Filter by
  • H Collins, 'Building European Contract Law on Charter Rights' in Hugh Collins (ed), European Contract Law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights (Intersentia 2017)
    Examines the debates about the proper scope for the application of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights to EU Contract Law, provides an introduction to the essays in the volume, and concludes by arguing that the Charter of Fundamental Rights will be used by the Court of Justice to provide foundations for a general EU contract law.
    ISBN: 978-1-78068-433-8
  • P P Craig, 'Comparative Administrative Law and Political Structure' (2017) Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 1 [Review]
  • P Eleftheriadis, 'Constitutional Illegitimacy over Brexit' (2017) 88 Political Quarterly 183
    Members and supporters of the British government say that the only constitutionally legitimate course of action over Brexit after the referendum is to press ahead with withdrawal from the European Union, even if that would entail the complete severance of all ties (which we normally call ‘hard Brexit’). A more sophisticated view of the constitution, however, shows that these more or less populist arguments are false. As the Supreme Court confirmed in the recent Gina Miller judgment, the constitution did not change with the June referendum. Parliament is still supreme and determines both ordinary legislation and constitutional change. In fact, if one examines closely the claim that the referendum entails hard Brexit, it becomes obvious that this claim is false as well. The referendum opened the door for one among four different possibilities. Which Brexit option—if any—the United Kingdom should take is a matter for Parliament now to decide, following the normal processes of democratic deliberation and representation.
  • R Ekins, 'Constitutional practice and principle in the Article 50 litigation' (2017) 133 Law Quarterly Review 347 [Case Note]
  • H Eidenmüller, 'Contracting for a European Insolvency Regime' (2017) 18 European Business Organization Law Review (forthcoming)
  • J Rowbottom, 'Crime and communication: do legal controls leave enough space for freedom of expression' in L. Gillies and D. Mangan (eds), The Legal Challenges of Social Media (Edward Elgar 2017)
  • P P Craig, 'Development of the EU' in C Barnard and S Peers (eds), European Union Law (Oxford University Press 2017)
  • E Brameshuber and J Adams-Prassl, 'Die “europäische Säule sozialer Rechte"' in P Aschauer and E Brameshuber (eds), Jahrbuch Sozialversicherungsrecht (NWV Verlag 2017)
  • P Yowell, 'Dworkin, Interpretation and Legal Change' in S Glanert and F Girard (eds), Law’s Hermeneutics: Other Investigations (Routledge, London 2017)
  • AE Ezrachi and M. E. Stucke, 'Emerging Antitrust Threats and Enforcement Actions in the Online World' (2017) Competition Law International
    E-commerce promises to bring us closer to some economists’ ideal of perfect competition – where ample choice, better quality and lower prices reign. The new online world promises to reduce entry barriers and search costs, and increase transparency and market access. But a closer look reveals an imperfect online environment. Following the wave of innovation and competitiveness introduced by e-commerce are powerful anti-competitive undercurrents. More online markets are exhibiting increased concentration, barriers to expansion and entry, and anticompetitive strategies. At times, these anticompetitive strategies may be based on contractual frameworks – such as parity clauses and online marketplace bans. Indeed, the European Commission’s sector inquiry on e-commerce noted the increased use of selective distribution systems online ‘to better control their distribution networks, in particular in terms of the quality of distribution but also price.’ It also noted increasing ‘restrictions on the use of price comparison tools and exclusion of pure online players from distribution networks.’ Moreover, licensing practices may impede entry by new online business models and services. Rather than promoting the flow of goods and services across the EU, the sector inquiry found that ‘almost 60% of digital content providers who participated in the inquiry have contractually agreed with right holders to “geo-block,”’ which ‘prevents consumers from purchasing consumer goods and accessing digital content online from other EU Member States.’ At other times, competition may be at risk due to other potential anticompetitive strategies, from algorithmic tacit collusion to abusive behaviour by powerful providers or gatekeepers. This paper explores three emerging antitrust threats in the online world -- algorithmic tacit collusion, behavioural discrimination, and abuses by the emerging super-platforms – and the enforcement challenges they raise. We note the growing realisation by competition agencies as to the imperfections of the online environment, the ability to utilise new technologies to dampen competition, and additional risks of data-opolies.
  • L Enriques, 'Empty Threats – Why the UK Has Currently No Chance to Become a Tax or Regulatory Haven' in J Armour and H Eidenmueller (eds), Negotiating Brexit (Beck 2017)
  • H Eidenmüller and M Fries, 'Entwicklung und Regulierung des deutschen Mediationsmarktes' (2017) 67 Anwaltsblatt 23
  • E Fisher, Environmental Law: A Very Short Introduction (OUP 2017)
    ISBN: 9780198794189
  • H Collins (ed), European Contract Law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights (Intersentia 2017)
    EUCOLATH European Contract Law and Theory Volume 2, series editors Stefan Grundmann, Hugh Collins, Fernando Gomez, Jacobien Rutgers, Pietro Siena.
    This is the first comprehensive analysis of the extent to which the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union will influence the development of contract and commercial law at a European level. The essays in this volume examine how the Court of Justice of the European Union has already used the Charter to steer the law governing consumer transactions, financial contracts, contracts of employment, self-employment, tenancies and other contractual arrangements. They then proceed to assess the likely future impact of the Charter on EU contract law using a variety of legal, historical and theoretical perspectives. These original assessments by distinguished scholars range from claim that the Charter will only have a mild indirect influence to arguments that the Charter provides the necessary legal foundations for EU contract law and for a market society within a multi-level system of governance.
    ISBN: 978-1-78068-433-8
  • E Fisher, 'Expert Executive Power, Administrative Constitutionalism and Co-Production: Why They Matter' in Maria Weimer and Anniek de Ruijter (eds), Regulating Risks in the European Union The Co-production of Expert and Executive Power (Hart 2017)
    ISBN: 9781849468794
  • H Eidenmüller and M Fries, Fälle zum Erbrecht (6th edn C H Beck 2017)
  • J Rowbottom, 'Government Speech and Public Opinion: Democracy by the Bootstraps' (2017) 25 The Journal of Political Philosophy 22
    DOI: 10.1111/jopp.12101
    This article considers the relationship between government speech and the idea that a democratic government should be responsive to public opinion. In particular, it considers the problems that can arise when state resources are used to influence public opinion. Such attempts to influence can potentially reverse the relationship between government and the people, which is central to democratic legitimacy. At the same time, government communications are an important tool in implementing policies. There is also a role for government officials to lead public opinion. The discussion provides a framework to analyze these issues and identify the types of communication that can challenge the democratic ideal of responsive government.
    ISBN: 0963-8016
  • Maurice Stucke and AE Ezrachi, 'How Digital Assistants Can Harm Our Economy, Privacy and Democracy' (2017) Berkeley Tech. L.J.
    “All you need to do is say,” a recent article proclaimed, “‘I want a beer’ and Alexa will oblige. The future is now.” Advances in technology have seemingly increased consumers’ choices and opened markets to competition. As sales migrate from brick–and–mortar shops to online sites, consumers seemingly are getting more of what they desire, including better prices and quality. And yet, looking beyond the ease of online shopping, several emerging threats arise, including algorithmic collusion, behavioral discrimination and abuses by dominant super–platforms. Thus, a more complex reality exists. To see why, this Article examines the emerging frontier of personal digital assistants. These helpers are being developed by the leading online platforms: Google Assistant, Apple’s Siri, Facebook’s M, and Amazon’s Alexa–powered Echo. These super–platforms are heavily investing to improve their digital assistant offerings. We show how network effects, big data and big analytics will likely undermine attempts to curtail the digital assistant’s power, and will likely allow it to operate below the regulatory and antitrust radar screens. As a result, rather than advance overall welfare, these digital assistants—if left to their own devices—can undermine our collective welfare. But the harm is not just economic. The potential anticompetitive consequences from these assistants will likely take a toll on privacy, well–being and democracy. For those who grew up watching The Jetsons, the prospect of a personal helper might seem marvelous. Many already rely on Google’s search engine to find relevant results, Facebook to identify relevant news stories, Amazon for book recommendations, and Siri to place phone calls, send text messages, and find a good restaurant nearby. Many also already benefit from basic digital assistants. Apple iPhones users may instruct Siri to call their family members on speakerphone. Siri can “predict” what app users might want to use, which music they would like to listen to. Navigation apps can anticipate where the individual is heading throughout the day and provide traffic updates and time estimates. Even one’s favorite coffee outlet may send a notification and prepare the loyalty card on one’s device whenever one is near an outlet. Now personal digital assistants—or “digital assistants”—are seeking to interact with users in a human–like way. With its increasing sophistication, a digital assistant promises to transform how individuals access information, communicate, shop, are entertained, control smart household appliances, and raise their children. The digital assistant will also undertake mundane tasks and free our time. Amazon’s voice recognition personal assistant, Alexa, for example, can already perform many tasks. Alexa can shop for its users (knowing everything its user previously bought through Amazon); plan one’s mornings, including accounting for upcoming meetings, traffic, and weather; entertain one with music; suggest movies, shows, or audiobooks; and control one’s house’s smart appliances. In 2016, Google showed a video of a suburban family undergoing its morning wakeup routine: “The dad made French press coffee while telling Google to turn on the lights and start playing music in his kids’ rooms. The mom asked if ‘my package’ had shipped. It did, Google said. The daughter asked for help with her Spanish homework.” As the digital assistant—powered by sophisticated algorithms—learns more about its users, their routine, desires, and communications, it can excel in its role. In a human–like manner, it can be funny—at just the appropriate level—and trustworthy. These digital assistants can provide more than information and services; they can anticipate one’s needs and requests. After all, being privy to so many of its users’ activities, the assistant will become their digital shadow. As Alphabet’s CEO noted, “[y]our phone should proactively bring up the right documents, schedule and map your meetings, let people know if you are late, suggest responses to messages, handle your payments and expenses, etc.” The digital assistant, with their users’ trust and consent, will likely become the key gateway to the World Wide Web. Consumers will happily relinquish other less personal and useful interfaces, and increasingly rely on their digital assistant to anticipate and fulfill their needs. With this unique position of power, the digital assistant will act as a gatekeeper in a multi–sided market. And yet, despite their promise, can digital assistants actually reduce one’s welfare? Might their rise reduce the number of gateways to the digital world, increase a few firms’ market power, and limit competition? And if so, what are the potential social, political, and economic concerns? Our Article seeks to address these questions. Part II discusses the current race among Google, Apple, and Amazon to control as many aspects of the online interface and reap the associated benefits. The stakes are high, given several data–driven network effects, that will likely lead to one or two digital assistants that primarily undertake most people’s tasks and make the majority of decisions. So what are the implications of this winner–take–all contest to be the chief digital assistant? Part III considers the toll a dominant digital assistant can have on competition, democracy, and privacy. Given these risks, one would expect and hope for a “virtuous assistant”—a class of independent assistants, developed by independent firms with the users’ personal interests paramount. Part IV identifies several factors that favor one of the four super-platforms (Google, Apple, Amazon, and Facebook) capturing the digital assistant market, and disfavoring the independent virtuous assistant. As market forces will not necessarily prevent and correct the harms we identify, Part V outlines several issues and challenges confronting antitrust enforcers. Part VI concludes.
  • H Eidenmüller, 'How to Negotiate a Successful Brexit' in J Armour and H Eidenmuller (eds), Negotiating Brexit (Hart 2017)