Since September 2021, the Editorial Board of the Review of European Administrative Law has set out on a new endeavour, the creation of a blog, where case law, policy developments, and scholarly discussions are highlighted and examined. Within the second year of its existence, the blog has published seventy-five pieces covering various topics such as administrative law and the Council of Europe (for instance a discussion of Georgiou v. Greece), the interactions between public and private powers (for instance the Administrative Power of Private Bodies), alternative means of resolving administrative disputes (with four pieces dedicated to mediation, in France, in Spain, in the UK and the Council of Europe) and the importance of public participation either in the decision-making process (here by Odile Ammann and Audrey Boussat) or in judicial challenges (here by Roberto Caranta).

Most notably, we organised a section with a series of pieces dedicated to discussing in-depth a case recently decided by the Court of Justice. After our successful series on Cilfit case law and preliminary references to the CJEU (Consorzio Italian Management II (C-561/19)) and the cooperation in taxation matters (État Luxembourgeois v B (C‑245/19 and C‑246/19) & État luxembourgeois v L (C-437/19) in 2021-2022, we discussed this year the Banco Popular Cases (T-481/17, T-510/17, T-523/17, T-570/17 and T-628/17) on the SRM framework.

We are immensely proud that our authors range widely from all corners of Europe (from Turin to Cork, from New South Wales to Cluj-Napoca) at all levels of seniority, and coming from academia as well as outside academia.

The blog attracted approximately more than 1,000 visitors a month, with the most views coming in numerical order from the UK, the Netherlands, Italy, Belgium, Italy, Germany, France, Spain, the USA, Poland and Ireland the UK, Germany, the USA (with 1,500 views for the UK alone).

Our most visited pieces this year were:

• The plea of illegality in European Union law – The missing piece in the puzzle of a ‘complete system of remedies’?, by Mariolina Eliantonio
• La jurisprudence des petits pas: C-561/19, Consorzio Italian Management, Catania Multiservizi SpA v Rete Ferroviaria Italiana SpA, by Giulia Gentile and Matteo Bonelli
• Article 19 TEU and national courts: A new role for the principle of effective judicial protection?, by S Prechal
• Environmental procedural rights before European courts: still searching for a common script or multiplying avenues of protection?, by Justine Richelle
• Foreseeable relevance’ and the impact on Taxpayers’ rights in the EU, by Pasquale Pistone
• The Thelen Technopark Berlin judgment: the Court of Justice sticks to its guns on the horizontal effect of directives, by Bruno De Witte
• Introduction to the blog series on Banco Popular cases, by Jolien Timmermans
• Reviewing Science & Law in Member States’ Courts: Enforcement of the Habitats Directive in Ireland, by Á Ryall

We have also a section dedicated to highlighting books discussing key topics in European/comparative law. Three books have been discussed systematically:

• EU Environmental Principles and Scientific Uncertainty before National Courts – The Case of the Habitats Directive, edited by M Eliantonio, E Lees and T Paloniitty (Bloomsburry)
• Indirect Judicial Review in Administrative Law – Legality vs Legal Certainty in Europe, edited by M Eliantonio and D Dragos (Routledge)
• Art 47 EUCh and effective judicial protection, edited by G Gentile, M Bonelli and M Eliantonio (Bloomsburry 2 volumes)

Do catch up with them if you missed them when they were published!

The blog has aimed not only to highlight the scholarship published in the journal, but to create a proper forum for discussion for academics of all countries, seniorities, and affiliations to discuss European and comparative administrative law. It has the ambition to be a “safe space” where thoughts can be exchanged in a critical yet respectful fashion, news ideas can be generated, and innovative projects can be discussed and concretised. To this end, we are developing “European administrative law dialogues”. The first such dialogue featured Professor Joana Mendes (Luxembourg), Dr Filipe Brito Bastos (Nova Lisbon), Tanja Enhert (European Ombudsman, Inquiries Coordinator)  and Judge Sacha Prechal (European Court of Justice)  around the topic of comparative administrative law in shaping European administrative law (recording available here). Another such meeting will be held in 2023-24. It is expected that it will discuss procedural rights in Europe.

Coming up next academic year, REALaw.blog intends to publish a series of comments on the recent CJEU, Case C‑348/22, Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato  v  Comune di Ginosa pertaining to the sensitive issue of beach concessions in Italy (for the background, please read this piece). We very much encourage initiatives for “focus” sections on specific themes, recent case law, or policy initiatives.

We also welcome proposals for online book discussions or methodological reflections. Furthermore, in order to expand the comparative focus of our blog, we particularly encourage submissions concerning administrative law issues in the following:

• Nordic countries;
• Eastern and Central European countries;
• Countries in the accession process to the EU;
• Small jurisdictions on the European territory.

We want to thank all our authors and readers, and especially Jolien Timmermans for coordinating the Banco Popular series and Danai Petropoulou Ionescu for her editorial help. We look forward to the third year of life of the blog. The REALaw blog will suspend its activities for the summer recess and will resume its weekly postings in mid-September.

Enjoy the Summer break!

Mariolina Eliantonio and Yseult Marique

Suggested citation: M Eliantonio and Y Marique, “REALaw.blog Newsletter 2023”, REALaw.blog available at https://realaw.blog/?p=2709