Stephen Weatherill was the Jacques Delors Professor of European Law from January 1998 until September 2021, since when he holds that title Emeritus. He also served as Deputy Director for European Law in the Institute of European and Comparative Law, and was a Fellow of Somerville College.
Although he is formally retired he remains active in the study of European Union law.
His research interests embrace the field of European Law in its widest sense, although his published work is predominantly concerned with European Union trade law. He is the author of LAW AND VALUES IN THE EUROPEAN UNION (Oxford University Press, 2016), PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE IN EU SPORTS LAW (Oxford University Press, 2017), THE INTERNAL MARKET AS A LEGAL CONCEPT (Oxford University Press, 2017), CONTRACT LAW OF THE INTERNAL MARKET (Intersentia, 2017), EU CONSUMER LAW AND POLICY (Edward Elgar, 3rd edition, 2013), CASES AND MATERIALS ON EU LAW (Oxford University Press, 12th edition, 2016) and co-author of CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW (Ashgate Publishing, 2nd edition, 2005, with Geraint Howells), EUROPEAN ECONOMIC LAW (Dartmouth Publishing, 1997, with Hans Micklitz), and WEATHERILL AND BEAUMONT's EU LAW (Penguin Books, 3rd edition,1999, with Paul Beaumont). The areas in which he has published papers in journals and edited collections, as well as blogposts, in recent years include; the impact of subsidiarity in EU law; the involvement of the EU in private law; aspects of "flexible" integration in Europe; the elaboration of strategies for the management of the EU internal market; sport and the law including the ruling in BOSMAN and its long-term effects and the impact of EU law on the proposed European SuperLeague; the law and practice of product safety; the UK's newly emerged internal market; and the many misrepresentations that propelled and continue to propel Brexit, in particular with reference to the Ireland/ Northern Ireland Protocol and the siting of a hardened regulatory and customs border within the UK.
In Oxford, his teaching interests focused on EU law. He has taught on the European Business Regulation course, as well as Constitutional Principles of EU Law and and Competition Law, offered to BCL and Mjur students, and also taught at undergraduate level. He has supervised dozens of graduate research students, and still carries out these responsibilities today.
Before joining the Oxford Faculty, he held the Jean Monnet Chair of European Law at the University of Nottingham, and he has also previously held positions at the Universities of Manchester and Reading since beginning his academic career as a research assistant at Brunel University a long time ago.
- DOI: 10.5040/9781509936663.ch-006ISBN: 9781509936632ISBN: 2002-3561
Chapter (45)DOI: 10.5040/9781509936663.ch-006ISBN: 9781509936632DOI: 10.5040/9781509928385.ch-001Impact assessments form an essential part of the European’s Commission’s Better Regulation Agenda. Better regulation has been a central preoccupation of the Commission of late: it has revised the Impact Assessment Guidelines, reformed the Impact Assessment Board, negotiated a new Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Lawmaking, and established the REFIT platform. Thus, the Better Regulation Agenda has continued to function as a major initiative to improve the EU’s impact as a regulator. Within this agenda, the European Commission has attached special importance to ex ante impact assessments. With the newly revised Better Regulation Guidelines, the European Commission has created standards for consultations and ex post evaluations, while also extending the use of combined ex-post evaluations of multiple measures in the form of ‘fitness checks’. Evaluations and fitness checks provide an ‘evidence-based’ judgment of the effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, and coherence of EU measures, as well as their EU added value. The combination of multiple measures should render fitness checks especially suited to ‘identify excessive regulatory burdens, overlaps, gaps, and inconsistencies’ in EU consumer law. These ambitions echo the criticisms of European contract law presented in previous Green and White Papers and Communications released by the Commission since it first insisted on the need to review and reform the state of EU contract law in 2001, but typically, and in a manner which is different from usual national private law initiatives, the evidence supporting fitness checks is procured from Eurobarometer surveys, commissioned research in the form of expert advice, reports, and interviews, as well as consultations. In turn, this evidence should strengthen impact assessments, as drafters of these frequently have little insight in national practices.ISBN: 978-1-50992-835-4DOI: 10.5040/9781509928385.ch-006ISBN: 978-1-50992-835-4DOI: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3660372DOI: 10.5040/9781509919512.ch-002ISBN: 9781509919482DOI: doi:10.1017/9781108565417.009DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784719500ISBN: 9781784719494DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783478101.00010ISBN: 9781783478095DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781782546405.00027ISBN: 9781782546399DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119037712.ch20ISBN: 9781849463089ISBN: 9781849464437ISBN: 9781849463355ISBN: 9780199695706ISBN: 1841135917ISBN: 3935808968ISBN: 199296049ISBN: 3832916814ISBN: 1845420330ISBN: 1841134880ISBN: 184113449XISBN: 1841134600ISBN: 0199275475ISBN: 1841133051ISBN: 9041199179ISBN: 199255601ISBN: 1841133442ISBN: 1841133442
Internet Publication (9)
Journal Article (27)ISBN: 2002-3561The Protocol, which is designed to keep the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland "soft" or invisible, offers a story of intellectual intrigue and dismal duplicity. Its intellectual value lies in the confirmation that the EU is, contrary to its rhetoric, prepared to insist on commitment to some but not all of its economic freedoms in particular, and its internal market acquis in general, as the price for keeping one of its external borders unguarded. The consequence, however, is that an as yet imprecisely defined border is required between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, which harms the UK’s own internal market. The duplicity which generated this damaging outcome is emblematic of the dishonesty at the heart of the entire Brexit campaign, the full implications of which are yet to emerge.ISBN: 16149920ISBN: 01650750ISBN: 13501763ISBN: 01443054ISBN: 16149920ISBN: 16149920ISBN: 01443054ISBN: 03075400ISBN: 0307-5400ISBN: 019927469XISBN: 01687034ISBN: 09289801ISBN: 01650750ISBN: 0046578xISBN: 02100797ISBN: 09596941
Edited Book (8)DOI: 10.5040/9781509928385ISBN: 9781509928354ISBN: 1841135917ISBN: 1841134880
Review (1)DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12667
Book (13)ISBN: 978-0-19-879365-6ISBN: 9780199685660ISBN: 978-0-85793-697-4ISBN: 199282234ISBN: 754623319ISBN: 1843769638ISBN: 199258783
European Law, Law & Sport, Consumer Law, Competition Law
Options taughtEuropean Union Law, Environmental Law, European Business Regulation: the Law of the EU's Internal Market
Blog posts by Stephen Weatherill22 Sep 2017
The Several Internal Markets
By Stephen Weatherill, Somerville CollegeOxford Business Law Blog18 Aug 2017
The Principle of Mutual Recognition: It Doesn't Work Because It Doesn't Exist
By Stephen Weatherill, Somerville CollegeOxford Business Law Blog11 Jan 2017
What is 'free trade'?
By Stephen Weatherill, Somerville CollegeResearch Collection: BREXIT