In this paper, the author explores the sources of European Union Law that regulate one segment of parental responsibility - the right of access to a child. The focal point of research is the transition from the conventional (interstate) regulation of judicial cooperation in marital disputes and parental responsibility issues to the regulation enacted by the European Union institutions, with specific reference to the Brussels II bis Regulation. First, the author briefly points out to its relationship with other relevant international law sources regulating this subject matter: the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction; the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Cooperation in the Field of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children; and other international sources of law. Then, the author examines in more detail its relationship with the Brussels II bis recast Regulation, which will be applicable as of 1 August 2022. In addition, the paper includes an analysis of the first case in which the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decided on the application of the Brussels II bis Regulation, at the request of granparents to exercise the right of access to the child. On the issue of determining the competent court which has jurisdiction to decide on how this right shall be exercised, the CJEU had to decide whether the competent court is determined on the basis of the Brussels II bis Regulation or on the basis of national Private International Law rules. This paper is useful for the professional and scientific community because it deals (inter alia) with the issue of justification of adopting a special source of law at the EU level, which would regulate the issue of mutual enforcement of court decisions on the right of access to the child. This legal solution was proposed by the Republic of France, primarily guided by the fundamental right of the child to have contact with both parents.

The concept of habitual residence is an important connecting factor in contemporary EU Private International Law (EU PIL). In this paper, the author examines this concept through content analysis and comparative analysis of selected sources of EU PIL and the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The author inevitably refers to the Regulations Rome I and Rome II, which provide a conceptual definition of habitual residence of legal and natural persons (in the context of performing economic activities). Unlike the sources of law pertaining to personal status, these Regulations did not leave the concept of habitual residence indefinite. The author underscores the importance of recitals from the acquis corpus. Being part of the preamble of the sources of EU law, they serve as basic guidelines for the Court of Justice when providing guidance to national courts on criteria for determining what is to be considered a habitual residence in different situations. The author further points out to the positions taken by the Court of Justice in its judgments in cases C-80/19 and C-289/20, regarding the possibility of disposing of multiple habitual residences, as well as the position taken in the judgment of 27 April 2016 in case C -528/14 on the question of whether a natural person can simultaneously have a habitual residence in an EU Member State and in a third country. In the final remarks, the author presents key considerations on the functional approach to this concept in view of ensuring an autonomous, uniform and consistent definition.

In this paper, through analytical and synthetic methods, where the central place is occupied by content analysis, comparative and historical-comparative analysis, we consider the general legal principle of mutual trust, which is applied in several areas of social relations governed by European Union law and which has not yet been incorporated into the founding treaties. In terms of content, we determine general legal principles, and by pointing out their historical development from the Montan Union to Lisbon, we make a distinction between them and the basic principles on which the European Union lays and which are, among other things, essentially related to open economy and free competition, supremacy of Union law in relation to laws of the Member States, autonomy of European organization law, its direct application, direct effect, etc. We separate the general legal principles from the general principles characteristical for each separate area that is regulated in the law of the European organization. This research will clearly show the significance of the case-law of the Court of Justice in positioning the principle of mutual trust in the system of general legal principles of the Union. For the purposes of this paper, we separate situations in which the principle of mutual trust acts between the Member States from situations in which it operates between the Member States and the European organization. In the end, we present key considerations.

In this paper, we explore the implementation of the Directive on services in the internal market in the Member States of the European Union, with the focus on assessing the clarity of the norms of this acquis. We perform analysis of selected cases from the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice. The source of law in question, among other things, we consider with regard to its implementation in the areas of public health, certification and technical supervision, and in the field of veterinary services. The topic of our work is useful for the professional and scientific community due to the further clarification of the importance of the development of the case law of the Court of Justice for the uniform application of the Directive governing a very important segment of the internal market.

Aware of the fact that autonomy is an important prerequisite for educational institutions to be able to perform their tasks, in this paper we explore and analyze one of the most interesting cases from the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union in this area. Namely, the European Commission initiated proceedings against the Republic of Hungary for violating the rights of the European Union. The focus is on the Law on Higher Education of that member state, which has caused sharp controversies within the academic community in the countries of the European Economic Area, but also in third countries. Although the work is mostly dedicated to the free movement of services in the field of higher education, we inevitably explore the relationship between European Union law and legal instruments of the World Trade Organization (WTO), as well as the views of the Court of Justice regarding their interpretation. The case we are discussing is also important for the status of countries aspiring to become members of the European organization, since the European Parliament adopted a recommendation to include in the Copenhagen criteria for accession the defense and protection of academic freedom and institutional autonomy in order to prevent their endangerment in member states.