Podcasts about european union law

Daniel Sarmiento talks with Elise Muir, Professor of EU Law at KU Leuven and Director of its Institute of European Union Law, on some of the main challenges of the EU in its human rights policy and the Court of Justice's case law on human rights.

Trade Show Talk Podcast Host Danica Tormohlen interviews Carina Bauer, CEO of IMEX Group, at the IMEX America 2024 event in Las Vegas. They cover Bauer's career journey from her first IMEX Frankfurt show in 2003 to overcoming challenges like digital transformation and sustainability. They discuss empowering teams to stay ahead of trends by attending various events, experimenting with new technologies, and enhancing customer experiences with innovations like Blue Dot technology for Google Maps-style navigation on the show floor. Strategic conversations around attendee engagement were highlighted, noting the increase in pre-scheduled meetings and attendance despite impacts from Hurricane Milton. Plans for future events at Mandalay Bay through 2027 are confirmed, and Bauer's upcoming engagements include attending a Brand USA event in London and preparing for next year's goals.  Plus, we are introducing a new segment to Trade Show Talk where we discuss the latest public policy issues impacting our industry with Tommy Goodwin, VP of the Exhibitions and Conferences Alliance. Our goal to inform event professionals about ECA's work on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, and in state houses and city halls nationwide, to advocate for public policies that will allow the exhibitions and conferences industry—which employs 2.6 million Americans and drives $399 billion in spending annually—to continue to serve as growth engines for entrepreneurs, small businesses, and communities nationwide. In this episode, we talk all about the November 5th election in the U.S. Goodwin shared insight on the recent launch of ECA Votes, a one-stop resource for everything the business events industry needs to know about the November 2024 election. Our guest: Carina Bauer, CEO, IMEX Group  Bauer is passionate about the business events sector and its impact on the world, taking a particular interest in issues around sustainability, diversity and inclusion, and mentoring the leaders of tomorrow. She also takes a keen interest in leadership development, and organizational best practice and culture.   Throughout her career, Bauer has been an active member of the meetings industry. She's past chair of the AEO Council (2021-2023) and the EIA (2021-2022), as well as past president of the SITE Foundation (2020). She previously served on the Board of the MPI UK Chapter and on global committees for MPI and PCMA.   Bauer is the proud recipient of a number of industry awards including the SITE Richard Ross Past Presidents' Award (2022), PCMA Wayfinder Award (2021) and ICCA Inspirational Women Awards (2018). In 2023, she was inducted into the Events Industry Council Hall of Leaders. Earlier this year, she received AEO's Outstanding Contribution to the Industry Award.  Appointed CEO of IMEX Group in 2009 following the expansion of IMEX into America, Bauer has been part of the IMEX team since the very beginning, joining in 2002 as marketing and operations director with the original launch team.   She enjoys spending time with her family (she's a mother to two boys) and traveling for work and pleasure. She is an adventure sports enthusiast with a particular love for climbing and skiing. In her spare time, Bauer works with a variety of local charities and is chair of the Brighton and Hove Albion Foundation—using the power of football to help people get active, learn and stay well throughout Sussex.   Connect with her on LinkedIn here or email at carina.bauer@imexevents.com Our guest: Tommy Goodwin, VP of Exhibitions & Conferences Alliance (ECA)  Thomas F. (Tommy) Goodwin is the Vice President of the Exhibitions & Conferences Alliance (ECA), an umbrella association of leading professional, industry, and labor organizations that represent the unified advocacy voice of the business events industry. In this role, he leads ECA's efforts on behalf of the interconnected ecosystem of exhibitors, show and event organizers, suppliers, venues, and destinations that comprise the business events sector.  Prior to joining ECA, he spent more than 20 years leading a wide range of government relations and public affairs efforts for several globally recognized organizations, including Oracle, AARP, and the Project Management Institute (PMI). He was also a research fellow at Harvard Business School focused on the international political and legal environment in which businesses operate.  Recognized by The Hill as one of Washington, DC's “Top Lobbyists” each year since 2020, he was also named a Leading Association Lobbyist by CEO Update in 2023, an Association Innovation Leader by DCA Live in 2022, and and one of the Top 21 in 2021 advocacy leaders by The Advocacy Association. Within the business events industry, he received the 2022 Industry Support award from TSNN and was named a 2022 Changemaker by MeetingsNet.  He has a B.B.A. from The George Washington University, an M.B.A. from Auburn University, and a Postgraduate Diploma in European Union Law from King's College London. He also holds a Certified Association Executive designation from the American Society of Association Executives (ASAE), where he is an ASAE Fellow, a Project Management Professional certification from PMI, and a Certified Meeting Professional certification from the Events Industry Council.  He is a past president of the National Institute of Lobbying & Ethics and a past chair of ASAE's Advocacy Council.  Connect with him on LinkedIn here. Podcast Host: Danica Tormohlen  An award-winning journalist who has covered the trade show industry since 1994, Danica Tormohlen is VP of Group Content, Meetings, Sports, Travel for Informa Connect. In her role, she oversees content for Trade Show News Network, Corporate Event News, MeetingsNet, BizBash and Connect's portfolio of in-person events. These leading media brands publish websites, newsletters, social media channels, video, podcasts and online and in-person programming for the trade show, corporate event, association meeting, experiential marketing and exhibition industries.  Tormohlen currently serves as president of the Women in Exhibitions Network North America chapter. She has been a speaker and moderator at major industry events, including the TSNN Awards, IMEX, IAEE, SISO, UFI, ESCA, DI and Large Show Roundtable — to name a few. 

GUEST 1 OVERVIEW: Kelly Victory, MD is a board-certified trauma and emergency specialist with over 30 years of clinical experience. She is an expert in disaster preparedness and response and medical management of mass casualties. Dr. Victory has worked with a range of public and private organizations including Fortune 500 companies, hospitals, schools, churches and municipalities on public health issues including disaster and pandemic preparedness and response. She holds a BS from Duke University and her MD from the University of North Carolina. you can follow her on X at @DrKellyVictory   GUEST 2 OVERVIEW: Andrea Powell grew up in a small Texas town and was a survivor of sexual violence as a teenage girl. As a student in Germany on a foreign exchange program, she met a young woman who was a domestic labor trafficking victim enslaved by her husband. Andrea searched for her friend after she disappeared but was ultimately unable to find her. This sparked a lifelong passion for supporting victims of traffickers and abusers. In 2001, after graduating with a Master's in European Union Law and Economics from the University of Bonn, Germany, Andrea founded FAIR Girls to support young women and girls who have survived human trafficking. During the next fourteen years, and after relocating to Washington, D.C., Andrea led FAIR Girls in creating the Vida Home, a safe home for young women survivors of human trafficking. She worked with survivors and advocates to create outreach programs and to advocate for justice for survivors. In 2019, Andrea founded Karana Rising to advocate for systemic change to ensure survivors of sex trafficking are not wrongfully arrested and incarcerated because of their own trafficking and abuse. Andrea believes in a life where doing good in the world is about placing kindness at the center of everything we do. In addition to her advocacy work and writing, she is a poet, multimedia artist, and mom to one human girl and one rabbit girl. You can find her writing in cafes and on the beaches in Encinitas, California. Find out more at www.karanarising.org and learn more about Believe Me at https://www.worldchangers.media/andrea-powell-believe-me.

In his address to the IIEA, Alberto Alemanno shares his views on the state of the European Union and the major political, legal and public policy trends in advance of the European Parliament elections and the new legislature. About the Speaker: Alberto Alemanno is the Jean Monnet Professor of European Union Law & Policy at HEC Paris. Alberto's research has been centered on how the law may be used to improve people's lives, in particular through the adoption of power-shifting reforms countering social, health, economic, and political disparities of access within society. He's the author of more than sixty scientific articles and a dozen books, including ‘Lobbying for Change: Find Your Voice to Create a Better Society'. Alberto is also a permanent visiting professor at the University of Tokyo School of Public Policy, the College of Europe, in Bruges and a scholar at the O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law as well as fellow at The Rutgers Institute for Corporate Social Innovation at Rutgers University.

In this episode we are joined by Ana Coculescu - an internationally-qualified, Senior Associate at Dentons Kensington Swan in the field of European Union Law, Resource Management and ESG. ‍ We track Ana's career from Romania, France, Australia and ultimately to New Zealand where she now specialises in ESG, or Environmental, Social and Governance. This ESG concept is not as widely talked about as employment, family or commercial law and there is no legislation supporting it currently. We explore the broad scope of it, how it applies to organisations and where it could go next. ‍ Ana is a passionate advocate for the environment, climate change and fighting the good fight for the bigger picture. She appears on multiple panels, co-produces DKS's ESG newsletter and enjoys reading outside of work. ‍ To listen to this episode, visit .......

Recording of the 155th episode of Europe Calling on 5 June 2023 on the topic “Anti-Climate Lobby – How fossil interests torpedo climate action & what we can do about it” With these guests: - Annika Joeres is a climate journalist for Die ZEIT and Correctiv known for her cross-border climate research from France and, together with Susanne Götze, author of the book “Klimaschmutzlobby – Wie Politiker und Wirtschaftslenker die Zukunft unseres Planeten verkaufen” (Anti-Climate-Lobby – How Politicians and Business Leaders Sell the Future of Our Planet). - Jennie King is Head of Climate Science and Policy at the prestigious Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) in London and known for her analysis of the digital disinformation strategies of the anti-climate lobby. - Alberto Alemanno is Jean Monnet Professor of European Union Law and one of the leading voices on the democratisation of the European Union. He founded the organisation “The Good Lobby” to support civil society. - Christina Deckwirth is a political scientist and represents the lobby-critical organisation LobbyControl in the organisation's Berlin office vis-à-vis politics and the media. - Moderation: Maximilian Fries, Managing Director of Europe Calling e.V.

The European Parliament is reeling from corruption allegations involving the Gulf state of Qatar. Members' offices have been sealed. Raids have been carried out by Italian and Belgian authorities. And large sums of cash seized including sacks of banknotes from the father of one of the lawmakers at the centre of the scandal. That lawmaker, Eva Kaili, was with the Greek socialist Pasok party. She was a vice president of the European Parliament — and she'd been strongly promoting Qatar. Kaili has now been stripped of her title and is in custody. Of course it's far from the first corruption scandal in the EU. But in this case there's the promise of further lurid revelations of cash-fuelled influence peddling on a much bigger scale than previously thought. And now the race is on to apportion blame. Some lawmakers suggest malign foreign interference is mainly responsible. Others say non-governmental organisations and campaign groups should be in the crosshairs. Still others stress that there will always be bad apples and so there should be no need for collective guilt in a Parliament with 705 members. But such finger-pointing mostly amounts to denial and deflection. That's because the dumpster fire at the European Parliament may be largely of the EU's own making. Foreign governments still can meet lawmakers largely undetected, and there's still no central independent investigator and no system for anonymous whistle-blowers. It's what Transparency International calls a complete lack of independent ethics oversight. And while the EU has many gifted politicians and policymakers who are above reproach — still too many are low grade national party hacks and worse. One of the leading voices on making the E.U. more accountable and transparent is Alberto Alemanno. Alberto is Jean Monnet Professor in European Union Law at HEC Paris, and he sits on the board of several civil society organisations. He's also a good sport for taking a scooter through downtown Brussels, in the dark, on an icy evening, to come talk about, yes, "Qatargate".Support the show

Dr. Claudia Winkler has a Master of Law from Harvard Law and a Doctorate of Law (in European Union Law) from Johannes Kepler Universität Linz. She leverages her degrees and experience to help lawyers become better negotiators. She strives to help them hone their skills, manage their emotions, and negotiate effectively. She shares what that looks like in this throwback edition of the Negotiations Ninja podcast. 

Insieme alla Dott.ssa Viviana Sacchetti, Research Fellow in European Union Law, analizziamo le condizioni dei detenuti in Italia e nel mondo durante la pandemia. Le testimonianze delle persone recluse nel Carcere di Santa Maria Capua Vetere presso Caserta, raccontano di una realtà grottesca, condivisa con altre carceri italiane. Scopriamo perché la Corte Europea dei Diritti Umani ha condannato il nostro paese e facciamo il confronto con gli altri. Le voci sono di Chiara Esposito, Vito Lavacca e Edoardo d'Antonio. La cura editoriale è di Federica Ranocchia, Alessandro Pollara, Cristiano Ciucci ed Edoardo d'Antonio. Musiche e montaggio sono di Renato Cacciapuoti.

The UK government has promised to introduce a new ‘Brexit Freedoms' Bill in the current parliamentary session. The government's aim is to make retained EU law – former EU legislation placed on the British statute book during the Brexit process – easier to amend. However, this may mean increasing ministers' ability to make important policy changes via delegated legislation, with relatively little parliamentary scrutiny. What can we expect the ‘Brexit Freedoms' Bill to look like? What could it mean for the relative power of parliament and ministers? What might this mean for laws and regulations that affect the everyday lives of UK citizens? This seminar will bring together an expert panel to discuss these important questions.Speakers:Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law and Employment Law, University of CambridgeDr Tom West, Delegated Legislation Review Manager, Hansard SocietyRuth Chambers, Senior Parliamentary Affairs Associate, Greener UKChair: Dr Joe Tomlinson, Senior Lecturer in Public Law, University of York

In this episode of the Liberal Europe Podcast, Leszek Jażdżewski (Fundacja Liberté!) welcomes Alberto Alemanno, Jean Monnet Professor in European Union Law & Policy at HEC Paris and one of the leading voices on the democratization of the European Union. They talk about business in light of the war in Ukraine, the World Economic Forum in Davos, Conference on the Future of Europe, and lobbying. Find out more about the guest: https://albertoalemanno.com/ This podcast is produced by the European Liberal Forum in collaboration with Movimento Liberal Social and Fundacja Liberté!, with the financial support of the European Parliament. Neither the European Parliament nor the European Liberal Forum are responsible for the content or for any use that be made of it.

Speaker: Professor Antonio Estella de Noriega, University Carlos III of Madrid Biography: Antonio Estella is Professor of Administrative Law and Jean Monnet Professor "ad personam" of European Economic Governance Law at the Carlos III University of Madrid (Spain). He has been Jean Monnet Professor of European Union Law in 2006-2010. He completed his PhD at the European University Institute (Florence, Italy, 1997) with an essay on the principle of subsidiarity, receiving the unanimous compliments of the jury for the "excellent quality of the doctoral thesis". He holds a Master's Degree in Community Law from the ULB (Brussels, Belgium, 1992). He graduated in Law from the Autonomous University of Madrid (Spain) in 1991. He started his academic career at the UC3M in 1997, where he obtained a tenured position as Associate Professor in 2003. In 2006 he obtained a Jean Monnet Chair in EU Law and in 2013 he was granted a Jean Monnet Chair "ad personam" in European Economic Governance Law. He has published on administrative law, constitutional law, European law, on theory of law and on the legal aspects of European economic governance. He has been Visiting Fellow at the University of Berkeley (1999), Princeton University (2012) and the University of Oxford (European and Comparative Law Institute) (2014-2015). He is the author of "The EU Principle of Subsidiarity and its Critique" (Oxford University Press, 2002), "El dilema de Luxemburgo: el Tribunal de Justicia de las Comunidades Europeas ante el Principio de Subsidiariedad" "(Ceura, 2000)," El control de la administración comunitaria a través de la motivación" (Aranzadi, 2005), "España y Europa: hacia una nueva relación” (Tirant Lo Blanch, 2014). He has recently published "The Legal Foundations of EU Economic Governance", (Cambridge University Press, 2018). He has been a member of/ is a member of evaluation panels of the Jean Monnet Program, the Altiero Spinelli Program, and the ERC program, in addition to other programs of a national (spanish) scope. He is a member of the editorial board of several Spanish and international journals, a member of the Executive Board of the Council for European Studies (Columbia University). He chairs the CES Law Research Network, an interdisciplinary and multinational network aimed at reinvigorating research in EU law. For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series This entry provides an audio source.

Speaker: Professor Antonio Estella de Noriega, University Carlos III of Madrid Biography: Antonio Estella is Professor of Administrative Law and Jean Monnet Professor "ad personam" of European Economic Governance Law at the Carlos III University of Madrid (Spain). He has been Jean Monnet Professor of European Union Law in 2006-2010. He completed his PhD at the European University Institute (Florence, Italy, 1997) with an essay on the principle of subsidiarity, receiving the unanimous compliments of the jury for the "excellent quality of the doctoral thesis". He holds a Master's Degree in Community Law from the ULB (Brussels, Belgium, 1992). He graduated in Law from the Autonomous University of Madrid (Spain) in 1991. He started his academic career at the UC3M in 1997, where he obtained a tenured position as Associate Professor in 2003. In 2006 he obtained a Jean Monnet Chair in EU Law and in 2013 he was granted a Jean Monnet Chair "ad personam" in European Economic Governance Law. He has published on administrative law, constitutional law, European law, on theory of law and on the legal aspects of European economic governance. He has been Visiting Fellow at the University of Berkeley (1999), Princeton University (2012) and the University of Oxford (European and Comparative Law Institute) (2014-2015). He is the author of "The EU Principle of Subsidiarity and its Critique" (Oxford University Press, 2002), "El dilema de Luxemburgo: el Tribunal de Justicia de las Comunidades Europeas ante el Principio de Subsidiariedad" "(Ceura, 2000)," El control de la administración comunitaria a través de la motivación" (Aranzadi, 2005), "España y Europa: hacia una nueva relación” (Tirant Lo Blanch, 2014). He has recently published "The Legal Foundations of EU Economic Governance", (Cambridge University Press, 2018). He has been a member of/ is a member of evaluation panels of the Jean Monnet Program, the Altiero Spinelli Program, and the ERC program, in addition to other programs of a national (spanish) scope. He is a member of the editorial board of several Spanish and international journals, a member of the Executive Board of the Council for European Studies (Columbia University). He chairs the CES Law Research Network, an interdisciplinary and multinational network aimed at reinvigorating research in EU law. For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series This entry provides an audio source.

Over the last 10-20 years we have seen the rise and rise of populist and nationalist movements in democracies across the world. This, in part, reflects a growing dissatisfaction with the state of our democratic institutions. Many people just don't believe that democracy delivers for them.My guest for this episode is Professor Alberto Alemanno. To combat the ever-increasing attraction of illiberal political movements, Alberto believes we need to work towards creating a more even playing field between companies and citizens in our civil society. If we could do that, so the argument goes, we would have a healthier polity and more effective democratic institutions.A specific step toward these goals would be to expect private firms to make public all of their political activity – adding a ‘P' for politics – to their existing ESG reporting requirements. As part of this, firms would need to report their support and membership of trade associations and the policies those associations work for and against. Like holding firms responsible for the ESG of companies in their supply chains, this type of political reporting would hold firms responsible for the interventions in the political system made on their behalf by others. Alberto argues that this would stop companies from playing a double game of supporting one policy publicly while simultaneously working to stop that policy through their support of other organisations and associations. The idea is a fascinating one, and Albertos knowledge and passion of the issues it raises shine through in our conversation.Alberto is the Jean Monnet Professor of European Union Law & Policy at HEC Paris. He is also the founder of the civic startup, The Good Lobby, whose mission is to equalize access to power by strengthening the advocacy capacity of civil society and making corporate political influence more accountable and sustainable. He sits on the board of several civil society organizations, such as Friends of Europe, European Alternatives, VoxEurop, Access Info Europe, as well as the citizens' campaigning movement We Move, which operates transnationally. I hope you enjoy the episode!CitationsAlemanno, A. (2017) Lobbying for Change: Find Your Voice to Create a Better Society. Icon Books.Heimans, J. & Timms, H. (2019) New Power: Why Outsiders are Winning, Institutions are Failing, and How the Rest of Us Can Keep Up in the Age of Mass Participation. Picador.The Good Lobby (www.thegoodlobby.eu)Mancur Olson (1974) The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Harvard University Press (revised edition). See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

On Thurday 17th March leading UK ferry operator P&O Ferries sacked 800 British crew across its entire fleet and stopped all sailings. The move sparked fury amongst employees and unions, and consternation in parliament. Many asked was the move - and the proposal to use cheap agency staff instead - legal, and also was it a result of Brexit? In this recording, Professor Catherine Barnard considers the legal implications, and the Brexit question. Catherine Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Employment Law at the University of Cambridge, and Deputy Director at UK in a Changing Europe. This item was originally published as a blog via UK in a Changing Europe at: https://ukandeu.ac.uk/po-ferries-and-employment-law/ For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

On Thurday 17th March leading UK ferry operator P&O Ferries sacked 800 British crew across its entire fleet and stopped all sailings. The move sparked fury amongst employees and unions, and consternation in parliament. Many asked was the move - and the proposal to use cheap agency staff instead - legal, and also was it a result of Brexit? In this recording, Professor Catherine Barnard considers the legal implications, and the Brexit question. Catherine Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Employment Law at the University of Cambridge, and Deputy Director at UK in a Changing Europe. This item was originally published as a blog via UK in a Changing Europe at: https://ukandeu.ac.uk/po-ferries-and-employment-law/ For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

On Thurday 17th March leading UK ferry operator P&O Ferries sacked 800 British crew across its entire fleet and stopped all sailings. The move sparked fury amongst employees and unions, and consternation in parliament. Many asked was the move - and the proposal to use cheap agency staff instead - legal, and also was it a result of Brexit? In this recording, Professor Catherine Barnard considers the legal implications, and the Brexit question. Catherine Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Employment Law at the University of Cambridge, and Deputy Director at UK in a Changing Europe. This item was originally published as a blog via UK in a Changing Europe at: https://ukandeu.ac.uk/po-ferries-and-employment-law/ For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

On Thurday 17th March leading UK ferry operator P&O Ferries sacked 800 British crew across its entire fleet and stopped all sailings. The move sparked fury amongst employees and unions, and consternation in parliament. Many asked was the move - and the proposal to use cheap agency staff instead - legal, and also was it a result of Brexit? In this recording, Professor Catherine Barnard considers the legal implications, and the Brexit question. Catherine Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Employment Law at the University of Cambridge, and Deputy Director at UK in a Changing Europe. This item was originally published as a blog via UK in a Changing Europe at: https://ukandeu.ac.uk/po-ferries-and-employment-law/ For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

On Thurday 17th March leading UK ferry operator P&O Ferries sacked 800 British crew across its entire fleet and stopped all sailings. The move sparked fury amongst employees and unions, and consternation in parliament. Many asked was the move - and the proposal to use cheap agency staff instead - legal, and also was it a result of Brexit? In this recording, Professor Catherine Barnard considers the legal implications, and the Brexit question. Catherine Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Employment Law at the University of Cambridge, and Deputy Director at UK in a Changing Europe. This item was originally published as a blog via UK in a Changing Europe at: https://ukandeu.ac.uk/po-ferries-and-employment-law/ For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

On Thurday 17th March leading UK ferry operator P&O Ferries sacked 800 British crew across its entire fleet and stopped all sailings. The move sparked fury amongst employees and unions, and consternation in parliament. Many asked was the move - and the proposal to use cheap agency staff instead - legal, and also was it a result of Brexit? In this recording, Professor Catherine Barnard considers the legal implications, and the Brexit question. Catherine Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Employment Law at the University of Cambridge, and Deputy Director at UK in a Changing Europe. This item was originally published as a blog via UK in a Changing Europe at: https://ukandeu.ac.uk/po-ferries-and-employment-law/ For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

On Thurday 17th March leading UK ferry operator P&O Ferries sacked 800 British crew across its entire fleet and stopped all sailings. The move sparked fury amongst employees and unions, and consternation in parliament. Many asked was the move - and the proposal to use cheap agency staff instead - legal, and also was it a result of Brexit? In this recording, Professor Catherine Barnard considers the legal implications, and the Brexit question. Catherine Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Employment Law at the University of Cambridge, and Deputy Director at UK in a Changing Europe. This item was originally published as a blog via UK in a Changing Europe at: https://ukandeu.ac.uk/po-ferries-and-employment-law/ For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

On Thurday 17th March leading UK ferry operator P&O Ferries sacked 800 British crew across its entire fleet and stopped all sailings. The move sparked fury amongst employees and unions, and consternation in parliament. Many asked was the move - and the proposal to use cheap agency staff instead - legal, and also was it a result of Brexit? In this recording, Professor Catherine Barnard considers the legal implications, and the Brexit question. Catherine Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Employment Law at the University of Cambridge, and Deputy Director at UK in a Changing Europe. This item was originally published as a blog via UK in a Changing Europe at: https://ukandeu.ac.uk/po-ferries-and-employment-law/ For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

In this seventh episode, Kelyn Bacon – Mrs Justice Bacon DBE – and Sarah Abram got together to discuss gender equality and social mobility in the legal profession and the judiciary. Join them as they discuss: · the reality of combining family life and practice; · why the bar is a career which does allow that combination to work, even though there remains much that can and should be done to promote gender equality; · the importance of schools outreach and, in particular, mentoring, in promoting social mobility; and, · the mentoring that is available at all stages of career development. Mrs Justice Bacon DBE was called to the Bar in 1998, and practised in EU and Competition law, with a particular specialism in state aid law (she was the author and general editor of European Union Law of State Aid and co-founder of the UK State Aid Law Association) and pharmaceutical regulation. She took silk in 2014, and appeared in many of the leading and landmark competition cases both domestically and in Europe. In 2017 she became a deputy high court judge, and in 2020 she was appointed to the High Court bench, to sit in the Chancery Division – the first woman from Brick Court Chambers to be appointed as a judge. Sarah Abram was called to the Bar in 2006. Her practice straddles Chambers' practice areas, encompassing competition, EU and commercial cases. Described by the legal directories as ‘without doubt a star of her generation', Sarah was nominated as EU and Competition Junior of the Year in the Legal 500 UK Bar Awards in both 2019 and 2020. In 2021, she was crowned Pro Bono Junior of the Year, in recognition both for her pro bono work and her work developing and launching a mentoring scheme for prospective barristers from under represented groups, which launched in 2020 initially with 6 participating sets, and now involves 10 leading commercial sets.

Mirbelle eau-de-vie is a specialty from the Lorraine region of France. We discuss Mirabelle plums, the spirit by the same name, production regulations, a cocktail recipe, and … what do poodles have to do with any of it? Resources from this episode: Websites & Documents: Bubbly Professor: Lorraine: Quiche, Plums, and a Bit of Wine, Nickles, J. (9 September 2016) https://bubblyprofessor.com/2016/09/09/lorraine-quiche-plums-and-a-bit-of-wine/ Cahier des Charges de L'Appellation d'Origine Controlee, Mirabelle de Lorraine (29 January 2015) https://info.agriculture.gouv.fr/gedei/site/bo-agri/document_administratif-d0be9622-e29c-4dfa-bbbb-2fafaebf8acd/telechargement EUR-Lex (Access to European Union Law): https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008R0110 Liquor.com: Everything You Need to Know About Eau-de-Vie, Nusog, T. https://www.liquor.com/articles/eau-de-vie/ Lorraine Magazine: La Mirabelle - la reine en sa région, #32 (27 August - 9 September 2014) https://www.lorrainemag.com/a-la-une/la-mirabelle-la-reine-en-sa-region/ New York Times: Eau de Vie: Fruit's Essence Captured in a Bottle, Apple, R.W. Jr.(1 April 1998) https://www.nytimes.com/1998/04/01/dining/eau-de-vie-fruit-s-essence-captured-in-a-bottle.html Podcasts: Glass in Session® Winecast: S2E3: Apple Brandy - Domestic Happiness https://glassinsession.libsyn.com/s2e3-apple-brandy-domestic-happiness Glass in Session® Winecast: S5E5: Grape Brandy Escape https://glassinsession.libsyn.com/s5e5-grape-brandy-escape Glass in Session® Winecast: S6E2: A Pisco Party! https://glassinsession.libsyn.com/s6e2-a-pisco-party Glass in Session® Winecast: Bonus Episode: Online Wine Learning and Admiral Nelson-ing Your Liquor Shelf - Interview with Jane Nickles, CWE, CSE https://glassinsession.libsyn.com/online-wine-learning-and-admiral-nelson-ing-your-liquor-shelf YouTube Channels: B-52s: Quiche Lorraine (3 December 2014) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJxz3owrJ80 Glass in Session® is a registered trademark of Vino With Val, LLC. Music: “Write Your Story” by Joystock (Jamendo.com cc_Standard License, Jamendo S.A.)

①Poland faces punishment for challenging supremacy of EU law. ②Senior UK physician warns about virus complacency. ③U.S. says it has made direct contact with North Korea.

1. On the 16th of June we will officially be saying goodbye to current ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, after which Karim Khan will be taking the post. In Bensouda's final briefing before the UN security council, which took place on the 9th of june, the chief prosecutor took the opportunity to reflect on her recent visit to Sudan, and emphasised the urgent need to execute the four outstanding arrest warrants, including the warrant for former Sudanese Minister of state, Ahmad Harun. 2. The European Commission has sent a letter of formal notice to Germany, stating a breach of the principle of supremacy of European Union Law. The infringement proceeding is the result of the German Federal Constitutional Court's PSPP judgement of May 5th 2020. Here the Court declared that the Public Sector Purchase Programme of the European Central Bank, as well as the Heinrich Weiss judgement of the European Court of Justice were ultra vires. The commission noted it is concerned about the precedent being set by the German court for other Member States. Germany has two months to respond. 3. Lastly, the Jus Cogens blog is open to submissions for its International Criminal Law series, where we focus on the international criminal court but also general international criminal law. Submissions should be no longer than 1500 words and can be sent to our editors at juscogensblog@gmail.com. For more information, check out our blog at juscogens.law.blog.

A short discussion about online shopping and the rights of consumers under European Union Law. Also discussed are property rights, including rights of way and adverse possession.

Ify Ononogbu is an immigration and family law practitioner in Dallas, Texas. She assists in reuniting families through family based immigration, deportation defense, child custody, modifications and divorces. She studied international studies at Baylor University and got her JD from American University Washington College of Law and her LLM in European Union Law from Universidad Carlos III in Madrid, Spain. After working and studying law in several countries including the United States, Spain, Colombia and Peru, she opened her own boutique law firm in Dallas, Texas ..Law Office of Ify Ononogbu. She is a lawyer that listens and is in your corner. She resides in Dallas, Texas with her husband Chike and their dog, Arya.

No, not a "disco" party, thank you very much, autocorrect. A Pisco Party! We're talking about distilled spirits from Peru and Chile: what they are, how they are made, and the many differences between them. They are unique and distinct beverages from their respective countries of origin, and the differences between the two make the two Piscos fascinating spirits to explore, from history to grape to their role in their national cocktails. Resources from this episode: Books: Certified Specialist of Spirits Study Guide (Society of Wine Educators), Nickles, J., (2020) Websites: Comisión Nacional del Pisco - Peru (CONAPISCO) https://conapisco.org.pe/ Cornell Law School: Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR), Title 27 Section 5.22 - The Standards of Identity (d) Class 4; brandy, (9) Pisco. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/5.22 EUR-Lex (Access to European Union Law): https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008R0110 Peru: Spirit of Peru https://peru.info/en-us/piscospiritofperu#production Peru Travel Info (maps) http://peru-travel-info.com/peru-maps.html Pisco Chile: https://piscochile.com/en/home/ Pisco World (Perú): http://www.piscoworld.com/ Podcasts: Glass in Session®: Grape Brandy Escape https://glassinsession.libsyn.com/s5e5-grape-brandy-escape Wine Two Five: Pisco Unpacked https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pisco-unpacked/id986650051?i=1000397336490   Glass in Session® is a registered trademark of Vino With Val, LLC. Music: Addict Sound (Jamendo.com cc_Standard License, Jamendo S.A.)

Just how complicit was the EU’s border agency Frontex in endangering the lives of migrants between Turkey and Greece? Guests: Yonous Muhammadi Co-Founder, Greek Forum of Refugees Jorrit Rijpma Professor of European Union Law, Leiden University Christian Kaunert Professor of Policing and Security, University of South Wales Roundtable is a discussion programme with an edge. Broadcast out of London and presented by David Foster, it’s about bringing people to the table, listening to every opinion, and analysing every point of view. From fierce debate to reflective thinking, Roundtable discussions offer a different perspective on the issues that matter to you. Watch it every weekday at 15:30 GMT on TRT World.

This is an overview of grape brandy around the world, and the different regions, production methods and styles. We distinguish the major grape brandy styles from those spirits made with other fruits, and the range of expressions from Grappa to long-aged brandies of the classic regions like Jerez, Cognac, and Armagnac. There are some fun historical facts and little known oddities extracted from US Code of Federal Regulations ... because your host is a big ol' corkdork. Resources from this episode: Books: Certified Specialist of Spirits Study Guide (Society of Wine Educators), Nickles, J., (2020) Distilling Knowledge: A professional guide to spirits and liqueurs (Wine and Spirits Education Trust) Broom, D., (2013) Grossman’s Guide to Wines Beers, and Spirits (7th Edition) Grossman, H., (Revised by Harriett Lembeck), (1983) Websites: Brandy De Jerez https://www.brandydejerez.es/en/enjoyment Charles Neal Selections: Armagnac http://www.charlesnealselections.com/armagnac1.html Charles Neal Selections: Cognac http://www.charlesnealselections.com/cognac.html Cornell Law School: Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR), Title 27 Section 5.22 - The Standards of Identity (d) Class 4; brandy. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/5.22 Difford’s Guide: Grappa https://www.diffordsguide.com/beer-wine-spirits/category/380/grappa EUR-Lex (Access to European Union Law): https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008R0110 Germain-Robin https://www.germain-robin.com/our-story San Francisco Gate: Over a Barrel - Germain-Robin makes superb brandies, yet they’re hard to sell, Gray, (2012) https://www.sfgate.com/wine/article/OVER-A-BARREL-Germain-Robin-makes-superb-2735377.php Podcast Episodes: S2E3: Apple Brandy - Domestic Happiness https://glassinsession.libsyn.com/s2e3-apple-brandy-domestic-happiness S3E5: Wine & Oxygen from Grapes to Glass https://glassinsession.libsyn.com/s3e5-wine-oxygen-from-grapes-to-glass S4E6: Got Wood? Talkin’ ‘bout Oak https://glassinsession.libsyn.com/s4e6-got-wood-talkin-bout-oak Wine Two Five: Pisco Unpacked https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pisco-unpacked/id986650051?i=1000397336490 Glass in Session® is a registered trademark of Vino With Val, LLC. Music: Addict Sound (Jamendo.com cc_Standard License, Jamendo S.A.)

Is liqueur just a fancy word for liquor? What’s the difference between a liqueur and a cordial? How are they made, and what the heck am I supposed to do with all of these bottles? We go there in this episode which is all about the sweetened, flavored spirits sitting around on your liquor shelf. Resources from this episode: Books: Certified Specialist of Spirits (CSS) Study Guide (Society of Wine Educators), Nickles, J., (2020) Grossman’s Guide to Wines Beers, and Spirits (7th Edition) Grossman, H., (Revised by Harriett Lembeck), (1983) Websites: Bar None Drinks https://www.barnonedrinks.com/drinks/by_ingredient/b/benedictine-189.html Bénédictine https://www.benedictinedom.com/ Cornell Law School: Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR), Title 27 Section 5.22 - The Standards of Identity (h) Class 8; cordials and liqueurs. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/5.22 Daily Beast: Lessons from the Virtual Bar, Wondrich (2020) https://www.thedailybeast.com/lessons-from-the-virtual-bar EUR-Lex (Access to European Union Law): https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008R0110 Liquor.com https://www.liquor.com/recipes/vieux-carre/ Glass in Session® is a registered trademark of Vino With Val, LLC. Music: Addict Sound (Jamendo.com cc_Standard License, Jamendo S.A.)

Most lawyers are not properly trained in legal negotiations. In many law schools, negotiation classes are offered—but not mandatory. So how does a lawyer cultivate the necessary skills and learn to negotiate effectively? Dr. Claudia Winkler joins me today to open the discussion about legal negotiation. We talk about the perception of lawyers’ abilities, managing emotion, planning a legal negotiation—and more. Don’t miss this episode of Negotiations Ninja! Dr. Claudia Winkler is the founder and lead trainer at The Negotiation Academy™. She holds a Master of Law from Harvard Law and a Doctorate of Law (in European Union Law) from Johannes Kepler Universität Linz. She desires to help lawyers leverage their communication and negotiation skills to become the super-negotiators of tomorrow. Listen for a glimpse of her story and an overview of negotiations for lawyers.  Outline of This Episode [2:08] Dr. Claudia Winkler’s background in law and negotiation [3:58] The public expectation that lawyers are super-negotiators [8:10] Where legal negotiations tend to derail [9:53] Fight or flight: how to teach lawyers to manage their emotions [11:49] How Claudia recommends improving negotiation skills [14:44] Planning and preparation for a legal negotiation [16:40] Cultivate open communication between lawyers and clients [20:17] Negotiating during times of crisis [23:41] Enactment of a Force Majeure clause [26:52] How to connect with Dr. Claudia Winkler Resources & People Mentioned What is a Force Majeure? COVID-19 Force Majeure? Connect with Claudia Winkler The Negotiation Academy The Negotiation Academy Facebook Claudia’s Personal Website Connect on LinkedIn Connect With Mark Follow Negotiations Ninja on Twitter: @NegotiationPod Connect with Mark on LinkedIn Follow Negotiations Ninja on LinkedIn Connect on Instagram: @NegotiationPod Subscribe to Negotiations Ninja

“That's great, it starts with an earthquake, Birds and snakes, an aeroplane” But we don't feel fine. Wow! What a week. And TLT is doing a special episode regarding COVID-19. We know we are sick of it but Coronavirus is still a huge topic, especially now. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared last week that COVID-19 is now officially a pandemic. WHO also declared that Europe is now the new epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic. Plus, we can say that European Union Law has some responsibility here. Don't get us wrong, we are a huge European Union fan and we are still hurt about Brexit, but we will analyze the impact that EU Law has over this. For further informations listen to our podcast this week! - March is Women's History Month: Ruth Bader Ginsburg this week. Not only was Ruth Bader Ginsburg's birthday last week, turning 87 years old, she still has an active professional life - she is currently Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, appointed by President Bill Clinton and has a stunning life path.

In another of the CELS occasional podcast documentary series we speak to three of our academics from the University of Cambridge about the reputation of the UK now following three years of ups and downs in its #Brexit negotiations with the EU. We ask Albertina Albors-Llorens, Professor of European Union Law; Catherine Barnard Professor of EU and Employment Law, Director of CELS and Dr Markus Gehring who teaches European Union and International Law at the Faculty of Law, if the EU is misunderstood, whether or not those misunderstandings are the result of media bias, and if the other 27 European Union members will now trust the UK in future trade negotiations. In this compelling documentary podcast you might be surprised to hear that all three of our speakers remain optimistic about the UK’s reputation in the longer term, whether or not the UK does actually #Brexit the EU at the end of 2020 under the terms of the Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s new Withdrawal Agreement which did pass through parliament with a majority of 30 but which has not yet had its second reading, and will not be voted on again until after the General Election in December should Johnson and his government stay in power. Professors Albors-Llorens and Barnard and Dr Gehring, point out that three years on there is now much more understanding of the UK’s relationship with the EU, which mitigates attempts to portray it as an institution that has taken control away from UK citizens, as happened in the prelude to the June 2016 Referendum. But that the media still divides right left on how it headlines the various #Brexit negotiations, votes in Parliament, and subsequent court battles, sometimes referring to Remain supporting MPs as “traitors” or “enemies of the people” and as the Benn Act,which stopped Johnson and his government taking the UK out of the EU on the 31st October 2019 with a no-deal Brexit, as the “surrender Bill”. The terms of the new Johnson Agreement have raised concerns, particularly on environmental protections and workers’ rights, but as Dr Gehring points out “co-operation with our EU neighbours” will remain important. Professor Barnard says that while there has been criticism of the media, it now has many more fact checkers than before. Professor Albors-Llorens says that as someone who came to the UK from Spain she has always loved this Country and remains an optimist about its future. Political rivalries and alignments have never been so bad tempered or fractured making the outcome of the General Election on December 12th 2019 hard to call, even by the pollsters, but the UK’s links with the EU have historically largely been positive and that bodes well for future relationships going forward, when all the 27 EU countries will be able to vote on future trade deals or block them. However, our three academics raise concerns about future court battles here and in Europe as the terms of trade are worked out. Key quotes: Professor Albors-Llorens: "The EU has not been transparent enough about some of its processes and I think that has been a problem. It’s quite sad that following the Referendum people seem to be much more informed about EU law than they were before because people are now better informed. There has been a lack of engagement and a lack of transparency and I think the EU also recognises that is a problem." Professor Barnard: "I think it is quite common for national governments to claim credit for the good things that come out of the EU and to blame the EU for the bad things that they know they have to implement. There’s been a failure to communication on the EU’s side but also a failure to communicate on the UK’s side. There is a misunderstanding about the role of the ECJ (European Court of Justice) but it is a referee and in any sport competition you need a referee to know the rules of the game are being complied with. That has been to the UK’s benefit." Dr Gehring: "It is much harder for the media to just splash out headlines that now the general population will understand as completely false. I have not read in the media over the past 12 months that there are faceless bureaucrats’ making rules for all of Britain when that used to be a staple in the British media. There is now much more differentiation and that is quite a positive development. But we are not by and large reading the full reports, however fact checking has become more common in the British media."

In another of the CELS occasional podcast documentary series we speak to three of our academics from the University of Cambridge about the reputation of the UK now following three years of ups and downs in its #Brexit negotiations with the EU. We ask Albertina Albors-Llorens, Professor of European Union Law; Catherine Barnard Professor of EU and Employment Law, Director of CELS and Dr Markus Gehring who teaches European Union and International Law at the Faculty of Law, if the EU is misunderstood, whether or not those misunderstandings are the result of media bias, and if the other 27 European Union members will now trust the UK in future trade negotiations. In this compelling documentary podcast you might be surprised to hear that all three of our speakers remain optimistic about the UK’s reputation in the longer term, whether or not the UK does actually #Brexit the EU at the end of 2020 under the terms of the Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s new Withdrawal Agreement which did pass through parliament with a majority of 30 but which has not yet had its second reading, and will not be voted on again until after the General Election in December should Johnson and his government stay in power. Professors Albors-Llorens and Barnard and Dr Gehring, point out that three years on there is now much more understanding of the UK’s relationship with the EU, which mitigates attempts to portray it as an institution that has taken control away from UK citizens, as happened in the prelude to the June 2016 Referendum. But that the media still divides right left on how it headlines the various #Brexit negotiations, votes in Parliament, and subsequent court battles, sometimes referring to Remain supporting MPs as “traitors” or “enemies of the people” and as the Benn Act,which stopped Johnson and his government taking the UK out of the EU on the 31st October 2019 with a no-deal Brexit, as the “surrender Bill”. The terms of the new Johnson Agreement have raised concerns, particularly on environmental protections and workers’ rights, but as Dr Gehring points out “co-operation with our EU neighbours” will remain important. Professor Barnard says that while there has been criticism of the media, it now has many more fact checkers than before. Professor Albors-Llorens says that as someone who came to the UK from Spain she has always loved this Country and remains an optimist about its future. Political rivalries and alignments have never been so bad tempered or fractured making the outcome of the General Election on December 12th 2019 hard to call, even by the pollsters, but the UK’s links with the EU have historically largely been positive and that bodes well for future relationships going forward, when all the 27 EU countries will be able to vote on future trade deals or block them. However, our three academics raise concerns about future court battles here and in Europe as the terms of trade are worked out. Key quotes: Professor Albors-Llorens: "The EU has not been transparent enough about some of its processes and I think that has been a problem. It’s quite sad that following the Referendum people seem to be much more informed about EU law than they were before because people are now better informed. There has been a lack of engagement and a lack of transparency and I think the EU also recognises that is a problem." Professor Barnard: "I think it is quite common for national governments to claim credit for the good things that come out of the EU and to blame the EU for the bad things that they know they have to implement. There’s been a failure to communication on the EU’s side but also a failure to communicate on the UK’s side. There is a misunderstanding about the role of the ECJ (European Court of Justice) but it is a referee and in any sport competition you need a referee to know the rules of the game are being complied with. That has been to the UK’s benefit." Dr Gehring: "It is much harder for the media to just splash out headlines that now the general population will understand as completely false. I have not read in the media over the past 12 months that there are faceless bureaucrats’ making rules for all of Britain when that used to be a staple in the British media. There is now much more differentiation and that is quite a positive development. But we are not by and large reading the full reports, however fact checking has become more common in the British media."

In another of the CELS occasional podcast documentary series we speak to three of our academics from the University of Cambridge about the reputation of the UK now following three years of ups and downs in its #Brexit negotiations with the EU. We ask Albertina Albors-Llorens, Professor of European Union Law; Catherine Barnard Professor of EU and Employment Law, Director of CELS and Dr Markus Gehring who teaches European Union and International Law at the Faculty of Law, if the EU is misunderstood, whether or not those misunderstandings are the result of media bias, and if the other 27 European Union members will now trust the UK in future trade negotiations. In this compelling documentary podcast you might be surprised to hear that all three of our speakers remain optimistic about the UK’s reputation in the longer term, whether or not the UK does actually #Brexit the EU at the end of 2020 under the terms of the Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s new Withdrawal Agreement which did pass through parliament with a majority of 30 but which has not yet had its second reading, and will not be voted on again until after the General Election in December should Johnson and his government stay in power. Professors Albors-Llorens and Barnard and Dr Gehring, point out that three years on there is now much more understanding of the UK’s relationship with the EU, which mitigates attempts to portray it as an institution that has taken control away from UK citizens, as happened in the prelude to the June 2016 Referendum. But that the media still divides right left on how it headlines the various #Brexit negotiations, votes in Parliament, and subsequent court battles, sometimes referring to Remain supporting MPs as “traitors” or “enemies of the people” and as the Benn Act,which stopped Johnson and his government taking the UK out of the EU on the 31st October 2019 with a no-deal Brexit, as the “surrender Bill”. The terms of the new Johnson Agreement have raised concerns, particularly on environmental protections and workers’ rights, but as Dr Gehring points out “co-operation with our EU neighbours” will remain important. Professor Barnard says that while there has been criticism of the media, it now has many more fact checkers than before. Professor Albors-Llorens says that as someone who came to the UK from Spain she has always loved this Country and remains an optimist about its future. Political rivalries and alignments have never been so bad tempered or fractured making the outcome of the General Election on December 12th 2019 hard to call, even by the pollsters, but the UK’s links with the EU have historically largely been positive and that bodes well for future relationships going forward, when all the 27 EU countries will be able to vote on future trade deals or block them. However, our three academics raise concerns about future court battles here and in Europe as the terms of trade are worked out. Key quotes: Professor Albors-Llorens: "The EU has not been transparent enough about some of its processes and I think that has been a problem. It’s quite sad that following the Referendum people seem to be much more informed about EU law than they were before because people are now better informed. There has been a lack of engagement and a lack of transparency and I think the EU also recognises that is a problem." Professor Barnard: "I think it is quite common for national governments to claim credit for the good things that come out of the EU and to blame the EU for the bad things that they know they have to implement. There’s been a failure to communication on the EU’s side but also a failure to communicate on the UK’s side. There is a misunderstanding about the role of the ECJ (European Court of Justice) but it is a referee and in any sport competition you need a referee to know the rules of the game are being complied with. That has been to the UK’s benefit." Dr Gehring: "It is much harder for the media to just splash out headlines that now the general population will understand as completely false. I have not read in the media over the past 12 months that there are faceless bureaucrats’ making rules for all of Britain when that used to be a staple in the British media. There is now much more differentiation and that is quite a positive development. But we are not by and large reading the full reports, however fact checking has become more common in the British media."

In another of the CELS occasional podcast documentary series we speak to three of our academics from the University of Cambridge about the reputation of the UK now following three years of ups and downs in its #Brexit negotiations with the EU. We ask Albertina Albors-Llorens, Professor of European Union Law; Catherine Barnard Professor of EU and Employment Law, Director of CELS and Dr Markus Gehring who teaches European Union and International Law at the Faculty of Law, if the EU is misunderstood, whether or not those misunderstandings are the result of media bias, and if the other 27 European Union members will now trust the UK in future trade negotiations. In this compelling documentary podcast you might be surprised to hear that all three of our speakers remain optimistic about the UK’s reputation in the longer term, whether or not the UK does actually #Brexit the EU at the end of 2020 under the terms of the Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s new Withdrawal Agreement which did pass through parliament with a majority of 30 but which has not yet had its second reading, and will not be voted on again until after the General Election in December should Johnson and his government stay in power. Professors Albors-Llorens and Barnard and Dr Gehring, point out that three years on there is now much more understanding of the UK’s relationship with the EU, which mitigates attempts to portray it as an institution that has taken control away from UK citizens, as happened in the prelude to the June 2016 Referendum. But that the media still divides right left on how it headlines the various #Brexit negotiations, votes in Parliament, and subsequent court battles, sometimes referring to Remain supporting MPs as “traitors” or “enemies of the people” and as the Benn Act,which stopped Johnson and his government taking the UK out of the EU on the 31st October 2019 with a no-deal Brexit, as the “surrender Bill”. The terms of the new Johnson Agreement have raised concerns, particularly on environmental protections and workers’ rights, but as Dr Gehring points out “co-operation with our EU neighbours” will remain important. Professor Barnard says that while there has been criticism of the media, it now has many more fact checkers than before. Professor Albors-Llorens says that as someone who came to the UK from Spain she has always loved this Country and remains an optimist about its future. Political rivalries and alignments have never been so bad tempered or fractured making the outcome of the General Election on December 12th 2019 hard to call, even by the pollsters, but the UK’s links with the EU have historically largely been positive and that bodes well for future relationships going forward, when all the 27 EU countries will be able to vote on future trade deals or block them. However, our three academics raise concerns about future court battles here and in Europe as the terms of trade are worked out. Key quotes: Professor Albors-Llorens: "The EU has not been transparent enough about some of its processes and I think that has been a problem. It’s quite sad that following the Referendum people seem to be much more informed about EU law than they were before because people are now better informed. There has been a lack of engagement and a lack of transparency and I think the EU also recognises that is a problem." Professor Barnard: "I think it is quite common for national governments to claim credit for the good things that come out of the EU and to blame the EU for the bad things that they know they have to implement. There’s been a failure to communication on the EU’s side but also a failure to communicate on the UK’s side. There is a misunderstanding about the role of the ECJ (European Court of Justice) but it is a referee and in any sport competition you need a referee to know the rules of the game are being complied with. That has been to the UK’s benefit." Dr Gehring: "It is much harder for the media to just splash out headlines that now the general population will understand as completely false. I have not read in the media over the past 12 months that there are faceless bureaucrats’ making rules for all of Britain when that used to be a staple in the British media. There is now much more differentiation and that is quite a positive development. But we are not by and large reading the full reports, however fact checking has become more common in the British media."

The Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge explores the common myths of #Brexit. In this exclusive podcast three academics from the Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge, give their verdicts on twelve common myths about the UK’s #Brexit from the EU. We speak to Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law and a Senior Fellow in the UK in a Changing Europe Programme; Dr Markus Gehring, University Lecturer in Law at the Law Faculty and former Deputy Director of the Centre for European Legal Studies and a Fellow of the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law; Professor John Bell, Professor of Law, University of Cambridge. In this two part #Brexitmyths documentary we ask them to tell you what is true and what isn’t when #Brexit is being discussed. First we speak to Professor Barnard and Dr Gehring and then Professor Bell to sum up his #Brexit myths at the end of each part. Below we give the questions we put to them and the approximate time codes for their answers so that if you want to dip into parts of this discussion it is easy for you to do so. We hope you enjoy the listen and learn much from it. Producer: Boni Sones OBE #Brexit Myths Part One • 0.00 The Withdrawal Agreement itself – it’s a bad deal? • 7.15 The EU got everything it wanted from the UK and took us for a ride? • 11.15 The NI backstop will keep the UK in a customs union indefinitely? • 14.49 May’s deal or No-Deal are the only two options? • 19.30 Trading on WTO terms will be good for the UK as we do more trade outside the EU than in it? • 23.43 The Political Agreement leading to a trade deal is too vague? #Brexit Myths Part Two • 0.00 We have 2 years to negotiate a trade deal when everything else will stay the same? • 5.15 The economy will dip but can make up ground later? • 12.00 By leaving the EU migration into the UK will reduce significantly? • 14.45 A Canada plus or EEA option will be able to deliver the government’s objectives? • 18.25 We have to reach a deal by 29th March 2019 or “crash out” of the EU and go it alone? • 19.45 We can’t revoke Article 50?

The Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge explores the common myths of #Brexit. In this exclusive podcast three academics from the Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge, give their verdicts on twelve common myths about the UK’s #Brexit from the EU. We speak to Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law and a Senior Fellow in the UK in a Changing Europe Programme; Dr Markus Gehring, University Lecturer in Law at the Law Faculty and former Deputy Director of the Centre for European Legal Studies and a Fellow of the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law; Professor John Bell, Professor of Law, University of Cambridge. In this two part #Brexitmyths documentary we ask them to tell you what is true and what isn’t when #Brexit is being discussed. First we speak to Professor Barnard and Dr Gehring and then Professor Bell to sum up his #Brexit myths at the end of each part. Below we give the questions we put to them and the approximate time codes for their answers so that if you want to dip into parts of this discussion it is easy for you to do so. We hope you enjoy the listen and learn much from it. Producer: Boni Sones OBE #Brexit Myths Part One • 0.00 The Withdrawal Agreement itself – it’s a bad deal? • 7.15 The EU got everything it wanted from the UK and took us for a ride? • 11.15 The NI backstop will keep the UK in a customs union indefinitely? • 14.49 May’s deal or No-Deal are the only two options? • 19.30 Trading on WTO terms will be good for the UK as we do more trade outside the EU than in it? • 23.43 The Political Agreement leading to a trade deal is too vague? #Brexit Myths Part Two • 0.00 We have 2 years to negotiate a trade deal when everything else will stay the same? • 5.15 The economy will dip but can make up ground later? • 12.00 By leaving the EU migration into the UK will reduce significantly? • 14.45 A Canada plus or EEA option will be able to deliver the government’s objectives? • 18.25 We have to reach a deal by 29th March 2019 or “crash out” of the EU and go it alone? • 19.45 We can’t revoke Article 50?

The Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge explores the common myths of #Brexit. In this exclusive podcast three academics from the Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge, give their verdicts on twelve common myths about the UK’s #Brexit from the EU. We speak to Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law and a Senior Fellow in the UK in a Changing Europe Programme; Dr Markus Gehring, University Lecturer in Law at the Law Faculty and former Deputy Director of the Centre for European Legal Studies and a Fellow of the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law; Professor John Bell, Professor of Law, University of Cambridge. In this two part #Brexitmyths documentary we ask them to tell you what is true and what isn’t when #Brexit is being discussed. First we speak to Professor Barnard and Dr Gehring and then Professor Bell to sum up his #Brexit myths at the end of each part. Below we give the questions we put to them and the approximate time codes for their answers so that if you want to dip into parts of this discussion it is easy for you to do so. We hope you enjoy the listen and learn much from it. Producer: Boni Sones OBE #Brexit Myths Part One • 0.00 The Withdrawal Agreement itself – it’s a bad deal? • 7.15 The EU got everything it wanted from the UK and took us for a ride? • 11.15 The NI backstop will keep the UK in a customs union indefinitely? • 14.49 May’s deal or No-Deal are the only two options? • 19.30 Trading on WTO terms will be good for the UK as we do more trade outside the EU than in it? • 23.43 The Political Agreement leading to a trade deal is too vague? #Brexit Myths Part Two • 0.00 We have 2 years to negotiate a trade deal when everything else will stay the same? • 5.15 The economy will dip but can make up ground later? • 12.00 By leaving the EU migration into the UK will reduce significantly? • 14.45 A Canada plus or EEA option will be able to deliver the government’s objectives? • 18.25 We have to reach a deal by 29th March 2019 or “crash out” of the EU and go it alone? • 19.45 We can’t revoke Article 50?

The Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge explores the common myths of #Brexit. In this exclusive podcast three academics from the Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge, give their verdicts on twelve common myths about the UK’s #Brexit from the EU. We speak to Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law and a Senior Fellow in the UK in a Changing Europe Programme; Dr Markus Gehring, University Lecturer in Law at the Law Faculty and former Deputy Director of the Centre for European Legal Studies and a Fellow of the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law; Professor John Bell, Professor of Law, University of Cambridge. In this two part #Brexitmyths documentary we ask them to tell you what is true and what isn’t when #Brexit is being discussed. First we speak to Professor Barnard and Dr Gehring and then Professor Bell to sum up his #Brexit myths at the end of each part. Below we give the questions we put to them and the approximate time codes for their answers so that if you want to dip into parts of this discussion it is easy for you to do so. We hope you enjoy the listen and learn much from it. Producer: Boni Sones OBE #Brexit Myths Part One • 0.00 The Withdrawal Agreement itself – it’s a bad deal? • 7.15 The EU got everything it wanted from the UK and took us for a ride? • 11.15 The NI backstop will keep the UK in a customs union indefinitely? • 14.49 May’s deal or No-Deal are the only two options? • 19.30 Trading on WTO terms will be good for the UK as we do more trade outside the EU than in it? • 23.43 The Political Agreement leading to a trade deal is too vague? #Brexit Myths Part Two • 0.00 We have 2 years to negotiate a trade deal when everything else will stay the same? • 5.15 The economy will dip but can make up ground later? • 12.00 By leaving the EU migration into the UK will reduce significantly? • 14.45 A Canada plus or EEA option will be able to deliver the government’s objectives? • 18.25 We have to reach a deal by 29th March 2019 or “crash out” of the EU and go it alone? • 19.45 We can’t revoke Article 50?

The Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge explores the common myths of #Brexit. In this exclusive podcast three academics from the Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge, give their verdicts on twelve common myths about the UK’s #Brexit from the EU. We speak to Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law and a Senior Fellow in the UK in a Changing Europe Programme; Dr Markus Gehring, University Lecturer in Law at the Law Faculty and former Deputy Director of the Centre for European Legal Studies and a Fellow of the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law; Professor John Bell, Professor of Law, University of Cambridge. In this two part #Brexitmyths documentary we ask them to tell you what is true and what isn’t when #Brexit is being discussed. First we speak to Professor Barnard and Dr Gehring and then Professor Bell to sum up his #Brexit myths at the end of each part. Below we give the questions we put to them and the approximate time codes for their answers so that if you want to dip into parts of this discussion it is easy for you to do so. We hope you enjoy the listen and learn much from it. Producer: Boni Sones OBE #Brexit Myths Part One • 0.00 The Withdrawal Agreement itself – it’s a bad deal? • 7.15 The EU got everything it wanted from the UK and took us for a ride? • 11.15 The NI backstop will keep the UK in a customs union indefinitely? • 14.49 May’s deal or No-Deal are the only two options? • 19.30 Trading on WTO terms will be good for the UK as we do more trade outside the EU than in it? • 23.43 The Political Agreement leading to a trade deal is too vague? #Brexit Myths Part Two • 0.00 We have 2 years to negotiate a trade deal when everything else will stay the same? • 5.15 The economy will dip but can make up ground later? • 12.00 By leaving the EU migration into the UK will reduce significantly? • 14.45 A Canada plus or EEA option will be able to deliver the government’s objectives? • 18.25 We have to reach a deal by 29th March 2019 or “crash out” of the EU and go it alone? • 19.45 We can’t revoke Article 50?

The Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge explores the common myths of #Brexit. In this exclusive podcast three academics from the Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge, give their verdicts on twelve common myths about the UK’s #Brexit from the EU. We speak to Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law and a Senior Fellow in the UK in a Changing Europe Programme; Dr Markus Gehring, University Lecturer in Law at the Law Faculty and former Deputy Director of the Centre for European Legal Studies and a Fellow of the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law; Professor John Bell, Professor of Law, University of Cambridge. In this two part #Brexitmyths documentary we ask them to tell you what is true and what isn’t when #Brexit is being discussed. First we speak to Professor Barnard and Dr Gehring and then Professor Bell to sum up his #Brexit myths at the end of each part. Below we give the questions we put to them and the approximate time codes for their answers so that if you want to dip into parts of this discussion it is easy for you to do so. We hope you enjoy the listen and learn much from it. Producer: Boni Sones OBE #Brexit Myths Part One • 0.00 The Withdrawal Agreement itself – it’s a bad deal? • 7.15 The EU got everything it wanted from the UK and took us for a ride? • 11.15 The NI backstop will keep the UK in a customs union indefinitely? • 14.49 May’s deal or No-Deal are the only two options? • 19.30 Trading on WTO terms will be good for the UK as we do more trade outside the EU than in it? • 23.43 The Political Agreement leading to a trade deal is too vague? #Brexit Myths Part Two • 0.00 We have 2 years to negotiate a trade deal when everything else will stay the same? • 5.15 The economy will dip but can make up ground later? • 12.00 By leaving the EU migration into the UK will reduce significantly? • 14.45 A Canada plus or EEA option will be able to deliver the government’s objectives? • 18.25 We have to reach a deal by 29th March 2019 or “crash out” of the EU and go it alone? • 19.45 We can’t revoke Article 50?

The Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge explores the common myths of #Brexit. In this exclusive podcast three academics from the Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge, give their verdicts on twelve common myths about the UK’s #Brexit from the EU. We speak to Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law and a Senior Fellow in the UK in a Changing Europe Programme; Dr Markus Gehring, University Lecturer in Law at the Law Faculty and former Deputy Director of the Centre for European Legal Studies and a Fellow of the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law; Professor John Bell, Professor of Law, University of Cambridge. In this two part #Brexitmyths documentary we ask them to tell you what is true and what isn’t when #Brexit is being discussed. First we speak to Professor Barnard and Dr Gehring and then Professor Bell to sum up his #Brexit myths at the end of each part. Below we give the questions we put to them and the approximate time codes for their answers so that if you want to dip into parts of this discussion it is easy for you to do so. We hope you enjoy the listen and learn much from it. Producer: Boni Sones OBE #Brexit Myths Part One • 0.00 The Withdrawal Agreement itself – it’s a bad deal? • 7.15 The EU got everything it wanted from the UK and took us for a ride? • 11.15 The NI backstop will keep the UK in a customs union indefinitely? • 14.49 May’s deal or No-Deal are the only two options? • 19.30 Trading on WTO terms will be good for the UK as we do more trade outside the EU than in it? • 23.43 The Political Agreement leading to a trade deal is too vague? #Brexit Myths Part Two • 0.00 We have 2 years to negotiate a trade deal when everything else will stay the same? • 5.15 The economy will dip but can make up ground later? • 12.00 By leaving the EU migration into the UK will reduce significantly? • 14.45 A Canada plus or EEA option will be able to deliver the government’s objectives? • 18.25 We have to reach a deal by 29th March 2019 or “crash out” of the EU and go it alone? • 19.45 We can’t revoke Article 50?

The Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge explores the common myths of #Brexit. In this exclusive podcast three academics from the Centre for European Legal Studies, University of Cambridge, give their verdicts on twelve common myths about the UK’s #Brexit from the EU. We speak to Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law and a Senior Fellow in the UK in a Changing Europe Programme; Dr Markus Gehring, University Lecturer in Law at the Law Faculty and former Deputy Director of the Centre for European Legal Studies and a Fellow of the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law; Professor John Bell, Professor of Law, University of Cambridge. In this two part #Brexitmyths documentary we ask them to tell you what is true and what isn’t when #Brexit is being discussed. First we speak to Professor Barnard and Dr Gehring and then Professor Bell to sum up his #Brexit myths at the end of each part. Below we give the questions we put to them and the approximate time codes for their answers so that if you want to dip into parts of this discussion it is easy for you to do so. We hope you enjoy the listen and learn much from it. Producer: Boni Sones OBE #Brexit Myths Part One • 0.00 The Withdrawal Agreement itself – it’s a bad deal? • 7.15 The EU got everything it wanted from the UK and took us for a ride? • 11.15 The NI backstop will keep the UK in a customs union indefinitely? • 14.49 May’s deal or No-Deal are the only two options? • 19.30 Trading on WTO terms will be good for the UK as we do more trade outside the EU than in it? • 23.43 The Political Agreement leading to a trade deal is too vague? #Brexit Myths Part Two • 0.00 We have 2 years to negotiate a trade deal when everything else will stay the same? • 5.15 The economy will dip but can make up ground later? • 12.00 By leaving the EU migration into the UK will reduce significantly? • 14.45 A Canada plus or EEA option will be able to deliver the government’s objectives? • 18.25 We have to reach a deal by 29th March 2019 or “crash out” of the EU and go it alone? • 19.45 We can’t revoke Article 50?

Many supranational organisations exist, be it the African Union, the Eurasian Economic Union, or the Association of Caribbean States. In this episode we will focus on just one of them: the European Union. Political parties all over its territory preach euroscepticism, which even resulted in the United Kingdom voting to leave: the infamous Brexit. But what is the European Union, its law, and how did it develop in the first place? In this tenth episode of Maastricht Law Talk, Andrea Ott introduces us to the world of European Union Law. Andrea is professor of European Union External Relations Law at Maastricht University and member of CLEER. Before starting her current position, she held both assistant and associate professorships of EU Institutional Law. She also taught several courses on External Relations Law and European Union Law in general, both on a Master's and Bachelor's level. Before you start listening, check out our episodes on What is Law?, Constitutions, Brexit, (EU) Citizenship, and International Law. If you have listened to them already, even better!

We will “take back control of our laws” after Brexit. But who will interpret, apply and enforce them? The role of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) is already emerging as one of the most explosive elements of the Brexit process. The Prime Minister says its jurisdiction in Britain will end, but could the court still have some role in UK law? Will it be responsible for resolving future disputes about Britain’s “divorce bill” and citizens’ rights, as the EU demands? Are other forms of dispute resolution possible? At the event, Raphael Hogarth, Research Associate at the Institute for Government, presented the key findings from the Institute for Government’s research on Brexit, dispute resolution and the ECJ. To discuss the findings, our panel included: Michael-James Clifton, Chief of Staff to the President of the Court of Justice of the European Free Trade Association Dr Holger Hestermeyer, Shell Reader in International Dispute Resolution at King’s College London Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law at the University of Cambridge This event was chaired by Jill Rutter, Programme Director at the Institute for Government.

Labour will play a crucial role in shaping Britain's exit from the EU now the Conservative government has lost its overall majority. The vast majority of Labour MPs backed Remain ahead of the referendum - but most followed party orders to allow Article 50 to be invoked (the mechanism for leaving the EU). On the day the government publishes the Repeal Bill and the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn meets the EU's chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, David Aaronovitch asks a range of political experts what Labour wants. He'll look back into the party's history to see if that helps explain today's divisions and he'll be briefed on whether Labour's Brexit wishlist is realistic. CONTRIBUTORS Steven Fielding, Professor of Political History at The University of NottinghamCatherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law, The University of CambridgeDeborah Mattinson, former advisor to Gordon Brown and founder of think tank Britain ThinksProducers: Phoebe Keane and Beth Sagar-Fenton

While Parliament is in recess, use the time to get acquainted with Article 207, 217 & 218. Dan Damon speaks with Catherine Barnard, professor in European Union Law and Employment Law at the University of Cambridge, as she prepares us for what happens next in the negotiations. The BBC's Political Correspondent Ben Wright is on hand to give analysis from Westminster. (IMAGE: A pro-remain protester holds up an EU flag with one of the stars symbolically cut out in front of the Houses of Parliament shortly after British Prime Minister Theresa May announced to the House of Commons that Article 50 had been triggered- CREDIT: OLI SCARFF/AFP/Getty Images)

In this ongoing series of short videos, academics from the University of Cambridge and beyond shed light on the key issues to be considered in the run up to the upcoming referendum on the UK's membership of the European Union. This video features Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law, sharing her experiences of researching the reasons why EU migrants move to the UK, and the extent to which the benefits available factor into that decision. She then considers the effects of the concessions won by David Cameron should the UK vote to remain on 23rd June. This series of videos has been created by the Centre for European Legal Studies (CELS). For more information visit http://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/

In this ongoing series of short videos, academics from the University of Cambridge and beyond shed light on the key issues to be considered in the run up to the upcoming referendum on the UK's membership of the European Union. This video features Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law, who examines the vexed issue of the deportation of EU nationals who are either known criminals, or who commit crimes while in the UK. This series of videos has been created by the Centre for European Legal Studies (CELS). For more information visit http://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/

In this ongoing series of short videos, academics from the University of Cambridge shed light on the key issues to be considered in the run up to the upcoming referendum on the UK's membership of the European Union. This video features Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law, who considers how Britain's membership of the EU has impacted the protection of workers, and any legislation governing such protection might change depending on the outcome of the referendum on 23rd June. This series of videos has been created by the Centre for European Legal Studies (CELS). For more information visit http://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/

In this series of short videos, academics from the University of Cambridge shed light on the key issues to be considered in the run up to the upcoming referendum on the UK's membership of the European Union. This video features Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law, considering what the impact of Britain's membership of the EU has been on the ability of workers to seek work in other countries, and for workers to seek work in the UK. She further discusses what each outcome of the vote might mean for employees in the UK. This series of videos has been created by the Centre for European Legal Studies (CELS). For more information visit http://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/

After long negotiations, on 19 February Prime Minister David Cameron announced that the European Council had agreed a new settlement for the United Kingdom in the European Union. In line with the Conservative Party manifesto, this agreement has triggered a referendum on whether Britain should remain in the European Union to be held on Thursday 23 June. In this next video in the Law in Focus series, Catherine Barnard examines the effects of the settlement. A longer analysis of the settlement is also available: http://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/2196035 Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

After long negotiations, on 19 February Prime Minister David Cameron announced that the European Council had agreed a new settlement for the United Kingdom in the European Union. In line with the Conservative Party manifesto, this agreement has triggered a referendum on whether Britain should remain in the European Union to be held on Thursday 23 June. In this next video in the Law in Focus series, Catherine Barnard examines the effects of the settlement. A three-minute quick summary of the settlement is also available: Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

After long negotiations, on 19 February Prime Minister David Cameron announced that the European Council had agreed a new settlement for the United Kingdom in the European Union. In line with the Conservative Party manifesto, this agreement has triggered a referendum on whether Britain should remain in the European Union to be held on Thursday 23 June. In this next video in the Law in Focus series, Catherine Barnard examines the effects of the settlement. A longer analysis of the settlement is also available: http://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/2196035 Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

After long negotiations, on 19 February Prime Minister David Cameron announced that the European Council had agreed a new settlement for the United Kingdom in the European Union. In line with the Conservative Party manifesto, this agreement has triggered a referendum on whether Britain should remain in the European Union to be held on Thursday 23 June. In this next video in the Law in Focus series, Catherine Barnard examines the effects of the settlement. A three-minute quick summary of the settlement is also available: Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

After long negotiations, on 19 February Prime Minister David Cameron announced that the European Council had agreed a new settlement for the United Kingdom in the European Union. In line with the Conservative Party manifesto, this agreement has triggered a referendum on whether Britain should remain in the European Union to be held on Thursday 23 June. In this next video in the Law in Focus series, Catherine Barnard examines the effects of the settlement. A three-minute quick summary of the settlement is also available: Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

After long negotiations, on 19 February Prime Minister David Cameron announced that the European Council had agreed a new settlement for the United Kingdom in the European Union. In line with the Conservative Party manifesto, this agreement has triggered a referendum on whether Britain should remain in the European Union to be held on Thursday 23 June. In this next video in the Law in Focus series, Catherine Barnard examines the effects of the settlement. A longer analysis of the settlement is also available: http://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/2196035 Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

After long negotiations, on 19 February Prime Minister David Cameron announced that the European Council had agreed a new settlement for the United Kingdom in the European Union. In line with the Conservative Party manifesto, this agreement has triggered a referendum on whether Britain should remain in the European Union to be held on Thursday 23 June. In this next video in the Law in Focus series, Catherine Barnard examines the effects of the settlement. A longer analysis of the settlement is also available: http://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/2196035 Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

After long negotiations, on 19 February Prime Minister David Cameron announced that the European Council had agreed a new settlement for the United Kingdom in the European Union. In line with the Conservative Party manifesto, this agreement has triggered a referendum on whether Britain should remain in the European Union to be held on Thursday 23 June. In this next video in the Law in Focus series, Catherine Barnard examines the effects of the settlement. A three-minute quick summary of the settlement is also available: Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

In his speech at Chatham House on 10 November 2015 (https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-speech-on-europe), the Prime Minister David Cameron outlined those aspects of the EU he would like to see reformed prior to any referendum on the UK's continued membership of the EU. EU employment law - one of the most controversial areas of EU policy - was not expressly identified in his list. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers the impact of EU social poicy on the lives of UK employees and what effect 'Brexit' might have on employees' rights. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

In his speech at Chatham House on 10 November 2015 (https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-speech-on-europe), the Prime Minister David Cameron outlined those aspects of the EU he would like to see reformed prior to any referendum on the UK's continued membership of the EU. EU employment law - one of the most controversial areas of EU policy - was not expressly identified in his list. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers the impact of EU social poicy on the lives of UK employees and what effect 'Brexit' might have on employees' rights. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

In his speech at Chatham House on 10 November 2015 (https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-speech-on-europe), the Prime Minister David Cameron outlined those aspects of the EU he would like to see reformed prior to any referendum on the UK's continued membership of the EU. EU employment law - one of the most controversial areas of EU policy - was not expressly identified in his list. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers the impact of EU social poicy on the lives of UK employees and what effect 'Brexit' might have on employees' rights. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

In his speech at Chatham House on 10 November 2015 (https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-speech-on-europe), the Prime Minister David Cameron outlined those aspects of the EU he would like to see reformed prior to any referendum on the UK's continued membership of the EU. EU employment law - one of the most controversial areas of EU policy - was not expressly identified in his list. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers the impact of EU social poicy on the lives of UK employees and what effect 'Brexit' might have on employees' rights. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

In his speech at Chatham House on 10 November 2015 (https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-speech-on-europe), the Prime Minister David Cameron outlined those aspects of the EU he would like to see reformed prior to any referendum on the UK's continued membership of the EU. EU employment law - one of the most controversial areas of EU policy - was not expressly identified in his list. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers the impact of EU social poicy on the lives of UK employees and what effect 'Brexit' might have on employees' rights. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

In his speech at Chatham House on 10 November 2015 (https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-speech-on-europe), the Prime Minister David Cameron outlined those aspects of the EU he would like to see reformed prior to any referendum on the UK's continued membership of the EU. EU employment law - one of the most controversial areas of EU policy - was not expressly identified in his list. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers the impact of EU social poicy on the lives of UK employees and what effect 'Brexit' might have on employees' rights. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

In his speech at Chatham House on 10 November 2015 (https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-speech-on-europe), the Prime Minister David Cameron outlined those aspects of the EU he would like to see reformed prior to any referendum on the UK's continued membership of the EU. EU employment law - one of the most controversial areas of EU policy - was not expressly identified in his list. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers the impact of EU social poicy on the lives of UK employees and what effect 'Brexit' might have on employees' rights. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

In his speech at Chatham House on 10 November 2015 (https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-speech-on-europe), the Prime Minister David Cameron outlined those aspects of the EU he would like to see reformed prior to any referendum on the UK's continued membership of the EU. EU employment law - one of the most controversial areas of EU policy - was not expressly identified in his list. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers the impact of EU social poicy on the lives of UK employees and what effect 'Brexit' might have on employees' rights. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

On Friday 14 November 2014, the Cambridge European Society hosted a lecture by Ana Júlia Maurício (PhD at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge) entitled "Problems of Compliance with European Union Law: The case of national final administrative acts" at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

On Friday 14 November 2014, the Cambridge European Society hosted a lecture by Ana Júlia Maurício (PhD at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge) entitled "Problems of Compliance with European Union Law: The case of national final administrative acts" at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

On Friday 14 November 2014, the Cambridge European Society hosted a lecture by Ana Júlia Maurício (PhD at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge) entitled "Problems of Compliance with European Union Law: The case of national final administrative acts" at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge.

'How can the government stem the tide of migrant workers coming to the UK?'. This question has been asked with increasing vigour by those who perceive immigration as a threat rather than a benefit to the UK economy. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers whether it is possible to restrict free movement of workers under EU law, both as it now stands and going forward. Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

'How can the government stem the tide of migrant workers coming to the UK?'. This question has been asked with increasing vigour by those who perceive immigration as a threat rather than a benefit to the UK economy. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers whether it is possible to restrict free movement of workers under EU law, both as it now stands and going forward. Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

'How can the government stem the tide of migrant workers coming to the UK?'. This question has been asked with increasing vigour by those who perceive immigration as a threat rather than a benefit to the UK economy. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers whether it is possible to restrict free movement of workers under EU law, both as it now stands and going forward. Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

'How can the government stem the tide of migrant workers coming to the UK?'. This question has been asked with increasing vigour by those who perceive immigration as a threat rather than a benefit to the UK economy. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers whether it is possible to restrict free movement of workers under EU law, both as it now stands and going forward. Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

'How can the government stem the tide of migrant workers coming to the UK?'. This question has been asked with increasing vigour by those who perceive immigration as a threat rather than a benefit to the UK economy. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers whether it is possible to restrict free movement of workers under EU law, both as it now stands and going forward. Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

'How can the government stem the tide of migrant workers coming to the UK?'. This question has been asked with increasing vigour by those who perceive immigration as a threat rather than a benefit to the UK economy. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers whether it is possible to restrict free movement of workers under EU law, both as it now stands and going forward. Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

'How can the government stem the tide of migrant workers coming to the UK?'. This question has been asked with increasing vigour by those who perceive immigration as a threat rather than a benefit to the UK economy. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers whether it is possible to restrict free movement of workers under EU law, both as it now stands and going forward. Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

'How can the government stem the tide of migrant workers coming to the UK?'. This question has been asked with increasing vigour by those who perceive immigration as a threat rather than a benefit to the UK economy. In this video, Catherine Barnard considers whether it is possible to restrict free movement of workers under EU law, both as it now stands and going forward. Professor Barnard is Professor of European Union Law and Jean Monnet Chair of EU Law. She has written extensively on EU Law and Labour Law, and has been involved in advising the UK Government as part of its balance of competence review. For more information about Professor Barnard, please refer to her profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/cs-barnard/9 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

Professor Niamh Nic Shuibhne, Chair of European Union Law, presented her inaugural lecture entitled "The Lawless Science of EU Law: Constitutional Responsibility and the Court of Justice".AbstractWhen constitutional courts interpret the law, they make law. But they also influence the direction of policy-making and are frequently called upon to determine questions that seem to have very little to do with legal reasoning at all. This lecture will position the Court of Justice of the European Union as a transnational constitutional court and evaluate its performance using the conceptual benchmark of constitutional responsibility. It will be shown that the values of fairness, coherence and integrity are central to that assessment; and that the verdict is mixed. The absence of more prescriptive guidance or signposts in the EU's primary legal documents - its Treaties - will be explored as a considerable challenge for the Court to manage. More pragmatically, it will be argued that the current structure of the Court hinders it from fulfilling the responsibilities it owes, especially to the national courts of the EU Member States. But the notion of responsibility also demands that the Court demonstrate greater awareness of its constitutional purpose and shape its own judicial behaviour accordingly.Recorded on Friday 9 November 2012 at Old College, the University of Edinburgh.