Book review: The European Union and Social Security Law
| Author | Tomislav Sokol |
| DOI | 10.1177/1388262719836792 |
| Published date | 01 March 2019 |
| Date | 01 March 2019 |
| Subject Matter | Book reviews |
are seen as the inevitable problems generated by conferring discretion on welfare professionals.
Indeed, this is perhaps most evident where a key ‘aim’ of the book is stated as to ‘explain why the
extensive delegation of discretionary powers to different professional groups in the welfare state is
problematic’ (page 78). This approach draws these valuable arguments away from those who do
not argue about mitigating problems with discretion, but rather claim that discretion is a legitimate
end in itself. The latter has informed a flourishing literature on loca lism – particularly in the
context of welfare austerity – which remains uninterrogated by Molander’s position that discretion
is de facto problematic, or as HLA Hart put it in his unearthed essay, ‘something to be tolerated’.
References
Alexy, R. (2002) A Theory of Constitutional Rights, Oxford: OUP.
Hart, H.L.A. (2013) ‘Discretion’, Harvard Law Review, 127, 652.
Author biography
Jed Meers is a Lecturer in Law at York Law School. His research interests comprise social welfare
law, public law, welfare reform, housing law and policy as well as socio-legal studies.
Jaan Paju, The European Union and Social Security Law, Oxford and Portland: Hart Publishing, 2017,
202 pp., ISBN 978-1-50991-157-8
Reviewed by: Tomislav Sokol, Zagreb School of Economics and Management, Croatia
DOI: 10.1177/1388262719836792
The primary competence to regulate social security law within the European Union rests with the
Member States. This can be observed through various provisions of the Treaty on the European
Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, especially the ones determining
types of EU competences and providing legal bases for legislative action by the EU legislator. At
the beginning of the integration process, the harmonisation of national social security systems was
considered, but abandoned because it was assumed that the economic development within the
European Communities would lead to the convergence of these systems. The latter has not materi-
alised, partially due to the fact that EU expansion has brought about much greater diversity of
national financial and regulatory frameworks than was the case when there were only six Member
States. On the other hand, the development of EU law, especially concerning the internal market,
has curtailed national autonomy to regulate social security, which has to be exercised within the
limits set by EU law. Jaan Paju’s book tries to answer the related question: How has European
Union law influenced, and how does it still influence, national social security systems, despite the
formal competence of the EU being limited to coordination?
Paju approaches this question by using the official legal sources, including legislation and
around 600 judgments by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Academic literature
Book reviews 83
To continue reading
Request your trial