Positive Obligations in the Field of Racial Discrimination – When is a court of law not enough or when is it too much?

Combatting racial discrimination has been a key objective of international human rights law since the adoption of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) in the 1960s. However, as societies evolve, as new treaties are adopted, and as there is a greater cross-pollinization among several protection systems, how should the law operate to combat this scourge, in present-days conditions? Continue reading “Positive Obligations in the Field of Racial Discrimination – When is a court of law not enough or when is it too much?”

The Court of Cassation and the Uniform Interpretation of the Law in the Italian Legal System: the Principle of Law in the Interest of Law.

One of the most serious issues in the Italian legal system concerns the need to guarantee certainty and uniform interpretation of law. The essential purpose of the Court of Cassation in Italy (and, for example, also in France) is to unify the case-law and ensure that the interpretation of texts is the same throughout the whole territory. Legal clarity and certainty contribute to avoiding litigation in an excessive number of cases and guaranteeing the principle of equality. Recently, however, the huge increase in the volume of litigation points out that the Italian legal system does not offer enough legal permanence and certainty. For this reason, the Italian legislator chose to strengthen the nomophylactic function of the Court of Cassation by instating the principle of law in the interest of law (art. 363 of Code of Civil Procedure).

Continue reading “The Court of Cassation and the Uniform Interpretation of the Law in the Italian Legal System: the Principle of Law in the Interest of Law.”

Inequality as National Identity – the Federal Paradox.

The Flemish Care Insurance Case in a Comparative Perspective

Fundamental rights and the principle of equality may be part of a Member States’ national identity and thus protected by Article 4 (2) TEU. This blogpost argues that within federal states such as Belgium, paradoxically the same holds true for the principle of (federal) inequality, which allows federal entities to treat similar situations differently than other federal entities. Continue reading “Inequality as National Identity – the Federal Paradox.”