Implications of a “no deal” Brexit for students at UK universities
Following the “historic defeat” of PM Theresa May’s Brexit deal at the hands of the UK House of Commons, the possibility of a “no deal” Brexit seems higher than ever before, meaning a scenario in which the United Kingdom would leave the European Union immediately on 29 March 2019 with no agreements in place about what their relationship would be like in the future. Without further preparatory actions or commitments made by the UK government, a “no deal” Brexit would create immediate uncertainty for EU nationals in UK universities, prospective students and staff from across the EU, and for those participating in any of the Horizon 2020, Structural Funds or Erasmus+ programmes. Read more… (Daniel Szilágyi)
The dispute settlement mechanism between investors and states provided for by the free trade agreement between the EU and Canada (Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA) is compatible with EU law, the Advocate General of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) concluded on Tuesday (29 January), dismissing previous concerns. The agreement does not adversely affect the autonomy of EU law and does not affect the principle that the ECJ has exclusive jurisdiction over the definitive interpretation of EU law. 
The Internet is the most important development in communication technology since the invention of the press, affecting the practice of freedom of speech and press and enabling more democratic opportunities for communication. Beside the multitude of advantages, this new technology brought along a swathe of new issues. One important question is: how can courts react to these changed circumstances in the course of human rights adjudication? Is it possible to apply the existing human rights measures or do the features of the new media require the development of new measures? 
The embattled firm has navigated through a number of legal challenges and regulatory disputes in various countries. 
Uber has lost its latest 
This article focuses on one of the most essential challenges for the European Union – Brexit, a process in motion since June 2016 and still shrouded in uncertainty. It is predicted that the UK will leave the European Union on March 29, 2019. However, no one knows yet how and by what conditions this “divorce” shall take place, and even whether it is truly inevitable: 
Advocate General Campos Sánchez-Bordona proposes that the European Court of Justice (ECJ) should declare that Article 50 TEU allows the unilateral revocation of the notification of the intention to withdraw from the EU. The ruling date has been set for December 10, just a day before the national Parliament’s vote on Prime Minister Theresa May’s much-maligned Brexit agreement. Regarding the issue, it seems that the United Kingdom isn’t united at all at the moment. 
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ordered the Polish government to immediately halt its ongoing reform of Poland’s Supreme Court – in a move that puts further pressure on the already strained ties between Brussels and Warsaw about a month ago (on 19 October). The ECJ said that Polish authorities must suspend implementing its April 2018 “Law on the Supreme Court”: to reinstate all of the Supreme Court judges who were forced to retire under the law and to refrain from any further attempt to replace them. 
The European Central Bank’s (ECB) bond-buying programme is legal and within the powers of the central bank, the advocate general of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) said on Thursday (4 October), amid a challenge in Germany to the bloc’s quantitative easing (QE) programme. 
Corporations have been undertaking very risk-taking activities abroad. Since they are met with less protective legislations in third-countries, some subsidiaries have been conducting their business without proper respect for human rights. As a result, not only the subsidiaries but also the parent companies can be held liable for violations of such rights in civil proceedings in their home countries. However, there is no standard international convention or jurisdictional body to regulate the relation between business and human rights and the legal remedies that victims can access. In this regard, victims must call upon domestic courts in a pursuit of the most favorable jurisdiction to obtain a civil legal redress mechanism.