首页> 外文OA文献 >Case C-270/12 (UK v Parliament and Council) : stress testing Constitutional resilience of the powers of EU Financial Supervisory Authorities : a critical assessment of the Advocate General's opinion
【2h】

Case C-270/12 (UK v Parliament and Council) : stress testing Constitutional resilience of the powers of EU Financial Supervisory Authorities : a critical assessment of the Advocate General's opinion

机译:案例C-270 / 12(英国诉议会):压力测试欧盟金融监管机构权力的宪法弹性:对司法部长意见的批判性评估

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

This paper takes a critical look at the conclusions and reasoning of the Opinion of the Advocate General in the case C-270/12 UK v Council and Parliament that, at the time of writing this paper, is pending before the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union. In his Opinion delivered on 12 September 2013, Advocate General Jääskinen found, in agreement with the UK, that the Article 114 TFEU was not an appropriate legal basis for the powers granted to the European Securities Markets Authority under Article 28 of the Regulation 236/2012 on Short Selling and certain aspects of Credit Default Swaps. This paper has three aims: first, to underline the “systemic” importance of the case for the nascent system of EU financial supervision; second, to point out certain neglected dimensions in the Opinion, especially the insufficient attention paid to ex ante (political and procedural) safeguards and the problematic relationship between financial stability and financial integration; and third, to emphasise the need of the Court to find a second-best solution in order to ring-fence the damage that could be caused to the supervisory system in the event the Court were to agree with the Advocate General’s findings.
机译:本文对C-270 / 12 UK诉理事会和议会一案的辩护律师意见的结论和理由进行了批判,该案在撰写本文时尚待法院大法庭审理。欧洲联盟司法部长。司法部长Jääskinen在2013年9月12日发表的意见中,与英国达成共识,认为TFEU第114条不是根据第236/2012号条例第28条授予欧洲证券市场管理局权力的适当法律基础关于卖空和信用违约掉期的某些方面。本文具有三个目标:首先,强调此案对于欧盟金融监管新生系统的“系统性”重要性;第二,指出《意见》中某些被忽略的方面,特别是对事前(政治和程序)保障措施的重视不足,以及金融稳定与金融一体化之间的关系存在问题;第三,强调法院有必要找到第二好的解决方案,以便在法院同意总检察长的调查结果的情况下,对可能对监督系统造成的损害进行防范。

著录项

  • 作者

    MARJOSOLA Heikki;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2014
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号