The 'standard' administrative procedure for supervising and enforcing EC law: EC Treaty articles 226 and 228

Law and Contemporary Problems

Volumn 68, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 135-159

  Gil Ibáñez, Alberto J ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD SAN PABLO CEU   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84904038084     PISSN: 00239186     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. H. AUDRETSCH, SUPERVISION IN EUROPEAN COMMUNITY LAW: OBSERVANCE BY MEMBER STATES OF THEIR TREATY OBLIGATIONS: A TREATISE ON INTERNATIONAL AND SUPRA-NATIONAL SUPERVISION (2d rev. ed., 1986)
2. Alfredo Calot Escobar, El procedimiento por infracción del Derecho Comunitario, in DERECHO COMUNITARIO 155 (1993)
3. ALBERTO GIL IBÁÑEZ, THE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION AND ENFORCEMENT OF EC LAW: POWERS, PROCEDURES AND LIMITS (1999) [hereinafter GIL IBÁÑEZ, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION]
4. Jean-Victor Louis, Le rôle de la Commission dans la procédure en manquement selon la jurisprudence récente de la Cour de justice, in DU DROIT INTERNATIONAL AU DROIT DE L'INTÉGRATION: LIBER AMICORUM PIERRE PESCATORE 387 (1987)
5. ALFONSO MATTERA, LE MARCHÉ UNIQUE EUROPÉEN: SES RÈGLES, SON FONCTIONNEMENT 681 (2d ed., 1990)
6. G. VANDERSANDEN & A. BARAV, CONTENTIEUX COMMUNAUTAIRE 97 (1977)
7. Alan Dashwood & Robin White, Enforcement Actions under Articles 169 and 170 EEC, 14 EUR. L.R. 388 (1989)
8. Alberto Gil Ibáñez, A Deeper Insight Into Article 169 EC Treaty, Harvard Jean Monnet Working Paper No. 11/98, http://www.jeanmonnetprogram.org/papers/98/98-11.html
9. Alberto Gil Ibáñez, Exceptions to Article 226: Alternative Administrative Procedures and the Pursuit of Member States, 6 EUR. L.J. 148 (2000).
10. Commission Recommendation of 7 December 2001 on Principles for Using "SOLVIT"-The Internal Market Problem Solving Networking, 2001 O.J. (L 331) 79.
11. Commission Communication to the European Parliament and the European Ombudsman on Relations with the Complainant in Respect of Infringements of Community Law, 2002 O.J. (C 244) 5, 7.
12. European Convention, Final Report of the Discussion Circle on the Court of Justice, CONV 636/03, Mar. 25, 2003.
13. DANIEL J. ELAZAR, AMERICAN FEDERALISM: A VIEW FROM THE STATES 73, 80-83 (2d ed. 1972). In spite of some important differences between federal systems and the Community, the former still remains a powerful model of comparison.
14. Jena Paul Jacqué, Cours général de droit communautaire, in 1 RECUEIL DES COURS DE L'ACADEMIE DE DROIT EUROPEEN 265 (1990).
15. Vlad Constantinesco, Comunidades europeas, Estados, regiones: el impacto de las estructuras descentralizadas o federales del Estado en la construcción comunitaria 16 REVISTA DE INSTITUCIONES EUROPEAS 13 (1989).
16. Richard Macrory, The Enforcement of Community Environmental Laws: Some Critical Issues, 29 COMMON MKT. L. REV. 347, 356-57 (1992).
17. ANDREW COX, THE SINGLE MARKET RULES AND THE ENFORCEMENT REGIME AFTER 1992, at 242 (1993).
18. Tanja A. Börzel, Guarding the Treaty: the Compliance Strategies of the European Commission, in THE STATE OF EUROPEAN UNION: LAW, POLITICS AND SOCIETY 198 (Tanja A. Börzel & Rachel A. Cichowski eds., 2003)
19. see also Tanja A. Börzel, Non-Compliance in the European Union: Pathology or Statistical Artifact? 8 J. EUR. PUB. POL'Y 803 (2001).
20. G. Majone & A. Wildavsky, Implementation as Evolution, 2 POL'Y STUD. REV. ANN. 105, 115 (1978).