@maupako.bsky.social
Prawnik, nauczyciel akademicki, w rzeczywistości. W alternatywnej rzeczywistości równie dobrze bibliotekarz, ogrodnik czy kaligraf:).
Good idea. Technically complicated, but still good.
February 2, 2025 at 9:55 PM
Good idea. Technically complicated, but still good.
Only obligations? And what about rights? Ruled out? A wounded soldiers directly (without any national implementation) invoking a provision from a treaty with DE against a national military. Would not be ok?:)
January 28, 2025 at 11:56 AM
Only obligations? And what about rights? Ruled out? A wounded soldiers directly (without any national implementation) invoking a provision from a treaty with DE against a national military. Would not be ok?:)
You may. But it does not change anything as regards the very issue we discuss here. Your disagreement is illogical. It leads to paradoxes in apllying EU. Since EU is not a soveraign entity, not the Court but States (in different forms) establish the meaning of the treaties.
January 28, 2025 at 11:43 AM
You may. But it does not change anything as regards the very issue we discuss here. Your disagreement is illogical. It leads to paradoxes in apllying EU. Since EU is not a soveraign entity, not the Court but States (in different forms) establish the meaning of the treaties.
Clarify, please, what they say.
January 28, 2025 at 11:26 AM
Clarify, please, what they say.
If you rally want earlier examples you may find them in many bilateral commercial treaties as well. The ECJ does not have any competence to establish any specific legal order. It is a domain of States. Your argument does not have a legal character. It's a confession of faith:).
January 28, 2025 at 11:23 AM
If you rally want earlier examples you may find them in many bilateral commercial treaties as well. The ECJ does not have any competence to establish any specific legal order. It is a domain of States. Your argument does not have a legal character. It's a confession of faith:).
Is it a joke? National militaries are organs of States. Their acts may lead to international resposibility. This is the the very statehood.
January 28, 2025 at 11:12 AM
Is it a joke? National militaries are organs of States. Their acts may lead to international resposibility. This is the the very statehood.
Once again, each and every international treaty has primacy on national law (see general customary norms - art. 13, 14 of the ILC Draft...).
January 28, 2025 at 11:06 AM
Once again, each and every international treaty has primacy on national law (see general customary norms - art. 13, 14 of the ILC Draft...).
The establishing of any meaning to the threaty is more complex than only a historical method of interpretation. See the rule in the art. 31 VCLT, especially par.3. The DE was not created by the judgments but it stems from states' acquiescence to the proposed interpretation (their practice).
January 28, 2025 at 11:00 AM
The establishing of any meaning to the threaty is more complex than only a historical method of interpretation. See the rule in the art. 31 VCLT, especially par.3. The DE was not created by the judgments but it stems from states' acquiescence to the proposed interpretation (their practice).
may find in the Jay Treaty ("supreme law of the land"), the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of wounded soldiers, the Versailles Treaty. There are also others. 4. The ILC Draft is not a treaty, btw. The docoment invokes norms of customary IL.
January 28, 2025 at 10:45 AM
may find in the Jay Treaty ("supreme law of the land"), the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of wounded soldiers, the Versailles Treaty. There are also others. 4. The ILC Draft is not a treaty, btw. The docoment invokes norms of customary IL.
1. I did not claim that these norms as depicted in the art. 13 and 14 of the ILC Draft... produce any DEP. 2. They embrace as lex generalis the concept of P and in the aftermath of it, under some conditions, the DE which may flow from international norms. 3. Some examples of self-executing norms you
January 28, 2025 at 10:38 AM
1. I did not claim that these norms as depicted in the art. 13 and 14 of the ILC Draft... produce any DEP. 2. They embrace as lex generalis the concept of P and in the aftermath of it, under some conditions, the DE which may flow from international norms. 3. Some examples of self-executing norms you
Such a direct effect on citizens as regards EU law is possible because the states in the treaty have accepted such an effect. He does not come from nothing. In such a sens without international legal rule there would be no EU law p&de.
January 26, 2025 at 11:10 AM
Such a direct effect on citizens as regards EU law is possible because the states in the treaty have accepted such an effect. He does not come from nothing. In such a sens without international legal rule there would be no EU law p&de.
These provisions contain international legal rules that embrace the primacy and direct effect of EU law. The EU has not invented anything extraordinary in this regard. States have proposed in Treaties the intensity of this phenomenon, known to international law before.
January 26, 2025 at 10:58 AM
These provisions contain international legal rules that embrace the primacy and direct effect of EU law. The EU has not invented anything extraordinary in this regard. States have proposed in Treaties the intensity of this phenomenon, known to international law before.
EU courts operate on the basis of the treaties, which can be amended. And they adjudicate within the limits of EU law with limited jurisdiction. Ultimately, they will not be able to defy a consensual decision to terminate the Treaty.
January 26, 2025 at 10:51 AM
EU courts operate on the basis of the treaties, which can be amended. And they adjudicate within the limits of EU law with limited jurisdiction. Ultimately, they will not be able to defy a consensual decision to terminate the Treaty.
For instance articles 13 and 14 of the Draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States (ILC, customary law).
January 26, 2025 at 10:38 AM
For instance articles 13 and 14 of the Draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States (ILC, customary law).
The term 'withdrawal' has a strict meaning. Making it plural doesn't change anything. A state cannot be forced to unilaterally withdraw from the treaty, but can be unanimously excluded (termination) under a general provision by all other parties.
January 26, 2025 at 10:31 AM
The term 'withdrawal' has a strict meaning. Making it plural doesn't change anything. A state cannot be forced to unilaterally withdraw from the treaty, but can be unanimously excluded (termination) under a general provision by all other parties.
Primacy & direct effect are not contrary to international law! They're familiar to international law before the EU. In the case of the EU, states created (treaty) a more intensive variant of p&de in the implementation of obligations. At any time they can unanimously change these principles.
January 26, 2025 at 10:16 AM
Primacy & direct effect are not contrary to international law! They're familiar to international law before the EU. In the case of the EU, states created (treaty) a more intensive variant of p&de in the implementation of obligations. At any time they can unanimously change these principles.
Article 60 of the VCLT does not force any state to withdraw (its act) from a particular treaty. The legal effect of termination of a treaty under this rule follows a decision made by the other parties.
January 26, 2025 at 10:02 AM
Article 60 of the VCLT does not force any state to withdraw (its act) from a particular treaty. The legal effect of termination of a treaty under this rule follows a decision made by the other parties.
All the specificity of the EU legal order in question here is effective as long as it is upheld by the member states. If we reject the general rules (VCLT), we allow countries like Hungary, Slovakia, and before that Poland, to digest the EU from the inside. That would be a shame.
January 26, 2025 at 9:33 AM
All the specificity of the EU legal order in question here is effective as long as it is upheld by the member states. If we reject the general rules (VCLT), we allow countries like Hungary, Slovakia, and before that Poland, to digest the EU from the inside. That would be a shame.
The EU's legal order was not created by the EU, it was created by the states and is sustained by the states. Thus, as long as the EU is not some form of state, not a sovereign entity, the general rules (VCLT) apply to the basis of its operation.
January 26, 2025 at 9:12 AM
The EU's legal order was not created by the EU, it was created by the states and is sustained by the states. Thus, as long as the EU is not some form of state, not a sovereign entity, the general rules (VCLT) apply to the basis of its operation.
4. Article 60 of the VCLT (general provision) allows treaties to be terminated against party/parties that materially violate its provisions. The consent of all other states is required. The provision can be applied to a group of states.
January 26, 2025 at 9:05 AM
4. Article 60 of the VCLT (general provision) allows treaties to be terminated against party/parties that materially violate its provisions. The consent of all other states is required. The provision can be applied to a group of states.
... the rules codified in the Convention apply to the EU treaties. 3. If the EU's own rules are unable to protect the object and purpose of the EU treaties, the general rules must be applied. ...
January 26, 2025 at 8:59 AM
... the rules codified in the Convention apply to the EU treaties. 3. If the EU's own rules are unable to protect the object and purpose of the EU treaties, the general rules must be applied. ...
The reasoning is as follows: 1. the treaties creating the EU are international agreements. This is evidenced by the mode of their conclusion. 2. subject to Article 5 of the VCLT (the EU's own rules on the law of treaties take precedence in application), ...
January 26, 2025 at 8:52 AM
The reasoning is as follows: 1. the treaties creating the EU are international agreements. This is evidenced by the mode of their conclusion. 2. subject to Article 5 of the VCLT (the EU's own rules on the law of treaties take precedence in application), ...
I suggest the Article 60 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969).
January 25, 2025 at 4:00 PM
I suggest the Article 60 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969).
Głosowanie za podjęciem uchwały lub wstrzymanie się od głosu to rozwód prawa i zdrowego rozsądku. W ten sposób zasadę rządów prawa składa się do grobu.
January 1, 2025 at 10:58 AM
Głosowanie za podjęciem uchwały lub wstrzymanie się od głosu to rozwód prawa i zdrowego rozsądku. W ten sposób zasadę rządów prawa składa się do grobu.