the OMC SPSI). While on the one hand, the OMC SPSI has achieved considerable success in creating a new social policy vocabulary in Europe, the very description of the OMC as an instrument of 'soft law' has handed considerable power to frame key policy decisions to national and European executives, while depriving Parliaments and local authorities from their normal rights of scrutiny. The OMC SPSI illustrates why - far from invoking a merely 'technical' or procedural set of questions - 'new governance' is deeply implicated in debates over the future of the European welfare state. The indicators and recommendations of the method are not seen by its participants as neutral descriptors, but rather invoke competing views of the very ends of social policy in Europe. The description of new governance as soft and heterarhical does not therefore dilute its key legitimacy challenges, but makes them ever more pressing. In response, the thesis will argue for a 'constitutionalisation' of new governance. This constitutionalisation, the thesis will argue, should not be aimed at a legal 'juridification' of OMC procedures, or at re-enforcing their participatory potential, but rather at creating opportunities for political contestation and scrutiny in procedures too long the preserve of a small and mutually re-enforcing circle of executive actors. A 'republican' constitutionalisation of the OMC - one able to politicise the norms and indicators through which national social policy is being evaluated - may allow 'new governance' a last opportunity to refute accusations of executive dominance and technocratic paternalism that threaten to undermine its 'procedural' potential.

Defence date: 9 May 1997
Supervisor: Francis Snyder
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digitised archive of EUI PhD theses completed between 2013 and 2017
Con l’istituzione del Tribunale di primo grado, resa possibile dall’Atto unico europeo e realizzata con la decisione 88/951 del Consiglio, è stato introdotto nel sistema comunitario il doppio grado di giurisdizione per le cause trasferite in primo grado alla competenza del Tribunale, A seguito della progressiva espansione delle competenze trasferite, il Tribunale è attualmente giudice di primo grado per tutti i ricorsi diretti proposti dalle persone fìsiche e giuridiche. Il Trattato di Maastricht ha esteso l'ambito delle competenze " potenziali" del Tribunale: l'art. 168A CE consente infatti il trasferimento dei ricorsi diretti proposti dagli Stati membri e dalle Istituzioni comunitarie. Resta riservata alla Corte di giustizia la competenza a conoscere delle questioni pregiudiziali sottoposte ai sensi dell’an. 177 del Trattato.

Author was awarded the European Public Law Group's special distinction 2010 for her PhD thesis.
Defence date: 28 September 2009
Examining Board: Profs. Ulf Bernitz (External Co-Supervisor, University of Stockholm); Gráinne de Burca (Supervisor, former EUI and Fordham University); Bruno De Witte (EUI); Walter van Gerven (University of Leuven)
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digital archive of EUI PhD theses
Through the judge-made requirements developed in its case-law, the Court of Justice has laid down obligations on national courts to provide effective judicial protection for individuals that seek to enforce Community law claims. This thesis will study the Europeanisation of national remedies and procedures that comes about in this process. I will carry out the analysis in two stages. In the first stage, I will look from a European perspective at the principle of effective judicial protection, which I will view as a Trojan horse containing the judge-made requirements, and establish what is understood by effective judicial protection. I will seek to identify more precise obligations incumbent on national courts in relation to different remedies and procedural rules. Moreover, I will seek to establish the rationale of the Court's intervention into national procedural autonomy. In particular, I will consider if the rationale is a concern to protect individual rights or whether the language of 'rights' is rather used as a legitimizing pretext for enhancing the general effectiveness of Community law and for harmonising remedies and procedures. In a second stage, the thesis will empirically study the Europeanisation of remedies and procedures at the domestic level, by looking at the Swedish judiciary's reaction to those judge-made requirements. It is only by looking at what happens when the Trojan horse unfolds in the national legal system that one can understand its role and whether the principle, in practice, achieves the intended rationales, or whether its complexity in fact hampers effective judicial protection. It will emerge that, in the Swedish context, there is a gap between European theory and national practice. In this respect, the study will highlight the role of the national legal and judicial culture in ensuring the effectiveness of Community law. Conclusions will be drawn from the empirical study on whether the Trojan horse really does serve as a functional and effective tool to achieve Europeanisation of remedies and procedures and the Court's intended rationales. I will call for clarifications, coherence and better 'judicial governance' of this complicated area of law.

Defence date: 20 June 2008
Jury Members: Prof. Niels Åkerstrøm Andersen, Copenhagen Business School; Prof. Damian Chalmers, London School of Economics and Political Science; Prof. Marise Cremona, European University Institute; Prof. Dr. Christian Joerges, European University Institute/University of Bremen (Supervisor).
Fulltext in Open Access was removed in January 2010 upon request by the author due to publication of the thesis with a commercial publisher.
First made available online: 29 July 2021
This dissertation explains the emergence and functioning of three forms of governance structures within the context of the European integration and constitutionalisation process: comitology, (regulatory) agencies and the Open Method of Co-ordination. The point of departure is the insight that the intergovernmental/supranational distinction, which most theories of European integration and constitutionalisation rely on, has lost its strength. A new paradigm of EU research is therefore needed. Against this background it is suggested that the distinction between governing and governance provides a more appropriate basis for analysing the phenomenon of integration and constitutionalisation in Europe. The distinction between governing and governance allows for an understanding of the EU as a hybrid consisting of a governing dimension, characterised by legal and organisational hierarchy, and a governance dimension which operates within a network form characterised by legal and organisational heterarchy. The function of governance structures is to ensure the embeddedness of the governing dimension in the wider society. Instead of representing contradictory developments, the two dimensions are therefore mutually constitutive in the sense that more governing implies more governance and vice versa. These theoretical insights are illustrated through two detailed case studies which respectively reconstruct the operational mode of the Open Method of Coordination within EU Research & Development Policy and the regulatory system for the EU chemicals market (REACH). The book is inter-disciplinary in nature and incorporates insights from law, political science and sociology.

Award date: 12 December 2013
Supervisor: Professor Loïc Azoulai, European University Institute.
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digital archive of EUI PhD theses
The thesis addresses a recent development in EU administrative law at the interface between the principle of primacy of EU law and the competence of the Member States to enforce EU law. EU law obliges Member States in a growing number of directives or regulations to equip their administrative authorities with independence from the government (‘governmental inde-pendence’). On the basis of two recent decisions of the European Court of Justice concerning the independence of national data protection authorities the legal meaning of governmental independence will be elaborated. This thesis argues that there is a broader approach in EU law triggering the establishment of domestic independent administrative authorities. However, obliging Member States to decouple domestic authorities from the national government is not without consequences. In order to determine these consequences the reception of EU inde-pendence requirements in France and Germany is examined in-depth for which telecommuni-cations, data protection and statistics serve as the fields of reference. In the following, this thesis focuses on the effect within the executive of the Member States and claims that Mem-ber States lose their autonomy regarding the setting up of their internal administrative organi-sation while self-confident administrative authorities appear on the national level challenging governmental decisions: the disaggregating effect. In contrast to other analyses, this thesis provides arguments that this development is not directed to technocratic models of govern-ance, but to a more effective application and enforcement of EU law which exceeds field-specific approaches to independent institutions. Furthermore, the competence of the EU to oblige Member States to create independent domestic administrative authorities is neither constrained by the respect of the national identity (Article 4 (2) TEU) nor by the principle of institutional autonomy. However, granting independence to domestic independent administra-tive authorities combined with a re-integration to the European Commission infringes the principle of a decentralised administrative structure as laid down in Article 291 (1) TFEU.

Defence date: 8 November 2003
Examining Board: Prof. Eduardo García de Enterría (Universidad Complutense, Madrid) ; Prof. Karl-Heinz Ladeur (Universidad de Hamburgo/Instituto Universitario Europeo, Florencia) ; Prof. Luis Martín Rebollo, Director externo (Universidad de Cantabria) ; Prof. Jacques Ziller, Director (Instituto Universitario Europeo, Florencia)
First made available online 21 May 2018

Defence date: 9 March 2009
Examining Board: Prof. Gráinne De Búrca, EUI- Fordham Law School- Harvard Law School (Supervisor); Prof. Marise Cremona, EUI (Internal Advisor); Prof. Takis Tridimas, Financial Law Unit, Queen Mary, University of London; Prof. Niamh Moloney, London School of Economics and Political Science- Financial Markets Group, University of London
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digital archive of EUI PhD theses
Financial markets help allocate capital efficiently across the economy, thereby boosting economic growth- hence the salience of the creation of a single market in financial services within the EU single market project. Nevertheless, despite the EU's financial regulatory programme, it appears that a fully-fledged single European financial market is yet to be achieved. According to some, the substantive context of EU financial regulation is partially to account for this failure. More recently, though, both in policy and academic circles, the focus has been shifting towards the governance of EU financial law. Within this context, this thesis analyses the institutional arrangements for EU financial market regulation and supervision - crystallized in the so-called Lamfalussy framework- and explores the potential and problems of the prospect of institutional consolidation (in the form of one or more EU financial authorities) as an alternative to that framework. The debate, which seemed to have subsided in recent years, is now again coming to the fore, in light of the ongoing international financial crisis. This evidences the close relationship between substance and governance: the quality of rules ultimately depends both on the input that produced them, as well as -if not more- on the quality of the implementation, application and enforcement of the rules. This discussion on the future of EU financial governance is undertaken in two parts. The thesis examines firstly the interaction of 'classical' financial law aims (achieving efficient and stable financial markets) with 'integrationist' aims (the commitment to create a single European financial market, as a response to growing international competition). The thesis then situates the institutional question within the broader context of the EU public law framework in a more deliberate and systematic way than has hitherto been done in the existing scholarly literature. The result is an argument in favour of institutional consolidation in the EU financial sector, with an emphasis on supervision. The case of the US SEC, whose success is arguably based on its enforcement function, is used to illustrate that institutional consolidation is not synonymous with 'one size fits all' solutions, but that flexibility can be incorporated in an authority's regulatory tools. To be sure, further discussion is necessary in order to achieve this balance; but the thesis argues that we do better to focus on the details of the 'how' best to design such institutions, rather than on omphaloskeptical questions of 'whether' they are needed. Indeed, at a closer look, arguments against this approach rarely dispute the need itself for some institutional consolidation, but rather point to the difficulties in its design.

Award date: 22 November 2017
Supervisor: Professor Nehal Bhuta
This thesis is an attempt to understand the multistakeholder model of governance within the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) through the lens of Global Administrative Law (GAL). ICANN is presented within GAL scholarship as a successful example that has incorporated principles found within GAL. This thesis questions that notion, and presents a narrative of ICANN that demonstrates some of the normative issues underlying the incorporation of GAL principles. In this thesis, I argue that ICANN does not neatly fit into the GAL narrative and is in fact an attempt akin to fitting a square peg into a round hole, by ignoring the salient features of ICANN. Ultimately, I believe that this enquiry will contribute to GAL scholarship as well as the present understanding of ICANN. For the former, this thesis discusses the most important principles of GAL, namely accountability, transparency, participation and engagement, and publicness. For the latter, this thesis highlights the shortcomings of ICANN and gives a yardstick on which ICANN could be measured.

Defence date: 31 October 2014
Examining Board: Professor Adrienne Héritier, European University Institute (Supervisor); Professor Laszlo Bruszt, European University Institute; Professor Renaud Dehousse, Sciences-Po Paris; Professor Mark Thatcher, London School of Economics.
In order to fill the 'EU regulatory gap' caused by the mismatch between the single market programme and the lack of EU regulatory capacity, a number of EU regulatory agents were created. Committees, networks and EU agencies mushroomed in order to fulfill different regulatory functions. The thesis aims at explaining the variation of these delegation patterns between sectors and over time. Combining an innovative and refined functional-institutionalist approach and power-distributional factors, the thesis first argues that the distribution of implementing competences has a crucial effect on the delegation pattern. While nationally based implementation would explain the establishment of EU regulatory networks, expert committees would be found where most implementing competences are in the hands of the Commission. Second, the gradual reinforcement of networks and committees up to their possible transformation into EU agencies is addressed by a dynamic relationship between functional and distributional forces unfolding over time through feedback loops. Keen on keeping their power, policy-makers set up weak agents before expanding their power at a later stage after realizing they lacked the means to achieve the policy objectives assigned to them. The empirical analysis, based on three case studies (the regulation of food safety, electricity and telecommunications) confirms and completes the conjectures by pointing at additional factors such as the presence of independent regulatory agencies at the national level, the technicality of the sector and sociological pressure. In addition to providing a wealth of new insights on regulatory delegation in the EU, the thesis offers a sophisticated adaptation of the principal-agent framework in multiple principals configurations and makes a strong case for refining the conceptualization of functional pressure and colouring the study of institutional choice, otherwise dominated by distributional and institutional factors, with a revamped functional approach.

Defence date: 21 June 2017
Examining Board: Prof. Hans-W. Micklitz, EUI (Supervisor) Prof. Marise Cremona, EUI Prof. Laurence Gormley, University of Groningen Prof. Fernanda Nicola, Washington College of Law, American University
The aim of this thesis is to illustrate, on the basis of a socio-legal study presented in three qualitative case studies, the role of hybrid collective remedies in enforcing European socially oriented regulation, in particular environmental law, anti-discrimination law and consumer law, for the creation of a European social legal order, which is able to gradually counter its perceived internal market bias. The hybrid collective remedies at stake in the three case studies – each case study constituted by a preliminary reference to the CJEU – are symptomatic of the three legal-political fields at stake. With the EU taking a leading role in the three fields for the purpose of complementing the creation of an internal market, the EU has decoupled the fields from their national social welfare origin and re-established a policy which is not so much based on ensuring social justice, but more based on procedural mechanisms to ensure access justice. Likewise, the EU left the creation of collective remedies fostering a genuine protective purpose to the Member States. The national and European models of justice underlying the three legal-political fields and their remedies are of a complementary, i.e., of a hybrid nature, and are moving towards the creation of an integrated European social order. The creation of the European social order via national actors using the preliminary reference procedure to implement the three policies at stake goes hand in hand with the creation of a European society.

Defence date: 20 November 1992
Examining board: Prof. T.C. Daintith (Institute of Advanced Studies, London) ; Prof. L. Lorvellec (Université de Nantes) ; Prof. Y. Mény (Institut d'Etudes Politique, Paris) ; Prof. F. Snyder (Institut universitaire européen, Florence) ; Dr. S. Ventura (Commission des Communauté européennes, Bruxelles)
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digitised archive of EUI PhD theses completed between 2013 and 2017

Defence date: 21 December 2000
Examining board: Prof. Joël Rideau, Directeur de thèse/extérieur, Université de Nice-Sophia-Antipolis, Membre de l'Institut Universitaire de France ; Prof. Renaud Dehousse, Directeur de thèse IUE, Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris ; Prof. Mario Chiti, Université de Florence ; Prof. Fabrice Picod, Université Panthéon-Assas de Florence ; Prof. Jacques Ziller, Institut Universitaire Européen de Florence

Award date: 30 November 2015
Supervisor: Professor Loïc Azoulai, European University Institute
This thesis considers the Europeanisation of English administrative law, in the specific context of the principle of protection of legitimate expectations. It assesses whether, how and to what extent the way in which the way in which legitimate expectations are protected in EU law has influenced the protection of legitimate expectations in English law. To make this assessment, a thorough analysis is conducted of case law in both jurisdictions. The thesis is structured into five main Chapters. Chapter A provides an introduction and looks at some general issues surrounding the concept of legitimate expectation, including which expectations are protectable and what is meant by legitimacy. Chapter B traces the development of the protection of legitimate expectations in English and EU law, and considers certain particular features in more detail for each jurisdiction, with the aim of establishing some parameters against which more recent case law can be tested and compared. In Chapter C an in-depth analysis of recent case law of the English courts, both falling within and outside the scope of EU law, is undertaken, and comparisons are drawn between these cases and with the traditional position of EU law on the protection of legitimate expectations. Chapter D contains a similar analysis in respect of recent cases of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Finally, Chapter E draws these analyses together and concludes that while there is limited convergence in the way English and EU courts approach the protection of legitimate expectations, both jurisdictions remain wary of external influence.

Defence date: 27 May 1992
Examining board: Prof. Marie-Chantal Boutard-Labarde (Université de Paris X-Nanterre) ; Prof. Fausto Capelli (Université de Parme) ; Prof. Peter Müller-Graff (Université de Trier) ; Prof. Jürgen Schwarze (Supervisor - EUI) ; Prof. Jean Vergès (Université de Paris I)
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digitised archive of EUI PhD theses completed between 2013 and 2017

Rozprawa doktorska składa się z pięciu rozdziałów, w których autorka podejmuje próbę identyfikacji wewnętrznych organów i zewnętrznych podmiotów organizacyjnych składających się na bezpieczeństwo otwartych funduszy inwestycyjnych, oraz oceny ich względnego wpływu na niniejsze bezpieczeństwo organizacyjne w tychże funduszach inwestycyjnych w Polsce. W niniejszej rozprawie doktorskiej przyjęto następujące trzy hipotezy robocze: ▪ działalność organizacyjna funduszy inwestycyjnych jest ściśle uregulowana literą prawa w zakresie jego funkcjonowania, jak również kontrolowana poprzez organy wewnętrzne i podmioty zewnętrzne funduszu inwestycyjnego, co należy uznać za jak najbardziej właściwą praktykę ustawodawcy, która, z uwagi na liczne kompetencje tych podmiotów i organów, gwarantuje zwiększone bezpieczeństwo organizacyjne i stabilność funduszy inwestycyjnych; ▪ przepisy prawa unijnego w coraz to większym stopniu wpływają na funkcjonowanie oraz działalność funduszy inwestycyjnych działających na rynku polskim, nakładając coraz więcej restrykcji i obowiązków, które prowadzą do zwiększenia bezpieczeństwa organizacyjnego funduszy inwestycyjnych, oraz ▪ działalność nadzorcza Komisji Nadzoru Finansowego nad funduszami inwestycyjnymi ma charakter bardzo szeroki, jednak słusznym założeniem ustawodawcy jest, aby, w celu bezpieczeństwa organizacyjnego uczestników funduszy inwestycyjnych, jak i samych funduszy, fundusze inwestycyjne podlegały nadzorowi zewnętrznemu w postaci niezależnego organu państwowego - Komisji Nadzoru Finansowego. W pierwszym rozdziale główny nacisk położono na wyjaśnienie podstawowych pojęć i elementów rynku finansowego jako obszaru, w którym fundusze inwestycyjne prowadzą działalność i przedstawiają fundusz inwestycyjny jako uczestnika tego rynku. Rozdział drugi przedstawia problematykę źródeł prawa, które są podstawą funkcjonowania funduszy inwestycyjnych, począwszy od chronologicznego opisu regulacji Unii Europejskiej (dyrektyw UCTIS), kończąc na krajowym systemie prawnym, wskazując postulaty de lege lata. Rozdział trzeci dotyczy zagadnień dotyczących struktury organizacyjnej funduszy inwestycyjnych, w tym podmiotów zewnętrznych i organów wewnętrznych funduszy inwestycyjnych. Rozdział ten zawiera wyczerpujące studium zasad działania i kompetencji towarzystwa funduszy inwestycyjnych, sądu rejestrującego fundusze, depozytariusza i biegłego rewidenta - które są podmiotami zewnętrznymi funduszu inwestycyjnego. Ponadto, dokonano podobnej analizy organów funduszy wewnętrznych, w tym: rady inwestorów, zgromadzenia inwestorów oraz zgromadzenia uczestników. Kolejny, czwarty rozdział poświęcony jest w całości Komisji Nadzoru Finansowego, która jest centralną instytucją nadzorczą w Polsce nad rynkiem finansowym. W niniejszym rozdziale przedstawiono zarys historyczny tej organizacji publicznej, przedstawiono podstawowe funkcje, jakie pełni ona w obszarze rynków finansowych, opisuje jej prawne formy działalności, kompetencje nadzorcze wobec towarzystw funduszy inwestycyjnych, kompetencje nadzorcze w ramach tworzenia i działania fundusze inwestycyjne, a także uprawnienia nadzorcze w kontekście transakcyjnym na rynku finansowym. Ostatni, piąty rozdział ma charakter prawno-porównawczy i został poświęcony regulacji rynku funduszy inwestycyjnych w kraju sąsiednim. Na potrzeby niniejszej rozprawy autorka wybrał państwo - Niemcy i postanowił przeprowadzić analizę prawno-porównawczą niemieckiego systemu funduszy inwestycyjnych i niemieckiego systemu nadzoru nad rynkiem finansowym - Die Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin). Pod koniec tego rozdziału autorka porównuje działania polskich i niemieckich organów nadzorczych oraz dokonuje porównania niemieckich funduszy inwestycyjnych z polskimi funduszami inwestycyjnymi w kontekście szeroko rozumianego „bezpieczeństwa organizacyjnego”, które jest głównym przedmiotem niniejszej rozprawy.
The doctoral dissertation consists of five chapters, in which the author makes an attempt to identify internal as well as external organizational elements of the safety of open investment funds and to assess their relative impact on the organizational safety of these investment funds in Poland. In this PhD thesis, the following three working hypotheses were adopted: - organizational activity of investment funds is strictly regulated by the legal regulations in the scope of its functioning, as well as controlled by internal bodies and external entities of the investment fund, which should be considered as the most appropriate practice of the legislator, which, due to the numerous competences of these entities and bodies, guarantees increased organizational security and stability of investment funds; - European Union law regulations affect the functioning and operation of investment funds providing their business on the Polish market, imposing ever more restrictions and obligations that lead to increased organizational security of investment funds, and - the supervisory activity of the Polish Financial Supervision Authority over investment funds is very wide, however, it is right that investment funds should be subject to external supervision in the form of an independent state authority - the Polish Financial Supervision Authority, for the purpose of organizational security of investment fund participants and the funds themselves. In the first chapter, the main emphasis was placed on explaining the basic concepts and elements of the financial market as an area in which investment funds run their business and presenting the investment fund as a participant in that market . The second chapter presents the issue of sources of law, which are the basis for the functioning of investment funds, starting from the chronological description of European Union regulations (UCTIS Directive), ending with the national legal regime, indicating de lege lata postulate. The third chapter deals with issues concerning the organizational structure of investment funds, including external entities and internal bodies of the investment funds. This chapter provides a comprehensive study of the operating principles and competences of the investment fund society, the court registering the funds, the depositary and the certified auditor - which are the external entities of the investment fund. Moreover, a similar analysis of the internal fund bodies are here made, including the investors' council, the meeting of investors or the assembly of participants. The subsequent, fourth chapter is devoted entirely to the Polish Financial Supervision Authority, which is central supervisory institution in Poland. This chapter presents a historical outline of this public organisation, shows the basic functions that it performs in the area of financial markets, describes its legal forms of its activity, supervisory competences towards investment fund companies, supervisory competences as part of the creation and operation of investment funds, as well as, supervisory powers in the scope of merger, management takeover, transformation, termination and liquidation of the investment funds. The last, fifth chapter is about legal and comparative nature and has been devoted to the regulation of the investment funds market in country - Germany and the organizational security of German investment funds. For the purposes of this dissertation, the author chose the state - Germany and decided to perform a legal-comparative analysis of the German investment fund system and the German system of supervision over the financial market - Die Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin). At the end of this chapter, the author compares the operations of the Polish and German supervisory authorities and the comparison of German investment funds with Polish investment funds in the context of broadly understood “organizational security”.