Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law

Digitalization is revolutionizing our life. In response to its ever growing impact, the European Commission has tabled two proposals for new directives, one pertaining to contracts for the supply of digital content, the other regarding online and other distance sales of goods. This contribution analyses both proposals critically. It questions the need for having a separate regime encompassing contracts for sale of digital content in light of the possibility of adapting the existing legal framework to reflect the particularities of such agreements. It also warns against adopting more specific rules on online sales, which would further widen the gap in their treatment when compared to face-to-face agreements. The author bemoans the confusion and contradictions the new proposals would introduce to EU consumer law. The choice of a maximum harmonization approach extends this lack of coherence into Member State law. Even worse, the EU legislator interferes with areas that have so far been the exclusive domain of national civil law, such as determining adequate levels of damages or the consequences of termination. Despite the need for compromise, the author suggests that the Commission should not seek them at any cost, but stick to principles of good law-making in multi-level governance systems.

The coordination and especially the export of family benefits within the EU is high on the agenda, not only due to its complexity, but also because it is politically sensitive. In the present article the plethora of various family benefits, corresponding to distinctive perceptions, historical developments, as well as modified family structures and patterns of mobility is presented. It is questioned whether a definition of a family is important for coordinating family benefits. Moreover, deviations from general principles of social security coordination law are analysed. Among them are the rules on equal treatment, determining the legislation(s) applicable for providing family benefits (including the question of overlapping benefits and the number of so-called ‘baskets’ of family benefits) as well as the export (of adjusted or unadjusted) family benefits. The question is raised as to whether social security coordination rules should be modified and focus more on a child and child benefit(s), leaving other kind of support to the family to social and tax advantages and the right to reside rules.

On 23 June 2016, the British people decided to leave the European Union (EU). Although the withdrawal process has not yet started, it is not surprising that some concerns have emerged in relation to the situation of British citizens residing outside the United Kingdom (but within the EU) who do not possess the nationality of another EU Member State, and citizens of the Union residing in the United Kingdom. From ‘the leave date’, British citizens will no longer possess the status of citizens of the Union, and will subsequently become third-country nationals for EU law purposes. Conversely, the United Kingdom will no longer be part of the EU territory and EU citizens can no longer exercise the rights and freedoms conferred to them within the EU. In this scenario, the right to reside in the EU for British citizens and in the United Kingdom for citizens of the Union could become legally uncertain. This contribution departs from the EU law perspective and takes a human rights approach to dealing with the issue of residence rights. It will be argued that residence rights, in an EU context, can be retained by operation of the provisions of the ECHR.

The EU fundamental right to data protection and the secondary legislation in this field are undergoing a constant process of expansion both through decisions of the Court of Justice of the EU as well as by means of legislative measures. This right is not only expanding in terms of its material and personal scope of application, but it is also gradually gaining importance compared to other fundamental rights and competing interests. Moreover, its scope of application is expanding outside of the EU borders as EU data protection becomes progressively more important for third-country controllers. The General Data Protection Regulation foresees further expansion of the scope of application of EU data protection. This article aims to assess the consequences of this gradual expansion of EU data protection and to determine whether the EU data protection regime could potentially expand to an undesirable extent, creating imbalances in the overall regime of fundamental rights protection.