Volume 16, Issue 2


THE SINGLE PAYMENTS AREA IN EUROPE

16 Colum. J. Eur. L. 321 (2010) Agnieszka Janczuk, LLM, PhD Candidate, European University Institute. Recent legislative developments in the field of payment services in the European Union aim at building a uniform European payments market. The creation of an internal market for payments has been the result of both industry self-regulation and public regulation. The Payment Services Directive (PSD) and Regulation 924/2009 support and complement the private regulatory regime developed by the banking sector’s European Payments Council, the Single Euro Payments Area (SEPA). The PSD provides a legal framework for SEPA by harmonizing certain core payments provisions, while Regulation 924/2009 substantially enabled the launch of SEPA Direct Debit by laying down the […]


CASES C-573/07, SEA & C-206/08, EURAWASSER

16 Colum. J. Eur. L. 303 (2010) Marco Amorese, Ph.D., UniversitA degli Studi di Brescia, LL.M. Harvard Law School, J.D. University of Milan, Studio legale Amorese. In the cases in comment, the European Court of Justice tries to clarify two crucial concepts in the area of services of general interest: (a) the definition of concession and (b) the scope of the “in-house” exception. The strict definition so far formulated has prompted local bodies to create very complex and inefficient corporate governances in companies awarded services of general interest. The European Court of Justice seems to have taken a more permissive tack that should give local bodies more ample maneuvering power in operating […]


A TROUBLED PATH TO PRIVATE PROPERTY: AGRICULTURAL LAND LAW IN RUSSIA

16 Colum. J. Eur. L. 261 (2010) Ira Lindsay When the Soviet Union collapsed, many observers hoped that decollectivization would improve the infamously inefficient Soviet agricultural sector and raise collective farm workers out of poverty. The initial results of market reform in Russian agriculture were a severe disappointment in both respects. Under Putin, Russia finally allowed agricultural land to be bought and sold. The effects of this latest reform neither met the expectations of its supporters nor realized the fears of its opponents. Russia’s experience with land reform suggests that while private ownership of farmland may offer significant advantages, successful land reform requires much more than the creation of legal rights. This Article […]


REEVALUATING THE EVIDENCE FOR ANTICOMMONS IN TRANSITION RUSSIA

16 Colum. J. Eur. L. 233 (2010) Brian Sawers, J.D., Harvard; A.B., Duke. Heller explains the underperformance and informality of retail in transition Russia as the consequence of botched privatization. He calls this outcome anticommons: too many people hold a veto, leading to underuse. Heller argues that the existence of too many overlapping property rights prevents entrepreneurs from opening brick-and-mortar shops in Russia. The ubiquity of kiosks, however, is better explained by other factors. Kiosks are smaller investments than storefronts, hence their ubiquity in a credit-constrained environment. In addition, taxes, corruption, organized crime, and favor-exchange networks all discourage scale. Retail is informal in Russia for the same reasons it is informal in other […]


ARTICLE 28 E.C. AND RULES ON USE: A STEP TOWARDS A WORKABLE DOCTRINE ON MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT TO QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS

16 Colum. J. Eur. L. 191 (2010) Mattias Derlin & Johan Lindholm, Doctors of Law and Senior Lecturers in Law at Umea University, Sweden In June 2009 the European Court of Justice (E.C.J) decided the Mickelsson case (C-142/05). Mickelsson concerns the application of the (in)famous Article 28 E.C. prohibiting practical obstacles to the free movement of goods within the European Union. The meaning of Article 28 is notoriously vague and has given rise to extensive case law. Mickelsson brings attention to a little discussed dimension of Article 28 E. C.: the fact that rules on use (i.e. national measures regulating how, when, and by whom goods can be used) can constitute practical […]


A LOVE-HATE RELATIONSHIP: FRANCE AND EUROPEAN LAW

16 Colum. J. Eur. L. 171 (2010) David Marrani, Lecturer in public and comparative law, School of Law, University of Essex. It was with great hope and spirit that the French Presidency of the Council of the European Union began in 2008. The French President was extremely proud to add to his many titles that of President of the European Council. In the welcome message posted on the French Presidency’s official website, it was made clear that France wanted “to be back in Europe. ” That said, communication between the French Republic and the European Institutions has not always been forthright, and these tumultuous relationships have been especially difficult in the […]