National procedural autonomy revisisted : consequences of differences in national administrative litigation rules for the Enforcement of European Union environmental law-- the case of the EIA directive / / Dr. Franziska Grashof

• Record Nr.: UNINA9910539434603321
• Autore: Grashof Franziska
• Pubbl/distr/stampa: Groningen : , : Europe Louisiana Publishing, , [2016]; ©2016
• ISBN: 90-8952-176-3
• Descrizione fisica: 1 online resource (341 p.)
• Collana: European administrative law series ; ; 10
• Disciplina: 344.046
• Soggetti: Environmental law - European Union countries; Environmental protection - European Union countries; Electronic books.; Europe European Union countries
• Lingua di pubblicazione: Inglese
• Formato: Materiale a stampa
• Livello bibliografico: Monografia
• Note generali: Description based upon print version of record.
• Nota di contenuto: National Procedural Autonomy Revisited. Consequences of Differences in National Administrative Litigation Rules for the Enforcement of European Union Environmental Law - The Case of the EIA Directive by Dr. Franziska Grashof; Acknowledgements; Contents; Abbreviations; Introduction; Part I. Uniform Rules: The EIA Procedure of the Union; Part II. Fragmented Enforcement: National Rules in EIA Cases; Part III. Beyond National Procedural Autonomy?; Hypothetical Case Study; Bibliography; Online Sources; Table of Cases; Table of Legislation; Curriculum Vitae
• Sommario/riassunto: "In National Procedural Autonomy Revisited, Franziska Grashof reconsiders one of the leading principles of European administrative law: the principle of national procedural autonomy. Her work shows that due to different national administrative litigation rules, common European rules are enforced in a fragmented manner. This is illustrated with the example of the judicial enforcement of Directive 2011/92/EU on environmental impact assessment for projects in the legal systems of Germany, England and the Netherlands. Under the same rule of ; Union law, litigants are treated procedurally unequally, there are different enforcement chances, and judges come to different conclusions not because of diverging interpretations of the law, but because of different administrative litigation rules. Subsequently, it is discussed whether it is necessary, desirable and possible to develop common rules of administrative litigation (in environmental matters) in the Union. It is argued, that by means of the instruments which are available in the Union - specifically legislation, jurisprudence, and comparative scholarship - a more precise common standard for administrative litigation (in environmental matters) should be created, so that the principle is: ubi ius europaeum, ibi remedium europaeum"--Back cover.