Review of'Horizontal Effect of Fundamental Rights in EU Law'by S. Walkila.

Review of'Horizontal Effect of Fundamental Rights in EU Law'by S. Walkila.内容摘要：

Sonya Walkila, Horizontal Effect of Fundamental Rights in EU Law. Groningen: Europa Law Publishing, 2016, 288 pages. ISBN 978908521811 This book is situated within a growing body of literature, particularly post-Lisbon, that poses the pertinent questions of whether, how and should fundamental rights enjoy horizontal effect in Union law. Valuable work conducted elsewhere has focused on specific issues, such as the horizontality of particular fundamental rights-embodying Treaty provisions or general principles, the extent of the applicability of the Charter, and, more broadly, on critiquing the constitutionalisation of EU private law. By contrast, Walkila’s contribution offers a timely and wider overview of these debates in order to conduct an important analysis of the question of the horizontality of fundamental rights against the uniqueness of the EU legal order. To this end, the book is divided logically into four parts and employs a number of methodological approaches with the aim of ensuring a rich and comprehensive analysis. Parts one and two principally utilise historical and doctrinal methodologies to critique the interlinked evolutions of, first, horizontality, and, second, fundamental rights, in the Union legal order. Part three conducts a theoretical assessment of the public/private dichotomy alongside a comparative inquiry into different jurisdictional attitudes to the horizontality of fundamental rights and a black-letter examination of the Union’s idiosyncratic approach to this issue. Part four offers conclusions, ultimately arguing that the horizontal effect of fundamental rights in the Union legal order is a necessary development when set against the contemporary entwinement of the public and private spheres, though a nuanced approach to the form of horizontality is required. Walkila’s mixed methodological approach yields a number of valuable contributions. In reviewing the progression of horizontality, generally, and the horizontality of fundamental rights more specifically, within the Union legal order, Walkila usefully identifies a number of combined influences across the book. These include: the Union’s historically public law and economic focus; the central position of the individual within European integration, especially after Van Gend; the significance of the role played by the Court of Justice in formulating and developing the notions of vertical and horizontal direct effect; the potential Treaty justifications for perceived judicial activism; the impact of internal market objectives on the public/private dichotomy, especially given the inevitable clashes they create between economic and social goals; the fundamental rights, particularly the principles of nondiscrimination and equality, that are intrinsically linked to seminal cases on horizontal effect, such as Defrenne II, Mangold and Kücükdeveci; and the expansion of policy areas covered by the Treaties, including fields associated with the private sphere. Crucially, these insights offer a critical understanding of the significance of the Union’s constitutional evolution, in combination with the expanding generations of fundamental rights, for the EU’s growing influence on relationships between private actors and its unique approach to the public/private divide. In the fundamental rights context, Walkila helpfully contrasts their traditionally vertical nature, in line with the tenets of liberal autonomy, with the growing relevance of horizontality in the context of the expansion of fundamental rights into economic, social and collective interests. For Walkila, this is amplified by the ‘modern social realities’, such as the influence of privatisation, trade liberalisation and current globalisation, which realign the public and private spheres. Walkila also charts the growing pertinence of fundamental rights within the EU, from their total absence in the Rome Treaty, to their position at the very foundations of 1 the Union legal order, particularly as a result of the ‘intensification of fundamental rights’ post-Lisbon. Cognisant, nevertheless, of the ongoing requirement that an issue falls within the scope of Union law before EU fundamental rights jurisdiction is triggered, Walkila proposes that, for the sake of legal certainty, a test requiring a ‘sufficient connection’ to EU law, based on the applicability of a substantive EU rule, should be determinative of fundamental rights jurisdiction. In addition, Walkila engages comprehensively with