Advertisement

Equality Among Member States and Differentiated Integration in the EU

  • Jan Wouters
  • Pierre Schmitt
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter examines the relationship between the principle of equality among Member States and the differentiation mechanisms used in the European Union’s integration process. It aims at evaluating the impact of the principle on the possibilities for differentiation at the level of primary EU law—such as the Economic and Monetary Union and Schengen—and secondary EU law. The first part analyses the many faces of the equality principle and its constitutionalization in EU law. The chapter proceeds with an examination of differentiation at the level of primary and secondary EU law and within Member States, and the impact of the equality principle as interpreted in the case-law of the Court of Justice. It appears that the impact of the principle on differentiation mechanisms is multifaceted and complex, presenting ‘multi-layers’ and ‘multi-players’ features.

Keywords

Differentiation Economic and Monetary Union Enhanced cooperation Equality principle Financial transaction tax Regulation on the choice of law in divorce Unitary patent protection 

References

  1. Adamski D (2012) National power games and structural failures in the European macroeconomic governance. Common Mark Law Rev 49:1319–1364Google Scholar
  2. Barents R (1990) The community and the unity of the market. some reflections on the economic constitution of the community. German Yearb Int Law 33:9–36Google Scholar
  3. Barents R (1992) The Court of Justice and the EEA agreement. Between constitutional values and political realities. Rivista di diritto europeo 32:751–767Google Scholar
  4. Barents R (2000) De communautaire rechtsorde. Kluwer, DeventerGoogle Scholar
  5. Bieber R (1993) Les limites matérielles et formelles à la révision des traités établissant la Communauté européenne. Revue du Marché commun et de l’Union européenne 343–350Google Scholar
  6. Borges R-M (2013) Le brevet unitaire européen et la Juridiction du brevet européen: enfin l’aboutissement? Revue du Marché commun et de l’Union européenne 148–155Google Scholar
  7. Burri S, Prechal S (2014) EU gender equality law. Update 2013. Report commissioned by the European Commission, http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/your_rights/eu_gender_equality_law_update2013_en.pdf. Accessed 31 Dec 2016
  8. Chemillier-Gendreau M (1999) Principe d’égalité et libertés fondamentales en droit international. In: Yakpo E, Boumedra T (eds) Liber Amicorum Mohammed Bedjaoui. Kluwer Law International, Deventer, pp 659–669Google Scholar
  9. Cheneviere C, Mesdag F (2015) Arrêt Royaume-Uni c/ Conseil: taxe sur les transactions financières et incertitudes juridiques. Revue européenne de droit de la consommation 2:397–404Google Scholar
  10. Connor T (1998) Community discrimination law: no right to equal treatment in employment in respect of same sex partner. Eur Law Rev 23:378–384Google Scholar
  11. Craig P (2012) The stability, coordination and governance treaty: principle, politics and pragmatism. Eur Law Rev 37:231–248Google Scholar
  12. Craig P, de Búrca G (2015) EU law: text, cases, and materials, 6th edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Crawford J (2012) Brownlie’s principles of public international law, 8th edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Curtin D (1993) The constitutional structure of the Union: a Europe of bits and pieces. Common Mark Law Rev 30:17–69Google Scholar
  15. da Cruz Vilaça JL (2014) EU law and integration. Twenty years of judicial application of EU law. Hart Publishing, Oxford and Portland, OregonGoogle Scholar
  16. da Cruz Vilaça JL, Piçarra N (1993) Y a-t-il des limites matérielles à la révision des traités instituant les CE? Cahiers de droit européen 29:3–37Google Scholar
  17. de Boer T (2011) Europese oogkleppen: waarom “Rome III” voor Nederland geen optie is. In: Boele-Woelki K et al (eds) Actuele ontwikkelingen in het familierecht—Vijfde UCERF symposium. Ars Aequi Libri, Nijmegen, pp 73–86Google Scholar
  18. de Búrca G (1997) The role of equality in European Community law. In: Dashwood A, O’Leary S (eds) The principle of equal treatment in EC law. Sweet & Maxwell, London, pp 13–34Google Scholar
  19. de Jesús Butler I, De Schutter O (2008) Binding the EU to international human rights law. Yearb Eur Law 27:277–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. de Sadeleer N (2012) The new architecture of the European economic governance: a leviathan or a flat-footed colossus? Maastricht J Eur Comp Law 19:354–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. de Witte B (1994) Rules of change in international law: how special is the European Community? Neth Yearb Int Law 25:299–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dutheil de la Rochère J (2011) French Conseil constitutionnel: recent developments. In: Beneyto JM, Pernice I (eds) Europe’s constitutional challenges in the light of the recent case law of national constitutional courts. Lisbon and beyond. Nomos, Baden-Baden, pp 17–30Google Scholar
  23. Epiney E (2007) The scope of Article 12 EC: some remarks on the influence of European citizenship. Eur Law J 13:611–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Evans AC (1998) Union citizenship and the constitutionalization of equality in EU law. In: La Torre M (ed) European citizenship. An institutional challenge. Kluwer Law International, The Hague, pp 267–292Google Scholar
  25. Fabbrini F (2013) The fiscal compact, the “golden rule,” and the paradox of European federalism. Boston Coll Int Comp Law Rev 36:1–38Google Scholar
  26. Farmer P, Lyal R (1994) EC tax law. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  27. Gregorio Merino A (2012) Legal developments in the Economic and Monetary Union during the debt crisis: the mechanisms of financial assistance. Common Mark Law Rev 49:1613–1646Google Scholar
  28. Hanf D (2001) Flexibility clauses in the founding treaties, from Rome to Nice. In: de Witte B et al (eds) The many faces of differentiation in EU law. Intersentia, Antwerp, pp 3–26Google Scholar
  29. Heun W (2013) Art. 3. In: Dreier H (ed) Grundgesetz Kommentar, 3rd edn. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, pp 457–543Google Scholar
  30. Himsworth C (2007) Devolution and its jurisdictional asymmetries. Mod Law Rev 70:31–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jennings R, Watts A (1992) Oppenheim’s international law, I.1, 9th edn. Longman, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Kokott J (2004) Souveräne Gleichheit und Demokratie im Völkerrecht. Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 64:517–533Google Scholar
  33. Kokott J (2011) States, sovereign equality. Max Planck encyclopedia of public international law, online editionGoogle Scholar
  34. Koutrakos P (2009) Case C-205/06, Commission v. Austria, judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 3 March 2009, not yet reported; Case C-249/06, Commission v. Sweden, judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 3 March 2009, not yet reported. Common Mark Law Rev 46:2059–2076Google Scholar
  35. Kroll DA, Leuffen D (2014) Enhanced cooperation in practice. An analysis of differentiated integration in EU secondary law. J Eur Publ Policy 22:353–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kuijper PJ et al (eds) (2015) The law of EU external relations. Cases, materials, and commentary on the EU as an international actor, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  37. Lamblin-Gourdin A-S (2012) Les coopérations renforcées au secours du brevet unique européen? Revue de l’Union européenne 254–269Google Scholar
  38. Lavranos N (2009) Commission v. Austria. Case C-205/06. Judgment; Commission v. Sweden. Case C-249/06. Judgment. Am J Int Law 103:716–722Google Scholar
  39. Lavranos L (2010) Protecting European law from international law. Eur Foreign Aff Rev 15:265–282Google Scholar
  40. Lavrysen L, Theunis J (2013) The Belgian constitutional court: a satellite of the ECtHR? In: Alen A et al (eds) Liberae Cogitationes. Liber amicorum Marc Bossuyt. Intersentia, Antwerp, pp 331–354Google Scholar
  41. Lenaerts K (2007) La constitutionnalisation de l’ordre juridique de l’Union européenne. In: Andersen R (ed) Mélanges en hommage à Francis Delpérée. Itinéraires d’un constitutionnaliste. Bruylant and LGDJ, Brussels and Paris, pp 815–831Google Scholar
  42. Lenaerts K, Van Nuffel P (2011) European Union law. Sweet & Maxwell, LondonGoogle Scholar
  43. Lenaerts K, Van Ypersele P (1994) Le principe de subsidiarité et son contexte: étude de l’article 3 B du traité CE. Cahiers de droit européen 30:3–85Google Scholar
  44. Lliopoulou A (2008) Libre circulation et non-discrimination, éléments du statut du citoyen européen de l’Union européenne. Bruylant, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  45. Louis J-V (2012) The unexpected revision of the Lisbon Treaty and the establishment of a European stability mechanism. In: Ashiagbor D et al (eds) The European Union after the Treaty of Lisbon. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 284–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Milner F, Kölliker A (2000) How to make use of closer cooperation? The Amsterdam clauses and the dynamic of European integration. European Commission Working Paper, Forward Studies Unit, http://ials.sas.ac.uk/postgrad/Grotius-civil/Closer%20cooperation.pdf. Accessed 31 Dec 2016
  47. More G (1999) The principle of equal treatment: from market unifier to fundamental right? In: Craig P, de Búrca G (eds) The evolution of EU law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 517–552Google Scholar
  48. Mosler H (1992) Die Übertragung von Hoheitsgewalt. In: Isensee J, Kirchhof P (eds) Handbuch des Staatsrechts des Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Müller, Heidelberg, pp 599–646Google Scholar
  49. Muir E (2015) Pursuing equality in the EU. In: Arnull A, Chalmers D (eds) The Oxford handbook of European law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 919–942Google Scholar
  50. Neuvonen PJ (2016) Equal citizenship and its limits in EU law: we the burden? Hart Publishing, Oxford and Portland, OregonGoogle Scholar
  51. Peers S (2012) The stability treaty: permanent austerity or gesture politics? Eur Const Law Rev 8:404–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pilczer J-S (2014) Le parcours contentieux de la coopération renforcée en matière de taxe sur les transactions financières: la bataille de l’autorisation est gagnée, celle de la mise en œuvre reste à mener. Réflexions sur l’arrêt du 30 avril 2014, Royaume-Uni/Commission (C-209/13). Cahiers de droit européen 50:597–636Google Scholar
  53. Piris J-C (2010) The Lisbon Treaty. A legal and political analysis. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pistoia E (2014) Enhanced cooperation as a tool to… enhance integration? Spain and Italy v. Council. Common Mark Law Rev 51:247–260Google Scholar
  55. Ross M, Borgmann-Prebil Y (eds) (2010) Promoting solidarity in the European Union. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  56. Sangiovanni A (2013) Solidarity in the European Union. Oxf J Leg Stud 33:213–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Schermers HG, Blokker NM (2011) International institutional law. Unity within diversity, 5th edn. Martinus Nijhoff, The HagueCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schütze R (2014) Foreign affairs and the EU constitution. Selected essays. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Shaw MN (2014) International law, 7th edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  60. Sindbjerg Martinsen D (2015) An even more powerful court? The political constraints of legal integration in the European Union. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. T.M.C. Asser Instituut (1999) Flexibiliteit en het Verdrag van Amsterdam. T.M.C. Asser Press, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  62. Tobler C (2005) Indirect discrimination. A case study into the development of the legal concept of indirect discrimination under EC law. Intersentia, AntwerpGoogle Scholar
  63. Tomkin J (2013) Contradiction, circumvention and conceptual gymnastics: the impact of the adoption of the ESM Treaty on the state of European democracy. Ger Law J 14:169–189Google Scholar
  64. Tomuschat C (2008) Gleichheit in der Europäischen Union. Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 68:327–346Google Scholar
  65. Tomuschat C (2009) The ruling of the German Constitutional Court on the Treaty of Lisbon. Ger Law J 10:1259–1261Google Scholar
  66. Tridimas T (2007) General principles of EU law, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  67. Tuytschaver F (1999) Differentiation in European Union law. Hart Publishing, Oxford and Portland, OregonGoogle Scholar
  68. van der Steen I (1999a) Toepassing Barber-rechtspraak Hof van Justitie: schending van artikel 26 BuPo-Verdrag. Nederlands Tijdschrift Europees Recht 5:230–232Google Scholar
  69. van der Steen I (1999b) Het BuPo-Comité en het Barber-arrest inzake gelijke pensioenen: reactie van de Nederlandse regering. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Europees Recht 5:320–323Google Scholar
  70. Van Malleghem PA (2013) Pringle: a paradigm shift in the European Union’s monetary constitution. Ger Law J 14:141–168Google Scholar
  71. Vandenberghe J (2015) The single common market organization regulation. In: McMahon J, Cardwell M (eds) Research handbook on EU agriculture law. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 62–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Waddington L (2003) The expanding role of the equality principle in European Union law. Policy Paper Series on Constitutional Reform in the EU 2003/04—European University Institute, Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced StudiesGoogle Scholar
  73. Wendel M (2011) Lisbon before the courts: comparative perspectives. In: Beneyto JM, Pernice I (eds) Europe’s constitutional challenges in the light of the recent case law of national constitutional courts. Lisbon and beyond. Nomos, Baden-Baden, pp 65–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wouters J (2001) Constitutional limits of differentiation: the principle of equality. In: de Witte B et al (eds) The many faces of differentiation in EU law. Intersentia, Antwerp, pp 301–345Google Scholar
  75. Zemánek J (2011) The two Lisbon judgments of the Czech constitutional court. In: Beneyto JM, Pernice I (eds) Europe’s constitutional challenges in the light of the recent case law of national constitutional courts. Lisbon and beyond. Nomos, Baden-Baden, pp 45–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies – Institute for International Law, KU LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  2. 2.General Court of the European UnionLuxembourgLuxembourg
  3. 3.Leuven Centre for Global Governance StudiesLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations