Professor David Collins, City Law School
Last week Jeremy Hunt, the UK Chancellor, announced that the UK would pursue implementation of its own Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). The EU adopted its own CBAM which is due to go into effect gradually over the next few years – it is currently in an information-gathering stage.
Christos Karetsos, City Law School
On the 2 October 2023 at City, University of London, Institute for the Study of European Laws (ISEL), Professor Peter L. Lindseth and Professor Päivi Leino-Sandberg presented their research project in progress, titled ‘‘Beyond ‘As If’ Constitutionalism: Revenue, Borrowing, and Spending in the New Regime of European Integration.’’ This blog post outlines the key ideas of the presentation and the discussion that followed.
Professor Elaine Fahey, Institute for the Study of European Law, City Law School, City, University of London
The EU-US Trade and Technology Council (TTC)
A Transatlantic Trade and Technology Council (TTC) has been set up quickly by the European Union (EU) with the US at the outset of the US Biden administration. It is not a trade negotiation and does not adhere to any specific Article 218 TFEU procedure, although it has many signature ‘EU’ characteristics. The TTC has high-minded goals to ‘solve’ global challenges on trade and technology with its most significant third country cooperating partner. Yet it is notably not the only recent Council proposed by the EU- there is also a new EU-India Trade and Technology Council. These new Councils represent a new modus operandi for the EU to engage with ‘complex’ partners, comprising executive to executive engagement, meeting agency counterparts regularly in close groups in an era of EU trade policy deepening its stakeholder and civil society ambit overall. The TTC has a vast range of policy-making activities, traversing many areas of EU law. Their precise selection and future is difficult to understand in EU regional trade and data policy, seemingly pivoting, like US trade law, to executive-led soft law.
Paul James Cardwell, King’s College London and Jed Odermatt, City, University of London
The Eurovision bandwagon has firmly arrived in Liverpool. During a week of two semi-finals, 37 competing countries will be whittled down to 26. Around 160 million people are then expected to tune in to the grand final on Saturday May 13. From humble beginnings in 1956, with only seven countries competing in a theatre in Switzerland, the contest is now one of the most watched entertainment events in the world.
Eva Pander Maat and Pia Rebelo
Monday April 18th marked the kick-off of the Global Goals Research Exchange between the Faculty of Law at the University of Groningen and City Law School at City, University of London. The Exchange presents an excellent opportunity to promote collaborative ties between legal researchers doing work in the topical areas of energy transitions and sustainable development. In the first iteration of the exchange, two City Law School researchers crossed the channel to present and discuss their work.
The Windsor Framework (WF) concluded between the UK and EU to resolve the difficulties associated with the Irish Border reflects a significant compromise, with the UK giving the most ground. The brainchild of a more pliant and technocratic Prime Minister than his two predecessors, Rishi Sunak’s WF is in many respects an agreement that should never have been needed. The new arrangement essentially compels the EU to do what it should have done under the original Northern Ireland Protocol, i.e. impose no unreasonable barriers to trade between Great Britain (GB) and Northern Ireland (NI) while maintaining sufficient safeguards that its Single Market would not be flooded with UK goods.
The future of EU legal integration is at a significant juncture with the departure of the UK, substantial rule of law challenges, internal and external crises, and an increasingly apathetic multilateral legal order. There is increased recognition amongst EU lawyers, who have historically limited themselves to doctrinal analysis and legal hermeneutics, that methodology plays an essential role in order to understand EU integration and shape its future (van Gestel & Micklitz, 2014). Certain schools now advocate that the future of EU law must become more methodologically grounded to realise its scientific benefits and to broaden the reach of lawyers beyond the doctrinal (Dyevre, Wijtvliet & Lampach, 2019). For example, anthropological and sociological approaches have given us a sense of how various national and international actors use EU law to achieve their goals (Vauchez & De Witte, 2013). Quantitative studies have offered new insights into the practices of courts and the effectiveness of legislative design (Larsson and Naurin, 2016; Larsson et al. 2017).
In my recently published book, The EU as a Global Digital Actor: Institutionalising Global Data Protection, Trade, and Cybersecurity I have sought to try to capture a range of issues emerging as to the EU’s digital and international relations agenda.