A tale of two approaches to Social Europe: The CJEU and the Advocate General drifting apart in Case C-201/15 AGET Iraklis
| DOI | 10.1177/1023263X17722337 |
| Author | Konstantinos Alexandris Polomarkakis |
| Published date | 01 June 2017 |
| Date | 01 June 2017 |
| Subject Matter | Case notes |
Case note
A tale of two approaches to
Social Europe: The CJEU and
the Advocate General drifting
apart in Case C-201/15 AGET
Iraklis
Konstantinos Alexandris Polomarkakis
*
1. Introduction
Antitheses form the backbone of the European project. Intergovernmentalism versus federal-
ism, enlargement versus containment –these are only some of the contradictory pairs that have
informed the development of the European Union (EU). One of them, that between the
economic and social elements of the Union might not have featured prominently in academic
literature since the start of the European project but has certainly gained increasing momentum
over time. Is the EU primarily an economic union, or could it also be a social one? What is the
significance of the social market economy, the concept introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon?
More specifically, how far should fundamental freedoms yield when confronted by social
rights?
These questions have occupied an important place in the Court of Justice’s (CJEU) jurispru-
dence, yet it was not until the so-called Laval Quartet series of cases that the CJEU’s approach
provoked an overwhelmingly vivid debate. Not much has changed since then, at least not funda-
mentally, despite voices putting forward a reformulation of the balancing exercise. Subsequent
case law has not managed to turn the tide, thereby showing that the CJEU was slow to pick up
the developments that took place at the institutional level post-Lisbon, with the introduction of the
social market economy paradigm, and the empowerment of the Charter, but also to respond to the
critique of neoliberal deregulation that was promoted through the various bailout packages in
crisis-hit Eurozone countries.
*University of Bristol Law School, Bristol, UK.
Corresponding author:
Konstantinos Alexandris Polomarkakis, University of Bristol Law School, Wills Memorial Building, Queen’s Road, Bristol
BS8 1RJ, UK.
Email: k.alexandris-polomarkakis@bristol.ac.uk
Maastricht Journal of European and
Comparative Law
2017, Vol. 24(3) 424–437
ªThe Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1023263X17722337
maastrichtjournal.sagepub.com
MJ
MJ
To continue reading
Request your trial