Who Is Who (or What) in This Relationship?

  • R. Eljalill Tauschinsky


Discussing fiduciary roles and responsibilities is much easier in the abstract than in the application to a concrete relationship. In this chapter I argue that the fiduciary relation between those adopting delegated and implementing acts and those subject to them should be constructed as a relationship between the Commission as fiduciary, and citizens, corporations and specific further groups as beneficiaries.


  1. Augsberg S (2015) GRC Artikel 1 [Würde des Menschen]. In: von der Groeben H, Schwarze J, Hatje A (eds) Europäisches Unionsrecht, vol 1, 7th edn. Nomos, p 556Google Scholar
  2. Barnard C (2010) The substantive law of the EU: the four freedoms, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, p 305 set seqGoogle Scholar
  3. Bartl M (2015) The way we do Europe: subsidiarity and the substantive democratic deficit. Eur Law J 21(1):23Google Scholar
  4. Bellamy R (2013) ‘An ever closer union among the peoples of Europe’: republican intergovernmentalism and demoicratic representation within the EU. J Eur Integr 35(5):499Google Scholar
  5. Bierbach J (2015) Frontiers of equality in the development of EU and US citizenship. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, Faculty of Law, p 244 et seqGoogle Scholar
  6. Calliess C (2002) Gemeinwohl in der Europäischen Union – Über den Staaten- und Verfassungsverbund zum Gemeinwohlverbund. In: Brugger W, Kirste S, Anderheiden M (eds) Gemeinwohl in Deutschland, Europa und der Welt, Nomos, p 188Google Scholar
  7. Calliess C (2011a) Art. 13 EUV [Die Organe der Union]. In: Calliess C, Ruffert M (eds) EUV/ AEUV Kommentar, 4th edn. Verlag CH BeckGoogle Scholar
  8. Calliess C (2011b) Art. 1 GRCh [Würde des Menschen]. In: Calliess C, Ruffert M (eds) EUV/ AEUV Kommentar, 4th edn. Verlag CH Beck, p 2768 et seqGoogle Scholar
  9. Chiti E (2013) European agencies’ rulemaking: powers, procedures and assessment. Eur Law J 19(1):93Google Scholar
  10. Cohen A, Vauchez A (2011) The social construction of law: the European Court of Justice and its legal revolution revisited. Annu Rev Law Soc Sci 7:417Google Scholar
  11. Criddle EJ, Fox-Decent E (2009) The fiduciary constitution of human rights. Leg Theory 15:301Google Scholar
  12. Criddle EJ, Fox-Decent E (2012) Interest balancing vs. fiduciary duty: two models for national security law. German Law J 13(5):542Google Scholar
  13. Cuesta Lopez V (2010) The Lisbon Treaty’s provisions on democratic principles: a legal framework for participatory democracy. Eur Public Law 16(1):123Google Scholar
  14. Davies G (2015) Democracy and legitimacy in the shadow of purposive competence. Eur Law J 21(1):2Google Scholar
  15. DeMott D (1992) Fiduciary obligations under intellectual siege: contemporary challenges to the duty to be loyal. Osgoode Hall Law J 30(2):471Google Scholar
  16. den Heijer M, Tauschinsky E (2013) Where human rights meet administrative law: essential elements and limits to delegation: European Court of Justice, Grand Chamber C-355/10: European Parliament v. Council of the European Union. Eur Constitut Law Rev 9(3):513Google Scholar
  17. Dyzenhaus D (2015) Process and substance and aspects of public law. Camb Law J 74(2):284Google Scholar
  18. Fox-Decent E (2011) Sovereignty’s promise: the state as fiduciary. Oxford University Press, p 1Google Scholar
  19. Frankel T (1983) Fiduciary law. Calif Law Rev 71(3):795Google Scholar
  20. Frankel T (1995) Fiduciary duties as default rules. Oregon Law Rev 74:1209Google Scholar
  21. Galligan D (1997) Due process and fair procedures: a study of administrative procedures. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  22. Getzler J (2011) An interdisciplinary view of fiduciary law: “As if” – accountability and counterfactual trust. Boston Univ Law Rev 91:973Google Scholar
  23. Grimm D (1995) Does Europe need a constitution? Eur Law J 1(3):282Google Scholar
  24. Haag M (2015) Artikel 9 EUV [Gleichheitsgrundsatz, Unionsbürgerschaft]. In: von der Groeben H, Schwarze J, Hatje A (eds) Europäisches Unionsrecht, vol 1, 7th edn. NomosGoogle Scholar
  25. Harbo T-I (2010) The function of the proportionality principle in EU law. Eur Law J 16(2):158Google Scholar
  26. Leib EJ, Ponet DL (2012) Fiduciary representation and deliberative engagement with children. J Polit Philos 20(2):178Google Scholar
  27. Majone G (2001) Two logics of delegation: agency and fiduciary relations in EU governance. Eur Union Polit 2(1):103Google Scholar
  28. Marias E (1994) The right to petition the European Parliament after Maastricht. Eur Law Rev 19(2):169Google Scholar
  29. Mendes J (2013) Delegated and implementing rule making: proceduralisation and constitutional design. Eur Law Rev 19(1):22Google Scholar
  30. Mowbray J et al (2008) Lewin on trusts, 18th edn. Sweet & Maxwell, p 208Google Scholar
  31. Nicolaïdis K (2004) We, the Peoples of Europe… Foreign Aff 83(6):97Google Scholar
  32. Niedobitek M (2014) Effet utile and citizenship of the Union. In: Tichý L, Potacs M, Dumbrovský T (eds) Effet Utile. Centrum Právni Komparatistiky - Právincka Fakulta Univerzity Karlovy v Praze, p 56Google Scholar
  33. Platon S (2015) The notion of “Public Authority” in the recent case law of the European Court of Justice and its impact on French Administrative Law. Montesquieu Law Rev (1):1Google Scholar
  34. Rave D (2013) Politicians as fiduciaries. Harv Law Rev 126(3):671Google Scholar
  35. Scharpf F (1999) Governing in Europe. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  36. Selheim N (2013) The neglected tradition? – The genesis of the EU seal products trade ban and commercial sealing. Yearb Polar Law 5:417Google Scholar
  37. Selheim N (2015) The goals of the EU seal products trade regulation: from effectiveness to consequence. Polar Record 51(258):274Google Scholar
  38. Smith L (2015) Loyalty and politics: from case law to statute law. J Equity 9:130Google Scholar
  39. Somek A (2008) Individualism. Oxford University Press, p 26Google Scholar
  40. Stone Sweet A (2002) Constitutional courts and parliamentary democracy. West Eur Polit 25(1):77Google Scholar
  41. Streinz R (2014) Effet Utile and the four freedoms. In: Tichý L, Potacs M, Dumbrovský T (eds) Effet Utile. Centrum Právni Komparatistiky - Právincka Fakulta Univerzity Karlovy v Praze, p 31Google Scholar
  42. Tauschinsky E, Weiß W (2018) Unionsinteresse und Bürgernähe in der Handelspolitik. Europarecht (1):3Google Scholar
  43. Taylor EK (1957) Accountability of charitable trusts. Ohio State Law Rev 18:157Google Scholar
  44. Thatcher M, Stone Sweet A (2002) Theory and practice of delegation to non-majoritarian institutions. West Eur Polit 25(1):1Google Scholar
  45. Tomuschat C (1999) International law: ensuring the survival of mankind on the eve of a new century (Recueil des cours: Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law), vol 281. Martinus Nijhoff, p 95Google Scholar
  46. Trukhtanov A (2007) The irreducible core of trust obligations. Law Q Rev 123:342Google Scholar
  47. van Ballaert B (2015) The politics behind the consultation of expert groups: an instrument to reduce uncertainty or to offset salience? Polit Gov 3(1):139Google Scholar
  48. van Schendelen R (2003) Macchiavelli in Brussles: the art of lobbying the EU. Amsterdam University Press, pp 63, 66 et seqGoogle Scholar
  49. Vauchez A (2010) The transnational politics of judicialization: Van Gend en Loos and the making of EU polity. Eur Law J 16(1):1Google Scholar
  50. von Bogdandy A (2012) The European lesson for international democracy: the significance of Arts. 9-12 EU Treaty for international organizations. Eur J Int Law 23(2):315Google Scholar
  51. von Bogdandy A, Goldmann M, Venzke I (2015) From public international to international public law: translating world public opinion into international public authority. SSRNGoogle Scholar
  52. Weiler J (1995) Does Europe need a constitution? Demos, Telos and the German Maastricht Decision. Eur Law J 1(3):219Google Scholar
  53. Wenzel GW (1996) Inuit sealing and subsistence managing after the E.U. Sealskin Ban. Geographische Zeitschrift 84(3/4):130Google Scholar
  54. Whish R, Bailey D (2015) Competition law, 8th edn. Oxford University Press, p 19 et seqGoogle Scholar
  55. Williams AT (2009) Taking values seriously: towards a philosophy of EU law. Oxford J Leg Stud 29(3):549Google Scholar
  56. Zürn M (2000) Democratic governance beyond the nation state: the EU and other international institutions. Eur J Int Relat 6(2):183Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Eljalill Tauschinsky
    • 1
  1. 1.WalldorfGermany

Personalised recommendations