Prohibition Of Abuse Of Law

The Court of Justice has been alluding to 'abuse and abusive practices' for more than thirty years, but for a long time the significance of these references has been unclear. Few lawyers examined the case law, and those who did doubted whether it had led to the development of a legal principle. Within the last few years there has been a radical change of attitude, largely due to the development by the Court of an abuse test and its application within the field of taxation. In this book, academics and practitioners from all over Europe discuss the development of the Court's approach to abuse of law across the whole spectrum of European Union law, analysing the case-law from the 1970s to the present day and exploring the consequences of the introduction of the newly designated 'principle of prohibition of abuse of law' for the development of the laws of the EU and those of the Member States.

The Court of Justice has been alluding to 'abuse and abusive practices' for more than thirty years, but for a long time the significance of these references has been unclear. Few lawyers examined the case law, and those who did doubted whether it had led to the development of a legal principle. Within the last few years there has been a radical change of attitude, largely due to the development by the Court of an abuse test and its application within the field of taxation. In this book, academics and practitioners from all over Europe discuss the development of the Court's approach to abuse of law across the whole spectrum of European Union law, analysing the case-law from the 1970s to the present day and exploring the consequences of the introduction of the newly designated 'principle of prohibition of abuse of law' for the development of the laws of the EU and those of the Member States.

How can the concept of abuse of European Union law – which can be defined as undesirable choice of law artificially made by a private citizen – generate so much disagreement among equally intelligent individuals? Seeking to transcend the classical debate between its supporters and adversaries, the present study submits that the concept of abuse of EU law is located on three major fault-lines of EU law, which accounts for the well-established controversies in the field. The first fault-line, which is common to all legal orders, opposes legal congruence (the tendency to yield equitable legal outcomes) to legal certainty (the tendency to yield predictable legal outcomes). Partisans of legal congruence tend to advocate the prohibition of abuses of law, whereas partisans of legal certainty tend to oppose it. The second fault-line is specific to EU law and divides two conceptions of the regulation of the internal market. If economic integration is conceived as the promotion of cross-border competition among private businesses (the paradigm of 'regulatory neutrality'), choices of law must be proscribed as abusive, for they distort business competition. But if economic integration is intended to promote competition among Member States (the paradigm of 'regulatory competition'), choices of law by EU citizens represent a desirable process of arbitrage among national laws. The third and final fault-line corresponds to the tension between two orientations of the economic constitution of the European Union, namely the fear of private power and the fear of public power. Those who fear private power most tend to endorse the prohibition of abuses of law, whereas those who fear public power most tend to reject it. Seen in this way, the concept of abuse of EU law offers a forum in which fundamental questions about the nature and function of EU law can be confronted and examined in a new light. In May 2013, the thesis that this book was based on won the First Edition of the European Law Faculties Association Award for Outstanding Doctoral Thesis.

Now available in paperback! There exists a certain tension between human rights protection and the concept of abuse of rights. While human rights essentially aim to promote freedom by affirming the basic rights and freedoms citizens enjoy vis-a-vis state authorities, the abuse clause primarily aims to protect the democratic organization of the state against groups and individuals invoking these rights with the aim of undermining it. Furthermore, an analysis of the growing body of case law on this topic shows that the interpretation and application of Article 17 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) are far from unequivocal. While according to Article 17 ECHR anti-democratic activities may be excluded from the protection of the Convention, clear criteria for determining which activities fit this description are lacking. This has resulted in a rather obscure and inconsistent case-by-case approach. This study seeks to shed light on the prohibition of abuse of rights in Article 17 ECHR in order to contribute to a more coherent interpretation of this provision. To that aim it studies the abuse clause from different perspectives. First, it looks at the historical background of the provision to examine what motivated the drafters to include this prohibition. Then it moves on to the case law of the European Commission of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights and to legal doctrine, revealing the difficulties and inconsistencies in the current interpretation of the abuse clause. It also analyzes the interpretation of prohibitions of abuse in other human rights documents to see whether parallels can be drawn with the interpretation of Article 17 ECHR. Based on the insights obtained from these different perspectives, this study puts forward a proposal as to how Article 17 ECHR can best be applied in the future. (Series: School of Human Rights Research, Vol. 78) [Subject: Human Rights Law]

Whether the corporate form is used to avoid liabilities or cover illegal acts, or whether abuse is practised to obtain certain advantages, the subject of this first-ever in-depth survey and analysis garners more attention every day – both in legal literature and in popular media. Taken together, the authoritative contributions in this book clearly and comprehensively reveal typical situations where abuse may take place and how company law and other areas of law have tackled these incidents and practices in a variety of key jurisdictions. Focusing on Europe but with global implications, the topics raised include the following: how group structures may be used by multinational enterprises to escape regulation and avoid taxation; whether the decision to incorporate a company in a particular jurisdiction may be abusive; companies set up for the purpose of money laundering; letterbox companies formed as a front to allow a company to benefit from one legal regime and avoid others; ex post transfers of seats such as cross-border mergers and conversions; when the use of phoenix companies may constitute an abuse of the corporate form; how corporate mobility is used to circumvent worker participation; and how online company formation and technological innovation may foster abuse. This book helps to explain how the line is drawn between abuse and (creative) use of the corporate form. Remedies covered include restricting the use of bearer shares, setting minimum capital requirements, piercing the corporate veil, ensuring transparency of beneficial ownership, using insolvency law to lodge claims against directors and shareholders and recover assets, and applying the general principle prohibiting abuse. There is no other book on the market focusing on abuse of companies and giving such a comprehensive analysis of the topic. Practitioners will get guidelines on how to avoid becoming involved in activities that may constitute abuse and how to address instances where abuse has occurred, and interested academics, legislators, and enforcement authorities in Europe and beyond will find this book’s perspectives invaluable.

Abusive Practices in Competition Law tackles the difficult questions presented to competition lawyers and economists regarding abusive practices: where and when is the red line crossed in competitive advances? When is a company explicitly dominant? How do you handle those who hold superior bargaining power over others but are not classed as dominant?

Corporal Punishment of Children - Comparative Legal and Social Developments towards Prohibition and Beyond provides insights into the views and experiences of prominent academics, and political, religious, and human rights activists from Australia, Canada, Germany, Ireland, Israel, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, Sweden, the UK, and the US. Country-specific and thematic insights in relation to children's ongoing experience of corporal punishment are detailed and discussed, and key questions are raised and considered with a view to advancing progress towards societies in which children's human rights to dignity and optimal development are more fully recognised.

This publication provides an unparalleled comparative analysis of two "hot topics" in the field of antitrust and unfair competition law with regard to a number of key countries. The first part of the book examines the prohibition of abuse of a dominant position and globalization in relation to two broad questions: first, whether there is consistency between the approaches of different jurisdictions to the notion of abuse, and, second, whether there are too many restrictions on legal rights and business opportunities resulting from the prohibition of abuse of dominance. The international report drafted by Professor Pinar Akman reveals that there are as many similarities as differences between the approaches of the twenty-one jurisdictions studied and presented in this book. This is an invitation to read the excellent international report as well as the reports on specific jurisdictions in order to grasp the variety of arguments and approaches of this antitrust area, which may, on the surface, appear alike. The second part gathers contributions on the question of protection and disclosure of trade secrets and know-how from various jurisdictions. The need for adequate protection of trade secrets has increased due to digitalization and the ease with which large volumes of misappropriated information can be reproduced. The comprehensive international report, prepared by Henrik Bengtsson, brings together these reflections by comparing various national positions. The book also discusses the resolutions passed by the General Assembly of the International League of Competition Law (LIDC) following a debate on each of these topics, and includes proposed solutions and recommendations.