On 23rd October 2012, the CJEU handed down its judgment in Joined Cases C-581/10 and C-629/10 Nelson/TUI. The ruling, which has been much-anticipated by airlines and passengers alike, confirms that fixed compensation under EU legislation is available not just to those whose flights have been cancelled, but also – in certain circumstances – to those who have suffered delays. While those have suffered the iniquities of delayed flight may welcome the ruling, there is reason for some alarm at the interventionist approach of the CJEU to the interpretation of the EU regulation which was at issue. Continue reading
The failure of the UN Security Council (“UNSC”) to agree resolutions on Syria, thanks largely to Russian and Chinese intransigence, is still big news. But both the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) have recently had occasion to consider instances in which UNSC resolutions have successfully been passed, in respect of individuals suspected of involvement in terrorism, with sometimes alarming consequences for human rights.
In Nada v Switzerland, the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR made a contribution to the growing jurisprudence, at European level, on States’ obligations when implementing UNSC Resolutions. The case is interesting in that it demonstrates a somewhat surprising reluctance on the part of the Strasbourg court to directly challenge the primacy of the UN legal order. This contrasts with the more robust approach of the CJEU in the Kadi case (judgment is currently pending in the follow-up case, Kadi II, which has been considered by this blog here).