Haftungsrecht

Brüggemeier, Gert

doi:10.1007/3-540-29911-4

Cited by 12 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…4 (2). Presumably such rules were not found to offend the Treaty by creating unjustified barriers to trade.…”

Section: Case Law Of the Ecj On Minimum Harmonizationmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…4 with very few exceptions. This policy has been widely criticised 2 and there seems to be a broad agreement that this approach is too rigid. Part of the reason for the strong reactions to this change in policy is because it focuses attention of the underlying rationale and quality of European laws.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The central question of the analysis is a truly federal one: how far may EU legislation using its broad internal market competence "intrude" into "reserved Member 2 Howells/Schulze [9], p. 6. Reich [21], pp.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The current limits of European harmonisation in consumer contract law

Howells

Reich

2011

ERA Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is concerned with the Proposed Consumer Rights Directive. In particular it considers the choices to be made concerning minimum and maximal harmonisation. In doing so it draws upon previous experiences of harmonisation and in particular reflects on the approach of the European Court of Justice. The aim is to consider which areas of the Proposed Consumer Rights Directive require maximal harmonisation and which ones can be left to minimal harmonisation.

show abstract

“…4 (2). Presumably such rules were not found to offend the Treaty by creating unjustified barriers to trade.…”

Section: Case Law Of the Ecj On Minimum Harmonizationmentioning

confidence: 94%

mentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The current limits of European harmonisation in consumer contract law

Howells

Reich

2011

ERA Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…71 The German concept of Tatbestandprinzip limits liability to the responsibility of the tortfeasor solely towards the person whose protected interest has been wrongfully infringed. 72 Despite the fact that 'life' is one of the protected interests mentioned in § 823 I of the German Civil Code, neither the deceased (because of his demise) nor his next of kin (his protected interest has not been infringed) can be awarded damages directly based on this paragraph. 73 Nevertheless, a circle of possible next of kin can be awarded damages for the loss of maintenance and funeral expenses (see § 844 of the German Civil Code).…”

Section: The System Of Compensation For the Next Of Kin's Damagementioning

confidence: 99%