Hylly
Henkilönnimi Johnson, Phillip, kirjoittaja.
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö 'Inverted Supremacy', 'Weaker Precedent' and Other Uncertainties Brought About by the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023
Julkaistu Sweet & Maxwell, London : 2023.
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa European Intellectual Property Review, ISSN 0142-0461 ; 45(11)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 fundamentally changes the nature of retained Euopean Union (EU) law. It removes the 'frozen supremacy' introduced by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act of 2018 and in some cases entirely inverts it so that domestic law trumps retained direct EU law. Thereby creating a degree of uncertainty. But greater uncertainty still comes from its abolition of the strained interpretation of domestic law (under the Marleasing Principle) to ensure compliance with retained EU law. Coupled with these changes, the Act endeavours to make it easier for judges to depart from retained EU law. This discussion looks at these changes and the difficulties they may present to the law generally, and intellectual property laws in particular, and it presents ways in which these difficulties may be mitigated by the courts.
Yhteisönnimi
Asiasana
Maantieteellinen nimi asiasanana
Sarjalisäkirjaus - yhtenäistetty nimeke European Intellectual Property Review, 0142-0461 ; 45(11)
*000 ab a ar
*00122722
*008 s2023 xxk e |||| 0|eng |
*040 $aFI-CUTE$bfin$erda
*0410 $aeng
*1001 $aJohnson, Phillip,$ekirjoittaja.
*24510$a'Inverted Supremacy', 'Weaker Precedent' and Other Uncertainties Brought About by the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 /$cPhillip Johnson.
*264 1$aLondon :$bSweet & Maxwell,$c2023.
*300 $as. 634-645
*336 $ateksti$btxt$2rdacontent
*337 $akäytettävissä ilman laitetta$bn$2rdamedia
*338 $anide$bnc$2rdacarrier
*4901 $aEuropean Intellectual Property Review,$x0142-0461 ;$v45(11)
*520 $aThe Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 fundamentally changes the nature of retained Euopean Union (EU) law. It removes the 'frozen supremacy' introduced by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act of 2018 and in some cases entirely inverts it so that domestic law trumps retained direct EU law. Thereby creating a degree of uncertainty. But greater uncertainty still comes from its abolition of the strained interpretation of domestic law (under the Marleasing Principle) to ensure compliance with retained EU law. Coupled with these changes, the Act endeavours to make it easier for judges to depart from retained EU law. This discussion looks at these changes and the difficulties they may present to the law generally, and intellectual property laws in particular, and it presents ways in which these difficulties may be mitigated by the courts.
*61024$aEuroopan unioni$0(FI-ASTERI-N)000035482
*650 7$aimmateriaalioikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p3068$2yso/fin
*650 7$aEU-oikeus $0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p20733$2yso/fin
*650 7$alainsäädäntö$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p13854
*650 7$abrexit$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p37972$2yso/fin
*651 7$aIso-Britannia$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p104990
*830 0$aEuropean Intellectual Property Review,$x0142-0461 ;$v45(11)
*852 $hSA-EIPR
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.