This course is open to all students who are interested in international/European moot courts, namely those in the area of European Union law. The course is composed of 3 lectures, 3 introductory seminars, 3 substantive seminars and 3 written assignments.
Lecture No. 1: 7 March 2019
Introduction to mooting - in general. (Dead sailor case.)
Lecture No. 2: 21 March 2019
Introduction to human rights mooting (EHRMCC)
Lecture No. 3: 4 April 2019
Introduction to EU law mooting (CEEMC + ELMC)
Seminar No. 1: 28 February 2019
Pleading a case - written and oral. The "spread butter" case.
Seminar No. 2: 14 March 2019
Working with ECJ case law: C-585/16 Alheto
Seminar No. 3: 28 March 2019
Shadowing #TeamMasaryk #CEEMC on their analysis of this year's case.
Seminar No. 4: 11 April 2019
State liability. Please read case C-244/13 Ogieriakhi and the Irish follow-up case.
Q: What are the three conditions for state liability?
(If you feel lost, read pp. 421-430 in the supplementary bundle.)
Seminar No. 5: 25 April 2019
EU asylum law. Please read the Qualification Directive and the Procedural Directive.
Q: What are the factors relevant for the assessment of an application for international protection?
(If you feel lost, consult Chapters 3 & 4 of this Handbook.)
(If you want to learn more, read this chapter of a commentary on the topic.)
Seminar No. 6: 9 May 2019
Rule of law in the EU. Please read the Commission's reasoned proposal in the Polish case (Jan, Adéla, Ondřej) and/or the Parliament's reasoned proposal in the Hungarian case (Jonáš, Eva, Aleš).
Q: Do you agree or disagree with the EU institutions' analysis of the situation in the respective Member State(s)? Is the EU the right actor to solve these crises?
Assignment No. 1: due Sunday 14 April
Please use the CURIA Search form to find a recent judgment on State liability and write an annotation of this judgment, focusing on the story (the facts of the case) and the assessment of the three criteria for State liability. To find a relevant case, you can for example search for "sufficiently serious" (through the "Text" criterion) or you can search for the names of the most famous liability cases (such as Francovich, Brasserie, or Köbler). Choose any of the results, but please communicate it to the other students so that everyone is working on a unique case.
Assignment No. 2: due Sunday 21 April
Please read this year's case and analyse it in light of the GDPR (Reg No. 2016/679), namely Articles 4, 5, 6, 32, 33, 34, 79 and 82. Then write a submission (3-4 pages) addressing one of the following questions:
- Has the Administrative Appeals Court breached the GDPR? (Jan arguing YES, Jonáš arguing NO)
- What exactly was the mistake of the Administrative Appeals Court? What exactly was the damage suffered by Atad? Is there a causal link between the two? (Adéla arguing YES, Eva arguing NO)
- Is the liability mechanism in Article 82 GDPR similar or dissimilar to the State liability mechanism pursuant to Francovich, Brasserie or Köbler? Should the Administrative Appeals Court be liable pursuant to any of the two liability mechanisms? (Ondřej arguing YES, Aleš arguing NO).
Assignment No. 3: due Sunday 28 April
[This task will be specified later.]