The article focuses on the public security exception as it is used in EU migration law. It opens with the public security grounds as they appear in the EU internal market rules and consequently in EU external relations. A special attention is paid to public security restrictions under the Directive 2004/114 as it was interpreted in case Fahimian. The article adds a comparison to other documents in EU external relations and their referrals to public security. The main perspective is the discretion attributed to Member States and their authorities when they apply public security exception especially in relation to regular migration.
The article focuses on the regulation of the free movement of workers under Agreement on the European Economic Area in the light of the considered accession of the United Kingdom to this agreement after the Brexit takes place. The participation in the European Economic Area would keep the United Kingdom part of the EU internal market including the free movement of workers. The article tries to answer the question on the degree of flexibility in the EEA Agreement which would give space for the UK to pursue its own policies on the movement of workers. The article argues that structurally the EEA Agreement gives a space for some flexibility, however, only in case of very specific circumstances.
The article deals with the rules for a grant of interim measures in the context of EU law and its application in national judicial proceedings. It covers the key case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU related to the regime, conditions and limits of the interim measures and adds a reflection of practice of Czech courts. Article pays particular attention to the conditions for suspension ofn the application of national law measures.
The article analyses the decision of the EU Court of Justice in Coman in which the Court derived residence rights for spouses in the same-sex marriages. The article outlines the basic grounds of the judgement and critically appraises them in the context of EU primary as well as secondary law and especially Directive 2004/38. The article raises concerns about the division of competences between the EU and its Member States, extended interpretation of the term “spouse” in the context of EU law, human rights considerations as well as potential effects of the decision on national family law.