/library/oar/handle/123456789/131549 2026-06-19T09:17:41Z /library/oar/handle/123456789/136006 Title: Self-preferencing in the digital markets : a new offence under article 102 TFEU? Abstract: This research examines the practice of self-preferencing by vertically-integrated digital platforms acting as gatekeepers, and whether such practice may constitute a standalone abuse under article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). This study is carried out against the backdrop of several prominent and public antitrust cases initiated against large digital platforms, or gatekeepers, such as Apple, Amazon, Facebook, and Google, which have been accused of exploiting their dominant position in one market to allow favourable treatment of their products, giving rise to ‘self-preferencing’ or ‘leveraging’ conduct sanctionable under EU competition law. By analysing decisions delivered by the courts and the European Commission, this dissertation examines how progressively the practice of self-preferencing has been construed as a standalone abuse within the ambit of article 102 TFEU. Chapter 1 identifies the main features of digital markets in the competition landscape and the types of leveraging behaviour developed. Chapter 2 examines how self-preferencing may fall within the scope of ‘traditional’ antitrust theories. Chapter 3 delves into the watershed Google Shopping case explaining the rationale which led to the courts classifying self-preferencing as a separate theory of harm under article 102 TFEU. Chapter 4 critically examines the legal tests developed by the courts in Google Shopping and their application to self-preferencing cases. Chapter 5 discusses the effects of the ex-ante regulations introduced by the Digital Markets Act in respect of gatekeepers. This research argues that notwithstanding the pronouncement by the courts in Google Shopping, self-preferencing as a label continues to overlap with existing legal categories. Additionally, the lack of the development of a legal test complicates its application in other anticompetitive cases. Description: LL.M. 2025-01-01T00:00:00Z /library/oar/handle/123456789/135865 Title: Lessons for future global health crises : examining the challenges of balancing public health interventions and human rights during the COVID-19 pandemic Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic has presented governments with an unprecedented challenge: how to effectively protect life and public health while preserving individual rights and freedoms. In response, governments have implemented various measures that have raised concerns regarding their alignment with human rights. This dissertation examines the legal and evidentiary bases governments have used to jus8fy measures that potentially restricted rights such as privacy and liberty, focusing on their alignment with international human rights standards. The research employs a doctrinal approach to analyse the interplay between individual rights and public health measures during a global health crisis. It scrutinises relevant international laws, regula8ons, and precedents that authorised such measures, as well as how international courts and bodies have balanced public health imperatives with human rights obligations. Central to this analysis is the application of international legal principles, including the necessity and proportionality of measures as outlined in international instruments and relevant jurisprudence from bodies like the European Court of Human Rights. The dissertation will thus engage with concerns regarding the implementation of public health measures that arise from the analysis of the legal and evidentiary bases that governments used to jus8fy their COVID-19 measures that are grounded in international law frameworks, as well as recommendations for more human rights-centred government responses in future pandemics. This research addresses a gap in the literature by providing an in-depth analysis of COVID-19 case decisions, the relationship between the evidential and legal bases of such measures, and their application in such cases. It explores how states have interpreted and applied their obligations under international law during the pandemic, including derogations from human rights treaties. The examination reveals inconsistencies and potential weaknesses in the legal and evidentiary foundations used by governments to jus8fy their COVID-19 measures when viewed through the lens of international law. It aims to contribute to the development of a more robust human rights framework for future global health emergencies. Description: LL.M. 2025-01-01T00:00:00Z /library/oar/handle/123456789/132394 Title: Comparative analysis of temporary protection for Ukrainian nationals fleeing war and standard asylum procedures : addressing double standards Abstract: This dissertation examines the comparative treatment of Ukrainian nationals fleeing the 2022 war and other asylum seekers, with a focus on temporary protection versus standard asylum procedures. The study analyzes the differential responses of host countries, particularly in Europe, to refugees from Ukraine compared to those from other conflict zones such as the Middle East and Africa. Drawing on international refugee law, political dynamics, and public perceptions, the research explores how temporary protection mechanisms for Ukrainian refugees have been implemented and contrasts these practices with the standard asylum processes. A central theme is the identification of double standards in refugee protection, highlighting disparities in access to rights, services, and support. Through critical analysis of legal, ethical, and humanitarian considerations, the dissertation discusses the implications of such disparities for the international protection regime. The final section offers policy recommendations aimed at fostering greater fairness, transparency, and international cooperation in asylum systems, with a call for reform to address inequalities in refugee treatment. This study contributes to the broader discourse on global refugee protection, urging a reevaluation of asylum policies to ensure they align with human rights principles and international obligations. Description: M.A.(Melit.) 2025-01-01T00:00:00Z /library/oar/handle/123456789/132392 Title: Detention conditions for vulnerable asylum seekers in Malta : a breach of article 3 of the ECHR Abstract: This study analyses interpretation of article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) in judgements delivered by the European Courts of Human Rights (ECtHR) in cases concerning vulnerable asylum seekers in Maltese detention centres. As the ECHR explains, article 3 main principle addresses the prohibition of torture, degrading and inhumane treatment. This dissertation aims to understands how through national and regional legislation, Malta adhered to the positive obligation set by article 3 on regards vulnerable asylum seekers who are placed in detention. The judgements selected included vulnerable asylum seekers on the grounds of age and gender, and individuals who had specific medical needs. Through a qualitative analysis of verdicts delivered by the ECtHR, national and regional laws, this study identified systemic gaps in the treatment and care of vulnerable asylum seekers in the Maltese detention centre. Some of the findings exposed issues related to the ineffective detention conditions, overcrowdings in the detention centres, lack information, unprepared staff, poor conditions of detention facilities, and reduced speed in procedures related to identifying present vulnerabilities in the detainees. This has often been criticised by the ECtHR through presented judgements analysed in this study. The dissertation concludes by suggesting a number of recommendations that will improve the observance of article 3 of the ECHR in the Maltese detention centres. Description: M.A.(Melit.) 2025-01-01T00:00:00Z