¹ Note that one may hope for change as a follow up of the Commission large scale impulse: Commission staff working document accompanying the document communication from the Commission to the European parliament, the Council, the European and Social Committee and the Committee of the regions ‘Establishing a European Pillar of Social Rights’ (SWD/2017/201).

² Examples of recast include: Directive 2003/88 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time (OJ L 299, 18.11.2003, p. 9–19) and Directive 2006/54 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (OJ L 204, 26.7.2006, p. 23–36).

³ See, for example, Proposal for a Directive amending Directive 2003/88/EC concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, COM(2004)607 final; and Proposal for a Directive amending Directive 92/85 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding, COM(2008)637 final.

⁴ See further M. Blauberger, ‘From Negative to Positive Integration? European State Aid Control Through Soft and Hard Law’, (2008) MPIfG Discussion Paper 08/4, Cologne: Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies and F.W. Scharpf ‘Negative and Positive Integration’ in Scharpf, F.W., Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? (Oxford University Press 1999) p. 43 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵ With a different approach: Hilpold identifies ‘islands of solidarity’ such as cohesion policy, development assistance asylum policy, EMU: Hilpold, P., ‘Understanding solidarity within EU Law: an analysis of the “Islands of solidarity” with peculiar regard to monetary union’, 34(1) Yearbook of European Law (2015) p. 257 Google Scholar at p. 264.

⁶ E.g. Gerstenberg, O., ‘The justiciability of Socio-economic Rights, European solidarity, and the role of the Court of Justice of the EU’, 33(4) YEL (2014) p. 245 Google Scholar at p. 270.

⁷ Kosta, V., Fundamental Rights in EU Internal Market Legislation (Hart 2015)Google Scholar.

⁸ Ibid., p. 242-45.

⁹ For a fuller account see De Baere, G. and Gutman, K., ‘The Basis in EU Constitutional Law for Further Social Integration’, in C. Barnard et al. (eds.), A European Social Union after the Crisis (Cambridge University Press 2017) p. 356 Google Scholar ff.

¹⁰ E.g. Directive 2001/23 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses (OJ L 82, 22.3.2001, p. 16-20), adopted on the basis of the former Art. 94 TEC.

¹¹ On the use of the legal bases for social objectives see De Baere and Gutman, supra n. 10, p. 352ff.

¹² Art. 235 TEEC. E.g. Directive 76/207 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions (OJ L 39, 14.2.1976, p. 40-42) was adopted on that basis.

¹³ Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (adopted on 24 January 2007) A/RES/61/106, available at <www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/other_treaties/text.jsp?file_id=191300>, visited 27 December 2017. Decision concerning the conclusion, by the European Community, of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (OJ L 23, 27.1.2010, p. 35-36).

¹⁴ Text available at <www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/details.jsp?id=13169>, visited 27 December 2017. Proposal for a Decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons who are Blind, Visually Impaired, or Otherwise Print Disabled, COM(2014)638. See also CJEU Opinion 3/15 EU:C:2017:114; and Opinion of AG Wahl in Opinion Procedure 3/15, EU:C:2016:657.

¹⁵ European Commission, Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States as regards the accessibility requirements for products and services (COM (2015)615).

¹⁶ Directive 2017/1564 on certain permitted uses of certain works and other subject matter protected by copyright and related rights for the benefit of persons who are blind, visually impaired or otherwise print-disabled and amending Directive 2001/29 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (not yet in force, OJ L 242, 20.9.2017, p. 6-13).

¹⁷ See further Waddington, L., ‘The European Union and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: A story of Exclusive and Shared Competences’, 18(4) Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law (2011) p. 431 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁸ Directive 2004/38 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221, 68/360, 72/194, 73/148, 75/34, 75/35, 90/364, 90/365 and 93/96 (OJ L 158, 30.4.2004, p. 77-123).

¹⁹ See recitals (10) and (16) as interpreted by the ECJ in Case C-333/13, Dano, EU:C:2014:2358.

²⁰ I am grateful to C. Kilpatrick for suggesting this expression.

²¹ ECJ 15 September 2015, Case C-67/14, Alimanovic, ECLI:EU:C:2015:597, paras. 51-53.

²² Directive 2004/38, Art. 7(b).

²³ ECJ 11 November 2014, Case C-333/13, Dano, EU:C:2014:2358, paras. 74-79.

²⁴ ECJ 12 May 1998, Case C-85/96, Martínez Sala, EU:C:1998:217, paras. 60-63.

²⁵ See C. O’Brien, ‘An Insubstantial Pageant Fading: A Vision of EU Citizenship under the AG’s Opinion in C-308/14 Commission v UK’, EU Law Analysis, 7 October 2015, available at <eulawanalysis.blogspot.be/2015/10/an-insubstantial-pageant-fading-vision.html>, visited 27 December 2017.

²⁶ Although admittedly within the limited parameters of EU decision-making processes: see Dawson, M., ‘The political face of judicial activism: Europe’s law-politics imbalance’, in M. Dawson, et al. (eds.), Judicial Activism at the European Court of Justice (Edward Elgar 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²⁷ Part one, Title II TFEU.

²⁸ Illustrating the importance of impact assessment for the work of other EU institutions: Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making (OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1-14).

²⁹ Available at <ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/impact/key_docs/docs/guidance_for_assessing_social_impacts.pdf>, visited 27 December 2017.

³⁰ Available at <ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/impact/key_docs/docs/sec_2011_0567_en.pdf>, visited 27 December 2017.

³¹ Dawson, M., ‘Better regulation and the future of EU regulatory law and politics’, 53 CMLR (2016) p. 1209 Google Scholar at p. 1124.

³² Butler, I. De Jesús, ‘Ensuring Compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights in Legislative Drafting: The Practice of the European Commission’, 37 EL Rev (2012) p. 397 Google Scholar at p. 405.

³³ I am grateful to C. Kilpatrick for suggesting this expression.

³⁴ De Jesús Butler, supra n. 33, p. 414-415.

³⁵ The author is grateful to an anonymous reviewer for useful suggestions on this point.

³⁶ As illustrated with reference to the European pillar of social rights in Jean-Claude Juncker: ‘State of the Union 2015: Time for Honesty, Unity and Solidarity’ (Strasbourg, 9 September 2015).

³⁷ Zeitlin, J. and Vanhercke, B., ‘Socializing the European Semester: EU social and economic policy co-ordination in crisis and beyond’, 25(2) Journal of European Public Policy (2018) p. 149 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, available at <dx.doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2017.1363269>, visited 28 December 2017.

³⁸ Ibid., p. 19 ff.

³⁹ Ibid., p. 21.

⁴⁰ See M. Dawson, ‘New governance and the displacement of Social Europe: the case of the European Semester’, in this issue.

⁴¹ E.g. Arts 13.1–13.11 of the EU-South Korea FTA (OJ L 127, 14.5.2011, p. 6). See also Arts 8.9(1), 10.2(5), 12.2(2),13.2(5), 22.1, 22.3, 23.1 and 23.3(2) of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada, of the one part, and the European Union and its Member States, of the other part (OJ L 11, 14.1.2017, p. 23). See further R. Yotova ‘Balancing Economic Objectives and Social Considerations in the New EU Investment Agreements: Commitments versus Realities’, in Barnard et al., supra n. 10, p. 271. See also Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 732/2008 (consolidated in 2017).

⁴² Bartels, L., ‘Human rights and sustainable development: obligations in EU free trade agreements’, 24 Legal Studies Research Paper Series (2012)Google Scholar.

⁴³ Available at <www.declarationdenamur.eu/doc/NamurEN.pdf>, visited 28 December 2017.

⁴⁴ D. Desierto, ‘Namur Declaration of 5 December 2016: An EU-Values Driven Path to Negotiating and Concluding Economic and Trade Agreements’, EJIL:Talk!, 7 December 2016, <www.ejiltalk.org/namur-declaration-of-5-december-2016-an-eu-values-driven-path-to-negotiating-and-concluding-economic-and-trade-agreements/>, visited 28 December 2017.

⁴⁵ De Wilde, P., ‘Silencing the Eurocrats in public crisis politics’, in D. Chalmers et al. (eds.), The End of the Eurocrats’ Dream (Cambridge University Press 2016) p. 146 Google Scholar at p. 152.

⁴⁶ Waddington, L., ‘A Disabled Market: Free Movement of Goods and Services in the EU and Disability Accessibility’, 15(5) European Law Journal (2009) p. 575 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁷ Proposal for a Directive on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States as regards the accessibility requirements for products and services, COM(2015)615. See comments such as A. Ahtonen and R. Pardo, ‘The Accessibility Act – Using the single market to promote fundamental rights’, (2013) Policy Brief – European Policy Centre.

⁴⁸ Barnard, C., ‘To Boldly Go: Social Clauses in Public Procurement’, 46(2) Industrial Law Journal (2017) p. 208 Google Scholar. See also Tobler, C., ‘Encore: “Women’s Clauses” in public procurement under Community law’, 25(6) European Law Review (2000) p. 618 Google Scholar.

⁴⁹ E.g. Directive 2014/24 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18 (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 65-242), Recital 95 and Art. 18(2). Indeed, Annex X provides for a list of international social and environmental conventions.

⁵⁰ See further, Social Platform, ‘Position Paper on Minimum Wage’ (26 February 2015), available at <www.socialplatform.org/> and Commission staff working document accompanying the document communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European and Social Committee and the Committee of the regions ‘Establishing a European Pillar of Social Rights’ (SWD/2017/201), on ‘Wages’.

⁵¹ Hinarejos, A., ‘A Missed Opportunity: The Fundamental Rights Agency and the Euro Area Crisis’, 22 European Law Journal (2016) p. 61 CrossRefGoogle Scholar at p. 70.

⁵² Salomon, M.E., ‘Of austerity, human rights and international institutions’, 21(4) European Law Journal (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar Section IV.

⁵³ Zeitlin and Vanhercke, supra n. 38, p. 14-15.

⁵⁴ See suggestions in that direction by F. Vandenbroucke, ‘The Idea of a European Social Europe: A Normative introduction’, in Barnard et al., supra n. 10, p. 4-5.

⁵⁵ I am grateful to Claire Kilpatrick for suggesting that expression.

⁵⁶ Directive 2000/43 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (OJ L 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22-26).

⁵⁷ Directive 2000/78 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ L 303, 2.12.2000, p. 16-22).

⁵⁸ See Guiraudon, V., ‘Construire une politique européenne de lutte contre les discriminations’, 53(11) Sociétés Contemporaines (2004) p. 23-24 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁹ See also Directive 2004/113 implementing the principle of equal treatment between men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services (OJ L 373, 21.12.2004, p. 37-43).

⁶⁰ Directive 2006/54 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (OJ L 204, 26.7.2006, p. 23-36).

⁶¹ Critically exploring the distinction between social policy and anti-discrimination approaches: Somek, A., Engineering Equality: An Essay on European Antidiscrimination Law (Oxford University Press, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. I do not wish to engage in this discussion here; see the preliminary assumptions in the Introduction.

⁶² See Dewhurst, E., ‘The Development of EU Case-Law on Age Discrimination in Employment: “Will You Still Need Me? Will You Still Feed Me? When I’m Sixty-Four”’, 19(4) European Law Journal (2013) p. 517 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶³ For an illustration of the relevance in the field of insurance protection see ECJ 1 March 2011, Case C-236/09, Association Belge des ConsommateursTest-Achats ASBL v Conseil des ministers, ECLI:EU:C:2011:100; and access to information on electricity services, see ECJ 16 July 2015, Case C-83/14, ‘CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria’ AD v Komisia za zashtita ot diskriminatsia, ECLI:EU:C:2015:480.

⁶⁴ In particular, the Commission sent letters of formal notice under Art. 258 TFEU to the Czech Republic (25/09/2014, infringement number 20142174); Slovakia (29/04/2015, infringement number 20152025); and Hungary (26/05/2016, infringement number 20152206).

⁶⁵ Lynskey, O., The Foundations of EU Data Protection Law (Oxford University Press 2015)Google Scholar p. 62 ff.

⁶⁶ E.g. Art. 88 of Regulation 2016/679 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46 (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1-88).

⁶⁷ Regulation 2016/679 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1-88) Art. 2(1).

⁶⁸ ECJ 20 May 2003, Joined Cases C-465/00, C-138/01 and C-139/01, Österreichischer Rundfunk, EU:C:2003:294, para. 42. In this respect, see H. Kranenborg, ‘Article 8 – Protection of Personal Data’, in S. Peers et al. (eds.), The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: A Commentary (Oxford University Press 2014) p. 227. The scope of the main instrument on EU data protection is now defined in broad terms in Art. 2 of Regulation 2016/679, supra n. 68.

⁶⁹ ECJ 13 May 2014, Case C-131/12, Google Spain and Google, EU:C:2014:317, paras. 80-81 and 99.

⁷⁰ ECJ 3 May 2012, Case C-520/10, Servet Kamberaj v Istituto per l’Edilizia Sociale della Provincia autonoma di Bolzano (IPES), ECLI:EU:C:2012:233, para. 90. See further S. Peers, ‘Case Note on Kamberaj’, 50 CML Rev (2013) p. 529. See also ECJ 4 June 2015, Case C-579/13, P and S v Commissie Sociale Zekerheid Breda and College van Burgemeestder en Wethouders van de gemeente Amstelveen, ECLI:EU:C:2015:369.

⁷¹ E.g. ECJ 21 June 2017, Case C-449/16, Kerly Del Rosario Martinez Silva v Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) and Comune di Genova, ECLI:EU:C:2017:485, paras. 29-30.

⁷² See ECJ, Case C-208/17 P, Appeal brought against the order of the General Court in Case T-192/16, NF v European Council (OJ C 231, 17.7.2017, p. 12-13), pending.

⁷³ E.g. see Amnesty International, ‘Hotspot Italy: How EU’s flagship approach leads to violations of refugee and migrant rights’, 3 November 2016, available at <www.amnesty.org/en/documents/eur30/5004/2016/en/>, visited 28 December 2017.

⁷⁴ Protocol 30 on the application of the said Title in the UK, Poland, Art. 2 and European Council Decision of 29/30 October 2009 on the application of Protocol 30 to the Czech Republic, Annex 1.

⁷⁵ See the case law on working time below.

⁷⁶ ECJ 22 November 2005, Case C-144/04, Werner Mangold v Rüdiger Helm [2005] ECR I-9981, paras. 74-76.

⁷⁷ Last confirmed, although in slightly different terms, in ECJ 19 April 2016, Case C-441/14, Dansk Industri (DI), acting on behalf of Ajos A/S v Estate of Karsten Eigil Rasmussen ECLI:EU:C:2016:278.

⁷⁸ See M. de Mol, ‘The Novel Approach of the ECJ on the Horizontal Direct Effect of the EU Principle of Non-Discrimination: (Unbridled) Expansionism of EU law?’, 18(1-2) MJECL (2011) p. 109, para IV.3.a.

⁷⁹ In subsequent cases, an explicit link was made between the general principle prohibiting discrimination on grounds of age and Art. 21(1) CFEU. E.g. ECJ 7 March 2014, Case C-176/12, Association de médiation sociale v Union locale des syndicats CGT, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2, para. 47.

⁸⁰ ECJ 24 January 2012, Case C-282/10, Maribel Dominguez v Centre informatique du Centre Ouest Atlantique and Préfet de la région Centre ECLI:EU:C:2012:33.

⁸¹ ECJ 26 March 2015, Case C-316/13, Gérard Fenoll v Centre d’aide par le travail ‘La Jouvene’ and Association de parents et d’amis de personnes handicapées mentales (APEI) d’Avignon ECLI:EU:C:2015:200.

⁸² Directive 2003/88 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time (OJ L 299, 18.11.2003, p. 9-19).

⁸³ Association de médiation sociale v Union locale des syndicats CGT, supra n. 80.

⁸⁴ Directive 2002/14 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community – Joint declaration of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on employee representation (OJ L 080, 23/03/2002, p. 29-34).

⁸⁵ See Dominguez, supra n. 81, para. 16 and M. de Mol, ‘Dominguez: A deafening silence European Court of Justice’, 8(2) EuConst (2012) p. 280 at p. 290-91.

⁸⁶ See Fenoll, supra n. 82, paras. 45-48.

⁸⁷ Association de médiation sociale v Union locale des syndicats CGT, supra n. 80, para. 45.

⁸⁸ Ibid., paras. 46-48.

⁸⁹ Ibid., para. 49.

⁹⁰ Directive 95/46 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31-50).

⁹¹ The matter came up in Satamedia but the Court did not answer that aspect of the questions raised before it: ECJ 16 December 2008, Case C-73/07, Tietosuojavaltuutettu v Satakunnan Markkinapörssi Oy and Satamedia Oy ECLI:EU:C:2008:727, paras. 50-62. Admittedly, as the 1995 Data Protection Directive will be replaced by the 2016 Regulation and Art. 61(1) TFEU post-Lisbon may be capable of horizontal direct effect, the Mangold case law is becoming less relevant for this specific area of EU law.

⁹² E.g. Racial Equality Directive, supra n. 57, Arts. 7-15.

⁹³ Directive 2014/54 on measures facilitating the exercise of rights conferred on workers in the context of freedom of movement for workers (OJ L 128, 30.4.2014, p. 8-14).

⁹⁴ Directive 2014/67 on the enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services and amending Regulation (1024/2012 on administrative cooperation through the Internal Market Information System (OJ L 159, 28.5.2014, p. 11-31).

⁹⁵ Regulation 2016/679, supra n. 68.

⁹⁶ Regulation 2016/679, Art. 77. See further Lynskey, O., ‘The Role of Collective Actors in the Enforcement of the Right to Data Protection under EU Law’, in E. Muir et al. (eds.), How EU Law Shapes Opportunities for Preliminary References on Fundamental Rights: Discrimination and other Examples (2017, Special Edition of the EUI Working Papers)Google Scholar forthcoming.

⁹⁷ E.g. Directive 2013/32 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 60-95) Art. 29. See further E. Tsourdi, ‘Enforcing Refugee Rights under EU Procedural Law: the Role of Collective Actors and UNCHR’, in Muir et al., supra n. 97.