Capital, Market and the State: Reconciling Free Movement of Capital with Public Interest Objectives: Nijhoff Studies in European Union Law, cartea 20
Autor Ilektra Antonakien Limba Engleză Hardback – 27 oct 2021
Din seria Nijhoff Studies in European Union Law
- 18%
Preț: 842.36 lei - 18%
Preț: 871.63 lei - 18%
Preț: 748.42 lei - 18%
Preț: 926.81 lei - 18%
Preț: 812.96 lei - 18%
Preț: 961.42 lei - 18%
Preț: 971.31 lei - 18%
Preț: 852.65 lei - 18%
Preț: 763.06 lei - 18%
Preț: 1185.52 lei - 18%
Preț: 1056.86 lei - 18%
Preț: 963.07 lei - 18%
Preț: 1035.93 lei - 18%
Preț: 712.65 lei - 18%
Preț: 1028.75 lei - 18%
Preț: 857.61 lei - 18%
Preț: 985.58 lei
Preț: 832.88 lei
Preț vechi: 1015.71 lei
-18% Nou
Puncte Express: 1249
Preț estimativ în valută:
159.45€ • 166.37$ • 133.66£
159.45€ • 166.37$ • 133.66£
Carte indisponibilă temporar
Doresc să fiu notificat când acest titlu va fi disponibil:
Se trimite...
Preluare comenzi: 021 569.72.76
Specificații
ISBN-13: 9789004471450
ISBN-10: 9004471456
Dimensiuni: 155 x 235 mm
Greutate: 0 kg
Editura: Brill
Colecția Brill | Nijhoff
Seria Nijhoff Studies in European Union Law
ISBN-10: 9004471456
Dimensiuni: 155 x 235 mm
Greutate: 0 kg
Editura: Brill
Colecția Brill | Nijhoff
Seria Nijhoff Studies in European Union Law
Cuprins
Introduction
i Bridging the Gap between the State and the Market in the Context of Capital Liberalisation
ii Academic and Societal Relevance
iii Structure of the Book
1Capital Liberalisation at the International and the European Level
i Capital Liberalisation at the International Level
AThe Theoretical Controversy about Capital Liberalisation
BThe International Legal Framework Governing Capital Liberalisation
ii Capital Liberalisation at the European Level
AA Historical Overview
1 Treaty of Rome: The Early Tentative Steps
2 The Council Directives
3 The Maastricht Treaty
BThe Current Legal Framework
1 The Scope of Article 63 tfeu
a) Territorial Scope
b) Material Scope
i) Difference between Capital Movements and Payments
ii) Definition of Capital Movements
c) Relationship with the Other Freedoms
2 Direct Effect of Article 63 tfeu
3 Restrictions
4 Derogations
a) Treaty-based Derogations
i) Article 65 tfeu
ii) Derogations Applicable only to Capital Movements to/from Third Countries
b) Overriding Reasons in the Public Interest
5 Proportionality
2Free Movement of Capital and Privatisations
i The Theoretical Underpinnings of Privatisation
ADefinition of Privatisation
BThe Theoretical Controversy about Privatisation
ii Privatisation and EU law
AThe Politico-economic Context
BThe Legal Framework: The Principle of Neutrality under Article 345 tfeu
1 The ‘Maximalist Shield’ Interpretation
2 The ‘Reductionist Shield’ Interpretation
3 The ‘Sword’ Interpretation
4 Assessment of the Three Interpretations
3Free Movement of Capital and Golden Shares
i Understanding the Theoretical Controversy Surrounding Golden Shares
ADefinition of Golden Shares
BGolden Shares as Control Enhancing Mechanisms
CThe Principle of Proportionality between Ownership and Control
DVarieties of Capitalism: Liberal Market Economies v Coordinated Market Economies
ECorporate Governance and EU Law
FThe Takeover Directive and the Golden Shares Case Law
ii Legal Issues Arising from the Golden Shares Case Law
AThe Horizontal Application of Article 63 tfeu in the Golden Shares Case Law
1 The Concept of ‘Horizontality’ in Constitutional Law
2 Horizontal Effect in EU Law
a) Defrenne: Horizontal Effect of Equal Pay
b) Walrave & Koch and Bosman: Horizontal Effect of Free Movement of Workers – Federation Exercising Regulatory Powers
c) Angonese: Horizontal Effect of Free Movement of Workers – Discriminatory Private Conduct
d) Viking and Laval: Horizontal Effect of Freedom of Establishment and Services – Trade Unions
e) Dansk Supermarked, Van de Haar and Fra.bo: Horizontal Effect of Free Movement of Goods
f) ams and Egenberger: Horizontal Effect of the Charter
3 Horizontal Effect of Article 63 tfeu
a) The Case Law Regarding the Horizontal Effect of Article 63 tfeu
b) Scholarly Opinions on the Horizontal Effect of Article 63 tfeu
c) Granting horizontal effect to Article 63 tfeu
BPublic Interest Objectives as Justification Grounds in the Golden Shares Case Law
1 The Objective of Safeguarding Energy Supplies in the Event of a Crisis as Covered by Public Security under Article 65 (1) (b) tfeu
2 The Objective of Ensuring Availability of the Telecommunications Network in the Event of a Crisis as Covered by Public Security under Article 65 (1) (b) tfeu
3 The Objective of Guaranteeing a Service of General Interest as an Overriding Reason in the Public Interest
4 Article 106 (2) tfeu
5 Protection of Workers and of Minority Shareholders
6 Economic Rule
CProportionality in the Golden Shares Case Law
DThe Definition of ‘Capital Restrictions’ in the Golden Shares Case Law
1 The Concept of ‘Restrictions’ in the Free Movement of Goods
a) The Pre-Keck Case Law on meeqr s
b) The Keck Ruling and the Introduction of the Concept of ‘Selling Arrangements’
c) The Post-Keck ‘Market Access’ Test
2 The Application of Keck in the Other Freedoms (Workers, Services and Establishment)
3 ‘Selling Arrangements’ in the Golden Shares Case Law
4 In Search of a Refined Test for ‘Capital Restrictions’
Conclusion
Bibliography
Index
i Bridging the Gap between the State and the Market in the Context of Capital Liberalisation
ii Academic and Societal Relevance
iii Structure of the Book
1Capital Liberalisation at the International and the European Level
i Capital Liberalisation at the International Level
AThe Theoretical Controversy about Capital Liberalisation
BThe International Legal Framework Governing Capital Liberalisation
ii Capital Liberalisation at the European Level
AA Historical Overview
1 Treaty of Rome: The Early Tentative Steps
2 The Council Directives
3 The Maastricht Treaty
BThe Current Legal Framework
1 The Scope of Article 63 tfeu
a) Territorial Scope
b) Material Scope
i) Difference between Capital Movements and Payments
ii) Definition of Capital Movements
c) Relationship with the Other Freedoms
2 Direct Effect of Article 63 tfeu
3 Restrictions
4 Derogations
a) Treaty-based Derogations
i) Article 65 tfeu
ii) Derogations Applicable only to Capital Movements to/from Third Countries
b) Overriding Reasons in the Public Interest
5 Proportionality
2Free Movement of Capital and Privatisations
i The Theoretical Underpinnings of Privatisation
ADefinition of Privatisation
BThe Theoretical Controversy about Privatisation
ii Privatisation and EU law
AThe Politico-economic Context
BThe Legal Framework: The Principle of Neutrality under Article 345 tfeu
1 The ‘Maximalist Shield’ Interpretation
2 The ‘Reductionist Shield’ Interpretation
3 The ‘Sword’ Interpretation
4 Assessment of the Three Interpretations
3Free Movement of Capital and Golden Shares
i Understanding the Theoretical Controversy Surrounding Golden Shares
ADefinition of Golden Shares
BGolden Shares as Control Enhancing Mechanisms
CThe Principle of Proportionality between Ownership and Control
DVarieties of Capitalism: Liberal Market Economies v Coordinated Market Economies
ECorporate Governance and EU Law
FThe Takeover Directive and the Golden Shares Case Law
ii Legal Issues Arising from the Golden Shares Case Law
AThe Horizontal Application of Article 63 tfeu in the Golden Shares Case Law
1 The Concept of ‘Horizontality’ in Constitutional Law
2 Horizontal Effect in EU Law
a) Defrenne: Horizontal Effect of Equal Pay
b) Walrave & Koch and Bosman: Horizontal Effect of Free Movement of Workers – Federation Exercising Regulatory Powers
c) Angonese: Horizontal Effect of Free Movement of Workers – Discriminatory Private Conduct
d) Viking and Laval: Horizontal Effect of Freedom of Establishment and Services – Trade Unions
e) Dansk Supermarked, Van de Haar and Fra.bo: Horizontal Effect of Free Movement of Goods
f) ams and Egenberger: Horizontal Effect of the Charter
3 Horizontal Effect of Article 63 tfeu
a) The Case Law Regarding the Horizontal Effect of Article 63 tfeu
b) Scholarly Opinions on the Horizontal Effect of Article 63 tfeu
c) Granting horizontal effect to Article 63 tfeu
BPublic Interest Objectives as Justification Grounds in the Golden Shares Case Law
1 The Objective of Safeguarding Energy Supplies in the Event of a Crisis as Covered by Public Security under Article 65 (1) (b) tfeu
2 The Objective of Ensuring Availability of the Telecommunications Network in the Event of a Crisis as Covered by Public Security under Article 65 (1) (b) tfeu
3 The Objective of Guaranteeing a Service of General Interest as an Overriding Reason in the Public Interest
4 Article 106 (2) tfeu
5 Protection of Workers and of Minority Shareholders
6 Economic Rule
CProportionality in the Golden Shares Case Law
DThe Definition of ‘Capital Restrictions’ in the Golden Shares Case Law
1 The Concept of ‘Restrictions’ in the Free Movement of Goods
a) The Pre-Keck Case Law on meeqr s
b) The Keck Ruling and the Introduction of the Concept of ‘Selling Arrangements’
c) The Post-Keck ‘Market Access’ Test
2 The Application of Keck in the Other Freedoms (Workers, Services and Establishment)
3 ‘Selling Arrangements’ in the Golden Shares Case Law
4 In Search of a Refined Test for ‘Capital Restrictions’
Conclusion
Bibliography
Index
Notă biografică
Ilektra Antonaki, Ph.D. (2019), Leiden University, is Référendaire at the Court of Justice of the European Union, General Court. She has several publications, including: Free movement of capital and protection of social objectives in the EU: Critical reflections on the case law regarding golden shares and privatisations in Sacha Garben & Inge Govaere, The Internal Market 2.0. (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2020), pp. 161-184 and Collective redundancies in Greece: AGET Iraklis (2017) 54 Common Market Law Review, Issue 5, pp. 1513-1534.