Art. 351 TFEU, the Principle of Loyalty and the Future Role of Member States' Bilateral Investment Treaties
Research output: Contributions to collected editions/works › Contributions to collected editions/anthologies › Education › peer-review
Standard
International Investment Law and EU Law. ed. / Marc Bungenberg; Jörn Griebel; Steffen Hindelang. 1. ed. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag, 2011. p. 79-93 (European Yearbook of International Economic Law , Special issue).
Research output: Contributions to collected editions/works › Contributions to collected editions/anthologies › Education › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - CHAP
T1 - Art. 351 TFEU, the Principle of Loyalty and the Future Role of Member States' Bilateral Investment Treaties
AU - Terhechte, Jörg
PY - 2011
Y1 - 2011
N2 - The transfer of national competences to the European Union or at least the discussion surrounding this contentious issue has been central to almost every revision of the European treaties in recent years. This is in part because none of the Union’s traits highlights its special, downright peerless role among other regional integration projects as succinctly as the wide scope of its competences and responsibilities. The transfer of competences often also serves to resolve policy issues that can no longer be adequately dealt with on a purely national level. The establishment of the Union Policy on the Environment by the Single European Act (now Art. 191–193 TFEU), the introduction of the Common Foreign and Security Policy by the Maastricht Treaty (now Art. 21–46 TEU) and the formation of Union Policy on Energy by the Treaty of Lisbon (Art. 194 TFEU) can all be traced to this central dilemma. In the transfer of the said competences to the Union also lies the Member States’ acknowledgement of their limited possibilities in a time of increasing fragmentation and globalization. They, thus, yield to an overarching “supranational causality”, as Werner von Simson has put it.
AB - The transfer of national competences to the European Union or at least the discussion surrounding this contentious issue has been central to almost every revision of the European treaties in recent years. This is in part because none of the Union’s traits highlights its special, downright peerless role among other regional integration projects as succinctly as the wide scope of its competences and responsibilities. The transfer of competences often also serves to resolve policy issues that can no longer be adequately dealt with on a purely national level. The establishment of the Union Policy on the Environment by the Single European Act (now Art. 191–193 TFEU), the introduction of the Common Foreign and Security Policy by the Maastricht Treaty (now Art. 21–46 TEU) and the formation of Union Policy on Energy by the Treaty of Lisbon (Art. 194 TFEU) can all be traced to this central dilemma. In the transfer of the said competences to the Union also lies the Member States’ acknowledgement of their limited possibilities in a time of increasing fragmentation and globalization. They, thus, yield to an overarching “supranational causality”, as Werner von Simson has put it.
KW - Law
U2 - 10.1007/978-3-642-14855-2_5
DO - 10.1007/978-3-642-14855-2_5
M3 - Contributions to collected editions/anthologies
SN - 3-642-14854-9
SN - 978-3-642-14854-5
SN - 978-3-642-26667-6
T3 - European Yearbook of International Economic Law , Special issue
SP - 79
EP - 93
BT - International Investment Law and EU Law
A2 - Bungenberg, Marc
A2 - Griebel, Jörn
A2 - Hindelang, Steffen
PB - Springer Verlag
CY - Heidelberg
ER -