Talk:EU–UK Partnership Council

Merge
The Partnership Council should have a separated article as this body will be central to the EU-UK relations. Hence, having a readily source to help avoid errors such as in the press where it is wrongly called the "Joint Partnership Council". This is with the tradition of having separated articles such as for the Treaty of the European Union and the European Court of Justice.

The article needs further work from primary sources: EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) as the press in often wrong. Going through this and related documents will take time.

Predictions, speculative material
It clearly indicated that the TCA is unratified. As the TCA progresses, the article will evolve.
 * The treaty is still in draft form, not even signed yet. Unified Patent Court and CTBTO are at least based on signed treaties. But has been removed. – Kaihsu (talk) 10:41, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

ECJ - EFTA
The
 * European Court of Justice
 * EFTA Court

have been put back in the See also because the three bodies will be closely related. Indeed, there might be a jurisdiction dispute, particularly between the ECJ and the Partnership_Council. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carrasco (talk • contribs) 11:06, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you expand a bit? L.tak (talk) 20:54, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The border jurisdiction between the Partnership Council and the European Court of Justice which jealously guard its power. Look at the [CETA case]: everybody was very reliefed as otherwise it would have blocked CETA and similar treaties. --Carrasco (talk) 13:43, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Which action do you mean? The German Constitutional Court or the Belgian CJEU action? L.tak (talk) 14:11, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Both, but of different nature. Regarding EU jurisdiction, the Belgian one was the most awkward one as it was a request for an opinion of the ECJ and a negative might have put CETA in danger.--Carrasco (talk) 17:01, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * But the most contentious issue there was the Arbitration, and the possibility of an Arbitration tribunal. There was some discussion about the CETA Joint Committee, which indeed has a similar function, so that could be in See Also. However, the powers of the CETA joint committee also had a link with arbitration (in deciding who could be arbitors), but that is not a role of the of the Partnership Council. In other words: no link here to arbitration, and thus also no jurisdiction discussions with CJEU (let alone EFTA court, which is a bout different countries).... L.tak (talk) 17:56, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Following-up with your arbitration comment. The key is: who has the final saying? Call it whatever you like: court, arbitration panel, or Partnership Council. _My_ interpretation of the TCA is that the Council will has the final saying in the EU-UK relations as, among others, it has the power to modify the TCA. Hence, the Council will be above the ECJ and so a possibility for a clash of jurisdiction with the ECJ.--Carrasco (talk) 18:07, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Exactly: the final say on changing an agreement is with the EU Council + Parliament. The judiciary interprets. One could say that by chaning the agreement a part of that power of EU Council + Parl is given away. But not that of the judiciary I'd say... L.tak (talk) 19:17, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * _My_ interpretation is that also the judiciary: if the Partnership Council say blue and the ECJ says red it is going to be blue.Carrasco (talk) 09:38, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * that's not that relevant. CJEU interprets. If the committee stays within its rights, than that's what's going to happen. Akin to the fac that if Council+Parl make regulations, than that's what it is. CJEU interprets and blocks what's contrary to the treaties... L.tak (talk) 12:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

External link
Today an external link was added by user:Carrasco: on a site named dragoman, authored by M.T. Carrasco Benitez. User Carrasco, are you the MT Carasco and is this a self published source? Or is there any reason to take this as a reliable source? L.tak (talk) 12:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes. I always register and write with my name; no alias. Reliable source: up to the public to evaluate, though it should be at least helpful. I put it as "External links", not as a "References".--Carrasco (talk) 18:21, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Functioning
Can you proof this was the first decision? It is until the 31 April, not at least.--Carrasco (talk) 18:27, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No, I can not prove it, but the numbering does suggest so... L.tak (talk) 21:28, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

I am trying to find out if there is a place with the decisions and other documents.--Carrasco (talk) 18:28, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Austria publishes it fast, but also the European Commission does a good job. L.tak (talk) 21:28, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

L.talk: Good idea to make a table with the decision. I changed the reference to the Official Journal (OJ). Also, if we start listing the documents, I wonder we should change the name from "Functioning" or open a new section for the documents, decisions or others. I have the feeling from my contacts with the European Council that there is no consolidated list of the Partnership Council documents: if this is the case, this article will be the best source.--Carrasco (talk) 19:41, 10 March 2021 (UTC)