European Union Law
- Supreme Court hands down important judgment on proportionality in EU law and legality of residence
- High Court declares Home Secretary’s investigation into immigration detention abuse at Brook House inadequate
- High Court hears challenge to legality of Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Scheme
- Supreme Court hears argument in Patel & Shah v SSHD concerning the approach to determining whether a non-EU carer of a dependant EU citizen has a 'Zambrano' right of residence under EU law
- Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights hears important case on extraterritoriality
Members of chambers regularly advise and appear in cases concerning EU law in a wide variety of contexts, both in the domestic courts and in the CJEU and General Court (including infraction proceedings under Art. 258 TFEU and preliminary references under Art. 267 TFEU). Landmark is ranked as a leading set for EU and Competition by The Legal 500 2016which points towards the “‘excellent’ quality of clerking and its members’ ‘proficiency in EU law’.” The 2015 edition stated that our “‘consistently great’ members handle European issues in public, social security, information, agricultural and environmental law.”
Our areas of particular expertise in the field of EU law include:
- Free movement of persons and EU citizenship
- State aid
- Public procurement
- EU environmental law
- The Charter of Fundamental Rights
Examples of recent cases include:
- Case C-43/12 Commission v. European Parliament and Council (an application to annul Directive 2011/82/EU of the European Parliament and Council on the cross-border exchange of information on road safety and traffic offences, on the basis that it had wrongly been adopted on the basis of Art. 87(1) TFEU, which permits an opt-out by Member States, as opposed to Art. 91(1), which does not).
- Case C-507/12 St Prix v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions  1 C.M.L.R. 38 (on the meaning of ‘worker’ for the purposes of Art. 7 of the Citizenship Directive and the compatibility of the Directive with the anti-discrimination provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights).
- R (Harrison) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department  2. C.M.L.R 23 (on the rights of non-EU family members of EU citizens lawfully resident in the UK, following the CJEU’s judgments in Zambrano, McCarthy and Dereci).
- Case C-530/11 Commission v. United Kingdom (on the compatibility of the costs rules in UK environmental litigation with the Public Participation Directive).
- Case C-567/10 Inter-Environnement Bruxelles ASBL v. Region de Bruxelles-Capitale  2 C.M.L.R. 30 (on the scope of the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive).
- Case C-186/10 Oguz v. Secretary of State for the Home Department  1 W.L.R. 709 (on the interpretation of the EEC – Turkey Association Agreement).
- Patmalniece v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions  2. C.M.L.R 45 (on the compatibility with EU law of the UK Government’s “right to reside” test for social security benefits).
- R (Midlands Co-Operative) v. Birmingham City Council  EU L.R. 640 (on the applicability of the Public Contracts Directive to development agreements and s.106 obligations).
A number of our members have held visiting lectureships in EU law at academic institutions, including Oxford University.
- Recent Cases
- Supreme Court hears important case about proportionality and EU law
- High Court: Balance of probabilities is a lawful standard for final trafficking decisions
- C-461/17 Holohan v. An Bord Pleanála ECLI:EU:C:2018:649
- Case T-715/14 NK Rosneft a.o. v. Council ELCI:EU:T:2018:544 and Joined Cases T-735/14 & T-799/14 Gazprom Neft v. Council ELCI:EU:T:2018:548
- R (on the application of Cairns) v Herefordshire CC and others  Env. L.R. 6