Brexiters now seek to deny the existence of basic precepts of international law - but they were happy to invoke the Vienna Convention when it suited them
More actual international law analysis re breach of the withdrawal agreement here, unless you prefer Lord Grenfell's Brexity fanfic - eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2020/02/how-do…
"I know nothing about international law, so here's some word salad"
Last week's ruling of the EU General Court that one of the cases about British citizens retaining EU citizenship is inadmissible is now public: curia.europa.eu/juris/document…
Ah, this is new information - a *second* case challenging the withdrawal agreement for allegedly "taking away" EU citizenship from UK citizens was *also* dismissed as inadmissible last week - curia.europa.eu/juris/document…
This is the case of Harry Shindler (WWII vet) and others. AND...
New judgment clarifies when civilians fleeing armed conflict (in this case, in Afghanistan) can claim subsidiary protection due to a "serious and individual threat" to their life or person - interpreting the test broadly
New judgment - Dutch law is not compliant with EU law where an asylum seeker makes a repeat asylum application, as it's too strict about how to define new evidence which can justify the new application: curia.europa.eu/juris/document…
CJEU, immigration law
New judgment - Austrian law requiring German-language proficiency in order to get housing benefit is in breach of EU law on long-term resident non-EU citizens (though not EU race equality law): curia.europa.eu/juris/document…
New ruling of the EU General Court yesterday on whether UK citizens retain EU citizenship. It's not published yet but Julien kindly sent it to me, so I will summarise in this thread.
This is one of three cases directly challenging the validity of the withdrawal agreement (or rather, the Council decision concluding it) in the EU General Court. There are also two cases on the same issue sent to the CJEU from French courts.
The EU General Court said that this case was inadmissible because the applicant lacks standing to sue directly. Therefore it did not rule on the merits of the case.
The latest infringement proceedings brought by the EU Commission. Lots of developments in different areas, but here's some highlights... ec.europa.eu/commission/pre…
Commission starts infringement proceedings against Germany due to national constitutional court refusing to accept primacy of EU law re ECB decisions
Commission starts infringement proceedings against three more Member States re EU law on racist hate speech and Holocaust denial
Hungary's legal challenge to the European Parliament triggering "rule of law" proceedings is admissible but fails on the merits, as the EP calculated votes correctly. (However, the Council has not acted on the EP's resolution...)
New judgment in Tesco case comparing pay of workers in shops to other workers - cases pending against other supermarkets too - one of final cases from UK
Hungarian government's dog whistle rant about Soros, immigration (the EP resolution included many other rule of law issues), and EP breaking its own rules proved unfounded
Important not to overlook the *all* migrants point - the legal challenge was (jointly) brought by an EU citizens' group on the basis of EU law, but the illegality of the immigration exception to data protection law is also relevant to non-EU migrants: