Interdisciplinary Centre Luxembourg Centre for European Law (LCEL)

The Luxembourg Centre of European Law (LCEL) was established as an inter-disciplinary centre of the University of Luxembourg in 2024, succeeding the Max Planck Institute (MPI) Luxembourg for Procedural Law. Its mission is to engage in cutting edge scholarly research which addresses contemporary societal problems, foster the study of European law, and contribute to its development. It pursues research excellence and aspires to be one of the leading transnational hubs for the study of European law in the world.

Objectives

The objectives of the Centre are the following:

  • to produce outstanding scholarship in the field of European law;
  • to contribute to the development of European law and to European law reform;
  • to provide a forum for the debate of EU law and policy;
  • to foster the academic study of European law.

The Centre aims at pursuing the above objectives mainly through the following means:

  • the publication of books and articles in internationally recognized journals;
  • the organization of conferences and academic events;
  • the establishment of an inclusive and inspiring research environment bringing together established and early-career scholars, policy makers, judges and those who wish to be involved actively in European affairs.

The Centre has a global outlook and a broad reach. Its targeted audience are academic scholars, policy makers, courts, legal practitioners, and the civil society. It takes advantage of its location in Luxembourg, a global financial centre, which hosts the Court of Justice of the European Union and many other European institutions. 

Scope of research

The primary focus of the Centre is the law of the European Union. The development of EU integration and the legal system which underpins it have provided a fruitful ground, indeed an inexhaustive mine, for research by law scholars and social scientists. In addition to the attractiveness of EU law as a subject of theoretical research, its study is also of huge practical importance. It affects virtually every area of national law and represents the greatest source of law reform for Member States. It is also influential in shaping global trends and the laws of non-EU countries.

In addition to EU law, there are other areas that may come under the umbrella of European law. These include the European Convention of Human Rights, comparative law,  international law-related aspects, and the history of European laws. The Centre’s remit is a broad one. We are an inclusive scholarly community open to embracing and fostering high quality cutting edge research.

The remit of the Centre encompasses all areas of European law, including:

  • EU constitutional law and the governance of the EU;
  • Fundamental rights, the EU Charter, and judicial protection;
  • The external relations of the EU, including trade, foreign policy and defence, and related international law aspects;
  • Internal market law;
  • Competition, commercial, and consumer law;
  • Migration policy;
  • Environmental protection and sustainability;
  • The regulation of digital markets and artificial intelligence;
  • The European Monetary Union (EMU) and the regulation of financial markets;
  • Private international law;
  • The European Convention of Human Rights;
  • Comparative law.

Core and priority areas

The Centre has identified the following fields as priority areas of research:

  • EU constitutional law, judicial protection, and EU governance;
  • Geopolitics, external relations of the EU; including CFSP, trade ande external aspects of internal market
  • Nature and sustainability;
  • The regulation of digital markets and artificial intelligence;
  • EMU and financial regulation.

The above areas have been selected for the following reasons. First, they are of great theoretical and practical importance; secondly, they are areas where the EU has made a particular contribution and/or areas that include the fault lines of possible structural changes; thirdly, they are fully aligned with, and advance, the University’s mission and priorities.

The above areas will guide the activities of the Centre but we recognize that it takes time to build expertise. Our goals are to advance in all of them and to build a substantial body of original research in at least two of them over the next 5 years. Also, the identification of the above fields is without prejudice to embrace excellence in the broader universe of European law.

Specific projects

The Centre encourages the study of transversal themes, i.e. topics that transcend specific areas of regulation and can contribute to the development of scholarship in various fields. It has provisionally identified a number of potential research projects from which some will be selected as areas of inquiry in the next three years. It is also envisaged that external financing will be sought. By way of example, the pool of potential projects includes, but it is not limited to, the following.

We live in an era where new rights are recognised (e.g. right to clean environment, the rights of nature, animal welfare, digital rights), leading to ‘entitlement proliferation’ and competition between new and old rights; the model of liberal democracy is contested and there has been regression in rule of law standards both in new and established democracies. These contradictory developments pose challenges that call out for further, both doctrinal and interdisciplinary, research. Themes include: What is the role of each branch of government in balancing conflicting rights and interests? How much should be done at national level and how much at EU or international level? What is the meaning and legal force of the Article 2 TEU values? What is the relationship between rights established by primary EU law sources and those created by EU legislation? In recent years, there has been a growth of systemic or structural principles of EU law, such as the principles of autonomy, mutual trust, effectiveness, and solidarity. What is the precise meaning of these principles and why have they developed as tools of judicial methodology? To what extent do they contradict the traditional general principles of EU law, such as fundamental rights protection, proportionality and legal certainty and how can they be compromised with them?

Constitutional courts engage in balancing conflicting rights, principles, and interests. This balancing exercise raises profound questions about the separation of powers and the proper limits of the judicial province in relation to the political sphere. A distinct feature of the post-Second World War European constitutionalism is that such balancing is not the exclusive province of national courts but is also performed by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). What factors does the ECJ take into account in performing that balancing? How do they differ, if at all, from those weighed by the ECtHR or the United States Supreme Court? Is there a political question doctrine in EU law? How should EU and national constitutional rights be balanced? How can economic and social rights best be balanced and what is the role of each branch of government in this respect? More generally, new geopolitical trends bring to the fore the role of courts in resolving conflicts, including conflicts between states, which call for further scholarly analysis.

Although some authors have engaged with the methods of interpretation used by the ECJ, a comprehensive scholarly study of the topic is lacking. It is envisaged that research in this area will address the following questions: What methods of interpretation does the ECJ use? How have they evolved? Does one or another method have more prevalence in certain historical eras? If so why? How do its methods of interpretation differ from those of national supreme courts, international tribunals or the ECtHR? Does the General Court of the EU use the same methods as those used by ECJ?

A distinct principle developed by the ECJ is the principle of effectiveness. Although in recent years it is one of the most oft-invoked principles, its meaning is far from clear. One can identify no fewer than five meanings of effectiveness. A critique of the principle will make an original contribution to academic discourse and serve as the entry point for a wider inquiry into the effectiveness of EU laws and institutions on which there is a dearth of legal analysis. The EU produces a plethora of measures that govern most areas of economic activity but are EU laws effective? What might inhibit their effectiveness? The Centre will explore the possibility of developing a methodology for assessing the effectiveness of laws and seek to assess key law EU reform initiatives on its basis going beyond the Commission’s REFIT programme.

Following the Treaty of Lisbon, we have had the longest period without any Treaty amendments since the onset of the European Communities. This period of forced constitutional consolidation raises important questions about the future of EU governance, institutional reform, and creeping silent constitutional amendments through case law and evolving institutional behaviour. Research in EU governance includes, among other themes, the hierarchy of EU norms, the possibilities of Treaty amendment, enlargement and institutional reform. The Centre should play a leading role in setting the academic agenda and conducting impactful research in the theme of constitutional transformation, e.g. by reassessing the competences of the EU, outlining future institutional arrangements or examining the systems for electing MEPs. EU governance also includes the study of the EU law-making process. The drafting of EU legislation has undergone enormous change with recent instruments being far lengthier, more detailed, and more prescriptive.  What are the reasons for these changes? Do we still need directives as a legal instrument?

Environmental protection and sustainability are one of the defining themes of our era. The European Union is viewed as a leader in the field with the European Green deal envisaging Europe to become the first climate neutral continent. In parallel, environmental rights mark a new frontier with many pioneering issues been litigated in national and supra-national courts across the world. Areas of research that Centre envisages to cover are (a) the relationship between environmental protection and constitutions; (b) the role of courts in the recognition of environmental rights and duties; (c) a critical assessment of EU initiatives. Are EU measures fit for purpose? What impact, if any, does EU law have on global climate governance? To what extent are EU actors able and willing to shape sustainability policy at European and international level? What has been the cost of business of EU initiatives such as the CSRD?

The growth of automated decision-making and artificial intelligence has a transformative effect on society and poses unprecedented challenges. This is a nascent area of law in which there is a thriving debate and normative standards are still being developed. The EU has developed important initiatives governing digital markets and AI. How does the EU model compare with those of other countries? How does digitalization affect democracy and human rights? What are the constitutional standards, if any, that should apply to automated decision-making?

The above research topics are indicative only. We are an open academic community committed to embracing excellence in all its forms. Other potential research topics include a study on the scope, meaning and distinctiveness of European Union rights; the role of general principles of law under EU and international law; and the legal issues arising from the development of a European defence policy; and the western imprint in EU law.

Research papers

  • 11 July 2024

    The chapters contained in this yearbook have been composed by the participants of the fifth edition of the Forum on Procedural Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union held on Monday, 27 February 2023 at the Max Planck Institute Luxembourg for Procedural Law. The scope of the Forum was twofold. First, it set out to tackle cutting-edge procedural issues which arise in the Court’s proceedings and case-law. Second, it provided an update on general procedural issues. The Forum took its name from the intention to have an open dialog among specialists of EU Law and Procedural Law and to foster comparison with other courts, be they domestic or international.

    Co-Editors: Daniel Sarmiento, Pierre-Henri Conac, Olivier Baillet, Walter Bruno

    Authors: Takis Tridimas, Lena Hornkohl, Nils Imgarten, Enrique Vallines, Sara Iglesias Sánchez, Simoncini Marta, Janek Tomasz Nowak

    Keywords: Court of Justice of the European Union, Procedural Law, Litigation, Preliminary References, Infringement Actions, Appeals on Points of Law, Action of Annulment

Share this