Bibliographie sélective OHADA

The picture presented and often referred to in EU internal market law and legal scholarship is clear. Within the internal market private actors are the recipients of rights and public authorities are constrained in their (regulatory) powers. The notion of this new individualism is bound up with capacities, powers, and resources that empower private actors to engage in the internal market and cross-border situations;ultimately serving the objectives the internal market seeks to attain. Yet, within thinew individualism a conceptually different class of private actors has emerged that is constrained in economic freedoms, i.e. through obligations, rather than being empowered in the context of the internal market. This thesis will enquire the reasons that led to the development of this counter-culture. Why did it emerge? To what extent does this phenomenon affect the roles of private actors in the internal market? I will demonstrate that under the counter-culture private actors are responsibilized and transformed into ‘competent authorities’, i.e. alternative forms of regulatory authority, in the internal market. Private actors are placed into systems of shared responsibilities the relationships of which are coordinated by EU internal market law. In this regard, the concept of responsibility will serve as a tool to bridge the gap between the new positions EU internal market law allocates to private actors and the emerging legal consequences, i.e. allocation of obligations or tasks. The legal contexts of EU free movement law, EU discrimination law, EU food safety law and EU data protection law will serve as case studies against which the construed conceptual framework will be tested. Under the counter-culture the new individualism is no longer only about the exercise of self-interests. Rather, this form of the new individualism comes with a requirement to give account to the interests of other actors within the internal market.