No abstract

Was ist Datenrecht? Internet der Dinge, Big Data, Künstliche Intelligenz, Blockchain, Clouds, internationale Datentransfers: Der rechtliche Umgang mit Daten im digitalen Zeitalter zählt zu den facettenreichsten Herausforderungen unserer Generation. Dieses Buch definiert erstmals das neu entstehende „Datenrecht“ in seinen wichtigsten Ausprägungen - und adressiert die aktuell drängendsten neuen Rechtsfragen im Kontext der digitalen, global vernetzten Geschäfts- und Alltagswelt.

The German Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) is undoubtedly one of the most respected and influential national courts in the European Union, notwithstanding the limits it sets to an overly pro-integration agenda. Only one year after the decision of the Bundesverfassungsgericht on the Lisbon Treaty, 1 a judgement which could be criticised for being too restrictive on further integration, 2 this Court appears to be trying to send a message which goes in the opposite direction. For a wider audience, the main interest of the decision lies in the response given in it to the question of whether an activist jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice can be regarded as an ultra vires act, violating the principle of conferral. We will see that the Bundesverfassungsgericht is prepared to exercise judicial restraint with such an activist jurisprudence-under certain conditions. Two other elements addressed in the case warrant the attention of non-German lawyers: the constitutional protection under German law of the obligation to refer questions to the European Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU and the question of how to address concerns of legitimate expectations once a national law has been found to violate European Union law by the European Court of Justice.

The article analyses the judgment rendered by the German Constitutional Court ('Bundesverfassungsgericht') on the conformity of the Lisbon Treaty and the implementing legislation with the German Constitution ('Grundgesetz'). It presents the complaints brought forward, then the Court's interpretation of the standards laid down by the 'Grundgesetz' on democratic governance in the EU and finally the evaluation of the changes brought by the Lisbon Treaty against theses standards. The analysis is organised along the main themes of the judgment. It provides a short analysis of the Court's reasoning and the standards it lays down. It concludes that the Lisbon judgment is very similar to the 1993 Maastricht judgment (so-called 'Brunner case') and that the underlying democratic theory will be an impediment to developing democratic governance in the EU.

Das Vorabentscheidungsverfahren betrifft die Auslegung von Art. 20 Brüssel IIa-VO. Frau Detiček, die slowenische Staatsangehörigkeit hat, und Herr Sgueglia haben eine gemeinsame Tochter, Antonella, die am 6. September 1997 geboren wurde. Die Eheleute lebten 25 Jahre zusammen in Rom. Im Sommer 2007 überträgt das für die Scheidung der Ehegatten zuständige italienische Gericht das alleinige Sorgerecht vorläufig auf Herrn Sgueglia und ordnet die vorläufige Unterbringung von Antonella im Heim der Suore Calasanziane in Rom an. Am selben Tag verlässt Frau Detiček mit Antonella das Land und zieht nach Zgornje Poljčane in Slowenien, wo beide seither wohnen. J. Engström, Course Director ( ) European Public Law, Academy of European Law, Metzer Allee 4,