Hybrid methodology for the EU principle of consistent interpretation

This article examines the legal methodology that courts have to employ when they construe domestic law in accordance with European Union directives. It demonstrates that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has set up autonomous ‘European methodological rules’. These rules apply together with national legal methods. The relationship between both regimes can be described with the concepts of overlapping, intervention, and Europeanization from the inside. The article thus holds that the doctrine of consistent interpretation possesses a hybrid methodology. The reanalysis of the CJEU’s case law offers answers to some unresolved questions. The article shows how consistent interpretation affects national principles of interpretation. It demonstrates the extent to which domestic judges are required to depart from traditional methods of construction and to what extent European methodological rules broaden the limits of the judicial function as accepted under national law. The contra legem limit is defined, and some of its misinterpretations in legal scholarship are highlighted

Commentary on MiFID II Conduct of Business Rules, Arts 21-30 MiFID II

This paper provides a detailed commentary of arts. 21 through 30 of the new Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (Directive 2014/65/EU, MiFID II). Its primary target audience is legal practitioners who want to inform themselves about the operating conditions for investment firms in Europe, particularly the conduct of business rules. MiFID II will come into force on 3rd January 2018. The aim of the commentary is to provide an understandable and at the same time thorough account of MiFID II’s requirements, the corresponding provisions in the MiFID II Delegated Directive (Directive (EU) 2017/593) and MiFID II Delegated Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2017/565) as well as ESMA’s guidance. The commentary also directs readers to issues that are in doubt or completely uncertain in the new regime, and it adopts a clear stance on these issues

A Theory of Exploitation for Consumer Law: Online Choice Architectures, Dark Patterns, and Autonomy Violations

Commercial practices that exploit consumer behavioural biases (behavioural exploitation) are an increasingly prevalent issue in online choice architectures. EU policymakers have started to expressly regulate such practices. What remains unclear about this type of regulation is when an online choice architecture exploits biased consumers. What is the legal meaning and significance of exploitation in the digital environment? Even though the concept of exploitation is frequently used in scholarship concerning behavioural exploitation such as “dark patterns”, it is rarely defined. The concept’s normativity is mostly ignored, remains underdeveloped, and lacks solid foundations. This Article aims to close this gap by developing a theory of exploitation for (behavioural) consumer law in the EU that applies to online choice architectures and unfair commercial practices in general. The Article eschews welfare analysis and instead relies on the philosophical discourse on exploitation theory. Even though this discourse is mostly ignored by the literature, the Article submits that this analytical framework fits better with the existing goals and scheme of EU consumer law compared to an approach to legal analysis that is driven by promoting consumer welfare through market efficiency. Ultimately, the Article defends the autonomy theory of exploitation and contends that regulating behavioural exploitation in online choice architectures means regulating for autonomy

Verständliche Risikoaufklärung und Schutz unkundiger Kleinanleger bei der Anlageberatung

Der Beitrag analysiert die anlegerschützende Wirkung des Gebots der verständlichen Risikoaufklärung im Aufsichts- und Zivilrecht. Dieser Schutz ist für unkundige Kleinanleger im Informationsmodell begrenzt, weil das Aufsichtsrecht ein Mindestmaß an Verständnis beim Privatkunden zwingend unterstellt. Im Beratungsmodell kann im Ausnahmefall hingegen auch ein Verständnistest beim Kunden gefordert sein. Die vom BGH zuletzt im Zinsswap-Urteil aufgestellten hohen Anforderungen an die Verständlichkeit stehen mit aufsichtsrechtlichen Wertentscheidungen im Einklang, gerade auch soweit sie in faktische Vertriebsbeschränkungen münden. Sie lassen sich zudem für den Schutz unkundiger Kleinanleger fruchtbar machen

Judicial law-making in English and German courts:Techniques and Limits of Statutory Interpretation

"This book is a valuable study of how two jurisdictions approach the task of statutory interpretation in a complex and multivalent constitutional environment. It is the product of considerable scholarship across the two jurisdictions and a fine sensitivity to the various factors and different theoretical dimensions which inform the interpretative exercise. The exposition is clear. The argument is forceful." – from the Foreword by Philip Sales (Lord Justice of Appeal, England & Wales) How far do contemporary English and German judges go when they interpret national legislation? Where are the limits of statutory interpretation when they venture outside the constraints of the text?Judicial Law-making in English and German Courts is concerned with the limits of judicial power in a legal system. It addresses the often neglected relationship between statutory interpretation and constitutional law. It traces the practical implications of constitutional principles by exploring the outer limits of what courts regard themselves as authorised to do in the area of statutory interpretation. The book critically analyses, reconstructs and compares judicial law-making in English and German courts from comparative, methodological and constitutional perspectives. It maps the differences and commonalities in both jurisdictions and then offers explanatory accounts for these differences and similarities based on constitutional, institutional, political, historical, cultural and international factors.It will be shown that a fundamental unity of statutory interpretation exists in English and German judicial practice in the sphere of rights-consistent and EU-conforming judicial law-making. The constitutional settings and legal cultures in Germany and the UK have converged in both areas of judicial law-making. However, that is not the case for judicial law-making under conventional canons of statutory interpretation, where significant differences in judicial approach to statutory interpretation remain.Judicial Law-making in English and German Courts is the first monograph in English that compares English and German legal methodology as applied in judicial practice, appealing to those interested in statutory interpretation, comparative law or legal methodology

The legal framework for financial advertising:curbing behavioural exploitation

Policy makers and behavioural finance scholars express growing concern that marketing practices by financial institutions exploit retail investors’ behavioural biases. Investor protection regulation should thus address these marketing practices and include mechanisms curbing behavioural exploitation. That raises the question whether the marketing communications regime of the new Markets in Financial Instruments Directive can live up to this demand. This article develops a regulatory model that integrates behavioural finance insights into the new marketing communications regime. It then determines how regulatory authorities can apply this model when they interpret and apply specific regulatory requirements. It demonstrates how a regulatory authority or a court can translate empirical behavioural finance research findings into legal arguments when assessing whether marketing practices can significantly distort a model investor’s decision-making process. The article further establishes that the detailed requirements imposed on investment firms by the new Markets in Financial Instruments Directive are necessary in order to protect investors from behavioural exploitation. Finally, the article submits policy proposals that aim to protect investors more effectively from behavioural exploitation

Die Rechtsprechung des BGH zur Präsentation von Risiken bei der Anlageberatung

Die Frage, wie ein Anlageberater seinen Kunden über Risiken des Anlageobjekts aufzuklären hat, ist vom Bestehen einer Aufklärungspflicht und vom Aufklärungsinhalt zu trennen. In der Regel hält sich der BGH in seiner Rechtsprechung mit konkreten Anforderungen an die Art und Weise der Risikopräsentation zurück. Zuletzt ist diese Thematik aber mit dem ZinsswapUrteil des BGH in den Vordergrund gerückt. Aufbauend auf verhaltenswissenschaftlichen Erkenntnissen plädiert der Beitrag für eine verstärkte Prüfung der beratungsvertraglichen Anforderungen an die Gestaltung der Risikoaufklärung in der forensischen Praxis. Er stellt die bisherige Rechtsprechung des BGH zu gesteigerten Anforderungen an die Präsentation von Risiken bei der Anlageberatung dar, systematisiert sie – soweit ersichtlich zum ersten Mal – und bewertet sie.</p

Europäisierung der Methodik richtlinienkonformer Rechtsfindung

Die Methoden der richtlinienkonformen Rechtsfindung richten sich grundsätzlich nach der jeweiligen mitgliedstaatlichen Methodenlehre. Unterschiede in den nationalen Methodenlehren gefährden zwar die einheitliche Wirksamkeit des Richtlinienrechts. Für eine vollständig vereinheitlichte, gemeineuropäische Methodenlehre fehlt der Union jedoch die Kompetenz. Der EuGH hat aber „europäische Methodenregeln“ aufgestellt. Der Beitrag ordnet diese Rechtsprechung des EuGH dogmatisch neu ein. Er bestimmt das Verhältnis der Methodenregeln zu den nationalen Methoden und klassifiziert die richtlinienkonforme Rechtsfindung als hybrides Instrument. Anschließend analysiert der Beitrag die europäischen Methodenregeln im Lichte der Rechtsprechung des BVerfG zu den verfassungsrechtlichen Integrationsgrenzen