No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 August 2021
1 See, for instance, the contributions on environmental protection in M Eliantonio, E Korkea-aho and O Stefan (eds), EU Soft Law in the Member States: Theoretical Findings and Empirical Evidence (Oxford, Hart 2021).
2 Council Directive 92 /43 /EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora [1992] OJ L206/7.
3 Commission, “Guidance document on the strict protection of animal species of Community interest under the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC” (2007) <https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/conservation/species/guidance/pdf/guidance_en.pdf> (last accessed 23 June 2021).
4 Commission, “EU competition rules – revision of the Vertical Guidelines” (European Commission Have Your Say n.d.) <https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12751-EU-competition-rules-revision-of-the-Vertical-Guidelines_en> (last accessed 23 June 2021); Commission, “Guidance on an EU methodology for the determination of Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) in telecoms regulation” (European Commission Have Your Say n.d.) <https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/1500-Guidance-on-an-EU-methodology-for-the-determination-of-Weighted-Average-Cost-of-Capital-WACC-in-telecoms-regulation_en> (last accessed 23 June 2021).
5 See, for instance, the contributions on environmental soft law in Eliantonio et al, supra, note 1; and M Eliantonio and G Lisi, “EU environmental soft law in the Member States: a comparative overview of Finland, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia and the UK” (2020) SoLaR Working Papers <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3656418> (last accessed 23 June 2021).
6 Commission, “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Better Regulation: Joining forces to make better laws” (2021) <https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/better_regulation_joining_forces_to_make_better_laws_en_0.pdf> (last accessed 23 June 2021).
7 For instance, as discussed in O Stefan, M Avbelj, M Eliantonio, M Hartlapp, E Korkea-aho and N Rubio, “EU soft law in the EU legal order: a literature review” (2019) SoLaR Working Papers <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3346629> (last accessed 23 June 2021).
8 O Stefan, “COVID-19 soft law: voluminous, effective, legitimate? A research agenda” (2020) 5 European Papers 1.
9 Case C-911/19, Fédération bancaire française (FBF) v Autorité de contrôle prudentiel et de résolution (ACPR) [2021] ECLI:EU:C:2021:294, Opinion of AG Bobek.
10 Case C-322/88, Salvatore Grimaldi v Fonds des maladies professionnelles [1989] ECLI:EU:C:1989:646; Case C-314/85, Foto-Frost v Hauptzollamt Lübeck-Ost [1987] ECLI:EU:C:1987:452.
11 Case C-16/16, Kingdom of Belgium v European Commission [2018] ECLI:EU:C:2018:79.
12 M Eliantonio and O Stefan, “The elusive legitimacy of EU soft law: an analysis of consultation and participation in the process of adopting COVID-19 soft law in the EU” (2021) 12 European Journal of Risk Regulation 159; D Petropoulou Ionescu and M Eliantonio, “Democratic legitimacy and soft law in the EU legal order: a theoretical perspective” (2021) 17 Journal of Contemporary European Research 43; S Vaughan, “Differentiation and dysfunction: an exploration of post-legislative guidance practices in 14 EU agencies” (2015) 17 Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 66; European Parliament, “European Parliament resolution P6_TA(2007)0366 on institutional and legal implications of the use of ‘soft law’” (Resolution) (2007) OJ C187 E/75.