Documents law 538 results

"This thoughtfully edited volume explores the operation of equality and discrimination law in times of crisis. It aims to understand how existing inequalities are exacerbated in crises and whether equality law has the tools to understand and address this contingency.
Experience during the COVID-19 crisis shows that the pandemic has acted as a catalyst for 'exponential inequalities' related to racism, xenophobia, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ageism, and ableism. Yet, the field of equality law (which is meant to be addressing such discrimination or inequality) has had little immediate relevance in mitigating these exponential inequalities. This is despite the fact that countries like the UK have a rather recent and state-of-the-art legislation in the field, namely the Equality Act 2010.

Exponential Inequalities offers readers an understanding of how these inequalities came to be and how crises such as the global pandemic, the climate emergency, or the economic downturn, can exacerbate an already untenable situation. It illuminates both the structural and the conceptual, as well as the practical and doctrinal difficulties currently experienced in equality law, and discusses whether or not equality law even has the tools to both understand and then address this contingency."

"Ce numéro spécial de La Revue de l'IRES s'intéresse à la dynamique des relations professionnelles en France dans un contexte de réformes institutionnelles visant à promouvoir la négociation collective au niveau de l'entreprise.
Il réunit des articles issus de travaux menés dans le cadre d'un appel à projet de recherches (APR) de la Dares intitulé « Les relations de travail dans un contexte de réformes institutionnelles », lancé en décembre 2017, quelques semaines après les ordonnances Macron du 22 septembre 2017.
À partir de la mobilisation croisée de l'exploitation statistique de l'enquête Relations professionnelles et négociations d'entreprise (REPONSE) 2017 de la Dares et des enquêtes qualitatives de terrain, les contributions ont pour objectif d'apporter un éclairage sur l'évolution des relations professionnelles avant et après ces ordonnances, jusque dans la période de crise sanitaire.
Au-delà du cadre juridique, ce numéro s'attache à montrer combien les dynamiques socio-économiques sont déterminantes dans l'évolution des pratiques des acteurs d'entreprise et de branche. Il montre que, plutôt que d'enrichir le dialogue social au sein des entreprises, les réformes semblent renforcer le pouvoir patronal dans les formes et modalités des négociations."

"The climate crisis is one of the most serious problems that humankind has ever faced. With the adverse consequences of this phenomenon, new practices have emerged in social, economic, and legal structures. One of these new practices is doubtlessly climate litigation that aim to pressure states to fulfil their positive obligations concerning the mitigation of the human-induced climate crisis. Global warming, advancing at an unprecedented rate, is pushing governments to take immediate measures and shape their legislation accordingly. Within this movement, the principle of non-regression, rooted in human rights, has gained a tangible form in environmental law. This study explores the potential role of the climate crisis and, specifically, the climate litigation cases in Europe in establishing the principle of non-regression as a settled principle in environmental law. It discusses its value as an argument in climate litigation from a practical point of view."

"A commitment by some UK lawyers not to work on fossil fuel schemes has sparked an ethical debate within the profession. While some see the pledge as problematic, however, it could be taken up by peers overseas.
A pledge by lawyers not to work on coal, oil or gas projects because of their climate change impacts has reverberated around the UK and beyond. Since the pledge publication on 29th March 2023, more than 170 lawyers have committed to refuse work supporting new fossil fuel projects or that takes action against climate protestors exercising their right to peaceful protest. Prominent UK signatories to the ‘Declaration of Conscience' include Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC, chair of the British Institute of Human Rights, and Farhana Yamin, one of the architects of the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change..."

"‘Just transition' has grown into an increasingly popular concept in climate policy. During the recent decade, it has been included in both international and national climate law frameworks. The concept, however, has not received much attention from legal scholars. Addressing this gap, this article analyses the meaning and legal implications of just transition, specifically within international climate law. Against this backdrop, it shows that, following the Paris Agreement, just transition has evolved into an increasingly important concept in how climate law principles and obligations are interpreted and developed. It further highlights a substantial evolution of just transition from a labour-centred to a more comprehensive concept that helps underline the importance of implementing climate measures in a way that engages and protects affected and vulnerable people and communities."

"Together with its members and partners, CAN Europe publishes today “Climate Laws in Europe – essential for achieving climate neutrality”.

The report, which takes stock of the situation of national climate laws in 17 European countries – also beyond EU borders – has three main goals:

1. Providing easy access to anyone that would like to increase their knowledge base about the content and status of a climate law in any of the participating countries.

2. Creating a resource to support partners in pushing Member States to adopt national economy-wide climate neutrality targets as well as a national governance enabling conditions to achieve it.

3. Showcasing the successful array of governance mechanisms that already exist at national level and which could inspire improvements of the EU's climate architecture.

Currently, the European Union's climate neutrality target is only enshrined in the European Climate Law; the target applies collectively to the Union but does not apply to each Member State individually. Yet, some 13 countries have already gone beyond this and have adopted — or are about to adopt — national whole economy wide climate neutrality targets. To accompany this effort, they have in many cases also put in place rather robust national climate governance mechanisms to create the enabling conditions for national ownership and responsibility to deliver their national climate neutrality target.

The report finds that a growing number of European countries are adopting national climate laws. This demonstrates a strong and growing consensus that robust national ownership of the responsibility to achieve climate neutrality is crucial for delivery. The quality of national climate governance matters just as much, being the bedrock to reach any target.

Where a national climate law has not been adopted or is not yet in the pipeline, the report found that civil society, convinced of the importance of national climate laws including a sound governance framework, is pushing for them.

Finally, the report emphasizes that the EU should take the opportunity of the ‘Fit for 55' process to achieve a ‘levelling up' of national standards to increase accountability of the EU's climate neutrality objective.

"

"Eurosceptic actors often mobilize legal concepts and institutions against European integration. This article makes three contributions to the understanding of this phenomenon. First, it proposes a conceptual definition of the Eurosceptic use of law as part of political strategies, with the aim to make a theoretical contribution to literature in the field. Second, to anchor this idea in the empirical reality, the article exhaustively analyses instances of use of law in the manifestos of medium to large size Eurosceptic parties in national elections, focusing on right wing Eurosceptic parties in the period 2010 to 2021. Third, the article presents some core features of how law is used by the Eurosceptic parties covered by this research at the strategic, conceptual, empirical and political levels, evidencing its widespread utilization and discussing its risks for the process of European integration."

"This article analyses the recent use of European Union (EU) terminology of digital sovereignty and strategic autonomy, aiming to identify tensions between policy considerations of fundamental rights, free market principles and geopolitical concerns. These tensions are rooted in the disparity between the EU's considerable economic and regulatory power in digital matters and its limited mandate and capabilities in foreign policy. The article also explores the translation of the notions of digital sovereignty and strategic autonomy into EU policy. It identifies three important trends in the geopoliticisation of the EU agenda on digital technologies: (1) the instrumental use of ‘classic' internal market policies to exert geopolitical influence; (2) the imposition of foreign policy imperatives on national markets; and (3) new ‘hybrid' digital policies that combine internal market concerns, fundamental rights and geopolitical concerns. Ultimately, digital sovereignty has inherent tensions with the EU's normative power in digital issues and may also result in a strategic cacophony."

"More than 20 years ago, a major and unprecedented development occurred in the European Union with the adoption in 2000 of two pieces of EU legislation in the field of anti-discrimination: the Racial Equality Directive (2000/43/EC) and the Employment Equality Directive (2000/78/EC). The transposition and implementation of these legal provisions into the national legal systems of the 27 Member States is described in a series of annually updated country reports produced by the European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination. In addition, the network also includes candidate countries (Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia and Türkiye) and the EEA countries (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway), as well as the United Kingdom, which exited the EU on 31 January 2020. The European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination was created in 2014, through a call for tenders from the European Commission to create a new single network following the work completed by the European network of legal experts in the non-discrimination field (managed by the Migration Policy Group and Human European Consultancy) and the European network of legal experts in the field of gender equality (managed by Utrecht University). The current network is managed by the Human European Consultancy, the Migration Policy Group and Utrecht University. The network reports annually on the national legislation of these countries compared with the anti-discrimination standards set by the EU. The national reports are written by independent national experts in each country covered by the network. The information is provided in response to questions set out in a template format that closely follows the provisions of the two directives, although the countries included in the network do not all have the same compliance obligations. The 36 reports cover national law, the establishment of enforcement mechanisms, case law and the adoption of other measures. They contain information current as of 1 January 2022.1 As such, they are a valuable source of information on national anti-discrimination law and can be found on the network's website at: www.equalitylaw.eu. This comparative analysis, drafted by Isabelle Chopin and Catharina Germaine (Migration Policy Group), compares and analyses the information set out in the country reports relating to 2021 in a format mirroring that of the country reports themselves and draws some conclusions from the information contained in them. The report further presents the general trends in European anti-discrimination policy and points out some of the remaining dilemmas in the application of anti-discrimination legislation. It gives an overview of the main substantive issues in both directives: the grounds of discrimination, the definition of grounds and scope, exceptions to the principle of equal treatment and positive action, access to justice and effective enforcement, and equality bodies."