Justin Lindeboom

Even voor de Nederlandse pers (@nrc, bij voorbeeld): De Vier Vrijheden (goederen, diensten, vestiging, en werknemers) zijn mooi, maar ze hebben niks met Schengen te maken. De Vier Vrijheden waren er al decennia voor de afschaffing van de grenscontroles.

Looking forward!

"Long, boring, and turgid, even by the normal opaque standards of ECJ judgments" is how Spencer Waller described the @EUCourtPress's Google Shopping judgment. Vaszilia Bartosova and I analysed the judgment for @EulawLive: eulawlive.com/weekend-editio… @Groningen_EULaw @GroningenLaw

@BenVanRompuy To be fair I think the Court is right on this. Ancillary restraints doctrine is a contextual analysis of whether, on balance, competition is restricted (albeit through a LRA test instead of balancing proper). Wouters is a public interest justification like in free movement law.

Noteworthy that the #ECJ once again avoids drawing any connection between the ancillary restraints doctrine and the Wouters exception (it has never done so). Despite frequent suggestions to the contrary in the literature, these remain distinct legal tests x.com/EUCourtPress/s…

Real Dynamic Competition: "Moore's law in chips that enabled the smaller, faster, cheaper paradigm [...] only proved true because competitors to Intel, like Advanced Micro Devices, forced Intel and others to reduce costs and innovate over time to remain competitive"

More than 2500 people have accessed this paper in six months…. Wow, unexpected! I’ve been saying these things for years (first in 1996, at the EurLRev). Nice! The Primacy of EU Law: Interpretive, not Structural europeanpapers.eu/en/e-journal/p…

Fully agree. Any other outcome would have deviated from decades of case law on standing. Mixing up admissibility with substance (or aims as you write) is just plain wrong.

@alemannoEU Alberto, how can you possibly suggest this is a "political decision" while the reasoning and outcome are perfectly in line with orthodox case law on standing (no matter how much one may disagree with that case law)? This judgment should be surprising to no one.

Wow. EU judges reject national judges’ attempt at holding the EU governments accountable for breaching the #ruleoflaw, when approving Polish recovery plan by Commission and Council despite permanent lack of compliance with EU law This order smells of a political decision: after initially reserving to address the issue of admissibility in a forthcoming judgment, the EU Court never came up with such a judgment. Why? Well, Pis lost the elections in #Poland and Tusk gets another free pass, after seeing Art 7 procedure suspended despite absence of reforms

Great to be @UCLLaws for the Cambridge-UCL Competition Law and Policy Workshop: A Foresight Approach. @IoannisLianos @d_mantzari @oandriychuk1 @kaleidoscomp @StavrosMakris2 @cambridgelaw @UCL_CLES

Thrilled to announce that my book ‘Legislative Authority and Interpretation in the European Union’ will be published by @OUPLaw in mid-July. global.oup.com/academic/produ… More information about the book and its argument in the tweets below 1/9

A short comment on the @EUCourtPress's judgment in C-315/22 Gabel Industria Tessile. More on horizontal direct effect of directives and national procedural autonomy! @EulawLive eulawlive.com/op-ed-another-…

An unlikely photo. At Oxford no less. ⁦@Barbie⁩

The Autonomy of EU Law, Legal Theory and European Integration - our new Special Section in @European_Papers with @JustinLindeboom is now available and fully open access. Many thanks to all esteemed contributors! europeanpapers.eu/en/news/europe…

New blog with Ina Opartyová on the gender effects of #EU trade policy in light of the EU's Gender Action Plan III. FTAs with New Zealand, Canada, and Chile show how gender-sensitivity can inform trade policy, but more can and should be done. @GroningenLaw @Groningen_EULaw

NEW: America is a rich country. Britain is a poor country with one wealthy region. People love to compare the UK to Mississippi, but it’s far more informative to look at UK subnationally, too. London ranks fairly well, the rest of the country does not 👉 ft.com/content/e5c741…

In the current Issue (EP. Vol. 8, 2023, No 1) What... Should Have Said ‘Preface: Rewriting Landmark Judgments of the European Court of Justice: A New Project for European Papers and a New Way of ‘Doing EU Law’’ by Justin Lindeboom (@JustinLindeboom) europeanpapers.eu/en/e-journal/p…

The @EUCourtPress rightly set aside the GC's decision in CK Telecoms (C-376/20). 2nd-guessing @EU_Competition's economic expertise is not the task of judicial review. Check out my op-ed @EulawLive: eulawlive.com/the-virtue-of-… @Groningen_EULaw @GroningenLaw #competitionlaw #mergers

Fully agree, the criticism of @ProfFionasm's appointment is nonsense.

@alemannoEU Imo not a good take @alemannoEU. 1st, "cross-fertilising of US thinking" has been going on for 20 years. 2nd, recent (<6y) experimenting in comp policy came from @EU_Competition, not the US. 3rd, knowing @ProfFionasm's work, idk how it suggests a "major modernising" of EU policy.

She may be able to reinterpret that role by cross-fertilising US thinking into European competition policy. Prof. Scott Morton is well known as a major modernizer in competition-related theory and practice. We may reasonably expect some major experimentation in competition practice in the EU, as well as contestation

🆘The appointment of Fiona Scott Morton as the new EU Chief Competition Economist is notable (and questionable) for several reasons. A thread 🧵 @ProfFionasm