Universitatea Petru Maior, Tîrgu Mureș „Conferința Națională Achiziții Publice în România – ediția a II-a. Modificarea legislației în 2017”, 23 ianuarie 2018

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. Practice Direction 11. The Court of Justice of the European Union


Tecla Mazzarese, FORME DI RAZIONALITÀ DELLE DECISIONI GIUDIZIALI, 2012 – pp. 223 – € 12,00 – ISBN 978-88-348-2921-9, G. Giappichelli editore [editia 1996]

Prefazione. – 0. Introduzione. – 1. Termini per una critica del sillogismo giudiziale. – 2. Costitutività vs. dichiaratività delle decisioni giudiziali. – 3. Scoperta e giustificazione nelle decisioni giudiziali. – 4. Logica fuzzy e presunto irrazionalismo normativo. – 5. Fuzziness e decisioni giudiziali. – 6. Decisioni giudiziali e ragionamento approssimato. – Riferimenti bibliografici.

Sylvain Brouard, Olivier Costa, Thomas König (Eds.), The Europeanization of Domestic Legislatures. The Empirical Implications of the Delors’ Myth in Nine Countries

Sylvain Brouard, Olivier Costa, Thomas König (Eds.), The Europeanization of Domestic Legislatures. The Empirical Implications of the Delors’ Myth in Nine Countries, Springer, 2012, VIII, 244 p. 41 illus., 30 in color.

Table of contents [pdf.]

Chapter 2. Thomas Konig, Tanja Dannwolf, Brooke Luetgert, EU Legislative Activities and Domestic Politics [pdf]


– Addresses several strong theses, including those of G. Majone, A. Moravcsik, and Martin and Vanberg, about Europeanization and legislation

– Includes an annex with extensive quantitative data on law Europeanization, detailed by country, type of norm, topic, period of time, etc

– Provides a method by which to measure Europeanization

In ten years 80 per cent of the legislation related to economics, maybe also to taxes and social aff airs, will be of Community origin.” This declaration has been largely quoted, paraphrased and deformed by different authors, creating a persistent myth according to which 80% of the legislative activity of the national legislatures would soon be reduced to the simple transposition of European norms”. This book addresses the topic of the scope and impact of Europeanization on national legislation, as a part of the Europeanization debate which raises normative concerns linked to the “democratic deficit” debate. The state of the art shows that there are many assumptions and claims on how European integration may affect national legislation and, more generally, domestic governance but that there is a lack of solid and comparative data to test them. The aim of the book is to give a solid and comparative insight into Europeanization focusing on effective outcomes in a systematic way. This book analyzes the period 1986-2008 and includes an introduction, a global overview of European legislative activities which set the background for Europeanization of national legislatures, 9 country contributions (8 EU member states + Switzerland) including systematic, comparative and standardized data, tables and figures, and a conclusion with a comparative analysis of the European and domestic reasons for Europeanization.


All national contributions conclude that Europeanization of national legislation is much more limited than assumed in the literature and public debate. It is limited to 10 to 30% of laws (depending on the country), far less than the 80% predicted by Jacques Delors and mentioned daily by medias and public opinion leaders to demonstrate EU domination on member states. Beside that general statement, the various chapters propose a deep insight on EU constraint over national legislation, providing much information on the kind of laws and policies that are Europeanized, the evolution of this process through time, the impact of Europeanization on the balance of powers and the relations between majority and opposition at national level, the strategies developed by national institutions in that context, and many other issues, making the book of inter

EUI: Ever-Closer in Brussels – Ever-Closer in the World? EU External Action after the Lisbon Treaty, 21.01.2011

The launch of the European External Action Service by the Lisbon Treaty coincides with a number of substantive changes to the legal framework of EU External Action. An ambitious agenda has been inserted into the primary law, calling on the EU in its relations with the world to “promote its values and interests”, “contribute to the protection of its citizens” and to “contribute to peace, security, the sustainable development of the Earth, solidarity and mutual respect among peoples, free and fair trade, eradication of poverty and the protection of human rights, in particular the rights of the child” (Art. 3(5) TEU). These principles are not to be pursued in isolation, but in a consistent manner and are to be “guided by the principles which have inspired [the EU’s] own creation” (Art. 21 TEU). This, in turn, requires also the Union institutions, as well as the Member States, to act in ways that do not contradict the EU position, a particular EU external policy or objective. It is the ambition of the EEAS to foster both consistency, as well as providing impetus to the EU’s external action. Looking at its structure, one can see that it is in itself a sui generis institution composed of officials from the Commission, Council and the Member States. This raises some fundamental questions that go well beyond those concerning which person is going to be the new EU ambassador in Washington, Beijing or Moscow. Above all, can this new sui generis institutional innovation live up to the ambitions of the sui generis entity that is the EU? What old problems does it purport to solve, and what are the big new question marks that it raises? In essence, to which extent does bundling the external objectives in the Treaty as well as pooling together the institutional resources in Brussels and the delegations render the EU actually an ever-closer actor in the world? Having in mind that the launch of the EEAS took place on 1st of December 2010, this workshop aims to address three big questions marks concerning EU external action after Lisbon: 1) the institutional allegiance of the EEAS, 2) the future of the “left out” DG Trade and the Common Commercial Policy, and 3) the protection of EU citizens abroad.

– Workshop organized by the RELEX Working Group with the support of Prof. Marise Cremona


Proiect CSDE in Seria Consultari Europene: „Identificarea dificultăţilor în materia soluţionării alternative a litigiilor în Uniunea Europeană” (CSDE-SCE-21)

Proiect CSDE in Seria Consultari Europene: „Identificarea dificultăţilor în materia soluţionării alternative a litigiilor în Uniunea Europeană” (CSDE-SCE-21)

Centrul de Studii de Drept European din cadrul Institutului de Cercetari Juridice al Academiei Romane organizeaza o selectie de CV-uri pentru realizarea unui punct de vedere documentat în acest sens. Vor fi selectati experti care vor realiza cercetarea şi punctul de vedere, concretizate într-un material care va fi publicat ulterior.

Denumirea proiectului: „Identificarea dificultăţilor în materia soluţionării alternative a diferendelor în Uniunea Europeană” (CSDE-SCE-21)

Persoanele interesate pot trimite un CV, în format european, la adresa mihai.sandru@csde.ro până la data de 27 ianuarie 2011. Vor fi contactaţi doar candidaţii selectaţi.

Sunt de asemenea invitaţi să trimită un CV şi cei fi interesaţi să participe la elaborarea unor studii viitoare, cu precizarea domeniilor de interes. Aceste candidaturi vor servi la actualizarea bazei de date a CSDE.

Cercetarea trebuie definitivată, iar punctul de vedere redactat până la data de 10 martie 2011.

Partener: Societatea de Ştiinţe Juridice.

Proiectul este sustinut de catre Editura Wolters Kluwer.


Anunţul Comisiei

CONSULTATION PAPER On the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution as a means to resolve disputes related to commercial transactions and practices in the European Union

Vaughne Miller, How much legislation comes from Europe?

Vaughne MillerHow much legislation comes from Europe?, House of Commons, RESEARCH PAPER 10/62 13 October 2010 disponibil la adresa www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/RP10-62.pdf

The former European Commission President, Jacques Delors, predicted in July 1988 that within ten years 80% of economic legislation, and perhaps also fiscal and social legislation, would be of European origin. Since then, Treaty amendments have given the European Union a role in several additional policy areas, which has contributed to a view that national legislatures are becoming ‘Europeanised’, both in terms of the quantity of EU laws and their impact on domestic law- and policy-making.In the UK data suggest that from 1997 to 2009 6.8% of primary legislation (Statutes) and 14.1% of secondary legislation (Statutory Instruments) had a role in implementing EU obligations, although the degree of involvement varied from passing reference to explicit implementation. Estimates of the proportion of national laws based on EU laws in other EU Member States vary widely, ranging from around 6% to 84%.This paper explores various approaches to the question of how much national law is based on or influenced by EU law.