<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<title>Freedom, Security &amp; Justice: European Legal Studies (2018), n.1</title>
<link href="http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/2692" rel="alternate"/>
<subtitle/>
<id>http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/2692</id>
<updated>2026-04-14T17:04:21Z</updated>
<dc:date>2026-04-14T17:04:21Z</dc:date>
<entry>
<title>Spazio europeo di libertà, sicurezza e giustizia e parabola evolutiva della cittadinanza. Qualche considerazione in occasione del primo anniversario della nascita di Freedom, Security &amp; Justice: European Legal Studies</title>
<link href="http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/2705" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Di Stasi, Angela</name>
</author>
<id>http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/2705</id>
<updated>2025-04-30T14:41:37Z</updated>
<published>2018-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">Spazio europeo di libertà, sicurezza e giustizia e parabola evolutiva della cittadinanza. Qualche considerazione in occasione del primo anniversario della nascita di Freedom, Security &amp; Justice: European Legal Studies
Di Stasi, Angela
</summary>
<dc:date>2018-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Corte di giustizia e Corte Costituzionale alla ricerca di un nuovo, seppur precario, equilibio: i punti (relativamente) fermi, le questioni aperte  e un paio di proposte per un ragionevole compromesso</title>
<link href="http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/2704" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Ruggeri, Antonio</name>
</author>
<id>http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/2704</id>
<updated>2025-04-30T14:38:12Z</updated>
<published>2018-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">Corte di giustizia e Corte Costituzionale alla ricerca di un nuovo, seppur precario, equilibio: i punti (relativamente) fermi, le questioni aperte  e un paio di proposte per un ragionevole compromesso
Ruggeri, Antonio
The study critically focuses on the most recent, divergent developments in the jurisprudence of the Italian Constitutional Court and of the Court of Justice of the EU, highlights the limits and shortcomings of the techniques for resolving antinomies (the one that relies on the mechanism of centralized constitutionality control as well as the one represented by the direct application of supranational law) and proposes some solutions aimed at containing (if not entirely eliminating) the risk of conflicts between the Courts’ judgments. The study concludes with a brief commentary on the complexity of the situation resulting from the joint allegation of violation by national laws of the Charter of the European Union, the ECHR and the Constitution.
</summary>
<dc:date>2018-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>L'effetto diretto nelle situazioni triangolari e relativi "limiti" nei rapporti orizzontali</title>
<link href="http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/2703" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Iermano, Anna</name>
</author>
<id>http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/2703</id>
<updated>2025-04-30T14:23:37Z</updated>
<published>2018-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">L'effetto diretto nelle situazioni triangolari e relativi "limiti" nei rapporti orizzontali
Iermano, Anna
This article concerns the controversial issue of the limits of the invocability of EU directives in triangular situations. It occurs where an individual invokes against a public authority an obligation imposed on such authority by an unimplemented EU directive, affecting the legal position of a third party in a detrimental way (see, in particular, Fratelli Costanzo e Delena Walls cases). In this regard what is controversial is its detrimental side effect on the legal position of a third party, in consideration of the denial of horizontal direct effect. Indeed the distinction between vertical (admitted) and horizontal (not admitted) direct effects gives, in practice, to considerable problems. However, inter alia, the recent Farrell case of the EU Court of Justice of 2017 seems to suggest a revisiting and review critically the justifications for rejecting horizontal direct effect.
</summary>
<dc:date>2018-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>I presupposti teorici della cittadinanza europea: originarie contraddizioni e nuovi limiti</title>
<link href="http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/2702" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Margiotta, Costanza</name>
</author>
<id>http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/2702</id>
<updated>2025-04-30T14:23:38Z</updated>
<published>2018-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">I presupposti teorici della cittadinanza europea: originarie contraddizioni e nuovi limiti
Margiotta, Costanza
This paper deals with EU citizenship and with some of the persistent ambiguities present in the case law of the Court of Justice. In the first part, it shows that EU citizenship, at the beginning, had a series of contradictions that are now emerging when it is under stress. In the second part, this work highlights how the economic and financial crisis and the consequent crisis of the political legitimacy of the EU is putting limits new and serious on the rights acquired through the EU citizenship by European mobile and static citizens. The fragility of the original institution emerged when, on the one hand, EU citizenship for the first time has gained the centre of the political discourse and when, on the other, it is put under stress by new and consistent intra-European migration, due to the financial crisis and encouraged by the inner opportunities offered by EU citizenship.
</summary>
<dc:date>2018-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
</feed>
