Jacob Öberg is Associate Professor in Law at Lund University.

• 1. Introduction I. The Question of EU Competence after Lisbon II. The Problems of the Existing Limits to EU Competences III. Main Arguments of the Book IV. Case Study—EU Regulatory Criminal Law V. Chapter Synopsis Part I: A Framework for Legality Review2. Principles Limiting the Exercise of EU Competences I. Introduction II. The System of Competence Monitoring III. Principle of Conferral IV. Principle of Proportionality V. Principle of Subsidiarity VI. Conclusions 3. Judicial Competence Review of EU Legislation I. Introduction II. The Link between Institutional and Conceptual Factors in Determining Intensity of Judicial Review III. The Case for Strict Procedural Review IV. The Court of Justice’s Track Record on Procedural Review V. Setting the Framework for a General Standard of Review and Test for Legality of EU Legislation VI. Conclusions Part II: Limits to EU Powers4. Limits to the Union’s Criminal Law Competence I. Introduction II. Limits to the Exercise of the Union’s Criminal Law Competence Prior to the Lisbon TreatyIII. Limits to the Exercise of Express Union Criminal Law Competence after Lisbon Treaty (Article 83(2) TFEU) IV. Conclusions 5. The Legal Basis for EU Criminal Law Legislation—A Constitutional Choice? I. Introduction II. The Relationship Between Article 83(2) TFEU and Article 114 TFEU with Respect to Criminalisation Measures III. The Fight Against Fraud: The Relationship Between Article 325 TFEU and Article 83(2) TFEU IV. Conclusions 6. Subsidiarity as a Constraint to the Exercise of EU Competences I. Introduction II. The Substantive Meaning of Subsidiarity III. Judicial Review of Subsidiarity IV. Case Study: The Market Abuse Crimes Directive V. Conclusions 7. Political Control of EU Competences—National Parliaments in the Field of EU Criminal Law I. Introduction II. National Parliaments’ Remit under the EWS Procedure III. National Parliaments’ Pursuit of Competence Control in Practice—The Yellow Card Against the EPPO Proposal IV. Conclusions 8. Conclusion I. Competence Control of the Exercise of EU Competences II. Reconstructing the Limits of the Treaties III. Epilogue: Future Prospects

In these days of burgeoning specialist discussion and publication of what is now firmly embedded under the title ‘EU criminal law’, Jacob Oberg’s book stands out as a distinctive contribution to the debates, with some real potential to drive forward policy and law.

Jacob Öberg is Associate Professor in Law at Lund University.

• 1. Introduction I. The Question of EU Competence after Lisbon II. The Problems of the Existing Limits to EU Competences III. Main Arguments of the Book IV. Case Study—EU Regulatory Criminal Law V. Chapter Synopsis Part I: A Framework for Legality Review2. Principles Limiting the Exercise of EU Competences I. Introduction II. The System of Competence Monitoring III. Principle of Conferral IV. Principle of Proportionality V. Principle of Subsidiarity VI. Conclusions 3. Judicial Competence Review of EU Legislation I. Introduction II. The Link between Institutional and Conceptual Factors in Determining Intensity of Judicial Review III. The Case for Strict Procedural Review IV. The Court of Justice’s Track Record on Procedural Review V. Setting the Framework for a General Standard of Review and Test for Legality of EU Legislation VI. Conclusions Part II: Limits to EU Powers4. Limits to the Union’s Criminal Law Competence I. Introduction II. Limits to the Exercise of the Union’s Criminal Law Competence Prior to the Lisbon TreatyIII. Limits to the Exercise of Express Union Criminal Law Competence after Lisbon Treaty (Article 83(2) TFEU) IV. Conclusions 5. The Legal Basis for EU Criminal Law Legislation—A Constitutional Choice? I. Introduction II. The Relationship Between Article 83(2) TFEU and Article 114 TFEU with Respect to Criminalisation Measures III. The Fight Against Fraud: The Relationship Between Article 325 TFEU and Article 83(2) TFEU IV. Conclusions 6. Subsidiarity as a Constraint to the Exercise of EU Competences I. Introduction II. The Substantive Meaning of Subsidiarity III. Judicial Review of Subsidiarity IV. Case Study: The Market Abuse Crimes Directive V. Conclusions 7. Political Control of EU Competences—National Parliaments in the Field of EU Criminal Law I. Introduction II. National Parliaments’ Remit under the EWS Procedure III. National Parliaments’ Pursuit of Competence Control in Practice—The Yellow Card Against the EPPO Proposal IV. Conclusions 8. Conclusion I. Competence Control of the Exercise of EU Competences II. Reconstructing the Limits of the Treaties III. Epilogue: Future Prospects

In these days of burgeoning specialist discussion and publication of what is now firmly embedded under the title ‘EU criminal law’, Jacob Oberg’s book stands out as a distinctive contribution to the debates, with some real potential to drive forward policy and law.

Jacob Öberg is Associate Professor in Law at Lund University.

• 1. Introduction I. The Question of EU Competence after Lisbon II. The Problems of the Existing Limits to EU Competences III. Main Arguments of the Book IV. Case Study—EU Regulatory Criminal Law V. Chapter Synopsis Part I: A Framework for Legality Review2. Principles Limiting the Exercise of EU Competences I. Introduction II. The System of Competence Monitoring III. Principle of Conferral IV. Principle of Proportionality V. Principle of Subsidiarity VI. Conclusions 3. Judicial Competence Review of EU Legislation I. Introduction II. The Link between Institutional and Conceptual Factors in Determining Intensity of Judicial Review III. The Case for Strict Procedural Review IV. The Court of Justice’s Track Record on Procedural Review V. Setting the Framework for a General Standard of Review and Test for Legality of EU Legislation VI. Conclusions Part II: Limits to EU Powers4. Limits to the Union’s Criminal Law Competence I. Introduction II. Limits to the Exercise of the Union’s Criminal Law Competence Prior to the Lisbon TreatyIII. Limits to the Exercise of Express Union Criminal Law Competence after Lisbon Treaty (Article 83(2) TFEU) IV. Conclusions 5. The Legal Basis for EU Criminal Law Legislation—A Constitutional Choice? I. Introduction II. The Relationship Between Article 83(2) TFEU and Article 114 TFEU with Respect to Criminalisation Measures III. The Fight Against Fraud: The Relationship Between Article 325 TFEU and Article 83(2) TFEU IV. Conclusions 6. Subsidiarity as a Constraint to the Exercise of EU Competences I. Introduction II. The Substantive Meaning of Subsidiarity III. Judicial Review of Subsidiarity IV. Case Study: The Market Abuse Crimes Directive V. Conclusions 7. Political Control of EU Competences—National Parliaments in the Field of EU Criminal Law I. Introduction II. National Parliaments’ Remit under the EWS Procedure III. National Parliaments’ Pursuit of Competence Control in Practice—The Yellow Card Against the EPPO Proposal IV. Conclusions 8. Conclusion I. Competence Control of the Exercise of EU Competences II. Reconstructing the Limits of the Treaties III. Epilogue: Future Prospects

In these days of burgeoning specialist discussion and publication of what is now firmly embedded under the title ‘EU criminal law’, Jacob Oberg’s book stands out as a distinctive contribution to the debates, with some real potential to drive forward policy and law.