欧盟在国际组织中的代表:案例C-161/20委员会诉理事会(国际海事组织)

Athena Herodotou, Ioanna Hadjiyianni
{"title":"欧盟在国际组织中的代表:案例C-161/20委员会诉理事会(国际海事组织)","authors":"Athena Herodotou, Ioanna Hadjiyianni","doi":"10.54648/eerr2023003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses Case C-161/20 Commission v. Council (International Maritime Organization (IMO)), in which the Court of Justice of the EU upheld a Council Decision endorsing a submission to the IMO by the Presidency of the Council on behalf of the European Commission and the Member States (MSs), and not on behalf of the EU. With this case, the Court contributes to the debate on the EU’s external representation, particularly in the context of an international organization to which all the MSs, but not the EU, are parties and which regulates issues falling within EU competences. Combining an EU external relations law and a public international law perspective, this article assesses the Court’s reliance on and interpretation of international law and explores the boundaries carved by EU and international law for the participation of the EU as a separate entity in the IMO. It also seeks to discern how this case fits within the Court’s established ‘gatekeeping’ mechanisms in determining the effects of international law in the EU legal order and whether it signals an emerging, more flexible engagement with international law.\nInternational Maritime Organization, European Union, international organizations, Court of Justice of the EU, competences, international law, external representation","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The EU’s Representation in International Organizations: Case C-161/20 Commission v. Council (International Maritime Organization)\",\"authors\":\"Athena Herodotou, Ioanna Hadjiyianni\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/eerr2023003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article analyses Case C-161/20 Commission v. Council (International Maritime Organization (IMO)), in which the Court of Justice of the EU upheld a Council Decision endorsing a submission to the IMO by the Presidency of the Council on behalf of the European Commission and the Member States (MSs), and not on behalf of the EU. With this case, the Court contributes to the debate on the EU’s external representation, particularly in the context of an international organization to which all the MSs, but not the EU, are parties and which regulates issues falling within EU competences. Combining an EU external relations law and a public international law perspective, this article assesses the Court’s reliance on and interpretation of international law and explores the boundaries carved by EU and international law for the participation of the EU as a separate entity in the IMO. It also seeks to discern how this case fits within the Court’s established ‘gatekeeping’ mechanisms in determining the effects of international law in the EU legal order and whether it signals an emerging, more flexible engagement with international law.\\nInternational Maritime Organization, European Union, international organizations, Court of Justice of the EU, competences, international law, external representation\",\"PeriodicalId\":84710,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European foreign affairs review\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European foreign affairs review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2023003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European foreign affairs review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2023003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文分析了C-161/20委员会诉理事会(国际海事组织)案,在该案中,欧盟法院维持了理事会的一项决定,认可理事会主席代表欧盟委员会和成员国(MSs)而不是代表欧盟向国际海事组织提交的文件。在这个案例中,法院促进了关于欧盟对外代表权的辩论,特别是在一个国际组织的背景下,所有成员国(而不是欧盟)都是该组织的缔约方,并且该组织管理属于欧盟权限范围内的问题。结合欧盟对外关系法和国际公法的视角,本文评估了法院对国际法的依赖和解释,并探讨了欧盟和国际法为欧盟作为一个独立实体参与国际海事组织所划定的界限。它还试图辨别此案如何符合法院在确定国际法在欧盟法律秩序中的影响方面建立的“守门人”机制,以及它是否标志着与国际法的新兴、更灵活的接触。国际海事组织、欧盟、国际组织、欧盟法院、管辖权、国际法、对外代表
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The EU’s Representation in International Organizations: Case C-161/20 Commission v. Council (International Maritime Organization)
This article analyses Case C-161/20 Commission v. Council (International Maritime Organization (IMO)), in which the Court of Justice of the EU upheld a Council Decision endorsing a submission to the IMO by the Presidency of the Council on behalf of the European Commission and the Member States (MSs), and not on behalf of the EU. With this case, the Court contributes to the debate on the EU’s external representation, particularly in the context of an international organization to which all the MSs, but not the EU, are parties and which regulates issues falling within EU competences. Combining an EU external relations law and a public international law perspective, this article assesses the Court’s reliance on and interpretation of international law and explores the boundaries carved by EU and international law for the participation of the EU as a separate entity in the IMO. It also seeks to discern how this case fits within the Court’s established ‘gatekeeping’ mechanisms in determining the effects of international law in the EU legal order and whether it signals an emerging, more flexible engagement with international law. International Maritime Organization, European Union, international organizations, Court of Justice of the EU, competences, international law, external representation
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editorial: Fast and Furious? A Quick Digest of a Plan for the Accelerated Integration of Candidate Countries into the EU The EU’s Vaccine Diplomacy in the WHO The Compatibility of the ISDS Mechanism under the Energy Charter Treaty With the Autonomy of the EU Legal Order European Defence Union ASAP: The Act in Support of Ammunition Production and the development of EU defence capabilities in response to the war in Ukraine Who is really affected by European Union terrorist sanctions? A Critical Study on ‘Proximity’ in EU Case Law
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1