Advertisement

The Duty of Sincere Cooperation and Its Implications for Autonomous Member State Action in the Field of External Relations

  • Peter Van ElsuwegeEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This contribution clarifies the procedural and substantive implications of the duty of sincere co-operation in order to identify the room of manoeuvre for individual Member States at the international stage. Based upon an analysis of the relevant case law of the European Court of Justice, it is argued that the implications of the loyalty principle essentially depend upon the particular context of the EU’s international involvement and, more specifically, upon the implications of a Member State’s intervention for the unity of the EU’s representation and the uniform application of EU law. Whereas this approach is instrumental to achieve the objectives of the EU’s external action as expressed in Article 21 TEU, it may nevertheless have certain paradoxical consequences from the perspective of the Member States.

References

  1. Casolari, F. (2012). The principle of loyal cooperation: A ‘master key’ for EU external representation? (CLEER Working Papers, 2012/5).Google Scholar
  2. Constantinescu, V. (1987). L’article 5 CEE, de la bonne foi à la loyauté communautaire. In F. Capotorti et al. (Eds.), Du droit international au droit de l’intégration. Liber Amicorum Pierre Pescatore (pp. 97–114). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  3. Council of the European Union. (2005). Procedural framework for the adoption of Community or common positions for IMO related issues and rules governing their expression in the IMO, SEC (2005) 449, as amended after discussions in the Shipping Working Party of the Council, doc. 11851/05.Google Scholar
  4. Cremona, M. (2008). Defending the Community interest: The duties of cooperation and compliance. In M. Cremona & B. De Witte (Eds.), EU foreign relations law. Constitutional fundamentals (pp. 125–169). Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  5. Cremona, M. (2009). Extending the reach of the AETR principle: Comment on Commission v Greece (C-45/07). European Law Review, 34, 754–768.Google Scholar
  6. Cremona, M. (2011). Member States as trustees of the Union interest: Participating in international agreements on behalf of the European Union. In A. Arnull et al. (Eds.), Constitutional order of states. Essays in EU law in honour of Alan Dashwood (pp. 435–457). Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  7. Czuczai, J. (2017). The principle of solidarity in the EU legal order – some practical examples after Lisbon. In J. Czuczai & F. Naert (Eds.), The EU as a global actor – bridging legal theory and practice (pp. 145–165). Leiden: Brill-Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De Baere, G. (2008). Constitutional principles of EU external relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Baere, G. (2011). O, where is faith? O, where is loyalty? Some reflections on the duty of loyal cooperation and the Union’s external environmental competences in the light of the PFOS case. European Law Review, 36, 405–419.Google Scholar
  10. Delgado Casteleiro, A., & Larik, J. (2011). The duty to remain silent: Limitless loyalty in EU external relations? European Law Review, 36, 524–541.Google Scholar
  11. Govaere, I. (2015). Novel issues pertaining to EU Member States’ membership of other international organisations: The OIV case. In I. Govaere, E. Lannon, P. Van Elsuwege, & S. Adam (Eds.), The European Union in the world. Essays in honour of Marc Maresceau (pp. 225–243). Leiden: Brill-Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  12. Hillion, C. (2009). Mixity and coherence in EU external relations: The significance of the duty of cooperation (CLEER Working Papers, 2009/2).Google Scholar
  13. Hillion, C. (2012). Cohérence et action extérieure de l’Union. In E. Neframi (Ed.), Objectifs et compétences de l’Union européenne (pp. 229–261). Brussels: Éditions Bruylant/Larcier.Google Scholar
  14. Hillion, C. (2014). A powerless court? The European Court of Justice and the Common Foreign and Security Policy. In M. Cremona & A. Thies (Eds.), The European Court of Justice and external relations law: Constitutional challenges (pp. 47–70). Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  15. Hillion, C., & Wessel, R. (2008). Restraining external competences of the Member States under CFSP. In M. Cremona & B. De Witte (Eds.), EU foreign relations law. Constitutional fundamentals (pp. 79–121). Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  16. Klamert, M. (2014). The principle of loyalty in EU law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Koutrakos, P. (2008). Primary law and policy in EU external relations – moving away from the big picture. European Law Review, 33, 666–686.Google Scholar
  18. Lenaerts, K., & Corthaut, T. (2006). Of birds and hedges: The role of primacy in invoking norms of EU law. European Law Review, 31, 287–315.Google Scholar
  19. Neframi, E. (2010). The duty of loyalty: Rethinking its scope through its application in the field of EU external relations. Common Market Law Review, 47, 323–359.Google Scholar
  20. Reuter, K. (2013). Competence creep via the duty of loyalty? Article 4(3) TEU and its changing role in EU external relations. PhD thesis, European University Institute, Florence.Google Scholar
  21. Schütze, R. (2014). Foreign affairs and the EU constitution. Selected essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tournaye, C. (2014). International organisations soon blocked by EU’s external powers?. Retrieved November 17, 2017, from http://voelkerrechtsblog.com/2014/10/21/international-organizations-soon-blocked-by-eus-external-powers/
  23. Van der Loo, G., & Wessel, R. A. (2017). The non-ratification of mixed agreements: Legal consequences and solutions. Common Market Law Review, 54, 735–770.Google Scholar
  24. Van Elsuwege, P. (2011). Annotation of Case C-246/07. American Journal of International Law, 105, 307–313.Google Scholar
  25. Van Elsuwege P. Upholding the rule of law in the common foreign and security policy: H vs. Council Common Market Law Review. 2017;54:841–58.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of LawUniversity of GhentGhentBelgium

Personalised recommendations