Minimum Harmonisation and Article 16 CFR: Difficult Times Ahead for Social Legislation?

10 Pages Posted: 21 Sep 2015 Last revised: 1 Oct 2015

See all articles by Marija Bartl

Marija Bartl

University of Amsterdam - Centre for the Study of European Contract Law (CSECL)

Candida Leone

University of Amsterdam - Faculty of Law

Multiple version iconThere are 2 versions of this paper

Date Written: September 20, 2015

Abstract

Two years later, as other contributions in this volume show, it still seems worth discussing Alemo-Herron. The case was a particularly bad surprise for those who had been more favourably impressed by previous decisions such as Aziz or Morcillo, in which the Court of Justice seemed inspired by the Charter of Fundamental Rights to grant relief to people being crudely hit by the economic crisis. Alemo-Herron seems to indicate a different path, providing the application of EU fundamental rights to private law questions with a somewhat bitter aftertaste. We argue that Alemo Herron is a problematic decision in two fundamental ways: first, it discounts the constitutional meaning of minimum harmonisation and second, it grants a thick partial meaning to article 16 CFR.

Suggested Citation

Bartl, Marija and Leone, Candida, Minimum Harmonisation and Article 16 CFR: Difficult Times Ahead for Social Legislation? (September 20, 2015). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2663044 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2663044

Marija Bartl (Contact Author)

University of Amsterdam - Centre for the Study of European Contract Law (CSECL) ( email )

P.O. Box 1030
Amsterdam, 1000 BA
Netherlands

Candida Leone

University of Amsterdam - Faculty of Law ( email )

Amsterdam, 1018 WB
Netherlands

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
164
Abstract Views
418
rank
97,577
PlumX Metrics