| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font
First page > Show document

Show document Help

Title:EVROPSKA INTEGRACIJA V LUČI TEHNIČNE STANDARDIZACIJE PROIZVODOV: VPLIV SODNEGA NADZORA NA STANDARDIZACIJO PROIZVODOV
Authors:ID Naglič, Nina (Author)
ID Hojnik, Janja (Mentor) More about this mentor... New window
Files:.pdf MAG_Naglic_Nina_2015.pdf (1,28 MB)
MD5: 8596C45A2C62AF7A5074853F5028B755
 
Language:Slovenian
Work type:Master's thesis
Typology:2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization:PF - Faculty of Law
Abstract:Predmetna magistrska naloga preučuje vprašanja povezana s standardizacijo proizvodov, predvsem pa vpliv sodnega nadzora na postopek standardizacije in na standardizacijske organe. Tehnični standardi, zlasti evropski, so pogosto spodbujevalec meddržavne trgovine, saj omogočajo kroženje in skladnost z drugim blagom, storitvami in postopki ali celo njihovo predvidljivost. Lahko pa tehnični standardi predstavljajo tudi ovire trgovini. Prav zaradi tega si mednarodni kot tudi evropski predpisi prizadevajo, da zaradi prednosti standardizacije ne bi bila ogrožena mednarodna trgovina ter zahtevajo takšno uporabo standardov, ki naj olajšuje in ne ovira mednarodno trgovino. Do sedaj je veljalo prepričanje, da standardizacijski organi niso in ne morejo biti predmet sodnega nadzora, vendar je sodba Sodišča EU v zadevi Fra.bo to spremenila. Zadeva Fra.bo je pomembna ne toliko zaradi izida (ne glede na to, ali se standardizacijske organe šteje kot kolektivne subjekte (generalna pravobranilka) ali kot kvazi zakonske subjekte (Sodišče EU), ekonomskih svoboščin ni mogoče obiti) ampak zaradi posledic uporabe svoboščin na proces standardizacije na splošno. Primer jasno kaže, da se ni mogoče izogniti obveznostim, ki jih določa Pogodba, z izbiro javnega ali zasebnega statusa. Kar šteje, je de facto moč subjekta, da sprejme regulativne odločitve, ki lahko vplivajo na notranji trg. S tem, ko se je Sodišče EU osredotočalo na »kvazi« zakonski značaj certifikacijskega organa, se je sicer izognilo izrecnemu odgovoru na vprašanje, ali in v kakšnem obsegu lahko zasebni subjekti postanejo naslovniki pogodbenih obveznosti in ali jim je dovoljeno upravičiti omejitve trgovini, ki izvirajo iz njihovega določanja standardov. Vendar pa je kljub temu mogoče zaključiti, da ima 34. člen PDEU horizontalni neposredni učinek. To pa pomeni, da standardizacijski organi s sprejetjem standardov in certificiranjem proizvodov ne morejo več določati, katerim proizvodom bo omogočen dostop do trga, saj morajo pri določanju nacionalnih tehničnih standardov spoštovati obveznosti, ki izhajajo iz določb prostega pretoka blaga.
Keywords:Standardi, standardizacija proizvodov, standardizacijski organi, prost pretok blaga, horizontalni neposredni učinek 34. člena PDEU, sodni nadzor
Place of publishing:Maribor
Publisher:[N. Naglič]
Year of publishing:2015
PID:20.500.12556/DKUM-55237 New window
UDC:346.544.4(043.3)
COBISS.SI-ID:5033003 New window
NUK URN:URN:SI:UM:DK:NZTCXJ0B
Publication date in DKUM:25.03.2016
Views:1659
Downloads:215
Metadata:XML DC-XML DC-RDF
Categories:PF
:
NAGLIČ, Nina, 2015, EVROPSKA INTEGRACIJA V LUČI TEHNIČNE STANDARDIZACIJE PROIZVODOV: VPLIV SODNEGA NADZORA NA STANDARDIZACIJO PROIZVODOV [online]. Master’s thesis. Maribor : N. Naglič. [Accessed 23 April 2025]. Retrieved from: https://dk.um.si/IzpisGradiva.php?lang=eng&id=55237
Copy citation
  
Average score:
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
(0 votes)
Your score:Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:Bookmark and Share


Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Secondary language

Language:English
Title:European integration in the light of technical standardisation of products: the impact of judicial review on product standardisation
Abstract:This master thesis examines the issues related to standardization of products, in particular the impact of judicial review on the process of standardization and standardization bodies. Technical standards, especially European standards, are often seen as a promoter of inter-state trade, since they enable the circulation and compatibility with other goods, services and processes or even their predictability. But technical standards can also represent a barrier to trade. That is why international and European regulations require the use of such standards that facilitate and not impede international trade in order not to endanger the international trade with the advantages of standardization. Until now it was believed that standardization bodies are not and cannot be subject to judicial review, but the judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) in case Fra.bo changed that. The case Fra.bo is important not so much because of the outcome (regardless of whether the standardization bodies are considered as collective entities (Advocate General) or quasi-legal entities (CJEU), economic freedoms can not be avoided) but for its consequence, which is the application of freedoms to standardization process. This case clearly shows that it is not possible to avoid the obligations imposed by the Treaty with the choice of public or private status. What is important is the de facto power of the entity to adopt regulatory decisions that can affect the internal market. Thus, when the CJEU focused on »quasi« legal nature of the certification body, it avoided the explicit answer to the question whether and to what extent private entities can become the addressees of contractual obligations and whether they are allowed to justify restrictions on trade arising from their standard-setting. However, it is possible to conclude that Article 34 TFEU has horizontal direct effect. This means that standardization bodies, when adopting standards and certifying products, can no longer determine which products will have access to the market, as they have to comply with the obligations arising from the provisions on the free movement of goods when setting national technical standards.
Keywords:Standards, standardisation of products, process of standardisation, free movement of goods, horizontal direct effect of Article 34 TFEU, judicial review


Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)
0 - 0 / 0
 
There are no comments!

Back
Logos of partners University of Maribor University of Ljubljana University of Primorska University of Nova Gorica