Share this page!

Steve Peers Profile picture
Twitter logo
21 Oct, 7 tweets, 2 min read
CJEU, criminal law

New judgment interprets EU law on confiscation of criminal assets - scope of the law is broad, but if assets are transferred to third parties, they must have fair trial rights to challenge its confiscation: curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/do…
CJEU, disability discrimination law

New judgment: complete ban on blind person being employed as a juror breaches EU equality law, interpreted in light of UN Convention on persons with disabilities: curia.europa.eu/juris/document…
CJEU, fair trials law

New judgment: Member States must have system in place to correct any errors made when criminal suspects were informed of accusations against them; national courts must try to interpret national law consistently with EU law
curia.europa.eu/juris/document…
CJEU, immigration law

New AG opinion on circumstances in which long-term resident non-EU citizens can lose that status due to absence from the EU, and whether a brief return can prevent loss of status: curia.europa.eu/juris/document…
(check out footnote 14 😀🥳)
This case could also be relevant by analogy to loss of permanent residence for EU citizens under free movement law: the AG discusses the comparison. If so, it might also be relevant to loss of permanent residence/settled status under the withdrawal agreement.
In fact the analogous question about loss of permanent residence for EU citizens - in this case, a UK citizen pre-Brexit - has just been referred to the CJEU:
Also there are "permitted absence" rules as regards *obtaining* these types of status (either for EU citizens, or under the withdrawal agreement, or for non-EU citizens) in the first place. The interpretation of absence rules re loss of status might be relevant by analogy here.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Steve Peers

Steve Peers Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @StevePeers

Steve Peers Profile picture
20 Oct
This action for damages against Frontex follows the action brought against it for failure to act (because it did not end its participation in alleged human rights breaches) back in May: curia.europa.eu/juris/document…
So EU courts can now clarify how much Frontex is legally accountable.
Note that an action for damages is subject to different standing rules than a failure to act claim. An action for damages needs to prove that an unlawful action by Frontex caused damage to the applicant. This unlawful action must also meet a threshold...>
...namely, it must be a sufficiently serious breach of a superior legal rule (presumably the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, in this case).

Frontex might argue that it is only assisting national authorities with expulsions etc, so cannot be liable.
Read 5 tweets
Steve Peers Profile picture
19 Oct
The suggestion to denounce the ECHR, if carried out, would mean that the EU ends criminal justice cooperation with the UK under the Brexit deal 1/
2/ Here's the EU commitment to this end, as part of my recent thread on human rights and the Brexit deal
3/ As for the "common law is world beating at protecting human rights" view, here's the classic debunk by @conorgearty
ukconstitutionallaw.org/2014/11/13/con…
Read 7 tweets
Steve Peers Profile picture
11 Oct
It seems that a very very basic point has to be made again: international treaties are binding on the UK in international law, even if they are not incorporated in (or breached by) domestic law. Here's the Supreme Court confirming this in Miller. 1/
2/ This very very basic feature of the law applies in spite of any statements by Brexity lawyers who write for the Spectator.

Equally it means that a bill which would breach a treaty is not "illegal", still less criminal, as a matter of domestic law.
3/ And a very basic constitutional convention is that the Queen signs bills passed by Parliament. Spare us from the "deus ex regina" discourse this time, please.
Read 4 tweets
Steve Peers Profile picture
9 Oct
The Spectator piece is by a barrister who blocked me for pointing out that he was falsely claiming that the withdrawal agreement was temporary. On this issue, the Brexit deal is separate from the withdrawal agreement, which does not have a human rights/rule of law break clause.
As for the Brexit deal, the human rights/rule of law break clauses mostly concern criminal law. There is an "essential elements" clause referring to the entire treaty, but it's subject to a high threshold to use it:
eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2021/01/analys…
See also my recent thread on human rights and the Brexit deal -
Read 5 tweets
Steve Peers Profile picture
7 Oct
EU Commission statement in response to Polish constitutional tribunal judgment Image
I've seen a suggestion that the Polish constitutional judgment should be interpreted as an Article 50 notification of withdrawal from the EU. This is unconvincing. The judgment (in the translated excerpts I have seen) does not state an intention to withdraw. 1/
2/ Nor AFAIK is it notified to the European Council, as required by Article 50(2) TEU. Thirdly, international law (the Vienna Convention on the law of treaties, which the CJEU has used to interpret Article 50) requires a notification from a senior government member.
Read 11 tweets
Steve Peers Profile picture
5 Oct
The TCA includes a reference to the importance of giving domestic legal effect to the ECHR in the criminal law part of the TCA. However, repealing the HRA would not automatically terminate the treaty as a whole or its criminal law part. 1/
2/ Nor is there a fast-track route to termination of the TCA, or its criminal law part, explicitly on the ground that the UK repeals the HRA.
3/ If, on the other hand, the UK denounced the ECHR, or the protocols to the ECHR which the UK has ratified, there is a fast track to terminate the criminal law part of the TCA.
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @StevePeers has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @StevePeers!

Read all threads by @StevePeers

:(