The administrative supervision and enforcement of EC law: powers, procedures and limits
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Oxford [u.a.]
Hart
1999
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| Beschreibung: | XLIV, 356 S. |
| ISBN: | 1841130567 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV012589773 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 19991110 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 990602s1999 m||| 00||| eng d | ||
| 020 | |a 1841130567 |9 1-84113-056-7 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)42703993 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV012589773 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakddb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a eng | |
| 049 | |a DE-739 |a DE-20 |a DE-355 |a DE-19 | ||
| 050 | 0 | |a KJE5602 | |
| 082 | 0 | |a 341.2422 |2 21 | |
| 084 | |a PS 2760 |0 (DE-625)139734: |2 rvk | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Ibáñez, Alberto J. Gil |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a The administrative supervision and enforcement of EC law |b powers, procedures and limits |c Alberto J. Gil Ibáñez |
| 264 | 1 | |a Oxford [u.a.] |b Hart |c 1999 | |
| 300 | |a XLIV, 356 S. | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 650 | 7 | |a Europees recht |2 gtt | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Europese Commissie |2 gtt | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Openbaar bestuur |2 gtt | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Rechtshandhaving |2 gtt | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Europarecht | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Administrative procedure |z European Union countries | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Law enforcement |z European Union countries | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Sanctions, Administrative |z European Union countries | |
| 651 | 4 | |a Europäische Union. Mitgliedsstaaten | |
| 655 | 7 | |0 (DE-588)4113937-9 |a Hochschulschrift |2 gnd-content | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m GBV Datenaustausch |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=008548764&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-008548764 | ||
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1804127238173491200 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | A 348906 THE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION AND ENFORCEMENT OF EC LAW:
POWERS, PROCEDURES AND LIMITS ALBERTO J. GIL IBANEZ *HART- PUBLISHING
OXFORD - PORTLAND 1999 CONTENTS TABLE OF CASES XIX TABLE OF TREATIES
XXXI TABLE OF SECONDARY LEGISLATION XXXV TABLE OF NATIONAL LEGISLATION
XLV INTRODUCTION ~- 1 RELEVANCE OF THIS STUDY 1 METHOD OF ANALYSIS,
PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH AND MAIN CONTENTS 4 PART I. PRELIMINARY
CLARIFICATIONS: WORDS, CONCEPTS AND CONTENTS 1. SUPERVISION,
ENFORCEMENT, ADMINISTRATION AND EC LAW 11 1. INTRODUCTION 11 2.
EFFECTIVENESS, IMPLEMENTATION, APPLICATION, SUPERVISION AND ENFORCEMENT
11 2.1 EFFECTIVENESS 12 2.2 IMPLEMENTATION AND APPLICATION 12 2.3
SUPERVISION AND ENFORCEMENT, OR HOW TO ENSURE THE APPLICATION OF EC LAW
15 3. THE CONCEPT OF ADMINISTRATION AT COMMUNITY AND NATIONAL LEVELS
17 3.1 IN SEARCH OF A DEFINITION 17 3.2 THE DIFFERENT ADMINISTRATIVE
FUNCTIONS 19 3.2.1 REGULATORY EXECUTION 20 3.2.2 ADMINISTRATIVE
EXECUTION 22 3.2.3 THE SUPERVISION AND ENFORCEMENT OF EC LAW 23 3.3 ONE
SINGLE BUT SHARED ADMINISTRATION? 24 3.4 A DEFINITION AD HOC 25 4. A
SUITABLE EC RULE FOR ENFORCEMENT 26 4.1 INTRODUCTION 26 4.2 GENERAL
CRITERIA THAT A RULE MUST FULFIL TO BE ENFORCEABLE 27 4.3 SOME ELEMENTS
THAT APPLY MORE SPECIFICALLY TO EC LAW 29 4.3.1 THE NEED TO TAKE INTO
ACCOUNT DIFFERENT REALITIES 29 4.3.2 THE NEED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE
MAIN INTERESTS OF MEMBER STATES 30 4.3.3 THE VOLUME OF EC LEGISLATION -
31 4.3.4 CLEAR DRAFTING AND GOOD TRANSLATION 33 5. SUMMARY AND
CONCLUSIONS 35 VIII CONTENTS 2. COMPETENCES, POWERS AND PROCEDURES 37 1.
INTRODUCTION 37 2. THE GENERAL PROBLEM OF THE DIVISION OF POWERS BETWEEN
THE COMMUNITY AND THE MEMBER STATES 38 2.1 PRELIMINARY REMARKS 38 2.2
EXCLUSIVE VERSUS SHARED 39 2.3 MIXED, CONCURRENT, PARALLEL AND
COMPLEMENTARY 42 2.4 CONFERRED POWERS VERSUS GROWING COMPETENCES 43 3.
AN ATTEMPT AT CLARIFICATION: COMPETENCES, POWERS AND PROCEDURES 45 3.1
COMPETENCES VERSUS POWERS 45 3.2 EXCLUSIVE COMPETENCES AND POWERS 48 3.3
SHARED VERSUS CONCURRENT COMPETENCES 48 3.4 LIMITS TO COMPETENCES AND
POWERS 49 3.4.1 LIMITS TO COMPETENCES 49 3.4.2 LIMITS TO POWERS: THE
NEED TO EXERCISE POWERS THROUGH PROCEDURES 52 4. THE POWER OF ENSURING
THE APPLICATION OF EC LAW 53 4.1 WHO HAS THE POWER TO LEGISLATE AND
ADOPT EXECUTIVE REGULATIONS CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF EC LAW? THE
PRINCIPLE OF UNIFORM APPLICATION AS A LIMIT TO NATIONAL POWERS 54 4.2
THE ACTUAL PROCESS OF ENSURING THE APPLICATION OF EC LAW 56 5. SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS: THE NEED TO ANALYSE PROCEDURES 58 PART II. PROCEDURES
FOR SUPERVISING AND ENFORCING EC LAW 3. OBTAINING INFORMATION: COMMUNITY
VERSUS NATIONAL INSPECTORS 63 1. OBTAINING INFORMATION: PRELIMINARY
REMARKS 63 2. COMMISSION INSPECTORATES AND OTHER MEANS OF REQUESTING
INFORMATION: LEGAL FRAMEWORK 65 3. COMMISSION S POWER TO REQUEST AND
RECEIVE INFORMATION AND MEMBER STATES DUTY TO PROVIDE IT 67 4. THE
COMMISSION S INSPECTORATES 71 4.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND: TYPES OF
INSPECTION 71 4.2 AREAS OF COMPETENCE WHERE THE COMMISSION HAS BEEN
GRANTED THE OPPORTUNITY TO USE INSPECTORS 72 4.3 DIFFERENT MEANS FOR
DIFFERENT AREAS 73 4.4 SOME COMMENTS ON THE PRESENT SYSTEM OF INSPECTION
74 5. NATIONAL INSPECTORS AND LIMITS TO THEIR ACTION 78 6. LIMITS TO
COMMISSION INSPECTORATES: INTERACTION WITH NATIONAL INSPECTORATES 80
6.1. POSSIBLE APPLICATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY 80
CONTENTS IX 6.2 ARE THE LIMITS WHICH APPLY TO NATIONAL INSPECTORATES
APPLICABLE TO THE COMMISSION S INSPECTORATES? 82 6.3. THE NEED TO BE
ACCOMPANIED BY NATIONAL INSPECTORS 83 6.4 THE NEED TO RESPECT THE
NATIONAL PROCEDURAL LAWS 84 6.5 THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF TAKING PART IN
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS 85 6.6 FORMAL LIMITS: THE RESPECT OF DEADLINES 86
6.7 WHO SHOULD SUPERVISE THE SUPERVISOR? 86 7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
87 4. PURSUING INFRINGEMENTS IN EC LAW 89 1. INTRODUCTION 89 2.
INFRINGEMENT PROCEDURES CREATED BY THE EC TREATY 90 2.1 ARTICLE 169
PROCEDURE: THE COMMON/GENERAL PROCEDURE 91 2.1.1 LEGISLATION
APPLICABLE 91 2.1.2 UNCLEAR PROCEDURAL STIPULATIONS CONCERNING THE ROLE
OF THE COMMISSION AND MEMBER STATES 92 2.1.2.1 THE COMMISSION S POWER TO
STATE THE SPECIFIC MEASURES THAT MUST BE ADOPTED TO COMPLY WITH EC LAW
92 2.1.2.2 THE MEMBER STATES OBLIGATION TO COMPLY WITH THE REASONED
OPINION AND THE DECISION OF THE ECJ 95 2.1.2.3 THE SCOPE OF THE RIGHT
TO THE DEFENCE OF MEMBER STATES 97 2.1.2.4 THE BURDEN OF PROVING THE
BREACH: THE COMMISSION S OR A MEMBER STATE S OBLIGATION? 99 2.2
EXCEPTIONS TO ARTICLE 169 PROCEDURE: SPECIAL PROCEDURES IN THE EC TREATY
TO FIGHT AGAINST INFRINGEMENTS COMMITTED BY MEMBER STATES 101 2.2.1
SUPERVISION OF AID GRANTED BY STATES: ARTICLE 93 EC 101 2.2.1.1
LEGISLATION APPLICABLE AND JUSTIFICATION OF THIS PROCEDURE * 101 2.2.1.2
INTERACTION BETWEEN THE ARTICLE 90(3) AND ARTICLE 169 PROCEDURE 103
2.2.2 ARTICLE 90(3): SPECIAL TOOLS OF THE COMMISSION TO ENSURE THE
APPLICATION OF COMPETITION RULES TO THE PUBLIC SECTOR 105 2.2.2.1
INTRODUCTION 105 2.2.2.2 INTERACTION BETWEEN ARTICLE 90(3) AND ARTICLE
169 PROCEDURE 106 2.2.3 A VERY SPECIAL PROCEDURE: THE PROCEDURE TO
CONTROL EXCESS ON NATIONAL PUBLIC DEFICIT AND DEBTS (ARTICLE 104C EC)
109 2.2.3.1 THE TWO STAGES OF THE PROCEDURE 109 2.2.3.2 THE SHIFT OF THE
INSTITUTIONAL BALANCE OF POWERS BETWEEN THE EC INSTITUTIONS; THE
PREDOMINANCE OF THE COUNCIL 111 X CONTENTS 2.3 REINFORCED POWERS OF THE
COMMISSION FOR ENFORCING EC COMPETITION LAW UPON LEGAL PERSONS: A
SPECIAL CASE 113 3. INFRINGEMENT PROCEDURES CREATED BY SECONDARY
LEGISLATION WITHOUT A CLEAR LEGAL BASIS IN THE TREATY 115 3.1 PROCEDURES
DEVELOPED WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE ARTICLE 169 PROCEDURE 115 3.1.1
SUPERVISION AND ENFORCEMENT OF PUBLIC PROCUREMENT RULES; A PECULIARITY
OF THE ARTICLE 169 PROCEDURE? 115 3.1.2 DIRECTIVE 83/189: A SPECIAL
PROCEDURE FOR SUPERVISING THE CONFORMITY OF NEW NATIONAL TECHNICAL RULES
WITH EC LAW 118 3.2 PROCEDURES EXTENDING BEYOND ESTABLISHED CONDITIONS
UNDER ARTICLE 169 EC 120 3.2.1 SPECIAL POWERS OF ENFORCEMENT IN AIR
TRANSPORT POLICY 120 3.2.2 THE CLEARANCE OF ACCOUNTS PROCEDURE IN THE
FRAMEWORK OF THE EAGGF 123 3.2.3 PROTECTION OF HEALTH AND SAFETY 125 4.
CRITERIA TO MAKE PROCEDURES MORE COHERENT AND EFFICIENT: BUILDING ON
SUCCESS 127 5. SOME POSSIBLE EXPLANATIONS OF THE CREATION OF REINFORCED
PROCEDURES 128 5.1 THE ACTIVE PARTICIPATION OF MEMBER STATES THROUGH THE
COMMITTEES 128 5.2 THE IMPERFECT CONTRACTING THEORY 130 5.3 A LEGAL
EXPLANATION? 131 6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 132 5. LIMITS ON THE USE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES 135 1. INTRODUCTION 135 2. LIMITS ON THE USE
OF INFRINGEMENT PROCEDURES: THE CASE OF THE ARTICLE 169 PROCEDURE 136
2.1 INTENSIVENESS 136 2.2 AN AREA FOR THE SUBSIDIARITY PRINCIPLE? 137
2.2.1 BREACHES THAT SHOULD BE LEFT, IN PRINCIPLE, TO THE COMMISSION 138
2.2.2 BREACHES THAT SHOULD BE LEFT, IN PRINCIPLE, TO MEMBER STATES 139
2.2.2.1 INTRODUCTION 139 2.2.2.2 WHEN LEGAL PERSONS AND PRIVATE PERSONS
ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INFRINGEMENT 140 2.2.2.3 WHEN THE ENTITIES
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INFRINGEMENT ARE NATIONAL JUDGES 141 2.3 A
PARTICULAR CASE: BREACHES COMMITTED BY REGIONS OR STATES WITHIN A
FEDERAL SYSTEM, WHICH HAVE BEEN GRANTED POLITICAL AUTONOMY 142 CONTENTS
XI 3. A NON-LEGAL LIMIT: LACK OF CAPACITY OF ADMINISTRATIONS AS A
GENERAL PROBLEM 147 3.1 SOME PREVIOUS CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT THE CONCEPT
OF ADMINISTRATIONS CAPACITY 147 3.2 LACK OF CAPACITY WITHIN THE
COMMISSION 149 3.2.1 GENERAL REMARKS 149 3.2.2 THE COMMISSION S LIMITED
CAPACITY AND THE USE OF INSPECTORATES 150 3.2.3 THE INFLUENCE OF THE
COMMISSION S LACK OF CAPACITY IN LIMITING THE USE OF INFRINGEMENT
PROCEDURES 151 3.3 THE LACK OF CAPACITY OF NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIONS 152
3.4 A LEGAL APPROACH TO THE PROBLEM OF LACK OF CAPACITY: THE ECJ S CASE
LAW 154 3.5 SOLUTIONS INCLUDED IN EC LEGISLATION TO THE PROBLEM OF LACK
OF CAPACITY OF ADMINISTRATIONS TO SUPERVISE AND ENFORCE LAW 156 4. AN
ALTERNATIVE APPROACH: DIFFERENT CAPACITIES REQUIRE DIFFERENT STRATEGIES
159 5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 161 PART III SELECTED ASPECTS OF THE
ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION AND ENFORCEMENT OF EC LAW 6. TIME CONSTRAINTS
165 1. INTRODUCTION 165 2. TWO DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO TIME CONSTRAINTS
166 2.1 TIME CONSTRAINTS AS INSTRUMENTS TO IMPROVE ADMINISTRATIVE
CO-ORDINATION, ORGANISATION AND EFFECTIVENESS 166 2.2 LEGAL CONSEQUENCES
OF THE PROBLEM OF TIME IN ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION. SOME CONCEPTS THAT NEED
CLARIFICATION 168 2.2.1 THE LACK OF VALIDITY OF AN ACT OR A LEGAL ACTION
168 2.2.2 THE PRESUMED ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION {DECISION IMPLICITE OR
SILENCIO ADMINISTRATIVO) 169 2.2.3 LE PROCEDE DE LA DEVOLUTION 171 2.2.4
TIME AS A PROCEDURAL CONSTRAINT 171 3. TIME CONSTRAINTS IN EC
INFRINGEMENT PROCEDURES 172 3.1 SOME PREVIOUS REMARKS 172 3.2 DEADLINES
UNDER THE ARTICLE 169 PROCEDURE: CASE LAW AND INTERNAL RULES 172 3.2.1
CRITERIA DERIVED FROM THE ECJ S CASE LAW 173 3.2.1.1 DEADLINES
APPLICABLE TO MEMBER STATES 173 3.2.1.2 DEADLINES APPLICABLE TO THE
COMMISSION 174 3.2.2 COMMISSION INTERNAL RULES ON DEADLINES 175 3.2.2.1
PRE 169 PROCEDURE 176 XII CONTENTS 3.2.2.2 FORMAL PROCEDURE 176 A.
FORMAL NOTICE 176 B. REASONED OPINION 177 3.2.2.3 REFERENCE TO THE ECJ
178 3.3 SPECIAL CASES WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE ARTICLE 169 PROCEDURE:
LACK OF TRANSPOSITION OF DIRECTIVES, TECHNICAL RULES (DIRECTIVE 83/189)
AND PUBLIC PROCUREMENT 179 3.4 DEADLINES APPLICABLE TO THE SUPERVISION
OF STATE AID (ARTICLE 93 EC): CASE LAW AND SOFT LAW 180 3.4.1 SOME
PREVIOUS REMARKS 180 3.4.2 DEADLINES APPLICABLE TO MEMBER STATES
OBLIGATION TO NOTIFY STATE AID 181 3.4.3 DEADLINES FOR DECIDING THE
INITIATION OF THE ARTICLE 93(2) PROCEDURE (NOTIFIED AID) 181 3.4.3.1
MAXIMUM PERIOD FOR DECIDING 181 3.4.3.2 COMMISSION S INTERNAL DEADLINES
183 3.4.4 DEADLINES FOR DECIDING THE INITIATION OF THE ARTICLE 93(2)
PROCEDURE (NON-NOTIFIED AID) 183 3.4.5 DEADLINES APPLICABLE DURING THE
ARTICLE 93(2) PROCEDURE MAXIMUM PERIOD FOR DECIDING AND THE COMMISSION S
INTERNAL DEADLINES 184 3.4.6 DEADLINES FOR COMPLYING WITH THE FINAL
DECISION 186 3.5 SPECIAL INFRINGEMENT PROCEDURES WHERE FORMAL RULES HAVE
BEEN ENACTED REFERRING DEADLINES TO ACT 187 3.5.1 DEADLINES REGARDING
THE ENFORCEMENT OF COMPETITION POLICY 187 3.5.1.1 TIME CONSTRAINTS
AFFECTING THE COMMISSION S ACTION 187 3.5.1.2 CASES OF DECISION
IMPLICITE OR SILENCIO POSITIVO 189 3.5.2 ANTI-DUMPING 190 3.5.3
DEADLINES IN THE CLEARANCE OF ACCOUNTS PROCEDURE 191 4. SUMMARY AND
SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT: TOWARDS A NEW MODEL? 192 4.1 WEAKNESSES OF
THE PRESENT SYSTEM 192 4.2 POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS OF THE SYSTEM: SPECIAL
REFERENCE TO THE ARTICLE 169 PROCEDURE 194 4.2.1 MAXIMUM PERIOD OF TIME
FOR THE COMMISSION S ACTION 194 4.2.2 LIMITATION PERIODS AND
PRESCRIPTION 195 4.2.3 LIMITS TO THE COMMISSION S POWER TO IMPOSE
DEADLINES ON MEMBER STATES ACTION 196 7. THE PROBLEM OF DISCRETION 199
1. INTRODUCTION 199 2. THE NEED FOR DISCRETION IN SUPERVISING AND
ENFORCING EC LAW 201 2.1 SOME PREVIOUS REMARKS 201 CONTENTS XIII 2.2
REASONS THAT JUSTIFY THE NEED FOR GRANTING DISCRETION TO BOTH THE
COMMISSION AND NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIONS 202 2.2.1 THE INCOMPLETE
CONTRACTING THEORY 202 2.2.2 THE NEED FOR SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT 203 3. A
KEY PRELIMINARY PHASE: DISCRETION OF ADMINISTRATIONS IN INTERPRETING THE
MEANING AND PURPOSE OF EC LAW 204 3.1 IS THE COMMISSION GOING BEYOND ITS
POWERS? 205 3.2 THE DISCRETION OF MEMBER STATES IN INTERPRETING EC LAW
207 3.3 THE CONFLICT OF INTERPRETATION BETWEEN THE COMMISSION AND
NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIONS 208 4. THE DISCRETION OF MEMBER STATES IN
ENFORCING AND SUPERVISING COMMUNITY LAW 211 4.1 THE POSSIBILITY OF
GRANTING SOME DISCRETION TO MEMBER STATES UNDER EC LAW 211 4.1.1 THE
PRINCIPLE OF INSTITUTIONAL AUTONOMY: ONLY A THEORETICAL PRINCIPLE? 211
4.1.1.1 ORGANIZATIONAL AUTONOMY 211 4.1.1.2 CHOICE OF MEANS OF
SUPERVISION AND ENFORCEMENT 213 4.1.2 SOME EXAMPLES OF MEMBER STATES
DISCRETION 215 4.2 LEGAL ARGUMENTS THAT DENY DISCRETION TO MEMBER STATES
217 4.2.1 THE OBLIGATION TO COMPLY WITH EC LAW AND ENSURE ITS
APPLICATION 217 4.2.2 ARTICLE 5 EC. THE ROLE OF MEMBER STATES IN
APPLYING EC LAW: A LEGAL DUTY? 219 4.2.3 SOME EXAMPLES OF MEMBER STATES
LACK OF DISCRETION 222 4.3 PRACTICAL REASONS THAT JUSTIFY THE GRANTING
OF DISCRETION TO MEMBER STATES 223 5. THE COMMISSION S DISCRETION IN
SUPERVISING AND ENFORCING EC LAW 225 5.1 REASONS THAT CAN JUSTIFY
GRANTING SPECIAL DISCRETION TO THE COMMISSION 225 5.2 THE COMMISSION S
DISCRETION IN INFRINGEMENT PROCEDURES 227 5.2.1 DISCRETION OF THE
COMMISSION IN THE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS UNDER ARTICLE 169 227 5.2.1.1 THE
INITIATION OF THE NON-JUDICIAL PROCEDURE. PRELIMINARY PHASE 228 5.2.1.2
THE DELIVERING OF A REASONED OPINION 229 5.2.1.3 THE CONFIDENCIALITY OF
THE FORMAL NOTICE AND REASONED OPINION 230 5.2.1.4 REFERENCE TO THE ECJ
230 5.2.1.5 SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT 231 5.2.2 DISCRETION OF THE COMMISSION
IN THE SUPERVISION OF THE AID GRANTED BY MEMBER STATES 233 5.2.2.1
GENERAL REMARKS 233 5.2.2.2 SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT 235 XIV CONTENTS 5.2.3
DISCRETION OF THE COMMISSION IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF COMPETITION POLICY
(REGULATION 17) 236 5.2.3.1 GENERAL REMARKS 236 5.2.3.2 SELECTIVE
ENFORCEMENT 237 6. LIMITS ON COMMISSION DISCRETION 239 6.1 INTRODUCTION
239 6.2 GENERAL LIMITS 239 6.2.1 LEGAL RULES 239 6.2.2 ARBITRARINESS AND
THE PRINCIPLE OF NON-DISCRIMINATION 240 6.2.3 MISUSE OF POWERS AND
MANIFEST ERROR 241 6.2.4 THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY 242 6.3
PROCEDURAL LIMITS: TOWARDS A CODE OF GOOD ADMINISTRATION? 242 6.3.1
PRELIMINARY REMARKS 242 6.3.2 THE COMMISSION IS REQUIRED TO ACT 243
6.3.3 THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD 244 6.3.4 THE RIGHT TO ACCESS TO THE FILE
244 6.3.5 STATEMENT OF REASONS 244 6.4 JUDICIAL CONTROL 247 6.5 OTHER
CONTROLS 248 7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 249 8. THE PROBLEM OF
CO-ORDINATION 251 1. INTRODUCTION 251 2. THE PROBLEM OF CO-ORDINATION
WITHIN ADMINISTRATIONS 254 2.1 INTERNAL CO-ORDINATION WITHIN THE
COMMISSION 254 2.1.1 THE GENERAL PROBLEM OF THE COMMISSION S
CO-ORDINATION 254 2.1.2 THE COMMISSION S INTERNAL CO-ORDINATION FOR
ENFORCING AND SUPERVISING EC LAW 256 2.2 THE INTERNAL CO-ORDINATION OF
MEMBER STATES 256 2.2.1 THE GENERAL PROBLEM OF CO-ORDINATION 256 2.2.2
INTERNAL CO-ORDINATION OF NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIONS TO RESPOND TO THE
COMMISSION S MONITORING ACTION: COMPARATIVE RESEARCH 258 2.2.2.1
PREVIOUS REMARKS 258 2.2.2.2 GENERAL RESULTS OF THE COMPARATIVE RESEARCH
258 2.2.2.3 CASE STUDY: GERMANY, BASIS FOR A MODEL? 271 A. STRUCTURES OF
THE UNIT RESPONSIBLE FOR CO-ORDINATING THE REPLY OF THE STATE WITH
RESPECT TO CONTROL PROCEDURES INITIATED BY THE COMMISSION (ARTICLES 169,
93(2) EC) 271 B. INTERMINISTERIAL CO-ORDINATION SYSTEM 271 C. SYSTEM OF
CO-ORDINATION WITH THE REGIONAL AND LOCAL ADMINISTRATIONS 273 CONTENTS
XV D. DO THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE TAKEN ON THE DEFENCE INITIATED BY THE
COMMISSION, PRIOR TO APPLICATION TO THE COURT, ALSO DEFEND THE STATE S
INTERESTS BEFORE THE COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE CASE OF ACTIONS FOR FAILURE
TO FULFIL OBLIGATIONS? 273 3. PROBLEMS OF CO-ORDINATION BETWEEN THE
COMMISSION AND NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIONS IN SUPERVISING AND ENFORCING EC
LAW 274 3.1 INTRODUCTION 274 3.2 CO-ORDINATION BETWEEN THE COMMISSION
AND THE MEMBER STATES WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF INFRINGEMENT PROCEDURES
274 3.2.1 POSITIVE POINTS IN THE RELATIONS BETWEEN NATIONAL
ADMINISTRATIONS AND THE COMMISSION 275 3.2.1.1 NATIONAL OFFICIALS
POSITION 275 3.2.1.2 THE REACTION OF COMMISSION OFFICIALS 275 3.2.2
NEGATIVE POINTS IN RELATIONS BETWEEN THE NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIONS AND
THE COMMISSION 275 3.2.2.1 NATIONAL OFFICIALS POSITION 275 3.2.2.2 THE
REACTION OF COMMISSION OFFICIALS 276 3.2.3 SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVING
THESE PROCEDURES 278 3.2.3.1 SUGGESTIONS MADE BY NATIONAL
ADMINISTRATIONS 278 3.2.3.2 THE REACTION OF COMMISSION OFFICIALS 279
3.2.4 SOME COMMENTS CONCERNING POSITIVE, NEGATIVE POINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
280 3.3 LEGAL PRINCIPLES THAT PRESIDE OVER THE RELATIONS BETWEEN THE
COMMISSION AND NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIONS IN ENSURING THE APPLICATION OF
COMMUNITY LAW. CO-OPERATION VERSUS HIERARCHY? 281 3.3.1 THE PRINCIPLE OF
LOYAL CO-OPERATION (ARTICLE 5 EC) 282 3.3.2 ARE NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIONS
HIERARCHICALLY SUBORDINATED TO THE COMMISSION? 285 3.3.2.1 ARGUMENTS
THAT ADVOCATE FOR A HIERARCHICAL RELATION 285 3.3.2.2 LEGAL AND
NON-LEGAL ARGUMENTS THAT CONTRADICT A HIERARCHICAL RELATION 289 3.4.
CO-ORDINATION THROUGH PARTNERSHIP AND NETWORKS IN THE EC: PUBLIC
MANAGEMENT AND RULES 291 3.4.1 CLARIFICATION OF CONCEPTS AND PURPOSE 291
3.4.2 ATTEMPT TO SYSTEMATISE THE CASES OF PARTNERSHIP AND NETWORKS FOR
SUPERVISING AND ENFORCING EC LAW 294 3.4.2.1 PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE
COMMISSION AND MEMBER STATES 294 3.4.2.2 PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN MEMBER
STATES WITH AND WITHOUT THE PARTICIPATION OF THE COMMISSION 295 3.4.2.3
NETWORKS TO SUPERVISE AND ENFORCE EC LAW 298 XVI CONTENTS 3.4.3 LEGAL
PROBLEMS OF NETWORKS AND PARTNERSHIP. IS THE PARTICIPATION OF THE
COMMISSION ESSENTIAL? 299 3.4.4 COMPLEXITY AND LACK OF TRUST AS PROBLEM
FOR PARTNERSHIP AND NETWORKS 302 4. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 306 9. SOME
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS AND PROPOSALS FOR IMPROVING THE SUPERVISION AND
ENFORCEMENT OF EC LAW 309 1. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS 309 1.1 CONFUSING
TERMINOLOGY 309 1.2 THE LACK OF A CLEAR DIVISION OF COMPETENCES AND
POWERS FORCES A DOWN-TO-EARTH APPROACH 310 1.3 DIFFERENT MEANS OF
SUPERVISION AND ENFORCEMENT FOR DIFFERENT POLICIES 310 1.3.1 DEVELOPMENT
OF NEW COMMISSION S MEANS ON A SECTORAL BASIS 310 1.3.2 LACK OF
COHERENCE IN THE SYSTEM 311 1.4 PROBLEMS OF DEVELOPING A SYSTEM THROUGH
SOFT LAW AND CASE LAW 312 1.5 THE LIMITED CAPACITY OF ADMINISTRATIONS
312 1.6 THE LACK OF WILL TO SUPERVISE AND ENFORCE EC LAW 313 1.7
DIFFERENT PROCEDURAL CONSTRAINTS FOR THE COMMISSION AND NATIONAL
ADMINISTRATIONS 314 1.8 THE SAME MEANS OF SUPERVISION AND ENFORCEMENT
FOR DIFFERENT MEMBER STATES 314 1.9 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE COMMISSION
AND NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIONS: HIERARCHY VERSUS CO-OPERATION 315 1.10
MORE CO-ORDINATION REQUIRES MORE TRUST 316 2. PROPOSALS FOR IMPROVING
THE ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM OF SUPERVISION AND ENFORCEMENT 316 2.1
CONCERNING THE POLICY MANAGEMENT 316 2.1.1 THE NEED FOR A COMMISSION AND
MEMBER STATES GLOBAL STRATEGY: DIFFERENT CAUSES REQUIRE DIFFERENT
APPROACHES 316 2.1.2 THE NEED FOR ASSURING MUTUAL TRUST AND INCREASED
DECENTRALIZATION 317 2.2 CONCERNING PROCEDURES 319 2.2.1 SUGGESTIONS FOR
NEW PROCEDURES 319 2.2.1.1 TOWARDS A DECENTRALISATION OF LIABILITY 319
2.2.1.2 THE PROCEDURE FOR ENSURING FAIR INTERPRETATION OF EC LAW 319
2.2.1.3 THE PARTICIPATION OF THE COMMISSION IN NETWORKS AND PARTNERSHIPS
320 2.3.2 IMPROVING EXISTING PROCEDURES 320 CONTENTS XVII 2.3.2.1 THE
NEED TO CLARIFY THE PARTICIPATION OF THE COMMISSION AND NATIONAL
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE DIFFERENT INFRINGEMENT PROCEDURES 320 2.3.2.2
BUILDING ON SUCCESS 321 2.3.2.3 MEANS THAT CAN BE EXTENDED TO OTHER
PROCEDURES 322 2.3.2.3.1 THE DIFFERENT MEANS OF INSPECTION 322 2.3.2.3.2
CLEAR AND FAIR RULES ON TIME CONSTRAINTS 322 A. LIMITATION PERIODS AND
PRESCRIPTION 322 B. MAXIMUM PERIOD OF TIME FOR THE COMMISSION S ACTION
322 C. LIMITS ON THE COMMISSION S POWER TO IMPOSE DEADLINES ON MEMBER
STATES ACTION 323 2.3.2.3.3 THE CRITERIA FOR SELECTING THE CASES THAT
THE COMMISSION HAS TO PURSUE 323 BIBLIOGRAPHY 325 INDEX 345
|
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| author | Ibáñez, Alberto J. Gil |
| author_facet | Ibáñez, Alberto J. Gil |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Ibáñez, Alberto J. Gil |
| author_variant | a j g i ajg ajgi |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV012589773 |
| callnumber-first | K - Law |
| callnumber-label | KJE5602 |
| callnumber-raw | KJE5602 |
| callnumber-search | KJE5602 |
| callnumber-sort | KJE 45602 |
| classification_rvk | PS 2760 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)42703993 (DE-599)BVBBV012589773 |
| dewey-full | 341.2422 |
| dewey-hundreds | 300 - Social sciences |
| dewey-ones | 341 - Law of nations |
| dewey-raw | 341.2422 |
| dewey-search | 341.2422 |
| dewey-sort | 3341.2422 |
| dewey-tens | 340 - Law |
| discipline | Rechtswissenschaft |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01619nam a2200421 c 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV012589773</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">19991110 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">990602s1999 m||| 00||| eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">1841130567</subfield><subfield code="9">1-84113-056-7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)42703993</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV012589773</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakddb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-739</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-20</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-355</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-19</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">KJE5602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">341.2422</subfield><subfield code="2">21</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PS 2760</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)139734:</subfield><subfield code="2">rvk</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ibáñez, Alberto J. Gil</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">The administrative supervision and enforcement of EC law</subfield><subfield code="b">powers, procedures and limits</subfield><subfield code="c">Alberto J. Gil Ibáñez</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Oxford [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="b">Hart</subfield><subfield code="c">1999</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">XLIV, 356 S.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Europees recht</subfield><subfield code="2">gtt</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Europese Commissie</subfield><subfield code="2">gtt</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Openbaar bestuur</subfield><subfield code="2">gtt</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Rechtshandhaving</subfield><subfield code="2">gtt</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Europarecht</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Administrative procedure</subfield><subfield code="z">European Union countries</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Law enforcement</subfield><subfield code="z">European Union countries</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Sanctions, Administrative</subfield><subfield code="z">European Union countries</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Europäische Union. Mitgliedsstaaten</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="655" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4113937-9</subfield><subfield code="a">Hochschulschrift</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd-content</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">GBV Datenaustausch</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=008548764&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-008548764</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| genre | (DE-588)4113937-9 Hochschulschrift gnd-content |
| genre_facet | Hochschulschrift |
| geographic | Europäische Union. Mitgliedsstaaten |
| geographic_facet | Europäische Union. Mitgliedsstaaten |
| id | DE-604.BV012589773 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-07-09T18:30:10Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 1841130567 |
| language | English |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-008548764 |
| oclc_num | 42703993 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-739 DE-20 DE-355 DE-BY-UBR DE-19 DE-BY-UBM |
| owner_facet | DE-739 DE-20 DE-355 DE-BY-UBR DE-19 DE-BY-UBM |
| physical | XLIV, 356 S. |
| publishDate | 1999 |
| publishDateSearch | 1999 |
| publishDateSort | 1999 |
| publisher | Hart |
| record_format | marc |
| spelling | Ibáñez, Alberto J. Gil Verfasser aut The administrative supervision and enforcement of EC law powers, procedures and limits Alberto J. Gil Ibáñez Oxford [u.a.] Hart 1999 XLIV, 356 S. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Europees recht gtt Europese Commissie gtt Openbaar bestuur gtt Rechtshandhaving gtt Europarecht Administrative procedure European Union countries Law enforcement European Union countries Sanctions, Administrative European Union countries Europäische Union. Mitgliedsstaaten (DE-588)4113937-9 Hochschulschrift gnd-content GBV Datenaustausch application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=008548764&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| spellingShingle | Ibáñez, Alberto J. Gil The administrative supervision and enforcement of EC law powers, procedures and limits Europees recht gtt Europese Commissie gtt Openbaar bestuur gtt Rechtshandhaving gtt Europarecht Administrative procedure European Union countries Law enforcement European Union countries Sanctions, Administrative European Union countries |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4113937-9 |
| title | The administrative supervision and enforcement of EC law powers, procedures and limits |
| title_auth | The administrative supervision and enforcement of EC law powers, procedures and limits |
| title_exact_search | The administrative supervision and enforcement of EC law powers, procedures and limits |
| title_full | The administrative supervision and enforcement of EC law powers, procedures and limits Alberto J. Gil Ibáñez |
| title_fullStr | The administrative supervision and enforcement of EC law powers, procedures and limits Alberto J. Gil Ibáñez |
| title_full_unstemmed | The administrative supervision and enforcement of EC law powers, procedures and limits Alberto J. Gil Ibáñez |
| title_short | The administrative supervision and enforcement of EC law |
| title_sort | the administrative supervision and enforcement of ec law powers procedures and limits |
| title_sub | powers, procedures and limits |
| topic | Europees recht gtt Europese Commissie gtt Openbaar bestuur gtt Rechtshandhaving gtt Europarecht Administrative procedure European Union countries Law enforcement European Union countries Sanctions, Administrative European Union countries |
| topic_facet | Europees recht Europese Commissie Openbaar bestuur Rechtshandhaving Europarecht Administrative procedure European Union countries Law enforcement European Union countries Sanctions, Administrative European Union countries Europäische Union. Mitgliedsstaaten Hochschulschrift |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=008548764&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ibanezalbertojgil theadministrativesupervisionandenforcementofeclawpowersproceduresandlimits |