LAUSR

Antitheses form the backbone of the European project. Intergovernmentalism versus federalism, 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) jurisprudence, 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 fundamentally, 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.